EVE Search - [Proposal to all Alliances] Interstellar Starbase Syndicate

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

Corporations and Alliances Summit

[Proposal to all Alliances] Interstellar Starbase Syndicate

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.09 12:52:00 - [1] Proposal to all Alliances The Interstellar Starbase Syndicate is a non-profit organisation with the mission of creating an economical and political framework for independent Starbase owners to work in. As such the ISS differs from existing Alliances in that the ISS have no territorial or military ambitions. The Eve-galaxy is immense and the task of colonising it is beyond the power of most of the existing political organisations. With 250.000 moons for the taking, there are more than enough for everybody. Owning and operating a Starbase is highly specialised work, very timeconsuming, and it requires skills in trade and logistics. The people who do it are builders and entrepreneurs in their field, and theyFre rarely interested in military endeavours like conquest and fighting. Our proposal to the Alliances is to enter a cooperation with independent Starbase owners organized in the ISS to our mutual financial benefit. The proposition we put before the Alliances is this - we offer to provide you with: 1/ A steady supply of cheap T2 building blocks (raws, single reactions, advances reactions and in some cases T2 items) locally in your space. The cost reductions stem from the savings in logistics and middlemen by avoiding empire markets. This offer will gain importance with the coming patch and the introduction of Outpost stations and more T2 items 2/ Steady tax revenue to the Alliances of for example 15M ISK pr month pr. ISS POS in your territory (to be determined, moon quality etc should be taken into account) 3/ Ship Array Hangar facilities for changing modules in deep space and secure storage of reserve ships 4/ Hangar Facilities for secure storage of items and ammunition 5/ Access to deep space refining facilities { favorable terms to be negociated locally 6/ No logistical headaches linked to the above. While it is highly likely that you already possess these facilities in certain places, our cooperation would ensure the proliferation of these facilities in out-of-way places for your miners and fighters, and provide safe-havens in times of crisis and war. All interactions with Starbases in your territory will be handled either directly between the individual POS owners and the Alliance leadership, or through a ISS Regional Director tasked with overseeing your territory. In return we ask for this: a/ The right to claim sovereignty over the systems we operate in, in the name of the ISS, in order to get the important 50% fuel bonus. The ISS will only construct starbases after prior consent from the host-Alliance. For the Alliances, this ensures that the ISS will not construct starbases in solar systems the host-Alliance deem important from a strategic or financial point of view. b/ That our neutrality be respected and your Navy forces will protect our shipping as they protect the host-Alliance shipping. c/ That your Navy forces will provide aid in case of POS sieges by forces hostile to the host-Alliance. d/ The right for ISS members to conduct moon surveys in your territory. e/ That the host-Alliances sign a treaty with the ISS according to which they will declare war on any and all corporations who declare war on the ISS. This serves to protect the neutrality of ISS shipping in both empire and 0.0 space. Politically, our Starbases will operate loyally under the host-Alliance. This mean that they will not harbor and aid enemies of the host-Alliance. This goes for all ISS starbases in all territories. An ISS starbase will always be a safe-harbor exclusively for members of the host-Alliances and ISS personnel. We look forward to your comments and we hope the Alliance leaderships will allow us to contact them shortly.
Phoenicia	Posted - 2005.06.09 13:04:00 - [2] Whoa. That sounds like a good offer, but at a big price... Why do I get this flashback to a wrinkled old guy who wanted to build a "Grand Army of the Republic", and later asked "Are you threatening me, Master Jedi?". I&m a bit foggy on the whole sovereignty thing but doesn&t that basically give this ISS control over the region? ---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--- CCP deleted my sig pic cause it was 50 pixels too wide and all I got was this lousy text.
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.09 13:19:00 - [3] Originally by: Phoenicia Whoa. That sounds like a good offer, but at a big price... Why do I get this flashback to a wrinkled old guy who wanted to build a "Grand Army of the Republic", and later asked "Are you threatening me, Master Jedi?". I&m a bit foggy on the whole sovereignty thing but doesn&t that basically give this ISS control over the region? Glad you like it, and I not wrinkled :-) We believe that in order for something like this to work, all parties must gain something equally good. Are you an official representative of the Free Space Alliance?
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.09 13:24:00 - [4] Draft for a Interstellar Starbase Syndicate [ISS]charter/businessplan The overall objectives of the ISS are 1/ Allow members to attain the 50% reduced fuel expenditure bonus in claimed systems through membership of the ISS alliance structure and at the same time avoid being embroiled in recurrent Alliance wars. Explanation of the gamemechanics coming in the June content patch: In order to get the 50% reduction in POS fuel usage, a given corporation must be member of an alliance and the system must be unclaimed by npc organisations/states. This point therefore only applies to POSFs in 0.0 space. This provides enormous benefits to POS owners: less hauling, less costs 2/ Provide a recommended pricelist for minerals and T2 building blocks. This is to avoid that new/inexperienced POS owners undercut the market prices. The goal is that POS owners can make as much ISK from the chosen occupation as for example mission runners. In the long term, this will stabilise the supply of T2 building blocks and help the Eve economy expand in a constant and healthy manner 3/ Create an ISS Task Force. Many POS owners have no where to go when their assets come under attack from pirates. The ISS TF will consist of a small group of experienced PvPFers. They provide a service to ISS members in the form of timely, military assistance everywhere in the galaxy in case of a problematic POS siege. Members can freely chose to subscribe to this service on a monthly basis. The subscription fee would serve to pay mercenaries and /or equipment and ammunition for ISS TF personnel. It is relevant for both empire and 0.0 POSFs. Proposed subscription fee: 2 M ISK pr. POS pr month 4/ To avoid misunderstandings, all ISS member will have viewing right to the ISS accounts
James Lyrus	Posted - 2005.06.09 14:40:00 - [5] Speaking as a starbase operator myself, I'll be mentioning this to my corp when we next meet up. I think this could work. It does rely on their being a suitable symbiotic relationship between the syndicate, and the host alliances though.
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.09 15:12:00 - [6] Edited by: Count TaSessine on 09/06/2005 15:13:01 Originally by: James Lyrus Speaking as a starbase operator myself, I'll be mentioning this to my corp when we next meet up. I think this could work. It does rely on their being a suitable symbiotic relationship between the syndicate, and the host alliances though. Indeed, but as long as all involved parties make money off it, it will work.
Alex Tremayne	Posted - 2005.06.09 15:44:00 - [7] Originally by: James Lyrus Speaking as a starbase operator myself, I'll be mentioning this to my corp when we next meet up. I think this could work. It does rely on their being a suitable symbiotic relationship between the syndicate, and the host alliances though. Speaking as one of your corp members, this looks very promising. As you say though, it will require other alliances to see an advantage in having us present. Effectively what we're offering is, in deep 0.0, for the host alliance to be able to pop down to the corner shop, (local ISS system) for goods rather than going to the out of town shopping centre that is empire.
Mansut	Posted - 2005.06.09 16:15:00 - [8] If we can continue to also offer the 'basics' in 0.0 to people regardless if they are at war with each other or not and we are left alone to do our job, we should be able to accomplish what CCP has not...Help to populate 0.0 space. Applicant to: Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
The Enslaver	Posted - 2005.06.09 19:33:00 - [9] I don't think that you are offering 'host' alliances enough. Definately not enough for alliances to allow you full use of their space in this manner. -------- FireFoxx80: If you think you can do a better job, go find yourself a datacentre to host a box, get a copy of Visual Studio, and STFU.
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.09 20:18:00 - [10] Originally by: The Enslaver I don't think that you are offering 'host' alliances enough. Definately not enough for alliances to allow you full use of their space in this manner. Ok, we're talking: what do you think would be fair?

The Enslaver	Posted - 2005.06.09 21:19:00 - [11] A percentage of your profits from that area of space in addition to the above. 15m per month per POS and cheaper T2 materials is nothing, and the rest can all be privded by the alliance itself at near to no hassle as it is. Then you might possibly get corps/alliances that claim space to allow you to use it with sovereignty... Without sovereignty and you wouldn't have had that problem though... To lose something like that over a part of space that the alliance claims is a serious blow to well... Ego. -------- FireFoxx80: If you think you can do a better job, go find yourself a datacentre to host a box, get a copy of Visual Studio, and STFU.
General Killah	Posted - 2005.06.09 21:32:00 - [12] Foothold. That's the problem with this idea, it gives you a foothold everywhere. People are corrupt and should anyone ever decide they didn't like a specific alliance, you would have an enormous foothold in their space for an attack already. I would never allow it personally... --------------------------------- You didn't think Rome ever REALLY fell did you?
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.09 21:40:00 - [13] Originally by: The Enslaver A percentage of your profits from that area of space in addition to the above. 15m per month per POS and cheaper T2 materials is nothing, and the rest can all be privded by the alliance itself at near to no hassle as it is. Then you might possibly get corps/alliances that claim space to allow you to use it with sovereignty... Without sovereignty and you wouldn't have had that problem though... To lose something like that over a part of space that the alliance claims is a serious blow to well... Ego. A percentage is more fair to you, that's true, that way the moon quality and so on is accounted for. It is after all more reasonable to pay tax as a function of value instead of a fixed price. It wouldn't be too hard to work out a table listing what profit one could expect for a given moon setup and then calculate the tax rate from that. Keep it simple :-)
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.09 21:45:00 - [14] Originally by: General Killah Foothold. That's the problem with this idea, it gives you a foothold everywhere. People are corrupt and should anyone ever decide they didn't like a specific alliance, you would have an enormous foothold in their space for an attack already. I would never allow it personally... That's a point of view. But you fail to take into account that the Starbases would be off limits to non-Alliance members. But it looks like you're contemplating a whole-sale treachery from ISS stations in a given region... That is VERY unlikely to happen. Why would ISS starbase owners want to put their property, which is extremely valuable, at risk in a war? And once they'd done it one time, there would be no turning back to the old way, who would trust them?
ReaperOfSly	Posted - 2005.06.09 22:00:00 - [15] Originally by: Count TaSessine Originally by: General Killah Foothold. That's the problem with this idea, it gives you a foothold everywhere. People are corrupt and should anyone ever decide they didn't like a specific alliance, you would have an enormous foothold in their space for an attack already. I would never allow it personally... That's a point of view. But you fail to take into account that the Starbases would be off limits to non-Alliance members. But it looks like you're contemplating a whole-sale treachery from ISS stations in a given region... That is VERY unlikely to happen. Why would ISS starbase owners want to put their property, which is extremely valuable, at risk in a war? And once they'd done it one time, there would be no turning back to the old way, who would trust them? What value is a foothold if it is completely surrounded by alliance territory, and routes in and out of said foothold are guarded by the alliance? Wouldn't be very smart for ISS to suddenly turn on the host alliance would it? Seriously, there's nothing to worry about in that respect. ----------------------------------------------- I love work. Work fascinates me. I could sit and look at it for hours.
RaidenMagmus	Posted - 2005.06.10 07:42:00 - [16] Originally by: General Killah Foothold. That's the problem with this idea, it gives you a foothold everywhere. People are corrupt and should anyone ever decide they didn't like a specific alliance, you would have an enormous foothold in their space for an attack already. I would never allow it personally... While I hate the idea of an alliance that is unprepared.. I will say that the idea of betrayal of a outpost near an alliance could happen.. but it'd only happen if that alliance was dying. I suppose then.. there would be rules as to what would happen if a alliance dissolved, or if there was a war large enough to crush an alliance. These are all very interesting arguments. But really.. a large number of POS owners are not at all going to attack anyone other than pirates.. we are carebears.. agent runners, industrialists. No different than a trade federation.. only we are not stupid enough, or strong enough to have a army of any real strength to practically any alliance.
Zandramus	Posted - 2005.06.10 13:51:00 - [17] Well what your offering the said controllers of the territory in form of rent is not very conducive for them allowing you into their territory. When even a small corporation can make billions in a very short amount of time while operating in 0.0 a few million a month would not get you access to our space. There would have to be a considerable payment to allow these people access to space in form of rent , somewhere in the order of 50 to 100 m per week. That is the type of monitary concession that Military outfits would be looking for , Because they are the ones that will be keeping the unfriendlies out and away from you , they will be the ones risking ships. You will be the ones making money, that income needs to be paid to them in the form of rent for their services as landholder and traffic police. Frankly you need to look at both sides of the coin here, and I think you are only looking at one side of it which is how you would be able to make alot of money without any risk. Zandramus Parking Violations Officer Geminate Division S.A.S
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.10 14:44:00 - [18] Originally by: Zandramus Well what your offering the said controllers of the territory in form of rent is not very conducive for them allowing you into their territory. When even a small corporation can make billions in a very short amount of time while operating in 0.0 a few million a month would not get you access to our space. There would have to be a considerable payment to allow these people access to space in form of rent , somewhere in the order of 50 to 100 m per week. That is the type of monitary concession that Military outfits would be looking for , Because they are the ones that will be keeping the unfriendlies out and away from you , they will be the ones risking ships. You will be the ones making money, that income needs to be paid to them in the form of rent for their services as landholder and traffic police. Frankly you need to look at both sides of the coin here, and I think you are only looking at one side of it which is how you would be able to make alot of money without any risk. Yes, we're working on a system whereby we pay a percentage of the value of the moon we're exploiting, not a fixed amount. It has to be proportionate. To put it into perspective, one POS harvesting two semi-good minerals create profits in the vicinity of perhaps 50M pr. week, and with the fuel bonus, it'll be more, excluding losses etc. So, a percentage of this amount goes to the host-Alliances. With several POS operating in their area, this could easily be 50-100M pr. week.
Zandramus	Posted - 2005.06.10 15:11:00 - [19] Originally by: Count TaSessine Originally by: Zandramus Well what your offering the said controllers of the territory in form of rent is not very conducive for them allowing you into their territory. When even a small corporation can make billions in a very short amount of time while operating in 0.0 a few million a month would not get you access to our space. There would have to be a considerable payment to allow these people access to space in form of rent , somewhere in the order of 50 to 100 m per week. That is the type of monitary concession that Military outfits would be looking for , Because they are the ones that will be keeping the unfriendlies out and away from you , they will be the ones risking ships. You will be the ones making money, that income needs to be paid to them in the form of rent for their services as landholder and traffic police. Frankly you need to look at both sides of the coin here, and I think you are only looking at one side of it which is how you would be able to make alot of money without any risk. Yes, we're working on a system whereby we pay a percentage of the value of the moon we're exploiting, not a fixed amount. It has to be proportionate. To put it into perspective, one POS harvesting two semi-good minerals create profits in the vicinity of perhaps 50M pr. week, and with the fuel bonus, it'll be more, excluding losses etc. So, a percentage of this amount goes to the host-Alliances. With several POS operating in their area, this could easily be 50-100M pr. week. But you are only looking at the small picture here. Access to the space to set up the POS is one thing ther are many other money making opportunities available to teh Corporation once in 0.0 that you are not including. IE, access to 0.0 allowes Corp members NPC privliges, Mining rare ores, and Complexes that are located in the region controlled by the alliance or PVP organizations area. While the POS chuggs away making money exploiting said moon corp members of the pos owner are normally not just sitting around waiting to haul stuff back to empire and fuel to the pos. There are other money making things to do in 0.0 that would boost the income of a corp once there. Also being in 0.0 gives the corp access to reare ores, and icefields nearby that allows them to fuel their POS without having to haul fuel all the way from empire. There has to be a way to find this balance between the PVP corps and the Industrial corps without exposing the industrial corps to unwarrented PVP and still gove the PVP corps access to money for defending the space and making it safe for the Industry corporations. That said some PVP corps dont want total peace and generally will look for fights , while the industrial corps want the polar opposite. I dont know if there is a good solution here but clearly it is better to have both sides working together but both must also look at the other as an opportunity. Without the PVP side losing ships to PVP there would be nothing for the industrial side to sell them and without the industrial side paying rent the PVP side would not have any money to spend on ships. Zandramus Parking Violations Officer Geminate Division S.A.S
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.10 15:36:00 - [20] Originally by: Zandramus Originally by: Count TaSessine Originally by: Zandramus Well what your offering the said controllers of the territory in form of rent is not very conducive for them allowing you into their territory. When even a small corporation can make billions in a very short amount of time while operating in 0.0 a few million a month would not get you access to our space. There would have to be a considerable payment to allow these people access to space in form of rent, somewhere in the order of 50 to 100 m per week. That is the type of monitary concession that Military outfits would be looking for , Because they are the ones that will be keeping the unfriendlies out and away from you , they will be the ones risking ships. You will be the ones making money, that income needs to be paid to them in the form of rent for their services as landholder and traffic police. Frankly you need to look at both sides of the coin here, and I think you are only looking at one side of it which is how you would be able to make alot of money without any risk. Yes, we're working on a system whereby we pay a percentage of the value of the moon we're exploiting, not a fixed amount. It has to be proportionate. To put it into perspective, one POS harvesting two semi-good minerals create profits in the vicinity of perhaps 50M pr. week, and with the fuel bonus, it'll be more, excluding losses etc. So, a percentage of this amount goes to the host-Alliances. With several POS operating in their area, this could easily be 50-100M pr. week. But you are only looking at the small picture here. Access to the space to set up the POS is one thing ther are many other money making opportunities available to teh Corporation once in 0.0 that you are not including. IE, access to 0.0 allowes Corp members NPC privliges, Mining rare ores, and Complexes that are located in the region controlled by the alliance or PVP organizations area. While the POS chuggs away making money exploiting said moon corp members of the pos owner are normally not just sitting around waiting to haul stuff back to empire and fuel to the pos. There are other money making things to do in 0.0 that would boost the income of a corp once there. Also being in 0.0 gives the corp access to reare ores, and icefields nearby that allows them to fuel their POS without having to haul fuel all the way from empire. There has to be a way to find this balance between the PVP corps and the Industrial corps without exposing the industrial corps to unwarrented PVP and still gove the PVP corps access to money for defending the space and making it safe for the Industry corporations. That said some PVP corps dont want total peace and generally will look for fights , while the industrial corps want the polar opposite. I dont know if there is a good solution here but clearly it is better to have both sides working together but both must also look at the other as an opportunity. Without the PVP side losing ships to PVP there would be nothing for the industrial side to sell them and without the industrial side paying rent the PVP side would not have any money to spend on ships. You're so right that operating in 0.0 in itself is valuable... This would have to be taken into consideration as well, of course. And I admire your understanding of the symbiotic relationship that exist between PvP'er and industry, many people on both sides of the bar ignore this reality. Now, how would one put a pricetag on 0.0 privileges in general? I have to admit that for me personally, I would only use the POS privileges. I hate mining with a vengeance, but many people don't share my feelings on this, so they would obviously jump at the opportunity, as would NPC hunters, which means that we would have to find a way to somehow price it. But you also have to understand that running a POS in a full time job, in the sense that pratically all my eve-time goes towards running my starbases, and I know most other POS owners are in the same situation. Perhaps that's why most PvP'ers just don't run starbases, despite their obvious tactical advantages. Again, we're back at the symbiotic relationship. I suppose it would be impractical to simply interdict mining? Depends on how well the region is policed. Any suggestions?

General Killah	Posted - 2005.06.10 16:03:00 - [21] Originally by: Count TaSessine Originally by: General Killah Foothold. That's the problem with this idea, it gives you a foothold everywhere. People are corrupt and should anyone ever decide they didn't like a specific alliance, you would have an enormous foothold in their space for an attack already. I would never allow it personally... That's a point of view. But you fail to take into account that the Starbases would be off limits to non-Alliance members. But it looks like you're contemplating a whole-sale treachery from ISS stations in a given region... That is VERY unlikely to happen. Why would ISS starbase owners want to put their property, which is extremely valuable, at risk in a war? And once they'd done it one time, there would be no turning back to the old way, who would trust them? That also said, it could be an excuse to get a station up without being bothered(maybe a war was already planned?) I am not trying to be pessimistic because it's an awesome idea, I just don't think anyone would let you enter their space and start putting up stations, just don't see it happening for security reasons. Good luck in your endeaver though. --------------------------------- You didn't think Rome ever REALLY fell did you?
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.10 16:24:00 - [22] Originally by: General Killah Originally by: Count TaSessine Originally by: General Killah Foothold. That's the problem with this idea, it gives you a foothold everywhere. People are corrupt and should anyone ever decide they didn't like a specific alliance, you would have an enormous foothold in their space for an attack already. I would never allow it personally... That's a point of view. But you fail to take into account that the Starbases would be off limits to non-Alliance members. But it looks like you're contemplating a whole-sale treachery from ISS stations in a given region... That is VERY unlikely to happen. Why would ISS starbase owners want to put their property, which is extremely valuable, at risk in a war? And once they'd done it one time, there would be no turning back to the old way, who would trust them? That also said, it could be an excuse to get a station up without being bothered(maybe a war was already planned?) I am not trying to be pessimistic because it's an awesome idea, I just don't think anyone would let you enter their space and start putting up stations, just don't see it happening for security reasons. Good luck in your endeaver though. Thanks! PS. At this point, we're still 'only' talking starbases, as in POS's, not Outposts.
Temerlyn	Posted - 2005.06.11 06:44:00 - [23] The real thing i see here is an oportunity to dominate the Tech 2 component market. it's clearly obvious that each set of region according to the Pirates that visit them have only specific Moon mins. So to successfully be tec 2 component sufficient you would need access to every space, gurristas, Angel etc... So you set up pos throught eve getting all the mins you need and make all the tec 2 comps means you can out do anyone else. So the question you need to ask youself as an alliance. Do you want to do tech 2 comps yourself? or let some one else go through the hassle?
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.11 08:53:00 - [24] Originally by: Temerlyn The real thing i see here is an oportunity to dominate the Tech 2 component market. it's clearly obvious that each set of region according to the Pirates that visit them have only specific Moon mins. So to successfully be tec 2 component sufficient you would need access to every space, gurristas, Angel etc... So you set up pos throught eve getting all the mins you need and make all the tec 2 comps means you can out do anyone else. So the question you need to ask youself as an alliance. Do you want to do tech 2 comps yourself? or let some one else go through the hassle? You wildly underestimate the logistics and backing that that would entail. What you propose is not within anyones reach in Eve. What we're proposing is a more symbiotic relationship with the host-Alliances, whereby we would loyally complement their own activities. The ISS structure will be loose, in the sense that we won't attempt to control or create a supply chain of either fuel or building components, simply because we think it will be too timeconsuming and because it would demand an unrealistic committment and discipline from the members and the leadership.
Mjnari	Posted - 2005.06.12 07:17:00 - [25] Edited by: Mjnari on 12/06/2005 07:18:29 I have to say that I tip my hat to Count TaSessine for the pragmatic approach. The willingness to work with criticism instead of against it is certainly refreshing and also well matched with the interests he is attempting to front for, who no doubt prefer business over image. As to the existence of the niche he is attempting to fill, I believe his key point is stability. It has been made clear that Outposts in particular and POSs to a lesser extent are sizable undertakings, assets which, as argued in this thread, would be substantial losses to Alliances were they to fall into hostile hands. However, that can be played as a strength of this new alliance in addition to a weakness, specifically in light of the recent Xetic split/disintegration. Which would you rather have in control of a system, a single corp in your alliance (bonded by a corp<->alliance relationship) or a member corp of a neutral alliance (bonded by an alliance<->alliance relationship)? If you accept the premise that Outposts/POSs are unlikely to be spontaneously generated to fill carrying capacity (moon resources available) in Alliance space (whether through lack-of-interest/inability of the Alliance to leverage its smaller corps and/or lack of sufficiently large corps to deploy one solo), then revenue is going to waste and therefore Count TaSessine's offer holds merit. That's not even mentioning the added value of having POSs to buffer the deployment of hostile POSs in the system or of course the benefit of having an Outpost that otherwise wouldn't exist in the Alliance's neighborhood. All told, I think extending trust to a neutral party is a small price to pay for what's gained (assuming the Alliance doesn't have the industrial muscle/organization to do it themselves), especially if the ISS proves itself a good neighbor by making sure that only quality corps who respect the deals negotiated are allowed to fly its banner.
Christopher Scott	Posted - 2005.06.12 09:19:00 - [26] How about something more simple? Renting-out systems. You pay "rent" for a specific system that is being offered by an alliance, with the price of the rent is based on the resources in the system. As long as you pay rent, you can use any of the resources inside that system. Kind of like renting a home IRL.
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.12 10:14:00 - [27] Originally by: Christopher Scott How about something more simple? Renting-out systems. You pay "rent" for a specific system that is being offered by an alliance, with the price of the rent is based on the resources in the system. As long as you pay rent, you can use any of the resources inside that system. Kind of like renting a home IRL. That's good idea and it would solve some of the thornier issues about what/if we should pay for mining rights etc. It would push the ISS (or rather the member corporation) to really use of the system once its rented because of the presumably much higher tax, but that could be positive. Perhaps it could be a secondary model, next to the pure POS model. Smaller corporations, of which the ISS would have many, would probably not be interested in full scale system rental because they wouldn't be able to recoup the investment.
DarkMatter	Posted - 2005.06.13 15:19:00 - [28] I must say, this is an awesome I idea. I have been debating starting up my own POS, because I have been exposed to the day to day operation of one, and really enjoyed that aspect of EVE. I was surprised when talking to a lot of POS owners, many of them are individuals, or small groups of 3 or 4 players. These players could not afford the 50-100 million fixed weekly rental some have asked for, that's just absurd. The ISS would be the one paying the rental fee. The ISS would have to track each POS operator, and based on the minerals at the moon, ore in the system, makeup of corp (miners, npc'ers) would have to extract a proportionate rental fee. These fee's have to be customized per POS operator, as some will take more of the systems resources than others. You can't demand a blanket rental from all POS operators... The first alliance that steps up to the plate and goes for this will be remembered in EVE lore for finally populating 0.0 space. The militaristic alliances need to face facts they will never accept the industrial might required to do this within their own ranks, and 0.0 space will stay as it is, even with more entrances... I applaud this idea as I've never applauded one on these forums before. I'd certainly sign my corp up for it... A huge base of T2 materials could be had in this manner, effectively controlling the entire market. Great Idea! As long as the alliances feel they are making enough money, they will go for it. But the gouge mentallity has to be let go, or it won't work...
Count TaSessine	Posted - 2005.06.13 15:45:00 - [29] Originally by: DarkMatter I must say, this is an awesome I idea. I have been debating starting up my own POS, because I have been exposed to the day to day operation of one, and really enjoyed that aspect of EVE. I was surprised when talking to a lot of POS owners, many of them are individuals, or small groups of 3 or 4 players. These players could not afford the 50-100 million fixed weekly rental some have asked for, that's just absurd. The ISS would be the one paying the rental fee. The ISS would have to track each POS operator, and based on the minerals at the moon, ore in the system, makeup of corp (miners, npc'ers) would have to extract a proportionate rental fee. These fee's have to be customized per POS operator, as some will take more of the systems resources than others. You can't demand a blanket rental from all POS operators... The first alliance that steps up to the plate and goes for this will be remembered in EVE lore for finally populating 0.0 space. The militaristic alliances need to face facts they will never accept the industrial might required to do this within their own ranks, and 0.0 space will stay as it is, even with more entrances... I applaud this idea as I've never applauded one on these forums before. I'd certainly sign my corp up for it... A huge base of T2 materials could be had in this manner, effectively controlling the entire market. Great Idea! As long as the alliances feel they are making enough money, they will go for it. But the gouge mentallity has to be let go, or it won't work... Why, thank you! It's great that we're not the only ones who can see the potential in this project. Regarding the rental conditions, the problem obviously need a good deal of thought. Originally I didn't envision the ISS taking on this task, (KIS: keep it simple), but if we can find a solution with little admin procedures to it, I'm all for it.
DarkMatter	Posted - 2005.06.13 15:58:00 - [30] Quote: Regarding the rental conditions, the problem obviously need a good deal of thought. Originally I didn't envision the ISS taking on this task, (KIS: keep it simple), but if we can find a solution with little admin procedures to it, I'm all for it. If you leave it up to the individual corps to report their earnings, there will be many who cheat that system, and the alliance will not take kindly to that... I do not have the answer, and it would be a huge undertaking to police each corp...



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.