These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

CSM Minutes: No New POSes
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tisisan
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#21 - 2013-01-17 01:46:27 UTC
DenForX wrote:
I am more pleased that they are looking seriously at doing it right rather than a major cluster tossed out as a bone that everyone chokes on.


I would be more comforted by this interpretation if the word "wormhole" had appeared anywhere in the explanation...
Klarion Sythis
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#22 - 2013-01-17 02:45:23 UTC
DenForX wrote:
I am more pleased that they are looking seriously at doing it right rather than a major cluster tossed out as a bone that everyone chokes on.

They didn't say anything about the feature being delayed due to development time. They basically said it wasn't important enough to work on.
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2013-01-17 03:51:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Mocam
Klarion Sythis wrote:
To be fair, I haven't read all 113 pages yet, but it seems POSes are back down the priority list. Possibly far down the list. I'll leave this here:

"UAxDEATH disagreed and brought up an example of priorities like POSes, “you promised us those things”. Greyscale replied that coming into meetings with the mindset of CCP promising a certain feature is a fallacious, and flat-out wrong, mindset. With conversation now completely deteriorating, Unifex took control of the conversation and spoke about POSes.

Unifex stated that what CCP did was spend effort and prototype what would make a good POS system. It would, however, only affect the group of people who manage POSes. Focusing that amount of time and effort on some small singular aspect of the game and delivering only that “is what will kill the business”.

The atmosphere was notably tense at the point."

Source: Page 37


POS management is one of the very few things in this game that cross all areas of space - highsec, lowsec, nullsec, wormholes -- all are effected and all gain benefits from them.

Unlike tweaking things like aggression flags or super caps or what not -- it enhances play for all those who deal with it. The absolute worst case is "I don't care" - extremely few negatives on such repairs.

Bluntly put - addressing how they work is a "benefits without penalties" effort that would grant returns to those who have shown they are both interested and willing to invest in "longer term" efforts within the game. A POS *IS* that "home away..." gig and takes a good deal of forethought to do right.

I honestly don't see a downside to addressing these concerns and issues. It looks more like a win-win dev effort than pissing off folks by changing things around all the time. "Someone" tends to get hacked off at almost any changes that happen.
Klarion Sythis
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#24 - 2013-01-17 04:03:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Klarion Sythis
Two step has made a post for us to show CCP our disagreement on the issue. Many of you are probably aware of it, but for those who aren't, go chime in.

Also, well said by Mocam.
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#25 - 2013-01-17 04:09:33 UTC
who needs POSes when e COULD have ponies? Roll

I should buy an Ishtar.
Klarion Sythis
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#26 - 2013-01-17 04:14:41 UTC
Or if Two step plays his cards right we could get anchorable space dicks. Apparently they're in high demand.
Slaktoid
Perkone
Caldari State
#27 - 2013-01-17 04:21:45 UTC
Tbh I think the extensive laundrylist of features we've "demanded" the new modular POS'es provide has made CCP hesitant. That being said, I doubt that Modular POS'es would be so hard to implement as CCP make it out to be. I'm still optimistic that we'll get a POS overhaul at some point. Something as simple as password protected SMAs/CHAs, as well as personal rights (on a pr moon basis) for Anchoring/Onlining would suffice (while keeping Starbase Config role unchanged).

A few simple tweaks would go a long way, but I liked the vision of Modular dockable POS'es for many reasons. It wouldn't be perfect, but I'd regret it if it all got canned.
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2013-01-17 04:55:08 UTC
Kusum Fawn wrote:
The one and only burning question i have at this juncture is :

Is anyone really that surprised about this?


Honestly, yes.

Changes here make more sense than revamping ship slot layouts, powergrids, etc. You will **** some people off changing such things around - enough that they will scream about it - but this change? The worst you'll get is "I don't care about this" - which is a trivial negative compared to "back in the game, what happened to my hurrican? I can't fit it anymore... what happened to my ... - it no longer fits what I had on it ..."

FFS - how hard is it to see that this is the most positive/least negative area to change in the game, which also rewards those who *ARE* playing regularly, *WITH* risks, because it takes logistics to keep one up and running?

Dumping this a revamp here doesn't make sense and you may use a /bogggle CCP but they usually don't go this far off the mark -- most changes usually *WILL* negatively impact some sizable portions of the community; this won't.
Vjorn Angannon
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#29 - 2013-01-17 07:12:29 UTC
Klarion Sythis wrote:
Two step has made a post for us to show CCP our disagreement on the issue. Many of you are probably aware of it, but for those who aren't, go chime in.

Also, well said by Mocam.


Thanks for pointing me in the right direction....

+1 chime Big smile
Frying Doom
#30 - 2013-01-17 07:18:34 UTC
As mentioned above

Yes another cancelled promise by CCP

See this two-step Dev blog
http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/i-am-small-portion-of-community.html

Post into this thread
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194625&find=unread

Thanks you for your time. It will only take a minute or 2 and this one is really important. Oh and like Two steps initial thread or for that matter all of them.

Also pass this message on to anyone you know in any alliance.

If we yell load enough then maybe CCP might understand that after years and years we are pi$@ed that we are once again on the bottom of the heap.

For once in CSM7, I will say thank you Two Step for trying your hardest.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Winthorp
#31 - 2013-01-17 07:25:03 UTC
I imagine Two step will be linking his thread in a rant to CCP but prob a good idea to also rage at them in their own thread on the issue.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=194440
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#32 - 2013-01-17 08:41:28 UTC
Xen Solarus wrote:
All i wanted was a "station-like" system, where players had seperate and individual tabs. Even something as simple as making a new structure that it has storage individual to each player, or changing the current structures to do the same.

EVE has interface issues when it comes to item storage and exchange that are arguably worse than that and could be fixed more easily. Something tells me that keeping inability to "magically" prevent corp thieft and the like in the game is CCP's strong MO.

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Random Woman
Very Professional Corporation
#33 - 2013-01-17 08:49:09 UTC
DenForX wrote:
I am more pleased that they are looking seriously at doing it right rather than a major cluster tossed out as a bone that everyone chokes on.



I think someone puts to much faith in CCPs abilities no matter what they do it will always be broken, just look at the bounty system where the walled did not showing the proper names in the transaction description. I mean how hard can it be to spot that during testing. The only explanation for something like that is, there is no testing done at all.

I mean as far as i understand we got that new ****** inventory system so they can fix various other stuff, i would say POSes are top of various other stuff, just about everything about them sucks.

PS: i am still missing that WH closing animation.
Indo Nira
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2013-01-17 09:37:05 UTC
everything's fine.. why change... remember unified inventory?
Efraya
V0LTA
New Eden Alliance 99013733
#35 - 2013-01-17 10:03:16 UTC
I'm going to post an unpopular statement here.

Currently the POS system is a bit "Clunky", but it does work. We can see who is active in space from dscan, there is a force field etc... I wasn't fully aware of what the modular pos system was going to bring but it sounded alot like docking in a station in wspace. Which we really don't want.

It's not the greatest system in existence but they did atleast give us fuel blocks which does simplify things a bit.

CCP is a business they need "Fresh meat" in game to keep things going. Spending time on a pos revamp would take time away from Jesus features. Jesus features are what is needed at this time, we need a new expansion like apochrypha. We don't need enless "Balancing" expansion like we have been seeing of late.

[b][center]WSpace; Dead space.[/center] [center]Lady Spank for forum mod[/center][/b]
Janus Nanzikambe
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#36 - 2013-01-17 10:10:11 UTC
No POS revamp means no modular POS

No modular POS means no removing the forcefield.

No removing the forcefield means no "hiding" your online players.

No docking games.

I dunno about the rest of you but I'd call this fantastic news.
Casirio
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2013-01-17 10:12:00 UTC
Janus Nanzikambe wrote:
No POS revamp means no modular POS

No modular POS means no removing the forcefield.

No removing the forcefield means no "hiding" your online players.

No docking games.

I dunno about the rest of you but I'd call this fantastic news.


yeah that was the first thing to come to my mind, dont have to worry about docking in w-space for a while at least.
Winthorp
#38 - 2013-01-17 10:48:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Winthorp
Efraya wrote:
I'm going to post an unpopular statement here.

Currently the POS system is a bit "Clunky", but it does work. We can see who is active in space from dscan, there is a force field etc... I wasn't fully aware of what the modular pos system was going to bring but it sounded alot like docking in a station in wspace. Which we really don't want.

It's not the greatest system in existence but they did atleast give us fuel blocks which does simplify things a bit.

CCP is a business they need "Fresh meat" in game to keep things going. Spending time on a pos revamp would take time away from Jesus features. Jesus features are what is needed at this time, we need a new expansion like apochrypha. We don't need enless "Balancing" expansion like we have been seeing of late.


I do see your point with this statement but i do believe they have made inroads with regards to new players. I recently sent an invite to a RL friend to play and when he got into the game i told him to hit FW up for a trial, the guy is absolutely loving it he gets to kill **** and make isk to replace his ships in turn he is learning EVE mechanics slowly in a rather fun way. A week in to the game and people are letting him join fleets and go on roams.

I also think they have spent considerable time getting Dust up to get new players involved and trying eve, So from all that work i think the time for us to get some love is now.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2013-01-17 11:29:52 UTC
As much as i hate to say it, another burn Jita campaign may be in order.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#40 - 2013-01-17 12:19:45 UTC
To be honest I am not terribly sad if the POS revamp is off the table for now. Some of the plans and ideas floating around for the new POSes were pretty horrible imho. No change is better than bad change.

The current system is not so bad. With a security concept with compartmentalized hangar divisions a POS can be made reasonably safe. And now that forcefield passwords are stored persistently on the server, it is very easy and effective to have your own password-protected POS.

What is missing most is SMA's with divisions so the security concept can be applied to them in the same way as the hangars.

.
Previous page123Next page