EVE Information Portal

Revisiting suggested numbers from post #96 in this thread.

1. Hi-sec COs need to charge a 50% tariff.

- This gives lo-sec POCOs a lot more headroom with which to compete on tariff rates in order to draw in clients. If hi-sec COs charge 10%, people are going to look at lo-sec POCOs attempting to charge 30-50% and scoff - even if they could net more product per day from a PI harvest world in lo-sec.

- It puts a hard cap on how badly a POCO owner can screw you over with the tariff rate when compared to just going to hi-sec and using a hi-sec CO. Currently, with the hi-sec COs using a 10% tariff, if the POCO owner decides to suddenly charge you 100%, you're being soaked for 10x what you would have paid in hi-sec. If the hi-sec COs charge a 50% tariff, then the worst-case with a POCO is that you'll pay 2x more tariffs. That reduces the main worry with a POCO to being locked out entirely.

2. The tariffs across tiers need to make sense and should be based on the ratios of inputs to outputs between the tiers. It gets a bit odd in the P3 and P4 product chains, but you can pick a middle point for those tiers and use a simple multiplier to set the base tariffs.

- Alternately, CCP needs to set the tariffs at the start of each month based on some percentage of the 5% or 10% sell volume across all of hi-sec.

Approximate ratios between the tiers. P0 = 1x

P0:P1 is 150x (so the P1 tariff should be 150x the P0 tariff)
P2 is 2400x (P1:P2 ratio is 16:1, so P2 tariff should be 2400x the P0 tariff)
P3 - 20400x (which is an 8.5 ratio above P2, some P3 is a 6.67:1 ratio of P2:P3, other is a 10:1 ratio)
P4 - 307200x (which is 128:1 over the P3)

Suggested tariffs (for hi-sec, assuming that the hi-sec COs are set to a 50% tariff setting):

P0 - 0.25 / 0.50
P1 - 37.5 / 75 (P0 tariff x 150)
P2 - 600 / 1200 (P0 tariff x 2400)
P3 - 5100 / 10200 (P0 tariff x 20400)
P4 - 76800 / 153600 (P0 tariff x 307200)

Impacts:

- The lower priced P1 goods will have to go up in price in order to be viable with the higher export taxes. Instead of 150-800 for P1, you're more likely to see 250-900 ISK/u market sell prices.

- For P2, which are 4500-11000, the price band will have to rise a bit into the 6000-12500 range.

- For P3, the impact won't be as large, but instead of paying 22000-65000, you'll have to pay 35000-75000 for P3s.

- For P4, the impact will be less and most goods will only go up about 50-60k ISK/u in price. But since the inputs will probably be more expensive, expect P4 prices in the 800k to 1600k range.

Alternate write-up:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=374795#post374795

They never stopped since this is a catered development for the nullsec overlords. They get more isk with practically no risk to their investment. They couldn't have asked for anything more tailored to them.

Funnily enough, there's no official Test server thread for this feature, and player-started ones have been ignored by devs.

Meanwhile, most of your questions were answered in the previous thread:

* What happen to goods in Reinforced POCOs ? Or, are POCOs still accessible while in reinforced mode, in order to move goods away ?

Yes, POCOs are operative while reinforced.

* Are goods in hangar jettisoned when POCOs are destroyed ?

No. CCP doesnt want POCOs shot for loot, so they drop nothing.

* Are players with Planetary Installations (not necessarily from owner corp) somewhat warned when their planet's POCO is assaulted ? How to know we have to evacuate goods from POCOs before they get destroyed ?

Not answered, but I would guess not.

* Are POCO grids completely static or is there a plan to be able to set a new POCO at different coordinates ?

POCOs can be anchored anywhere within 10000 km of a planet.

* Are POCOs allowed to have names ?

No. Probably because of the "time to penis" rule, that they are visible in the entire system (unlike towers), and the sheer number makes names hard to police (unlike 0.0 outposts).

Does CCP want any player feedback or testing on the POCOs?

This is one of the very few expansion features without its own thread on the Test Server Feedback forum. They haven't even seeded the gantry structures on Sisi, so to test this feature on the test server, you have to jump through hoops and run FW missions on there. Even without an official thread, people are posting about it and the devs are not replying.

Omen dissapeared from the thread after just a couple hours (even faster than the last time). Is he even still reading? Will he post again? Or does he only communicate through devblogs?

I was looking forward to POCOs. But at this rate, it looks like the rollout will be a complete mess.

Wheres the common sense that Interbus is going to offline their COs only because some capsuleer thinks he has to anchor his own CO at a planet?
Why is it a problem anyway that COs can be killed and need to be defended if you dont want your PI infrastructure crippled?
Why dont you defend your assets?
Why dont you go to highsec if you dont want to? There are Concord COs everywhere and you will always be able to acces them. But if you want more yield from your extractors then you have to fight for it.

o/ John

Ingvar, you keep confusing your ideas with common sense. The simple fact that many people don't agree with you show they are not "common sense". They may be good or not, but in any case they require massive changes to the mechanic that CCP can't do in time for the expansion anyway.

I'm more worried about CCP not interacting with us about their current implementation. They don't provide us with testing tools (seeding the structures, giving us a central location for implementation feedback), nor acknowledge or clarify bug reports.

For example, tax rates on Sisi make no sense (P0 > P1). Are the devs even aware of this? Also, you can't attack a CO with drones, they just ignore your orders. Is this intended? If so, why are they penalizing gallente drone boats? (both have been bug reported).

We've seen CCP take this approach before. It never ends well. It ends with threadnaughts on release day over stuff that was known but ignored on Sisi.

This



Seems to be sarcastic? can't tell...

Did you even read all 85+ pages? Or just answered to the couple of posts that fitted your schedule?

Also; good job on giving them killmails, you've just given 3th parties that wan't absolute nothing to do with with PI (and therefore will never replace the POCO's themselves for profit) one more reason to shoot them down.

This is basically a example of mind over matter.

We don't matter and CCP doesn't mind.

New Interbus CO"s a BAD IDEA!


Look, the only thing you're doing is adding a 2 hour+ investment PER PLANET ON TOP OF an 80Million ISK cost to anyone who wants to ACTUALLY USE YOUR SYSTEM. If someone actually wants to setup a POCO Network now, you're just making it a PAIN in the ASS for them to do so! So what incentive are you giving people to USE it except more hassle?


I seriously think you need to make those Interbus POCO's have about 1/3 of the HP of their player made counterparts, so that there is more than a monetary incentive to put up your own POCO but also more importantly a tactical decision to not have an easily destroyed space object!


Also, PLEASE review the Defense Choice paradigm on the attack system so that there is an option to defend other than being force to go at your reinforcement timer.

I think they should have triple the HP, 99% resists and the option to select whatever tax you feel is fair to pay, as well as the complete inability to lock anyone out of PI.

See! I can have bad ideas too!