These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Player Owned Customs Offices: An update!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions
#281 - 2011-11-17 18:51:32 UTC
Let the carebears fight!

Allow player owned customs offices to be set up in highsec!

I honestly think PoCo based sov is a good idea https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1417544
Chicken Pizza
One-man Armada
#282 - 2011-11-17 19:06:28 UTC
Solo Player wrote:
more garbage


Do you even know what irony means?

And..let's see...more reinforcing of what i said...

Ah! There's one. If customs offices are a bad idea in wormhole space, then what do you propose? Planetary launches? Don't make me laugh.

I think maybe you should look up not only words like "irony" before you use them, but also words like "fiction", and maybe do some research on what "common sense" is. Fiction and common sense are not synonymous in the least.

I can see you don't really have anything to say of actual value anymore, though I'm hard-pressed to find anything of actual value that you've already said in the first place. There's got to be something...

Go play a free-to-play game if 15 dollars a month is what you consider being worth small aesthetic changes so things "make sense".
Solo Player
#283 - 2011-11-17 19:20:59 UTC
Forgive my derailing, but...

u
m
a
d
?
Chicken Pizza
One-man Armada
#284 - 2011-11-17 19:50:45 UTC
Solo Player wrote:
Forgive my derailing, but...

u
m
a
d
?


Naw, because I know it'll never happen. And even if it did, I'd just avoid the hassle. Cool
Mikron Alexarr
New Age Solutions
#285 - 2011-11-17 19:57:46 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
pussnheels wrote:
Dear CCP do you actually read the feedback ; on those 89 pages of feed back the overwhelming majority said NO bad idea
and what did you do ?? Yep just went ahead and itroduced a new game mechanic that will NEVER work


Why ccp WHY


They addressed pretty much the only valid points made in those 89 pages. 88 pages were hysterical rewording of the exact same non-fact based imaginings.


As someone with plenty of pages worth of fact or experience based objections, I disagree.
Mikron Alexarr
New Age Solutions
#286 - 2011-11-17 20:00:45 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
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.


I agree. He actually wanted to discuss some of the far-reaching implications, but bowed out for some reason. The early discussion was exactly what the players are looking for.
Mikron Alexarr
New Age Solutions
#287 - 2011-11-17 20:05:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Mikron Alexarr
Jack Dant wrote:
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.


On the massive changes... If massive changes are required to make the feature work, it needs to be pulled. Period. Being a software developer for a large company, my #1 priority is the customer's welfare. When we screw customers, we lose business and revenue. This translates to cutbacks in resources (think lay offs).

Leaving the current system in place will not harm players. Putting this in half-baked will cause more havok than we've ever seen.
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#288 - 2011-11-17 20:40:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Jowen Datloran
Oh well, guess it is too late to wish for changes now; POCOs will be released as stated in this blog and CCP will monitor and adjust "if needed".

It is not because I do not appreciate what CCP is trying to achieve here and, back in the days, I would perhaps believed it could succeed. But the whole point of CCP Greyscales "Lessons Learned" were exactly to demonstrate how mechanics that were initially thought out to bring interesting and engaging play to the game turned out to fail in the real world of EVE, and therefore should be avoided to use in new mechanics. (Unless CCP follows a corporate policy of identifying poor design so it can be repeated). As POCO mechanics does not only fit one but many of the items on Greyscales list I would have to be incredible naive to expect that POCOs will turn out as a success*.


Link to CCP Greyscales list about Lessons Learned regarding unsatisfying gameplay.


*: I suspect the team never decided upon a way to determine success or failure, as such; it will of course be a success.

Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook 

electrostatus
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#289 - 2011-11-18 00:45:54 UTC
I've been playing with the new numbers for the taxes and... they seem a bit odd. If they stay as they currently are on sisi, exporting by launchpad will cost more than export by command center at a rate of 10%. One would have to have a tax rate lower than 7.5% if they want to be cheaper than exporting by command center. More details on the numbers here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=377210#post377210

Asteroid Timer: Know exactly when that roid depletes! PI Profit Calculator: calculates your profits and taxes of any PI product depending on how you built them!
Chicken Pizza
One-man Armada
#290 - 2011-11-18 05:59:29 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Lessons learned

Shooting at stationary structures is boring
IT'S BORING. STOP GIVING US UNNECESSARY STRUCTURES TO BLOW UP.
See: Starbase warfare, Dominion sov warfare. Even the good fights that do happen around such objectives could be improved by having better objectives.

Shooting at things with hitpoints scales very efficiently with fleet size, which encourages lag-producing behavior
People will hotdrop them. People will provoke fleet fights over them. Just how we'll be affected by it is yet to be seen, but clearly the possibilities have not been taken into account.

Having to spend significant amounts of effort defeating an enemy which isn't even fighting back is really boring
ONCE AGAIN IT'S ******* BORING.
See: Starbase warfare, Dominion sov warfare. See in particular how long it took to clear IT Alliance's ownership out of Delve, as a recent example

Waking up every morning and having to clean up the mess made while you were asleep is boring
Boring is a bad thing, CCP. A bad thing. Not a good thing.
See: station ping-pong pre-sov, repairing station services. Having to do something tedious every day before you can actually play the game is not cool

Doing something just "because it would be cool/neat/awesome" is always a bad idea and will come back to bite you later
See: Jump bridges, cyno jammers, Sov 4, AoE doomsdays, titans in general, supercarrier boost... Note that we should still obviously strive to make everything cool/neat/awesome, but when we start off with an awesome idea rather than an actual problem we want to fix or a feature that has a clear, functional and necessary goal, it generally requires painful fixes further down the road
Is the goal of the POCO necessary? No. Have you learned nothing from your past mistakes? Have fun with your painful fixes.

Cost is a useful variable to tune but an unwise thing to rely on to enforce scarcity or balance - players will always be richer than you think
See: outposts, titans, supercarriers

Making something tedious will not stop players doing it if it's very clearly the best option. They'll do it, and they'll hate it
This is important, possibly more than you realize. But you need to keep in mind that there is a balance within the spectrum of tedium that you MUST maintain. The concept of the POCO is tedious by nature. You grind LP/ISK to buy a BPC, you grind ISK for buying/produce your own materials to build it with. You spend time building it, must defend it, repair it, treat it like an undefended miniPOS. Your contact list will become an unmanageable clusterfawk. It's nothing but tedium. You expend far too much effort for relatively no gain unless you **** off/drive away the local populace. And that is harmful.
See: everything involving starbases. As a counterpoint though, things like the one-per-corp-per-system-per-day starbase rule demonstrate that if something doesn't make a big difference but is sufficiently awkward to do, then any theoretical "exploit" scenarios tend to fall out of favor quickly as they're just not worth the effort.

People like to do one-stop shopping, and will "go to Jita" for everything unless doing so is comparatively very inconvenient
See: moon mineral distribution, high-strength booster resource distribution, neither of which achieved much in the way of the nullsec-to-nullsec trade that they hoped to encourage


My 2 cents are italicized.

Whoever was posting this earlier, I felt the need to post it again. They need to put this damn thing up on their walls in poster form. Maybe some motivational posters. I should make some for them. They should chant it every day when they come into work, like our Pledge of Allegiance in schools(bad example because that's actually a stupid requirement. But mine isn't!!).
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#291 - 2011-11-18 10:46:33 UTC
A question for any devs that might still be reading this thread. Are you watching the test server feedback forum for the bugs and problems people are reporting? Can you acknowledge or comment on them? Examples so far:

  • Customs offices can be anchored inside POS force fields or right on a station undock as long as the distance to the planet is small enough.
  • Drones ignore orders to attack customs offices.
  • Customs offices have extremely small (100m) sig radius, so any missiles larger than heavies don't apply full damage.
  • Taxes for P0 items are larger than P1, and both are very different from the expected values.

Keep in mind, this is what people found despite all the obstacles to acquire a gantry on Sisi. Who knows what will actually surface once everyone is using them on TQ.

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644
Vio Geraci
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#292 - 2011-11-18 10:57:48 UTC
So many tears in response to a nuanced, well-thought out game change that will make a boring world of dots and lines actually result in player driven conflict/content. For shame, babies, for shame: CCP did good on this one.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#293 - 2011-11-18 12:00:01 UTC
Vio Geraci wrote:
So many tears in response to a nuanced, well-thought out game change that will make a boring world of dots and lines actually result in player driven conflict/content. For shame, babies, for shame: CCP did good on this one.


Wait a minute, what are you looking... oh, wait... Goon.

Nevermind.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
John DaiSho
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#294 - 2011-11-18 14:39:58 UTC
Heh, and hes actually right.
Zhula Guixgrixks
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
#295 - 2011-11-18 15:14:48 UTC
Hey,

Thx for the update! Good changes. I like the smooth Interbus in-between solution.
Tried to shoot a Interbus office with a siege dread + Mega , but got bored after a few minutes :-)



0ccupational Hazzard --> check out the true love story 
Max O'Deel
O'Deels Reclaimers
#296 - 2011-11-18 19:53:07 UTC
As Quoted in DEV Blog
"We hope that you like the adjustments we are doing, we certainly value the feedback!

The Player Owned Customs Office feature will launch with the winter expansion.

May your plans be dark and full of tax money!

Best regards

CCP Omen on behalf of Team Pi"

Basically No! for the simple reasons we hold a C4 WH with 5 corp players who use the PI to fuel our POS. so who the Heck are we going to tax in that WH, The only other players who are in there are either PVPers or site raiders, and they sure as F**K aint interested in PI, when are you going to wake up Bud, to the fact that in a WH we have no one else to tax but ourselves and that is just plain stupid, I really wonder whether you have an education or actually play in this environment to see the balls up this is for WSpacers in general.
Also as we are mainly in WH space with access out being way to unpredictable the BPC's are going to be almost inaccessable to us as we cannot achieve the points in a sensible time or run the risk of leaving the POS undefended. Thats like leaving a Porche down town in the roughest area you can find and expect it to stay in one Piece whilst you go about finding or in this case making the new fuel. and the mechanism to get the fuel to your car, talk about dumb... it just dont come in to it....
Max O'Deel
O'Deels Reclaimers
#297 - 2011-11-18 20:11:09 UTC
CCP Omen wrote:
Here are some replies to topics raised:

"People will grief the Interbus COs"
That is quite probable, even with this change of deployment, our guiding light is that EVE is player driven. This way the transition between NPC owned and Player owned will be smoother. It's no silver bullet and balancing between player driven and player convenience is very difficult. Our hope remain that you, the player will organize and sort out the supply and demand of PI goods and the availability of Customs Offices. If that does not happen, and there is a measurable decline in lowsec or PI activity then we will act. How we act will be decided if that event occurs, but we will not simply let lowsec die. We strive to invigorate lowsec, not just with this feature but for the long run. You may disagree that this feature will accomplish that, but that is never the less one of our goals and we will monitor how it pans out.

"Do you think more people will do PI?"
No, as many have pointed out the PI gameplay in itself is far from perfect and we are absolutely not trying to make people do PI. The player owned customs offices are meant to increase meaningful space conflict and the verisimilitude of the EVE universe. Actual improvements to PI is an entirely different topic. Having said that, we are hoping for activity to stay somewhat the same.

"Did you have a clue the prices went up based on the previous blog?"
Yes - absolutely and that was expected. We also fully expect the prices of PI goods to be unstable while the market adapts. The higher prices are in fact essential to drive motivation to operate Customs Offices. In the end, we believe the prices of for instance POS fuel will stabilize as we have seen with nearly all other player driven commodities in EVE.

"You did not account for all or even most of the feedback to the first thread"
We acted on the feedback that we agreed with and that was feasible within the time frame. Many ideas were excellent but too grand.

Regards
Omen


Still no support for WSpacers then, you sure as hell never played in that environment, its all, oh we will keep an eye on low sec;
typical stereo typed approach. and very blinkered...
Max O'Deel
O'Deels Reclaimers
#298 - 2011-11-18 20:11:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Max O'Deel
disgustedly
Markata Lazair
Zephyr Corp
#299 - 2011-11-18 20:14:11 UTC
To hell with the details, I am looking forward to setting up some POCOs in our w-space system just so we can lure a few people away from the WH itself to shoot at it.
Vio Geraci
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#300 - 2011-11-18 22:02:24 UTC
Markata Lazair wrote:
To hell with the details, I am looking forward to setting up some POCOs in our w-space system just so we can lure a few people away from the WH itself to shoot at it.


I bet you could make a whole mini profession of finding wormholes that have static connections to high sec, and populating the planets there. Who is going to bother blowing them up? You'd never need to look at the wormhole again, either, after all the POCOs are down.