These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A few question about the HISEC POCO Wars...

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#81 - 2014-02-07 03:41:46 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
So what's wrong with our POCOs?

The landlords.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#82 - 2014-02-07 03:45:56 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


Further, even if I made it, I would be bounced off the CSM so fast, assuming that CCP even allowed me on it.
I would have no problem telling certain CSM members and dev's exactly what I think of them.
And that would not just do, in the eyes of CCP, I am sure.



Courteous and businesslike conduct is expected, yes, even in cases (as has happened on this CSM, which I'm sure you won't believe at all) where you violently disagree. It's a bit of a pity to hear that you're not mature enough to hold yourself to that standard, at least.


If your opinion mattered to me somewhat, I might be offended by your comment.
Fortunately, for my fragile ego, your opinion does not matter to me.

If that upsets you, slap another billion on my head like you did before when my posting struck a little too close to home.


Now I can see why people haze you. You come off as an arrogant ****. I hope you never stop getting trolled to be quite honest. Maybe people do have it out for you...but I can certainly see why. Im going to nominate you for CSM now just to hopefully harvest some tears during election time.


I have no concept of what you hope to gain by doing so, but I won't be running.
Waltaratzor
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
#83 - 2014-02-07 03:46:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Waltaratzor
Jill Chastot wrote:

I don't see any reason for why these established groups need a harder time holding highsec POCOs

Just because you have a personal beef with them is not really a valid excuseStraight


CCPs stated objective with high sec POCOs was to drive conflict between corps in high sec. That isn't happened as its too easy for large groups to hold said pocos. If CCP wishes to achieve their objective, they need to make it easier to take POCOs.

However, I don't think CCP will actually do that. It would take too much work. If they do anything it will be nerfing POCO income.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#84 - 2014-02-07 04:45:45 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Nykala wrote:


Jump to assumptions much? I'm a nomadic player in general and 10 of those colonies were always moving to provide a POS fuel localization service for folks. When it becomes a reoccuring issue where the folks who want you to make fuel at their doorstep do so because the tax is too, high, and you have to decline because the tax is too high, the business dies. Also, as for not moving, I operate in all 4 empires and shift between them monthly via jump


So what's wrong with our POCOs?

they smell

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Shantetha
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2014-02-07 06:00:44 UTC
Waltaratzor wrote:


Perhaps a good way to fix this would be to have POCOs lower the cost of wardeccing a corp or alliance(to a limit). For instance, every POCO you own could reduce your wardec cost by 10m to a minimum of 50 million. That way big groups who own lots of POCOs have some risk associated with that ownership.

For lore reasons(if you really need them), you could say that Concord isn't happy with corporations taking over their pocos so they make them easier to dec.



Or just remove high sec poco's from concord protection, ie don't require a war deck to attack them. Suspect flagging + evemail notifications should be enough to allow people to CTA defend them with their current hp. This would also allow unannounced guerrilla tactics for taking high sec poco's.

As long as the poco's require a war deck in high sec they will never be a true conflict driver.
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#86 - 2014-02-07 07:25:24 UTC
Shantetha wrote:
Waltaratzor wrote:


Perhaps a good way to fix this would be to have POCOs lower the cost of wardeccing a corp or alliance(to a limit). For instance, every POCO you own could reduce your wardec cost by 10m to a minimum of 50 million. That way big groups who own lots of POCOs have some risk associated with that ownership.

For lore reasons(if you really need them), you could say that Concord isn't happy with corporations taking over their pocos so they make them easier to dec.



Or just remove high sec poco's from concord protection, ie don't require a war deck to attack them. Suspect flagging + evemail notifications should be enough to allow people to CTA defend them with their current hp. This would also allow unannounced guerrilla tactics for taking high sec poco's.

As long as the poco's require a war deck in high sec they will never be a true conflict driver.




Reinforcement Timer ---> They come back with reps and a fleet ---> Your "guerilla attack" has a scheduled time it has to attack or else it fails (and the enemy can choose this time) -----> You all die horribly because you can't even get together 20 dudes. ----> The corporation/alliance/coalition with more resources and will to use them succeeds.



There is no reason for you to be able to take on a huge-ass alliance if you can't afford "500m in wardec fees" or have the people or time to shoot a single POCO when these coalitions are driven by the station grind, which takes 100x more effort than you have to expend.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#87 - 2014-02-07 08:28:57 UTC
Jill Chastot wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Lister Vindaloo wrote:
There's basically no margin in hisec PI anyway, as said above, taxes go up by 30% so will prices.

If the mechanic somehow allowed small groups to control POCOs maybe you would see some conflict but there are too few large organized groups in Hisec to justify the effort when a Relatively small null group can come in and control as many as they want.

If hisec POCOs had been used to introduce hisec dwellers to the concepts of Sov and "owning" things in space we might have seen more player flow from hisec to low, null and wormholes, instead they've given up on owning anything and PI as well...



Pocos in high sec must change. They must be different from low sec. Must cost less and have half the HP. That makes easier for small groups make fast hit and runs on larger groups pocos, making not worth for these groups to defend or retake them.


That or simply make impossible for 0.0 sov holder to get concord legalization for deployign pococ in high sec.. explanation? simple relation streee between the powerful null sec capsuleers and concord that feels threatened.



I don't see any reason for why these established groups need a harder time holding highsec POCOs

Just because you have a personal beef with them is not really a valid excuseStraight



Want a simple explanation? In low sec and 0.0 Is TRIVIAl to obliterate a POCO, you do not need to give a 24h early warnign trough war dec.. and you can land a SINGLE dread to do it in 16 minutes, or 3 dreads in a single siege cycle.


Holdign itn High sec is desproportionaly easier. They should go to 30% of normal POCO HP to stay on same playing field.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#88 - 2014-02-07 08:29:51 UTC
Jill Chastot wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Lister Vindaloo wrote:
There's basically no margin in hisec PI anyway, as said above, taxes go up by 30% so will prices.

If the mechanic somehow allowed small groups to control POCOs maybe you would see some conflict but there are too few large organized groups in Hisec to justify the effort when a Relatively small null group can come in and control as many as they want.

If hisec POCOs had been used to introduce hisec dwellers to the concepts of Sov and "owning" things in space we might have seen more player flow from hisec to low, null and wormholes, instead they've given up on owning anything and PI as well...



Pocos in high sec must change. They must be different from low sec. Must cost less and have half the HP. That makes easier for small groups make fast hit and runs on larger groups pocos, making not worth for these groups to defend or retake them.


That or simply make impossible for 0.0 sov holder to get concord legalization for deployign pococ in high sec.. explanation? simple relation streee between the powerful null sec capsuleers and concord that feels threatened.



I don't see any reason for why these established groups need a harder time holding highsec POCOs

Just because you have a personal beef with them is not really a valid excuseStraight



Btw.. you just gained a war dec.. congrats.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Waltaratzor
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec
#89 - 2014-02-07 23:29:22 UTC
Loraine Gess wrote:


Reinforcement Timer ---> They come back with reps and a fleet ---> Your "guerilla attack" has a scheduled time it has to attack or else it fails (and the enemy can choose this time) -----> You all die horribly because you can't even get together 20 dudes. ----> The corporation/alliance/coalition with more resources and will to use them succeeds.



There is no reason for you to be able to take on a huge-ass alliance if you can't afford "500m in wardec fees" or have the people or time to shoot a single POCO when these coalitions are driven by the station grind, which takes 100x more effort than you have to expend.


The reason is to drive conflict. If CCP is fine with giant alliances controlling POCOs with very few fights, that is fine. But there stated objective is to drive conflict, which isn't happening.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#90 - 2014-02-08 04:12:38 UTC
Waltaratzor wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:


Reinforcement Timer ---> They come back with reps and a fleet ---> Your "guerilla attack" has a scheduled time it has to attack or else it fails (and the enemy can choose this time) -----> You all die horribly because you can't even get together 20 dudes. ----> The corporation/alliance/coalition with more resources and will to use them succeeds.



There is no reason for you to be able to take on a huge-ass alliance if you can't afford "500m in wardec fees" or have the people or time to shoot a single POCO when these coalitions are driven by the station grind, which takes 100x more effort than you have to expend.


The reason is to drive conflict. If CCP is fine with giant alliances controlling POCOs with very few fights, that is fine. But there stated objective is to drive conflict, which isn't happening.

Instead, no reinforcement timer -> they just burn down your poco over and over.

No one ever meets, it's just people showing up to your poco and destroying it.

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 ?
Mario Putzo
#91 - 2014-02-08 04:13:24 UTC
Waltaratzor wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:


Reinforcement Timer ---> They come back with reps and a fleet ---> Your "guerilla attack" has a scheduled time it has to attack or else it fails (and the enemy can choose this time) -----> You all die horribly because you can't even get together 20 dudes. ----> The corporation/alliance/coalition with more resources and will to use them succeeds.



There is no reason for you to be able to take on a huge-ass alliance if you can't afford "500m in wardec fees" or have the people or time to shoot a single POCO when these coalitions are driven by the station grind, which takes 100x more effort than you have to expend.


The reason is to drive conflict. If CCP is fine with giant alliances controlling POCOs with very few fights, that is fine. But there stated objective is to drive conflict, which isn't happening.


Then saddle up a fleet and go have conflict.
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#92 - 2014-02-08 05:45:17 UTC
Waltaratzor wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:


Reinforcement Timer ---> They come back with reps and a fleet ---> Your "guerilla attack" has a scheduled time it has to attack or else it fails (and the enemy can choose this time) -----> You all die horribly because you can't even get together 20 dudes. ----> The corporation/alliance/coalition with more resources and will to use them succeeds.



There is no reason for you to be able to take on a huge-ass alliance if you can't afford "500m in wardec fees" or have the people or time to shoot a single POCO when these coalitions are driven by the station grind, which takes 100x more effort than you have to expend.


The reason is to drive conflict. If CCP is fine with giant alliances controlling POCOs with very few fights, that is fine. But there stated objective is to drive conflict, which isn't happening.




I guess CCP should have taken into account that you're too much of a pussy to shoot one of the 600 POCOs that goons can't possibly defend all at once
Nykala
L.L.A.M.A.
#93 - 2014-02-11 09:07:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Nykala
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
So what's wrong with our POCOs?

The landlords.


Eventhough the large power blocs thrived for years, they get more buffs to null and increases in their sources of income. Changes that are delivered in the name of incentives to get more folks in null and possibly spark conflict drivers, only result in maintaining and further supporting the big blue stale donut and complicates the possibility of smaller groups getting space Your POCOs are no exception to this. By ownership alone, if I HAD to pay POCO 30% taxes to either a small group or a larger one, I'd go with the smaller group every time. Thing is, with EVEs diversity, you can flat out choose to not do something and devote assets and time to other resources, which is what I have done.

March rabbit wrote:


You can easily move to NPC null somewhere, find a very unused system out of the way (plenty out there) and plant an entire system worth of POCOs. Even the worst null planets are much better then the best highsec planets. if you have 25 PI installations going with a setup like that, you will have those POCOS paid off very shortly, and be turning a decent profit. But then again, highseccers are afraid of nullsec, so that's unlikely to happen.


Logistics logistics logistics. I did find a nice corner of null that had potential for PI, 8% tax, reasonably quiet with a few regulars who were NBSI. However, regardless of the specific location, the situation always ends in trying to figure out how to get your goods to a worthwhile market. Which, npc null stations are not. Thanks to bubbles at choke points and blob camps, getting them to highsec becomes tedious and generally the risk outweighs the potential ISK. As I mentioned in another post, I'm one of the few who is not afraid of null and venture there often. I've even seen larger blocs that had agreements with folks freighting stuff out of null (blue status) get shot down time and time again, just because of "clerical errors" or someone didn't get a do not shoot memo. Locality and freedom of movement is the catcher for why so many choose to just go the lower risk methods, the risk is less sure, but that little bit of isk does all you need it to when you dont asplode at every corner.
Nykala
L.L.A.M.A.
#94 - 2014-02-11 09:23:28 UTC
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Nykala wrote:


Jump to assumptions much? I'm a nomadic player in general and 10 of those colonies were always moving to provide a POS fuel localization service for folks. When it becomes a reoccuring issue where the folks who want you to make fuel at their doorstep do so because the tax is too, high, and you have to decline because the tax is too high, the business dies. Also, as for not moving, I operate in all 4 empires and shift between them monthly via jump


Good God Woman ! Feeling hostile today ?

Are you denying that some players in high sec are too lazy to move a space pixel ?

That's been one of the main complaints for years. They complain about Bumping, and just stay in the same systems day after day getting bumped. They don't want to be bothered.

But you are an exception. That's fine. I'm an exception to that too.

This is hardly "jumping to assumptions". But you sure are quick to jump on a truth about the HS player base such as this.

So, I guess we are all really proud of you and all your "moving around". Gee....and WOW.

In fact, CCP should put your name on the monument about 5 times to satisfy your clearly, absolutely obese ego.


At the time, yes I may have been more clumsy with my words. It happens when you have a head cold and the entire left side of your brain feels like it has a fog. I am deniying that SOME players in highsec are too lazy to move a space pixel, however that is not all of them. It happens all too often where the actions of a few dictate the image of the rest. Being one of those exceptions, I encourage and show folks how to be more mobile, tell them about the perks, and even get some to use jumpclones to dodge situations where .CODE drags their knuckles through industrialists areas and bumps folks.

*grabs tearbucket and mop for the rest*

Your Dad Naked wrote:
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:


Right. Hold the playerbase responsible for your sub-par equipment. Yup, it's all our fault.

You are better off with a psychologist to deal with this kind of petty but huge whining about your personal financial life in general, that matters not to CCP or other players.


Hmmm. I'm thinking the dude freaking out on an internet forum over absolutely nothing might be the one who needs the psychologist. Roll
Don't mind the trolls, esp. here. Excessive rage and angst tends to be an unfortunate side effect of pushing/presenting a once vast and intricate space sci-fi universe into a simple pvp battledome where everything has to die in every way at every moment and at any cost. If it's not appealilng to more paranoid sociopaths or easy to rage folks, it's bringing that side out of people and playing with it.

Anyhoo, random thought while reading through the rest of the posts. What would the result be if highesc POCOs were only anchorable based on standings? Like with POS'