These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Fleet hangars and changes to various settings

First post First post
Author
Temmu Guerra
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#81 - 2012-10-22 17:22:19 UTC
Let me keep my hanger divisions PLEASE!!!!!!

I dont care if you modify them as long as I can still store and organize across them.
Kari Juptris
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#82 - 2012-10-22 17:25:16 UTC
Bloodpetal wrote:


When people wonder "Do you really play this game?"... these kinds of feature changes are why.



Not empty quoting.
CCP Habakuk
C C P
C C P Alliance
#83 - 2012-10-22 18:48:08 UTC
Hey all,

Short update: We had some discussions today, but our programmer for these changes was not in the office today, so we have to wait with any decisions. I'll post here as soon as anything is decided.

A short explanation for the fleet hangar changes from my point of view: Why are doing this and removing a feature (divisions)?
The concept of having corp hangars on personal ships had some benefits, but it was a constant source of bugs and inconsistencies and it made changes to related features more difficult. For many players (and devs Blink) it was also quite confusing which rules and roles apply exactly in which case. After quite some internal whining about bugs and inconsistencies it was decided to rework the whole system and convert the corporation hangars into fleet hangars - with the goal to improve the experience for all players. Unfortunately we underestimated the current usage of the corp hangars - so we need to fix this part. Oops

Bloodpetal wrote:

When people wonder "Do you really play this game?"... these kinds of feature changes are why.

Many of us play the game, but we cannot cover all parts in the game in the same extent. I'm personally playing the game quite a bit (and since beta) and I have some experience with capital ships - but I am for example lacking experience with super capitals (only used them on test servers). This is why these feedback threads are really important. It might have been good to get feedback form your guys before starting to code the changes - but it's at least better to get the feedback now than after the changes are on TQ.

CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five 0 | (Team Gridlock)

Bug reporting | Mass Testing

Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#84 - 2012-10-22 18:59:27 UTC
With the important caveat that I am not a capital pilot:

How hard would it be to let cap pilots assign keyword tags to selected items, and then apply permissions by keyword? This doesn't cover all the bases (for instance, it is nice to allow miners to deposit ore into bays they can't take anything from), but it covers most of the concerns and it's far more flexible than containers or divisions.

Tag your pimp mods "refit" and give no-one permission; tag your rifters and dictors "fleet" and allow fleet members to access anything tagged "fleet"; etc. If you allowed more than one tag per item, you could even have overlapping permissions.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Alli Othman
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2012-10-22 20:10:44 UTC
CCP Habakuk wrote:
Hey all,

Short update: We had some discussions today, but our programmer for these changes was not in the office today, so we have to wait with any decisions. I'll post here as soon as anything is decided.

A short explanation for the fleet hangar changes from my point of view: Why are doing this and removing a feature (divisions)?
The concept of having corp hangars on personal ships had some benefits, but it was a constant source of bugs and inconsistencies and it made changes to related features more difficult. For many players (and devs Blink) it was also quite confusing which rules and roles apply exactly in which case. After quite some internal whining about bugs and inconsistencies it was decided to rework the whole system and convert the corporation hangars into fleet hangars - with the goal to improve the experience for all players. Unfortunately we underestimated the current usage of the corp hangars - so we need to fix this part. Oops


Thank you for addressing that. While I feel you were on the right track- corporate access and the related roles and how they work with cap hangars is unnecessarily confusing- you had clearly missed the value of the organization and granularity of access allowed by the divisions, and I hope that the importance of that functionality is not lost in the urge to iterate on this feature after the feedback in this thread.
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#86 - 2012-10-22 22:15:13 UTC
CCP Habakuk wrote:


Bloodpetal wrote:

When people wonder "Do you really play this game?"... these kinds of feature changes are why.

Many of us play the game, but we cannot cover all parts in the game in the same extent. I'm personally playing the game quite a bit (and since beta) and I have some experience with capital ships - but I am for example lacking experience with super capitals (only used them on test servers). This is why these feedback threads are really important. It might have been good to get feedback form your guys before starting to code the changes - but it's at least better to get the feedback now than after the changes are on TQ.



I'm not saying you don't play. I'm just pointing out when changes like this come around, it's the kind of design elements that are obvious when you play the game, from that perspective. I'm not trashing you, I'm just pointing out the *grab our hair and pull* reaction you get sometimes from the community. Pirate

Where I am.

Rengerel en Distel
#87 - 2012-10-23 00:44:08 UTC
It seems like the easiest solution is to make it so secure containers actually work in space, then make fleet hangar containers that only work in fleet hangars, can't be ejected, etc. Make them various sizes so people can customize their space.

Perhaps a ship hangar container set up as well, so you can lock up your own ships, but allow the fleet to grab others.

Just seems to me that containers are easier to code than the ships.

With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.

Martin Gregor
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#88 - 2012-10-23 10:42:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Martin Gregor
Please do not remove the categories from the hangar, as they are often used for sorting items in space (since you cant just put as many containers in the ship as you want).
My opinion on this:

- Categories are good, keep them, BUT remove the corporation access roles from them.
-instead implement a function to set up you own rules for each category.
( Every category has its own checkboxes to allow "[x] fleet usage" and "[x] corp usage" )
- The fleet hangar categories are super important for
a) miners (small scale) - they use it for sorting the private stuff of all the fleet members, who minded how much and so on
b) capital pilots - for example transport: sort private and other stuff in different categories, without these it gets difficult to distinguish your stuff from others stuff.
c) super cap pilots - they sort their stuff in different categories since station containers are not possible and they cant dock to stations for sorting it. If you want fleet access with only one hangar, the fleet can take all your private stuff too!
- Super important: Make the hangar scan- and droppable, since it is a 100% safe location for all the expensive stuff now.
Most people in high sec use the orca for safe hauling of blueprints, faction stuff, technetium and so on. You cant scan it, you cant loot it. Easiest hauling ever.
Scannable fleet hangars make hauling / trading a lot more interesting for both sides, the hauler and a potentially pirate.
Also makes capital drops better, as super caps transport all the shiny stuff with them (they cant dock, you remember?).

Please do not mess up or remove already working things, just make them better!!!

One last idea: Audit containers can lock items and you can mark and unlock a selection of them.
Is this possible for fleet hangars? So the cap pilot can lock certain items (nobody outside can take it) and unlock them later? Would be interesting to use this!
CCP GingerDude
#89 - 2012-10-23 15:51:41 UTC
Hey folks.

Being the guy writing this code, I think I should chime in a bit (disclaimer: I haven't read through the whole thread yet).

The corp hangars on ships code had to go. Sorry, but that's simply the reality of the matter. It's been broken since it was first put in the game and was made completely unfixable when fleet member access was added to the mix. And by broken I mean both design and implementation. Corp roles clashed and were inconsistent between usages, there was no way for the client to reliably know if it could access another players ship so it had to guess and handle errors (you can probably imagine how healthy and correct that was most of the time), you could put stuff in without knowing that you couldn't take it back and the list just kept growing. Every time someone fixed a bug in this code, at least two new bugs surfaced, usually within either POS corp hangar arrays or offices in stations as all 3 of them shared the same codebase. It. Had. To. Go.

So, taking as a given that we could no longer use the same code for the ships corp hangars as the other types, then the options really boil down to either a) rewrite the corp hangars on ships seperetaly, but keep the corp hangars concept, but not share the code with the other two types of corp hangars, or b) rethink the functionality. Having two almost identical corp-hangars implementations, except for a bunch of special cases, didn't ring particularly well with the engineer in me and having to construct some resemblance of sanity and to avoid code-duplication, either through inheritance or composition while doing it wasn't appealing either.

So, after asking around, both internally, via the CSM and within the player community where I know people, it was generally agreed that fleet hangars were the way to go.

I'm absolutely not dismissing any of your criticisms here, merely explaining why a change had to happen. We're putting significant effort these days to try to clean up some of the really bad code which has accumulated over the years that no-one dares touch anymore (this, crimewatch, POSes are getting some rethink Soon(tm)) because of the certain breakage said touching will cause.

That said, we can't please everybody at the same time, but we'll do our best to address your concerns wrt. the change in functionality here. We've already made a few changes to address stuff raised in this thread, but I'll leave it to CCP Habakuk and Grayscale to detail those. Keep watching this space....

Cheers.

Senior Server Programmer

Alli Othman
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#90 - 2012-10-23 16:35:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Alli Othman
CCP GingerDude wrote:
Hey folks.

Being the guy writing this code, I think I should chime in a bit (disclaimer: I haven't read through the whole thread yet).

The corp hangars on ships code had to go. Sorry, but that's simply the reality of the matter. It's been broken since it was first put in the game and was made completely unfixable when fleet member access was added to the mix. And by broken I mean both design and implementation. Corp roles clashed and were inconsistent between usages, there was no way for the client to reliably know if it could access another players ship so it had to guess and handle errors (you can probably imagine how healthy and correct that was most of the time), you could put stuff in without knowing that you couldn't take it back and the list just kept growing. Every time someone fixed a bug in this code, at least two new bugs surfaced, usually within either POS corp hangar arrays or offices in stations as all 3 of them shared the same codebase. It. Had. To. Go.

Thank you for taking the time to provide your reasoning. I think that everyone does agree that the corporate hangar system is very unwieldy and unnecessarily confusing, however there are two main issues that come up: the need for efficient organization in these large spaces, and the need for granularity of access control.

The currently proposed system leaves capital pilots unable to efficiently organize the modules in their rather large storage spaces. Containers are an unwieldy and as has been stated currently unusable method of achieving this- that someone could simply take the container complicates things even more. In fact, under the newly proposed system there would be *no* effective way to organize. While it may seem that the inventory system allows for this, it's unfortunately inadequate in high-pressure situations such as an incoming doomsday hit or needing to refit from a buffer fit to a triage fit in pantheon tactics. The Corporate Hangar system's divisions however do allow this effectively and efficiently.

The second issue of access control is rather important as cap sized modules have to be stored in the Hangars due to their size. While their size may be somewhat of a deterrent to theft, it would still be possible for fleet or corp members to remove these vital modules under the proposed system. The ability to store these high value modules in a division inaccessible- or at least only accessible if the pilot wishes- by others is a necessity for capital ship pilots.

Due to the need to store the large modules and the need to quickly refit as necessary, many capital pilots store their modules in the various divisions provided by the Corporate Hangar system. Having the only option for allowing fleet/corp members to grab a ship from the SMB or grab a necessary module out of the Hangar be one in the same *and* providing those members with free reign over the high value modules will mean that users will be at least hesitant to even allow access and at worst will simply never allow the access.

So while many celebrate being freed from the confusing ties to corporate roles, we simply cannot accept the currently proposed system.

A system that would both maintain the functionality necessary for capital pilots and would free the Hangar system from the ties to corporate roles would be to have several divisions similar to the Corporate System, but with the control options of your proposed system. Have these divisions access be controlled individually- NOT tied to the SMB access, NOT tied to eachother's access, and definitely NOT tied to corporate roles. It may seem at first glance that such a system would just be recreating the Corporate Hangar system and would lack elegance, but it would both free users from the abysmal Corporate Hangar system *and* maintain the functions necessary for capital pilots to even use a new system and not simply fall into never allowing access (which would mean a lot more wasted effort on your part if your users were to not even use the system)
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#91 - 2012-10-23 19:27:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Kolonko
CCP GingerDude wrote:
Hey folks.

Being the guy writing this code, I think I should chime in a bit (disclaimer: I haven't read through the whole thread yet).

The corp hangars on ships code had to go. Sorry, but that's simply the reality of the matter. It's been broken since it was first put in the game and was made completely unfixable when fleet member access was added to the mix. And by broken I mean both design and implementation. Corp roles clashed and were inconsistent between usages, there was no way for the client to reliably know if it could access another players ship so it had to guess and handle errors (you can probably imagine how healthy and correct that was most of the time), you could put stuff in without knowing that you couldn't take it back and the list just kept growing. Every time someone fixed a bug in this code, at least two new bugs surfaced, usually within either POS corp hangar arrays or offices in stations as all 3 of them shared the same codebase. It. Had. To. Go.

So, taking as a given that we could no longer use the same code for the ships corp hangars as the other types, then the options really boil down to either a) rewrite the corp hangars on ships seperetaly, but keep the corp hangars concept, but not share the code with the other two types of corp hangars, or b) rethink the functionality. Having two almost identical corp-hangars implementations, except for a bunch of special cases, didn't ring particularly well with the engineer in me and having to construct some resemblance of sanity and to avoid code-duplication, either through inheritance or composition while doing it wasn't appealing either.

So, after asking around, both internally, via the CSM and within the player community where I know people, it was generally agreed that fleet hangars were the way to go.

I'm absolutely not dismissing any of your criticisms here, merely explaining why a change had to happen. We're putting significant effort these days to try to clean up some of the really bad code which has accumulated over the years that no-one dares touch anymore (this, crimewatch, POSes are getting some rethink Soon(tm)) because of the certain breakage said touching will cause.

That said, we can't please everybody at the same time, but we'll do our best to address your concerns wrt. the change in functionality here. We've already made a few changes to address stuff raised in this thread, but I'll leave it to CCP Habakuk and Grayscale to detail those. Keep watching this space....

Cheers.


Will the new hangar be visible trough cargo scanner?
will the new hangar drop loot?

*wink* Hi-sec Orcas *wink*
Cobalt Rookits
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#92 - 2012-10-23 21:58:29 UTC
I'm not sure how much you use your corp hangars, but for someone who does, this is a really big nerf. IF you have to remove the current functionality, make sure you replace it with something comparable - having a decent number of "hangar"s while being able to set access would be great.
Rengerel en Distel
#93 - 2012-10-23 22:22:02 UTC
I would suggest that you guys figure out the solution before removing the functionality. I still think fixing containers in space, and adding new ones is the easiest solution, since you guys don't want to put :effort: into coding it correctly.

With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.

Zendon Taredi
Tier Four Technologies
#94 - 2012-10-24 10:16:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Zendon Taredi
CCP GingerDude wrote:
Hey folks.

Being the guy writing this code, I think I should chime in a bit (disclaimer: I haven't read through the whole thread yet).

The corp hangars on ships code had to go. Sorry, but that's simply the reality of the matter. It's been broken since it was first put in the game and was made completely unfixable when fleet member access was added to the mix. And by broken I mean both design and implementation. Corp roles clashed and were inconsistent between usages, there was no way for the client to reliably know if it could access another players ship so it had to guess and handle errors (you can probably imagine how healthy and correct that was most of the time), you could put stuff in without knowing that you couldn't take it back and the list just kept growing. Every time someone fixed a bug in this code, at least two new bugs surfaced, usually within either POS corp hangar arrays or offices in stations as all 3 of them shared the same codebase. It. Had. To. Go.

So, taking as a given that we could no longer use the same code for the ships corp hangars as the other types, then the options really boil down to either a) rewrite the corp hangars on ships seperetaly, but keep the corp hangars concept, but not share the code with the other two types of corp hangars, or b) rethink the functionality. Having two almost identical corp-hangars implementations, except for a bunch of special cases, didn't ring particularly well with the engineer in me and having to construct some resemblance of sanity and to avoid code-duplication, either through inheritance or composition while doing it wasn't appealing either.

So, after asking around, both internally, via the CSM and within the player community where I know people, it was generally agreed that fleet hangars were the way to go.

I'm absolutely not dismissing any of your criticisms here, merely explaining why a change had to happen. We're putting significant effort these days to try to clean up some of the really bad code which has accumulated over the years that no-one dares touch anymore (this, crimewatch, POSes are getting some rethink Soon(tm)) because of the certain breakage said touching will cause.

That said, we can't please everybody at the same time, but we'll do our best to address your concerns wrt. the change in functionality here. We've already made a few changes to address stuff raised in this thread, but I'll leave it to CCP Habakuk and Grayscale to detail those. Keep watching this space....

Cheers.


Something that's been working for years, albeit with a few kinks here and there "IT HAD TO GO"? I suggest you listen less to your in-house guys and instead listen to the players. We love the corp hangar, we need the corp hangar.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#95 - 2012-10-24 10:22:28 UTC
Obviously lots of players are using corp hangars on ships, however recognizing that Team Gridlock is now aware of this I have full faith in them creating a good solution that doesn't curbstomp anyone too drastically...

Pinky
DJ P0N-3
Table Flippendeavors
#96 - 2012-10-24 12:16:47 UTC
CCP GingerDude wrote:
Hey folks.

Being the guy writing this code, I think I should chime in a bit (disclaimer: I haven't read through the whole thread yet).

The corp hangars on ships code had to go. Sorry, but that's simply the reality of the matter. It's been broken since it was first put in the game and was made completely unfixable when fleet member access was added to the mix. And by broken I mean both design and implementation. Corp roles clashed and were inconsistent between usages, there was no way for the client to reliably know if it could access another players ship so it had to guess and handle errors (you can probably imagine how healthy and correct that was most of the time), you could put stuff in without knowing that you couldn't take it back and the list just kept growing. Every time someone fixed a bug in this code, at least two new bugs surfaced, usually within either POS corp hangar arrays or offices in stations as all 3 of them shared the same codebase. It. Had. To. Go.

So, taking as a given that we could no longer use the same code for the ships corp hangars as the other types, then the options really boil down to either a) rewrite the corp hangars on ships seperetaly, but keep the corp hangars concept, but not share the code with the other two types of corp hangars, or b) rethink the functionality. Having two almost identical corp-hangars implementations, except for a bunch of special cases, didn't ring particularly well with the engineer in me and having to construct some resemblance of sanity and to avoid code-duplication, either through inheritance or composition while doing it wasn't appealing either.

So, after asking around, both internally, via the CSM and within the player community where I know people, it was generally agreed that fleet hangars were the way to go.

I'm absolutely not dismissing any of your criticisms here, merely explaining why a change had to happen. We're putting significant effort these days to try to clean up some of the really bad code which has accumulated over the years that no-one dares touch anymore (this, crimewatch, POSes are getting some rethink Soon(tm)) because of the certain breakage said touching will cause.

That said, we can't please everybody at the same time, but we'll do our best to address your concerns wrt. the change in functionality here. We've already made a few changes to address stuff raised in this thread, but I'll leave it to CCP Habakuk and Grayscale to detail those. Keep watching this space....

Cheers.


Thanks for braving the forums. So, I'm no supercap pilot, but even capital and subcap pilots really benefited from this method of personal organization in w-space. Not only did it let you become a walking sorting facility for loot or a source of extra ammo for those prolonged fights or what have you, but when you weren't in combat, you had a better method for organizing your own things than what POSes give you, which is:

a) Put everything in containers, label the containers, and every time you want to access something, get in a ship with a big cargo hold and access the containers/anchor it in space.

b) Put things in the cargo hold of a ship. Never let that ship out of the force field.

c) Have your own POS.

Having a ship with its own CHA gave you all the convenience of having your own POS in terms of item storage without having to have your own POS. The general fleet hangar downgrades this to having an extra-large cargo hold that other people can access, too.

Maybe the future-POSes are going to address the long-term storage aspects, but even if they do, that's a long ways down the line and it still doesn't help cap pilots who need to change fittings quickly or find their extra fuel and quick and so on. After my experiences trying to offload loot into a CHA with multiple other people accessing it at the same time, I cannot assume that any search function or filtering of items in the inventory will be fast enough for OH GOD OH GOD FIT FOR CAP NOW NOW NOW. Maybe it will be soon, but right now...not quite.
Rumpelstilski
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#97 - 2012-10-25 06:48:29 UTC
CCP GingerDude wrote:
...


CHA had a multitude of in-game reasons to be implemented. One of those is that a carrier is a ship which among other things enables you and your friends to live for weeks in remote parts of hostile 0.0, the CHA enabled you to keep personal stuff in a high security area and stuff available to the fleet in another. Not to mention move ops suddenly turning into pvp ops

Is it possible to implement so players can create their own folders in the FHA and set access rules for each of them?


This way you will have pretty much everything that was good in the old system combined with the benefits of the new system?
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#98 - 2012-10-25 08:14:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Rommiee
CCP Habakuk wrote:
We discussed these changes with the CSM



See, that was your first mistake.


This is the most ineffectual and clueless CSM for years


CCP Habakuk wrote:
Many of us play the game, but we cannot cover all parts in the game in the same extent. I'm personally playing the game quite a bit (and since beta) and I have some experience with capital ships - but I am for example lacking experience with super capitals (only used them on test servers)


Obviously no members of the CSM fly Supers either.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#99 - 2012-10-25 08:19:05 UTC
LethalGeek wrote:
It's like the people here complaining about losing their capital divisions have never noticed the Search function in the universal Inventory or that they can make custom filters they can toggle at will.

Or they can be lazy whiners instead of learning how to do these things, whatever.


So you have never had to fly a cap in combat then, and had to do a quick refit. Cap hanger with the refit mods in it for a quick swap. Easy.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#100 - 2012-10-25 08:40:22 UTC
Kari Juptris wrote:
CCP Habakuk wrote:


  • Divisions: I am afraid that it would be very difficult to bring them back. I will discuss on Monday with the team, if we could find any good alternatives.


Mate, this was a wonderful feature that a lot of capital and super capital pilots used. Why did Team Gridlock have to go and gut it?


This. Another example of CCP forging ahead with a badly thought out ideas without an option to revert. Awesome.