| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Brutor Shaun
Minmatar
Freelancers UK Alliance
   |
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:24:00 -
[1]
Was playing cat and mouse around the system tonight and warped into an ice field. Don't think I've ever had so much lag, as I was surrounded by literally hundereds of anchored cans.
Now I don't think you have to be a genius to realise that most of these cans haven't been used in a loooooong time. Would it hurt to give them a 3 month life, and then let them pop due to deterioration and being hit by space particals?
Surely it would be a load off the servers too?
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:26:00 -
[2]
I would /signed for that.
-----------------------------------------------
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:26:00 -
[3]
Been suggested a thousand times. Each time, everyone /signs it and CCP ignores it.
-[23] Member-
Listen to EVE-Trance Radio! (DSTrance channel ingame) |
Sebastien LeReparteur
Minmatar
SpaceTravelers Freelance Corp
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:34:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Sebastien LeReparteur on 11/01/2007 20:31:37
/Signed anyways!
BTW Dark Improvement is in the Queue for revelation 3 and this is one of those major improvement...
|
benzss
Gallente
The Peoples Republic of Power
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:37:00 -
[5]
Yep I agree
|
Bawldeux IV
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:45:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Dark Shikari
Been suggested a thousand times. Each time, everyone /signs it and CCP ignores it.
yep
ccp doesn't care
|
El Marchetto
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:45:00 -
[7]
Perfectly reasonable idea, all it needs is a DATETIME recording the time of anchoring, and a once a day scan (at downtime) of the anchored cans, if the can is 3months - 3 days then eve-mail the anchorer with a warning, if can there after 3 months then delete it...
|
MysticNZ
Solstice Systems Development Concourse
The Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:47:00 -
[8]
They should have a 3 month life span, but I think if they are being used within that time the timer gets reset. I'd be very happy with that.
-=====-
|
Dave White
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:50:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Dave White on 11/01/2007 20:46:41
Even though it will probably not do much.
/signed. Just let it expire if someone doesn't use it for 3 months.
Edit: Same for abandoned ships in space (shuttles,noobships etc) would be nice imho.
____________________________________________
EvE +NLINE - T+TALHELLDEATH SUPPORTER |
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:51:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Sebastien LeReparteur
BTW Dark Improvement is in the Queue for revelation 3 and this is one of those major improvement...
Really? I didn't hear of this... where's it posted?
-[23] Member-
Listen to EVE-Trance Radio! (DSTrance channel ingame) |
|
|
Marlenus
Caldari
Ironfleet Towing And Salvage
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:55:00 -
[11]
I have to chime in -- as I always do in such threads -- to point out that there's no need at all to make the cans go *pop*. Just let them drift free of their anchors, so that salvagers like me can get at them. They are expensive enough to be worth scooping.
|
Xendie
Forsaken Empire
The Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 20:57:00 -
[12]
small 1000 isk/week
medium 2500 isk/week
large 7500 isk/week
giants 20000 isk/week
you dont pay they get unanchored and recycled by concord for littering.
now that would sort out alot of cans.
Quote:
Nertzius > having fun being incompetitent?
|
Krxon Blade
Caldari
Apogee Group
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 01:03:00 -
[13]
Agreed!
Except cans in New Eden. Theese are sacred!
--
|
Feerax
FATAL REVELATIONS
FATAL Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 01:10:00 -
[14]
A life span when not scooped up and redeployed within X time.
|
Bawldeux IV
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 01:10:00 -
[15]
Originally by: MysticNZ
They should have a 3 month life span, but I think if they are being used within that time the timer gets reset. I'd be very happy with that.
I like that idea!
Satisfy the masses, reduce the lag and nobody can say that their important stuff went poof! (if it was important then why did you not check on it in 3 months time?)
that idea earns you 20 cookies
|
Mephesto Nizal
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 01:11:00 -
[16]
or when an asteriod field is mined out, switch locations of the field bit.
|
Malthros Zenobia
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 01:14:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Mephesto Nizal
or when an asteriod field is mined out, switch locations of the field bit.
All orbital items should move one grid per downtime to simulate an orbit.
Originally by: kieron
The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
|
Sorela
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 01:15:00 -
[18]
Hey they'll reduce pirate spawns to improve server performance but I've this nagging feeling getting this one fixed is a pipe dream for some reason.
|
Mistress Suffering
Einherjar Rising
Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 01:25:00 -
[19]
Agreed as always.
Please get rid of the endless clutter.
|
Suze'Rain
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 01:32:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Malthros Zenobia
Originally by: Mephesto Nizal
or when an asteriod field is mined out, switch locations of the field bit.
All orbital items should move one grid per downtime to simulate an orbit.
I remember suggesting that in the very early forums, long before beta.
would've eliminated BMJs if that had been implemented...
and I definately agree with the OP... there's a few cans out there that my corp have left behind, and we can't get rid of because we've lost the passwords... god knows what's in 'em, if anything.
|
|
|
SasRipper
DIE WITH HONOUR
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 01:34:00 -
[21]
I reamber my posts on this topic fell on deaf ears @ ccp too 
anyway /signed & get rid of shuttles & ibis as well 
|- Insert witty sig here -|
Save Radar Scanner Man!
|
Frug
SYOID
Fimbulwinter
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 01:36:00 -
[22]
Signed but CCP doesn't care
- - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - or automatic signatures - - - - - - - - |
Terranid Meester
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 01:40:00 -
[23]
Id prefer if they could be hacked into after so and so months (and can be unanchored). Then at least any tasty goodies inside won't be wasted ;)
|
Ajaku
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 02:09:00 -
[24]
Why does CCP refuse to do anything and ignore these repeated requests to do something about all these unused cans?!
They also should remove corporations or alliances that have zero members, but seeing as how CCP seems to not be able to even do something as simple as removing cans, it probably won't happen.
|
Gungankllr
Caldari
STK Scientific
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 02:23:00 -
[25]
Anchored cans are both a blessing and a curse for Eve online.
They are a great tool for a solo player or small corporation to be able to stock/live out of prior to POS deployment. (I've got fond memories a few years ago living out of 3 giant secures in Pure Blind)
They are a needed tool for this game, and I'm glad they exist.
That being said, persistent objects in Eve are bad without any plan to degrade them.
POS run out of fuel, they get offlined. Ships left in space can be probed out and stolen. Anchored cans can only be shot for hours or days in 0.0, or using a wardec killed in Empire.
I know the developers see the same anchored can hell I see when I fly around different systems.
I still have a can anchored in Isaziwa from 3 years ago, I saw it today.
The three cans I anchored in Pure Blind are still there.
With 100k players, the amount of cans anchored in space is going to grow, and there needs to be some game mechanics in place to ensure that the server load from cans is held at a nominal level, and that cans anchored by departed players are removed within a specific window of time.
I would suggest that the amount of cans you can anchor be directly resultant of your skill in anchoring.
A new skill tree and some new cans would be appropriate.
Adding "Colossal" and "Gargantuan" and "Holy Crap" sized anchored cans would be a great start.
Make them assembled in pieces, like an outpost. Larger cans equals less cans. Less is more.
If there is a 100k m3 can available, players won't need to anchor 40 giant secures.
I have a few suggestions for fixing the can problem.
1. Change the anchoring skill to a broader tree. Add Starbase Anchoring and Container Anchoring skills.
Seed the Starbase anchoring skills prior to making the change, and give the skill automatically to anyone with Starbase config roles set. (Like they do on the test server, they can add skills to players) If they do that prior to making the change, then players that are involved in the management of POS will not be affected, and no POS will disappear or go offline due to the skills of the person that anchored it being not adequate.
(Unless once an item is anchored, it doesn't matter anymore, CCP hasn't ever made the distinction to us I believe)
Each level of anchoring unlocks the ability to anchor a larger can.
Anchoring
1: Small Standard
2: Medium Standard
3: Large Standard
4. Giant Standard
5. Colossal Standard
Container Anchoring
1. Small Secure
2. Medium Secure
3. Large Secure
4. Giant Secure
5. Colossal Secure
Add to this maintenance fees, ship hazard fees, you name it.
If a player doesn't pay their fee to register the can in empire, then it is removed by a branch of CONCORD and the contents impounded in a CONCORD station. (With an automatic evemail sent)
I know that there might be some serious confusion, so I'd say players that have important stuff in cans would know exactly what is where.
Anything else that you forgot about 3 years ago is a non-issue.
Those are my ideas. if CCP really wants to improve the customer experience, then changing the way we think about anchorable containers is a start.
Also, Recruiting messsage cans are spam. if you want to recruit, then put together a decent post on the forums.
|
Decairn
Caldari
Shinra
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 02:39:00 -
[26]
Have a last accessed time updated when someone opens can.
Have daily or weekly db maintenance delete any not updated within 3 months or whatever is appropriate.
--Decairn
|
Ajaku
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 02:48:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Gungankllr
Anchored cans are both a blessing and a curse for Eve online.
They are a great tool for a solo player or small corporation to be able to stock/live out of prior to POS deployment. (I've got fond memories a few years ago living out of 3 giant secures in Pure Blind)
They are a needed tool for this game, and I'm glad they exist.
That being said, persistent objects in Eve are bad without any plan to degrade them.
POS run out of fuel, they get offlined. Ships left in space can be probed out and stolen. Anchored cans can only be shot for hours or days in 0.0, or using a wardec killed in Empire.
I know the developers see the same anchored can hell I see when I fly around different systems.
I still have a can anchored in Isaziwa from 3 years ago, I saw it today.
The three cans I anchored in Pure Blind are still there.
With 100k players, the amount of cans anchored in space is going to grow, and there needs to be some game mechanics in place to ensure that the server load from cans is held at a nominal level, and that cans anchored by departed players are removed within a specific window of time.
I would suggest that the amount of cans you can anchor be directly resultant of your skill in anchoring.
A new skill tree and some new cans would be appropriate.
Adding "Colossal" and "Gargantuan" and "Holy Crap" sized anchored cans would be a great start.
Make them assembled in pieces, like an outpost. Larger cans equals less cans. Less is more.
If there is a 100k m3 can available, players won't need to anchor 40 giant secures.
I have a few suggestions for fixing the can problem.
1. Change the anchoring skill to a broader tree. Add Starbase Anchoring and Container Anchoring skills.
Seed the Starbase anchoring skills prior to making the change, and give the skill automatically to anyone with Starbase config roles set. (Like they do on the test server, they can add skills to players) If they do that prior to making the change, then players that are involved in the management of POS will not be affected, and no POS will disappear or go offline due to the skills of the person that anchored it being not adequate.
(Unless once an item is anchored, it doesn't matter anymore, CCP hasn't ever made the distinction to us I believe)
Each level of anchoring unlocks the ability to anchor a larger can.
Anchoring
1: Small Standard
2: Medium Standard
3: Large Standard
4. Giant Standard
5. Colossal Standard
Container Anchoring
1. Small Secure
2. Medium Secure
3. Large Secure
4. Giant Secure
5. Colossal Secure
Add to this maintenance fees, ship hazard fees, you name it.
If a player doesn't pay their fee to register the can in empire, then it is removed by a branch of CONCORD and the contents impounded in a CONCORD station. (With an automatic evemail sent)
I know that there might be some serious confusion, so I'd say players that have important stuff in cans would know exactly what is where.
Anything else that you forgot about 3 years ago is a non-issue.
Those are my ideas. if CCP really wants to improve the customer experience, then changing the way we think about anchorable containers is a start.
Also, Recruiting messsage cans are spam. if you want to recruit, then put together a decent post on the forums.
This post in full of win, CCP, listen to this man!
|
Thundercat Doom
Minmatar
Melissa Jumpclones INC
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 02:56:00 -
[28]
Thank the local ore thieves for all these cans in the belts.
--------------------
--------------------
Flamers are Lamers. |
Tommy TenKreds
Animal Mercantile Executive
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 03:07:00 -
[29]
/signed for delete cans not accessed for > 3 months
or, add a "date anchored" to the cans' info and let us do the job through war decs..
Originally by: Tyrrax Thorrk
Is there anything other than ISK you might be interested in? |
Fedacorr
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 03:08:00 -
[30]
Yup, nothing difficult about can fixing, for the case of NEW cans.
