Awox will still be possible if the rumor ends up being true.

Only change is now you will have consequences.

And as many have demonstrated,,,,some of the so called pvp'rs and content creators don't want consequences for themselves.

do... do you even know what awoxing is?

According to this thread the ability to kill anyone in a corp I join with no consequence to myself.

According to this thread the ability to kill anyone in a corp I join with no consequence to myself.

Tell me more about these consequences... I'm still reading the 146 page pdf (which by the way I love).

You are reading the wrong stuffs.

"There seems to be a strong suggestion that you will soon no longer be able to "legally" shoot corpmates, and the implication seems to be that shooting corpmates will be a criminal act in highsec that will be met with CONCORD retribution."


The only ones saying awoxing is going to disappear are the ones who don't like the fact that the only baseless thing that was mentioned was that now Concord would step in.



Which translates into someone not wanting to awox anymore because they will lose their ship as well.

Which means that awoxing ceases to exist, since what you described is suicide ganking and already exists.

So what you're saying is, if ship loss occurs (as in most forms of pvp), it stops being awoxing?

I don't have much against awoxers, save for the fact that eve might be more successful without their particular mechanic, but you aren't making a good case for yourself here.

TBH I always though awoxing was attacking a corpmate. Everything that came after that was a consequence of the awox attempt.

According to this thread the ability to kill anyone in a corp I join with no consequence to myself.

no, that's because if concord gets involved... that's suicide ganking, not awoxing. so that suggestion literally translates to "we want to removing awoxing".

y'all are aware that ecm will get you out of any high sec awox situation. right?

there have been many occasions when a perfect awox has been foiled by a single jam.

The awox will still happen. Only change would be that you lose your ship a well.

If you make the choice to no longer awox due to losing your ship I can only conclude you don;t like losing your ship. As that would be the only change.

And if that awox is important to your corp, have them replace the ship...after all...its for the betterment of the corp.

All I personally know is that when I came into EVE, I joined a mission running corp and were told all these things that were untrue about lw and null. If it wasn't for CCP introducing Faction Warfare, I'd have quit because based on bad information I was too afraid to venture outside of high sec.

My experience is not unique. I've trained more than a few guys back when I was in Atlas and IT and then Raiden who would say "man, can't belvie I didn't do this sooner".

I've come to realize that goons were doing it right, quickly ejecting their new players from high sec before they could become brainwashed lol. I now encourage new players to get the hell out of high sec as soon as possible, and avoid pve only high sec corps if they don't stay with my group.

So what you're saying is, if ship loss occurs (as in most forms of pvp), it stops being awoxing?

I don't have much against awoxers, save for the fact that eve might be more successful without their particular mechanic, but you aren't making a good case for yourself here.

TBH I always though awoxing was attacking a corpmate. Everything that came after that was a consequence of the awox attempt.

Sure, if you have some familiarity with it online at the time who can run back and grab it in time to stop the attack.

Since it's almost completely useless against rats, the odds are probably not good that most members of any given high sec PVE corp have even trained Electronic Warfare, never mind the amplification skills. There's no reason to use a dedicated jamming boat in PVE, so the odds that one would just be lying around are slim. Unless they do incursions, they might not even have logi. I trained it because my corp had veterans who had flown in PVP fleets for years. Not everyone does.

I'm willing to bet that most AWOXs succeed to the extent they do not just because of good timing by the AWOXer (striking when a mission boat is up against max DPS in a mission) but because people who have never PVP'd can and do freeze up when they're suddenly confronted with it and do dumb and uncoordinated things that get them popped.

That's another problem: PVE has become so utterly unlike PVP, and rats so completely unlike capsuleer ships, that people end up specializing into completely different areas. It's bad enough that most PVE rewards solo work, whereas most PVP rewards fleet work, so the odds aren't bad that the corp members are lacking the RL or even in-game skills to form an effective fleet, with roles and support.

I'm not particularly interested in blaming or fault-finding; this seems to me to a solvable problem.

so what you're saying is, people should be protected from something even if they put 0 effort in to protecting themselves from it? really?

i'm willing to bet that most awoxes succeed because people don't bother to do basic checks before recruiting. accepting blank applications from known awoxers, for example.

of course it's solvable... fix neutral logi turning a 10 hour pilot in a gnosis in to an unstoppable killing machine once he has activated his scram and web.

That is, unless your entire gameplay style is centered on abusing people who don't understand counterintuitive gameplay mechanics in EVE's 'safest' systems,

The continued misuse of the word 'awox' in this thread has me in quite a state. Check your history, almost all of you are wrong.

This change would literally only effect hisec. Seriously. That's it. Want to shoot your mates in low/null/wh? Go nuts. There is otherwise no impact anywhere else with this.

That is, unless your entire gameplay style is centered on abusing people who don't understand counterintuitive gameplay mechanics in EVE's 'safest' systems, in which case I'm sure this will impact you, and I'm so very sorry you're unable to take on real challenges and lack the imagination to think of other ways to hurt people. Basically, you're dumb if you think that anyone who knows what real risk means is going to hop on some terrible hyberbolic bandwagon defending your right to beat up the proverbial new kid and take their lunch money.

Or to put it another way, HTFU yourselves you bunch of whiners.

so when's the ETA on banning scams?
when's the ETA on banning mission baiting?

you are banning those too, i assume, since they're also centered on the same things.

If you straw man any harder you might soon be joined by a tin man and a cowardly lion.

if you want to stop people awoxing with such impunity, fix the broken neutral logi mechanics.

so what you're saying is, people should be protected from something even if they put 0 effort in to protecting themselves from it? really?