These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Corp rights and Station Container in Wormholes

Author
5NAK3 PLI55K3N
Die Gallier - Abt. Zivilisten
#1 - 2012-01-19 21:43:49 UTC  |  Edited by: 5NAK3 PLI55K3N
The Corp member rights are really hard to understand, terrible to handle, also terrible to change and they do not what the should do -> Securing the Corp Equipment.

The system has only 3 states:
state 1 : member can do nothing
state 2 : member can work with, if he has no spezial requirements
state 3 :member can do too much

Especialy research. Think so that the most new members in a corp would ask after a while to do some research in the corp pos (maybe, maybe not ;) ).

You can give him the rights to do so. He can put the "blue print" in and start the job. But he can't get the "blue print" out if the job is finished. So you can give him the rights to get the "blue print" out (good) but now he can get the whole POS out (WTF????)

Can somebody explain why this is nessesary? Maybe it's nessesary because of 8 year old game mechanics and so on but things like that are so called epic fail in game design. Why should a member do some easy research with having the rights to get the entire corp equipment out of space???

In addition:

Did the guys who worked out the "Wormhole" feature think about how a corp member should handle his equipment without having a single "Station Container" ?
The workaround is to put as much "Corp Hangars" online as needed to hande the member equipment.
The bad thing on this workarround ist that you can't give each division in every single "corp hangar" a member name (except bookmarks) Twisted
This may work for a handfull of pilots but really -> this is also "EPIC FAIL" in game design (not that much like the one above because wormholes are in "eve time" a brand new feature, and as we all know this is some "pre-alpha state" compared to other games ... but CCP also bad).

If im in a bad mood i would secondary ask what do you think what this "Station Container" workaround has to do with the "Member rights managment" wormhole <-> empire / 0.0 .. but im not in a bad mood .. so i dont ask Cool

So CCP do not that much new stuff ... get the old stuff working first ...


PS: maybe im totally wrong and somebody can tell me what i have to do Idea
PSS: If your a mission runner you know the problem if you add "large collidable objects" to overview if you cant find the mission objectives (Why CCP WHY?) If i want to see these details i would try to load EVE into a Map Editor or AutoCad.
And ist there not a more spacy mmorpg eve online name for "large collidable objects"? Sounds like a Map Editor. Maybe there could be a additional point like "mission objectives" which only shows "mission objectives" Twisted


kind regards

5NAK3
Da'Than
Interstellar Military Industries
#2 - 2012-01-19 22:03:15 UTC
To promote corp theft and generate an atmosphere of constant paranoia? Maybe.
Or maybe we should start yelling about this just a loud as about the UI, than we might see a working and comfortable system in a few years... Roll
5NAK3 PLI55K3N
Die Gallier - Abt. Zivilisten
#3 - 2012-01-21 07:45:07 UTC  |  Edited by: 5NAK3 PLI55K3N
I'm not sure if i should continue with all the things who are not so good as it could be when somebody remove all the unlogical things in EVE. Think so until that happends CCP must decide to release EVE 2 planned from scratch Shocked
Crellin Anophis
An Errant Venture
#4 - 2012-01-21 08:42:35 UTC
I may be wrong but I believe that WHs were never intended for long-term habitation via POSes.....
Tallianna Avenkarde
Pyre of Gods
#5 - 2012-01-21 08:47:49 UTC
But they are designed for long term habitation in Nullspace away from outposts, and do a shite job of it there too..

And a sudden plunge in the sullen swell. Ten fathoms deep on the road to hell.

Vyl Vit
#6 - 2012-01-21 08:50:49 UTC
I'd have to agree, from what I understood at the time, wormhole habitation just became an offshoot based on possibility, not intent. Along with that therefore would come a cobbled-together implementation of said activity. I see there are some hitches in the get-along. So be it.

A lot of the "giving members rights" to-do has to do with the fact officers are supposed to do a lot of these chores, but are either too lazy or too busy to be bothered. Granting members rights that are under the officers' auspices is tantamount to promoting the member to officer. I'd say most of the complaints I've seen about this has more to do with CEO's promoting their buddies to officers not because they'd be good at it, but because they're buddies. So, no crying about that from me.

It seems to be an officer in a corporation requires changing the "do what you like" modality to "do what you must," and a lot of people just don't like that. I know! Let's change the game mechanics to cover irresponsibility, too! Now you're talkin'!

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.

5NAK3 PLI55K3N
Die Gallier - Abt. Zivilisten
#7 - 2012-01-21 09:26:41 UTC  |  Edited by: 5NAK3 PLI55K3N
Vyl Vit wrote:
I'd have to agree, from what I understood at the time, wormhole habitation just became an offshoot based on possibility, not intent. Along with that therefore would come a cobbled-together implementation of said activity. I see there are some hitches in the get-along. So be it.

A lot of the "giving members rights" to-do has to do with the fact officers are supposed to do a lot of these chores, but are either too lazy or too busy to be bothered. Granting members rights that are under the officers' auspices is tantamount to promoting the member to officer. I'd say most of the complaints I've seen about this has more to do with CEO's promoting their buddies to officers not because they'd be good at it, but because they're buddies. So, no crying about that from me.

It seems to be an officer in a corporation requires changing the "do what you like" modality to "do what you must," and a lot of people just don't like that. I know! Let's change the game mechanics to cover irresponsibility, too! Now you're talkin'!



You get the point -> if you have 50 Members and you have 5 Officers who handle all the Corp related stuff everything is fine. But if anybody of your Members want do some serious research you have to grand him all the officer rights without a need. Because only to take his own blue print out of the labor without bothering an Officer. Also its not the lazy Officers or the Direktor of the corp who let all do everything -> its the "right managment" Cool Because there is no possibility to do some research without being an Officer or without having an Officer to handle all the Blue Prints all day Roll
5NAK3 PLI55K3N
Die Gallier - Abt. Zivilisten
#8 - 2012-01-21 09:43:57 UTC  |  Edited by: 5NAK3 PLI55K3N
Crellin Anophis wrote:
I may be wrong but I believe that WHs were never intended for long-term habitation via POSes.....


The creative team at CCP need a 6 year old child who always ask "why ?"
You can bring all the equipment into a wormhole. You can also bring in some capital ships if its needed. You can build, research and all the stuff. But you cant bring in a "Station Container" to place the pilots teddy for the night? How much "Station Container" fits into a "Corp Hangar"? There are some serious logical problems in the System -> (as above said: pre-alpha state ;) )
Juliana Stinger
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2012-01-21 10:15:57 UTC
I have to agree with this, when i lived in null sec it was very uncomfortable as a member, my spot was a bunch of flying containers in the pos. People talk how good reward is living in null sec, but it seems like only for high ranking officers.
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
#10 - 2012-01-21 13:56:06 UTC
Corp window has been broken since it was made. This will always be so and never change.

SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac

Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
#11 - 2012-01-21 14:08:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Vyktor Abyss
To the plonker (Crellin) and others in this thread missing the point entirely:

The issues concerning wormhole colonization and whether it was intended or not is irrelevant. The real issue is that POS are corporate structures, when combined with the badly designed/outdated corporate roles mechanics create a nightmare for POS operators, CEOs/directors and users of corporate POS alike.

Although the OP struggles a bit with his english, and lost me at times I'm fairly sure I agree with him that after 8 years developing the game, we should have a better system for management and control of player owned structures. It has actually been up there near the top of every CSM crowd-sourcing to fix, but as yet CCP have done almost nothing because they know it would probably take the resources of an entire expansion to put right. Sad but true.
5NAK3 PLI55K3N
Die Gallier - Abt. Zivilisten
#12 - 2012-01-22 13:45:03 UTC  |  Edited by: 5NAK3 PLI55K3N
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
To the plonker (Crellin) and others in this thread missing the point entirely:

The issues concerning wormhole colonization and whether it was intended or not is irrelevant. The real issue is that POS are corporate structures, when combined with the badly designed/outdated corporate roles mechanics create a nightmare for POS operators, CEOs/directors and users of corporate POS alike.

Although the OP struggles a bit with his english, and lost me at times I'm fairly sure I agree with him that after 8 years developing the game, we should have a better system for management and control of player owned structures. It has actually been up there near the top of every CSM crowd-sourcing to fix, but as yet CCP have done almost nothing because they know it would probably take the resources of an entire expansion to put right. Sad but true.


Mmmhh! Sounds that this is a bad thing for CCP and also bad for us. Thanks for the technical better explanation of the problem Big smile
Oxandrolone
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2012-01-22 14:08:39 UTC
the best way to secure stuff in wormholes is having members have their own pos or share a pos with just a couple other people. pw the poss so only them members and the management can get in.

your right its very diccicult. would be great if members could get their own tab in an SMA /. CHA but only ccp can impliment this.