Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
2108
|
Posted - 2015.08.17 12:52:48 -
[1] - Quote
How did I miss this one? Sorry Noragen. I don't have time to read the entire thread right now, so I'll stick with your updated OPs.
1. I like the idea behind Proposal 1. However, any kind of system- or constellation-wide benefit needs to be exactly that: a benefit to the owning corp, not any sort of penalty to anyone else. Hisec is free and open to all comers, even -10s.
There is one thing that I think should come in addition to this: monthly upkeep. You shouldn't just get a benefit like this because nobody has bothered to challenge you on it yet, you should have to pay for it. If this is going to be some melding of Sov and POS mechanics, and both of them include upkeep, this should too. Not only would this encourage corps to stay active to get the benefit, it would hopefully reduce the number of corps con-trolling* a system/constellation.
*(See what I did there?)
2. I've liked this idea and its variants for a long time (you can hardly take credit for this one). Two changes though. First, I would make the "yield" penalty to refining yield, not to actual miner yield. I know, ideally it'd be nice from your standpoint to actually reduce the mining laser yield so miners are encouraged to get out of NPC corps, but that gets into weird game mechanics issues that I don't think we want to mess with. I think it's neater and cleaner to keep changes to station/POS services, not in-space mechanics. Secondly, I would also include an increase to market transaction fees and job installation costs to your CONCORD taxes so that trade and research/industry alts are also discouraged from staying in NPC corps.
EDIT: One thing that I've seen tossed around with these ideas in the past is a minimum membership. I would totally and wholeheartedly oppose this as it would effectively destroy a way of life for myself and many of my associates. If you're willing to put yourself on the line, membership numbers shouldn't count.
3. I like where you're going with your proposed wardec changes, especially allowing offensive assistance, but I can't entirely support it. Allowing offensive assistance would get abused like all get out without hard limits on offensive wardecs and I'm pretty sure you agree with me here. The problem is that I don't like the idea of hard caps on wardecs. Scaling costs? Sure. Hard caps? No. If you want to wardec a corp that is much smaller than you, you should probably pay more. If you want to have a bunch of wardecs active at once, they should probably start costing more per wardec. If you want to keep one wardec active for several months, it should probably start costing more.
So, no to offensive assistance because I don't like the idea of hard caps and it would be broken without them, yes to scaling wardec fees to discourage long, numerous, or lopsided wars.
Cheers.
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
A brief history of C&P Thunderdome
|
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
2156
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 19:06:47 -
[3] - Quote
Mobadder Thworst wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote:Tengu Grib wrote:...would reduce the frequency of troll decs and blanket decs. More of the wars being declared would be 'legitimate' wars over resources. I may well steal this for my CSM platform. Bring back can flipping as well and I'll vote for you... You still can still can flip, game mechanics don't prevent it, it's just that people are less likely to mine into a jetcan these days. I suspect-gamed this Retriever into aggressing me (and dying, along with his pod) just a few days ago. (Full disclosure: I shot his MTU instead of flipping a can, but the principle is the same.) I also used to do it recently in ice anoms, but in those cases I just wanted the ice so I didn't shoot anyone.
So...do I get yer vote?
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
A brief history of C&P Thunderdome
|