Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Keep current options for corp allowed and disallowed hangar and container access. Maybe hide the lesser used 75% to an advanced level, but don't remove any of the current options please.

One piece of additional info I'd like is a breakdown of uncovered escrow isks for market orders due to margin trading, for each corp wallet division separately, separate again from personal uncovered escrow isks. Right now I can't see if buyorders in one wallet are covered enough.

1) Roles.

2) I almost died trying before I finally found how to rename corp hangars.

3) Ability to give out permissions per structure or temporary permissions would be great.

My personal wishlist for the corp management:

*) Please give us the option to adjust the number of divisions, both for the corp wallet and the hangar. a small corp may only need the existing 7, but a large corp might diversify their assets, plus it would give us greater freedom in pos-management (private pos for corp-members is my personal keyword here)

*) Same goes for roles and titles! We need more =)

*) The member list needs more filters, maybe I want to check how many recruits we currently have, or find only inactive toons (not online for 1 month+), instead of having the seperate "search for member"-tab

*) I never used the "accounting"-tab in the member-window. what is it for? I honestly don't know, so either remove it or fix it !?

*) Rework the whole "politics"-window! the vote-system is broken, more than 15-20 outstanding votes and the client'll crash; the votes can't be ordered. Votes should end when all shareholders actually voted OR after a fixed time.

*) the corp-asset-window should be accessable like the personal assets (allow us to check through containers)

*) move the corp-details somewhere we can see them =)

*) when safety is green, i don't want to shoot one of my corpmates... flying incursions with corp-mates sucks like hell when you capchain and fire at a friend at the same time =P at least give us the option to somehow turn off friendly fire

*) placeholder for another great idea

Aisa Anistan
CoCEO of GNIC

I find it funny that you can organise your contacts folder by headers so easily multiple groups per individual, corp, alliance etc, but even the most basic corp permission is restrictive & counter-intuitive. Even fleets are easier to sort & manage.
Get the Corp management software routines (and divisional level) & just Burn them.

Then start with a mix of the coding for fleet wing/squad management (dragging/dropping etc.) Then allow a tag/header like for contacts to be applied to any individual/group/corp/alliance/Non corp individuals/Groups ofr each function, multiple can be assigned for each group & people/organizations can be part of any other group, the right click & select header for a very fine grained function/multi function for any or all or multiple groups.

ie drag my alliance, corp, a few friends in NPC corps, buddy's into a group like a fleet.
the for instance.
select tag POS>Personal-Storage>allowed
select tag POS>Fuel/Stront>can fuel UP (not down should be different permission)
select tag POS>Industry>Manufacturing>Personal/Corp/Alliance)>queues allow 1 to infinity.

Region>access/deny
Region>constallation>access/deny
Region>constallation>system>access/deny
Region>constallation>system>named-group-structure (like contacts/player drag/drop groups)access/deny
Region>constallation>system>named-structure>access/deny


Wallet could also use this to define wallets for every single group etc.
Wallet->(flexible tag)>assign to group

For more specific groups ie. this single person
select tag POS>Industry>Manufacturing>Personal/Corp/Alliance)>queues allow 0
As this is more specific than grouped one above would allow group allowing and barring.

Even a tag header for each group/individual as follows:
(ALL or sub)-> Allows override Denys
(ALL or sub)-> Denys override Allows

Just my tuppence worth.

Corp wallets Need looking at. Like trading on behalf of corp You cant tell the differance between a corp buy order or a personal one. (The clever use of colour highlights might do the trick)

ROLES need to be more intuitive and over haul the corp UI (each time im using them i wanna poke my eyes out!)

and the abilities that allow allies/friends (non-corp/non-alliance member) to use a corp/alliance owned structure would be cool (or CCP recognize the coalition and formally making them a formal game mechanic instead of its just a player agreement)

Can I move things around in the Market Deliveries hangar more? Right now the only way to split a stack within that hangar (that I know of) is through the contract-creation interface, which is a really pointless and painstaking way compared to shift+drag&drop. This offers no benefit compared to being able to drag-and-drop, which you only can't do because you're not allowed to drop things into the market deliveries hangar (which is itself a pointless labor-wasting system if you have corp contracting roles, because you can contract something to yourself and accept it from the corp to land it in the MD hangar).

One of the biggest obstacles to eve fleet play is waiting around for other players to get properly fitted. In fact, this is also a major obstacle to enjoying the fighting life (?!!) in any real military. The army is described as "hurry up and wait" for good reason.

Another major obstacle to fleet operations in eve is folks trying to get other folks to pay for their grand adventures. This is a game, but when you analyse the way many FCs address newer players, you could be forgiven for thinking senior players actually own the fleet, and that newer players owe them something by default.

Rather than change the entire game, I would suggest that CCP might make some "fleet enabling tools" that give corps the option of getting around these two problems. So, if corps could "opt in" to a specific model of operation, certain tools could become available to them.

At first draft, an opt in fleet tool could be a special type of fleet hanger concept. The special type of fleet hanger would be made to give effect to fast, specific fleet policies.

Three tools would be ideal for speeding up organization and curtailing FCs who want obedient bots as cannon fodder.

1. The fleet hanger would be divided up with a hanger for EACH FC. The corp or alliance appoints one player to be the FC for that hanger. Each FC is responsible for BUYING AND FITTING all the ships in his or her fleet. Whether they take donations from others is negotiable, but in principle each FC pays for and maintains THEIR fleet, to be used when their prefered doctrine is called for. So a corp or alliance would then have a hanger for each doctrine they might wish to use. i.e. a corp or alliance might have an ambush hanger commanded by one player who is right into recon and SB doctrine. Another hanger night be for tech one cap war battleship doctrine. Another might be a WH fleet with a mining wing. The point is that the hangers would be designated for a specific fleet with a specific doctrine, and only the FC would have access to that hanger, to choose ships and to fit them. And, if they are not into using other players as free canon fodder for their mad aspirations, they can pay for the ships and fittings as well.

2. The fleet hanger will have a mechanism for assigning ships to fleet members. Thus, when all the fleet members are assembled in station, as guests, the FC can fleet up and then assign ships to designated fleet members. The idea here is to make it simple. This can already be done with the trade window, but doing this for a twenty or thirty ship fleet is very awkward. If the FC could assign ships to players BEFORE the players assemble, and then press a single button to issue each ship to each player in station, the time taken to get everyone into their designated ship could be cut dramatically. It would be ideal if the "issue ship to player" command did three things:
a. automatically removed the designated player from their current ship and made the fleet ship active.
b. prohibited the player from changing fittings
c. automatically assigned the UI to the preconfigured status for that ship, in that role, as created by the FC.

3. Self destruct feature to curb loose canons. This is really simple. If a player tries to change a fitting or disobeys the FC in battle, the FC should have the power to simply blow up the errant fleet member. It is a straight up field court martial, and not beyond realistic policy. If the FC pays for the fleet, he or she is entitled to destroy it. If a fleet member disrupts doctrine by being a loose canon (loose canon!), they ought to expect summary justice in the traditional manner. The incentives here are not unbalanced. Sure, players have to respect fleet doctrine and discipline, but FCs also have to weight their options very carefully. After all, blowing up your own ships in battle is not a sign of solid FC credentials, and it puts the onus on FCs to choose their pilots wisely, and to treat them with due respect. Lastly, if the FC is paying for these ships, they will think twice before taking the nuclear option.

As I noted earlier, this kind of new fleet organization should be, must be, opt in. The way the game is played now is fantastic, and should not be changed. It is pure sandbox, and people should be able to fly their own ships in their fleets any way they want.

Be that as it may, if a option exists for fleets who have already agreed that they want to fight a certain way, with battlefield discipline and incentives properly allocated with capital costs, then a feature which facilitates this method would save a whole bunch of time for everyone.

I envisage a system where 12 new players could all join a new fleet, and have a hanger each. The new players would each take turns at FC, and each would develop their own preferred doctrine with their own preferred fits. It would be entirely up to each FC, in turn, to buy and fit their fleet. Overall, as each player would fly "for free" in the other 11 fleet doctrines, players would all pay the same amount for the same amount of game play.

With such a system, players could log on when they have their own time, in order to fit and managed their fleet. When groups schedule field operations, the fleet could be undocked as a fully operational fleet within 30 secs of the formation time.

Getting this operational readiness timeframe down to 30 secs is really important, because players need to know that they can log in and have a cool experience in an hour. If that hour of gameplay is stretched to three hours because of the inevitable waiting for fit and assembly, flying fleets becomes a major drain on real world time.

Lastly, I would leave the loot mechanics alone, albeit with the proviso that the FC can auto destruct each ship.

The auto destruct feature should only work in system, or perhaps across all adjacent systems. In other words, folks should still be able to try and flee a rogue FC with a stolen ship.

1. PRIMARY PAIN POINT - The biggest pain point is not having a new recruit friendly introduction...being able to see more tabs than just 'home' is adding too much complexity, AND unnecessary access to raw recruits. SUGGESTION - only allow raw recruits to see the 'home' tab in corporation panel, and give us more bulletins!
2. PRIMARY PAIN POINT - the "HQ", "Based at" and "Other" hangars is woefully inadequate to protect a corporations assets aside from making, as intended, only one station hangars secure (or by unintended, using 'based at' as a second HQ) SUGGESTION give us some way of flagging an office an 'hq' level access, and/or add a new drop down option for 'outpost' or 'vault' that we can also flag an office with such a rubric
3. SECONDARY PAIN POINT - "factory manager" is a headache. SUGGESTION rent lab / factory slot should be the role that allows one to start a project (and finish/cancel one's own), whereas 'factory manager' should be the more powerful umbrella role dealing with all facets of such for the corporation
4. SECONDARY PAIN POINT - When you subscribe to a mailing list you don't get previous evemails. SUGGESTION when you subscribe to a mailing list you'll see all the archived mails the CEO has in the mailing inbox (or someone designated as the archivist)
5. SECONDARY PAIN POINT - Lack of alliance bookmarks, fitting manager, etc SUGGESTION - allow CEOs/directors to add alliance bookmarks and add fittings to an alliance level manager.
6. TERTIARY PAIN POINT - The next pain point is not having a way for recruits, who are given roles (via titles or otherwise...i prefer titles exclusively btw), to be able to see a list of things they are allowed to do. SUGGESTION - create a new tab with a list of roles that have been enabled for that character, much like the 'edit member', but also with some link to and explanation on eve-wiki or the encyclopedia. (example)
7. TERTIARY PAIN POINT - the horrible explanations of what each role grants access to, etc..., since the griefers all know the loopholes why make things opaque for n00b CEOs? SUGGESTION - make a new updated glossary of what the roles enable
8. TERTIARY PAIN POINT - Too much power for raw recruits
see combat loss mails (even ones to npcs),
send and read corp evemails,
copy and create corporate bookmarks,
see corporate fitting management,
see corporate contacts (standings),
view corp mates locations on map (if in space only),
see locations of all offices,
ability to put items/ships into any corporate hangar,
view a member list showing last known logins (how many hours ago),
shoot any corp member without any repurcussions from CONCORD (and even be remotely repaired by a third party outside of corp without said pilot being flagged),
be able to view and engage in corporate chat window without moderation.
SUGGESTION assign most if not all of the above to some kind of role, either currently coded or new ones

I'd also like to pimp GamerChick42's article about this subject

Not sure if this has been mentioned. I run a corp for myself and alt and do manufacturing and trading I'd very much like to be able to change a corporate sell order even if my char didnt place it. This wold of course need proper roles and security levels and access.