| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 11:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
There have been quite a few WH threads on here over the last few days that I have read. There has even been the odd interesting post.
One theme that keeps being brought up is that W-Space is full of abandoned or not used POS's.
My friends and I are quite new to the game about 5 months old and we have been trying out different aspects of EvE from Low-sec PvP to FW and now we have just set-up as we like to describe a little out-post in a wormhole.
When we where initially daytrippping WH's we also noted a lot of POS's and it quickly became clear that scanning a POS was not a reason to avoid the system.
We then started looking for these POS's and in our noobness we asked each other... If it is offline can we steal it??.
The more I think about it the more it seems like a good idea, and why shouldn't we be able to? it was our natural complusion!
Maybe there is a time delay from going off-line until it gets a further status called "Abandoned". if it is then "Abandoned" for a further period of time and not re-occupied it falls out of orbit and self destructs!
I am sure there are market ramifications for this and it might hurt POS manufacturing in the short term etc etc.
Discuss (I expect nothing other than the usual quality of replies).
P.S. Never write a forum post on here without copy and pasting it. Hitting the post button rarely seems to post anything!
|

RaTTuS
BIG Gentlemen's Agreement
150
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 11:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
if it's offline then shoot it http://eveboard.com/ub/419190933-134.png
|

Jenshae Chiroptera
249
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 11:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
POS control tower stands on its own because of how long they take to destroy them. Directional scan (D-scan) for Force Fields.
Yeah, I would like to see high hacking skills used to get control towers to repackage when they are found offline.  Ideas and stuff EVE - the game of sand castles, either building them or kicking them down. |

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 11:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
RaTTuS wrote:if it's offline then shoot it
I would rather steal/recover it.
A POS shouldn't just be for Christmas you know...
|

KFenn
Percussive Diplomacy
126
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 11:21:00 -
[5] - Quote
Or, maybe capture it and start using it for your own purposes. I really like the idea of discovering abandoned player-built POSes and bringing them online. Adds to the exploration factor. Commanding Officer of the Treacle Tart Brigade SLAPD Director |

Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
71
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 11:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Yeah, I would like to see high hacking skills used to get control towers to repackage when they are found offline. 
This... but like the OP said, there should be a waiting period before it becomes abandoned (3-7 days maybe).
|

Aedeal
The Dark Space Initiative Revival Of The Talocan Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 11:31:00 -
[7] - Quote
POSs in WHs are still wrong IMO. It's a 0.0 system, you shouldn't be as safe as essentially high-sec when it comes to what can bash down your tower.
Gonna assume they don't wanna build a cap inside your hole, and we're talking about C4 and below:
You put up a large tower. Keep this fueled and death/dickstar it, and the most they can bring to you are battleships (Battlecruisers in a C1). I know there's a lot of people that have bashed towers in battleships and I think you'll all agree, it's mindless boring as **** thankless work. Very rarely do you get anything substantial at the end of it, in terms of gameplay or ISK, and the job is so dull and crap that any satisfaction you get at the end is just for the fact that it's finally over and you can go sleep cos it's 5am. Throw into this the dickstar tower and mass constrictions. This means that unless you find a HS each time, you can't bring forces into the hole (The chances of rolling the connection back on anything over than a C6 aren't worth it). Now when you're there, you're getting jammed to hell every so often, making it take all that longer.
C5/C6 are both different. C5s the only real way is to Cap-Inject: Have a scout in that WH find every nullsec he can over a while. Any which are in range of your caps, bring 3 in and logoffski. Caps bash POS, it's just a small nullsec pos-bash fleet.
C6s you have the option of force rolling the hole to get the target back again. There are so few C6s that this is a practical task (as shown the excellent Clarion Call vid). Of course, you require caps inside your hole, but that's no massive deal. This can give larger pos-bash fleets.
Side note to those that want moongoo in WHs: Not until the moongoo can be stolen/denied without smashing down the entire tower. Otherwise you have a fairly safe tower with a massive ISK printing machine. |

seany1212
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
35
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 11:52:00 -
[8] - Quote
Aedeal wrote:
You put up a large tower. Keep this fueled and death/dickstar it, and the most they can bring to you are battleships (Battlecruisers in a C1). I know there's a lot of people that have bashed towers in battleships and I think you'll all agree, it's mindless boring as **** thankless work. Very rarely do you get anything substantial at the end of it, in terms of gameplay or ISK, and the job is so dull and crap that any satisfaction you get at the end is just for the fact that it's finally over and you can go sleep cos it's 5am. Throw into this the dickstar tower and mass constrictions. This means that unless you find a HS each time, you can't bring forces into the hole (The chances of rolling the connection back on anything over than a C6 aren't worth it). Now when you're there, you're getting jammed to hell every so often, making it take all that longer.
Do you guys even play in wormholes anymore? If a group wants a tower down and have the capabilities to they will take it down regardless of what class it is and whether its dickstar'd, fleet of tengus could hammer a pos in a couple of hours and that dickstar is predictable and useless unless it has active pos gunners. It's whether the force required to take it down is worth the reward of actually removing it  |

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
354
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 12:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
To get back on topic, I rather like the OP's suggestion that long abandoned POS towers take on a new "abandoned" status and be conquerable, repackagable, etc.
Make it the same 30+ days inactivity timer that an anchored GSC goes by perhaps. This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |

Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
71
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 12:00:00 -
[10] - Quote
seany1212 wrote: If a group wants a tower down and have the capabilities to they will take it down regardless
Agreed. I have taken a POS down as part of a pure stealth bomber group. |

Aedeal
The Dark Space Initiative Revival Of The Talocan Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 12:09:00 -
[11] - Quote
You can take it down. That wasn't the point of my post. The point was that the effort and more importantly the time is, as both of you above said, really not worth it unless you have a massive reason to be there. |

Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
728
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 12:59:00 -
[12] - Quote
Aedeal wrote:You can take it down. That wasn't the point of my post. The point was that the effort and more importantly the time is, as both of you above said, really not worth it unless you have a massive reason to be there.
So, to summarize, you're babbling on about something where you have no idea what the hell you're talking about.
Anyhow... I had the idea awhile back that a POS, if offline for at least a month, would lose it's "allegiance" with whomever planted it. This would mean the next person to come along at this point could unanchor the POS.
However... then comes the question of ripple effects... how would this affect the POS manufacturing market, null sec, wormholes etc. if there was this sudden influx of basically free POS's into the scene? Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |

Mistress Motion
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 13:26:00 -
[13] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:To get back on topic, I rather like the OP's suggestion that long abandoned POS towers take on a new "abandoned" status and be conquerable, repackagable, etc.
Make it the same 30+ days inactivity timer that an anchored GSC goes by perhaps.
This would be great for small few man corps in hisec, since every 0.5 system is full of offline ancient pos's. Then again, it wouldn't really take too much people to burn that pos without shields. That said, there seems to be some amount of hisec corps who already are doing the cleaning job and wardeccing just to smash offlined ones.
I can still imagine this would be good thing in WH's. |

Obax Bannon
Fidelis Technologies
29
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 13:29:00 -
[14] - Quote
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:POS control tower stands on its own because of how long they take to destroy them. Directional scan (D-scan) for Force Fields. Yeah, I would like to see high hacking skills used to get control towers to repackage when they are found offline. 
This I like Would be nice to be able to hack into any abandoned tower and change it over to your corp or even to just be able to unanchor it.
I mean its hardly feasable for any small corp to come along and kill a large tower, this seems like a great alternative |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
283
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 13:38:00 -
[15] - Quote
I'd go so far as to say that if a POS is offline, it should be vulnerable to hacking attacks. Once it's hacked, it's hacked to your corp and you can online or unanchor it.
This should be doable in hisec as well as low/null/ws, to clean out all the placeholder/abandoned POSes in hisec. |

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 13:50:00 -
[16] - Quote
Just came back from lunch and nice to see good support for the idea!
Please try and keep it on topic. This is simply about recovering/capturing/changing ownership of an off-line POS.
please keep posting if you support the idea and maybe we can attract some Blue attention! |

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
355
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 13:53:00 -
[17] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:I'd go so far as to say that if a POS is offline, it should be vulnerable to hacking attacks. Once it's hacked, it's hacked to your corp and you can online or unanchor it.
This should be doable in hisec as well as low/null/ws, to clean out all the placeholder/abandoned POSes in hisec.
Yeah, that's a better mechanic than abandoned timers.
Hack it - make the chance really small and/or require several successes so it takes a little while (at least 10 minutes) - and then give it a reinforced timer where the original owners get eve mail and a time period to try and come un-hack it and put it back online. This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |

Velicitia
Open Designs
194
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:06:00 -
[18] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:I'd go so far as to say that if a POS is offline, it should be vulnerable to hacking attacks. Once it's hacked, it's hacked to your corp and you can online or unanchor it.
This should be doable in hisec as well as low/null/ws, to clean out all the placeholder/abandoned POSes in hisec.
Hack and it unanchors (everything). Otherwise, you can potentially "pick up" POS all over the ******* place because the hacker(s) don't have POS roles. |

Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
728
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:07:00 -
[19] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:Lord Zim wrote:I'd go so far as to say that if a POS is offline, it should be vulnerable to hacking attacks. Once it's hacked, it's hacked to your corp and you can online or unanchor it.
This should be doable in hisec as well as low/null/ws, to clean out all the placeholder/abandoned POSes in hisec. Yeah, that's a better mechanic than abandoned timers. Hack it - make the chance really small and/or require several successes so it takes a little while (at least 10 minutes) - and then give it a reinforced timer where the original owners get eve mail and a time period to try and come un-hack it and put it back online.
I like where you're going with this... but I think the reinforced timer would wind up hurting the efforts to clean out wormholes of their abandoned POS's with little to no chance of the prior owners finding entry to the abandoned system to reactivate it. If you're in empire, you have little to no chance at all of finding any particular wormhole system on short notice. Plus the poor bugger that did the hacking may be up against his own way home being EoL so time's an issue there. Six months in the hole... it changes a man. |

Barakkus
1186
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:08:00 -
[20] - Quote
Should just make the tower unanchor after 90 days, that way people can just scoop em :) |

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:11:00 -
[21] - Quote
I like some of the idea's keep it coming.
With some of the ideas here an off-line POS could be a nice magnate for small gang PvP too.... |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
284
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:14:00 -
[22] - Quote
Velicitia wrote:Lord Zim wrote:I'd go so far as to say that if a POS is offline, it should be vulnerable to hacking attacks. Once it's hacked, it's hacked to your corp and you can online or unanchor it.
This should be doable in hisec as well as low/null/ws, to clean out all the placeholder/abandoned POSes in hisec. Hack and it unanchors (everything). Otherwise, you can potentially "pick up" POS all over the ******* place because the hacker(s) don't have POS roles. I don't see why POS roles would have anything to do with it. If someone's let their POS run out of fuel, the defenses are down. If the POS is then hacked, oh well so sad someone had firmware access to the tower and could rewrite the auth routines.
If the POS is fuelled and online, welp guess you don't have access and can only glare at it angrily across space. |

Spurty
D00M. Northern Coalition.
68
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:15:00 -
[23] - Quote
I vote for dedicated class of pos salvage ships which just hack the anchoring codes and change ownership of a pos.
Make it take X mins and produce one mail That there is a security attempt on the pos.
if the owners can't show up un twenty mins (remember they got a bucket load of notifications that this pos was low on fuel), pos flips ownerrship to hacker.
This one change alone carves a huge career for pod pilots. 60 mins large,40 medium, 20 small (with perfect hacking skills, dedicated ship and modules etc)
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |

Barakkus
1186
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:18:00 -
[24] - Quote
Spurty wrote:I vote for dedicated class of pos salvage ships which just hack the anchoring codes and change ownership of a pos.
Make it take X mins and produce one mail That there is a security attempt on the pos.
if the owners can't show up in time (remember they got a bucket load of notifications that this pos was low on fuel), pos flips ownerrship to hacker.
This one change alone carves a huge career for pod pilots. 60 mins large,40 medium, 20 small (with perfect hacking skills, dedicated ship and modules etc)
Make it 3 days large, 2 medium and 1 day small. |

Morganta
Peripheral Madness The Midget Mafia
542
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:21:00 -
[25] - Quote
no, no free towers and mods to carebears looking to "safe up" in a hole because high sec is too dangerous
you want the tower gone SHOOT IT if you're not willing to do the work to set up shop in a hole you shouldn't be there The American public's reaction to the change was poor and the new cola was a major marketing failure. The subsequent reintroduction of Coke's original formula, re-branded as "Coca-Cola Classic", resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy |

Spurty
D00M. Northern Coalition.
68
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:22:00 -
[26] - Quote
Barakkus wrote:Spurty wrote:I vote for dedicated class of pos salvage ships which just hack the anchoring codes and change ownership of a pos.
Make it take X mins and produce one mail That there is a security attempt on the pos.
if the owners can't show up in time (remember they got a bucket load of notifications that this pos was low on fuel), pos flips ownerrship to hacker.
This one change alone carves a huge career for pod pilots. 60 mins large,40 medium, 20 small (with perfect hacking skills, dedicated ship and modules etc) Make it 3 days large, 2 medium and 1 day small.
Minutes mate. Minutes... ---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |

Terrorfrodo
Deep Space Darwinian Law Enforcement Agency
6
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:23:00 -
[27] - Quote
seany1212 wrote:Do you guys even play in wormholes anymore? If a group wants a tower down and have the capabilities to they will take it down regardless of what class it is and whether its dickstar'd, fleet of tengus could hammer a pos in a couple of hours and that dickstar is predictable and useless unless it has active pos gunners. It's whether the force required to take it down is worth the reward of actually removing it 
Only because most people are dumb and lazy and don't know how to fit a POS for w-space. 80 Caldari ECMs will discourage even a 100-strong tengu blob ready to invade, as I can tell you from experience. Sure, theoretically they could just bring 200... only there is no one in w-space who has those numbers. Even then it would be ******* annoying.
Only way to kill a POS like that in c4 and below it to build your own dreads inside, all the while being vulnerable to the residents' dreads.
Actually, the best way to capture a system that has heavily fortified POSes is to just move in and make daily life hell for the residents. If you are stronger than them in the field, they'll pack up and leave soon enough. |

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:24:00 -
[28] - Quote
I like the 60 - 40 - 20.
Although once complete, the end result should be the packaged item.
The new owner should have to go through the process of anchoring and on-lining if they want to make it operational straight away rather than just bringing fuel in? |

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 14:30:00 -
[29] - Quote
THIS IS NOT ... a thread debating if POS's should be allowed in wormholes or not.
Please stay on topic!
This is about a secondary means of acquiring the structures that has the added benefit of clearing up space.
Most of the suggestions so far require an increased investment in time to recover and get the POS operational.
The trade for me should be:
Time + Risk + Additional skill training = Ability to acquire abandoned structures
|

Elson Tamar
Lion Investments
66
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 15:02:00 -
[30] - Quote
I approve of theft. |

TheGunslinger42
Bite me inc. Narwhals Ate My Duck
13
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 15:44:00 -
[31] - Quote
Aedeal wrote:POSs in WHs are still wrong IMO. It's a 0.0 system, you shouldn't be as safe as essentially high-sec when it comes to what can bash down your tower.
Gonna assume they don't wanna build a cap inside your hole, and we're talking about C4 and below:
You put up a large tower. Keep this fueled and death/dickstar it, and the most they can bring to you are battleships (Battlecruisers in a C1). I know there's a lot of people that have bashed towers in battleships and I think you'll all agree, it's mindless boring as **** thankless work. Very rarely do you get anything substantial at the end of it, in terms of gameplay or ISK, and the job is so dull and crap that any satisfaction you get at the end is just for the fact that it's finally over and you can go sleep cos it's 5am. Throw into this the dickstar tower and mass constrictions. This means that unless you find a HS each time, you can't bring forces into the hole (The chances of rolling the connection back on anything over than a C6 aren't worth it). Now when you're there, you're getting jammed to hell every so often, making it take all that longer.
C5/C6 are both different. C5s the only real way is to Cap-Inject: Have a scout in that WH find every nullsec he can over a while. Any which are in range of your caps, bring 3 in and logoffski. Caps bash POS, it's just a small nullsec pos-bash fleet.
C6s you have the option of force rolling the hole to get the target back again. There are so few C6s that this is a practical task (as shown the excellent Clarion Call vid). Of course, you require caps inside your hole, but that's no massive deal. This can give larger pos-bash fleets.
Side note to those that want moongoo in WHs: Not until the moongoo can be stolen/denied without smashing down the entire tower. Otherwise you have a fairly safe tower with a massive ISK printing machine.
Wrong thread buddy, the nullsec whines about wh thread is that way. |

