EVE Search - POS's Flogging the Dead Horse

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

POS's Flogging the Dead Horse

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
De Guillaume Caldari Provisions Caldari State 262	Posted - 2012.03.07 18:25:00 - [91] - Quote This is a great idea plain and simple. It needs some fixing but the core is sound. Poses currently are a total waste of space and more of a burden than a total benefit +1000000848343434
Tchulen Trumpets and Bookmarks 41	Posted - 2012.03.08 08:21:00 - [92] - Quote My turn to flog the dead horse. I'm not getting much enjoyment out of it. It's just bones shifting about all over the place as I flog it. But flog it I must, to keep this thread alive.
Carmizan DOCS RUFF RIDERS Free Beer. 15	Posted - 2012.03.08 11:23:00 - [93] - Quote Kusum Fawn wrote: the saddest thing is i read the original flogging thread three years ago, and it had already been flogged for three years before that. seriously new noob ships? who is asking for that crap? why is this not a higher priority ? All of us that have been promoted this thread from the start have been asking the same question. Really the only thing we want and need from the dev team at CCP is a simple answer to a simple question. Are you going to implement this idea and if so when? oh and if not why not? Every Dev that has posted on this thread and the orginal one has said basically that it is a good idea, but none of them can or will tell us what is going on. I start to think that they do not want to touch the POS and hope that we will get bored of keeping this thread alive. SO i say to CCP give us an answer.
Carmizan DOCS RUFF RIDERS Free Beer. 15	Posted - 2012.03.13 11:00:00 - [94] - Quote Unashamed bump for this great idea and still no answer
Velicitia Open Designs 779	Posted - 2012.03.13 12:21:00 - [95] - Quote Carmizan wrote: Unashamed bump for this great idea and still no answer Keep in mind that they were posting pre-incarna... they were forced into implementing ****** things (Incarna, Nex store) rather than cool things (fixed POS, new modules, new ships, rebalanced stuffs). With Crucible, and the upcoming Inferno expansions ... it really looks like they're getting the right idea again (or at least understanding some of the mistakes they've made). So, perhaps they cannot poast because they'll give away the "big" thing for the expansion -- I mean, they already fixed fueling the damn things...
Kusum Fawn State War Academy Caldari State 2	Posted - 2012.03.13 18:57:00 - [96] - Quote Velicitia wrote: Carmizan wrote: Unashamed bump for this great idea and still no answer Keep in mind that they were posting pre-incarna... they were forced into implementing ****** things (Incarna, Nex store) rather than cool things (fixed POS, new modules, new ships, rebalanced stuffs). With Crucible, and the upcoming Inferno expansions ... it really looks like they're getting the right idea again (or at least understanding some of the mistakes they've made). So, perhaps they cannot post because they'll give away the "big" thing for the expansion -- I mean, they already fixed fueling the damn things... As much as i want you to be right, the odds are so heavy against this that its not funny. not anymore, not after all these years. [/i]years[/i ] While its true that CCP seems to be turning a new leaf in its customer relations departments. its also still true that some things that are bad and recognized continually to be bad. are still bad with no feedback by the people who can fix them. even the engagement of a conversation in the hypothetical would be a welcomes and extremely useful discourse, so that players could learn about some of the issues blocking this and ccp could better understand what exactly are the problems that need to be addressed. as to fuel blocks. im not really sure how its a fix. fuel supply is a longer chain now. its only the fuel dump to pos thats easier, everything before that is harder. oh and remember while they were "fixing" it ? lack of communication between CCP and players, (and it seems to a certain extent between CCP personnel) made the entire situation a lot worse then it should have been. considering all the ramp up to it.
Velicitia Open Designs 784	Posted - 2012.03.13 19:15:00 - [97] - Quote Agreed, it's ccp we're talking about, and communication isn't exactly a strong suit of theirs ... however, with that said, they have been doing things well since crucible (or at least "well" compared to prior to that). It'll take time, but they're at least putting on the facade of trying. also, forgot "soon(tm)" in my earlier post. Place where appropriate
Zombo Brian Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 3	Posted - 2012.03.13 19:24:00 - [98] - Quote +9001, sounds incredible, and makes the pos actually look like something
Leto Aramaus Grimm Hounds 11	Posted - 2012.03.13 23:04:00 - [99] - Quote Why? Why has this not been done, or at least something like this? I remember this thread had been on the first page of the features and ideas on the old forums for months, or was it even years? And here it is again, back and with just as much support as before CCP this idea is so blatantly supported by so many players, WHY have you not re-designed the POS system? What's your excuse? Incarna? Please, I'd rather see WiS abandoned and removed than have resources taken away from improving the space part of our Space game. New expansions? barf... what have you added? Faction warfare?, lame. Incursions?... ULTRA lame. For how much money you Icelandic trolls make off this game you need to start putting your time and effort into what the PLAYERS want. Sometimes EVE makes me so mad I could quit, but I won't... for the sparse hope that one day, maybe just maybe, CCP will make EVE a good game.
Carmizan DOCS RUFF RIDERS Free Beer. 15	Posted - 2012.03.14 08:11:00 - [100] - Quote Velicitia wrote: Carmizan wrote: Unashamed bump for this great idea and still no answer Keep in mind that they were posting pre-incarna... they were forced into implementing ****** things (Incarna, Nex store) rather than cool things (fixed POS, new modules, new ships, rebalanced stuffs). With Crucible, and the upcoming Inferno expansions ... it really looks like they're getting the right idea again (or at least understanding some of the mistakes they've made). So, perhaps they cannot poast because they'll give away the "big" thing for the expansion -- I mean, they already fixed fueling the damn things... While i understand please note that this idea has been around since 2008, and nearly ever conceivable idea has been brought up in that thread, but still there has been no definitive answer from the Devs. They keep trying to encourage more ideas, but no yes, no or we tried and can not do it. Oh and as to fuel blocks they even got that wrong. They stated that you would be able to load a months worth of fuel in the pos. Well i am sorry but less than 30 days is not a month. Plus we are not asking for a the Devs for an exact date on implementation (though after 4 years I think we should). We are asking for answer from them as to whether or not they are looking at this with a view to adding it to the game. Surely that is not alot to ask from these guys. Hell they nerf modules left right and centre after one thread with 2 pages of post crying that they are overpowered, but a thread that has been going for 4 years is ignored. This is the act of a company that says they listen to their customers.

