EVE Search - NPC corps should not be safe havens for players

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

NPC corps should not be safe havens for players

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Romar Agent Ishukone Regional Headquarters 58	Posted - 2012.06.18 17:40:00 - [1] - Quote God, you must really be bored out there in Nullsec if you're feeling the need to disassemble Highsec. Just leave those players alone. Regardless of what type of game EVE is supposed to be, or how the game is supposed to be played, everyone is free to play the way they want. It's not like NPC corp-members are choosing an option that isn't open to anyone. It's not like NPC corps are without consequences. NPC corps are an intended mechanic - Highsec is supposed to be safer - Highsec is also supposed to be less profitable - NPC corps fit right in that concept.
Romar Agent Ishukone Regional Headquarters 58	Posted - 2012.06.18 18:20:00 - [2] - Quote Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote: Romar Agent wrote: God, you must really be bored out there in Nullsec if you're feeling the need to disassemble Highsec. EVE is a closely interconnected game, you should go play on a game with sharded servers if you don't want to hear discussions about risk/reward balance across various secstatus. But I am talking about risk and reward. NPC corpmembers are safe only in Highsec. As soon as they touch Low or Null they are free game as everyone. They profit of their choice only in Highsec. And of the three security levels Highsec offers the defined lowest reward for activities. Higher the risk: go to Low - you are attackable with next to no consequences, but may gain higher rewards. Higher the risk: stay in High but join a player corporation - you are better organized (= possibly higher rewards), but can be wardecced and are attackable with next to no consequences. Repeat the thought into Null... EVE has all these steps. They are not equal. They are all running on a risk/reward graph of higher risk/higher reward. It's all by design.
Romar Agent Ishukone Regional Headquarters 58	Posted - 2012.06.18 18:39:00 - [3] - Quote Darth Gustav wrote: Why do the old bad mechanics of poorly-organized NPC corps have to remain not only bad, but stagnant as well? Why not turn NPC corps into high-sec fiefdoms and allow players' characters to compete politically within the body of those NPC corps to actually attain goals and objectives? I favor bringing the vote system to NPC corps and making them war dec'able (and able to dec and recruit allies as well) but under a truly democratic leadership. Let democracy and combat motivate them to excel at Eve instead of allowing poor design principles to bog down an entire sector of the playerbase - a sector that also happens to be a default condition of leaving a player corporation. No problem with such an idea - I would most probably like it. I would just not like to have NPC corps wardeccable on the spot (= more risk) without offering the opportunity of higher reward. I would also like to retain a safest haven for the people inclined to play that way - say they could join an NPC Navy and automatically have their NPC forces in the back should they happen to be wardecced. Or give each NPC faction some NPC ships roaming their stations at random - something to offset the disadvantage of the clear cut command structures of a dedicated player corporation.
Romar Agent Ishukone Regional Headquarters 58	Posted - 2012.06.18 19:04:00 - [4] - Quote Darth Gustav wrote: ... That said, I'm afraid I don't know what to say to a player whose character left a rookie corp for a player corp (with ostensibly more risk and more reward available), didn't like it but still wanted to play Eve in safety, and therefore left the player corp for an increase in safety. I think this is a remnant of a bad design. Players should never be left to stagnate by the mechanics of an MMORPG. I'm feeling that the default NPC corps are a bad thought out mechanic, probably coming from CCP's data model not allowing to have corpsless characters as well as not allowing progression from player corp to player corp. Who actually wants to be in, say Viziam, from a storyline point of view? I envy those Khanids who at least get a staff position with the Ministry of War... Overall I personally think there should be a corp/sec option for every tier of risk and reward, like very safe/next to no reward in an undeccable Highsec institution (with staying in Highsec) and highest risk/huge reward like living in a wormhole. All tiers have their place in the game. What I agree on is that neither the safest nor the riskiest of these tiers should be made into a default tier. Actually the default state should be high risk/low reward. Say, being recruited into your nation's militia or navy (with permanent wardec to your enemy's navy) - the default state should be of a kind that shoul make people to want to leave it. But give the option, and make it a conscious decision to join a safe haven corporation for anyone who just wants to play around casually with no intention of amassing riches. i.e. - You are progressed from your training corporation into a militia/navy (with the added vulnerability as described above) after a given character age, logon time, skill point level. - You can always join or leave a player corporation defaulting to that militia/navy. - You can always join a safe haven corporation, with certain game mechanics taken from you (no contracts outside, so no neutral freighter pilots). Just make sure none of these states is exploitable.
Romar Agent Ishukone Regional Headquarters 58	Posted - 2012.06.18 20:01:00 - [5] - Quote Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote: ... Players only use NPC corps to stick their PVE characters in because it competitively advantageous to do so. ... I'm basically NPCing in my own two-alts-corp. I would rather be in that or in an NPC corps than in a larger player corp, because other corplings would have a negative impact on my playing style. I guess I'm not the only one.
Romar Agent Ishukone Regional Headquarters 60	Posted - 2012.06.19 05:35:00 - [6] - Quote Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote: sandbox = we must have badly abused mechanics that make pvp optional thanks for that contribution Sandbox = PVP is optional Sandbox = PVE is optional Sandbox = anything is optional Though PVP is only optional for those who decide to PVP,, as there is non-consentual PVP in this game. That EVE has lots of bad mechanics and a plethora of bad physics is not new, but is a different topic.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.