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) |
Daedalus II
The Older Gamers
58
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:54:00 -
[961] - Quote
A thought about the standing lockout of the customs offices;
What if you removed the ability to set +5 and +10 standing lockouts on all customs offices that are outside your own sov space. That way you can still lock out your enemies, but you can't very well put EVERYONE in EVE on your enemies list, so customs offices would be open to most of the general public.
Once you get into your own sov space though, you'll get the ability to also lock out the general public via the +5 and +10 standing options.
Of course you can still set a very high tax on your offices to lock people out that way, but that's another question. |
Agente
Milking Interstellar Incorporated.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:57:00 -
[962] - Quote
Reading most of the post I think there is people who undestood the taxes wrongly:
Enriched Uranium: now at 16500isk
Actual export tax: 9 isk/unit--->0.05%
Proposed High Sec tax: 18 isk/unit---->0.1% POCO at 100%:180 isk/unit------>1.1%
1. This is not going to be the problem. 2. Nobody will get rich with a POCO. 3. High Sec is going to be more profitable than anyother place once you factor the placement/replacement cost of the POCO.
So, good time for carebears, at increased prices. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
111
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:58:00 -
[963] - Quote
I can't wait to see all the whining when Dust514 finally goes live and the ability to shoot at PI installations becomes a reality too.
I'm sure it'll come as a complete surprise to people that the Eve - Dust514 link is a pvp game too. This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
34
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 19:59:00 -
[964] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote: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.
If you try in any of the low sec I spend time in you will be throwing isks down a rat hole. The locals will pop you CO as soon as you put it up. A single person corp can't possible keep a CO alive for long in most low sec.
Issler |
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 20:00:00 -
[965] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:I can't wait to see all the whining when Dust514 finally goes live and the ability to shoot at PI installations becomes a reality too.
I'm sure it'll come as a complete surprise to people that the Eve - Dust514 link is a pvp game too.
You made Hello Kitty cry! |
Hundo Kay
Great White North Exploration Gryphon League
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 20:00:00 -
[966] - 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.
I don't know what WH Space you are looking at, but nearly every C1 to C3 I fly into has active PI, they cant all be making POS fuel only for themselves.
I would wager to guess that a significant amount (20-30%) of PI comes from W-Space. I could be way off, but it is not insignificant.
|
Bodega Cat
Expedition Arcadia Narwhals Ate My Duck
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 20:04:00 -
[967] - Quote
Issler Dainze wrote:
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
I agree with you, thats why i think it would be best if theirs always a CO no matter what (with a static tax, or just a couple of options but no real way to block out everyone outside of null), and corps can flip it to have their sticker on it to get the tax benefit instead of it going to NPC's.
Can leave the same reinforce mechanics in, but essentially when the structure gets to 0, it fills all the way back up with the attacking corporation now having rights to the tax collector.
People with holdings on the planet don't have to worry about one day not having any access at all, at most, they might have to fear one owner imposing a bit more tight of a tax than another, thats about it. |
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY Tribal Conclave
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 20:14:00 -
[968] - Quote
CCP Omen wrote:Dorian Wylde wrote:While I do support putting more control into the players hands, I am a little sad about this change from the perspective of someone who lives in a wormhole. I hope the customs offices are either A: not too expensive, or B: fairly durable. Basically I'm envisioning people coming into occupied wormholes, blowing up customs offices, and leaving. No real interaction, just costing us money for the sake of griefing.
Also, nice touch adding the BP to the faction warfare stores. I know it isn't much, but I hope the little attention paid to the abysmal feature of FW will be appreciated. We gave this a lot of thought, and the CSM helped in significantly lowering the costs from what we had initially planned. All the materials are in the blog so you can both figure out what it will cost you, and even prepare a stash with those materials. One point to note is that the CO is still operational while in reinforcement, so unless the aggressor sticks around for the entire time you'll just rep the office back up when they are gone. If this becomes a big problem, we have solutions to mitigate it. Regards Omen
It is the same case here, I'm from a corporation that lives from WH PI, and it is a must say that, this changes can help us allot, in case these CO are not too expensive and they are durable against griefers.
Although, if possible, it would be really nice to anchor some sort of defenses around it that shots upon aggression. ( does it makes sense leaving these structures defenseless like this? not even a gun? ).
And how about each Faction having a different type o CO like are the Control tower system? Some having more capacity, others having more defense/offense...
And how about more levels of upgrade? to increase capacity/defense? or different fitting systems for it?
If you guys makes it customizable, it would be easier for players to fit them on every situation.
|
Agente
Milking Interstellar Incorporated.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 20:24:00 -
[969] - Quote
Another batch of numbers.
Critical factor to build a POCO:
I am alone in a plasma planet, producing Enriched uranium: Actual price 16500isk/unit
Maximum yield: 360 units/day=6M ROI of the POCO: 17 days
Is the POCO to survive less than 17 days?---> FORGET Is the POCO to survive between 17 and 34 days?--->Depends of how bored you are. Is the POCO to survive more than 34 days?---> Great, i get the same that with PI 2.0 but with more risk.
Answer with 90% prob: buy the POS fuel in Jita.
|
Meldan Anstian
Imperial Genesis The Seventh Day
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 20:25:00 -
[970] - Quote
Lin Fatale wrote:
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
I put up a POCO for 20 mil ISK. As the owner of the POCO, what am I risking by loosing the POCO other than the POCO's cost itself? The PI materials? They aren't mine, I don't care.
If I form a counter fleet and land on the 10 man roaming fleet attacking my POCO, and I loose 1 ship and sustain a loss of over 20 mil ISK from the battle, I would have been better to not defend the POCO at all and just put up a new one.
If the 10 man gang puts it in RF mode, I come in to rep it. I am risking a ship, probably worth atleast 20 mil, to repair something less expensive then my ship I am flying. Again, let em blow it up, why risk a ship more expensive than what it's repairing?
The owner of the PI materials in the POCO presumably would not get an notification that a POCO with my stuff is being attacked. If they did, why would they bother to defend it? It's not my POCO. If loosing my stuff in a POCO happened often enough, I keep my materials on the launch pad and only move it to the POCO when I come in system to pick it up. So the roaming gang really wouldnt get ISK, since PI owners wouldn't keep their stuff in a POCO.
If we go the other way, and make a POCO very expensive and therefore worth defending, the payback time on the investment goes way up as well. Raising taxes to a point that the payback time is reasonable, raises the cost of Pi to unreasonable rates, and makes it worthwhile to avoid the POCO and just launch stuff into space avoiding the taxes entirely.
I agree with what this idea is trying to achieve. I simply do not see a way to make it feasible in the game. |
|
amarr alt2
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 20:43:00 -
[971] - Quote
Hey CCP, Remember this ? http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=2672
Thats right, the one about CCP CEO apologising to the EVE player base for rushed expansions/features that no-one wants/nerfs that suit the few and not those that actually use the ****, without listening to the player base. ..
Just because he didn't mention PI, doesn't mean you have to **** that up too ! |
Par'Gellen
Neon Cranium
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 20:55:00 -
[972] - Quote
amarr alt2 wrote:Hey CCP, Remember this ? http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=2672Thats right, the one about CCP CEO apologising to the EVE player base for rushed expansions/features that no-one wants/nerfs that suit the few and not those that actually use the ****, without listening to the player base. .. Just because he didn't mention PI, doesn't mean you have to **** that up too ! This! |
Meldan Anstian
Imperial Genesis The Seventh Day
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 21:10:00 -
[973] - Quote
The only way I see this working.....
1. Keep all CO's not in high sec non destructible as they are now.
2. However, you can attack them as originally put forth in the blog... attack it, put into RF mode, come back in 24 hours and "destroy it". When you "destroy" it, you are really gaining ownership of it, not really destroying it.
3. You then can set taxes as you wish. Too high and people either move to another planet or just use launches to avoid your taxes. Too low and you get swamped with people trying to save money on taxes, but resources on the planet are depleted very quickly, hurting everyone's income.
4. No matter what state the CO is in, you can go up to it and get resources out of it, and risk getting your ass blown off too.
5. Maybe make it so that you can't lock out people in low sec with standings, but you can in WH and null sec? I don't know, would want feedback from people before deciding on this definitively if I were CCP.
6. The tariff's would work the same as planned in the blog.
7. CO's would stay in NPC ownership until attacked and "destroyed".
You get the original intent of getting income via planetary taxation, and also the increased player-to-player interaction.
You avoid the problems of trying to get a return on investment of a destructible structure. The CO's become somewhat worthwhile to defend since you would loose whatever income it generated. They would become somewhat worthwhile to attack to gain the income from the CO.
The effect on the overall economy is much much easier to understand and predict, and certainly not as dramatic.
It avoids the vacuum of CO's just after implementation as originally planned.
The only problem I see is that the 10-20 mill ISK income per month... isn't really worth fighting much over. |
Marie Celeste Engelenhart
Amarr War Industries Empire Industry
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 21:11:00 -
[974] - Quote
amarr alt2 wrote:Hey CCP, Remember this ? http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=2672Thats right, the one about CCP CEO apologising to the EVE player base for rushed expansions/features that no-one wants/nerfs that suit the few and not those that actually use the ****, without listening to the player base. .. Just because he didn't mention PI, doesn't mean you have to **** that up too !
This indeed. Also CCP, please consider the fact that you give the ++berblobs the tools to completely sever the link between EVE and Dust514. Why would I hire PS3-players to defend my PI when the bottleneck is clearly the vulnerability of of my POCO. (Worst acronym ever btw.) Do you really want cluster****whatever make Dust obsolete just because you foolishly thought it would be to big a task to complete? You underestimate the lulz in griefing. |
Buruk Utama
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 21:18:00 -
[975] - Quote
Team PI, how many of you actually play the game on a regular basis and interact with the PI/Industrial markets?
If none on your team can raise their hand then this is doomed to be one big clusterf*ck. |
Laechyd Eldgorn
draketrain
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 21:21:00 -
[976] - Quote
great news
i just hope hi sec PI will be balanced in a way it's also still lucrative business in low sec
also i don't like idea of bpc's being FW only. how about also low sec mission agents or storyline missions?
|
Shadow51585
Legio Geminatus Gentlemen's Agreement
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 21:37:00 -
[977] - Quote
Low-sec should remain under NPC control. The offices there shouldn't be able to be destroyed or fought over.
I can understand wanting to give low-sec dwellers something to fight over, but this doesn't seem like a god place to do that. After all, it is technically empire space.
To be frank, this seems like one more thing as a whole that just doesn't need to be changed. I do PI in null-sec, and my alliance holds space there, so my planets will likely be fine... but we don't DO this faction warfare stuff. How are we supposed to get the BP's without paying some stupid high price?
Come on... make the blueprints for this available from more then just one place.... |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
102
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 22:05:00 -
[978] - Quote
DECISION TREE
There needs to be a decision tree for these POCO's that's greater than simply "Attack" and then come back in x hours and "Defend".
Do this :
The attacker, if he wants to take the POCO is required to deploy a "Administrative Task Force Shuttle" (I'm having fun here) - that's full of politicians that infiltrate and make the POCO vulnerable to attack. More realistically, some kind of "Planetary Blockade Unit".
It takes 30 minutes from that moment of deploying the Unit for the POCO to become vulnerable to Phase 1 attack. This 30 minute buffer alerts the defenders and allows them to scramble a quick force to defend the POCO, and also forces the attackers to do more than "Drive by" attacks on multiple planets. They have to WANT the POCO down.
Once the POCO is vulnerable to the first attack, it can get taken down to 25% shields and reinforced for the timer the next day. This way the DEFENDERS have a decision and an option to scramble and defend their POCO's, and it forces the attackers to bring assets and an INTENT to "disturb" the Customs offices. There is absolutely no reason that "Pirates" won't just bash POCO's for fun on a boring afternoon. Forcing the attacker to deploy assets and waiting for the time limit to expire limits how much can be "disturbed".
My biggest concern is random Pirates bashing POCO's for fun, getting all the defenders to come defend the next day and not care to show up even - but "Griefing" and "crying wolf" repeatedly just because they can. NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |
Cyniac
Twilight Star Rangers Black Thorne Alliance
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 22:06:00 -
[979] - Quote
CCP Omen wrote: the tax thing is quite complex, (to my own surprise when I took it on) but whenever you do percent, there has to be a value at the bottom to modify with the percent. In the "real" world, customs are paid as actual money for any given commodity. Like for instance, 1kg Banana costs 1 USD or whatever. This is the tariff. This cost, is set by CCP on every single item that can flow to/from planets and the owner of the customs office modifies how much of that value he wants. This value existed before this change as well, and was precisely what you paid for import and export. We have increased it significantly but in turn, the default value is 5% which is the same as before =)
Hope that makes any sense!
Regards Omen
Not really complex at all.
It would probably be conceptually a simpler idea to charge not an isk fee but a % of goods transferred instead, with the owner of the station having a special corp hangar (maybe bigger than average) where the goods are stored.
This also has a couple of other advantages such as making it so that the value of the structure increases over time up to the point where the owner drops in and empties the "taxes".
Not only is the idea of charging a different tax rate for different security settings a good idea - it would also be very useful to have separate tax rates on the import and export of materials.
Differentiating between the import and export of materials is important because it means that you could allow extraction from a planet, (to a certain sec class) but in essence prohibit turning it into a factory planet (by setting a very high import tax) I could see a corp setting up a small cartel over some of the more valuable PI space doing this.
However this is going to greatly skew PI - WH PI is going to get a massive boost (because PI in a WH is fairly well protected) whereas PI in NPC nullsec is going down the drain.
Final question - why just one customs office if I might ask? I could see the use and value of having these in different sizes too, or having some of the nullsec factions (Syndicate comes to mind, their LP store is not very interesting) provide for some interesting flavours of customs offices.
Anyhow... interesting but it does royally mess up all of my PI right now. |
Solo Player
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 22:08:00 -
[980] - Quote
NPC (and other) sov holders letting you tariff their planets at no costs? Are you mad? Or are you planning to cut your utterly neglected backstory altogether anyway in order to include even more game-y feature into your "space simulation" sandbox?
And damn your buggy new forum - I just typed in half an hour of brilliant ideas on how to improve this and when I finally hit "post" it just refreshed the page to the original (empty) state. RAGE!
Also, listen to Issler, she's got it righter than you. Except standings to the sov holder should be relevant, not the local pirate faction. |
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 22:14:00 -
[981] - Quote
Solo Player wrote:NPC (and other) sov holders letting you tariff their planets at no costs? Are you mad? Or are you planning to cut your utterly neglected backstory altogether anyway in order to include even more game-y feature into your "space simulation" sandbox?
And damn your buggy new forum - I just typed in half an hour of brilliant ideas on how to improve this and when I finally hit "post" it just refreshed the page to the original (empty) state. RAGE!
Also, listen to Issler, she's got it righter than you. Except standings to the sov holder should be relevant, not the local pirate faction.
You are setting tariffs on the goods which pass through the POCO, which excludes rocket launches. Since at that point you would own the POCO, why would you not be able to charge for it's use? |
Monger Man
D.S.A.
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 22:20:00 -
[982] - Quote
Bilaz wrote:Let me remind you one of devblogs written not so long ago: fom here http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=2351Quote:Lessons learned 1) Shooting at stationary structures is boring See: Starbase warfare, Dominion sov warfare. Even the good fights that do happen around such objectives could be improved by having better objectives. Shooting at things with hitpoints scales very efficiently with fleet size, which encourages lag-producing behavior 2) Having to spend significant amounts of effort defeating an enemy which isn't even fighting back is really boring See: Starbase warfare, Dominion sov warfare. See in particular how long it took to clear IT Alliance's ownership out of Delve, as a recent example 3) Waking up every morning and having to clean up the mess made while you were asleep is boring See: station ping-pong pre-sov, repairing station services. Having to do something tedious every day before you can actually play the game is not cool 4) Doing something just "because it would be cool/neat/awesome" is always a bad idea and will come back to bite you later See: Jump bridges, cyno jammers, Sov 4, AoE doomsdays, titans in general, supercarrier boost... Note that we should still obviously strive to make everything cool/neat/awesome, but when we start off with an awesome idea rather than an actual problem we want to fix or a feature that has a clear, functional and necessary goal, it generally requires painful fixes further down the road 5) Cost is a useful variable to tune but an unwise thing to rely on to enforce scarcity or balance - players will always be richer than you think See: outposts, titans, supercarriers 6) Making something tedious will not stop players doing it if it's very clearly the best option. They'll do it, and they'll hate it See: everything involving starbases. As a counterpoint though, things like the one-per-corp-per-system-per-day starbase rule demonstrate that if something doesn't make a big difference but is sufficiently awkward to do, then any theoretical "exploit" scenarios tend to fall out of favor quickly as they're just not worth the effort. 7) People like to do one-stop shopping, and will "go to Jita" for everything unless doing so is comparatively very inconvenient See: moon mineral distribution, high-strength booster resource distribution, neither of which achieved much in the way of the nullsec-to-nullsec trade that they hoped to encourage now to your new customs office 1) check. Its sure stationary and we kinda expected to shoot it 2) check. it surely wont fight back 3) check. Yeah - at night someone reinforced it and you HAVE to rep it up 4) check. We dont really need it, now do we? 5) check. It cost much more than most people get from pi and taxes are going up 6) check. We have to get bpc, build one thing, haul it, then do something with it again - with no reasoning behind it so you repeat 6 out of 7 mistakes you folks supposedly learned? Good job as always.
I have to say I cant disagree with this. At first I read the blog and smiled. Thinking of all the possibilities in lowsec. But then realized why I haven't bothered with a pos, defense, fueling, tedious, and for what? So I can research blue prints? Or haul crap in and out? I have 4 planets in lowsec right now. I spend little time on them, the hauling is just boring as hell. Most likely I'll wont be doing it at all with this change. |
Solo Player
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 22:34:00 -
[983] - Quote
Ok. I'll try once more. Forum better not eat it this time.
problem: your proposition for POCOs just adds another largely seperate minigame to the EVE that is easily exploited and doesn't make sense in the gameworld you have
goal: mesh this new feature with what you already have in away that makes sense and offers interesting new gameplay
solution (for low sec and npc nullsec): - require minimum standings towards system sov holder in order to apply for the privilege of tariffing a planet - players apply for a "letter of privilege" to tariff a planet for a set amount of time (one month?) as a corp at the planet's regular customs office. - applying corps will offer a certain share of claimed tariffs to the sov holder - letter of privilege for the next time period will go to the highest offer (modified by the corp's standings) at the time the current letter runs out. - if the current holder isn't successful, their POCO will unanchor at that time. - the letter of privilege further costs a basic fee dependent on system sec to be deposited upon application. - corps/alliances may shoot and disable war targets' POCOs - shooting/disabling (griefing) of non-war target POCOs is possible, at the risk of a system sec-dependent Concord reaction. - when no operational POCO is in orbit, a sov-holder operated conventional customs office is open for business at high sec conditions. - possibly further allow shooting/disabling of sov holder npc customs office at increased risk of Concord reaction. import/export would then be limited to direct launches until said customs office auto-regenerates after a while.
advice: a sandbox balances itself if factors are sufficiently interdependent. don't listen to whiners fearing the need to adapt their strategies. players will adapt as long as it includes some measure of fun. |
Kar DeMerchant
Trinova DeepOps Trinova
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 22:38:00 -
[984] - Quote
First, I would like to thank the devs for giving large alliances one more way to drive small alliances into the ground.
On the other hand, so long as we small alliances can still ninja any planet regardless of sec status or sov holder it might not be so bad.
I am getting very tired of CCP making decisions based on what makes sense for PL and the other mega alliances and neglecting the little guy.
|
Solo Player
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 22:58:00 -
[985] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote: You are setting tariffs on the goods which pass through the POCO, which excludes rocket launches. Since at that point you would own the POCO, why would you not be able to charge for it's use?
Because the sov holders' services of policing the system and providing infrastructure is usually provided at the cost/incentive of taxing and tariffing those services' beneficiaries. If they subcontracted their privilege to someone else, they'd be sure to get something out of it, wouldn't they? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 23:10:00 -
[986] - Quote
Solo Player wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote: You are setting tariffs on the goods which pass through the POCO, which excludes rocket launches. Since at that point you would own the POCO, why would you not be able to charge for it's use?
Because the sov holders' services of policing the system and providing infrastructure is usually provided at the cost/incentive of taxing and tariffing those services' beneficiaries. If they subcontracted their privilege to someone else, they'd be sure to get something out of it, wouldn't they?
I'm not sure where any policing can been seen or benefit us. As far as the infrastructure, the colonies and soon the POCO will be player owned. There will be no NPC involvement. What you are proposing is a considerably different system. CCP is proposing that that the role once filled by NPC structures be done away with and totally replaced by structures built and operated by us. What you propose is more like subcontracting the existing resources instead of buying/replacing them, in which case, yes, paying the NPC sov holders would make sense. |
Battelle
No Option Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 23:22:00 -
[987] - Quote
I waited a while before responding to this to see how the posts went. It's good to see that some folks are actually thinking about the ramifications of this finally. Congrats to Bilaz and his post. I suspect this will probably be the death of PI for the average player but maybe that's what CCP wants if you think about it. |
Solo Player
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 23:33:00 -
[988] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote: I'm not sure where any policing can been seen or benefit us. As far as the infrastructure, the colonies and soon the POCO will be player owned. There will be no NPC involvement. What you are proposing is a considerably different system. CCP is proposing that that the role once filled by NPC structures be done away with and totally replaced by structures built and operated by us. What you propose is more like subcontracting the existing resources instead of buying/replacing them, in which case, yes, paying the NPC sov holders would make sense.
Granted, but I don't see CCP handing players the reins to the universe at all, actually. New technology, background plots, missions, stargates etc. are still fast in their hands.
Neither do I see the empires do that - they are fighting over worthless space such as Black Rise, why should they just give it to us pretentious/thankless bunch? And they do provide services such as Concord (an empire joint venture), free (why?) stargate transport and probably others.
If it was otherwise, what sense in leaving them sov in low-sec? Why have low-sec at all? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 23:35:00 -
[989] - Quote
Battelle wrote:I waited a while before responding to this to see how the posts went. It's good to see that some folks are actually thinking about the ramifications of this finally. Congrats to Bilaz and his post. I suspect this will probably be the death of PI for the average player but maybe that's what CCP wants if you think about it.
The only aspect of this that seems bad globally would be the ability to lock people out based on standings. All other aspects have the same capacity to be self regulating that everything else has. If you want to operate a POCO but not do PI, you don't limit access, you set taxes low and leave it open to anyone. In lowsec this encourages traffic from ninja PI but may ward it away as well due to real time updates letting you know people locations.
I would make a few potential changes though:
1 Seed the BPC's about 1 week prior to removing the CO's to prevent shortages while they are built/deployed 2 Remove standings. I'm sort of torn on this one. It seems bad in my head but I can see that making open ones more lucrative at the same time 3 Instead of having a percentage of a set value per item, charge a fixed amount per cubic meter 4 Don't give wallet ticks in real time and don't identify the specific POCO that was paid. This reduces the POCO's capabilities as a gank tool.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.19 23:43:00 -
[990] - Quote
Solo Player wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote: I'm not sure where any policing can been seen or benefit us. As far as the infrastructure, the colonies and soon the POCO will be player owned. There will be no NPC involvement. What you are proposing is a considerably different system. CCP is proposing that that the role once filled by NPC structures be done away with and totally replaced by structures built and operated by us. What you propose is more like subcontracting the existing resources instead of buying/replacing them, in which case, yes, paying the NPC sov holders would make sense.
Granted, but I don't see CCP handing players the reins to the universe at all, actually. New technology, background plots, missions, stargates etc. are still fast in their hands. Neither do I see the empires do that - they are fighting over worthless space such as Black Rise, why should they just give it to us pretentious/thankless bunch? And they do provide services such as Concord (an empire joint venture), free (why?) stargate transport and probably others. If it was otherwise, what sense in leaving them sov in low-sec? Why have low-sec at all?
If we must broach lore/RP I choose to look at it like a strategic business decision on the part of Concord/the empires. The risks of opperating in low null are too great to likely be able to return a sustainable profit so they scrap the entire low/null/WH(and how did they even operate there?) and let someone else take a stab at it if they so choose. As far as Concord/Empire funding: sales taxes, LP stores, Sov fees(again how?), Highsec POCO taxes, NPC corp taxes and whatever else (+lore elements like economic activity on occupied worlds) and other should be able to keep them afloat I guess. |
|
|
|
|
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 |