• Repair the functioning of shares for those that use them and allow a corp to disable shares if they want. If you are to repair it then the shareholders should be able to see the assets of their corp just like assets are public in RL of publicly traded companies.


• Add the ability to run an alliance as a dictatorship. I.E. No voting to oust the executor.


• Lockdown and Unlock votes should be able to be proposed on many BPS at once. This should create a single vote to lock or unlock the entire list.


• A user should be able to select several votes, right click and vote yes or no on all of them at once.


• Sanctionable actions should be able to be approved or rejected en-masse with a similar mechanism as the voting one above.


• The current hangar system should be replaced with a flexible system. In this system the user or corp has two hangars called Hangar and Vault while a user has one hangar that includes ships and items. Then the user or corp can define views of that hangar. For example, we could say a view has all items of type "Charge" in it. The corp or user could define as many views as they want with the parameters of anything known about its object. For example, I could define a view that has all tech 1 modules and another one that has tech 2 modules and still another that has all tech 2 modules except the large guns. The view should be based on building up criteria for objects. The Vault hangar would be for something like partitioning out resources so you only have 2000 megacyte in the main hangar and visible by the views but can keep another 100k in the vault. The Vault hangar is a compromise because havign item amount quotas would be tough to manage and a lot of data to store.


• Users and corps could define their views only globally. As a user I couldn't have different views in different stations because that would introduce too much database load.


• Users should be limited to 20 views and corps to 100 views.


• Corps should be able to define permissions for their hangars on an office by office base if they desire or globally. So for example, I could say members with the title Captain can view and take from the "Tech 2 Equipment" view in any station but they can only view and take from the "Vault" view in the HQ. This UI should be redesigned so that the permissions person can select and office or "all" or "based at" and then select a view or hangar and then mark permissions by role. Searching should be similarly changed to accomodate the permissions.

• POS Corp hangars should respect the views for the corp. Furthermore these hangars should have the ability to allow personal member hangars with a quota. Their storage capacity should be trippled as well.


• Logging should be available for all corp views. The corp should be able to turn logging on (it should be off by default) and then anything taken from that view or added to it would be logged. There should be an ability to "log take" and "log put" so that a corp can decide to log who took from a hangar or put things in a hangar as they desire. Corp logs on views should be accessible via the corp interface and filterable by view. Naturally they would have a limit of items stored in the log but also the ability to access the log via API Key.


• Sanctioning actions should be able to be assignable to other directors.


• A corp should be able to choose to not support "running for CEO" if they so desire. Essentially the idea of the Dictatorship corp should be supported.


• There should be an ability to have an alliance hangar with views as well.


• POS access permissions (fueling, anchoring, onlining, etc) should be assigable to a title by POS. There should be fine grained permissions such as "online/offline Guns", "online/offline harvesters and silos", "take from silo" etc. These permissions could be set on the tower.


• A corp should be able to have as many or as few titles as they desire. (within limits naturally)


• A corp should be able to decide if titles are public (show up on the show info) or not.


• You should be able to tell why you rejected an application.


• A corp should be able to put Corp wide visible notes on a player such as "Joe's Alt" as well as personal notes.


• Corp asset search should work based upon Keyword search rather than actual items.


• All asset searches, corp or otherwise, should have a max for returned records so you dont accidentally type "a" and search like you can in the market search now.


• Corp and personal asset search should look into cans.


• A corp should be able to determine by role, who can see POS warnings. These warnings should be in a log rather than evemail.


• A corp should be able to link characters to each other so I can knwo that John is Joe's ALT.

Originally by: Roguehalo

---

Can you nano Titans?

---

Originally by: Jim McGregor

---

Edited by: Jim McGregor on 14/08/2008 17:06:55

The entire game interface needs some spunk.

Of course any idiot can say that. Coming up with a better interface that really works is where the hard work is.

Microsoft has always been good at user interfaces. Hire them, but make sure they cant touch any of the critical game code and mess it up.

---

Originally by: Ordais

---

I would bet that the one making the interface is not in CCP anymore = they dont have a clue how to make it better = everything takes 10x the time it normally would ;)
In no other way i can explain why the "windows move on random" is still not fixed.

---

Originally by: Roguehalo

---

Can you nano Titans?

---

Originally by: Jim McGregor

---

Microsoft has always been good at user interfaces. Hire them, but make sure they cant touch any of the critical game code and mess it up.

---

Originally by: J'Mkarr Soban

---

Originally by: Jim McGregor

---

Microsoft has always been good at user interfaces. Hire them, but make sure they cant touch any of the critical game code and mess it up.

---

You are kidding, right? MS are consistently used in HCI and UI classes as prime examples of what not to do. I mean the 'Ok/Cancel' window plagues all MS products, and is the most useless window in existance - there are significantly more options available to the user in any of those situations. Or the wonderful one of 'I have crashed [Ok|Cancel]' - erm, what?

There's no sense of control, only of being allowed to use the application within the limits and settings that MS has provided for you - and that is what provides the majority of the frustration with MS products.

Anyway, other than that brief rant (which I'll let the wonderful Xaen continue - I have a huge interest but only vague practise of UI), I agree completely. But it's not just a UI overhaul - don't make that mistake, because then it'll just get shoved with the UI project. No, this is a complete usability overhaul that's needed, to provide better management and structure for corporations. It could have the most simple UI in existence, but be an incredibly powerful, useable, management tool.

---

Originally by: Roguehalo

---

Can you nano Titans?

---

Quote:

---

A corp should be able to determine by role, who can see POS warnings. These warnings should be in a log rather than evemail.

---

Quote:

---

Corps should be able to define permissions for their hangars on an office by office base if they desire or globally. So for example, I could say members with the title Captain can view and take from the "Tech 2 Equipment" view in any station but they can only view and take from the "Vault" view in the HQ. This UI should be redesigned so that the permissions person can select and office or "all" or "based at" and then select a view or hangar and then mark permissions by role. Searching should be similarly changed to accomodate the permissions.

---

Originally by: Rells

---

Edited by: Rells on 14/08/2008 16:56:49

Imagine, if you will, a chicken coup containing 300 chickens. Now imagine no one has cleaned it out for 5 years. The smell would be enough to get it declared a chemical weapons facility. That is what the corp interface is. To say it is a pile of dung would be an understatement of vast proportions. Its high time it gets fixed. My suggestions for the interface are here:

• Repair the functioning of shares for those that use them and allow a corp to disable shares if they want. If you are to repair it then the shareholders should be able to see the assets of their corp just like assets are public in RL of publicly traded companies.


• Add the ability to run an alliance as a dictatorship. I.E. No voting to oust the executor.


• Lockdown and Unlock votes should be able to be proposed on many BPS at once. This should create a single vote to lock or unlock the entire list.


• A user should be able to select several votes, right click and vote yes or no on all of them at once.


• Sanctionable actions should be able to be approved or rejected en-masse with a similar mechanism as the voting one above.


• The current hangar system should be replaced with a flexible system. In this system the user or corp has two hangars called Hangar and Vault while a user has one hangar that includes ships and items. Then the user or corp can define views of that hangar. For example, we could say a view has all items of type "Charge" in it. The corp or user could define as many views as they want with the parameters of anything known about its object. For example, I could define a view that has all tech 1 modules and another one that has tech 2 modules and still another that has all tech 2 modules except the large guns. The view should be based on building up criteria for objects. The Vault hangar would be for something like partitioning out resources so you only have 2000 megacyte in the main hangar and visible by the views but can keep another 100k in the vault. The Vault hangar is a compromise because havign item amount quotas would be tough to manage and a lot of data to store.


• Users and corps could define their views only globally. As a user I couldn't have different views in different stations because that would introduce too much database load.


• Users should be limited to 20 views and corps to 100 views.


• Corps should be able to define permissions for their hangars on an office by office base if they desire or globally. So for example, I could say members with the title Captain can view and take from the "Tech 2 Equipment" view in any station but they can only view and take from the "Vault" view in the HQ. This UI should be redesigned so that the permissions person can select and office or "all" or "based at" and then select a view or hangar and then mark permissions by role. Searching should be similarly changed to accomodate the permissions.

Continued in next post...

---

Originally by: CCP Garthagk

---

While these forums may not give you everything that you want, they will usually let you post.

---

Originally by: Trader Jen

---

is there anything you dont make a whine post about?

---

Originally by: Rells

---

It wasnt put here in the first place because this is the first place that CCP ignores.

---

Originally by: Sorolia

---

And now that it is in the ignore forum it can be more easily ignored.

---

Originally by: CCP RyanD

---

Most EVE devs read these forums regularly. They are trained not to respond unless they actually are responsible for the topic, and they have something constructive AND finalized to say. Every time a dev speculates in public an angel dies. So we ask them not to do that. :)

---

Originally by: Rells

---

Edited by: Rells on 14/08/2008 16:56:49

Imagine, if you will, a chicken coup containing 300 chickens. Now imagine no one has cleaned it out for 5 years. The smell would be enough to get it declared a chemical weapons facility. That is what the corp interface is. To say it is a pile of dung would be an understatement of vast proportions. Its high time it gets fixed. My suggestions for the interface are here:

• Repair the functioning of shares for those that use them and allow a corp to disable shares if they want. If you are to repair it then the shareholders should be able to see the assets of their corp just like assets are public in RL of publicly traded companies.


• Add the ability to run an alliance as a dictatorship. I.E. No voting to oust the executor.


• Lockdown and Unlock votes should be able to be proposed on many BPS at once. This should create a single vote to lock or unlock the entire list.


• A user should be able to select several votes, right click and vote yes or no on all of them at once.


• Sanctionable actions should be able to be approved or rejected en-masse with a similar mechanism as the voting one above.


• The current hangar system should be replaced with a flexible system. In this system the user or corp has two hangars called Hangar and Vault while a user has one hangar that includes ships and items. Then the user or corp can define views of that hangar. For example, we could say a view has all items of type "Charge" in it. The corp or user could define as many views as they want with the parameters of anything known about its object. For example, I could define a view that has all tech 1 modules and another one that has tech 2 modules and still another that has all tech 2 modules except the large guns. The view should be based on building up criteria for objects. The Vault hangar would be for something like partitioning out resources so you only have 2000 megacyte in the main hangar and visible by the views but can keep another 100k in the vault. The Vault hangar is a compromise because havign item amount quotas would be tough to manage and a lot of data to store.


• Users and corps could define their views only globally. As a user I couldn't have different views in different stations because that would introduce too much database load.


• Users should be limited to 20 views and corps to 100 views.


• Corps should be able to define permissions for their hangars on an office by office base if they desire or globally. So for example, I could say members with the title Captain can view and take from the "Tech 2 Equipment" view in any station but they can only view and take from the "Vault" view in the HQ. This UI should be redesigned so that the permissions person can select and office or "all" or "based at" and then select a view or hangar and then mark permissions by role. Searching should be similarly changed to accomodate the permissions.

Continued in next post...

---

Originally by: Kabantik

---

The permission system needs a complete overhaul too don't forget that! And stasis periods and 24 hour votes? come on please CCP......

---