EVE Search - Tyrannis is discrimination of poor pets!

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Tyrannis is discrimination of poor pets!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tracia Pandragon	Posted - 2010.05.07 16:47:00 - [1] Edited by: Tracia Pandragon on 07/05/2010 16:48:57 First of all I love the new options for industrial players. But as I am a member of a 00 Pet Alliance its bad becaus we are not able to use this feature as we are not the sov holding alliance only the renter alliance. Any workaround planed for that feature? Exept joining the Sov Ally or moving 10 Jumps to a system without Sov? Thanks in advance! BR Tracia
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate	Posted - 2010.05.07 17:05:00 - [2] Is there anything in PI that requires sov at all? Hell, its not even set up for proper corp interaction. I don't think you need sov for anything related to PI. In fact, it seems like its set up for pilots to ninja off planets anyway.
Tracia Pandragon	Posted - 2010.05.07 17:14:00 - [3] "You are not able to deploy the commandcenter, as you are not member of the alliance holding the sov ......" Just tried it.
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate	Posted - 2010.05.07 17:56:00 - [4] i do stand corrected then. for some reason sov isnt claimed on the test server out where I am so I guess it was just never an issue for me. well that sucks for non-sov holders. you don't need sov to put down a tower and TCU-based sov doesn't have any direct links to planets in a system. So I don't see why sov should have anything to do with putting down command centers. Now, I can agree that it forbid your use of the Customs Office because that is a space structure, but planet-based structures should not be affected by who dropped a TCU in space.
Radgette	Posted - 2010.05.07 18:01:00 - [5] actually it makes perfect sense not to allow non sov holders to deploy PCC's if anyone could deploy PCC's then you would get the situation that you can grief another alliance by planting extractors in their systems and remotely ( up to 9ly away ) safely keep them active and just draining their planets with no intentions of production. hopefully they will add a feature where we can allow people with certain standings to use our planets like we can with outposts etc. in the meantime you could always ask the alliance your renting off to get sov in a system :p
Dishi Irlev Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2010.05.07 18:05:00 - [6] So then how does this effect the Low Sec and Empire planets?
Radgette	Posted - 2010.05.07 18:07:00 - [7] it doesn't affect lowsec or empire planets they are 100% free for all which means empire will suck majorly, lowsec slightly less :p
Catari Taga Centre Of Attention Rough Necks	Posted - 2010.05.07 18:07:00 - [8] Originally by: Radgette actually it makes perfect sense not to allow non sov holders to deploy PCC's if anyone could deploy PCC's then you would get the situation that you can grief another alliance by planting extractors in their systems and remotely ( up to 9ly away ) safely keep them active and just draining their planets with no intentions of production. Well I thought that was what that console game was for. If you cannot grief their planets why fight over them? Of course they might change it when that game comes out.
Tracia Pandragon	Posted - 2010.05.07 18:23:00 - [9] Originally by: Radgette actually it makes perfect sense not to allow non sov holders to deploy PCC's if anyone could deploy PCC's then you would get the situation that you can grief another alliance by planting extractors in their systems and remotely ( up to 9ly away ) safely keep them active and just draining their planets with no intentions of production. hopefully they will add a feature where we can allow people with certain standings to use our planets like we can with outposts etc. in the meantime you could always ask the alliance your renting off to get sov in a system :p Standings would be a key to solv that problem. So lets see if CCP will do something or not. /me hopes the best
Jim Luc Caldari Rule of Five	Posted - 2010.05.07 18:29:00 - [10] What would solve this issue is to give "access rights" to the sov holders, however allow sov holders to "rent out" planetary rights to individual players. This would allow a sov holder to rent out a certain amount of spaces per planet. Want to make some extra cash? Rent out 20 spaces for each planet in your system - keeping enough room for the corp's own PI needs. This would be really cool actually, and might get people to make the jump from hisec to low sec, if they can rent spots on planets. The only problem I see would arise if the corp decided to take the planet back for themselves.
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate	Posted - 2010.05.07 18:39:00 - [11] Originally by: Radgette actually it makes perfect sense not to allow non sov holders to deploy PCC's if anyone could deploy PCC's then you would get the situation that you can grief another alliance by planting extractors in their systems and remotely ( up to 9ly away ) safely keep them active and just draining their planets with no intentions of production. Stopping griefers, poachers or other types from "stealing" your stuff doesnt really seem consistent with how EVE is currently managed by CCP. Like I said, you can drop a POS and moon mine without regard to sov. But I do realize you can destroy a POS from within EVE itself and given that there is no way to get structures off "your" planet until Dust arrives, this may just be CCP's way of limiting something you can't control at the moment.
Anela Cistine Amarr GoonWaffe SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO	Posted - 2010.05.08 03:44:00 - [12] Blame it on the NPCs. Most Temperate planets and some Ocean, Barren, Ice or Storm planets must already have colonies of NPCs, with their own local NPC government. The planetary Governor isn't going to issue extraction permits contrary to the wishes of the thugs that claim the space surrounding her planet -- that is just asking for trouble. The bureaucracy and politics inherent to civilization is largely hidden from players, but that doesn't mean it isn't there. Besides, in 0.0 we need a reason for random systems to be valuable enough to bother trying to hold sov. Since Dominion it costs millions just to keep your flag up in a system with no upgrades, so to cut costs many alliances have let formal sov drop in unimportant backwater systems. (That doesn't mean there is room for anyone else to move in, they'll still shoot anyone trying to move into "their" space, they just don't get their name on the map there.) Tyrannis has the potential to make all systems more valuable, so people are willing to fight for systems that don't have any good moons, stations, or a strategic location. I hope that some portion of the taxes and construction costs get kicked back to the corp that holds sov in the region. That would give them a solid reason to "own" planets, and to allow other people to use those planets. Most moon income got nerfed pretty hard, corps could use another income source.
Steve Thomas Minmatar	Posted - 2010.05.08 03:50:00 - [13] I seriously doubt that the developers will code in a work around for people who get around Aliance expenses by "renting" . . . . . . . . a (Long) Guide to Pi
Cadde Gallente 221st Century Warfare	Posted - 2010.05.08 05:08:00 - [14] Originally by: Steve Thomas I seriously doubt that the developers will code in a work around for people who get around Aliance expenses by "renting" Hah! Well said, here's a small cookie in binary form. 00000000 00011000 00111100 00011000 00000000 I am also pretty sure this limitation is just a placeholder until Dust 514 comes out but even if it isn't that won't change a single thing as Dust 514 can operate just fine without the enemy alliance having their own installations on the planet. It's still quite possible to send a team of 12 year old kids to blow up planetery infrastructure from space you know. If anything, the limitation imposed here only further encourages people to actually claim sov of the systems they are renting or if they are intending on NOT renting, claim sov anyways to keep things interesting. And before you go "lol, they will die a horrible death" i wanna point out that if 50 alliances did this around one major alliance i doubt that major alliance would have the time or the energy to keep dealing with all these small flies when they have bigger fish to fry. Also, wasn't sov supposed to REDUCE the amount of space large alliances would hold making room for other smaller alliances to enter the scene independently? My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
HeliosGal Caldari	Posted - 2010.05.08 11:09:00 - [15] Dear poster with lack of lateral thinking - there are hundreds of c5 and c6 wormhole systems with no one in them they will have on average the same as 00 systems as far as planets and most wont be mined at all - welcome to logic U can also harvest areas with no sov holders and also npc 00 regions which are close to most areas. Most of the drone regions have no sov and no restrictions Also low sec lots of empty space should be at least twice as profitable as high sec. Heck even a lot of high sec wont be touched -try getting them out of jita - jita will be a free for all till they discover omg no yield. This might be enough to shift traffic around ( yay). Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00
ChrisIsherwood	Posted - 2010.05.08 22:10:00 - [16] Originally by: Steve Thomas I seriously doubt that the developers will code in a work around for people who get around Aliance expenses by "renting" Unless/until/if ever the "treaty" idea CCP mentioned a while ago ever gets developer resources. If they were going to do treaties, this seems like an reasonable option to add to the menu. But no reason to work on a PL-only treaty like mechanic until you are ready to address treaties. Perhaps we should refer to treaties as "Negotiating in Station"?
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse	Posted - 2010.05.11 09:00:00 - [17] Originally by: "Radgette" actually it makes perfect sense not to allow non sov holders to deploy PCC's if anyone could deploy PCC's then you would get the situation that you can grief another alliance by planting extractors in their systems and remotely ( up to 9ly away ) safely keep them active and just draining their planets with no intentions of production. hopefully they will add a feature where we can allow people with certain standings to use our planets like we can with outposts etc. I thought Eve was supposed to be a PvP combat game, in which case isn't the correct fix for this issue to enable us to blow up each others stuff in Eve? Unless I missed a memo where it stated that Eve shall henceforth be known as Hello Kitty Online 2, which is quite possible given that the only other expansion we have to look forward to in the next 18 months is the addition of being able to dress up.
Steve Thomas Minmatar	Posted - 2010.05.11 09:20:00 - [18] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: "Radgette" actually it makes perfect sense not to allow non sov holders to deploy PCC's if anyone could deploy PCC's then you would get the situation that you can grief another alliance by planting extractors in their systems and remotely ( up to 9ly away ) safely keep them active and just draining their planets with no intentions of production. hopefully they will add a feature where we can allow people with certain standings to use our planets like we can with outposts etc. I thought Eve was supposed to be a PvP combat game, in which case isn't the correct fix for this issue to enable us to blow up each others stuff in Eve? Unless I missed a memo where it stated that Eve shall henceforth be known as Hello Kitty Online 2, which is quite possible given that the only other expansion we have to look forward to in the next 18 months is the addition of being able to dress up. you realy have not been paying that mutch attention have you? Dust 514 is how you (arange) for other peoples stuf to be attacked while arrangeing for your stuff to not be attacked Incarna bascialy seems to have a quasi Shadowrun kind of thing going for it both have been useing developer resources that havent toutched things like Ship development (T3 Frigates is currently planed to be part of Winter expansion) Missions (were getting 2 new 0.0 Pirate faction epic arcs that are both curently on Sisi if you want to try them out. go back a couple of pages to find the CCP posts about them) Exploration (the idea of moveing Roids perminently out of static belts seems to have been taken out of the freezer to thaw, plus something tied into fall/winter releas timeframe has been hinted at) or in otherwords, shut the sniveling that you did not get your dream feature handed to you on a silver plater exactly the way you ordered it. . . . . . . . . a (Long) Guide to Pi
cyclobs Minmatar Honourable Templum of Alcedonia	Posted - 2010.05.11 10:12:00 - [19] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: "Radgette" actually it makes perfect sense not to allow non sov holders to deploy PCC's if anyone could deploy PCC's then you would get the situation that you can grief another alliance by planting extractors in their systems and remotely ( up to 9ly away ) safely keep them active and just draining their planets with no intentions of production. hopefully they will add a feature where we can allow people with certain standings to use our planets like we can with outposts etc. I thought Eve was supposed to be a PvP combat game, in which case isn't the correct fix for this issue to enable us to blow up each others stuff in Eve? Unless I missed a memo where it stated that Eve shall henceforth be known as Hello Kitty Online 2, which is quite possible given that the only other expansion we have to look forward to in the next 18 months is the addition of being able to dress up. well you thought wrong. eve isn't a PvP combat game. it's a 'sand box' that is do what you want when you want. if eve was a PvP combat game it would be more like star trek online. there'd be no industry.
Anela Cistine Amarr GoonWaffe SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO	Posted - 2010.05.11 14:49:00 - [20] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset I thought Eve was supposed to be a PvP combat game, in which case isn't the correct fix for this issue to enable us to blow up each others stuff in Eve? Unless I missed a memo where it stated that Eve shall henceforth be known as Hello Kitty Online 2, which is quite possible given that the only other expansion we have to look forward to in the next 18 months is the addition of being able to dress up. It's not a combat game, it is a "science fiction universe" game. Combat is only one aspect. PVP combat is an even smaller aspect. There are plenty of people who spend most of their time in high-sec, carefully avoiding PVP, and that is a legitimate game play style. When Incarna roles around there will be even more people who never undock, much less seek PVP, and that is fine too. From a RP/flavor text aspect, it makes perfect sense that we can not "blow up stuff" on planets. Capsuleers were only recently allowed to extract resources from planets at all, if they start blowing stuff up that would obviously be seen as abusing their privilege by the people living on the planets -- imaginary people, but people nonetheless. Blowing things up in space is different, people choose to go into space and they know the risks, but having immortal bullies ruin inhabited planets for fun would be unacceptable to civilization at large.
Lady Sinister	Posted - 2010.05.11 18:34:00 - [21] Also as a renter in null, I just found out last night that you have to have sov for PI. That totally just ruin all excitement I had for tyrannis. Does this also mean that systems with no sov claimed are also unusable?
Lordess Trader	Posted - 2010.05.11 18:44:00 - [22] they really need to enable "allow Planteary Interaction in System X for alliance standing > X" so we can allow that, and so that sov holders can collect the export tax.
Steve Thomas Minmatar	Posted - 2010.05.11 18:57:00 - [23] Edited by: Steve Thomas on 11/05/2010 18:57:22 Originally by: Lady Sinister Edited by: Lady Sinister on 11/05/2010 18:40:58 Also as a renter in null, I just found out last night that you have to have sov for PI. That totally just ruined all excitement I had for tyrannis. Does this also mean that systems with no sov claimed are also unusable? Ok One last time You CAN drop a PCC in any NPC or unclamed space including Wspace and any PSov System that you are a member of. you CAN NOT drop a PCC in any System where you, your corp, or your alliance is not a member. Originally by: Lordess Trader they really need to enable "allow Planteary Interaction in System X for alliance standing > X" so we can allow that, and so that sov holders can collect the export tax. They are not going to be doing anything like that untill they can devote resource time to creating a real treaty system . . . . . . . . a (Long) Guide to Pi
Obsidian Hawk RONA Legion	Posted - 2010.05.11 19:51:00 - [24] Well this is the time for all the pets to merge into a power block and drop some SBU's and take the space for themselves now isnt it. If the pets work together their masters cannot handle them, especially since all the masters are too busy fighting each other.
Eternum Praetorian Method In Khaos	Posted - 2010.05.11 20:20:00 - [25] Originally by: Obsidian Hawk Well this is the time for all the pets to merge into a power block and drop some SBU's and take the space for themselves now isnt it. If the pets work together their masters cannot handle them, especially since all the masters are too busy fighting each other. Good luck with that Pets are pets for a reason, they typically fail really hard. -- Khaos Incarnate
HeliosGal Caldari	Posted - 2010.05.12 04:18:00 - [26] big powerblock alliances have lots of empty systems, sov charges were meant to make it that the more they owned the more they paid but .... as it turned out sov with no index means next to nothing and doesnt escalate with more systems owned. Well if ccp keep it the way it is pets wont be able to farm planets, big alliance still wont be able to use system one of two things will happen ccp will allow it to be standings based ie allwo or disallow xyz pet to PCC or if left the large alliances will drop not needed systems and allow pets bits of sov Im going to go with first one cause ccp are lazy and whining leads to easy mode rather than making powerblocks ( cough drone regions cough) drop sov if systems not used Signature - CCP what this game needs is more variance in PVE aspects and a little bit less PVP focus, more content more varied level 1-4 missions more than just 10 per faction high sec low sec and 00

Pages: [1] :: 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.