These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#101 - 2012-10-25 08:48:01 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
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.


Far too complicated and time consuming
CCP GingerDude
#102 - 2012-10-25 11:22:22 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP GingerDude
Ok, I've finally read through the whole thread. Is the following a fair summary of the issues and questions raised ?

* Granularity of access, i.e. the ability to offer access to the SMB and FH separately to either corp or fleet or both.
* Visual organization, i.e. a single click to view groups of items.
* Divisional security, i.e. the ability to have a (semi-)private section and "public" section, so far accomplished with corp roles.
* Emergency fitting problem. i.e. the ability to Ctrl+A -> drag everything over the fitting screen because OMGTHEYREGANKINGMEOHSHITOHSHITOHSHIT.
* Max pilots using fitting service as once. This is actually a red herring and in any case not something I've changed, but was raised, so lets include it anyway. Maybe the restriction should be changed. No promises though.
* Question about scannability. Are FH contents scannable? Should they be?
* Question regarding loot drops. Does FH content drop as loot? Should it?
* The "drop-only" functionality, i.e. you can put stuff in, but not view or take

Am I missing something?

[edited to add that last part]

Senior Server Programmer
Alli Othman
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#103 - 2012-10-25 11:25:48 UTC
CCP GingerDude wrote:
Ok, I've finally read through the whole thread. Is the following a fair summary of the issues and questions raised ?

* Granularity of access, i.e. the ability to offer access to the SMB and FH separately to either corp or fleet or both.
* Visual organization, i.e. a single click to view groups of items.
* Divisional security, i.e. the ability to have a (semi-)private section and "public" section, so far accomplished with corp roles.
* Emergency fitting problem. i.e. the ability to Ctrl+A -> drag everything over the fitting screen because OMGTHEYREGANKINGMEOHSHITOHSHITOHSHIT.
* Max pilots using fitting service as once. This is actually a red herring and in any case not something I've changed, but was raised, so lets include it anyway. Maybe the restriction should be changed. No promises though.
* Question about scannability. Are FH contents scannable? Should they be?
* Question regarding loot drops. Does FH content drop as loot? Should it?

Am I missing something?

Looks like a fair summary. I believe there were also some WHers that brought up a couple other concerns as well.
Grey Stormshadow
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#104 - 2012-10-25 12:03:57 UTC
CCP GingerDude wrote:
Ok, I've finally read through the whole thread. Is the following a fair summary of the issues and questions raised ?

* Granularity of access, i.e. the ability to offer access to the SMB and FH separately to either corp or fleet or both.
* Visual organization, i.e. a single click to view groups of items.
* Divisional security, i.e. the ability to have a (semi-)private section and "public" section, so far accomplished with corp roles.
* Emergency fitting problem. i.e. the ability to Ctrl+A -> drag everything over the fitting screen because OMGTHEYREGANKINGMEOHSHITOHSHITOHSHIT.
* Max pilots using fitting service as once. This is actually a red herring and in any case not something I've changed, but was raised, so lets include it anyway. Maybe the restriction should be changed. No promises though.
* Question about scannability. Are FH contents scannable? Should they be?
* Question regarding loot drops. Does FH content drop as loot? Should it?
* The "drop-only" functionality, i.e. you can put stuff in, but not view or take

Am I missing something?

[edited to add that last part]

Looks solid

Get classic forum style - custom videos to captains quarters screen

Play with the best - die like the rest
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#105 - 2012-10-25 12:09:59 UTC
CCP GingerDude wrote:
* Emergency fitting problem. i.e. the ability to Ctrl+A -> drag everything over the fitting screen because OMGTHEYREGANKINGMEOHSHITOHSHITOHSHIT.


You have pretty much covered it, with just a refinement on the above point....

It is also necessary to keep different sets of fitting change(s) in seperate hangers. Fuel and maybe faction mods etc (that aren't a complete fittings change) in another. So if you are thinking of just making one additional hanger, it would not really be enough.
Dhaaran
deZoltral Bloodline
#106 - 2012-10-25 14:33:49 UTC
CCP GingerDude wrote:
Ok, I've finally read through the whole thread. Is the following a fair summary of the issues and questions raised ?

* Granularity of access, i.e. the ability to offer access to the SMB and FH separately to either corp or fleet or both.
* Visual organization, i.e. a single click to view groups of items.
* Divisional security, i.e. the ability to have a (semi-)private section and "public" section, so far accomplished with corp roles.
* Emergency fitting problem. i.e. the ability to Ctrl+A -> drag everything over the fitting screen because OMGTHEYREGANKINGMEOHSHITOHSHITOHSHIT.
* Max pilots using fitting service as once. This is actually a red herring and in any case not something I've changed, but was raised, so lets include it anyway. Maybe the restriction should be changed. No promises though.
* Question about scannability. Are FH contents scannable? Should they be?
* Question regarding loot drops. Does FH content drop as loot? Should it?
* The "drop-only" functionality, i.e. you can put stuff in, but not view or take

Am I missing something?

[edited to add that last part]


sounds good!
while you are at it though - is there any reason to not just up the fuel bay for supers/titans by a factor of 5-10 so they dont need to store fuel in their corp hangars? not like we are gonna suddenly start hauling fuel from empire in our supercapitals ...
I DontLikeWhatYoureDoing
The Executioners
#107 - 2012-10-25 14:36:52 UTC
CCP GingerDude wrote:

* Question regarding loot drops. Does FH content drop as loot? Should it?


Please don't just pay this lip service by merely answering the question. We really need the loot situation handled for specialized bays. You guys back in August added loot from some of the bays onto API-pulled killmails (yay!). But they still don't show up in the Copy Text option from the in-game killmail. This wreaks havoc on killboards when somebody manually posts a mail ("The mods show up on the in-game mail, why aren't they showing on the killboard?!").

Additionally, there are many of us who would really, really, really like to see loot drop from some of the bays that currently have a 0% chance of doing so. Tons of m3 of player created goods disappear from the game every time one of these ships go boom (after the angel gets its wings).
Kari Juptris
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#108 - 2012-10-25 17:01:10 UTC
CCP GingerDude wrote:
Ok, I've finally read through the whole thread. Is the following a fair summary of the issues and questions raised ?

* Granularity of access, i.e. the ability to offer access to the SMB and FH separately to either corp or fleet or both.
* Visual organization, i.e. a single click to view groups of items.
* Divisional security, i.e. the ability to have a (semi-)private section and "public" section, so far accomplished with corp roles.
* Emergency fitting problem. i.e. the ability to Ctrl+A -> drag everything over the fitting screen because OMGTHEYREGANKINGMEOHSHITOHSHITOHSHIT.
* Max pilots using fitting service as once. This is actually a red herring and in any case not something I've changed, but was raised, so lets include it anyway. Maybe the restriction should be changed. No promises though.
* Question about scannability. Are FH contents scannable? Should they be?
* Question regarding loot drops. Does FH content drop as loot? Should it?
* The "drop-only" functionality, i.e. you can put stuff in, but not view or take

Am I missing something?

[edited to add that last part]


This sounds like an accurate collection of concerns from this thread.
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#109 - 2012-10-25 21:59:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Kolonko
CCP GingerDude wrote:

* Question about scannability. Are FH contents scannable? Should they be?
* Question regarding loot drops. Does FH content drop as loot? Should it?



It has pros and cons

Pros:

Orca hi sec travel with expensive stuff


Cons:

Orca hi sec travel with expensive stuff

depending on witch end of the gun You are

but without corp hangar as safe storage suicide ganking will become even more iritating

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Arcosian
Arcosian Heavy Industries Corp Holding
#110 - 2012-10-26 01:09:54 UTC
CCP GingerDude wrote:

* Question about scannability. Are FH contents scannable? Should they be?
* Question regarding loot drops. Does FH content drop as loot? Should it?


I can already see drool dripping from every suicide ganker's mouth.

This change would mean Orcas could now be massive loot pinatas. I say "could" because making the fleet hangar scannable and drop loot would only mean indy/traders would find new safer means to transport goods be that fitting a bigger tank on the orca(it's pretty easy to get well over 250k ehp), using Red Frog to transport things or just transporting smaller loads with an "un-gankable" value. Nevertheless, I can see the gankers' argument for this change since "Those evil highsec carebears get a 100% risk free 40km3 cargohold to transport billions of goods. And they must all be killed with fire because they ruin nullsec and lowsec and the economy. blah blah blah. "Eve is hard noob, get used to it." blah blah blah" Roll

Personally, I'm against this change since the orca takes months to train for so having an unscannable and undroppable cargohold isn't something a 2 week old noob would have access to. Suicide ganking is already a nuisance as it has become very easy with the introduction of the talos and tornado allowing a 10 man fleet to pop freighters with virtually no consequences. And gankers already have plenty of stupid people transporting billions in untanked T1 indy ships.

Now, I'm not against ganking since it's good for business and keeps people from messing with my markets more than they would otherwise but with no way to counter it other than being lucky with gate camps it seems like if this change goes through then there should also be a re-balance to ganking/criminal actions entailing greater consequences or buffing the EHP of all indy ships.

tldr: If this change goes through it will enrage EVERY highsec industrialist/orca pilot. Suicide ganking is a nuisance and already got buffed with the Tornado and Talos.
Grey Stormshadow
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#111 - 2012-10-26 05:53:55 UTC
Yea what comes to the scannability and loot drops of fleet hangar, they should inherit their behavior from current corp hangar.

If you're willing to change these to one way or another there has to be broad discussion about the topic - not just something you do based on feedback from some test server thread.

Get classic forum style - custom videos to captains quarters screen

Play with the best - die like the rest
CCP Habakuk
C C P
C C P Alliance
#112 - 2012-10-26 16:54:13 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Habakuk
Changes, which reached Duality with today's patch:

  • Fleet hangars: Assembled containers in fleet hangars can now be used fully by the owner of the ship.
  • Force field passwords: They are now stored on the server per character.

Feel free to test these changes on Duality. Bonus points for whoever finds a bug and reports it here and with a bugreport. Blink

Further improvements to fleet hangars are being planned to address many of your concerns, but CCP Greyscale will post them later, as soon as he had time to go through them in detail.

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

Bug reporting | Mass Testing
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#113 - 2012-10-26 17:40:57 UTC
CCP Habakuk wrote:
Changes, which reached Duality with today's patch:

  • Fleet hangars: Assembled containers in fleet hangars can now be used fully by the owner of the ship.
  • Force field passwords: They are now stored on the server per character.

Feel free to test these changes on Duality. Bonus points for whoever finds a bug and reports it here and with a bugreport. Blink

Further improvements to fleet hangars are being planned to address many of your concerns, but CCP Greyscale will post them later, as soon as he had time to go through them in detail.



I am just glad to see Team Gridlock taking those concerns seriously and handling them, especially the one about not letting my expensive faction mods go walk about because someone needs to get a shield hardener out of my Fleet Hanger.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
Lord Haur
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#114 - 2012-10-26 17:54:25 UTC
Containers do not fully address the concerns, partly because of the static nature of container-based divisions (although the bonus of increased storage space may alleviate this somewhat), but mainly because (as I read it) if you open the Fleet Hangar to public use, there is nothing stopping anyone simply removing the containers.
GeeShizzle MacCloud
#115 - 2012-10-26 17:59:17 UTC
so to recap as ive just tested it on duality...
corp members and fleet members are now separately selectable to use the sma and fleet hangar.
fleet hangar has no different hangars in them... its just 1 big hangar
we still cant assign separate use of the sma on carriers from hangar access.


im sorry but how is this better than where we are currently on tranquility?
CCP Habakuk
C C P
C C P Alliance
#116 - 2012-10-26 18:20:37 UTC
Lord Haur wrote:
Containers do not fully address the concerns, partly because of the static nature of container-based divisions (although the bonus of increased storage space may alleviate this somewhat), but mainly because (as I read it) if you open the Fleet Hangar to public use, there is nothing stopping anyone simply removing the containers.


The current version on Duality is NOT how this will be released to TQ. Container-access will be changed for sure. Details will be posted by CCP Greyscale.

GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:
... im sorry but how is this better than where we are currently on tranquility?


Please wait for the post by CCP Greyscale. Bear

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

Bug reporting | Mass Testing
GeeShizzle MacCloud
#117 - 2012-10-26 19:05:37 UTC
thanks for the swift response habakuk! =)
Vonce forthelulz
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#118 - 2012-10-26 20:32:12 UTC
Lord Haur wrote:
Those divisons on the carrier hangers were kinda useful btw.


qft

Seems clear that everyone wants some organization to the hanger.
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#119 - 2012-10-26 22:21:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Panhead4411
Vonce forthelulz wrote:
Lord Haur wrote:
Those divisons on the carrier hangers were kinda useful btw.


qft

Seems clear that everyone wants some organization to the hanger.


And again. Its not only carrier pilots...anyone running mining ops w/ rorq/orca....those divisions were EXTREMELY useful. Its hard to do a filter search for who deposited what.

Why remove the functionality we had? What was deemed wrong with it? Other than the fact that your new Uni Inv and its bloody tree made it extremely unpleasant to navigate without a huge window.
--edit--
Also, who needs to feedback about the bloody music that is forever playing. It is not the jukebox, b/c when you start playing that, it changes music, then when you pause the jukebox, other music starts. Why?

http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing    < Unified Inventory is NOT ready...
SlayerOfArgus
Hermes Enterprises
#120 - 2012-10-27 19:25:29 UTC
Not sure if it's been posted yet but sizes for the stations containers don't seem to make sense. When repackaged, the station container is 100k m3, the station vault is 50k m3 and the station warehouse is 100k m3. But the amount of space that they hold is 1 million, 10 million and 100 million respectively. Are the repackaged sizes correct? I would have thought the station container would be smaller than the vault since it holds less Smile