These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post
Author
El 1974
Green Visstick High
#1381 - 2011-10-24 12:51:27 UTC
Dominus Alterai wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Max Devious wrote:
Only question I still have not seen answered is how my standings are going to be affected by killing one of these LowSec structures, and will I be on an aggression timer afterwards.


You get a security status hit for aggressing / destroying one in lowsec and will be on GCC.


One issue I have with aggression on POCOs is the fact that a GCC only lasts 15 minutes. After that 15 minutes is up, a defending fleet will lose standings shooting the offenders once they get to the POCO. Picture this scenario: My indy corp's POCO is under attack, so I get a fleet together to go defend it. That takes anywhere from 15-20 minutes, including travel time to said POCO. Once I get there, the POCO has been reinforced and the offending fleet no longer has aggro, forcing my corp mates to lose standing. I propose that the corp gets 24 hour kill rights on the players that attacked the POCO. This would eliminate the need to lose standings in order to defend an otherwise defenseless structure.


There is little reason to attack the aggressors while the CO is in reinforcement. Wait for reinforcement to end and then repair your CO. If they then attack the CO again, you can shoot them.

You're screwed if you have set multiple COs to come out of reinforcement at roughly the same time though.
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#1382 - 2011-10-24 13:16:15 UTC
Dominus Alterai wrote:

I know how GCC works.... I was saying that after they stop shooting the POCO. I can see a scenario where people shoot the POCO just to lure out industrial corps from high sec to shoot at or just to annoy people. For instance, if I shoot a POCO and then cloak up, I can wait until the defending fleet comes to defend, finds nothing, then leaves. After they leave, I could shoot it again, and get them back; rinse and repeat.


What's the point in doing that? And even if you did it, most of the time people will ignore it until the POCO gets reinforced.

Question for the devs, tho. Once a POCO comes out of reinforcement, what's the victory condition for the defender? Do you have to rep up the shield before it can be reinforced again? To what level?

If there is one thing in EVE more boring than shooting structures it's repping them. It takes about 10 hours for a single logi to rep 10M shield HP.

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

Dominus Alterai
Star Freaks
#1383 - 2011-10-24 13:17:36 UTC
El 1974 wrote:
Dominus Alterai wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Max Devious wrote:
Only question I still have not seen answered is how my standings are going to be affected by killing one of these LowSec structures, and will I be on an aggression timer afterwards.


You get a security status hit for aggressing / destroying one in lowsec and will be on GCC.


One issue I have with aggression on POCOs is the fact that a GCC only lasts 15 minutes. After that 15 minutes is up, a defending fleet will lose standings shooting the offenders once they get to the POCO. Picture this scenario: My indy corp's POCO is under attack, so I get a fleet together to go defend it. That takes anywhere from 15-20 minutes, including travel time to said POCO. Once I get there, the POCO has been reinforced and the offending fleet no longer has aggro, forcing my corp mates to lose standing. I propose that the corp gets 24 hour kill rights on the players that attacked the POCO. This would eliminate the need to lose standings in order to defend an otherwise defenseless structure.


There is little reason to attack the aggressors while the CO is in reinforcement. Wait for reinforcement to end and then repair your CO. If they then attack the CO again, you can shoot them.

You're screwed if you have set multiple COs to come out of reinforcement at roughly the same time though.


I've clarified this in the previous post. I was looking at this as more of a griefing tactic prevention. Shoot the POCO once, then dock and wait for defending fleet to leave, then undock and shoot at it again. Rinse and repeat. A 24 hour kill right will at least let the defending fleet leave a token force that won't lose standings shooting at the griefer.

Reducing your holes to a quivering mess since 2009.

Dominus Alterai
Star Freaks
#1384 - 2011-10-24 13:20:34 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
Dominus Alterai wrote:

I know how GCC works.... I was saying that after they stop shooting the POCO. I can see a scenario where people shoot the POCO just to lure out industrial corps from high sec to shoot at or just to annoy people. For instance, if I shoot a POCO and then cloak up, I can wait until the defending fleet comes to defend, finds nothing, then leaves. After they leave, I could shoot it again, and get them back; rinse and repeat.


What's the point in doing that? And even if you did it, most of the time people will ignore it until the POCO gets reinforced.

Question for the devs, tho. Once a POCO comes out of reinforcement, what's the victory condition for the defender? Do you have to rep up the shield before it can be reinforced again? To what level?

If there is one thing in EVE more boring than shooting structures it's repping them. It takes about 10 hours for a single logi to rep 10M shield HP.


Point of of doing that is harassment.

Anyway, I agree completely. No one wants to sit there for 4 hours in a carrier repping a POCO back to 100%. Yet another reason why, at least in low-sec, POCOs should be conquerable. Same mechanics as proposed, except no BOOM, just a flip.

Reducing your holes to a quivering mess since 2009.

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#1385 - 2011-10-24 13:23:00 UTC
Dominus Alterai wrote:
I've clarified this in the previous post. I was looking at this as more of a griefing tactic prevention. Shoot the POCO once, then dock and wait for defending fleet to leave, then undock and shoot at it again. Rinse and repeat. A 24 hour kill right will at least let the defending fleet leave a token force that won't lose standings shooting at the griefer.


If anyone tries that, he will lose sec too, and pretty soon will go under -5. Then you'll enjoy a permanent killright on him Smile

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

Dominus Alterai
Star Freaks
#1386 - 2011-10-24 13:25:15 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
Dominus Alterai wrote:
I've clarified this in the previous post. I was looking at this as more of a griefing tactic prevention. Shoot the POCO once, then dock and wait for defending fleet to leave, then undock and shoot at it again. Rinse and repeat. A 24 hour kill right will at least let the defending fleet leave a token force that won't lose standings shooting at the griefer.


If anyone tries that, he will lose sec too, and pretty soon will go under -5. Then you'll enjoy a permanent killright on him Smile


True, but apparently you've never made a throw away alt for scouting, cyno, super-cap purchases, etc. I can see a person creating a noob alt, flying them out there in their rookie ship, taking a few pot shots, then docking up and logging off.

Reducing your holes to a quivering mess since 2009.

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#1387 - 2011-10-24 13:34:44 UTC
Dominus Alterai wrote:
Anyway, I agree completely. No one wants to sit there for 4 hours in a carrier repping a POCO back to 100%. Yet another reason why, at least in low-sec, POCOs should be conquerable. Same mechanics as proposed, except no BOOM, just a flip.

You still need a victory condition for the defender then. For conquerable outposts, you can blow up the SBUs and avoid repping the station. For POCOs, I'd say a timer (say 1 hour) after coming out of RF before it self-reps would be perfect.

Quote:
True, but apparently you've never made a throw away alt for scouting, cyno, super-cap purchases, etc. I can see a person creating a noob alt, flying them out there in their rookie ship, taking a few pot shots, then docking up and logging off.

So? The char that shoots the POCO will lose sec. It doesn't matter if it's in an ibis or a dread. Unless you want to transfer the aggro to his main somehow?

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

Dominus Alterai
Star Freaks
#1388 - 2011-10-24 13:43:30 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
So? The char that shoots the POCO will lose sec. It doesn't matter if it's in an ibis or a dread. Unless you want to transfer the aggro to his main somehow?


Not my point. The point is that the notification that's given to the corp that owns the POCO will cause them to defend it. when they arrive and see nothing, they RR and leave. It just makes having POCOs that much more annoying.

I guess my point is that CCP hasn't thought the POCO mechanics all the way through. The dev blog was helpful in getting what the basics that they are going to do, but it lacked ALOT of info as to how these will function in the eve universe, especially as they relate to the player base in low/00/w-space.

Reducing your holes to a quivering mess since 2009.

Dominus Alterai
Star Freaks
#1389 - 2011-10-24 13:48:23 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
You still need a victory condition for the defender then. For conquerable outposts, you can blow up the SBUs and avoid repping the station. For POCOs, I'd say a timer (say 1 hour) after coming out of RF before it self-reps would be perfect.


Very possible.

Just to play devil's advocate here, I could bring in faction warfare control bunker mechanics and say that a victory condition isn't needed, just that the ownership switches on the next downtime after RF ends.

Reducing your holes to a quivering mess since 2009.

Creat Posudol
German Oldies
#1390 - 2011-10-24 14:27:05 UTC
Meldan Anstian wrote:
[...] If I were to seriously attack a PCO and wanted to avoid a counterattack, why would I not attack all the PCO's that a corp has in an area? It would generate a ton of emails, some are fake distraction attacks, and there would be 1 real attack. Other than pure luck, how would a defending corp know which PCO was actually under attack? If a PCO can be put into reinforced mode in 20 minutes by a fairly small force, what chance does a corp have of defending it, having to organize and warp to the correct PCO, unless it has very few PCO's?

I can also see bored people just taking pot shots at PCO's not to destroy it, but to annoy someone.

If I get 10 emails a day that my PCO is under attack, how often would I actually go out to defend it?

The PCO has no defenses other than it's hit points. There is nothing preventing even a noob ship shooting a PCO once and warping off to attack some other PCO. There may, or may not be a real attack following.

[...]


Notifications for POS generate one mail per hour per target, included is the shield/armor/structure level and name/corp/alliance of the attacker. So attacking a POCO for 30 minutes generates exactly 1 mail. "Per target" means that if they don't just shoot the control tower, but guns or something it will generate another mail for that, don't know if it would for every single sentry or just the first/one of them though.

Back to the Tactic: I's of course a valid tactic. Why wouldn't you do this every time? Because you need more people and/or you reduce the number of people shooting at the primary target. If you have 10 people shooting at it, it will reinforce in a couple of minutes anyway (depending on ships probably 10-15 at the most). Why dilute your forces? The enemy is unlikely to respond in that time frame in most cases. If he does, having a couple of other POCOs under attack might give you enough time to finish the job, but you would probably already be done with all shooting at the same target. He has to scout around to find the primary site.
Also: the others attacking the non-primary target (just 1 person each I suppose?) are very vulnerable. Even if they are in crap ships they still generate a nice (and in that case easy) killmail to pad the kb with. You warped your fleet to the wrong POCO because you were to lazy (or had no time) to send a scout ahead? Just pick them off 1 by one that way, works too and might cost even more than the 1 POCO, which is only reinforced after this, not destroyed.

This tactic has much more disadvantages than advantages, but in any case it has counters and surely fits nice in the EVE universe if you ask me!

Why not shoot at a dozen or so? Because you get a security status hit (unless you're at war obviously), that's what's stopping you (and this is confirmed by CCP!). What would be stopping someone with -10 sec status? the fact that he has better things to do (like shoot actual people) hopefully, but apart from that nothing. Somehow I doubt it will become a problem though...
If you are at war it's of course a valid tactic to at least annoy your enemy. Go knock yourself out if you consider this fun ^^

The reinforcement mechanic is there for a specific reason: To create a fight AFTER a structure exits it, not before. We wouldn't need it then, would we? If you agree with the mechanic or not, the fight is still supposed to happen upon reinforcement exit. The amount of HP is balanced (quite well if you ask me): low enough to have it take long enough so not every damn one of these things for 5 systems is reinforced by a 5 man gang in 30 minutes, but also not so high that you need to shoot at it for 4 hours with 15+ dreads.
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#1391 - 2011-10-24 14:28:21 UTC
Dominus Alterai wrote:
Just to play devil's advocate here, I could bring in faction warfare control bunker mechanics and say that a victory condition isn't needed, just that the ownership switches on the next downtime after RF ends.


FW has people online all day, so you have some chance of getting a fight at a random time with little warning. A normal corp doesn't. Even the big blocs have their prime time. The defender needs at least a chance to defend in their own timezone: a reinforcement timer, a fight after it ends, and a way to win that fight and return to status quo.

If these structures don't encourage fights, they are pointless, nobody likes shooting structures. If you want these to change hands without fighting, maybe we should be able to lease them off the empires instead? The highest bidder each month gets to charge tax for the CO?

NOTE: that last bit was not a serious proposal.

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

Dominus Alterai
Star Freaks
#1392 - 2011-10-24 14:44:26 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
Dominus Alterai wrote:
Just to play devil's advocate here, I could bring in faction warfare control bunker mechanics and say that a victory condition isn't needed, just that the ownership switches on the next downtime after RF ends.


FW has people online all day, so you have some chance of getting a fight at a random time with little warning. A normal corp doesn't. Even the big blocs have their prime time. The defender needs at least a chance to defend in their own timezone: a reinforcement timer, a fight after it ends, and a way to win that fight and return to status quo.

If these structures don't encourage fights, they are pointless, nobody likes shooting structures. If you want these to change hands without fighting, maybe we should be able to lease them off the empires instead? The highest bidder each month gets to charge tax for the CO?

NOTE: that last bit was not a serious proposal.


Well, I wouldn't be so sure. Sure, the taxes would be astronomical so the corp renting it could make a profit, but it would encourage a lot more wardecs, or perhaps a new kind of economic warfare?

Reducing your holes to a quivering mess since 2009.

Creat Posudol
German Oldies
#1393 - 2011-10-24 15:28:17 UTC
(Had to shorten the quote to get enough characters to be able to respond. Original post I have quoted is here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=237400#post237400 )

Meldan Anstian wrote:
Creat Posudol wrote:
Indestructible POCOs, switching owners upon attack: HORRIBLE idea!!!

Keep current COs until players replace them:

Tax as % of transferred goods instead of fixed ISK rate:

Size of planetary launches:


A. I understand your argument against indestructible structures. I do agree that "attack here for profit" is a problem, but making them destructible doesn't solve that.

[...]

One assumption that many seem to make, is that destroying a PCO is with the intent of putting one up in it's place. I think many attacks would be just for lol's and the killmails, not for any potential profits from putting up a PCO in it's place. We can not assume that there would be an interest to put up a new PCO if the old one were destroyed, either by the ones destroying it or anyone else. If your doing PI on a planet, suddenly not having a PCO there drastically changes the attractiveness of that planet for PI. If your constantly dealing with planets that suddenly don't have a PCO, you stop doing PI in anything other than high sec. I do not think we can assume that those doing PI will put up a PCO, since PI is often done by poor and low SP characters. Not knowing if your PI planet will have a PCO tomorrow doesn't make you want to invest in an elaborate high income PI setup on a planet. You need elaborate high income PI setups to justify investing in a PCO. PI people need some kind of stability or they just wont invest in PI. I think the end result is a huge impact on the economy that we can't predict now, and this whole plan revolves having sufficient people doing PI to make taxes profitable. So having destructible PCO's is a bad idea in my opinion.

Problem with indestructible POCOs: It gives even more power to the power blocs we already have. Keep in mind that with the currently proposed mechanic just because there is a POCO doesn't mean you can use it! So you might not only lose access but also have a now unfriendly POCO you're unable to destroy as a small industrial corp, instead of just having the cost of putting another one up.
Powerful entities would not have to invest a single ISK to get control of regions POCOs. While the income from one or even 10 POCOs may be negligible, it eventually does add up if you have 100-300. All they need to do it have a gang of say a dozen or two reinforce all those, come back after 2 days and take over every POCO whose shied was not repaired to the 25% needed to reset the reinforcement mode. Repeat once a month or so. Yea, the access to the planets will stay there IF they allow neutrals/reds (depends on if this is gonna be changed). And they can at least in theory take it back but they easily have the numbers to defend that and ward of any attacks that industrial corps can usually manage (let's say they just drop 10 carriers and 20 BS, rarely can an industrial corp can match that) and they get some ships to shoot at.
They have NO upkeep cost for any of this, again: NOT A SINGLE ISK HAS TO BE SPENT BY THE ATTACKER FOR THIS!

With destructible POCOs the incentive for large entities to attack drops significantly. Yes, they can grieve people, but it's tedious and provides NO payout WHATSOEVER. They don't drop anything upon destruction. It would be solely to grieve, and there is no reason anyone would do that on a large scale except to influence the market and control prices. Providing a payout to grieving these structures is a very VERY bad thing in my opinion!

Also see my answer to C below for additional thoughts on this in combination with other mechanics!

Meldan Anstian wrote:
B. I agree that the NPC CO's should stay in game. As to have the taxes increased over time to a point or indefinitely, I disagree. The incentive to put up PCO that your not seeing should be the profits of taxation. I don't think this plan gives enough profits to justify the investment, but that's a side issue. The problem is that many planets are low resource planets, and are not profitable enough to interest a corp to put up a POCO there, ever. As the NPC tax goes up and up, eventually the planet is removed from the pool of useful planets - not enough tax to have a POCO put on it, but too high taxes to do profitable PI on the planet.

I agree, the problem with profit and return of investment needs to be fixed independently (and that it's a side issue). If this isn't change the whole PI market will go bananas anyway. I think these NPC COs should be removed after a while, but an alternative would still be to just increase the price until it is so high that it exceeds the value of the items, and the remove it. This would then allow the global removal of all those remaining at some time in the future.

continued below....
Creat Posudol
German Oldies
#1394 - 2011-10-24 15:28:37 UTC
Meldan Anstian wrote:
C. Hate the idea of taxes being actual goods and not ISK. How does a corp get the goods out of a POCO to haul them to market? The volume of the collected taxes would be substantial. I am not going to fly a freighter in low/null/WH space to collect my taxes from POCO's. I just won't have POCO's. Only potential ship I see is a JF, and then fuel costs cut into already slim profits. Never mind having to keep track of how much taxes are in various POCO's. I think this would mean 0 tax in null and WHs, just so you would not have to go get your taxes, and no one wanting to put up a POCO in low sec. People stop PI because it's a PITA to haul stuff around, and people would stop owning POCO's because it's a PITA to haul stuff around.

This provides a disincentive for power blocks, the only suggestion in this direction I've seen so far. It limits the amount of POCOs a corp can reasonably manage profitably.
PI is logistics. That's the whole point! Up till now it's the only activity resulting from PI besides clicking "install program" a couple of times every now and then. If you don't want to haul stuff around, don't do PI! This should of course extend to operating POCOs. It will also take quite a while for on of these to actually fill up 35k m³ (assuming the proposed corp tax hangar thingy gets to be the same size as personal hangars). You can empty them if/when they get full or once a week with a standard deep space or even T1 hauler (whatever suits your desired ISK vs. risk level). Taken from your own statistics below, if you have a 10% tax it will be 260-300 m³ per P1-colony per day (much less for P2-P4!). That can easily be handled for 5-10 POCOs by collecting the stuff just once a week.

This is also a mechanic that could make indestructible POCOs feasible. Large entities no longer have an incentive to take over hundred of theses, as they'd have to collect the goods resulting from taxes! If they still take them over, eventually they would get full and not require any tax anymore unless the stuff is collected. No more ISK magically appearing for those taking them over, best solution of all if you ask me!

Meldan Anstian wrote:
D. Size of planetary launches - I have lvl 4 in command centers. With that, I can get about 7000 units of P1 materials (like oxygen) from a planet doing nothing else in 24 hours. That's 2660 m3 of volume. Guessing lvl 5 would get me 3000 m3 of volume. If I can launch something near that volume, my production is the same but my taxes are very low. So are the profits of the POCO, since people launch and avoid the POCO taxes. More disincentive to put up a POCO. If I can launch 2500 m3 of stuff and have it cost 25k to do so, or I can use the POCO and pay 20k in taxes, guess what, I'll launch every time. Getting my launch in essentially a safe spot or going to what could be a camped hostile POCO for the difference of 5k ISK, or even 100k? What would you choose? As much as I like the idea of adding flexibility and making the command center something worth clicking on, doing so really breaks the profitability of POCO's, already of very dubious profitability.

Yes I see your point about this, but it's all just a question of balance and price. You just made up a bunch of numbers where it's much more favorable to use the launch. It shouldn't be that cheap of course, but equate to a significant tax rate (70%?), so that using the CO is the much more sensible option if it has a reasonable tax rate. Using the CO will still be the better option if you want to collect large amounts in one run (maybe even at 100% tax), not launch half a dozen can's (which would obviously require a cool down on the launch, maybe an hour?). It depends then on your play style, do you prefer 10 trips in a blockade runner at a premium for export or just one in a deep space transport...
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#1395 - 2011-10-24 15:37:45 UTC
What if POCO worked like this:

1) You cannot un-anchor a POCO or gantry
2) While only one POCO can be anchored, any number of gantries can be.
3) If there is only one anchored item, it uses the planet's magnetic field to make itself invulnerable.
4) If more than one item is anchored this invulnerability is disrupted and all can be attacked.

Result: drive by shootings no longer work, grief killings are virtually gone. If you want to destroy a POCO you got to commit, buy one yourself and anchor it. Sorry griefers, but eve is a cruel place.

Second result: This becomes even more the domain of the big boys. So lets do this as well:

If you build a launchpad on the planet and you cannot use the POCO (either because its not there, or you do not have rights) you can launch a 10,000 cu m can from the pad. Cost to be worked out, but high.


Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#1396 - 2011-10-24 15:50:02 UTC
Creat Posudol wrote:
Powerful entities would not have to invest a single ISK to get control of regions POCOs. While the income from one or even 10 POCOs may be negligible, it eventually does add up if you have 100-300. All they need to do it have a gang of say a dozen or two reinforce all those, come back after 2 days and take over every POCO whose shied was not repaired to the 25% needed to reset the reinforcement mode. Repeat once a month or so. Yea, the access to the planets will stay there IF they allow neutrals/reds (depends on if this is gonna be changed). And they can at least in theory take it back but they easily have the numbers to defend that and ward of any attacks that industrial corps can usually manage (let's say they just drop 10 carriers and 20 BS, rarely can an industrial corp can match that) and they get some ships to shoot at.
They have NO upkeep cost for any of this, again: NOT A SINGLE ISK HAS TO BE SPENT BY THE ATTACKER FOR THIS!


ISK is not a deterrent. For big alliances, isk is never the limiting factor, the number of active players is.

It's going to be pretty hard to convince any number of alliance grunts to log on and do 20 jumps to shoot the POCOs of lowsec/npc region (home region is different).

On the other hand, for the people who live in a system, taking the POCOs that alliance left behind is going to be pretty easy.

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

Meldan Anstian
The Night Crew
The Night Crew Alliance
#1397 - 2011-10-24 15:54:14 UTC
(quoting response 1390 by Creat)

I don't disagree at all that it is a valid tactic.

The idea of this whole thing is to increase player to player interaction. If, as you propose, it's very challenging to get a fleet together to go out and defend your PCO before it gets reinforced, you are increasing player interaction, but only marginally.

1 player vulnerable? Yeah, to an extent I guess. In the vast emptiness of low, null and WH space, not very much exposed, especially if your diversionary attackers are in a cloaky. It doesn't take a BS to generate a warning email.

Kill off defending players 1 by 1? You're kidding right? If the defender is so stupid to warp to 0 to see if someone is attacking a PCO, they deserve to lose it. Have a tactical 150+ km away from the POCO and you can see if a attack is occurring in your battleship and warp off before you can be tackled.

Why would you send ships out worth more than the PCO to begin with? The only thing you are defending is the income, and the value (80 mil ISK) of the PCO. You don't lose SOV, you don't loose assets held within the PCO, you don't get anchored structures around the PCO. Yeah, I would go for a fight for fights sake, but you don't need a PCO to get into a fleet fight.

I think the dev's are comparing a POS attack with a PCO attack, and I don't think that is a fair comparison. POS's have significant defenses which shoot first that would have a tendency to discourage people shooting just to have a email sent.

I do agree that many people won't use a diverse attack to attack a PCO. Too much of a pain. The more serious problem is random people just generating tons of emails to PCO owners. The end result is that you never go out to defend a PCO. The purpose of the PCO (to increase interaction) doesn't occur.

Security stasis hit? Only in low sec. Not in WH's and not in null sec. If I'm already at -10 which is not too unusual, why would I care any way? Better things to do for those with -10 stasis? Assuming that a email is not generated when a PCO is put into RF mode, you have to go out to check to see if your PCO is in RF mode. I might kill you when you come to check, or if the PCO is in reinforced mode, when your sitting there for minutes in a 130m ISK uncloaked logi repping the 80m ISK PCO. (Why would a logi pilot do that... I'm not sure, but they could. I wouldn't). Bring a fleet to keep the logi safe? Sure, it's easy to get 10 pilots to spend 30 minutes of their game time to save 80mil ISK. They make an average of what 20 mil ISK an hour each, so it cost them 100m ISK to save 80m ISK.

Why defend (or attack) the PCO when it comes out of RF mode? It's 80m ISK, and doesnt generate much income, not worth much effort to defend it. I get a kill mail if I destroy it, but other than that... I get no ISK. Not worth much effort to destroy it, especially if I don't have a desire to put up my own PCO in it's place.

I would think, atleast in low sec, those putting up PCO's would not be the same group of people attacking them for the most part. If I'm in the group trying to make money with a PCO, 80mil PCO loss would be a cost of doing business. Loosing a couple t1 BC's worth 40mil each in defending that 80mil PCO, and you quickly learn that it's better letting the PCO get destroyed and replacing it later than defending it.

It's been my argument all along, the economics don't make sense with the plan as proposed. I don't see a way to make the economics work without breaking lots of other things in the process, at least that accomplishes the 2 goals they started out to achieve.

If your a Trekkie, remember the episode in ST:TNG where Data creates a daughter named Lal? Lal dies because of a cascading failure that keeps growing. That's like this idea. Fixing the original idea breaks something else. Fixing that breaks something else, the fix for that breaks something else, etc, etc.
Meldan Anstian
The Night Crew
The Night Crew Alliance
#1398 - 2011-10-24 17:01:13 UTC
Responding to Creat Posudol's responses.


I understand what your saying about the problems with indestructible PCOs. I don't think the large power blocks would be interested in spending 2 days a month to remove non-power block PCO's from their system. 1 day to put them in RF and another to switch them. It's boring and the rewards are small.

Yes, you do get significant income from 100-300 PCO's. But the ratio of investment to return does not change. The time involved with managing 100-300 PCO's is much more than if you have 2 PCO's. With 2, just every week or whatever, you go out and empty them. With hundreds, you have spreadsheets and schedules and such to do the same task. The administrative time per PCO is way up compared to just a couple PCOs, and the return for that time is very small. 1 or 2 people can't empty hundreds every week, which then adds in the issue of corp theft and corp roles. (cringe)

Not a single ISK needs to be spent by the attacker with destructible PCO's either. I proposed indestructible PCO's way back in page 40 something IIRC, simply as a way to make the economics work.

In your next response, you gave numbers of 300m3 of P1 goods per colony per week. Lets assume 5 colonies per planet? Sound fair? So 1500 m3 of P1 goods, or ~3950 P1 units, each worth currently ~750 ISK (which is high at the moment because of this discussion). Your taxes for a week is just under 3 mil ISK. If you spend 80 mil ISK to put up a PCO, it would take 6 months to get your 80m ISK investment back. Sorry, but there is no way in hell I would invest that, and hope it doesn't get destroyed for 6 months before I earned a profit. I invest 80mil in any other venture in Eve, earn vastly more with less risk, and I wouldn't need to haul something from it every week.

Yup, I am using contrived numbers for my example. We have to start someplace. It's hard to come up with real world numbers when the tax rate can vary between 0 and 100%, the amount of resources can vary, the number of colonies can vary from 0 to 20 (?), and the size, cost, and cool down timer of a command center launch is undetermined. The point I was trying to make is that to make PCO's work, you have to keep them cheaper than simply launching stuff into space. As you increase the size of the launch, that becomes harder to do. This also touches on the idea of locking non-blue PI out of the PCO and ninja PI. You need big launches for ninja PI make sense in the case of being locked out of a PCO, and ability to lock PCO's is strongly desired by SOV and WH players.

Don't think I didn't notice that you argued against indestructible PCO's on 1 hand, and then for them in the next response!!! :)

I don't think indestructible structures are a perfect solution, but I do think they are better than destructible ones, given the economics. I really really would disagree with making dramatic game changing economic changes to get this plan into the game, and I think that would be necessary to get the economics of owning a destructible PCO to make sense.
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1399 - 2011-10-24 17:47:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Kassasis Dakkstromri
rootimus maximus wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
Lastly, if as proposed, PCO's are left fully destructible in all regions (excluding High Sec), then what was the rational for making the gantry volume m3 higher than what a blockade runner could hold?


Two of the blockade runners can fit the gantry. For those who didn't pick the right races, they can cross-train or use a deep space transport and team mates.


I was unaware... I would still wonder though, given the impetus to encourage PCO anchoring, why it wasn't set at a volume to accommodate all Blockade Runners (i.e. Crane)?

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf

Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#1400 - 2011-10-24 18:17:58 UTC
Still hating the idea of this taking someone's control of their own PI and putting it in the hands of the corporation. So much of the game requires cooperation to play well, if at all already. Leaving people that little bit of "me time" activity, when they want to break from doing this or that with these guys or those guys... this is important simply from the mental health standpoint of the game. If every part of the game turns into a "cooperation required" event it's going to eventually begin to burn people out.

Sometimes it's just nice to log into the hole, kick back and mess with the PI a bit. There's already the risk that someone can come in and blast everything you have away... risk is inherent in the game after all. However this puts the PI in the hands of someone else who can screw with you even during relaxing times. Actually, this is likely a bigger problem in empire, where some bunghole can put one of these things up on the planets you've been working for months and now you're totally cut off from your own little bit of activities... for what?

It's really not making sense to take personal control of PI out of the player's hands and giving the power to corporations. In the long run, it'll damage the game for many on a personal level well outside of the pew-pew risks, etc. I think it's important to preserve what little "me time" people do have in an MMO which already has a lot that requires co-op, as an MMO should.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.