Making Sov more fun

I’ll prefix this all with: I’m not particularly experienced when it comes to Null, and Sov grinding. I’m not a Noob to eve, that’s just not an area I’ve gone into. Most of this stems from the arguments about it that I’ve seen on the forums.

From the sounds of it, the main complaints are:
Grinding Sov is dull, as you have to take out many multi-million EHP structures, to do pretty much anything to someone. Or camp their systems to stop them maintaining their upgrade levels.

This isn’t fun. Not fun at all.

The second is: There’s no space that’s not taken. Even if it’s not being used, it’s not available.

What I’d suggest is the following, with large parts stolen wholesale from Faction warfare.

If a system has neighbors which are not owned by the same alliance, and don’t have upgrades, they are ‘Frontier’ systems. Frontier systems do not improve in Strategic index, unless the system has levels in either Military or Industrial.

In all systems strategic index will decay, if there are no other upgrades.

Upgrades are not anchored at POS any more. They are stand alone structures which generate a deadspace field (with free acceleration gate) The owner can set the size of ship that can enter these. This cannot be changed after installation, without tearing it down. (This includes moon mining facilities)

Upgrades and levels of the indices spawn complexes, which can be attacked by people to reduce the index levels in a system (or knock out an upgrade). When the Indexes hit zero, a final complex will spawn (at a time set by the owner, or X hours away. Just to deal with off hours invasions) which will remove Sov from the system, if defeated.

The higher the levels of indexes, the larger the ships that can enter the some of the complexes. These complexes will have multiple entrances, to make camping the way in more difficult.

Effects:

  • If you can get behind enemy lines, you can blow stuff up and mess with their upgrades. And while doing so, you can be sure you won’t be hot dropped, by staying in the smaller complexes. you’ll do less damage in them, but they’ll allow you to chip away.
  • Fights should be somewhat more fun that the blobs. As you can always blap stuff in a frigate or cruiser
  • Sov isn’t an all or nothing affair. You can hurt an enemy, even if you can’t knock them out. A BLOPs fleet can cause pain.
  • You don’t need to take down a POS to get at the goo. I’m thinking a multipart facility. taking it entirely offline is hard, but damaging it so you can steal, easier.

Useful bits and pieces – Eve SDE

Once you get comfortable with the CCP way of doing things, the SDE isn’t too bad to work with. You’ll have to dig around in it to get some of the numbers you want, and sometimes it’s the opposite way round from what you’d expect, but it’s not too bad, most of the time. Here are a few more useful snippets for getting information on things.
Continue reading

Why I’m in a personal corp

tl;dr: I’m a suspicious bastard. Gimme a personal POS I can let specific other people use.

I make stuff in Eve. Mostly T2 stuff. I run three accounts to do this. I’d like to be part of a larger corporation, but instead I keep my alts in a separate Corp. This is an attempt to explain why.

It’s because of 2 things.

  1. I’m paranoid
  2. I can’t control who accesses my POS, beyond some very very general roles.

The two are tightly linked, as you might guess. Either I join a Corp where they’re willing to grant me the ability to anchor stuff (and un-anchor other people’s stuff. And have other people un-anchor my stuff) or I keep it all in a single Corp.

I can’t imagine that I’m the only person in EVE that thinks this way.

What would be ideal for me is the ability to launch a POS that I can limit access to, to a very specific list of people. So only those people I authorize can use its resources, un-anchor it and so on (ideally a separate list for each)

I might trust my CEO to manage the corporation’s ISK. I don’t trust them to not take my stuff and kick me out the Corp. Only time I’d trust them that much, is if I know them, and can take it out of their hide in person.

Corp Roles and POS Management – A Vision

My fist disclaimer: I don’t run a big corporation. It’s entirely possible, perhaps even probable, that I’m missing things, or possibly making things harder. I hope not, but that’s what comments are for.

I’ve heard many problems for how corp role assignment is painful, and how that can make management of POS painful too. It mostly comes down to things not being fine grained enough. Either you can cancel every corp industry job, or you can cancel none, for example.

So what I was thinking was the following. If it’s familiar, you may have worked with POSIX user management before. It’s pretty much lifted from there.

The first step is to allow for the creation of ad hoc user groups within the corporation. I’d recommend that you can nest them at least once as well, allowing for groups within groups. Multilevel nesting would be nice, but complicates matters a little.

Ideally these are parsed at logon, and then stored, to reduce the workload. Recursion makes databases cry. Stored in the ‘brain’ for the character. This would be easier once the ‘brain in a box’ work that’s been mentioned in the past is repeated. To allow for updates without needing a log off, I’d suggest a button on the corp pages or character pages, allowing someone to get a group update. This always annoyed me in Windows 😉

In an ideal world, you could also create groups of locations/hangers. So you could have a ‘The Forge’ group, which would contain all the hangers in the Forge, and a ‘Jita’ group which is just the hanger in jita 4-4 CNAP. A seperate group for a singular POS, or multiple POS would also be handy.

At that point, you could assign management roles for a location group, to a user group. Or for a user group, to a user group.

 

Some roles would need to be split apart, so you could have an anchor role that can be assigned globally, but split the un-anchor function away from it. So the user who anchors something can un-anchor it, but not everyone else. Just the people that user (or someone with a global management role) specifies.  Ditto with arrays and labs (or jobs run from a corp hanger) A role to start them, and a role to manage them.

 

Ideally such groups would be global, capable of holding people who aren’t actually in your corporation (automatic removal when you kick someone or they leave) so you could share the ability to run jobs in your POS with people outside your corp (granted at corp, pos or array level)

It’s probably over complicated, but if you set things up right in the beginning (grant roles to groups, not people, then add people to groups) then it’s actually pretty simple to work with.

Industry Iteration

tl;dr: In this post, I talk about how I’d change industry, to shake things up a bit, while not crippling anyone. Change highsec slots and costs to make station based industry less attractive.

A lot of the following depends on significant updates to POS, and corp role management. Specifically the ability to launch POSes for personal use, or at least a lot more strictly tied down on usage rights. The ability to say “Person A can use this POS, but person B can’t. Person B can use this other POS which person A can’t (Person C can use both though)” is very important. Without it you have to depend on trust, which just really doesn’t work. Access groups on POS are thus important. And the ability to use BPO/BPCs from personal hangers.

It’s said that null-sec industry is stillborn, due to the ease of manufacturing in High-Sec, with its myriad stations with many many slots.

Some people would recommend just removing the slots, but this has some issues when it comes to newbies. I have an alternate set of suggestions:

  1. Have the price for slot use rise, when the number of empty slots falls below a threshold. This is in a similar fashion to how the price of Offices rises, when there are none free in a station. I’d base the rise on a percentage free, however. so when you drop below 50% free at downtime, it rises a little. When you drop to 10% free it rises even faster. Exactly how much is a more complex matter, but increasing above 33k per hour isn’t insane.
  2. Specialize the slots. If you’re manufacturing in a POS, you have to decide which arrays to launch, to get slots able to manufacture certain things. Specialize the available slots, perhaps by Corporation, so you can’t just set up shop in a station and manufacture /everything/ there. Imperial Armaments for Ammo and modules. But not ships or drones, for example. Make Ammo slots more common that others, to give newbies a break (as most people start on ammo)
  3. Increase the fuel cost for charters for POS, depending on the number of free moons in a system/Number of POS in the system. Possibly looking at surrounding systems too, but that’s a little more up in the air. This will: A: spread manufacturing across highsec more cleanly. B: make null-sec more viable as they don’t have that cost.

Manufacturing near Jita should cost you more than doing it 20 jumps away, purely due to competition for space and slots.

I’d also like to see the ability to stick in a bunch of identical jobs at the same time. Even if it’s restricted to ‘identical jobs, in the same facility’. That’d help.

Eve SDE SQL – Blueprint Details – Part 2

I covered the basics of Blueprint details from the SDE back in my last post, which covers most of what people actually want to know. There are a few extra bits which the more dedicated coders will want. They’re simple enough to work out, but it’s time you might not want to have to look at. Consider this a round up post.

Perfect Blueprints

Perfecting blueprints is, in many cases, a waste of time. You want ‘good enough’, rather than perfect. It’s also unattainable for some. A Raven would take you over 4 million days to perfect. And half of that time (or so) would be to save a single Trit.

I don’t have a formula for a ‘good enough’ level. It’s very dependent on the types of materials being used. The Formula for perfect, for each material, is:

floor(Quantity*(\frac{(\frac{Waste Factor}{100})}{0.5})

If you want the perfect for an entire blueprint, pick the material with the highest quantity.

As before, the Waste Factor comes out of invBlueprintTypes.

Production Times

More details from invTypeBlueprints.

If the PE of the blueprint is 0 or above, the total time in seconds is:

productionTime*(1-(\frac{productivityModifier}{productionTime}*\frac{Blueprint PE}{1+Blueprint PE}))

If the PE of the blueprint below 0, the total time in seconds is:
productionTime*(1-(\frac{productivityModifier}{productionTime}*(Blueprint PE-1))

To then adjust it for your industry level

Time from Above * (1 - (0.04 * Industry))

So to recap, the time in the database is the maximum time it’ll take to manufacture something (assuming it’s not a negative PE), with everything else reducing the time. The changes also fall off rapidly. PE beyond 5 or so is often worthless.

Materials to invent off of something

select t.typeid,t.typeName, r.quantity
from ramTypeRequirements r,invTypes t,invBlueprintTypes bt 
where r.requiredTypeID = t.typeID 
and r.typeID = bt.blueprintTypeID
and r.activityID = 8
and bt.productTypeID=?;

The bind variable is what you’re making. You could simplify the query if you had the blueprint ID already, eliminating the join to invBlueprintTypes, going straight to ramTypeRequirements. It’s possible to pull the damage too, but the SDE currently says the Interface is used up.

If you want to eliminate the interface from the pulled materials, use this sql. It’s eliminating interface, by ignoring the group it belongs to. To pull just Interface, then turn the != into a =

select invTypes.typeid,invTypes.typename,ramTypeRequirements.quantity
from ramTypeRequirements,invBlueprintTypes,invTypes 
where producttypeid=?
and ramTypeRequirements.typeid=invBlueprintTypes.blueprintTypeID
and activityid=8
and invTypes.typeid=requiredTypeID
and groupid !=716;

Skills to manufacture something

select t.typeName Name, r.quantity Quantity
from ramTypeRequirements r,invTypes t,invBlueprintTypes bt,invGroups g
where r.requiredTypeID = t.typeID
and r.typeID = bt.blueprintTypeID
and r.activityID = 1
and bt.productTypeID=?
and g.categoryID = 16
and t.groupID = g.groupID

The bind variable is what you’re making. You could simplify the query if you had the blueprint ID already, eliminating the join to invBlueprintTypes, going straight to ramTypeRequirements.

Skills to invent something

This is a little bit of a pain. The skills are tied to the datacores and interface, rather than the job. Specifically they’re in dgmTypeAttributes, under the attributeIDs of 182 for the skill, and 277 for the level of the skill. As they’re done that way, pulling it with a single sql query is somewhat difficult, with a pivot table required (use if conditions, along with a max, then group them). When I’ve done it, I’ve just used 2 queries, and handled the pivoting in the code.

The skills

select t.typeid,t.typeName skill,r.requiredTypeID
from ramTypeRequirements r,invTypes t,invBlueprintTypes bt,
dgmTypeAttributes dta 
where coalesce(dta.valueInt,dta.valueFloat)= t.typeID
and r.typeID = bt.blueprintTypeID
and r.activityID = 8
and bt.productTypeID=?
and dta.typeid=r.requiredTypeID
and attributeID=182

The requiredTypeID refers to material you need the skill for. In this case, datacores and interfaces. Everything else is the skill.
The bind is what you’re making.

The skill levels

select r.requiredTypeID,coalesce(dta.valueInt,dta.valueFloat) level
from ramTypeRequirements r,invBlueprintTypes bt,dgmTypeAttributes dta
where r.typeID = bt.blueprintTypeID
and r.activityID = 8
and bt.productTypeID=587
and dta.typeid=r.requiredTypeID
and attributeID=277

The requiredTypeID refers to material you need the skill for. Level is the minimum level for the skill.

In the previous 2 queries you’ll have seen the use of coalesce. That’s because CCP seem to have had trouble deciding which to store the value in. It’s normally the valueInt, but not always.

Research times

researchMaterialTime and researchProductivityTime are straight out of invBlueprintTypes.

Material Efficency research

Per level:
researchMaterialTime*(1-(Your Metallurgy*0.05))

Productivity Level research

Per level:
researchProductivityTime *(1-(Your Research*0.05))

Times are all in seconds.

Getting Basic Blueprint Information

select productionTime,wasteFactor,productivityModifier,researchProductivityTime,researchMaterialTime
from invBlueprintTypes
where productTypeID=?;

This is most of the information needed in previous equations.

Is this obtainable through invention?

select parentTypeID
from invMetaTypes
where typeid=?
and metaGroupID=2

This will only return a result if you can invent the blueprint from another one. The parentTypeID is the typeid of the original type. Such as a rifter, if you’re looking at a wolf.

Chance to invent

This isn’t actually in the SDE. However, I found some handy sql to stick it into an table you can use for lookups. The type id is that of the product, rather than the blueprint.

create table inventionChance(typeid int,chance float);

insert into inventionChance (typeid,chance)
select typeid,CASE
WHEN t.groupID IN (419,27) OR t.typeID = 17476
THEN 0.20
WHEN t.groupID IN (26,28) OR t.typeID = 17478
THEN 0.25
WHEN t.groupID IN (25,420,513) OR t.typeID = 17480
THEN 0.30
WHEN EXISTS (SELECT * FROM eve.invMetaTypes WHERE parentTypeID = t.typeID AND metaGroupID = 2)
THEN 0.40
ELSE 0.00
end
from eve.invTypes t,eve.invBlueprintTypes b where b.producttypeid=t.typeid;

That’s everything for now. I’ll cover how I deal with price data in a later post, but it’s a little more involved, as I’m taking it all from EMDR‘s firehose, and depending on memcache.

Eve SDE SQL – Blueprint Details

As you may know, I’m the ‘author’ of one of the blueprint calculators that some people use in EVE Online. The one at http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/blueprints/

If you didn’t know that, how did you get here? 😉

Anyway, it’s not uncommon to see people asking how to get the materials for building something out of the Static Data Export; and as such, I thought I’d write up a post here that I can direct people to. Oh, and if you’re looking for the code for the blueprint calculator, take a look at https://github.com/fuzzysteve/eve-blueprint-calc It’s mostly up to date, just missing a few twiddly bits.

The SQL

Now for the meat of this post. Being able to run this SQL is dependent on having a copy of the SDE up and running. If you’re using anything other than mysql, postgresql or oracle, you may have problems with the greatest function, in the first bit of sql. replace it with a case statement. You’re wanting to return 0, if the value is negative.

select typeid,name,greatest(0,sum(quantity)) quantity from (
  select invTypes.typeid typeid,invTypes.typeName name,quantity
  from invTypes,invTypeMaterials
  where invTypeMaterials.materialTypeID=invTypes.typeID
   and invTypeMaterials.TypeID=?
  union
  select invTypes.typeid typeid,invTypes.typeName name,
         invTypeMaterials.quantity*r.quantity*-1 quantity
  from invTypes,invTypeMaterials,ramTypeRequirements r,invBlueprintTypes bt
  where invTypeMaterials.materialTypeID=invTypes.typeID
   and invTypeMaterials.TypeID =r.requiredTypeID
   and r.typeID = bt.blueprintTypeID
   and r.activityID = 1 and bt.productTypeID=? and r.recycle=1
) t group by typeid,name
SELECT t.typeName tn, r.quantity qn, r.damagePerJob dmg,t.typeID typeid
FROM ramTypeRequirements r,invTypes t,invBlueprintTypes bt,invGroups g
where r.requiredTypeID = t.typeID and r.typeID = bt.blueprintTypeID
and r.activityID = 1 and bt.productTypeID=? and g.categoryID != 16
and t.groupID = g.groupID

Notes

There are three bind variables in total, two in the first, one in the second. These are all the same value, the typeid of the item being manufactured. You could just replace them, but bind variables are your friend. Learn how to use them, and love them. People that do string replacement are asking for trouble. PHP has PDO, Perl has DBI, Python has DB-API, Java has JDBC. They all support bind variables.

The reason for the two queries is that CCP have split the materials into those affected by ME, which are also recovered when you recycle it (the base materials), and those which aren’t affected (the extra materials). The base materials query here doesn’t return the materials recovered, but that’s due to the removal of materials which are marked as recyclable in the extra materials.

Extra Credit

The queries above only give you the materials for a perfect blueprint. It’s rare that you actually have one, so you’ll need to take ME and Production Efficiency into account as well. The waste factor referred to in the formulas is that one that’s defined in invBlueprintTypes. Perfect is the number of the materials defined by the above queries.

If your ME is 0 or greater, then for each material in your base materials: round(Perfect + (Perfect * \frac{(\frac{Waste Factor}{ME of Blueprint+1})}{100}))

If your ME is less than 0, then for each material in your base materials: round(Perfect + (Perfect * (\frac{Waste Factor}{100}*(1-ME of Blueprint))))

If your production efficiency is less than 5, then you also need to add (Perfect*(0.25-(0.05*Production Efficiency))) to your materials. You only do this for:

  • Base materials
  • Extra materials that also appear in the base materials

If it’s 5, you’re adding a number that’s been multiplied by 0. You may wish to do this for completeness, or so that your code works for more than just your main producer.

That’s it for now. If you have any questions, feel free to ask here, or in Eve.

Scanning stuff. A text only tutorial

Exploration can be a pretty lucrative thing to do in EVE. It’s chance based, so you’ll spend a good deal of time scanning and finding only unstable wormholes, but if you have an appropriate ship to do what you find, you can make millions. It’s also somewhat more interesting than shooting red crosses 😉

 

Anyway, you’ll want the following:

  • The scanning skills. This is a minimum of Astrometrics 1. Get more. It helps. Astrometric Rangefinding is good as it’s stronger probes.
  • Core scanning probes. The only time to use Combat probes is if you’re looking for people. They’re half the strength of the core probes. Sisters Core probes are preferable. an extra 10% bonus to scan strength never hurts.
  • A probe launcher. The sisters launcher is a nice, but pricy bonus.
  • A scanning ship. Ideally a frigate (the one with the scan bonus), a covops frigate (If you have covops 3+) or a T3 with the right subsystem.
  • The scan strength rigs. Gravity Capacitor Upgrades.

The idea is to stack as many bonuses together as you possibly can. Because the stronger the strength, the easier it will be to scan down a signature. Keep another ship around to run them after, if you’re in ‘safe’ space.

 

Once you’ve got all that, go find a suitable system to scan. as signatures respawn elsewhere as soon as they despawn (or so it seems) don’t assume that heavy traffic systems will be clear.

How to scan:

  • Hit your scanner button. Make sure your scan filter is clear. Once you’re comfortable with it, you can change this.
  • Launch 4 probes.
  • Blow them up to 32AU range (select all of them in the scanner window, right click, and pick 32AU)
  • Hit the starmap button
  • Click and drag on the background, to shift the map around so you’re looking down from above, from a distance you can see the entire system from (assuming it’s not one of the /huge/ ones)
  • Using the arrows on each probe, move them into a diamond formation, with them overlapping in the middle. You want all 4 overlapping the other 3, as it’s only in that overlap you’ll get a fully locked signal. You might need to shift the map again to make sure it’s actually covering the system. Some places you’ll be in a system won’t be on the same plane as the others, so you’ll have to shift the probes down.

When moving the probes around, there are two useful keys.

  • Hold shift when resizing probes to resize them all. (click and drag on the shell of a probe to resize)
  • Hold shift when moving probes to move them all, in the pattern they’re in.
  • Hold alt when moving a probe, to move them all towards or away from the central point of their pattern.

The last two help when scaling down, as you resize them all (click and drag on the shell with shift held), then adjust them closer together (hold alt and drag one towards the others)

 

If you’ve followed the steps above, you’ll either be told no signatures detected (Bad luck, find another system or move your big pattern around in a huge system), or you’ll get one (or more) of the following:

A red sphere

This is an indication that only one of your probes has picked up this signature. It exists somewhere on the sphere. As signatures tend to be within 4 au of a celestial, this should help you localize it. and as you only have one probe detecting it, it’s not within the overlapping areas. Move your pattern of probes to more fully enclose the possible space and repeat.

A red circle

Two probes have picked it up, and it’s somewhere on that circle. As signatures tend to be within 4 au of a celestial, this should help you localize it. and as you only have two probe detecting it, it’s not within the overlapping areas with your other probes. Move your pattern of probes to more fully enclose the possible space and repeat.

Two red dots

You’ll know this one when you look at the list of signatures and see the same one twice. At this point, you have three probes detecting it. It’s often easy to eliminate one, as it’s far away from any celestial (more than 4au). move the probe that isn’t picking them up to cover both in it’s overlap and rescan. Or take a chance and assume it’s the one closer to the celestial. this isn’t a bad thing to do, if the other is a long way away. It’s a bad idea with 2au range probes.

One dot (red or yellow)

Now you’re cooking with gas. Recenter the pattern on the dot (On all axis. make sure to shift to a side on view too), rescale it down a level, and rescan. If you lose it, go up in scale and try again. It’s possible someone finished it, or you’re just that inaccurate (skills can reduce the inaccuracy). Once they’re yellow, you’ll get an indication of what they are

One green marker

If it’s not 100%, continue as above. If it is, bookmark it. the go run it, or continue scanning. If you can’t get it to 100%, sometimes you just have to leave it.

If you have more probes, feel free to use them. just overlap the other spheres from the top and bottom. I tend to start with 4 and add more if I can’t get a high enough signal strength.

Ship Fitting for Beginners – Part 1 – Tanking

There have been many words written on how to fit ships in EVE Online, but not so many written by me. So here are mine.

I’m not going to tell you ‘This is how you fit a ship.’ No-one can tell you that. There are no rules to follow which will give you a good ship. EVE is like that, which is one of the major selling points for me; no ‘right way’. But there are guidelines which can lead you to fit your ships in a ‘not bad’ way. There are many more bad ways to fit a ship, than there are good ways. And so, here are my guidelines; you’ll find some of them in the Rules of EVE page.

Tanking

Tanking refers to how you deal with damage coming at your ship. Almost all ships need a form of tank. The only one I can bring to mind that doesn’t, is a ship fitted for a suicide gank in highsec. Don’t think about combining them. There are very few places where this makes sense. Mixing your tank cripples your ship.

Here’s where it gets complex. You have a number of choices to make. First, pick one of the following.

  • Shield Tank: For ships with: A bonus to shield tanking, like shield resists or boosting. And for ships with more mid slots than low slots. Generally the fastest of the lot
  • Armour Tank: For ships with: A bonus to armour tanking, like armour resists or boosting. And for ships with more low slots than mid slots. More hit points, but slower than shield tanked ships
  • Hull Tank: Real men Hull tank. Or people who don’t have a choice. This probably isn’t you. Combat ships do not hull tank unless piloted by morons.

Next, pick from one of the following:

  • Active tanking : For people in PvE, and possibly frigate PvP. Other classes generally won’t last long enough for the repairs to make a difference.
  • Buffer Tanking : This can be used with all tank types. The idea is to increase the raw hit points you have using  shield extenders and armour plating, and to increase your resists to make those hit points worth more, using modules such as Adaptive Invulnerability Fields, and Energized Adaptive Nano Membranes. This is standard for PvP. In PvE, you’ll end up paying a lot for repairs, or refitting after missions with a repper.
  • Passive Tanking : This only applies to Shield Tanks. It is similar to a Buffer tank, but also covers increasing your shield regeneration rate. Great in PvE. Not so worth it in PvP

There are also other minor forms of tanking, which take more skill to use. I’m not covering them here.

  • Speed tanking: Travelling fast enough, close enough, at the right angles to make you hard to hit.
  • Signature tanking: Being so small that you’re hard to hit.

Now, most ships are easy to pick which to use. Take the Punisher, for example. It has more low slots than mid slots. And it has a bonus to armour resists. Other ships are a trifle harder. Some can be tanked either way. Spend time with a Fitting tool, such as EFT, Eve HQ or pyfa They will save you time and isk. Battleclinic isn’t a bad idea. Just bear in mind that bad fits end up there.

POS changes for EVE

This is all inspired by A post by Two step about where he’d like to see POSes going.

I pretty much agree with what he’s saying, but it inspired a few more detailed thoughts than I was happy putting into a comment on someone elses blog. So, I’m writing this one.

 

The method for placing POS modules appears to be a reasonable one. I’m happy enough with it as that is, except I’d like it to require modules to be connected, before they can be powered up. This would need a connector module, or another ‘useful’ module, like a lab, hanger, assembly aray, you name it. That way, you’ll have a ramshackle arrangement, but it’ll be a thing. Rather than a few disparate modules all hanging there, with some sort of power beaming tech, and wireless communications 😉

That pretty much matches with what was mentioned in fanfest. This is good.

 

I don’t like the central tower idea. It makes upgrading to another size more difficult, and it means someone can go ‘large tower, this much in the way of resources.’ What I do like, is the following:

  • Every module still requires a certain amount of power, and CPU.
  • Power is provided by dedicated power station modules, which have no CPU requirement, and each have their own fuel bay.
  • CPU is provided by dedicated control modules. These have a power requirement. If you have a charter requirement, they would go here. Possibly add charter requirements for SOV space (Sov holder’s choice) with a ‘Pirate’ Control module that avoids it, while providing significantly less.
  • The first module to be anchored is a power module. And this can be /anywhere/ in a system. No moon requirement.  Then a CPU module.
  • POS shields are provided by another module. Ideally with a variable power requirement, depending on the range you want. Multiple modules are possible, allowing for intercecting bubbles of POS shields. If you want to store a Titan in one, it’ll cost you a lot more power, requiring a more powerful Power station. If a shield is taken down, it exposes the things within it. Multiple shields reduce what is exposed. I wouldn’t want for the shields to be stackable though.
  • Power Stations come in a number of sizes, each providing a different quantity of power, and each using a different number of fuel blocks. A more powerful module may cost more than multiple smaller modules providing the same amount of power, but it requires less work to keep fueled, as it’s just one bay, rather than multiple. It’ll also take up less space, making shield requirements smaller.
  • Docking up is possible, but will require a dedicated module.
  • All station services are possible, but require dedicated modules for each. This includes market services, but they’re only advertised to people who have the standing to use it.
  • A cheap module to allow people to see your POS on the overview.
  • Defense modules as normal.
  • A ‘cloaking’ module, to make it harder to scan down. Including ships docked up in it. Hard, but not impossible to scan. The higher the power rating, the easier it is to scan. this can be mitigated by more cloaking modules. But these should be expensive to run, at least CPU wise.

 

As for anchoring, I’d open it up to allow individuals to do it for themselves, as well as on behalf of a Corp or Alliance, as well as allowing the transfer of the POS as a whole between any of the three. If the owner doesn’t have the standing for the POS increase the charter cost. Delegation of POS access should be from the Owner’s standings to th User/Corp/Alliance, with each level being overridden by the earlier. Ideally, like with the research services, you can allow access on a slot by slot basis, without people being able to change other people’s jobs.

Something I’m not sure about yet, is a War Dec immunity on a POS. If this was allowed, on the other hand, all services on the station would have to be made public (and on the overview), with a suitable cost cap. Possibly with an on-going cost, too. Pretty much to make it a break-even endevour. This would mostly to be to move things into player hands, and out of NPC hands, without the ability of wardecs to cripple high-sec. It doesn’t quite feel right though.

 

I’ll probably have another post, as I think about it more.