These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

POSes: I am a small portion of the community

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tomytronic
Perkone
Caldari State
#1421 - 2013-01-17 18:28:24 UTC
Aryth wrote:
Alx Warlord wrote:
Nair Alderau wrote:
mynnna wrote:
To reiterate what I see is the problem here is not that they aren't doing them yet and (evidently) that they aren't working on them at all, but that they seem to see it as a problem that only affects "a small part" of the playerbase and so perhaps do not regard it as a higher priority item.

That is clearly very, very wrong.


Very, very wrong indeed.

Very, very, VERY wrong indeed.


Oh boy a quota chain!

Very, very VERY VERY wrong indeed

So unbelievably wrong that we'll have to invent a new word to describe it; wrong just isn't cutting it anymore.
Axel Kurki
Aseyakone
#1422 - 2013-01-17 18:28:35 UTC
I hereby wish to notify that I do strongly support this cause.

....was there a low limit for input in posts? Usually when I post, I tend to write walls-of-text, but I kind of feel that the most necessary things have probably been said already. Consider the personal structures that were once thought about as a possible way to demo new starbase mechanics before expanding to corporate structures (proper starbases).

And yes, a revamp to starbase structures would probably increase POS usage, decrease POS manager pain and might even empower smaller groups to start putting down structures. Catering to small groups would probably help the large groups even more, but the smaller the initial investment (ISK and time) to structures, the easier it is to take the first step.
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1423 - 2013-01-17 18:28:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Vera Algaert
mynnna wrote:
https://twitter.com/mynnna_eve/status/291968306146062337

We don't think it's not going to happen. Maybe we did at first, but that's on us - perhaps we didn't read closely enough, didn't notice the sections Gargant brought to our attention. So that's no longer the problem.

Maybe you'd like to share your understanding with the rest of us?
(as CCP seems to fail at communicating as usual)

I don't see how adding new hangar arrays to the current POS system would gradually lead to a modular POS system as outlined at the previous summit (no POS shields, mooring bays, jumpdrives, linking several POSes together, arc of fire on POS guns, ...).

To me it seems that the modular system would be so different from the current one that it would have to be developed separately and cannot be achieved through evolution of the existing POS system.

The vibe I get from the CSM minutes, Two Step's blog post and the CCP response in this thread is that we might get a few bandaid fixes to the current POS system in the summer expansion which will then push modular POSes off the roadmap for the foreseeable future as that area of the game is considered "dealt with".

.
Chandaris
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#1424 - 2013-01-17 18:29:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Chandaris
POS code is difficult to deal with as it's some of the earliest code in the game.

I've known this for years, it's been stated over and over again everytime the subject comes up. CSM obviously is not paying attention.

Unfortunately I agree 100% w/ CCP here. If it's the 'old scary code' it's not worth the time investment in fixing until you know exactly what you want to do with it. As stated, POS managers are a very small percentage of the population. For the rest, they are simply wallpaper or something to bridge from.

Spending large resources on a singular aspect to change it 'just because' is silly. CCP should decide firmly on what posses should be, and how they should work moving forward and how they should change. Then, and only then should people start touching code.

EDIT: Modlar posses are a cool idea, but don't deliver any new gameplay or mechanics. Mechanics and gameplay need to be defined first. Then start hanging the tinsel and garland on it.
Max Shader
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1425 - 2013-01-17 18:29:36 UTC
Pos access is a nightmare. Please Fix
CinXodr
Stone Circle
U N K N O W N
#1426 - 2013-01-17 18:30:12 UTC
A rather disturbing viewpoint from CCP. (c)

WH people purely dependent on POSes, because they just.. live on them.
And I rarely dont see a tower on d-scan in k-space.
Quite interesting idea, how community, that do present almost in every system in known and unknown space.. turned out to be "a small portion of the community".

On summer CSM summit "Modular POS system" was declared to be the main point of next(2013) year expansions. And I dont know anyone, who didnt like this or at least was uninterested in this point. If now one of the most loved planned features will be just canceled, because "dont interest anyone".. it will be disturbing. Very disturbing.
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Einheit X-6
#1427 - 2013-01-17 18:30:14 UTC
approving the general message: give us the POS overhaul.

as far as my experience goes, every corp has at least one guy tending to (multiple) POSes and at least two POSes
all the invention POS' in low and high...
every 0.0 system with habitants has POSes (safe POS, moon mining, jump bridges)
every WH with habitants has POSes
just think about all the logistic POSes of alliances in low.
...
...


i thought all the talk about instigators and enablers, while rather abstract, had a core of truth. now please, don't fail to apply your shiny new method of game design @ the very first chance.

CCP, this your chance to make this the feature every single player wants to use.
as i see it, every system without a station needs at least one POS for every entity using this system more then travelling through it, may it be high, low or 0.0
just think about how much more cruiser and the ex-low-tier frigs are used since its worth using them.

how can this be a feature only a few people woult interact with?
Acks
RONA Corporation
#1428 - 2013-01-17 18:30:53 UTC
Please completely overhaul all things POS.

Improvements to what is there are desperately needed. An optimal solution is to start over with the Module POS etc plans.
Sergeant Spacehopper
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1429 - 2013-01-17 18:31:32 UTC
Oh this is bad news. I am not one for bashing CCP usually but boy, this time they deserve it.

+1
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#1430 - 2013-01-17 18:31:52 UTC
I live in high sec and I can attest that managing and running a POS is an absolute pain in the butt.

Please fix the POS. Thank you.

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#1431 - 2013-01-17 18:32:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Gogela
Modular POS Thread from 2006

Another of many Modular POS threads in 2008 w/ more Dev response, and here's the useless CSM making it an issue in the same year.

Anyone remember this thread from 2011? It's on the old forums... it's interesting to go up a level there and see all of the topics they got player feedback on.

...and to top it all off: Keynote from Fanfest 2012 that talks about POS's (linked at 46 min).

"POS's... we're gonna re-do POS's."
~CCP at 2012 Fanfest

...so DO IT. P

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Tiradem Trulis
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1432 - 2013-01-17 18:32:31 UTC
CryEvilCry

+1
Zedah Zoid
Good Eats
#1433 - 2013-01-17 18:32:41 UTC
@CCP Gargant - thanks for the reply. As other said, I appreciate the fact that CCP isn't saying they will never fix this, and for pointing out the other positive things in the Meeting Minutes. But it has been quite a while since it was brought up(like 5 years ago). And the words attributed to Soundwave about "the POS system by itself would only affect a small portion of the community." is complete and utter nonsense.

Sure, building a huge lego system for modular POS'es might be a Jesus feature that we could live without this summer or in 2013 and there are probably only a few people that would actively spend their time doing this, BUT the POS system itself needs some work and that work should be looked at and done without letting art and other things stand in the way. Just start by fixing the roles interface and hangar access. When you have to grant roles that will allow a guy that only wants to run T3 reactions to basically unanchor and run off with the entire POS setup of a 30 man corp that's just silly. Sure maybe one time it made sense because you had other areas of the game to concentrate on and reactions were something only a very few alliance leader alts did or something but today there is much more need for finer granularity in manipulating POS modules without giving away the keys to the Ferrari.

BTW, just so you know we're not all spoiled, screaming brats all the time, thanks a lot for the offline/online and anchoring timer changes. See? I can be thankful. Just give me a reason to be.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#1434 - 2013-01-17 18:32:50 UTC
Sometimes people say "this is not cost effective" despite the benefits that it would bring. Don't be a child about it.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Joe Endicott
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1435 - 2013-01-17 18:33:16 UTC
Two step sucks but a pos revamp is needed
SAVANT Mahr
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#1436 - 2013-01-17 18:33:26 UTC
C'mon CCP you know its time to gives us POS dwellers some love....C'Mon just give us some FREAK'N LOVE.....oh yea and can we plz has some more loves plz for our POS love shacks plz
Vega Sohalia
Planck Unit
#1437 - 2013-01-17 18:34:19 UTC
As a player that uses POSs everday in-game I fully support a POS revamp.

Secure ship storage
A more user-friendly interface

Please make this happen!
Joe XR
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1438 - 2013-01-17 18:34:51 UTC
I also believe two step sucks but think poses need to be revamped
Cleuseau Remos
EVE University
Ivy League
#1439 - 2013-01-17 18:35:02 UTC
I would love to get more involved with POSes but in my experience they were extremely difficult to manage and caused a all-or-nothing trust relationship.

I believe this goes against the technology based theme of the game itself. I highly respect Eve's developers and the work that has been done has been amazing, but I agree this is lacking a full set of management features.
E Potato
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1440 - 2013-01-17 18:35:25 UTC
Some changes would be a huge help.

Allowing corporations to allow a member to change modules on one or certain towers without having to allow that member to make changes on all towers would be good.

Allowing tech 3 ships to change subsystems at a POS seems necessary. Is there even a good reason not to allow those ships to fly with partial subsystems? The ship could get a cargo container for a model when in that state if the model is the issue.