These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

POS's Flogging the Dead Horse

First post
Author
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#141 - 2012-11-04 17:43:44 UTC
Upcoming changes with Retribution expansion are good, but that kind of changes to POS would be amazing !

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Zarak1 Kenpach1
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#142 - 2012-11-19 23:16:52 UTC
bump hurry the f up CCP
Beta Miner
COBRA Logistics
#143 - 2012-11-20 00:17:04 UTC
+1

AFK Cloaking? An afk cloaker has never ganked me. In fact a cloaker at his keybourd has never ganked me either.

Dreadful Bride
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#144 - 2012-12-08 22:45:34 UTC
After doing searches for what people would like from the POS revamp I decided to put in what i would like rather than spending weeks going through it all. So here is what I like from what I`ve read and what if come up with.

Existing Modules

Control Towers to be Power Cores that supply PG/CPU and have fuel and stront bays that stack without penalty. Armor will stack without penulty but shields will have a stacking penalty. Each Core will use fuel depending on size and 1 charter per hour in hisec. You can dock or anchor once at least 1 core is online which will be like docking in an NPC station and allows access to station functions. POS modules can be linked to the tower but not onlined if more than a set number of links away from a Core. I like the idea of limiting deep space POSes to Small or Medium at most or any combination like 2 Smalls = 1 Medium anything larger than that will have to be anchored at a moon.

Ship Maintainence Array allows ship switching only if there is enough space to store the ship you are leaving. The storage space will be a Corp Ship hanger that will only be acessable if you are granted the correct roles the storage will stack without penalty. The array will be reuired to switch subsytems on T3 ships.

Corp Hanger Array will stack without penalty and still work the same way it is now.

Maufacturing/Science Arrays will add slots for what they allow to be built and their storage will add to the Corp Hanger for the station without penalty. I would like a POS to offer repeating production/copy/invention jobs if the materials are there to support it. Each Slot can be set to allow Corp Member, Corp, Alliance or Public access with varying charges Corp Member access is for private jobs by the corp members and allows corps to charge its members for private jobs.

Refining Array could use a few changes for Anchoring in hisec then each array will require 1 Charter per hour for 0.5 2 for 0.6 and 3 for 0.7. For the refining amount I would suggest a new skill that has high requirements and a high price tag it would only be as effective as an NPC station at level 5. I would keep the time for the refining to be finished but possibly have 2 or 3 refineing lines this means for a hisec pos you would need 2 or 3 arrays to be able to feed production lines.

Moon Mining I have not done Moon Mining so the only suggestion i can think of is converting the silos, transfer arrays etc into a Materials Warehouse where the storage capacity stacks without penalty.

POS Weapons/Ewar I think that a weapons control array would help here where you can control limited groups of identical weapons or ewar. For each level of starbase defence you can control 1 array if there is no one controlling the weapons then they behave in their current random manner. Each weapon controlled by an array must have identical ammo type and amount. the control array has to be within a number of links from a core but the weapons can be placed as they are now to cover a range of defence. When a pilot activates an array they are shown an outside wiew of the station. I`m unsure wether these should work as a group or have the choice of single weapons.

New Modules

Member Hanger Array is a stackable hanger for member usage with an option for lockout by someone granted the proper roles if someone is hogging all the space this will allow them to remove but not place items in their hanger.

Ship Repair/Module Repair Arrays these arrays allow access to repair functions similar to NPC stations. These modules should have a high PG/CPU cost so that running them will either force the powering off of other arrays or onlining another core.

Medical Facility Array will allow clone facilities probably best to have this lowsec and below or have a charter cost like the refining array. If the array should go offline then any stored jump clones will be lost and Medical Clones moved to the nearest NPC station.

Targetting Array each POS should have a limited targetting ability these arrays are to increase the number of targets a pos can aquire up to the pilots maximum and the targets are pooled between the controlling pilots.

Logistics Arrays can provide support to pilots that are not docked or anchored. These modules should be similar to capital modules and each one counts towars a pilots Starbase defence limit and the towers targetting ability.

Alliance Array will provide access to alliance members and limited access to POS services depending on how the access is set up. Each array will have a small hanger similar to the Member Hanger.

Open Array is like an Alliance Array but for members of the public.

Starbase Jump Drive has been suggested but i see it only being outside of highsec for a single powercore POS the cycle starts by pulling in any weapons or other external modules.

Starbase Destruction

Should the starbase defences and armor be overcome then the modules will become acessable through starbase hacking something that will require a new skill and a new high slot hacking module I see similarities to how the ice miner works cycle wise. You will need to hack each module to see what has been dropped in it with ship arrays holding random ships, corp arrays with corp property and personal with pilot property for the hacking purpose manufacturing and science arrays are treated as corp arrays
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#145 - 2012-12-09 02:12:41 UTC
Dreadful Bride wrote:
After doing searches for what people would like from the POS revamp I decided to put in what i would like rather than spending weeks going through it all. So here is what I like from what I`ve read and what if come up with.


Most of the community is willing the same thing.... And most of it is in the last CSM minnutes and the last CSM letter to CCP...
Take a look at this tread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=143764&find=unread
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#146 - 2012-12-09 07:28:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Did I mention that I want Player Owned Starbases? Literally, "Player Owned". Allow them to be Player Owned. For Corp Owned Starbases (COSs), we already have stations. Let the only difference between a POS and a COS be how it was anchored and maybe also where it was anchored and how it affects or is affected by sovereignty, too. And let wormholers have their own COS's (stations). Since stations are tied to the next issue of sovereignty, let's get into that a little too.

Let wormholers have sovereignty AND stations (COSs) too, already. What else are they going to do with sov (besides feeling a sense of ownership in their unknown system)? Build supers? Fine, let them. The supers will never make it back into known-space and the wormholes will have an ISK sink and will be very happy to sink their ISK there. Make the wormholers happy; why not? Worried about increased challenges to wormhole invasion (as if that is really a big deal ..), then fine, add a wormhole stabilizer module for the command ship. More toys for wormholers, I say.

Since POSs have defenses, it makes sense that players should manage CPU and PG with stations, I mean COSs, in building defenses and other structures. The time required to take a POS should probably be similar to the COS, AND the ability to take the POS instead of destroying it should follow the mechanics established by the station/COS.

Lastly, allow COSs in sov space to be anchored at stargates, planets, and asteroid belts for basic defense, logistics, and other roles. The corporations did after all earn their sovereignty over that space so they ought to be able to defend key parts of those systems as desired. Remember, every defense structure is not just a deterrent to smaller groups, but also a target for larger groups.

Edit: POS's consume fuel. Isn't it about time that stations consume fuel too? Let the lights go out in stations if they get low on fuel. Merge POS and station into a single, unified concept with the option to anchor for either corp or player based on the location (Planet/Moon/other) and on the structure size. Let the POS/station hybrid concept allow module changes (refitting) with conditions (ie, ship hangar must be empty first, etc.) so that existing POSs/stations may be changed as players/corps desire. POS tower would become [Racial] Sm/Med/Lg Station Core (with PG/CPU and bonuses) anchored for either corp or individual, while the station would become [Racial] Extra Large Station Core (with PG/CPU and bonuses) anchored for a corp (or alliance?).

The hardest part may be replacing the existing POSs with the new POSs, especially in whs. Old pos's would probably be phased out while new pos's are allowed to take their place OR existing pos's are converted with existing content transferred to the new pos. A time is given before CPU and PG requirements force modules to offline in cases where the conversion yields CPU or PG overloads.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

Zarak1 Kenpach1
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#147 - 2012-12-27 02:46:26 UTC
bump because CCP cannot let this go auto lock. which i am sure they would love to happen
Infernatil
Gravity Core
#148 - 2012-12-27 05:20:39 UTC
BUMP,

Keep it alive people
Soltrac
PROFTECH
#149 - 2012-12-27 09:06:57 UTC
What the users want is in this forum post


Keep it alive and make it happen
Celestis Kudzu
Elliss
#150 - 2013-01-03 15:06:24 UTC
+1
Justitia McKingston
#151 - 2013-01-04 10:51:21 UTC
+1
Jessy Berbers
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#152 - 2013-01-04 14:23:00 UTC
+1 and yes make stations and POS alot more blurry, or atleast make stations that are player owned consume fuel, and needing active management, so large alliances arent able to hold HUUUUGE swathes of space without any actual effort.

Also allow for POSes to upgrade space to be more useful, as in farm and field concept.
Michael Loney
Skullspace Industries
#153 - 2013-01-04 17:12:29 UTC
*WHACK*

There, I did my part of the dead horse beating!

+9001 too
Hakan MacTrew
MUTED VOID
#154 - 2013-01-04 18:50:57 UTC
Michael Loney wrote:
*WHACK*

There, I did my part of the dead horse beating!

+9001 too

"It's over 9000!!!"




...sorry.
Couldn't resist...
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#155 - 2013-01-04 19:11:36 UTC
We just need to w8 for the minutes... they are coming soon... and If we dont like it, lets flog CCP =D
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#156 - 2013-01-04 20:31:48 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:
We just need to w8 for the minutes... they are coming soon... and If we dont like it, lets flog CCP =D

Ah. So "Dead Horse" is code for CCP. Love it. Got it. ;)

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
#157 - 2013-01-04 23:09:58 UTC
+1

Is it a rock point a lazer at it and profit. Is it a ship point a lazer at it and profit. I dont see any problems here.

Dacryphile
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#158 - 2013-01-04 23:57:02 UTC
+1 Flog from me. I left EVE for a few years, and to be honest I was surprised that the old POSes were still here when i recently resubbed.
Octoven
Noir Holdings
#159 - 2013-01-05 16:48:59 UTC
I believe there was some mention about getting new starbases off of moons and anchorable in virtually any part of the system. You can anchor it in a safe spot, around a moon, planet, or in the middle of the sun...if you want a nice tan line :) The whole purpose of having the structures anchored to moons is to facilitate in moon mining. We all know that isn't going well in sticking around.

I think CCP really wants to drive home the idea of personalized star bases. These structured are owned and maintained by you and as such you should be free to put them any place you like and make them YOUR starbase. I don't like the idea of allowing smaller star bases to anchor anywhere and larger to just moons, that kind of restricts the freedom involved with the new starbases. I have heard suggestions of small being personal, mediums being corp, and large being alliance star bases. Again, I feel like this restricts the purpose of even owning a star base. If you personally feel as if you can handle and manage a larger starbase on your own, you should still be able to launch and anchor for yourself and not alliance.

I do like the stint about wormhole space though. Wormhole space was designed to be a playground where no one can claim sovereignty and where people can essentially stay for a limited time and then leave. The problem is that since Apocrypha was released, wh space has become congested and populated with settlers who want to stay. As it stands, corps still build capitals in wh space as well as fleets with towers that take forever to knock down. Go ahead and allow sovereignty in wh space. The aforementioned post about super caps is right, they can't go anywhere. I would surmise a good 90% of wh systems are already populated, why not transition into a more permanent status for its inhabitants. Essentially CCP has already took that step by allowing POCOs. You jump into a wh see all the POCOs with the same corp, warp around cloaked and see towers under that corp, and look up on wormhole.es lol its easy to see that corp owns that system even if it doesn't officially say it does.

Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#160 - 2013-01-05 18:42:06 UTC
I thought the point of limiting POS anchoring to moons was to limit the number of available spaces and encourage conflict?

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs