# Customs Offices need fuel requirement **URL:** \ **Category:** Player Features & Ideas\ **Tags:** planet-interaction\ **Created:** [May 29, 2022, 1:42am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592 "2022-05-29T01:42:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Maldiro\_Selkurk](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/maldiro_selkurk/32/368019_2.png) [@Maldiro\_Selkurk](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Maldiro_Selkurk)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2022, 1:42am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/1 "2022-05-29T01:42:55Z")
The proposed fuel requirement is intended to make local control more likely. The fuel usage would be low but the fuel bay would be small forcing someone to go and refuel it at some realtively short interval, like a week or two. If the fuel runs out so does any reinforcement timer and the station becomes public to pervent people from just dumping Offices all over the place to ‘spite’ anyone that wants to use the planet. ---
**Author:** ![Scarlett\_LaBlanc](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/scarlett_lablanc/32/358434_2.png) [@Scarlett\_LaBlanc](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Scarlett_LaBlanc)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2022, 3:13am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/2 "2022-05-29T03:13:55Z")
I really like the idea. Two weeks fuel on hand should be plenty if the owning organization is active and even remotely local. When it goes into an “unfueled” state the tax should default to 10% payable to some NPC entity. This would encourage destruction and replacement. ---
**Author:** ![Tarvahn\_Rostega](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/tarvahn_rostega/32/274549_2.png) [@Tarvahn\_Rostega](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Tarvahn_Rostega)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2022, 4:40am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/3 "2022-05-29T04:40:17Z")
As long as this doesn’t prevent other players from using the Customs Office to get their stuff off the planet when it’s out of fuel (although it would be an NPC getting the fees), then I see no problem with this. ---
**Author:** ![Zhalyd\_Lyehin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zhalyd_lyehin/32/358574_2.png) [@Zhalyd\_Lyehin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zhalyd_Lyehin)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2022, 5:13am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/4 "2022-05-29T05:13:40Z")
Considering how little lots of pocos earn, a fuel requirement only makes it less likely that places get a poco at all, and the places that do have them will have higher taxes to compensate the added fuel cost. I own a number of pocos with a very competitive tax rate. It took me over 2 months to recover the cost of 1 of them. This fuel requirement would prolong this time considerably and make it untenable to have them in the first place. Plus, your “goes public” feature is exploitable by letting pocos go public intentionally and then be refueled again, which forces people to either pay ridiculous taxes or waste ISK anyway because they have to tear their setup down and set it up again on another planet. > [@Scarlett\_LaBlanc](#): > > This would encourage destruction and replacement. Why would it do that when the previous poco with higher taxes didn’t? Why would it if you couldn’t attack it before because it belongs to someone who defends it? If someone wanted a poco gone because it prevents them from doing business, they would already declare war (if in HS) or attack it outright (if in LS) as it is. ![REDNES](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/4X/9/6/5/96524d53cb22e8d34dff925203908c55729b363e.png) ---
**Author:** ![Scarlett\_LaBlanc](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/scarlett_lablanc/32/358434_2.png) [@Scarlett\_LaBlanc](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Scarlett_LaBlanc)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2022, 6:21am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/5 "2022-05-29T06:21:45Z")
I don’t want to speak for the OP, but I’ll share my thoughts… > [@Zhalyd\_Lyehin](#): > > This fuel requirement would prolong this time considerably That would depend on the burn rate. The way I interpreted the OP’s post, the intention was a very low rate of consumption. More of a “tend your structure” than a real operational cost. I was thinking like 1-2 blocks a day. > [@Zhalyd\_Lyehin](#): > > your “goes public” feature is exploitable by letting pocos go public intentionally and then be refueled again That would be very true if the export tax was cheaper in the unfuled state. The unfuled NPC rate would have to be high enough to be unattractive but no so high as to make the planet completely unusable. As to my comment about encouraging destruction, that would be no different than the rash of medium structures that were destroyed when the “abandoned” state was introduced after time unfuled. An “abandoned” POCO would earn zero revenue for the owner and impose a higher tax on people using the planet. It would also imply (perhaps incorrectly) that it would not be defended. All reasons to encourage content in space. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_Deveron](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/max_deveron/32/245870_2.png) [@Max\_Deveron](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Max_Deveron)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2022, 2:06pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/6 "2022-05-29T14:06:15Z")
I like this idea with Scarlett’s added input. 2 weeks of fuel…ok sounds reasonable. Out of fuel POCO’s revert to 10% NPC tx, and no income for owner till fueled, interesting idea…customs tax code bring that down to 5% tax if maxed out. Think the only reason I like this idea is might give chance for **some** POCO’s to return to a local entity willing to put up with the annoyance of keeping them fueled. I highly doubt Omega and Blackflag will give up any surrounding any of the Trade Hubs. ---
**Author:** ![Dredwerkz](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/dredwerkz/32/282494_2.png) [@Dredwerkz](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Dredwerkz)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2022, 8:21pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/7 "2022-05-30T20:21:43Z")
> [@Zhalyd\_Lyehin](#): > > make it untenable to have them in the first place. Nah, it would just make it untenable for YOU to have one. The locals who want to use the planet will be more than happy to foot the bill. I think this is a great idea. You have to cycle your PI about once a day to get something good out of it. I fully support the same for the POCOs. Minimum fuelling once a day or the structure can be blasted. I also think the launch pad should be directly accessible from space. For a fee, or some fuel. I refuse to believe the only way to get on and off planet is the POCO. If it WASN’T the prices might actually be reasonable to encourage players to use them. As it stands, they are something known as a “monopoly.” ---
**Author:** ![MB\_ThePhotographer](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/mb_thephotographer/32/373722_2.png) [@MB\_ThePhotographer](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/MB_ThePhotographer)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2022, 9:01pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/8 "2022-05-30T21:01:14Z")
I would rather see it have a 2 wk(?) timer for a corp mate or other blue to use it or it goes offline. Maybe add that you lose ownership if that happens? No need for fuel. Next person can pop it without agro? No taking it over though. ---
**Author:** ![leavwiz](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/leavwiz/32/235353_2.png) [@leavwiz](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/leavwiz)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2022, 9:41pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/9 "2022-05-30T21:41:26Z")
Apparently you feel the administrative burden on corps isnt enough already. They recently made POCOs easier to kill, this sounds like just another ploy to make industrials fly around and be targets not to mention keeping track of it all. I personally have responsibility for 53 POCOs in 9 systems and i am not even a big corp. what you are proposing is just another headache that gains nothing of value for most players ---
**Author:** ![Scarlett\_LaBlanc](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/scarlett_lablanc/32/358434_2.png) [@Scarlett\_LaBlanc](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Scarlett_LaBlanc)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2022, 12:15am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/10 "2022-05-31T00:15:29Z")
> [@leavwiz](#): > > you feel the administrative burden on corps isnt enough already. No, i am very familiar with how the majority of work falls on a minority of players. The smaller the corp, the worse it becomes for those few that pitch in. The suggestion was not so much about making it “harder” but how “easy” a perpetual passive income source should be. > [@leavwiz](#): > > just another ploy to make industrials fly around and be targets I would expect that most people would agree that more ships in space and more opportunities for player interaction is a good thing. > [@leavwiz](#): > > I personally have responsibility for 53 POCOs in 9 systems and i am not even a big corp. Even in the era of passive moon mining, those POS’s had to be visited at minimum of once a month to continue collecting passive income. Your POCO’s will continue to produce passive income until someone blows them up or the server goes dark. You don’t even have to log in. No other structure works that way. I think it is reasonable that any structure that produces a passive income stream should require more interaction than “I placed it in space and forgot about it.” Visiting it once a month to drop 30 fuel blocks in it seems an extremely minor price to pay for that passive income. While i agree that visiting 53 POCO’s a month would be a burden on a small corp, I think that speaks more to it being reasonable for a small corp to control that many planets in than it does the merits of the idea presented. ---
**Author:** ![Zhalyd\_Lyehin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zhalyd_lyehin/32/358574_2.png) [@Zhalyd\_Lyehin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zhalyd_Lyehin)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2022, 5:07am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/11 "2022-05-31T05:07:04Z")
> [@Dredwerkz](#): > > Nah, it would just make it untenable for YOU to have one. The locals who want to use the planet will be more than happy to foot the bill. The locals can already use them or destroy them and place their own. This idea makes it harder for them to use them because they cost more and give less returns. > [@Dredwerkz](#): > > I think this is a great idea. You have to cycle your PI about once a day to get something good out of it. I fully support the same for the POCOs. Minimum fuelling once a day or the structure can be blasted. Daily fueling trips to your pocos? This is about the most fun and engaging treadmill idea that I have heard in a long time. In fact, I have not heard a better and more meaningful idea to make pocos better ever. > [@Dredwerkz](#): > > As it stands, they are something known as a “monopoly.” And monopolies are a driver for conflict. If you don’t like the monopoly, you are supposed to engage in the conflict driven nature of the game and kill it. > [@Scarlett\_LaBlanc](#): > > No other structure works that way. All outposts worked that way in the time when pocos were implemented. The drop and leave it running meant less useless busy work and more focus on actually reasonable, meaningful and enjoyable tasks. But as it stands, CCP nowadays is all about creating more useless, menial busywork. This idea fits right into this line of thought and will without a doubt be implemented as soon as CCP gets around to turn pocos into upwell structures. ![REDNES](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/4X/9/6/5/96524d53cb22e8d34dff925203908c55729b363e.png) ---
**Author:** ![Maldiro\_Selkurk](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/maldiro_selkurk/32/368019_2.png) [@Maldiro\_Selkurk](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Maldiro_Selkurk)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2022, 11:21pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/12 "2022-05-31T23:21:18Z")
> [@Zhalyd\_Lyehin](#): > > Plus, your “goes public” feature is exploitable by letting pocos go public intentionally and then be refueled again, which forces people to either pay ridiculous taxes or waste ISK anyway because they have to tear their setup down and set it up again on another planet. Can you re-word this as written I have no idea what you are trying to say. ---
**Author:** ![Maldiro\_Selkurk](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/maldiro_selkurk/32/368019_2.png) [@Maldiro\_Selkurk](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Maldiro_Selkurk)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2022, 11:26pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/13 "2022-05-31T23:26:34Z")
Killing something in highsec space should always cause an aggression flag. Your idea on the whole; however, is along the lines of my own and I could support such a change. ---
**Author:** ![Maldiro\_Selkurk](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/maldiro_selkurk/32/368019_2.png) [@Maldiro\_Selkurk](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Maldiro_Selkurk)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2022, 11:30pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/14 "2022-05-31T23:30:28Z")
I disagree, I think just the opposite, that most players would gain from this, not lose. Also, it is you that Im trying to get under control. You say you are responsible for 53 POCOS, you should have to work for the ISK, not just set and forget. We have to work to get our 2 cents worth of PI product on, at most 2 week basis but most people probably do so every few days. You should have to work every week or two as well to keep earning your pay. ---
**Author:** ![Maldiro\_Selkurk](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/maldiro_selkurk/32/368019_2.png) [@Maldiro\_Selkurk](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Maldiro_Selkurk)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2022, 11:38pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/15 "2022-05-31T23:38:59Z")
A person or two have mentioned that the taxes when the system goes public should be high but not too high, I agree with this. There maybe be other concerns as well that we havent even come across in this discussion but POCOs need a fuel requirement. ---
**Author:** ![MB\_ThePhotographer](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/mb_thephotographer/32/373722_2.png) [@MB\_ThePhotographer](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/MB_ThePhotographer)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2022, 12:47am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/16 "2022-06-01T00:47:59Z")
Considering all the poco’s I had, I say no. I visited mine enough that it should count. (3 times a wk per toon) Fine if you want the option to pay fuel if you want to wait over 2 wks. I risk enough as it is. I don’t need the extra bs. ---
**Author:** ![Dredwerkz](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/dredwerkz/32/282494_2.png) [@Dredwerkz](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Dredwerkz)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2022, 1:33am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/17 "2022-06-01T01:33:03Z")
What do you think about having to move resource collectors in PI every day? Busy work. What do you think about mining ships automatically changing targets when an asteroid is depleted? Busy work. What do you think about having to manually click each jump gate to travel in a reasonable amount of time? Busy work. Coming from someone who bothers to add an image to the end of every post you make? Admit it, you absolutely love some busy work. But only when it helps you. ---
**Author:** ![MB\_ThePhotographer](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/mb_thephotographer/32/373722_2.png) [@MB\_ThePhotographer](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/MB_ThePhotographer)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2022, 1:47am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/18 "2022-06-01T01:47:57Z")
To add to that. Try doing it in a wh. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_Deveron](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/max_deveron/32/245870_2.png) [@Max\_Deveron](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Max_Deveron)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2022, 3:43am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/19 "2022-06-01T03:43:44Z")
https://www.youtube.com/embed/Hen92QFrDUo?feature=oembed&wmode=opaque&list=PLQvKSs1k6DLOiGGb44McruXcndTtzUUlu original concept of upwell structures, 21:18 in…taking over Custom Office functions, took me a bit of time to find this…im going to continue my research into these original concepts, so im going to watch the older videos of Fanfest Upwell concepts. personally i feel CCP should of continued with this idea, get rid of Custom offices, and just let us put Upwells around a planet. ---
**Author:** ![Zhalyd\_Lyehin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zhalyd_lyehin/32/358574_2.png) [@Zhalyd\_Lyehin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Zhalyd_Lyehin)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2022, 5:01am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592/20 "2022-06-01T05:01:19Z")
And you really think I want more of that unrewarding, annoying crap that does nothing but create more tasks for the sake of tasks without improving a single thing? ![REDNES](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/4X/9/6/5/96524d53cb22e8d34dff925203908c55729b363e.png) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/customs-offices-need-fuel-requirement/364592.md?page=2)