|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 36 post(s) |
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 16:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
As a director for nearly 2 years of a successful WH corp, here are my thoughts:
- Subsystem reconfiguration in the hole? Big win.
- Accessing anything from anywhere within the shield? Also a win.
- Adding new hangar to allow personal items to be securely stored? Partial win. My only concern is directors not being able to access members' personal hangars. If someone wants to keep things truly private, they have the option to put them in an orca, or anchored in a GSC, etc. The directors manage the tower resources, and (in my mind) ought to be able to access anything stored there, including members' private hangars.
- Removing sovereignty requirement for Capship Maintenance Arrays? Somewhat win, but also somewhat terrifying. Yes, it'll be nice to be able to store all our vanity dreads and carriers somewhere appropriate, instead of having to anchor SMAs everywhere, one per capital ship. But please, please, PLEASE tell me you're not going down the path of allowing supercaps and titans to be built in wormholes (i.e. no capital ship ASSEMBLY arrays without sov). Don't get me wrong, if it becomes allowed, we'll be the first ones doing it, but it's a bad, bad, bad idea. At this point, no wormhole corp is immune from eviction; everyone in every hole could be evicted by a dedicated force determined to do so. But if you allow wormhole dwellers access to the biggest firepower in the game, you will astronomically increase the difficulty of evicting a well-dug-in corp. As of right now, if we find an enemy POS in our system trying to establish a foothold to evict us, we bash the POS and send the intruders home via pod express, a process taking hours or days. If we had access to supers and titans, we not only could bash their POS faster, but also repel any firepower they managed to bring with greater ease. Effectively, removing the sov requirement to construct titans and supers would greatly increase the position of the defender, and up the ante of the attacker. I'm as big of an industrial carebear as they come, but I don't want to see that, for it would mean greater safety and less fights. The whole point of wormholes is lack of safety. Please don't ruin that.
- No mention of fixing gas reactions to at least add a progress bar? Fail. C'mon, CCP. Just give me a timer like the refinery arrays have, or something better than "check the output in a couple hours and see if you set it up right"
But all together, thank you for putting effort where it will be most noticed by the most players. I bet this is the most closely scrutinized devblog EVER. |
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
6
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 16:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:And a reminder once again, we are not allowing people to build supercaps in wormholes or lowsec, don't worry.
<3
Pity I can only like this once.
|
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
8
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 18:26:00 -
[3] - Quote
Oreamnos Amric wrote:ExookiZ wrote: This will create more problems than it does solves. I suspect I stand with almost every large WH corp in saying that this needs to be looked at. Please elaborate on the problems this creates for you that is so terrible you don't want them in your hole.
There are lots of things I don't want in my hole, but to each their own. Don't ask, don't tell...
|
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 18:38:00 -
[4] - Quote
Oreamnos Amric wrote:Not having CEO and Directors able to empty member hangers will mean increased timescales for moving POSs - i.e. a notice period to move your stuff or it will be lost for good. Without making the member hangers in pCHAs accessible to CEOs and Directors there will be plenty of times where a POS move results in destruction of player property. Even with a notice time period there will be people who didn't or couldn't log in.
I don't have a massive issue with the destruction of stuff, just having to wait a week or two because some mechanic is dumb.
I'm more concerned about persons taking other people's stuff or corporate stuff from CHAs, labs, arrays, etc, and deliberately placing it in their personal hangar as a denial-of-resource action. If directors, or at least the CEO, can access personal hangars, I'm happy about it. If it stays inaccessible to anyone other than the character who put it there, I'm not a fan, and would argue that they're more of a liability than a help.
|
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 18:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
Max Kolonko wrote:And Fozzie - while looking at POS structures, can You look at the problem with no ships droping from destroyed SMA???
Eh? I've shot SMAs for the candy inside before. Never noticed a problem. Are you sure the SMA wasn't empty to begin with? |
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 18:44:00 -
[6] - Quote
Altrue wrote:Even if the code for starbases is old; badly made and so on, I really have a hard time believing you when you are under "technical limitations" for everything.
"This code is crap and poorly commented and I'd have to reimplement it from scratch" counts as a technical limitation, and I don't have a hard time believing it at all ;) It gets extra embarrassing when it was code I wrote myself from a year or so ago...
|
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 19:03:00 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:If people are not willing to take the risk that their corp will move without them, they can always store certain items in the CHAs instead. Having tradeoffs and decisions to make between what to store in each of the two forms of storage is one of our goals.
To Hek with the people unwilling to take risk (hello? wormholes? pure risk?), but if you're looking for a reason to give CEO/director access to personal hangar, it's to prevent a situation where an average member can do something that a CEO/director can't. Stuff can be stolen from existing CHAs, yes, but anything that's anywhere in any POS module can be accessed by the CEO/directors. Making a POS module where a trolling thief can put other people's stuff (taken from CHA, lab, assembly array, whatever) and deny them access to it, and a CEO/director can't touch it either, would be a new vulnerability.
At that point, from the system you describe, the only way to even have a chance of getting that "stuff" back would be to offline the tower and blow up the personal hangar array and hope for the best. Ew.
|
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 19:14:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tshaowdyne Dvorak wrote:Kennesaw Breach wrote:[quote=CCP Fozzie]Making a POS module where a trolling thief can put other people's stuff (taken from CHA, lab, assembly array, whatever) and deny them access to it, and a CEO/director can't touch it either, would be a new vulnerability. As opposed to just putting it in a carrier/Orca/freighter/hauler and logging off? This is no new threat to anyone. You could fly the stuff out to a customs office and dump it in there now if you wanted. With the new PHA, the CEO and Directors will be able to see what you have in it, so they can sanction you accordingly for thefts. If you want to profit from your spoils, you'll still have to drag it out of the wormhole in something that anyone in the corp can blow up.
True that there's no new threat, merely an extension and convenience factor to an existing one. I just don't like the idea of there being something in a POS I manage that I can't manage. |
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 19:44:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tshaowdyne Dvorak wrote:Verified. I was wrong about this and you are correct. I never did try until now. Still, GSCs anchored in a safe spot. Hard to track down (but not impossible) and can only be killed to be rid of. Nobody can get into them either.
My point is that making it in the POS at the new personal hangar makes it trivial to deny access to resources. I know it's not a new threat, but the personal hangar array makes denial of access literally a drag and drop thing for the trolling thief, with no recourse from the POS managers. Philosophically, I don't like having a POS module with aspects that are off limits to the POS managers and POS owner.
|
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
21
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 20:16:00 -
[10] - Quote
silens vesica wrote:If you've got full capacity in the WH, money becomes less of a concern. I only venture out of the WH now to get those necessary components for fuel blocks & munitions that I can't source/create locally. If I had better refining capacity, I'd venture out even less.
I have lived exclusively in W-space for the past 2 years, and I am not in favor of any changes that make WH dwellers less reliant on having to travel outside their own systems.
Fuel in, loot out. I don't even mind the refinery losses, that's what rorqual ore compression is for. And I don't mind not being able to reprocess metal scraps, either, because people would just bring in modules to reprocess for their minerals rather than mine them in the hole, if reprocessing were a thing one could do in the hole. But if we're going to start getting nitpicky about industrial stuff that wasn't explicitly discussed in the original devblog, here's my laundry list:
1) Gas reactions: I've gotten used to the massive clickfest to set it up, but can we PLEASE get a progress meter on it? Or just make it a manufacturing job like everything else? 2) Ore compression: Yes it works, but the rorqual assembly lines always show as "READY" even if they're in use, so that's bugged. 3) Ore compression continued: If one corp member leaves jobs unfinished on the assembly line, and another corp member gets in the rorqual, that new corp member cannot start new jobs on the in use assembly lines (even though they show as READY). The original installer of those jobs will have to get in the rorqual and clear the lines. 4) Ore compression continued, continued: Can we not make jobs run multiple times? To do ore compression at maximum efficiency, it takes (I kid you not) one click every 6 seconds for 5 minutes straight. And that's for one cycle of the rorq's siege module. Giving jobs the ability to be run more than once, or better yet run until the supply of ore is depleted, would be huge. HUGE. 5) Ore compression, the final: Does anyone outside of W-space even do ore compression? This isn't really a bug needing fixing, I'm just curious if the nullsec denizens even care about it, or if they just jump freighter their raw ore to an outpost with max skills and implants to do their refining on the spot. Nullseccers have it so easy.
That's all I've got for now. If anyone wants to hear more, I may get drunk at fanfest and go off on an indy carebear rant about these topics to anyone who will listen.
|
|
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
28
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 14:22:00 -
[11] - Quote
Katsuo Nuruodo wrote:And, are you saying that in order to move your POS to a different place, you'd now have to bash your own pos modules first?
That would be the unfortunate side effect of the proposed personal hangar array. If there's stuff in it when you need to move, and the owners of that stuff aren't around right then, the only way to recover anything is to blow it up.
Unless CEOs/directors can pull stuff out of people's personal hangars, I don't see us anchoring the new module at all.
|
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
28
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 14:38:00 -
[12] - Quote
Proddy Scun wrote:Currently if you look in most C3+ wh you see 3-10 POS.
I suspect a lot of that is due to storing personal user stuff 7 users per CHA (in additon to shared area CHA). True some of it is also just to prevent quick conquest by having fall back POS.
In any case I would bet the number of POS in typical well developed C3+ wh systems would fall to much lower numbers maybe more like 1-3 for most wh's
You might want to add Force Fields to your overview, mate. Not all POSes in wormholes are online, and some of those offline POSes are offline for good reason.
Wormhole POSes are for defense, changing ships, and doing industrial work. Personal storage is best done in orcas.
|
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
28
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 14:43:00 -
[13] - Quote
Proddy Scun wrote:heh or CCP could make things really easy on themselves. Just allow WH and single star system in unconquered constellation to have some sort of limited single system sovereignty structure so corps can build real outposts and stations instead. POS issues solved.
And with sov comes supercaps and titans. And with that comes a lot of unsubscribing of wormhole players. |
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 15:12:00 -
[14] - Quote
silens vesica wrote:Infinion wrote:CCP Masterplan wrote:Stegas Tyrano wrote:Will the tiny drones that move stuff around be animated? They better be! They'll only be animated inside the server ;) Just out of curiosity, if you used an existing drone model and only animated it in such a way that it 1) moves between two points 2) passes through all objects and 3) appears/disappears within a certain distance from a structure which process would be too time-consuming to include with the feature? Dude. Burning needless and precious server-side CPU cycles. Completely needless, and counter-productive to what we want CCP to be doing - Putting cycles into things that matter.
Oh, I'd lump it in with the other eye candy, like the little ships at customs offices that make me think I'm getting ganked every time I see one flash onto my screen... those are great. |
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 16:26:00 -
[15] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:And to also repeat the statement my earlier post, that allowing CEOs to access the storage within the PHA does not currently appear to be an option for the first iteration of the structure. We may consider it for later iterations.
Please do!
Everything else announced is spot on. Good luck and happy coding! |
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
41
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 18:21:00 -
[16] - Quote
CCP Masterplan wrote:For all you players asking about the roles for cancelling jobs (and this applies to regular station jobs also) I'm going to have a look and see if there is something we can do about it. Take this with a hefty slice of Expectation Management Pie, but one simple possibility I'm thinking of is restricting the ability to cancel corp jobs to director roles only. With just the Factory-Manager role, you'd still be able to cancel your own corp jobs, but not those corp jobs belonging to your corpmates. What do you think about this idea? Be aware this is a very specific, focused fix to an problem that has come up a few times. Please don't feature-creep on me, or there's simply no scope for it happening!
I would support this. |
|
|
|