These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Summer 2014] Calling for feedback on Assembly Line Settings

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S
Affirmative.
#41 - 2014-05-05 03:33:02 UTC
Meytal wrote:
Not specifically related to the settings themselves, but it solves many other issues that others have raised in this thread, and not just with assembly lines.

Allow us to define arbitrary groups and then provide permissions based on those definitions.

Alliance A has member corps Corps A-One, A-Two, A-Three, and A-Four.
Alliance B has member corps Corp B-Alpha and B-Beta.
Bob, the CEO of Corp A-One, has an alt named Chuckles in Corp A-Four.

Corp A-One owns a manufacturing facility.

They define a "Unrestricted Manufacturers" group that:
  • includes Corp A-One
  • includes character Chuckles
  • restricts (the rest of) Alliance A
  • includes Alliance B
  • Everyone else is restricted by default

They define a "Taxed Manufacturers" group that:
  • includes Corp A-Three
  • includes +10 standings
  • Everyone else is restricted by default

They define a "Restricted Manufacturers" group that:
  • includes Corp A-Four
  • includes Corp B-Beta
  • includes +5 (and higher) standings
  • Everyone else is restricted by default

They grant permission:
  • "Unrestricted Manufacturers" = full access, no tax
  • "Taxed Manufacturers" = full access, 15% tax
  • "Restricted Manufacturers" = specific assembly line access, 15% tax, group may only run one simultaneous job

If someone is in multiple categories, such as Corp B-Beta above, whatever is first is what takes effect; so B-Beta receives the permissions from Unrestricted Manufacturers because that the earliest they are mentioned.

Wherever you might have used a role or title or alliance or corp previously, allow use of these custom-created arbitrary groups instead.

I'm not in front of a computer with Eve on it at the current time, but wouldn't something similar to Contact Labels work for this?
(I know that contact Labels are used on personal level, I can't remember if they were implemented for Corporation Contacts)
The 3 Groups that you mentioned, might be worthwhile to have as Built-in Labels and then just adding a corporation contact to the appropriate Label would give them the appropriate access?
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S
Affirmative.
#42 - 2014-05-05 03:37:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Caldari 5
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Hello people,


As you know it by now, we are focusing on industry for summer and bringing significant mechanic and UI changes to this feature as a whole.

There is one specific point we wish to receive your feedback on, which is assembly line settings.

Those settings (which are illustrated here) serve to control cost and access to POS / outpost industry lines.

We are thinking of streamlining this a bit by removing character and corporation security settings, which don't seem used that much in the first place.

We are also not certain of the usefulness of the "good standing discount %" and "bad standing surcharge %" entries since player groups usually do not want to allow access to such lines to their enemies in the first place. But we could be missing something.

Do you have any use for character and corporation security options? How useful is the good / bad standing surcharge options to you / your corporation / your alliance? Anything else you would like to change, add or remove on these settings?


Thanks for your time - and see you at Fanfest for those attending.

The main reason that Good/Bad standing discount/surcharge are not used is because Public Access doesn't work, if public access did work they might actually be used. However I suspect that some form of a POCO type interface on the outside of the POS shield may be required in order to access the Arrays on the inside.

Edit: Oh and if I remember correctly the Restriction masks work in reverse to what you expect. Checking the Allow Corporation Member Use actually prevents them from using the array, WTF?
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#43 - 2014-05-05 05:17:43 UTC
Scarlett LaBlanc wrote:
I see no point in adding public access to POS lines. With the removal of slots, no one would bother looking for a public POS as there will always be "room at the inn" of NPC stations for research and manufacturing.



Being that the more people use a certain system, the cost increases to manufacture/research things. By opening public access to your pos, this should decrease the cost because it increases the available resources.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#44 - 2014-05-05 05:50:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Batelle
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
We are thinking of streamlining this a bit by removing character and corporation security settings, which don't seem used that much in the first place.


You should obviously remove this.

CCP Ytterbium wrote:
We are also not certain of the usefulness of the "good standing discount %" and "bad standing surcharge %" entries since player groups usually do not want to allow access to such lines to their enemies in the first place. But we could be missing something.


If its not too much clutter for the UI or whatever, you may want to keep this in in case freeport stations come back into vogue at some point in the next 5 years. Or if public access on poses or whatever replaces poses becomes a viable thing in hisec (and it should, selling facility services makes complete sense as a design objective)

Quote:
Thanks for your time - and see you at Fanfest for those attending.


DIdn't get a chance to talk to you, but Greyscale said he would pass along my praises on the design of the compression/refining changes.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#45 - 2014-05-05 15:16:32 UTC
Not to toot my own horn, but I want people to know that CCP Ytterbium is paying attention to this thread.

http://imgur.com/HrAVveS

For POSes, I think a public hanger division would pretty much solve most of the public access issues. In fact, having the ability to designate any or all corp hanger divisions as public access would be pretty cool. Though I can't imagine needing more than one hanger division as public.

A POS would still need to have a way to choose who can get into the shield. Now that I think about it, the current menu would serve well for that.

As far as security is concerned, there would have to be a certain level of trust. But this is part of operating at a POS. At the very least one would not have to worry about their job outputs being stolen, since an industrial manager can only retrieve jobs from corp members.

Also, a public POS is always subject to certain other risks, like bumping or being destroyed. But those are the risks you take when you undock.

Theoretically, under the new system, one could anchor a POS in a station system (hostile or otherwise) to take advantage of the local teams and global percentage indices without having to pay the station taxes. But fuel would probably outweigh that benefit.

I think what needs to happen is to look at how we use assembly arrays (and POSes in general) and how we can make them both accessible and secure without an overly complicated and confusing system of roles and titles. But that is for another blog.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Tetania
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#46 - 2014-05-05 17:18:23 UTC
There is one major issue with the "public POS" idea beyond shield access and the dependency on corp hangar divisions.

A job started from a POS is destroyed if the POS or array dies or is unachored. In the new system not just the minerals will be destroyed but also the now local BP. I don't think anyone is actually going to use a POS array they don't have some ownership of.

It's a lot of implementation effort for something no one will use because they could very cheaply just run their own POS.
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#47 - 2014-05-05 23:22:52 UTC
From a POS owner standpoint, many of those settings are useless and will become even more so after the expansion (no more remote research on BPOs).

Until non corp members can access arrays for R&D and manufacturing - adding and removing only their materials and products, it may as well cease being part of the ui.

Now in terms of outposts, you may want to follow some of the prior suggestions by:
- having a allowed and dis-allowed box you can either type the name of an alliance/corp/individual or drag drop their linked name or portrait into the respective boxes.
- priority is determined by detail. The more specific trumps the less specific so that an alliance placed in dis-allowed cannot use the facilities but a corporation within that alliance placed into allowed can while a certain pilot from said corp who is placed into dis-allowed cannot.
- you will be able to filter names as I imagine either list could become very long.
- you might add a further level of detail to those allowed to use the lines that can be mass edited or individually edited. This level of detail would cover taxes and use limits (lines per day or month or even based on run costs).

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#48 - 2014-05-05 23:53:07 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

We are also not certain of the usefulness of the "good standing discount %" and "bad standing surcharge %" entries since player groups usually do not want to allow access to such lines to their enemies in the first place. But we could be missing something.


Those only made sense when you could remote ME/TE. They could have theri stuffs at station and still research at your POS.

Since you stupidly destroyed that ability to remote research....

Oh wait. It is totally unneeded, since unlimited station slots means NO ONE will be doing any sub-supercap building or any research at a POS anyway, because there is no reason to have a high sec POS, and no reason to put anything except DPS, scrams, drains and hardeners at a low/null POS.
Flyinghotpocket
Small Focused Memes
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#49 - 2014-05-06 21:56:00 UTC
none of this **** matters since pos's cant be opened to public for renting of slots. which is what i thought it was for.

but hey with slots going away this **** is really useless.

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Dex Nederland
Lai Dai Infinity Systems
The Fourth District
#50 - 2014-05-07 04:58:54 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
providence probably wants to talk to you about this.

penifSMASH wrote:
- Security status restrictions and bad standing discharge is useless for the vast majority of null but you should wait to hear feedback from Providence station holders as some of them RP as anti-pirates. Also some of their stations have allowed bad standing characters to dock and use services (so it's still feasible albeit unlikely they'd want to use assembly lines)

Tetania wrote:
Security status. (I was going to leave this out but Provi block might care. Nobody else will.)

Millia Goodpussy wrote:
What in hell is going with you Dev's man you think folks do not use the security settings..

Provi for one does!! for petes sake do you even log into the game??

CVA Guide & FAQ

The Providence Holders coalition tries to operate on a Not-Red-Don't-Shoot (NRDS) policy. Someone who has a negative security rating may not actually be Red to Providence, since they may operate NRDS in lower-Domain & Derelik low-sec and Providence and avoid shooting at holders, but may operate NBSI in other low-sec areas (thus gaining a negative security rating).

All of this is a long way of saying, even in Providence, facilities access based on security status does not seem particularly useful based on our ROEs. If I am wrong, someone higher up the totem pole will be along to correct me once soon enough as I have cross-posted to the coalition's forums.



Alliance/Corporate Standings are another matter entirely and I can even seeing it having utility outside of Providence. There could be a desire to keep a particular system's global fraction suppressed and therefore limit access to some minimum standings for allies/blue residents/renters in order to keep it below the cap. Something similar to the POCO interface seems like a good starting point.

Lai Dai Infinity Systems
Sbrodor
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#51 - 2014-05-07 07:52:10 UTC
as sov and outpost holder in providence i want to feedback is necessary the good and bad standing discount % if the flow of used lines spike in future. We need to regulate the flux of neutrals and friends discount.

Even if at moment these value in production lines are quite useless because all line have so irrilevant isk flux and set a high or low discount change only a few milions a month for a good system. almost irrilevant even in amarr outpost with good industry and market.

Security status is quite irrilevant even for most strict RP in provi ^^
Deacon Ix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#52 - 2014-05-07 08:34:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Deacon Ix
Going to keep this brief

I like to be able to restrict assembly line usage based on standings purely to be able to reserve some lines for the corp, and ideally have a differentiation between corp member usage and corp usage (from a corp hanger).

being able to charge different amounts for different standing would also be good

current station interface is awful - the cost modifiers are completely unintuiative

slightly off topic - the improvements need to have some sort of coherency - eg the info tab for a Minmatar Basic Outpost Office Platform - A basic upgrade to Minmatar Outpost office facilities. Gives an additional seven office slots.
Where as hovering over the slot in the improvements tab states only 3 offices...

Back on topic -
Quote:
Security status is quite irrelevant even for most strict RP in provi


+1
Adunh Slavy
#53 - 2014-05-07 09:36:17 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
We are also not certain of the usefulness of the "good standing discount %" and "bad standing surcharge %" entries since player groups usually do not want to allow access to such lines to their enemies in the first place. But we could be missing something.

Do you have any use for character and corporation security options? How useful is the good / bad standing surcharge options to you / your corporation / your alliance? Anything else you would like to change, add or remove on these settings?



A lot of this may depend on what the corp roles revamp may do. Just how far are you guys, CCP, going to go on this sort of thing? If the revamp provides more granularity and flexibility, we the players may need additional granularity and flexibility on tangential UIs.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Mra Rednu
Oyonata Gate Defence Force.
#54 - 2014-05-07 15:11:03 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
What in hell is going with you Dev's man you think folks do not use the security settings..

Provi for one does!! for petes sake do you even log into the game??



AFAIK Provi does not give two ***** about sec status.
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#55 - 2014-05-07 15:31:28 UTC
penifSMASH wrote:
Station settings for assembly lines are so archaic, rigid, useless, and undocumented that dealing it with has been a complete and utter headache. I say this is as one of the people runs the executor corp in Brothers of Tangra, which owns 111 outposts that service hundreds and hundreds of corps both in and out of the alliance. Thanks in advance for addressing this issue.

Instead of suggesting what modifications we'd like to see made to that particular existing UI, I will list what overall changes I would like to be made in the hopes that it will help guide you.

- Security status restrictions and bad standing discharge is useless for the vast majority of null but you should wait to hear feedback from Providence station holders as some of them RP as anti-pirates. Also some of their stations have allowed bad standing characters to dock and use services (so it's still feasible albeit unlikely they'd want to use assembly lines)
- I would like to have the ability to block out particular corps (or conversely only allow certain corps) within the alliance from using assembly lines
- I would like to have the ability to set different tax rates for different corps (instead of the same blanket cost for all corps within an alliance)
- same as the previous two points except with different alliances
- When setting job costs for different lines, I'd like to be able to set the same costs for multiple lines at once instead of having to click each one individually, although I guess this will be irrelevant after the industry changes
- I'd like to allow/restrict use of Reprocessing services for different corps within the alliance, or at the very least modify reprocessing tax based on the corp that uses it

Maybe there is a way to do all of this but there is no documentation and we never get help from petitions so maybe release some kind of guide or explanation for setting up stations overall, although I guess this specific request goes beyond the scope of this thread.



Well, so far we have only heard 2 things regarding stations:
Install and hourly cost get rolled into a tax
There will be some way to limit the lines to some people

Maybe if we saw what you have so far instead of the old screenshot we can tell you where to go (C what i did there)

If you are lost and need a start - Penif got it pretty close

The main thing is the ability to not only break it down by standings but also by corp, even within an alliance
ie: These 10 corps can use the station refinery for free, these 10 pay 3% tax, the rest pay 10% tax. This can apply to refinery, production lines, repair, office rental etc, but should be able to be set separately. This will allow any alliance to set the office rental space for their corps at say 1 isk, but allow for coalition corps to rent for 50mil/month or something along those lines. Right now that is only possible if you basically set everyone +5 and make +6 your cutoff and do some fudging with discount percent and other things. But then that makes it so alliance can only have basically +5 standings


Still not sure why there is access controls for bounty and courier missions on player outposts...maybe some one can tell me about that....

outpost improvement mouseovers are wrong - pre 2013 outpost changes are listed in mouseovers

The ability for Outpost owners to see what jobs are running in there station would be nice as well

In clone contracts, put the corp thing there instead of the name, maybe the symbol with the little blue, grey or red thingy in it, or make the link clickable. When you conquer a station, most of the time, you have to click them all and say revoke, but it would be nice if you knew who was blue, neut, red etc before you started a clickfest - and maybe a kick all butan would be swell

I am sure I'll have more after lunch
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#56 - 2014-05-07 17:06:11 UTC
OK, i am sitting here eating my delicious ham and cheese sandwichBig smile

I re read what I wrote and figure NFW are they going to do all that, then I started looking for shortcuts

Blam:

Make a seperate division for corps that rent offices - we can control that already and therefore we can psuedo control a seperate subset of taxes that way

Mind you, everything I said above is still wanted and relevant, just maybe not doable in 4 weeks....
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#57 - 2014-05-07 18:54:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Catherine Laartii
Loraine Gess wrote:
Catherine Laartii wrote:

Reducing fuel block consumption rate is ideal; solo or small-gang players don't necessarily have the funds to prop up their own starbase in wh space or hisec for that matter, and so for allowing the fuel costs to drop somewhat would help alleviate that.




Seriously???

A large costs <500m/mo to fuel.

This is significantly less than a plex, which droves and droves and droves and droves of players manage to afford on a monthly basis, doing even stupider things, like mining in highsec.



Don't even need to critique the folly of reducing demand for fuel blocks (and their components)


You are forgetting that fact that not only demand after this is implemented will jack prices up quite a bit, but how lazy people actually are in this game, specifically in hisec. If it reduces fuel prices, that's more money they can line their pockets with, so it's a net gain for the solo/small guy in that respect. Sure either of us could make that much in a few days, but relatively newer players who might want to try striking out on their own after researching how things work would find that extremely useful. Or mission-runners, for that matter.

And I'm astounded that you don't think this is a huge thing for wh. PI production for blocks is a ***** to maintain, so having to deal with less building fuel and more farming of sleepers or relics from a null static from a lower-class wh is a VERY important thing.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#58 - 2014-05-08 10:35:08 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
Alright people, here is the plan so far after we internally discussed this issue based on your feedback.


  • Starbases: we are removing all those settings altogether. Mainly because, as many of you mentioned, this was only relelvant for Remote Research, which is going the way of the dinosaur. Since we are not making Starbase public for now (it's just too much work for the time allotted, if anything we need another release to fix Starbases at the very least), there should be no use case left.

  • Outposts: we will most likely move those Industry settings to the "Station Management" window, since individual lines are going away. We will not remove any of the options currently listed until we have a proper overhaul of Starbases and Outposts in general.



Please let us know if we forgot something.
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate
Wildly Inappropriate.
#59 - 2014-05-08 11:40:28 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Alright people, here is the plan so far after we internally discussed this issue based on your feedback.


  • Outposts: we will most likely move those Industry settings to the "Station Management" window, since individual lines are going away. We will not remove any of the options currently listed until we have a proper overhaul of Starbases and Outposts in general.



Please let us know if we forgot something.


So no way to partial lock a station to avoid congestion in said station?
Or to seperate acces between diffrent corperations in an alliance, instead of standings which are flawed as hell. Only the ability to allow acces by standings means everyoen in your alliance has acces instead of maybe just a few corps. Or just your own corp has acces. Really need an option of something in between
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#60 - 2014-05-08 12:34:44 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Alright people, here is the plan so far after we internally discussed this issue based on your feedback.


  • Starbases: we are removing all those settings altogether. Mainly because, as many of you mentioned, this was only relelvant for Remote Research, which is going the way of the dinosaur. Since we are not making Starbase public for now (it's just too much work for the time allotted, if anything we need another release to fix Starbases at the very least), there should be no use case left.

  • Outposts: we will most likely move those Industry settings to the "Station Management" window, since individual lines are going away. We will not remove any of the options currently listed until we have a proper overhaul of Starbases and Outposts in general.



Please let us know if we forgot something.


So, basically NOTHING that was widely asked for will make it

You are essentially moving a menu from A to B