These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Concord should not protect POS, that ran out of charters.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#41 - 2015-04-10 14:31:33 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Donnachadh wrote:
....

Changing the salvage and loot from a destroyed tower is something I can support based on my experiences but that is for another discussion topic.


I'll clarify my point on this, salvaging from a destroyed tower is fine in my view but hacking/salvaging towers that are offline is not. You want the space, you wardec and take it.


Or pay someone to do it for you.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2015-04-10 14:39:14 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Donnachadh wrote:
....

Changing the salvage and loot from a destroyed tower is something I can support based on my experiences but that is for another discussion topic.


I'll clarify my point on this, salvaging from a destroyed tower is fine in my view but hacking/salvaging towers that are offline is not. You want the space, you wardec and take it.


Or pay someone to do it for you.


Or ask the corp if you can buy the tower as they aren't using it

Just so long as it isn't free shooting of player stuff without consequence.
El Geo
Warcrows
Sedition.
#43 - 2015-04-11 05:53:48 UTC  |  Edited by: El Geo
Donnachadh wrote:


Since the theory of POS deteriorating over time has raisedit's ugly head again the answer is NO.
Because, players paid to place it there and you have to pay to remove it.
So no to any game mechanic that makes a POS more vulnerable over time.
NO to any mechanic that makes an offline POS more vulnerable than they are now.

If 50 mil and a few hours is to much for you to invest then you do not want the space badly enough to be given a cheap and easy way to claim it.

Changing the salvage and loot from a destroyed tower is something I can support based on my experiences but that is for another discussion topic.


Well, it must be something the community wants as it keeps "raising its head"

They didnt pay to place it there, they merely paid for the assets and fuel.

Logic says if I bought a faction ship, kitted it out with faction modules then left it floating in space without a pilot ANYONE could steal it without the need for wardec mechanics or hacking/salvage. Similarly if I anchor a container and fill it with loot it will disapear in time if I do not interact with said container, personally instead of disapearing i think these (after a time) should also become probable and hackable/salvageable.

In previous corps where we wardec'd inactive corps to remove towers the cost nearly always outweighed the benefits and we never, ever dec'd a corp that had closed nor did we ever dec a corp who only had an offline tower + defences up, of which there are plenty, some have been offline for years, in fact I have POS in w-space that hasn't been onlined for at least 2 and although it requires no dec, no one will ever attack it because eve players are inherantly lazy, it poses no threat and doesn't sit on a valuable location.
.

CDIA Based overlay resource for After Effects 6

Eve pathfinders Youtube
Max Deveron
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#44 - 2015-04-11 06:56:45 UTC
-1

The ignorance of this conversation astounds me.

1.) Charters are required in a ship to anchor a POS
2.) Charters are required in Empire space as fuel to keep it active.
3.) Concord is not the Empires, it is an organization to police Capsuleers getting out of hand(ie ganking)

As Concord has nothing to do with the charters or how they are used you do not get to bash a POS or structure in highsec because it as no Empirical Legal Authority for operations.
Loki Feiht
Warcrows
Sedition.
#45 - 2015-04-12 09:36:23 UTC
Max Deveron wrote:
-1

The ignorance of this conversation astounds me.

1.) Charters are required in a ship to anchor a POS
2.) Charters are required in Empire space as fuel to keep it active.
3.) Concord is not the Empires, it is an organization to police Capsuleers getting out of hand(ie ganking)

As Concord has nothing to do with the charters or how they are used you do not get to bash a POS or structure in highsec because it as no Empirical Legal Authority for operations.


Great, constructive input there Mr Deveron....

If it bothers you that much why don't you just imagine that its a flag gained through the local Empire holder, it doesnt matter exactly how, hell, you could even tie it in with a new wardec contract doobie with Empires postig contracts on corporations who arent using charters in their space, or just have the local Empires start shooting the pos and make it an open target for the Empires militia, maybe even a mission.
Open your mind you arrogant sod. Roll

More NPC - Randomly Generated Modular Content thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=220858
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2015-04-12 10:02:38 UTC
I think if your POS runs out of charters in highsec, CONCORD should disassemble it and move it to a nearby station, and charge you a fee to pay the cops for moving your junk.

In lowsec if you run out of charters, the faction navy should come out and shoot at it...because what else is the point of paying charters out there? I imagine it's a "protection" racket.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
erg cz
Federal Jegerouns
#47 - 2015-04-13 07:03:27 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I think if your POS runs out of charters in highsec, CONCORD should disassemble it and move it to a nearby station, and charge you a fee to pay the cops for moving your junk.

In lowsec if you run out of charters, the faction navy should come out and shoot at it...because what else is the point of paying charters out there? I imagine it's a "protection" racket.


You do not need charters in low sec, do you?

And I do not ask for CONCORD to do any action against those abandoned POSes. Merely to stop protect them. Cause I still see it fair, if any POS owner will have to pay charters just as me, regardless to the POS online state. I understand the fuel issue - POS ran out of fuel, it goes offline. But I disagree with charters being nothing more but additional fuel in high sec. Why they are needed in high sec and only in high sec than? Low sec is also imeprial space, just not that protected.

Absolutely free head start for newcomers!. Just click the link and get extra 250 000 SP!
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#48 - 2015-04-13 07:37:10 UTC
Have it unanchor and scoopable :)
Null Infinity
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#49 - 2015-04-13 11:09:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Null Infinity
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:


I'll clarify my point on this, salvaging from a destroyed tower is fine in my view but hacking/salvaging towers that are offline is not.


afkalt wrote:
Have it unanchor and scoopable :)


So, how about scoop, if salvage of what is no wrecks (yet) is wrong? Will this really kill PI market? Minigame to hack the abandoned tower before unancor. You failed - tower goes into reinforced mode when no one can hack it for let say 24 hours. No hack = no anchor... The new profession can be skill intensive in hacking skills.

New mining menthods: interactive mining and comet mining
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2015-04-13 12:17:24 UTC
Null Infinity wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:


I'll clarify my point on this, salvaging from a destroyed tower is fine in my view but hacking/salvaging towers that are offline is not.


afkalt wrote:
Have it unanchor and scoopable :)


So, how about scoop, if salvage of what is no wrecks (yet) is wrong? Will this really kill PI market? Minigame to hack the abandoned tower before unancor. You failed - tower goes into reinforced mode when no one can hack it for let say 24 hours. No hack = no anchor... The new profession can be skill intensive in hacking skills.


Towers are built mostly from PI materials along with any starbase structure. Make all those that are sat out in space scoopable by any means and this will have a pretty big impact on the PI market since a huge amount won't be needed as it is now for quite some time.

Maybe any unchartered towers will simply be towed away by the empires when the new structures come in :D Otherwise any ship or structure in space should have to be destroyed before you can loot/salvage from it.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2015-04-13 12:23:45 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Fair point sir :)

Impound their ass with a fee of 75% build cost in isk to get it back. Adds an isk sink Lol
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#52 - 2015-04-13 13:20:55 UTC
erg cz wrote:
And I do not ask for CONCORD to do any action against those abandoned POSes. Merely to stop protect them

NO.
Like a ship that POS belongs to another player or group of players and Concord is there to punish those who choose to violate the rules by shooting targets that are not valid. If you want to shoot an offline POS war dec the corp and go for it. ANd your right the answer is no I do not care how much of your time and ISK that "wastes" since you can simply avoid the whole issue by moving on to another moon and plant your POS there.

As I have said before. No to any form of mini game, no to POS deteriorating over time and any other ideas for making the removal of an offline tower easier or cheaper. You want it gone WD and shoot simple as that.
Max Deveron
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#53 - 2015-04-14 03:36:01 UTC
Loki Feiht wrote:
Max Deveron wrote:
-1

The ignorance of this conversation astounds me.

1.) Charters are required in a ship to anchor a POS
2.) Charters are required in Empire space as fuel to keep it active.
3.) Concord is not the Empires, it is an organization to police Capsuleers getting out of hand(ie ganking)

As Concord has nothing to do with the charters or how they are used you do not get to bash a POS or structure in highsec because it as no Empirical Legal Authority for operations.


Great, constructive input there Mr Deveron....

If it bothers you that much why don't you just imagine that its a flag gained through the local Empire holder, it doesnt matter exactly how, hell, you could even tie it in with a new wardec contract doobie with Empires postig contracts on corporations who arent using charters in their space, or just have the local Empires start shooting the pos and make it an open target for the Empires militia, maybe even a mission.
Open your mind you arrogant sod. Roll



Actually mind is quite open, and your idea of Direct NPC interaction for POS removal is rubish.
AND why need a new wardec system just o bash a pos.....pay your 50 million and be done with it. Because really your not paying the Empires for a wardec.......you are paying CONCORD.

Now as to the milita's.......well I and a friend (my ceo actually) think the NPC Milita corps of each faction should be able to fire on players from opposing enemy NPC corps that are flying within their sovereign territory, makes sense being at war you know.

But no a player corp(not npc) has invested time and effort in one way or another to have a tower up. You must wardec them to take it down, enough said.
erg cz
Federal Jegerouns
#54 - 2015-04-14 12:16:58 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:

Like a ship that POS belongs to another player or group of players

Unlike the ship the POS offer a kind of suverenity hold. It hold the place and therefore prevents other players to use that spot.

Donnachadh wrote:

since you can simply avoid the whole issue by moving on to another moon and plant your POS there.

There are high systems with less then 20 moons, where all of them are occupied.

Donnachadh wrote:

No to any form of mini game, no to POS deteriorating over time


Agree, and this was never any part of the OP.

Absolutely free head start for newcomers!. Just click the link and get extra 250 000 SP!
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2015-04-14 12:22:40 UTC
erg cz wrote:
Donnachadh wrote:

Like a ship that POS belongs to another player or group of players

Unlike the ship the POS offer a kind of suverenity hold. It hold the place and therefore prevents other players to use that spot.

Donnachadh wrote:

since you can simply avoid the whole issue by moving on to another moon and plant your POS there.

There are high systems with less then 20 moons, where all of them are occupied.


POS implies no sovereignty at all, in Empire space you pay in charters, anywhere else you take what you can hold.

Someone once said 'Nuke the site from orbit...it's the only way to be sure'. Follow this advice :D
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#56 - 2015-04-14 14:13:46 UTC
erg cz wrote:

Unlike the ship the POS offer a kind of suverenity hold. It hold the place and therefore prevents other players to use that spot.



You can use it as long as you are willing to put in the required amount of effort/resources which you clearly don't want to.
erg cz
Federal Jegerouns
#57 - 2015-04-16 09:33:17 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:


You can use it as long as you are willing to put in the required amount of effort/resources which you clearly don't want to.


I do want to put effort in shooting POS (I do not require CONCORD or empire Navy to shoot it for me) and I do want to put my resources into building just another POS on the same spot.

I just want this to be fair. If player has to pay charters for the place to live, why other player keep it spot without paying? Such ppl called squatter in RL if I am right.

Absolutely free head start for newcomers!. Just click the link and get extra 250 000 SP!
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2015-04-16 09:44:30 UTC
erg cz wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:


You can use it as long as you are willing to put in the required amount of effort/resources which you clearly don't want to.


I do want to put effort in shooting POS (I do not require CONCORD or empire Navy to shoot it for me) and I do want to put my resources into building just another POS on the same spot.

I just want this to be fair. If player has to pay charters for the place to live, why other player keep it spot without paying? Such ppl called squatter in RL if I am right.


In RL you have to take legal action to remove a squatter, in EvE terms this is the wardec.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#59 - 2015-04-16 13:58:11 UTC
erg cz wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:


You can use it as long as you are willing to put in the required amount of effort/resources which you clearly don't want to.


I do want to put effort in shooting POS (I do not require CONCORD or empire Navy to shoot it for me) and I do want to put my resources into building just another POS on the same spot.

I just want this to be fair. If player has to pay charters for the place to live, why other player keep it spot without paying? Such ppl called squatter in RL if I am right.


Put in the ressources by hiring mercs who will do the work for you since something seem to be preventing you from doing it the right way.

Or you know, you could tell your corp CEO you have to deal with something out of corp and even explain it to him if needed then leave for the few days required to do the DEC + shooting and then re-join. I'm pretty sure if you are on good term with your corp leadership this would not really cause issues...
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#60 - 2015-04-16 14:26:40 UTC
erg cz wrote:
Unlike the ship the POS offer a kind of suverenity hold. It hold the place and therefore prevents other players to use that spot.

No one is preventing you from doing anything. You want the spot WD and remove the POS and you have the spot.

What you want is a simple, cheap and easy way to shoot an offline POS without Concord intervention and you will never get support from me for that. POS is the personal property of a player or group of players and it is Concords job in high sec to punish those who shoot personal property with out the proper "legal" paperwork and authorization. In EvE the proper paper work and legal authorization to shoot PLAYER OWNED property is to file a WD.
And so we keep coming back to the same place.
If there is a POS at t moon that you want file the "legal" paperwork(war dec) and remove it.

erg cz wrote:
There are high systems with less then 20 moons, where all of them are occupied.

Yes indeed there are systems with POS at every moon. There are also more than a dozen moons open in high sec systems within 5 jumps or less of this characters corporate base. Since there are free moons in high sec move on and find one of them for your use. If you want a specific moon, or a moon in a specific region or system and there are none available then you know the drill WD and shoot.

erg cz wrote:
Agree, and this was never any part of the OP.

And I never said it was a part of the OP. It is however a part of the ongoing discussion and as such I choose to respond to it.