EVE Search - Sticky:New Dev Blog: Player-owned Customs Office

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Sticky:New Dev Blog: Player-owned Customs Office

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 63 post(s)
Cailais Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United 49	Posted - 2011.10.18 21:09:00 - [1] - Quote Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: Anela Cistine wrote: Seriously, if you want to make this fun, rather than a hideous chore, you need to make them smaller, cheaper, and easier to hurt. Small: 1000m^3, just like CCs, would be fine. Even the wormhole guys could get all the platforms they need in a couple blockade runners, so they will be happy. Cheap: Plan for the finished product to cost no more than 5,000,000 isk, including the cost of the BPC and all the construction components. Easy to hurt: Drop the initial hitpoints down to 10% of what has been listed. Make it feasible for a small BS gang to knock one of these into reinforced in 15 minutes. Actually killing them is probably okay at the hitpoints listed, since breaking something should be easier than utterly destroying it. The easier they are to knock into reinforced, the less likely it will be a "worthwhile" activity for supercaps. Small, cheap structures create more dynamic gameplay than large, expensive ones. Easy come, easy go. Griefers coming by and knocking down your customs centers for lols should be a minor annoyance, not something that makes you consider quitting because it will be such a tremendous hassle to put them back up. Yeah, because we certainly want to make this as easy as possible for Goons and PL to wipe out huge quantities of these, thereby griefing as many people as possible. Because the people you attack are online 23/7 to replace what you destroy. Anela might have a point here. Cheaper semi disposable structures are more dynamic in the sense you get a faster turn over of them: rather than the proven 'fail' of shooting large HP totals. Easy to put up, easy to put down might be a mantra that actually works if HP blocks are the only option. C.
Cailais Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United 49	Posted - 2011.10.18 22:15:00 - [2] - Quote Helothane wrote: So those who belong to an NPC corp cannot extract from planets in low sec, unless someone else has set up a customs office at that planet and allows other corps to use it? If the player can't have roles, then he/she cannot set up a customs office. I dunno you could like use the launch pad and rocket the stuff up? C.
Cailais Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United 49	Posted - 2011.10.18 22:53:00 - [3] - Quote Helothane wrote: Cailais wrote: Helothane wrote: So those who belong to an NPC corp cannot extract from planets in low sec, unless someone else has set up a customs office at that planet and allows other corps to use it? If the player can't have roles, then he/she cannot set up a customs office. I dunno you could like use the launch pad and rocket the stuff up? C. As mentioned before, that is very limited in terms of volume. There is a timer after you launch before you can do so again, and it isn't trivial. Then just use a planet with someones custom office on it - you're paying tax as it is now anyway: just this time the ISK goes to another player, rather than an NPC ISK sink. C.
Cailais Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United 51	Posted - 2011.10.19 08:43:00 - [4] - Quote Dominus Alterai wrote: Cailais wrote: Helothane wrote: Cailais wrote: Helothane wrote: So those who belong to an NPC corp cannot extract from planets in low sec, unless someone else has set up a customs office at that planet and allows other corps to use it? If the player can't have roles, then he/she cannot set up a customs office. I dunno you could like use the launch pad and rocket the stuff up? C. As mentioned before, that is very limited in terms of volume. There is a timer after you launch before you can do so again, and it isn't trivial. Then just use a planet with someones custom office on it - you're paying tax as it is now anyway: just this time the ISK goes to another player, rather than an NPC ISK sink. C. you forgot to mention that it'll be ALOT more isk coming out of your pocket to another player and not the standard CONCORD tax. I foresee tax rates in excess of 20-30% being the norm in low sec. AH but that's where it gets really interesting: if a corp is pressuring PI manufacturers with high tax rates what will be the result? I think it will vary but we might anticipate: Migration away from those systems (perhaps an incentive for the owning corp to lower its tax rate? Tax rate 'wars' between Corps PI manufacturers banding together (mutual support, removal of high tax corps etc) Low tax rates as an incentive for players to join a corp, or to operate in its region / systems Critically its a LOT more interaction between players - and while that might not be great for a specific individual surely that's good for the game? C.
Cailais Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United 51	Posted - 2011.10.19 11:57:00 - [5] - Quote War Kitten wrote: Rek Seven wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Rek Seven wrote: @ CCP Nullarbor, can you confirm if we will be able to set different access rights and tax rates for each level of standing? (i.e. terrible, bad, neutral, good, excellent) Access rights are based on setting a minimum standing but currently the tax rate is the same for everyone who has access. Ah thanks for answering my question. I'm sure you see the flaw in this feature now and I hope that this will be "fixed" upon release... If a customs office owner wishes to charge negative standing players a high tax, i don't think they will be happy if this adversely affects their relationship with friendly corps. I wouldn't call it a flaw as it stands, but being able to set a different tax rate for each standings level would be a great feature. Tax by standings level would indeed be a seriously good move. I'm not sure if it has been answered elsewhere but will there be a 'show info' for the customs office? For example if I tootle up to a planet and find an established CO can I check its details (owning corp, relative standings, tax rates etc)? C.
Cailais Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United 51	Posted - 2011.10.19 12:28:00 - [6] - Quote Kim Lesley Hartman wrote: What gives the little guy the right? His/her ability outsmart and dodge a much larger hostile force out to get him/her that gives them the right. This change means however I will now simply be denied access to the planets and no amount of cleverness will save me. That seems wrong to me. You make some good points, but I think we have to keep in mind where CCP are going with PI and its inevitable interaction with DUST 514. To illustrate: Dustbunny "Hi my teams here to defend this world from your aggressors!" Dave "Er..hi." Dustbunny "So what support can your corp mates give? Orbital bombardment? How big's your fleet?!" Dave "Er...well its just me tbh" Dustbunny "..." Having said all that CCP could include some interesting smuggling mechanics in here > avoiding custom office tariffs for example. Personally I don't fear to much for the smart little guy; they typically outwit the larger entities as is and I don't think POCO will be much different. C.
Cailais Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United 52	Posted - 2011.10.19 13:34:00 - [7] - Quote Ingvar Angst wrote: Cailais wrote: Kim Lesley Hartman wrote: What gives the little guy the right? His/her ability outsmart and dodge a much larger hostile force out to get him/her that gives them the right. This change means however I will now simply be denied access to the planets and no amount of cleverness will save me. That seems wrong to me. You make some good points, but I think we have to keep in mind where CCP are going with PI and its inevitable interaction with DUST 514. To illustrate: Dustbunny "Hi my teams here to defend this world from your aggressors!" Dave "Er..hi." Dustbunny "So what support can your corp mates give? Orbital bombardment? How big's your fleet?!" Dave "Er...well its just me tbh" Dustbunny "..." Having said all that CCP could include some interesting smuggling mechanics in here > avoiding custom office tariffs for example. Personally I don't fear to much for the smart little guy; they typically outwit the larger entities as is and I don't think POCO will be much different. C. Hey Cail, you know we'll need ten of these damnable structures in our hole and we won't benefit in any way, shape or form from having them? The only thing that will happen is our PI will be screwed while we try and get these over priced pieces of crap in there. You have to consider the bigger picture: WH PI will be more cost effective than High Sec PI, that's pretty much a given. It will also be significantly less vulnerable to 'outside influence' than say a low sec / null PI set up. Less vulnerable also equals less expensive in the long term. Accepting that PI materials increase in price (or at least are considerably more unstable) WH PI could prove to be quite lucrative. C.
Cailais Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United 53	Posted - 2011.10.19 13:37:00 - [8] - Quote Apodis Blue wrote: Sorry, this is FAIL ! EPIC FAIL ! Think of the economical impact! Prices of PI stuff aren't high enough already?? And as said in the latest Price Indices report, ice product prices and PI product prices are negatively correlated! In other words, ice products will get cheap, bottom prices, and PI stuff expensive. Btw, PI stuff isn't all for POS fuel, but also for T2 production. I don't wanna think about the price risings there... The BPO only available through CONCORD LP shops or Faction Warfare... Another FAIL !! Who gets CONCORD LPs? Those who do incursions. PI is for industrials !! They don't run incursions !!! And they don't do faction warfare either !! Industrials don't / can't fly combat ships !! So how do you want us to defend our custom offices ??!! Oh! And another thing... PI in hisec is already very time consuming, due to low resources on those hisec planets, and now you're going to double import/export taxes ??!! Thanks alot! But this change will break PI even more, if not completely !!! What you mean to say is that someone, somewhere, will make a buck out of the whole process. Incursion players by selling POCO BPCs. PI manufacturers who are successful, POCO owners etc etc etc. Adapt or die as we used to say around here. C.
Cailais Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United 54	Posted - 2011.10.19 19:25:00 - [9] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: Daedalus II wrote: It's also extremely hard to find a good deal; maybe the system next door has much better taxes, but you have to manually fly there and check out every damn office to know that. What if you have hundreds of potential systems? it will take forever to check them all out. Tax rate is available to you while you are in system but you can see them all on the overview so you don't need to actually fly up to each one. I will cite technical complexity as the reason it isn't initially available to everyone / everywhere but I can also see an argument for exploration as being part of the PI gameplay anyway. Re comments about not responding, give us some time, today has been a particularly rough day at CCP. We did have a meeting this morning to discuss the many ideas and comments in this thread and some points are being acting on already so hang tight. I think that much of the POCO concept is sound. There might be some market fluctuation, and yes it's possible prices will rise but the market should balance itself out over time. PI has, so far, been a relatively risk free activity with limited player to player interaction. The POCO concept will increase player interaction: that won't be universally popular but in my view it's better to introduce that change now, than wait until DUST514's impact - when you can reliably expect uproar from PI manufacturers when their networks get nuked from orbit or razed to the ground by dust bunnies. Change is hard, but for too long EVEs players have forgotten the maxim: adapt or die. C.
Cailais Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United 57	Posted - 2011.10.19 19:31:00 - [10] - Quote Issler Dainze wrote: This idea make low sec even worse, ruins an activity a lot of Eve players enjoyed, risks messing up a lot of the Eve ecconomy and shows how little CCP actually accepts the nature of the players in its own game. The profit motive and alturistic nature that CCP expects to be present in the wasteland of low sec doesn't exist! The folks there are going to blow up anything not defended and drive the few remaining residents of low sec out (maybe entirely out of Eve). I'd certainly consider setting up POCO structures as a means of generating an income. I think others will too. C.

Cailais Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance 227	Posted - 2011.10.21 12:16:00 - [11] - Quote CCP Phantom wrote: As earlier mentioned, I was working on compiling a list of concerns with the current design of Player-owned Customs Offices. I am posting this list here, please have a look if I have missed anything important there. I think it has been mentioned elsewhere and I think should be included for consideration: How does a player 'find' a suitable POCO to work under? There are various options - perhaps through the corporate information interface (corp A runs the following POCOs and their tax rates are....), a map or system information panel or through remote scanning of a planet. These considerations are important because players will want to know, potentially in advance, what PI availability is around them and what the competition might entail. Equally it has ramifications in terms of conflict - how easy would it be to 'find' a corps full POCO set up and raise it to the ground: is that a good, or a bad thing? There's a balance to be achieved within providing that information and a challenge in how it is communicated through the UI. C.
Cailais Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance 227	Posted - 2011.10.21 15:25:00 - [12] - Quote Zhula Guixgrixks wrote: Because of the known griefing potential I myself was thinking of a more griefer-proofed approach. With current rates of 50% of the materials being produced in hi-sec, the current iteration will force much more people to hi-sec, which is not good. Lord Timelord proposed: Lord Timelord wrote: Empire CO - Double the Current Tax Rate and indestructible (Still Owned by CONCORD) Low-Sec CO - Current Tax Rate and indestructible (Still Owned by CONCORD) Null-Sec CO - Adjustable Tax Rate and Destructible (Player Built) W-Space CO - Adjustable Tax Rate and Destructible (Player Built) Even if it's not reflecting the exhaustive wish list of people posting in this thread, it probably matches well with the already written code. I like this approach and would just see it little bit more fine grained. Empire CO - Double/Tripple the Current Tax Rate and indestructible (Owner: CONCORD) Low-Sec CO - Current Tax Rate+ small offset ,indestructible (Owner: CONCORD). A gang can attack the structure and put it out of order for a few hours. HP ~ Small Pos. Null-Sec NPC - Current Tax Rate, industrictible (Owner: local NPC). Gang can attack the structure and put it out of order for 1-2 days . HP ~ Med Pos. Null-Sec CO - Adjustable Tax Rate and Destructible (Player Built) . HP - Large POS W-Space CO - Adjustable Tax Rate and Destructible (Player Built) . HP - Large POS I don't agree with the Low Sec = Concord Ownership idea. Low Sec has long been left forgotten in terms of development and making it a watered down version on High Sec is unappealing. Low Sec's mechanics should be closer to that of Null Sec - i.e vulnerable. Vulnerability might be something to fear, but it acts as a magnate for conflict and player interaction (collaboration in defence or attack). Keep Low Sec's POCOs vulnerable and player owned. C.
Cailais Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance 227	Posted - 2011.10.30 19:27:00 - [13] - Quote Pamela Zolo wrote: This is just for when somebody tells me...and WHY you didn't say anything BEFORE?... Well... I am against the change in low sec... Try first in 0.0 and come back in 6 months... Im 100% for the change in low sec space - low sec is an area of inherent vulnerability and adding some genuine reason to fight for that space can only be a good thing: more player to player interaction - less NPC safety nets. C.
Cailais Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance 227	Posted - 2011.10.31 19:45:00 - [14] - Quote Ingvar Angst wrote: They're an even worse concept in Low sec, actually reducing conflict because high sec people, especially those in NPC corps, will have nothing to fight for once some dungpile plants a POCO on a planet they've been using. Why destroy it if there's nothing left anyhow? Again, the cost to erect these things won't be worthwhile for any small indy corps to have to bear. However... if they leave customs offices in place and have them go inactive when a POCO is active at that moon and have them go active again if the POCO is removed or destroyed, then high sec people have something they can fight for. They'll have the option to destroy the POCO and regain full access to their PI. Some will, some will hire mercs... but they'll be fought over/for. There will be a reason to. Leave the customs offices. Have them go inactive when a POCO is present. Have them be online when one isn't. So many issues are prevented and the system becomes much more dynamic like it sounds the original intent was. Everyone wins. In low sec space i think you will see corps fight over the ability to place POCOs in order to tax the PI inhabitants - i believe it will be relatively uncommon for PI manufacturers to set up their own POCOs, although some will and some may even band together to protect those assets. W space is slightly different. It rather depends on if its a worthwhile effort to place a POCO in order to exact a tax on the inhabitants, especially if you cannot easily protect that asset. Theres no doubt that keeping a POCO in place for self use in W space will be harder - but i think we can expect PI materials to rise in price as a result of POCOs being knocked out in low and null. This means that a w space PI process has the greatest security (over null and low sec) and the best profit margin. Over the long term w space PI should be plentiful and pretty reliable - albeit more awkward to establish. C.
Cailais Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance 227	Posted - 2011.10.31 20:34:00 - [15] - Quote Ingvar Angst wrote: Tax the PI inhabitants... sure... but how much? You'll either see exhorborant tax rates in low sec simply because they can or you'll see corps locking out non-corp members completely to keep the resources for themselves, especially with the PI prices spiking as you've mentioned. But... if you keep the customs offices there, the high sec PI people can fight back. W-space... no, you're not going to put one up to tax your own people, that's just silly especially when they're likely providing some of the pos fuel you need. Anyone getting carried away like that will cause rifts in the corp with people that once had control of their own PI and now have to deal with corp leadership controlling it to a degree. You're certainly not going to put a POCO up in someone elses hole... that's simply target practice and wasted isk. In terms of the question of 'how much to tax' we might well see market forces come into play. If the tax rate is too high PI players may well migrate to planets with lower tax demands. Those corps that enforce lockouts will, rather ironically, set themselves up as prime targets for attack - their planets being rather juicy and productive (if self run) or barren of PI structures if left fallow. POCOs in w space are most likely to be managed by the same players running the PI - but some will see the advantage of pre setting POCOs across w space on the basis that others wont want the hassle (especially if the tax rate is low). A risky investment for sure but its entirely possible. Is it worth blowing up a low tax POCO and then go through the trouble of bringing in your own POCO if someone else has done that for you? C.
Cailais Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance 227	Posted - 2011.11.01 22:38:00 - [16] - Quote Issler Dainze wrote: So it seems despite all the feedback to CCP that the concept was broken for low sec we see on SiSi it implemented as blogged? They really don't get it. Issler Except youre assuming that the 'concept for low sec' is broken: when it plaintively isnt. Destructable Low Sec POCOs are the desperately needed future. Accept that the 'free and easy' ISK font is going and adapt accordingly. C.