open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked Corporate Roles - Comprehensive Change
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2010.08.07 07:19:00 - [1]
 

I've been soliciting feedback on the topic of corp role changes, and with the next CSM meeting's issue deadline coming up, it's time to put this into an Assembly Hall post. This is intended as a comprehensive look at the entire topic, from top to bottom.

Changing Existing Roles
CCP has previously stated that there's a hard limit on the number of possible roles due to the back-end design of the role system. This is obviously not an ideal state of affairs, but it's a limit I'll respect here. Thus, my proposed changes are intended not to increase the number of total roles in game. Now, on to the changes.

- Four roles can be removed with no major difficulties. Rent Office can be folded into Accountant, Contract Manager into Trader, Fitting Manager into Communications Officer, and Station Manager into Config Starbase Equipment. The last I may be wrong about, I don't do 0.0 alliance work, but it seems fairly safe. This frees up four open slots for new additions.

- The industry roles are fundamentally broken, and make security impossible. Take the three that currently exist, and replace them with, at minimum, an "Install jobs" role which only lets them cancel/deliver their own jobs, and a "Cancel jobs" role which lets them work on anyone's jobs. You could also make viewing other people's jobs impossible for the basic role and have a view all jobs role, or you can split science and industry apart if you like, though I don't really see a reason to do either.

- Config(non-Starbase) Equipment should only apply to unanchoring equipment, not anchoring. Bubbles and cans should be freely anchorable.

- This is more UI than roles, but Auditors should be able to search the audit history by role, and not just by member name - i.e., see all changes to Config Starbase Equipment, no matter which member it was to.

- CEOs should be able to set default access rights for assorted POS structure types, so that people don't have to whine for access every time a new lab goes online.

- The current Base/Headquarters/Other split seems useless to me. Replace it with a system where each corp storage space(POS/office) can be put into A/B/C, and people can get separate access to A, B, and C. This does remove Base functionality, so perhaps A/B/Base works as a compromise, but HQ/Other is dumb and should be replaced. Also, let the CEO pick which one POSes fall into by default(and maybe work in default access rights on POS structures while you're at it).

New Roles
- The idea of a "Diplomat" role has been proposed by CCP, to allow non-directors to set standings, and I fully support it.

- Corporations should have the option to switch from vote-locking BPOs(which is only really appropriate for things like IPOs and very centralized corps) to role-locking them. This change will require a "Blueprint Manager" role be added.

- I'm torn on this, because it could make bumping too easy, but a second corp trader role should be considered, to allow you to modify/cancel other people's corp orders.

- This probably runs afoul of the role limits, but "Use" rights on office tabs could be interesting - don't allow them to take the stuff, but allow them to use it for production jobs(which could only be delivered to the same hangar tab, ofc). This could allow jobs to be outsourced with fewer security concerns, which should help newer players get into industry more easily.

Other
- Titles need to work properly, especially as regards notifications. A Fuel Tech-by-role gets fuelmails, while a Fuel Tech-by-title does not. Grantable titles would be lovely as well, but again this probably qualifies as 7 new roles.

- Make it so that the UI doesn't make my eyes bleed. Yes, it'll use tables, but they don't have to be horrible, unintuitive, poorly-explained tables.

- Allow corp-level API data to be split out by role, not limited to directors only - e.g., let fuel techs see the StarbaseDetail XML. This can be a CEO toggle or just an automatic system.

Abdiel Kavash
Caldari
Paladin Order
Fidelas Constans
Posted - 2010.08.07 11:13:00 - [2]
 

Separate access rights for individual POSes. At the moment I can't let people online more guns at our staging tower when under attack, without giving them the right to unanchor all our mining POSes.

Hangar tabs in the SMA, with respective restricted access.

Also, slightly off-topic, but personal hangars for each member in the CHA. Let directors or a separate role set a quota for everyone, or let directors access each member's hangar (to prevent someone from taking up all the cargo space).

Qoi
Exert Force
Posted - 2010.08.07 17:39:00 - [3]
 

Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto

Station Manager into Config Starbase Equipment. The last I may be wrong about, I don't do 0.0 alliance work, but it seems fairly safe. This frees up four open slots for new additions.


This would allow anyone that can control a POS to config outposts and offline TCUs (thus removing sovereignity from their alliance) - I don't think this is a good idea.

The rest is partly dangerous and mostly very useful. Supported, although i don't like every aspect of it.


Aineko Macx
Posted - 2010.08.07 17:42:00 - [4]
 

Excellent proposal.

Jorgan Niklow
Posted - 2010.08.07 18:58:00 - [5]
 

Supported, again.

This has been brought up before, it will be brought up again.

This
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Corporation_and_Alliance_tool_overhaul_%28CSM%29

Then
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1243317

Then
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Overhaul_of_roles_and_grantable_roles_system_(CSM)

Now we are here again, still waiting for CCP.

rootimus maximus
Caldari
Posted - 2010.08.07 19:53:00 - [6]
 

An excellent suggestion. Fully supported.

Might I also suggest adding: make the entire roles interface much simpler and easier to use? I've been playing for a couple of years and still can't always make it do what I want.

Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
Shadow Confederation
Posted - 2010.08.07 20:28:00 - [7]
 

Once again supporting a classic Hersch Proposal.

Unfortunately I seriously doubt there's a snowballs chance in hell CCP will even touch the damn thing for the next 18 months to 2 years in light of recent developments... but one can hope.

Dr BattleSmith
PAX Interstellar Services

Posted - 2010.08.08 04:23:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto

- The industry roles are fundamentally broken, and make security impossible. Take the three that currently exist, and replace them with, at minimum, an "Install jobs" role which only lets them cancel/deliver their own jobs, and a "Cancel jobs" role which lets them work on anyone's jobs. You could also make viewing other people's jobs impossible for the basic role and have a view all jobs role, or you can split science and industry apart if you like, though I don't really see a reason to do either.



It is impossible to secure an industry corp correctly.

The ability to invite new people and get them to work on locked blueprints is not functioning as they have the ability to shutdown the corp.


The settings are hacks to make corp production work while not locking up individuals slots.
It's a dirty hack in the original code that needs to be replaced with a proper feature.


Zedolf
Posted - 2010.08.08 08:27:00 - [9]
 

I fully support. Corp-related issues are long overdue.

Bunyip
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2010.08.08 08:34:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: Bunyip on 08/08/2010 08:35:56
I think it's fair to say that not just roles need to be looked at - many things about corporations in Eve need to be examined and revised (cost and mechanics of wardecs, POSes, etc). However, this is a succinct analysis of changes to the roles system, and so I support this.

Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente
Imperial Tau Syndicate
POD-SQUAD
Posted - 2010.08.08 11:43:00 - [11]
 


Bhattran
Posted - 2010.08.08 15:03:00 - [12]
 

I guess this will be a surprise for us in like 3 years right....right?

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2010.08.09 23:02:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Qoi
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Station Manager into Config Starbase Equipment. The last I may be wrong about, I don't do 0.0 alliance work, but it seems fairly safe. This frees up four open slots for new additions.


This would allow anyone that can control a POS to config outposts and offline TCUs (thus removing sovereignity from their alliance) - I don't think this is a good idea.

The rest is partly dangerous and mostly very useful. Supported, although i don't like every aspect of it.


I don't have any active TCUs to mess with this, but according to Evelopedia, TCUs are already handled under Config Starbase Equipment, and Station Manager roles only apply to actual outposts. If you're already trusting someone with the ability to take away sov or rip down your towers, then trusting them to set docking fees and reinforce timers seems minimal.

Originally by: Bhattran
I guess this will be a surprise for us in like 3 years right....right?


Confirming that if this ever happens, it will be a surprise.

Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles

Posted - 2010.08.10 17:15:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Kazuo Ishiguro on 10/08/2010 17:14:39
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
I don't have any active TCUs to mess with this, but according to Evelopedia, TCUs are already handled under Config Starbase Equipment, and Station Manager roles only apply to actual outposts.


CCP was on the verge of implementing it that way, but a very large number of people complained about the security problems it would have imposed, and so CCP changed it at the last minute iirc.


 

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