Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sean Parisi
Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T
636
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 10:34:08 -
[1] - Quote
This is something that crept up on me. A player that is podded while inside a NPC corporation will cause you to receive a standing hit from 8-75% loss. This also apparently transfers over to limited engagements (Where you pod the player without concordable recourse)
For example if you were to look at my standing sheet it is as follows:
Perkone -10 (-50% Combat Pord Kill, -8% Combat Ship Kill) Federal Defense Union -10 (-75% Combat Pod Kill, -75% Combat Pod Kill, -12% Ship Kill, -12% Ship Kill, -75% Combat Pod Kill) State Protectorate -10 (-12% Ship Kill, - 75% Pod Kill, -75% Pod Kill, -12% Ship Kill, 12 Ship Kill, -75% Pod Kill, -3% Combat Aggression, ETC ETC) Tribal Liberation Force -10 The Scope -10 Royal Amar Institute -5
Note: All of these standing losses were incurred while Podding players in day-to-day PvP; with no FW Awoxing involved at all.
So my question is this - Why is it that I suffer a penalty when podding players in NPC corporations when those players would receive no penalty for podding me outside of the standard security hit.
In these cases it seems like an unfair reprisal. We all understand that Podding another player unless with a limited engagement (or if suspect / pirate) we will lose security status. Something which can be gained quite easily. But why is it that NPC corporation based players who engage freely in PvP (with limited engagement timers) receive a benefit of screwing you PVE wise?
What is everyone elses opinions on this? Do you feel this is a fair mechanic or that it is too punishing - especially considering NPC corporation players gain the benefit.
*Note, Not all NPC corporation members are newbies - some are war target alts following you around with an alt to get free intel.
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
143
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 10:38:42 -
[2] - Quote
What's the point? Don't mission for NPC corps which can host player chars, and you should be fine. I even have bad standings with my own NPC corp due to podding.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Sean Parisi
Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T
636
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 10:40:38 -
[3] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:What's the point? Don't mission for NPC corps which can host player chars, and you should be fine.
Because it provides an advantage to NPC based corporate players. For example - FW Corporate missions are quite lucrative, something I would like to run should I return to FW. However, having my Standing slaughtered by FW NPC Corp members who engage me seems somewhat stupid? |
Major Trant
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
1300
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 11:23:12 -
[4] - Quote
I suffered from this while in the Minmatar Militia. I was running a plex when a 'friendly' player in the TLF came into the plex. He attacked me and I was forced to kill him, then scrammed his pod while I linked a post showing how to set up his overview. Eventually I let the pod go.
I then realized my perfect standing to the TLF had dropped from +10 to -6. I petitioned it stating that he shot first and I had a limited engagement flag running. The GM fobbed me off 'Working as intended'. I don't agree with it, at best no standing loss should occur if you are not taking a security hit. In addition Militia AWOXers in particularly are exploiting this mechanic to make it detrimental to aggress them even in response to their attacks.
It is clear the system differentiates between NPC and player ships even if they are in the same corp. Cause you don't get concorded, gate gunned or sec status hit for killing an NPC. So it should be possible to make is so that Player ships don't grant corp standing losses and that needs to happen. |
Sean Parisi
Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T
636
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 11:34:26 -
[5] - Quote
Major Trant wrote:I suffered from this while in the Minmatar Militia. I was running a plex when a 'friendly' player in the TLF came into the plex. He attacked me and I was forced to kill him, then scrammed his pod while I linked a post showing how to set up his overview. Eventually I let the pod go.
I then realized my perfect standing to the TLF had dropped from +10 to -6. I petitioned it stating that he shot first and I had a limited engagement flag running. The GM fobbed me off 'Working as intended'. I don't agree with it, at best no standing loss should occur if you are not taking a security hit. In addition Militia AWOXers in particularly are exploiting this mechanic to make it detrimental to aggress them even in response to their attacks.
It is clear the system differentiates between NPC and player ships even if they are in the same corp. Cause you don't get concorded, gate gunned or sec status hit for killing an NPC. So it should be possible to make is so that Player ships don't grant corp standing losses and that needs to happen.
Yeah that is quite a silly situation. I can understand slightly blurred lines when viewing how AWOXING works. But even from a perspective of this: I am not in a FW corporation as of current, I am sitting in a FW complex - State Protectorate, Perkone or whatever NPC Corporation based player comes and attacks me - said player is not apart of same Militia, yet when I kill the player and rightfully pod them- I lose Standings with their corporation?
Most of the Starter corporations are semi Useless to have standings with (However, you shouldn't standing points when the other guy won't for Podding you). However, when you apply this to FW - especially people outside of it. The fact you lose such extreme amounts of standings is quite ridiculous. Already, you will lose derivative standings from Rank ups with whole factions - with the addition of losing standing via killing Mission rats. But in this case it is acceptable because you are literally attacking and benefiting from the attacking of said NPC corporation. Players however, should not be calculated in standings at all - unless their is a specific system for it.
In this case every pilot is a "Wild card" who you have to check before killing. If anything it acts as a deterrent to killing other players in Low Sec - even when you are legitimately engaged. At no point did I ever see anything telling me I would lost standings for killing other players; However possible security status loss has always been accepted - making this somewhat of a hidden mechanic in itself. |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
144
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 11:39:38 -
[6] - Quote
Sean Parisi wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:What's the point? Don't mission for NPC corps which can host player chars, and you should be fine. Because it provides an advantage to NPC based corporate players. For example - FW Corporate missions are quite lucrative, something I would like to run should I return to FW. However, having my Standing slaughtered by FW NPC Corp members who engage me seems somewhat stupid? Works as intended, you are not part of the FW system and are messing around with militia members, what you expect? Also I think you still can join a player corp enlisted in FW if your standing is too low to get into an NPC corp.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Sean Parisi
Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T
636
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 11:46:34 -
[7] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Sean Parisi wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:What's the point? Don't mission for NPC corps which can host player chars, and you should be fine. Because it provides an advantage to NPC based corporate players. For example - FW Corporate missions are quite lucrative, something I would like to run should I return to FW. However, having my Standing slaughtered by FW NPC Corp members who engage me seems somewhat stupid? Works as intended, you are not part of the FW system and are messing around with militia members, what you expect? Also I think you still can join a player corp enlisted in FW if your standing is too low to get into an NPC corp.
This applies outside of FW and in regular Low Sec / High Sec Duels - As long as the person being killed is in an NPC corp - even if they are the aggressor.
Please tell me why you deserve a bonus repercussion to engagements against you for being in an NPC corp when I myself am in a player corp and receive none of said benefit?
Also the reason people join FW is for PvP with the additional bonus of being able to make ISK on the side. Why should the incentive to provide content be prevented because of some backwards system that benefits some players but not all? |
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2135
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 11:49:50 -
[8] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Sean Parisi wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:What's the point? Don't mission for NPC corps which can host player chars, and you should be fine. Because it provides an advantage to NPC based corporate players. For example - FW Corporate missions are quite lucrative, something I would like to run should I return to FW. However, having my Standing slaughtered by FW NPC Corp members who engage me seems somewhat stupid? Works as intended, you are not part of the FW system and are messing around with militia members, what you expect? Also I think you still can join a player corp enlisted in FW if your standing is too low to get into an NPC corp.
Do you even read before you post? No nevermind, don't answer.
Yes, it's silly and I very very much doubt it is working as intented. It seems like a big glaring oversight to me that has been there for a while. It doesn't just apply to FW corps but all NPC corps and it is more than a little silly. |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
144
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 12:02:47 -
[9] - Quote
Kiandoshia wrote: Yes, it's silly and I very very much doubt it is working as intented. It seems like a big glaring oversight to me that has been there for a while. It doesn't just apply to FW corps but all NPC corps and it is more than a little silly.
It does not apply to all NPC corps but only to those which can host players, namely a few starter and returning corps plus the militia NPC corps. Intended or not, I still don't see that this is a big point (putting the awoxing matter described above aside). I'm not aware that you can lose faction standing with this mechanic (not being in a militia), this would be a big issue.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Wendrika Hydreiga
258
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 12:05:23 -
[10] - Quote
The whole standings system is a sordid afair, with no signs of ever being fixed (or make logical sense). Specially when you throw diplomacy into the deal.
A real pity though. |
|
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2135
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 12:11:29 -
[11] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Kiandoshia wrote: Yes, it's silly and I very very much doubt it is working as intented. It seems like a big glaring oversight to me that has been there for a while. It doesn't just apply to FW corps but all NPC corps and it is more than a little silly.
It does not apply to all NPC corps but only to those which can host players, namely a few starter and returning corps plus the militia NPC corps. Intended or not, I still don't see that this is a big point (putting the awoxing matter described above aside). I'm not aware that you can lose faction standing with this mechanic (not being in a militia), this would be a big issue.
Yes, it may not be a huge game breaking issue, unless you really like to run missions for those corps but don't tell me it is working as intended... I'm sure none of this is intended and all of it has just been left to run its course for the last 10 years and no one ever bothered to look into it because in the grand scheme of things nobody cares. That's right.
It's still a big oversight, or it seems that way to me anyways, that wont make any sense to anyone who hasn't grasped the grand scheme of things yet (I'd guess everyone who has been playing for less than a year and has less than 2 accounts =P ) |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
144
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 12:21:00 -
[12] - Quote
Sean Parisi wrote: Please tell me why you deserve a bonus repercussion to engagements against you for being in an NPC corp when I myself am in a player corp and receive none of said benefit?
Also the reason people join FW is for PvP with the additional bonus of being able to make ISK on the side. Why should the incentive to provide content be prevented because of some backwards system that benefits some players but not all?
I still don't get it, why you think NPC corps have a benefit? There are only lost standings in the equation, how can this translate to a plus on one side? Actually being in a player corp is beneficial as you can't screw up your standing with your own corp, which can happen being in an NPC corp.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Sean Parisi
Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T
636
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 12:32:25 -
[13] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Sean Parisi wrote: Please tell me why you deserve a bonus repercussion to engagements against you for being in an NPC corp when I myself am in a player corp and receive none of said benefit?
Also the reason people join FW is for PvP with the additional bonus of being able to make ISK on the side. Why should the incentive to provide content be prevented because of some backwards system that benefits some players but not all?
I still don't get it, why you think NPC corps have a benefit? There are only lost standings in the equation, how can this translate to a plus on one side? Actually being in a player corp is beneficial as you can't screw up your standing with your own corp, which can happen being in an NPC corp.
*Me - Former Faction Warfare Player, I used to make a large amount of my day-to-day profit form doing missions with the state protectorate when I was new. I have a 10 standing with said State Protectorate. In future I may want to go back to Faction Warfare for its rich PvP environment and ISK Potential.
However, Player A - Who is a part of the State Protectorate (Me being Neutral and not in FW) am sitting in an Asteroid belt when he engages me - He is a part of an NPC corporation. He fires on me, I fire back and eventually kill him - I then POD him with the limited engagement timer and go from 10+ Standing with the State Protectorate to -5 / -10 Instantly.
Now 2 months from now I join Faction Warfare on the Caldari side. Its a slow day, I've killed a few people - Now I will go mission. But wait... Even though I had never shot a State Protectorate Rat and had done a thousand or so Level 4's for said group - I am sitting a -5 / -10 for one or two POD kills. Now In order for me to do them again, I will have to grind level ones for a whole -10 of standing.
Do you see how that is broken?
The other player does not just risk hurting me - with the possibility to pod me with no loss. But they also hurt my standings and my ability to enjoy other parts of the game whether intentional or not. When they are the ones who engaged me. |
Major Trant
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
1301
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 12:36:57 -
[14] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:I still don't get it, why you think NPC corps have a benefit? There are only lost standings in the equation, how can this translate to a plus on one side? Actually being in a player corp is beneficial as you can't screw up your standing with your own corp, which can happen being in an NPC corp. Read my post above! There is a clear dis-incentive to poding a player in an NPC corp. He can pod me happily, but even shooting his ship after he engaged me resulted in a punishment to me. If he hadn't scrammed me I would have been better off warping out than shooting back.
That certainly isn't working as intended. |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
144
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 14:30:20 -
[15] - Quote
Major Trant wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:I still don't get it, why you think NPC corps have a benefit? There are only lost standings in the equation, how can this translate to a plus on one side? Actually being in a player corp is beneficial as you can't screw up your standing with your own corp, which can happen being in an NPC corp. Read my post above! There is a clear dis-incentive to poding a player in an NPC corp. He can pod me happily, but even shooting his ship after he engaged me resulted in a punishment to me. If he hadn't scrammed me I would have been better off warping out than shooting back. That certainly isn't working as intended. Agreed, podding NPC corpies screws your standing with the player's corp. Outside FW this is of little impact, as you can choose to mission with other corps. It does not screw faction standing, so you still can join FW or a FW player corp. Fleet up running a couple of lvl4/lvl3 missions and your corp standing should be fixed soon (I assume the mechanic is the same as standing share in non-FW missions ...). As I said faction standing is not the problem, which would be rather painful to fix.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
6075
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 14:40:44 -
[16] - Quote
I say standing losses should be determined by the relative standing between your standing to corporations/factions the victim has good standings with and even go in the opposite direction, you gain standing with corporations the victim has terrible standing with. If the difference is 5 or more, standings modifications incur.
So if you keep popping high-sec carebears, you will find the pirate factions cheering for you, will getting boos from the empire.
Sovereignty and Population
New Mining Mechanics
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2781
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 15:36:16 -
[17] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Agreed, podding NPC corpies screws your standing with the player's corp. Outside FW this is of little impact, as you can choose to mission with other corps. It does not screw faction standing, so you still can join FW or a FW player corp. Fleet up running a couple of lvl4/lvl3 missions and your corp standing should be fixed soon (I assume the mechanic is the same as standing share in non-FW missions ...). As I said faction standing is not the problem, which would be rather painful to fix. Except that those player-run FW corps will flat-out reject you because your standing will bring down the corporation's standing, which is a requirement for being in FW.
The whole standings thing is why I stopped caring about FW and shelved my FW character.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Nerath Naaris
Pink Winged Unicorns for Peace Love and Anarchy
957
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 15:44:45 -
[18] - Quote
CCP should generally rethink standing and - more importantly - security loss for Podding now that there is no longer any danger of losing skillpoints.
Forum-unbanned since 2011.10.20.
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
144
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 16:00:04 -
[19] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:Agreed, podding NPC corpies screws your standing with the player's corp. Outside FW this is of little impact, as you can choose to mission with other corps. It does not screw faction standing, so you still can join FW or a FW player corp. Fleet up running a couple of lvl4/lvl3 missions and your corp standing should be fixed soon (I assume the mechanic is the same as standing share in non-FW missions ...). As I said faction standing is not the problem, which would be rather painful to fix. Except that those player-run FW corps will flat-out reject you because your standing will bring down the corporation's standing, which is a requirement for being in FW. Corporate standing is irrelevant for joining and staying in FW, you need to have a positive or zero faction standing, which is not in jeopardy here.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2781
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 16:05:27 -
[20] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:Agreed, podding NPC corpies screws your standing with the player's corp. Outside FW this is of little impact, as you can choose to mission with other corps. It does not screw faction standing, so you still can join FW or a FW player corp. Fleet up running a couple of lvl4/lvl3 missions and your corp standing should be fixed soon (I assume the mechanic is the same as standing share in non-FW missions ...). As I said faction standing is not the problem, which would be rather painful to fix. Except that those player-run FW corps will flat-out reject you because your standing will bring down the corporation's standing, which is a requirement for being in FW. Corporate standing is irrelevant for joining and staying in FW, you need to have a positive or zero faction standing, which is not in jeopardy here. If that's the case (and I really don't remember since it's been years since I was active in FW), then this can still prevent you from joining the NPC FW corporations if you pvp the "wrong" targets. That's not a good thing. But tbh, I remember something about screwing up my standings and being unwanted by FW corporations from one of the sides in the conflict, so it would be nice if someone posts here to confirm whether it's just the corporate standing, or the faction standing as well.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
|
Sean Parisi
Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T
636
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 16:09:50 -
[21] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:Agreed, podding NPC corpies screws your standing with the player's corp. Outside FW this is of little impact, as you can choose to mission with other corps. It does not screw faction standing, so you still can join FW or a FW player corp. Fleet up running a couple of lvl4/lvl3 missions and your corp standing should be fixed soon (I assume the mechanic is the same as standing share in non-FW missions ...). As I said faction standing is not the problem, which would be rather painful to fix. Except that those player-run FW corps will flat-out reject you because your standing will bring down the corporation's standing, which is a requirement for being in FW. Corporate standing is irrelevant for joining and staying in FW, you need to have a positive or zero faction standing, which is not in jeopardy here. If that's the case (and I really don't remember since it's been years since I was active in FW), then this can still prevent you from joining the NPC FW corporations if you pvp the "wrong" targets. That's not a good thing. But tbh, I remember something about screwing up my standings and being unwanted by FW corporations from one of the sides in the conflict, so it would be nice if someone posts here to confirm whether it's just the corporate standing, or the faction standing as well.
It is faction standing. Essentially if the standing is below 0.1+ (Around that) then the individual or corp is unable to join the Militia in question. Corporate standing in regards to FW is more so to run missions / not get aggroed by rats and for promotions (As your corporate standing with the Militia Corporate Faction goes up you will receive promotions which then provide you with faction standing bonuses.
However, I still stand by the fact that losing standing for engaging another player in PvP is a ridiculous mechanic. Especially when it is never mentioned and only matters if said player is within an "NPC Corporation" |
March rabbit
Federal Defense Union
1545
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 16:56:33 -
[22] - Quote
Sean Parisi wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:What's the point? Don't mission for NPC corps which can host player chars, and you should be fine. Because it provides an advantage to NPC based corporate players. For example - FW Corporate missions are quite lucrative, something I would like to run should I return to FW. However, having my Standing slaughtered by FW NPC Corp members who engage me seems somewhat stupid? Technically it is not 'FW NPC Corp members who engage me' but your decision to pod them AFTER you already won the engagement.
That's your only decision so you have decided it for yourself to lose standings.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
281
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 17:44:50 -
[23] - Quote
I had this issue happen a while ago.. I petitioned and the standing loss was reversed (due to the pod being GCC).. Doubt they would do that for suspects or in FW though. |
Sean Parisi
Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T
636
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:06:54 -
[24] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Sean Parisi wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:What's the point? Don't mission for NPC corps which can host player chars, and you should be fine. Because it provides an advantage to NPC based corporate players. For example - FW Corporate missions are quite lucrative, something I would like to run should I return to FW. However, having my Standing slaughtered by FW NPC Corp members who engage me seems somewhat stupid? Technically it is not 'FW NPC Corp members who engage me' but your decision to pod them AFTER you already won the engagement. That's your only decision so you have decided it for yourself to lose standings.
Taking this logic though - Why do FW corps under the same banner not push forward the same consequences when they are podded? Why is it that a GCC player vs player engagement effects PVE standings for an arbitrary reason?
I already take consequences for doing such an action - but for many these Standing consequences are not clearly explain by CCP and quite frankly as many others have also said in this thread - it is a poor mechanic. It has no merit, the only people I see supporting it primarily come from NPC corps themselves. |
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon Cynosural Field Theory.
1528
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:09:21 -
[25] - Quote
" I want to pod people but I would like them to love me".
TunDraGon is recruiting!
"Also, your boobs [:o] " -á
CCP Eterne, 2012
"When in doubt...make a di++k joke."-áRobin Williams - RIP
|
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
6522
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:46:42 -
[26] - Quote
Eugene Kerner wrote:" I want to pod people but I would like them to love me".
This.
You seriously mean to tell us you've been playing since 2010 and didn't realise there were standings hits for podding players in NPC corporations? This has always been a consequence, even when the pod kill is 'legal' it's still considered 'below the belt' and NPC corporations don't like it when you pod their members. This isn't an advantage for NPC players, it's not like they get a standings boost, and it's certainly not a protection for them given that it in no way stopped you from podding them. It's just a penalty from that one corp they're in - it's that corp saying "hey, that **** ain't cool bro, and we like you less now because of it." There's nothing unusual about that at all. I can name any number of player corporations that will also give you bad standings if you pod their pilots. Hell, any number of them will set you instantly to -10 just for one pod kill. Compared to that, NPCs are pretty generous to be perfectly honest. At the very least, they're consistent, so you always know what to expect.
Don't like the consequences? Don't pod them. Really not that hard to figure out, mate, and it's been this way for a very long time, and you've been around long enough that you have no excuses really.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Sean Parisi
Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T
636
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:58:16 -
[27] - Quote
Its not something new to me - it is something I have known about for a while now. The question here is why it apply to only players under an NPC corporation as opposed to players within a player corporation.
If we look at podding players currently - if they are not legal you will lose security status. This is a rule that then applies to everyone. If they are legal then there are no penalties - unless of course they are in an NPC faction, ergo you gain a penalty at random. Said player could Pod me but would incur no penalty, except possibly to security status.
The penalty does not just apply to podding but also to regular engagements. Essentially it adds nothing to the game except a minor headache. Other then the fact that it is slightly irritating if I ever chose to do anything with those corporations, it literally has no game play merit on its own. If the standing system was fleshed out more to be more dynamic I would understand - but this seems like pointless legacy code. |
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
6523
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 20:12:43 -
[28] - Quote
Sean Parisi wrote:Its not something new to me - it is something I have known about for a while now. The question here is why it apply to only players under an NPC corporation as opposed to players within a player corporation.
If we look at podding players currently - if they are not legal you will lose security status. This is a rule that then applies to everyone. If they are legal then there are no penalties - unless of course they are in an NPC faction, ergo you gain a penalty at random. Said player could Pod me but would incur no penalty, except possibly to security status.
The penalty does not just apply to podding but also to regular engagements. Essentially it adds nothing to the game except a minor headache. Other then the fact that it is slightly irritating if I ever chose to do anything with those corporations, it literally has no game play merit on its own. If the standing system was fleshed out more to be more dynamic I would understand - but this seems like pointless legacy code.
If you are in a player corporation, there are no penalties if the players in that corporation decide there are no penalties. I've already gone over this, try paying attention.
As for 'no gameplay merit', based on your argument you could apply that to everything to do with NPC corporations from the ground up. The standings hit you get isn't the real issue, it's the ease with which players can retreat to NPC corporations when the going gets too tough for them, or use them as holding corporations for alts.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2026
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 21:18:36 -
[29] - Quote
I'm not really sure why people are trying to defend this totally nonsensical mechanic. It's not reasonable and serves no functional purpose. |
Orlacc
810
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 22:35:56 -
[30] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:I'm not really sure why people are trying to defend this totally nonsensical mechanic. It's not reasonable and serves no functional purpose.
I agree.
"Measure Twice, Cut Once."
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |