Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Evangelina Nolen
Sama Guild
46
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 09:16:00 -
[31] - Quote
or you could use 5 dreads for 3 seige cycles 15 minutes b4 DT. |
Zappity
Kurved Space
477
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 09:30:00 -
[32] - Quote
I am looking forward to stealing from you all even if it isn't profitable. Just because I can. Especially in wormholes. This could be great for campers. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |
Xorionna
Power Absolute Absolute Damage Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 10:16:00 -
[33] - Quote
Will multiple POS siphons have stacking penalties ? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
11887
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 10:19:00 -
[34] - Quote
Novaroid wrote:Although these siphons seem like a good idea they're not going to have the intended effect.
All these hopes that POS Siphon is going to create some viable guerilla tactics to damage big alliances is wishfull thinking. If anything the big alliances like CFC will be the least affected by them. They have the pilots and resources to cover all the time zones and make sure their important moon mining reaction farms are never impacted by this.
Small pirate gangs arent going to go deep into their space to attack these...they are more likely to go after the small corps or even the independent moon miner / reaction farmer that has a few towers in low or null sec. These small corps cant cover all the timezones and wont have the time to clear their POS daily.
If these operations become unprofitable due to siphons these small corps only have two choices. 1. Packup and go to Hi-sec 2. Join a mega alliance that can keep your POS secure
For a lot of small corp players the only point to even go to null or low sec is for moon mining and reactions. If that game play isnt viable then no reason to be there.
Looks to me like CCP believes that operating a POS should only be for the realm of the big alliances like CFC etc.. Anything designed to hurt a big alliance will hurt a smaller one by a much larger factor.
We will see how these changes turn out..but I fully expect these changes to either drive more people out of low/null or into larger alliance blobs.
On a side note..as far as plausible reality..I can understand how a siphon could steal from a moon harvester beam sucking resources from a moon. But explain a reaction silo...this beam magically can go thru a POS shield a pull material thru a silo wall? I expect game mechanics should at leas have some form of realisitc plausibilty.
I disagree. Small organisations with only 1 or 2 valuable moons will be much more likely to closely guard their assets.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
3448
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 11:42:00 -
[35] - Quote
We appear to get stuck on the All or Nothing result of things. Typical in western society.
Either this is supposed to be the end of moon mining dominance for nullsec overlords, or it's the end for the little guy.
But you have to think of chess and go at least a few layers deep when considering this siphon thing.
It's going to stir up trouble, that's for sure. That may well be the idea. And if hit-and-run moon siphoning turns out to be lucrative, expect trouble.
The days of completely deserted nulllsec might be coming to an end. |
Zappity
Kurved Space
478
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 11:51:00 -
[36] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:We appear to get stuck on the All or Nothing result of things. Typical in western society.
Either this is supposed to be the end of moon mining dominance for nullsec overlords, or it's the end for the little guy.
But you have to think of chess and go at least a few layers deep when considering this siphon thing.
It's going to stir up trouble, that's for sure. That may well be the idea. And if hit-and-run moon siphoning turns out to be lucrative, expect trouble.
The days of deserted nulllsec (save for the chugging of moon mining peacefully sucking away) might be coming to an end. It certainly won't be quiet.
Exactly. Frankly, I'm more comfortable with CCP taking a 'baby steps' approach to practically everything they do. The game is so complicated and the various ecosystems so inter-related that large changes in a single instance would almost certainly bugger something up badly. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1536
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 13:04:00 -
[37] - Quote
It's more likely that the people already in the alliance/corp that aren't getting a cut of the moongoo and pissed off about it will be the ones to put up the siphons.
But IDK, it feels like a lame mechanic, not morally, but just IDK lame. Don't ban me, bro! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
16704
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 13:18:00 -
[38] - Quote
GǪI'm just wondering how many corps will put these on their own towers to no longer have to fiddle with offlining and onlinig their silos. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
KuroVolt
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
817
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 14:16:00 -
[39] - Quote
Its all going to depend on wether or not you get a notification of a *Spah sappin mah POS*
If you dont get a notification, its going to be a nerf to the alliances that hold alot of sov or just pluck down POSs here and there but rarely actually traverse the area of their POSs. Meaningwhile it would only be a small nuicance to alliances that actually live in the space where they have POSs.
If you just get a notification however, nothing changes. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
1030
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 14:19:00 -
[40] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪI'm just wondering how many corps will put these on their own towers to no longer have to fiddle with offlining and onlinig their silos.
I... you are a genius. Theoretically you couldn't double up on these either, so it would potentially help prevent theft too. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
|
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
1238
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 14:23:00 -
[41] - Quote
I think people are vastly over-estimating the absentee moon-empires since the tech nerf.
"Gamechanger" is laughable. Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal |
Red Teufel
Mafia Redux Black Legion.
226
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 14:30:00 -
[42] - Quote
What caught my attention was ccp mentioning it would steal reactions as well. so many idiots in low-sec running reactions. easily make 40-60mill for 4 hours of theft. |
Varius Xeral
Galactic Trade Syndicate
1238
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 14:32:00 -
[43] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote:What caught my attention was ccp mentioning it would steal reactions as well. so many idiots in low-sec running reactions. easily make 40-60mill for 4 hours of theft.
That's who's going to get dongslapped by this.
Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal |
stoicfaux
3164
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 15:03:00 -
[44] - Quote
Xorionna wrote:Will multiple POS siphons have stacking penalties ? How about siphon parties? Deploy enough siphons at once to suck up all production for a few hours and move on.
|
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
2907
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 15:06:00 -
[45] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Domanique Altares wrote:Confirming CCP should put EVE on life support. Harassment tactics have no place here. Abandon hope, potential sneak thieves. This is true. The only time the "big guys" should have to undock is after they receive a 24 hour email notice and have a chance to get a really good solid 8 hours sleep to prepare for all the "hard work" required to run an alliance. Anything else is unthinkable. There should be no spontaneity in EvE online. You're still hurt about that failed pos bash? This asset attack notification thing is really getting under your skin. Never shot a POS in my life. I did get shot by one the other day warping to a celestial though, warped out with [I ] that much armor. Fun Fun. Well, that's one way to act in the face of failure.
Thats all you relaly need to know about that poster.
Infinity can't easily kill people in null because of local = all those posts about removing local in Features and Ideas.
Infinity can't easily kill TCUs because of hitpoints = complaints about hitpoints
Infinity doesn't want to bring a freind or a resupply alt and ends up with 70 jump round trips to raid "safe" null sec = Infintiy's suggestion that every region have someplace for neutrals to dock up and refit.
All of this with no understanding whatsoever that ALL Infinity suggestions have the same end result : Stronger null sec alliances and safer nullsec (Infinity is another poster that can't learn the lesson know as "Malcanis' Law").
|
Red Teufel
Mafia Redux Black Legion.
226
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 16:08:00 -
[46] - Quote
Varius Xeral wrote:Red Teufel wrote:What caught my attention was ccp mentioning it would steal reactions as well. so many idiots in low-sec running reactions. easily make 40-60mill for 4 hours of theft. That's who's going to get dongslapped by this.
running isk factories 1 jump from highsec is way too safe. sorry but safety is out in 0.0 is shouldn't be lowsec. |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1238
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 16:42:00 -
[47] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Have to agree here. Not really sure what damage is likely to be done. And so you go up to a POS, which undoubtedly has guns, you still need to stop those killing you while you anchor your structure. Then it has no access rights, so anyone can take the materials. I find it unlikely that a siphon first of will successfully get placed by a solo operator, then secondly would stay up long enough to actually take anything, and thirdly that anyone would be able to get a hauler in to get the goods out. I have a feeling these structures will get placed alongside defender missiles.
That structure will get killed faster it will even bring something back to cover Siphon structure to be profitable. Was already easy with current BSs will be a lot easier if Marauders get what they should not even accounting Dread/Carrier pilots easy to find in low/null areas leave alone large groups of players. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
KuroVolt
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
817
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 20:15:00 -
[48] - Quote
I do think this could spawn a new playstyle, the parasite.
Similar to the ninasalvager, spends his time going from POS to POS leeching for isk. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1536
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 21:53:00 -
[49] - Quote
KuroVolt wrote:I do think this could spawn a new playstyle, the parasite.
Similar to the ninasalvager, spends his time going from POS to POS leeching for isk.
It would have been better if CCP introduced this as a module, not a structure. But meh, whatever. Don't ban me, bro! |
Qolde
Scrambled Eggs Inc.
187
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 22:33:00 -
[50] - Quote
I like where they are going with this. It makes it so that more people have to undock, and introduces a new way to have conflict. What would be even better, is if you can anchor them offgrid of the POS. If someone craps in your sandbox: 1. Light it on fire 2. Grab your shovel 3. Throw it back at them. |
|
Eram Fidard
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
332
|
Posted - 2013.09.29 23:17:00 -
[51] - Quote
I just don't see how moon mining (an activity whose profit margins are determined monthly) is going to be significantly disrupted by anything like 15% siphon.
So you have a small gang of friends and you set up a siphon (or 5) on the local lowsec moons, including whatever 'work' has to be done to make that possible. Now you're making less than it would cost to run a moon, for significantly more effort.
Anything short of taking it all, or a set percentage of what is stored (empty those silos people!), I judge not lucrative enough to hold the attention of even a hi-sec miner. Make it lucrative enough to be worth doing, and you take away the value of effort put forth by those running POS. Not a nice catch-22. Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
3451
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 00:32:00 -
[52] - Quote
I think the actual siphoning is going to be something like this. |
Infinity Ziona
Hot Drop Buns
454
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 00:34:00 -
[53] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote: Thats all you relaly need to know about that poster.
Infinity can't easily kill people in null because of local = all those posts about removing local in Features and Ideas.
Infinity can't easily kill TCUs because of hitpoints = complaints about hitpoints
Infinity doesn't want to bring a freind or a resupply alt and ends up with 70 jump round trips to raid "safe" null sec = Infintiy's suggestion that every region have someplace for neutrals to dock up and refit.
All of this with no understanding whatsoever that ALL Infinity suggestions have the same end result : Stronger null sec alliances and safer nullsec (Infinity is another poster that can't learn the lesson know as "Malcanis' Law").
This is all true. I am a terrible player, terrible person and terrible poster. You win the forums. Love Hate.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
1032
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 00:54:00 -
[54] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Jenn aSide wrote: Thats all you relaly need to know about that poster.
Infinity can't easily kill people in null because of local = all those posts about removing local in Features and Ideas.
Infinity can't easily kill TCUs because of hitpoints = complaints about hitpoints
Infinity doesn't want to bring a freind or a resupply alt and ends up with 70 jump round trips to raid "safe" null sec = Infintiy's suggestion that every region have someplace for neutrals to dock up and refit.
All of this with no understanding whatsoever that ALL Infinity suggestions have the same end result : Stronger null sec alliances and safer nullsec (Infinity is another poster that can't learn the lesson know as "Malcanis' Law").
This is all true. I am a terrible player, terrible person and terrible poster. You win the forums. Love Hate.
Well, you are the first and the last of those things. I don't know you in real life so I can't make that judgement.
As to the last, I highly suggest that every time you think you have a suggestion, that you sit on it for a few days before posting, and think about how it might be perceived or abused or twisted, or what it's repercussions might be.
That, and learn to drop your grudge against big power blocs. They're players too, and with a few minor exceptions, most of them have earned what they have today by fighting and clawing for it in the past, many of them through literal years of warfare.
Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
Infinity Ziona
Hot Drop Buns
454
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 00:59:00 -
[55] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Jenn aSide wrote: Thats all you relaly need to know about that poster.
Infinity can't easily kill people in null because of local = all those posts about removing local in Features and Ideas.
Infinity can't easily kill TCUs because of hitpoints = complaints about hitpoints
Infinity doesn't want to bring a freind or a resupply alt and ends up with 70 jump round trips to raid "safe" null sec = Infintiy's suggestion that every region have someplace for neutrals to dock up and refit.
All of this with no understanding whatsoever that ALL Infinity suggestions have the same end result : Stronger null sec alliances and safer nullsec (Infinity is another poster that can't learn the lesson know as "Malcanis' Law").
This is all true. I am a terrible player, terrible person and terrible poster. You win the forums. Love Hate. Well, you are the first and the last of those things. I don't know you in real life so I can't make that judgement. As to the last, I highly suggest that every time you think you have a suggestion, that you sit on it for a few days before posting, and think about how it might be perceived or abused or twisted, or what it's repercussions might be. That, and learn to drop your grudge against big power blocs. They're players too, and with a few minor exceptions, most of them have earned what they have today by fighting and clawing for it in the past, many of them through literal years of warfare. That was sarcasm. I suggest you look after your own posting. I'll post what I like, when I like, how I like as long as its within the rules of the forum.
Its so easy to get you and Jenns panties in a knot... do you wear the same brand?
|
Johan Civire
The Lyran Empire
665
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 01:39:00 -
[56] - Quote
Damn I love my job :) Um I mean I agree :D |
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome Caldari State Capturing
563
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 01:52:00 -
[57] - Quote
I have different idea on how I want to use this new syphon structure.
I am going to put up siphons on my own corp members moon goo poses as a form of corp tax.
If you want to get your soul to heaven, trust in me. Now don't judge or question. You are broken now, but faith can heal you. Just do everything I tell you to do. (Opiate - Tool) |
Liemoris Starbuck
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 15:46:00 -
[58] - Quote
Novaroid wrote:Anything designed to hurt a big alliance will hurt a smaller one by a much larger factor.
This in a nutshell. But with that being said, I still like the idea. |
Plastic Psycho
Necro-Economics
549
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 16:41:00 -
[59] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Confirming that I already have some targets in mind for as soon as I can train up the skill for a siphon. Small corps are less likely to pay me back for stealing from them. Also confirming I've found a few 'nests' of poorly-guarded and infrequented towers that I'm going to take a crack at. And no, they're not pat of a small alliance, either.
Lucas Kell wrote:Have to agree here. Not really sure what damage is likely to be done. And so you go up to a POS, which undoubtedly has guns, you still need to stop those killing you while you anchor your structure. Then it has no access rights, so anyone can take the materials. I find it unlikely that a siphon first of will successfully get placed by a solo operator, then secondly would stay up long enough to actually take anything, and thirdly that anyone would be able to get a hauler in to get the goods out. I have a feeling these structures will get placed alongside defender missiles. I was out fairly deep into Nul, looking for solo miners and explorers, when I stumbled upon what may be a dirty secret - Whole systems of resource extraction, with very few defenses and very light traffic. Now, I'm a solo operator, but I found my way out there, and I can fly a blockade runner too.
I like my chances.
May not do anything but attract some activity, but that's fine by me. I've wanted more targets anyway. CCP, debuff Barges, or buff Ganking. Either will do for me, but we need more Yaaar! in this game lest it become WoW in Spaaaaace! -á~ Me |
Murk Paradox
Duty. The Cursed Few
541
|
Posted - 2013.10.02 16:57:00 -
[60] - Quote
Novaroid wrote:Although these siphons seem like a good idea they're not going to have the intended effect.
All these hopes that POS Siphon is going to create some viable guerilla tactics to damage big alliances is wishfull thinking. If anything the big alliances like CFC will be the least affected by them. They have the pilots and resources to cover all the time zones and make sure their important moon mining reaction farms are never impacted by this.
Small pirate gangs arent going to go deep into their space to attack these...they are more likely to go after the small corps or even the independent moon miner / reaction farmer that has a few towers in low or null sec. These small corps cant cover all the timezones and wont have the time to clear their POS daily.
If these operations become unprofitable due to siphons these small corps only have two choices. 1. Packup and go to Hi-sec 2. Join a mega alliance that can keep your POS secure
For a lot of small corp players the only point to even go to null or low sec is for moon mining and reactions. If that game play isnt viable then no reason to be there.
Looks to me like CCP believes that operating a POS should only be for the realm of the big alliances like CFC etc.. Anything designed to hurt a big alliance will hurt a smaller one by a much larger factor.
We will see how these changes turn out..but I fully expect these changes to either drive more people out of low/null or into larger alliance blobs.
On a side note..as far as plausible reality..I can understand how a siphon could steal from a moon harvester beam sucking resources from a moon. But explain a reaction silo...this beam magically can go thru a POS shield a pull material thru a silo wall? I expect game mechanics should at leas have some form of realisitc plausibilty.
You are absolutely right.
So while those huge alliances are off in who knows where, their moons they have planted everywhere else could of course not get siphoned.
So don't go away from your home system and ignore what siphon structures you see in place please =)
This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |