Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sosona
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 10:10:00 -
[721]
Originally by: DeFood *sigh*. Not irrelevent. 0.5 and up are "safe". POS are inherently not safe. Therefore they dont belong in high sec empire.
Please point me to where CCP or the developers said that POS are inherently not safe and also where they said that POS would be not available for NPC corp members. You keep basing your discussion around it.
My point to have POS personally in 0.5+ is that they would be safe as i am in a NPC corp. |
Sosona
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 10:10:00 -
[722]
Originally by: DeFood *sigh*. Not irrelevent. 0.5 and up are "safe". POS are inherently not safe. Therefore they dont belong in high sec empire.
Please point me to where CCP or the developers said that POS are inherently not safe and also where they said that POS would be not available for NPC corp members. You keep basing your discussion around it.
My point to have POS personally in 0.5+ is that they would be safe as i am in a NPC corp. |
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 11:04:00 -
[723]
Originally by: Sosona
Please point me to where CCP or the developers said that POS are inherently not safe and also where they said that POS would be not available for NPC corp members. You keep basing your discussion around it.
My point to have POS personally in 0.5+ is that they would be safe as i am in a NPC corp.
GG in shooting own your own argument..
PoS are high-end toys, their defenses and the forcefield that keeps them invulnerable for a time (whilst under attack) as well as your ability to semi-time how long it takes before it leaves reinforced state is all the evidence we need to claim that they're meant as bases that can be destroyed. Their very gameplay aspects proves this, no need for ccp to come out and say "HAY GUYS U CAN SHOOT AT THESE THINGS, K?"..
So, being that they are able to make a profit, and that they're combat-related, having them 100% safe is completely contrary to their purpose. Since you already stated that your presence in an NPC corp would make em 100% safe (since you can't be wardecced), you argued for NOT having them in 0.5+ space.
again, gg :)
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 11:04:00 -
[724]
Originally by: Sosona
Please point me to where CCP or the developers said that POS are inherently not safe and also where they said that POS would be not available for NPC corp members. You keep basing your discussion around it.
My point to have POS personally in 0.5+ is that they would be safe as i am in a NPC corp.
GG in shooting own your own argument..
PoS are high-end toys, their defenses and the forcefield that keeps them invulnerable for a time (whilst under attack) as well as your ability to semi-time how long it takes before it leaves reinforced state is all the evidence we need to claim that they're meant as bases that can be destroyed. Their very gameplay aspects proves this, no need for ccp to come out and say "HAY GUYS U CAN SHOOT AT THESE THINGS, K?"..
So, being that they are able to make a profit, and that they're combat-related, having them 100% safe is completely contrary to their purpose. Since you already stated that your presence in an NPC corp would make em 100% safe (since you can't be wardecced), you argued for NOT having them in 0.5+ space.
again, gg :)
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Buggsi
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 11:23:00 -
[725]
Why not just make it a prerequisite, you MUST be in a corp to own a POS. So any other CORP can declare war on you.
|
Buggsi
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 11:23:00 -
[726]
Why not just make it a prerequisite, you MUST be in a corp to own a POS. So any other CORP can declare war on you.
|
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 11:33:00 -
[727]
Originally by: Buggsi Why not just make it a prerequisite, you MUST be in a corp to own a POS. So any other CORP can declare war on you.
It already is, you can only anchor pos for your corp, not for yourself. Members of an npc corp dont get the role that aloows anchoring of stuff for their corp, hence NPC corp members dont get to play with pos.
//end
|
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 11:33:00 -
[728]
Originally by: Buggsi Why not just make it a prerequisite, you MUST be in a corp to own a POS. So any other CORP can declare war on you.
It already is, you can only anchor pos for your corp, not for yourself. Members of an npc corp dont get the role that aloows anchoring of stuff for their corp, hence NPC corp members dont get to play with pos.
//end
|
Valentine Keen
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 11:34:00 -
[729]
Originally by: Discorporation
Originally by: Sosona
Please point me to where CCP or the developers said that POS are inherently not safe and also where they said that POS would be not available for NPC corp members. You keep basing your discussion around it.
My point to have POS personally in 0.5+ is that they would be safe as i am in a NPC corp.
GG in shooting own your own argument..
PoS are high-end toys, their defenses and the forcefield that keeps them invulnerable for a time (whilst under attack) as well as your ability to semi-time how long it takes before it leaves reinforced state is all the evidence we need to claim that they're meant as bases that can be destroyed. Their very gameplay aspects proves this, no need for ccp to come out and say "HAY GUYS U CAN SHOOT AT THESE THINGS, K?"..
So, being that they are able to make a profit, and that they're combat-related, having them 100% safe is completely contrary to their purpose. Since you already stated that your presence in an NPC corp would make em 100% safe (since you can't be wardecced), you argued for NOT having them in 0.5+ space.
again, gg :)
But let's make sure we catch that distinction.
NPC corp in 0.5, sure. Player corps in 0.5 can still fight over them, so that's while you're right that its not a great argument to allow them, it doesn't preclude them from 0.5+
Yes the risk will be lower, but rather than fixate on balancing risk vs reward by attempting to disallow them in safe space, simply reduce the rewards of owning them in safe space instead.
That way everyone gets to use them, but no one can argue that they're unfair or altering the risk reward balance.
(While they're at it, improve the middle ores like Hedbergite or something to make 0.4 worth going to and I for one would happily set up shop out there. To an extent, I'm hoping the random ore changes in Shiva will make it viable to head out to low sec, for the chance at the odd Gneiss rock or two etc.)
|
Valentine Keen
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 11:34:00 -
[730]
Originally by: Discorporation
Originally by: Sosona
Please point me to where CCP or the developers said that POS are inherently not safe and also where they said that POS would be not available for NPC corp members. You keep basing your discussion around it.
My point to have POS personally in 0.5+ is that they would be safe as i am in a NPC corp.
GG in shooting own your own argument..
PoS are high-end toys, their defenses and the forcefield that keeps them invulnerable for a time (whilst under attack) as well as your ability to semi-time how long it takes before it leaves reinforced state is all the evidence we need to claim that they're meant as bases that can be destroyed. Their very gameplay aspects proves this, no need for ccp to come out and say "HAY GUYS U CAN SHOOT AT THESE THINGS, K?"..
So, being that they are able to make a profit, and that they're combat-related, having them 100% safe is completely contrary to their purpose. Since you already stated that your presence in an NPC corp would make em 100% safe (since you can't be wardecced), you argued for NOT having them in 0.5+ space.
again, gg :)
But let's make sure we catch that distinction.
NPC corp in 0.5, sure. Player corps in 0.5 can still fight over them, so that's while you're right that its not a great argument to allow them, it doesn't preclude them from 0.5+
Yes the risk will be lower, but rather than fixate on balancing risk vs reward by attempting to disallow them in safe space, simply reduce the rewards of owning them in safe space instead.
That way everyone gets to use them, but no one can argue that they're unfair or altering the risk reward balance.
(While they're at it, improve the middle ores like Hedbergite or something to make 0.4 worth going to and I for one would happily set up shop out there. To an extent, I'm hoping the random ore changes in Shiva will make it viable to head out to low sec, for the chance at the odd Gneiss rock or two etc.)
|
|
Buggsi
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 11:37:00 -
[731]
Originally by: Marcus Aurelius
Originally by: Buggsi Why not just make it a prerequisite, you MUST be in a corp to own a POS. So any other CORP can declare war on you.
It already is, you can only anchor pos for your corp, not for yourself. Members of an npc corp dont get the role that aloows anchoring of stuff for their corp, hence NPC corp members dont get to play with pos.
//end
<---Im with stupid.
|
Buggsi
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 11:37:00 -
[732]
Originally by: Marcus Aurelius
Originally by: Buggsi Why not just make it a prerequisite, you MUST be in a corp to own a POS. So any other CORP can declare war on you.
It already is, you can only anchor pos for your corp, not for yourself. Members of an npc corp dont get the role that aloows anchoring of stuff for their corp, hence NPC corp members dont get to play with pos.
//end
<---Im with stupid.
|
Sosona
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 12:29:00 -
[733]
Originally by: Discorporation GG in shooting own your own argument..
PoS are high-end toys, their defenses and the forcefield that keeps them invulnerable for a time (whilst under attack) as well as your ability to semi-time how long it takes before it leaves reinforced state is all the evidence we need to claim that they're meant as bases that can be destroyed. Their very gameplay aspects proves this, no need for ccp to come out and say "HAY GUYS U CAN SHOOT AT THESE THINGS, K?"..
So, being that they are able to make a profit, and that they're combat-related, having them 100% safe is completely contrary to their purpose. Since you already stated that your presence in an NPC corp would make em 100% safe (since you can't be wardecced), you argued for NOT having them in 0.5+ space.
again, gg :)
I dont see the difference to a apoc stripmining away in 1.0. It is the same kind of safety, it doesnt have restrictions in mounting offensive or defensive modules or using them at all - the difference to 0.0 or 0.4 is merely the risk vs. reward - you make much less ISK per hour with this previously high-end toy. While you can more or less easily gank a frig or industrial in 1.0 and get its loot, it is nearly impossible to do the same with a battleship. Exactly the same like it would be for POS if they could be owned by a NPC corp member.
So i dont see at all how i argued against my own case.
Beside this - it was already discussed that empirespace POS shouldnt/wouldnt be able to use all different modules for example like offensive ones or refinery or labslots. |
Sosona
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 12:29:00 -
[734]
Originally by: Discorporation GG in shooting own your own argument..
PoS are high-end toys, their defenses and the forcefield that keeps them invulnerable for a time (whilst under attack) as well as your ability to semi-time how long it takes before it leaves reinforced state is all the evidence we need to claim that they're meant as bases that can be destroyed. Their very gameplay aspects proves this, no need for ccp to come out and say "HAY GUYS U CAN SHOOT AT THESE THINGS, K?"..
So, being that they are able to make a profit, and that they're combat-related, having them 100% safe is completely contrary to their purpose. Since you already stated that your presence in an NPC corp would make em 100% safe (since you can't be wardecced), you argued for NOT having them in 0.5+ space.
again, gg :)
I dont see the difference to a apoc stripmining away in 1.0. It is the same kind of safety, it doesnt have restrictions in mounting offensive or defensive modules or using them at all - the difference to 0.0 or 0.4 is merely the risk vs. reward - you make much less ISK per hour with this previously high-end toy. While you can more or less easily gank a frig or industrial in 1.0 and get its loot, it is nearly impossible to do the same with a battleship. Exactly the same like it would be for POS if they could be owned by a NPC corp member.
So i dont see at all how i argued against my own case.
Beside this - it was already discussed that empirespace POS shouldnt/wouldnt be able to use all different modules for example like offensive ones or refinery or labslots. |
Sosona
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 12:32:00 -
[735]
Originally by: Marcus Aurelius It already is, you can only anchor pos for your corp, not for yourself. Members of an npc corp dont get the role that aloows anchoring of stuff for their corp, hence NPC corp members dont get to play with pos.
//end
If that would be the final way how POS are introduced into eve, then my personal case would indeed be ended as it means no POS without severe risk. |
Sosona
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 12:32:00 -
[736]
Originally by: Marcus Aurelius It already is, you can only anchor pos for your corp, not for yourself. Members of an npc corp dont get the role that aloows anchoring of stuff for their corp, hence NPC corp members dont get to play with pos.
//end
If that would be the final way how POS are introduced into eve, then my personal case would indeed be ended as it means no POS without severe risk. |
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 12:40:00 -
[737]
1. POS are not "player houses". 2. POS are not a toy for NPC corps. (NPC corps already have (indestructible) NPC owned stations. Ha!) 3. There is no need to allow POS in 0.5+. Restricting them to 0.4 and below does NOT exclude anyone from owning a POS. Anyone willing to own/operate a POS is implicitly willing to operate in 0.4 down. Any players who feel they are being excluded by this policy should not be allowed to operate a POS as they clearly do not understand the role of, or risks inherent in, owning a POS.
|
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 12:40:00 -
[738]
1. POS are not "player houses". 2. POS are not a toy for NPC corps. (NPC corps already have (indestructible) NPC owned stations. Ha!) 3. There is no need to allow POS in 0.5+. Restricting them to 0.4 and below does NOT exclude anyone from owning a POS. Anyone willing to own/operate a POS is implicitly willing to operate in 0.4 down. Any players who feel they are being excluded by this policy should not be allowed to operate a POS as they clearly do not understand the role of, or risks inherent in, owning a POS.
|
Valentine Keen
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 13:29:00 -
[739]
Originally by: DeFood 1. POS are not "player houses". 2. POS are not a toy for NPC corps. (NPC corps already have (indestructible) NPC owned stations. Ha!) 3. There is no need to allow POS in 0.5+. Restricting them to 0.4 and below does NOT exclude anyone from owning a POS. Anyone willing to own/operate a POS is implicitly willing to operate in 0.4 down. Any players who feel they are being excluded by this policy should not be allowed to operate a POS as they clearly do not understand the role of, or risks inherent in, owning a POS.
YOUR definition of its role anyway.
As I've said before, there would be risks with ownership in 0.5+ and not all functions of POS make them only beneficial in low sec space.
By all means they should be of limited use in 0.5 and above, but I still don't understand any real reason that anything other than Risk vs Reward should govern these, as with any other items owned by players.
|
Valentine Keen
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 13:29:00 -
[740]
Originally by: DeFood 1. POS are not "player houses". 2. POS are not a toy for NPC corps. (NPC corps already have (indestructible) NPC owned stations. Ha!) 3. There is no need to allow POS in 0.5+. Restricting them to 0.4 and below does NOT exclude anyone from owning a POS. Anyone willing to own/operate a POS is implicitly willing to operate in 0.4 down. Any players who feel they are being excluded by this policy should not be allowed to operate a POS as they clearly do not understand the role of, or risks inherent in, owning a POS.
YOUR definition of its role anyway.
As I've said before, there would be risks with ownership in 0.5+ and not all functions of POS make them only beneficial in low sec space.
By all means they should be of limited use in 0.5 and above, but I still don't understand any real reason that anything other than Risk vs Reward should govern these, as with any other items owned by players.
|
|
drunkenmaster
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 14:51:00 -
[741]
Originally by: Sosona
Originally by: Marcus Aurelius It already is, you can only anchor pos for your corp, not for yourself. Members of an npc corp dont get the role that aloows anchoring of stuff for their corp, hence NPC corp members dont get to play with pos.
//end
If that would be the final way how POS are introduced into eve, then my personal case would indeed be ended as it means no POS without severe risk.
So, leaving the NPC corp is now 'severe risk'?
Whatever next? .
|
drunkenmaster
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 14:51:00 -
[742]
Originally by: Sosona
Originally by: Marcus Aurelius It already is, you can only anchor pos for your corp, not for yourself. Members of an npc corp dont get the role that aloows anchoring of stuff for their corp, hence NPC corp members dont get to play with pos.
//end
If that would be the final way how POS are introduced into eve, then my personal case would indeed be ended as it means no POS without severe risk.
So, leaving the NPC corp is now 'severe risk'?
Whatever next? .
|
Sosona
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 15:33:00 -
[743]
Originally by: drunkenmaster So, leaving the NPC corp is now 'severe risk'?
Whatever next?
Try to read and understand the whole sentence i wrote and even in context of the topic of this thread |
Sosona
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 15:33:00 -
[744]
Originally by: drunkenmaster So, leaving the NPC corp is now 'severe risk'?
Whatever next?
Try to read and understand the whole sentence i wrote and even in context of the topic of this thread |
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 15:35:00 -
[745]
I read it the same way as DM, maybe you should re-word it? ______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots. They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 15:35:00 -
[746]
I read it the same way as DM, maybe you should re-word it? ______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots. They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 15:47:00 -
[747]
Quote: I read it the same way as DM, maybe you should re-word it?
That's because you two are...
Ah, never mind, I just got back from being banned... ------------------------------------------------ "for piece sakes!" |
Bhaal
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 15:47:00 -
[748]
Quote: I read it the same way as DM, maybe you should re-word it?
That's because you two are...
Ah, never mind, I just got back from being banned... ------------------------------------------------ "for piece sakes!" |
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 15:52:00 -
[749]
Originally by: Bhaal
Quote: I read it the same way as DM, maybe you should re-word it?
That's because you two are...
Ah, never mind, I just got back from being banned...
Are what? If you haven't got the guts to speak your mind, don't post.
Someone ban him again please? ______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots. They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
Avon
|
Posted - 2004.10.19 15:52:00 -
[750]
Originally by: Bhaal
Quote: I read it the same way as DM, maybe you should re-word it?
That's because you two are...
Ah, never mind, I just got back from being banned...
Are what? If you haven't got the guts to speak your mind, don't post.
Someone ban him again please? ______________________________________________
Never argue with idiots. They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |