|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 56 post(s) |
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
79
   |
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:02:00 -
[1] - Quote
Are there any plans to provide some other reason to have faction standings? Selling POS corps was a small but reasonable income stream for anyone who took the time and effort to grind out faction standings. I'm not exactly sad to see that mechanic go, but it does mean faction standings are now essentially useless. Other than those few (not at all worth the effort) one-time BPC agents at the extreme upper end, it seems like faction standings are nothing more than an RP thing now. |
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:40:00 -
[2] - Quote
Makoto Priano wrote:I hate to be that guy, but: any content for shooting-at-people stuff, or any development along the explore-new-shenanigans and make-new-implants realm?
There will be POS's everywhere and those POS's are now slightly more likely to contain BPO's. I'm pretty sure the shooting-at-people demographic is getting an indirect buff here ;) |
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:44:00 -
[3] - Quote
Querns wrote:The removal of standings for anchoring POS makes it trivial to evade destruction of your POS.
But the dev blog says "The core goal is to motivate player entities to actually defend their Starbases if attacked". So clearly you must be wrong! ;) |
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
82
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 20:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
I'm mostly annoyed that I'm going to have to either move or spread out. I found a nice out of the way system with a manufacturing station and available moons where freight cost to a hub was reasonable. Took all the POCOs for myself, consolidated all my operations. manufacturing, research, and PI into one spot and one corp office. But of course there are no lab slots within several jumps, because I didn't need them.
Now I'll have to put my BPOs either in my POS or in a different system. Then I'll have to plan ahead and make BPCs and move them to wherever they need to be for manufacturing. Whichever I choose, that means more spreadsheets and more thinking ahead about what I intend to make because I can't just simply produce/research/copyinvent from BPOs sitting in my consolidated corp office on-demand anymore. I don't fully utilize my POS as it is because I'm lazy and inefficient already; I don't plan out my manufacturing far enough in advance to be intelligently making BPC's and moving them around. The convenience of having everything in one spot where I could just "industry" on a reactive, hobby scale was more than worth the reduced profits for me. I still came out ahead, but I was never min/maxing this stuff.
After the changes... meh. Sure, I can find a new system with the 0.8+ landrush, but it won't have my factory PI planets/POCO's there. I could ferry BPCs from some other system or ferry BPOs to/from my POS in my current location, but that means I'll have to spend time, not to ferry things around but to THINK about what needs to be ferried around. I could manufacture at the POS, but I doubt a small will have the fitting for it and anyway, there goes the convenience of a gigantic station corp hangar stockpile. I'll probably have to plan head and make BPC's, which sounds annoying. The convenience of consolidation was worth a lot. Honestly I'll probably just liquidate... the thought of re-locating and sorting out BPC planning beyond invention and whatnot is just not very appealing.
Yeah, I'm just whining. |
Lena Lazair
Khanid Irregulars
91
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 16:56:00 -
[5] - Quote
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:I do hope they are looking at a full mission overhaul now for maybe the winter release since standings grind is no longer as necessary (though it still gives access to higher mission levels, better refining etc) Standings are still required for reprocessing & refining except if you want to use an array at a POS. Sounds like more 'dumbing down' of the game doesn't it.  Standings are also still required to work for higher level mission agents. Standings are still required to reduce taxes incurred from trading on the market. Have I missed any other current reasons to have high standings ? 
There is a lot of confusion in this thread between faction standings and corp standings. Except for a very small maximal efficiency niche in your third point vis-a-vis market tax, you are talking about corp standing use cases, not faction standing (unmodified at that). You also forgot to mention jumpclones, but also a corp standing use case. |
Lena Lazair
Khanid Irregulars
92
|
Posted - 2014.04.19 00:57:00 -
[6] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:standings characters are still worth the most as traders.
Not for long, I'd wager. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. They've confirmed standings, and faction standings in particular I guess, are a mechanic that no one wants or likes and are actively removing it from anything they touch. How long until they they remove it from broker fees? The sooner the better, honestly. |
Lena Lazair
Khanid Irregulars
92
|
Posted - 2014.04.19 07:20:00 -
[7] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:
I disagree directly. I'm thinking the high sec POS standings requirement was a move to proliferate industry, and the market standings taxes mechanic is not going away... because it doesn't have the problem of blocking players from trade gameplay.
if anything, the high sec POS standings removal was a move toward market's system where everyone can participate in market trades, but at different tax rates. (refine, build, research jobs at various tax rates, but everyone can do it)
No one was blocked from industry. You bought a pre-fab standings corp and setup your pos, or got standings yourself (or bought a standings char) if you wanted more flexibility. Maintaining your own standings was a slight edge and viable income source, but certainly nothing game breaking.
If the argument for removing standings for POS use is that standings are a lame mechanic, then the exact same argument holds for broker's fees.
If the argument was that it limited hisec POS use, that is demonstrably false. |
|
|
| |
|