| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Anubis Xian
Word Bearers of Chaos
   |
Posted - 2011.01.07 04:26:00 -
[91]
Siege Tower (Small, Medium, and Large)
Anchoring V
Anchoring Delay 43200 s
Onlining Delay 43200 s
Duration 86400 s
Anchoring the ST triggers pvp flag on the corp Sieging the POS. DED sends warning mail to incumbant corp.
ST requires 2x the fuel as an equivalent POS Tower.
ST has CPU and PG, but can only support weapon structures and has no shield.
Only the ST can agress a non war target POS without CONCORD intervention.
 Originally by: CCP Oveur
The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
|
Alvin Exe
Corporation.exe
|
Posted - 2011.01.07 11:12:00 -
[92]
Supported
|
Jaina Sunspot
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.01.07 11:32:00 -
[93]
Why isn`t my Jaina Han**** already on this...
+1
|
prospector oen
|
Posted - 2011.02.15 12:16:00 -
[94]
a small bump for an awesome idea, ccp still havent replied or moved to do anything about this pretty high up issue ( offline tower spam)
|
Bal'Ayle
|
Posted - 2011.02.15 12:49:00 -
[95]
brilliant idea, slight adaptadion to be suggested?
say after the 9 weeks there is a chance if not destroyed that it gets taken over and becomes a rogue drone hive so that there can be a little bit of a fight involved in taking it over, where on a 2% chance rogue drones infest it and it gradually gets back its hp as they repair it eventually becoming almost like a scannable site. possibly with sleepers taking over wormhole ones at a 1% chance =]
gives us people something to attack en-masse because its not something that could be done with only a few vessels once its been that for a month or two and would give a better reward then a free tower with a lot more risk :D
|
Ed Wuncler3rd
Amarr
STRAG3S
|
Posted - 2011.02.15 13:04:00 -
[96]
I support this, or anything done in a similar fashion to the way dead POS and their structures are handled.
|
iamnotacriminal
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 06:12:00 -
[97]
I'm actually suprised that there has been absolutely no word one way or the other. I do however agree that when you go into a system with 30 moons and there are a half dozen online towers and no recourse other than a wardec in hisec to remove them.
I know the whole "go get friends" argument, but for the most part I tend to notice the "squatters" are not nescessarily defunct, but also being held as unused placeholders by corps and alliances it would be sheer suicide to wardec even for a modest to medium sized corp, let alone a small unaffiliated corp.
In closing, I support this simply because a single 3 man corp using the facilities creates more of an isk sink using it than a larger corp or alliance squatting on an offline tower doing nothing. They pay 250 M isk to errect a small tower, I pay that monthly in fuels and research consumables. their tower costs 250 M isk per decade (if it sits that long) mine sinks 3 B isk a year in fuel...
These towers need a viable way for even a 1 man corp to remove them, and online their own. It would be incentive to never let it go offline, or to unanchor it so the space isn't wasted, or intentionally exploited and denied to someone that wants to use it.
In empire I'm sure the tower says it uses X charters per day? So would in theory these be needed to keep it anchored as well as online? It's still anchored in empire space...
|
Echo Byteme
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 11:17:00 -
[98]
the hacking idea of the pos is nice. maby a hacking device activates some kind of mini game. A random hard puzzle to unlock the dead pos so you can salvage it.
+1
|
ollobrains
5th Front enterprises
Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2011.04.06 14:08:00 -
[99]
Originally by: iamnotacriminal
I'm actually suprised that there has been absolutely no word one way or the other. I do however agree that when you go into a system with 30 moons and there are a half dozen online towers and no recourse other than a wardec in hisec to remove them.
I know the whole "go get friends" argument, but for the most part I tend to notice the "squatters" are not nescessarily defunct, but also being held as unused placeholders by corps and alliances it would be sheer suicide to wardec even for a modest to medium sized corp, let alone a small unaffiliated corp.
In closing, I support this simply because a single 3 man corp using the facilities creates more of an isk sink using it than a larger corp or alliance squatting on an offline tower doing nothing. They pay 250 M isk to errect a small tower, I pay that monthly in fuels and research consumables. their tower costs 250 M isk per decade (if it sits that long) mine sinks 3 B isk a year in fuel...
These towers need a viable way for even a 1 man corp to remove them, and online their own. It would be incentive to never let it go offline, or to unanchor it so the space isn't wasted, or intentionally exploited and denied to someone that wants to use it.
In empire I'm sure the tower says it uses X charters per day? So would in theory these be needed to keep it anchored as well as online? It's still anchored in empire space...
removal off offline towers would sitmulate the dead planetary interaction advanced pos module chains. So ccp wants to ecnourage more PI allow greater demand for poses allow offline ones to decay and allow us to remove em quicker if they are untouched for a length of time. CCP seem to be ignoring this one so friendly bump
|
HeliosGal
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.04.27 05:20:00 -
[100]
Bump
|
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2011.04.27 06:22:00 -
[101]
10 weeks is an annoyingly short timeframe.
Declare war on the holding Corp, blow the POS up. If it really is abandoned you should face no resistance.
--
[Aussie players: join ANZAC channel] |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2011.04.27 12:10:00 -
[102]
1. Find offline tower.
2. Anchor Hacking Unit next to it, costing 25 mill, requiring Hacking V and having ~200k EHP.
3. 24 hour hacking cycle begins, with a publicly visible countdown timer. Tower owner gets mail stating time of start and end.
4. Tower owner can a) blow up Hacking Unit or b) re-online the tower. Both halt the hacking cycle; re-onlining the tower unanchors the Hacking Unit for the tower owner to scoop (haha bait towers).
5. Upon completion of 24-hour hacking cycle, the tower and hacking unit are unanchored and can be scooped by anyone (it's a tarp!).
|
Khalan Warr'el
Bendebeukers
Green Rhino
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 18:01:00 -
[103]
+1 in favor of the Poshacking Device (PhD :P )
It's something I been discussing with friends some of wich are pirates. And they all say the killmail is nice for the board, but they'd rather sell the (fation) towers.
_____________________________________
To be forgotten is worse that death |
Syphon Lodian
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 18:55:00 -
[104]
An entire alliance of thousands of players can disband if the dues are not paid. Yet a derelict POS sits in space forever, taking no damage, not getting caught in a gravity well, nothing.
I had a derelict POS that I left for about 5 months, and I came back expecting it to be gone, but it was still there. Frankly I was annoyed that I had to unanchor everything and haul it out. I was kinda hoping it wasn't there.
-------------------------------------------------
Go pod yourself. |
shadowace00007
Amarr
Beyond The Gates
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 19:11:00 -
[105]
I support / give an idea. How about simply after a POS is offline for a week anyone can unanchor it and take it.
-----------
Born Amarr, Raised Minmatar.
|
ThatDudeThere
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 20:01:00 -
[106]
Even easier in a coding sense would be that after 10 weeks offline the corp that launched it looses ownership and then anyone can come along and claim it.
|
Wa'roun
Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.06.28 21:34:00 -
[107]
Having abandoned POS' degrade just fits with reality. Space is harsh and structures need upkeep.
Without shields the rigors of space (meteorite impacts, radiation...) will eventually overtake structures.
Drones and other debris get removed eventually from space, so why not abandoned POS'?
|
GizzyBoy
|
Posted - 2011.06.29 06:23:00 -
[108]
Voyager has been in space like what 50 years? and its till functioning fine
stuff dosn't really degrade in space at all if left alone, unless subjected to asteroids or excessive em from the sun.
there's nothing to do at moons in high sec so i don't know why you care whats located at a moon there.
i can only imagine now that pos's and related structures don't take up any where near as much space as all those exotic dancers do, so i guess its not considered low hanging fruit to tackle.
|
chanteel
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.06.29 06:35:00 -
[109]
I support this idea. +1
should an anchored pos with its shields down that (big cloudy bubble) even have shields to go through.....
|
Sir Asterix
|
Posted - 2011.06.29 11:19:00 -
[110]
POS for a corp are not an easy thing to place in Hi-Sec. When I started my corp I was the only player and so the corp standings quickly reached the level required to anchore a POS. I anchored two towers but I was only using one, why? Becasue once I stated recruiting members to my corp the corp standings drop and I can no long anchore towers in that system. Some times both towers are off line, some times as I need one tower I'll online it. What I don't need is to have to warp to my towers every week and rep up this 'damage' your idea would creat. The reason their are so many off line towers is down the the corp standings issue. |
Jenshae Chiroptera
|
Posted - 2011.06.29 16:52:00 -
[111]
Took less than six jumps for my alliance to blow up an offline POS. If you can't kill it then you probably shouldn't have one.
Greetings and salutations all who reside here. May your flames be warm and your trolls tasty. |
Shin Dari
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.06.29 19:25:00 -
[112]
After a week of being offline the shield should drop. And should people decide to destroy it, then they should get enough salvage/loot back from the remains to pay for ammo costs.
Lets make a better EVE. |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
Black Sun Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.06.29 23:20:00 -
[113]
Originally by: ollobrains
Simple wormhole and regular space is littered with offline poses
Way to fix one week offline it looses 10% of its shield armour and hull
up to 9 weeks where it will loose 90% and stay at that a large pos then becomes a more manageable 5m shield and about half a mil armour and strucutre
Will make abandoned and unfuelled poses ( with time for the owners to recoup them) much easier to kill they are everywhere and ccp seems to be ignoring how long it takes to kill em
um, if the pos is "offline", no fuel, is not the shield already down? No fuel = no defensive batteries running...are they not already an easy mark?
I don't understand the need.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |