| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Syath
Einherjar Rising
Cry Havoc.
   |
Posted - 2008.03.17 03:42:00 -
[211]
 Quote:
Maintenance cost. Once built, a ship costs nothing to operate (apart from ammo/fuel costs). Yeah, I know the fuel bill on an active Titan is scary, but once again, compared to the wealth of alliances, it is not that much. In "peace" times (i.e when titans aren't operating 24/7 and using their bridges/doomsdays) having a Titan in space does not cost more than having a rookie ship.
hmmm good stuff I think supercapitals should probably have a passive cost associated with them as well, even when they are just sitting at a pos doing nothing, they should be bleeding isk for it to not go into a mothballed state.
|
Syath
Einherjar Rising
Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 03:43:00 -
[212]
not only would it either make less... it would make them FRIGGIN USED MORE!!!
|
Moonlight Express
Moonlight Express Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 03:48:00 -
[213]
Originally by: Syath
Quote:
Maintenance cost. Once built, a ship costs nothing to operate (apart from ammo/fuel costs). Yeah, I know the fuel bill on an active Titan is scary, but once again, compared to the wealth of alliances, it is not that much. In "peace" times (i.e when titans aren't operating 24/7 and using their bridges/doomsdays) having a Titan in space does not cost more than having a rookie ship.
hmmm good stuff I think supercapitals should probably have a passive cost associated with them as well, even when they are just sitting at a pos doing nothing, they should be bleeding isk for it to not go into a mothballed state.
So does that mean that when you sit in a station all day, you should bleed isk to the station owner for rent and power used?
|
Mr Mozzie
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 04:18:00 -
[214]
Edited by: Mr Mozzie on 17/03/2008 04:19:19
Originally by: Moonlight Express
Originally by: Syath
hmmm good stuff I think supercapitals should probably have a passive cost associated with them as well, even when they are just sitting at a pos doing nothing, they should be bleeding isk for it to not go into a mothballed state.
So does that mean that when you sit in a station all day, you should bleed isk to the station owner for rent and power used?
Personally, I rather like the idea of running costs for supercapitals at least. As for conventional ships, I see that as presenting some problems. The main problem being that new players, or players who neglect their accounts could easily be bankrupted if they are not careful.
|
Syath
Einherjar Rising
Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 04:24:00 -
[215]
well i mean you would never go into negative isk because then the ship would just become unusable with a hefty retrofitting cost.
|
Jennai
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 04:24:00 -
[216]
Originally by: Quartex
To kill an Alliance = You need to collapse it from the inside by making logging on dull/frustrating and for most; non-ISK generating.
No need to "take" a home system to achieve the latter - denying them access to space around their key systems will do this.
this isn't really possible with empire alts, jump bridges, jump freighters, and carriers unless the alliance is being camped into their last cynojammed station system.
|
Mr Mozzie
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 04:40:00 -
[217]
Originally by: Syath
well i mean you would never go into negative isk because then the ship would just become unusable with a hefty retrofitting cost.
There is a question of when ships would require running costs. If ships were to deteriorate when the player is offline, they might legitimately not log into the game for several weeks only to come back and find that their ships are all unusable.
This could be prevented by allowing loopholes such as only applying costs to unpackaged ships, or active ships, or ships in space. But each of these fixes has its downsides. Each presents loopholes that will generate a higher workload for the player.
I'm not saying that these problems are intractable. Perhaps they are worthwhile compromises. But they need to be thought out.
|
Syath
Einherjar Rising
Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 04:50:00 -
[218]
Quote:
There is a question of when ships would require running costs. If ships were to deteriorate when the player is offline, they might legitimately not log into the game for several weeks only to come back and find that their ships are all unusable.
Thats why the cost is taken from the alliance wallet, I mean it is an alliance ship right?
|
Mr Mozzie
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 05:03:00 -
[219]
Originally by: Syath
Thats why the cost is taken from the alliance wallet, I mean it is an alliance ship right?
What happens to people in an NCP corporation?
Like I said it is an idea that needs to be thought about.
|
Mister Xerox
A Multitude of Blues
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 05:51:00 -
[220]
Originally by: Chowdown
Lets not have a mad talk about tians getting nerfed, lets simply make them 10x more expensive ...... everyones happy
Especially the ones who've built them. Instaprofit.
CCP learned that mistake with large towers.
|
Trupplupagus
Settling Tank
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 05:55:00 -
[221]
Originally by: Mister Xerox
Originally by: Chowdown
Lets not have a mad talk about tians getting nerfed, lets simply make them 10x more expensive ...... everyones happy
Especially the ones who've built them. Instaprofit.
CCP learned that mistake with large towers.
I missed what happened there...did they just up the price suddenly?
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |