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) |
bilingi
Ghosts of the Storm
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:43:00 -
[1591] - Quote
Im just wondering what Idiot will actually use a player Poco in low sec..... Hello look a customer ....... BOOOOOMMM...
HAHAHHA what a carebear quick lets wait on the next one.... |
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:13:00 -
[1592] - Quote
bilingi wrote:Im just wondering what Idiot will actually use a player Poco in low sec..... Hello look a customer ....... BOOOOOMMM... HAHAHHA what a carebear quick lets wait on the next one....
There's nothing I can add to improve upon this... |
rootimus maximus
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
48
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 05:57:00 -
[1593] - Quote
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:bilingi wrote:Im just wondering what Idiot will actually use a player Poco in low sec..... Hello look a customer ....... BOOOOOMMM... HAHAHHA what a carebear quick lets wait on the next one.... There's nothing I can add to improve upon this...
Indeed. His post is utterly beyond help. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
895
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:19:00 -
[1594] - Quote
rootimus maximus wrote: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. How can you be so certain that there won't be reasonable tax rates? Quote:But... if you keep the customs offices there, the high sec PI people can fight back. Fighting back would be what the combat ships are for.
1. Human nature. You may initially see low tax rates to draw people to the planet by some before raising them, but really... if you're doing PI in low, where the resources are limited, do you really want to make it cheap for others to drain those resources? No. You either cut them off or jack up the rates. If their entire assumption is that corps will plant these and be kind and gentle overlords... well, it appears CCP doesn't know their own game, and that's scary.
2. Fighting back... there's no reason for high sec PI folks to fight back once these things are implemented as originally stated. What for? If you're in an NPC corp, as many are, you can't plant your own. However, if you leave the customs offices in place, then high sec folks can opt to destroy the offensive POCOs and regain full access to their PI.
It's pitifully sad CCP is ignoring these issues though while those looking to abuse the system (or that have no horse in the race and simply will laugh at the griefing) blow sunshine up their arses. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
895
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:20:00 -
[1595] - Quote
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:CCP will not code for PI 'Power Users'... so arguing the finite details of power using the current PI feature will not impress anything upon CCP developers that will help iterate a better PCO feature. CCP Omen expressed exactly the current problem with the proposed PCO feature as it is currently iterated when he said: Quote: Our assumption is that Alliances or any corp will want to make money off their CO in low-sec. If that assumption turns out to be wrong, then we might intervene with a future update. THIS and only THIS is what we should be challenging in this thread, and constructively arguing against this over arching assumption to help iterate a better feature - anything less is a complete waste of all of your (everyones) intelectual talents imo. I really hope this exceptionally constructive thread doesn't devolve into epeen drivel...
They already have coded for the PI power users. Otherwise there wouldn't be any. They're potentially breaking an established paradigm. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
628
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:33:00 -
[1596] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:CCP will not code for PI 'Power Users'... so arguing the finite details of power using the current PI feature will not impress anything upon CCP developers that will help iterate a better PCO feature. CCP Omen expressed exactly the current problem with the proposed PCO feature as it is currently iterated when he said: Quote: Our assumption is that Alliances or any corp will want to make money off their CO in low-sec. If that assumption turns out to be wrong, then we might intervene with a future update. THIS and only THIS is what we should be challenging in this thread, and constructively arguing against this over arching assumption to help iterate a better feature - anything less is a complete waste of all of your (everyones) intelectual talents imo. I really hope this exceptionally constructive thread doesn't devolve into epeen drivel... They already have coded for the PI power users. Otherwise there wouldn't be any. They're potentially breaking an established paradigm.
Wow.
80 pages and several weeks later, and you're still just upset that CCP is changing things? "Breaking an established paradigm"?
Yes, CCP is moving your cheese. Get over the angst Mr. Angst.
If you're reading my sig you cannot claim ignorance, only stupidity or apathy, if you don't go VOTE now for CSM7. |
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:48:00 -
[1597] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:CCP will not code for PI 'Power Users'... so arguing the finite details of power using the current PI feature will not impress anything upon CCP developers that will help iterate a better PCO feature. CCP Omen expressed exactly the current problem with the proposed PCO feature as it is currently iterated when he said: Quote: Our assumption is that Alliances or any corp will want to make money off their CO in low-sec. If that assumption turns out to be wrong, then we might intervene with a future update. THIS and only THIS is what we should be challenging in this thread, and constructively arguing against this over arching assumption to help iterate a better feature - anything less is a complete waste of all of your (everyones) intelectual talents imo. I really hope this exceptionally constructive thread doesn't devolve into epeen drivel... They already have coded for the PI power users. Otherwise there wouldn't be any. They're potentially breaking an established paradigm.
There is no potential about it, they are breaking an established paradigm.
With that said, what is at issue is the paradigm they are shifting to... a paradigm shift that needs to be critiqued by the community to ensure its the 'right' paradigm shift.
So when I say they will not code for power users, you've misunderstood my meaning:
They will not modify their paradigm shift to cater to power users, as the current paradigm is being broken in favor of a new PCO-centric paradigm.
So arguing about maintaining a paradigm that will not be maintained, is a waste of time.
What will be productive, will be approaching CCP with reasonable arguments that attempt to alter their theoretical paradigm vision to a realistic and practical one that actually fits real game play dynamics.
|
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:50:00 -
[1598] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:
Yes, CCP is moving your cheese. Get over the angst Mr. Angst.
I c wat U did thar!! |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
895
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:26:00 -
[1599] - Quote
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
There is no potential about it, they are breaking an established paradigm.
With that said, what is at issue is the paradigm they are shifting to... a paradigm shift that needs to be critiqued by the community to ensure its the 'right' paradigm shift.
So when I say they will not code for power users, you've misunderstood my meaning:
They will not modify their paradigm shift to cater to power users, as the current paradigm is being broken in favor of a new PCO-centric paradigm.
So arguing about maintaining a paradigm that will not be maintained, is a waste of time.
What will be productive, will be approaching CCP with reasonable arguments that attempt to alter their theoretical paradigm vision to a realistic and practical one that actually fits real game play dynamics.
But that's just it... they can do both. They can maintain things for those established in the system while introducing PCOs in a way that the system and economy can absorb with relatively little pain. By simply leaving the customs offices in place, even for a period of three to six months outside of low, permanently in low, you allow everyone plenty of time to adapt while the PCO model establishes. If I have reasonable time to gather the BPCs and build the PCOs needed in my hole (will be up to 10) then for me nothing breaks at all. It becomes nothing more than an annoying added expense, but that can be absorbed. It's the cold turkey you're-PI-is-dead-right-now approach that concerns me personally, and with regards to high sec into low sec PI the fact that without customs offices to fight for the high sec folks are pretty much screwed and completely at the mercy of other people for their PI when that's never been the case before.
I don't hate or even dislike the PCO concept. I don't trust it as of yet, this is true... giving other people control over someone else's PI seems inherently bad... but if implemented intelligently and not forced down our throats generating an immediate gag reflex I think it can wind up working well.
Right now... a lot of people are gagging. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
493
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:51:00 -
[1600] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:But I notice there's CONCORD COs all over lowsec, not sure if they are destroyable. Just injected the skills for a dread on sisi, will let you know tomorrow The lowsec concord COs on Sisi are destroyable, just confirmed it.
The HP is misleading, because it bleeds too much into armor and hull. It died while still at 90% shields or so. I expect this will be different for player COs.
It does not go into reinforced (being NPC-owned, it was expected). And you do get a killmail from it (it must be the only NPC structure that does).
You get a -1.5% sec hit just from shooting it, -6% from destruction. If this is the sec status penalty for shooting player COs, it's much too high. What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644 |
|
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
1101
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:25:00 -
[1601] - Quote
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 |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
744
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:37:00 -
[1602] - 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 probably had to roll out what they had, a one week lead time is not all that long in terms of development time - especially if they are going significantly back to the drawing board with the concept (as they need to).
|
Cailais
Rekall Incorporated Sinewave Alliance
227
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 22:38:00 -
[1603] - 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.
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 22:47:00 -
[1604] - Quote
Cailais wrote: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.
pi goods used to be an isk sink. i would love them to go back to exactly that, but at this stage pi is perfect to ccp.
the isk font is still there and infact it grew more with corps getting the tax income insted of it being removed from the game. CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:23:00 -
[1605] - 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
If CO's in low sec are destructible on SiSi, then I see that as an indication they are making changes based on our feedback.
We asked NPC-CO's be left but made destructible in Low Sec and that's what's being reported...
It may be a bit of a stretch to say they don't get it... not if their re-iterating. |
Zeronic
Zero Core Labs United Abominations
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:34:00 -
[1606] - Quote
I keep see this issues being talk about and the current path being a negative one. So CCP Dev's what if the people say Cancel this POCO and work on polishing the game over new content. Is that so much to ask?? |
Certis
Spaced Cowboys
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:57:00 -
[1607] - Quote
Sorry don't have time to read through all these pages, so maybe this has been said.
If I got this right you are saying that an individual and/or member of an npc corp can't build a customs office in low sec. In which case CCP just gonna shoot themselves in the foot yet again. Way to go if you want to loose even more old players who are in an npc corp and are happy that way. Not to mention many more new players who may also prefer not to join a non npc corp.
Low sec has been underutilised for years now and just when you introduce something that gives more players the incentive to explore and use low sec, you go and nerf it.
Introduce new stuff by all means, but don't keep moving the goal posts and nerfing stuff that many players have spent a great deal of time setting up for themselves.
Jeez when are you guys gonna wake up. |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
895
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 01:44:00 -
[1608] - Quote
Cailais wrote: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.
Ah, C, you're missing the main point though. If the COs in low are destroyed and someone puts a PCO up, what recourse do the high sec folks have in NPC corps if they wind up denied access to those planets they're already established on?
None. Go somewhere else.
However, if you leave the COs intact but only offline them in the presence of a PCO, then the high sec people are given the option to band together, remove the PCO and start using the customs office again. Maybe a different corp will come along and set one up at fair rates the high folks accept... then they're making isk. You have to see that buy leaving the COs intact, though, that there's greater options for conflict simply because the high sec folks will have something they can actually fight for if provoked. The current method removes all incentive to fight for them. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
rootimus maximus
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
48
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:12:00 -
[1609] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:Ah, C, you're missing the main point though. If the COs in low are destroyed and someone puts a PCO up, what recourse do the high sec folks have in NPC corps if they wind up denied access to those planets they're already established on?
They could experience Eve in all its glory by joining or forming a player corp. NPC corps have their place, but they can also be a hinderance. This is an excellent case in point. |
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 07:18:00 -
[1610] - Quote
Zeronic wrote:I keep see this issues being talk about and the current path being a negative one. So CCP Dev's what if the people say Cancel this POCO and work on polishing the game over new content. Is that so much to ask??
Ah what the hell let's just cancel DUST 514 too?
It's not the feature, its the lack of refinement in the current proposed iteration - lets see what the next Team Pi DevBlog says...
*CCP Omen - But whatever you do, Don't do what CCP Tallest did by leaving info out of his blog that he had to go back and edit |
|
MasterDk78
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 08:21:00 -
[1611] - Quote
Since they are totally defenceless, i would suggest putting in some kind of defence.
Etc, it would be pretty annoying while your sleeping that some noob spend some few hours alone sitting with his drones to get the office down to reinforce mode.
A way to add some defence to it can be done in some ways.
1. being able to upgrade the office with an attachment of dronebay. (150 m3) with 125 bandwith The dronebay attachment has 4 med slots, etc with the purpose of putting an sensor booster on it, some drone mod bonus'ses. As standard the dronebay attachment would have an range of 50km (hench why u can attach a sensor booster. Depending on the size of the attacking ship, the dronebay attachment would then send out drones accordingly to the mass of The attacker. Etc. light drones (if in stock) against a frig. Heavy drones vs bc & bs or aboth.
2. The office could be upgradeble with small to medium guns, those guns cant be killed, but if the office went into reinforce mode, The guns would be shut down, untill repaired.
now a q.
In lowsec, its a criminal act to attack an another player where u would loose standing, would it count in the same way when attacking an office (unless u at war) |
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 09:32:00 -
[1612] - Quote
MasterDk78 wrote:Since they are totally defenceless, i would suggest putting in some kind of defence.
Etc, it would be pretty annoying while your sleeping that some noob spend some few hours alone sitting with his drones to get the office down to reinforce mode.
A way to add some defence to it can be done in some ways.
1. being able to upgrade the office with an attachment of dronebay. (150 m3) with 125 bandwith The dronebay attachment has 4 med slots, etc with the purpose of putting an sensor booster on it, some drone mod bonus'ses. As standard the dronebay attachment would have an range of 50km (hench why u can attach a sensor booster. Depending on the size of the attacking ship, the dronebay attachment would then send out drones accordingly to the mass of The attacker. Etc. light drones (if in stock) against a frig. Heavy drones vs bc & bs or aboth.
2. The office could be upgradeble with small to medium guns, those guns cant be killed, but if the office went into reinforce mode, The guns would be shut down, untill repaired.
now a q.
In lowsec, its a criminal act to attack an another player where u would loose standing, would it count in the same way when attacking an office (unless u at war)
Yes - this was already answered by CCP Nullarbor - Shooting PCO's in low sec will give you GCC as per the normal mechanic.
All aggression mechanics stay the same. |
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
493
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 10:42:00 -
[1613] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote: Ah, C, you're missing the main point though. If the COs in low are destroyed and someone puts a PCO up, what recourse do the high sec folks have in NPC corps if they wind up denied access to those planets they're already established on?
None. Go somewhere else.
A bunch of NPC corp people can cooperate to take down a POCO, but not enough to setup an alt corp that anchors a new one?
In any case, I think forcing people to keep their lowsec POCOs open to all makes lots of sense. It fits lowsec gameplay better, in the same way a lowsec corp can "claim" a station, but can't stop others from using it except by permacamping the undock. And it makes more sense for the lore. What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644 |
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
895
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 10:50:00 -
[1614] - Quote
rootimus maximus wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Ah, C, you're missing the main point though. If the COs in low are destroyed and someone puts a PCO up, what recourse do the high sec folks have in NPC corps if they wind up denied access to those planets they're already established on? They could experience Eve in all its glory by joining or forming a player corp. NPC corps have their place, but they can also be a hinderance. This is an excellent case in point.
So they should be forced to give up a part of the game they like in order to play the way you think they should? Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
628
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:30:00 -
[1615] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:rootimus maximus wrote:Ingvar Angst wrote:Ah, C, you're missing the main point though. If the COs in low are destroyed and someone puts a PCO up, what recourse do the high sec folks have in NPC corps if they wind up denied access to those planets they're already established on? They could experience Eve in all its glory by joining or forming a player corp. NPC corps have their place, but they can also be a hinderance. This is an excellent case in point. So they should be forced to give up a part of the game they like in order to play the way you think they should?
What is there to like about being in an NPC corp?
The taxes you pay "to the man" for no benefit?
The camaraderie of hundreds of newbies in corp chat asking the same silly questions over and over?
Perhaps it's the false sense of community one gets when they see green star icons in hi-sec all the time?
Or is it just the sad fear of being wardec'd in a real corporation that keeps them in the shallow end of the pool?
If you're reading my sig you cannot claim ignorance, only stupidity or apathy, if you don't go VOTE now for CSM7. |
Anna Orkiste
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 13:38:00 -
[1616] - Quote
So PVPers preper pay more for your ships. POS fuel again geting higher in price on this, So ractions to wil go up in price, and thatmeans ships modules evriting will rise in price.
I dont like this, more usles job for industrialists again :( no fun :(
Afcors grifers happy yeah someting to kill but they not tink forder than this ;)
|
Dirk Smacker
Inglorious-Basterds
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 13:56:00 -
[1617] - Quote
The steep standing hit may prevent large nul sec alliances from marauding through low sec, blowing up all the customs offices, and becoming absentee landlords.
That could be a good thing. I guess once you have a signature, you cannot have a blank one. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
215
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 14:00:00 -
[1618] - Quote
Dirk Smacker wrote:The steep standing hit may prevent large nul sec alliances from marauding through low sec, blowing up all the customs offices, and becoming absentee landlords.
That could be a good thing.
that steep standing hit means nothing for anyone that lives in 0.0. can raise it fast by using the sec'ing up loophole. or stay blinky in 0.0 it donst really matter either way. but tbh i doubt any roaming gang shooting them will come back to finish them off. id expect them mostly ref'ing them to anoy people and making them come rep it. cos repping is awesom fun as already stated by ccp CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
895
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 14:02:00 -
[1619] - Quote
War Kitten wrote: What is there to like about being in an NPC corp?
The taxes you pay "to the man" for no benefit?
The camaraderie of hundreds of newbies in corp chat asking the same silly questions over and over?
Perhaps it's the false sense of community one gets when they see green star icons in hi-sec all the time?
Or is it just the sad fear of being wardec'd in a real corporation that keeps them in the shallow end of the pool?
What difference does it make? They're happy that way paying and playing Eve. Their reasons and motivations don't have to match up to what either of us think they should. It's their playstyle. I can't stand the thought of null space but enjoy the hell out of wormholes. Others are the opposite. Is either more right? No, to each their own. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
628
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 15:15:00 -
[1620] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:War Kitten wrote: What is there to like about being in an NPC corp?
The taxes you pay "to the man" for no benefit?
The camaraderie of hundreds of newbies in corp chat asking the same silly questions over and over?
Perhaps it's the false sense of community one gets when they see green star icons in hi-sec all the time?
Or is it just the sad fear of being wardec'd in a real corporation that keeps them in the shallow end of the pool?
What difference does it make? They're happy that way paying and playing Eve. Their reasons and motivations don't have to match up to what either of us think they should. It's their playstyle. I can't stand the thought of null space but enjoy the hell out of wormholes. Others are the opposite. Is either more right? No, to each their own.
Their reasons and motivations don't have to match up to ours, no. But for them to be catered to, they probably ought to be rational in the context of the argument you're making.
Why should CCP, creators of the dark and harsh world of Eve Online, care that people who are too risk-averse or lazy to even create their own corporation won't be able to own a customs office in lowsec or have easy access to lowsec PI?
Lowsec isn't easy mode or for those afraid of risks.
NPC corporations are easy mode, specifically for those too new or too afraid of risk.
Just because they have access now doesn't make it "right", nor is it a valid argument for continuing the access into the future. If you're reading my sig you cannot claim ignorance, only stupidity or apathy, if you don't go VOTE now for CSM7. |
|
|
|
|
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 |