Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Landarian
Spaceways Provisioning Company
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 17:58:00 -
[1]
Obviously you couldn't claim sov or anything, but why can't a corp build one in a system where there are no NPC stations?
Before anyone answers with the "Because CCP says you can't", I'm wondering if there is some sort of game-logic involved. I know you can put a POS up but a POS is nowhere near as useful when it comes to having a place to dock, setting up manufacturing lines, etc. It certainly seems like having that ability might encourage some corps to move to low-sec who aren't willing/able to claim space in 0.0
|
Carniflex
Caldari Fallout Research Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 18:01:00 -
[2]
Bcos outposts are conqurable and this mechaniks is tied to having sov.
|
Landarian
Spaceways Provisioning Company
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 18:14:00 -
[3]
yes, I'm aware of that :)
But that's the sort of thing that could be changed to allow one to be deployed in low-sec could it not? Just like having charters is required for POS fuel in hi-sec and not in low/0.0, certain conditions for having an Outpost could be altered or lifted for placement in low-sec space.
|
Newbear
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 18:33:00 -
[4]
I see questions within questions! Why do we even have low sec?! lets just make it all null.
Click here for my High Security POS Service
|
adrian barbobot
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 19:10:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Newbear I see questions within questions! Why do we even have low sec?! lets just make it all null.
only reference and nullable types can be set to null kekekkeke |
Jack Freely
Trading and Industry LLC
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 20:25:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Newbear I see questions within questions! Why do we even have low sec?! lets just make it all null.
Now that there are ways to stop people no matter what in low and 0.0; I will agree with you as to why do we have low sec.
I think it would be more fun if we expand empire out one or two more then turn all the other systems to 0.0 space, but thats just my noob thoughts on it.
|
Jurgen Cartis
Caldari Interstellar Corporation of Exploration
|
Posted - 2008.03.06 22:39:00 -
[7]
Because that is the empire's space. By actively developing it without their permission, you're effectively contesting their sovereignty of that space. Not that they could actually stop an alliance that really wanted such space, but we're not allowed to contest NPC space, no matter how easily they fall to the Raven hordes, to keep the map from becoming a huge mass of 'Caldari State'. -------------------- ICE Blueprint Sales FIRST!! -Yipsilanti Pfft. Never such a thing as a "last chance". ;) -Rauth |
Carniflex
Caldari Fallout Research Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 10:34:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Jurgen Cartis Because that is the empire's space. By actively developing it without their permission, you're effectively contesting their sovereignty of that space. Not that they could actually stop an alliance that really wanted such space, but we're not allowed to contest NPC space, no matter how easily they fall to the Raven hordes, to keep the map from becoming a huge mass of 'Caldari State'.
Do not underestimate power of empires. When they really would feel threatened it would be in their power to yank your organization docking rights in all their stations, revoke all medical clone rights in their stations, deny acsess to market orders based in their stations and all other nasty stuff player alliances can't really do (like making sentry guns shoot at your pilots whenever they see them). Plus their economic power is immense. When they would see the war going bad for them they just might hire some other pod pilot alliance to help them out a bit. Or just lobby with CONCORD to label your alliance as 'pirates' and stop paying your pilots any kind of bounties for NPC's and add bounties to your pilots (as hey, they would be officially pirates).
|
mamolian
Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 17:53:00 -
[9]
Why would anyone want to deploy an outpost in low sec?? -----------
|
Floppy Disk
Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.07 18:26:00 -
[10]
Originally by: mamolian Why would anyone want to deploy an outpost in low sec??
the last refuge from titan warfare..
|
|
Landarian
Spaceways Provisioning Company
|
Posted - 2008.03.08 15:50:00 -
[11]
Originally by: mamolian Why would anyone want to deploy an outpost in low sec??
There are many, many low-sec systems with perfectly nice resources like belts and moons, but no NPC stations withing a few jumps. An Outpost would give docking abilities, manufacturing, and all the other things you would want if you wanted to live out there. You wouldn't be able to claim sov of course but so what? As is obvious from the amount of BS that is 0.0 politics, having sov isn't all that great anyway. Some folks just want a decent HQ to operate from out in less populated spaces.
|
Kaaii
Caldari PixelJuice Design Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2008.03.08 19:15:00 -
[12]
Planned in the faction warfare, there is talk of "viceroys" which are designated corps/alliances that are allowed to "hold" low sec stations. No idea whether these are to be built by players or to take over existing ones.
Theres a blog on it somewhere...
According to Oveur, existing LSAA's already anchored will stay there. kieron Director of Community Relations,
|
Grr
Amarr Epitoth Fleetyards Vigilia Valeria
|
Posted - 2008.03.08 21:20:00 -
[13]
I don't remember a blog but it is on the drawing board.
http://myeve.eve-online.com/updates/plannedfeat.asp |
Kaaii
Caldari PixelJuice Design Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 20:42:00 -
[14]
from the "drawing board" section, towards the bottom
Quote: Viceroys
Viceroyalties are systems in low security Empire space which are administered by a player Viceroy, on behalf of their corporation or alliance. TheyÆll allow you to both turn a better profit and defend your chosen system from pirates, and act as both a way to populate low-sec space and an easier first step on the road to 0.0.
According to Oveur, existing LSAA's already anchored will stay there. kieron Director of Community Relations,
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |