It does sound then like removing AWOXing may be a good idea. Although removing 'bumping' would be game-breaking IMO.

I'm sorry, who the **** are you to tell anyone to "adapt or die"? You're a sniveling little whingey ***** who's hiding behind CCP's skirt and chanting for a safer EVE, you loser ******* carebear.

Yawn, meme, meme, meme, I've never had a unique thought, meme, meme, meme.

Please tell me how to think, I am but a sheep for memes.

Look at how clever I am, repeating memes that I copied from someone else who was repeating them from the meme machine generator of memeeememememememems.



Should you not have deducted it for yourself, nobody cares about LowSex.

How about this? In YC235754, CONCORD issued a notification to the empires that due to inflation in the price of PLEX, their budget could no longer support responses to intra-corporate capsuleer aggression. All capsuleer corporations were advised to provide for their own internal security."

Hey Mike, since you're so fixated on "makes sense" in regards to CONCORD ignoring inter corporate violence.

Tell me how it "makes sense" that if they can't be asked to show up in a mission pocket to shoot the NPC actual pirates, that they can just appear by magic if a player shoots at another player.

Please tell me how that "makes sense" and isn't exactly the kind of arbitrary thing you're claiming to crusade against.

If they won't show up to shoot the rats, I think they shouldn't show up at all. "Makes sense", right?

Or we can admit to ourselves that absolutely nothing about the Infallible Magic Space Police makes sense, and just talk about game mechanics without hiding behind non logic false flags. Because if you want it to "make sense", they should not exist in the first place, let alone have unstoppable weapons.

See above. Ever do the Angel Arc? You even hunt down and kill a CONCORD deputy. Sure seems like they are concerned with the NPCs.

It's pretty "inconsistent" for them to even shoot players at all if they can't deal with the actual pirates. Since "inconsistent" is also something the carebears seem so concerned with.

It does preclude you from pointing that finger at others.

So let's knock off the "makes sense" bullshit, and talk about it on it's own merits, or lack thereof.

One wonders why CONCORD is in Curse, then.

It doesn't cost subs.

AWOXing is not, and never has been, an exploit. CCP intentionally made Concord not respond to intra-corp combat. They are now planning to change that behaviour in order to make the rules of highsec more intuitive and remove exceptions that are not immediately apparent or regarded as logical. That does not make the current behaviour any less intended.

AWOXing is not, has not been, will not be an exploit.

Prove that it does.

And the crux is this:



Spot on FunkyBacon. This concept of "reasonableness" is exactly the problem with the "permabanned because you were being unreasonable and we're not going to tell you why" problem (and it is a problem).

People come to the game with different expectations of what is reasonable, begat from differing experiences of gaming & "normal" culture, and from what they learned about the game before joining. It is irresponsible and (ironically) unreasonable of CCP not to educate the players as to what CCP thinks is "reasonable".

There seems to have been a cultural shift at CCP over the years, and while loads of brilliant things are being done to improve the game there seems to be a pernicious shift behind the scenes which continues to erode Eve's USP -- which to me seems much more of a threat to the longevity of the product than bewildered rookies. Educate them!

All MMO companies are twitchy about releasing retention-related figures (due to competitive analysis, I assume).

If a wardec mechanic (or any mechanic) is to exist in EvE it should be meaningful and choice/consequence based. The way wardecs can be simply ducked today however breaks this fundamental concept. It also defies logic...

The aggressor followed the rules and paid CONCORD for war rights, but the defender corp disbands and re-forms under another name to immediately invalidate the war. Does the aggressor get a refund? Does the aggressor get a refund even based on percentage of defenders who drop corp? No. Even though the aggressor may have a 'legitimate' complaint against the defender, they get shafted by a mechanic set up to favor the defender who can 'opt out' of the war entirely...

But seriously, even then a refund doesn't quite cut it does it. In WWII, could Poland have just opted-out of getting blitzed by Germany or paid a UN imposed fee to have the war by Germany voided? Could the USA 'opt out' and prevent the Pearl Harbor bombings just by changing their fricken name from 'USA' to 'USA2'?

War is hell. It has implications. If a war mechanic is to exist, it must not be duckable.

F

there clearly is if you form a ONE MAN CORP.

they are sanitised and heavily nda'd veers , the things they suggest are many and varied.

Thank you, Mag's, for identifying one way in which this change will definitely enable more high sec skullduggery: no more freighter and Orca webbing. Enjoy those align times!

I think I am gonna have to write a long letter to dice soon.

I would very much like to play battlefield and just fly around in a chopper, watching all the nice explosions without ever getting involved into the action myself.

Being forced to engage into PvP in Battlefield sucks. I love the graphics and I love flying choppers but I do not want to shoot at other people, so they there should be an option in the game which prevents me from getting involved into any combat action. I want my chosen playstyle to be valid in every game i could possibly ever touch, no matter if it fits into the core concept of the game or not.

Just to make sure:

I am being sarcastic here, to point out how silly the way you "I want to PvE in peace" ppl think is.

Also if you think this will prevent awoxing then you are not thinking this through. Sure with that change you can not just freely attack your corpm8s in high sec, but people who are flying around PvE ships that are actually worth awoxing will still be stupid enough to lose ships to people, who know how to infiltrate a corp and gains peoples trust. Sure it will be a bit more difficult, but I would place any bet that still more than enough people will get blown up by people in their corp.

All this does is putting another restriction on yet another game mechanic that did not ever stop eve from growing and if CCP keeps moving in that direction, they might get more people like Veers, who think their PvE only playstyle should be valid in every game.

And anyone with 2 braincells can see how long Eve will keep going with a PvE only community.

This has not been the only change over the years driving Eve more and more in that direction. It-¦s the sum of all the changes which gradually make Eve safer and safer, catering to the anti PvP people.

On your replies to my sarcastic BF remark, you totally did not get the point did you?

Since you seem unable to understand it:

The point is. When I go and play an FPS game I have to expect to get shot at.

If I am playing Eve (a open world PvP Sandbox - which would not work without PvP at all) I am well aware that PvP is possible and people who clain that their PvE only playstyle without interference should be viable are just as deluded as anyone thinking you can go play an FPS game without ever being shot. And the people who defend changes like that are exactly the same people who would want this playstyle to be possible in Eve.

I never claimed Eve has reached the status of a PvE only community yet, but that is the direction the game seems to be going.

So where do all the people whose main argument against this change find the ground to stand on . . . that by shifting a rule that made little sense (It is OK to go Postal if you are in a post office and work there) we are somehow moving away from what the game IS. It is like they are the apostles of a religion within the game but I cannot seem to find their holy book or church.

Now go tackle the topic of highsec reward being too high.

Result - everyone operating in one man corps and even LESS social interaction. This is good for the game how exactly?

No. guns don't magically stop working in high sec,

X Rebirth is a PVE game, EVE is a PVP (and not just the shooting kind, station traders pvp for example) game with supporting pve elements.

Ironically, one of the reasons I chose this play style, straight out of the gate. Because while I may end up being the "bad guy," I have taught a valuable lesson, not easily forgotten by incompetent corp leaders, or their line members. Yep, such a horrible, horrible thing to do.

Only ones not willing to adapt are the awoxxers who are saying they will stop doing said activity because their ship will get blown up.

Strange how that works.

The hypocrisy is really getting deep in here.

Pretty sh*t move tbh if they do, it's a nice way to test setups and have inter corp competitions and had no detrimental affect on the rest of the game.


Tal

Aren't the CSM suppose to represent everyone. Even the dumb ones. Its obvious by reading the minutes that you look down on these people and I have to wonder how can represent them.

I don't think you can and by your statement....no requirements to be nice ...I can only think that you don't represent everyone equally. You only represent the ones who you agree with.


This whole CSm thing seems alittle dodgy to me now.

The Council of Stellar Management (CSM) is a player-elected council to represent the views of the players to CCP. Current CSM members can be identified by the golden title CSM under their image in forum posts, and a list is available in the Category CSM Candidates.

Players can raise issues to the CSM for consideration, and obtain support for the CSM to raise issues to CCP by posting in the Assembly Hall Channel on the Eve-Online official forums.


If the CSM thinks the person is dumb, then they must think that what they say is dumb...and I have to wonder if they are going to bring these dumb concerns to CCP.

I wouldn't feel comfortable talking to this person and trusting they will bring up my concerns. Most people wouldn't.

Sounds more like a politician with their own personal agenda.