| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 36 post(s) |
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
5
   |
Posted - 2013.04.02 15:27:00 -
[1] - Quote
Dranchela wrote:A hanger is something you put clothes on in a closet. A hangar is something you store aircraft/spacecraft in.
I'm glad I didn't have to be the one to say it. It's a little bit like having an eyelash in your eye to see a word misspelled over and over again. Eventually you'll get over it, but it's really annoying while it's there. Apparently they managed to fix it between the time I read the article and started to write this comment, so now you and I will look like crazy people. ;)
On the topic of the changes: they all sound excellent. The only one I don't really care about is changing the interface to set up defenses. It's a huge pain to set them up initially, yes, but it's also something that doesn't happen very often. If something needs to be scrapped in order for other features to make the expansion and more time is needed to finish the other tasks, please deprioritize this. I think we can all live with the currently crappy experience of setting up a POS for a while longer if the trade-off is that personal hangars, repackaging, and Tech 3 subsystem swaps become a reality! |
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 15:42:00 -
[2] - Quote
Dalcho wrote:However I agree that ceo/directtors MUST be allowed access to remove items rather than destroying them for afk/on vacation members.
This defeats the purpose of personal storage. Remember, these changes are a stopgap for a full POS overhaul, not the final product. I think that many of us who have to live out of a POS are tired of the theft problems inherent in a poorly designed system. Someone can get director access and clean out everyone's stuff, and it happens all the time in Eve.
I don't think it's the best solution that the only ways to get rid of a player's crap who has left the corp is to blow up the hangar or to unanchor it, but short of a full overhaul of the roles system (which is the clear solution that must eventually be implemented) it's a reasonable compromise that I'm willing to accept in order to have storage completely incapable of being stolen. I'd rather my crap burn in a fire than have it be stolen by some jerk who I didn't approve of, and had no say in, getting a directorship.
On the other hand, since it seems like the personal storage will be available to all members of the corp, maybe there's no upper limit to how much the structure can store. Then it hardly matters whether directors/CEO can access what's in there since it's not depleting valuable storage space for others. If that's the case, the only reason they'd want access to it is in order to take what isn't theirs. The rage of thieves warms the cockles of my heart. |
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
7
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 15:57:00 -
[3] - Quote
Sedrie wrote:There's no station trading in a POS, so without shared hangars between Billy and Timmy, he's got little other options.
Nobody said anything about removing the current CHA structures. Those will probably continue to exist in their current state. As I understand it, the new personal hangar will be a different structure entirely and work like a customs office.
|
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
8
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 16:07:00 -
[4] - Quote
Stegas Tyrano wrote:Will the tiny drones that move stuff around be animated? They better be!
I think it's cooler to imagine that they're nanites capable of completely disassembling things at a molecular level, moving them, and reassembling them where they need to be. It's like the Star Trek transporter system, but with cool little intelligent nanites doing the work instead of magical beams that are unlikely to ever exist in reality. What do the nanites do when they're not busy moving anyone's stuff around? Maybe they play Minecraft with molecules, building their own little nanite worlds. |
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 16:20:00 -
[5] - Quote
From the blog post:
"No limit on the number of characters that can use the structure, but storage is limited per character. The exact per-character volume is undecided but we are currently considering a range from 10,000m3 to 40,000m3."
Devs, can we get some clarification on this point? Is there an upper limit to the volume the whole structure can hold? In other words, does the volume of materials stored in it by various characters actually deplete available volume for everyone else? This would clarify whether or not directors/CEO having access to stuff really matters.
Altrue wrote:Better than nothing but there is so many problems with these changes that it's.. dissapointing. The ability for director to access others members' stuff to emergency evac, private hangars size and potential abuses with alts, unchanged corp roles... At least we are keeping the old CHA.
If you're a tiny corp, maybe you won't want or need it. If you're a large corp, let the players decide what stuff should be stored in personal hangars and what should be stored in the current CHAs based on their fear of losing stuff to eventual POS destruction. If they want directors to be able to move it, they can put it in their CHA. Otherwise they store it in the personal hangar of their own volition. Choices are a good thing. |
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 16:52:00 -
[6] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I can confirm that we're not removing CHAs, the Personal Hangar structure is a separate structure and the two can exist alongside each other to meet different needs.
Letting directors and/or CEOs access the member's sections of the PHA is not going to be within our scope for the first iteration due to technical limitations, and I am honestly not sold on ever adding it. These structures are not intended to completely replace CHAs for all purposes, and the added difficulty to rapid evacuation provides slightly more incentive for wormhole invasions.
The Personal Hangar does not have any limits to total storage, which significantly reduces the amount of management that needs to be done to keep it running smoothly.
And a reminder once again, we are not allowing people to build supercaps in wormholes or lowsec, don't worry.
This addresses every significant problem I could foresee with the stopgaps you guys are putting in. As a part of emergent gameplay, it's a good thing that there's a bit of intelligence needed to decide what goes into a PHA and what goes into a CHA. Do I want directors to be able to move my stuff in case we get invaded? Which stuff? Which stuff can I part with, or don't trust corp leadership to have access to (keeping honest people honest - you might trust your neighbors, but lock your front door anyway)? Everyone hates the thought of losing stuff to invading forces, but this is Eve, and invading forces happen (and should happen!). Either defend your stuff or plan well to protect/evac it. This just adds another delicious layer to that planning.
Great post, as always, Fozzie. You have my autocannon! |
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 17:52:00 -
[7] - Quote
chen Gidrine wrote:I don't know if this was covered earlier but with the fact that is is all unable to be moved by anyone other then it's owner what happens if the tower is attacked and an emergency evac is needed? Anything in the private hangers is just SOL and the best you can do is destroy it all yourself before it gets onto the attackers kill mail? 
It was covered. CHAs will continue to exist, so you'll have the option to use them or PHAs at your discretion. If you fear that you won't be able to get on in time to move your own stuff and want directors to be able to do it, put it in a CHA instead.
Also, stuff in POS modules don't show up on killmails now, so why would you expect they'd start to? I'm a software developer with a ton of experience myself, so I feel qualified in saying that by and large developers are lazy creatures. We won't code something we weren't tasked to unless it serves our own laziness (lots of throwaway code snippets or mini projects are produced in order to automate stuff we do manually which would otherwise waste our time). I assume that you just weren't aware that module killmails don't show contents, just the death of the module. |
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 18:10:00 -
[8] - Quote
Torrelus Toh'Kon wrote:On the surface the first option would seem simpler, BUT surely any given array will NOT have an unlimited capacity (therefore inline with current array instead of NPC station hanger).
Incorrect. They will have infinite capacity as far as the module is concerned. The limits to capacity are on the characters.
Nobody is shocked that customs offices can store an infinite amount of crap in 35,000 m^3 allotments per character that no other player in the game has access to. The new PHA will be no different, except the amount that can be stored per character will probably be smaller.
It is done this way because it allows the array to remain for personal access only, without worrying that orphaned assets aren't cutting into other people's available storage space and without the need to give anyone access to it except the character to whom the assets belong. If orphaned assets were to take up the module's available m^3, I'd be the first in line requesting that directors had access to them because it's inevitable that the space would get chewed up by people who aren't playing Eve anymore or who have left the corp. |
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 18:26:00 -
[9] - Quote
Atomic Option wrote:If someone's not available / on vacation / quits during an evacuation and/or POS reinforce, there will be no way to evac or self-destruct their stuff to deter looters, as is currently done with everything in an SMA, unless directors or people with some sort of role have access to personal ship hangers.
If you're going on extended leave from the game, then move your crap to an NPC station in known space. It's inconvenient, but also a surefire way not to lose your crap.
Atomic Option wrote:Of course that would somewhat remove the "personal" nature of the ship hanger.
Therein lies the rub. This is why I support the devs' current conception and not any of the players' suggestions to the contrary. Personal means personal, and it's something K-space dwellers take for granted. Your stuff in an NPC station cannot be touched/taken/lost by anyone other than a GM and drunken you. Drunken you doesn't know better, but leads to hilarious stories of losses for the rest of the community. The rest of us support drunken you in all of his drunken endeavors, for your tears are delicious. ;) |
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
12
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 19:09:00 -
[10] - Quote
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. |
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
16
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 19:20:00 -
[11] - Quote
Oreamnos Amric wrote:Fair point but not everyone has an Orca alt or would be willing to commit an Orca to a wormhole they intend to rob. What Kennesaw is laying out is a way anyone could easily instigate asset deprivation.
Again: move the crap to a customs office. They're just general storage floating in space that you can put anything you like into.
Also, who needs to move an Orca or any such thing into a WH in order to rob them? You just train up your character(s) to be able to fly an Orca/all the freighters/carriers and you steal one of those too. Why go small in your theft when you can nab a 1.5 billion ISK freighter or even more disgustingly expensive carrier if that's what you're infiltrating a corp to do? Also, don't most people just strip every ship they can of valuable modules and self destruct all the ones they can't easily move for the insurance?
I'm no corp thief, but I can certainly think like one, and have read enough posts on heists committed in the past to get the gist of how those guys operate. It's called "casing the joint." In real life heists, people figure out what they can easily take with them and plan to do that quickly. Yes, the bank's whole safe did cost them a ton to have installed, but it also weighs several tons and is much harder to make off with than the contents of a specific few safety deposit boxes which may well contain bearer bonds or other valuable assets that are worth more than what's in the whole rest of the bank. |
Tshaowdyne Dvorak
The Dark Space Initiative
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 19:35:00 -
[12] - Quote
Oreamnos Amric wrote:Tshaowdyne Dvorak wrote:
Again: move the crap to a customs office. They're just general storage floating in space that you can put anything you like into.
I'm not 100% on this, but I'm fairly certain POCOs will only hold PI materials.
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. |
| |
|