Just make anchoring skill determine how many cans you can place, 1-5, AND make 'stealing from jetcans' a concord offense.
No more need for belt cans, and corps have enough cans between them for 'legitimate' can uses. Heck, make it 2 cans per level of anchoring, even, 2-10 cans.
The problems CCP probably don't want to face are how to deal with CURRENT cans. Just declare them illegal (after a warning period) and say they'll poof? Hear those screams?
At the LEAST, they could set it so you cannot place a NEW can if you're currently 'over' the new anchoring skill limits, thus keeping even MORE cans from being placed. Old, forgotten password cans, those are a problem, since I doubt CCP is going to want to require petitions to clear them.
I think to 'fix' this, they're going to have to bite the bullet, and declare a 'remove them or loose them' period. 1) Make anchoring skill determine total anchored cans allowed, with those already 'over limit' not removed, just prevent you from dropping a new can. 2) flag all current cans as 'present at start of warning time'. 3) Post lots, all over, that after 2 months, any can with that flag is going away if you have too many cans for your skill. 4) End of warning time, POOF those cans over the limit, preferably by oldest cans first, if that's flagged on the database. Let people cry.
|
|
|
tadig smik
Taintclan Industries
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 03:08:00 -
[31]
I can't agree with destroying all cans... I've got cans in places that I have no intention of 'forgetting'.
However, anchored cans that are within say, 150Km of a celestial object should have an expiration timer on them... It is annoying to warp into a belt and get lagged out because of cans...
|
R3dSh1ft
Caldari
FIRMA
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 03:10:00 -
[32]
Edited by: R3dSh1ft on 12/01/2007 03:12:21
Edited by: R3dSh1ft on 12/01/2007 03:09:07
/signed but with one addition - 6 months and with activity based. I.e. once you open the can, its life span resets again to 6 months, so if you take a long break, your stuff is still there and you dont have to do any fancy unanchor/anchor stuff to get your can to stay where you left it...
edit: and as others' suggestion, this is only for cans within say, 1000km of a celestical object
edit2: it would not be hard to do this with all current cans either, simple send the person who anchored the can, or the corp who anchored the can a notification saying the can will be destroyed within 6 months and a location of the can i.e. "The Giant secure container belongin to FIRMA corporation anchored at Niyabainen IV - Moon 1 will be destroyed due to tidal forces within the next 6 months" so at least its easy to find, i guess that kind of operation would take some serious server effort so it could be spread over several of the 1st tuesday extended maintenence DTs
______________________________________
|
Daelmon
Minmatar
Ascent of Ages
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 03:10:00 -
[33]
/signed
|
StratComm
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 03:19:00 -
[34]
I'd like to see an expiration timer based on anchoring date/time but with the ability to re-anchor them without having to scoop them up or wait for them to unanchor. What I've got in mind would be a right-click context option just like unanchoring, but to basically just reset the timer. Make the can expire in a month if it's not refreshed, but give it a visual indicator - blue blinkers instead of red/green or something (actually blue for anchored, red for expiring would make more sense in context if there weren't existing precedents) - when it's in the latter third or so of its anchor period.
Of course, that'd be too easy to maintain. CCP'd never go for it.
|
Marlenus
Caldari
Ironfleet Towing And Salvage
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 03:28:00 -
[35]
I still don't understand why you all keep talking about making the cans "expire". Just let them come unanchored, for pete's sake!
That way in crowded areas, folks will salvage up the old stale ones. But your precious hidden loot can will probably never be found, and will still be waiting when you go back to it. Would prevent a lot of the screaming.
|
Hurgh Jhev
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 03:33:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Marlenus
I have to chime in -- as I always do in such threads -- to point out that there's no need at all to make the cans go *pop*. Just let them drift free of their anchors, so that salvagers like me can get at them. They are expensive enough to be worth scooping.
I am in complete agreement with Marlenus, the price of the cans warrants a bit more respect than treating them like plain three month old jetcans.
|
Corbin Devereux
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 03:49:00 -
[37]
/sign there are still cans in the game from people that quit the game months ago.
|
Corbin Devereux
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 03:49:00 -
[38]
/sign there are still cans in the game from people that quit the game months ago.
|
Rinab
Gallente
Telekinesis
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 03:57:00 -
[39]
I agree with more than half the stuff in this topic, though even 3 months sounds like a long time to me, something like 1 month with no activity would be better
that way every month more room would be freed up in belts, rather than having a bunch of cans sit there for 3 months, maybe get used for a few days after anchored, then forgotten and destroyed due to inactivity, then have somebody else drop their cans where old ones used to be a few days before, have them used only a few days then forgotten and have to wait 3 MORE months for those to go away...
I mean 3 months is 1/4th a year, I know where alot of people are coming from when they say 3 months would be a good amount, but for other people 3 months is a very long time (like me, I may only be in a system for a month or less)... I have enough to gripe to myself about with some of my skill training times (though as I say, I gripe to myself about it, I know everyone else goes through the same thing, I can normally stand anything under 20 days)
Maybe also making it so cans can only be dropped like 9km from an object (isn't it 5km right now? I haven't dropped a can in so long, and also make it so cans can still be placed 5km from other cans or whatever the distance is right now) so there won't be as many people who are willing to drop cans since it would put it near the edge of mining laser range and make it so less cans can BE in range of a ship thats mining
Sure, all this would make it harder for alot of miners if they wanted to use secure cans, but it would reduce lag for everyone
|
Scrapyard Bob
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 19:32:00 -
[40]
If I didn't have to deal with broken can / ore-thief flagging rules, I wouldn't bother using GSCs around mining belts.
So either fix the broken flagging rules or give us larger GSCs to cut down on the number of GSCs needed.
|
|
|
Inspiration
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 20:15:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Inspiration on 12/01/2007 20:12:14
Just make people pay for every can they have anchored. That should wear down the can spammers :). Not paid the space rent? Concord takes out your can with extreme force and anything in it :)
Watch those cans disapear fast, only the functional ones with real importance to someone will stay around!
|
Tanis Bastar
Caldari
Interstitial Incorporated
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 21:13:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Marlenus
I still don't understand why you all keep talking about making the cans "expire". Just let them come unanchored, for pete's sake!
That way in crowded areas, folks will salvage up the old stale ones. But your precious hidden loot can will probably never be found, and will still be waiting when you go back to it. Would prevent a lot of the screaming.
Stop it--this makes too much sense!
|
Gungankllr
Caldari
STK Scientific
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 21:18:00 -
[43]
I don't believe that unanchoring a can is a solution.
I think having them "Impounded" by Concord or a Concord Subdivision is a more viable alternative.
Reason being, is that people may have extended absences from Eve, due to Injury, financial considerations or Military Service.
If their items are impounded and an evemail is sent as to their location, when a player returns they can go claim their items.
Don't get all wrapped up in short term "How can I get rich" and think of what's good for both the game and the players.
|
Priest Valour
|
Posted - 2007.01.12 21:39:00 -
[44]
/signed.
|
Winters Chill
Amarr
Scavenger Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 03:58:00 -
[45]
totally /signed.
Or at leats cut the character limit in cans so they can't be used as annoyin signage. And actually introduce a cool real sign :)
On second thoughts...
|
Kesh McCall
Caldari
Malkalen Enterprises
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 05:20:00 -
[46]
/Signed
|
Gemini Zero
Caldari
Agony Unleashed
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 13:45:00 -
[47]
/Signed
Now what about all of those damn shuttles left behind that just clog up the scanners...
|
Todeskuh
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 14:00:00 -
[48]
/Signed
|
Wild Rho
Amarr
Black Omega Security
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 14:55:00 -
[49]
Considering CCPs general stance on can art I'm suprised this hasn't been delt with.
A year or two ago they said all anchored cans in high sec were going to be deleted after a "grace time" to give people a chance to move anything important from them.
In the end though nothing happened.
I've seen some belts that literally had more cans in it than roids.
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it.
|
Thews Mortaza
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 15:12:00 -
[50]
/Signed.
An unanchor after 3 months of inactivity would be nice, but then so would can deletion if it came to that. I don't know if cans really add up that much for server lag, but I'm pretty sure they increase client lag.
(Sig) Your momma so fat ... when I tried to scoop her to my cargo hold, she don't fit ! |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |