| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 61 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
58
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 18:43:00 -
[931] - 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.
Good to hear.
There have been some good points made, and a whole lot of points made by people that either have reading comprehension issues or don't understand the social vs. economic forces at play in EVE.
Just to point out a couple of things worth considering.
1: Consider making rocket payloads a bit larger as an alternative. 2: Consider solutions for people who can't launch a rocket because of command center placement. 3: Consider removing the ability to control access via standings. Control via 100% tax has serious (good) drawbacks that encourage reasonable tax rates and better availability to the general public. 4: Consider making PCO's sig radius small enough to discourage cap use (hot drops to gank the PCO).
Thanks for your efforts in this. To kill the enemy and break their toys!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |

Dominus Alterai
No Bullshit Jokers Wild.
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 18:43:00 -
[932] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:POCOs need to be nameable - just like POS towers.
(They also need the ability to base taxes on standings, as has been suggested multiple times.) no, they don't need to be nameable.... |

Meldan Anstian
Imperial Genesis The Seventh Day
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 18:47:00 -
[933] - Quote
1. WH space - I don't see PI done in WH space with the intention of selling it on the market. It's used for POS fuel and manufacturing in the WH. PI goods made in WH's have no significant effect on the market. PITA to get a CO installed, but once done, business as usual, and no change to income.
2. Null sec - I think, don't know, that much of the PI in null space is intended for the use by the corps/alliances in null sec, also for POS fuel and manufacturing. Certainly more gets to the market than in WH, but I really question how significant it is. Gut feeling is that it's not real significant. I think it discourages ninja PI, since it's pretty much agreed that few would allow non blue to use a CO. It makes low sec more attractive than null sec, since you can't launch all you produce.
3. PCO's in low sec - very poor return on investment, especially given the risk of loss. They are not worth putting up, not worth attacking, and not worth defending if they were. Launch stuff from your command center, haul it to high sec and produce the higher tier stuff on a production planet. If you disagree about the return on investment, do the math.
4. High sec - basically unchanged. Tax rates are currently insignificant, and doubling them doesn't change that much, especially since it's pretty universally agreed that the PI prices will go up.
The stated goal of allowing getting income from CO taxation - don't see how the implementation as described achieves this goal, in any sec status system.
The stated goal of increasing player interaction - in WH and null, don't see much change here from the current system. In high sec, player interaction is irrelevant, I don't see the risk nor reward changing much in high sec. Low sec - since I don't see CO's being put up much, the player interaction goes down. You can't camp a CO that doesn't exist. Not that many people camp CO's currently, never seen a CO camp in months of doing PI. So I think player interaction is either unchanged or decreased depending on the sec status of the system. |

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
58
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 18:48:00 -
[934] - Quote
Acorn FB wrote:Here is the problem I see, at first the low sec peeps will have a shortage of POCOs, then they will spend the next few weeks struggling to get some up only to have some pirate blow it up and put a high tax rate in place just for the tears. Then the real nightmare begins.
Some null sec alliance is going to figure out CCP has just offered them free isk to the extent not seen since the early moon goo days. The mechanic will look like this, find a few systems that offer good planets and then rush that solar system and its neighboring systems. The force will be well beyond the capabilities of local pirates and within two days all good planets and most others will have the official Goonswarm approved version of the POCO. THey will then set the taxes at such a point to extract most of the profit from PI, leaving just enough to keep their little PI slaves thinking hey have a chance.
Base a few hundred BS, HACS, etc. in the center system and anyone who messes with them dies, tell your null sec friends and enemies that this is your area, but you can have the next set of systems and BOOM free money. Amusingly the null sec alliances may able to manipulae prices of some PI materials by messing with tax rates on specific POCOs, pull bait and switches, by lowering a rate on a set of planets then raising them when people invest in them etc.
So basically we are all going to be working for our nullsec overlords. Guess the CSM is earning their paychecks.
One last thing if you go through with this, make low sec THE place for PI give it the highest rates of PI, basically flipping it with null sec so may at least you can create the LO SEC PI WARS.
I find the idea of any large Null sec entity spending significant amounts of time to extract an extra pittance from their corp members PI efforts fairly amusing.
I would not object to PI having the best rewards in Low Sec however... that could be interesting.
To kill the enemy and break their toys!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
58
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 18:53:00 -
[935] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:POCOs need to be nameable - just like POS towers.
(They also need the ability to base taxes on standings, as has been suggested multiple times.)
I don't care about naming, but I wouldn't object to it either.
No, POCO's do not need the ability to more selectively exclude/penelize people from using them. Rather they need to keep to one tax rate (that applies to everyone including the owning corps members) and lose the ability to keep people out via their standings.
This would vastly encourage the proliferation of available POCO's throughout Low and even Null Sec space.
Restricting people from using a planets resources should be the job of your fleet, or eventually DUST merc's... not the tax man or diplomats. To kill the enemy and break their toys!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |

Alasik
The Ostrogoths Curatores Veritatis Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 18:56:00 -
[936] - Quote
You are going to ruin the PI industry doing it this way. It is going to end up not being worth it for alliances/corporations to come running to save the Custom Offices when frig and bc wipe out all the CO's in a system. This will force all PI characters to high sec for little resources and drive up the price. I am not sure if someone has already suggested this, but this is how it should work.
1. CO's are built and sold as you plan. 2. System Alliance/Corporation owners are the only ones who can drop the CO's on the planets and are the only ones who can edit the security/tax price. They are also the ones who receive the tax. 3. Just like stations they are invulnerable until the system is SBU'ed and remove the reinforcement timer. This way by the time the system is SBU'ed and the station is taken all you have to do is warp to each planet and take out the CO's to put up your own.
POS, SBU, and Station shooting/saving is boring enough, please dont make us even more bored and we just give up on CO's all together!!
EDIT: Low sec and High sec should be controlled and taxed by concord the same way it is now. |

Jada Maroo
Mysterium Astrometrics BRABODEN
282
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 18:57:00 -
[937] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:1:  Consider making rocket payloads a bit larger as an alternative.
This, this, and this. Doesn't need to be a huge expansion. There still needs to be an overwhelming advantage for space ports / customs. But CC should be able to hold and launch, say, 2000m3. Even 1500 would be nice. 500 is just silly. |

Bodega Cat
Expedition Arcadia Narwhals Ate My Duck
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 18:58:00 -
[938] - Quote
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
Why not: Okay it's like this EVE Community - even though we should have started PI this way in the first place, we did it backwards and are now trying to fix it. And we need your help. We have a working code, but need additional input so that we just 'fracture' your game a little, instead of breaking it and further decrease our subscriber base... and do so just after one of the largest population drops in the games running history - which was so bad it caused Hilmar to openly appologize to all of you [[which was appreciated btw]]
CCP and Team Pi we know you need to address Planteary Interaction... but DO NOT give us a beta for you to tweak - I have no problem with increased risk... so long as I have the additional search/ informational tools to determine if that risk is worth taking.
Risk Is Good - but it needs the be coupled with knowledge to make it work right!!!
I agree with the majority of your points, but i gotta be honest....
If they take your advice and design their features your way, they'll never make it out of forum discussions ever. They will design, implement, and iterate around in circles endlessly as sentiments give and tug, and we all hem and haw.
Sooner or later, you gotta put that new swingset down in the sand box to see what your monkeys are going to do with it.
|

Acorn FB
Puppeteers of Doom Real Life Rejects
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:00:00 -
[939] - Quote
Actually you missed my point about the null sec allaince, will "take over" a low sec cluster, they will not actually live there or PI there just collect tarriffs. They will just set up a small reserve fleet of ships so that a group of their pilots can just Warp clone there or may be just one cyno pilot and bring capitals/ super caps in, basically the fear of going head to head with them will keep their POCOs safe and they just get the free money from everyone else, the null sec ones in their own system will probaly have very low tax rates.
THey will be incontrol of a bottle neck and as everyone knows who deals in the market, the controler bottleneck makes the money. They do not have to manufacturer, or farm , or offer a service, by the might of their sword they will take the largest share. |

Par'Gellen
Neon Cranium
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:04:00 -
[940] - Quote
rootimus maximus wrote:Par'Gellen wrote:Here are the four things PI really needs:... I wish there was a way to vote for you to be in charge of PI. All excellent points that would drastically improve PI (and use it as a template for fixing other stuff, like S&I). Why thank you :) I'd be more than happy to accept the position if CCP offered it to me! |

Chard Kalan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:06:00 -
[941] - Quote
I don't do any sort of PI, but I don't really like this:
1. BPCs should not be an LP reward. It forces people to either run incursions / join faction warfare, use an alt for one of these activities, or pay through the nose for a BPC.
2. There is nothing to prevent a large alliance from getting a lot of BPCs and spamming every planet in a system, constellation, or region. A decent upkeep amount would help to mitigate this issue.
3. This will very likely drive up already high POS fuel prices.
4. This will potentially eliminate a source of income for players in NPC corporations and small corporations.
5. Because there are no native defenses around a POCO, it's effectively a giant bullseye if it's deployed by a smaller corp.
This to me just seems to encourage people to join large alliances that will have the means to spam POCOs and the manpower to defend them, effectively eliminating the smaller corporations from the PI game. |

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
111
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:06:00 -
[942] - Quote
Acorn FB wrote:Here is the problem I see, at first the low sec peeps will have a shortage of POCOs, then they will spend the next few weeks struggling to get some up only to have some pirate blow it up and put a high tax rate in place just for the tears. Then the real nightmare begins.
Some null sec alliance is going to figure out CCP has just offered them free isk to the extent not seen since the early moon goo days. The mechanic will look like this, find a few systems that offer good planets and then rush that solar system and its neighboring systems. The force will be well beyond the capabilities of local pirates and within two days all good planets and most others will have the official Goonswarm approved version of the POCO. THey will then set the taxes at such a point to extract most of the profit from PI, leaving just enough to keep their little PI slaves thinking hey have a chance.
Base a few hundred BS, HACS, etc. in the center system and anyone who messes with them dies, tell your null sec friends and enemies that this is your area, but you can have the next set of systems and BOOM free money. Amusingly the null sec alliances may able to manipulae prices of some PI materials by messing with tax rates on specific POCOs, pull bait and switches, by lowering a rate on a set of planets then raising them when people invest in them etc.
So basically we are all going to be working for our nullsec overlords. Guess the CSM is earning their paychecks.
One last thing if you go through with this, make low sec THE place for PI give it the highest rates of PI, basically flipping it with null sec so may at least you can create the LO SEC PI WARS.
LOL
Tinfoil prices just jumped up at least.
For any of that doomsday scenario to come true, you'd have to assume first that lowsec was a hotbed of ANY activity, let alone PI activity, and that Goons or some other 0.0 alliance would get so hot and bothered about the hundreds of THOUSANDS of isk flowing through PI taxes compared to the hundreds of MILLIONS of isk in their moon goo. Yeah, I see NC. rushing right out ot conquer the lowsec PI cash cow planets.
All I see are people who are so afraid of lowsec that they assume everything that goes there dies or blows up within minutes complaining that they won't be able to ninja the lowsec PI anymore. That, and the occasional WH reisdent loathing yet another logistics mess to manage (once) to build another few structures on the planets.
The game is about player vs. player interaction. This is a step in taking essentially free PI income into the realm of player interaction again. It's all good. This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |

Bodega Cat
Expedition Arcadia Narwhals Ate My Duck
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:08:00 -
[943] - Quote
Meldan Anstian wrote:1. WH space - I don't see PI done in WH space with the intention of selling it on the market. It's used for POS fuel and manufacturing in the WH. PI goods made in WH's have no significant effect on the market. PITA to get a CO installed, but once done, business as usual, and no change to income.
2. Null sec - I think, don't know, that much of the PI in null space is intended for the use by the corps/alliances in null sec, also for POS fuel and manufacturing. Certainly more gets to the market than in WH, but I really question how significant it is. Gut feeling is that it's not real significant. I think it discourages ninja PI, since it's pretty much agreed that few would allow non blue to use a CO. It makes low sec more attractive than null sec, since you can't launch all you produce.
3. PCO's in low sec - very poor return on investment, especially given the risk of loss. They are not worth putting up, not worth attacking, and not worth defending if they were. Launch stuff from your command center, haul it to high sec and produce the higher tier stuff on a production planet. If you disagree about the return on investment, do the math.
4. High sec - basically unchanged. Tax rates are currently insignificant, and doubling them doesn't change that much, especially since it's pretty universally agreed that the PI prices will go up.
The stated goal of allowing getting income from CO taxation - don't see how the implementation as described achieves this goal, in any sec status system.
The stated goal of increasing player interaction - in WH and null, don't see much change here from the current system. In high sec, player interaction is irrelevant, I don't see the risk nor reward changing much in high sec. Low sec - since I don't see CO's being put up much, the player interaction goes down. You can't camp a CO that doesn't exist. Not that many people camp CO's currently, never seen a CO camp in months of doing PI. So I think player interaction is either unchanged or decreased depending on the sec status of the system.
I agree with you, its funny cause if theirs any goals here to have the efforts of the CO holder to see some monetization rewards in this as a landlord, they could only effectually ever be realized in high sec.
In fact, i would even go as far as saying they should allow CO's in high sec to have owners, but the tax rate always stays the same, just the sticker on the CO can be fought and won so someone gets to stick their hand in the cookie jar should they want to.
The problem with this feature only ever comes into play if you analyze the controls the CO owner can impose. Take the controls away and just have all CO's have a flat tax and this system might be win. |

Rek Seven
Zandathorn Industries
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:09:00 -
[944] - 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.
Wait, so you have to travel all the way to a system just to view the customs tax? That's crazy dude.
I assume you are aware that it's possible to view/scan a planet out of system (range depending on your remote sensing skill) so why not add the tax information to that screen?
I do not want a search option like some people are saying because that makes it too easy for that planet to be ome over run, but people do need some way of remotely viewing tax.
|

Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:12:00 -
[945] - Quote
Bodega Cat wrote:Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
Why not: Okay it's like this EVE Community - even though we should have started PI this way in the first place, we did it backwards and are now trying to fix it. And we need your help. We have a working code, but need additional input so that we just 'fracture' your game a little, instead of breaking it and further decrease our subscriber base... and do so just after one of the largest population drops in the games running history - which was so bad it caused Hilmar to openly appologize to all of you [[which was appreciated btw]]
CCP and Team Pi we know you need to address Planteary Interaction... but DO NOT give us a beta for you to tweak - I have no problem with increased risk... so long as I have the additional search/ informational tools to determine if that risk is worth taking.
Risk Is Good - but it needs the be coupled with knowledge to make it work right!!!
I agree with the majority of your points, but i gotta be honest.... If they take your advice and design their features your way, they'll never make it out of forum discussions ever. They will design, implement, and iterate around in circles endlessly as sentiments give and tug, and we all hem and haw. Sooner or later, you gotta put that new swingset down in the sand box to see what your monkeys are going to do with it.
I don't disagree.... but the extreme lack of peripherial elements seems like this has been looked at as a minor update when it isn't minor at all.
Take roles for example:
There should be a specialized role for Custom's Officer under the roles normally associated with POS's -
Why?
Because there should be a clear delination between Corp POS assets and POCO's --- where POS roles in many corps is a trusted position and practically a full time job. Corps should be able to still give POCO roles to someone, probably the resident Corp PI expert that has no POS roles in the first place, without necessarily moving directly to POS roles.
This is one example of how what has been presented thus far seems 'limited' in scope vs. it's impact. |

Aph3xus
Focused Annihilation Detrimental Imperative
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:13:00 -
[946] - Quote
It seems to me that this is indeed a better system and one that definitely fits better with EVE's universe, but that it should have been implemented when PI was introduced. Now that the economy and the player base are used to the current system, simply removing all the custom offices in low, null, and WH space strikes me as a terrible idea. I like the idea of player controlled custom offices. I just tend to agree with many posts here that at this point it should be a gradual shift towards that and that simply removing all the existing NPC custom offices would make the switch more painful then it needed to be.
I read through the first 10 pages of comments or so and didn't see anything about a question that has been eating at me: How many customs offices would each corporation be able to control? Would there even be a limit? My apologies if this was answered somewhere and I missed it.
|

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
58
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:17:00 -
[947] - Quote
Jada Maroo wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:1:  Consider making rocket payloads a bit larger as an alternative. This, this, and this. Doesn't need to be a huge expansion. There still needs to be an overwhelming advantage for space ports / customs. But CC should be able to hold and launch, say, 2000m3. Even 1500 would be nice. 500 is just silly.
Thank you for your support on that point.
However, it is even more important to ensure/encourage that people have access to a wide range of planets through the more efficient POCO is to remove the ability to control access via standings. To kill the enemy and break their toys!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |

Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:20:00 -
[948] - Quote
Aph3xus wrote:It seems to me that this is indeed a better system and one that definitely fits better with EVE's universe, but that it should have been implemented when PI was introduced. Now that the economy and the player base are used to the current system, simply removing all the custom offices in low, null, and WH space strikes me as a terrible idea. I like the idea of player controlled custom offices. I just tend to agree with many posts here that at this point it should be a gradual shift towards that and that simply removing all the existing NPC custom offices would make the switch more painful then it needed to be.
I read through the first 10 pages of comments or so and didn't see anything about a question that has been eating at me: How many customs offices would each corporation be able to control? Would there even be a limit? My apologies if this was answered somewhere and I missed it.
Like POS's it will be unlimited - though with POS's there is a maintenance element that does not exist with POCO's
So POCO spamming will supplant the POS Spamming of old. |

Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:20:00 -
[949] - Quote
Spanking Monkeys wrote:i cant belive this is something you have worked on for a while CCP owen. this is a badly thought out structure driven boring activity, rather than just a boring activity. started offlining pos's already cos theres no way currently to absorb the extra costs involved. glad i have 3 months worth of fuel stored for 6 towers. i now have 18months for the 1 that will stay.
i just dont see why you at ccp are always trying to **** over the smaller guys/corps/alliances. this is directly what your doing here, have no doubt about it.
This is exactly why I've continued to run for the CSM to try and make CCP consider the "little guy". The solo player, the little indy corp or alliance. Clearly someone in the CSM needs to advocating for that segement of the pilots of Eve because this is another example of how CCP just doesn't get it!
Once again CCP screws the "little guy" and continues its focus on driving us to the "end game" when there is no "end game" in a sandbox MMO with a player dirven ecconomy!
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).
CCP you don't understand stick and carrot, this idea has neither, this is marshmellow/flounder.
Here is what really scares me about this idea. It clearly has been in the works for a while, it has had resources applied and sounds close to complete. It sounds like it wasn't disucssed with the CSM (or we have another reason to worry about the CSM). This was done while CCP failed to work on other unfinished or broken content. What other things are in the "bad idea" queue CCP?
What other seriously half baked game breaking "features" have you developed instead of finishing or fixing all the other things here in the 'verse?
So to the critics that say I am just being negative here is how you fix this idea.
1. Null sec and WH's work as planned. 2. Structures have to be "serviced" every 30 days by the owners or the shields and structure drop to 0 and be single shot popped. 3. High sec taxes can rise but only after the correct numbers have been determined after real study, not just a lazy doubling. 4. Low sec CO belong to the pirate faction dominant in the system they are in. To access them you have to work out your NPC pirate issues. 5. Rockets get a lot bigger and you are allowed to drop supplies to the planet. 6. Rocket launches and orbital deliveres happen at the launch facilities, not the command center. 7. I can hack a CO and steal whats inside in WH and Null, I can in low sec but I have to fight off an NPC pirate spawn to do it.
Do that and I think I can endorse your product or service.
Issler |

Cailais
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
54
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:25:00 -
[950] - 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.
|

Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:30:00 -
[951] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:Tetragammatron Prime wrote:If someone makes their customs office inaccessible to you there will always be others owned by reasonable people who welcome the neutral haulers into their space for the small profit through tax and potential killmails. Through what mechanism? No information has been presented by Team Pi regarding any search-ability function associated with POCO's I think they need to be allowed to connect with the team that works on ingame metrics and the MAP to make this change practical, and not a POCO Beta It should be possible to search for them through the Science and Industry window - but you should only be able to see POCOs that you are allowed to use. By limiting the S&I window searching to only the POCOs that you qualify for, an organization that wishes to "fly by night" and keep a low profile could simply restrict usage of the POCO to their closest friends (or just their corp members). Their POCO would not show up on the S&I screen and in order for someone to find the POCO they would have to fly out to the planet's customs office location and look (just like a modern POS). This would give security to the POCO similar to that of existing POS towers in that you would have to survey the system regularly to find POCOs that don't show up in the S&I window. I don't believe that POCOs should show up on the overview unless on-grid, but their warp-in points should (just like moons - the moons are on the overview, but the towers are not unless you are on-grid). The S&I window would need a filter for "current solar system", "current constellation", "current region" - just like when you search for lab slots.
Based on what I have understood from CCP Omen thus far, I'm beginning to wonder if it might not just be better to set a universal tarif setting and intentionally dispense with standings?
Reason: If the intention is to maintain economic productivity while also increasing player interaction, then removing standings settings eliminates policization of low sec poco's (and in fact perhaps there should be POCO variations similar to scan probes [ie general vs. combat])
But if the intention is politicization, then NBSI rules will impact economic productivity in low sec regions. The Strategic hybrid privitization of low sec is concerning given the plan to wipe out all NPC-CO's... and I'm still wrestling with why this wasn't implemented this way from the beginning...
Talk about a shell game of planetary proportions! Now you see it, now you don't... |

Cailais
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
57
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:31:00 -
[952] - 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.
|

Sashaaa
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:36:00 -
[953] - Quote
Confirming that this is a bag of crap |

Lin Fatale
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:40:00 -
[954] - Quote
I am heavily pvp oriented and doing PI Stuff to get ISK....so in know both sides.... And i realy love this POCO Idea
But I am not sure what you want to achieve with the current design. CCP Omen can you answer this question? so you would get the right feedback if it could work or not.
On PVP side with that much HP grinding and no reward. I dont think small gangs will attack these structures. Why should they do it?
Its just another structure with tons of HP. You need a blob --> usually blobs result in no fights --> after RF someone have to rep this stuff Added two boring jobs, thats not what I am looking for.
And if bigger alliances go arround and RF / kill these POCOs, they will just do it because they are bored. Then obv. something is wrong with the game design.
Why not take this Idea and add some real dynamic and small scale pvp to the game? POCO HP = 500.000 HP => can be rfed by a 10 men roaming gang in 15 min => enough time to form a counter fleet POCO Costs = 20 mil ISK => also small corps or people in lowsec can drop 10 of it in a system POCO drops everything if it dies => roaming gang get a fight or some ISK => its not the end of the world for the PI owner
POCO anchor/onlining time = 5-10 min max => no more boring things POCO cannot attacked by supercaps = always good
With Something like this the result could be that roaming gangs flying around to rf POCOs. Blocks or alliances will not form CTA fleets to safe some RFed PI stuff. So Renter or the owning corp have to defend it byself. And only if a big gang is coming the alliance helps out cuz there is maybe a fight incoming.
Small gangs have something to do. And if you have to rep a POCO you can do it with a few people and not with 10 carriers.
You have to go away from this, everything have to be super safe and lots of HP will do the trick. Current design = just another structure with tons of HP. Dont force people to bring blobs to do grind/rep something small. Add some real dynamic stuff and i think you have a chance with this POCO stuff.
|

Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:44:00 -
[955] - Quote
Cailais wrote: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.
I'd like to think that there would be lots of folks like you that would give it a try. I have to say unless you have a pretty big combat fleet that can be on 23/7 in the low sec where I live your CO will be shot to bits every day. We have standing 20+ ship roaming pirate fleets as a standard part of life here and they are always looking for something to shoot. Most of the time they never even loot what they kill, they just like to 'splode' stuff.
Issler |

Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:45:00 -
[956] - Quote
Issler Dainze wrote: So to the critics that say I am just being negative here is how you fix this idea.
1. Null sec and WH's work as planned. 2. Structures have to be "serviced" every 30 days by the owners or the shields and structure drop to 0 and be single shot popped. 3. High sec taxes can rise but only after the correct numbers have been determined after real study, not just a lazy doubling. 4. Low sec CO belong to the pirate faction dominant in the system they are in. To access them you have to work out your NPC pirate issues. 5. Rockets get a lot bigger and you are allowed to drop supplies to the planet. 6. Rocket launches and orbital deliveres happen at the launch facilities, not the command center. 7. I can hack a CO and steal whats inside in WH and Null, I can in low sec but I have to fight off an NPC pirate spawn to do it.
Do that and I think I can endorse your product or service.
Issler
Re: #4 - Consider instead that Pirate NPC-CO's go up but are attackable? And will spawn NPC Pirate Defenders (Just thinking of defense here since CONCORD won't be an option - not thinking about carebearing) --- and in FW Region's like Black Rise current NPC-CO's might be the default milita controling the system, and attacking spawns defenders?
This will allow a gradation from HSec to 0.0 (just as it is now) with out fundamentally altering the idea of POCO's nor the ability for the industrious Pirate or FW Corp from placing a POCO.... 0.0 Alliances are not needed in low sec - and precisely why they were not included in Faction Warfare in the first place imo.
Ultimately, there is a balance here, and CCP needs to take a balanced approach rather than the 'radical' changes that have thus far been discribed as 'missteps' (See CCP's recent layoff announcement)
#5 Tier 4 Advanced Commodities should be able to be taken off planet by rocket in a practical way - with a processor producing up to 2400m3 per 24 hours (if configured and feed properly -- and don't for get to burp them :P) anyone should have the practical option to access those commodities when a POCO is being camped - even if there is an associated ISK sink attached to that...
There are any number of options for exacting a price for such a practical option that does not entirely circumvent POCO's
#7 Is a no go as it would defeat the purpose of DUST 514 |

Arron Samar
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:46:00 -
[957] - Quote
Issler has it right and probably get my vote for the next CSM - Probably because I'm a lazy drunk who never sees anything through 
I PI in low on two characters and normallty turn over 450m isk per month which isn't great and really isn't worth the time, effort and bit of danger flying around 0.4 and 0.3 systems. I can earn the same amount in a few hours of incursions or 30 level 4s (made up stats ) but I do it as it is something different and lets me whizz around in my Covert Crane annoying the local .
Will I set up my own floating bullseye? It's really not worth the ISK Will I defend it if attacked? It's not worth it. Will I pay someone else tax to use one belonging to them? Maybe, depends on the rate.
Maybe this is a good thing as I can finally move from my 0.5 home and explore a bit, maybe I would have given it up when Dust allowed people to attack my command centres, maybe.
Eve changes and it may change for the better but for me, this time, I think not.
Hopefully this is not set in stone as it will be -2 targets for lowsec warriors to chase and more high sec for me  |

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
111
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:46:00 -
[958] - Quote
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
Like POS's it will be unlimited - though with POS's there is a maintenance element that does not exist with POCO's
So POCO spamming will supplant the POS Spamming of old.
By "POS spamming of old", are you referring to when POS count was married to sov mechanics? I don't see your connection.
This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |

Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:53:00 -
[959] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
Like POS's it will be unlimited - though with POS's there is a maintenance element that does not exist with POCO's
So POCO spamming will supplant the POS Spamming of old.
By "POS spamming of old", are you referring to when POS count was married to sov mechanics? I don't see your connection.
Lol I feel like I'm about to put my foot in my mouth but, yes.... it may be a loose example but I ultimately meant that there is no fixed number (at least not implied in anything written thus far). |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:53:00 -
[960] - Quote
Issler Dainze wrote:Spanking Monkeys wrote:i cant belive this is something you have worked on for a while CCP owen. this is a badly thought out structure driven boring activity, rather than just a boring activity. started offlining pos's already cos theres no way currently to absorb the extra costs involved. glad i have 3 months worth of fuel stored for 6 towers. i now have 18months for the 1 that will stay.
i just dont see why you at ccp are always trying to **** over the smaller guys/corps/alliances. this is directly what your doing here, have no doubt about it.
This is exactly why I've continued to run for the CSM to try and make CCP consider the "little guy". The solo player, the little indy corp or alliance. Clearly someone in the CSM needs to advocating for that segement of the pilots of Eve because this is another example of how CCP just doesn't get it!
It's odd because this change has me wanting to push up my plans to start a corp to place these in out of the way locations and try to get lucky and setup on a planet that is actually used. And I'd be one person doing it for the most part. And even if I don't get a decent opportunity to place and use them at least i could probably sell a few. Who knows. But I can't be the only one who sees this as a potential solo opportunity.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 61 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |