These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

POCO in Hi Sec and no empire standing required
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
#41 - 2013-10-04 16:39:36 UTC
Fey Ivory wrote:
its sort of utterly stupid that dread pirate ganker, with a negative standing can set up infrastructure in that empire, just isent logical nor realistic, so set some kind of standing requirement

I actually think it would make more sense that the super-hostile pirate would be more free to do so than someone who was known to follow rules and regulations.

If the empires are losing their grip on Capsuleers, the ones who are most likely to start shooting would be the ones that the empires would probably steer clear of, since it forces the empires to put significantly more lives on the line than it does the Capsuleers (who, if they are in small-enough ships, such as Frigates, may not even require a crew).

The empires can then try to make up some of the lost tax revenue by taxing other, law-abiding groups more, while attempting to minimize their personnel losses.

For the Newbies: The 8 Golden Rules - The Magic 14 Skills - Finding the Right Corp - EVE University Wiki
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2013-10-04 16:55:43 UTC
Inxentas Ultramar wrote:
Maybe because corps that do have the proper faction standings are usually massive, risk-averse 1-man carebear operations that do nothing but grind L4's all day? I don't know a single corp that is elegable for hisec POS anchorage, and not one of these typical standing-grinded 1-man tax havens.

so you mean this game should cater to simple-minded unable to do anything outside simple pvp corporations?

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#43 - 2013-10-04 17:36:50 UTC
Winter Archipelago wrote:
Fey Ivory wrote:
its sort of utterly stupid that dread pirate ganker, with a negative standing can set up infrastructure in that empire, just isent logical nor realistic, so set some kind of standing requirement

I actually think it would make more sense that the super-hostile pirate would be more free to do so than someone who was known to follow rules and regulations.

If the empires are losing their grip on Capsuleers, the ones who are most likely to start shooting would be the ones that the empires would probably steer clear of, since it forces the empires to put significantly more lives on the line than it does the Capsuleers (who, if they are in small-enough ships, such as Frigates, may not even require a crew).

The empires can then try to make up some of the lost tax revenue by taxing other, law-abiding groups more, while attempting to minimize their personnel losses.


Took me 3 pages before I found a comment along the lines of my thinking. The whole point is the evolution of capsuleers taking more control. There does not need to be "balance" with how things have always been. Capsuleers are taking control, not asking factions or Concord for permission. I like the idea of a knee-jerk higher tax to make up for lost revenue. Maybe they can levy a special tax on minerals or something to make up. One thing that could "balance" things is to reduce the cost to declare war against large alliances. In my opinion, there should be a small flat filing fee that is not dependent on the size of your opponent. This would nerf the ability of large alliances to take them all along with taking them back by smaller corps prohibitively expensive for many under the current system.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.
Montevius Williams
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2013-10-04 17:42:12 UTC
Nocxi wrote:
I would like a dev to explain why there is no required standing planned to place a POCO in Hi Sec. How is it that an emipre has a problem with you placing a POS in 0.5 with a standing of 4.90 towards them to do research and production, but is fine with a corp/alliance with a -10.0 standing with them place a POCO in 1.0 space? Yes in game play it really only effects players, but means they would alow that -10.0 standing corp/alliance to tax exports and imports of their people and planets. I like the idea of POCO, but why are we going to throw standings out the window for this, but not anything else?



They clearly stated in the Video blog that Capsulers are starting to assert their authority in Empire space. In other words, screw your standings, we are starting to take what we want, when we want. Because we are capsulers and everyone else is peons. This is the start of that process.

"The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB
Mike Mulder
Imperial Phoenix Legion
#45 - 2013-10-04 18:03:14 UTC
I need to grind standing and get permission via charters to anchor a POS, but not a POCO?

Is a POCO going to require fuel of some sort?
None ofthe Above
#46 - 2013-10-04 18:13:34 UTC  |  Edited by: None ofthe Above
Mike Mulder wrote:
I need to grind standing and get permission via charters to anchor a POS, but not a POCO?

Is a POCO going to require fuel of some sort?


Not according to the current plans.

No standings required, no POS fuel, no charters.

CONCORD and the empires will happily allow a corp full of -10 gankers setup a POCO and do "legitimate" business locking out PI business from highsec planets.

And they blow up your ship if you shoot at these criminal's POCO. Or even shoot at them while they are destroying the existing Customs Office (well I guess not in the case of the gankers, but no suspect flag is applied to people clearing Interbus COs).

Excited for this new release yet?

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Johnny Marzetti
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#47 - 2013-10-04 18:18:04 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
Mike Mulder wrote:
I need to grind standing and get permission via charters to anchor a POS, but not a POCO?

Is a POCO going to require fuel of some sort?


Not according to the current plans.

No standings required, no POS fuel, no charters.

CONCORD and the empires will happily allow a corp full of -10 gankers setup a POCO and do "legitimate" business locking out PI business from highsec planets.

And they blow up your ship if you shoot at these criminal's POCO. Or even shoot at them while they are destroying the existing Customs Office (well I guess not in the case of the gankers, but no suspect flag is applied to people clearing Interbus COs).

Excited for this new release yet?


Yes. Yes I am.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#48 - 2013-10-04 18:32:31 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
Give it up, highsec. It's pretty clear the motivation for this is "but it would stop the goons taking them!" and you can rest assured, it would do no such thing. If you assume a) this change happens and b) we want them, then we can trivially bypass the requirements using alt corps, joining the war you declared against our alts as a defender if necessary. All this would do is force your own corps to grind standings .. for no reason at all.

Besides, if you're not able to see very obvious subtext the 'path' CCP are on is taking power away from the empires/NPCs and giving it to players. This is a good thing ... if anything you should be saying "Why not POSes also?"

The answer to that might be coming with the eventual POS rework/replacement.


And this prove once aagin that alts are stupidly powerfull at evading game mechanics just like NPC corps. As long as they don't find a way to prevent all those things, arbitrary like standing are not really usefull from a gameplay perspective.
None ofthe Above
#49 - 2013-10-04 18:44:31 UTC
Johnny Marzetti wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:
Mike Mulder wrote:
I need to grind standing and get permission via charters to anchor a POS, but not a POCO?

Is a POCO going to require fuel of some sort?


Not according to the current plans.

No standings required, no POS fuel, no charters.

CONCORD and the empires will happily allow a corp full of -10 gankers setup a POCO and do "legitimate" business locking out PI business from highsec planets.

And they blow up your ship if you shoot at these criminal's POCO. Or even shoot at them while they are destroying the existing Customs Office (well I guess not in the case of the gankers, but no suspect flag is applied to people clearing Interbus COs).

Excited for this new release yet?


Yes. Yes I am.


Thank you for supporting my point, my friend.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Nocxi
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2013-10-22 13:48:28 UTC
CCP is moving to more PVP interaction .... cause if it was just interaction they would have put in the ablitily to not sell to neg faction standing or people you've blocked. They do need to start more of a crack down on pirate/ganking too. If it was 'real life', the moment you docked in a station in high sec with neg standing or a supect/criminal flag you would be fined or your ship taken. If CCP did this it would force more interaction on pirate/ganker corps/alliances. You would see low sec trade hubs spring up ... like black market centers. Traders would have new possibilities running cargo to these black market hubs.

CCP needs to start giving industry/trade more opportunity to interact and instead of PVP'ers. We've already seen how PVP'ers can put a neg affect on industy/trade. Give industy/trade the tools to do the same.
Nocxi
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2013-10-22 13:57:40 UTC
To reply to the standing requirements ... interaction is not just shooting people. I totally agree if the others post, that if you've been bad there should be a price. It is not right that a corp with all members -10.00 ss should be able to place a POCO in 1.0 system. Right now as it stands a caldari faction corp could put a POCO in gallente 1.0 space. That doesn't make sense either.
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#52 - 2013-10-22 13:57:48 UTC
Nocxi wrote:


CCP needs to start giving industry/trade more opportunity to interact and instead of PVP'ers. We've already seen how PVP'ers can put a neg affect on industy/trade. Give industy/trade the tools to do the same.



If you are referring to the latest Ice Interdiction, I beg to disagree. I made a freaking fortune over that.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Good Posting
Doomheim
#53 - 2013-10-22 14:21:15 UTC
RomeStar wrote:
Inxentas Ultramar wrote:
Maybe because corps that do have the proper faction standings are usually massive, risk-averse 1-man carebear operations that do nothing but grind L4's all day? I don't know a single corp that is elegable for hisec POS anchorage, and not one of these typical standing-grinded 1-man tax havens.



you sound mad bro tell us where the bad carebear corp touched you?


More like mad, he sounds jelly. And i don't understand why is he so arngry/jelly since he's the ceo of a so called pvp with taxes corp that lives in slumsec.

Tell us bro, why do you need to collect taxes from your members? To pay the sov bill? Ah yes, maybe it is for the reimbursement program because rifters are expensive. Okay.

I've been playing EVE long enough to know that most of the taxes end in the pockets of the CEO & friends for buying capitals and alts.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#54 - 2013-10-22 14:29:37 UTC
Erotica 1 wrote:


Took me 3 pages before I found a comment along the lines of my thinking. The whole point is the evolution of capsuleers taking more control. There does not need to be "balance" with how things have always been. Capsuleers are taking control, not asking factions or Concord for permission. I like the idea of a knee-jerk higher tax to make up for lost revenue. Maybe they can levy a special tax on minerals or something to make up. One thing that could "balance" things is to reduce the cost to declare war against large alliances. In my opinion, there should be a small flat filing fee that is not dependent on the size of your opponent. This would nerf the ability of large alliances to take them all along with taking them back by smaller corps prohibitively expensive for many under the current system.



I was about to say

This Thread Is Boring


Until I read this



Buff/Nerfers take note




An echo from the future is in this comment

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#55 - 2013-10-22 14:40:44 UTC
Good Posting wrote:
RomeStar wrote:
Inxentas Ultramar wrote:
Maybe because corps that do have the proper faction standings are usually massive, risk-averse 1-man carebear operations that do nothing but grind L4's all day? I don't know a single corp that is elegable for hisec POS anchorage, and not one of these typical standing-grinded 1-man tax havens.

you sound mad bro tell us where the bad carebear corp touched you?

More like mad, he sounds jelly. And i don't understand why is he so arngry/jelly since he's the ceo of a so called pvp with taxes corp that lives in slumsec.

Tell us bro, why do you need to collect taxes from your members? To pay the sov bill? Ah yes, maybe it is for the reimbursement program because rifters are expensive. Okay.

I've been playing EVE long enough to know that most of the taxes end in the pockets of the CEO & friends for buying capitals and alts.

No, rifters (slashers actually) are very cheap. It's mostly the fleet reimbursements that make up the bulk of the expenditures, if I recall the last audit correctly.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#56 - 2013-10-22 14:44:37 UTC
Actually, huh. Interesting. Didn't know sov bills were so large. And that's before Fountain too i think

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#57 - 2013-10-22 14:48:23 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Actually, huh. Interesting. Didn't know sov bills were so large. And that's before Fountain too i think


Yeah, the last time I saw one of your guys' bills listing, I realized that all the moon goo money "they" accuse you all of hoarding probably mostly goes to your sov bills.

I also realized that your finance guys are effing geniuses to find ways to make all this crazy crap work as well as it does.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#58 - 2013-10-22 14:59:27 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Actually, huh. Interesting. Didn't know sov bills were so large. And that's before Fountain too i think

Yeah, the last time I saw one of your guys' bills listing, I realized that all the moon goo money "they" accuse you all of hoarding probably mostly goes to your sov bills.

I also realized that your finance guys are effing geniuses to find ways to make all this crazy crap work as well as it does.

Ah, but we did have hoarded isk which was spent in fountain.

And another gabillion isk in debt to black legion because of their fees

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
SoldierSister
State War Academy
Caldari State
#59 - 2013-10-22 15:29:59 UTC
Is the No standing required not to help turn hi sec into a more war Dec/alliance wars idea?

Think about it. if you had to have standing say with Caldari and RvB prob being the biggest alliance in that that area would have a lot of poco's would somebody like EU then have to grind standing to take RvB's?

I which case they would prob just stay in there own faction space and not bother same think for RvB. so the POCO's would most likely stay in control of the same corp/alliances. But this Way any one has a chance to kill a poco put in there own.

Remember Pocos are not force fielded like POS's

and to some of the points? if you have a -5 or below faction standing while you there shooting a poco do you knit get blapped by fiction police?

Soldier Out
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#60 - 2013-10-22 15:33:43 UTC
The POS system is being overhauled soon™, I think we can expect a similar approach for them. No more standing based, but maybe some other restricting factor that prevents people from spamming towers everywhere.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums