Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 103 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Frying Doom
2398
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 21:50:00 -
[2761] - Quote
Its a start and at least that is a good thing. I too would like to see work on the security.
But all I have to say is that without Two Step and this thread we would have gotten, Nothing. Again Thank you Two Step. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
whaynethepain
65
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 21:59:00 -
[2762] - Quote
All that empty space.
How about a fuelled Rorqual module that makes it anchor and throw up a shield? Or some new star-base capitol container with guns, dunno, you've got the stuff, it just needs the CCP magic spark and some player feedback.
As for reworking the old POS code, "Ball of mud." No-one wants the Eve team bogged down, go on, press the delete key, I dare you. Do it.
POS always seem to be at moons or planets anyhow, borrrrrring, dull dull, help us explore a little. Getting you on your feet.
So you've further to fall. |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
138
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 07:02:00 -
[2763] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vo0vbusruT0 2 minutes 50 seconds in I think they got the point of this thread. I love the delay
Sounds really good. I just hope when they say more fighting over thing we get reasons that is not just shinies and isk dominance. More latteral integration is vital to shake things up. Also smart integration of aspects. We need a little more feeling of speed and feeling of accomplishment per time increment.
Oh and a personal WTF. Why can we have a link out of client on splash and in the code, but not a ctrl+click on links to go outside client when browsing? How hard it that to add to the game? Either that or open for some flash in the IGB for Gods sake. YouTube, twitch etc..
|
Hakan MacTrew
Caledonian Light Industries Sick N' Twisted
465
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 11:19:00 -
[2764] - Quote
Well, the devblog is a start...
Thank you Two-step for starting this thread. MODULAR DRONES
MORE ORE SHIPS |
Frying Doom
2398
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 11:35:00 -
[2765] - Quote
Hakan MacTrew wrote:Well, the devblog is a start...
Thank you Two-step for starting this thread. Definitely better than we would have gotten out of some of the rest of OUR CSM members. Any spelling and grammatical errors are because frankly, I don't care!! |
Celly Smunt
Viziam Amarr Empire
145
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 17:07:00 -
[2766] - Quote
Balder Verdandi wrote:Absolutely nothing about corp roles ..... well, maybe next decade.
"Since we at CCP have made mistakes with expectations management surrounding this feature in the past"
ya think?
Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator. |
Balder Verdandi
Czerka. WHY so Seri0Us
144
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 22:50:00 -
[2767] - Quote
Celly Smunt wrote:
"Since we at CCP have made mistakes with expectations management surrounding this feature in the past"
ya think?
I would troll this post ...... but I'm too upset with CCP to attempt it. Long live the failure of "Unified Inventory"! Player Owned Station fix dated back to 2006!
|
Kronarn
Dirty Old Bastards Nulli Secunda
23
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 19:14:00 -
[2768] - Quote
I think the new hanger idea's for members is great, I don't like the fact that only members can remove their items, corp should be able to have the CEO remove items as many people go AFK without warning for extended periods of time, or the corp shareholders should be able to vote on releasing the items.
I like the proposed changes but I still feel the corp permissions/management needs reworking as a priority over towers.
Just my 0.02c |
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
138
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 06:42:00 -
[2769] - Quote
Kronarn wrote:I think the new hanger idea's for members is great, I don't like the fact that only members can remove their items, corp should be able to have the CEO remove items as many people go AFK without warning for extended periods of time, or the corp shareholders should be able to vote on releasing the items.
I like the proposed changes but I still feel the corp permissions/management needs reworking as a priority over towers.
Just my 0.02c
The CEO take option is only natural, and should really be considered. Especially because it would also be a potential update for station hangars. A personal division hangar showing in your personal inventory but granting access to corp would make a lot more sense than current function. Your corp should not be able to look into your personal assets, but in your personal division only, and with take option for CEO.
See longer post PDH
|
Celly Smunt
Viziam Amarr Empire
145
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 21:04:00 -
[2770] - Quote
Balder Verdandi wrote:Celly Smunt wrote:
"Since we at CCP have made mistakes with expectations management surrounding this feature in the past"
ya think?
I would troll this post ...... but I'm too upset with CCP to attempt it.
LOL, go ahead, it will allow you to have some fun with it :)
o/ Celly Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator. |
|
Andy Landen
Air Initiative Mercenaries
118
|
Posted - 2013.04.06 03:33:00 -
[2771] - Quote
Has anyone brought up the personal aspect of the player owned station in this thread yet? I want to own my own pos, without connection to my corp. If I change corp, then I still control the pos. If a director gets greedy and wants the stuff in my pos, then he actually has to siege it, unless I give him permissions to access it. |
Hawkwar
M.I.M.M.S The Watchmen.
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.06 05:13:00 -
[2772] - Quote
I would like POS's to not be confined by artificial limits but have the ability to gradually grow until they are massive industrial complexes in space and not necessarily next to a moon either. The opportunity to anchour a "hidden" POS in deep space which in time becomes a massive shipyard would be cool as players add to it with new hangers, factories, refinaries, computer cores and power plants as well as weapons and shield generators. This would also make fuel production and supply as well as defence fairly critical. |
Cage Man
192
|
Posted - 2013.04.06 18:23:00 -
[2773] - Quote
A change which I think is needed is that when you cancel a long ME process the BPO is returned but the queue stays active till the original process time expires so even if you cancel a job, you can't reuse the job queue. Oh PLEASE!!! CCP Fozzie Can I haz a Navy moa....... |
Celly Smunt
Viziam Amarr Empire
145
|
Posted - 2013.04.07 19:31:00 -
[2774] - Quote
Andy Landen wrote:Has anyone brought up the personal aspect of the player owned station in this thread yet? I want to own my own pos, without connection to my corp. If I change corp, then I still control the pos. If a director gets greedy and wants the stuff in my pos, then he actually has to siege it, unless I give him permissions to access it.
Yes, that has been brought up as well you can search for "personal POS" and it should get you a list of the posts here containing that if you'd like to read/respond/comment on them.
o/ Celly
Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator. |
Hien Morisato
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 15:56:00 -
[2775] - Quote
First point before I get into POSes. The only thing that is keeping CCP alive as a company isn't the fact that they have a great Product, or awesome customer service. Its the fact that the players are loyal to a game that they have devoted time to and have built relationships in. Eventually that will end at which point CCP will either have to think up something or start producing lack luster graphical garbage that other gaming genre's like fighting, FPS, and Action Adventure games have become in order to survive. This will give the masses of younger gamers, who have never had the privilege of experiencing a real game or civil social interaction in a game, something to do with their lives to escape the pressures of their families and the industrialization of the schooling system. Anyway moving on.
Ya know I think the most amusing thing about a POS is the fact that CCP named it "Player Owned Star-base" when in reality a player in an NPC corp can't even anchor one. In order to anchor a POS you must be part of a player corp. The skills required to anchor a POS are a joke, level 1 anchoring takes all of 1 hour and 15 minutes if that to train up. Instead you have to grind to get your standings up with a faction, in the process destroy your standings with all the other factions if you wish to anchor in empire space low or high. Oh yeah almost forgot its not just the single player's standings that matter. It is the entire corp of which that player's character belongs to as well as the alliance to which that corp belongs to. Which brings me to yet another amusing thought. What the heck can an alliance with one corps POS do? Rent a research slot? maybe.... have fun setting that one up....they can't use manufacturing slots they can't use corp hangers, might be able to use the fitting abilities, they can't use refining arrays. So they can hide behind the POS shield bubble .....whoopity frak'n do....Another laugh is the abilities you get with a POS. So you can research things at a cost that exceeds any station research cost by atleast double most of the time more depending on the size of POS you are using. So you can manufacture things you can do the same in a station for cheaper, take the same amount of time, and the same amount of materials. So you can store things, 1.4mil m3 is nothing compared to the infinite space in a station. So you can fit ships, you can do that if you are near any ship that has a maintenance bay.
Anyway Things that you can do only with a POS is moon mine, build super capitals, create a jump bridge, and conduct material reactions. All of which are limited, which means that only a small number of people utilize the full potential of the POS.
Alright things that if done in addition to what the dev-blog http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/odyssey-summer-expansion-starbase-iterations/ (which we all know is a bunch of words until we see physical proof) lists would further improve upon a POS, while keeping balance in the game and minimizing time spent on the project.
1.) Allow a Launching system similar to that of a GSC for the POS (Launch for Self, Corp, Alliance) this would allow the anchoring requirements to be based of You, Your Corp, or the Alliance you Belong too. You can still restrict it so that you only anchor if you are in a player corp. 2.) Have an option added to the POS to allow for onlining of player owned structures, corp owned structures, or alliance owned structures based off the Launching system. (So for example if you Launch for Alliance, other corps in your alliance could online a Structure attached to your POS. However you could go further as to have an allocation of POS resources for each corp. Initially your corp would have 100% of the POS Resources with you as the POS manager Recieving 100% of the POS resources [ POS Resources being CPU and Power-grid]) 3.) In addition to Private Hangers for Corp/Alliance hangers the POS Manager would have complete access to all hangers 4.) Corp/Alliance Hangers Should have minimal Resource consumption (1 CPU 1 Power-grid) and be of Sufficient size (100mil m3 or 1bil m3) 5.) Ship maintenance bays should also have minimal Resource consumption (1 CPU 1 Power-grid) 6.) As stated many times through out this form There needs to be a re-balancing between the refining Arrays on a POS and a Station a Station should have a lower Base then a POS also the POS refining array should be instant or take at least a 1/10th of the time it currently does. 7.) Also as stated many times through out this form there needs to be re-balancing between Assembly arrays on a POS and manufacturing slots on a station. The Assembly arrays on a POS should be not only quicker but consume even less materials then a station, Control tower resources should be lowered as well.
8.) Research Labs: This one is by itself because it seriously needs to get fixed. First Remove them completely from Stations. They are almost never used in low and null, and its usually 60+ days to get an open slot in high sec not to mention the fact that its way cheaper then any POS. The Labs themselves need to be fixed as well, 1 copy slot, 3 ME, 3 PE and 5 invention really CCP? You can Leave the ME and the PE slots alone but swap the Copy and the Invention. so it would be 5 Copy, 3 ME, 3 PE and 1 Invention slot for the Standard lab. For the Experimental Lab you could have 5 Invention, 3 Copy no ME or PE. And for Reverse Engineering Labs 3 Reverse Engineering, 1 Copy. Drug labs......1 slot......seriously c'mon....atleast give us what drone assembly array has give us 10 or maybe even half that 5 slots.
9.) Allow Material Reactions "Anywhere". What is so bad about reacting materials in high sec anyway? Heck When you are removing the research slots from the stations put in Reaction slots in the station. |
Hien Morisato
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 15:56:00 -
[2776] - Quote
10.) Last but not least, this one is so easy a baby monkey could do it. Add in some "POS" skills. LIke for example a POS Anchoring Skill, a POS management Skill, and a POS Interaction Skill. (In order to anchor a control tower of what ever size you need to have the POS Anchoring Skill of what ever level. Small tower level 1, Large tower level 4. Same goes for POS structures to anchor say a Corp hanger or Ship maintenance Array POS Anchoring Skill level 1. For Capital Ship Assembly Array POS Anchoring Skill level 5. Structures could also require POS management skills and POS interaction skills based on what they do etc. etc.)
As stated before above are things that would require minimal dev time spent on fixing and rebalancing. Most of this stuff is changing some numbers in a database frame work and not manipulating lines of code well except for the first and last part but really all they might have to do is copy and paste lines from Anchor-able containers, toss in a few skills which we all know they love to do and do some debugging. Things that should be changed that may require new models, manipulating lines of code etc. are below.
1.) New POS Structures that would increase POS CPU and Power Grid at the cost of more POS Fuel consumption. 2.) External POS Fuel bay that could be Linked to POS for longer Operational Duration (For all you W-space guys love ya btw) 3.) New POS Defensive Modules similar to ship modules Shield Extender for more shields hit points, shield booster (Consumes fuel of some kind), Active Shield hardeners (Also Consumes fuel)
The next few are going to get mixed reactions.
4.) Allow Jump bridges outside of Sov space potentially allow the anchoring of a jump bridge in high sec thus creating a corp/alliance jump gate for private use (This would make a POS more valued in high sec as well as anywhere else in eve-verse not to mention make it more of a target then ever before for corps/alliances to go to war over)
All of these things I believe are do-able and I'm sure it will spark a lively discussion both constructive and destructive. But keep in mind they are just ideas. We all know how CCP works, They enjoy seeing conflict so if you voice a change to CCP always voice one that will potentially spark wars in the game or generate conflic |
Suffering Shadow
Heaven's Harvesters LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 20:28:00 -
[2777] - Quote
It seems like in the new model of corp hangar you can not move stuff from your hangar to another persons hangar. That will make thigs really difficult. If whole corp is making fuel from PI, they need to be online at the same time to be able to move stuff? Of use containers like before to leave stuff for other members? That doesnt seem very convinient.
Also as the game is fast phased and you should log in every day to check things, many players can not do that. In the new model the maintenance persons (corp directors) can not move other peoples stuff safe if the pos is attacked. That means billions of isks lost if you can not log in every day. Especially in a wormhole where you dont always have exit anywhere near a station the stuff keeps pileing.
Other than these 2 things all the changes are great! Really looking forward to try them. |
nomad Raholan
1st Steps Academy Fidelas Constans
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.16 00:44:00 -
[2778] - Quote
Hien Morisato wrote:10.) The next few are going to get mixed reactions. Like the post and (most of) the ideas, well thought out and quite easy to follow.
Quote: 1.) New POS Structures that would increase POS CPU and Power Grid at the cost of more POS Fuel consumption. 2.) External POS Fuel bay that could be Linked to POS for longer Operational Duration Along this line, with the actual changes we know are coming, (IE; personal hangers), will existing pos's receive extra PG and CPU with which to anchor these or will the pos manager need to drop other essentials to make room?? .,.,.,Disagree with me if you feel the need.,.,., .,.,.,Right or Wrong.,.,.,.-á .,.,.,My opinion is free and mine to own.,.,.,. |
Hien Morisato
Imperial Combat Engineers Empire of Arcadia
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.16 00:48:00 -
[2779] - Quote
nomad Raholan wrote:Hien Morisato wrote:10.) The next few are going to get mixed reactions. Like the post and (most of) the ideas, well thought out and quite easy to follow. Quote: 1.) New POS Structures that would increase POS CPU and Power Grid at the cost of more POS Fuel consumption. 2.) External POS Fuel bay that could be Linked to POS for longer Operational Duration Along this line, with the actual changes we know are coming, (IE; personal hangers), will existing pos's receive extra PG and CPU with which to anchor these or will the pos manager need to drop other essentials to make room??
Yeah those are things I'd like to see but for some reason I think our requests are falling on deaf ears. Glad to see some changes though not exactly what again in my opinion I'd like to see but at least its a move in the right direction for once. |
Balder Verdandi
Czerka. WHY so Seri0Us
144
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 07:15:00 -
[2780] - Quote
I'm still looking for fixes to the most basic stuff ........ you know, like corp roles?
I know the interface needs some work, and I'm sure we can fix that later ...... but really, myself and many others need corp roles fixed just so we can delegate the simple stuff out, provide labs to corpies, and not have our most prized possessions (insert WH corps here) stolen from us.
The new hangar is a start, but it doesn't solve the issue with corp roles that have been bypassed for far too long.
I can wait on getting all the pretty stuff ...... what I can't wait on is the functional stuff that makes my life easier. Long live the failure of "Unified Inventory"! Player Owned Station fix dated back to 2006!
|
|
Devon Krah'tor
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz Noir. Mercenary Group
53
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 21:35:00 -
[2781] - Quote
+1 for modular POS
I get it, for low effort you get high return when dealing with Ship Tiericide etc...
Modular POS will take a long time to implement, as the code is ancient (and nasty).
However, a well thought out POS system would be a game changer. We want to have our own homes/factories/labs that we can use without wanting to shoot ourselves in the face/that are actually better than the cheap super efficient NPC provided ones.
thanks.
PS do it CCP. Greater.Insight.Skill.Knowledge |
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY Last Resort.
427
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 09:15:00 -
[2782] - Quote
140 pages... And now the CCP chat leaks... Showing all concerns from ccp related to this tread...
http://pastebin.com/umuXEf3n
At this point I have low hopes that CCP will ever do anything close to this: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=143764&find=unread
This makes me terrible sad. This had So much potential....
Please read these! > New POS system > New SOV system |
Choc talar
The Sp00n WHYS0 Expendable
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 07:52:00 -
[2783] - Quote
+1 bump to keep these topic fresh |
Jake Pappottess
Altyr Industries The Forgotten Templars
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 07:54:00 -
[2784] - Quote
Do not know if it is an original idea, but could current POS's become Player Owned Outposts (mostly in name) in the future/meantime while Player Owned Stations are developed by CCP and become Modular Stations. This allows both to serve similar purposes, but the obviously more complicated and expensive modular POS would be more efficient, more permanent, and more configurable. A good part of this solution is that it allows for Modular Stations to be released slowly overtime without a complete revamp of the entire current POS system.
Less so, A common issue seen is the WH space issue with stations. Stations being the technical sovereignty of WH space they provide some level of dominance. Perhaps Player owned outposts could be used as invasion tools with quicker deployment and the ability to be anchored near an enemy Station and to be offensive against it, or to provide staging areas to overcome lock down of large Modular Stations |
Arablue
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 13:23:00 -
[2785] - Quote
I have scanned through the thread here as best I can, so please forgive me if this is a re-post of someone else's suggestions.
One thing that needs to be seriously looked at regarding POS' is to choose between who owns the POS when dropped.
There is nothing more irritating than POS fuel Nag mails from a POS that was dropped purely for a certain player in the corp. Like many of the other deploy-able equipment in the game where one can launch for player or launch for corp needs to be an option for POS' . This helps in 2 ways:
1: Players that want to experience POS control /activities that are in a corp withing an alliance the ability to maintain their own structure without having to be given specific permissions by the corp that in some cases Corp officers are reluctant to give out for corp security or other reasons.
2: A privately owned POS would not Flood Corp notifications with fuel issues so that the notifications for POS being attacked won't get lost in the spam about fuel from an individually run tower. |
Balder Verdandi
Czerka. WHY so Seri0Us
144
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:26:00 -
[2786] - Quote
Bump!
Because we do need a sound resolution to POS management, roles, and access rights. Long live the failure of "Unified Inventory"! Player Owned Station fix dated back to 2006!
|
Celly Smunt
Viziam Amarr Empire
147
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 13:42:00 -
[2787] - Quote
Balder Verdandi wrote:Bump!
Because we do need a sound resolution to POS management, roles, and access rights.
Another bump as well.
Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator. |
Balder Verdandi
Czerka. WHY so Seri0Us
145
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 07:52:00 -
[2788] - Quote
Roles.
Not the kind you would have for dinner, but the ones we need to make things easier for us in game.
I have guys in my corp that want and/or need to make ammo, rigs, drones, etc., and we keep the BPC's available in the corporate hangar for this reason but ........
These stupid roles!!! You're giving me a headache with these roles!!!
I can't allow my corpmates to simply run the job from even their own hangar or else they could mess up the other jobs we have running. My indy guy will freak out if someone were to accidentally cancel a research job, and the way you guys setup these roles is very very messy.
We need a fix. Now. I can't have my indy guy do everything, nor does he want to keep track of ammo for one guy, missiles for another, crystals for miners, etc.. He has enough on his plate with building, researching, and making copies of BPO's for corp use.
I know you can't do anything about it with the Odyssey, but really ..... this has gone on for far too long.
Long live the failure of "Unified Inventory"! Player Owned Station fix dated back to 2006!
|
Balder Verdandi
Czerka. WHY so Seri0Us
146
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 08:43:00 -
[2789] - Quote
Balder Verdandi wrote:Roles.
Not the kind you would have for dinner, but the ones we need to make things easier for us in game.
I have guys in my corp that want and/or need to make ammo, rigs, drones, etc., and we keep the BPC's available in the corporate hangar for this reason but ........
These stupid roles!!! You're giving me a headache with these roles!!!
I can't allow my corpmates to simply run the job from even their own hangar or else they could mess up the other jobs we have running. My indy guy will freak out if someone were to accidentally cancel a research job, and the way you guys setup these roles is very very messy.
We need a fix. Now. I can't have my indy guy do everything, nor does he want to keep track of ammo for one guy, missiles for another, crystals for miners, etc.. He has enough on his plate with building, researching, and making copies of BPO's for corp use.
I know you can't do anything about it with the Odyssey, but really ..... this has gone on for far too long.
Quoting myself and bumping this. After this newest fiasco with the launcher, I'm fed up and want a fix ..... and the only reason why I've not cussed out you CCP devs is because I don't want to be banned even though I am upset to the point that if I ever go to FanFest there is a high probability I'll chew you devs a new arse for this stupidity and sloth.
And I mean a honest to goodness proper fix, not the normal buggy software patches you roll out that require additional patching or workarounds.
Long live the failure of "Unified Inventory"! Player Owned Station fix dated back to 2006!
|
Celly S
Viziam Amarr Empire
156
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 23:46:00 -
[2790] - Quote
proper fix bumpage....
o/ Celly Smunt. Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 103 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |