EVE Search - Why do we have concord?????

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

Why do we have concord?????

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Neslo Gallente No Angels Here	Posted - 2008.04.17 22:20:00 - [31] Originally by: Shakuul They could just have the agressor's ship blow up by itself after a specified amount of time (depending on sec status), or increase concord dps again, so they would instapop everything as soon as they spawned. I live in the US... And we're going through a political cycle. I'm seriously thinking that Concord being an effective tool... is like the second amendment. People have a fundamentally SCREWED up view of how it's supposed to work. Concord is meant to retaliate as a service, not a protective one. It's job isn't to protect you from the evil in the game. It's meant to punish those that attack you. So you might ask. Why does it start attacking you as soon as an attack occurs instead of when you die? Good question, Simply put, it's a nusiance device. If you have 2-3 n00bs randomly locking you and shooting you, without penalty... then people will just make alts and do that to kill you. Concord comes in and cleans up the n00b trash. This doesn't mean you won't take damage from the n00b, just not infinite till you are dead. HOWEVER, If by some unlucky chance you run into a fleet of n00bs, then when they attack you you will still take the "small" amount of damage before concord kills them, but you will simply take more damage. And in some cases the damage exceeds what you are able to take. They receive a sec hit, you simply get to cry, and then see them all die. Also, anyone that takes from your can / wreck... will be agressable (and i really think that people who take from peoples cans shouldn't be allowed to dock till they have their full 15 minute timer get expired (allowing you a revenge kill... yes even if they log you should be able to kill them and take your stuff back)... this is a flawed system that could be worked out in the end.) My 2isk (to continue the discussion) ---------- Sig Begins ---------- ...This thread is soooo doing it wrong...
EnslaverOfMinmatar Amarr Adv Asteroid Mining and RD Sobaseki Corporation	Posted - 2008.04.18 00:58:00 - [32] Lets get rid of Concord and blow up all carebears YAY!!
Aarin Wrath	Posted - 2008.04.18 02:17:00 - [33] Edited by: Aarin Wrath on 18/04/2008 02:20:02 No concord means nobody mining veld in empire, and no industry in empire. (all barges and mining cruiser would be the first targets, industrials shortly there after) Imaging how much ships would cost if the mins had to be imported from 0.0 via jump freighter, then escorted into empire with a pvp fleet. (since 0.0 would then be more secure than empire) PVP would die a slow expensive death. Would be fun for a few days though.
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2008.04.18 02:26:00 - [34] As much as I'd like the same things, an option to be a concord police (anti pirate) in faction wars etc... There's a reason the game has developed the way it has, allowing only 6 gateguns or whatever leaves highsec open for very rich pickings by the alliances, they can tank anything less then an astronomical amount of damage on a single ship by adding x more logistics ships to their support.
solla bolla	Posted - 2008.04.18 05:37:00 - [35] Edited by: solla bolla on 18/04/2008 05:38:34 an idea to make suicide ops a bit less fancy is to remove insurance payout if a concord is on the killmail, its lame to see that ppl can actually gain isk by suiciding my 2 isk
F'nog Amarr Celestial Horizon Corp. Valainaloce	Posted - 2008.04.18 06:43:00 - [36] Originally by: Walkin if i remember correctly eve was launched without concord, the population policed itself and everyone prospered. When concord was introduced the population went to hell, we got asshats hiding within game mechanics to grief others. Turn back the clock, make all of eve 0.0. I need to dust off the guns :) You remember incorrectly. Concord was added because a few people sat in starter system blasting every noob as he undocked. This didn't happen constantly, but often enough that there were real fears the player-base would crumble and Eve would die. If you think suiciding is bad now, think of how many people would start killing haulers and miners in high sec if they knew they wouldn't lose their ship(s)? It would make jihadswarm look like a bunch of chimps throwing poo in comparison to the bloodbath that would ensue. High sec would grind to a halt. Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari F'nog for Amarr Emperor. Nuff said
Cipher7 Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.04.18 07:37:00 - [37] Concord provides safety. Err no wait it doesn't. Concord provides consequences. Err no wait it doesn't. Concord provides....um...what does Concord provide?? Oh yeah, lag.
Vladimir Ilych Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.04.18 07:41:00 - [38] So you wanna make all of Eve 0.0? My first thought to this is the fact that 99% of the player base living in high sec would quit eve. That is the end of CCPs business and the end of your game too.
suzie stormbringer	Posted - 2008.04.18 07:55:00 - [39] If we didnt have concord players in small corps would get slaughtered. Maybe its a good idea afterall
Dont Tasemebro	Posted - 2008.04.18 08:25:00 - [40] CONCORD doesn't provide security, it only provides consequences. But then "Insurance" negates those consequences. Something is broke, here. And it's not Concord. Insurance paying out for losing your ship to Concord is like grounding your kid to his room where he has a TV, xbox, ****o mags, computer, etc. Not really much of a consequence.
Phoenix Torp Caldari Kingmakers	Posted - 2008.04.18 08:29:00 - [41] Originally by: William DeMeo Removing Concord is an awesome idea. Just have 4 gateguns on all the gates and stations and leave it at that. I agree with this idea. Originally by: Tenebrys we have concord to keep 20000+ motsu cnrs from cancelling their subscription 2 days ago a kestrel shooted at my CNR an other BS there (+?). U know the CNR it's the most flied faction ship? Originally by: hauler111 just make people who attack someone in above 0.4 illegally blow up instantly. problem solved. Not so simply, then all the people would be safe in all high-sec. No matter if 0.5, 0.6... I see that's correct to lower the standing and finishing only to be able at low-sec (even null-sec if standings require it). This would overload the population in high-sec (even more that currently). And I can declare I don't want to go to low-sec till i finish all what i want to train, but it's needed this type of situations. ------ Skills
Rhatar Khurin Minmatar Sten Industries	Posted - 2008.04.18 08:36:00 - [42] I keep thinking about EVE without CONCORD and having mixed feelings. Half of me thinks.. "Wow, everything would become so much more interesting and dangerous as well as low sec not being so laden with pirates as they would be more spaced out..." and the other half of me (the even more carebear side) thinks... "Eek!, everything would become so much more and dangerous as well as pirates being everywhere!" _ EVE RELATED CONTENT
Tippia Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.04.18 09:25:00 - [43] If you want to (ostensibly) reduce lag and nerf high-sec a bit, why not just remove, say, one ship from each rat- and mission spawn group?
The Tzar	Posted - 2008.04.18 09:33:00 - [44] Yes please! Get rid of concord, we then only have the rather embarressing customs officials which can be tanked all day long =) It'll be like one massive hisec wide wardec but with sentries. I would give all my stuff to see this happen. Gangs of freighters? Even better... __________________________________________ 'Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear intelligent until they speak' __________________________________________
Thenoran Caldari Knights of MADD Accord Corporate Enterprise Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.18 09:51:00 - [45] Remove CONCORD and you destroy the industry by effectively making High-sec into Low-sec. All the miners not able to mine in an Alliance will get picked off by the dozens until Mining is even less unattractive then it is now and eventually it will just stop altogether. Minerals then become 0.0 stuff and the whole market essentialy dies. If you are wondering, yes I mine in High-sec, why? Because I want to! Mining in low-sec is just a joke with Nocxium at an all time low and the pirates there would kill a Faction fitted Hulk in seconds, watching Local and everything won't protect you. In 0.0 you got Taxes, constant POS and Alliance warfare, crappy refines and not to mention the pain of hauling it to Empire. For me High-sec remains as the only option and I like it, not all of us want to go out there and kill 24/7, I got missions to do if I want to go kill something. The economy needs a constant influx of minerals and other items in order to keep running and a safe area for mining and missions provides exactly that, if you remove CONCORD there is nothing to prevent an Alliance or a bunch of pirates from taking over constellations or even whole regions, you would probably end up with an Alliance taking over systems like Jita entirely. Also, you would completely kill the reason for new players to play EVE, they would either be forced into some Alliance's war machine or they just get ganked till they leave, imagine all the whines on the forums of all the 1.0 starting systems with nothing but Command Ships and Heavy Interdictors killing anything not joining their alliance. Don't want CONCORD to interfere with your ganking? Adjust and move to low-sec or 0.0, don't make EVE adjust to you. I don't expect 0.0 to change so it has CONCORD so I can mine the asteroids there, why should High-sec change for you and be devoid of CONCORD so you can gank my barges with no risk (as if suicide ganking has much risk nowadays anyway)? I mine (PvE), you fight (PvP), that's the difference and its an endless discussion. Also Escorts are really a joke, you can simply kill the Freighter before the Escort has time to kill you and other agressors, the only kind of possible Escort that might protect a Hauler would be a bunch of Shield or Armor repping Battlecruisers/Battleships. It would still not prevent a bunch from elite players in T2 ships to simply kill both the Escort and whatever they are protecting.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. Insurgency	Posted - 2008.04.18 10:05:00 - [46] Originally by: solla bolla Edited by: solla bolla on 18/04/2008 05:38:34 an idea to make suicide ops a bit less fancy is to remove insurance payout if a concord is on the killmail, its lame to see that ppl can actually gain isk by suiciding my 2 isk Raise mineral prices, and ships will become more expensive than the insurance value. Ravens were 130M ISK when I started playing. Every time people cry for more protection in empire and get it, mineral prices fall. "Insurance" pays out on ship loss, regardless of the reason - even if you self-destruct! It will be interesting to see if removing NPC shuttle supplies (and the trit price cap) has any effect on suicide ganking.
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.04.18 10:24:00 - [47] Originally by: Malcanis It will be interesting to see if removing NPC shuttle supplies (and the trit price cap) has any effect on suicide ganking. Civilian Afterburner! Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Drizit Amarr FREEDOM FIRST Black Sun Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.18 11:52:00 - [48] Originally by: EVIL SYNNs yeah I was like robbed in london not so long ago. Broad Day light it was... so what do I pay my tax for police eh! Capital of my country and I get robbed. At least you know in eve the swines will die too! That's the whole problem, they DON'T die. Concord should be the only NPC that pods players and insurance should be stopped for Concordable actions. Would you accept it if the police in RL ran a car off the road with a criminal in it, let the criminal go after destroying their car so they can retrieve the TV etc they stole from you and stashed in plain view of the police. Then the insurance company pays the criminal 100% of the replacement value of the car as well? If that's what it was like in RL, I'd want to be a criminal. In some reapects, I agree with the OP. Either make Concord more effective in terms of non payment of insurance and protection of the property belonging to the person who was unlawfully attacked or remove Concord altogether.
Ragnar Janysgold Gallente N.A.S.A. Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.04.18 20:47:00 - [49] after seeing some of the responses to this thread. I truely believe Concord should exist. but there does need to be some sort of adjustment made to how it works. because the risk / gain benefit a griefer/ganker has doesn't account for the loss of property, that the Gankie endures everyday. I'll say this 1 more time. the attacker risk's a 0.5 security hit. and at max 30 mill insurance payment. to gain what ever he wants. and as some in EVE know. there is no defence or counter measure that can be brought to bear against the attacker. You can't war dec noob corps. Anyone can live in a Noob corp forever. or bounce in and out at will. I dont' have the answers, but there needs to be some serious discussion on the matter. involving CCP as well. I'll bet they get 300+ petitions on this fact each day. and that is a form of lag in its self. it puts the dev's working on cut/paste duty when they could be doing bug fix's. or New Content development. I like the Idea of droping Insurance for Concord involved deaths. I like the Idea of a time limit that drop'd Items can be access'd by NON-Owners in .5 and above space. say, for the first 20 mins after a gank. the drop'd items can only be access'd by the owner. like an Impound timer, Most ppl that fly expensive items in haulers. do it cause that toon can't fly much else. and usually the Main toon is stuck in 0.0 fighting for space and glory. And as you might have forgotten. Some players. dont' PVE or PVP. I have some corp members that buy and sell only. or Research Only. those toons are ill prepaird for gankers. and the Gankers know that. http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h224/RagnarEve/ragnar.jpg
Aarin Wrath	Posted - 2008.04.18 20:59:00 - [50] Edited by: Aarin Wrath on 18/04/2008 21:01:10 Originally by: F'nog You remember incorrectly. Concord was added because a few people sat in starter system blasting every noob as he undocked. This didn't happen constantly, but often enough that there were real fears the player-base would crumble and Eve would die. If you think suiciding is bad now, think of how many people would start killing haulers and miners in high sec if they knew they wouldn't lose their ship(s)? It would make jihadswarm look like a bunch of chimps throwing poo in comparison to the bloodbath that would ensue. High sec would grind to a halt. Yeah sounds about right. Eve would be a frag fest for a month or so, till everyone but the hardcore pvp guys quit. (A month or two later even the hardcore pvp guys would quit because of lack of targets) EVE then dies.
Gaius Bonus	Posted - 2008.04.18 22:16:00 - [51] lol concord are like those goblin townguards in wow. abolish concord and i wtfp0wn all that dumb carebears in one night with my domi.
Something Random Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2008.04.18 22:22:00 - [52] Ive never shot a concord commander in my alt that hasnt insta popped me..... it works.
Roxanna Kell Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.04.18 22:32:00 - [53] NPCS Majority is not Concord. In fact, have you ever set foot in 0.0? There is 3-6 npcs in 1/3 the belts of eve at least Police in Real life do more after crime stuff, and criem prevention when there is lots of hooligans about and such. You can't expect british police to be next to you 6 seconds after u got stabbed. So no Concord is like rl police, and customs as well. They dont do any investigating or arrests, thats the onyl differences that sets em apart, They do eat doughnuts. As for the Empire ganking. Here is how it works, Police resposne has a delay So, You see a CNR fitted with 3bil worth of stuff. So, 10 Battleships T1 fitted. Loss cost of an insured raven with fitting will be around 40 mills. So total 400 mills for a chance of one of your 1-2 bill module surviving. Dont forget that Overloading t1 moduels will make them jsut as good as t2, and it will last long enogh to kill a cnr. no way it will tank 10 ravens with torps. or eve less. = PROFIT. The problem here is more of the insurance, buts thats another discussion which i rather not touch with a 20 foot poll since iam no different one way or another. Quote: There is no Dishonor in winning fools, so do it any way you can.
Lucas Kell Gallente Silver Edge Mercenaries Inc.	Posted - 2008.04.18 23:29:00 - [54] Originally by: Ragnar Janysgold I"ve play'd since nov 05. and in that time I havent seen 1 thing that concord can do properly except assist the pirates in stealing assets from working ppl. This is not a Troll thread. or an EMO rant. but an honest question. Does EVE need CONCORD> in the assorted 600+ systems that we call HIGH SEC. there is at minimum 5 concord in each system. that is 3000 (AT MINIMUM) moving objects that the server's have to account for. each time a pirate gank's some one. New concord is spawn. increasing there overall numbers. the concord that was already spawn'd (even on that gate) does nothing to interfere with the pirates. As we all know. that given enough time the pirates will figure out a fitting that will allow them to kill a freighter with a noob ship all while Concord does there job of patrolling there sectors. with the activity I've seen in the last few months with the from time to time EPIC battles in the south. and soon in the north we hear. the players are gonna need some releaf from lag. I say we eliminate the Ineffectual Concord. and stop giving people a false sence of security. and just play the game. with out concord. we'd run in packs to keep our haulers and freighters safe. which would make for better battles. all over. we'd have less server side lag. which would make for better battles. and we'd know exactly where we stand at all times. it would be the same as flying in low sec. ( you can die at any moment.) live with it. which is what CCP tells us everytime a freighter dies to pirates. or a hauler full of officer mods drops to the guy who plays' 1-2 days a week and sells the isk he gets so he can by that 4x4 for his 16 yrold .... anyone have a better Idea. (Troll's can stay in the Goon threads. this is for adults) Personally, i think concord is required to prevent new characters, or smaller characters from getting repeatedly killed. Removing concord would cause new players to leave fairly rapidly. As for the lag issue, isn't EVE running across multiple servers, so concord on one server shouldnt really affect the lag on the others? I think the whole cleanup in space thing will probably eliminate more of the lag than removing concord, and without removing new players.
blathering idiot Caldari Butterfly Valve	Posted - 2008.04.19 04:49:00 - [55] Edited by: blathering idiot on 19/04/2008 04:53:02 Yeah kill the insurance along with the gankers ship. Furthermore, allow 'hauling insurance' in the form of % of value of total haul and while concord is killing gankers, customs will scoop the insured remaining loot from the wreck to the nearest station for the victim to retreave at thier leasure. And allow the insurance to extend into low sec at a payout drop per lower sec status but you got no returned items. This might even help out true low sec pirates by increasing travel in them areas.
El'Niaga Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.04.19 05:26:00 - [56] Without Concord there would be chaos and to be frank the game population would plummet. Although it is not 100% effective it is probably 60-70% effective. The real problem isn't Concord, its the fact that we allow criminals to collect insurance. Insurance should be invalidated if you have a criminal flag. The insurance company cancels the policy. At the same time criminals should not be allowed to insure their ships. You know the lawsuits from the families of their victims overcoming the insurance company. Thus anyone with a Sec Rating of -5.0 or less should not be able to purchase insurance. Any policies are cancelled upon getting a -5.0 or lower rating. Even this change to insurance wouldn't make it 100% but would probably bump it up into the high 80s or low 90s.
F'nog Amarr Celestial Horizon Corp. Valainaloce	Posted - 2008.04.19 06:47:00 - [57] A lot of the "Let's get rid of Concord" people seem to be basing their desires on the fact that they won't abuse the system if Concord isn't there. That's great, but it doesn't apply to everyone. Just a few abusers are all it takes to ruin the game for a good chunk of the players. You may only kill people you believe you have a valid reason to, but too many will do it just because they can. Look at the idiots can baiting noobs in the starter systems. They get a piece of trit, maybe, and a few civvie mods for their troubles. Ooo, the profit! And these people can be permabanned. Think what would happen if there were no significant consequences? Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari F'nog for Amarr Emperor. Nuff said
Everyone Dies Caldari	Posted - 2008.04.19 07:11:00 - [58] I think it would be rather interesting and more true to the the hardcore style of EVE game play if concord was removed. /signed.
Luh Windan Minmatar Republic University	Posted - 2008.04.19 07:47:00 - [59] Well if we are worried about lag in Empire here's an idea: anyone with a less than 0.0 security rating stands a chance (say 10% + sec rating * 2 or something like that) of being popped by the gate guns when they jump. That would weed out a fair bit of traffic which will improve lag and will make things a bit safer because these people are the ones more likely to be ganking.
Nocturnal Avenger Black Plague. RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.19 09:55:00 - [60] Originally by: Ragnar Janysgold I"ve play'd since nov 05. and in that time I havent seen 1 thing that concord can do properly Concord has at the very least protected 1 ship I misclicked on once... R.I.P. my sweet tempest :/

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.