Barakkus
1186
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 15:51:00 -
[32] - Quote
Spurty wrote: Minutes mate. Minutes... if you want 'DAYS' of response time, PUT FUEL IN IT!!!!!
Only reason I said days is b/c r/l gets in the way sometimes, at least give people a chance especially with the timezone differences in this game :P http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc |

L Salander
Bite me inc. Narwhals Ate My Duck
11
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 15:57:00 -
[33] - Quote
Quote:POSs in WHs are still wrong IMO. It's a 0.0 system
Are you proposing that POSes shouldn't be allowed in 0.0?
Thats quite the proposal, bro.
I fully support the idea of offline poses becoming abandoned/recoverable. It makes no sense that the only way to get rid of an entirely dead, offline and abandoned-by-its-corp tower is to sit and shoot it apart. If it's in such a sorry state there should be a way for others to remove or recover them in some other way. It'd also clean up hundreds of instances of space garbage, throughout hisec and wh space. |

Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
162
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:03:00 -
[34] - Quote
This is a potential solution to the issue of there being thousands of offlined POS towers all over highsec that nobody can be bothered to remove because there's nothing in it for them.
You should definitely be flagged with aggression while you're hacking a tower though. |

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:30:00 -
[35] - Quote
I am not sure how it would work in high-sec.
It would basically be whoever got their first.
In low,null and WH it would be whoever got there first and stayed alive long enough to recover it.
I feel that if a high-sec POS goes off-line for a defined period of time it should just end up as space garbage then de-spawn. |

Spurty
D00M. Northern Coalition.
68
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:37:00 -
[36] - Quote
Barakkus wrote:Spurty wrote: Minutes mate. Minutes... if you want 'DAYS' of response time, PUT FUEL IN IT!!!!!
Only reason I said days is b/c r/l gets in the way sometimes, at least give people a chance especially with the timezone differences in this game :P
Sorry if I came across a bit brash, but really .. you can stuff those things up with weeks of fuel. If you're tardy, in EVE, it should be costly. This as an excuse doesn't fly.
This and the fact that there are just insane amounts of abandoned pos's littering moons (Left overs from the old SOV mechanic, owner of 51% of moons took sov).
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |

Spurty
D00M. Northern Coalition.
68
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:39:00 -
[37] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:You should definitely be flagged with aggression while you're hacking a tower though.
You are 'looting' after all :o
Not combat aggression where concord arrives and deals a deft blow though. Just flagged to old owners.
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |

stoicfaux
398
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:42:00 -
[38] - Quote
If a POS is abandoned then it should turn into a derelict from lack of maintenance. Then like any derelict building, it should be demolished.
Let players buy "demolition charges" (and a few CONCORD demolition permits in hi-sec) to attach to abandoned/derelict structures in order to quickly destroy them.
You can tell me what is and isn't true when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head.
|

Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
452
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:44:00 -
[39] - Quote
Spurty wrote: This and the fact that there are just insane amounts of abandoned pos's littering moons (Left overs from the old SOV mechanic, owner of 51% of moons took sov).
In null space yes. But a large number of the idle towers in hi-sec are because of the way hi-sec anchoring works, spare towers are common. (Otherwise you have to grind up faction standings on every single character within the corp, or boot everyone out if you need to anchor an additional tower for expansion.) |

Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. The Lostboys
179
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:44:00 -
[40] - Quote
I think hacking an offline tower should be part of the game. CCP may think so too. In the current build is a item called a Data Subverter with the description "A specialized computer and communications suite designed to assist attempts to subvert the control routines of orbital structures."
At present none are on the market or in contracts, and its not clear what they do, but hacking an offline POS is a possibility. I assume it still needs to be added to loot tables or something.
If you hack an offline POS, you should not be able to put it on-line, but should get it in an un-anchored state. Reason: Anchoring in high sec requires standings. We do not want to introduce a way to get a high sec POS without standings, at least not like this. (Have a corp with standings anchor the POS for you, then abandon it, then you hack it).
Stealing off line POSes may nerf the POS market, but with places to anchor working POSes opening up, it may boost the market for POS arrays. It should work out OK. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can. |

Dr Karsun
Coffee Lovers Brewing Club Care Factor
35
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:45:00 -
[41] - Quote
Allowing the pos to switch to "abandoned" after 30 days and then allowing another player with a special ship to come in and hack it, would be cool. Some new ore ship for that would be quite nice.
But unless someone hacks it after the first 30 days, I'm for not allowing it to vanish at all.
And offtopic - this is , yet again, as always NOT F&I... Please go there for proper flaming :) "Have you had your morning coffee?" -> the Coffee Lovers Brewing Club is recruiting! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=363976#post363976 |

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:48:00 -
[42] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:Spurty wrote: This and the fact that there are just insane amounts of abandoned pos's littering moons (Left overs from the old SOV mechanic, owner of 51% of moons took sov).
In null space yes. But a large number of the idle towers in hi-sec are because of the way hi-sec anchoring works, spare towers are common. (Otherwise you have to grind up faction standings on every single character within the corp, or boot everyone out if you need to anchor an additional tower for expansion.)
I don't think this is a good enough reason for them to be just sitting there offline. yes it is a pain to put a high sec POS up. We bought a Corp with standings just to get on online. Those standings last for 7 days then thats's your window closed.
If the high sec POS we have up gets neglected and goes offline then abandoned then we deserve to loose it. Or we could sell the corp because it has a high sec POS if we no longer need it.
|

Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
195
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:53:00 -
[43] - Quote
Sounds like a bunch of lazyasses don't want to work to remove a POS tower. I have no clue why "harsh" and "scam" describing other aspects of EVE would somehow let you steal an anchored object when you cannot steal an anchored GSC just because "Hacking" is coded in game for a PVE content but should somehow imply that it needs to affect PVP. Yeah, only makes sense if you don't think about it; lets not think that a single tower anchored but offline isn't being used at all, is not producing rewards, is at risk of being destroyed for just being there, and amazingly you are risk free when taking it down because no one will fire back BUT you don't want to shoot it because its boring. So in fact, you having a problem means that you must turn to CCP and "Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi, you are my only hope" to fix your probem when the tools are already in game. Hey, next time someone asks to buff the Hulk don't belittle them and try to come up with a response better then "lol tears" or HTFU but instead "Hey, why can't CCP buff a hulk because its so easy to kill. It would still be possible to kill it and I agree it should get a buff since I got to steal a POS that previously I wouldn't bother with." (<-- yeah right, when ever Hulk is mentioned its a flat out NO!) |

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 16:54:00 -
[44] - Quote
Dr Karsun wrote:Some new ore ship for that would be quite nice.
I was thinking this also. it could have specific bay space, and a bonus to "hacking" or such like. It might require specific scripts etc for the different racial / faction POS's.
It should also be paper thin and have a terrible align time, not far off the Noctis!
Anyway back to the mechanics and ideas as to how this could work. |

War Kitten
Panda McLegion
355
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 17:00:00 -
[45] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:Sounds like a bunch of lazyasses don't want to work to remove a POS tower. I have no clue why "harsh" and "scam" describing other aspects of EVE would somehow let you steal an anchored object when you cannot steal an anchored GSC just because "Hacking" is coded in game for a PVE content but should somehow imply that it needs to affect PVP. Yeah, only makes sense if you don't think about it; lets not think that a single tower anchored but offline isn't being used at all, is not producing rewards, is at risk of being destroyed for just being there, and amazingly you are risk free when taking it down because no one will fire back BUT you don't want to shoot it because its boring. So in fact, you having a problem means that you must turn to CCP and "Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi, you are my only hope" to fix your probem when the tools are already in game. Hey, next time someone asks to buff the Hulk don't belittle them and try to come up with a response better then "lol tears" or HTFU but instead "Hey, why can't CCP buff a hulk because its so easy to kill. It would still be possible to kill it and I agree it should get a buff since I got to steal a POS that previously I wouldn't bother with." (<-- yeah right, when ever Hulk is mentioned its a flat out NO!)
My EYES!
Your point of view might be more relevant if it had more carriage returns and less Hulk references. This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 17:01:00 -
[46] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:Sounds like a bunch of lazyasses don't want to work to remove ........ blah blah learn to use paragraphs!
But in responce..
Someone leaves their assets un-protected in space. My initial thoughts are not... woohoo lets blow it up. It's ohh can I steal / take that for myself.
Your wandering though space and you see a nice faction battleship with no pod pilot in it, what's your gut reaction?
|

Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
452
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 17:17:00 -
[47] - Quote
Abbey Kharum wrote:I don't think this is a good enough reason for them to be just sitting there offline. yes it is a pain to put a high sec POS up. We bought a Corp with standings just to get on online. Those standings last for 7 days then thats's your window closed.
So what are you going to do in a few months when you outgrow your first POS tower? Because when you reach the point where you need to expand to more towers, you're going to have to kick all the members out who are dragging down your faction standings. Or are you going to anchor a bunch of spares and then pay to keep them fueled, even when they're not running any labs/arrays? Unless CCP changes the hi-sec POS mechanics, being able to anchor spares is a valid game mechanic (risky, but valid).
There's no in-game way to tell whether a tower is temporarily been left unfueled as a spare vs one that is abandoned.
Towers owned by corporations that have been disbanded - yes, those should simply unanchor and be scoopable. |

Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
340
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 17:21:00 -
[48] - Quote
After a POS goes offline, a 30 day timer should start, the owner mailed, and then after 30 days, it should be "hackable", level V hacking etc, special module, what have you, then steal-able. Also any anchored (and not onlined) towers should also have this same timer installed as well). I'm a ******* profanity filter that can catch **** and *****, but fuckin little else. -á
|

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 18:50:00 -
[49] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:Abbey Kharum wrote:I don't think this is a good enough reason for them to be just sitting there offline. yes it is a pain to put a high sec POS up. We bought a Corp with standings just to get on online. Those standings last for 7 days then thats's your window closed.
So what are you going to do in a few months when you outgrow your first POS tower? Because when you reach the point where you need to expand to more towers, you're going to have to kick all the members out who are dragging down your faction standings. Or are you going to anchor a bunch of spares and then pay to keep them fueled, even when they're not running any labs/arrays? Unless CCP changes the hi-sec POS mechanics, being able to anchor spares is a valid game mechanic (risky, but valid). There's no in-game way to tell whether a tower is temporarily been left unfueled as a spare vs one that is abandoned. Towers owned by corporations that have been disbanded - yes, those should simply unanchor and be scoopable.
By that stage I am hoping we will not need to rely on a high sec POS. We will either go to WH, low or null. Join an allaince / be in a position to defend assets in WH or low-sec space. Just as we found a solution to fit our current needs our industrial requirements will change, and we will plan for that eventuality understanding the limitations and benefits of all the possible options.
We have already started dipping our toes in WH space.
If we wanted to expand our assets in Empire then we know we need to increase our Corp standing. |

Karash Amerius
Sutoka
23
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 19:15:00 -
[50] - Quote
You should be able to hack it to recover, or even salvage it to convert to metal scraps (seriously 500:1 compression on Trit as that volume is a nice ....niche)
I think you should be able to hack functioning POS to gain intel of what they are producing / researching / mining, etc.... of course you need to negotiate the defense for that, but still. |

Karash Amerius
Sutoka
23
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 19:16:00 -
[51] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:
Towers owned by corporations that have been disbanded - yes, those should simply unanchor and be scoopable.
I don't think you can disband a corporation with assets in space can you? I honestly don't know, just a gut feeling.
|

Emiko P'eng
7
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 20:08:00 -
[52] - Quote
Here are my ideas!
1) To hack an un-fuelled POS you would need a hacking module that you attach to the tower. When activated, this would send an email to the owner warning of the hack attempt. For a POS just out of fuel, the computer defences mean it would take 24 hours for the module to work. On a POS that has been abandoned for over 50 days it might take just a couple of hours.
2) In Low-Sec as you need Government permission for your tower. You could only attempt a takeover after the Government has either declared the POS abandoned after say 50days or as a result of war between the owner & those attempting to gain control of the POS. On a successful hack you would then need to pay a 'transfer of deeds' fee to the Government to seal the deal.
3) The longer the POS has been abandoned the more it should cost to repair & renovate. The result is after say 100days the cost of renovation would be more than selling it for scrap and buying new! (Note this means in Low-Sec the above 50day rule would mean the renovation costs would automatically be approx 50% the cost of a new POS + the transfer fee)
4) In 0.0 & WH space the hacking attempt could take place immediately after the fuel ran out, without the need of a war-dec & no transfer fee required.
I feel if these were introduced you would see a new style of war where one corp would attempt to stop another corp from refuelling its POS so they can gain access after the fuel runs out ! |

March rabbit
Ganse Shadow of xXDEATHXx
49
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 09:34:00 -
[53] - Quote
Ingvar Angst wrote:War Kitten wrote:Lord Zim wrote:I'd go so far as to say that if a POS is offline, it should be vulnerable to hacking attacks. Once it's hacked, it's hacked to your corp and you can online or unanchor it.
This should be doable in hisec as well as low/null/ws, to clean out all the placeholder/abandoned POSes in hisec. Yeah, that's a better mechanic than abandoned timers. Hack it - make the chance really small and/or require several successes so it takes a little while (at least 10 minutes) - and then give it a reinforced timer where the original owners get eve mail and a time period to try and come un-hack it and put it back online. I like where you're going with this... but I think the reinforced timer would wind up hurting the efforts to clean out wormholes of their abandoned POS's with little to no chance of the prior owners finding entry to the abandoned system to reactivate it. If you're in empire, you have little to no chance at all of finding any particular wormhole system on short notice. Plus the poor bugger that did the hacking may be up against his own way home being EoL so time's an issue there. well. i would say: this is what WH is supposed to be - unknown, unpredictable and dangerrous system. |

Abbey Kharum
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 10:28:00 -
[54] - Quote
Do CCP have an overall policy / design principle when it comes to abandoned assets? |

Banroh
Eggers Den
10
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 11:06:00 -
[55] - Quote
I would like to hear reason to this. Why is this problem? I know what this means and i know there are sometimes offline POS on my dscan too.
Altho this has never ruined my ping or fps, ive never felt great emotions on offline poses or felt like this is problem at all.
I agree they could change ownership, its not that bad idea.
Still reason it somehow. Or hire mercs if you want to prove ccp that eve is so much better without this imaginary problem |

I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
36
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 11:18:00 -
[56] - Quote
I really think this is one of the better threads here on GD in a while. Some interesting ideas here. I think they should be conquerable myself if they are offline and abandoned.
One positive aspect of this is it could actually free up some server resources by cleaning out the unused POS, like they did when they started to clean out unused GSCs. Mind you, I'm no server expert or anything, dunno if cleaning up abandoned POS would effect the server. It was just a thought I had because you could actually notice it on the server when they cleaned up the GSCs. ( o Y o ) ( o Y o ) ( o Y o ) ( o Y o ) ( o Y o ) ( o Y o ) ( o Y o ) ( o Y o ) ( o Y o ) ( o Y o ) ( o Y o ) ( o Y o )
The world would be a better place if boobies ran the world instead of boobs. |

Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. The Lostboys
182
|
Posted - 2011.12.15 00:38:00 -
[57] - Quote
Banroh wrote:I would like to hear reason to this. Why is this problem?
Its not a "problem", its something that many think should be part of the game, to make the game more interesting and maybe add a new profession: POS recovery. If I find an abandoned POS, why should my only option be blow it up? Why not add an option to recover and sell the POS? It would be a new thing for people to do, some more sand in the sandbox. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can. |

Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
244
|
Posted - 2011.12.15 00:51:00 -
[58] - Quote
I have to say that this is not an original idea. I mean who hasn't thought how cool it would be to be able to either bring online what in essence is a fully setup pos or salvage it in some way? And yes there are a lot of them out there. Unless you're km whoring there really isn't any reason to take down a lone tower.......as tower with anchored guns absolutely. You never know when the owners will wake up and come back. We want breast augmentations and sluttier clothing in the NeX! |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |