| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
84
   |
Posted - 2014.04.03 00:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
I agree. As CEO, you should be able to fire the guy straight off. But to protect from other forms of abuse, the player currently has to be docked to kick them. This should be changed and I like the idea for this change:
Have someone who refuses to dock and is smart enough to avoid being baited? CEO can kick them regardless of where they are. Only, if they are in space, they are removed after 24 hours at the next downtime.
Good idea. |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
90
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 02:43:00 -
[2] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Mickael Tokoyaski wrote:And part of the awox experience is to hold the corp for ransom to leave. This change would end that. Good. First and foremost, they just betrayed you - so how can you trust that they're going to honor the ransom? You can't, and they never do - it's the AWOX equivalent of the "bonus round". Second, why should a CEO have to wait off-peak for downtime in the vain hopes of logging before the AWOX'er and managing to kick him? He shouldn't, and a determined AWOX'er has a better than 50-50 chance of beating it since he can both logoff and logon in space. Finally, more often than not the corporation is forced to simply block the individual due to the numerous taunts, vulgarities and other profanities that accompany a post-AWOX - usually in an attempt to further humiliate the victim and extract tears. CEOs and directors of a corporation should be able to kick whomever whenever and wherever they want. And if that ends the "crying game", wellGǪ tough. This infantile game mechanic exists for no other reason than to fulfill the self-serving interests of a bunch of delinquents. It's not sandbox and it's not even sand trap; it's quicksand.
Exactly, I am in control of the corporation as CEO. If I want you gone, you should be packing your Megathron models into that cardboard box and heading out the door. The peon hireling for a corporation should not have any say as to the duration of his employment with a corp outside of leaving it himself. "Emergent gameplay" as an excuse wears thin quickly. |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
94
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 04:49:00 -
[3] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
The inability to kick people in open space exists for a damned good reason.
You propose throwing those things away because some people can't be asked to put "Must submit full API" in the corp advertisement. Your cure is far, far worse than the disease.
Hence the requirement that there is a time delay between when the CEO kicks and the kicking takes effect.
Full APIs are not a silver bullet to the issue. They don't guarantee that you are dealing with a clean alt of a known AWOXer.
I hate to do this, but this suggestion actually made sense to me as a reasonable fix to address people helping AWOXERS with impunity.
There is another method to deal with AWOXers that could be added: An in-Corp PvP toggle. The CEO can enable specific people for PvP within the corp or disable them. If they are disabled, they cannot be attacked or attack freely within the corp. If they are enabled they can attack and be attacked freely within the corp. Default would be enabled.  If the player is toggled on or off from PvP, they are notified and given 24 hours before the change takes effect.
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
105
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 21:01:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Petrified wrote:
Full APIs are not a silver bullet to the issue. They don't guarantee that you are dealing with a clean alt of a known AWOXer.
"guarantee"? This is the problem with you people. You think if you don't have perfect safety, that it's all for nothing. You don't get a flipping "guarantee", no ones does. What you get are tools. Use them correctly, or don't.
That is my point: there is no guarantee. So why you even bothered to bring it up is a good question.
But then employment with a corp should not be guaranteed either.
The CEO should be able to kick any member it likes and, to protect against abuse, the actual time of kick will take place 24 hours after the CEO starts the kick process - kinda like a war dec. |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
108
|
Posted - 2014.04.05 00:45:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Ah, there it is.
"A corp should not be able to be taken down by a new member".
Why not?
....
So, why should someone in space not be kicked after 24 hours by their CEO (irregardless for the reason).
Explain now...
go!
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
108
|
Posted - 2014.04.05 00:56:00 -
[6] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Petrified wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Ah, there it is.
"A corp should not be able to be taken down by a new member".
Why not?
.... So, why should someone in space not be kicked after 24 hours by their CEO (irregardless for the reason). Explain now... go! Because you can't kick someone in space unless they're logged off. They've stood behind that pretty solidly for a while now.
And you now lose the Multi-billion ISK bonus round for failing to answer the question. Thanks for playing.
You can try again for chuckles if you like:
So, why should someone in space not be kicked after 24 hours by their CEO (irregardless for the reason). |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
110
|
Posted - 2014.04.05 03:11:00 -
[7] - Quote
Cloak n'all wrote:Bill Lane wrote:At the very least, the CEO should have the power to instantly kick any member, in space or not. Anyone other than the CEO (directors and such) should have a restriction such as 24 hours or kept as current. I beleave the reason that you cant kick people in space instantly is that you could kick them webbing a corp ship, say a freighter to decrease its aline time, and they would be concorded for this. It is a good thing that no one has that power. Hence the delay with notice idea.
I wonder how safties would change this. |
| |
|