EVE Search - Fleet hangars and changes to various settings

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Fleet hangars and changes to various settings

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 22 post(s)

CCP Habakuk C C P C C P Alliance 276	Posted - 2012.10.19 11:56:00 - [1] - Quote Team Gridlock has been working in the last months mostly on improving server-side parts of the inventory system (and related systems). Many of the changes won't be visible to the player (except that a few old bugs should be gone), but there are a few important changes, which are now on Duality for testing: Fleet hangars: Corporation hangars on capital ships and Orcas have been converted into fleet hangars. These fleet hangars have no divisions and corp roles are irrelevant. The size of the fleet hangar is the same as the old corp hangar and all items are moved from the corp hangar to the fleet hangar at deployment of the patch. The access rules to the ship maintenance bay (SMB) and fleet hangar have also changed: It is always possible to use the fitting service of the SMB of a corp member and a fleet member Corp members can access both the SMB and the fleet hangar with the setting "Allow corp member usage" Fleet members can access both the SMB and the fleet hangar with the setting "Allow fleet member usage" We discussed these changes with the CSM and we hope that they improve the usability of the fleet hangar and the new access rules should make it much clearer on what is possible when. Known issue in the build on Duality: The right-click option to open containers in fleet hangars is not doing anything. Storing the settings for SMB and fleet hangars on the server: The above mentioned settings for SMB and fleet hangars are now stored on the server and they stay always on the ship (as long as it is not repackaged). It is no longer necessary to re-configure the ship after a jump or after a relog. Be careful when boarding a ship from your corp mate or similar - it will be using the settings, which he set. Storing the forcefield password of ships on the server Forcefield passwords are now stored on the server. But: We are currently working on another iteration of this to improve the consistency. Please do not send bugreports about this yet. ;) Storing the "lock items" setting for audit log containers on the server The "lock items" setting on audit log containers is no longer a personal setting, but it is stored on the server and applying to all users. The new default setting is "unlocked". In corporation hangars the role "Configure Please reply here, if you find any bugs or other problems, which we might have missed. The changes should also be covered in a DevBlog later, but I have no idea yet on when it will be ready. CCP Habakuk \| EVE Quality Assurance \| Team Gridlock Writing bug reports \| Mass tests

Cedric deBouilard PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore 54	Posted - 2012.10.19 12:40:00 - [2] - Quote CCP Habakuk wrote: Storing the settings for SMB and fleet hangars on the server: The above mentioned settings for SMB and fleet hangars are now stored on the server and they stay always on the ship (as long as it is not repackaged). It is no longer necessary to re-configure the ship after a jump or after a relog. Be careful when boarding a ship from your corp mate or similar - it will be using the settings, which he set. Storing the forcefield password of ships on the server Forcefield passwords are now stored on the server. But: We are currently working on another iteration of this to improve the consistency. Please do not send bugreports about this yet. ;) Storing the "lock items" setting for audit log containers on the server The "lock items" setting on audit log containers is no longer a personal setting, but it is stored on the server and applying to all users. The new default setting is "unlocked". In corporation hangars the role "Configure . First, and finally. You know how long carrier pilots prayed for this, don't you? :)
Lord Haur Grim Determination Nulli Secunda 28	Posted - 2012.10.19 14:12:00 - [3] - Quote Those divisons on the carrier hangers were kinda useful btw.
Marrakech Olivia Minter GLU CANU Open Space Consultancy 0	Posted - 2012.10.19 14:13:00 - [4] - Quote CCP Habakuk wrote: Storing the "lock items" setting for audit log containers on the server The "lock items" setting on audit log containers is no longer a personal setting, but it is stored on the server and applying to all users. The new default setting is "unlocked". In corporation hangars the role "Config Equipment" is needed to change the setting (assuming no password is set).. Oh thank **, I got so tired of forgetting that all my ** was locked by default every time I bought a new station warehouse.
Griznatch Distinguished Gentleman's Boating Club Test Alliance Please Ignore 195	Posted - 2012.10.19 14:21:00 - [5] - Quote Lord Haur wrote: Those divisons on the carrier hangers were kinda useful btw. qft I used to have a clever sig but I lost it.
Scrapyard Bob EVE University Ivy League 1136	Posted - 2012.10.19 14:28:00 - [6] - Quote CCP Habakuk wrote: Corporation hangars on capital ships and Orcas have been converted into fleet hangars. These fleet hangars have no divisions and corp roles are irrelevant. The size of the fleet hangar is the same as the old corp hangar and all items are moved from the corp hangar to the fleet hangar at deployment of the patch. This is going to be annoying as heck for those of us who used the different divisions within the corp hangar bay for organization. If you're going to do this, then we need more sizes of the General Freight Containers. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1961318#post1961318 Right now, all we have for useful work is the 120k m3 GFC, which is too large to help us organize a corp hangar. And "secure" containers like the GSC are either overkill (we don't need the auditing or secure nature) or too small for the purpose.
vidax Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension 0	Posted - 2012.10.19 14:39:00 - [7] - Quote "These fleet hangars have no divisions" Are you kidding me CCP? Its the only way I had, to organise the 100s of items carriers have to carry.
Ingen Kerr Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 18	Posted - 2012.10.19 14:44:00 - [8] - Quote The only problem I foresee in killing the "let fleet members refit" checkbox is because of the limited of number of ships that refit off of any given ship at once (10 for carriers and supers, 2 for titans for some reason), when ships get clumped up nobody can refit. Currently, you can sometimes hamfist your way through the problem by having people cycle their refit off and on. That's no longer an option, obviously, if refit is permanently enabled for fleet members and corp mates. Killing hangar divisions and tying access to the same checkbox as the SMB has at least this issue: I want to let my fleet/corp mate take a dictor from my SMB. I don't want him taking an officer smartbomb out of my hangar.
Aprudena Gist GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 10	Posted - 2012.10.19 14:57:00 - [9] - Quote Hanger divisions are super useful for titans and motherships as they are not allowed to dock and have to carrys tons of **** with them but i Guess they have to use containers now or something stupid like that. Can you introduce a Container that is 10,000m3 then?
FinalFlash84 North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion 2	Posted - 2012.10.19 15:00:00 - [10] - Quote CCP Habakuk wrote: It is always possible to use the fitting service of the SMB of a corp member and a fleet member Does this mean that there won't be the "too many people" issue/feature for using the fitting service?

Ketplunk Loki's Legion 9	Posted - 2012.10.19 15:07:00 - [11] - Quote Add divisions to Ship Maintenance Arrays while you're at it...
Kais Fiddler Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2012.10.19 15:19:00 - [12] - Quote It would be very useful to retain the hanger divisions in some fashion. Keeping them and being able to name them with titles such as "Fuel" or "Tank Mods" would be very handy for cap pilots.
Rascal deJascal Nova-Tek 10	Posted - 2012.10.19 15:20:00 - [13] - Quote I guess this also means that items in the fleet hangars can now be scanned.
Theodore Calliente RSI Group 0	Posted - 2012.10.19 15:20:00 - [14] - Quote This is cool and all, but when will we get actually useful ****.... ya know, like organizational options that don't suck ass? here's an idea: Stack-able physical containers with no bonus storage for physical item sorting Folders for visual-only organization.
Chirality Tisteloin Evil .inc WHY so Seri0Us 0	Posted - 2012.10.19 15:24:00 - [15] - Quote Actually. Customizable divisions (folder-like) would be really useful in each and every container (Hangars...) Fly smart. Chira
Tshaowdyne Dvorak The Dark Space Initiative 0	Posted - 2012.10.19 15:34:00 - [16] - Quote What I want to know is if you've considered the ramifications of passwords being stored with the ship as far as contract sales go. Sometimes the rigs on a ship are pretty expensive and people choose to sell them via contracts so as not to lose that value in the sale. Will adding a ship to a contract scrub its forcefield password? Also, can it be unset in case someone has to eject from a ship? Say that my corp wants to fleet up and kick some sleeper butt, but one guy doesn't have a Guardian to fly. I'd like to lend him one, but I don't want him in my POS. Does setting a password on a ship open me up to security problems like this? I really think this is a bad idea. It seems like there's all sorts of possibly unexpected ways to break into otherwise secure POSes under the current system and steal everything in them. Why not set this up so that the password goes with the character, instead of a ship? You could even make it clever, like an "implant" that acts as an ident chip. Someone could give you a chip for their POS that they've set up (maybe you add another bay to the POS, like the stront and fuel bays where you can load and encode ident chips). That also gives players something new to manufacture and sell that's of value (maybe even make it take some component that acts as an ISK sink to help combat inflation). Then just permit the POS owner to deactivate old access chips (like changing passwords works now). If they can set a password on the chips (just like you'd set a password on a secure container) and make them burn out if the wrong password is entered three times, then a POS is still secure even if the chips are stolen.
Emperor Salazar Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 700	Posted - 2012.10.19 15:34:00 - [17] - Quote Its a start, at least you're looking at it. Give us the ability to have up to a certain number of divisions, for cha and sma, allow us to rename them, and allow us to allow access on a checkbox by checkbox basis.
Wibla Tactical Narcotics Team 96	Posted - 2012.10.19 15:37:00 - [18] - Quote 1. Separate access options for SMB and Fleet hangar 2. Do not remove divisions from the fleet hangar.
Indeterminacy THORN Syndicate THORN Alliance 219	Posted - 2012.10.19 16:08:00 - [19] - Quote Wibla wrote: 1. Separate access options for SMB and Fleet hangar 2. Do not remove divisions from the fleet hangar. I disagree. The current mechanism being tested is simpler. Simpler = better IMO.
Styth spiting Gunzerkers 68	Posted - 2012.10.19 16:08:00 - [20] - Quote " These fleet hangars have no divisions and corp roles are irrelevant." Wait, so now there is no way to sort/order items between different divisions? Seriously this is 1/2 the reason the corp hangers on the Orca were so great, since there has yet to be any type of container of a descent size to use for this. This just seems like a ridiculous change. So now when trying to find mining crystals in the orca, or sorting ship fittings (one division for ammo, crystals, drones, one for mods, 1 for ore, etc) we will be stuck with one large blog crap view? Personally I do quite a bit of PI each day, and I'm sure others like me use these divisions to separate the daily PI needed on my factory planets. So now we will have to sort out all our daily PI into the orca, and then again sort it all out again at each POCO, otherwise deal with making 5 trips from POCO to station. I also do simular things with my manufacturing items / bpo's and finished goods. Instead of being able to sort out all my manufacturing materials I will now need to do this 2 times wit the loss of the divisions. And the same goes with market orders. Items being bought / sold on specific planets now require an additional step. Now these additional step might not sound like alot of time, but it really is. We're talking an extra several minutes of time (per POCO, station trip, manufacturing trip) with ALOT of chances of screw ups. And most important of all, will these bays be scannable by other players and or police? I'm kind of suprised that one of the most important features of an Orca that could very well be changed wasn't brought up. If this is true then this is just a terrible update. The ability for players to take items from an orca (instead of just jet canning the items they need, thus not allowing them access to EVERYTHING) if they are in your fleet is far less useful then what divisions and had to offer.

Iniquita Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 88	Posted - 2012.10.19 16:11:00 - [21] - Quote Quote: Corp members can access both the SMB and the fleet hangar with the setting "Allow corp member usage" Fleet members can access both the SMB and the fleet hangar with the setting "Allow fleet member usage" Since most pilots of larger ships like suppercarriers and titans use their SMA to store expensive modules which go on their ship, yet also have a large SMA to allow for reshipping options for other members such as spare dictors and the like. Wouldn't it make more sense to have seperate check boxes for fleet hangar and SMB access? I may want someone to be able to take ships from my SMA but that doesn't mean I want to give them access to the fuel and officer mods in my fleet hangar.
Alli Othman Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 32	Posted - 2012.10.19 16:12:00 - [22] - Quote Maintain divisions with separate access options for them (I may want someone able to grab a module to refit, but not something expensive or that I will need to refit to, so having a fleet-members-have-at-it division is beyond necessary), and please please please have separate SMB and Hangar access options. There's far too many issues that arise without having these two things that will just encourage orca and cap pilots to just never allow access at all otherwise.
ELA Riald PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore 3	Posted - 2012.10.19 16:13:00 - [23] - Quote Indeterminacy wrote: I disagree. The current mechanism being tested is simpler. Simpler = better IMO. Then you obviously don't store anything expensive in your capital. I want to give out rifters, not my expensive faction stuff.
Skrilla Zilla Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2012.10.19 16:15:00 - [24] - Quote Wibla wrote: 1. Separate access options for SMB and Fleet hangar 2. Do not remove divisions from the fleet hangar. This. I might want to let people grab cyno ships out of my SMB but not those officer cap rechargers sitting in my CHA. Divisions are also incredibly useful, they should stay.
Vincent Gaines 257	Posted - 2012.10.19 16:18:00 - [25] - Quote Does the setting save for "allow corp/alliance access" and is it saved to the character or to the ship?
Lors Dornick Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet 265	Posted - 2012.10.19 16:33:00 - [26] - Quote CCP Habakuk wrote: Fleet hangars: Corporation hangars on capital ships and Orcas have been converted into fleet hangars. These fleet hangars have no divisions and corp roles are irrelevant. The size of the fleet hangar is the same as the old corp hangar and all items are moved from the corp hangar to the fleet hangar at deployment of the patch. Aargh! Using an Orca for mining support (absurd but it happens) will in most cases mean that you use the Corp Hanger to transfer (and finally store) ore and carry replacement crystals. Having both types in one hangar will create lots of pain for both miners and Orca pilots.
Artemisia Doubleday Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2012.10.19 16:35:00 - [27] - Quote CCP Habakuk wrote: Storing the forcefield password of ships on the server Forcefield passwords are now stored on the server. But: We are currently working on another iteration of this to improve the consistency. Please do not send bugreports about this yet. ;) What about ships I sell? If I set the password for my pos on a ship and then sell it on the market or on contract do either of those clear the saved passwords?
agrajag119 Paxton Industries Gentlemen's Agreement 8	Posted - 2012.10.19 16:58:00 - [28] - Quote Reiterating the question - Will we be able to drop items into a fleet hangar if the box isn't checked. Losing that ability will play havoc with a great number of things.
Kari Juptris Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 28	Posted - 2012.10.19 17:06:00 - [29] - Quote Indeterminacy wrote: Wibla wrote: 1. Separate access options for SMB and Fleet hangar 2. Do not remove divisions from the fleet hangar. I disagree. The current mechanism being tested is simpler. Simpler = better IMO. Tell me about the billions of isk and hundreds of items you have stored in your capital ship. No? We need divisions to maintain organization in bays. The names of the divisions are always the corp names, but in my capitals they're all used for my personal use and allow me to quickly find a bunch of items that I want grouped together. EX: OH GOD, SWAP FROM CAP FIT TO TANK FIT NOW NOW NOW
Gritz1 Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance 129	Posted - 2012.10.19 17:09:00 - [30] - Quote I used the different hangars quite often when organizing things for myself, deliveries for others, and so on. Please let them stay!



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.