Manufacturing roles in corporations suck

Industry Gameplay Center Science & Industry
1

Hi there,
I’m trying to set up an industrial project for the people in my corp and I find it weird that to manufacture something on behalf of the corporation a member needs BOTH:

  • Factory Manager
  • Rent Factory Facility (optionally + Rent Research Facility)

Just to clarify here’s a quote from Roles Listing support page:

Factory Manager
Allows management (set up, delivery or cancellation) for corporation jobs, even those installed by other members of the corporation. Also allows the listing and use of all corporation owned blueprints within the “Blueprints” tab of the Industry window, independent of corporation hangar access. Proper “Take” Access to the respective Hangars or containers is still required for any job requiring input materials.

Rent Factory Facility
Required to be able to start manufacturing jobs on behalf of the corporation.

A member needs the Rent Factory Facility to install jobs on behalf of the corporation in the Industry Window. However, even if he’s set up to see into a specific corp hangar with blueprints in it and even TAKE from that hangar - that member still can’t do jack, cause in the industry window his access will be denied. He needs the role of the Factory Manager to gain that access.

Now, even if someone was a titular Foreman and had the Factory Manager role he would still not be able to start a job. The Factory Manager role allows a member to see a list of corp blueprints in the Industry window. But that role alone would be insufficient, cause even though he can see the blueprints, he can’t click “start” on them. He needs the Rent Factory Facility role.

— Rant incoming —
My question is - WHY?
CCP has this awesome feature now that allows to make a project out of manufacturing something on behalf of the corporation (if set up in a certain way) - but regular members can’t do anything to profit from it. No sane CEO or Director would give out a Factory Manager role to random people and risk them having a fit cancelling all corp manufacturing.

To me this is ■■■■■■■■. Here are the tools to actually put skills of your members to use and create jobs for them that pay actual isk, give them a sence of going toward something together (like an MMO should!) - and then one malicious person can undo all that.
And before you say “it’s Eve and we need sabotage and drama” - I call ■■■■■■■■ again. Cancelling someone else’s Nyx manufacturing project without getting the input materials back is clicking a button, not skillful ascent on the trust ladder to a director position and stabbing someone in the back in an elaborate plan.
Regular members should have the chance to help their corporation’s industry efforts without breaking it and being trusted with way too much power over it.
— Rant over —

How to fix it?
I’m not a programmer or a database architect, but to me there are two ways this can be addressed:

1. Separate the need of a Factory Manager role from being able to manufacture for a corp

A Factory Manager role is fine where it is if only one trusted officer holds it. Otherwise it’s a problem. It’s good that a Factory Manager is able to deliver or cancel other members’ projects.
A regular member that only has the role for Renting Factory Facility should still be able to install a manufacturing job if they have access to see a hangar with blueprints and access to take from a hangar with materials. However that member should NOT be able to cancel that job. Only the Factory Manager should be able to. Of course this locks somone’s slot and this should be explained when clicking the ‘Start’ button so that members know what they’re getting into.

Yes, this still creates a risk that someone could just start manufacturing jobs and wasting resources on something that a corp doesn’t need. But that could be amended by a better organisation of corp hangars and what materials lie where.

2. Change the Manufacture corp project.

It would also work if the Manufacture project didn’t reward the act of installing a job but actually delivering something. Because jeez, somone can just install a job, cash in, and then cancel it immediately. First of all this should award a delivered product (no matter if the member delivers it or the Factory Manager). Not only that, make it an option so that the product is delivered to the specified corp hangar location if “on behalf of the corporation” is chosen!
But the change could go deeper than that. The Factory Manager that sets up the corp project could set up a manufacturing job inside the Industry window and instead of clicking a the start button - turn that job into a corp project (again, don’t know how projects are designed under the hood, so that might be impossible). A member that sees it can click “Accept” on that project - and install a job using their skills, but the Factory Managers permissions in terms of access to blueprints and materials. In effect that would be a member renting out their industry slot to the corp for isk. Still not able to cancel the job though, because after that the permission link ends.

So, you managed to see the end of this ranty post. Good job, a gold star for you!
I’d love to discuss this, because while CCP adding more ways to engage corp members into activities via the opportunities window is really awesome and we need more of that in an MMO game - a lot of it is being sabotaged by some really old stuff that should be updated to see that system shine. And by extension make multiplayer industry a thing instead of just one dude with a dozen alts.

Please do poke holes in my reasoning, or maybe explain how to set this up without relying on the Factory Manager role if you’re able :wink:

4 Likes
2

The Factory manager roles allows a corp member to access to rent a job slot at a place that has factory slots…

You allso need to give the member access to a corp wallet if you want them to build for the corp…cause i mean if i had to use my own wallet…i would not let you have the stuff I make or even work for the corp.

3

You allso need to give the member access to a corp wallet if you want them to build for the corp

That’s actually not true (I checked :stuck_out_tongue: )
If a character doesn’t have access to a corp wallet they will use their own wallet to finance job costs.
Which is fine - in the context of manufacturing corp projects job cost should be added to isk paid per product delvered.

Factory Manager requirement should be out of the question though. One malicious person can revert the whole system to a closed one with too much beureaucracy for people to care running it above the level of something like a corp buyback.

4

Manufacturing in general is a lot worse than it used to be due to the huge brokers fee tacked on to re-listing items to be competitive.

Eve Online used to shine as a game rich with multiple ways to play it, but the brokers fee system change slamming you with a huge penalty for re-listing at a new price took away the business type’s game play of being competitive while playing and logged in.

Hopefully they will change that back someday. I just re-listed some ships and it was 2 million brokers fee to do so. Can’t do that very often before all your profit is deleted into CCP tax system. Feels like a much more sluggish system that does not reward being logged in whatsoever.

2 Likes
5

The margins are there and easy to find but if you want to keep relisting the items then you will completely remove these margins yourself.

If you are willing to wait a little longer just make sure the sell price is around the average item price then it will get sold, it just may not be the next item to sell. The margin remains intact and you can work on other items while those sell.

If you aren’t willing to wait then look into selling items to the buy orders rather than the sell orders, you won’t have as much profit on the item but you will turn them over quicker and can draw a bigger profit in the same timeframe.

6

That’s an option, but not one that benefits being logged in and engaging in the game. If I undercut someone and they can’t be bothered to check or login for a week or more that should be their loss. However, the current system doesn’t allow for that very often because of the ridiculous brokers fee hammering away profits.

7

Being docked is not being engaged in the game.

Which is good.

8

did you miss where i said, if it was me doing a corp job…like the new projects…I would not do it with my own ISK. It needs to be Corp ISK.

I would love an idiot like you that would keep doing things for the corp and funding the jobs with your own ISK.

10

I’m sorry? Where did you take that from? What are you even talking about? :smiley:

This is a thread about how a “factory manager” is bad for multiplayer industry in the game.

Yes, you need access to withdraw from a corp wallet division to use that isk. But technically it’s not true to make it happen - hence me directly writing there that the job cost can be added to the reward for the corp project.

I would love “an idiot like you” to actually read and understand what they’re talking about.

2 Likes
11

exactly…
Trust…

and the Corp roles have their value in “trust” and “security” for a properly operated Corporation.

and since “Trust” is one of the more valued commodities in this game…there is no way I would work for a Corporation that expected me to use my own ISK to do Corporate Jobs as there is no guarantee of reimbursment

12

In combat there are line members and FCs. Even IRL factories have managers and regular workers.

IMHO not every line member in a corp should have access to as much power as the Factory Manager role provides. Trust has nothing to do with this, since a line member that wants to just make some isk on their industry slots and help the corp at the same time is not required to know everything that such projects entail.

Currently this system is set up in a way that you have to have the Factory Manager role to do anything industrial for the corp. Either that or you don’t do anything at all. This way the effect is that only a few people are trusted by the corp leadership to have that role and they need to make do with contracts, external spreadsheets and a ■■■■ ton of “paperwork” to get things going. It just means that things go slow OR people just do industry solo with alts because it’s easier to manage.

Neither the Factory Manager role or the corp manufacturing projects help with this currently.
That’s why I’m proposing how to change it to enable this.

Your problem of paying the job cost for example can be easily solved by the variant where factory managers create jobs and turn them into corp projects - the cost of installing it can then be paid upon creation from the corp wallet. Easy.

So seriously - chill out and lets figure out a way to improve that system so that actual multiplayer (and not multi-account) corp industry can be a thing people enjoy :slight_smile:

1 Like
13

Being docket and engaging in the market is most certainly being logged in and engaging in the game, what are you even saying? Not everyone plays eve like you stefnia. If you want to plop your stuff on the market and walk away for a week that’s not a good game system for a MMO. It’s actually counter-productive to getting people to login. The broker system needs to be re-worked for the people that actually want to play the game from a PVP market perspective.

14

Yet this is a game about spaceships, not docked spaceships users.
You’re as much engaged in the game as any AFK player.

15

Except EvE is almost as well known for its unique market as it is for its spaceships. Most of the absolute wealthiest players in game made their money trading.

16

And ?

Your post does not address my point. People who are connected solely to uncut other people should not be a gameplay that is promoted, as it is not engaging with the game.

More importantly, those people you talk about, if they made huge money using that activity, it’s a proof it should be more discouraged. People should need to be actually engaged in the game to make high amounts of money.
But I think you are wrong, and that cutting other people down makes very small money. You just can’t realize because you lack the experience.

17

Your argument makes literally no sense. If you are logged in and engaging in game mechanics, you are playing a game. Some people enjoy flying around, some people enjoy crafting and market, some people haul stuff all over, there’s hundreds of things that people like to do and they are all engaged in playing. You can’t just expect people to play like you. Just because you want to drop 100 ships on the market and call it a day for 90 days doesn’t mean everyone else wants to play like that. The ridiculous broker fees have to go back to the way they were before so the market is second by second engagement.

18

no.

If you are logged in and undercutting people, you are logged in and undercutting people.
The market is as much a game mechanism as the local chat.
You are as much active in the game as people who discuss in local.

Again, cutting on the market is as much engagement into the game as being AFK.

People who are willing to actually engage in the game should not be bother by people who don’t.
Play the way you want, but don’t ask for specific rules to help you when you are not engaging with the game and prevent people who are from doing so.

The opposite, the minimum broker fees have to go 3% instead of 1% and the minimum tax have to be reduced from 3.6% to 1.6%

1 Like
19

bump.

Needs fixin’.

20

Good evening,

I did a bugtrack on this subject.
Not to mention the project corp and so on…

It doesn’t make sense that an option that allows you to rent factory or rent research should necessarily have to go through the “trust” box.

In the case of citadels, it’s possible to ensure that members only have access to certain parts of the citadel because the options have been designed for this.

But not for industry, and it seems to me to help industrial corps (who don’t just do industry, for my part it’s pvp, pve, mining and a bit of industry).

It seems more logical and I agree with the creator of this post. If a member wants to help the corp I should be able to give them a role that allows them to do so. (After that it’s up to me to manage portfolios or not and division access or not, that’s another detail).
At the same time, I don’t want the first ill-intentioned player to be able to sabotage everything on a whim just by spamming the start and cancel keys.
If afterwards I need a player to have more access, I can give him the factory manager, and if he starts to ■■■■ me over. Then it’s my fault.

But if we want to simplify life a little while being more logical, we need to be able to give manufacturing access just with rent factory or rent research (it goes without saying that if I’m talking about manufacturing, for research it’s research).

For me, it’s not a case of forgetting to add something, but rather a bug that nobody is dealing with because many people think it’s normal, whereas I’m sorry, but it’s not normal. If we have plenty of other optimisation options that are possible in many other areas, I don’t see why we should give the industry an option if we’re going to end up creating it and not be able to give the player the opportunity to use it because another option comes into conflict due to a configuration error.

To err is human, and when few people realise it and find it normal, there’s a problem, especially when it’s not normal.

Sorry if my English sucks.

21

Have you brought this up with the CSM? Like @Angry_Mustache etc etc