| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Daenna Chrysi
Omega Foundry Unit
The Ditanian Alliance
109
   |
Posted - 2014.12.16 14:46:37 -
[61] - Quote
Alliance Service Structures,
Since the roles are a pain to sort out, it could be useful to bring out structures that dont have the corp hangar, since if I remember right that is one of the things causing pain when trying to provide services to the alliance. So labs, hangars, and so on, everything that now has a corp hangar, would be nice if there was a service structure version of it for providing alliance services.
I know this probably is not a small thing, but, since the roles are such a mess. This would be a nice workaround for the issue while sorting out the bigger problems.
|
Aryndel Vyst
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
829
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 14:46:54 -
[62] - Quote
Please allow for a "rejection evemail" if you reject a corp application. Either standard format like the welcome mail, or individual mails like a "rejection reason" box somewhere.
The use case is someone applies to corp but they screw something up with their application, and you want to tell them why. As it stands now you have to physically EVEmail them with the reason which is a lot of effort. Streamlining that process would be extremely helpful to corps that handle hundreds of applications a month.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
1235
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 14:47:50 -
[63] - Quote
Not sure if this is in scope, but making the Deliveries hangar be a first class inventory location that you can add things to (without using a contract and an alt,) stack items in, or split stacks would be nice.
Also, getting rid of limited office slots in stations/outposts entirely would be AMAZING.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Ivana Twinkle
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
482
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 14:49:44 -
[64] - Quote
Aryndel Vyst wrote:
The use case is someone applies to corp but they screw something up with their application,
Most does, really. This would be a good thing. |
Amy Garzan
Northstar Cabal
Tactical Narcotics Team
22
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 14:53:16 -
[65] - Quote
Aryndel Vyst wrote:Please allow for a "rejection evemail" if you reject a corp application. Either standard format like the welcome mail, or individual mails like a "rejection reason" box somewhere.
The use case is someone applies to corp but they screw something up with their application, and you want to tell them why. As it stands now you have to physically EVEmail them with the reason which is a lot of effort. Streamlining that process would be extremely helpful to corps that handle hundreds of applications a month.
+1 for this |
DaveTheGreat
Enlightened Industries
Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 14:58:08 -
[66] - Quote
Aryndel Vyst wrote:Please allow for a "rejection evemail" if you reject a corp application. Either standard format like the welcome mail, or individual mails like a "rejection reason" box somewhere.
The use case is someone applies to corp but they screw something up with their application, and you want to tell them why. As it stands now you have to physically EVEmail them with the reason which is a lot of effort. Streamlining that process would be extremely helpful to corps that handle hundreds of applications a month.
+1 this is a great idea. |
calaretu
Honestly We didnt know
Unsettled.
239
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 14:59:27 -
[67] - Quote
a more avaiable and understandable description of the function each role has would be good
~Bringer of happiness
http://collapsedbehind.blogspot.no/
|
Akasha Mayan
Paladin Order
Fidelas Constans
8
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 15:04:22 -
[68] - Quote
If I could manage market deliveries more directly (i.e. stacking/entering items, especially the most wonderful alt+t assets interface) without using contracts to myself that would be extremely helpful.
It would also be nice if I could seize members' assets on basis of eminent domain. |
Makari Aeron
The Shadow's Of Eve
TSOE Consortium
153
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 15:12:01 -
[69] - Quote
1. Corp role interface
A. Titles / corp role name should wrap so that it isn't infinite length as the corp role window is not infinitely scrollable
B. more available titles
2. corp roles
A. better description of what each role gives the player
B. split POS rights from Station rights (shouldn't have to have station roles at all)
C. make it so where POSes have no direct ties to Sov (un)anchoring or on/off-lining
3. corp hangars
A. more corp hangars
B. have the corp hangars be able to have a description
CCP RedDawn: Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty.
CCP Goliath: I often believe that the best way to get something done is to shout at the person trying to help you. http://goo.gl/PKGDP
|
Serene Repose
1752
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 15:15:04 -
[70] - Quote
If you're interested in "little things" contact the Goonwaffles. I understand that's their area of expertise.
Treason never prospers. What is the reason? Why, if it prospers, none dare call it "treason."
|
|
|
TedochiKito
Petrovytsh RusCosInd Corporation
30
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 15:24:42 -
[71] - Quote
To that stated above, it's difficult to add anything. However, there is one thing that NO ONE remembered!
Shares. They are so worthless that most players already forgotten about their existence.
If we are talking about changing the interface, the only one thing should be added to the corp. management window relating to shares - drop-down list of corporations that you can manage, with a package of their shares. |
Easthir Ravin
Easy Co.
Fatal Ascension
114
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 15:25:15 -
[72] - Quote
Roles
Recruiting
Rejection
Resource Management
IN THE IMORTAL WORDS OF SOCRATES: -á" I drank WHAT?!"
|
Kaasboer
30plus
Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
1
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 15:32:09 -
[73] - Quote
Corp contracts longer than 14 days.
In fact, since your asking, how about sell/buy orders limited to your corp members if people so choose++ |
Talia Andronicus
The Pack
Fidelas Constans
1
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 15:39:31 -
[74] - Quote
Aryndel Vyst wrote:Please allow for a "rejection evemail" if you reject a corp application. Either standard format like the welcome mail, or individual mails like a "rejection reason" box somewhere.
The use case is someone applies to corp but they screw something up with their application, and you want to tell them why. As it stands now you have to physically EVEmail them with the reason which is a lot of effort. Streamlining that process would be extremely helpful to corps that handle hundreds of applications a month.
Very good idea +1
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
5821
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 15:45:25 -
[75] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:As mentioned in may other places:
Ideally you would have the ability to grant permissions to groups, which can have other groups as members (nested) with the permissions flowing down to users. (With both allow and deny privileges. Deny overrides any number of allows)
Permissions should be possible down to the structure level, with inheritance from a number of levels.
So basically structure it like Windows Server Active Domain users and groups.
That could sound monstrously boring to a layperson but anybody who administrated WinX servers can see the efficiency in this and how useful that would be for in-game corporation management.
Bring back DEEEEP Space!
|
Marcus Gord
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security
75009
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 15:52:12 -
[76] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:As mentioned in may other places:
Ideally you would have the ability to grant permissions to groups, which can have other groups as members (nested) with the permissions flowing down to users. (With both allow and deny privileges. Deny overrides any number of allows)
Permissions should be possible down to the structure level, with inheritance from a number of levels.
So basically structure it like Windows Server Active Domain users and groups. That could sound monstrously boring to a layperson but anybody who administrated WinX servers can see the efficiency in this and how useful that would be for in-game corporation management.
as an MCP, i can get behind this.  
".....Storm'd at with shot and shell,
Boldly they rode and well....."
http://i.imgur.com/LM2NKUf.png
|
Speedy Conzollis
Only Fools and Horses
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 16:43:46 -
[77] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:As mentioned in may other places:
Ideally you would have the ability to grant permissions to groups, which can have other groups as members (nested) with the permissions flowing down to users. (With both allow and deny privileges. Deny overrides any number of allows)
Permissions should be possible down to the structure level, with inheritance from a number of levels.
So basically structure it like Windows Server Active Domain users and groups. That could sound monstrously boring to a layperson but anybody who administrated WinX servers can see the efficiency in this and how useful that would be for in-game corporation management.
So we would belong to a domain within a forest instead of corps and alliances? :P |
Prt Scr
569th Freelancers
94
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 16:56:10 -
[78] - Quote
I'd like the ability to 'hire out' POS (industrial) services for a fee...to non corp & non alliance members, similar to the ways POCO's can be set. Different fees for each would be nice.
This is my signature, there are many like it , but this one is mine
|
Sol Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
274
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 16:57:32 -
[79] - Quote
Not sure this counts, but more colors and images for creating corplogos would be nice. |
Prt Scr
569th Freelancers
94
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 16:58:09 -
[80] - Quote
and I didn't forget....ROLES, ROLES, ROLES, Roles.
This is my signature, there are many like it , but this one is mine
|
|
|
DaReaper
Net 7
1445
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 17:01:49 -
[81] - Quote
I am sure these have been said but here is a list, I'm also going to add on a small bit of my alliance management gripes cause I feel they are tied together:
In no real order:
The CEO should have the ability to kick anyone, at any time, for any reason. (yes I know the technical and gameplay limitations, this is why ceo only) Regaurdless of roles, amount of shares, or if you are docked.
The role system is complicated and doesn't give you enough information. For example, setting hanger access for 'other' makes no sense as to what exactly is other?
Hanger limited to 7 tabs is a huge pain for running a hanger array in a wh where you don't have station access, the personal hanger array kinda helped, but its still limiting. This also limits access in station hangers.
Not fully knowing what one title does vs another, it took me years to figure out that what each thing did. The title system should be scrapped for a more robust "access right: view, take, use" like: Corp wallet access: full, view Rent a lab: anywhere, specific spot, etc.
Shares are pointless, if the role system changes so locking down bp is easier, then shares either need to be killed or have a full overhaul.
On shares: The ability to split or have a share buy back would be awesome, this might actually help get a player run stock market that functions.
On shares: If a corp is closed that share should reflect the corp is closed or should be removed from all share holders share tabs. I have a few shares from dead corps that Ingore, would be nice to get a mail that a corp closed and the share went away.
The ability to set an auto kick would be nice, like "if corp mates are inactive for X time, kick" would be good.
Things besides mission rewards and bounties over 35K should be taxed (note this could be bounced to an alliance level where all transactions can be taxed) you should be able to set your tax based on activity. For example, I don't want people to trade all day in my corp so I set a 100% trading tax. Or I want to encourage missions runners to run missions so I drop my tax to 1% while still taxing miners, traders, etc. I firmly believe a corp should have the abilty to tax anything it wants. (this also goes for an alliance)
More tools for players to easily see what type of corp it is, like if taxes become more robust I can see a tax history so I know that they may dislike my play style.
A lot of my older gripes got fixed, so I'm good
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
ploptastic
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 17:08:34 -
[82] - Quote
Aryndel Vyst wrote:Please allow for a "rejection evemail" if you reject a corp application. Either standard format like the welcome mail, or individual mails like a "rejection reason" box somewhere.
The use case is someone applies to corp but they screw something up with their application, and you want to tell them why. As it stands now you have to physically EVEmail them with the reason which is a lot of effort. Streamlining that process would be extremely helpful to corps that handle hundreds of applications a month.
+1 this. Amazing idea. |
Angelica Everstar
67
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 17:16:43 -
[83] - Quote
To be updated
§ Any typos, bad spelling or grammar found, are yours to keep.
¢ Bonds: Current AE07 1 Trillion (Filled) // Total : 2+ Trillon ISK
¦Æ Angel ConsultingGäó || Angel's Pawn ShopGäó
|
DaReaper
Net 7
1445
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 17:38:57 -
[84] - Quote
I'll add a +1 to the welcome and rejection mail ideas.
At times in my ceo/alliance leader life this would of been a life saver
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
4504
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 17:49:46 -
[85] - Quote
Speedy Conzollis wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:As mentioned in may other places:
Ideally you would have the ability to grant permissions to groups, which can have other groups as members (nested) with the permissions flowing down to users. (With both allow and deny privileges. Deny overrides any number of allows)
Permissions should be possible down to the structure level, with inheritance from a number of levels.
So basically structure it like Windows Server Active Domain users and groups. That could sound monstrously boring to a layperson but anybody who administrated WinX servers can see the efficiency in this and how useful that would be for in-game corporation management. So we would belong to a domain within a forest instead of corps and alliances? :P
That's probably taking it a touch too far 
Though being able to have groups within a corp, which include groups from other corporations isn't the world's worst plan
Woo! CSM 9!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Neevor Airuta
Grey Horizon
68
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 17:55:24 -
[86] - Quote
Role managment obviously needs a revamp. As of lesser ones I'd like to see two:
- being able to select standing displayed in local / fleet instead of corp + allince automaticly overriding lower levels
- renting corp infrastructure to people from outside corp; with access limitation mechanics of some sort and ability to set rent either per service or for timed access |
Crynsos Cealion
Matari Munitions
The Obsidian Front
19
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 18:07:54 -
[87] - Quote
Corporation Standings
Kinda annoying for diplos when you change a standing (or add or remove) and then it has a good chance of just reverting that change a couple minutes later... |
Kossaw
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
108
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 18:13:15 -
[88] - Quote
Its been said before, but I just wanted to add to the list of voices telling you just how bad the current Corp Roles interface is. There just so much wrong with it its hard to know where to start.
- The available corp roles themselves simply are not flexible enough. While theres a level of detail on where roles are applied that 90% of the time isnt useful, theres a huge lack of detail on what roles allow/prevent you from doing.
- Its a nightmare trying to manage the current roles system. One missing tick box can expose your assets to theft in some obscure location half way across the map where you forgot your corp had an office. One of my old corps lost billions in assets because somebody had access to the delivery hangars, but not in their home station.
- Theres no overview of who has what roles. Auditing who can do what means going through every single setting and double checking everything. Even so, making mistakes is easy.
- Lets not even start on POS management, starbase defence and fueling roles 
- The "search" tool for finding members in a role looks just like a badly kludged together interface on top of an SQL query to the database. Its a horrendous click fest of selecting drop boxes and pressing buttons to perhaps maybe find what you want this time.
- Auditing is frankly broken. Most of the information you need to try to work out who did what to whom is either missing or wrong.
- If you re-open the corp management interface after you did a large search yesterday, the search repeats again and you sit for minutes waiting for it to complete.
Sorry, theres just nothing good that can be said about corp management. At best it "works" - but only just.
Thanks for looking at this finally Punkturis. We all look forward to seeing what you guys can come up with.
WTB : An image in my signature
|
RDevz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
227
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 18:16:54 -
[89] - Quote
Roles.
It requires Director role to change the time at which an Infrastructure hub exits reinforced mode. This is inconsistent with stations, which can be retimed by Station Manager. More to the point, an Infrastructure Hub (and indeed a Territorial Claim Unit) can be offlined by a Station Manager.
This makes the added security from limiting the retiming further a massive headache, as sov-holding corps try to limit the number of directors they have, because directors can do fun things like drop the corporation out of the alliance.
To quote a certain short, ginger developer at Fanfest 2013, this is a "really dumb" game design decision. I'm willing to offer eternal gratitude and/or leftover duty free alcohol from the next time I visit Iceland if it's changed so that Station Manager can time the Ihub.
~
|
Viceran Phaedra
Instar Heavy Industries
60
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 18:19:02 -
[90] - Quote
Most things have been covered, but I'll champion the littlest of little things:
- Updated corp logos (as the ships get prettier the corp logos should probably get prettier too if we're going to be able to put them on our ships eventually). I would suggest tonnes of new ones along with revamped versions of the old ones that still look quite similar, for those of us that love our current logos. More colour choices for logo design too, please.
- Updated medal system. Again, with newer/shinier medal options. Also the text box for medal design is hopelessly broken (i.e. doesn't recognise formatting of any kind bold, italic etc etc...).
And now my big idea!!
A drag-and-drop corporate organisation chart so members can easily see who they can go to for what purpose at a glance! Just whack another tab in the corp screen and you're all set. Very corporatey! Don't want to use it? Don't click the tab then...
Chief Executive Officer
Instar Heavy Industries
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |