Shutdown of Holiday Mode

[Burning]

Turning off the need of supplying PoBs would be too extreme, yes. I had a rather spontanous idea: Let's have shipment event on random PoBs on a weekly basis. If it's technically possible. Every weekend, an event would trigger and it's announced, that a random PoB (with Core 2 and higher) needs to be supplied. Given every Core 2+ PoB is there with legitimate RP background and with IFF, it would be possible to let the system create a new commodity (Outpost Supply Commodities) that's spawned on a station with the same IFF as the PoB 2 or 3 systems away. Now the PoB gives a bonus for that commodity (which is not from the PoB bank account) and every pirate / criminal base has a set amount of bonus they get for this commodity. Every pirate / criminal ID gets a kill bonus (not as high as selling it on the pirate base) on ships that have the Outpost Supply Commodities loaded.

This way, supplying PoBs would not be as boring and would actually lead to interaction and activity in an always changing region.

Sorry for the text, but the spontanous idea just became very interesting to me. What do you think about it?

[Laura C.]

Regarding the idea of no tear and wear damage at all - result will be massive spam of POBs over time.

Just from top of my head what this can cause: Player wants to make money by mining but doesn´t have a friend to transfer ore from miner to 5k trader. If all he has to do is just build POB (what takes like an hour to gather needed commodities), he can build one his very own POB near the mining field (or even more fields in case one will be endangered by pirates) and then just use it/them without any drawback like invested time and money for maintenance. Imagine how spammed with tens of POBs locations in and around mining fields will be when players will start to do this. Especially if unused bases will stay there "forever" because there won´t be basic regulation in form of base destructions due to no supplies.

Not to mention spam caused by all those players which will just want to have that feeling of having their own piece of space. If all you have to do is invest hour of playing, many and many players will build their POB just because they can and nothing is required from them after the base is built.

---

On a ragebreak. Or ragequit. Time will tell.

[Burning]

Result of no tear and wear damage will be massive spam of POBs over time.

Just from top of my head what this can cause: Player wants to make money by mining but doesn´t have a friend to transfer ore from miner to 5k trader. If all he has to do is just build POB (what takes like an hour to gather needed commodities), he can build one his very own POB near the mining field (or even more fields in case one will be endangered by pirates) and then just use it/them without any drawback like invested time and money for maintenance. Imagine how spammed with tens of POBs locations in and around mining fields will be when players will start to do this. Especially if unused bases will stay there "forever" because there won´t be basic regulation in form of base destructions due to no supplies.

Not sure if you were talking directly to me, but that could be countered easily by just activating the need to supply for Core 1 PoBs.
Those PoBs which are meant to stay on the long run will level up to Core 2 anyways. Those who wish to keep Core 1's have to supply them and spammed Core 1's delete themselves after none supplied them.

[Lythrilux]

Result of no tear and wear damage will be massive spam of POBs over time.

Just from top of my head what this can cause: Player wants to make money by mining but doesn´t have a friend to transfer ore from miner to 5k trader. If all he has to do is just build POB (what takes like an hour to gather needed commodities), he can build one his very own POB near the mining field (or even more fields in case one will be endangered by pirates) and then just use it/them without any drawback like invested time and money for maintenance. Imagine how spammed with tens of POBs locations in and around mining fields will be when players will start to do this. Especially if unused bases will stay there "forever" because there won´t be basic regulation in form of base destructions due to no supplies.

Bad POBs will simply be destroyed or regulated by the rules before then at least. People already gang up to deal with troublesome POBs, why would this change things?

And what you've described is more or less how all Ore POBs work anyway.

---

[Laura C.]

Result of no tear and wear damage will be massive spam of POBs over time.

Just from top of my head what this can cause: Player wants to make money by mining but doesn´t have a friend to transfer ore from miner to 5k trader. If all he has to do is just build POB (what takes like an hour to gather needed commodities), he can build one his very own POB near the mining field (or even more fields in case one will be endangered by pirates) and then just use it/them without any drawback like invested time and money for maintenance. Imagine how spammed with tens of POBs locations in and around mining fields will be when players will start to do this. Especially if unused bases will stay there "forever" because there won´t be basic regulation in form of base destructions due to no supplies.

Not sure if you were talking directly to me, but that could be countered easily by just activating the need to supply for Core 1 PoBs.
Those PoBs which are meant to stay on the long run will level up to Core 2 anyways. Those who wish to keep Core 1's have to supply them and spammed Core 1's delete themselves after none supplied them.

It was not reply to you, but the idea of no wear and tear damage. The solution you propose won´t help much in my opinion, because if players will know that they need to reach core 2 to stop the annoying part of having POB, they will focus on that, do it as soon as possible and then we are back at problem of POB spam.

---

On a ragebreak. Or ragequit. Time will tell.

[Laura C.]

Result of no tear and wear damage will be massive spam of POBs over time.

Just from top of my head what this can cause: Player wants to make money by mining but doesn´t have a friend to transfer ore from miner to 5k trader. If all he has to do is just build POB (what takes like an hour to gather needed commodities), he can build one his very own POB near the mining field (or even more fields in case one will be endangered by pirates) and then just use it/them without any drawback like invested time and money for maintenance. Imagine how spammed with tens of POBs locations in and around mining fields will be when players will start to do this. Especially if unused bases will stay there "forever" because there won´t be basic regulation in form of base destructions due to no supplies.

Bad POBs will simply be destroyed or regulated by the rules before then at least. People already gang up to deal with troublesome POBs, why would this change things?

And what you've described is more or less how all Ore POBs work anyway.

Destroying POBs is far from fun, not to mention the tears it sometimes causes. With no tear and wear damage, there will be higher interest in POBs and thus more of these situations which bring only negatives. I definitely don´t see that as good thing.

---

On a ragebreak. Or ragequit. Time will tell.

[Felipe]

Maybe changing to from Core 3 onwards then? Where RP is required to get the blueprints?

Anyway, i think that the never ending hauling for pobs indeed is tiresome and get to a point u turn pc on ranting against pobs, but having saw some 4 or 5 pobs popup just in omega-7 last year, and having saw 3 in Munich, if not all most of em way too close (or even inside) fields, if need to choose between no wear&tear or as is usually, i prefer keep as it is usually.

Making core one and two (that just need be done, and nothing apart hauling required) being "immortal" *can* indeed lead to pob spamm.

I still would like to point out that as Kruger i atm need keep 3 pobs supplied.

---

User was banned for: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2329969
Time left: (Permanent)

[Thyrzul]

As talked about in OFL:

I think the grindy aspects of POBs greatly limit their potential to be an enriching and interesting feature of the mod. The mechanics for POBs right now force people to build them in the same locations over and over again for the sake of gameplay (having a decent FOW source to limit the tedious grind). Exploring POBs for the sake of roleplay is in the majority of cases - unless they're convenient gameplay wise - a waste of time.

The 'rewards' you reap from owning a POB are okay at best and don't really compensate for the time and effort you put in. In my experience, you end up supplying the POB not because you want to, or because it's profitable, but because you don't want the guilt of letting all that effort go down the drain.

Back when we had completely empty systems (Yukon etc) I always fantasized how cool it would be if players could actively colonize and contest those systems themselves with POBs. Unfortunately, POBs are so horrendous to manage that such a dream is impossible.

This change wouldn't affect the siege mechanics.

As talked about in OFL:

The balancing aspect of maintenance supply balances and limits location along two variables: costs/distance, and the amount of people taking care of the base in question, you can minimize required individual effort by either picking the location carefully, or involve more people in the project. If you purposefully decide to have a PoB while aiming to as little effort required, it's partially you limiting your own choices of location. Besides it's far not the only factor limiting where you can place PoBs.

As I said, having a PoB is not an obligation, but a choice, it is up to you or anyone else if you/them want to maintain a base for whatever reasons. It is up to one's own judgement to consider cost, time investment, possible profits, fulfillment of goal, viability, environment, relations with the locals, measure how all these balance out resulting in a gain or loss, and then decide for or against base construction.*

If the goal is having a storage for commodities, like ores, make use of the feature, like single-player ore trade, for enough profit to maintain it. If the goal is module construction for sale, make sure you can sell enough that it returns some cash, if it's for yourself, make it to cost the least possible. If the goal is to have a base as an instrument for roleplay, it's entirely up to your own judgement how far you want to go with it and how much you consider it being worthy. I personally had no issues roleplaying with a PoB almost six years ago for three months, I don't really consider my own potential being limited there, not really having any regrets either.

Many I see complaining that it becomes a chore over time, but it's pretty much that point when it has to stop: when you feel it doesn't worth keeping the base alive anymore, it's just about time to stop supplying it, because after that point it indeed becomes a waste of time and effort. If it is no more use for you, just let it go. If you feel letting it go will make all the effort to keep it alive until that point go to waste, you are already past turning it into a chore for yourself and going on will just make it worse.

---

* Council has a project planned, for which I've designed a massive spreadsheet calculating various things such as commodity distance, cost, sell prices, profit, weekly maintenance cost, supply time with 3-5kers, module and factory cash and time costs, ship module costs, price planner, market comparator, rate of return calculator, etc. it's still a WIP with plenty of planned features, but in the end I plan to turn it into an entirely customizable version and share it.

---

[sasapinjic]

You disscus in vain people, there will be no change in POB suplay method weither you agree here or not!

---

Spoiler

welcome to Loberty
^ where you can get Freelancer ISO , in emergency

These two spoilers were too big so now they're both one ~Champ

[JorgeRyan]

I'd be interested in seeing a rebalance of PoB feeding. FOW is usually pretty easy anyway, except at core 5, but by then you no longer need the ~8600 RA/day, which is the main time comsumer of feeding imo.