Vertisce Soritenshi Varion Galactic Tragedy. 1277	Posted - 2012.03.14 14:48:00 - [101] - Quote The original thread brought a lot of attention to CCP on the issue. One of the Dev blogs a few months back stated that they had people working on revamping the POS's but not a lot of specifics were mentioned. I assume that the recent fuel block changes are just part of a bigger plan to change POS's. Somebody should bring this up at Fanfest and ask them directly about it, force their hand. Would also be prudent for a Dev or two to chime into this thread once in a while and update us with new information if possible as to what changes are coming or if there are any changes to come at all. EvE is not about PvP.-á EvE is about the SANDBOX! - CCP!-á Open the door!!!
Aneroi VIRTUAL LIFE VANGUARD 0	Posted - 2012.03.15 21:33:00 - [102] - Quote Vertisce Soritenshi wrote: Somebody should bring this up at Fanfest and ask them directly about it, force their hand. Would also be prudent for a Dev or two to chime into this thread once in a while and update us with new information if possible as to what changes are coming or if there are any changes to come at all. This.
Kusum Fawn State War Academy Caldari State 6	Posted - 2012.03.16 00:20:00 - [103] - Quote 700 hours fit into a pos fuel bay 28 days is 672 hours 30 days is 720 hours. 31 days is 744 hours. 2006.09.08 22:54:00 time of long running pos flogging thread origination 2012.03.16 00:20:00 approximate time of this posting time between them 174101160 seconds 2901686 Minutes 48361 hours 2015 days
Tarn Kugisa Modern Mining Industries Space Mongolians 38	Posted - 2012.03.16 02:48:00 - [104] - Quote Yes 5Yes Real Caldari Hull Tank (And Win doing so) Support https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=16580
Dr Prometheus Gears of Construction Gears Confederation 30	Posted - 2012.03.19 10:20:00 - [105] - Quote Ok bump it back up, and i hope this is the main feature of the new expansion if not; burn them! Dude, where is my Charon?
hellwarz Rising Thunder 0	Posted - 2012.03.25 18:58:00 - [106] - Quote They are working on it!!!
Kusum Fawn State War Academy Caldari State 9	Posted - 2012.04.06 23:43:00 - [107] - Quote Hi! we havent spoken recently, but Id like to keep the dialogue open as we still have some issues to work out. namely, there is still some room for improvement. mostly in the structural areas of your expertise. it seem slacking in cohesion of vision and we, would love some information of how this will be addressed in the future, or if in fact this is being taken into consideration. Thanks
hellwarz Rising Thunder 0	Posted - 2012.04.23 22:54:00 - [108] - Quote ok we we need this off of page 15(16?) right now unthell we have the now poses.
Andy Landen Tartarus Ventures Surely You're Joking 20	Posted - 2012.04.24 01:16:00 - [109] - Quote Has CCP committed to any specific points of pos mechanics improvements? Do they understand the needs of wormholers regarding poses? Lastly, CCP, you should consider making wormholes sov space. Why not?
El Geo Pathfinders. Mining For Profit Alliance 16	Posted - 2012.04.24 12:49:00 - [110] - Quote Andy Landen wrote: POS - Player Owned Station. .. When will it REALLY be player owned and controlled, as opposed to corp owned/controlled? Also, a corp of 1-5 characters (being alts anyway) is really just a person working under the guise of a corp, because the pos mechanics won't let it be player owned. Has CCP committed to any specific points of pos mechanics improvements? Do they understand the needs of wormholers regarding poses? Lastly, CCP, you should consider making wormholes sov space. Why not? P player O owned S structure but yeah POS revamp would be nice, but you dont want it to be an outpost, better security options would be nice, like hangers in the maint array for instence

Velicitia Open Designs 871	Posted - 2012.04.24 13:01:00 - [111] - Quote Andy Landen wrote: POS - Player Owned Station. .. When will it REALLY be player owned and controlled, as opposed to corp owned/controlled? Also, a corp of 1-5 characters (being alts anyway) is really just a person working under the guise of a corp, because the pos mechanics won't let it be player owned. Has CCP committed to any specific points of pos mechanics improvements? Do they understand the needs of wormholers regarding poses? Lastly, CCP, you should consider making wormholes sov space. Why not? (lolrp reason) You need to be in a capsuleer-run corporation to anchor the towers, because the NPC mega-corps have already exhausted their licensing with the faction claiming sovereignty over that space. As capsuleers fall under the jurisdiction of CONCORD, rather than any one of the four empires, they are extended rights by those sovereign factions to anchor their own starbases at moons between the 0.7 and 0.5 CONCORD security bands. For systems of CONCORD security of 0.4 to 0.1, there simply aren't enough navy officials to police structured anchored by capsuleers. (/lolrp reason). Seriously though, being able to anchor a tower in a NPC corporation would be bad, since the owner could never get dec'd.
Andy Landen Tartarus Ventures Surely You're Joking 20	Posted - 2012.04.24 22:42:00 - [112] - Quote Velicitia wrote: Andy Landen wrote: POS - Player Owned Station. .. When will it REALLY be player owned and controlled, as opposed to corp owned/controlled? Also, a corp of 1-5 characters (being alts anyway) is really just a person working under the guise of a corp, because the pos mechanics won't let it be player owned. Has CCP committed to any specific points of pos mechanics improvements? Do they understand the needs of wormholers regarding poses? Lastly, CCP, you should consider making wormholes sov space. Why not? ... Seriously though, being able to anchor a tower in a NPC corporation would be bad, since the owner could never get dec'd. So? War-decs only matter to pos's in high sec anyway, so.. And if I want to be in a player corporation, a player owned station could be owned by the player anchoring it for self. The corp directors couldn't mess with its security, operations, set-up, contents, etc. If the player changed corp, the pos would still be his. He did pay for it and everything anchored with it. He did spend all of the time anchoring, onlining, and fueling it. He did pay for everything that he put into it, including bpos/bpcs, materials, ships, modules, and everything that the pos produces. Other proposals: Pos towers which are offline for a certain period of time become (or can be) unanchored and can be scooped. No sense in offline, anchored pos's cluttering space for years, as is common in w-space. Pos may be configured to issue keys based on standings or on a pre-set list of authorized pilots to be used in conjunction with a password to set the ship's shield harmonics to enter the pos.
Andy Landen Tartarus Ventures Surely You're Joking 20	Posted - 2012.05.03 01:43:00 - [113] - Quote Also, allow the pos owner to group batteries together so that they lock and attack the same target together. Make the ECM batteries prefer ships which match their primary jamming type. Either remove CPU for missiles, or give CPU requirements (even just 1) to all other turret batteries. Not that such a change won't prevent fleets from simply putting all batteries into incap anyway, but no sense bringing undue bias against Caldari weapons systems. We don't see missile launchers going offline when the ship's shields are depleted .. Add a new pos module (outside pos) for trading which registers goods on the market. Remove sov requirements for anchoring any pos module. Give wspace moons valuable stuff to mine with pos's.
Wolodymyr Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation 133	Posted - 2012.05.03 05:10:00 - [114] - Quote Andy Landen wrote: So? War-decs only matter to pos's in high sec anyway, so.. Yeah but it's pretty important. No structure that can be anchored in highsec should be anchorable by any entity that is immune to wardecks and always has concord protection. Basically these structures would go up but there would be no way to take them down because there would never be a way for people to shoot it down without getting Concorded. letting individual people own a POS (or any anchorable structure) is a good idea. But if they every go into an NPC corp the POS can't come with them.
Kusum Fawn State War Academy Caldari State 40	Posted - 2012.05.03 06:37:00 - [115] - Quote Andy Landen wrote: Also, allow the pos owner to group batteries together so that they lock and attack the same target together. Make the ECM batteries prefer ships which match their primary jamming type. Either remove CPU for missiles, or give CPU requirements (even just 1) to all other turret batteries. Not that such a change won't prevent fleets from simply putting all batteries into incap anyway, but no sense bringing undue bias against Caldari weapons systems. We don't see missile launchers going offline when the ship's shields are depleted .. Add a new pos module (outside pos) for trading which registers goods on the market. Remove sov requirements for anchoring any pos module. Give wspace moons valuable stuff to mine with pos's. group pos batteries, yes missiles suck anyways intercorp trading (buy/sell) module is great, (also been suggested before) no sov in wh so no ihub or tcu, cause how would you remove sov in a wh? where to put sbu? valuable stuff other then sleepers? and grav sites with abc/m?
Kusum Fawn State War Academy Caldari State 40	Posted - 2012.05.03 06:39:00 - [116] - Quote Andy Landen wrote: Yes! I can hit post too! Alt corps. learn about them, use them, enjoy them

CCP Phantom C C P C C P Alliance 1266	Posted - 2012.05.04 00:31:00 - [117] - Quote Vertisce Soritenshi wrote: Somebody should bring this up at Fanfest and ask them directly about it, force their hand. Would also be prudent for a Dev or two to chime into this thread once in a while and update us with new information if possible as to what changes are coming or if there are any changes to come at all. The following part of the CCP Presents! keynote speech from Fanfest 2012 might be somehow related to this topic here. Don't miss to watch it! CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator

Flamespar Woof Club 363	Posted - 2012.05.04 04:34:00 - [118] - Quote Each module of a POS should also have an interior space as well, so as you constuct the exterior, you are also constructing the interior. CCP make it so! I can post on a forum, therefore I represent everyone.
NoxiousPluK Abyssal Frontier Jovian Empire 25	Posted - 2012.05.04 07:44:00 - [119] - Quote Oh, good I see this now. I was working on an alike-idea last night, with modulair POS modules. Like, a 'core' module with a docking bay, wich provides a small fuel bay, basic CPU/PG output, 3 POS structure mounting points and 4 mounting points for defensive structures. Each module would have sites that could connect to eachother, thus making expanding a POS easy. One would logically use a core module with a corp hangar and ship hangar module, then expand with a powerplant module that uses also fuelblocks per X time, but makes the PG/CPU output of the POS increase. Then a dedicated fuel bay to store some fuels, defensive structures, personal hangar array, repair facility, labs, etc... Anyway, a basic painting of the thing (core + corp hangar array) that is far from being done (but after seeing this thread i dont need to work on it anymore): http://dl.dropbox.com/u/11684856/EVE/Ideas/Modulair%20POS/Caldari_Core_Hub_Render_00001.jpg On the right of the 'core hub' you can see a POS structure mounting point, with a corporate hangar array module (not finished painting this) attached to it. Both modules have mount points for defensive structures on top of them. A lot of parts have not been done, and offcourse the texturing is also not there. If you guys like, i could continue drawing this stuff, but i guess the OP already had a better idea :) dont want to steal that.
Ciar Meara Virtus Vindice 644	Posted - 2012.05.04 08:46:00 - [120] - Quote The idea that won't die even within those that never heared about it. Carry on horse, carry on until we beat you right into orbit! - [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow]



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.