These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

High Sec POS vs. POCO-- IT BREAKS THE GAME
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#21 - 2013-12-05 04:58:19 UTC
Patri Andari wrote:
Mortimer Civeri wrote:
I think Goons POCO'ed OPs factory planet.Lol


Sorry m8 I do not PI


That is blatantly obvious because if you actually did PI, you'd recognise that the RVBee POCOs have lower taxrates than the NPC ones they replaced.
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#22 - 2013-12-05 04:59:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Patri Andari
Malak Alraheem wrote:


Your argument is missing the rest of the story. By your logic there should also be standings needed to even do PI on planets as well as the need to fuel the command centers. How dare any player be allowed to even set up on a planet and tinker with PI before they have done endless grinding, paid charters, and bought fuel?


I see where you are going, but I also see that setting up PI on a planet requires ongoing taxes be paid to the NPC. No? Why not also have ongoing taxes (at leaset) be required to operate a POCO?

Malak Alraheem wrote:


Please give it a rest. It is a different game mechanic and it works just fine. Unlike the datacore issue (which is still free money BTW, they just taxed it basically) this is somethings that someone CAN take away from you if they want to. However, in most cases, the cost of doing so isn't going to give you a worthwhile return on your investment in the near term. There isn't a lot of isk to come from most of the high-sec planets, they are a limited resource and a competitive market.


Please explain how this any different from a high sec POS strategically located in high sec?

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#23 - 2013-12-05 05:01:18 UTC
As has been suggested in the last three threads like this: you are correct, they should get rid of the standing requirements for hisec POS as well.

Thank you for furthering this point. Hopefully CCP will realize this oversight, and further reduce boring standings grinds as a barrier to fun.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#24 - 2013-12-05 05:06:22 UTC
Tauranon wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:
Mortimer Civeri wrote:
I think Goons POCO'ed OPs factory planet.Lol


Sorry m8 I do not PI


That is blatantly obvious because if you actually did PI, you'd recognise that the RVBee POCOs have lower taxrates than the NPC ones they replaced.




I know that m8 and that you for sharing the knowledge. This goes to show that the discussion has nothing to do with the rates charged at all. The issue is the passive income generated from a high security ( NPC space) structure with no requirement for standings or taxation to the owner.

Even if said taxes and standings were minimal they should be required. If not, why still need them for POS?

Mind you, I would not purely object to removing those requirements for POS, but I think there is a need for some equity here.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#25 - 2013-12-05 05:11:31 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
As has been suggested in the last three threads like this: you are correct, they should get rid of the standing requirements for hisec POS as well.

Thank you for furthering this point. Hopefully CCP will realize this oversight, and further reduce boring standings grinds as a barrier to fun.


Varius, I apologize for not checking to see if this has been brought up before. I hate rehashing old arguments. I simply thought about the mechanic recently, saw the issue in my mind and posted my thoughts.

Hope the community will forgive me for not doing due diligence and searching.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#26 - 2013-12-05 06:24:29 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
As has been suggested in the last three threads like this: you are correct, they should get rid of the standing requirements for hisec POS as well.

Thank you for furthering this point. Hopefully CCP will realize this oversight, and further reduce boring standings grinds as a barrier to fun.

more standings grinds ahoy

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 ?
Lugalbandak
Doomheim
#27 - 2013-12-05 08:24:59 UTC
we need a guide for what HIGH SEC MEANS

The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#28 - 2013-12-05 08:38:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Tauranon
Patri Andari wrote:
Malak Alraheem wrote:


Your argument is missing the rest of the story. By your logic there should also be standings needed to even do PI on planets as well as the need to fuel the command centers. How dare any player be allowed to even set up on a planet and tinker with PI before they have done endless grinding, paid charters, and bought fuel?


I see where you are going, but I also see that setting up PI on a planet requires ongoing taxes be paid to the NPC. No? Why not also have ongoing taxes (at leaset) be required to operate a POCO?


The ongoing taxes for the POCO are paid by your users.

Note that if you wish to, you can hire peoples alts for your research corp, give them all access to a research wallet, and have costs setup on your research pos slots, in which case, again, your POS costs will be defrayed by your users, and again you have the option of making those sufficiently high as to be profitable.

You are comparing Apples and Oranges, but plainly you continue to be comparing fruit.

A reasonable reason for POSes being more costly than a POCO to run, is of course that a POS gives you the right to anchor defences, and a POCO does not.
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#29 - 2013-12-05 08:50:16 UTC
The Op is clearly mad.

The only solution I see is to eliminate the standings requirements for POSes so that anyone can erect them.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#30 - 2013-12-05 10:09:42 UTC
Tauranon wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:
Malak Alraheem wrote:


Your argument is missing the rest of the story. By your logic there should also be standings needed to even do PI on planets as well as the need to fuel the command centers. How dare any player be allowed to even set up on a planet and tinker with PI before they have done endless grinding, paid charters, and bought fuel?


I see where you are going, but I also see that setting up PI on a planet requires ongoing taxes be paid to the NPC. No? Why not also have ongoing taxes (at leaset) be required to operate a POCO?


The ongoing taxes for the POCO are paid by your users.

Note that if you wish to, you can hire peoples alts for your research corp, give them all access to a research wallet, and have costs setup on your research pos slots, in which case, again, your POS costs will be defrayed by your users, and again you have the option of making those sufficiently high as to be profitable.

You are comparing Apples and Oranges, but plainly you continue to be comparing fruit.

A reasonable reason for POSes being more costly than a POCO to run, is of course that a POS gives you the right to anchor defences, and a POCO does not.

yeah can we anchor sentry guns on our pocos please?

i think more of highsec needs to learn about gun, incapping and reinforcement mechaics

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 ?
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#31 - 2013-12-05 10:35:05 UTC
Being in hisec only means that unsanctioned aggression comes at a greater cost than elsewhere. Minimizing player control has never been a guideline for hisec, nor should it be.

Even if they introduced standings requirements for setting up POCOs, ours are already set up and any new ones would simply be anchored under a corp with the appropriate standings. This wouldn't be a challenge at all.

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Malak Alraheem
Doomheim
#32 - 2013-12-05 13:44:03 UTC
Actually there is a way to anchor a POS without the player having to do a standings grind. You just hire someone that already has the standings to build/run your corp for a week and then you have a week to put up all the towers you want.

I am still trying to see where this is breaking the game as the OP is claiming. Both systems are based on established game mechanics, similar yet different. The game mechanic for the high sec POCO is the taxation by the NPCs and the fact that the resources on the planets are fairly poor. The game mechanic for the high-sec POS is the need for standings (trivial, it really is) and the need for charters (also trivial). Otherwise there is no difference in play between high-sec and the other regions of space.
Davon Mandra'thin
Das Collective
#33 - 2013-12-05 13:53:58 UTC
For all the reasons you have stated, POCOs are better. The OP reads like an argument for why POCOs are awesome and then you come to the conclusion that they should be more like their **** counterparts.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#34 - 2013-12-05 14:16:35 UTC
Patri Andari wrote:
Completely different?
Overstate much?
Not really, no.
POCOs have more in common with a Dominix than they have with POSes (and the commonalities there are very small).

So them not following the same rules as POSes makes at least as much sense as Dominixes not following those rules either. As others have pointed out, the best solution would be to remove most of the restrictions on POSes — pointlessly applying those restrictions on something that's meant to highly unrestricted would be a move in the wrong direction and doesn't make any sense to begin with.

So again, two completely different things working completely differently does not break the game.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#35 - 2013-12-05 15:18:23 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Patri Andari wrote:
Completely different?
Overstate much?
Not really, no.
POCOs have more in common with a Dominix than they have with POSes (and the commonalities there are very small).

So them not following the same rules as POSes makes at least as much sense as Dominixes not following those rules either. As others have pointed out, the best solution would be to remove most of the restrictions on POSes — pointlessly applying those restrictions on something that's meant to highly unrestricted would be a move in the wrong direction and doesn't make any sense to begin with.

So again, two completely different things working completely differently does not break the game.

Tippia, I think if you look between the lines the OP really doesn't care about POCO's, and doesn't do PI related activities at all.

No, the point of this thread is simply to use how POCO mechanics work to further his agenda to make High Sec POS's cheaper to run and easier to share. He rather WANTS people to argue that POCO's should run the way they do, and list all the good reasons why they should run that way, so that the next logical step in the process then becomes "why can't high sec POS's run that way as well".

Such a clever lad. Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#36 - 2013-12-05 15:23:04 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Tippia, I think if you look between the lines the OP really doesn't care about POCO's, and doesn't do PI related activities at all.

As always, I point to Poe's law. Blink

Sure, POSes could certainly have their highsec idiocy level reduced and the standings grind could certainly do with a good shotgunning behind the shed, but there are enough people who genuinely believe the nonsense the OP puts forth so it's worth responding to.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#37 - 2013-12-05 15:27:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Tippia wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Tippia, I think if you look between the lines the OP really doesn't care about POCO's, and doesn't do PI related activities at all.

As always, I point to Poe's law. Blink

Sure, POSes could certainly have their highsec idiocy level reduced and the standings grind could certainly do with a good shotgunning behind the shed, but there are enough people who genuinely believe the nonsense the OP puts forth so it's worth responding to.

Yeah, I'm not opposed to POS's mechanics in High Sec being improved... well POS mechanics anywhere for that matter.

I'm just appreciating the fact that he has people that think they are arguing against him helping to make his actual point for him.

Still, I agree with you that it's best for everyone concerned to make sure the facts are clear.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#38 - 2013-12-06 01:17:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Patri Andari
Tippia wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Tippia, I think if you look between the lines the OP really doesn't care about POCO's, and doesn't do PI related activities at all.

As always, I point to Poe's law. Blink

Sure, POSes could certainly have their highsec idiocy level reduced and the standings grind could certainly do with a good shotgunning behind the shed, but there are enough people who genuinely believe the nonsense the OP puts forth so it's worth responding to.


It is one thing to say "I do not agree" , but what do you attribute my opinion as "nonsense"?

Seems a bridge too far even for you.

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#39 - 2013-12-06 01:27:35 UTC
Malak Alraheem wrote:
Actually there is a way to anchor a POS without the player having to do a standings grind. You just hire someone that already has the standings to build/run your corp for a week and then you have a week to put up all the towers you want.

I am still trying to see where this is breaking the game as the OP is claiming. Both systems are based on established game mechanics, similar yet different. The game mechanic for the high sec POCO is the taxation by the NPCs and the fact that the resources on the planets are fairly poor. The game mechanic for the high-sec POS is the need for standings (trivial, it really is) and the need for charters (also trivial). Otherwise there is no difference in play between high-sec and the other regions of space.


I like this train of thought because it has a rationale. Let's say I agree that the requirements are trivial. should not they be consistent?

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#40 - 2013-12-06 01:30:36 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Being in hisec only means that unsanctioned aggression comes at a greater cost than elsewhere. Minimizing player control has never been a guideline for hisec, nor should it be.

Even if they introduced standings requirements for setting up POCOs, ours are already set up and any new ones would simply be anchored under a corp with the appropriate standings. This wouldn't be a challenge at all.


I can therefore list you as in agreement to my view?

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown