That is exactly the issue.
Can’t have alts in different corps and still sharing research/manufacturing/assets.
Can’t move things from your jita freighter to alt pool unless you create dedicated corp for that.
same account, and same station…
little johnny in jita shouldn’t be able to access a BP that little mary has in amarr.
2 Likes
It’s how I do it.
I just drop stuff into my alts hangar in the office I rent, and vice versa, easy peasy.
account does not exist at the engine level for assets.
And yes, little johnny in Jita should be able to access a BO that little Mary has in amarr. You can do that with corps.
in what context?
In the context of shared personal hangers.
That’s the topic ^^
That’s something that is doable for alts in corporations only, and therefore requires people to have alt corps in order to do it.
Requiring alts in alt corp is a problem.
You can already transfer property through contracts, but it’s not practical because of how tedious it is.
This !
I don’t think that anyone is suggesting teleporting stuff. It’s just a box that both alt 1 and alt 2 can access at a station without corp stuff involved.
1 Like
Sounds to me like there was just a misunderstanding because of ambiguity.
Sharing items in other stations can be interpreted as “I am using a blueprint that’s available in another station” as well as “I can give this blueprint in another station to my other character without physically moving there”.
From the context I had assumed the suggestion was talking about the second one, but I do understand why people may have gotten the wrong impression and assumed the first option.
Rather than seeing that there can be a misunderstanding and trying to clarify the suggestion, you would rather accuse people of trolling. That’s hostile.
To be clear, @ImYourMom you do not suggest being able to use items that are in other stations right? Just that you can move those items remotely to another character without the item moving out of the station it’s in?
I’m in favour of such a change.
Right now I do use contracts to remotely move items between characters, as delivery only works when you’re physically at that location, but I do see how contracts can be annoying when you’re not keeping the station hangars tidy and you only want to move a subset of items rather than everything.
There was no ambiguity.
And both can already be done using corp hangars. You can use a BP in another station, or drop one and your other character can take while you are no more there.
So both would be possible with that proposal, just like they are now using corp hangars hangers.
Because that’s the same persons who troll the threads every time. As I wrote, they never go back on their claims but instead add more fallacious ones.
That’s not hostile. That’s what they do. THEY are antagonizing. THEY are abusing the forum.
They literally did it for another proposal about button to auto target because they are afraid it would allow people to defend against suicide gankers.
Or you want to do a lot of jobs among several alts. moving all materials + BP every time is very long as the game has to update EACH item’s own, and I guess CCP could even ban you for that.
Not so long ago I was moving 30k items once per month and it was killing the game every time. You could hear the DB screaming as it was recursively moving the item’s owner.
It’s just not practical. Even not possible anymore once you reach a size big enough.
There clearly was ambiguity, some people assumed that sharing items remotely between multiple characters in different stations also meant transferring goods remotely between those stations.
This was a misinterpretation, I assume, but that doesn’t mean there was no ambiguity.
If you had spotted the misunderstanding you could have clarified it yourself, but instead you chose to accuse the people who made the wrong assumption of trolling.
Yeah, that’s on them. Not on ambiguity.
The fact that he wrote “like corp hangars” and that there is no moving the goods using corp hangars is enough.
I did not spot it. Because they did not actually even make an argument explaining.
They kept “this is abusable for obvious reasons”. Only obvious for people who don’t want to understand.
Because once you actually read the OP that claim is a nonsense.
Because that’s what they usually do. There is no discussion with people who keep trolling : they are here to make people waste their time, to even try to discuss with them is already to lose. They made the choice to prevent discussion on the forum, by actively sabotaging it.
nobody talks about assat teleportation! nobody except you …
Was a plain troll, as he was the one talking about it.
this should only work on the same station ! everything else leads into massive abuse !
Again, your two interpretations
Are both valid, and none of them require assets teleportation.
The simple idea of “same station” is a nonsense, as assets are shared among corp users independantly of the station, they are accessible the same way, just like one character’s assets are.
If I can build in station X using blueprints stored in station Y on another character I’m most certainly using asset teleportation.
Or are you saying blueprints can be remotely used in industry?
No you are not.
If I build in Jita using a BP in Amarr X, the mats are taken from a hangar in Amarr X, and the product is placed in an hangar in Amarr X. There is no teleportation.
Are you kidding me ? There is a skill for that.
Jobs are started on a location (station/structure) with required accessible industry service(s) (eg ME job requires ME service) , using hangars you have access to on that location. Mats, BP and product destination must be on that location.
The sole limit is the number of jumps from that location to your character, and the skill that increases that limit. (and of course jobs limit, job skills required but that’s besides the point)
Maybe more info here Industry - EVE University Wiki .
I’m talking about the situation where I build in Jita using materials in Jita and a blueprint in Amarr.
That’s not possible as it would involve teleportation of the blueprint.
Yes, remote activation of industry jobs is possible, but only if all the materials and blueprint are available in one (remote) location. What you describe does indeed not involve teleportation but is not the situation I was talking about.
That’s just not possible with the present industry engine.
The proposal was not about changing the job installation rules.
It was about having a shared hanger.
There was no ambiguity.
Yet some people interpreted it as a proposal to allow players to teleport stuff.
That was likely a mistake, but you instantly call them a troll.
May I suggest reading up on Hanlon's razor - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
People often make mistakes. The forums would be a happier place if you wouldn’t be so trigger-happy to assume the worst in people and keep accusing people of trolling.
And if they interpret is as a request for free isk, what about it ?
And then they interpret it as a request for new ships ?
Just because people interpret it in a wrong way, does not mean it’s ambiguous.
It means, people interpreted it in a wrong way.
They ARE trolls.
Here the OP was perfectly clear, with explanation about the issue, and embryo of idea on how to do that. There was no way to actually read it and believe this was about teleporting assets.
In other threads, they added stupid arguments and never went back on them, instead added more stupid ones.
There is no discussion with people who are not here to discuss but to censor people with a different opinion.
They did not make mistakes. They purposely distorted what was said, and added more trolls as soon as they were debunked.
Errare humanum, perseverare diabolicum.
and this is the context i was seeking from you in the first place for clarity on your stance and thought process…instead you gave me some sort of sperging assault that was ambiguous as 
No, I exactly answered the question you asked in an unambiguous way :
I took the time to answer, without any form of aggression, to your question which actually made no sense.
To which you did not even answer, nor request more explanation.
You calling that “sperging assault” is toxic BS.
YOUR question was the meaningless
Seems like my mistake was actually to take the time to answer your