EVE Information Portal

Title should be renamed to "Retribution 1.2 POS Fixes"

More content next time . . .

The longer I think about the more potential there is in the control tower being the access point to all hangars:

• no need to implement any transport drone mechanic but a need to track the capacity of the different hangar
• no need to search for the right module to be able to access it's storage
• if there are two modules running but only the space of one module is used, you could remove one module without having to move a single item or pop up a warning if you should remove some items or lose them in case of PHA -> this would simplify moving a POS since you could remove that is not in use
• like for hangars, let the control tower be the access point to research & manufacturing slots (see above), which would allow a more dynamic way of running labs
• POS setup could somehow move towards fitting screen

thanks! but I want to ask only one thing: give to directors right to take everything from personal hangars.
it's necessary cause :
1 in my wh we can move our pos somewhere, or take everything to empire. and not all from us might log in and give things to me.
2 spy can't more do something really incredible)

personal hangars with this rules you want will not be useable cause I will never buy and anchor it.

40k m3 per director will not enough, so I cant understand problem why)


add: you can give us a switcher to control this function.

Personally I find the current announced implementation plan to be a bit underwhelming. However it is far, far better than nothing. However I hope you (CCP) read and consider my thoughts on the matter.

---

This is also a concern of mine and something I feel justifies at the minimum allowing a CEO access to the contents of private hangars. I can imagine a disgruntled member with fuel bay access or access to the corporate hangar arrays fuel reserves for the POS taking those reserves and slamming them into an untouchable personal hangar.

Unlike an NPC station where the Security Officer can only view the contents of the hangar (as the storage is provide by an entity other than the corporation, the Personal Storage Array is being provided by the corporation. It should be understood in my opinion that if an asset is stored in any facility at a POS it is corporate property.

However, with that said, CEO/Director should only ever be able to TAKE from personal hangars, never put. Simply put allowing them to give & take would enable exploitation of the array for infinite storage given sufficient characters to 'create' or 'initiate' their personal storage.

---

I agree with this. Something tells me though that each individual POS structure is coded separately, which leads me to believe adding a new structure is a much easier solution for them than modifying an existing one.

If this theory of mine is correct, in addition to adding the new POS structure(s) I would like to see a new control tower class added. Honestly using ORE or the Sisters of EVE as the producer could legitimize only having one new tower added.

Call this tower an "Expeditionary Tower" and make it big, bulky, consume more fuel and likely be stronger. Maybe even have the perk of being able to use any of the four fuel types, or just one. It doesn't matter.

Where an Expeditionary Tower would stand out though is allowing a much much larger Personal Storage directly embedded within the tower. Something like 1,000,000 m3 per player, plus an appropriate personal ship hangar capable of storing at minimum a compliment of 1 exhumer/mining barge (whichever has the highest volume), 1 battleship, 2 cruisers, and 3 frigates.

This type of tower would be more advanced and an evolution to the system enabling players to actually store their personal gains from wormholes, remote mining operations, nullsec operations etc etc.

As I see it now, even a 50k m3 personal hangar allotment is going to prevent any real personal gain from PI, Mining, R&D, Manufacturing etc at a POS as 50k m3 is not a lot of space, especially for any serious miner or PI user.

However, it's better than nothing.

---

My biggest disappointment with this announcement is that not a shred of information was released in this dev blog in relation to the usability of Research & Manufacturing facilities at a POS.

When Odyssey was announced and POS changes were mentioned I was hoping the need for Factory Manager role would finally be addressed. I'm still holding out hope that it will be addressed and have a few ideas how to fix it (assuming I even have a grasp of how the code for roles [roles, not the POS module] are handled.)

As it stands, I personally feel that if CCP were to fix the overwhelmingly large issues with the Factory Manager requirement in EVE it would breathe a new life into the game the likes of EVE has never seen before.

Imagine a world where POS R&D and Manufacturing can be done in a corp with many members sharing the same labs and manufacturing facilities without fear that members that aren't part of the leadership can just cancel everything making everyone lose tons and tons of work?

Imagine... Null sec corps and alliances would be more open to pure industrialists who could use the wealth of their systems to keep themselves stocked locally without over-crowding their outpost slots.

People like me could actually fund a series of POS' and allow open member usage, creating an ease of accessibility for people who are interested in R&D or Manufacturing but simply don't have access to sufficient facilities. (Especially true with R&D).

Food for thought CCP.

---

Is there any hope of getting the ability to mark a player in the current roles system (assuming it isn't going to be revamped this expansion) as "Based At" a POS? The Personal Storage is a huge huge boon to POS security, but I really feel that being able to "Based At" a player to a POS would be significant.

As it stands now, POS hangar access is all or nothing. Further security requires fuel tech or config starbase equipment, which further complicates things with access levels.

Want secure storage beyond regular roles? Fuel Tech. Don't want that same person being able to manage POS fuel? Starbase Config. Crap, don't want that person unanchoring your tower? You're SOL. This often leaves the CEO/Director (in a smart, secure corp) in charge of maintaining their POS fuel bays and allows little room for delegation.

Ideally I'd like to be able to fully delegate maintenance of a specific POS to a specific member by having "Based At" hangar access enabled for said POS and then further fixing it by having separate POS Fuel Tech & Config Starbase roles under the Based at section.

If it's possible to do this and then further be able to specify in the existing POS menus whether it uses the based at or regular Fuel Tech/Config roles would immensely increase configuration with minimal effort.

Q1: Will we be able to research and/or copy blueprints from our personal storages?

Q2: Can we issue contracts from/to our personal storages?

Q3: I didnt understand the reasons behind CSMA changes, could anyone explain?

Feature request: market facility. A director creates a list of trade-able goods, with prices. Any corp-mate can sell those goods to get isk from corp wallet, or can buy some. Goods are stored in a CHA tab, which is linked to the market facility. No orders are seen on a regular market, the interface looks more like a POCO.
You cannot over-estimate that feature. It would make running corporate projects (including, but not limited to idustry) so much more efficient! Did you ever try to organize a mining operation with fair rewards? What about T2 or T3 production chain? Almost impossible, unless all of your corpmates are your own alts. Do it please - it's a rather simple feature that would incredibly tighten connections within corporation, solidifying community.

Some anonymous entities is not a valid argument. Please explain how it leads to "bareface trolling" and degradation?

I have been the CEO of a wormhole corp for years, and I agree that this change will lead to "corporate interpersonal relation degradation". There should be some way for either ceo's, directors, and/or corp members with some certain role to be able to move items to and from other people's hangar bays.

On a number of occasions, people in my corporation have left for months, then returned. To have to tell them, "oh, we decided to move to a different solar system two days ago, so all your stuff is gone", isn't exactly desirable. It also greatly decreases the chances of them continuing their subscription. I had one corp member who was with us for the better part of a year, left for a few months, returned, and, because he had been dropped from corp while he wasn't playing, lost the expensive ship he had logged out in to our own automatic POS guns. He stopped playing shortly after that and has not returned. Imagine how much this would be amplified if someone returns to find out all the items they've been collecting in their WH home are now gone.

Now, of course this happens currently when a corp theft happens, and when the POS is attacked. But, there's a key difference here. Currently, the person to blame is the corp thief, or the attacking force. But, with the change, the person to blame for all your stuff being lost would be the corp CEO or directors. You're the one that took down the POS. If you don't want to destroy people's stuff, you'd have to keep up old POSs indefinitely, making moving or changing POS models prohibitively expensive.

My corp has lived in quite a number of different wormhole systems over the years, and every time we've moved, we've hauled everyone's stuff out and saved it for them, whether they were currently active or not. I don't want to be forced to decide between preserving billions of isk worth of my corp member's items, and moving to a new system so that my corporation can grow and thrive.

1. You can always choose to never anchor a new PHA, only use CHA.
2. There are risks of living at a POS, and in a WH in particular. Evacuation of a base for any reasons is one of those risks. If a corpmate doesnt want to take those risks - too bad for him. EVE is a dark cold place, etc. etc.
3. You're a CEO, damn it, not a baby-sitter. If corpmates connot care for themselves and their property - should you care? If you choose to be a baby-sitter though, you have an option #1.

P.S.: I bet that player who lost his tengu to POS guns whould have quit anyway.

P.P.S.: My first thought was also "need a way to scoop those stuff somehow". But then I've read a reasoning from Fozzie, who said that you should have a tough choice between using CHA and PHA. The choice is hard indeed, works as intended. Just make sure your corpmates understand that.

This is probably the best news I've read regarding EVE for a very long time. Thanks CCP and CSM7

Seems to have been some love for this post - any chance it could get a response from Fozzie or Masterplan?