These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
153 PagesPrevious page12345Next pageLast page
 

POSes: I am a small portion of the community

First post First post
Author
Second Empire.
#41 - 2013-01-17 04:31:40 UTC
+1

Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary

Ivy League
#42 - 2013-01-17 04:32:44 UTC
I brought this up a long time back as a neutral point for changes to the game.

It doesn't favor any portion of space over any other. *ALL* security status space gains if this is addressed. It isn't giving more to any area yet does reward players who show they are interested in longer-term investments, with risks, across the game.

Seriously -- look at it:

-- You change ships, like a hurricane, to "match others" of their ilk and CCP pisses off people who no longer can fit the ships like they used to.

-- You add ships and you cut into what other, existing ships are used for and that will annoy others.

-- If you change around resources in space, again, you are messing with how players operate and what they focus on for accomplishing things -- now favoring operations in this space or that one over how it was.

Addressing controls and capabilities for POS's rewards mostly "supporting abilities" of these *PLAYER OWNED* items, enhancing the uses of things that take a good deal of cooperative effort to use - these are "invested players" who need to keep play regularly to maintain and use them.

Unlike things that you don't have to log in to keep, you really do need to be involved in this game to properly use them *AND* they are an "at risk" item while deployed.

Net effect, of all the things CCP can enhance and extend, this rewards those who actually play the game regularly, using things that *ARE* at risk, without any favoritism for a given type of space one chooses to operate out of.

I really don't get how they can choose to shelve this vs other efforts that *WILL* annoy players. Those are much higher "player loss" changes than enhancing this portion of the game.

Note: No, I don't have a POS so I gain nothing really from these changes. I just see different areas of this game tweaked in ways that do annoy some/many -- this at least will engender a "worst case" of "I don't care about that..." - best case being an increase in the use of these being as they can be "adjusted" to be a better option than "no risk" things like NPC stations and Outposts.
#43 - 2013-01-17 04:33:11 UTC
Kniht wrote:
Towers need major love soon.

O. L.

Sleeper Social Club
#44 - 2013-01-17 04:33:20 UTC
I'm upping my efforts to attending fanfest specifically to be able to discuss this in person with devs. Yes, I'm serious, it is that important.

CSM 8 Representative

http://csm8.org

Minmatar Republic
#45 - 2013-01-17 04:33:29 UTC
Rhavas wrote:
+1

I support whatever this man says.
Caldari State
#46 - 2013-01-17 04:35:14 UTC
Supported, POS mechanics are frustrating and tedious at best, and hair pulling, rage inducing monstrosities at worst
#47 - 2013-01-17 04:38:33 UTC
I have lived in and out of POSes for a long damn time now and the *only* thing that's gotten better for them in that entire span of time is the change to the force field password. Thanks for that small but significant change. But the POS system clearly needs love, not only from an administrative standpoint, but from a graphical and implementation standpoint.

Why should a POS be significantly different than an NPC owned station? There's no reason at all. And it's not only WH dwellers, it's the nullsec, lowsec and even some highsec players that are impacted by POSs.

Just because it's a *large amount of work* doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. That's one of the lamest excuses ever CCP. Seriously.

And your assumption that it affects only a small number of players is based on... what? Try pulling the number of players flagged for 'config starbase equipment' or 'starbase fuel technician' and then *post* those numbers as a a percentage of active players if you want us to buy that particular bag of b.s.

We have higher priorities? Okay, fix those first, fine. Just keep these POS fixes in the pipeline.
#48 - 2013-01-17 04:38:59 UTC
Minutes wrote:
Unifex stated that what CCP did was spend effort and prototype what would make a good POS system. It would, however, only affect the group of people who manage POSes. Focusing that amount of time and effort on some small singular aspect of the game and delivering only that “is what will kill the business”.


A good POS system would impact upon the play style of:

  • W-space dwellers (all of them, regardless of roles)
  • Manufacturers
  • Researchers
  • Inventors
  • Miners
  • People using POSes as logistics bases in hostile territory
  • People competing with any of the above
  • People relying on any of the above for income or support


Of all the players in EVE, the only ones whose play style will not be impacted by revamped POSes are the ones who only ever spin their ships in stations (and even that is up for debate).

Revamped POSes will go a long way to ameliorating the sucking chest wounds of nullsec.

Revamped POSes will go a long way towards moving the entire EVE economy into player hands.

NOT revamping POSes will kill the game more certainly than spending a year fixing them.

Suggesting that the POS using population is small right now, thus no revamp required, is clearly putting the cart before the house (the causative link is actually: POSes suck, so only desperate people use them)
#49 - 2013-01-17 04:40:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Bienator II
having a proper pos system would be much more as only a minigame for a minority. Cities of poses where in discussion after the limitation of anchoring a single pos per moon would be dropped. A lot of other fun extensions could be built on top of that (even WIS, your own store front..). New terrain is very much needed in eve (just take a look at the bring lowsec DED1/2 plexes back threads).

CCP just wrote a devblog about a new process which allows to deal with features which do not fit in one expansion... modular POSes: DO IT

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Pandemic Legion
#50 - 2013-01-17 04:45:49 UTC
Fix POS mechanics now please.....
#51 - 2013-01-17 04:46:03 UTC  |  Edited by: None ofthe Above
I find it disturbing that the POS redesign is being abandoned because it doesn't effect enough players.

And why do they not affect enough players? Because of their design.

Circular logic? You betcha.

POS revamp could include design changes that do make them important for more people. Either by making it easier and more prevalent for players to have them, or by having the players that do have them able offer more services to your average player.

An easy extension of the existing structure would be to allow the selling of jobs for material research of blueprints to strangers or by standings or whatnot. Very popular, I'd wager.

Or the POS could be important for any number of economic activities and they could hand them out at the end of the business tutorial. Make it easy for every one to have and make it their own home.

Not entirely sure these ideas are the best, but just a few things off the top of my head.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.

#52 - 2013-01-17 04:48:53 UTC
I'm a POS. Fix me.
Amarr Empire
#53 - 2013-01-17 04:50:40 UTC
Good to know CCP does not care at all about the subscription fees of anyone living in wormhole space.

We matter so little that its fine to lie through your teeth at us about a POS revamp for all this time.

Time to unsubscribe my Wormhole Accounts. It clearly isn't worth playing in a part of the game they have paid zero attention since release, and clearly do not plan on fixing anything that is wrong with it.
#54 - 2013-01-17 04:54:50 UTC
I was critical of Two Steps lack of response until i see now he would have been at the time working on this blog and post, MY apologies and thanks for making it as big as an issue as it really should be.


POS's are horrible as they are and need to be fixed above all else. Fixing POS's will in fact invigorate more gameplay in Wh's and in the greater EVE community, it will enable WH corporations to actively recruit without so much paranoia and vile towards the possibility of recruitment. It will allow HS, LS and NS POS's to be built in greater numbers.

+1 Two Step for the response we needed.
Minmatar Republic
#55 - 2013-01-17 04:58:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Akyla Dey
It may not effect a large amount of the EVE population (and I don't actually believe that for a second), but it certainly does effect some of your loyalest, longest term players. People who have continued to sub through thick and thin, people who have made the effort to bring magic and content to your sandbox, people who have gone to lengths to bring new players to the game and keep them there. Discounting them discounts a (possibly) small but very vital part of your game. For that reason alone you should be looking at POSs.

Agreeing that if a POS revamp isn't in the near future, some stopgap measures should be taken to address the glaring issues (security, storage, management, etc).
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2013-01-17 05:01:28 UTC
If I could pick one area of the game that would influence the most players... POSes come to mind.
Gallente Federation
#57 - 2013-01-17 05:02:09 UTC
Please fix POS's, as a wormhole dweller, POS managments is a pain. The only way to keep our stuff safe is to have multiple POS's for new members. So after awhile there will be 20 small POS's floating around the system when we could all live in one.
#58 - 2013-01-17 05:03:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Mara Rinn
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Pretty much the entire CSM agrees that POSes have to be replaced in the mid- to long-term, and in the meantime, something has to be done to reduce the pain induced by current POSes.

I for one will be working hard to encourage CCP, during the planning process that they have just started, to choose a theme that naturally includes work on POSes. The unprecedented access we are getting during this process gives us the opportunity to make the case.

Our second Skype meeting about this is on Friday. Wish us luck.


Here's a suggestion for a themed expansion release:

First theme: Industry

Focus: farms and fields, the player driven economy

Output: homogenise the refinery & reprocessing system. All NPC stations use variants of POS refineries/reprocessing modules. They all have a number of disassembly lines which handle a certain volume of product per hour, at a particular efficiency, with associated job and time costs. New skills to enhance processing/refining line capacity per hour. POS refineries will generally be better, higher capacity facilities will have worse efficiency (thus rewarding all-5 industrialists with bean counter implants).

Output: rework industrial ships. Remove ore bay and survey bonus from Orca, add new industrial command ship with skirmish link bonus, large ore bay. Add new ORE frigate with T2 variant (astrometrics/covops) no weapons, survey range, survey speed and web speed bonus.

Output: move Rorqual link bonus from industrial core to hull/ship skill, remove rorqual ore bay, add industrial capital ship with focus on ore bay & compression lines, ability for freighters to load from hangars. Thus the "field command" variants of orca & rorqual focus on mining head activity, "fleet command" variant focuses on ore logistics. Frigates focus on exploration and nimble mining. Rorqual becomes useful in a belt due to extreme range tractors and no need to fit industrial core.

Output: allow ice harvester upgrades to affect cycle times on mining lasers

Output: freighter variant specialising in compressed ore transport, requires some support skill such as ore compression

Output: ammo bays which hold charges, lenses, scripts, probes, missiles, etc.

Output: remove mineral compression: all manufactured items become larger than the minerals required to manufacture them.

Output: introduce Research Projects, timed tasks undertaken by research agents based on exploration materials, which ends up producing data cores - thus removing the "passive" income of datacores (though this does nothing to address the significant effort of collecting said cores).

Output: remove data ores from FW LP stores, resource production through blowing things up is nonsensical.
#59 - 2013-01-17 05:05:41 UTC
Just because something is hard, doesn't mean you shoudn't do it.
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2013-01-17 05:07:19 UTC
Living at a POS and building at a POS is a pain, and POS related role are ********.


Fix POSes now.
153 PagesPrevious page12345Next pageLast page
Forum Jump