Industry + Corpration Membership/Asset Management

Industry Gameplay Center Science & Industry
1

o7,

As far as I know there is no way to unify the industrial overview and/or wallets of the characters of an account without putting all of them into an alt corp and using that corp wallets/indy interface. Thus, any and all chars of an account that work on the same production pipeline need to have allocated ISK and blueprints which needlessly splits apart the whole process while not being able to simultaneously view all running jobs.
This is especially annoying when those chars are not pure indy alts but chars that actively pursue other playstyles in the game, like it is with a main that is indy-competent but also happens to be a properly skilled PVP or trade char.

What I’d like to discuss are the following points:

A) What stands in the way, beyond the simple “nobody at CCP/nobody aside from me” may be bothered by this, of implementing something like a checkbox to unify wallets and hangars of chars on your account/acccounts?

B) Did I spodbrain this and it actually is a thing already (without using a private corp)?

C) As a way of how to implement this I’d recommend the following: Each char on an account has a checkbox in the settings that allows it to unify hangars/wallets with other chars on the account. Chars that don’t have the box checked simply keep their separate wallet and hangars. Let’s say this change is implemented at downtime or something (not that IT savvy no clue if that would help data-load wise). For now I’d keep away from linking whole accounts like this because of the whole cascade unleashed by one account getting stolen and so on. You can also not trade a char that has linked assets.

maxresdefault
maxresdefault1280Ă—720 105 KB

Shoutout to EVEnton and the “EVE Online Slander” vid since I stole the thumbnail meme…

For the mods: Feel free to move this topic to a more appropriate thread this Indy one seemed good to me not sure if there’s a better one :wink:

Regards,
KK

2

Because even if they’re on the same account, the system considers each of them a separate player, and doesn’t care that you’re running them all.

What you’re describing is one of the drawbacks to multiboxing. As these are few, far between, and generally easily compensated for, I have a better question.

If you’re unable to play the game at the level you’re trying to, why do you need CCP to now provide you with assistance that hasn’t been provided to or needed by anyone else playing at this level?

Many, many people play the game at the level you’re trying to do so, myself included, without needing CCP to provide us a crutch. Try assigning one of your alts to be your accountant, that’s what I do. One alt keeps the money until it needs dispersed.

3

I already adapted to how things are and simply suggest a quality-of-life improvement that goes hand in hand with participating in corps as line member and makes things easier for anybody that goes towards the direction CCP is sending people anyways. So my answer is this; Because a q.o.l improvement that could be implemented for the playstyle that CCP supports (multiboxing) makes basic sense for them since it’s less annoying to have several chars on an account that do the same thing, therefore one is more inclined to continue doing that. It makes the same-acc multiboxing experience simpler and easier which should be a go-to direction for any developer who, well, wants you to run many chars :smiley:

About the third paragraph: I don’t like that suggestiveness. The status quo is needlessly annoying and I just want to spark a discussion about what’s in the way of making the same-acc multiboxing experience easier for those who want that (checkbox-part). I’d like to see something like that being implemented. The way you ask this is irritating because, well, perhaps I am not alone when it comes to wanting something like this and I do not demand this to be implemented solely for me. You also suggest that iths hasn’t been needed by anybody else which I don’t think you can actually know for the entire playerbase that just has to adapt to the needlessly separated interface and assets for industrial activity.

4

Don’t feed the toxic troll, he only posts to make negative judgements on persons.

So what stands in the way :

First, you need an entity to aggregate all of those. A wallet is linked to an entity, be it corporation, or character.
If you want to characters in different corporations to share a wallet, it means they need to be linked to that entity and that entity must be used to start the job.

It’s the same for the assets, each asset must be somewhere, belong to something, and placed in a specific location flag. This is true for everything you can manipulate, including the implants in your brain, your skills, etc.
When you start a job, this job is also an asset, so it must belong to something too. This something must own the BP, the materials used to start the job, and have access to the destination of the product.

At the moment only characters and corporations can own job and have a wallet.
Each character can only belong to one corporation, and belongs to its own character, so the solution would be to add another kind of affiliation, for example a “guild”, which would be given the same behaviour as a corporation (especially in the UI), but with a slightly changed recruitment process, typically : guild director sends an invite that must be accepted. The idea is that people can work for several guilds even if they are in a corporation.

This, however, could need a lot of work, especially to avoid security issues and integration in ESI.
As always, the issue is not what is possible, but how much it will cost, and how much it will help.

5

Yeh his other comments on different topics all seemed to align with your statement.

About the entity part. I get the thing about how everything has to be allocated to one. I guess we could create an “account entity” or guild how you described it that just mirrors what we already have for corp jobs and wallets but limits it to the account or the “work groups” you described.

My biggest problem is that I have seen how this can be possible with the PLEX vault, but that is ofc just one static value shared across the account. It might be a whole other story with the myriad of stuff just lying around in hangars etc. but we have the infrastructure for sharing the assets like it’s already a thing for corps.

I noticed how those hangars aren’t as equally accessible as your personal one, like with attempting to enter a ship stored in one. However, I do think (not know) that this is a minor technical thing. Here is an example how it could go:

The account assets are merged. You can log into both example chars, which have different skills, but you face the same assets in the same locations, so all items are shared. I insert my +5 implants into char A, log into Char B and bam they’re no longer in the hangar since their “presence in hangar” value changed for both chars but the “presence in clone value” changed for the char into whom I inserted the implants. This logic applies to everything including indy job input. Both chars see the things stored at the same location, but only one can run the job. You set it up and see on the shared indy window that the jobs have been started by that char, and you can see how the input assets got consumed. Now you can use the shared hangar in which you sorted your BPO/Formula/Input-Output cans to run more jobs without having to deliver or contract around the input stacks since it’s all in one location already.

So in the background clicking my suggested checkbox merges all asset locations/wallet heaps, effectively turning two different tags into one for items/ISK on that account while not merging stuff like skill queue, pod locations, job slot provider etc.

6

No we don’t ?

Just because it’s done for corps, does not mean it’s easily doable for something else.
The thing is, if it’s not done yet, you don’t know what it costs to add such a feature.

Please, read what I wrote.
Plex store is a different thing, it does not store items : it’s a counter of how many plex your account has.

You can’t merge the assets : they need to belong to someone. If you undock, your ship must belong to you. There are several things that you can’t use unless they belong to you (can’t board a ship you don’t own, can’t package).

Also please structure your posts into paragraph. This is very had to read.

7

Sry for the text block I didn’t format it enough.

About what you responded to. I meant that in the way that what I’d like to see for an account is already somewhat present like we have it for entire corps. If I start a job there, although the stuff belongs to the corp, it still respects which char did it, what skills the chars had and so on.
In other words the infrastructure is there in the sense that we already have for entire corps and what i’d like to see is that this is applied to entire accounts too.
It was indeed phrased wrong :confused:
I have no clue how much work it is to translate this unified corp “infrastructure” into something that is on an account-level, but I assumed that since it’s possible for corps it is not the greatest effort to mirror this on account-level. Like corp membership entitles you to interaction with those hangars, “account membership” would do the same for my merged suggested hangar.

I did read all of it thoroughly, but my response is based on my insufficient understanding of what it actually means that somethings belongs to something in EVE technicalities :D. My mention of the PLEX store was based on the idea that if it’s possible to store one information across the account, like the PLEX number, it would not be impossible to do so with other informations like assets in hangars (although that is more complex than just the total PLEX number).

So this is the same technical limitation that stops me from undocking with corp hulls, I need to own them first by dragging them into my own hangar. I guess that is one of the hard changes that would need to be made to make the shared account assets possible. Ownership in the way how I saw it would be shared by the chars. Who owns the hull in the shared hangar wouldn’t make a difference until you decide to enter it with one of the chars in my suggested scenario. You could see which hull is currently occupied by the other chars in that shared ship hangar. Since this would be quite the fundamental change it seems my idea will be stuck indefinitely in “won’t happen no dev time” state :frowning:

1 Like
8

if it’s more complex, then it’s not the same thing. Just because your idea looks like something that already exists, does not mean it can be implemented.

Account rewards are another example of account-level shared management, though they are rewards, not assets.

The important information you are missing, is how Eve stores that data : assets are in a table, with the field I gave (and more), so the whole model must respect those rules. They are locked by the node managing them, then stored again in the DB when you exit the node (log off, jump/pod, use gate, etc)
Though they technically may not, the cost to change that may be too important.

So until CCP accepts to store the whole universe inside a fortizar again, every item MUST have ONE owner at ANY TIME, and that’s why I said a possible change would be, to create a specific entity (I call guild) to own them, and that entity would have over simplified management rules compared to corporation (no roles since everyone is director expect creator, no access rules), which would both help the server go faster AND help alts access shared resource outside of their respective corporation.

9

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.