Player Features and Ideas Discussion

WTF CONCORD. From a lore perspective, the steady buffing of CONCORD makes little sense. Since the destruction of Yulai, CONCORD has been struggling to maintain any semblance of control over the four Empire factions; even resorting to breaking their own laws in an effort to regulate cloning technology and enforce their policies.

From a gameplay perspective, CONCORD runs contrary to the very heart of EVE. Yes, EVE is a game with consequences; but EVE is also a game with risks and conflict. Currently, even with the present popularity of ganking/bumping, HiSec remains a virtually risk free environment; CONCORD and Security Status mechanics effectively lock out the ne'er-do-wells, making HiSec games more effort than they are worth.

CONCORD is killing EVE, and sapping all the fun out of it. CONCORD should be nerfed and Faction Police should play a bigger role in HiSec policing. This fits 100% with the lore of the 4 factions struggling for independence from CONCORD so that they can have at eachother's throats.

This is sure to draw the ire from many carebears, to which my response will be short and curt: CONCORD is a game mechanic implemented by CCP, just like any other game mechanic. It is not a *right* that you have, nor are you *entitled* to safety in any part of EVE outside of your personal hangar.

My proposal is to nerf CONCORD to only operate in 1.0 and 0.9 systems. Outside of these systems, Faction Police/Navies would respond to crimes in 0.8 to 0.5. They would respond in the same way as CONCORD - warping to the scene of a crime within a certain amount of time and attacking aggressors - but the difference would be that Faction Police would not be immortal, invincible, omnipotent blapmobiles. They would be tankable, defeatable, evadable.

I am not suggesting a holiday for suicide gankers. I think that a Catalyst shooting at a miner in an asteroid belt should absolutely be a suicidal endeavor. I think that fighting Faction Police should be a concerted effort requiring a fleet with logistics and battlecruisers. Illegal aggression in HiSec should result not only in a security status penalty, but a standings penalty based on who's sovereignty you commit the crimes in. This would open up choices and consequences for players. It would bring EVE back to it's "wild west roots". It would make EVE live up to it's reputation once more. EVE is no longer the most dangerous game I've played, but I would like it to be again - and so would many others!

Nerfing CONCORD and replacing it with a buffed Faction Police would also reintroduce an element of risk to the game that has been lacking for some years now.

It Wouldn't Be So Bad!

In Heimatar, we have a gatecamp run by a pirate corporation on the Ossogur/Amamake gate. They use insta-locking T3's with high alpha and pretty much kill everyone that comes through, regardless of how fast you can warp. Smart players adapt: Ossogur is added to our "avoidance" lists, and we go around the other way. Because most people do not jump expensive assets into LowSec, and because most people in the area know about the camp, most of the victims of the Ossogur/Amamake camp are noobships and Industrials carrying cheap mission loot. I am making two points here:

1) LowSec is empty precisely because HiSec is so safe
2) Players can and will adapt to their environment

If HiSec was only marginally safer than LowSec, it would close the "perception gap" and help to populate LowSec more. This would be a good thing and it would not be the end of EVE, nor would it make every whiny miner quit. The reason being is that HiSec is actually very big; over 1,000 systems in total. They can't all be camped - especially if fighting the Faction Police required a coordinated fleet and engaging in criminal activities put those players at risk from anti-pirates (especially with the new CrimeWatch system coming out). Players would have to take more responsibility for their own safety - and this is a good thing. No more AFK auto-piloting a billion ISK worth of junk in a freighter - in fact, no more AFK auto-piloting an unescorted freighter, period! No more solo-playing; players would be more strongly incentivized to work together towards common goals and safety than to go it alone to maximize personal profits. These skills, learned in HiSec, could then be taken to LowSec. This would only be feasible, however, if HiSec resources were slightly nerfed and LowSec resources slightly buffed.

So how should this actually work, exactly? I do not know! I leave that up to you guys to talk about. This is just a silly fantasy I had in my head while warping around HiSec and seeing how crowded and boring it was.

However, some key points to keep in mind during this discussion:

1) The Faction Police should be defeatable, tankable, and evadable. Players should be able to sustain a pirate camp in HiSec for a reasonable amount of time. Faction Police responses should scale with location; Stations - Gates - Celestials.
2) The Faction Police should not *easily* be evadable; players should not be able to "hit and run" free of consequences. There should be a mechanic in place that limits mobility when breaking the law; 1-5 minute aggression timers preventing jumping/docking, temporary warp interdiction drones that prevent instantly warping away after aggressing, Navy Faction tackle-frigates that lock down heavier ships.
3) Suicide ganking miners should still have the same itinerary and outcome - unless of course you use a fleet.
4) The ultimate goal should be to reintroduce the "wild west" elements of the EVE of old, to increase choices and consequences, and to reward those players who combine their efforts over those who choose solo playstyles.

Feel free to flame. Again, this was just a fantasy I had today.

Also INBL.

Pretty much what I've thought for a long time now. Since it became bannable to survive CONCORDOKKEN.

INR, it makes me very, very sad.

! HAHAHAHAHA

Social misfits don't come in groups of 5,000.

Except the people in prison gangs aren't in prison voluntarily the way Goons play EVE Online voluntarily. Furthermore in your analogy, GoonSwarm would be the only "prison gang" that existed before the entire gang was sent to the same prison together.

Your analogy is bad and you should feel bad.

You are a self-entitled carebear and EVE Online needs to purge itself of parasitic crybabies such as you.

This would be a pretty interesting change **IF** Faction Police responded to the initial engagement instead of the kill. Then the challenge of taking out a lone player target would be about not only the target (which you know you can overpower), but the FW response... Plus you'd have to keep the target locked down during the fight, or kill it first and risk getting killed by the Faction Police. It would make the whole thing so much more interesting.



Here I have to disagree. If you make highsec unsafe, many of the players who enjoy it would just stop playing EVE. If there is nowhere in the universe to play solo, learn the game, and experiment without being killed.. then the game will just be a romping grounds for the old-timers who already know the ropes.

Fixed it for you.

Stop assuming those with other play styles will be grateful if you somehow force them to adapt to your style.

If you cannot convince them to play your game, just accept that not everyone is interested in that side of the game.

concord is fine, i didnt read the manafesto you wrote it was too long




here a choose your own ending story, just for you.


page 1. L2P?

page 2. Contract your possessions to me if you decide this isnt the game for you.

page 3. Dont let the doorknob hit you on the way out.

Page 4. The End