open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Nullsec design goals feedback: Smallholding
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 : last (11)

Author Topic

Teya Ihara
Posted - 2011.09.02 17:31:00 - [271]
 

First off we already know making POS's invulnerable is incredibly daft, and will never happen, so we can dismiss the fact that if it DID happen then SOV alliances would just POS every moon and require renters to do the same for them.

The main difference of opinion is in implementation. Like it or not a POS will never make small holding work. They're too visible and in your face, and too much of a security risk for the SOV holders involved. In addition, people could ALREADY just go setup a small pos to work off of, they don't for many reasons not the least of which is setting up a pos will just get your stuff shot. The way to make small holding work is to keep them small, relatively benign, and difficult(though not impossible) to search out. I don't believe even a small POS has those qualities, even with any of the suggested changes.

Weather it's an idea like a space Winnebago that can anchor like my proposed T3's, or a new type of station you can put in deep safes that need special equipment to probe out, they need to be relatively well hidden. This also inherently makes them scale poorly, because having more people means easier detection. Staying below the radar is the way to go for me personally. Anything that involves POS is DOA for me, no matter the risk:reward ratio. They can't make it high enough without breaking something for me to want to ever put up/live out of a POS in someone's space.

To be clear: I want a small station type item (be it a ship that can turn into a temporary station, anchorable station item, whatever) that gives some of the comforts of a normal station while having its own drawbacks(worse refining, limited space for pilots, ships, cargo etc, mfg slots etc). I want it to be hard to find(system scanner at a sov holders POS that increases detection speed with sov level is a good idea), but once found easy to remove. This means it should also be pretty quick to setup and tear down, mobile enough for a small corp to move around including getting into 0.0 in the first place, big enough to let you work out of with a small corp or couple of friends for a week or two.

If such a station were used by too large an entity it would be obvious where they might be hiding in addition to being much less effective due to storage or other constraints, adding in needed scalability problems.

I don't think there is a simple fix to enticing smaller player groups to 0.0, and changing POS mechanics certainly isn't one of them.

EI Digin
Caldari
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.09.02 19:31:00 - [272]
 

Originally by: Teya Ihara
The main difference of opinion is in implementation. Like it or not a POS will never make small holding work. They're too visible and in your face, and too much of a security risk for the SOV holders involved. In addition, people could ALREADY just go setup a small pos to work off of, they don't for many reasons not the least of which is setting up a pos will just get your stuff shot.
It's like I'm talking to a brick wall here.

If a large entity WANTS to try to kill your static structures, they will do anything to get rid of it, whether its bubble camps or supercaps or spies or whatever. It's still going to die. No matter how much you hide your little home, it will be gone. You can't hide anything in EVE due to the rampant amount of metagaming, backstabbing, and spying. The minute they decide that they don't want to have your POS or space tent or whatever anymore, they can and most certainly will try any tactic they have to get rid of it. Delay tactics like hiding stuff with cloaky posses or deep safes or making it unscannable just wastes time. It doesn't solve anything. Your home is still gone. Does it really matter if your home is destroyed in three to four days, or within a week or two?

Let's say you are, Legion of xX DEATH Xx. You have over 350 systems of space, and you rent out most of that to pets. Even though you rent out, and have more than 8500 people, most of your space is empty. Does this not leave holes of space where nobody lives, where I can hide my smallholding entity?

I'm sorry, but I do not believe for one moment that having a POS in one system located in a mishmash of 10 other completely dead systems that are not used is way too visible and in your face if the change that I am suggesting, remove the POS anchoring notifications for sovholders, is implemented. If someone wants it dead, they will go looking for it and eventually find it, although it might take a few hours to a day out of someone's time.

You have to make the larger entity NOT WANT TO BOTHER LOOKING FOR YOU by being both SNEAKY and PERSISTENT. Win the morale war!

Secondly, people don't set up small posses everywhere because it needs to be more profitable to live in nullsec so people will actually want to move there. The mechanics are already in place to live as a smalholder. When you see more POS sprout in unused nullsec, because you can make more isk there than anywhere else, it will become more difficult for a large alliance to cope with the space on its borders, both passively and actively hostile, because so many people are setting up shop. I think it's silly that there is so much argument about how much risk should involved, when it is the reward that needs to be looked at.

Originally by: Teya Ihara
Anything that involves POS is DOA for me, no matter the risk:reward ratio. They can't make it high enough without breaking something for me to want to ever put up/live out of a POS in someone's space.
If you can't handle loss at all, nullsec isn't for you. Sorry, try highsec, although that might not be safe enough for you. I hear World of Warcraft is free up until you hit level 20 now.

Satav
Posted - 2011.09.02 19:40:00 - [273]
 

Hmm. Just wondering what making Outposts destroyable would do to help facilitate all these ideas.
I have my own opinions of this idea but would like to hear yours first. Debate!

Ms Michigan
Gallente
Aviation Professionals for EVE
Fusion Alliance
Posted - 2011.09.02 19:41:00 - [274]
 

Sigras, et al,

I will give you the point that invulnerable POS's are ridiculous but I was trying to get you guys to open op the idea that small holding via a small POS incarnation isn't a big deal like others have pointed out if you make it to the point where it is hard to get rid of JUST FOR THE SAKE of getting rid of.

In effect I would like to see something like this implemented because it would basically "PUT A FOOT" in the door for people to come out to 0.0. Again, I get that Greyscale said it has to be destroyable and not to shoot structures and I agree to a certain extent except that I almost think that precludes any other idea. This whole hidden base thing doesn't work for me even though it meets all the other requirements. If it is scannable - people will find it. How do you propose to keep it hidden and not be an unfair advantage to the SOV holder?? No one has come up with a clear mechanic that can't be exploited.

I would rather see Small POS's simultaneously buffed in HP and nerfed in other areas to allow for a SMALL staging ground. You guys are splitting hairs here (selectively quoting as well). Again - a POS in plain site that is just a royal pain the arse to take out and really provides a bare minimum "Tactical" advantage to anyone wanting to erect it (think - ABUSE MECHANICS) wouldn't be anything but a "Foot in the door" and that is all I want it to be. A pain to take out for what reason. We could nerf shield bubble size Sigras - so that the "200" ships you talk of could be 35 or something....this is assuming your "fact" isn't based on some non-practical "200" where they are all bumping into each other. Make it to where Smalls can hold just enough to not be a threat but it allows people to BE in 0.0

IS that so hard? Why is everyone so against tweaking this? IT really isn't that big of a deal. Like was also pointed out - you make small pos's small enough with enough fuel and accessories that two transport ships can carry them. Small holding will spring up. Of course you will complain that this will totally screw up some big Alliances holdings....well you are neglecting to point out - it cuts BOTH ways. They could do it to someone else. You could have little harrassment camps all over 0.0. People playing cat and mouse, PVP galore. Maybe make a rule where a home system can't have small holding - either way the IDEA of a POS IS WORKABLE.

As per the moon rule - I think that is a dumb rule anyways. Why can't POS's be anchored in space or more than one per moon?


Ms Michigan
Gallente
Aviation Professionals for EVE
Fusion Alliance
Posted - 2011.09.02 19:44:00 - [275]
 

Originally by: EI Digin
Originally by: Teya Ihara
The main difference of opinion is in implementation. Like it or not a POS will never make small holding work. They're too visible and in your face, and too much of a security risk for the SOV holders involved. In addition, people could ALREADY just go setup a small pos to work off of, they don't for many reasons not the least of which is setting up a pos will just get your stuff shot.
It's like I'm talking to a brick wall here.

If a large entity WANTS to try to kill your static structures, they will do anything to get rid of it, whether its bubble camps or supercaps or spies or whatever. It's still going to die. No matter how much you hide your little home, it will be gone. You can't hide anything in EVE due to the rampant amount of metagaming, backstabbing, and spying. The minute they decide that they don't want to have your POS or space tent or whatever anymore, they can and most certainly will try any tactic they have to get rid of it. Delay tactics like hiding stuff with cloaky posses or deep safes or making it unscannable just wastes time. It doesn't solve anything. Your home is still gone. Does it really matter if your home is destroyed in three to four days, or within a week or two?

Let's say you are, Legion of xX DEATH Xx. You have over 350 systems of space, and you rent out most of that to pets. Even though you rent out, and have more than 8500 people, most of your space is empty. Does this not leave holes of space where nobody lives, where I can hide my smallholding entity?

I'm sorry, but I do not believe for one moment that having a POS in one system located in a mishmash of 10 other completely dead systems that are not used is way too visible and in your face if the change that I am suggesting, remove the POS anchoring notifications for sovholders, is implemented. If someone wants it dead, they will go looking for it and eventually find it, although it might take a few hours to a day out of someone's time.

You have to make the larger entity NOT WANT TO BOTHER LOOKING FOR YOU by being both SNEAKY and PERSISTENT. Win the morale war!

Secondly, people don't set up small posses everywhere because it needs to be more profitable to live in nullsec so people will actually want to move there. The mechanics are already in place to live as a smalholder. When you see more POS sprout in unused nullsec, because you can make more isk there than anywhere else, it will become more difficult for a large alliance to cope with the space on its borders, both passively and actively hostile, because so many people are setting up shop. I think it's silly that there is so much argument about how much risk should involved, when it is the reward that needs to be looked at.

Originally by: Teya Ihara
Anything that involves POS is DOA for me, no matter the risk:reward ratio. They can't make it high enough without breaking something for me to want to ever put up/live out of a POS in someone's space.
If you can't handle loss at all, nullsec isn't for you. Sorry, try highsec, although that might not be safe enough for you. I hear World of Warcraft is free up until you hit level 20 now.


Thank you El Digin - It is like talking to a brick wall. They just don't get how life works in 0.0.

Like you said WOW is free! ROFL Laughing

I sense the hi-sec is strong with these.

EdTeach
Posted - 2011.09.02 20:38:00 - [276]
 

Edited by: EdTeach on 02/09/2011 20:55:01
Edited by: EdTeach on 02/09/2011 20:47:50

I am seeing what seems to be a lot of repeating themes and arguements. I agree that the hisec mentality has to be abandoned for those discussing this. Nul is risk. You risk everything in nul you own, unless you are a long-term alliance high-roller(which could afford massive losses anyway). If your game pieces are too valuable to you, then there is a load of other content to enjoy. Nul is more than just larger in-game profit. It is not a formulaic equation to be crunched. You either want to go to nul or you don't.

ANY STATIC smallholding structure is dead meat, regardless of incentives gained by allowing. Unless they are allowed to exist by renting, which is not what we want.

It must be mobile in some form. Non-anchored, warp/jump capable(once a day), possibly cloak-capable maybe. Uber-Roqual/Orca concepts work for me.

Still risky and kill-able, but a small group should still be able to stay alive and running anoms or doing whatever.

----

Either the presence of the smallholders or their equipment needs to grant incentives of some sort that all in-system pilots can benefit from. These incentives should be adjusted by actual smallholder pilot activity, or alliances will just make phantom smallholder corps to boost systems. If they use their pilots as smallholders, well it's still the same thing... more activity in small groups. A lot of the best ratting systems in nul suffer from localism that would do a surfer proud. A lot of alliance ratters would love to smallhold to get their own -1 rats.

Each smallholder corp can only boost one attribute in any of their smallholdings, subject to DT shift of priorities and associated base Modules.


Each additional smallholder base vessel on-grid(from same corp) adds a bonus(say 2% for giggles) to defensive abilities of entire group. Incentive to grow.


EDIT - Maybe allow base ship to enter Wspace. Wspacers would love the things, and Kspace smallholders would have somewhere to duck into every now and then, plus the ability to cross the galaxy without the pathetic jump range those ships would have to have. Special Module required to be fitted on each base ship due to mass ... call it a Tachyon Disruptor or something. Let it eat a High slot to make for less offense.


--------

TL;DR

1. Remember, it if it cannot run, it WILL die. If it can run, it only MAY die.

2. If the legal owners do not benefit, game over.

-----

Oh and one more thing ....

If there is local as it exists today in nul... then any smallholding concept is doomed. Wspace-style local is only way to "sneak" anyone into a system.

EdTeach
Posted - 2011.09.02 21:30:00 - [277]
 

Edited by: EdTeach on 02/09/2011 21:31:53



More thoughts on incentives...

TL;DR - Expounding on earlier suggestions ... move along. :)

As stated, one system attribute bonus per occupying corp/equipment/Baseship, subject to up to one a day(?) change.

Each same corp smallholder Base in system/on same grid(?) adds slightly to total system bonus.

Each day/week(?) the same attribute is boosted by same corp adds slightly to total system bonus.

Add these to no Local.

Dead system starts to get better before the legal Sov holders realise it. Fait acompli, and their space is better for their pilots as well.

It is like optional rent. If the Sov holders want something from the smallholders, just go to the system they live in and kill everything BUT the smallholders every few days or so. Isk that otherwise would not be made by that alliance. Keeps the ratters/PVEers happy, and the PvP pilots may catch a smallholder outside his cloaked deadspace Baseship too. Sucks to be him.

No need to kill the Goose That Laid the Golden Egg.

Just take all her eggs.

----

Seneqa
Surrender Dorothy
Bipolar Stability
Posted - 2011.09.02 21:48:00 - [278]
 

I've read many of the posts here and I like the ideas and some of our players often speak about how to live permanently in nullsec. At the moment, we tend to PVP and have our weekly 'fun' in NPC space...but it can't support us. At the same, time, we're not particularly content to become slaves to massive Alliances in SOV SPACE but long to live in 0.0 and have a real home. I like the idea of a Mini-OutPost that is just large enough for small corporations that are placeable into some sort of scanable anomaly accessible by a corporate-owned acceleration gate that must be hacked by enemies to enter. I'd love to have a small corporate/alliance 'bar' or boardroom in it for walk-in ability too. I also think they should have upgrades on small scale....to draw in anomolies and other smaller benefits to make NPC space or other areas worthwhile.

Sigras
Gallente
Conglomo
Posted - 2011.09.02 22:02:00 - [279]
 

Originally by: EI Digin
If a large entity WANTS to try to kill your static structures, they will do anything to get rid of it, whether its bubble camps or supercaps or spies or whatever. It's still going to die. No matter how much you hide your little home, it will be gone. You can't hide anything in EVE due to the rampant amount of metagaming, backstabbing, and spying. The minute they decide that they don't want to have your POS or space tent or whatever anymore, they can and most certainly will try any tactic they have to get rid of it. Delay tactics like hiding stuff with cloaky posses or deep safes or making it unscannable just wastes time. It doesn't solve anything. Your home is still gone. Does it really matter if your home is destroyed in three to four days, or within a week or two?


Yes, in fact that was my whole point! Lets say the average time for a large entity to notice you're basing out of one of their systems is 10 days. (its probably not, but just for numbers sake) With your idea, on day 11, the POS will be reinforced and caged making getting your stuff out . . . lets just say difficult. With my idea, on day 11 they anchor the scanning array and start the scanning process which sets off a 3-4 day timer giving you a chance to get your stuff out.

Originally by: EI Digin
Secondly, people don't set up small posses everywhere because it needs to be more profitable to live in nullsec so people will actually want to move there. The mechanics are already in place to live as a smalholder. When you see more POS sprout in unused nullsec, because you can make more isk there than anywhere else, it will become more difficult for a large alliance to cope with the space on its borders, both passively and actively hostile, because so many people are setting up shop. I think it's silly that there is so much argument about how much risk should involved, when it is the reward that needs to be looked at.


Here I agree with you, the invisible hand of the market will do its job and people will figure something out if the reward is enough.

Originally by: EI Digin
Originally by: Teya Ihara
Anything that involves POS is DOA for me, no matter the risk:reward ratio. They can't make it high enough without breaking something for me to want to ever put up/live out of a POS in someone's space.
If you can't handle loss at all, nullsec isn't for you. Sorry, try highsec, although that might not be safe enough for you. I hear World of Warcraft is free up until you hit level 20 now.


I think the point he was making is that if the reward stays the same, there is no way to mitigate the risk enough that the current reward becomes worth it, but raising the reward would do the same thing.

Honestly I really think nullsec should stay the same as far as solo profit is concerned, buffed as far as small group profit is concerned, and slightly nerfed as far as large alliances are concerned.

Teya Ihara
Posted - 2011.09.02 22:09:00 - [280]
 

Nice ad hominem. Don't worry, I'll wait for you to google it. Done? ok.

Actually I'm far less risk averse than most of you sov holders sitting in your "dangerous" 0.0 sov 4 systems, and have spent good chunk of my EVE time in 0.0 and quite enjoy it. No I'm not a top 10k PVPer mind you, but baseless attacks don't change anything about POS's being **** design for the small holdings idea. They do not match any of the stated design goals. Your misreading of my dislike for the entirety of POS implementation as risk aversion is you projecting pretty ****ing hard if you ask me.

I'll spell it out for you in easier terms to understand. I want something that is hard to track, and easy to remove/destroy, not the other way around. This encourages small holdings to stay small, mobile, and under the radar. I grow extremely tired of everything revolving around POS's, it is a boring and frankly stupid mechanic. A larger and more permanent structure like a POS encourages and requires growing to a larger size in order to mount any sort of defense of your holding, in conflict with stated design goals.

Quote:
Delay tactics like hiding stuff with cloaky posses or deep safes or making it unscannable just wastes time.


Exactly? "It should be possible for the bigger players to evict the smaller ones without too much investment, but it should take time to do so. This makes evicting or otherwise clearing out people more of a chore and thus a less trivial decision; it makes smaller investments less risky by ensuring an attentive owner has time to pull down their stuff and move it elsewhere..."

You cannot remove a POS when it is reinforced. An attentive owner can do nothing but evacuate items once their POS is found and reinforced and wait for the cleanup crew when the timer expires. Making POS's stronger ie: requiring more in material investment to remove, ALSO conflicts with the stated design goal. I'll refrain from more childish attacks and simply reiterate, using a POS as a small holding mechanic even with suggested changes cannot meet the design goals as provided IMO.

Luis Graca
Posted - 2011.09.02 22:14:00 - [281]
 

Edited by: Luis Graca on 03/09/2011 01:58:46
only 1 question

If by any reason people got something that is profitable on this treat them tell me how are you going to stop the big alliances or their friends to grab them and therefor destroying the smallholding?


Note: Smallholding is eve is something that simple doesn't exist if people whant to live in 0.0 whithout have to be a part of a big alliance or being their friends they should just go to npc space

Fixed

EdTeach
Posted - 2011.09.02 22:35:00 - [282]
 




Originally by: Sigras
Honestly I really think nullsec should stay the same as far as solo profit is concerned, buffed as far as small group profit is concerned, and slightly nerfed as far as large alliances are concerned.



+1

Balance Technium/goo/etc a bit, raise multi-constellation fees a tad for big allaince nerf. Doubt it would slow 'em down much, but better to ease into things than swing a bat. Use the lube of smallholder bonuses to ease the pain.

Smallholdings of some sort for small groups.

Same bounties for solos, just maybe more rats/anoms if smallholders present.

----

Nul-only(and wspace too) rules suggestions...

No Local.

No directional scans INTO a deadspace. You know the deadspace is there, not what ships may or may not be inside it.

No more complete ID of probe results. No more EVE survival guide until you warp on-grid. You just know if it is a Mag or a Grav etc at 100%. It could be empty, look empty but be full of cloaked smallholder baseships, or be full of shiney Anomaly Rats. If you warp in on rats fighting smallholders you should be safe... as smallholders know killing any SOV holder citizen would be a bad thing. Fleet invite and loot share builds more bridges than podkill every time I would think.

Some empty deadspace last from 48-96 hours with new long-term ones every DT, while some random old ones die. Deadspace collapse timer for smallholder bases to allow warp to new deadspace. Results in more total deadspace to keep up anom rates.

No more non-consensual watchlist, or at least online/offline list. Couple this with No Local and we have TruNul.

EI Digin
Caldari
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.09.03 01:28:00 - [283]
 

Originally by: Sigras
Yes, in fact that was my whole point! Lets say the average time for a large entity to notice you're basing out of one of their systems is 10 days. (its probably not, but just for numbers sake) With your idea, on day 11, the POS will be reinforced and caged making getting your stuff out . . . lets just say difficult. With my idea, on day 11 they anchor the scanning array and start the scanning process which sets off a 3-4 day timer giving you a chance to get your stuff out.
Morale, caging a pos 24/7 isnt easy, a single pos isn't your entire life etc etc etc. I also think that such a blatant red flag makes it way too easy for the smaller entity to get out unharmed. They should be able to use signals like "there are too many hostiles coming around this area too often", or "there was a guy in the system for far too long". Smaller entities should be forced to be paranoid and skittish, they have to stay out of the way after all.

But if you want we can agree that increasing stront timers could make it easier to get your stuff out? Smile Little tweaks here and there are helpful if CCP finds that it's too hard for smallholders to get their stuff out if they are under attack. But first, we need to allow the market to make it viable to for people to move in, and we can go from there.

Originally by: Luis Graca
If by any reason people got something that is profitable on this treat thwm tell me who are you going the big alliances or their friends to grab them and therefor destroying the smallholding?
The idea is that if you increase the livability factor of 0.0 for everyone, the large holding alliances will be content with the space they have now, because they will make so much profit off it it, and the less profitable space will be taken by smallholders. You have to do it across the board. I think this is the point you are trying to get at, correct me if I'm wrong.

Luis Graca
Posted - 2011.09.03 01:58:00 - [284]
 

Originally by: Luis Graca
If by any reason people got something that is profitable on this treat thwm tell me who are you going the big alliances or their friends to grab them and therefor destroying the smallholding?
The idea is that if you increase the livability factor of 0.0 for everyone, the large holding alliances will be content with the space they have now, because they will make so much profit off it it, and the less profitable space will be taken by smallholders. You have to do it across the board. I think this is the point you are trying to get at, correct me if I'm wrong.


Thats not it all what i was saying, alliances always whant more more isk either by taxes their corp/renters alliances or from moons, if a small corp/alliance can make a profit the big alliances will simple force the small to be a part of them or charge them to be there.

sorry crappy english right ASAP Embarassed. here's the correct one:
If by any reason people got something that is profitable on this treat them tell me how are you going to stop the big alliances or their friends to grab them and therefor destroying the smallholding?

EI Digin
Caldari
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.09.03 01:59:00 - [285]
 

Originally by: Teya Ihara
using a POS as a small holding mechanic even with suggested changes cannot meet the design goals as provided IMO.

Let's go through the list then.

ArrowAccessible
Small POS are cheap, they cost approximately 45-50m depending on the type and are available in every trade hub. The fuel is about 3-4m a day for a small, 5-6m for a medium, 10-11m for a large. The SMA, CHA, and a couple of mods will cost you about 20m. If you don't want to start with a pos, buy a GSC that has more risk, about 2m each. You can buy bigger POS if you like, but you're likely to lose them.

ArrowPredictable security
You should be able to tell by how many hostiles are going through "your" space. This isn't a weekly thing, but a week is a long time in EVE. A POS is vulnerable and destroyable as everything else is, and you can tell when the end is coming by reinforcement timer. Fully evicting a smaller entity does take time to do, with not much strategic (supercaps, battleships) investment put into it. Put your small gang FC's to work! Evicting a group is a chore because as POS are cheap, they can be put back up again easily, and we all know how killing a POS does not mean evicting the entity right? Because of the CHA changes I am suggesting, you shouldn't lose much from a lost POS. POS allow you a safe haven if you're in a small gang getting chased, or you need to form up to fight. If you put up a large POS, with more helpful and expensive modules, or more small POS it will cost you more if it gets blown up.

ArrowMostly self-sufficient
POS need fuelling runs. Your players living there will need ammo runs, and runs to move loot to empire. Blockade runners can do this work. If you want to, you can delay these runs for the added risk that if your pos is found, it will be more difficult to move your stuff out. There's also some connect with the empire space you buy and sell your stuff in. Doing the runs may be nailbiting at times, it isn't a lot of work if you live close to empire.

ArrowScales badly
It's hard to fit lots of people into a POS, and items are less secure than for example a station, where everyone gets a hangar. It's also hard to support manufacturers or miners in the same POS as your pvp ships due to grid/cpu issues. POS can't screw over the big guy, because the big guy can roll the POS over if they don't like it, and it doesn't screw over the little guy because stuff can be moved out if you are under attack. There's also more risk if you have a network of POS.

ArrowReward investment, commitment
POS allow you to survive in the interim while you get enough isk/members to do something. "In a few days, we can make enough to put up some more POS in the area.", "If we had a bit more money, we could upgrade to a large POS and have a bomber fleet on standby so we can take out thosen pesky battleships that come around every so often, or at least **** them off.", "If we just had some more members with Amarr Battleship 5, we can start thinking about taking SOV". If you are committed enough and invest your time into it your small entity could grow. You can always decide to live in the small area you attempt to control, but with growth comes more problems. POS also don't tie you down, because you can pick them up and leave whenever you want, there are no real blocking mechanics forcing you to stay.

ArrowSimilar, but distinct
POS warfare is similar to the timer system of Sov warfare. You can apply the time zone control methods, and the de facto system control to Sov warfare. But it is different as pos warfare does require you to defend all the time if you want to keep your stuff, and sov warfare requires quite a bit of people to defend. Sov warfare can not effect the way you run a POS, but POS warfare can very slightly tip the favour in Sov warfare, only because it acts as a safe spot. Sov does not give you a safe spot.

Tell me what you don't agree with. These all satisfy CCP's requirements.

EI Digin
Caldari
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.09.03 02:39:00 - [286]
 

Originally by: Luis Graca
Thats not it all what i was saying, alliances always whant more more isk either by taxes their corp/renters alliances or from moons, if a small corp/alliance can make a profit the big alliances will simple force the small to be a part of them or charge them to be there.


The idea is it will take too much effort for a large entity to defeat a smaller, more persistent one and replace it with weaker pets. If you have been farming the small space you have had for a while you should have a substantial amount of funds, which you can use for defense purposes. Yes, you might have temporary setbacks like losing sov, or your pos network, but the pets will just get rolled right over by the smaller entity unless it is constantly being supported by the larger one, and you should be able to take back your sov. This is if the smaller entity is less competent than the one being installed.

Many systems in 0.0 are unoccupied, you can look towards previous discussions about morale and the ability to live in empty space. And of course, if you are unable to make it in 0.0 by yourself, you can decide that you are going to have to pay your way in, or otherwise forge an alliance with other entities.

High value moon mining is sadly something a smallholding entity cannot feasibly do, because they likely do not have the numbers to face off against a larger entity. You might be able to ninja a high value moon for a couple weeks or so, but if you are a smallholder you likely don't have the resources (large BS fleets and supercaps) to stop an assault on highly valuable static isk printers like moons. You might be able to take some lesser value moons though, that a large group doesn't feel is worthy of dealing with. You also don't want to poke the hornet's nest, you don't want to attack these larger value moons because that could be the tipping point for a large entity, between allowing you to exist on its borders and wanting to destroy every last one of you.

Luis Graca
Posted - 2011.09.03 02:47:00 - [287]
 

This might sound wird but i totally agreed with you, but i still believe if they grow a little as soon as people see them, they will join a big group or going to leave that place (btw it's what's happening)and i don't thing thats the ccp ideia for that however if this is a problem to them before thry discuss anything else they sould solve this or it will be pointless all the other actions.


Note: i have no ideia to solve that, and i thing the corrent sistem is fine because corp/alliance leaders learn mutch faster how to lead the corp/alliance and there for it's the fastest way to reach the top or to offer a "0.0 home" to several more player's (and this yes it's what ccp whant's .... or they say that Rolling Eyes )

Ms Michigan
Gallente
Aviation Professionals for EVE
Fusion Alliance
Posted - 2011.09.03 04:53:00 - [288]
 

Originally by: Teya Ihara
Nice ad hominem. Don't worry, I'll wait for you to google it. Done? ok.


I dun read it, you dun say it - so cooooool...buhhhhhhh. LOL Are we done yet!? You get what you give in life my friend.
We are both passionate about a small holdings idea but you did not address a single technical point brought up. I am just glad EI Digin went through a list to spell it out for you and other people who instead of working with an idea just troll it.

Originally by: Teya Ihara

Actually I'm far less risk averse than most of you sov holders sitting in your "dangerous" 0.0 sov 4 systems, and have spent good chunk of my EVE time in 0.0 and quite enjoy it. No I'm not a top 10k PVPer mind you, but baseless attacks don't change anything about POS's being **** design for the small holdings idea. They do not match any of the stated design goals. Your misreading of my dislike for the entirety of POS implementation as risk aversion is you projecting pretty ****ing hard if you ask me.


Wow - F bombs now huh? You call logical points about how POS's could work as "Baseless attacks" yet you cuss and can't address points. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Congratulations - you have almost pushed me out of "your" thread escalating this to 6th grade mentality.

In RE: to POSs "NOT WORKING" - See EI Digin's post above (Thank you again sir for your dose of sanity in this thread) as he spells out one of many ways per CCP design category how POSs can and will work to fill a void easily with tweaking. Not to mention you have no idea how long things like this take to program I am guessing, because otherwise you would realise a POS modification would be a lot easier to roll out than a whole new game mechanic (albeit less shiny - but hey - there is always WOW ya know).

Originally by: Teya Ihara

I'll spell it out for you in easier terms to understand. I want something that is hard to track, and easy to remove/destroy, not the other way around. This encourages small holdings to stay small, mobile, and under the radar. I grow extremely tired of everything revolving around POS's, it is a boring and frankly stupid mechanic. A larger and more permanent structure like a POS encourages and requires growing to a larger size in order to mount any sort of defense of your holding, in conflict with stated design goals.


The real reason you don't like our suggestions - you hate POS's in general. "I want something that..." Again - it is all about you and what YOU want right?? In RE: to POS's encouraging growing for defense...you obviously still have not addressed any ideas about making them super cheap/easy to setup or more moble. Why couldn't we tweak their anchoring time? Why couldn't we make their shields on PAR with a large? There are a hundred ideas that could be worked and added easily to make a small POS work. But you don't care because it isn't what you want. GOT IT.

Originally by: Teya Ihara

I'll refrain from more childish attacks and simply reiterate, using a POS as a small holding mechanic even with suggested changes cannot meet the design goals as provided IMO.


You have shown great listening skills, restraint and patience up until now my friend - WHY STOP!!?!

TROLL Rolling Eyes

Marak Mocam
Posted - 2011.09.03 12:37:00 - [289]
 

Edited by: Marak Mocam on 03/09/2011 12:38:18
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: RAW23
I love the idea of small-holdings but I'm not really sure I understand quite what is intended by the term. Would it be possible to elaborate a bit more with some hypothetical examples?


Ok, gonna use this post to reference a whole bunch of other posts in this thread which I agree with Smile

The basic idea is that it should be viable for small groups of players to set up shop in quiet areas of nullsec without necessarily getting the approval of the big fish in the area (particularly if they're doing smart things like settling in space owned by an alliance in a different TZ). They'd have to keep out of the way of the "owners", but so long as they managed to do that it'd end up being far more hassle than it was worth, and cost much more than it would save, to evict them.

This requires, more than anything else, the ability to make a "safe base", which would ideally be something along the lines of a fully scalable modular starbase anchored somewhere in deepish space, where it couldn't be found unless you followed its owners home, provided it stayed small enough. This gives both a practical base of operations and a "homestead"ish feel - as you build up and customize your own little settlement, it becomes your home as well as your base.

Ideally this would also entail various tools to upgrade bits of the system in a way that again isn't really worth dealing with, maybe even down to the per-planet level (all the belts around this one planet are a bit better, or it spawns some extra anoms, or something).


Perhaps a mixed situation: A new type of complex. You clear the complex to the last building. That building is an infrastructure that, once at 10% structure left, it will "stop being hostile" and a message will appear in local that the current owners (NPC's) wish to evacuate - at which point you have the option to take it over or just blow it up and get whatever miscellaneous stuff might drop from the previous owners.

Once you've taken it over, you have to fix/rebuild it and it will have a certain number of services slots on it that you can then manufacture/purchase parts for - like a station. More slots on some, fewer on others.

The style, type, composition, defense batteries that may be around it, etc... would be somewhat random dependent upon the space it was taken over in so they would be a little different and only available in nullsec.

No "SOV" held, just a base that would/could be found and would show the same as the original complex that you conquered if someone were exploring. The only way you'd know if it were possible to do this is if you were doing the complex and cleared the final room.

Because you are *NOT* building anything, you are restoring, the API does not need to change for POS's going up nor SOV changes. It's just a complex but the final building, in that final room... That final room could exist until found and blown up by someone - the complex would remain until eventually the building were destroyed.

Yes this is not a "guaranteed" way to get a spot. No, you aren't going to cherry pick and go build a POS. You might spend days or weeks hunting through complexes to find one of these but when you did find one... What's the value?

Explorers gain. Those who wish to do it on their own can gain. It still has "scam" potential for those who may do these and sell the info to players THEN to nearby SOV holders... It still remains EVE to the core.

Ms Michigan
Gallente
Aviation Professionals for EVE
Fusion Alliance
Posted - 2011.09.03 14:17:00 - [290]
 

Originally by: Marak Mocam


Perhaps a mixed situation: A new type of complex. You clear the complex to the last building. That building is an infrastructure that, once at 10% structure left, it will "stop being hostile" and a message will appear in local that the current owners (NPC's) wish to evacuate - at which point you have the option to take it over or just blow it up and get whatever miscellaneous stuff might drop from the previous owners.

Once you've taken it over, you have to fix/rebuild it and it will have a certain number of services slots on it that you can then manufacture/purchase parts for - like a station. More slots on some, fewer on others.

The style, type, composition, defense batteries that may be around it, etc... would be somewhat random dependent upon the space it was taken over in so they would be a little different and only available in nullsec.

No "SOV" held, just a base that would/could be found and would show the same as the original complex that you conquered if someone were exploring. The only way you'd know if it were possible to do this is if you were doing the complex and cleared the final room.

Because you are *NOT* building anything, you are restoring, the API does not need to change for POS's going up nor SOV changes. It's just a complex but the final building, in that final room... That final room could exist until found and blown up by someone - the complex would remain until eventually the building were destroyed.

Yes this is not a "guaranteed" way to get a spot. No, you aren't going to cherry pick and go build a POS. You might spend days or weeks hunting through complexes to find one of these but when you did find one... What's the value?

Explorers gain. Those who wish to do it on their own can gain. It still has "scam" potential for those who may do these and sell the info to players THEN to nearby SOV holders... It still remains EVE to the core.


I like this very original idea for the exploration, originality, stealthyness of it and "lower" design time. It would be very cool to even leave a few NPCs around the station you are camping in to provide cover and the appearence that "these aren't the squatters you are looking for."

The ONLY problem I see with it is that sites despawn when clear and move. So if one stayed there and didn't despawn the residents would know where you were...it may take them as short as a day or as long as few days but they would know. I was thinking that TIME FRAME wise a small holding would want to be in a place for longer than that otherwise we would go with the Nomad idea ya know? That is just too short of a time I think to be able to have a reward more than the incurred expense.

With that said - maybe this mechanic could be tweaked? Maybe we could make all sites exploration based as they are now but fix their time to two weeks or something but respawn in themselves daily. So the content regens (I.e. like farming a mission) but the site stays the same?

Anyways - very original post/idea. Very EVE like you say.

N88 TOE
Posted - 2011.09.04 00:58:00 - [291]
 

Edited by: N88 TOE on 04/09/2011 00:58:41
Edited by: N88 TOE on 04/09/2011 00:58:16
having experiance being nomadic in low sec. i say this is a great idea. i spent the whole time getting shot at and killed. a big corp practicly prints cash. so when me and my broke crew had a last stand at our temp hq, we were fighting for a reason unlike the big guys. To them the bs they lost were othing to them, replacing those were like getting ammo for us. what we need is a reason for small groups to settle in low sec/wh. especialy miners so if i want to mine i dont want to get gate camped and killed by the roaming mega corp jill squads. So when we are mining nd have a fleet to defend us, when mauraders and heavy assult ships decend on us, its pretty much over and bak to the drawinf bord. So how about placeable sentries that are cheap but a valuable detterent, and cheap reafining and manufacturing facilities, that arnt fast or big but do the job. docking and repair and storage for small groups would be great. and big corps need a detterent. not like a power to the people that makes them weak but a plausible detterent. rethink combat, small fast ships should easily take down a large ship. and we also need mobile defences, so we can entrnch in a position. look at stratagy, most stratagies use the "needs moar power approach and use all big guns and ships. when a corp decides what ships to buy for a fleet they shouldnt think just big, a well balenced fleet of frigs, cruisers, and destroyers should be a serious enemy, not cannon fodder. we should also have temp alliances, so if the it alliance decided that me and my friends should have left yesterday, us and the other people in the area should be able to band together to hold them back. Doing this would have the avantages of being in a real alliance. but not over power the little guy, a cllation of small groups should be a deadly force to contend with but not over powerd. and to addres the big fleet disadvantage, there shuld be seperate cargo for ammo, so in a long battle the need to resuply would become apperent, and with indys bringing in ammo this leaves a huge weak spot with big fleets because attacking smart small squad should be able to ambush and cut of attacking fleets. this woud give the home team an advantage. and with self suffincincient, peopel should relay on each other if not you could stay of the radar. this brings tacticle and politicle vulberabilities to light, such as if your a small,strong pvp gang, wiping out the mining colonie near you shuld be a seriuous descion, forming alliances should be more valuable then killing all. so befrinding the mining group and defending them as they make supplies for you and extra to generate profit so that both can expand would be a great idea. so looking around your system shouldnt be a question of who do i kill first? but how can i use my neighbors in a mutual agreement? with pos structure they should be small, and inefficiant at first but should give you pride in ownership and having a patch of land to call home and to steadly expand. and stations should only support a number of ships so there is a carrying capcity. a small flet has incentive to expand so they an have more ships and cool stuff. while it means mega corp cant just sit in stations, and that mega fleets should be a serious logisticle headache because of the fact that they all cant go to station, meaning invading leets wuld have to setu small encamp ments as they goe creating vulnerable supply lines. and every proffesion should be viable to small groups weather you enjoy the spoils of (small scale) war, sow the seeds of industrie, or go were no man has gone before or anything else. null sec should still be a haven of mega corps pirates, but also the promised land for small and medium groups. null sec will become the home of many, a new frontier for the countless gangs of eve, who will make this barren land there own eden.

Marak Mocam
Posted - 2011.09.04 09:42:00 - [292]
 

Originally by: Ms Michigan

The ONLY problem I see with it is that sites despawn when clear and move. So if one stayed there and didn't despawn the residents would know where you were...it may take them as short as a day or as long as few days but they would know. I was thinking that TIME FRAME wise a small holding would want to be in a place for longer than that otherwise we would go with the Nomad idea ya know? That is just too short of a time I think to be able to have a reward more than the incurred expense.

With that said - maybe this mechanic could be tweaked? Maybe we could make all sites exploration based as they are now but fix their time to two weeks or something but respawn in themselves daily. So the content regens (I.e. like farming a mission) but the site stays the same?

Anyways - very original post/idea. Very EVE like you say.


Thanks but I'm looking less at trying to hide in someone's SOV held space or in busy 0.0 systems - you WILL be found if this is done. There are tons of systems in nullsec that aren't used much but...

The 2.0 API exposes, for anyone who asks the API, whenever a POS/Station is being put up and when SOV changes. Nice little info for "mapping" SOV but VERY easy (and used) fo "off-line" monitoring of these barren systems.

If ANYONE tries to "sneak in" and build anything, the API will publish it to the web and 'someone' will get an e-mail or text message that a POS is being built or SOV is being declared. At this point, they just log in, pull a gang together and go blow up the new-kids on the block.

Thus ANY "Build my own POS" is going to require changes to the API or it's suicide to try it. Big alliances don't just monitor their SOV space but all the buffer systems around them so, even if people haven't visited a system in weeks, they WILL know - unless the API is changed.

This suggestion is an attempt to work around the API and in barren systems, that aren't visited much, you could end up with a nice safe "home" for months on end - a place you COULD defend if it's just an explorer or ratter coming there to "mess around" - they just "ran into a gang while PvE'ing" - common in nullsec when going to "unused" systems.

Not "guaranteed safety" but a better option than some POS building which will be known within an hour to the web.

Max Kolonko
Caldari
Worm Nation
Ash Alliance
Posted - 2011.09.04 23:39:00 - [293]
 

Originally by: N88 TOE
Edited by: N88 TOE on 04/09/2011 00:58:41
Edited by: N88 TOE on 04/09/2011 00:58:16
having experiance being nomadic in low sec. i say this is a great idea. i spent the whole time getting shot at and killed. a big corp practicly prints cash. so when me and my broke crew had a last stand at our temp hq, we were fighting for a reason unlike the big guys. To them the bs they lost were othing to them, replacing those were like getting ammo for us. what we need is a reason for small groups to settle in low sec/wh. especialy miners so if i want to mine i dont want to get gate camped and killed by the roaming mega corp jill squads. So when we are mining nd have a fleet to defend us, when mauraders and heavy assult ships decend on us, its pretty much over and bak to the drawinf bord. So how about placeable sentries that are cheap but a valuable detterent, and cheap reafining and manufacturing facilities, that arnt fast or big but do the job. docking and repair and storage for small groups would be great. and big corps need a detterent. not like a power to the people that makes them weak but a plausible detterent. rethink combat, small fast ships should easily take down a large ship. and we also need mobile defences, so we can entrnch in a position. look at stratagy, most stratagies use the "needs moar power approach and use all big guns and ships. when a corp decides what ships to buy for a fleet they shouldnt think just big, a well balenced fleet of frigs, cruisers, and destroyers should be a serious enemy, not cannon fodder. we should also have temp alliances, so if the it alliance decided that me and my friends should have left yesterday, us and the other people in the area should be able to band together to hold them back. Doing this would have the avantages of being in a real alliance. but not over power the little guy, a cllation of small groups should be a deadly force to contend with but not over powerd. and to addres the big fleet disadvantage, there shuld be seperate cargo for ammo, so in a long battle the need to resuply would become apperent, and with indys bringing in ammo this leaves a huge weak spot with big fleets because attacking smart small squad should be able to ambush and cut of attacking fleets. this woud give the home team an advantage. and with self suffincincient, peopel should relay on each other if not you could stay of the radar. this brings tacticle and politicle vulberabilities to light, such as if your a small,strong pvp gang, wiping out the mining colonie near you shuld be a seriuous descion, forming alliances should be more valuable then killing all. so befrinding the mining group and defending them as they make supplies for you and extra to generate profit so that both can expand would be a great idea. so looking around your system shouldnt be a question of who do i kill first? but how can i use my neighbors in a mutual agreement? with pos structure they should be small, and inefficiant at first but should give you pride in ownership and having a patch of land to call home and to steadly expand. and stations should only support a number of ships so there is a carrying capcity. a small flet has incentive to expand so they an have more ships and cool stuff. while it means mega corp cant just sit in stations, and that mega fleets should be a serious logisticle headache because of the fact that they all cant go to station, meaning invading leets wuld have to setu small encamp ments as they goe creating vulnerable supply lines. and every proffesion should be viable to small groups weather you enjoy the spoils of (small scale) war, sow the seeds of industrie, or go were no man has gone before or anything else. null sec should still be a haven of mega corps pirates, but also the promised land for small and medium groups. null sec will become the home of many, a new frontier for the countless gangs of eve, who will make this barren land there own eden.


ZOMGWTF

Blacksquirrel
Posted - 2011.09.05 00:17:00 - [294]
 

Dude enter key...

Need to add some sort "mother ship" for small holding. I suppose you could use an orca, but that requires an alt. This ship once you leave cloaks up so you can go about doing something else... Essentially like any criminal organization/james bond villain needs a hideout.

Fake asteroid hide in a belt lol I dunno. Just need a hideout for a really small scale.

Dracoth Simertet
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.09.05 00:32:00 - [295]
 

Any kind of static structure no matter how tent like is probably going to end up getting shot at by your local sov holders if you stick around or try and plant roots anywhere.

A Thukker Mix nomadic lifestyle should be the way to go for small groups looking to make there way in 0.0 space. Your smallholding shouldn't have to mean anything fixed or held down for any length of time to a system. You may only be in one place for a few days or maybe even only a few hours.

Properly buffed Black ops battleships would be perfect for this role being able to move small groups from system to system past gatecamps and chokepoints. Perhaps somthing like a black ops Orca, or at least an Orca like ship, could help carry fuel to move about and carry loot back to empire.

Needs to be a very careful balance between what would help small groups and what would just help AFK cloakers though.

o7
Drac

Pubbie Scum
Posted - 2011.09.05 04:22:00 - [296]
 

Edited by: Pubbie scum on 05/09/2011 04:21:56
you could put a cloak on a carrier

or a rorqual

Prince Stroud
Posted - 2011.09.05 09:03:00 - [297]
 

Edited by: Prince Stroud on 05/09/2011 09:27:04
Edited by: Prince Stroud on 05/09/2011 09:25:28
Edited by: Prince Stroud on 05/09/2011 09:22:05
First of all, let me say that while I can't claim any real experience outside of highsec thus far, nearly all of the ideas proposed in this thread would likely drag my carebear trailer out to nullsec immediately if they were implemented appropriately.

While there've been too many propositions made up to this point for me to quote them all, it strikes me the largest issue with this concept is detectability in the face of the much larger sov. holding entity (or by extension, any much larger entity present in the region).

It would seem that this arises from the fact that any static structure can, and sooner or later will likely be probed out or found through either active input from the alliance (this should still pose a risk to smallholders, if the majority of an alliance wants you gone, tough), or the meddling of one probing alt simply running routine checks with no real reason to suspect anything (the more likely problem)... If the second point is to be circumvented, I would propose that the smallholding structure be both static AND mobile simultaniously.

Imagine a structure as follows, like a POS it is deployed/fueled/set up for operation much like many of the other suggestions in the thread. While it is being used, it remains a static, probable structure like any other, with the ships/players using it only adding to the amout of detectable clutter. When left to it's own devices however (unmanned, with nothing anchored/flying in the immediate vicinity) it then proceeds to orbit the sun within the system at whatever distance it was anchored at, at a predefined speed (quite high, possibly in the range of tens of km/s).

What this means is that should the structure be probed out with only the prober in system, in the time it takes to mobilise and deploy a fleet to immobilise it and take it down, it may have moved quite some distance from it's original location and need to be probed again. Where as if the alliance has already mobilised in advance it can be probed and destroyed with little complication as it will have barely moved. The players responsible for the structure will always possess an immediate "warp to" option, possibly in the form of a permenant bookmark.

As this is not supposed to be a fleet staging point or anything of the sort, large numbers of ships will equal an immediate finding, for smallholders however this places the risk of detection back in their hands. As the risk of detection now becomes directly proportional to their activity within the structure.

Just a thought, but if such a thing worked I'd probably turn my back on highsec in an instant.


EDIT: Just had the idea that perhaps if unattended, the structure could be set to move at such a speed that it completes it's orbit in a predefined period of time (say 3 days or something) so that the sov. holders may not have a chance of catching it immediately after probing it, but could set up a dragnet of bubbles/ships to catch it on it's subsequent pass. This would promote alliances actively seeking them out as opposed to passively bashing them with an AFK fleet (they would need to actively compensate for immobile times when the structure is used) and allow smallholders time to evac when they see a suspected dragnet established on dscan, knowing that without attention their demiPOS will be caught by it in a matter of a day or two (times are up to discussion)

EDIT 2: the demiPOS could be set to move still, but slower when a ship is nearby so that it'll still eventually move beyond AFK cloakers near it (then speeding back up) and also allowing it to be caught immediately at those speeds. This stops AFK'ers delaying the dragnet capture by simply cloaking near it, encouraging a much more active response.

Sigras
Gallente
Conglomo
Posted - 2011.09.05 09:29:00 - [298]
 

Originally by: EI Digin
Let's go through the list then.

Accessible
Small POS are cheap, they cost approximately 45-50m depending on the type and are available in every trade hub. The fuel is about 3-4m a day for a small, 5-6m for a medium, 10-11m for a large. The SMA, CHA, and a couple of mods will cost you about 20m. If you don't want to start with a pos, buy a GSC that has more risk, about 2m each. You can buy bigger POS if you like, but you're likely to lose them.


Its interesting how million turned into million, but I agree both are trivial amounts.

Originally by: EI Digin
Predictable security
You should be able to tell by how many hostiles are going through "your" space. This isn't a weekly thing, but a week is a long time in EVE. A POS is vulnerable and destroyable as everything else is, and you can tell when the end is coming by reinforcement timer. Fully evicting a smaller entity does take time to do, with not much strategic (supercaps, battleships) investment put into it.


Interesting how week to week got changed to day to day . . . Rolling Eyes Also this lacks the scaling that was mentioned in the blog, but I suppose you could argue that the medium POS is "scaling"

Originally by: EI Digin
Mostly self-sufficient
SNIP
Doing the runs may be nailbiting at times, it isn't a lot of work if you live close to empire.


I mostly agree here except "close to empire" is exactly where you dont want to be, because thats where all the people are.

Originally by: EI Digin
Scales badly
It's hard to fit lots of people into a POS, and items are less secure than for example a station, where everyone gets a hangar. It's also hard to support manufacturers or miners in the same POS as your pvp ships due to grid/cpu issues. POS can't screw over the big guy, because the big guy can roll the POS over if they don't like it, and it doesn't screw over the little guy because stuff can be moved out if you are under attack. There's also more risk if you have a network of POS.


I disagree for 2 reasons
1. POSs can be used for more than small groups making money in 0.0 they can also be used in an attack as a safe spot and a place to reload and reship. In that way they scale better than liner because a small invulnerable safe spot is just as good as a large invulnerable safe spot.
2. When Eve first started, they didnt even had POSs, and when POSs came out, they scaled just fine up to hundreds of people.

Originally by: EI Digin
Reward investment, commitment
POS allow you to survive in the interim while you get enough isk/members to do something. "In a few days, we can make enough to put up some more POS in the area.", "If we had a bit more money, we could upgrade to a large POS and have a bomber fleet on standby so we can take out thosen pesky battleships that come around every so often, or at least **** them off."
SNIP


1. If their goal "in a few days" is to make enough money to put up another POS, why are they not in high sec running missions? In one day one person can buy 3 POSs easy, why risk 0.0 when it makes you less money (more on this later)

2. Why do you need a larger POS to have a bomber fleet on standby, in fact, why would I ever need a larger POS or even more than one? If im filling my corp hangers, my main problem is going to be getting all that stuff out not storing more.

Originally by: EI Digin
Similar, but distinct
POS warfare is similar to the timer system of Sov warfare. You can apply the time zone control methods, and the de facto system control to Sov warfare. But it is different as pos warfare does require you to defend all the time if you want to keep your stuff, and sov warfare requires quite a bit of people to defend. Sov warfare can not effect the way you run a POS, but POS warfare can very slightly tip the favour in Sov warfare, only because it acts as a safe spot. Sov does not give you a safe spot.


I agree with this part entirely

Sigras
Gallente
Conglomo
Posted - 2011.09.05 09:36:00 - [299]
 

TL;DR
All of Eve is either single player or huge alliances, there is no need for small holdings because there is nothing for them to do, suggestion below


I think We've discovered a core issue here that needs to be addressed before we go any further. What exactly are these small groups supposed to do? There is nothing in 0.0 that a 5 - 50 man corporation can do to make money that its members cant do seperately to make more money individually; meaning if you have 10 guys, you can all run a single anomaly plex etc but splitting up and running them seperately would make more money for each person involved.

The way I see it, 0.0 has solo content, (anomalies, plex) and it has content for huge groups (sov, moon goo) but theres this awkward stage for a groups between 2 - 2,000 people where they may as well all split up and do their own thing because they arent large enough to throw their weight around and demand moon goo.

What Eve needs is small group content that cannot be soloed but pays better per person than the solo content that they could have done instead. EG why would I run stuff with my buddies for an hour and make 40 million when I could have made 70 million running sanctums.

The numbers break down like this (based on personal experience):
25 - 35 million isk / hour running missions (up to 50 million per hour at the very top end)
50 - 80 million isk / hour running sanctums solo (up to 150 million per hour with supercaps)
4 - 6 billion isk / month per moon needs large alliance (up to 8.3 billion mining Technetium)

what eve needs is something in between solo and moon mining, something that cannot be soloed, so it would have to be gated, provide more isk per person per hour than running sanctums, and have semi-predictable accessability.

Think incursions but on a much smaller scale. Incursions currently fill this role quite nicely but if that's all squatters have to do, theyre also a huge neon sign saying "check for squatters here" what if the small holdings outposts could spawn sanshas invasions into the system at random intervals via an upgrade.

To prevent alliances from forming puppet corps to squat in their own space, this upgrade would be mutually exclusive with military level 4 or 5

Prince Stroud
Posted - 2011.09.05 10:23:00 - [300]
 

Edited by: Prince Stroud on 05/09/2011 10:30:18
Originally by: Sigras
TL;DR
All of Eve is either single player or huge alliances, there is no need for small holdings because there is nothing for them to do, suggestion below


I think We've discovered a core issue here that needs to be addressed before we go any further. What exactly are these small groups supposed to do? There is nothing in 0.0 that a 5 - 50 man corporation can do to make money that its members cant do seperately to make more money individually; meaning if you have 10 guys, you can all run a single anomaly plex etc but splitting up and running them seperately would make more money for each person involved.

The way I see it, 0.0 has solo content, (anomalies, plex) and it has content for huge groups (sov, moon goo) but theres this awkward stage for a groups between 2 - 2,000 people where they may as well all split up and do their own thing because they arent large enough to throw their weight around and demand moon goo.

What Eve needs is small group content that cannot be soloed but pays better per person than the solo content that they could have done instead. EG why would I run stuff with my buddies for an hour and make 40 million when I could have made 70 million running sanctums.

The numbers break down like this (based on personal experience):
25 - 35 million isk / hour running missions (up to 50 million per hour at the very top end)
50 - 80 million isk / hour running sanctums solo (up to 150 million per hour with supercaps)
4 - 6 billion isk / month per moon needs large alliance (up to 8.3 billion mining Technetium)

what eve needs is something in between solo and moon mining, something that cannot be soloed, so it would have to be gated, provide more isk per person per hour than running sanctums, and have semi-predictable accessability.

Think incursions but on a much smaller scale. Incursions currently fill this role quite nicely but if that's all squatters have to do, theyre also a huge neon sign saying "check for squatters here" what if the small holdings outposts could spawn sanshas invasions into the system at random intervals via an upgrade.

To prevent alliances from forming puppet corps to squat in their own space, this upgrade would be mutually exclusive with military level 4 or 5


I've always found that the current system for DED assesed sites seems rather limited for what it is. You suggest that EVE requires more content suitable for small gangs for good income but not tailored to be just as easy solo, would it be possible to say expand the system to sites based on an "x/(>10)" system as opposed to current "x/10" one? whereby the sites/anomalies within the initial 10 (ones already in game) remain untouched, but the ones beyond a current 10/10 become far to difficult to solo?

For example, we've seen already in incursions and sleeper NPC's the ability for them to dynamically change targets. What if the NPC's in any site beyond a DED 10 rather than focusing fire on a single ship, distributed it dynamically across all ships in the site. That way, a solo player can be met with an untankable amount of DPS (if these sites are given NPC carriers or something, high DPS and inablility to blitz it out could be easily achieved), but a small group of players would find that with reasonable co-ordination the NPC threat was mitigated to managable levels. Rewards could then be scaled to meet the issue you highlighted accordingly.

... In hindsight, aside from this being a response to your post, this'd probably be better suited to the PvE thread instead of smallholding. But smallholders could easily be made big enough to co-ordinate these groups, providing an added incentive for small group transition to nullsec (yay for abstract relevancy!)


Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 : last (11)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only