These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
MisterAl tt1
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#301 - 2012-11-06 13:03:36 UTC  |  Edited by: MisterAl tt1
CCP is kinda fond of ffffrustrating people with this coming expansion.

"Divisions are gone, as is any other reliance on corp roles
Fleet hangars will now behave like normal cargo hold when it comes to ship scanners and loot drops (ie, will be scannable, and loot will drop from them) "

How are we, WH dwellers, expected to move billions on sleeper loot out to trade? Remember we don't have bounties and have to haul blue books, yea? Last time I moved corp sellary out it was like 30+bil in one cargo. Do you want us to move that in what? Even Viators get poped by your precious high-sec suicide gankers!

Usual tactics now is haul to highsec, wait for orca, put it into closed section (so that noone steals it on the way) and haul that like that. These changes make it impossible. You expect people to like the game for a hard stress of moving big summs with taking heart medicines on every successfully passed system?
Violet Giraffe
Space Giraffes
#302 - 2012-11-06 20:23:28 UTC
Rommiee wrote:

Give it to Red Frog, they will move it for a few mil.

In a few weeks.
Arcosian
Arcosian Heavy Industries Corp Holding
#303 - 2012-11-06 20:28:41 UTC
MisterAl tt1 wrote:
CCP is kinda fond of ffffrustrating people with this coming expansion.

"Divisions are gone, as is any other reliance on corp roles
Fleet hangars will now behave like normal cargo hold when it comes to ship scanners and loot drops (ie, will be scannable, and loot will drop from them) "

How are we, WH dwellers, expected to move billions on sleeper loot out to trade? Remember we don't have bounties and have to haul blue books, yea? Last time I moved corp sellary out it was like 30+bil in one cargo. Do you want us to move that in what? Even Viators get poped by your precious high-sec suicide gankers!

Usual tactics now is haul to highsec, wait for orca, put it into closed section (so that noone steals it on the way) and haul that like that. These changes make it impossible. You expect people to like the game for a hard stress of moving big summs with taking heart medicines on every successfully passed system?

You get to make 100 trips now ... yay for a hauling buff. But seriously as someone who builds large orders of T2 stuff and T3 subs this will make it a pain to transport both mats and subs seeing as how 1 T3 BPC of offensive subs is worth almost 800mil and only takes up 400m3. Not to mention it's easy to queue up 10 T2 jobs worth few bil at a time on 1 char. So yes hauling will suck big time. I expect Red Frog to get a ton of business after the change and probably fall really behind on completing contracts on time. And we may even see more regionalization between gallente and amarr space if the gankers pop enough people.

But using a heavy tanked orca you could probably haul 2-2.5bil at a time pretty safely long as you scout the route and make sure there isn't a gate camp. That still makes a lot of trips required to move 30+bil of mats and products unless you just want to risk it.
MisterAl tt1
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#304 - 2012-11-06 21:52:18 UTC
And CCP, why removing sections in ships' corp hangars? We use different sections including closed one every time we PVE!
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#305 - 2012-11-06 23:19:07 UTC
MisterAl tt1 wrote:


Usual tactics now is haul to highsec, wait for orca, put it into closed section (so that noone steals it on the way) and haul that like that. These changes make it impossible. You expect people to like the game for a hard stress of moving big summs with taking heart medicines on every successfully passed system?


I am pretty sure CCP does want you to get popped and then still keep paying sub money. Wonder how well their plan will work.

Maybe this wouldn't be so bad, if they added more changes or had a real plan for hauling or something.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
MisterAl tt1
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#306 - 2012-11-06 23:39:56 UTC
Me alone is not that much of a problem - I can keep up in the comming situation. However, I've got a corporation behind me and with the changes proposed that's goiing to be much more pain to keep all the things running. Is it worth it, such a "game" ?
Cursan Voran
Jita Traders Society
#307 - 2012-11-07 08:33:43 UTC
Rommiee wrote:
Give it to Red Frog, they will move it for a few mil.


Part of eve is being self sufficient. I trained a lot of skills I dont have any other use for just because of the orca's unscannable hanger as it was a critical point for me in becoming self sufficient. This was a rational choice that a lot of people have made.

I wont derail this by saying 'CCP give me back my skill points' but I am thinking it is just months of wasted training time now and will say that when you make deliberate and rational choices in training only to have the things you intentionally trained for removed or changed beyond recognition (like contracting) it becomes very frustrating.
mrpapageorgio
Cutting Edge Incorporated
#308 - 2012-11-07 10:33:36 UTC
CCP GingerDude wrote:
Panhead4411 wrote:

So, by your statements, is it safe to assume that you are pushing for us to fill our new 'simpler' fleet hanger with containers in order to maintain a semblance of organization that we had before you decided that hanger divisions were evil?

It's not divisions that are evil, it's the fact that all the different hangars on ships *are* divisions in tech-terms. The absolute horror that was corp hangars on ships was evil and that had to go. The goal was not to remove divisions, but without some seriously major work, we can't create divisions within divisions which is why they're unlikely to come back. Sorry.


Did you people learn nothing from the Unified Inventory rage? If you can't commit to doing something right, then don't do it at all. Anyone who has actually flown a capital/super will be extremely inconvenienced because CCP wants to half ass a solution to a functionality we have enjoyed for years.

If I haven't yet made myself clear. We want divisions to stay. Containers in any size are not an acceptable replacement.

I can sympathize with maintaining old code, it is a huge pain. However, your client (the players) like this feature and want to keep it. If it takes longer to do so, then delay this change and take the time to do it correctly. Releasing something that people hate, users raging on the forums, CCP promising to iterate until people are happy, and then moving on after 1 or 2 iterations is not an acceptable or smart release plan.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#309 - 2012-11-07 14:39:40 UTC
Cursan Voran wrote:
Rommiee wrote:
Give it to Red Frog, they will move it for a few mil.


Part of eve is being self sufficient. I trained a lot of skills I dont have any other use for just because of the orca's unscannable hanger as it was a critical point for me in becoming self sufficient. This was a rational choice that a lot of people have made.

I wont derail this by saying 'CCP give me back my skill points' but I am thinking it is just months of wasted training time now and will say that when you make deliberate and rational choices in training only to have the things you intentionally trained for removed or changed beyond recognition (like contracting) it becomes very frustrating.


Completely agree, I trained that skill on 3 characters for the same reason.

However, I can make more money during the time I would have spent hauling than it does to pay Red Frog to do it for me. So, no big loss, really.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#310 - 2012-11-07 14:46:31 UTC
mrpapageorgio wrote:
CCP GingerDude wrote:
Panhead4411 wrote:

So, by your statements, is it safe to assume that you are pushing for us to fill our new 'simpler' fleet hanger with containers in order to maintain a semblance of organization that we had before you decided that hanger divisions were evil?

It's not divisions that are evil, it's the fact that all the different hangars on ships *are* divisions in tech-terms. The absolute horror that was corp hangars on ships was evil and that had to go. The goal was not to remove divisions, but without some seriously major work, we can't create divisions within divisions which is why they're unlikely to come back. Sorry.


Did you people learn nothing from the Unified Inventory rage? If you can't commit to doing something right, then don't do it at all. Anyone who has actually flown a capital/super will be extremely inconvenienced because CCP wants to half ass a solution to a functionality we have enjoyed for years.

If I haven't yet made myself clear. We want divisions to stay. Containers in any size are not an acceptable replacement.

I can sympathize with maintaining old code, it is a huge pain. However, your client (the players) like this feature and want to keep it. If it takes longer to do so, then delay this change and take the time to do it correctly. Releasing something that people hate, users raging on the forums, CCP promising to iterate until people are happy, and then moving on after 1 or 2 iterations is not an acceptable or smart release plan.


Exactly my point earlier....

Quote:
Anyone who has flown a Capital ship in combat would know this. It really is no-brainer. It is pretty clear that the Devs that are pushing this fiasco have never done that. If they had, they would not have entertained this idea, even for a second. Poncing around in a Super on SISI, really isn’t the same. Seriously.

It’s another example of CCP “fixing” something, where the result is far more cumbersome, time consuming and annoying than before the said “fix”.

Okay, so the code was messed up, if you are not prepared to put in the work to sort out new code without losing functionality then leave it alone. I know full well the complexities of Corp Management, and it does need looking at, but not at the expense of losing a function that is fundamental in Cap warfare.
Thoregon Aubaris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#311 - 2012-11-07 17:00:00 UTC
I invested many days (an SP) training for the orca, so this change would be frustrating. If you really do this, give me back my SP so i can use it for a freighter, they have more HP.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#312 - 2012-11-07 17:35:21 UTC
CCP, you are removing two areas of functionality, and not replacing them with anything.

1) Fleet members need to be able to keep their stuff separate from others when placed in a ship corp hangar. Divisions allowed for this. A single hangar does not. Cans in the single hangar do not as only the ship pilot has access to them. If fleet members could access cans in the FH it would be better. But there is still the space allocation issue. If the game included a "bag" it would work. (A bag is a container that has no pre-determined volume, its volume is equal to what is inside it. It would have no compression, no security, and would spill its contents into jet cans if the ship is destroyed.)

2) Protecting cargo. Maybe it was never intended for Orcas to be used this way, but many do it. This functionality could be returned in a number of ways:

Keep the hangar as it is now.

Add a rig that makes the FH unscannable,

Add a "Security can". It explodes, destroying all within, if the ship explodes.

Add a "unscanable can". It, and its contents do not show on scan. (Note we already got a can that shows up on scan but hides its contents: double wrapped courier contract).

Please CCP, do not nerf game play, please?

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
virtualgenius
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#313 - 2012-11-07 19:27:12 UTC  |  Edited by: virtualgenius
So its another Unified Inventory Fiasco again fix a system that isnt broken, who dreams this stuff up isnt there really broken parts of the game that need fixing than messing with carrier pilots and the way they use the corporate hangars, this will bring player backlash if you screw this up please leave the corporate hangars alone or is it the same as the UI we had to have regardless of the countless players that tell you its the wrong direction.
Mirel Dystoph
Perkone
Caldari State
#314 - 2012-11-07 21:50:26 UTC
CCP GingerDude wrote:

It's not divisions that are evil, it's the fact that all the different hangars on ships *are* divisions in tech-terms. The absolute horror that was corp hangars on ships was evil and that had to go. The goal was not to remove divisions, but without some seriously major work, we can't create divisions within divisions which is why they're unlikely to come back. Sorry.

If you're too fuckin' lazy to do it right, don't even dare to touch it.
Simple as that.

We don't want half-assed solutions, we don't want removed functionallity and we don't care if it's old, messed up code which glues everything together as long as it does it's job better than the new code.

"Nothing essential happens in the absence of noise." 
Regan Rotineque
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#315 - 2012-11-07 22:41:45 UTC
As a regular Orca user, I do like my nice and tidy corp hanger divisions.

Though when mining I just put it all I one most of the time, but when shopping for corp members its nice to have the separate divisions.

As for scanning, it was nice while it lasted, it was one of the BIGGEST benefits I'd Orca travel.

However I agree, it perhaps should be modified now. What I would suggest is a replacement why not create a new module or rig which when fitted disrupts cargo scanning. The any pilot could choose to fit that. I'd or rig to hide their nom noms from being scanned. Surely by the time period that EvE is set in someone would have figgured out how to block a simple cargo scanner. Perhaps a new skill for people who want to scan vs those who want to hide.

Either way, it sounds like these changes are a done deal. I am not 100% liking all of this, primarily on the loss of the divisons.

Hope your still listening on this thread CCP, my spidey senses are tingling, that this change and that cargo one without some new replacement for what we have might get some to bring out the pitchforks and torches.

