Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 52 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
Omega Flames
Forever Winter The Kingdom of Heaven
61
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 20:01:00 -
[1141] - Quote
Sojobo Otaku wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:I'd be interested to know about future application of the "API will lie to you" precedent.
Just think of the possibilities to make you have to check everything in-game. A skill to make your market orders api more accurate ... This feature would be completely useless if the API didn't lie. I do however think the size should probably be bigger in the cargohold. If the API didn't lie though then POS owners would instanly know someone is stealing from them and thus the feature would be a total waste of time. /me detects a bullshitter somewhere...oh its that sojobo guy! the one who tries telling people the API would instantly make these syphoons useless when in reality the corp assets api has a 6 hour cache timer and someone would have to check that api data and even if you automatically checked every 6 hours you still need someone to be awake and able to go to the pos to remove the syphoon. I have a life so even with the ability to know that my pos is being stolen from there is a 16 hour window (us real world people call it sleep and a job) that I literally can NOT get on eve to do a damn thing about a syphoon. At least if someone was killing my pos my stront would give me a realistic chance to tear down/gather a defense force. <Munnkeh> i'm gonna use that excuse if i ever kill someone. "look, if you keep meeting ppl, it's bound to happen eventually" http://i.imgur.com/76pQ9.jpg |
TimNeilson
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
8
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 20:46:00 -
[1142] - Quote
Vyktor Abyss wrote:Arrendis wrote:Vyktor Abyss wrote:Fact is the API tool is useful for helping people do stuff out of game with the tools designed by players. These tools should NOT give an in game advantage, which is what some player designed 'syphon alert' system would do if POS syphoning appeared via the API.
And the fact is that the API's purpose is to give accurate, useful information. If it shouldn't be giving certain information, the correct response is to not give out that information, not to give out inaccurate information. If you're giving players a tool and saying 'you can trust this', and then you make it lie, you're only demonstrating that your players can trust neither your tool, nor you. No because you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. It is still a useful indicator, just not guaranteed to be a 100% accurate figure *if* you get you POS syphoned. If you want to know your EXACT silo statuses every hour - check in game.
Except there's no good justification for why your poses would lie to you in the first place. And like other people have said, there's a 6 hour cache on pos status updates anyway, so the only way you would know "immediately" would be if the siphoner was unlucky and managed to place his siphon shortly before the end of that 6 hour window. Combine this with people having other things to do rather than sit in front of a computer keeping track of their poses all day for a marginal decrease in how much they'll be penalized by these things, and you get a ****** mechanic that also drags down a good one, namely the API. |
Omega Flames
Forever Winter The Kingdom of Heaven
61
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 20:46:00 -
[1143] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Lessons learned
GÇóShooting at stationary structures is boring
GÇóWaking up every morning and having to clean up the mess made while you were asleep is boring
GùªSee: station ping-pong pre-sov, repairing station services. Having to do something tedious every day before you can actually play the game is not cool
GÇóMaking something tedious will not stop players doing it if it's very clearly the best option. They'll do it, and they'll hate it
GùªSee: everything involving starbases. From this Dev Blog. Apparently they have forgotten the lessons learned. quoting just to make a dev read this again! <Munnkeh> i'm gonna use that excuse if i ever kill someone. "look, if you keep meeting ppl, it's bound to happen eventually" http://i.imgur.com/76pQ9.jpg |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
1461
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 21:54:00 -
[1144] - Quote
Holy cocks, i forgot all about that Greyscale quote. Nice grab. Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal |
Ereshgikal
Pigs and Sows
18
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 22:17:00 -
[1145] - Quote
Herr Esiq wrote:It would be tedious if i see my sihphon units removed constantly..
Interesting point. Since the siphon is linked to a person, I do hope it is accessible through the persons asset API, thus making it easier for the siphon owner to check amount of goodies in it. |
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
473
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 22:21:00 -
[1146] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Holy cocks, i forgot all about that Greyscale quote. Nice grab. 21 Jun 2011, never forgive, never forget. You've got to remember that these are just simple miners. These are people of the land. The common clay of New Eden. You know... morons. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4894
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 22:46:00 -
[1147] - Quote
Ereshgikal wrote:Herr Esiq wrote:It would be tedious if i see my sihphon units removed constantly.. Interesting point. Since the siphon is linked to a person, I do hope it is accessible through the persons asset API, thus making it easier for the siphon owner to check amount of goodies in it. Nah it should lie to you. Go check the siphon to see what is in it or if it has been destroyed. There are no goons. The goons' 0.0 dream is over.
"Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action." ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
349
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 23:30:00 -
[1148] - Quote
Fix Lag wrote:Stop misspelling siphons.
http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/syphon |
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
349
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 23:51:00 -
[1149] - Quote
TimNeilson wrote:Vyktor Abyss wrote:
No because you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. It is still a useful indicator, just not guaranteed to be a 100% accurate figure *if* you get you POS syphoned. If you want to know your EXACT silo statuses every hour - check in game.
Except there's no good justification for why your poses would lie to you in the first place. And like other people have said, there's a 6 hour cache on pos status updates anyway, so the only way you would know "immediately" would be if the siphoner was unlucky and managed to place his siphon shortly before the end of that 6 hour window. Combine this with people having other things to do rather than sit in front of a computer keeping track of their poses all day for a marginal decrease in how much they'll be penalized by these things, and you get a ****** mechanic that also drags down a good one, namely the API.
A much better argument, but actually there is good justification why your POS silos would wrongly report their levels to you - because they are being tampered with by the syphons.
You seem to think that we are entitled to POS silo information inherantly, and I'd challange that belief and say that actually we operated for years without it before it was included in the API, so why don't you actually justify why now it is so essential?
Sure its 'nice' to see this info while at work or wherever when you cant log into Eve but are "sitting in front of a computer keeping track of your poses all day for a marginal" improvement in their POS management efficiency... but is it really necessary or essential information? IMHO no. |
TimNeilson
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
10
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 00:07:00 -
[1150] - Quote
Vyktor Abyss wrote:TimNeilson wrote:Vyktor Abyss wrote:
No because you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. It is still a useful indicator, just not guaranteed to be a 100% accurate figure *if* you get you POS syphoned. If you want to know your EXACT silo statuses every hour - check in game.
Except there's no good justification for why your poses would lie to you in the first place. And like other people have said, there's a 6 hour cache on pos status updates anyway, so the only way you would know "immediately" would be if the siphoner was unlucky and managed to place his siphon shortly before the end of that 6 hour window. Combine this with people having other things to do rather than sit in front of a computer keeping track of their poses all day for a marginal decrease in how much they'll be penalized by these things, and you get a ****** mechanic that also drags down a good one, namely the API. A much better argument, but actually there is good justification why your POS silos would wrongly report their levels to you - because they are being tampered with by the syphons. You seem to think that we are entitled to POS silo information inherantly, and I'd challange that belief and say that actually we operated for years without it before it was included in the API, so why don't you actually justify why now it is so essential? Sure its 'nice' to see this info while at work or wherever when you cant log into Eve but are "sitting in front of a computer keeping track of your poses all day for a marginal" improvement in their POS management efficiency... but is it really necessary or essential information? IMHO no.
If the information is provided, it should be accurate. I would rather have the information not be provided than have unreliable information, even though that's still a giant pain in the ass, because it accomplishes the exact same thing of "I have to go check on this **** ingame to find out the correct values." That said, either way this is a step back in terms of the API and ease of use for a feature that's already a pretty big pain in the butt to begin with if you're involved in it in any way. |
|
Miner Hottie
Polaris Rising Gentlemen's Agreement
35
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 00:13:00 -
[1151] - Quote
Herr Esiq wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:On the matter of the API, yes diddling the API so it reports false information, what could be wrong with that? I guess those people using Evemon, Eve Fitting Tool, Pyfa they are all lazy as well I suppose, bad API feeds wouldn't bother them would it? And you can"t see the difference between a 'personal character monitor' and a 'automated alliance tool that monotors a complete empire like HAL 9000'. You really cant can you?
Hmm, let me think about that for a moment. Yeah, no quite sure Mittens doesn't have such a tool, I mean I am sure Digi would LOVE such a tool in his never ending quest to find spies. It's all about how hot my mining lasers get. |
Miner Hottie
Polaris Rising Gentlemen's Agreement
35
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 00:32:00 -
[1152] - Quote
Vyktor Abyss wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:Vyktor Abyss wrote:So many stupids talking about the API "lying to them".
It is absolutely moronic to think someone performing a type of in game covert sabotage against your corporation IN GAME should actually be flagged up nice and easily OUT OF GAME via API just to make your lives easier.
With whines like that it is no wonder everyone is trolling you - The question is: Is there really any reason Corp structures etc need to even be included in the API in the first place? (It is done to make life easier for POS folks, not to do half the maintenance work for them).
Tools already exist for POS fuelling via the in game calander, notifications are sent via mail in game for fuel, or when it is attacked, even when some random puts a tower up in your Sov etc... I'd argue for a much harsher Eve without even the in game help for POS operators - and that players who can't be bothered to even log in to manage and maintain their Eve POS empires don't deserve those empires in the first place.
Right now CCP panders completely for the lazy community - adding any 'syphon warning' via the API would be a massive mistake. And so many eve online subscribers demonstrating there incredible absence of knowledge thinking POSs are easy and AFK, that POS monkeys are lazy and are pandered to by CCP. CSM actions and consequently the Devs were told here what those lazy POS monkeys' thought about that sort of attitude "I am a small portion of the eve community" note the 143 pages of comment on why CCP not fixing POS interface and mechanics and security was not good. If CCP was to be considered to be pandering to anyone truly lazy, it would be cloaky AFKers. I mean, how little effort do they put into their gameplay? Think further, how ironic would it be if someone combined an AFK cloaky with these siphons to steal moon goo? How could that not be described as lazy gameplay? On the matter of the API, yes diddling the API so it reports false information, what could be wrong with that? I guess those people using Evemon, Eve Fitting Tool, Pyfa they are all lazy as well I suppose, bad API feeds wouldn't bother them would it? You are being obtuse. GÇó It is accepted that a moon mining POS is AFK income, as in it accrues materials while you are offline - so you are wrong. GÇó You assume others have no knowledge of POS managment because they disagree with your whines - you are wrong (I have ran a POS network of 15 POS solo and know the issues and pain of doing so). GÇó You are crying about Eve Fitting tool other API tools/data that have nothing to do with syphons and their (lack of) impact on the API - it just shows how obtuse you are being. GÇó You are apparently delibrately confusing Two Steps suggestions (dead horse POS rework) with supporting your own agenda about syphons - Just because POS owners (myself included) badly want a rework of the mechanics in a threadnaught about POS mechanics doesn't mean they agree with you about syphons. GÇó AFK Cloak whine - Stop talking rubbish about AFK cloaking laziness, you are being stupid and should go post in the relevant thread about that. Fact is the API tool is useful for helping people do stuff out of game with the tools designed by players. These tools should NOT give an in game advantage, which is what some player designed 'syphon alert' system would do if POS syphoning appeared via the API.
Not obtuse at all. You just don't like me knocking your points over.
*the income from POS is only earned, collected, when you get it to market, the POS accumulates materials you can sell over time. However, like any ship you undock, you must assume it can be lost at any time unless it is in a station. Before you whine at me about that, I am an accountant in real life and moon goo in a POS would not be classified as income earned on accounting grounds. As the risk and reward of the moon goo has not substantially passed to the customer. *I linked a thread in which CCP devs didn't seem to get it, why should you? You stated you thought we were lazy. Now you say you know the pain of running POS. Which is it? Can't have it both ways. *No, just a broad example, obtuse means open angle by the way. Marketters, station industrialists, researchers all rely on API tools, none of them are getting there ring burnt by these changes, why not? Why shouldn't the API lie to them as well? *POS mechanics, interface and security all drive the way we interact with POS and contribute to the burn out people suffer from these things. Which CCP just decided wasn't enough without adding these unbalanced devices. *AFK Cloaky I have no issue with the mechanic itself, I do it myself at times. What I am quite certain is that it IS NOT ACTIVE GAME PLAY you moron. It is the most completely lazy game mode ever, which you seem to think I engage in lazy gameplay when managing my POS's, which you then is an issue and painful. Very confusing. It's all about how hot my mining lasers get. |
Sgt Ocker
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 00:58:00 -
[1153] - Quote
Vyktor Abyss wrote:A much better argument, but actually there is good justification why your POS silos would wrongly report their levels to you - because they are being tampered with by the syphons. so why don't you actually justify why now it is so essential? . Your justification is in your own post, pos siphons were not around years ago, the API was not around years ago. Now we have both. It is not the pos siphon that is manipulating the numbers returned from the API, it is CCP manipulating the API.
How about if CCP decided alliance G***----- was to powerful so to help get rid of them, whenever 1 of their pilots enters a fight the damage his ship takes will be manipulated to show less than it actually is and the damage his weapons does will be reduced. Extreme example but basically the same thing is happening with pos's. The information you will receive is manipulated to show as wrong.
I like to think the people I pay money to are at least honest in their business dealings. I'm not talking about ingame that would be naive, everyone is a thief that's why we have 3rd party sites and applications, to be able to see who may be an awoxer or who is a corp thief, is the guy who applied to my corp the alt of a corp we are at war with, etc. CCP has openly admitted to manipulating the API information, what's to stop them doing it in other areas. Is it being done in other areas?
**I am aware these are extreme examples BUT the whole eve economy is based on you being smarter than the guy trying to rip you off, if ccp is helping the guy who is ripping you off it really unbalances things.
The API updates every 6 hours, let it give accurate information so it can be acted on. If I'm at work and can't actually login to the game I still want to be able to trust the information I am getting from the API so I can possible call someone in to act on it.
|
Johnny Marzetti
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
791
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 01:45:00 -
[1154] - Quote
:frogsiren: Serious Question for Devs :frogsiren:
Does the siphon have to be within 50 km of the POS in order to function, or just to be deployed? In other words, can I deploy a siphon 50.1 km from a POS and have a non-functioning, but still fully deployed siphon? Such that, to the casual observer looking on dscan or just showing up on grid, it appears that a siphon is already acting upon that POS?
Thanks! |
Khoul Ay'd
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
117
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 01:48:00 -
[1155] - Quote
Ereshgikal wrote:Interesting point. Since the siphon is linked to a person, I do hope it is accessible through the persons asset API, thus making it easier for the siphon owner to check amount of goodies in it.
I hope if they do this, and I hope they make it so the API lies and always says its full of R64. The things we do today we must live with forever.... Think about it |
Benjamin Hamburg
SnaiLs aNd FroGs Verge of Collapse
35
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 01:49:00 -
[1156] - Quote
Sure shooting a 50k hp struct is tedious.
Tell me now about farming red crosses a whole day. |
Sariton Xavian
Mercado Mercator Partners and Associates
4
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 02:06:00 -
[1157] - Quote
The general concept that individuals can profit from disrupting large entities outside empire space is a good one.
An implementation where anyone can inexpensively spam their way to ruining the days of POS operators is a bad one.
People are up in arms about the API lying to them and arguing about that, but I think that argument of tool integrity/POS management drudgery vs gameplay imperative has missed the real issue: that the apparent asynchronous gameplay objective of siphons as announced isnGÇÖt quite right.
Everyone complains about AFK and asynch gameplay overshadowing real interaction... so rather than try to spice up the dull passive (plus boring administration) play of POSGÇÖs with another piece of fundamentally asynch gameplay, why not come at it from the angle of it encouraging interactive gameplay events instead?
Make the siphon a bit larger and more expensive, and provide a benefit to the POS operator if they respond to it quickly GÇô for example by allowing the incapacitation, scooping and melting of the siphon (and associated recovery of its contents). The point is POS operators shouldnGÇÖt purely dread the threat of being siphoned, there should be a potential positive to them logging in to respond to one quickly. The API then wouldnGÇÖt need to lie, because the GOAL is that POS owners mobilise quickly.
Placing a siphon then becomes a small scale incitement event available to individuals or small groups. A more fluid, faster turn around, accessible alternative to re-enforcing a tower. If the POS owner is lazy, doesnGÇÖt care, isnGÇÖt paying attention, then the individual/small group can profit. If the owner is on the ball, they lose nothing and maybe gain a bit GÇô and heaven forbid a skirmish might even occur. With a design along these lines larger groups might use siphon placement as a baiting, testing or buildup exercise which once again adds to the experience rather than detracting. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4898
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 03:18:00 -
[1158] - Quote
Sariton Xavian wrote:The general concept that individuals can profit from disrupting large entities outside empire space is a good one.
An implementation where anyone can inexpensively spam their way to ruining the days of POS operators is a bad one.
People are up in arms about the API lying to them and arguing about that, but I think that argument of tool integrity/POS management drudgery vs gameplay imperative has missed the real issue: that the apparent asynchronous gameplay objective of siphons as announced isnGÇÖt quite right.
Everyone complains about AFK and asynch gameplay overshadowing real interaction... so rather than try to spice up the dull passive (plus boring administration) play of POSGÇÖs with another piece of fundamentally asynch gameplay, why not come at it from the angle of it encouraging interactive gameplay events instead?
Make the siphon a bit larger and more expensive, and provide a benefit to the POS operator if they respond to it quickly GÇô for example by allowing the incapacitation, scooping and melting of the siphon (and associated recovery of its contents). The point is POS operators shouldnGÇÖt purely dread the threat of being siphoned, there should be a potential positive to them logging in to respond to one quickly. The API then wouldnGÇÖt need to lie, because the GOAL is that POS owners mobilise quickly.
Placing a siphon then becomes a small scale incitement event available to individuals or small groups. A more fluid, faster turn around, accessible alternative to re-enforcing a tower. If the POS owner is lazy, doesnGÇÖt care, isnGÇÖt paying attention, then the individual/small group can profit. If the owner is on the ball, they lose nothing and maybe gain a bit GÇô and heaven forbid a skirmish might even occur. With a design along these lines larger groups might use siphon placement as a baiting, testing or buildup exercise which once again adds to the experience rather than detracting. But I liked the punishing people who aren't around
There are no goons. The goons' 0.0 dream is over.
"Progodlegend said the goal of N3 is to destroy Goonswarm Federation, but in reality NCdot is in Fountain due to the fact it is virtually the last place there is action." ~NC., Fountain 2013 |
Kropotkin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 03:23:00 -
[1159] - Quote
Yeep wrote:Why is this a deployable not a highslot module that sends a notification?
Quote:As I see it at last it was my lot to plant the harpoon of algebraic topology into the body of the whale of algebraic geometry. -- Solomon Lefschetz |
Omega Flames
Forever Winter The Kingdom of Heaven
64
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 03:23:00 -
[1160] - Quote
Sariton Xavian wrote:The general concept that individuals can profit from disrupting large entities outside empire space is a good one.
An implementation where anyone can inexpensively spam their way to ruining the days of POS operators is a bad one.
People are up in arms about the API lying to them and arguing about that, but I think that argument of tool integrity/POS management drudgery vs gameplay imperative has missed the real issue: that the apparent asynchronous gameplay objective of siphons as announced isnGÇÖt quite right.
Everyone complains about AFK and asynch gameplay overshadowing real interaction... so rather than try to spice up the dull passive (plus boring administration) play of POSGÇÖs with another piece of fundamentally asynch gameplay, why not come at it from the angle of it encouraging interactive gameplay events instead?
Make the siphon a bit larger and more expensive, and provide a benefit to the POS operator if they respond to it quickly GÇô for example by allowing the incapacitation, scooping and melting of the siphon (and associated recovery of its contents). The point is POS operators shouldnGÇÖt purely dread the threat of being siphoned, there should be a potential positive to them logging in to respond to one quickly. The API then wouldnGÇÖt need to lie, because the GOAL is that POS owners mobilise quickly.
Placing a siphon then becomes a small scale incitement event available to individuals or small groups. A more fluid, faster turn around, accessible alternative to re-enforcing a tower. If the POS owner is lazy, doesnGÇÖt care, isnGÇÖt paying attention, then the individual/small group can profit. If the owner is on the ball, they lose nothing and maybe gain a bit GÇô and heaven forbid a skirmish might even occur. With a design along these lines larger groups might use siphon placement as a baiting, testing or buildup exercise which once again adds to the experience rather than detracting. the mere fact there is something stealing from our pos will be enough to drive the pos owners online...ccp is wanting some sort of useful theft device thou and that demands that the pos owners dont find out about the siphons so there will be something to actually steal in the siphon. basically this kind of mechanic will never hurt the major null alliances as much as it will hurt the small low sec corps, its very nature is broken. <Munnkeh> i'm gonna use that excuse if i ever kill someone. "look, if you keep meeting ppl, it's bound to happen eventually" http://i.imgur.com/76pQ9.jpg |
|
Sgt Ocker
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 03:38:00 -
[1161] - Quote
I'd like to see a pole on this;
Will pos siphons affect major alliances 1 Positively 2 Negatively 3 Both 4 Neither |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
1462
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 04:00:00 -
[1162] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:I'd like to see a pole on this;
Will pos siphons affect major alliances 1 Positively 2 Negatively 3 Both 4 Neither
I would like to see your pole. Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal |
Sariton Xavian
Mercado Mercator Partners and Associates
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 06:36:00 -
[1163] - Quote
Omega Flames wrote: the mere fact there is something stealing from our pos will be enough to drive the pos owners online...ccp is wanting some sort of useful theft device thou and that demands that the pos owners dont find out about the siphons so there will be something to actually steal in the siphon. basically this kind of mechanic will never hurt the major null alliances as much as it will hurt the small low sec corps, its very nature is broken.
The way I look at it, the entire framework that causes null alliances and coalitions to form is broken, and is unlikely to be fixed by any single bandaid. Most things that take a stab at it will hurt small lowsec corps more, and addressing that problem is a much bigger question than a little feature like this one. However, I think a feature along these lines could add overall interest to the entire POS mining equilibrium without needing to poke lowsec punitively in the eye. In particular if the investment into the siphon is tuned at the right level (which might include a fuel cost rather than an increase in the ticket price of its materials), it will make the value equation of hitting lower value moons shakier and drive attention towards the higher value moons which are routinely held by the larger alliances. For it to work, there needs to be enough room in the financial value of the moon mining stream to motivate individuals (or corps) to risk X to try and siphon Y from it so with the right numbers it could be deliberately tuned to be undesirable in lowsec.
As for the simple fact of someone stealing from a POS being enough to drive the owner online, yes I agree it will. But they will resent it because it is a lose/lose scenario for them where the most positive outcome is for nobody to ever drop a siphon on them in the first place - something the POS owner can't even realistically control. When a major stakeholder's ideal situation is for other people to simply not choose to use a new feature, that seems like a fundamentally poor addition to the game. The justification of needing to break an unhealthy status quo isnGÇÖt sufficient excuse for such a design choice imo.
Change the spin of the feature a bit so that there is potentially something in it for the stakeholder (the POS owner) that can be positive, something that gives them a sense of agency and involvement, and that substantially changes the value of the feature.
Obviously there still needs to be enough incentive of potential profit for people to be motivated to drop siphons, but I think there's enough value in moon mining streams to make that work. |
Sgt Ocker
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 07:37:00 -
[1164] - Quote
Sariton Xavian wrote:Omega Flames wrote: the mere fact there is something stealing from our pos will be enough to drive the pos owners online...ccp is wanting some sort of useful theft device thou and that demands that the pos owners dont find out about the siphons so there will be something to actually steal in the siphon. basically this kind of mechanic will never hurt the major null alliances as much as it will hurt the small low sec corps, its very nature is broken.
The way I look at it, the entire framework that causes null alliances and coalitions to form is broken, and is unlikely to be fixed by any single bandaid. Most things that take a stab at it will hurt small lowsec corps more, and addressing that problem is a much bigger question than a little feature like this one. However, I think a feature along these lines could add overall interest to the entire POS mining equilibrium without needing to poke lowsec punitively in the eye. In particular if the investment into the siphon is tuned at the right level (which might include a fuel cost rather than an increase in the ticket price of its materials), it will make the value equation of hitting lower value moons shakier and drive attention towards the higher value moons which are routinely held by the larger alliances. For it to work, there needs to be enough room in the financial value of the moon mining stream to motivate individuals (or corps) to risk X to try and siphon Y from it so with the right numbers it could be deliberately tuned to be undesirable in lowsec. As for the simple fact of someone stealing from a POS being enough to drive the owner online, yes I agree it will. But they will resent it because it is a lose/lose scenario for them where the most positive outcome is for nobody to ever drop a siphon on them in the first place - something the POS owner can't even realistically control. When a major stakeholder's ideal situation is for other people to simply not choose to use a new feature, that seems like a fundamentally poor addition to the game. The justification of needing to break an unhealthy status quo isnGÇÖt sufficient excuse for such a design choice imo. Change the spin of the feature a bit so that there is potentially something in it for the stakeholder (the POS owner) that can be positive, something that gives them a sense of agency and involvement, and that substantially changes the value of the feature. Obviously there still needs to be enough incentive of potential profit for people to be motivated to drop siphons, but I think there's enough value in moon mining streams to make that work. 2 siphons shuts down a pos and even if the pos owner is online and destroys them is still going to suffer losses. With no way to recoup those losses what incentive is there for small operators to continue moon mining? It will be cheaper and involve less risk to keep dropping siphons than to reinforce a pos, the attacker gets to put the pos out of business with little to no risk, while the owner of the pos has little to no way of fighting back. Employing people to guard my pos's is not an option as there simply isn't enough profit in it. The simple proximity of lowsec moons is a really good indicator as to where the majority of these will be tested out (initially at least) Who's going to travel to nul and look for moons when there is such an abundance in lowsec. Nulsec involves running the gauntlet of SOV space to 1st get to where the moon mining operations are carried out, then you need to scan down the pos's, putting you at risk of being found by sov holders. Imo lowsec will be the primary target of these and the nul empires can sit back and laugh as their stake in moon mining grows more valuable due to lack of competition.
Could someone come up with some projected figures as to how much a siphon on an R64 moon would pay?? Are they a viable source of income or simply a griefing tool?
|
Sariton Xavian
Mercado Mercator Partners and Associates
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 08:13:00 -
[1165] - Quote
If the siphon is scoopable after incapacitation, and/or requires fuel to run that the POS owner can claim as their prize when they respond to being siphoned (and which also reduces the profitability of a siphoner when targeting lower value moons), then the POS owner can achieve a net profit from responding effectively to being siphoned at the expense of fire and forget siphoners. On average across the world of Eve some profit will be diverted away from POS owners, that is after all one of the goals. But by altering the risks taken by the siphoner and the accessibility of those outlays to the POS owner on response it creates a dynamic where the diligant of either side have a chance to be better off. A running cost for the siphoner also makes the otherwise more vulnerable moons less desirable to help direct the attention where its needed - high value moons. The logistics of going deep into nullsec are another piece of the puzzle - but at least its the right puzzle to be trying to solve.
The feature as published is busted. I'm saying the idea can be made to work in a useful way with some changes.
I'd also like to see some numbers. I don't have time atm to theorycraft a comparison of the different moon goos up and I'm sure there are many people in this thread with more experience than me at running moon mining operations who could do it more quickly and accurately. |
Kropotkin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 10:01:00 -
[1166] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:It's critical that the moment you set up the siphon, resources begin to be irrecoverably lost.
In fact, when t fills up, it should just jetcan the stuff and start filling up. Of course after 2 hours the jetcan goes poof. Remember the siphon could be emptied by anyone anyway. I don't like this. Unlimited unattended destruction is no better than unlimited unattended production. |
Omega Flames
Forever Winter The Kingdom of Heaven
64
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 10:42:00 -
[1167] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:[Could someone come up with some projected figures as to how much a siphon on an R64 moon would pay?? Are they a viable source of income or simply a griefing tool?
a dyspro moon makes 4,602,103.00 min or 4,989,997.00 max per hour at jita prices (thats before fuel costs as the siphon doesnt care how much isk we have to spend on blocks) so 1 siphon would steal 60/100 units and with a 20% loss thats 48 units per hour into the siphon (2,209,009.44 min or 2,395,198.56 max per hour). assuming a cost of 10 mil isk it would take 4.52 at min price or 4.17 at max price hours to turn a profit. so if the siphon went undetected for 25 hours (the time needed to fill the siphon with 1200 m3 of dyspro) it would make 55,225,236 min or 59,879,964 max (before the cost of the siphon) however it would cost the pos owner 69,031,545 min or 74,849,955 max (before the cost of fuel). a min of 45 mil or max of 49 mil isk in the first day of the siphon stealing aint too bad a haul for "afk" work (and yes that siphon is afk work). if the siphon was abandoned and its mats collected by the pos owner after 25 hours then the pos owner still lost 14 mil min or 15 mil max from the siphon. it takes only 18.1 at min price or 16.7 at max price hours to cost the pos owner as much in moon goo due to the 20% loss as it cost to deploy the siphon. so you only need a 17-18 hour window for the pos to go unchecked and you have for sure cost the pos owner just as much isk as the siphon is worth if you never went back to collect the stolen moon goo. <Munnkeh> i'm gonna use that excuse if i ever kill someone. "look, if you keep meeting ppl, it's bound to happen eventually" http://i.imgur.com/76pQ9.jpg |
Omega Flames
Forever Winter The Kingdom of Heaven
64
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 10:56:00 -
[1168] - Quote
Kropotkin wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:It's critical that the moment you set up the siphon, resources begin to be irrecoverably lost.
In fact, when t fills up, it should just jetcan the stuff and start filling up. Of course after 2 hours the jetcan goes poof. Remember the siphon could be emptied by anyone anyway. I don't like this. Unlimited unattended destruction is no better than unlimited unattended production. except "unlimited unattended production" does NOT exist in eve at all. A pos must be kept fuel'd, silo's emptied/refilled, and out of reinforced to make moon goo production. Some of the really tight moon reaction setups have to be attended to at least every 36 hours already to maintain the pos's. Most reaction pos's don't just run for a month in between maintenance, we already have to get on alot to handle our pos's however a random griefer isnt going to know how often we have to login to know whether or not its worth while to put up a siphon but we would now have to login multiple times a day to prevent massive %'s of revenue being lost. <Munnkeh> i'm gonna use that excuse if i ever kill someone. "look, if you keep meeting ppl, it's bound to happen eventually" http://i.imgur.com/76pQ9.jpg |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1136
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 11:19:00 -
[1169] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Lessons learned
GÇóShooting at stationary structures is boring
GÇóWaking up every morning and having to clean up the mess made while you were asleep is boring
GùªSee: station ping-pong pre-sov, repairing station services. Having to do something tedious every day before you can actually play the game is not cool
GÇóMaking something tedious will not stop players doing it if it's very clearly the best option. They'll do it, and they'll hate it
GùªSee: everything involving starbases We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Banner was used for this Post |
Prester Tom
Death By Design
5
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 11:23:00 -
[1170] - Quote
Anyone else seeing an exciting new use for these SoE ships? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 52 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |