These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Phoebe] Long Distance Travel Changes - updates!

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1301 - 2014-10-16 06:57:18 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:

Someone needs to HTFU.

How about the carriers get lots of boosts to traveling and the rest of Eve HTFU!

Oh hey I have a great idea, let's make it so the only ships worth owning are capitals, because if I put more ISK on the field than the other guy, I should win!

Andy Landen wrote:
Subcap pilots are such whiners for their easy capital kill mails. Heaven forbid that they would actually have to risk billions of ISK in assets just to take down a single capital ship, who in his own right is already risking billions of ISK!

As a capital pilot myself I'm going to just say that this is a dumb as hell attitude. Next you'll say that titans should be invulnerable to anything except other titans, because of "isk value".

Andy Landen wrote:
PS: And by "risking billions", I mean the carrier should have the power to easily destroy billions of ISK of ships on its own before being taken down herself. That way, gate camping would not represent an easy carrier kill operation and carriers would be feared as they should be. Obviously the same arguments apply to all other capital ships, but since the rest do not have drones capable of dealing with subcaps, their ability to escape bubble camps is much more important.

"I put x isk on field, that means I should win, or at least take down my equivalent in isk!" is the worst possible train of thought you could come up with. Stop doing that.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1302 - 2014-10-16 06:59:09 UTC
Dwissi wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
Dwissi wrote:
We - the players - twisted the original ideas of ships into some completely different roles and as a result we twisted the original ideas of many other things at the same time. Eve is intertwined and we created effects that where not appreciated by many. CCP gave us a lot of time and just watched - but they obviously where not blind.

You do realize that using ships and mechanics in ways that the developers don't envision is one of the things the developers intend for the game, right?

I do - and i also know that each twist has a limit of being useful and smart in a complex system. When you reach the point that those twists break more things than they improve its fair game to say: you twisted too much.

The changes CCP are making to capitals aren't twisting it too much. You'll see that if you wait a while to let people actually deal with them, instead of just knee-jerk whine about them.
Easthir Ravin
Easy Co.
#1303 - 2014-10-16 07:04:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Easthir Ravin
There is an easy fix to all this. Give the Coalitions something else to do, give us some place to go. Even under the current mechanics, creating more space would focus the attention elsewhere. If only CCP was a game developer and had the capability to build onto their game instead of continually looking inward at the minutia.

On another note, (Looking for clarification on this) I have heard rumor that another feature of the upcoming patch is that Stealth Bombers are reverting back to the old days when they had to remain at distance from each other to keep from de-cloaking. Supposedly this is because of the effectiveness of, what?, about four truly good multi-boxers? So since you are effectively destroying their chosen play style, are you also going to nerf multi-boxing miners so they are unable to single-handedly mine out complete systems?

Just seems a bit lopsided on the rebalance.

IN THE IMORTAL WORDS OF SOCRATES:  " I drank WHAT?!"
Dwissi
Miners Delight Reborn
#1304 - 2014-10-16 07:05:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Dwissi
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Quote:
=CCP Greyscale

The fatigue isn't because of traveling through the 'hole, rather it's caused by the mental effort of causing it to form at the correct co-ordinates. Natural wormholes, stargates etc don't have this problem, and the further the distance the hole needs to connect to, the harder it is to calculate.

(Jump bridges/portals merely act as a surrogate jump drive, each ship still creates its own wormhole.)

Interesting, I would have thought the cyno created the hole and the ships followed it. The same as using a jump bridge or wormhole or any other form of jump portal. The pilot can not form his own destination, he can ONLY jump to the coordinates at the end of the hole/portal. Which is created by a 3rd party, not the "mental effort" of the pilot.

If in fact a pilot is responsible for creating the hole by mental effort, does that not mean there is no need for cynos, jump beacons, jump bridges etc - The pilot would use "mental effort" to select the destination.

The HOLE logic behind and reason for cynosural fields, worm holes, jump bridges and even gates, just got changed.
You seem to have forgotten, a gate between systems is a hole created in space to allow travel between selected places (like a jump bridge), why would that not create fatigue?

