EVE Search - Too many secure cans? I'd say so.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Too many secure cans? I'd say so.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Talla Hurzin	Posted - 2007.07.21 23:42:00 - [1] One thing I've noticed in my time flying around EVE is the staggering amount of secure cans anchored around everywhere. We've all seen them around gates, but the real problem exists in the asteroid belts. In my survey of over a dozen systems, every 0.7 and below system has a lag-inducing amount of secure cans anchored in the asteroid belts. I'm talking over two dozen on average, at least a dozen minimum, and anywhere up to over 100 cans in a single belt. A lot of these cans were placed there by very old players, and are undoubtedly no longer in use and forgotten about. I've gone to systems 5 jumps off the beaten path and without fail there are a dozen cans anchored in the belts. So what do I say should be done to remove this lag-inducing menace? I say there should be a 3 month time limit placed on all anchorable containers. After 3 months have passed from the time of anchoring (or in the case of those old cans, since the timer was implemented), the can will automatically be unanchored, and if they have not been either reanchored or scooped by the next downtime, they would be removed in the same way jet cans are removed. 3 months will allow the corp/person who dropped it sufficient time to decide to commit to the system, and if they decide not to it won't be a very long time before the garbage they left behind is cleaned up. Not only will this clean up the belts, this will help reduce the problem around gates regarding advertising/joke can dropping. This will also finally clean up all the left over cans in 0.8 systems and above that have been left abandoned for 2 to 3+ years. What say you?
The Pointless Gallente Plastic Toys	Posted - 2007.07.21 23:44:00 - [2] Do it! /starskyandhutch ----------------------------------------------- "Breaking News! The Pointless hates GIFs!"
Dane Hur Caldari x13	Posted - 2007.07.21 23:45:00 - [3] Sounds good to me.
Webster Belken	Posted - 2007.07.21 23:53:00 - [4] Edited by: Webster Belken on 21/07/2007 23:53:22 How tough are cans? The reason I am asking is I've seen alot of people upset over the amount of cans and I'm wondering why people havent suicide ganked them? I know there isnt much profit in it, but if it upsets you so much - then take them out yourself (if it is possible - I really have no idea how tough they are and if its possible). Edit: fixed spelling
Ma Raia'l Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.07.21 23:54:00 - [5] Originally by: Webster Belken How tough are cans? The reason I am asking is I've seen alot of people upset over the amount of cans and I'm wondering why pople havent suicide ganked them? I know there isnt much profit in it, but if it upsets you so much - then take them out yourself (if it is possible - I really have no idea how tough they are and if its possible). Giant Secure cans (the most popular in belts) have somewhere around 1 million hull. It's not feasible to try and suicide gank them.
Webster Belken	Posted - 2007.07.21 23:57:00 - [6] sigh well, at least it was a thought.
Guilliman Roboute	Posted - 2007.07.21 23:59:00 - [7] I wouldnt mind them wiping every single can in eve for once, it's not like they cost much I'm 100% sure over half of them never gets used
Guilliman R Gallente PRO Space Hunters Federation Of united Corps	Posted - 2007.07.22 00:00:00 - [8] wrong char oops! Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Wachtmeister ([email protected])
Brutor Shaun	Posted - 2007.07.22 00:02:00 - [9] Linkage Bookmark Idea - My skills
Dave White coracao ardente Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.07.22 00:03:00 - [10] Originally by: Brutor Shaun Linkage That makes this the 1,000,001th... I couldn't agree more, CCP wake up?
Siege Minmatar Siegecraft Bounty Hunting	Posted - 2007.07.22 01:06:00 - [11] Tried petitioning it, just to be sure they knew about it, and they said to post on the forums. Post a problem on the forums, they say to petition it. :::Sigh::: The silence continues. At this point, I don't even care what CCP says, I just want them to acknowledge they are aware of this issue.
SasRipper DIE WITH HONOUR	Posted - 2007.07.22 01:14:00 - [12] change it to cans can only be anchored in low sec & reduce there hp!!! snip Sas has spoken this tread shall be locked.
Trind2222 Amarr The Red Ring	Posted - 2007.07.22 01:25:00 - [13] I think i have good idea after 12 days the securty cans will unancor and will disepare after downtime so if you have to reancor the can evry 11 day.
Talla Hurzin	Posted - 2007.07.22 01:30:00 - [14] Originally by: Trind2222 I think i have good idea after 12 days the securty cans will unancor and will disepare after downtime so if you have to reancor the can evry 11 day. 12 days will require too much attention from the person. Secure cans are nice in the fact you don't have to worry about them after you anchor them. However, this infinite life isn't good either, as the number of cans will just continue growing exponentially unless something is done. 3 months allows for a solid enough time for any person/corp dedicated to an area, but it still ensures the cans that have been truly abandoned or forgotten about are removed.
OdinWolph Minmatar	Posted - 2007.07.22 01:46:00 - [15] Edited by: OdinWolph on 22/07/2007 01:49:57 2 weeks should be the max that cans stay in space. Then they were removed and put back into the players hangar. I am also sick and tired of all the stupid cans all over the place. Warp to a belt in high sec and it takes sometimes 10 seconds to load because of all the cans in the area. I actually think there should be a priority on this and include it in the next patch, or even at the earlist possible moment (like during the next downtime). Here's to CCP doing something about this soon! SIGNED! ------------------------- "At one time they had a flourishing empire with a level of mechanical excellence never before or since seen anywhere." - Lets bring this era back to our people.
Rocky Sullivan	Posted - 2007.07.22 03:34:00 - [16] 6 months i think is where it should be, more time baby , and those a$$es that anchor them in stations should be flagged so they can be instawtfpwned
Rafein	Posted - 2007.07.22 05:20:00 - [17] why not just limit the number a player can have, based on their anchoring skill? Or have them eat charters, 1 per day, to be anchorable in Empire.
Enaria Ferenic Amarr Ordo Ministorum	Posted - 2007.07.22 07:05:00 - [18] Originally by: Rafein why not just limit the number a player can have, based on their anchoring skill?. Signed, + lets have them deacy after a certain time period.
Brutor Shaun	Posted - 2007.07.22 07:53:00 - [19] Originally by: OdinWolph 2 weeks should be the max that cans stay in space. Then they were removed and put back into the players hangar. NO!!! They're annoying now, they'd be even more annoying is they suddenly developed the ability to teleport themselves! Or are you suggesting fitting small warp drives to each can so they fly back? Still NO!!! Bookmark Idea - My skills
Voculus E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.07.22 08:05:00 - [20] Space is pretty dull and drab place as it is. Those cans, old though they may be, are part of Eve history! Anyway, all you have to do is reomve them from your overview, and suddenly, the problem will vanish. You'll never worry about them again. _________________________________________________________
000Hunter000 Gallente Magners Marauders	Posted - 2007.07.22 09:44:00 - [21] I think hte time limit is a great idea, but not poof!!! this way people can make a career out of scooping and reselling/refining them said cans CCP, let us pay the online shop with Direct Debit!!! Magners is now recruiting, evemail me or Dagazbo ingame.
Del Narveux Dukes of Hazard	Posted - 2007.07.22 16:05:00 - [22] Del's totally awesome 2 step plan to reduce can lag 1. Start tagging cans as active if somebody uses them, starting next patch. Then a cpl months later, delete all cans that werent tagged as active. That means nobody is using them. 2. FFS for the eleventy billionth time add a new secure-type ore container that can hold a lot of stuff when anchored in space. One of the main reasons theres so many cans is a typical miner can fill a giant secure in like, 4 minutes so it takes a ton of them if youre not jetcan mining. Bigger cans ==> need less of them ==> fewer cans anchored in belts ==> less lag. An optional bypass to all of this, which CCP is apparently planning on anyway, is to do the thing where mining is tied to exploration. But Im not sure I endorse this cause if its not done properly it will screw over miners. _________________ [SAK] Alumnus--And Proud Of It! -- aka Cpt Bogus Is that my torped sig cloaking your base? Originally by: Wrangler Well, at least we have forum PvP..
Rafein	Posted - 2007.07.22 16:30:00 - [23] Yeah, we need a total can overhaul. We need 1. Bigger cans, so we don't need as many cans. a Secure can, that when anchored, has the same size of of jetcan ould work wonders. 3k to haul, can only be assembled in space, where it takes the size of a Jetcan. 2. Limit the number of cans available. Something like 3 per level of anchoring, so 15 max. Up to that player if they want t anchor all 15 in one system, or spread them out.
techzer0 IDLE GUNS	Posted - 2007.07.22 16:41:00 - [24] The cans people have anchored should show up in their assets IMO... Might help with people forgetting where they are. Also... make abandoned control towers stealable (yes i made that word up) ____________________ Hi. I'm not an alt :)
Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.07.22 16:44:00 - [25] Time limit should restart every time they are used (otherwise players will just unanchor-reanchor anyway). Other than that, the idea posted here is fine.
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings D-L	Posted - 2007.07.22 16:54:00 - [26] Edited by: DubanFP on 22/07/2007 17:00:02 Although it would be nice it's not as easy as it seems. Unless there is already a pre-existing system that keeps track of the date containers were anchored there's no way of knowing how old the cans are. Although it's safe to say the the containers in .8+ are all very old "and probebly should be destroyed" in any system below that there's really no way to tell. You could add a timer today "which would even INCREASE" the very same load on server you wish to remove" but you wouldn't know how old existing cans were. However in say 3 months when that timer does run out the system will have to remove millions of cans from the system at once. In theory that should work without destroying new cans, although it would be a good idea to keep servers locked for a while while they handle all the ancient cans being removed after the timer first expires. Anyways although i'm a computer science (programming) major I don't even pretend to know a lot about EVE and the way it works. I could easily be overlooking or missing something about the difficulty of such a feat. But thinking it would be easy to "just" clean the old cans out is a bit of an oversight on what even simple changes can do. ______________________ DubanFP> I stopped capitalizing the g in goonswarm a little while back. I find they no longer deserved the little bit of extra effort required to press the shift key.
Tsukiko Ishida Amarr Emanation Of Malevolent Outcries	Posted - 2007.07.22 16:55:00 - [27] Edited by: Tsukiko Ishida on 22/07/2007 16:57:03 I'm going to have to agree, can's should pop if not used/fixed or instaly if the corp go's under/disbands. They should pop in 30 days regardless and need to be fixed on a weekly basis. It would make for a good ISK sink. A prime example on can spamage is the City of God. I was passing through and decided to stop and take a look. It was loaded with secure cans, which made it look like crap. It made me FAILEDÖ
NightF0x Gallente principle of motion Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.07.22 17:03:00 - [28] Everyone's missing the bigger picture here. You're not going to have to worry about cans once belts start having to be probed to find them.
ForumPosterAlt	Posted - 2007.07.22 17:03:00 - [29] Best way to do it is to just blow the can if it hasn't been interacted with by the owner in X amount of days, and when it is interacted with, reset the timer. Do same thing for abandoned ships. Evemail the owners a fair amount of time before hand before blowing the cans/ships.
Suboran Gallente Sphinx Inc Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2007.07.22 17:10:00 - [30] Edited by: Suboran on 22/07/2007 17:10:25 how about after 3 months they unanchor and password resets

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.

FAILEDÖ