| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nac MacFeegle
   |
Posted - 2005.05.20 23:45:00 -
[1]
Now, while I can understand (to an extent) inter-corporation and inter-alliance wars, there are some people who join corps/alliances to take part in capacities other than fighting. Believe it or not, not everyone plays this game to shoot down everyone else... 
In my mind, Empire space (which I define as .5+ security systems with CONCORD presence) should be free of violence. I mean, what's the point of security forces in the systems if they aren't going to keep the peace?
So, I have an idea. Non-Combatant Insurance. You pay a reasonable sum (say 250k per week) to CONCORD to cover their expenses (ammo, ship maintenance, crew wages, etc.), and you are declared a non-combatant. If you are fired upon by anyone in space where CONCORD maintains a presence, including pilots your corp/alliance happens to be at war with, CONCORD will intervene on your behalf. Conversely, if you fire upon any players in CONCORD-presence space, be if you are at war with them or not, your insurance is cancelled and CONCORD, not being happy with your breach of contract, gets medieval on your butt.
There would obviously be warning boxes, both on the aggressor's side ("This pilot is a registered non-combatant. Attack anyway?") and on your side ("You are a registered non-combatant. Firing on another vessel will void your non-combantant status and flag you as a criminal, etc. etc.")
I can think of a way to add another level of difficulty to the non-combatant's side: make the insurance for each individual empire (Caldari, Gallente, Amarr, Minmatar, Khanid, etc.), where you're only protected in their space, and their naval/police ships respond to attacks.
Thoughts?
Let loose the cries of "Carebear!" and "Don't be in a corporation then, you n00b!"...
|
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.05.20 23:47:00 -
[2]
Carebear 
--
The best description of alliances, ever:
|
Viceroy
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 00:38:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Viceroy on 21/05/2005 00:38:43
Long post short;
"Please make PvP in 0.5+ 100% consentual!"
No thank you.
-
|
Grimpak
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 00:48:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Viceroy
Edited by: Viceroy on 21/05/2005 00:38:43
Long post short;
"Please make PvP in 0.5+ 100% consentual!"
No thank you.
...thank you for clearing up. couldn't understand what the hell did he wrote.
oh and bit OT btw: loved the (non)recruitment announcement you guys made in Minmatar and Gallente ingame channels
-------------------
Quote:
Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
|
MOOstradamus
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 00:49:00 -
[5]
/me agrees with Viceroy
MOOrovingian  "Following & supporting EVE (since Jan 2001) is like wiping your arse with sandpaper."
|
Von Yulinor
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 00:49:00 -
[6]
Nice idea and I agree with u... Ignore all the flames u'll get, many of us out there agree that eve's not all about combat, and i'll happliy pay the insurance fee if it ment i could live in peace with my m8s.
|
Johnathan Roark
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 00:56:00 -
[7]
This is a bad idea. You are supporting the war effort in your own way, your mining in empire provides the minerals to make the bullets.
-------------------------------------
Quantum Industries
|
The Talon
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 01:08:00 -
[8]
Edited by: The Talon on 21/05/2005 01:10:04
Edited by: The Talon on 21/05/2005 01:08:38
Yes this is a good idea.
BUT lets make this fair
1)Any Non-Combatant who flys into low sec space will not have the benefit of being protected by any sentry guns (at the gate or stations)
2)Any corp can destroy the Non-Combatant and pod without security status loss if the Non-combatant is in 0.4 and lower space.
3)Further more any Non-Combatant who targets and attempts to mine any roids in low sec space will have the local NPC pirate presence warp in and attack just like Concord does in secure space when an attack of aggression happens.
**)If a player wishes to be declared a Low Security Status Player and pays a fee of 250k isk a week they can attack any travelers just as if they were Non-Combatants explained in the above 3 examples.
Hmmm can anyone else add anything to this?
|
Ifni
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 01:11:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Ifni on 21/05/2005 01:15:02
Originally by: Nac MacFeegle
Now, while I can understand (to an extent) inter-corporation and inter-alliance wars, there are some people who join corps/alliances to take part in capacities other than fighting. Believe it or not, not everyone plays this game to shoot down everyone else...
Yes, and not everyone wants to have a non combat area. You chose to join that alliance, if you find they are too fighting orientated, then move elsewhere. In war some people choose to shoot what others view as non combatants. It is up to both sides to decide what they are going to consider a target.
As it is, fighting is the most extensive player vs player interaction in the game, whether you like it or not. Denying that shows that you would rather have a game limited to you and your style of gameplay. That is not a Massively Multiplayer Online Game.
The wonder of EVE is in its variety of players. Forcing a group of players to adapt to your style or ideas will simply create more problems.
-
|
Von Yulinor
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 01:20:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Ifni
As it is, fighting is the most extensive player vs player interaction in the game, whether you like it or not. Denying that shows that you would rather have a game limited to you and your style of gameplay. That is not a Massively Multiplayer Online Game.
I dont think it shows that at all, it just shows some of us want to massivly multiplay with our m8s with out the combat.
It would be our choice not to go to the more profitable low security space. Those that do, run the risk of combat (risk v reward).
EVE is big enough for the 2 sides to play together, at the moment its a flawed system, with only 1 option, NPC corps.
|
Na'Axin
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 01:24:00 -
[11]
this gonna be one of those random "Carebear vs. Pirate" threads? if so, you can stop here because neither will agree with the other in the end...
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination. |
Unbeleever
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 01:32:00 -
[12]
Consentual PvP = BAD!!! for game mmkay
Would smash the foundation of this game, and would remove the uniqness of it along with it.
Leave as is...... just mho
P.S My Spelling is bad I know it.
For me... Group therapy is a 30 pack of BEER!!
Then all of the voices are satisfied. |
Kade Shaderow
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 02:13:00 -
[13]
Why bother joining a corp in the first place if you don't want to expose yourself to the idea of getting hammered while you're mining away at some Scordite?
|
MutationZ
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 02:16:00 -
[14]
The shops are full of single player games.
You can also join a noob corp.
I think your idea sucks. You are taking away what makes EVE special.
|
Nac MacFeegle
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 02:16:00 -
[15]
Non-consentual PvP == Bad, mmkay? Where's the fun in paying $15/mo when you can't step foot out of a station when some bunch of twits declared war on you for no apparant reason?
All I'm saying is that in .5+ space, for a premium, you could avoid 95% of that unfun factor. Hell, boost the price to 10-20 million per week -- keep you busy enough paying for it to not contribute as much to your corp or alliance.
And of course, the moment you step outside of .5 space, you're completely open to gankage.
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 02:24:00 -
[16]
okokokok, whooohooo HOLD IT HERE !
This thread will be going nowhere at record speed soon, ans before it does, I want you to know this:
This whole discussion is moot, since CCP has already repeatedly stated that non-consentual combat will always be a risk to which every player in every part of space is subjected.
Now, while this should end this thread right here and now, I know it will not. But tbh, I've seen this discussion mroe then often already and simply advise you (not because i dont like non-combatants or people i dont agree with) to go find a different game if non-consensual combat is a problem big enough to you. Forget about changing it, not going to happen, period.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
MutationZ
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 02:28:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Nac MacFeegle
Non-consentual PvP == Bad, mmkay? Where's the fun in paying $15/mo when you can't step foot out of a station when some bunch of twits declared war on you for no apparant reason?
All I'm saying is that in .5+ space, for a premium, you could avoid 95% of that unfun factor. Hell, boost the price to 10-20 million per week -- keep you busy enough paying for it to not contribute as much to your corp or alliance.
And of course, the moment you step outside of .5 space, you're completely open to gankage.
Adding an mmmmkay at the end of a statement does not make it so. I disagree with you. Enough said.
|
Nikolai Nuvolari
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 02:28:00 -
[18]
I love that little blue guy in the corner of your signature :D
___________________________________________
^^^***---All things serve the Beam---***^^^ |
The Talon
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 04:34:00 -
[19]
Rod is correct. I know that so does 95% of the people who posted on this topic.
Its almost boring now....naaa it is boring.
But I still like my idea, tit for tat ya know.
|
DigitalCommunist
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 05:09:00 -
[20]
Idea: SUCKS.
Goodbye
_____________________________________
Perpetually driven, your end is our beginning.
"Can I be a consultant for EVE II?" - WhiteDwarf |
Gen Maximus
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 06:39:00 -
[21]
It is , in my opinion, quite a silly idea. it opens the doorway for possible exploit type situations where playing 'insure' and un insure at their own leasire and convenience against corporations that they are at war with. It would create too much confusion.
If you are a member of a corp that is at war.. maybe you would have been made aware of said war and if you dont agree or support it, perhaps you could join a sister or affilliate corp until the hostilities are over. It isnt my place to talk about your corps internal politics but that is how i see it.
And no, PVP in any space isnt a big part of my game.
|
Liu Kaskakka
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 06:41:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
okokokok, whooohooo HOLD IT HERE !
This thread will be going nowhere at record speed soon, ans before it does, I want you to know this:
This whole discussion is moot, since CCP has already repeatedly stated that non-consentual combat will always be a risk to which every player in every part of space is subjected.
Now, while this should end this thread right here and now, I know it will not. But tbh, I've seen this discussion mroe then often already and simply advise you (not because i dont like non-combatants or people i dont agree with) to go find a different game if non-consensual combat is a problem big enough to you. Forget about changing it, not going to happen, period.
rod makes me erect
|
mahhy
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 10:57:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Liu Kaskakka
rod makes me erect
theres pills and stuff for that now a days, you didn't need to resort to drastic implant surgery.
And please dont remove the non-consetual pvp aspect of this game.
|
The Talon
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 19:39:00 -
[24]
Originally by: DigitalCommunist
Idea: SUCKS.
Exactly!!!
But instead of flaming which I think 1/2 the starters of these threads want anyway. Or just calling them tards, give them them a counter suggestion.
If they want to tilt the scales so far in one direction give an idea to put them back in balance. (which is just as foolish as theirs)
Who would want a game where if you just paid 250k a week you were safe from combat or if you paid 250k a week you could gank without repercussion in 0.4 and below.
Its stupid, period.
I just chose to try and show these people how unfair the PvPers version of their idea would be.
|
zaqq
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 22:56:00 -
[25]
Its funny how its ALWAYS the PK'S that shout the loudest about pvp issues.
There ARE a damn sight more ppl in eve that DON'T want to pvp than do pvp.
Its a fact, and you are affraid that if enough ppl shout loud enough, your pking will be, ahhhhh (sarcastic sympathy mode) curbed.
But don't worry your lil heads about it, you have the devs on your side, so the majority will not get the vote. 
|
MutationZ
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 23:25:00 -
[26]
Originally by: zaqq
Its funny how its ALWAYS the PK'S that shout the loudest about pvp issues.
There ARE a damn sight more ppl in eve that DON'T want to pvp than do pvp.
Its a fact, and you are affraid that if enough ppl shout loud enough, your pking will be, ahhhhh (sarcastic sympathy mode) curbed.
But don't worry your lil heads about it, you have the devs on your side, so the majority will not get the vote.
They have a mission statement and a vision for the game. They have a dream to make the game a certain way. If that means you quit then fine. At the end of the day they will have stuck to their principles rather than taking the easy way out and making "miner sims in space / npc grind in space" that would probably appeal to a broader (and less discerning) audience.
So sit there and roll your eyes. Instead of bleating, take the time and read the above paragraph again. Because majority or not, you will never get your way with things like this
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 23:42:00 -
[27]
Tbh, just for kicks and without any boinding consequence, I'd like to see a poll about pvp.
One that is in exremis tho, not some about wether pvp should be slightly harder or slightly simpler etc.
Just simple one question:
Do you want non-consensual pvp to be part of this game ?
And then, I'd like to see our players opinions on it.
Not to use it, but to end this crap about people claiming to represent a majority of the playerbase left and right.
You represent NO-ONE but yourself and your alts. Deal with it and bring valid arguments instead of appealing to some sort of statistic you made up.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
Von Yulinor
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 23:50:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Tbh, just for kicks and without any boinding consequence, I'd like to see a poll about pvp.
One that is in exremis tho, not some about wether pvp should be slightly harder or slightly simpler etc.
Just simple one question:
Do you want non-consensual pvp to be part of this game ?
And then, I'd like to see our players opinions on it.
Not to use it, but to end this crap about people claiming to represent a majority of the playerbase left and right.
You represent NO-ONE but yourself and your alts. Deal with it and bring valid arguments instead of appealing to some sort of statistic you made up.
me2
|
zaqq
|
Posted - 2005.05.21 23:52:00 -
[29]
if the majority wanted to pvp, then 0.0 would be fuller, comprehend? don't take rocket science brain power to work that out, or does it ?
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.05.22 00:01:00 -
[30]
Originally by: zaqq
if the majority wanted to pvp, then 0.0 would be fuller, comprehend? don't take rocket science brain power to work that out, or does it ?
Eeeh, no.
Not wanting to pvp, and not wanting the game to feature non-consentual combat are two wholly different things.
And anyway, try employing actual logic instead of low level braincell rubbing. Pvp costs isk. Isk is made in empire easier then anywhere else. so, pvp'ers are in empire when they arent fighting.
Secondly, try looking at ships and pods destroyed and checking out empire systems. I hope you like orange cicrles.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |