Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sack o'Richards
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 21:12:05 -
[1] - Quote
So that's the deal. I think we, the playerbase, have the ability AND the right to police ourselves.
There is no need for CONCORD in EVE. Players, not npcs, police everything else ingame. Why can't CCP allow us to also police high security space? I am not saying remove high sec, you could implement something that keeps anyone under -5.0 out of 0.5's and higher, or even have it scale. Factional Warfare could cover high sec also. And yes, we need starter systems. I understand the need for a certain ammount of 'security' for newbros, but please don't make us slaves to the machines any longer!
Justice is a human construct, but CCP places stewardship of it in the hands of non-player characters. There is no justice there, just mechanics. Where is the human element? Human element best element? The very presence of CONCORD causes bot like behavior from players. How can anything npc decide what defines human justice.?
Are we not worthy CCP?
Do you not have any faith in our community?
We need player ran police departments in EVE, the only thing standing in our way is the redundancy that CONCORD creates. EVE is about taking control, yet we are being hamstrung by the same people that tell us to take control.
EVE is hard huh? Prove it. Let us, the players, decide what's wrong and what's right in our communities.
Who's with me? Who wants to play in a real sandbox?
|
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
8577
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 21:23:37 -
[2] - Quote
tl; dr:
Wants to turn highsec into nullsec.
--> Features and Ideas
.
Gÿ+
The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the ho's and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' and I'll look down, and whisper: 'Hodor'.
|
Sack o'Richards
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 21:30:27 -
[3] - Quote
Not even close friend. There is opportunity for much isk to be made by the humam police forces in high security space. Plus the option for 'police only' mods and access to pursuit type hulls that can bridge into systems they police.
How could this not be good? |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3552
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 21:40:13 -
[4] - Quote
reaction time would be too slow
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Escalating Entropy
10445
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 21:54:59 -
[5] - Quote
Sack o'Richards wrote:Do you not have any faith in our community? History has shown that a large amount of people living in High-sec are not willing to put even a token effort into self-defense.
The MoO gatecamp from the early days of EVE showed that a tankable CONCORD (see: CONCORD used to behave similar to the Faction Police) can be beaten back by a large enough force and steamroll through most player counter-strikes.
The Goonswarm Incursions (all of them) showed that a large enough force can roll through multiple corporations and Starbases at the same time.
The Hulkageddon and Burn Jita events showed that your average player is generally pretty bad at "paying attention" to current events and coming up with countermeasures that don't involve simply logging off until the dust settles.
Hell... we still have bleating masses up in arms because someone has declared war on them and are interfering with their "pacifist" lifestyle.
Sack o'Richards wrote:Why can't CCP allow us to also police high security space? I am not saying remove high sec, you could implement something that keeps anyone under -5.0 out of 0.5's and higher, or even have it scale. You can already do this. Set up a gatecamp at places you know -0.5 or lower players often travel through. Or escort convoys of ships. Then shoot the "outlaws" when they appear.
Sack o'Richards wrote:Justice is a human construct, but CCP places stewardship of it in the hands of non-player characters. There is no justice there, just mechanics. Where is the human element? Human element best element? The very presence of CONCORD causes bot like behavior from players. How can anything npc decide what defines human justice.? True enough. But players simply do not have the will, time, or reaction speed to stop all offenses or be everywhere at once.
Also... players can be bribed or bought out
This is why few "non-PvP corporations" do not trust MERC groups to defend them and would rather whine.
Sack o'Richards wrote:We need player ran police departments in EVE, the only thing standing in our way is the redundancy that CONCORD creates. EVE is about taking control, yet we are being hamstrung by the same people that tell us to take control. You take some, you give some.
Neither the current situation nor yours is ideal (for different respective parties). But at least the current situation is... more reliable and trustworthy for some.
How did you Veterans start?
The Mustache and Beard Thread
|
Caco De'mon
New Order Logistics CODE.
31
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 22:01:00 -
[6] - Quote
I put forth what though were great Ideas that solved these issues...
- Make 1.0 - 0.8 Concord's domain. Reaction is instant. Remove 90% of the belts.
- The rest of HS is self governed except Concord pays players to enforce the law through a bounty system that actually works.
HS is WAY too big, rich and safe...why would the little bears want to leave? Why wouldn't LS/NS players farm rocks from work?
*"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance
17419
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 22:01:28 -
[7] - Quote
The anti gankers are by and large hilariously bad at their job, you would essentialy need the mercs to do this as they are the only ones in high with the manpower, experiance and most importantly the patience to operate as effective millitary forces in highsec. As an ex merc can tell you with almost 100% certainty that the only systems that would see any service would be the systems Jita, amarr , dodixi and the systems that connect them, with a handfull of +1's ocasionally being policed.
And thats only if you pay them.
=]|[=
|
Gibbeous Moon
Heimdal Freight and Manufacture Inc
24
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 22:13:53 -
[8] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:
Also... players can be bribed or bought out
I wouldn't expect anything less in Eve. So, on the whole I think that the ideas of the OP's has merits.
|
Hal Morsh
Hmmzor. Muffins of Mayhem
537
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 22:26:36 -
[9] - Quote
Gibbeous Moon wrote:ShahFluffers wrote:
Also... players can be bribed or bought out
I wouldn't expect anything less in Eve. So, on the whole I think that the ideas of the OP's has merits.
http://i.imgur.com/g4bIU0A.gif
Omar Alharazaad > Pretty much any time you blow something up in space it's bound to annoy someone or something.
|
Serene Repose
2659
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 22:50:18 -
[10] - Quote
OP - I love BS. And, you stacked it so high! Why can't the fox be trusted to guard the chicken coop? Why do they have to put all the bank money in vaults? Why do they have the tire puncher rack at the parking garage exits? LET ME SEE......Pens chained down...motel TV locks...leave your passport at the desk...walk through the metal detector....aw gee. The honor system? This one's too easy. "TRUST" an EVE player??? I need to get my coffee. Allow me to take a break from rolling on the floor...laughing.
ROFLCOPTER
You had to ask.
We must accommodate the idiocracy.
|
|
Sack o'Richards
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 00:26:04 -
[11] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:reaction time would be too slow
good cops should know what's happening in their systems, and who is in them. if a system is not worth paying for police protection, then it should not have any.
ShahFluffers wrote:Also... players can be bribed or bought out
This opens more opportunities, for player oversight through government. If you live in an area, be prepared to at least vote for a government. We already vote for CSM, lets elect governors for regions.
any region worth living in should have no problems electing a government.
Caco De'mon wrote:HS is WAY too big, rich and safe...why would the little bears want to leave?
he gets it
Serene Repose, i knew someone would think that i was trolling, but i am truly all for building a better EVE. and i believe that can only be done without CONCORD interference. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
56044
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 00:54:49 -
[12] - Quote
These types of threads always show up every year. Seriously if CCP takes your advice, this game will become Vaporware in less than a year. Yeah, good idea you got there.
How about you do your player police force action in low security systems that are connected to high sec, occupy / patrol those systems and turn them into NRDS? Then maybe high sec players will immigrate there and help build it up even more.
Highly doubtful though since the main mantra in Eve is 'Trust Nobody'.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Lulu Lunette
Savage Moon Society
422
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 01:01:54 -
[13] - Quote
HIghsec is so awkward.
@lunettelulu7
|
Caco De'mon
New Order Logistics CODE.
31
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 01:09:38 -
[14] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:How about you do your player police force action in low security systems...
Because the OP isn't talking about some independent security force in LS that works 100% outside game mechanics.
*"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."
|
Sack o'Richards
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 01:23:24 -
[15] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
some unsupported drivel about 'the end of EVE'
if this scares you it's because you cannot understand the benefit to making EVE the game you see in the advertisements.
the removal of CONCORD can only benefit EVE as it will bring out our strengths, and force the community to hold us all accountable.
resistance is a sign of fear, the only way to overcome that fear is to face it.
|
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
853
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 02:00:36 -
[16] - Quote
If we wanted self policing, the implementation would need to be in steps to ensure balance.
First step is that more permanency needs to exist to the consequences of being a criminal. Make regaining security standing Much more difficult. It should cost more than the gain as that is the nature of punishment. So if you gank a 6b isk freighter expect to pay more to get back in.
Second is how to punish, but in a way that makes piracy it's own lifestyle. Best way is the gates. Make pirates use smuggler lanes and be unable to use normal gates the worse their standings.
That creates a mechanic to the risk vs reward, the tough part is how to remove the concord. Ideally high sec anti pirates would get a reward in terms of LP from the faction's security forces. Once more, an isk balanced to prevent exploit. Players also responsible for keeping smugglers gates at bay.
If by this time, there is no exploitation or imbalance, then they could look at removing concord. But would have to try with modifying concord at every stage.
As others have said, response rate is the biggest thing. To help faction alignments could assist so that player police can shoot those that are not below -5 yet. Similar to faction warfare but based on pirate and security standings for both parties.
To quote Lfod Shi
The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
|
Cade Windstalker
536
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 02:00:49 -
[17] - Quote
There are no where near enough players for this to be remotely viable as an idea. If you dislike how CONCORD works go out to Null and don't look back.
CONCORD are a part of the game, they're not going anywhere, get used to it. They're a mechanic and a core part of the game.
Also this belongs in Features and Ideas, not General Discussion. |
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
853
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 02:02:21 -
[18] - Quote
Sack o'Richards wrote:[quote=DeMichael Crimson]
if this scares you it's because you cannot understand the benefit to making EVE the game you see in the advertisements.
the removal of CONCORD can only benefit EVE as it will bring out our strengths, and force the community to hold us all accountable.
resistance is a sign of fear, the only way to overcome that fear is to face it.
Eve is a game. The players who run in highsec would face it, by moving out and to a different game. Meaning the jobs of hauling, mining, and missions to get all that wonderful faction LP items would fall for the people who rag on highsec.
Are you ready to do the mining?
Edit: They will face it, but only if it is rewarding in terms of gameplay. I would be a police if it offered me advantage and depth to how I already play. I would not to it to prevent a downtrodding of gameplay. Is saying make things more tedious for the purpose of absolutely no gain.
To quote Lfod Shi
The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
|
Hal Morsh
Hmmzor. Muffins of Mayhem
541
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 02:05:08 -
[19] - Quote
Sack o'Richards wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote:
some unsupported drivel about 'the end of EVE'
if this scares you it's because you cannot understand the benefit to making EVE the game you see in the advertisements. the removal of CONCORD can only benefit EVE as it will bring out our strengths, and force the community to hold us all accountable. resistance is a sign of fear, the only way to overcome that fear is to face it.
I felt a great disturbance in the forums, as if thousands of voices suddenly cried out in terror.
Omar Alharazaad > Pretty much any time you blow something up in space it's bound to annoy someone or something.
|
Caco De'mon
New Order Logistics CODE.
31
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 02:06:46 -
[20] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:If you dislike how CONCORD works go out to Null and don't look back.
If you don't like your country, don't work to fix it, just leave...
Ok then...great advice...
*"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."
|
|
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
853
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 02:16:50 -
[21] - Quote
Caco De'mon wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:If you dislike how CONCORD works go out to Null and don't look back. If you don't like your country, don't work to fix it, just leave... Ok then...great advice...
And there is nothing wrong with fixing, but is important to consider the other inhabitants.
CODE. is a great part of eve. The only real criminal enterprise in what is supposed to be player run. You have a playstyle and purpose of this post is to expand on it, yet?
What you are asking is to improve how you live in the country at expense of others though.
Think of it this way. Said previous post, but eve is a game. People will not adapt, they will move on. Like moving out of a city that is crappy to live in. What no concord without a significant level of other mechanics is the same as telling somebody to take losses for no gains, while removal of concord gains the criminal element of eve and incur less losses.
So if you are wanting no concord, then highsec people need to gain the means to offset. For you to gain the means to pirate without concord (A GUARANTEE) instead of player police (A SLOWER RESPONSE POTENTIAL) Then you will have to have loss somewhere else to counter it.
Else those who took the loss will get tired of the cost and move out.
To quote Lfod Shi
The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
|
Caco De'mon
New Order Logistics CODE.
31
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 02:30:11 -
[22] - Quote
Markus Reese wrote:What no concord without a significant level of other mechanics is the same as telling somebody to take losses for no gains, while removal of concord gains the criminal element of eve and incur less losses.
This is the key point and I did mention it earlier. (expanded) I suggested actually making CONCORD part of the bounty system for a new 0.5-0.7 "middle-Sec" and have them foot the bill for bounty-hunters that enforce the law (think "the wild west"). A real job type, school and NPC corp would evolve to support this new trade...heck add in corp exclusive goodies via some LP system.
The folks mentioning the low player numbers being an issue do have a point though...
All I know is that the status quo makes EVE stale and HS stagnant...it has most of the population (blatant guess) and yet we all know there are huge issues with such a massive and rich HS.
CODE tries to shove the little birdies out of the nest but really all that happened is CCP made it harder for us to do that (read made it easier to make no-risk ISK/PLEX).
I think that a test should be done with 0.5 space....
*"See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."
|
Eternus8lux8lucis
Primus Inc. LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
892
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 02:49:54 -
[23] - Quote
Its not about pushing. Pushing never works with many in real life and also in game where its even easier to just stop playing instead of dealing with the stick. My ex is a gamer, hardcore, she loves MMOs and I convinced her to try Eve after a while. She HATED being interrupted every 5 mins in null doign whatever it was she was doing, yes she had a WoW/Everquest style MMO background. She ganked and got ganked, she pvped... though she hated doing it, logied, mined ice, ore, ratted and explored. We literally did everything. High, low and null. Only place I didnt take her was a wh.
She was the kind of person that liked to chill and do stuff and see results without the need to make stuff blow up. She would help logi wise and loved that. But she wasnt the type to go out and shoot people. 85% of the people that leave that dont blow up are more or less like her. They need a reason and a purpose beyond the explosions. They arent driven by adrenaline or risk. They are driven by goal oriented accomplishments that the adrenaline junkies find BOOOOOORRRRRIIIINNNGG!! Btw this is coming from a guy that got so bored in real life on a run I decided to run in the middle of the street and when that got boring I started running over the cars that came towards me. Adrenaline is such a fun drug.
But if players cannot understand this difference between players you will never be able to grasp a world full and complete that actually works imo.
Now as for the OP..... it will be gamed, hardcore and badly and turned into null sec which is great until YOU get kicked out by a bigger force because tbh 99% of people that post are NOT the ruling elite in this game nor have the critical mass to do so. It just is a fact and not an insult. Its how life works.
Have you heard anything I've said?
You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?
That's right.
Had to end sometime.
|
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
853
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 02:51:12 -
[24] - Quote
Caco De'mon wrote: CODE tries to shove the little birdies out of the nest but really all that happened is CCP made it harder for us to do that (read made it easier to make no-risk ISK/PLEX).
That does need to be taken with a grain of salt. Yes, there is lots of rich people, but the rich are the ones who would be least affected. Incursion farmers and market traders, those multibillionaires most of the time have a multitude of alts working for them. If hauling is harder, will be work around or losses will be reflected in pricing. There are those who spend time in highsec simply because the cost of living elsewhere is too much. What isk we do get slowly builds and goes to having a good game experience.
Why don't I pvp? Because I don't find it a good experience. I have had in the past many good fights and found it to be a good experience, but maintaining it was too much of an offset. Taking concord out of 0.5 makes it 0.4. Policing wouldn't be reactive, it would have to be proactive. Sit on the gates and just wait for somebody to show up. It still means wait until they shoot first. That also is just like lowsec. People will gank the police and play that way.
There has to be some means of pro-active defence on the side of highsec people for them to consider it a worthwhile investment. Even with isk, it is time spent doing that which they could get isk elsewhere.
So I ask, what would you give up in exchange for a Midsec system mechanic? What INCREASES the risk to you to offset the lack of a guaranteed shiploss from concord. Concord is a guarantee, therefore it isn't a factor and isn't a risk. Making players do the work means that you would have less losses. What is the offset?
To quote Lfod Shi
The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
|
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
56046
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 03:04:25 -
[25] - Quote
Sack o'Richards wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote:
some unsupported drivel about 'the end of EVE'
if this scares you it's because you cannot understand the benefit to making EVE the game you see in the advertisements. the removal of CONCORD can only benefit EVE as it will bring out our strengths, and force the community to hold us all accountable. resistance is a sign of fear, the only way to overcome that fear is to face it. Despite your fail troll attempt of misquoting my posted reply, I'll answer your allegations towards me. Especially since you can't even consider doing what I suggested, create your player police force and occupy / patrol a few low sec systems, turn them into NRDS, invite players there and show us your idea can work.
As for your suggestion making me scared, yes it does indeed scare me. Not because my ship might be attacked and destroyed. Hell, that's pretty much commonplace in high sec right now despite Concord and their quick response time. Your suggestion will only create anarchy which will perpetuate chaos and mayhem. Your version of high security will become nothing more than a wasteland. When this game first started, there was no Concord or high security. Why do you think CCP added them to the game? Ask yourself why does a majority of the playerbase conduct gameplay in high security?
Because Concord and their response time is a major deterrent for those who want to turn this game into a massive 'Shoot Em Up Free For All'. Your suggestion of removing Concord probably includes Gate and Station guns as well. Your big idea will only end up driving a majority of the playerbase away. What scares me is that would more than likely cause CCP to go bankrupt and end up shutting down the servers. Then we all lose out on being able to enjoy this great game. That's what scares me.
Now it sounds like you're looking for a 'Free For All Shoot Em Up' Sci-Fi game. I suggest you either go to Low Sec, Null Sec or W-space for that. Better yet, go do a Google search for another game and stop trying to ruin this great game.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Sack o'Richards
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 03:15:07 -
[26] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:Sack o'Richards wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote:
some unsupported drivel about 'the end of EVE'
if this scares you it's because you cannot understand the benefit to making EVE the game you see in the advertisements. the removal of CONCORD can only benefit EVE as it will bring out our strengths, and force the community to hold us all accountable. resistance is a sign of fear, the only way to overcome that fear is to face it. Despite your fail troll attempt of misquoting my posted reply, I'll answer your allegations towards me. Especially since you can't even consider doing what I suggested, create your player police force and occupy / patrol a few low sec systems, turn them into NRDS, invite players there and show us your idea can work. As for your suggestion making me scared, yes it does indeed scare me. Not because my ship might be attacked and destroyed. Hell, that's pretty much commonplace in high sec right now despite Concord and their quick response time. Your suggestion will only create anarchy which will perpetuate chaos and mayhem. Your version of high security will become nothing more than a wasteland. When this game first started, there was no Concord or high security. Why do you think CCP added them to the game? Ask yourself why does a majority of the playerbase conduct gameplay in high security? Because Concord and their response time is a major deterrent for those who want to turn this game into a massive 'Shoot Em Up Free For All'. Your suggestion of removing Concord probably includes Gate and Station guns as well. Your big idea will only end up driving a majority of the playerbase away. What scares me is that would more than likely cause CCP to go bankrupt and end up shutting down the servers. Then we all lose out on being able to enjoy this great game. That's what scares me. Now it sounds like you're looking for a 'Free For All Shoot Em Up' Sci-Fi game. I suggest you either go to Low Sec, Null Sec or W-space for that. Better yet, go do a Google search for another game and stop trying to ruin this great game. DMC
|
Sack o'Richards
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 03:23:41 -
[27] - Quote
Markus Reese wrote:
Would removing concord gain players? No, or very few Would removing concord lose players? Yes, much more than any gain
i see nothing here but conjecture and superstition. you have no proof at all.
OK so maybe EVE is not for everyone, those that are prepared to own it are the only ones deserving of it.
and i think the playerbase is a bit more resilient than all of these doomsayers claiming that most highsec players would rather leave EVE than fight for it. just because you might run don't mean the rest of us cannot make it work.
so who would leave? let them speak for themselves. |
Coralas
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
32
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 03:35:08 -
[28] - Quote
Sack o'Richards wrote:Markus Reese wrote:
Would removing concord gain players? No, or very few Would removing concord lose players? Yes, much more than any gain
i see nothing here but conjecture and superstition. you have no proof at all. OK so maybe EVE is not for everyone, those that are prepared to own it are the only ones deserving of it. and i think the playerbase is a bit more resilient than all of these doomsayers claiming that most highsec players would rather leave EVE than fight for it. just because you might run don't mean the rest of us cannot make it work. so who would leave? let them speak for themselves.
What you don't understand is that the majority of the playerbase is not at all motivated by the task of protecting a semi-afk player making money in highsec, who will never contribute to their own defence, let alone the defence of others, and who would be so completely unthinking during the process as to brag in local about how much money they made, whilst other people flew pvp fits on their behalf - and who would probably be prone to indignant fury at the DEFENDERS if a pirate got through and killed their precious officer fit navy raven.
On the other hand if you form a large visible corporation, you'll get enough wardecs to effectively set aside concord protection, and you can decide then who you are willing to protect, and you can manage your group to ensure that all people are contributors and you can get rid of non contributors and general asshats.
|
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
854
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 03:40:20 -
[29] - Quote
Sack o'Richards wrote: i see nothing here but conjecture and superstition. you have no proof at all.
OK so maybe EVE is not for everyone, those that are prepared to own it are the only ones deserving of it.
and i think the playerbase is a bit more resilient than all of these doomsayers claiming that most highsec players would rather leave EVE than fight for it. just because you might run don't mean the rest of us cannot make it work.
so who would leave? let them speak for themselves.
o/
Yes, it is conjecture, but it is based off experiences and business model. So the opener.
"What would it bring to your game experience you cannot get elsewhere?"
Modify the bounty system? Yes, it could work if the play itself is viable. I would be interested in part of a policing corp, but if piracy, it would be only hit and run, or people hanging out hoping for a fight. If i cannot shoot first, then the system will never work since pirates would never engage or be gone before on grid. That alone makes player policing highly improbable.
So we are not bringing something to the game. Only taking away something. If nothing is being brought, then how could it not be true.
Personally, if it was just remove concord and add bounty? I would leave. It would be frustrating and always chasing or exposing yourself. I know a good many people that have left because of the existing gank mechanic. A good in game friend from when I started eve? Big in markets, it was his play. Got tired of all the ganking as it stands, and now make it worse?
I know other people, jaded from it and left reasons for the same that I would. We like to experience and move around highsec. Now we are being locked into tiny pockets and having to fight just cause we want to visit amarr. Relying entirely on random people to hopefully be camping, which as stated before wouldn't happen since any camp would promptly be met by a bigger force designed to counter. People who prefer PvP would rather go out looking for a fight then wait for an unfair disadvantage sitting for one. From when I was in nullsec. Nobody liked sitting in the station waiting for the reds to show up.
And lastly, and most critically, many years of working with newbeans. Ones who get that gank early on, then I gotta explain to them that eve is about repurcussions, not prevention. Then the fun part of saying that alts and isk really means the punishment is nothing. They ask how to protect, and I can only say tank more. They log in a couple more times then quit the game.
Number one cause of quitting for everybody I know both RL and online has been they think that the highsec ganking is supid enough as it is. Overwhelmingly more than I have met who decide they want to get into piracy. Make it even more bias to the pirates and those numbers will shift more.
So yes, it is conjecture, but conjecture based on psychology and the way markets work. If people wanted to pirate and gank more, than highsec wouldn't be the most populated part of eve.
Coralas wrote: On the other hand if you form a large visible corporation, you'll get enough wardecs to effectively set aside concord protection, and you can decide then who you are willing to protect, and you can manage your group to ensure that all people are contributors and you can get rid of non contributors and general asshats.
Very good point. Any anti pirate group operating out of highsec would very quickly find themself under the perma wardec and not able to do anything at all.
To quote Lfod Shi
The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
574
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 03:44:10 -
[30] - Quote
Sack o'Richards wrote:So that's the deal. I think we, the playerbase, have the ability AND the right to police ourselves.
There is no need for CONCORD in EVE. Players, not npcs, police everything else ingame. Why can't CCP allow us to also police high security space? I am not saying remove high sec, you could implement something that keeps anyone under -5.0 out of 0.5's and higher, or even have it scale. Factional Warfare could cover high sec also. And yes, we need starter systems. I understand the need for a certain ammount of 'security' for newbros, but please don't make us slaves to the machines any longer!
Justice is a human construct, but CCP places stewardship of it in the hands of non-player characters. There is no justice there, just mechanics. Where is the human element? Human element best element? The very presence of CONCORD causes bot like behavior from players. How can anything npc decide what defines human justice.?
Are we not worthy CCP?
Do you not have any faith in our community?
We need player ran police departments in EVE, the only thing standing in our way is the redundancy that CONCORD creates. EVE is about taking control, yet we are being hamstrung by the same people that tell us to take control.
EVE is hard huh? Prove it. Let us, the players, decide what's wrong and what's right in our communities.
Who's with me? Who wants to play in a real sandbox?
Your post is full of vague ideology and nothing more. How would it work ? What benefit is big enough to get people to be police (even in nullsec the people that should be fighting rarely do, how about you going there and "police" them out of there comfortable SOV farms). Why would CCP want to introduce a game mechanic likely to cost them a considerable amount of its playerbase for no real gain (since you can play 'policeman' in wh, low and nullsec already?)
Lastly, EVE isnt nor has it ever been a sandbox ! (tell me one sandbox you have played in where your sand castle defends itself against any force no matter the size and survives till you get back?)
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |