Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
163
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 18:26:00 -
[61] - Quote
tengen san wrote:POCO's are corp asset, once the ROI is completed there is no reason for taxation if you price adjustments will gives you market advantage. Higher prices will be a general outcome. After reiciving the ROI itGÇÖs all about who can beat the market price. YouGÇÖre out of competition against anyone selling on a 0 tax scheme. What are your costs? PI is not manufacturing, you don't have input costs once you've paid back your setup. So by that theory, prices should be zero?
Quote:Would you give assurance to the neutral customer to set up a new POCO within the couple monthGÇÖs period once it was taken down defenseless? Are you willing to repeat the effort continually no matter the cost? (Further infestment)
How do you intent to hold your "tax cows" on the planet. Are you able to come up with the resources to assure uninterrupted production flow? (guarding and defending your POCO) Where is the point you decide to give in after Investment . /. Income drops heavily out of balance. Sure, there are no assurances, like pretty much anything else in EVE outside highsec. But what's the risk to them? The cost of setting up a PI installation is very small. If the situation changes, they can always switch to another planet. The POCO owner is taking the largest risk.
As I've said from the first devblog, POCOs are a boon to PVP corps. They are small enough to attract small gangs, which bring fun fights, while they don't have the logistics pain of towers. And at their price, they are cheaper than a bait battleship.
However, that's unrelated to their economic sense.
Quote:They hotdrop you and clear out a system within hours, getting rid of any competition. You will see MerchGÇÖs on 0.0. alliances payroll doing nothing but GÇ£poffGÇ¥ POCOGÇÖs in low. It will become a save source of income for them. You would be surprised on the financial capability of 0.0. alliances and willingnes to bring them in deployment if the make up their expens by gauging the market. You mean just blowing them up? To do that in a remotely efficient way, they'd have to split up forces. I, for one, would welcome the small fights. If they do it to anchor their own, it's easy to keep harassing them until they give up.
Anyway, the whole 0.0 alliance scarecrow is just a fantasy by people who have never experienced the boredom of shooting structures. If you go into alliance chat and say "Everyone fleet up, we are going to shoot down lowsec POCOs for the next 3 hours", you'll see half the alliance logoff. |

tengen san
Triton-TC
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 18:46:00 -
[62] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:tengen san wrote:POCO's are corp asset, once the ROI is completed there is no reason for taxation if you price adjustments will gives you market advantage. Higher prices will be a general outcome. After reiciving the ROI itGÇÖs all about who can beat the market price. YouGÇÖre out of competition against anyone selling on a 0 tax scheme. What are your costs? PI is not manufacturing, you don't have input costs once you've paid back your setup. So by that theory, prices should be zero? Quote:Would you give assurance to the neutral customer to set up a new POCO within the couple monthGÇÖs period once it was taken down defenseless? Are you willing to repeat the effort continually no matter the cost? (Further infestment)
How do you intent to hold your "tax cows" on the planet. Are you able to come up with the resources to assure uninterrupted production flow? (guarding and defending your POCO) Where is the point you decide to give in after Investment . /. Income drops heavily out of balance. Sure, there are no assurances, like pretty much anything else in EVE outside highsec. But what's the risk to them? The cost of setting up a PI installation is very small. If the situation changes, they can always switch to another planet. The POCO owner is taking the largest risk. As I've said from the first devblog, POCOs are a boon to PVP corps. They are small enough to attract small gangs, which bring fun fights, while they don't have the logistics pain of towers. And at their price, they are cheaper than a bait battleship. However, that's unrelated to their economic sense. Quote:They hotdrop you and clear out a system within hours, getting rid of any competition. You will see MerchGÇÖs on 0.0. alliances payroll doing nothing but GÇ£poffGÇ¥ POCOGÇÖs in low. It will become a save source of income for them. You would be surprised on the financial capability of 0.0. alliances and willingnes to bring them in deployment if the make up their expens by gauging the market. You mean just blowing them up? To do that in a remotely efficient way, they'd have to split up forces. I, for one, would welcome the small fights. If they do it to anchor their own, it's easy to keep harassing them until they give up. Anyway, the whole 0.0 alliance scarecrow is just a fantasy by people who have never experienced the boredom of shooting structures. If you go into alliance chat and say "Everyone fleet up, we are going to shoot down lowsec POCOs for the next 3 hours", you'll see half the alliance logoff.
Well than, good luck with it.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=402836#post402836
|

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
163
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 19:16:00 -
[63] - Quote
Heh. Sieged dreads away from station/pos? \o/
Each of those dreads is worth a dozen POCOs. Without a support fleet, they are easily killed by 10 battleships. You do the math. |

tengen san
Triton-TC
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 19:36:00 -
[64] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:Heh. Sieged dreads away from station/pos? \o/ Each of those dreads is worth a dozen POCOs. Without a support fleet, they are easily killed by 10 battleships. You do the math.
Its not about the dreads, its about the change of CO's in player hands was intended to foster 0.0. income with low sec carring all the disadvantage.
From my math the risk/ reward ration in low sec is at 80/20 may be even 90/10. after 29. Nov Yea, I do have exclusive low sec PI running atm. |

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
163
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 19:42:00 -
[65] - Quote
tengen san wrote:Its not about the dreads, its about the change of CO's in player hands was intended to foster 0.0. income with low sec carring all the disadvantage. No, it was intended to create more player conflict, and the dreads are very much about conflict. |

Xen Solarus
Inner 5phere
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 22:39:00 -
[66] - Quote
Errm, no-one has mentioned Wormholes. Surely now people will be blowing up these custom offices just for the hell of it? Jesus, you get a kill mail for it for christs sake. And what would be the point in spending loads of isk to replace them, when they'd still just be big floating targets for people to blow them up just for the hell of it?
And everywhere else, you're basicly putting the taxation into the only groups able to effectively hold them, big alliances. Everyone else is going to get screwed!! And lots of industry orintated people get alot of enjoyment out of managing their planets (such as me). Now they're going to have serious problems.
At the very least we should be able to build defences at them, make them slightly self-sufficent in looking after themselves.
I was really looking forward to this expansion. Now, i'm not at all!  |

Shana Matika
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 08:45:00 -
[67] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:tengen san wrote:Its not about the dreads, its about the change of CO's in player hands was intended to foster 0.0. income with low sec carring all the disadvantage. No, it was intended to create more player conflict, and the dreads are very much about conflict.
Maybe that is the intention - but what Jack wrote is what happened.
Again: Conflicts are only possible as long as 2 or more Groups show up. I don't see this happen here. Group A will chose a time where they are most comfort with - which will be some time while Group B (CO Owner) is not arround and start shooting their CO just to kill their CO.
On a side Note:
tengen san wrote:
Making Low sec. as secure as high sec wonGÇÖt cure the problem.
High sec = as intended Low sec = POC holding corps canGÇÖt refuse to take or deny customers, so consequently eliminate any standing prerequisite for low sec. This at least would gain a theoretical interest to use the POC by any others than members of the holding corp to add anticipate tax income, theoretically of course. If a corporation set up in low sec (what I truly do not believe) they focus mainly for their own PI production, so any tax issue is irrelevant anyway as charging no tax gives your own products an price advantage on the market.
For 0.0.; Of course you want to keep your foes off your lawn. So implementation as intended, zero tax for corp members and renters receive an GÇ£out of system GÇ£taxation, probably % share of the product to keep prices in balance. Problem solved for 0.0.!
But it wonGÇÖt work as intended anyway!
Still any tax income is just theoretical but bears no practical relevance as even lucrative Planets in 0.1. /0.2.wonGÇÖt attract more than 5 foreign installations. For now even less, as none of the GÇ£publicGÇ¥ users ever can be sure to use them in a productive sense in the long term.
WH holders will go into PI big time (zero tax) if the earnings bear any merits what is to be expect once the prices go to spike.
So again, no matter which taxation you imply it a.) never will pay off the investment as.) no one will set up a PI installation and willing to pay the requested tax on his export to a foreign corporation while his sales price (based on the higher export tax) is heavily under bided by corporations with zero taxation on their export.
It certainly was a nice idea to hand the COGÇÖs over in players hands. But unfortunately it will not work out as intended.
Weather you scrap the tax, or make them defendable, otherwise they will lose any and all attraction in low sec.
While Lowsec should involve some risk a not-destructable CO in NPC hand won't do anything about the risk itself of warping to and away from there. The Interbus fleet is just a point that would be possible to turn the stick arround, or just untargetable CO :)
|

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
164
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 09:20:00 -
[68] - Quote
From the devblog thread, the wiki page listing the new base tax values is up:
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/CustomsOffice
I'd say this changes things a lot. POCO income for P1 or P2 extraction planets is now 144mil/BIF or 3.2mil/AIF per month, at 10% taxes. On a busy planet, that should repay the office in a couple months. |

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
164
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 09:25:00 -
[69] - Quote
Shana Matika wrote:Again: Conflicts are only possible as long as 2 or more Groups show up. I don't see this happen here. Group A will chose a time where they are most comfort with - which will be some time while Group B (CO Owner) is not arround and start shooting their CO just to kill their CO. Slightly derailing thread, but anyway...
There's a reinforcement timer that ensures it comes at a time Group B is comfortable with. And, even if Group B doesn't come, the timer is visible system-wide for the 24+ hours the POCO is reinforced. This provides an excellent beacon to any PVP group in the area to come shoot at group A, group B, or both.
|

Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
395
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 13:37:00 -
[70] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote: I'd say this changes things a lot. POCO income for P1 or P2 extraction planets is now 144mil/BIF or 3.2mil/AIF per month, at 10% taxes. On a busy planet, that should repay the office in a couple months.
Yes, the numbers seem a lot more sensible across the tiers.
(running numbers) Lo-sec PI harvest colonies, figure somewhere between 4-8 BIFs. 50 ISK/u export fee for P1 at 10%. A single BIF outputs 48 times a day, producing 20 units each time. Figure 30.5 days in a month.
1 BIF = 1,464,000/mo export tariffs at the 10% setting.
4 BIFs = 5,856,000/mo 6 BIFs = 8,784,000/mo 8 BIFs = 11,712,000/mo
Which indeed means that lo-sec POCOs for PI harvest planets might be economically viable now. Even if you charge a bit less then the standard 10%. As long as you have 10-12 extraction colonies on the surface of your planet, you can pay off the POCO in about 30-45 days.
Sov Null and W-Space residents would be smart to charge about 3-5% tariffs, which would help the corp coffers and help pay for the POCOs while still letting your residents have a cost advantage over the hi-sec folks who are paying 10% tariffs. |

Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
395
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 13:41:00 -
[71] - Quote
Xen Solarus wrote:Errm, no-one has mentioned Wormholes. Surely now people will be blowing up these custom offices just for the hell of it? Jesus, you get a kill mail for it for christs sake. And what would be the point in spending loads of isk to replace them, when they'd still just be big floating targets for people to blow them up just for the hell of it?
In w-space, the attackers (unless *really* dedicated) will probably not stick around long enough to actually destroy a POCO (due to the reinforce timer). They will probably destroy any Interbus COs as those don't have timers.
(But as with most structures - the only way to keep a structure from being killed is to bring a fleet of defenders. The problem with structure-only defenses is that they are static and the attacker can easily plan out a fleet to neutralize/deal with the defensive modules.)
|

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
82
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 17:46:00 -
[72] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:From the devblog thread, the wiki page listing the new base tax values is up: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/CustomsOfficeI'd say this changes things a lot. POCO income for P1 or P2 extraction planets is now 144mil/BIF or 3.2mil/AIF per month, at 10% taxes. On a busy planet, that should repay the office in a couple months.
Excellent changes. This is the "first step" from my initial post -- a straight up rebalance of reference tax values. Hopefully they continue to change them in the future, as their market values float.
POCOs are now competitive with Interbus COs. I'm not sure which I'd prefer to have in my system. We'll see! |

electrostatus
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 20:01:00 -
[73] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:From the devblog thread, the wiki page listing the new base tax values is up: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/CustomsOfficeI'd say this changes things a lot. POCO income for P1 or P2 extraction planets is now 144mil/BIF or 3.2mil/AIF per month, at 10% taxes. On a busy planet, that should repay the office in a couple months.
That does simplifies the taxes. However, I still see some lingering form of the old tax system (see info on command centers and launchpads) on sisi. I doubt those will change, as it looks like its rather needed. I should have this updated in my program shortly. PI Profit Calculator: calculates your profits and taxes of any PI product depending on how you built them! |

Exer Toralen
Zaporozhye Sich
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 21:26:00 -
[74] - Quote
Some things I haven't noticed in thread:
1. Concentration of PI resources is higher in null-sec than in low-sec. But cost of POCO is going to be the same. So POCO building in low-sec is going to be less profitable than in null-sec.
2. It seems that PI was designed current way as job for people unable to spend a lot of time in game, as some mean for them to do something and to not get left completely behind all other carebears. Doubt such people would be able to draft some fleet to protect their assets. At least it would be harder in anarchy low-secs than in sovereignty null-secs as you have to be part of some big alliance to work in null-sec, but can be alone in low-sec.
3. The absence of CONCORD/Navy is the only actual difference between high-sec and low-sec at the moment, meaning low-sec is free-pirating zone. There is no place for pirates in high-secs (as NPC law present) or null-secs (replaced there with alliance wars).
Introducing "aggressive marketing" in form of fleets of null-sec alliances roaming around low-sec to eliminate PI competition would destroy remains of profit from pirating (for those doing it for profit and not just for griefing) as null-sec alliances are better organized and equipped than low-sec ones and would wipe low-sec pirates clean.
4. Doubt pirates would care enough to build POCOs, but a lot of pirates would actually love to destroy everything because that's the only thing the most of them do. And low-sec carebears are now already at disadvantage: they have all cons of null-sec carebearing (danger), but not those profits/protection.
5. Low-sec POSes are now at least partially fueled using low-sec PI. Even now it might be pretty hard to find enough Noble Metals for all POSes, but with PI becoming less possible in low-secs, some POSes will have to be simply removed because of lack of local fuel and complexity of its transportation from other places.
As a result, such changes to PI would probably lead to even more people leaving low-secs for high- or null-secs and low-secs as game concept losing even more interest.
P.S. If CCP already talking about "replacing NPC with PC wherever it possible", why not remove NPC stations/sentries from low-sec as well and make low-secs just some part of null-sec battlefield with only difference of actions affecting your Security Standing? |

tengen san
Triton-TC
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 23:09:00 -
[75] - Quote
pmchem wrote:Jack Dant wrote:From the devblog thread, the wiki page listing the new base tax values is up: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/CustomsOfficeI'd say this changes things a lot. POCO income for P1 or P2 extraction planets is now 144mil/BIF or 3.2mil/AIF per month, at 10% taxes. On a busy planet, that should repay the office in a couple months. Excellent changes. This is the "first step" from my initial post -- a straight up rebalance of reference tax values. Hopefully they continue to change them in the future, as their market values float. POCOs are now competitive with Interbus COs. I'm not sure which I'd prefer to have in my system. We'll see!
Bravado! See you agian in 6 months. |

tengen san
Triton-TC
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 23:14:00 -
[76] - Quote
Exer Toralen wrote:
3. The absence of CONCORD/Navy is the only actual difference between high-sec and low-sec at the moment, meaning low-sec is free-pirating zone. There is no place for pirates in high-secs (as NPC law present) or null-secs (replaced there with alliance wars).
Ah......,what is the news now.... really! Beside history counts. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
84
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 02:28:00 -
[77] - Quote
To anyone reading my thread, I have no idea what this tengen san guy is talking about. After Interbus COs were announced he still seemed to think all lowsec/nullsec COs were disappearing on patch day (they are not). He also wanted lowsec COs to be 0% tax for whatever reason, and of course POCOs have had that option since they were first announced.
I am guessing he's just a highsec guy with a bunch of alts doing PI in lowsec who doesn't actually want lowsec groups to be able to exert some control over their home turf. Who knows! |

Kaaii
Kaaii-Net Research Labs KAAII-NET
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 09:42:00 -
[78] - Quote
I still haven't found in any of these threads how many runs the bpc has......
anyone know?
|

RubyPorto
Profoundly Disturbed RED.Legion
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 10:52:00 -
[79] - Quote
Kaaii wrote:
I still haven't found in any of these threads how many runs the bpc has......
anyone know?
Probably safe to assume 1, then be pleasantly surprised if it's more. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 17:20:00 -
[80] - Quote
On sisi they are 1-run BPCs. |

General Sauron
Saurian Industrial Corporation DSM FOUNDATION
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 01:55:00 -
[81] - Quote
My opinion is that POCOs in low sec arent going to work due to the fact that they are too easily blown up, are rather expensive, and are too difficult to defend.
I am not sure how other people are going to handle the problem, but my solution is to have all my low sec planets make P2 and then just use the Command Center to launch the P2 into space. That is assuming that there isnt an Interbus CO or POCO in place and also assuming the tax rate isnt obscene if a POCO is in place.
If figure that if I plan on picking up P2 twice a day for two days every week or two, I should be able to move 2000 m3 of goods and not need a POCO and the hassle associated with it. its a bit of a hassle with hauling, but no POCO needed is that advantage.
I may consider making P3 instead in order to keep the volume down even further. Of course, this depends on whether the hauling is too much of a PITA.
I think that this is going to be a rather common work around for low sec. null sec, and WH space. |

Covert Kitty
SRS Industries SRS.
55
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 04:57:00 -
[82] - Quote
It will be interesting to see how all this plays out. Will lowsec entities be interested in doing PI and defending it? Right now lowsec PI is less profitable than nullsec (including wormholes), however is easily raidable by the large alliances. I think PI will shift more heavily to wormhole and nullsec space, and away from lowsec for the most part. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
87
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 06:29:00 -
[83] - Quote
Covert Kitty wrote:Right now lowsec PI is less profitable than nullsec (including wormholes), however is easily raidable by the large alliances.
Lowsec PI should be less profitable than nullsec or WH. That's by design. But easily raidable? POCOs have reinforcement timers, so large alliances would have to send fleets to the systems not once, but twice in order to kill a structure than gives us no significant benefit (compared to a tech moon), no great killmail, no loot, etc. Plus they have a lot of HP so to reinforce them you'd want to use capitals or a really, really big high DPS fleet. A large alliance like mine has absolutely zero interest in sending capitals many regions away to kill some meaningless POCOs in lowsec. Our fleets are busy doing fun stuff like fleet fights in nullsec instead of randomly shooting lowsec PI structures.
If COs are killed in lowsec they are mostly going to be killed by other lowsec residents: I suggest you defend your turf. |

Velicitia
Open Designs
121
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 13:41:00 -
[84] - Quote
pmchem wrote:.... or a really, really big high DPS fleet.
Tornado/Naga/Talos/Oracle...
fit for gank over tank... they will be an "easy" and "cheap" fleet that can throw out DPS like crazy.
I am becoming more and more convinced that CCP is doing things to start breaking up the "Great Wall of Carebear". |

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
171
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 13:49:00 -
[85] - Quote
Velicitia wrote:Tornado/Naga/Talos/Oracle...
fit for gank over tank... they will be an "easy" and "cheap" fleet that can throw out DPS like crazy. Yea, you just need 10-15 of these to reinforce or kill a POCO in 20 minutes.
On the other hand, that fleet can be countered by a well balanced t1 cruiser/destroyer/BC fleet. Fun fights.
Quote:I am becoming more and more convinced that CCP is doing things to start breaking up the "Great Wall of Carebear". I'm not sure what this means 
|

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
91
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 18:02:00 -
[86] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:Velicitia wrote:Tornado/Naga/Talos/Oracle...
fit for gank over tank... they will be an "easy" and "cheap" fleet that can throw out DPS like crazy. Yea, you just need 10-15 of these to reinforce or kill a POCO in 20 minutes. On the other hand, that fleet can be countered by a well balanced t1 cruiser/destroyer/BC fleet. Fun fights. Quote:I am becoming more and more convinced that CCP is doing things to start breaking up the "Great Wall of Carebear". I'm not sure what this means 
a good post by Jack.
If you just bring a pure tier 3 BC fleet and start shooting a POCO you leave yourself open to attack. While doing a very boring and distracting activity. Opportunity for more fights (thought it's likely fights will happen at the reinforcement timer exit, which is one of the goals of POCO design!)
and yeah all the carebear tears, so frustrating, especially since POCOs only show up in lowsec and nullsec. Everything in lowsec/nullsec should be player driven and have risk. CCP protected carebears in crucible by removing insurance payouts for deaths to CONCORD, therefore giving additional protection to the hordes of missing running bots (currently the most popular form of botting) from suicide ganks. POCOs have nothing to do with carebear activities. |

tengen san
Triton-TC
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 20:13:00 -
[87] - Quote
pmchem wrote:To anyone reading my thread, I have no idea what this tengen san guy is talking about. After Interbus COs were announced he still seemed to think all lowsec/nullsec COs were disappearing on patch day (they are not). He also wanted lowsec COs to be 0% tax for whatever reason, and of course POCOs have had that option since they were first announced.
I am guessing he's just a highsec guy with a bunch of alts doing PI in lowsec who doesn't actually want lowsec groups to be able to exert some control over their home turf. Who knows!
Not a guess, a presumption, wrong just as your presumptions on D514.
Pre-warned = Pre-armed!
pmchem wrote: A large alliance like mine has absolutely zero interest in sending capitals many regions away to kill some meaningless POCOs in lowsec. Our fleets are busy doing fun stuff like fleet fights in nullsec instead of randomly shooting lowsec PI structures.
Lulling wonGÇÖt take fare. Problem, your alliance isnGÇÖt exactly well known for reliability ore trustworthiness. And who said they will or need to do the job themselves.
A. They hired out Mrechs on the Ice interdiction big time, just remember the advertisement. B. Your alliance will be the financial sponsor for the H5-unholy uninon , are any plans up yet to include POCOGÇÖs in the deal?
Once the hulkageddon is over I make the fair assumption a new playground need to be found.
You have singlehanded set the record for the POCO taxation straight, let it be there, but donGÇÖt give out assurances you cannot hold, they only will be judged as deception.
|

Velicitia
Open Designs
124
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 20:40:00 -
[88] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:Velicitia wrote:Tornado/Naga/Talos/Oracle...
fit for gank over tank... they will be an "easy" and "cheap" fleet that can throw out DPS like crazy. Yea, you just need 10-15 of these to reinforce or kill a POCO in 20 minutes. On the other hand, that fleet can be countered by a well balanced t1 cruiser/destroyer/BC fleet. Fun fights. Quote:I am becoming more and more convinced that CCP is doing things to start breaking up the "Great Wall of Carebear". I'm not sure what this means 
Yes, you're completely right with the first point in regards to they're stupid weak overall ... "Malcanis' Law" applies here, but essentially it gives nearly everyone the ability to do BS amounts of DPS without having a really expensive lossmail.
Think about it -- anyone running L3 missions has a pretty good set of skills for flying battlecruisers already (well, they should anyway). Train large guns up to level 3 or 4 (you were doing that anyway to get L4 missions, right?) and now you're a decent DPS platform and not getting "left out" of a fight because you can't fly a BS yet.
As for the great wall of carebear -- ask anyone in hisec about lowsec, and you'll pretty much get the same answer (don't go there, every gate has a gatecamp, you'll never get past that first jump). Now, obviously there are people who are so risk-averse that they will NEVER venture into lowsec, even with these new tools, but there are also the people who simply needed the right "incentives" if you will.
Let's say we have a gang of 5-7. We *could* fly BS, but we're better skilled with BC, and can more easily replace them.
Currently -- everyone has a BC, maybe one guy in a logi cruiser (T1)... Maybe someone in a BC has ganglinks and RR too. Crucible -- replace 3 of the tier 1/2 BCs with tier 3 (still have the logi cruiser, and a BC with ganglinks/RR).
In both instances, let's say we run into a gatecamp with 2x BS. Both instances we're likely to DIAF, but at least now with the tier3 BC, we have a fighting chance of taking one of them with us... |

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
172
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 21:02:00 -
[89] - Quote
Oh, I get it now, I think we are on the same page.
POCOs are relatively low-cost (and low income), they can be killed with low-cost fleets, and so can be defended with low-cost fleets. This lowers the barrier of entry for "meaningful" PVP. Which is great.
There's one big obstacle that keeps highseccers out of lowsec PVP, tho. The sec status losses. |

RubyPorto
Profoundly Disturbed RED.Legion
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 23:26:00 -
[90] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote: There's one big obstacle that keeps highseccers out of lowsec PVP, tho. The sec status losses.
Ahhahahahahaha... No.
Hiseccers aren't in lowsec because they're neurotically risk-averse. If it were sec status, they'd be in FW. |
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |