open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Organizational tools, standings and other changes
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9

Author Topic

Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2010.02.28 17:27:00 - [211]
 

Originally by: Pilk
I'd heartily support an interface with the five standings buttons, as you've shown, but where they adjust a slider bar for you. Let me see if I can mock something up...

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

So, clicking one of the five buttons sets the standings slider to that value. Optionally, you can click the little arrow on the right edge, just below the five buttons (shown here clicked and expanded) to modify the standings with additional granularity.

--P


this would be a good alternative :)

Teck7
Gallente
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2010.02.28 18:40:00 - [212]
 

Edited by: Teck7 on 28/02/2010 18:40:12
1) calendar is nice concept but it will only scale into practical use if it has associated alert/reminder settings for events -- if people have to constantly check the calendar to find events its going to be useless and alliance mails will continue to remain the standard

2) removing granular choice from standings is a massive blow to 0.0 alliances of all shapes and sizes, you fail to grasp that the standings are not just used to dictate refining tax levels but also repair costs, docking costs, restrict what type of allies/blues can use cloning, fitting, repair and other services.

For example a common practice is to have your own alliance and closest allies have free repairs / all access to station services / lowest refine tax; have your subordinate allies who operate in your space be charged for X % for repairs, have access to cloning and have an intermediate refining tax then you have renters/lesser allies who do not have access to cloning, receive the highest refining tax and highest repair bills.

This is all made possible by the fidelity of the current standings system, all of which will be impossible under the proposed changes - it will be all or nothing on allowing people station access which is very unreasonable.

3) Then there is the POS infrastructure, this is a whole can of worms but the bottom line is not only has it been long needed for control towers to inherit alliance standings but they ALSO NEEED TO ALLOW FORCE FIELD ACCESS BASED ON STANDINGS. The whole concept of POS force field passwords is flawed and has created a litany of headaches over the years that simply replacing it with standings based force field access would all but resolve.

T'Amber
Garoun Investment Bank
Posted - 2010.02.28 19:35:00 - [213]
 

Originally by: Teck7


3) Then there is the POS infrastructure, this is a whole can of worms but the bottom line is not only has it been long needed for control towers to inherit alliance standings but they ALSO NEEED TO ALLOW FORCE FIELD ACCESS BASED ON STANDINGS. The whole concept of POS force field passwords is flawed and has created a litany of headaches over the years that simply replacing it with standings based force field access would all but resolve.



This would be extremely useful.
From what I get from the CSM4 minutes, POS wont be getting any love for a while though Confused

-T'amber

Nika Dekaia
Posted - 2010.03.01 02:11:00 - [214]
 

Very nice. Looking forward to this very much.

What I have to ad:

Corp membership should not be easy to get. Let the intelgathering be part of the game.

Since atm hardly anybody uses the addressbook for friends and rather for not so friendly people, could you give the watchlist one tab for "friends" and one for "hostiles"?

Also, will the watchlist be aviable via Eve Gate? It would be nice to see who is online and not having to log in. Make adding someone to the "friends" list, which is viewable OOG, to be mutual only, so everyone can control who is able to see his game status OOG. Adding someone to the "hostile" list does not need to be mutual and can only be seen IG.

And make everything but the bare minimum of the Eve Gate information hide by default.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.03.01 03:46:00 - [215]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
As a result, we've decided to make some changes to how standings work between player entities. Standings from NPC entities will be untouched; support for standings to NPC entities will likely be dropped as they're essentially non-functional.


Requesting Clarification: Does this mean that I will no longer be able to set the School of Applied Knowledge (for example) to red? How would one go about setting the entire Minmatar Milita (for example) to red? Please make sure that whatever system you use to fix this allows people/corps/alliances to set standings to NPC corps/"alliances"/factions/militias/whatever.

Also, since I have your attention: can you fix the crap rewards from the Minnie LP stores? Just because the mod is "Domination" or "Republic Fleet" doesn't mean it needs to suck. Ok, fine, RF Disruptors don't suck - but that's about it. Rolling Eyes

-Liang

Future Capacity
Posted - 2010.03.01 07:15:00 - [216]
 

Edited by: Future Capacity on 01/03/2010 07:20:30
While you are modifying the Address Book, please consider changing (Or adding an option for) the behavior of Conversation Invitations as incoming from players present in your Book. At current, any convo from anyone in your Address Book will be automatically accepted, which, regardless of if that person is friend or foe, can lead to some fairly icky situations. For example, I am almost invariably surprised when a new chat window suddenly pops up, especially since it means that I had no chance to even know who is calling beforehand, much less any time to prepare before being thrown into it without any warning at all. It also means there is no chance to decline any such invitation, effectively leaving me at the mercy of anyone that wants to pull me into a channel. The automation also tends to imply that I myself authorized it intentionally, which can easily create a whole set of problems in itself; a common situation stemming from this is that, to someone else, it may appear that I accepted their convo and subsequently forgot or even ignored them immediately, while the reality is that I am simply AFK and never even knew about their contacting me in the first place.

Though I could go on and on about all the potential and even regularly occurring complications, the ultimate message I am trying to send is that the current lack of choice presented by the auto-accept is a bit silly, especially given all that can happen as a result. Perhaps I've just built up some tunnel vision regarding this particular issue, but I cannot see any good in the current functionality, especially while there is so much to gain from controlling our own presences in the many chat channels of EVE.

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2010.03.01 14:48:00 - [217]
 

Just leaving a note to say that I'm still reading this and making notes. I've got a list of things to discuss with other team members, and I'll try and get back to you soonish.

FlameGlow
Gypsy Band
Posted - 2010.03.01 15:57:00 - [218]
 

"Alliance standings will now be used whenever stations or starbases make a standings check."
^the only good change in whole blog

Ashina Sito
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2010.03.01 19:01:00 - [219]
 

Edited by: Ashina Sito on 01/03/2010 19:09:48
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Just leaving a note to say that I'm still reading this and making notes. I've got a list of things to discuss with other team members, and I'll try and get back to you soonish.


\0/


Ooh!! Just thought of something. Can you make it so individual pilots, that are not in corps themselves, can set alliance standings?

If I want to set the standings of an Alliance I have to go into the alliance info and set standings with each individual corp, it is a bit time consuming. Additionally if a corp leaves/joins the alliance they will have incorrect standings.

It's just odd to be flying around and see a Red/Blue pilot and take a look and wonder why you set standings to Scrumpy Jim's Wandering Junkyard Corp.

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2010.03.01 19:15:00 - [220]
 

I’m most concerned about the “friends” lists becoming public or losing the ability to make folders classified however we want as we do now (I couldn’t tell if you implying that or not)

Truly, given the two boxes that seem to display on local, it would be great to have the ability to rank on an x and y axis… or at the very least on parallel systems for purposes that others have listed. I get a green light if someone is in my address book, if I could chose to alter that to turquoise or maroon accordingly, that would be great. (or even better, allowing a letter to be superimposed over the colored box to allow non-linear classification.

I participate in “Trading pvp”. I like to put names of competing traders in my address book so I can look to see when they are online and get a feel for patterns of when I should update prices etc. . They certainly shouldn’t be Red to me. Red or Orange to me, means a military danger.

I certainly don’t want them to know that I’m watching them. I certainly wouldn’t want my alts “outed” by seeing strangers watching them.

Also the folders are important for grouping watch threats by alliance or category. If I put 50 names in when a corp is war-decced, after the war-dec, I don’t want to remove them as there is a good chance they’ll be another war with them down the line. You need to be able to open up a folder you’ve created for a given corp. and see who’s online. I also might create a folder for known pirates in a given system to help me decided whether or not to think about making a trade-run in the area.

And of course I address book griefers, suiciders or can flippers and if they’ knew I watched them they would be all the more likely to target me for lolz because they know they’d caught my attention and/or just be reminded of my name.

I hope you’re not getting rid of custom folders, and absolutely hope that you wont even consider making them publicly viewable.

Also, does having hundreds of names in your address book slow a client down ? Does it need to run a separate indexed search that wouldn’t already have been run by just jumping into a system… does checking each person in system against a longer address book list mean that a longer list could be a military disadvantage ? If so, could there be a way to turn on and off folders (or sort of “remove names” to a place where I could easily add them back on)?

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2010.03.01 19:42:00 - [221]
 

Supporting others here, I also think its vital for a person to be able to overide Alliance settings. You need to be able to have side deals for personal friends or people who you’re in some sort of side cooperative agreement with as a corporation or an individual. One of the premises put out by you guys with dominion was to aim towards groups more interpersonally manageable (what was it “pascale’s” number or something?)

Your loyalty for your corporation comes before loyalty to an alliance, which is often a more temporary coalition of groups with congruent aims. 6 months down the road, you corporation maybe be positioning itself to take space in another region, or have political pretexts based on sister corps politics in empire, where its important to maintain peace with a corp currently in an alliance with whom your alliance is at war. Ideally you’d have some symbol or number that let you quickly see that status, but at least with the current system your corp leader can adjust things somewhat.

In my opinion, the boot licking of petty-internet- titans of dominant alliances isn’t a tasteful part of the game, but the reality of it is that you’re cutting your throat not positioning yourself with a “mother Russia”. While some aspects of that are perhaps a logical mirror of military and national controls over the centuries, the game has the mechanical odd quirks where when someone at the top of an alliance loses interest in the game(as most people will eventually) they can demolish and abscond things that hundreds of players worked long and hard for. Its also rather unrealistically easy for a general to suddenly run off with large portions of the military assets of his country.

Not meaning to open that whole debate, my point is that every step possible to mechanically enable control farther down the line gives players defenses from what many many players feel are game-context breaking mechanics. I guess that’s the “roles” thing mentioned… but don’t step backwards even incrementally in the abilty of players and coporations to form relations different than black vs white mutli thoushand player powerblocks.

Red Raider
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.03.01 21:30:00 - [222]
 

Originally by: Ibo Tpmp
Scenario 1: I have a friend in RL who is a pirate (I'm a carebear). So I want them to show up red in space, but for social networking purposes I want to give them access to my blog/updates/whatever.

Scenario 2: I have a family member in RL who also plays EVE. I post embarrassing things in my blog and don't want them to read it, but I want them to show up blue in space so I don't shoot them.

Scenario 3: In-game I'm a role player who sets all pirates and amarrians to red. I don't roleplay on my blog, however, and want everyone to be able to read it.

Scenario 4: I'm a not-blue=shoot it kind of player, so I need to set all kinds of people to blue so I don't shoot them. But I only want a few select people to be able to read my status updates or view my profile.



Right now you how are you doing this since the only option is to either tell him about your blog or posting it in your bio. I don't see how this alters this mechanic one bit from the current situation though maybe you can put people you hate(in game) into your friends folder and them access your EVEgate info. Either that or maybe they can allow for the creation of folders within the friends list and allow you to assign access levels to the people in those folders. As for posting information on the internet you don't want others too see it will really boil down to them not being smart enough to get it not them being denied access. If you haven't learned that anything you put on the internet can come back to haunt you then you are a disaster waiting to happen.

As it is, we don't know anything about the mechanics of how this system will work and from what I can tell you are making wild assumptions as to how it will function that have zero bearing on the game in it's current state anyways.

Mikal Drey
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2010.03.01 22:12:00 - [223]
 

Originally by: T'Amber

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s260/MrOosterman/eventmenu_version2_mouseover.jpg




T'Amber do you still have your original thread link for that ?

CCP . . Take a good look at that link. its ****ing beautiful and full of epic win.

just steal the entire UI from that pic and add the functionality it shows.

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2010.03.01 23:18:00 - [224]
 

As a related note to this Gate concept: “social networking” puts me off in a big way…and it’s a shame to find one more place moving towards that “big brother”, Orwellian norm, even if it’s only applying in an imaginary context.

I find programs like Facebook and insidious and generally a subtle evil, pushing people to conformity, potentially threatening people reaching out to people on the edges of social thought, and making modest personal choices in friends potentially wreck financial and career opportunities in fields that are highly political and subjective in clients or suprevisors minds.

If you’re a programmer, hey, maybe your employability comes down to how well you code but if you’re a family attorney or a real estate broker, or maybe looking for tenure at a university, the quesiton “is he like me” or “is he a steady mainstream guy” becomes a pivotal consideration point . For a minor example, If my sister ardently believes in a woman’s right to an abortion and my life-long friend and business partner is an ardent catholic marching in “pro-life” parades, them being able so see each other’s profiles or things written on a “wall” can instill levels of doubt in relationships with both, and could certainly make a potential client or employer think that I was “too political” or something, or maybe “just not a good fit for our corporate culture” maybe if they just saw people of one group or another . Not all of my clients would necessarily see playing computer games something that fits their stereo-type of disciplined living traits. In past issue of racism or mc-carthyism that decimated professional careers of many people as recently as 1950’s america for having friends that attended a few communist political meetings. Its easy to think we’re in a “more enlightened” age where such evils won’t come about again… but I’m afraid these sort of things are cycle aspects of human social relations

Sure, maybe you don’t need to “friend” clients them but many would see that in itself as a defensive move pointing to an unwillingness to build a sort of personal trust between each other so necessary in many fields.

Where that applies to the game? (smile here.. I’m not claiming…the game itself is –tha- important, but read a bit further)

It could take some FUN aspects out of the game. It could have similar chilling effects on making relations with other players, especially if “Gate” helped people tie you to your alts, or corps with your limited api to find out more about your alts relationships, or just people seeing similar friends lists on characters they suspected might be an alt of someone.

But back to the larger wrankle I have:

Generally I believe that what you accept in a game creates habits, or at least less resistance, to accept similar things in real life . *

(*which is also why, despite losing no ships to lag, I get so upset by the customer service / game refereeing response admitting that their errors cause harm but not stepping up to make an attempt at restitution for damages… “taking responsibility for ones actions” if I accept a company shrugging that off that concept in customer treatment in a game(especially where closing the gap would be a couple keys strokes away, even if the amount weren’t exact or what all sides wanted), I accept that principle by treatment from my Utility companies or my Insurance companies etc.)

Swidgen
Posted - 2010.03.02 03:14:00 - [225]
 

Originally by: CCP Karuck
Exactly, and since we have some pretty smart customers it's only a question of time when someone creates a spider that crawls a big portion of the EVE Gate website to automatically gather this information. That is a scenario we want to prevent.

As someone who considers themself a "pretty smart customer" I reject the effort to force me into any form of "social networking". If I wanted to do that I'd be on facebook for hours on end trolling for "friends" instead of playing Eve.

I will probably visit Eve Gate exactly once, to disable any and all options that reveal any information about my characters, and be done with it.

I also find it curious that there is no comment thus far by any dev to the poster who noted that the CSM recommended the exact opposite of what you're doing to the standings system. Not that I'm surprised. The CSM thing is meant to convey the illusion of player input into the decision making process, and this is further evidence that it's nothing more than that.

CCP should leave the social networking to others who understand that sort of thing. I mean, you can't even be bothered to use decent forum software on this website as it stands now, so what makes you think you can pull off the whole social networking thing? Got the QEN economist working on this, too?

Ambein Flambein
352 Industries
Posted - 2010.03.02 03:18:00 - [226]
 

Originally by: Diomedes Calypso
As a related note to this Gate concept: “social networking” puts me off in a big way…and it’s a shame to find one more place moving towards that “big brother”, Orwellian norm, even if it’s only applying in an imaginary context.

I find programs like Facebook and insidious and generally a subtle evil, pushing people to conformity, potentially threatening people reaching out to people on the edges of social thought, and making modest personal choices in friends potentially wreck financial and career opportunities in fields that are highly political and subjective in clients or suprevisors minds.

If you’re a programmer, hey, maybe your employability comes down to how well you code but if you’re a family attorney or a real estate broker, or maybe looking for tenure at a university, the quesiton “is he like me” or “is he a steady mainstream guy” becomes a pivotal consideration point . For a minor example, If my sister ardently believes in a woman’s right to an abortion and my life-long friend and business partner is an ardent catholic marching in “pro-life” parades, them being able so see each other’s profiles or things written on a “wall” can instill levels of doubt in relationships with both, and could certainly make a potential client or employer think that I was “too political” or something, or maybe “just not a good fit for our corporate culture” maybe if they just saw people of one group or another . Not all of my clients would necessarily see playing computer games something that fits their stereo-type of disciplined living traits. In past issue of racism or mc-carthyism that decimated professional careers of many people as recently as 1950’s america for having friends that attended a few communist political meetings. Its easy to think we’re in a “more enlightened” age where such evils won’t come about again… but I’m afraid these sort of things are cycle aspects of human social relations

Sure, maybe you don’t need to “friend” clients them but many would see that in itself as a defensive move pointing to an unwillingness to build a sort of personal trust between each other so necessary in many fields.


if an employer is going turn me down because of something on a facebook page, then i dont want ot work for them anyway, likewise if a corp ingame is going to reject me because of something on my eve gate page that has nothing to do with them then i dont want to be part of that corp

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.03.02 05:45:00 - [227]
 

Edited by: Liang Nuren on 02/03/2010 16:25:02
Originally by: Diomedes Calypso
...


It's funny that you ranted for so long and totally missed the scary part. You see, most social networking sites have "privacy settings" that make it such that you can show only certain things to certain people. For instance, non-friends might see nothing at all save that you have a page.

All there rest of your concerns can basically be summed up with a single question: why the **** are you giving your clients and/or boss access to your personal Facebook page?! If you want to have a "business face", then make a "business" facebook page - it's hardly unheard of. You can even include pictures from recent team building events, company parties, press releases, announcements, etc.

Now, as I was saying above - you went off on a giant rant that has oh so many ways for you to fix. But the more interesting problem is the things that you can't fix - like the fact that you're giving your personal data to a corporation that you have no real control over. What they do with your data (build amazing demographics engines, target you with custom ads, sell your info to other businesses, sell your info to businesses that aren't quite businesses, sell your info to the government, etc).

How can you possibly rant about the trivialities that you ranted about and miss the most important aspects of privacy?

Disclaimer: There is a great deal of truth in what the people say: when there gets to be so much data, its very hard to data mine it. The best you can really do is look for specific quirks in the data stream or possibly zero in on a specific person because of some "tip" that you should look for them. Bud God help you once you've been spotted - because Big Brother knows everything.

-Liang

Ed: And yes, I do in fact have a Facebook page, and a Myspace page [that I don't check nearly often enough], a Twitter account, and a gmail email address.

Darth Skorpius
m3 Corp
Fidelas Constans
Posted - 2010.03.02 08:41:00 - [228]
 

Originally by: Darth Skorpius
not really related to the specifics of this dev blog, but does this mean we are getting non-fail forums soon?


i still want ot knwo if we are getting new forums, because quite frankly, these ones suck. and if i have to start making threads to get an answer i will, but that will just watse peoples time and create spam. so just answer the bleeding question already

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2010.03.02 10:11:00 - [229]
 

Liang,

I understand and agree with your points.

And yes, I probably did get a little rant-ish on the pet peeve hot-buttons I have, and not even mentioned what you may rightly consider more important issues.

Yes, It is the loss of control, or the ceding of control that is a major issue. I understand how it may have not sounded that way, but that was more or less my point. The loss of control comes in part by choices third parties (friends) make about their privacy and what becomes generally accepted customs among people you associate with (what is considered standard courtesy and etiquette).

To me, it ts that the social networking sites make it all so easy and jostle and cheer people forward in encouraging people to make personal relations public, and archived for time foreward. (yes, you can make many things private but I think its difficult to create firewalls between types of friends and like you said, they ‘own” information ).

As for friending business associates, well that’s more specific to some industries more than ohters. (I mentioned more "sales" type agency professions, but quai-political postioitns like a police chief etc might also apply) When you speak to a person daily, know about their family’s and otherwise try to cement a relationship, you’re probably pretty close to a friend. You share lots of things. But you wouldn’t want him to know that you were a regular hunter if he and his wife were PETA members.

Having a standard adopted service that, as its very purpose trys to connect people I know with other people I know really isn’t something I want to encourage. I want to strongly discourage it.

But I will say:

Social Neworking has saved lives and leads to innovation:

I’m sure they’ve saved countless lives connecting blood donors or getting vital equipment quickly donated etc. People who might not have connected without the social networking engine prodding people forward. I imagine its led to many marriages (and spurred some infidelities leading to divorce.), reconciled families etc.

Its certainly made furthered more careers than its hurt too.

But there are more diffused manners of doing the same things where the user has more control. And big brother and group think is a real issue if not at least resisted in its reach and nature.

Ra Vhim
Black Bag Ops
Posted - 2010.03.03 05:47:00 - [230]
 

Edited by: Ra Vhim on 03/03/2010 05:50:59
Originally by: CCP Greyscale

1) Adding the option almost always requires more programming work. As our software engineers like to tell us, anything is possible, but everything costs something. Given finite programming resources, we have to prioritize in terms of what will give us the most value for a day's work; frequently, giving the user more customization options means giving up something else.



Keep in mind that it cost nothing if you don't change something that already work.

If I understand your reasons for changing standings correctly then you are worried that too many standings will somehow confuse Eve players when using Eve Gate as a social tool, or that the old standing system will have so many options that people will not have use of it in Eve Gate. I doubt that any of those possible scenarios should be reason for any concern.

Isn’t Eve Gate just an option we can use if we like - must such an option really need to change a working system in game?
Are Eve players too dim-witted to understand the old system if shown in a browser?
Can’t Eve Gate for example just translate a standing of 8,1 to a dark blue standing symbol?
Is it possible to make a less drastic change if a change now must be made?

HeliosGal
Caldari
Posted - 2010.03.03 06:33:00 - [231]
 

If something already works why spend the costs on changing it, standings should be viewable by both sides and if standings are change the other party should be notified.

Eve gate should it be an option or a total repalcement, should it be dumbed down or boosted and changs made to to the lowest common mental state

Still watching with interest

Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.03.03 07:52:00 - [232]
 

Edited by: Marlona Sky on 03/03/2010 09:51:49
As I once heard a certain superhero say, "Is it too much to ask for both?"

Can the standings thingy be both? Simple mode which is the 5 button standings you are suggesting and then an advanced mode with a slider and widow to type the exact standing from +10 thru -10 like we currently have?

That way we get the best of both worlds?

Chirjo
Posted - 2010.03.03 11:50:00 - [233]
 

-1 to less granularity for player standings. EVE is mainly about interacting players in huge numbers, so making this harder is a no-go for me.

-1 to alliance standing overriding corp and corp standing overriding own. I'm currently in a mixed Caldari/Gallente corporation and implementing standing in this way will surely break that corporation apart because nobody could get a good refine anymore. So a HUGE thumbs down for that idea.

Malakai Asamov
Minmatar
Van Diemen's Demise
Posted - 2010.03.03 13:09:00 - [234]
 

Quote:
For now we're only planning on having a "month" view; we think the majority of players are unlikely to have more than two or three events per day, and the fact that we're a 23/7 game means trying to show "day" and "week" present some visual hurdles.


A nice solution is to show a list of upcoming events, that is still filterable by corp, alliance etc, as the month view is. Scrolls vertically (can be capped if need at the next ten or 20 events) showing the next upcoming events at the top, displaying title, start date and time,finish date and time, created by and the start of a description.

The real estate required to show multiple events on a day square in a month calendar is not really enough and the less click required to get to this info the better right?



Matalino
Posted - 2010.03.03 14:08:00 - [235]
 

Originally by: Chirjo
-1 to alliance standing overriding corp and corp standing overriding own. I'm currently in a mixed Caldari/Gallente corporation and implementing standing in this way will surely break that corporation apart because nobody could get a good refine anymore. So a HUGE thumbs down for that idea.
Wrong standings!

They are not changing NPC standings.

They are talking about the color of friends/enemies on the overview/local/etc.

Neu Bastian
Minmatar
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2010.03.04 03:16:00 - [236]
 

PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD (OR LACK THEREOFF):

Add a rigth click feature where you can send a contact to a folder.

"righ click > send to folder > (list of folders)"

And allow us to make a Wartarget-only overview! it is currently imposible.

Mayobe
Minmatar
Trauma Ward
Posted - 2010.03.04 03:31:00 - [237]
 

I'm glad you're overhauling the standings system. However, I want to make you aware of some concerns I have regarding the proposed changes.

First and foremostly, it was mentioned that the corp member list would probably be added to the corp's 'show-info' and there was a question of whether or not to make this list globally accessible. At present when a corp is engaged in a war it's a burden to the enemy to acquire the names of the members of that corp. There are a few ways of doing this, but I won't reveal them here (for tactical reasons, lol). My point is that it requires a non-trivial amount of effort to gather this intel. Making corp member lists public would thereby change the strategic nature of corp warfare to some degree. I'm not sure whether or not I welcome such a change as it would essentially be 'dumbing-down' the successful prosecution of warfare.

Secondly, a feature I would very much like to see is the ability to put someone in the address book, in a specific category, allowing for login/logout notifications, but simultaneously being able to block them. A somewhat common practice is to add war targets to address book in order to be able to see which of them are online, etc. However, this allows war targets to instantly open a convo to you, which in some cases is irritating to say the least.

Finally, the proposal to make alliance standings override corp and personal standings seems very counter-intuitive to me. If I have someone blue personally I d*** well did it for a reason and I don't want it to be overridden by my corp. Likewise, if my corp sets someone blue I want to see them blue, regardless of what my alliance thinks about them. In this case I would propose that the player be allowed to set the precedence level for themselves.

At any rate, these are my concerns and I thought I'd air them. Again, I'm really quite pleased that this system is being overhauled, as (like several others) it's a bit overdue.

Keep up the good work, devs! :)

Ibo Tpmp
Posted - 2010.03.04 07:39:00 - [238]
 

Originally by: Red Raider
Right now you how are you doing this

I'm not doing this right now, those were hypothetical examples describing things someone might want to do once EVEGate goes live.
Originally by: Red Raider
As for posting information on the internet you don't want others too see it will really boil down to them not being smart enough to get it not them being denied access.

Oh agreed, I was thinking more of casual (read:accidental) threats rather than deliberate, focused efforts.

Regardless, my main point stands... the current standings system is primarily used to identify friends and foes within the fiction of the game, while the "friends" function of EVEGate would likely be used to identify friends in a context outside the fiction of the game; I don't think the two mix as well as the game designers are hoping they will.

SirDynty
Boiians
Posted - 2010.03.04 14:14:00 - [239]
 

Originally by: T'Amber
Lets hope you can invite 5000+ people to share your events details :)

http://i154.photobucket.com/albums/s260/MrOosterman/eventmenu_version2_mouseover.jpg


-T'amber

Updated Image to URL - Adida

yes,because we cant wait to read spam and some random pages advertisment,such as yours.
Fan site is one thing,this crap is another. Including your great corporation name and great screenshot and great signature you provided
for me this is the same like cheap isk spam

Frug
Omega Wing
Snatch Victory
Posted - 2010.03.04 15:31:00 - [240]
 

Originally by: Odhinn Vinlandii
Originally by: Frug

Hey thanks for not reading my statement or testing it yourself. It's very helpful to have useless information given.

War targets is by default at the top of that list, and no, it does not solve the problem I was describing. The priority of it is what decides the priority of the colour, not whether or not it appears.


It works fine for me. contact me in game, I will export my overview for you.


No, it doesn't work for you because you don't understand, but thanks for the offer anyway.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only