Cheers

~R~
Sinzor Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#316 - 2012-11-08 13:16:45 UTC
MisterAl tt1 wrote:
How are we, WH dwellers, expected to move billions on sleeper loot out to trade? Remember we don't have bounties and have to haul blue books, yea? Last time I moved corp sellary out it was like 30+bil in one cargo. Do you want us to move that in what? Even Viators get poped by your precious high-sec suicide gankers!

OMG Mittani&CCP ruined my game!
Jeez, just fit a cloaky Proteus and fly wherever you like.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#317 - 2012-11-08 13:18:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Rommiee
Mirel Dystoph wrote:
CCP GingerDude wrote:

It's not divisions that are evil, it's the fact that all the different hangars on ships *are* divisions in tech-terms. The absolute horror that was corp hangars on ships was evil and that had to go. The goal was not to remove divisions, but without some seriously major work, we can't create divisions within divisions which is why they're unlikely to come back. Sorry.

If you're too fuckin' lazy to do it right, don't even dare to touch it.
Simple as that.




Absolutely. Very well put.
Sinzor Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#318 - 2012-11-08 13:22:07 UTC
Thoregon Aubaris wrote:
I invested many days (an SP) training for the orca, so this change would be frustrating. If you really do this, give me back my SP so i can use it for a freighter, they have more HP.

Orca is designed for mining. If you have abused it and now it's fixed - it's not my problem.
Sinzor Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#319 - 2012-11-08 13:30:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Sinzor Aumer
CCP GingerDude wrote:
It's not divisions that are evil, it's the fact that all the different hangars on ships *are* divisions in tech-terms. The absolute horror that was corp hangars on ships was evil and that had to go. The goal was not to remove divisions, but without some seriously major work, we can't create divisions within divisions which is why they're unlikely to come back. Sorry.

Then just do it, would you. Please, we dont want that "unified inventory" nightmare again.

EDIT: I cant really see why you need nested divisions. Just make "Root"->"Fleet_hangar_Division1" instead of "Root"->"Fleet_hangar"->"Division1"
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#320 - 2012-11-08 13:44:40 UTC
Cain Leigh wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Salpun wrote:

Looks better but some will complain. Any word on pos security improvements or will that have to wait till the new poses?

Might want to clearify which corp hangers are effected. All ship equiped corp hangers for example.


No official word, no, sorry. And yeah, cleared that up, my bad.


In the CSM minutes of May/June 2012 p. 68 Two Step came up with this during the discussion about the new POS system and you said “We would like to code that in ASAP, even for the current system.” You were considering adding a new item hangar with personal storage for each pilot.

Is this new item hangar still in the works? Will we get it this winter expansion?


Again, no official word, no, sorry.

Forlorn Wongraven wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Ok, so here's our current complete plan:

...

We're hoping this will be the final set of adjustments, but obviously we're reading the feedback here :)

-Greyscale


Great changes right there. Can we get drops from SMA as well, please? Pirate


Yup. Anything in any kind of bay should now be able to drop (including drone bay, SMA, ore bay etc).

Alli Othman wrote:
Changes are looking much better on the user end now.
I still see containers as an inferior way of managing that, but it's an adequate compromise so long as they actually work. The changes to scanability are great, can't wait for more orcas to actually be tanking out.

To clarify that I am indeed reading this portion correctly...
Quote:
Fleet hangars and ship maintenance arrays on ships both now have "allow fleet member use" and "allow corp member use" in the inventory UI

Each one has its own options now?


Yes.

Tippia wrote:
Andski wrote:
rodyas wrote:
Ah, I did not know the ganked wreck belonged to the ganker. Then yeah that will be easy to sidestep.

No, this is only the case with NPCs. Player wrecks belong to the player that lost the ship.

…although it was mentioned somewhere, either in the blog or in the comment thread, that the looting rights for player wrecks would be extended to whomever caused that wreck.

Combine this with the new s-flagging for theft, and it essentially creates a situation where the ganker would own the wreck.


No, the wreck-flagging change is that if you could legally kill the ship that died, you can legally loot from its wreck. Suicide-ganking does not fall into this category.