Quote:
=CCP Greyscale
Part of the goal with logistics is to reduce the amount you need to live in null, which we think changes the playing field fairly substantially.

As to jumping through gates, yeah, thought about it, implementing a solution.


So the long term plan for nulsec is homogenization, so each region has access to everything they need to live in nulsec?
Yeah that's going to open up lots of reason for conflict.

Ahh good, at least we didn't forget anything - Capitals will now be allowed to use gates and cynos, beacons etc but to ensure they can't do both at the same time to minimize risk - A solution is being implemented - Glad I didn't miss that bit. Well done.

I am all for change - As long as the proposed changes make sense - You explanation as to how fatigue works, does not make sense.



Another quote from the Eve book(lore helps a lot for fundamentals):

When the ship goes through the mass boson sphere, a mono-atomic layer of mass boson gets
deposited on the ships surface. This layer counters the stretching of the ship against the metric gradient, enough to keep the structural integrity of the ship for the duration of the trip through the hole. This doesn't mean that the gradient is completely wiped out, and even seasoned space veterans still know the feeling known as 'going down the drain' when entering a wormhole.


Thats your answer - its physical stress in several forms in the end - not only stress on the material involved.

Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins

Before someone complains again: grr everyone

Greed is the death of loyalty
Dwissi
Miners Delight Reborn
#1305 - 2014-10-16 07:07:11 UTC
Lord TGR wrote:
Dwissi wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
Dwissi wrote:
We - the players - twisted the original ideas of ships into some completely different roles and as a result we twisted the original ideas of many other things at the same time. Eve is intertwined and we created effects that where not appreciated by many. CCP gave us a lot of time and just watched - but they obviously where not blind.

You do realize that using ships and mechanics in ways that the developers don't envision is one of the things the developers intend for the game, right?

I do - and i also know that each twist has a limit of being useful and smart in a complex system. When you reach the point that those twists break more things than they improve its fair game to say: you twisted too much.

The changes CCP are making to capitals aren't twisting it too much. You'll see that if you wait a while to let people actually deal with them, instead of just knee-jerk whine about them.


You might want to go back to my original post - i dont complain at all about CCP changing. The contrary.

Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins

Before someone complains again: grr everyone

Greed is the death of loyalty
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1306 - 2014-10-16 07:12:48 UTC
Dwissi wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
Dwissi wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
Dwissi wrote:
We - the players - twisted the original ideas of ships into some completely different roles and as a result we twisted the original ideas of many other things at the same time. Eve is intertwined and we created effects that where not appreciated by many. CCP gave us a lot of time and just watched - but they obviously where not blind.

You do realize that using ships and mechanics in ways that the developers don't envision is one of the things the developers intend for the game, right?

I do - and i also know that each twist has a limit of being useful and smart in a complex system. When you reach the point that those twists break more things than they improve its fair game to say: you twisted too much.

The changes CCP are making to capitals aren't twisting it too much. You'll see that if you wait a while to let people actually deal with them, instead of just knee-jerk whine about them.


You might want to go back to my original post - i dont complain at all about CCP changing. The contrary.

Whoops, I'm getting too used to people just whining about the changes. My apologies, and serves me right for assuming.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1307 - 2014-10-16 07:24:31 UTC
Easthir Ravin wrote:
There is an easy fix to all this. Give the Coalitions something else to do, give us some place to go. Even under the current mechanics, creating more space would focus the attention elsewhere. If only CCP was a game developer and had the capability to build onto their game instead of continually looking inward at the minutia.

The problem with this idea is that it would just be a temporary stop-gap which won't solve the fundamental flaw with the current sov system which is what has caused the current situation.

Yes, it would give some of us something to do for a few weeks, maybe even a few months, but it would only be for those who actually went there, and it would not incite the rest of the universe to stop stagnating or even do anything other than just have pre-arranged fights for fights' sake (with the occasional unintended clusterfuck). What EVE needs is more actual wars, and not just the big wars with 3k+ fights, but lots of smaller, more local, fights. Fights between neighbours.

And it needs a reason for big coalitions like the CFC, N3 etc to revise their list of friends and start going at eachother's throat again. This won't happen if you just add more space.

Easthir Ravin wrote:
On another note, (Looking for clarification on this) I have heard rumor that another feature of the upcoming patch is that Stealth Bombers are reverting back to the old days when they had to remain at distance from each other to keep from de-cloaking. Supposedly this is because of the effectiveness of, what?, about four truly good multi-boxers? So since you are effectively destroying their chosen play style, are you also going to nerf multi-boxing miners so they are unable to single-handedly mine out complete systems?

Just seems a bit lopsided on the rebalance.

It's not because of a few good multiboxers, it's because bombers are too good right now, pure and simple. We had good bombers back before they removed the fact bombers would uncloak eachother when getting too close even while cloaked, we'll get good bombers after they're reverted back as well. It just won't be as easy as it is right now.
Byson1
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1308 - 2014-10-16 08:40:02 UTC
CCP does obviously listen. I am still disappointed that they messed with jump freighters. For small alliances who ccp claim they are trying to help into null sec, logistics is key. Oh we all will still survive. Game play will change.

There will be a few JF kills because of it, thats what they wanted. If the range was cut any shorter small alliances would have been assimilated by the larger ones. Still might happen.

Sure peeps who dont live in null or are in large alliances where these changes really wont effect, even if you cut it to 5 are crying and saying you should cut it more. You should lay completely off logistics (JF) at least with the range sure 90% fatigue i can see.

If you want to get small corps out to null sec and get lots of fights how bout put a couple high sec systems for market hubs in each null sec region and allow logistics to jump straight into these high sec systems. That would allow for small alliances to live. would provide for more fighting without wiping out the little guy. if they can jump straight to it.

Just a thought that a few of us in a small alliance in null sec had.

Thanks for listeningRoll
Byson1
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1309 - 2014-10-16 09:21:45 UTC
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
a significant percentage of their basic needs on-site without relying on JF chains


AKA: rebalancing nullsec ore anomalies


Good idea. It's been a while since I messed with nullsec anomalies. I think I remember how to do it...



Off topic, yes, but listen a bit.

The problem with null industry is a few things, but adjusting the ore anomalies will only help by a very small amount. The reason things need to be imported into null is that a single person can only mine a small volume. Due to the rorqual boosts, you can get a 15% increase over highsec with an Orca, but it is still a small amount a single person can do.

Even though I used to multibox and build ships myself thus basing mining off ISK is incorrect, here is some ISK stats for mining in null.

T2 ammo on a hulk, max yield fit plus rorqual and 3% mx implant:
1772 m3/m
Max refine:
88%

With the exception of Mercoxit at current prices, that is less than half a million a minute
Gniess is the highest at 491000 isk/m
Omber is the lowest at 297500 isk/m
Average is 414000 isk/m
That is 25 million isk an hour, per person when mining everything.

High sec contains 2 of the most expensive ores, Kernite and Plagioclase - because of the mexallon deficit in nul. A person mining in highsec can achieve similar results, and can sell better because of trade hubs. This is an important factor since most people who mine do it for the isk.

Nullsec has more available volume, but most players do not want to mine because: Ratting makes more money, some claim it is boring, and frankly they like shooting things.

You could remove lower priced ore (all of which are huge volumes of Trit which are necessary) or adjust the types of ore, but that will not make people want to mine.
You could make mining more active, but that will likely hurt multiboxers. Some may like this, but it really is not a good idea.
the 3rd option is the make the volume of ore you can mine in null greater. This means the people in highsec have an incentive of more than 15% to move.



As far as ore anom mechanics, there are, IMO, 2 major flaws.

1st, How large the sites are. The sites are way to big and take too long for 10 people to kill.
2nd, The sites should be despawning and respawning to prevent camping. Last I knew the site lasted until it was killed and respawned the next downtime or after 3 days.

It would be a good idea to make the ore sites more like combat anoms where they are designed for one person or multilple but last upto an hour, and then respawn. Larger sites would be designed for more and more people, with the largest designed for 20-25 people mining for 1 hour.



wow.. the truth is.. if you cant sell it.. no one will mine it. It you cant take it to market. NO ONE WILL BUY IT. IF NO ONE WILL BUY IT.. NO ONE WILL MINE IT.

lets review. If you cant get what you mined buy building stuff and jumping it to a market or moving it there in raw form. NO ONE CAN BUY IT. if no one can buy it. NO ONE WILL.. you get the idea, i knew you would
Byson1
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1310 - 2014-10-16 09:45:40 UTC
How many null sec systems have no one mining the belts? Why are no one in those systems? It's not worth it. If you want more people in null you have to make it worth it. How? If people can get goods to market and make a buck then they will. If they cant make it to market because of range or any other reason they wont do it.. Cut off the source of money from either end, those that produce or those that buy and the system breaks down. Sure there will be more ratters, instant isk. But if you want people out in null make it easier to get goods to market not harder. That's all their is to it.

A corpmate came up with the idea of high sec market hubs in null sec that people can JUMP a jf straight into. sure that changes the rules.. but it makes null sec available to the small guys If there is a way to get there people will do it. if it is completely controlled by the large alliances then you got more status quo.

just a thought
Yun Kuai
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1311 - 2014-10-16 09:47:00 UTC
Byson1 wrote:
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
a significant percentage of their basic needs on-site without relying on JF chains


AKA: rebalancing nullsec ore anomalies


Good idea. It's been a while since I messed with nullsec anomalies. I think I remember how to do it...



Off topic, yes, but listen a bit.

The problem with null industry is a few things, but adjusting the ore anomalies will only help by a very small amount. The reason things need to be imported into null is that a single person can only mine a small volume. Due to the rorqual boosts, you can get a 15% increase over highsec with an Orca, but it is still a small amount a single person can do.

Even though I used to multibox and build ships myself thus basing mining off ISK is incorrect, here is some ISK stats for mining in null.

T2 ammo on a hulk, max yield fit plus rorqual and 3% mx implant:
1772 m3/m
Max refine:
88%

With the exception of Mercoxit at current prices, that is less than half a million a minute
Gniess is the highest at 491000 isk/m
Omber is the lowest at 297500 isk/m
Average is 414000 isk/m
That is 25 million isk an hour, per person when mining everything.

High sec contains 2 of the most expensive ores, Kernite and Plagioclase - because of the mexallon deficit in nul. A person mining in highsec can achieve similar results, and can sell better because of trade hubs. This is an important factor since most people who mine do it for the isk.

Nullsec has more available volume, but most players do not want to mine because: Ratting makes more money, some claim it is boring, and frankly they like shooting things.

You could remove lower priced ore (all of which are huge volumes of Trit which are necessary) or adjust the types of ore, but that will not make people want to mine.
You could make mining more active, but that will likely hurt multiboxers. Some may like this, but it really is not a good idea.
the 3rd option is the make the volume of ore you can mine in null greater. This means the people in highsec have an incentive of more than 15% to move.



As far as ore anom mechanics, there are, IMO, 2 major flaws.

1st, How large the sites are. The sites are way to big and take too long for 10 people to kill.
2nd, The sites should be despawning and respawning to prevent camping. Last I knew the site lasted until it was killed and respawned the next downtime or after 3 days.

It would be a good idea to make the ore sites more like combat anoms where they are designed for one person or multilple but last upto an hour, and then respawn. Larger sites would be designed for more and more people, with the largest designed for 20-25 people mining for 1 hour.



wow.. the truth is.. if you cant sell it.. no one will mine it. It you cant take it to market. NO ONE WILL BUY IT. IF NO ONE WILL BUY IT.. NO ONE WILL MINE IT.

lets review. If you cant get what you mined buy building stuff and jumping it to a market or moving it there in raw form. NO ONE CAN BUY IT. if no one can buy it. NO ONE WILL.. you get the idea, i knew you would

You clearly don't get that at a certain point, there will be people who move it; i.e. compressed ore loaded into a DST and manually flown to jita. An occator can get roughly 85k m3 cargo fit. That's a pretty decent amount of compressed ore to be moving around.

Also, is it just me or people really not know how to move between systems without a scout or a massive fleet behind them in nullsec? I've seen way to many people complaining about the instant death of jumping a capital through a gate in nullsec...last time I checked, the changes aren't forcing the CFC or N3 to reset all of their blues, so pretty sure you'll still be just fine...

--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#1312 - 2014-10-16 11:23:24 UTC
I'm pretty sure there are a fair few out there figuring out the best way to ninja gank them and disappear quickly. I think it will be a turkey shoot - the careless, the lazy, the left behind are going to take an @55beating from time to time. There are a lot of folks used to cynoing around with zero risk to their ships. Please give them some time to come to terms with this new concept of risk.

It's not an easy transition from invincible to normal. Give the lads a few days to clear out their tear ducts.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1313 - 2014-10-16 11:34:55 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
Excuse me for not reading the full 64 pages to see whether this has been mentioned (surely it has, right? People do actually log onto sisi and test changes, right?), but at least there doesn't seem to be any developer acknowledgement so...

The system described in the dev blog and later updates is NOT what is implemented on sisi. There is a severe bug in the sisi implementation causing you to get the jump activation timer for your next jump instead of your current jump. Let me quote the dev blog:

"After a jump is complete but before your fatigue is increased, you gain a jump cooldown timer. The length of this timer is a number of minutes equal to your jump fatigue (before being increased by that jump!),"

The expected result of jumping with zero current fatigue (no timer displayed) is no jump activation timer (that's the in game name, same thing as the "jump cooldown timer" mentioned in the blog). The actual result is that you get the expected amount of fatigue but also get a jump activation timer equal to 1/10 of that fatigue, which you should not get according to the blog and later updates unless you jump again immediately after.

This is filed as EBR-25104 and I'm rather concerned that it hasn't been addressed since you just have two lines of code in the wrong order.


This wasn't clear in the blog as originally published, but we updated it with the following line:

Quote:
Additionally, there is a minimum jump cooldown of 1 + (light years travelled) minutes. (See Appendix A for examples.)
Celly S
Neutin Local LLC
#1314 - 2014-10-16 11:40:15 UTC
Byson1 wrote:
How many null sec systems have no one mining the belts? Why are no one in those systems? It's not worth it. If you want more people in null you have to make it worth it. How? If people can get goods to market and make a buck then they will. If they cant make it to market because of range or any other reason they wont do it.. Cut off the source of money from either end, those that produce or those that buy and the system breaks down. Sure there will be more ratters, instant isk. But if you want people out in null make it easier to get goods to market not harder. That's all their is to it.

A corpmate came up with the idea of high sec market hubs in null sec that people can JUMP a jf straight into. sure that changes the rules.. but it makes null sec available to the small guys If there is a way to get there people will do it. if it is completely controlled by the large alliances then you got more status quo.

just a thought


I don't know where the post is at the moment, but this follows directly with my prior statement that one of the issues with a localized economy is the "station may be inaccessible" aspect of it.
Where we live, there are certain folks who are unable to dock in the station, so they aren't going to buy our products since they would effectively be useless to them.

This also follows my "free trade zones" post as well so that there would be an area of space that people could access in order to purchase the goods in some relative safety if they are not part of the ruling organization in a specific area.
This is something that Jita (et al) already provides

without a solution to these 2 basic things, null sec industry and by extension null sec logistics will never be where it could, or should be.

o/
Celly Smunt


Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1315 - 2014-10-16 11:44:03 UTC
Celly S wrote:
Byson1 wrote:
How many null sec systems have no one mining the belts? Why are no one in those systems? It's not worth it. If you want more people in null you have to make it worth it. How? If people can get goods to market and make a buck then they will. If they cant make it to market because of range or any other reason they wont do it.. Cut off the source of money from either end, those that produce or those that buy and the system breaks down. Sure there will be more ratters, instant isk. But if you want people out in null make it easier to get goods to market not harder. That's all their is to it.

A corpmate came up with the idea of high sec market hubs in null sec that people can JUMP a jf straight into. sure that changes the rules.. but it makes null sec available to the small guys If there is a way to get there people will do it. if it is completely controlled by the large alliances then you got more status quo.

just a thought


I don't know where the post is at the moment, but this follows directly with my prior statement that one of the issues with a localized economy is the "station may be inaccessible" aspect of it.
Where we live, there are certain folks who are unable to dock in the station, so they aren't going to buy our products since they would effectively be useless to them.

This also follows my "free trade zones" post as well so that there would be an area of space that people could access in order to purchase the goods in some relative safety if they are not part of the ruling organization in a specific area.
This is something that Jita (et al) already provides

without a solution to these 2 basic things, null sec industry and by extension null sec logistics will never be where it could, or should be.

o/
Celly Smunt



They exist. It's called NPC stations.
Edward Olmops
Gunboat Commando
#1316 - 2014-10-16 11:47:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Edward Olmops
Celly S wrote:


This also follows my "free trade zones" post as well so that there would be an area of space that people could access in order to purchase the goods in some relative safety if they are not part of the ruling organization in a specific area.
This is something that Jita (et al) already provides


My question is:
Why don't these free trade zones exist?
There is no rule forbidding to build one.

You could open up your outpost to everyone and everyone would be able to do trade there.

Answer is given already: the ruling organizations don't want free trade to exist to keep space empty and devoid of any potentially hostile ships.
But maybe that itself will change with more localism.
Imagine, the big nullsec alliances would have to rethink their structures if direct shipping from Jita is no viable option any more.
Maybe they'll then be more interested in trading with locals themselves.

I would certainly prefer such a scenario.

(which is not to say that a few more key NPC stations/constallations would not help)
Celly S
Neutin Local LLC
#1317 - 2014-10-16 11:49:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Celly S
Lord TGR wrote:
Celly S wrote:

I don't know where the post is at the moment, but this follows directly with my prior statement that one of the issues with a localized economy is the "station may be inaccessible" aspect of it.
Where we live, there are certain folks who are unable to dock in the station, so they aren't going to buy our products since they would effectively be useless to them.

This also follows my "free trade zones" post as well so that there would be an area of space that people could access in order to purchase the goods in some relative safety if they are not part of the ruling organization in a specific area.
This is something that Jita (et al) already provides

without a solution to these 2 basic things, null sec industry and by extension null sec logistics will never be where it could, or should be.

o/
Celly Smunt



They exist. It's called NPC stations.



be that as it may in some areas, there are no npc stations that I know of within 5ly of where I live, so such blanket statements aren't as accurate as we might want them to be.

o/

Celly Smunt

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1318 - 2014-10-16 11:52:13 UTC
Celly S wrote:
be that as it may in some areas, there are no npc stations that I know of within 5ly of where I live, so such blanket statements aren't as accurate as we might want them to be.

You do know what this "free trade zone" station would be used for, right?

I'll give you a hint, it won't be for trade, it'll be used to stage out of to **** with the locals.
Celly S
Neutin Local LLC
#1319 - 2014-10-16 11:54:07 UTC
Edward Olmops wrote:
Celly S wrote:


This also follows my "free trade zones" post as well so that there would be an area of space that people could access in order to purchase the goods in some relative safety if they are not part of the ruling organization in a specific area.
This is something that Jita (et al) already provides


My question is:
Why don't these free trade zones exist?
There is no rule forbidding to build one.

You could open up your outpost to everyone and everyone would be able to do trade there.


If I held SOV and owned an outpost, I would have no problem doing so.

Which brings the question of why some of the bigger groups are so intent on killing everything they see that's not in their cliche that they cut their own throat in the process.

o/
Celly Smunt

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.
Celly S
Neutin Local LLC
#1320 - 2014-10-16 11:56:35 UTC
Lord TGR wrote:
Celly S wrote:
be that as it may in some areas, there are no npc stations that I know of within 5ly of where I live, so such blanket statements aren't as accurate as we might want them to be.

You do know what this "free trade zone" station would be used for, right?

I'll give you a hint, it won't be for trade, it'll be used to stage out of to **** with the locals.


which follows my reply to Edward, and further backs up my statement that until those 2 issues are dealt with, nothing is going to be where it could or should be.

o/

off to work...

Celly Smunt

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.