Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kimi
|
Posted - 2003.06.14 10:22:00 -
[1]
The recent multiple hangers fix was a great leap forward. However, in solving one problem, it introduced at least 3 others.
1. There is no way for anyone to see what is in a hanger unless they have full access. What is needed is a "look but not take" option (or default). I went from handing out cheap ammo one day to answering time after time "do we have this, do we have that" questions because nobody could see what was available. The default should be to allow all members to view what is in corp hangers - unless the corp has something to hide from it's members...
2. Member hangers (bad idea) - one member can no longer drop items in another members hanger unless they have the rating of "Security Officer". Therefore, we ended up giving ALL members that rating. To be honest, I don't even see the reason for this - I have never heard anyone complain that others could see what was in their hanger - unless they had something to hide.
3. Still no "use but not take" for BP's in labs and factories. If you allow anyone access to the factory hanger (Factory Manager), you are also allowing them TOTAL access to all minerals and Blueprints. All this did was move the same problem to a differently named hanger.
4. Market hanger - what is the purpose of it? The corporation still cannot buy or sell from it. At this point it seems to be useful only for such things as temporary storage.
5. I thought it had been decided that hangers could be named by the corp - ie, "Ore - Recycle", "Ammunition" etc. ? Not a serious issue, but it would be handy if the hangers could be named instead of just numbers.
|
Archon Stormrage
|
Posted - 2003.06.14 10:46:00 -
[2]
I agree with every single point. Especially the members hangars. Our Indys normall use members hangars to drop people's ore in them. Now we have to go through loads of members giving them this role.
Also with roles to hangars make it so you can choose whether they can not view/access hangar, view hangar and view/access hangar. That way if they feel the need to hide some things it can be done.
|
Eldariel
|
Posted - 2003.06.14 14:18:00 -
[3]
1. Global view would be good - but not necessarily easy to implement (I have no idea - only the devs can answer that one). My take on this atm would be that one of the hangars should be your "generic" basic access hangar into which you put things your not worried about, and then give everyone access to that. Things you *are* worried about should go into more restricted space.
2. Members hangar change was in there because it was still a serious exploit loophole. Although a new member couldn't clean out the corp hangars - they *could* go through everyone's personal hangars and clean them out instead. Hence the need for this new role. The ideal option was to make this a push option only (i.e. you can *put* items, but can't *take* them), which was suggested, but I guess this didn't fit too well with the current role functionality ...
3. Not a "total" fix relative to your comments but next week I believe the new patch allows you to specify where the item is pulled from and where it is ejected to post job completion. There's nothing to stop people having a "limited" mineral resource in the factory hangar, with the main stockpile elsewhere. Just depends how you want to manage it...
4. Don't know yet :) - but I guess they have a plan for it
5. Naming is supposed to be coming in the next patch, as are the associated journals for accounting
Edited by: Eldariel on 14/06/2003 14:52:23
|
Kimi
|
Posted - 2003.06.15 04:18:00 -
[4]
"Although a new member couldn't clean out the corp hangars - they *could* go through everyone's personal hangars and clean them out instead.."
Not so.
You never could take stuff out of anyone else's hanger.
|
Eldariel
|
Posted - 2003.06.15 09:49:00 -
[5]
OK that I didnt know...
As CEO or Director you could take things from others hangars in previous builds .... I've done it (not sure about levels below CEO/ Director). This appears to not be so in the current build - not sure when it was introduced.
Fundamentally though this change doesn't restrict your ability to use it in the way it was used before - it enhances it by allowing you to restrict access if you chose to do so.
You have to go through and set up all users with access to the relevant security hangars, so I'm not sure why this is an issue - it's just checking another box each time you go through the security hangar role assignment
Still, it would be nice if it allowed you to drop stuff off without seeing what was in the target hangar. That I'm all in favour of since it would be the best of both worlds...
Edited by: Eldariel on 15/06/2003 10:20:23
|
Mikeman
|
Posted - 2003.06.15 11:58:00 -
[6]
I agree that Eve is taking a leap in the right direction with the current changes it¦s just what we wanted thank you dev team. What I personally would want to see to the recent hangar change thou are 3 options to each hangar. View, give, take. Full access as only option is just to much. And I agree also with that the factory manager should not be able clean out every blueprint from the factory if he wanted too... They should be use only unless you grant him the power to give or take. I feel these changes are very needed to create the security a corporation needs instead of creating a "who took what" situation.. Logs on every transaction made would most likely create insane amount of extra load for the servers...
Keep up the good work dev team.
Edited by: Mikeman on 15/06/2003 11:59:08 |
Hellmar
|
Posted - 2003.06.15 15:58:00 -
[7]
We are adding view/take roles to all hangars and all accounts (accounts will get split up as the hangars). This was just the first step; next patch will include the whole system. The full system should be viewable on Chaos shortly.
|
Kimi
|
Posted - 2003.06.15 17:26:00 -
[8]
Thank you Hellmar - those additions should pretty much make hangers an almost perfect solution.
|
Ga'shitan
|
Posted - 2003.06.16 07:21:00 -
[9]
Another thing which would be great is the ability to assign security levels for each separate station.
That way I could, for example, make somebody a Factory Manager for our regional factory, without giving him access to every other hangar in the universe.
|
Federot
|
Posted - 2003.06.16 08:50:00 -
[10]
Eldariel: You seem to be very misinformed about corporate hangars coming from such a large corp.
1. No one has ever been able to remove items from other members hangars. 2. To use the new hangars as "drop-box" type hangars, have the member drag the item ontop of the TAB at the top and let go. The item goes into the hangar, and the member does not get to see inside it.
Ga'****an: The new system is a "paperwork" nightmare as it is...having to worry about every station's permissions individually would drive me insane.
-Federot
Edited by: Federot on 16/06/2003 08:52:23 |
|
Eldariel
|
Posted - 2003.06.16 09:32:00 -
[11]
Federot:
#1. Whether it was a bug or not (I have no idea) - I *have* done this on the test server a couple of times (quite a lot of builds ago though)
#2. I know - it formed part of my bug report at the start of June... but how does your comment relate to the members hangar(s) functionality. That's where the "see but don't take" discussion originated...
Station permissions would be too much, and also a signifincant database overhead.
It's impossible to please everyone with functionality that is introduced/ removed - the best CCP can aim for is to please the majority.
Did you actually have any suggestions for improvement, or was this just a rant?
Edited by: Eldariel on 16/06/2003 09:37:58
|
ArcLight
|
Posted - 2003.06.16 19:20:00 -
[12]
Not sure about the rest of you I can live with the current changes for awhile and would rather them implement a better UI for corp member management. It was fun going though each individual member and clicking on the same tiny buttons for each and every one, and the occasional higher access. But once was plenty :) -my 2 isk ____________ Gillgamesh, Executor Krath Imperium
|
Wahnima
|
Posted - 2003.06.17 02:10:00 -
[13]
We ended up giving everyone security officer as well, it was a pain to go through 100+ members and assign them privileges, but it worked out in the end I think.
I would definitely love to see 'use but not take' implemented on the factory hangar for blueprints. There are very few people who should be able to move blueprints around, but many folks for whom it would be ok to make stuff (ammo in particular). Maybe a factory operator role distinct from Factory manager.
I have thought about the need for having a 'regional' factory manager role as well, or even per station and while I agree it would be a nightmare, we really don't have that many factory managers. If it was implemented I'd use it in a heart beat. My guess is that the degree of difficulty on that feature is much higher even than that of introducing a new factory operator role would be.
|
DP Mephisto
|
Posted - 2003.06.17 12:37:00 -
[14]
A factory operator is a realy good idea. But it would be better if the factory hangar was split in 2 part where a factory manager can divide the blueprints to be manufactured by factroy operators and blueprints to be manufactured by factory managers and higher.
Because i dont want anyone to build thoraxes but everyone should be able to BUILD ammo( not move the blueprint).
This brings the next subject to the light. Why do we need to load that list. Its totally useless. If all Blueprints are in the factory hangar the are a list of there own. At the moment I check if the BP is there and after that i have to wait till the BP is loaded.
PLz consider the following: Let a right click on the BP and a option to produce be enough. Ask the slot after that. Or right click and multyple options like "produce in slot 15".
Greetz DP Mephisto
Edited by: DP Mephisto on 17/06/2003 12:37:58 Eve-Concepts: Player vs player action trough the agent system
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |