| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Goose99
   |
Posted - 2010.08.12 17:00:00 -
[1]
Propose changes to concord. Remove automatic concording, replaced with a "distress call" button.
-Highsec:
Must press "distress call" button after being attacked, for concord to show up, after a short timer that's appropriate for system's sec status. Afk/bots are free to kill.
-Lowsec:
After sending distress call, much, much longer timer before concord shows up, timer visible to pirate. Concord don't "give chase," pirate is free once warped off grid, no need to repackage, etc (whether successfully popping target or not before running out of time and warping off makes no difference).
Feel free to criticize/flame.
|
Guilliman R
Gallente
Northstar Cabal
R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.08.12 17:08:00 -
[2]
Can't wait to get 100 alliance friends to all distress call in front of jita 4-4. The Concord ship spam would be awesome.
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2010.08.12 17:11:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Guilliman R
Can't wait to get 100 alliance friends to all distress call in front of jita 4-4. The Concord ship spam would be awesome.
Button only works after being attacked. It was stated in original post, although not clearly, sorry about that.
|
Guilliman R
Gallente
Northstar Cabal
R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.08.12 17:21:00 -
[4]
I'd say the macro's would just adjust their macro, shouldn't be too hard to auto press a button whenever shield drops below 75% or so. So in essence you're only screwing over the people who need to AFK for a RL issue, and the freighter pilots who frequently AFK auto pilot (because hey, even at the keyboard it can take 30mins+ for a haul.)
Personally I'd think the idea would cause more issues then it helps. It looks more like a change for the sake of change. And knowing CCP's track record, it'll be bugged and half decent for months before they fix it. By that time god knows how many highsec bears cancelled their account.
I'll say it sounds like a fun idea, but in the end it'll cause more issues then it fixes(non).
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2010.08.12 17:45:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Goose99 on 12/08/2010 17:54:58
Edited by: Goose99 on 12/08/2010 17:50:54
Edited by: Goose99 on 12/08/2010 17:46:42
Originally by: Guilliman R
I'd say the macro's would just adjust their macro, shouldn't be too hard to auto press a button whenever shield drops below 75% or so. So in essence you're only screwing over the people who need to AFK for a RL issue, and the freighter pilots who frequently AFK auto pilot (because hey, even at the keyboard it can take 30mins+ for a haul.)
Personally I'd think the idea would cause more issues then it helps. It looks more like a change for the sake of change. And knowing CCP's track record, it'll be bugged and half decent for months before they fix it. By that time god knows how many highsec bears cancelled their account.
I'll say it sounds like a fun idea, but in the end it'll cause more issues then it fixes(non).
It wasn't actually intended as a block for macros. Macros those days are so advanced(color, sound recolonization, etc) there's no way to block them aside from putting pass phrase on everything.
I had 2 intentions in mind. First was to make concording mechanics more intelligent, discourage afk at the same time. It lets player decide whether to concord or not. Someone rr you, but hit weapons by mistake, there's the choice to not concord. Same goes for fof missile hitting the wrong place, webbing freighters for faster warp, ecm burst hitting neutrals when defending convoy during wardec, and many other scenarios. As for afk freighter hauling, it can be alleviated somewhat by being able to web it for fast align by any toon, not necessarily in same corp, without automatic concording. I don't think anything in a game should be completely afk, preventing this is one of the purposes of this proposal, for good or ill.
The 2nd intention was to smooth out security difference between high and lowsec(aka, lolsec). Pushing the relative risk between them closer together, and populate lowsec without converting it to highsec.
As for CCP's bugs... yeah, it's rather sad. But that applies to all proposals on the board. Nothing will ever get done if starting from that basis.
|
Seith Silverstein
Something Rotten
|
Posted - 2010.08.12 17:59:00 -
[6]
CONCORD? We ain't got no CONCORD. We don't need no CONCORD! I don't have to show you any stinkin' CONCORD!
We like low-sec police mechanics the way they are. Thanks. Go back to carebear heaven. There are far more important things to fix in low-sec than SPAWNING CONCORD. FFS.
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
I am literally the internet
|
Slimy Worm
Cyan Wolf
|
Posted - 2010.08.12 18:10:00 -
[7]
Supporting the part about highsec.
|
Guy LeDuche
|
Posted - 2010.08.12 18:11:00 -
[8]
Looks like all the potential problems are related to highsec changes. Just keep lowsec Distress Call and keep highsec as is.
Lolsec is empty, can't get a fight there even after roaming or camping for hours. And the pirates fight each other more often than anyone else. Gotta support your pirate alt with another toon with a real profession. Distress Call might bring enough people to make pirating profession viable. The timer just have to be long enough for the pirate and short enough for the pirated.
|
Slimy Worm
Cyan Wolf
|
Posted - 2010.08.12 18:19:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Guy LeDuche
Looks like all the potential problems are related to highsec changes. Just keep lowsec Distress Call and keep highsec as is.
Lolsec is empty, can't get a fight there even after roaming or camping for hours. And the pirates fight each other more often than anyone else. Gotta support your pirate alt with another toon with a real profession. Distress Call might bring enough people to make pirating profession viable. The timer just have to be long enough for the pirate and short enough for the pirated.
This can be fixed by making rat bounties depend more whether or not there's a serious risk to PvP in the system than on the difficulty of the NPC. So, the same rat in a highsec mission could pay out maybe a third as much as that rat in low or nullsec.
Before you say that missionbears will quit the game, the content of the missions would stay the same; they'd just pay out less in bounties if they're in highsec.
|
Galen Gallente
Gallente
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.08.13 19:40:00 -
[10]
Or the Pirate S****could just do something productive rather than be bottom feeders.
|
Xorv
|
Posted - 2010.08.13 19:57:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Slimy Worm
Supporting the part about highsec.
ditto.
No to the Low Sec part.
|
mchief117
|
Posted - 2010.08.14 21:45:00 -
[12]
To me it seams that the only players who dislike this idea are the pirates themselfs , and they can go drink a can of quaff some where else.
Honistly if your in low sec and you cant pop the Indy thats calling for help before concord gets there "YOUR DOING IT WRONG" as well as the fact that concord in low sec wont chase you again "YOUR DOING IT WRONG"
and so freaken what about if one or two managed to get concord to show up and you cant pop them , guess what theres probly gona be 10 more around some time soon so in a way this helps the pirates out, much more targets for hunting
|
Denidil
Gallente
Rape Pillage and Burn
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:27:00 -
[13]
no
|
JonasML
The Nietzian Way
Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:37:00 -
[14]
Highsec should be left as it, but I see it as being useful for lowsec. Have to point out though that the button, when it pops up, can't force you to act on it like some of the other ones do (try starting a petition while doing something else), otherwise it will hamper your efforts to defend yourself.
|
Slimy Worm
Cyan Wolf
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 07:51:00 -
[15]
Originally by: mchief117
To me it seams that the only players who dislike this idea are the pirates themselfs , and they can go drink a can of quaff some where else.
Honistly if your in low sec and you cant pop the Indy thats calling for help before concord gets there "YOUR DOING IT WRONG" as well as the fact that concord in low sec wont chase you again "YOUR DOING IT WRONG"
and so freaken what about if one or two managed to get concord to show up and you cant pop them , guess what theres probly gona be 10 more around some time soon so in a way this helps the pirates out, much more targets for hunting
gb2wowkthxbai
|
Ravenesa
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 18:20:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Ravenesa on 16/08/2010 18:22:13
The ability to call Concord in lowsec would completely negate lowsec space and turn EVE into a highsec/nullsec game with no middle ground. It does not matter if it is a 30 second delay or a 5 minute delay.
Miners could "pre load" belts with Concord ships that are not affected by the delay. Missioners and plex runners can do the same as well.
"Lowsec" would also become a safehaven for Super Caps as you would need a very very hard core fleet to drop a supercap that can call in concord after a few minutes. The loss to the agressors would be billions. This would basically negate Cap Ship usage in lowsec.
This would completely negate lowsec gate camping, especially for placeslike Rancor and Helg. The first hauler that gets attacked hits the distress button and the gate camp for the day is basically done and over with. Same can be applied for station camping/games as well.
Horrible idea top to bottom.
Originally by: Guy LeDuche
Looks like all the potential problems are related to highsec changes. Just keep lowsec Distress Call and keep highsec as is.
Lolsec is empty, can't get a fight there even after roaming or camping for hours. And the pirates fight each other more often than anyone else. Gotta support your pirate alt with another toon with a real profession. Distress Call might bring enough people to make pirating profession viable. The timer just have to be long enough for the pirate and short enough for the pirated.
You are doing it wrong :) Just gotta know where to look and what to do.
|
Vesok Toch
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 19:20:00 -
[17]
In high sec by time you think about pressing the button it's already to late in some circumstances.
I would however like to be given the option, like a button that would tell Concord to back off so I can take care of the issue myself. Pressing it would immediately stop the Concord response and leave all aggro rules in place.
|
Arkanor
Gallente
Ixion Defence Systems
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 19:56:00 -
[18]
No to both suggestions, requiring distress call is silly, and CONCORD doesn't belong in low-sec. If you want to keep people from AFKing the game than give them something to do instead of wait for their mining lasers to cycle or the rats to die.
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 05:36:00 -
[19]
Supporting this.
And as avoiding CONCORD is an exploit, the person attacked can wait as long as they want before pressing the button. Since it would be an exploit to self-destruct to avoid CONCORD you'd be imprisoned in that system for ever and ever and ever.
|
Stupid McStupidson
Gallente
Hoek Lyne and Sinker
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 18:18:00 -
[20]
I kind of like the concept as it pertains to high-sec. As for low, no way. It takes away the distinction of low-sec. Granted, low-sec needs some kind of attention, or 'boost' as it were, but this is not the kind it needs.
|
Astroka
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 19:29:00 -
[21]
Not supported. I would only support the highsec part if autopilot warped to zero. High security space is called that for a reason, it's relatively secure, I don't have a problem with AFK people. If someone walks away for 10 minutes to make themselves some tasty dinner during a 40-jump journey and sets their ship on autopilot why should they be a free kill if they're jumping in 0.5-1.0 security systems?
The part about lowsec, enter at your own risk. I don't think Concord should be able to protect anyone there, regardless of how long it takes them to arrive.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |