Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[orange]

All, does your org operate NRDS?  Have you hit the 2600 limit on standings?  How many years ago was that?

Help support this thread and maybe we can get them to expand the limit.

[NISYN Aelisha]

Better yet, standings export or 'standings sharing' would be nice additions.  Currently we must engage in the laborious process of adding new reds for joint ops with friends, but were we able to 'apply standings mask of corp X' additional reds, or blues, could be added temporarily with a relational assignment.  Standings export would be an easier, XML or PlainText method of sharing standings without screenshots or finger-breaking amounts of typing, consider it a halfway house towards a full standings sharing system.

The corporate interface in general needs a complete overhaul, as we can already see that the alliance level additions do not suit independent corps, and the existence of coalitions of alliances highlights the need for collaborative tools outside those permitted us. 

As much as I consider NRDS to be a fools errand, it is a part of our sandbox, and I will support anything that adds depth, richness and usability to our currently limited standings/political system in EVE.

[BloodBird]

Better yet, standings export or 'standings sharing' would be nice additions.  Currently we must engage in the laborious process of adding new reds for joint ops with friends, but were we able to 'apply standings mask of corp X' additional reds, or blues, could be added temporarily with a relational assignment.  Standings export would be an easier, XML or PlainText method of sharing standings without screenshots or finger-breaking amounts of typing, consider it a halfway house towards a full standings sharing system.

The corporate interface in general needs a complete overhaul, as we can already see that the alliance level additions do not suit independent corps, and the existence of coalitions of alliances highlights the need for collaborative tools outside those permitted us. 

As much as I consider NRDS to be a fools errand, it is a part of our sandbox, and I will support anything that adds depth, richness and usability to our currently limited standings/political system in EVE.

+1

This should be asked for, not just an increase in the standings slot cap. The corporate-alliance-wider universe political tools available to players are very out-dated and rather limited in many ways. While they upgrade everything else, it would be very nice to see an expansion/patch that upgrades the entire political tool-box as well.

[Silas Vitalia]

I believe an overhaul of standings and alliances / treaties was in the works as of last year?

Something to formalize the currently informal arrangements.

and... NBSI for life, ya'll

[Leopold Caine]

Electus Matari say my corp's full of raccoons and pirates.

[lallara zhuul]

I'm not that good with coding that I am a sorting algorithm wizard, but as far as I can tell the complexity of the standings databases do hit a roof at some point with the hardware that is running those databases.

I would have to bother my brother about it, he is doing database stuff for libraries, but he is working in a different scale... when he is talking about his job it is pretty much about griping of adoption of algorithms in the system in the first place that causes the whole thing to slow down when hitting a cap for those algorithms that were put in to use in the first place.

So, to clarify.

Perhaps the database 'Stuff' CCP has adopted in the first place for the standings system is outdated and incompatible with new ideas, because implementing those new ideas might mean a full re-coding of the system from the ground up.

Dunno how the SQL stuff that they adopted in 2006 or was it 2007 works nowadays.

[Lithium Flower]

From theoretical point of view, number of potential allies is considerably lower than number of potential enemies. This means it would be rational to change ROE from NRDS to NBSI when you are hitting cap
But ok, 2600 standings, my head hurts when I think about it! You know, 2600 reds is almost NBSI 
Well, but if it is conceptual, there are always other solutions (without bothering CCP, who would change it in a next ten years... maybe). I bet majority of these reds are dead entities. So you may try to send them mails, asking them to pay like ~10m to stop being red (I doubt any will pay, but if they do, yay) Alive peoples will answer with some insults, threats, etc. But if there won't be any answer, just kick them from standing list for free 

[BloodBird]

And if they make an effort to ignore you, and you remove their red status, they get away from your KOS list while utilizing zero effort.

The only way to be sure your standings lists are updated is to go check all of the entries by hand...

Are these pirates still alive and pirating? In our systems? Yes? No?
Are these guys still actively doing what we don't like them for? Yes? No?

etc...

[Lithium Flower]

Have mercy on their diplomats! 
You know, complete standing reset might be even easier solution. I don't think there will be problems finding active 'reds' to add and shoot, if they hit 2600 

[Ulphus]

.

The only way to be sure your standings lists are updated is to go check all of the entries by hand...

Are these pirates still alive and pirating? In our systems? Yes? No?
Are these guys still actively doing what we don't like them for? Yes? No?T

etc...

EM used to run a kill board scan for all our reds. Have they disbanded, are they still getting kills in the republic, have they joined an alliance, that sort of thing. This gave our diplos lists of corps worth re-evaluating if they were bored, but I don't think we ever made it over 2k standings.

For a long time we thought the max was 300 standings which was a lot tighter.

If people cared enough to want to not be red, talking to EM diplos was the best way.