These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Odyssey summer expansion: Starbase iterations

First post First post
Author
Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#521 - 2013-04-10 09:17:31 UTC
DoToo Foo wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:
For all you players asking about the roles for cancelling jobs ... restricting the ability to cancel corp jobs to director roles only. With just the Factory-Manager role, you'd still be able to cancel your own corp jobs, but not those corp jobs belonging to your corpmates. ...


Stabase fuel technician would be a better role for this than director. I might want to set up someone to trust with my POS, but not give them full director permissions to access everything (including other wallets).

A Stabase fuel technician can already stop everyones job simply by making the POS offline. If I trust them with that much permission, I could also trust them to stop someone's job; but I would not need to give them permisison on everything corp related.


Again using hangar access as the fundamental feature seem so much easier.. and would resolve things in POS in a much more general way..

That way the fuel technician would be an overall access to the fuel bays everywhere. More local rights could be granted using existing features like "based at" etc.. This way you could create roles that had access to fuel depending on say region, or only in personal system (based at) .. even more details could be added as functionality later on. So ranges like constellation, regions, system, etc..

A lot more and a lot easier.

Also you might even want to consider adding some range to access fuel bays and tower from just outside the shields, thus differentiating between managing and gaining access to the actual assets inside.. This would be especially useful in regards to alliance access, and the concept mentioned of a storage that can be alliance based accessed. The towers could simply get a storage that worked like the fuel bays..

Ydnari
Estrale Frontiers
#522 - 2013-04-10 09:45:16 UTC
DoToo Foo wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:
For all you players asking about the roles for cancelling jobs ... restricting the ability to cancel corp jobs to director roles only. With just the Factory-Manager role, you'd still be able to cancel your own corp jobs, but not those corp jobs belonging to your corpmates. ...


Stabase fuel technician would be a better role for this than director. I might want to set up someone to trust with my POS, but not give them full director permissions to access everything (including other wallets).

A Stabase fuel technician can already stop everyones job simply by making the POS offline. If I trust them with that much permission, I could also trust them to stop someone's job; but I would not need to give them permisison on everything corp related.


I disagree; a person may be given access to add fuel to a wormhole POS, but that doesn't mean they should as a result have access to cancel all the corp jobs in highsec NPC stations.

Whilst this has come up in a POS thread, it applies to all industry, not just POS jobs. (And personally I am more interested in preventing cancelling station-based corp jobs than POS ones, although the POS ones are important too).

Even in POS jobs, starbase fuel tech can't cancel jobs; taking the tower offline pauses the jobs, you need to unanchor or destroy the labs/arrays to actually cancel the jobs; so someone with Config Starbase Equipment can do that (as well as unanchoring and stealing your POS).

In the absence of a new "job canceller" role which is not going to happen, Director is the right choice.

--

DJ P0N-3
Table Flippendeavors
#523 - 2013-04-10 11:59:10 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Good question. I'd imagine that delivering a finished corp job should still work for anyone with the FM role


All good then.
Chris Winter
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#524 - 2013-04-10 15:32:36 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
As you are working on POS can you change the refining arrays so they are better than NPC stations?

A POS owner pays for his POS, an NPC station user doesn't pay for refining. In honesty I think 100% is good.

IMO remove the 75% cap, and set the base refine to be something such that you reach 100% with all relevant refining skills (on the person who starts the refining process) to 5.
Infinite Force
#525 - 2013-04-10 15:49:10 UTC
Chris Winter wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
As you are working on POS can you change the refining arrays so they are better than NPC stations?

A POS owner pays for his POS, an NPC station user doesn't pay for refining. In honesty I think 100% is good.

IMO remove the 75% cap, and set the base refine to be something such that you reach 100% with all relevant refining skills (on the person who starts the refining process) to 5.


This is the the thread that you're looking for. Bump it and let's get an easy itteration on refining into June's expansion!

HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud

http://tinyurl.com/95zmyzw - The only way to go!

Frying Doom
#526 - 2013-04-10 22:46:47 UTC
Chris Winter wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
As you are working on POS can you change the refining arrays so they are better than NPC stations?

A POS owner pays for his POS, an NPC station user doesn't pay for refining. In honesty I think 100% is good.

IMO remove the 75% cap, and set the base refine to be something such that you reach 100% with all relevant refining skills (on the person who starts the refining process) to 5.

The reason I said 100% was due to the coding difficulty of tying in all the skills or for that matter just referencing the NPC stations refining function.

As I am hoping for something short and sweet, 100% or if necessary alter its anchoring requirements to include refining efficiency 4 or 5.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Chris Winter
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#527 - 2013-04-10 23:53:56 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Chris Winter wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
As you are working on POS can you change the refining arrays so they are better than NPC stations?

A POS owner pays for his POS, an NPC station user doesn't pay for refining. In honesty I think 100% is good.

IMO remove the 75% cap, and set the base refine to be something such that you reach 100% with all relevant refining skills (on the person who starts the refining process) to 5.

The reason I said 100% was due to the coding difficulty of tying in all the skills or for that matter just referencing the NPC stations refining function.

As I am hoping for something short and sweet, 100% or if necessary alter its anchoring requirements to include refining efficiency 4 or 5.

Skills already have an effect on the POS refineries, they're just hard capped at 35% or 75%. The math is somewhere.
Frying Doom
#528 - 2013-04-11 00:01:22 UTC
Chris Winter wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Chris Winter wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
As you are working on POS can you change the refining arrays so they are better than NPC stations?

A POS owner pays for his POS, an NPC station user doesn't pay for refining. In honesty I think 100% is good.

IMO remove the 75% cap, and set the base refine to be something such that you reach 100% with all relevant refining skills (on the person who starts the refining process) to 5.

The reason I said 100% was due to the coding difficulty of tying in all the skills or for that matter just referencing the NPC stations refining function.

As I am hoping for something short and sweet, 100% or if necessary alter its anchoring requirements to include refining efficiency 4 or 5.

Skills already have an effect on the POS refineries, they're just hard capped at 35% or 75%. The math is somewhere.

Are they?

The text just says

"Refining yield efficiency does not apply to ice ores, which are always refined at the maximum efficiency the operator is capable of."
And the refining yield multiplier says 0.75 x

So it has the ability to read the Ice processing skills but I am not sure I would say it has the ability already for ore processing skills.

If it does then great, set it to a base 50% same as NPC stations, if not set it to 100%.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Caleb Ayrania
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#529 - 2013-04-11 10:01:29 UTC

On the whole topic of refining and yields.. CCP should consider flipping the script and adding a time sink to refining.

If it took time to refine both at stations and POS, and POS had base 50% and thus max yield on max skills, then a whole player to player driven market would develop. The profession of refiner and recycler would make much more sense.

Public free markets and self sustainability without downside will promote p2p interaction that is not just shooting stuff.

NERF NPC...

T RAYRAY
Echelon Research
Goonswarm Federation
#530 - 2013-04-12 01:34:16 UTC
i used to live in a WH and think the personal hangar space is a good add for player stufz security...

the cold-hearted side of me wonders how many long term corp theft operations just went into overdrive knowing the golden years of the loot pinata that is the CHA and 'joint storage' will soon be not-so-golden...hmmmmm

Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association
#531 - 2013-04-12 01:52:32 UTC
I'm still thinking they need a much more extensive overhaul than this. A viable design that I would call 'based on T3' if it didn't predate them by years,

These are all very nice patches of problems that have existed for years, and been ignored for years, but I say lets toss the whole thing out and take up the better of the two plans rather than waste time patching this thing, again.

I say yes to modular POS.



I know there's a new version of it, but here's the thread from the old forum:



http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=391410
Frying Doom
#532 - 2013-04-12 01:54:16 UTC
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:
I'm still thinking they need a much more extensive overhaul than this. A viable design that I would call 'based on T3' if it didn't predate them by years,

These are all very nice patches of problems that have existed for years, and been ignored for years, but I say lets toss the whole thing out and take up the better of the two plans rather than waste time patching this thing, again.

I say yes to modular POS.



I know there's a new version of it, but here's the thread from the old forum:



http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=391410

So what do we do for the next 5 years until that is partially completed?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

db Deckard
Loc-Nar Support Services
#533 - 2013-04-12 11:43:28 UTC
You have a small POS user community because of the poor POS functionality. Today POS authorizations are directly related to Corporation authorizations and roles. There are a few modules that when switched to alliance access that actually work, ship maint array. At the core of the problems is the linkage to auths.

Array use problems: Currently to register a job in a manufacture/research array you have to put a bpo/bpc in the array corp hanger at the POS with any materials, and you have to have either anchoring or pos fuel corp auths. This causes all kinds of problems and forces corp leadership to only grant access to the trusted few. For simple jobs requiring no additional materials one can put the job in an Local Station Corp Office hanger and register the job from there.

Recommended changes:
1) Break the relationship between corp auths and POS. Allow players with access rights to modify the POS configuration to grant access by player/corp/alliance.
2) Do not require Fuel Tech or Anchoring auths to register jobs
3) Allow jobs to be registered from authorized players local station personal hanger. Allow the selection of the completed job to be delivered to the origin hanger. Currently if I put a copy job in a local office hanger the BPO will return to the office hanger but the copy will be in the hanger at the array.

-db
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#534 - 2013-04-12 13:42:36 UTC
db Deckard wrote:
You have a small POS user community because of the poor POS functionality. Today POS authorizations are directly related to Corporation authorizations and roles. There are a few modules that when switched to alliance access that actually work, ship maint array. At the core of the problems is the linkage to auths.

Array use problems: Currently to register a job in a manufacture/research array you have to put a bpo/bpc in the array corp hanger at the POS with any materials, and you have to have either anchoring or pos fuel corp auths. This causes all kinds of problems and forces corp leadership to only grant access to the trusted few. For simple jobs requiring no additional materials one can put the job in an Local Station Corp Office hanger and register the job from there.

Recommended changes:
1) Break the relationship between corp auths and POS. Allow players with access rights to modify the POS configuration to grant access by player/corp/alliance.
2) Do not require Fuel Tech or Anchoring auths to register jobs
3) Allow jobs to be registered from authorized players local station personal hanger. Allow the selection of the completed job to be delivered to the origin hanger. Currently if I put a copy job in a local office hanger the BPO will return to the office hanger but the copy will be in the hanger at the array.

-db
Quoted for emphasis. I haven't used the more advanced aspects of a POS for 3+ years due to OpSec. Love my corp and not really interested in doing my own thing, so that's the way it must be in my case. There are many thousands of cases where players new to corps won't have a chance in hell in getting roles to do POS-related stuff, too.

It is the CCP-designed mechanic which has inherently suppressed POS use, not the will of EVE subscribers.

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.

Jireel
Perkone
Caldari State
#535 - 2013-04-12 19:10:25 UTC
Infinite Force wrote:
Chris Winter wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
As you are working on POS can you change the refining arrays so they are better than NPC stations?

A POS owner pays for his POS, an NPC station user doesn't pay for refining. In honesty I think 100% is good.

IMO remove the 75% cap, and set the base refine to be something such that you reach 100% with all relevant refining skills (on the person who starts the refining process) to 5.


This is the the thread that you're looking for. Bump it and let's get an easy itteration on refining into June's expansion!

CCP PLS
Sassums
Repo Industries
#536 - 2013-04-13 00:22:52 UTC
For such a large issue, and the huge voice from WH dwellers the lack of changes and upgrades to the POS's are disappointing. A few lousy changes?

This barely addresses anything many from WH space have asked for. POS and Corp permissions are a disaster and still are in need of updates to increase corp security.
bloodknight2
Revenu.Quebec
#537 - 2013-04-13 02:27:25 UTC
o/

I had a talk with some guys from my corp and there is one think we do not understand. This new hangar will remplace the old one? If yes, isn't 50k of space a bit low?
Frying Doom
#538 - 2013-04-13 03:13:33 UTC
bloodknight2 wrote:
o/

I had a talk with some guys from my corp and there is one think we do not understand. This new hangar will remplace the old one? If yes, isn't 50k of space a bit low?

No they already explained that the old one will still exist.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

bloodknight2
Revenu.Quebec
#539 - 2013-04-13 12:17:20 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
bloodknight2 wrote:
o/

I had a talk with some guys from my corp and there is one think we do not understand. This new hangar will remplace the old one? If yes, isn't 50k of space a bit low?

No they already explained that the old one will still exist.



Thank a lot o7
Charles Sandford
Mosquito Alley
#540 - 2013-04-13 15:10:03 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Update on our current progress:
  • Taking your feedback so far into account, the Private Hangar currently has a storage size of 50,000 m3 per character, slightly larger than had been discussed before. We are interested in your opinions about that change.
  • .

    I appreciate the increase but we can still use much more space.

    Why do you need to limit personal storage to less then 4% of what we have today for each array.

    Mining, PI, and a hauler spawn can generate large amounts of personal volume.

    A 500,000 m3 limit creates a larger loot pinata to encourage conflict. At the same time it provides adequate storage for personal needs.

    If you are trying to force us to use shared hangers and deal with corp theft, at least give us a tool to fight against corp theft like inventory logging.

    Thanks.