Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
243
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 21:32:00 -
[1] - Quote
This feature request grew out of a Twitter discussion started by Cherenadine Harper and driven in collaborations with several current and potential CSMs (Ali Aras, Mike Azariah, Sugar Kyle) as well as feedback from several regular EVE blogosphere and Twitter participants. Now IGÇÖd like to open up discussion to the whole EVE community.
In short, I believe (as I think many do) that POS towers left to rot, unfueled around a moon, are a blight on New Eden and should be ripe for salvaging since their owners have not seen fit to defend them. I use the term salvage very intentionally. I believe that these items are space junk and thus the original owner has more or less given up title to them.
In writing my post and through comments and conversation on Twitter, I have moderated my original approach (which was: GÇ£Have Hacking V? POS offline? ItGÇÖs yours!GÇ¥) in the interest of moving the conversation forward productively and addressing the concerns of those who live in different sorts of space and may have differing opinions.
The primary realistic argument to my original premise was that RL sometimes bites and you canGÇÖt get to your POS to refuel it, despite your best intentions. The other argument (especially in highsec), which to me holds little water, is GÇ£I stuck a bunch of unfueled POS up for contingenciesGÇ¥. While smart, this is lame and IMO you should lose your unfueled POS for being lazy and cheap. A few other objections revolved around GÇ£just take itGÇ¥ being weak game play.
So with that said, here is my proposal. I understand that CCP will likely shriek and run yelling obscenities about POS code, but no ask, no get. Also at worst it may inform the discussion around the future of structures designed to replace POS.
- A new status be created for POS: Standby.
- Online, Anchoring and Reinforced modes remain unchanged from current.
- If POS fuel runs out (including charters in highsec), the POS switches from Online to Standby, rather than from Online to Anchored/Offline as today. The POS must be at full shields in order to enter Standby mode. Otherwise it drops into Reinforced instead.
- In most ways, Standby is very much like Reinforced. Like Reinforced, Standby mode is fueled by Strontium Clathrates. The shields will slowly drop to 25% over the course of 48 hours. The major difference is that the stront will be consumed at a far slower rate, leading to Standby lasting 28 days (assuming a full stront bay), and consuming stront at an even rate that entire time. Like Reinforced, Standby is shown with an in-space timer and status. [Side note: To me 28 days is ridiculously long GÇô I think a week is far more reasonable. But IGÇÖm trying to be accommodating here.]
- If the POS is refueled while in Standby, the POS returns to Online mode over the course of 24 hours.
- If the POS is shot while in Standby, it obeys current rules for going into Reinforced. This means that within the first 48 hours (as the shield winds down to 25%) it must be shot several times, thereafter one shell should do the trick. Obviously this also means that the stront consumption accelerates to rules dictated by Reinforced status.
- Once Standby mode ends, the tower goes offline to Anchored status. At this point the tower officially changes status from property to salvage, in game terms. ItGÇÖs basically a white wreck. Anyone can take a shot at stealing it.
- Once in Anchored but unpowered status, the structure may be hacked. Hacking should use the standard hacking modules and skills. Difficulty of hacking rises with size and faction, with a small basic tower being relatively easy, and a large pirate faction tower being very tough.
- Once hacked, the tower must be removed by someone with appropriate Anchoring skills (Anchoring 3 (small), 4 (medium) or 5 (large)).
I believe that this approach solves several ends in a fair and balanced way. It gives an incentive to remove proven dead towers GÇô and defines that as more than 4 weeks unfueled. It gives work to a new class of potentially low-skilled character GÇô POS salvager, creating new game play. It doesnGÇÖt waste the time of potential salvagers because the POS has an in-space timer showing when it will be salvageable. It cleans up space, leading to better performance. It potentially reduces POS cost by putting more on the market. And it does this while giving lazy POS owners a full month to refuel their station, and in fact provides them another tool against attack, since any tower in Standby obviously is stronted, so no reason to bother with a stront check.
BONUS SUGGESTION: I think there is an opportunity for a new ship here GÇô or better yet (thanks to Coffee Rocks for the suggestion), a repurposing of the currently-useless Primae. Specifically, the ship should be designed to hold a POS tower and potentially a bit more loot, plus have bonuses to space and hacking in order to take down and grab POS towers efficiently. This would be (and the Primae is) an ORE ship leveraging the same skill tree.
Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary |
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
243
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 21:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
Reserved. Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary |
ChYph3r
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
128
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 21:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
I have agreed with Sugar and Rhavas on this. It seems I maybe the only one that does. On the blog posts it seems everyone is against this. I do not understand why.
Want to find all the podcasts around EVE Online visit http://evepodcasts.com @chyph3r-á on Twitter
|
Bane Nucleus
Sky Fighters Sky Syndicate
1344
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 21:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
Admittedly, i haven't read all those articles yet, but I do have one quick concern. What about placeholder POS's? They are offline but on standby in case someone wants to invade and has to make room for their pos. This may apply mainly to wormhole space, but I figured I would raise this.
Other than that possible issue, I like the idea behind it. No trolling please |
Tarsas Phage
Freight Club
273
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:01:00 -
[5] - Quote
So in highsec, I presume your "standby" mode would require a wardec in order to shoot it? |
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
245
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:05:00 -
[6] - Quote
Bane Nucleus wrote:Admittedly, i haven't read all those articles yet, but I do have one quick concern. What about placeholder POS's? They are offline but on standby in case someone wants to invade and has to make room for their pos. This may apply mainly to wormhole space, but I figured I would raise this.
Other than that possible issue, I like the idea behind it.
Hi Bane - SSC, you will be unsurprised to learn, has full moon coverage in our home system. That means a bunch of placeholder POS. I do not speak for SSC management when I say this, but IMO, we should have to fuel those things at least once a month. and keep them stronted. I think most WH alliances can afford it if they can afford to POS every moon.
But in return for that concession to cost, I want us to be able to steal every POS that's not nailed down in the chain every night.
I think it's a fair trade. Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary |
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
245
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:06:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tarsas Phage wrote:So in highsec, I presume your "standby" mode would require a wardec in order to shoot it?
Yep, in Standby, all normal rules would apply. You'd still need a wardec.
However, the minute it drops out of Standby and into Anchored, it is "white" salvage. No wardec, no flashy, first person to hack and grab it gets it. Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary |
Daoden
The Scope Gallente Federation
22
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:07:00 -
[8] - Quote
So how will this effect people anchoring a POS to avoid another person taking the spot on the moon but leaving it offline? As for the hacking part, would this be legal to any one or would it require a war dec? How long would the hacking take? Would you hack just the tower or would you have to hack each individual module to take it? Would you become suspect while doing this in high sec? What happens if someone puts fuel in and tries to online while you are trying to hack?
I demand answers. Also I can agree with the idea to some degree as long as every aspect is looked at +1 |
Tarsas Phage
Freight Club
273
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:15:00 -
[9] - Quote
Rhavas wrote:Tarsas Phage wrote:So in highsec, I presume your "standby" mode would require a wardec in order to shoot it? Yep, in Standby, all normal rules would apply. You'd still need a wardec. However, the minute it drops out of Standby and into Anchored, it is "white" salvage. No wardec, no flashy, first person to hack and grab it gets it.
Well, that's reassuring at least. Too many of the "offline POS" related ideas want "push button, receive moon slot" simplicity...
Regarding your proposal, it just seems too tedious overall. If I find a derelict tower on a moon I want, owned by a obviously dead/inactive corp, I'd rather just issue a dec and get me and some friends to shoot it in Oracles for a few hours and be done with it rather than play a 28 day game of status transitions.
I'd also rather see the tower have to be destroyed, in order to maintain the destruction/production cycle of Eve.
As an alternative, maybe a tower that goes offline could lose 1/2 or 2/3 of its HP? It seems that most people don't want to deal with the time sink of shooting a tower (for example, even I would rather find something else to do than solo a large caldari) |
Nathalie LaPorte
Republic University Minmatar Republic
241
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:16:00 -
[10] - Quote
Rhavas wrote:Bane Nucleus wrote:Admittedly, i haven't read all those articles yet, but I do have one quick concern. What about placeholder POS's? They are offline but on standby in case someone wants to invade and has to make room for their pos. This may apply mainly to wormhole space, but I figured I would raise this.
Other than that possible issue, I like the idea behind it. Hi Bane - SSC, you will be unsurprised to learn, has full moon coverage in our home system. That means a bunch of placeholder POS. I do not speak for SSC management when I say this, but IMO, we should have to fuel those things at least once a month. and keep them stronted. I think most WH alliances can afford it if they can afford to POS every moon. But in return for that concession to cost, I want us to be able to steal every POS that's not nailed down in the chain every night. I think it's a fair trade.
I think overall this is a great idea..I'm wondering if the stront consumed by this would be enough to dramatically change the cost of stront on the markets?
|
|
Sugar Kyle
Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder
521
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:29:00 -
[11] - Quote
A lot of the conversation covers what are good ways to cover this. I do not think that we have to settle with one way. I'd love multiple approaches to the situation considering the existence of POS in each space is a bit different.
However, placeholder POS iritate me. Turn it on. If you want the spot, fuel it. Low Sec Lifestyle : An Eve Online Blog Candidate for CSM9 |
Rendiff
Funk Soul Brothers Bloodline.
65
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:31:00 -
[12] - Quote
My god, it's beautiful. This is the single best suggestion for dealing with offline POS I've ever heard, |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1239
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:31:00 -
[13] - Quote
Tarsas Phage wrote:
Well, that's reassuring at least. Too many of the "offline POS" related ideas want "push button, receive moon slot" simplicity...
if left to wind down in standby mode on its own it does not require a war dec and anyone can hack and scoop. hacking should at least make u go suspect or something. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Stavblest
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:34:00 -
[14] - Quote
I think that this idea has promise. I hope that this thread is brought to the attention of the wormhole community and game designers. |
Nathalie LaPorte
Republic University Minmatar Republic
241
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:35:00 -
[15] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Tarsas Phage wrote:
Well, that's reassuring at least. Too many of the "offline POS" related ideas want "push button, receive moon slot" simplicity...
if left to wind down in standby mode on its own it does not require a war dec and anyone can hack and scoop. hacking should at least make u go suspect or something.
I think it would be more interesting to let multiple people try to hack it at once; may not be easy to code however?
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1239
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:36:00 -
[16] - Quote
and way more interesting than that for ppl to fight over it EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Arthur Aihaken
Arsenite
3165
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:39:00 -
[17] - Quote
I'm going to offer a simple counter-proposal:
1. When a POS runs out of either fuel blocks or charters, it goes into reinforced mode if there are Strontium Clathrates available. 2. Otherwise, the POS and any modules immediately go offline, are unanchored and become available for salvaging. This incurs a suspect (but not criminal) flag and does not require a WarDec.
I appreciate that the OP wants to include a 28-day respite, but there is already so much abuse that abandoned POS have become a blight in EVE (regardless of the type of space) - and seriously hinder new player and corporation development.
The above mechanic ensures an automatic and expedient removal of these floating junkyards and instead turns them into profitable salvage for the keen observer. It also eliminates the ability to abuse the "placeholder" mechanic, one that affords corporations the ability to run boosting links from within a non-fueled POS as well as provide safe haven for ships. This also introduces a new warfare mechanic in the form of being able to implement a blockade to "starve out" a POS by preventing refueling. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Sugar Kyle
Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder
521
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:58:00 -
[18] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:I'm going to offer a simple counter-proposal:
1. When a POS runs out of either fuel blocks or charters, it goes into reinforced mode if there are Strontium Clathrates available. 2. Otherwise, the POS and any modules immediately go offline, are unanchored and become available for salvaging. This incurs a suspect (but not criminal) flag and does not require a WarDec.
I appreciate that the OP wants to include a 28-day respite, but there is already so much abuse that abandoned POS have become a blight in EVE (regardless of the type of space) - and seriously hinder new player and corporation development.
The above mechanic ensures an automatic and expedient removal of these floating junkyards and instead turns them into profitable salvage for the keen observer. It also eliminates the ability to abuse the "placeholder" mechanic, one that affords corporations the ability to run boosting links from within a non-fueled POS as well as provide safe haven for ships. This also introduces a new warfare mechanic in the form of being able to implement a blockade to "starve out" a POS by preventing refueling.
In the blog comments and twitter we have been playing with a lot of back and forth when it comes to when the POS can be hacked with these proposals. There is a wide range of reasons that POS go offline. While take it because it is there is appealing is it going to be productive? Or are people going to be frustrated because they got the flu, went to a wedding, or had a week long power outage because of flooding? A POS is a large investment and a large project for many. That is one of the many things we are trying to consider in this crowd sourced proposal.
Low Sec Lifestyle : An Eve Online Blog Candidate for CSM9 |
Ali Aras
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
664
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 23:01:00 -
[19] - Quote
I love most of this, but one nit to pick:
Rhavas wrote:
If the POS is refueled while in Standby, the POS returns to Online mode over the course of 24 hours. This is IMO a catastrophic regression from the present day. Right now, if you mess up and forget to fuel your POS, you have to pray that nobody finds it before you get back to it, because an offline POS has exposed incredibly valuable loot pi+¦atas (that is, your CHA/SMA or silos). Come to think of it, this applies to almost any tower but a bare staging stick: you're probably maintaining a POS as space-infrastructure, and that's probably got some valuable stuff on it.
Unless, of course, you're envisioning Standby mode including the POS shield, which IMO would *also* be a bad idea-- after all, then one could "fuel" a POS with Strontium Clathrates as a cheapskate mode, and one's valuable assets would be more protected than they are now against fuel mishaps.
I'd rather see fueling a Standby POS act the same as onlining it-- for whatever the online time is, the shield isn't up, then it springs to life at the end. http://warp-to-sun.tumblr.com -- my blog |
kermity
Unholy Knights of Cthulhu Test Alliance Please Ignore
46
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 23:01:00 -
[20] - Quote
Sugar Kyle wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:I'm going to offer a simple counter-proposal:
1. When a POS runs out of either fuel blocks or charters, it goes into reinforced mode if there are Strontium Clathrates available. 2. Otherwise, the POS and any modules immediately go offline, are unanchored and become available for salvaging. This incurs a suspect (but not criminal) flag and does not require a WarDec.
I appreciate that the OP wants to include a 28-day respite, but there is already so much abuse that abandoned POS have become a blight in EVE (regardless of the type of space) - and seriously hinder new player and corporation development.
The above mechanic ensures an automatic and expedient removal of these floating junkyards and instead turns them into profitable salvage for the keen observer. It also eliminates the ability to abuse the "placeholder" mechanic, one that affords corporations the ability to run boosting links from within a non-fueled POS as well as provide safe haven for ships. This also introduces a new warfare mechanic in the form of being able to implement a blockade to "starve out" a POS by preventing refueling. In the blog comments and twitter we have been playing with a lot of back and forth when it comes to when the POS can be hacked with these proposals. There is a wide range of reasons that POS go offline. While take it because it is there is appealing is it going to be productive? Or are people going to be frustrated because they got the flu, went to a wedding, or had a week long power outage because of flooding? A POS is a large investment and a large project for many. That is one of the many things we are trying to consider in this crowd sourced proposal.
That is what his stront mechanic was for, if you are gone from eve for a month or more and no one else you know can fuel the POS it serves to real purpose. |
|
Daoden
The Scope Gallente Federation
22
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 23:34:00 -
[21] - Quote
kermity wrote:That is what his stront mechanic was for, if you are gone from eve for a month or more and no one else you know can fuel the POS it serves to real purpose. Or you could tear to POS down for a month. It shouldn't be hard to fuel a POS. If your "going away" for a month make sure you have a friend's alt with rights to fuel it, put extra fuel in corp hanger array and all hell have to do is click and drag to fuel your POS. |
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
250
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 23:39:00 -
[22] - Quote
Daoden wrote:So how will this effect people anchoring a POS to avoid another person taking the spot on the moon but leaving it offline? If it never comes online, it can be hacked/stolen as soon as current anchoring timers allow. If it is fueled but unused, it stays like today.
Daoden wrote:As for the hacking part, would this be legal to any one or would it require a war dec? No war dec to hack. By that time it has waited a month!
Daoden wrote:How long would the hacking take? Would you hack just the tower or would you have to hack each individual module to take it? Both of these are largely up to the game designers. In my mind this is no different than can hacking - a matter of minutes. You get the tower, you get everything would be my preference. Based on some anecdotal research (see Cherenadine's post link in the OP) I don't think there will often be much to take.
Daoden wrote:Would you become suspect while doing this in high sec? My original thought? No. But I could live with a standard 15-minute suspect timer.
Daoden wrote:What happens if someone puts fuel in and tries to online while you are trying to hack? Highly improbable (given the short timer I stipulate above) but possible. My gut check says that when the hacking starts it locks the tower so it can't be fueled, then unlocks if the hack fails.
Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary |
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
250
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 23:44:00 -
[23] - Quote
Tarsas Phage wrote:Too many of the "offline POS" related ideas want "push button, receive moon slot" simplicity...
Regarding your proposal, it just seems too tedious overall. If I find a derelict tower on a moon I want, owned by a obviously dead/inactive corp, I'd rather just issue a dec and get me and some friends to shoot it in Oracles for a few hours and be done with it rather than play a 28 day game of status transitions.
I'd also rather see the tower have to be destroyed, in order to maintain the destruction/production cycle of Eve.
As an alternative, maybe a tower that goes offline could lose 1/2 or 2/3 of its HP? It seems that most people don't want to deal with the time sink of shooting a tower (for example, even I would rather find something else to do than solo a large caldari) Point by point:
- "Just shoot it" works most of the time in highsec and theoretically in sov null. It works much less in low, NPC null, and especially wormhole space where you get locked out of your exits before the stupid thing comes out of all its timers and HP. See my post in the OP for more detail.
- I think we the players could benefit from more theft rather than destruction.
- I would be totally fine with an HP reduction as well - thus the auto-drain to 25% shield. But I'd be willing to take it further if the designers thought it made sense.
Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary |
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
250
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 23:47:00 -
[24] - Quote
Nathalie LaPorte wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:Tarsas Phage wrote:
Well, that's reassuring at least. Too many of the "offline POS" related ideas want "push button, receive moon slot" simplicity...
if left to wind down in standby mode on its own it does not require a war dec and anyone can hack and scoop. hacking should at least make u go suspect or something. I think it would be more interesting to let multiple people try to hack it at once; may not be easy to code however? As mentioned above, I could live with a 15-minute suspect timer like stealing from a can. It could add entertainment value to highsec attempts and would be mostly irrelevant everywhere else. Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary |
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
250
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 23:56:00 -
[25] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:I'm going to offer a simple counter-proposal:
1. When a POS runs out of either fuel blocks or charters, it goes into reinforced mode if there are Strontium Clathrates available. 2. Otherwise, the POS and any modules immediately go offline, are unanchored and become available for salvaging. This incurs a suspect (but not criminal) flag and does not require a WarDec.
I appreciate that the OP wants to include a 28-day respite, but there is already so much abuse that abandoned POS have become a blight in EVE (regardless of the type of space) - and seriously hinder new player and corporation development.
The above mechanic ensures an automatic and expedient removal of these floating junkyards and instead turns them into profitable salvage for the keen observer. It also eliminates the ability to abuse the "placeholder" mechanic, one that affords corporations the ability to run boosting links from within a non-fueled POS as well as provide safe haven for ships. This also introduces a new warfare mechanic in the form of being able to implement a blockade to "starve out" a POS by preventing refueling.
I actually don't want the respite, but even in my posts on my blog it became rapidly clear that it would not have a majority of support (which CCP will be looking for) without it. So, as long as the timer starts with the fuel ending instead of with the hack, fine, I can deal with it.
Also I LOVE the blockade idea. What an awesome tactic. Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary |
Arthur Aihaken
Arsenite
3167
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 00:11:00 -
[26] - Quote
Sugar Kyle wrote:There is a wide range of reasons that POS go offline. While take it because it is there is appealing is it going to be productive? Or are people going to be frustrated because they got the flu, went to a wedding, or had a week long power outage because of flooding? A POS is a large investment and a large project for many. That is one of the many things we are trying to consider in this crowd sourced proposal. If as you say it's a large investment for a group, then an unforeseen even that effects one or more of the members shouldn't preclude the others from being able to refuel the POSGǪ I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Nathalie LaPorte
Republic University Minmatar Republic
241
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 01:17:00 -
[27] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:and way more interesting than that for ppl to fight over it
Yes, another timer at the end of which there's a fight, that's definitely interesting and new. ~_~
Quote:edit- plus, when i leave my wrecks unabandoned in a belt or site, if anyone tries to take from them they go suspect whether i care about the wrecks or not.
A month later? Nope. That said, this is a minor point, the main thing is that the proposal happens in some form. |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1375
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 02:56:00 -
[28] - Quote
Hey Rhavas,
Other than what Ali pointed out about the 24 hour Standby to Online mode, I think this idea has a ton of merit and would definitely help to solve the issue of POS litter all over New Eden. I'll take some time to read the blogs and other discussions, but this is a good idea overall.
+1 CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 My Blog: http://casualcapsuleer.wordpress.com | No-Local News Writer/Editor |
Rhavas
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
253
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 02:57:00 -
[29] - Quote
Ali Aras wrote:I love most of this, but one nit to pick: Rhavas wrote:
If the POS is refueled while in Standby, the POS returns to Online mode over the course of 24 hours. This is IMO a catastrophic regression from the present day. Right now, if you mess up and forget to fuel your POS, you have to pray that nobody finds it before you get back to it, because an offline POS has exposed incredibly valuable loot pi+¦atas (that is, your CHA/SMA or silos). Come to think of it, this applies to almost any tower but a bare staging stick: you're probably maintaining a POS as space-infrastructure, and that's probably got some valuable stuff on it. Unless, of course, you're envisioning Standby mode including the POS shield, which IMO would *also* be a bad idea-- after all, then one could "fuel" a POS with Strontium Clathrates as a cheapskate mode, and one's valuable assets would be more protected than they are now against fuel mishaps. I'd rather see fueling a Standby POS act the same as onlining it-- for whatever the online time is, the shield isn't up, then it springs to life at the end.
I actually agree with you here, now that you've explained it. My personal experience is almost entirely with dead sticks, that's the norm for abandoned in w-space. But I get where you're coming from.
I've updated Post #2 to ask this question in more detail. Thanks Ali!
Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary |
Hesod Adee
Kiwis In Space
303
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 03:02:00 -
[30] - Quote
If a player doesn't care enough to fuel their POS, it should be removed. Making it profitable for other players scoop and sell it is one option. So I support this suggestion.
Bane Nucleus wrote:Admittedly, i haven't read all those articles yet, but I do have one quick concern. What about placeholder POS's? They are offline but on standby in case someone wants to invade and has to make room for their pos. This may apply mainly to wormhole space, but I figured I would raise this.
Other than that possible issue, I like the idea behind it. High sec offline placeholder POS's are the biggest problem caused by an inactive POS. They take up the limited number of moons, even when the POS owner does not have a current subscription*. Forcing anyone who wants a high sec POS to wardec them and then spend hours shooting the POS. Often being AFK except, if they aren't using lasers, to press the button to resume shooting after a reload.
*I've got a corpmate who removed a POS owned by a corp with 1 member. That member did not have a portrait, meaning he has not logged onto that character since Incarna was released.
If players want to run a placeholder POS, they should online it. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |