Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Dacryphile
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 18:01:00 -
[181] - Quote
+1 flogg |
Andy Landen
Exploring Eagles
87
|
Posted - 2013.01.20 23:32:00 -
[182] - Quote
The Pos should be modular capital ship-like structures, player owned, complete with cyno drive, and without limitations on where it can be. If 10 pos could be cyno'd to a system, they could really make a dynamic universe. The station fills the role of a stationary corp controlled base, while the pos is mobile and player controlled. The easiest part is making the pos player anchorable and controlled already.
The pos rework should be really easy: Just make the towers into new capital-type ships which do not have to have pilots in them and stay on grid when pilots sign out, and translate the pos arrays into fitable modules. |
Chaotic Mind
Rennfeuer Curatores Veritatis Alliance
21
|
Posted - 2013.01.24 11:34:00 -
[183] - Quote
The horse shall be flogged |
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY Tribal Conclave
355
|
Posted - 2013.01.24 14:43:00 -
[184] - Quote
Flogged the horse shall be. Please read this! > New POS system (Block Built) Please read this! > Refining and Reprocess Revamp |
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers R O G U E
183
|
Posted - 2013.01.24 15:08:00 -
[185] - Quote
flogging the horse more cause it seems to just be the thing to do thses days. |
evilliun
Exploring Eagles
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.24 21:43:00 -
[186] - Quote
Abso-floggin'-lutely. Beat the dead pile of rotten organic matter back to life again. Flog it until someone realizes that the small part of the community isn't as small as they would like to believe.
And, no, it won't be fixed if one complex, awkward pos system is replaced with another. Follow the Eve ship fitting model and make the pos work for the community so that we all want to use it. Make the pos relevant to Eve, useful to the players, and mobile. |
joshua mckayne
Laststar Industries Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 09:58:00 -
[187] - Quote
+1 flogging the dead horse |
Stegas Tyrano
GLU CANU Open Space Consultancy
202
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 15:23:00 -
[188] - Quote
The dead horse has long ago rotted and disintegrated into particles. These particles were then absorbed by plants such as grass, which were then eaten by yet another horse. This new horse has also died, and we are flogging this one.
+1....again...maybe... [PROPOSAL] INGAME ADVERTS FOR PLAYERS |
Cari Cullejen
Thukker Tribe Holdings Inc. Gathering Of Nomadic Explorers
18
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 06:02:00 -
[189] - Quote
This GOING to happen, we just need to bug CCP to make it happen faster! In love with CCP Sunset, and maybe-áCCP t0rfifrans :3 |
Thorian Crystal
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
7
|
Posted - 2013.02.07 18:13:00 -
[190] - Quote
Yes, please.
Problem is though, that if I need to make my own corp just to have a POS, it wouldn't be that easy after all. The POSes seem to be modular even now, just not interconnected modules. But I need my own corp... |
|
Omendor
Cult of the Fluffy Bunny
5
|
Posted - 2013.02.07 20:27:00 -
[191] - Quote
+1 |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
49
|
Posted - 2013.02.07 23:45:00 -
[192] - Quote
I like it a lot and for the role of a POS.....they should offer better quality services and faster then busy stations can offer. It always bothered me that you have instant and perfect refine at stations and that dedicated hard to fit, costly POS structures are slow and inefficient. The same logic should be applied to everything else industrial a POS does really, which make them something worth going for combat wise!
And please do not restrict to 0.0 only, give POS real pervasive role! |
Inspiration
Focused Radical Energy Engineering
49
|
Posted - 2013.02.07 23:47:00 -
[193] - Quote
Thorian Crystal wrote:Yes, please.
Problem is though, that if I need to make my own corp just to have a POS, it wouldn't be that easy after all. The POSes seem to be modular even now, just not interconnected modules. But I need my own corp...
In other words, the POSes are kind of not POSes at the moment but COSes (corporate owned stations), even though players own corps, but still. To have a real POS (player owned station) the station would have to be personal. After that you could still grant accesses to individual players and or corps and or standings etc...
Agreed, and it would also be nice to offer public services...for that however we might need to have the option for shields like stations and ships use...instead of a large bubble! |
Amyclas Amatin
EVE University Ivy League
3
|
Posted - 2013.02.08 02:56:00 -
[194] - Quote
As long as we get to burn or loot everything on POS destruction...
Indestructible outposts are something like a bad joke from a realism perspective. In EVE, everything player-made must be player-destroyable!
Otherwise, any plans to expand on POSes are most welcome. |
Andy Landen
Exploring Eagles
88
|
Posted - 2013.02.23 22:22:00 -
[195] - Quote
Anyone heard any commitment from CCP on fixing this THE WAY WE WANT? I have already let one subscription expire, and I am losing patience with the other two. I am sure many players have either crossed that bridge or are approaching it. We need a solid time/date commitment or it will continue to be put off indefinitely.. |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
1231
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 16:53:00 -
[196] - Quote
No new news that I've heard of. Basically, back in December CCP said "it's too hard to revamp".
I'm still kind of hopeful that we'll see some low-hanging fruit harvested for the summer expansion, otherwise I'm going to let half a dozen accounts lapse in disgust. It's not like there aren't (probably) simple things that could be done to address the glaring weaknesses and issues in the current system:
- Remove the need of granting the Factory Manager role to people in order for them to make use of the POS labs/arrays. Instead, allow us to grant usage of the labs based on the 14 "titles" in the Corp UI. That would mean that players could no longer cancel other players jobs easily and would make running a "research" division much easier. Which might improve the particulars of null-sec industry.
- Change how job cancellation works. If a job gets cancelled partway through, you should get as much progress as was made on the job within that time. In the case of BPO research, the number of ME/PE points accumulated by that point in time, rounded down. Plus a refund of any unspent per-hour fees. The main reason for this is to open the door for allowing player-owned towers to provide public research. If the customers are assured of at least getting partial credit on their jobs instead of all or nothing, then there's less potential for outright griefing and theft of the fees. Fees should be placed into an escrow and then paid out to the tower owner every N hours (whenever the job gains a new level of ME/PE or output).
- It should be possible to do copy jobs using alliance POS towers, have the copies delivered to the location of the BPO.
- Fix CHAs to allow containers to be fully used (withdrawing of contents, not just deposit boxes). They got the job halfway done last December, since we can now deposit into containers, how about fixing the other half?
- Add audit entries for corporate hangars / SMAs so you can see who took/deposited what.
- Fix CHAs to allow items to be repackaged.
- Add corporate tabs to the SMAs.
- Fix SMAs and T3 ship reconfiguration.
- Re-introduce the faction towers as BPC drops from exploration / loot / pirate faction stores. Make their recipes rely on taking an existing tower and then adding existing resources to it. Those resources needed should be a mix of moon-goo, PI products, gas mining, ores and salvage. Use it as a chance to slightly increase demand for the resources that nobody seems to want.
- Give us an XL and XXL tower size option, which can only be anchored in low/null. Fuel consumption / PG / CPU / etc should be 2x and 4x that of the existing large tower.
- Add smaller SMA, which is about 1/4 the existing SMA size and lighter on PG/CPU usage.
- Add smaller CHA that is competitive with the CAA on size / PG / CPU usage.
- Add larger CHA variants (4M m3 and 10M m3) which are competitive with the LSAA on size vs PG/CPU usage.
- Add a "personal CHA" where players can rent slots like lockers of a size about 25-50k m3/slot. If they don't pay every 30 days, it gets locked and only someone with roles can access the contents. Make it a limited number of slots such as 25 or 50 slots.
- Change towers so that they unanchor if not fueled, but give owners the option to mothball towers where they only consume 10% of the normal fuel blocks per hour (but still consume charters at full rate). If you want to keep a tower at a moon, then you should need to fuel it regularly. At 10% rate, that means mothballed towers could run for 10 months or so, which is not that bad. Increase the warning time on tower fueling to 7-days instead of 1-day, with notifications starting as soon as 7-days prior to "out of fuel", but decrease interval to be only every 6 or 12 hours on the warning mails.
- Do something about gas silo mechanics, not sure what.
- Allow "alliance" CHAs / SMAs to be anchored at the tower, which would let 2 corps in an alliance share tower facilities.
- Allow lab/array fees to be paid out of a personal wallet.
|
Notorious Fellon
Republic University Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 17:13:00 -
[197] - Quote
Do it. |
Deornoth Drake
tipiwhenua tuarangi
17
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 20:54:00 -
[198] - Quote
Check out some ideas of that thread
How to improve a nomadic lifestyle |
Hakan MacTrew
Caledonian Light Industries Sick N' Twisted
353
|
Posted - 2013.03.01 06:42:00 -
[199] - Quote
How much more flogging can this horse take? MODULAR DRONES
MORE ORE SHIPS |
He dares
Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal The Mockers AO
7
|
Posted - 2013.03.01 13:19:00 -
[200] - Quote
The only time ill ever +1 for thread necromancy |
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1658
|
Posted - 2013.03.01 19:51:00 -
[201] - Quote
Hakan MacTrew wrote:How much more flogging can this horse take? Eight on its side. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Bud Austrene
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
16
|
Posted - 2013.03.01 21:25:00 -
[202] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:Thread was automatically locked for inactivity and now has been unlocked again.
Surely, this could mean the horse might not be dead. Yes I am an alt. I see no reason to make it easy for bullies and greifers |
Leskit
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
10
|
Posted - 2013.03.02 01:27:00 -
[203] - Quote
Ciar Meara wrote:Updated POS by Evilgrivion, basicly the sum of the parts of the years of discussion: Here it is: [EDIT]: I remember that In another iteration everything of the POS was placed on the bottom as low as possible to allow for more movement of ships and capitals without being bumped by everything. But this summary should do: Evelgrivion wrote:[edit]Edited by: Evelgrivion on 04/11/2009 14:37:42[/edit] For the past three years, there has been a tremendous show of support for the old GÇ£Flogging the Dead HorseGÇ¥ post regarding a proposed re-design of the Player Owned Structure system. The two biggest reasons for support are that players hate what they look like GÇô a bunch of scrap floating in space, and they hate the interfaces that are used to interact with them on a daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly basis. Enter the Modular StarbaseAesthetically, people want to see an end to the era of junk floating inside and in the immediate vicinity of force field bubbles. A series of geometrically interconnected structures, such as squares or hexagons, make up the design of the proposed replacement system. The abilities of the facility are enhanced with each newly attached component. Weapons would be placed on extensions to the top and bottom or even the sides of the tower, emerging from the force field. These weapons systems would remain vulnerable to attack like they are today.
I like this idea quite a lot. I've lived in a wormhole for over 2 years, and the most annoying thing about it is the POS system. I've heard that the pos bubble is a particularly nasty piece of code and CCP really wants to get rid of it, but living in a wh, it's something that I find is actually essential. Being able to do things as beneign as fleet alaign, look at our ships (orbiting the pos with a MWD is our version of ship spinning), bump each other when bored, and look at our ship and the space that we live in is something that I see as tied to living in a WH.
Living in a wh, information is the single most important thing, and the current pos setup (read: seeing ships in the bubble and not being able to dock) is great for gathering information. I'd hate to see the day when docking games enter into WH life. I love the modularity of this idea, and hopefully the modularity will help with pos security and role dilineation. A pos upgrade would probably be the single biggest thing you could do to improve WH life. I think pos thefts should be a result of weaseling your way into a corp and getting roles, not because we have to lump access to things together like some mutilated tool.
Also, fuel use based on the # of modules would be great too. |
Cealis Naarker
Explorers Incorporated
9
|
Posted - 2013.03.05 11:09:00 -
[204] - Quote
Please make this come true!
Pretty please, with sugar on top, revamp the [redacted] POS-system! |
Remnant Madeveda
Ixion Defence Systems Test Alliance Please Ignore
36
|
Posted - 2013.03.05 12:18:00 -
[205] - Quote
"Soundwave commented, the POS system itself would only affect a small portion of the community..." from the CSM minutes. I'd like to check into this thread stating this small portion of the community for more years than I've been playing is still waiting Soundwave. The POS system affects anyone who lives in WH's, Null, and anyone who likes the idea of doing industry. You should really consider that more people are affected by POS's than I believe your metrics to indicate.
I'm a newish character, living in Null, and I support POS changes for everyone. |
Banana1x
The Scope Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 02:09:00 -
[206] - Quote
Just came across this. Such a clever and expansive idea.
+1 |
Carniflex
StarHunt
43
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 14:39:00 -
[207] - Quote
I remember supporting this thread back in 2006 (post 97 in the original thread and many many after that) up through years thereafter in the old forums. When the old forums went down it was the single thread I regretted most of losing.
It has been close to 7 years now, CCP. Perhaps it would be a time to let the poor hore rest a bit? eh ? So coould you please take, for example, the group working on walking in stations and put em to work on this thing until its done. Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... *THWONK!* GOT the bastard. |
Buzzy Warstl
The Strontium Asylum
507
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 16:39:00 -
[208] - Quote
Since the concept of "anchor anywhere" has been broached, what would appropriate anchoring rules be for these beasties? http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1672
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 17:19:00 -
[209] - Quote
Buzzy Warstl wrote:Since the concept of "anchor anywhere" has been broached, what would appropriate anchoring rules be for these beasties? 1) Not near an NPC station or stargate, say at least 1000 km away. 2) Some other keep out distances from moons, customs offices and planets. 3) Not to near each other 4) Only the smaller sizes in high sec, (up to about a large POS) and the largest size can only be in player held space. 5) The current standing based requirement is a pain. You essentially buy a corp with the standings, put up the structure, then invite your members. If you want to do another structure, you kick everyone but a no-standings CEO and a "shill" member who has standings. This sort of meta-gaming is not nourishing game play. I propose you just pay a one time anchoring fee to the NPCs, maybe reduce-able with standings. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Buzzy Warstl
The Strontium Asylum
507
|
Posted - 2013.03.07 18:17:00 -
[210] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote: 1) Not near an NPC station or stargate, say at least 1000 km away. 2) Some other keep out distances from moons, customs offices and planets. 3) Not to near each other
One of the CCP devs mentioned a vision of effectively "villages" of these. That implies a clearance of some tens of km but not more than that.
Combined with some heavy grid-fu that could lead to some interesting (and possibly server-breaking) results.
Vincent Athena wrote: 4) Only the smaller sizes in high sec, (up to about a large POS) and the largest size can only be in player held space. 5) The current standing based requirement is a pain. You essentially buy a corp with the standings, put up the structure, then invite your members. If you want to do another structure, you kick everyone but a no-standings CEO and a "shill" member who has standings. This sort of meta-gaming is not nourishing game play. I propose you just pay a one time anchoring fee to the NPCs, maybe reduce-able with standings.
The standing based requirement is a pain, but it does put a rather effective brake on planting POSes in 0.7 systems since the normal procedure is to only have one cycle of tower planting for a corp due to the immense pain involved in replanting. http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |