These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Player Owned Custom Offices (high sec)

Author
Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#61 - 2016-12-08 17:22:04 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Having read the article I linked, Ive come to consider perhaps Im approaching this from the wrong angle.
I acknowledge that endless POCOs on any planet is not a solution. My point was it chafes me in principle that a single POCO owner can set rates without competition. Violence and buy-out are options, but I dont think they are enough.

What about somekind of POCO upkeep/maintenance?

As the article I linked suggests, there are POCOs apparently perpetually paying into long absent corps wallets.


Then it should not be hard to take those POCOs through force. It may take a little time but even a solo drone BS can pop a POCO.
Salvos Rhoska
#62 - 2016-12-08 17:35:53 UTC
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:


Then it should not be hard to take those POCOs through force. It may take a little time but even a solo drone BS can pop a POCO.


Just about everything in EVE can be taken by force.

That is not the issue.

The issue is whether POCOs should have some maintenance requirements, rather than sitting after initial investment, garnering passive profit for no effort.

If even a dead corp can profit from a POCO, something is wrong with the system.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#63 - 2016-12-08 17:45:33 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:


Then it should not be hard to take those POCOs through force. It may take a little time but even a solo drone BS can pop a POCO.


Just about everything in EVE can be taken by force.

That is not the issue.

The issue is whether POCOs should have some maintenance requirements, rather than sitting after initial investment, garnering passive profit for no effort.

If even a dead corp can profit from a POCO, something is wrong with the system.

Profit? Hahahaha.

That's hilarious. Highsec POCOs don't make profit. Most of them never come even close to earning back the 120 - 200 million ISK they cost.

Profit.....lol

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Salvos Rhoska
#64 - 2016-12-08 17:54:47 UTC
Which just indicates its a stupid system.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#65 - 2016-12-08 19:28:33 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
That's hilarious. Highsec POCOs don't make profit. Most of them never come even close to earning back the 120 - 200 million ISK they cost.

Profit.....lol

Except, you know, the ones in the vicinity of trade hubs that make billions of isk a week from individual planets.
Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#66 - 2016-12-08 19:37:32 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
That's hilarious. Highsec POCOs don't make profit. Most of them never come even close to earning back the 120 - 200 million ISK they cost.

Profit.....lol

Except, you know, the ones in the vicinity of trade hubs that make billions of isk a week from individual planets.


Very, very true.

Profit is also relative. A group of say 10 PI pilots could claim 6 planets tucked away and easily exceed the start up costs very quickly. It really is all a matter of planning ahead and patience.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#67 - 2016-12-08 19:43:07 UTC
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
That's hilarious. Highsec POCOs don't make profit. Most of them never come even close to earning back the 120 - 200 million ISK they cost.

Profit.....lol

Except, you know, the ones in the vicinity of trade hubs that make billions of isk a week from individual planets.


Very, very true.

Profit is also relative. A group of say 10 PI pilots could claim 6 planets tucked away and easily exceed the start up costs very quickly. It really is all a matter of planning ahead and patience.

~15,000 planets in highsec and only a small handful ever makes their costs back.

Most wouldn't even cover the cost of even a trivial upkeep cost if one was implemented.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#68 - 2016-12-08 19:51:47 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
That's hilarious. Highsec POCOs don't make profit. Most of them never come even close to earning back the 120 - 200 million ISK they cost.

Profit.....lol

Except, you know, the ones in the vicinity of trade hubs that make billions of isk a week from individual planets.


Very, very true.

Profit is also relative. A group of say 10 PI pilots could claim 6 planets tucked away and easily exceed the start up costs very quickly. It really is all a matter of planning ahead and patience.

~15,000 planets in highsec and only a small handful ever makes their costs back.

Most wouldn't even cover the cost of even a trivial upkeep cost if one was implemented.


So? The same can be said of nul. There are POCOs out there that have never been used. It doesn't mean the game play isinvalidor there is a problem. It just means someone has to put the effort in to find ways to make their own profits. Heck, there are modules that don't make a profit either yet they exist. It is part of the hazards of EVE.
Solonius Rex
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#69 - 2016-12-08 19:58:20 UTC
ACESsigepps wrote:
I'm curious as to how well this was implemented. How many POCs have changed hands in high sec? Is this just a passive income for those established players in EVE?
I can understand corp/alliance owned offices in Null but?
It also has eliminated the need of "customs code expertise" skill book which I'm sure there's hardly any NPC owned offices anymore....


You have it wrong there, and no one that i see has touched on this yet, so I might as well.

The "Customs code expertise" skillbook still comes in handy because Hisec Pocos have a MANDATORY empire Tax applied to them. I believe this is 10%.

So if I own a hisec POCO, and i set the tax to, say, 7%, the actual user needs to pay 17% tax. With level 5 "customs code expertise", this will be cut down to only 12% tax.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#70 - 2016-12-08 20:13:46 UTC
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
That's hilarious. Highsec POCOs don't make profit. Most of them never come even close to earning back the 120 - 200 million ISK they cost.

Profit.....lol

Except, you know, the ones in the vicinity of trade hubs that make billions of isk a week from individual planets.


Very, very true.

Profit is also relative. A group of say 10 PI pilots could claim 6 planets tucked away and easily exceed the start up costs very quickly. It really is all a matter of planning ahead and patience.

~15,000 planets in highsec and only a small handful ever makes their costs back.

Most wouldn't even cover the cost of even a trivial upkeep cost if one was implemented.


So? The same can be said of nul. There are POCOs out there that have never been used. It doesn't mean the game play isinvalidor there is a problem. It just means someone has to put the effort in to find ways to make their own profits. Heck, there are modules that don't make a profit either yet they exist. It is part of the hazards of EVE.

So even dead Corps are not making profits from POCOs.

What? why can't people read?

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Solonius Rex
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2016-12-08 21:16:08 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Im beginning to see the nascent underlying interests of antagonists in this thread.

I analysed the data from CCPs economy report, and the existance of remaining Interbus stations is apparent, but not relevant to the issue of whether a single POCO should constitute a systemic monopoly.

Nobody has yet addressed my argument of why there should not be multiple POCOs, as opposed to one.

Certainly the planetary based interests are divergent, and DUST showed that all planets are as contested as is the space above and beyond them.

Why does one entity, for such small price, gain MONOPOLY over an entire planet and its import/export?

Surely it is more rational, and native to EVE, that any number of POCO operators, whom pay for its installation, should be able to compete on rates?


First off, so lets say that anyone can set up any number of pocos on any single planet.

You have to warp, and be in range within 2500 of a POCO to transfer PI materials.

Before, if you already have a PI set up on a planet, all you have to do is open the planetary interaction list, right click, and warp to the customs office.

Now, you need to click to check the info of each POCO to see which one offers the lowest tax, for each planet you have.

Youve just made PI into an even more bigger clickfest than it already is.

Secondly, it would be ugly. Having 10, 15 Pocos on one planet, would make a mess.

Thirdly, warping to planets warps you to the POCO. Which POCO does it warp you to now that there are 5-10?

Fourthly, thats a poor argument to begin with. Why does one entity gain MONOPOLY over an entire structure or region? Why does one entity gain MONOPOLY over an entire moon region? why cant we have 3-4 towers mining the same moon, competing for resources?

Salvos Rhoska
#72 - 2016-12-09 11:22:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Then lets consider a upkeep/maintenance requirement on POCOs.

This willl atleast decay out those which are no longer actively administered by their owner, freeing up the POCO slot.

Active POCO owners can offset the cost with raised taxes.
Mala Zvitorepka
Karthen-Woight
#73 - 2016-12-09 12:38:37 UTC
Eh, the philosophy behind POCO is to be a kind of government for the planet. You can't make your own government just like that, so a single POCO per planet makes sense.
On the other hand, why assume the whole planet has the same government? Why not install second poco and put troops to the ground so they conquer a bunch of planet and spark a nice war down there. Without suitable military presence on the ground you might even have a POCO up there that doesn't cover any planet area and is therefore useless.

Ignoring rationality behind stuff and looking at game mechanics, POCO has disappointing mechanics compared to say engineering complexes. You can set up another manufacturing station to compete economically (on taxes), or blow them up. Or both. Plus these cost resources to run as well - set and forget is impossible. So I assume POCO will be eventually redesigned to offer more competition at the cost of more effort.
Lulu Lunette
Savage Moon Society
#74 - 2016-12-09 14:38:49 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:


Then it should not be hard to take those POCOs through force. It may take a little time but even a solo drone BS can pop a POCO.


Just about everything in EVE can be taken by force.

That is not the issue.

The issue is whether POCOs should have some maintenance requirements, rather than sitting after initial investment, garnering passive profit for no effort.

If even a dead corp can profit from a POCO, something is wrong with the system.


This is an issue that needs addressing. Dead sticks and POCO's that don't get used for an extended time should fall naturally without ridiculous timers

@lunettelulu7

Solonius Rex
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#75 - 2016-12-09 17:14:24 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Then lets consider a upkeep/maintenance requirement on POCOs.

This willl atleast decay out those which are no longer actively administered by their owner, freeing up the POCO slot.

Active POCO owners can offset the cost with raised taxes.


So what do you do with a planet with no pocos active because its rarely used and people didnt want to pay the bills anymore? Or with planets that rarely get used and are not worht the isk?

Let me tell you about a Poco we used to own in hisec. It made, maybe 5 mill a month. There were people who used it, but there werent many. If it were to get taxed, we wouldnt use it anymore. So those people would get screwed. And id reckon this would be true for a lot of hisec systems.

People often go out to low-end systems trying to find cheap pocos and richer amounts of PI mats, and yet they wont be able to, because all the pocos are offline.

What a terrible idea.
Salvos Rhoska
#76 - 2016-12-09 18:59:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Its your own problem if you are only earning 5 mil/month on that POCO.
You would have paid many times that to put it up, plus time in destroying its predecessor.
Or you bought it cheqp or as part of a peace. I dont care.
Sounds like you made effort for pitiful profit.
Sounds like you had a terrible idea.


I propose that some periodic maintenance/upkeep (either material, accessing locally, or in isk) of POCOs is necessary, or it defaults back to Interbus ownership.
Dr Yukazuma
Absolute Order
Absolute Honor
#77 - 2016-12-09 21:20:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Dr Yukazuma
Mala Zvitorepka wrote:
Eh, the philosophy behind POCO is to be a kind of government for the planet. You can't make your own government just like that, so a single POCO per planet makes sense.
On the other hand, why assume the whole planet has the same government? Why not install second poco and put troops to the ground so they conquer a bunch of planet and spark a nice war down there. Without suitable military presence on the ground you might even have a POCO up there that doesn't cover any planet area and is therefore useless.

Ignoring rationality behind stuff and looking at game mechanics, POCO has disappointing mechanics compared to say engineering complexes. You can set up another manufacturing station to compete economically (on taxes), or blow them up. Or both. Plus these cost resources to run as well - set and forget is impossible. So I assume POCO will be eventually redesigned to offer more competition at the cost of more effort.



Wasn't this the premise for DUST or something? Some sort of planetary war/government military action on behalf of EVE Online PC players? I still think CCP and Sean Murray should collaborate and push something out EVE based.


War Never Changes...
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2016-12-10 01:54:55 UTC
Dr Yukazuma wrote:



Wasn't this the premise for DUST or something? Some sort of planetary war/government military action on behalf of EVE Online PC players? I still think CCP and Sean Murray should collaborate and push something out EVE based.


War Never Changes...


The same Sean Murray that released a heaping pile of bugged RNG and false promises on the world for the price of a premium game? CCP would have to be quite literally insane to let him touch this game with anything but his own subscription to it.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#79 - 2016-12-10 06:04:20 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Marcus Blackthorn wrote:
Maybe I misunderstood (I probably did), but do you even need a POCO? I thought I remembered seeing a YouTube tutorial on PI by eveiseasy where he just launched the product into space and then went and picked it up. If that's the case, why even bother with a POCO, why pay the taxes, is there any benefit by using a POCO?

I know you can compress up to P4, is that what the POCO is for?

Thanks,




Because CC launches are wildly impractical, to the point that nobody should ever do it. It basically exists to allow mathematically challenged internet-space sovereign citizens feel like they're stigginit to the The Man/POCO owners.

If you can't find a POCO with tax less than the 15% launches will cost you, then you're not even looking. Couple that with the extra time you're going to spend faffing about picking up launches - time you could have used just finding or negotiating a better tax situation - and you'll quickly realize it's an utterly insane non-option.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Dr Yukazuma
Absolute Order
Absolute Honor
#80 - 2016-12-11 01:01:05 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Dr Yukazuma wrote:



Wasn't this the premise for DUST or something? Some sort of planetary war/government military action on behalf of EVE Online PC players? I still think CCP and Sean Murray should collaborate and push something out EVE based.


War Never Changes...


The same Sean Murray that released a heaping pile of bugged RNG and false promises on the world for the price of a premium game? CCP would have to be quite literally insane to let him touch this game with anything but his own subscription to it.



Yes the same one, I feel your concern. That and I do think that NMS could have and should have been polished more. CCP tends to take the longer view of things (at least that's what it looks like from my lowly perch) and Sean had a solid idea. He just didn't take the time needed to flesh it out. I think public demand got the better of them and I'm sure Sony isn't the most "laid back, make it correct and good" type company.

That being said I saw the what he wanted to do (again being different from what was released) and honestly believe that some inspiration could be gleaned though at least working with CCP. I'm not saying it's going to ever happen but I do think that productive conversations could ensue.