| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sati Kerensky
SEA Industries
0
   |
Posted - 2011.12.17 21:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
I think we all know the nice feature that CONCORD doesn't come right at you when you do a little sparring with corpmates. It's great for testing PvP fittings and all. But after joining a seemingly good corp and getting caught at a gate in highsec in my freighter by my own recruiter, it suddenly turned from a nice feature to a severe hindrance in finding a corp - there is no sensible way to check your new corpmates first.
My idea to keep the feature intact but lessen the griefing: If it's a mutual fight (the 'victim' shoots back even once), CONCORD considers it a friendly sparring, but if a ship gets destroyed without shooting back even once, they come after the aggressor.
Yep, I realize that some sparring fights are to test whether you can insta-pop this or that ship, but then just fire first with the target ship (fit a single cheap turret on that industrial, whatever), and you're in the clear again. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
223
|
Posted - 2011.12.17 21:42:00 -
[2] - Quote
Don't automatically trust the people in the corp you sign up with?
No, seriously... when applying, make yourself out to be more noobish and poor than you really are. Or you can just not bring out all that expensive crap until after you have gained good rapport with the people in the corp.
"Just because I seem like an idiot, doesn't mean I am one."
~Unknown |
Emperor Salazar
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
277
|
Posted - 2011.12.17 21:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
More easily solved by not being an idiot. |
Sati Kerensky
SEA Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.17 21:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Don't automatically trust the people in the corp you sign up with?
No, seriously... when applying, make yourself out to be more noobish and poor than you really are. Or you can just not bring out all that expensive crap until after you have gained good rapport with the people in the corp.
You mean lie, because the ones you're about to work with might be lieing as well? And I always thought corp were there to cooperate, not grief each other.
Let's see if someone can come up with a reason to NOT implement such a simple solution. |
Yeep
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 00:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
Sati Kerensky wrote:
Let's see if someone can come up with a reason to NOT implement such a simple solution.
Because people would still kill your freighter, they'd just do it in a t1 frigate on a disposable alt over the course of a couple of hours |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
223
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 01:04:00 -
[6] - Quote
Sati Kerensky wrote:ShahFluffers wrote:Don't automatically trust the people in the corp you sign up with?
No, seriously... when applying, make yourself out to be more noobish and poor than you really are. Or you can just not bring out all that expensive crap until after you have gained good rapport with the people in the corp. You mean lie, because the ones you're about to work with might be lieing as well? And I always thought corp were there to cooperate, not grief each other.
Welcome to EVE. Lying a bit to cover your own ass IS important as "trust" is gained, not given. And it works both ways.
If you want an actual reason for keep things the way they are... short of ejecting someone from a corp and/or suicide ganking, the current mechanics allow the corp as a whole to "enforce" the corp rules (whatever they may be) and "deal" with people who are spys/thieves/douches.
"Just because I seem like an idiot, doesn't mean I am one."
~Unknown |
Sati Kerensky
SEA Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 01:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
Yeep wrote:Because people would still kill your freighter, they'd just do it in a t1 frigate on a disposable alt over the course of a couple of hours
Good point, it's not too difficult to keep a webbed ship from a gate or station by bumping. Maybe add a timer, 1 minute should be enough to fire back during friendly fights, and stop firing if the target doesn't.
ShahFluffers wrote:Sati Kerensky wrote:You mean lie, because the ones you're about to work with might be lieing as well? And I always thought corp were there to cooperate, not grief each other. Welcome to EVE. Lying a bit to cover your own ass IS important as "trust" is gained, not given. And it works both ways. If you want an actual reason for keep things the way they are... short of ejecting someone from a corp and/or suicide ganking, the current mechanics allow the corp as a whole to "enforce" the corp rules (whatever they may be) and "deal" with people who are spys/thieves/douches.
A thief will most likely leave the corp by himself. And you would actually prefer to keep a spy or douche in your corp and just kill him once (or maybe twice if he's extremely stupid) than to eject him? Assuming the guy was given roles, if he wants to harm you, he will, and then stay docked until the 24h run out. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
223
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 01:50:00 -
[8] - Quote
Sati Kerensky wrote:A thief will most likely leave the corp by himself. And you would actually prefer to keep a spy or douche in your corp and just kill him once (or maybe twice if he's extremely stupid) than to eject him? Assuming the guy was given roles, if he wants to harm you, he will, and then stay docked until the 24h run out.
You make it sound that the person in question will always know that people are on to him/her. I can say from experience that the "upper management" of a corp rarely says what it knows to the rest of the corp. Matters of this nature are, if done right... discreetly and decisively handled.
Sati Kerensky wrote:Trust of the new member towards the corp - how can it be built without actually joining the corp, which makes you instantly vulnerable, forcing you to give trust up front?
It can't. Because trust should NEVER be automatic or forced upon. Ever. It's a principle thing.
"Just because I seem like an idiot, doesn't mean I am one."
~Unknown |
Sati Kerensky
SEA Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 02:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Sati Kerensky wrote:Trust of the new member towards the corp - how can it be built without actually joining the corp, which makes you instantly vulnerable, forcing you to give trust up front? It can't. Because trust should NEVER be automatic or forced upon. Ever. It's a principle thing.
Well, basically you're agreeing with me then. Trust should never be forced. But joining a corp makes you extremely vulnerable to the rest of the corp (and other non-PvP corpmembers to you), meaning it currently is forced. More from the new member, since directors can see his location, even access his hangar if there's an office at the station! |
Abdiel Kavash
Paladin Order
Fidelas Constans
220
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 03:25:00 -
[10] - Quote
I would much prefer a system where being in a corp doesn't grant you automatic CONCORD immunity, but instead there is a system where you can very easily allow anyone - in corp or not - to attack you without reprecussions if you want to. |
Spork Witch
Soul-Strike
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 11:24:00 -
[11] - Quote
Actually, this is the opposite of what they need to do. They need to fix it so alliances can shoot each other without penalty, not just corps (or at least let the executor of the alliance have a setting whether to allow it or not).
You joining some untrustworthy people and getting yourself killed via stupidity is _your_ fault, not the system's.
Per the 70 Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries (previously known as The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates):
30. A little trust goes a long way. The less you use, the further you'll go. |
Spork Witch
Soul-Strike
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 11:25:00 -
[12] - Quote
Abdiel Kavash wrote:I would much prefer a system where being in a corp doesn't grant you automatic CONCORD immunity, but instead there is a system where you can very easily allow anyone - in corp or not - to attack you without reprecussions if you want to.
They already have this, it's called World of Warcraft. Go there. |
Sati Kerensky
SEA Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 15:03:00 -
[13] - Quote
Spork Witch wrote:Actually, this is the opposite of what they need to do. They need to fix it so alliances can shoot each other without penalty, not just corps (or at least let the executor of the alliance have a setting whether to allow it or not).
You joining some untrustworthy people and getting yourself killed via stupidity is _your_ fault, not the system's.
Per the 70 Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries (previously known as The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates):
30. A little trust goes a long way. The less you use, the further you'll go.
You didn't really respond to my previous post. How can you build trust with someone without joining the corp? The current mechanics force you to trust them.
Besides, what's the point of being able to shoot corp-mates out of the blue? Repercussion against thieves and spies only rarely works if they know at least a bit what they're doing, and ejecting them is the final step anyways. In low- and nullsec, it doesn't matter either way, so it's just highsec. Wardecs are already one way to legalize highsec-PvP, why not remove this one that's obviously very easy to abuse? |
Goose99
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
320
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 15:22:00 -
[14] - Quote
Ever wondered why 72% of characters in Eve are either in npc corps or one man corps? |
Sati Kerensky
SEA Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 15:51:00 -
[15] - Quote
Goose99 wrote:Ever wondered why 72% of characters in Eve are either in npc corps or one man corps?
Yep, I know. It does go a bit against the multiplayer-idea though I'd say. Corps are there for cooperation ;) |
Emperor Salazar
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
277
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 16:04:00 -
[16] - Quote
Goose99 wrote:Ever wondered why 72% of characters in Eve are either in npc corps or one man corps?
I thought it was 74%.
|
Spork Witch
Soul-Strike
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 18:06:00 -
[17] - Quote
Sati Kerensky wrote:Spork Witch wrote:Actually, this is the opposite of what they need to do. They need to fix it so alliances can shoot each other without penalty, not just corps (or at least let the executor of the alliance have a setting whether to allow it or not).
You joining some untrustworthy people and getting yourself killed via stupidity is _your_ fault, not the system's.
Per the 70 Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries (previously known as The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates):
30. A little trust goes a long way. The less you use, the further you'll go. You didn't really respond to my previous post. How can you build trust with someone without joining the corp? The current mechanics force you to trust them. Besides, what's the point of being able to shoot corp-mates out of the blue? Repercussion against thieves and spies only rarely works if they know at least a bit what they're doing, and ejecting them is the final step anyways. In low- and nullsec, it doesn't matter either way, so it's just highsec. Wardecs are already one way to legalize highsec-PvP, why not remove this one that's obviously very easy to abuse?
To answer your inaccurate assumption: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FguHIOqkngE&list=UUXbA4vvefSq_zMHgkKhIe4g&index=1&feature=plcp |
Sati Kerensky
SEA Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 22:01:00 -
[18] - Quote
So.. you're pointing out a vid of a fight in nullsec as an argument, where CONCORD is so far away that it doesn't matter in the least who you fire at?
Yes, I know such a 'punishment' would work in highsec as well with the current mechanics. But that's exactly my point. You need to bribe CONCORD to look the other way if you want to attack some outsider, but they don't do anything if a few people run amok against corp-mates?
How about a different idea then. Directors can set a corp-wide flag that becomes active 24h later, allowing everyone who doesn't agree to leave the corp. You can always try to sweet-talk traitors and such into staying. |
Bearilian
Man Eating Bears
50
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 23:22:00 -
[19] - Quote
I support this idea and how its being looked over. and as much as i would like there to be more of a balance, there is going to be the majority of people voting against any change. most likely because they have been on the sweeter side of the downfall in corp trust. I completely understand how it is used as a form of punishment for spies etc.. but i garuntee you that it is abused in the other direction most of the time. there are many corps out there with the sole purpose of exploiting this mechanic. Ive tried to argue something similar about this and feel your solution is actually a good one.
make it a concordable offence if the fight is entirely one sided. if you find a spy in your corp and you want to surprise them with a gank, then it would stil be worth it if you had to sacrifice a ship or two. just get him/her to fly something worth value, then scram pop em.
another suggestion for you, since you were mentioning a timer. would be to have a warning pop up, say after 60(or so) seconds the person being fired apon will be asked by concord if it is sanctioned. if they say no, then a warning will pop up on the aggressors screen, warning them to stop firing.
if you look at how ccp has set up high sec and the empires and their rules and regulations. then corp killing is an exploit no matter how you look at it.
I am tired of people trying to quote WoW, and telling people to go play that game. there is literally no comparison between the two. if your going to tell people to go play something else, at least have the decency to mention another sci fi space flyer. ccp's ongoing struggle is going to keep new players subscribed, and allowing some buffer to noobs would be a good step for them. the problem is that you are going to say one thing about "oh i want to kill spies", but in reality you want to be a long time griefer and kill noobs. just saying...
I know i'm about to get a lot of flack, but the system is unbalanced and experienced people can pick on the little guys with no reprocussion. every time i get into a conversation or argument with someone, they try to say that you have to accept the risks of the game. but seriously where is the risk in ganking or poding a corp mate? there is no reprocussion available... |
Alara IonStorm
654
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 23:32:00 -
[20] - Quote
I love all the talk about how trust is hurt by being able to kill you.
Apparently in EVE, Trust is just a nickname for the In-Game Police.
In WoW, Trust = GM's. In EVE we trust each other and if we get burned a few times so be it because the people who earn our trust have a stronger bond then a petition to a GM could ever create.
|
Tenris Anis
Schattenengel Clan
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 23:34:00 -
[21] - Quote
Small question: What would happen if you would have left the corp when they start to shoot your freighter?
Next question, what would happen if someone self destruct in a sparing fight instead of shooting back with your new system? ;-) |
Terminal Insanity
Convex Enterprises
Unprovoked Aggression
166
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 23:36:00 -
[22] - Quote
Another carebear thread, trying to dumb down eve. |
Sati Kerensky
SEA Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 23:37:00 -
[23] - Quote
Tenris Anis wrote:Small question: What would happen if you would have left the corp when they start to shoot your freighter?
Next question, what would happen if someone self destruct in a sparing fight instead of shooting back with your new system? ;-)
You can't leave the corp unless you're docked (Yep, I was told it was possible some time ago, but it was apparently changed).
Self-destructs should of course be considered a consensual kill ;) |
Sati Kerensky
SEA Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.19 23:38:00 -
[24] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:Another carebear thread, trying to dumb down eve.
Another poster who needs to look up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
85
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 00:58:00 -
[25] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:Another carebear thread, trying to dumb down eve.
this
it is already way too noob friendly |
Sati Kerensky
SEA Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 01:07:00 -
[26] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Terminal Insanity wrote:Another carebear thread, trying to dumb down eve. this it is already way too noob friendly
If CCP wasn't interested in keeping highsec somewhat secure vs. griefers, why do you think they implemented that warning when you're about to logi-help a criminally flagged? They do afterall advertize with EVE offering something to all types of players, peaceful mining or trading up to nullsec wars (can't find the quote again currently, but I'll see if I can dig it up again). Sure, non-consensual combat is an integral part of EVE, but in highsec, you should pay the price for it, that's what CONCORD is for. Wardecs - sure, you do pay at least a nomal fee. But corp-ganks are currently just a way to get past that. |
Epofhis
StarFckers Inc.
The Jagged Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 01:09:00 -
[27] - Quote
We're talking about a game whose own marketing Explicitly recommends that you destroy the life savings and work of hundreds of other players to satisfy your own butthurt. (Causality trailer)
Good luck with trying to change this, and as always,
This feature is working as intended.
PS: Maybe don't be such an easy mark next time.
|
Sati Kerensky
SEA Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 01:24:00 -
[28] - Quote
Epofhis wrote:We're talking about a game whose own marketing Explicitly recommends that you destroy the life savings and work of hundreds of other players to satisfy your own butthurt. (Causality trailer)
Good luck with trying to change this, and as always,
This feature is working as intended.
PS: Maybe don't be such an easy mark next time.
Before I take this post seriously, or any following along the same lines - explain why CONCORD exists at all.
You attack someone in highsec, successfully or not, CONCORD comes in and kills you, making sure you pay the price. Feature works as intended.
You pay off CONCORD to look the other way so you can attack a certain group of players without them interfering, so you pay the price up front. Feature works as intended.
You attack someone against their will, CONCORD doesn't see one ISK, you don't lose anything apart from your ammo. Feature doesn't work as intended. |
Tenris Anis
Schattenengel Clan
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 01:29:00 -
[29] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Terminal Insanity wrote:Another carebear thread, trying to dumb down eve. this it is already way too noob friendly
A game can never be too noob friendly. It only can screw up with taking this attitude over into gameplay beyond its starting phase. |
Epofhis
StarFckers Inc.
The Jagged Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 01:36:00 -
[30] - Quote
Sati Kerensky wrote:
Before I take this post seriously, or any following along the same lines - explain why CONCORD exists at all.
Concord do not exist to save your ass when you fall in with the wrong crowd. In all the fluff and descriptions I have seen Concord does Not intervene in matters of corporate internal security. So if someone stole all my corporate assets, hung out in space in a freighter, and I went to shoot him, I would be destroyed? I'm sure that there is absolutely as much potential for abuse In this system as the current system, if not more.
You got scammed, bro. Please accept it, move on, and lower your crack intake.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |