Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nikeffo
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 17:18:00 -
[1] - Quote
Perhaps a purging in highsec is in order? Lots of anchored towers just floating around, without owners, structures and life, taking up space for new players who wants a tower in profitable systems.
Just a thought |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations Paper Tiger Coalition
451
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 17:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
YUp , mentioned it a long time ago myself.A tower inactive for a month + should just be removed automatically or free to kill for all. There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed.-á
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Arec Bardwin
806
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 17:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
I agree. Offline towers should unanchor after a certain time, this has been proposed countless times. |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
521
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 17:25:00 -
[4] - Quote
There is a system you can use to purge a tower if you want that moon. War dec them.
It doesn't take much to take out a offline tower. Just time and some ISK.
EVERYBODY KNOWS |
Alara IonStorm
3873
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 17:25:00 -
[5] - Quote
I think if a Tower is off line it should lose its shield and the armor and structure should deteriorate over a weekor two from unseen small asteroid impacts. When it is gone it breaks up and falls out of Orbit.
Basically fuel your Towers or take them down and don't abandon them, they might not be there when you get back. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
2318
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 17:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
Nikeffo wrote:Perhaps a purging in highsec is in order? Lots of anchored towers just floating around, without owners, structures and life, taking up space for new players who wants a tower in profitable systems.
Just a thought If the corp is inactive and has practically no one for members, then war dec'ing them should be very cheap.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Liam Money
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 17:33:00 -
[7] - Quote
So you want CCP to do your job for you? If you want those towers moved blow them up. If you lack the force to do so, then you don't deserve to have the moon. |
Alara IonStorm
3874
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 17:39:00 -
[8] - Quote
Liam Money wrote:So you want CCP to do your job for you? If you want those towers moved blow them up. If you lack the force to do so, then you don't deserve to have the moon. As long as people do the required upkeep then taking down a Tower should require just the force you say they should use. That way the "Laziness" would work both ways. If you want to hold a Moon so someone else can not use it then spring for the fuel.
|
Ptraci
3 R Corporation The Irukandji
753
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 17:41:00 -
[9] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:There is a system you can use to purge a tower if you want that moon. War dec them.
It doesn't take much to take out a offline tower. Just time and some ISK.
I don't understand why people are so against using this route.
Because people are too lazy to fit out a couple Amarr battleships with multifrequency crystals and sit there for 5-6 hours, and would rather "the government" I mean, CCP, do it for them... Cos you know, entitlement and all that. |
Pyre leFay
The Scope Gallente Federation
129
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:30:00 -
[10] - Quote
Ptraci wrote: Because people are too lazy to fit out a couple Amarr battleships with multifrequency crystals and sit there for 5-6 hours, and would rather "the government" I mean, CCP, do it for them... Cos you know, entitlement and all that.
Because structure grind is soo much fun everywhere else in the game? I think CCP should make the effort in limiting the amount of structure grind to only instances that are necessary. Such as onlined and operational buildings. Ones failure to upkeep shouldn't be a punishment to your time, in any sec specially low class wormholes.
Not that moons will be a big deal in high after the POS revamp and the ability to perhaps place them almost anywhere. But like abandoned anchored cans, CCP should do something to keep space from being littered with abandoned equipment when the change comes. |
|
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
3945
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:36:00 -
[11] - Quote
Definitely been a long term issue.
I think an inactive/offline tower should become un-anchored and available to everyone after it's been offline for a set amount of time. Any player, either in a player corp or NPC corp, should be able to pick up/remove it or destroy/salvage it. Only player corps should be able to reactivate/anchor it.
DMC |
Some Rando
University of Caille Gallente Federation
308
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:38:00 -
[12] - Quote
Because structure grinding is literally ****, I am personally for an offline tower having very little in the way of HP and resists. You should not be able to hold a moon location just by virtue of having a tower anchored; it should have to be fueled.
However, I can confirm that four very bored guys with 50 mil ISK, two Oracles, an Abbadon, and a 'Geddon can take down an offlined Dread Guristas large tower in @ ten hours, so it's not like there's no solution out there. |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
527
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:40:00 -
[13] - Quote
Pyre leFay wrote:Ptraci wrote: Because people are too lazy to fit out a couple Amarr battleships with multifrequency crystals and sit there for 5-6 hours, and would rather "the government" I mean, CCP, do it for them... Cos you know, entitlement and all that.
Because structure grind is soo much fun everywhere else in the game? I think CCP should make the effort in limiting the amount of structure grind to only instances that are necessary. Such as onlined and operational buildings. Ones failure to upkeep shouldn't be a punishment to your time, in any sec specially low class wormholes. Not that moons will be a big deal in high after the POS revamp and the ability to perhaps place them almost anywhere. But like abandoned anchored cans, CCP should do something to keep space from being littered with abandoned equipment when the change comes.
Then pay someone else to do it. And with enough people it take very little time.
High-secs biggest problem and perhaps the key to fixing null is that alliances in high-sec really have nothing to hold them together. A corporation in High-sec means everything first, alliance whatever as long as it is convinient So if you want something done you go to a strong corporation not an alliance with 100's of small single player corporations in it. EVERYBODY KNOWS |
fukier
RISE of LEGION
287
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:43:00 -
[14] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:There is a system you can use to purge a tower if you want that moon. War dec them.
It doesn't take much to take out a offline tower. Just time and some ISK.
I don't understand why people are so against using this route.
cool you can wardec npc corps now?
even with high sec poses after a month of inactivity being able to be shot its still mind numbing to actually kill one...
how about a new heavy BS class ship? something the size of the freighter but acts like a mini dread...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
1512
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:45:00 -
[15] - Quote
AFK towers are worse than AFK cloakers, C/D?
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
3172
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:46:00 -
[16] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:Definitely been a long term issue.
I think an inactive/offline tower should become un-anchored and available to everyone after it's been offline for a set amount of time. Any player, either in a player corp or NPC corp, should be able to pick up/remove it or destroy/salvage it. Only player corps should be able to reactivate/anchor it.
DMC Seems like a lot of special cases to the current rules, not to mention you shouldn't lose the POS to a random bypasser just because someone forgot to fuel it on time. It's still your anchored asset and is still in highsec, so it should be protected like everything else you own. The only thing that needs to change is to allow them to be removed without the normal POS grind, if they're offline. |
Ginger Barbarella
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
338
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:47:00 -
[17] - Quote
Nikeffo wrote:Perhaps a purging in highsec is in order? Lots of anchored towers just floating around, without owners, structures and life, taking up space for new players who wants a tower in profitable systems.
Just a thought
Have at it! Let me know where you'll be blasting war dec'd towers and I'll bring the popcorn! Fly Minmatar Air --- "Trust in the Rust!" |
Ginger Barbarella
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
338
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:49:00 -
[18] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:There is a system you can use to purge a tower if you want that moon. War dec them.
It doesn't take much to take out a offline tower. Just time and some ISK.
I don't understand why people are so against using this route.
High-sec dec'ers are typically afraid of biting off more than they can chew. If it's a small tower, awesome! If not, they risk being around too long when a countering force arrives. Fly Minmatar Air --- "Trust in the Rust!" |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
527
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:54:00 -
[19] - Quote
fukier wrote:Simetraz wrote:There is a system you can use to purge a tower if you want that moon. War dec them.
It doesn't take much to take out a offline tower. Just time and some ISK.
I don't understand why people are so against using this route. cool you can wardec npc corps now? even with high sec poses after a month of inactivity being able to be shot its still mind numbing to actually kill one... how about a new heavy BS class ship? something the size of the freighter but acts like a mini dread...
You can't hold a POS in high-sec if you are in a NPC corp. IF there are any out there then it needs to be corrected cause it is based on corp standings.
EVERYBODY KNOWS |
Urgg Boolean
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
264
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:54:00 -
[20] - Quote
If a POS is offline and inactive - it should be conquerable. Bring the fuel, fire it up, supply the anchoring rights doc (from the LP store) - tada! You own it !
Kinda like squatter's rights. Real Estate laws in sunny CA are quite clear - you must maintain your property and pay the taxes. If you don't, and somebody else does - they takeover ownership via squatter's right. It's the same concept.
That way, if there is anything juicy in the storage bays - you keep it!
The typical 5-10 hour torching exercise is a serious dysincentive and none of the existing structures or stored goodies can be recycled. |
|
Caviar Liberta
Moira. Villore Accords
32
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:54:00 -
[21] - Quote
Just a handful of those Tier 3 BC should be able to reinforce a tower. Maybe throw a couple bombers for good measure. Also maybe some way for SCC to auction off towers that were owned by defunct corporations/alliances. |
Natsett Amuinn
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
781
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:55:00 -
[22] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:Definitely been a long term issue.
I think an inactive/offline tower should become un-anchored and available to everyone after it's been offline for a set amount of time. Any player, either in a player corp or NPC corp, should be able to pick up/remove it or destroy/salvage it. Only player corps should be able to reactivate/anchor it.
DMC How about hacking offline towers to take ownership of them.
CCP creates tools. This is EVE.
You use tools to solve problems. CCP shouldn't have to use mechanics to do something a player could do with a tool. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
1177
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:56:00 -
[23] - Quote
fukier wrote:cool you can wardec npc corps now? No, but then NPC corps don't have towers, only player corps can anchor them. |
Pohbis
124
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:57:00 -
[24] - Quote
Hire a corp to do it for you. They are out there, but being lazy doesn't come cheap |
fukier
RISE of LEGION
287
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 18:57:00 -
[25] - Quote
Simetraz wrote:fukier wrote:Simetraz wrote:There is a system you can use to purge a tower if you want that moon. War dec them.
It doesn't take much to take out a offline tower. Just time and some ISK.
I don't understand why people are so against using this route. cool you can wardec npc corps now? even with high sec poses after a month of inactivity being able to be shot its still mind numbing to actually kill one... how about a new heavy BS class ship? something the size of the freighter but acts like a mini dread... You can't hold a POS in high-sec if you are in a NPC corp. IF there are any out there then it needs to be corrected cause it is based on corp standings.
cool was not aware of that fact... i have been asked to do a high sec op before and i just sat there watching tv... never wanted to do it again... At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
3946
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 19:09:00 -
[26] - Quote
Destination SkillQueue wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote:Definitely been a long term issue.
I think an inactive/offline tower should become un-anchored and available to everyone after it's been offline for a set amount of time. Any player, either in a player corp or NPC corp, should be able to pick up/remove it or destroy/salvage it. Only player corps should be able to reactivate/anchor it.
DMC Seems like a lot of special cases to the current rules, not to mention you shouldn't lose the POS to a random bypasser just because someone forgot to fuel it on time. It's still your anchored asset and is still in highsec, so it should be protected like everything else you own. The only thing that needs to change is to allow them to be removed without the normal POS grind, if they're offline.
Good point.
However, the same can be said about secure containers that were anchored at various locations and then left. CCP eventually placed a timer on them (couple years ago) and when the timer (30 days) expired due to not being accessed, the containers are removed from space.
The timer on abandoned inactive POS should be much larger, such as 3 months. That is more than enough time for a Corp to refuel their offline Tower. After 3 months of being inactive/offline, the POS becomes un-anchored and available to everyone to take/salvage/sell it. Only player corps should be able to re-activate it (add fuel) and re-anchor it again at same location without moving it.
DMC |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
531
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 19:16:00 -
[27] - Quote
Secure container anchoring was a different situation. That was abuse of a game mechanic.
Your are talking a few ISK to drop a can at every moon in a system as compared to the price of a Tower.
EVERYBODY KNOWS |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
3946
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 19:26:00 -
[28] - Quote
It's still someones personal property. In my opinion the price of the property doesn't matter. The point is it's not being accessed for a specific amount of time, thus making it abandoned.
DMC |
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
532
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 19:31:00 -
[29] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:It's still someones personal property. In my opinion the price of the property doesn't matter. The point is it's not being accessed for a specific amount of time, thus making it abandoned.
DMC
Ah but my answer was incomplete. You need zero standings (or there are no standing requirements) to drop a secure container in high-sec. Effectively someone in a NPC corp could lock up every last moon in a system.
To anchor a tower you need corporation standings and that means you can be wardec'd. See the difference ? EVERYBODY KNOWS |
Dracones
Tarsis Inc
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 20:22:00 -
[30] - Quote
Urgg Boolean wrote: The typical 5-10 hour torching exercise is a serious dysincentive and none of the existing structures or stored goodies can be recycled.
If they can't manage the 5-10 "slog" to burn an existing tower down, then how are they going to handle the boring logistics of setting up and running one? And it's not like there's a lack of available moons out there to put towers on.
Anyway, it's probably a moot point since there's a POS revamp incoming. For all we know the new POS system won't be dependent on moons. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |