These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Which POS mechanic would you like to see fixed first?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Skippy Usenet
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#81 - 2014-04-05 17:52:22 UTC
Lord LazyGhost wrote:
Being able to rent out manufacture research invention slots to coro members and have it act the same as npc stations ie. They can only see there own jobs and cant interfear with others


Take that a step further. Rent out production slots to public. (make a skill to use privately owned public slots at a distance so as to not loose your BPO when I offline it.)

You want that research done tomorrow? Rent the slot, you just run the risk that some bloke is going to come blow it up.
Sarah McKnobbo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#82 - 2014-04-05 17:53:20 UTC
The code.
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#83 - 2014-04-05 18:31:34 UTC
Hevymetal wrote:
Hopefully in the near future the POS will get some much needed lovin and there will be a good improvement on the use and operational management of them. Those that have had to use and manage them can share frustration in the limitations and problems with the current mechanics.

What would be the first thing you would like to see fixed/changed?

I know there are so many things to decide from :(

The one thing that I always wished worked correctly, was the ability to rent POS lab slots to alliance members (yeah I know, it sorta works, but not right) or even the general public.


So much stuff needs to be looked at regarding POS-es, but I'd start with:

POS-es not looking and functioning like a bunch of random stuff scattered inside a bubble.

Then it would be easier to add a "one-for-all purposes" user interface and resolving the technical problems that POS-es currently have :)
Lugia3
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#84 - 2014-04-05 18:48:59 UTC
The bubble shield. It has insane deviation. It needs to be static like the new warp bubbles.

"CCP Dolan is full of shit." - CCP Bettik
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#85 - 2014-04-05 18:57:49 UTC
Alliance access settings. For the love of god! Shocked

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#86 - 2014-04-05 19:32:04 UTC
You know that mechanic that doesn't allow you to put up a POS in 1.0 space?

I want that fixed.

Mr Epeen Cool
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#87 - 2014-04-05 22:49:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Tau Cabalander
Mr Epeen wrote:
You know that mechanic that doesn't allow you to put up a POS in 1.0 space?

I want that fixed.

Well, I think I read something (from CSM?) about changing / getting-rid of the standing requirement, which I do think is a good idea, as it doesn't add anything to the game other than frustration. It will make 0.5 - 0.7 more accessible.

As 1.0 are rookie areas, I don't think your idea is one that would be considered
George Gouillot
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#88 - 2014-04-06 06:39:10 UTC
- save and load POS standard setups (like ship fittings)
- anchor /unanchor , online/offline groups of modules (can still have serial timers) - but stop make me sitting there and waiting

and most of what has been said above
BoBoZoBo
MGroup9
#89 - 2014-04-08 16:02:01 UTC
Felicity Love wrote:
I'd like to see abandoned POS, being those towers that aren't burning fuel, simply blink out of existence (along with any associated structures and contents therein) after 30 days. Anchor/Unanchor times have been trimmed dramatically over the last few years, so mere laziness is no excuse. Fuel it or lose it.


Agreed - thought I think there is an opportunity for something more interesting with this. Like maybe being able to hack the tower and claim ownership the second it runs out of fuel. After 15 days of no fuel, then the tower degrades by itself. But making it hackable would be a cool opportunity for scavengers and would fall in line with the role-play.

Aside from that, I think some of the biggest issues with POSs are roles and security. It is just a mess. (Being able to change the password form the outside of the shield being one of the most immersion-breaking of them.) Outside of that, it seems like they are addressing the other concerns like time-consuming anchor times and module/structure changes.

Primary Test Subject • SmackTalker Elite
Dracnys
#90 - 2014-04-08 19:01:09 UTC
POS issues that need fixing:

  • Manufacturing arrays need more cargo to avoid having to shuffle around minerals for minutes to get just the right ratio fitted in the thing for a long job
  • Advanced Ship Assembly Arrays are trash and make every production unprofitable
  • Balance weapon systems (missiles are underpowered)
  • Fix corp roles associated to POSes to make it possible to do cooperative industry without exposing all jobs to canceling
  • Standing requirements in highsec force industrialists to do PVE (which isn't the thing they want to do) and can be easily circumvented with a standings service, but then it's not possible to set up a new POS without kicking all members with standings

Spurty
#91 - 2014-04-08 19:09:45 UTC
I say we just make new pos code. Don't even touch the old cruff.

Have both code paths run in parallel and flip over to the new path once proven solid.

Would like control of gunning to make some bloody sense. Chaotic and nonsense clicking.

WTB sensor boosters for pos also.

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#92 - 2014-04-08 20:23:13 UTC
Spurty wrote:
I say we just make new pos code. Don't even touch the old cruff.

Have both code paths run in parallel and flip over to the new path once proven solid.

Would like control of gunning to make some bloody sense. Chaotic and nonsense clicking.

WTB sensor boosters for pos also.

As I posted earlier in this thread, many POS problems are not POS problems, but rather roles and access rights problems.

Overhauling roles and access rights is a high-risk endeavour.
Wacktopia
Fleet-Up.com
Keep It Simple Software Group
#93 - 2014-04-08 22:06:32 UTC
Personally, I think they really need to address the SMA's. I understand it's "all old nasty code" but it's such a terrible way to store ships at present.

Per-user ship storage FTW.

Kitchen sink? Seriousy, get your ship together -  Fleet-Up.com
BrundleMeth
State War Academy
Caldari State
#94 - 2014-04-08 23:43:42 UTC
What's a POS?
Spurty
#95 - 2014-04-09 05:57:47 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
Spurty wrote:
I say we just make new pos code. Don't even touch the old cruff.

Have both code paths run in parallel and flip over to the new path once proven solid.

Would like control of gunning to make some bloody sense. Chaotic and nonsense clicking.

WTB sensor boosters for pos also.

As I posted earlier in this thread, many POS problems are not POS problems, but rather roles and access rights problems.

Overhauling roles and access rights is a high-risk endeavour.



Hence ignoring that cruff and making new code to do it.

Thought my post was clear enough. Guess not.

Basically: we have spaghetti code tied into other code.

Leave that code be.

Make new code all the way back that doesn't touch the spaghetti and switch over

No matter what the problem is, it should be rewritten in parallel.

Does it take a boat load of time? Yes

Should we not desire a better way just because it will take "time"? No. This is eve. Everything takes time.

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP