[IDEA] Player Owned Hangar

Not sure i’m allowed to do that, but as the original post has been closed, i wanted to get comments from the community now that a lot of players came back to Eve Online thanks to (or because of) Covid19.

Original post : [IDEA] Player Owned Hangar

Note : My idea is NOT an Office already in the game, this is something else, please read everything before commenting. :slight_smile:

In stations, you have in Inventory window,

The Ship you’re in, or capsule.
Ship hangar
Item hangar
Deliveries hangar
Corporation hangar
Corporation deliveries
PLEX Vault

My idea is to add another one to those :

Personal hangar or “Sharable hangar” or “Player hangar” whatever

This hangar could be a service, with a monthly fee, it would not be a default hangar, you’d have to subscribe to have one in a station. (ISK sink is good ! <3)
This could be a new kind of “Container” item to assemble and repackageable.

This hangar, would have access rights “view”, “deposit”, “pick”, grantable by players to any other players, alliances or corporations. Or only to players, if this is too much, it’s up to CCP to decide the scope.
Just like you can give access to a Bookmark Folder via a personal Access List, or Citadel Services via the exact same system.

This would allow friends, that are not necessarilly in the same corporation to share stuff to one another even if the other is -not in station -not logged in -not playing with this character, etc…
And by ‘not in this station’ i mean, he could move an item to this hangar he has access to for a later use when he won’t be there to trade with his firend, instead of going through the contract system.

Note#2 : It would be awsome if the Access List could be customed as such :

  • As i mentionned, 3 different types of access : View, Deposit, Pick.
  • Each of those type could be customed so that you could grant access to a whole corporation for instance, BUT this_particular_member#1, this_particular_member#2. OR to a whole Alliance BUT this particular corporation or this particular member within this Alliance.

(Also, with Citadels now Anchoring and Disanchoring at a never-seen rate, please reduce repackageable Station Container delay).

1 Like

That’s called an “office”, which you can find in NPC stations and upwell structures, which you can rent when you’re running a corporation. All it requires is ISK and being in a player made corporation as CEO or member with the required rights.

From there, pretty much everything you want is already achievable.

1 Like

You missunderstood my idea.

An Office, can only be accessed by members of the Corporation renting it.
No other player in the game can access it, only Corp members.
It also has to be available for renting in NPC Station (if no changes has occured that i don’t know).
And i can add that only the CEO or members with required rights can modify the accessibility for a specific corp role.

My idea is focused on the player itself and only.
This idea is to allow anyone to open a Hangar or a Station Container with a custom Access List, just like Bookmarks Folders or Citadel Access List.

For instance, i could have :

  • Personal Hangar #1 -> Accessible to my_friend#1, my_friend#2, random_corporation#1.
    Knowing that my_friend#1 is not in my corporation, and that random_corporation#1 is not my corporation, nore the corporation of my_friend#1 or my_friend#2.

  • Personal Hangar #2 -> Accessible to ‘my_friend#3’, ‘my_friend#4’, etc…
    Knowing that none of those ‘my_friend#x’ are in my corporation or alliance.

Original post edited to be clearer. (i hope so)

Yes, that’s the whole point of them existing, instead of people having an individual one. Worse, these “offices” are not unlimited. For your idea to work, there needs to be an unlimited amount of these personal spaces.

Not only that, the whole point of corporations is for people to benefit from grouping up. You basically want to sidestep corporations and have people benefit from “grouping” up without committing to it by joining a corporation. I can’t see your idea ever happening, because it makes “joining a corporation to benefit from grouping up” obsolete.

I’ve tried hard, but i still can’t see how my idea ever renders corporations obsolete the 2 ways you describe it…

1. Corporation Offices already exist.
Well yes, they do.
But that’s not all, they also give access to multiple Hangars for different purposes and uses according to CEO and/or Directors will.
You might have never been a CEO or a Director, but i’ve sometimes, once i were one, been asked to open a Hangar for this or that use, with no real benefit for the whole corporation, or with too much restrictions to the access that it would only benefit a small part of its members.

Did sharable Bookmarks render Corporation Bookmarks obsolete ?
I think not, obviously.

My idea does not render these hangars obsolete as they can still exist for Corporation usage only, with a restricted access list only and the faith from members that it IS a Corporation hangar and not an item or something personal even from the CEO or the Director, it’s Corporation-based, with very detailed access list based on roles which every member can have knowledge of.

2. Corporation should be the smallest social group in Eve Online recognised by all and most of all CCP.
Coalitions exist, and yet, there are no organisation IN GAME that lets people join as a recognisable entity.
Small group exist cross corporations over years and years, and they don’t necessarilly want, or most importantly SHOULD NOT, join as a same recognisable entity or organisation to be able to do what they do.

My idea does not render social groups such as Corporation obsolete, since other types of social groups already exist in the game for years now, they just have no recognition in a form of an organisation from CCP. (only Alliances and Corporations do).
My idea is just a way to improve quality of life for such social groups that nonetheless not only exist, but use other means to achieve goals with free contracts for instance in our subject (exchange items between players).

For the other general points you mentioned.
I don’t see either why my idea would need an ‘unlimited amount’ of these personal spaces.
Sharable Bookmarks are limited to 3, why ? Why aren’t they unlimited ? Should they be unlimited ?
I don’t understand.

Okay. Go ahead. Good luck.

PS: That wasn’t meant as an allowance for you to proceed. :slight_smile:

Thank you for allowing me to go ahead.


PS: I know ! It was a gentle sarcastic mockery. :slight_smile:

1 Like

you would be the first one who cries because someone take stuff out of your Hangar and dont gave it back.

If i would’ve been stolen anything in ‘my’ hypothetical Hangar, it would’ve been my entire fault for not setting the Access List correctly.
Just like it would’ve been my entire fault, if i’m sharing a Bookmark to which i’m warping with ‘my’ hypothetical Titan and get enventually destroyed doing so.

But that’s purely hypothetically (and badly) trolled i suppose.

Basically a hangar that uses Access Control Lists to determine access instead of the hard-coded corp-only… it’s actually not a bad idea since it would use existing infrastructure. We already have ACLs in the game, so all you need to do is assign an ACL for View/Take (whereas in corp perms there is a checkbox for these perms per title). It would eliminate the need to roll alts into “bank” corps just to access goods. I can get behind this idea :+1:


That’s a whole other subject, but your comment made me thought about this generalisation of ACLs in Alliances.
We all know that the Executor Corporation is a false corporation filled with alts.
With ACLs, you don’t really need an Executor corp, just a well managed ACL with various rights and title.

Wouldn’t that make it impossible for people to take over alliances by joining their own fake corporations into them and then having a vote? That’s some serious higher level meta gameplay. I don’t really know much about this, but I knew a few people who loved doing that.

You are refering to shares right ?
Basically, how the system works, if i’m not mistaking, is that the true Alliance, is the Executor Coporation instead of the Alliance itself.
There are no Alliance Rights, everything goes through the Executor Corp.

The idea of Alliance ACL is that when someone decide to create one, there’s an entity created above them, like a “father folder”.
Devs could build a requirement in Alliances ACL (this folder rights) that says : “You need to assign X member at the highest rank possible”, one at least of each corporation.
Shares could still exist, but at the Alliance level, not the Executor corp.

I don’t really know how it works. I remember someone telling me that he’s joining alliances with his corp, trying to get in several alt corps as well, to be able to use the CEOs to out-vote the actual owner, taking over the alliance.

ACLs are completely unrelated to shares within a corp (used to take over as CEO) and votes within an alliance (used for a corp to become a new executor corp over an existing one). The ACL mechanism cannot be used to take over as CEO or Executor Corp in either of these instances.

It can’t right now, we were discussing about the faisable things or not via ACLs if they ever exist as part of a complete Alliance rebuild and/or Corapotion rebuild as well.
Imagine managing roles and titles the same way you do for ACLs, it would be so much easier and clearer.

1 Like

bump ?

hmm, ok posting in a “I want shareable hangars for my alts thread”

and as to the alliance thing it works like this:

Executor Corp: it is the lead of an alliance.
1.) All other corporations are able to set their support for others in the alliance, or nobody, which is secret.
2.) If a corporation has more support than the Executor corp does, it can start a vote to oust the Executor corp as the lead corporation.

Agreed. You shouldn’t have to make an alt corp and get it blued to your alliance to have a shared hangar. I don’t really see any harm for this, especially since Upwell structures have (I think) an unlimited space for offices.

hmph, and with the way things are going for Asset Safety i wouldnt leave an ibis in one.