| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Amy Garzan
The Warp Rats
Intrepid Crossing
   |
Posted - 2010.07.14 15:05:00 -
[31]
--------------------------------------------------
101010 The Answer to Life, The Universe, and Everything |
Shalamar Bladesinger
|
Posted - 2010.07.14 15:26:00 -
[32]
suport.
and he is right. you cant just willy nilly just run around in an orca and just pick them up. a war dec must be declared and and a lenght of time must pass to take it.
|
Javajunky
|
Posted - 2010.07.14 16:45:00 -
[33]
Supported - some form of game mechanic to rid our moons for idle assets due to people losing interest in the game without having to get 50 BS's together to solve the problem.
Great Idea. Fits well within the Sandbox schema.
|
Raid'En
|
Posted - 2010.07.14 19:36:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Raid''En on 14/07/2010 19:39:47
there's lots of good ideas in this thread
what i think useful (almost all have been said) ;
* a special module to force the unanchoring
* the module need anchoring 5 and hacking 5
* the module have at least the price and the volume of a small tower
* can only be used on offline tower, and can't be used to unanchor modules outside bubble range of an online tower
* need some hours to works (at least 6 hours, 24h may be too much)
* unanchoring time the same / greater than normal unanchoring
* need a war dec if the pos is on HS space, and our module can only be targeted by the owning corp on HS
* the owner corp got a mail when we online our unanchoring module, and another one for each module we unanchor
|
Laina Delapore
Caldari
Red Sun Industries
|
Posted - 2010.07.15 08:39:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Laina Delapore on 15/07/2010 08:41:44
Edited by: Laina Delapore on 15/07/2010 08:39:13
 Originally by: SencneS
It's pretty simple... One man One POS Corps.. He gets into an accident in real life, ends up in hospital for a week, comes back knowing his POS is offline only to find his entire POS is missing..
We come back to this week long timeframe. Which is not 30 days. Also, back to the point of: same scenario, he gets wardecced in that time and his POS is STILL gone. Furthermore, as people have stated - a POS should be a corporate venture. Too many 1 man and his Alt outfits have towers up - a POS has ceased to be something special. I'm all in favour of making it LESS easy to maintain one solo.
Originally by: SencneS
MAIN REASON which will probably change your mind...
Corp Member Alts.
You have a Corp Member that is a POS Fuel tech with NO OTHER rights (he can't unanchor etc), he knows the tower is about to go offline, instead of fueling the POS, he is looking for some easy profit. He logs into his alt, travels out to the POS, waits for the VERY SECOND the POS goes offline, then starts to unanchor all the MODS and the POS. Sounds reasonable to you? or are you just a greifer?
Well, assuming the alt in question brings along a STRIP waits for the POS to online, spends 2 hours anchoring the STRIP, onlines it, waits the 24 hours for its cycle to complete, scoops the POS and its mods and no one else from the corp notices this happening or decides to read the notification that your tower is being STRIPped or the mailbox full of "Tower low on resources" mails...I say tough luck.
Originally by: SencneS
This is why I proposed
1) A reasonable time frame to pass before anyone can unanchor anything.
24 hours of the tower moaning about being low fuel plus 24 hours for the STRIP to complete its cycle, provides a reasonable timescale, to my mind.
Originally by: SencneS
2) YOU HAVE to declare war. A Wardec warns the entire CORP something is coming. Besides you can't attack structures without Concord coming to BBQ you, Which is why.....
OK, the whole purpose of this proposal was to provide a mechanic to remove offline towers without having to attack them or declare war on the corporation. So, if you want tack having to wardec them on top of the other requirements suggested, why not just amalgamate your suggestion re POS hitting structure rendering it unanchorable without any of the suggestions I've made?
As to warning, again, the activation of the STRIP sends a notification to the corporation.
I think though, that you're missing the main thrust of the argument here - this is a corporation that has left its "multi-million ISK investment" abandoned in space. They've ignored 24 hours worth of warnings that their "time and effort" in putting up this structure is about to be rendered moot.
Originally by: SencneS
The idea of you can't just warp around looking for offline POSes in a Orca scooping them as you come across them.. That's not good game design.
In my opinion, so is being able to set up massive, expensive structures in space, and just leave them floating, secure in the knowledge that if you leave EVE for a month that the tower will still be there 'cause wardeccing them and assembling a fleet to take out an offline large tower is too much effort for minimal reward. Your POS is at risk if you do not maintain the fuel bay in a proper and timely manner.
|
Darveses
DAEDALUS X
The Final Stand.
|
Posted - 2010.07.15 10:54:00 -
[36]
STRIP/ADU/whatever - not supported.
Stealing/removing a tower is a group effort now and should remain so.
I would support making offline towers unanchorable once they hit a certain percentage of shields/armor/sructure though.
---
|
Rawr Cristina
Omerta Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.07.15 13:31:00 -
[37]
As soon as POS goes offline and all structures are destroyed, you get an option to Force Unanchor the tower. IMO that should take about 24 hours and the owner would get a notification about it.
If nobody shows up in those 24 hours, the tower is yours.
If you would rather have the mods than the tower, you'd still need to blow up the tower.
- Malyutka (The Virus) - |
Ahsekuaw
Brother Theo's Monastery
The Ancients.
|
Posted - 2010.07.15 15:56:00 -
[38]
Originally by: SencneS
I would want the following.
30 days unfueled.
You have to declare war
You have to attack the POS to the point where structure is no more then 50% This would destabilize the structure
Then you can unanchored it and have to repair it.
I like this approach better than the original proposal. I would add one item for the high sec POS's. Any high sec POS that is unfueled for 120 days gets reclaimed by Concord and is removed.
Ahs
|
Drifnir
Mnemonic Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.07.15 19:09:00 -
[39]
supported, if only to clean out all the abandoned towers in W-space.
|
Ghostau
scorpion explorers
|
Posted - 2010.07.16 05:29:00 -
[40]
|
|
|
Laina Delapore
Caldari
Red Sun Industries
|
Posted - 2010.07.16 08:34:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Ahsekuaw
I like this approach better than the original proposal. I would add one item for the high sec POS's. Any high sec POS that is unfueled for 120 days gets reclaimed by Concord and is removed.
Why all the desire to add "This tower has been offline for X days" to this? Either you can remove a tower by the employment of an anchorable module once its offline or you can attack it and reduce it to 50% structure and then remove it.
Personally, in spite of thinking of the ADU, I'm just as in favour of the simple, 1 change required solution of "Tower hits 50% structure, becomes unstable, can be unanchored by hostile forces." Although I'd prefer to move away from the model of; "Must wardec inactive 2 man corp w/ abandoned tower and assemble large battleship fleet for boring hours-long highsec op."
I really don't see that there should be any pre-requisite "This tower as been offline for X days." Your tower goes offline, you get wardecced, your tower can be removed or assploded. All this talk of "sufficient warning" goes out of the water when you consider that there's notice from a wardec and notice from the tower itself. 24 hours is considered sufficient notice for people to start shooting your tower when they CAN'T steal it, so it should also suffice for when they can.
Originally by: Rawr Cristina
As soon as POS goes offline and all structures are destroyed, you get an option to Force Unanchor the tower. IMO that should take about 24 hours and the owner would get a notification about it.
If nobody shows up in those 24 hours, the tower is yours.
If you would rather have the mods than the tower, you'd still need to blow up the tower.
Why should the Force Unanchor take 24 hours? The owner should already know their tower is in trouble - you declared war and then it started sending out "Under attack!" mails. If anyone was going to show up they should've done so before then. It doesn't matter whether your tower goes boom or gets taken away - in both instances its gone.
"...as soon as the tower goes offline and all modules have been destroyed."
So, would this make a wardec on a corp to remove its tower a choice between blowing up the tower and taking the modules OR blowing up the modules and taking the tower?
I'd support that - choose between 500mill in anchored labs or 1.2bill of tower. Want both? Tough. Choose. 
|
Cyrus Doul
Cosmic Vacum Cleaners
|
Posted - 2010.07.16 13:06:00 -
[42]
I have a map of most the towers in lonetrek i would bet about 1/3 are offline. Ill check when i get home.
|
Marcus Gideon
Gallente
Federal Defense Operations
|
Posted - 2010.07.16 14:51:00 -
[43]
Since there's so much debate over whether or not you should be able to steal a POS...
Why not have them impounded?
An active POS burns fuel, when it's out of fuel, it shuts down.
Charters are not "fuel", so much as they are an ongoing agreement with the landlords of the system.
So charters should continue to be consumed whether the POS is online or not. The mere act of anchoring a tower requires you to give up 1 charter. Then you need to load them into the fuel bay(like they are now).
If a tower runs out of fuel, it goes offline. But if a tower runs out of charters, whether it is still online or not, it is immediately impounded.
The tower (and all associated modules) are carted off to the station housing a Corp Office.
Or another approach, would be to get rid of the Charters themselves, and instead have a rental bill. If the bill goes unpaid, then the POS is impounded. That way, POS belonging to bygone Corps will eventually go away. |
rootimus maximus
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2010.07.16 16:57:00 -
[44]
|
Reetoc Kraace
|
Posted - 2010.07.16 16:58:00 -
[45]
|
Major Stallion
Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers
The 0rphanage
|
Posted - 2010.07.16 17:49:00 -
[46]
the problem of "place holder" pos's in high sec is out of control.
The only solution to this problem is to tie it to the "need for speed" mechanic that deletes untended items in space which havent been touched for (x) days. Attach a value to POS's...let's say if it hasnt been refueled in 90 days (fair enough amount of time imo) then the tower unanchors and remains at the planet to be scooped to the first party who stops by. Or, if you dont want to go that route, just have the pos deleted from space if it has gone unfueled for 90 days.
By refueling, I'm referring to the point where the tower goes offline. If theres no activity at that tower in 90 days from the minute it goes offline, then take it off the moon....
|
Marcus Henik
|
Posted - 2010.07.17 12:01:00 -
[47]
I think being able to unanchor after a month of off line time is reasonable. I cant tell you the number of times we find cold poses in w-space. things that just sit there for ever because noone wants to invest the 12 hours it would take to kill them for no gain other than a kill mail.
|
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
|
Posted - 2010.07.26 15:39:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Raid'En
Edited by: Raid''En on 14/07/2010 19:39:47
there's lots of good ideas in this thread
what i think useful (almost all have been said) ;
* a special module to force the unanchoring
* the module need anchoring 5 and hacking 5
* the module have at least the price and the volume of a small tower
* can only be used on offline tower, and can't be used to unanchor modules outside bubble range of an online tower
* need some hours to works (at least 6 hours, 24h may be too much)
* unanchoring time the same / greater than normal unanchoring
* need a war dec if the pos is on HS space, and our module can only be targeted by the owning corp on HS
* the owner corp got a mail when we online our unanchoring module, and another one for each module we unanchor
I agree with everything except the wardec. This is supposed to be a thieving Sanford and Son action, not a full blown corp war action.
Also this is only for single offline towers that are abandoned and left to rot in space that have no other structures anchored with it.
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2010.07.26 17:08:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Galdornae
No.
This is a terrible idea.
Why should someone who say... can't play the game for a week lose their hard-earned investments this way because their POS went offline?
The mechanic, as annoying as it seems sometimes, works this way for a reason.
If you really want those POS mods or the spot, you'll have to wardec them and get out your guns just like the rest of us.
Not Supported.
^This
Aside from why it shouldn't be done, CCP is terrified of changing any POS related codes, and have stated so. If not for this, they'd probably have made a lot of changes already.
|
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.07.26 19:14:00 -
[50]
High Sec POSs are always vulnerable to wardec. I like the idea of stealing a POS, however, there needs to be some kind of notification system in place. It also should take a day or so to accomplish it (as with every other POS-related activity).
This signature is useless, but it is red.
|
|
|
Kentonio
|
Posted - 2010.07.27 08:51:00 -
[51]
Supported. Personally I'd get rid of all the extra crap around the idea tho. If a POS is offline, then let anyone have the power to start unanchoring it. Send a mail to the corp telling them an unauthorized unanchoring is taking place, and have unanchoring take exactly the time it takes normally.
Keeping POS's fueled is a pain in the ass, and yes sometimes they go offline. This is Eve. You screw up, and you pay the price for that. This proposal would almost certainly cost me a lot more than it ever made me, but I'm still supporting it 100%.
|
Brutus B
|
Posted - 2010.07.29 04:17:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Brutus B on 29/07/2010 04:18:01
You can steal pos's in highsec now. Here's how:
1) Find a sweet pos. Do intel to see if you can handle the owners if things get lively.
2) Dec the corp.
3) Add all known members into address book.
4) When any of them are online, watch the pos closely and cloaked even before the war goes live. (Some corps try to take their pos's down before a war rather than risk a forced removal.)
5) If they start taking it down, have a cloaky transport get in position to scoop it. Also have other allies on hand to bump away their scooping-ships. (If they do it this way, you can get the tower.) Highsec pos owners are suprisingly likely to do this because most are unaware of how vunerable they are to theft while unanchoring a pos under the false belief they are "safe" till the war dec goes live.
6) Be prepared to remove the pos by force, if they are smart enough to keep it up and online. If they do you get the other stuff after blowing the tower up. (If they force you to do it this way, you get the stuff the tower leaves behind.)
For dead pos's of dead corps, just dec the corp and drone/lazer them to death. (Cheapest way) If you want the spot. It'd be nice to take the tower, of course, so I offer tenative support for this. But, don't overlook fun ways you can already relieve someone of their pos toys in empire.
|
inthebutt
|
Posted - 2010.07.29 04:41:00 -
[53]
I'll be honest, having dozens of offlined towers all over eve is annoying at times. However I don't think stealing them is the answer. I think towers that are not kept online should start to receive damaged at an exponential rate till they are destroyed. More exact, something that would emulate the degradation of a structure in space without the proper defense to keep it structurally intact. It would give people a chance to recover or repair and online a tower that was mistakenly left without fuel and the such. It would as far as I understand also help with decreasing trash left over the years by players/corps no longer active. Maybe even adding a positive effect to the servers performance.
|
Catari Taga
Centre Of Attention
Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.07.29 12:31:00 -
[54]
No need to allow stealing them, abandoned control towers should just be garbage collected (i.e. destroyed) just like abandonded secure containers after 30 days.
--
Originally by: CCP
the data does not seem to support that polished quality sells better than new features
|
Rellik B00n
Lethal Death Squad
Motivated and Determined
|
Posted - 2010.07.29 14:36:00 -
[55]
If its solely the tower (no labs, guns, hardners, ecm or anything) I would support this.
Personally I think it would be far better to have a 'cool down' timer (I mean we love timers in eve right?) that runs for say 7 days.
a 7 day timer allows players with busy lives to plonk their tower down then return and fuel it etc.
If after this time the tower has still not been activated it would become unanchorable by anyone with the required anchoring skills.
This has the added bonus that it gives a time when the tower will become a free for all. This gives us all new places to fight. Win - win.
So, supported in some implementation.
.
sig says "We Are Recruiting!" |
Hooded Hauler
|
Posted - 2010.07.29 22:01:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Galdornae
No.
This is a terrible idea.
Why should someone who say... can't play the game for a week lose their hard-earned investments this way because their POS went offline?
Hint - if you don't keep enough fuel in your pos, you deserve to lose it
|
Brengholl
|
Posted - 2010.07.30 02:41:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Catari Taga
No need to allow stealing them, abandoned control towers should just be garbage collected (i.e. destroyed) just like abandonded secure containers after 30 days.
good idea because it's simple
i dont agree with most of the posts here
you people are trying to make collecting trash more complicated than taking a 0.0 system
offline pos is trash, cloging up the server
-(saving a good moon by anchoring stuff is an exploit)
but!
i like the idea of "stealing" poses because someone can make ISK of someone elses lazyness
so just plain and simple, after 30 days the pos can be unanchored by anyone with the normal anchor timer and anchoring skills
-maybe after 20 days the owning corp recives mail about their tower permanently being lost within 10 days, because, maybe, just maybe it's possible that someone actualy forgets a tower
|
Ya Huei
|
Posted - 2010.07.30 12:28:00 -
[58]
Totally agree we need some mechanism to get rid of offline POS towers. W-space is littered with those buggers.
Not maintaining your assets should cause them to deteriorate and eventually be destroyed/stolen.
I'd favor the latter, at least that way somebody profits from it.
|
Stoogie
Cadre Assault Force
|
Posted - 2010.07.30 21:44:00 -
[59]
|
Omega Flames
Last Resort Inn
|
Posted - 2010.07.31 23:37:00 -
[60]
I think a 2 day total (that includes time to anchor and online the ADU) time for it to unanchor a pos is good and 50-75 mil cost. If you do use an ADU in low sec without a wardec then you still get the sec hit just like attacking/destroying a ship would give you in pvp. I'm not sure if you should require a wardec in highsec or not, I'm on the fence about that one.
-------------------------
"Forsys > WAR
Forsys > HUH
Forsys > WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR
Harry Sunday > loot
Forsys > touchT" |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |