These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Removing concord
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tigris Liono
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#61 - 2012-12-20 01:38:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Tigris Liono
Thomas Gore wrote:
Tigris Liono wrote:
As stated, removing CONCORD from the game would cause carebear tears, and a massive drop in subs.

I do like the idea of players helping CONCORD deal with criminal offenders.

what about some form of timer on CONCORD dps/reinforcments?

for example, a ganker nukes a little Badger MKII that someone forgot to tank, a single CONCORD ship arrives, locks down (scram, web, and some ECM (but not the total permajam lockdown that occurs now)) the criminal and starts shooting, this starts a timer, where local players can come help out the lone CONCORD ship but after a period of time more CONCORD ships arrive if the target isn't dead yet, steadily ramping up the dps untill either players arrive and help kill the target (or get killed) or enough CONCORD ships arrive to finish off the offender.

CONCORDs own brand of justice will still be served, just slower than it happens now, giving players a chance to join in, maybe have some kind of 'Deputising' mechanic, where you can join CONCORD FW which makes Criminal Beacons show up in the overview allowing you to warp to them.

CONCORD could give out LP based on the ship loss, and the better your CONCORD standing, the further away you can find out about criminal acts (maybe even from 2 or 3 jumps away, if your standing is good enough)

Obviously needs fleshing out a little, but it keeps CONCORD in the game to appease the carebears, and allows the players who like hunting pirates more oppertunities to do so


What purpose would this serve? Give highsec dwellers free kills as the offender will be killed eventually, anyway, and cannot escape?

If on the other hand they would have a chance to escape justice, I come back to my previous statement - highsec ganks would boom into unbelieveable amounts and the carebears would leave EVE in masses.

Again, the only thing that keeps the gankers (mostly) in check is the fact that they KNOW they will lose their ship. Change that knowledge into uncertainty and you will have chaos.


the purpose would be to add a new (interesting?) mechanic to CONCORD interactions, I don't think giving away free kills is the best way, so have some sort of CONCORD Deputy mechanic, (pay isk to be a deputy, get LP rewards for assisting CONCORD)

if the Criminals are allowed to shoot the deputy, this could create some interesting situations, The criminal will still, eventually, lose thier ship to CONCORD, but could have the chance to take a few more people down (shooting at non-deputy players would accelerate CONCORDS wrath)

Like I said, the idea needs fleshing out a little, but i'd be interested in seeing what more people thought of it.
El 1974
Green Visstick High
#62 - 2012-12-20 10:49:30 UTC
Tigris Liono wrote:
the purpose would be to add a new (interesting?) mechanic to CONCORD interactions, I don't think giving away free kills is the best way, so have some sort of CONCORD Deputy mechanic, (pay isk to be a deputy, get LP rewards for assisting CONCORD)

if the Criminals are allowed to shoot the deputy, this could create some interesting situations, The criminal will still, eventually, lose thier ship to CONCORD, but could have the chance to take a few more people down (shooting at non-deputy players would accelerate CONCORDS wrath)

Like I said, the idea needs fleshing out a little, but i'd be interested in seeing what more people thought of it.

I like the idea of merely helping Concord as a compromise since totally removing might not work.
Maybe we can have a middle-sec where you can get away with a crime if too few deputees show up. As it is now gatecamps at the hisec to lowsec gate are keeping too many people out of lowsec. I would really like to see players sufficiently rewarded for removing those.
I don't think people should pay isk to get 'free' killmails. If the criminal gets the opportunity to fire back (no concord ECM etc.) this will make it more interesting and this risk is imo enough 'cost'.
Risien Drogonne
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#63 - 2012-12-20 19:06:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Risien Drogonne
Tigris Liono wrote:

the purpose would be to add a new (interesting?) mechanic to CONCORD interactions, I don't think giving away free kills is the best way, so have some sort of CONCORD Deputy mechanic, (pay isk to be a deputy, get LP rewards for assisting CONCORD)

if the Criminals are allowed to shoot the deputy, this could create some interesting situations, The criminal will still, eventually, lose thier ship to CONCORD, but could have the chance to take a few more people down (shooting at non-deputy players would accelerate CONCORDS wrath)

Like I said, the idea needs fleshing out a little, but i'd be interested in seeing what more people thought of it.

Seems to me all this does is make the game more interesting for a handful of gankers who don't want to go to nullsec, at the expense of tens of thousands of carebears who don't want to go lowsec.
Piugattuk
Litla Sundlaugin
#64 - 2012-12-20 21:42:10 UTC
How do you guys put it, there's already several places without Concord, low,WH,0.0,Null.

Why would we need Concord removed where that style of game play exist already.

As far as bankruptcy for CCP if they did, well let's experiment with their income cause money talks BS walks let the money talk if they make it great for the players left in game if they don't then you'll never have to worry about carebears in EVE ever.
Kira Vanachura
Green Visstick High
#65 - 2012-12-21 11:43:01 UTC
Piugattuk wrote:
Why would we need Concord removed where that style of game play exist already.

I have several arguments for removing/nerfing concord in hisec:
1. Hisec has become too safe since Retribution
2. People want more small-scale PvP
3. More opportunities for player interaction rather than ganking being a one-sided action with a helpless victim and an overpowered npc police
4. i think it would just be cool
Lee Woods
Doomheim
#66 - 2012-12-22 12:19:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Lee Woods
Shylari Avada wrote:
Skartor wrote:
The thing you guys fail to realise is that the moment concord is absent , th big 0.0 entities will just move in and run empire space like nullsec.


Because we want it, right?


No, it's because those in high-sec don't want people like you imposing their twisted laws and regulations on them. Let us not forget the Ice Interdictions or Jita shall we.

I say keep CONCORD, and allow players to join them in banishing outlaws like the Goonswarm and ClusterFuck Coalition.

They've highlighted an inherent weakness in CONCORD, only one that can be filled by anti-pirate players who are willing to do the right thing, and protect the innocent.
Lee Woods
Doomheim
#67 - 2012-12-22 12:24:40 UTC
Piugattuk wrote:
...if they don't then you'll never have to worry about carebears in EVE ever.


And yet who is going to provide the minerals on the market for the so-called elite of this galaxy to produce their ships, modules, and ammunition?

Is the galaxy just going to **** miracles directly onto the market for you all?
Theron Dashto
Doomheim
#68 - 2012-12-23 08:47:10 UTC
Risien Drogonne wrote:
There are no white knights to be found anywhere. If there were such people, they'd already be policing low-sec. In reality, you just get gankers and other gankers.

Players can't be trusted to police an MMO. Ever.


Agreed.

Allowing players to police hi-sec would completely corrupt the system. Corps with deep wallets would offer bribes and be able to run rampant, while smaller corps and individual players would eventually be driven from the game.
Kyril Bonfiglioli
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#69 - 2012-12-23 13:00:36 UTC
Shylari Avada wrote:
Risien Drogonne wrote:
Never happen. EVE would lose 2/3 of its subscribers overnight.


EVE would become a better game overnight.


Surprise, surprise... The goons would like to see PVP everywhere. In other words, they want to be able to kill anyone, anywhere with impunity. You have low and null sec for that. Not everyone wants to engage in PVP. I certainly don't. Eve is big enough to allow the relative safety of high sec. Also the model CCP have now is a real winner resulting in a growing membership while other MMO's are steadinly losing memberships.

High sec is a good "nursery" for new players to learn the game and then decide what they want to do in the game, and yes, that means that they may wish to engage in PVP and head to null, but imagine if every time you undocked you got blown out of space... That doesn't sound like fun to me... I would quit imediately.

Goons need to realise there are actually others in the game that enjoy different playstyles without being annoyed by them.
Karrl Tian
Doomheim
#70 - 2012-12-23 16:03:42 UTC
Shylari Avada wrote:
Skartor wrote:
The thing you guys fail to realise is that the moment concord is absent , th big 0.0 entities will just move in and run empire space like nullsec.


Because we want it, right?


Wouldn't matter if you'd want it or not. You'd have to take it just so your enemies couldn't use it against you.
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2012-12-24 01:11:41 UTC
Kira Vanachura wrote:
Apparantly one of the devs at the Vegas meeting made a remark that he'd favor the complete removal of concord.


What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.Big smile
Da Dom
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#72 - 2012-12-24 03:15:05 UTC
Well I was going to say...

No insta-pops! Make CONCORD ships as powerful as normal ships. Balance it out with roaming police mega-blobs

But upon reflection, and several good responses from posters, I very much doubt that it would stop a repeat of the "BURN JITA" campaign on an apocolyptic scale...

No, like it or not, CONCORD is here to stay...

Because Far-que... That's why.
Cyprus Black
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#73 - 2012-12-24 04:41:28 UTC
Kira Vanachura wrote:
Apparantly one of the devs at the Vegas meeting made a remark that he'd favor the complete removal of concord.

Proof or GTFO.

Summary of EvEs last four expansions: http://imgur.com/ZL5SM33
Dea della Morte
Perkone
Caldari State
#74 - 2012-12-25 16:07:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Dea della Morte
imho:

Concord is nice for new players, but for experienced players, you may have a beef with someone, they're in an NPC corp, and you cant do anything about it. Also the fact that concord is a be all end all to any aggression in high sec is a little much. Maybe give one a fighting chance, and concord becomes more powerful the longer the engagement goes on? That can be a solution, However CONCORD needs to scale to the point where they will eradicate what is engaged, to prevent 0.9 systems from turning into a battlefield.. Lol imagine the ibis fights.

Higher security systems scale concord's power faster. etc.

Situation:
0.7 system, Raven is running missions, Pirate gang drops in ontop of the raven and begins aggression. Same concord response time, only the pirates have a fighting chance. Concord is wailing away at the pirates while they try and kill the raven, more concord ships show up over a period of time, dictated by sec status of system. Hopefully this can make for some interesting engagements.


This is coming from a player that lives in high sec atm as well. Its pretty hard seeing a hulk just sitting by itself. and knowing that if you attack it, you just die.

inb4 HTFU move to low/null/WH: I prefer null honestly, but with the coalitions, its not fun. Besides, this isnt a NERF CONCORD post, its just a suggestion.
Risien Drogonne
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#75 - 2012-12-25 20:08:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Risien Drogonne
Kira Vanachura wrote:

I have several arguments for removing/nerfing concord in hisec:
1. Hisec has become too safe since Retribution

It's same danger as it was a month ago.

Kira Vanachura wrote:
2. People want more small-scale PvP

Beating up miners and missioners isn't small-scale PVP.

Kira Vanachura wrote:
3. More opportunities for player interaction rather than ganking being a one-sided action with a helpless victim and an overpowered npc police

Removing concord doesn't accomplish that

Dea della Morte wrote:

Higher security systems scale concord's power faster. etc.

Situation:
0.7 system, Raven is running missions, Pirate gang drops in ontop of the raven and begins aggression. Same concord response time, only the pirates have a fighting chance. Concord is wailing away at the pirates while they try and kill the raven, more concord ships show up over a period of time, dictated by sec status of system. Hopefully this can make for some interesting engagements.

And the immediate result would be that the people you hope to gank would move to 0.8+ systems.
Kyril Bonfiglioli
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#76 - 2012-12-26 10:46:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Kyril Bonfiglioli
Dea della Morte wrote:
imho:

Concord is nice for new players, but for experienced players, you may have a beef with someone, they're in an NPC corp, and you cant do anything about it. Also the fact that concord is a be all end all to any aggression in high sec is a little much. Maybe give one a fighting chance, and concord becomes more powerful the longer the engagement goes on? That can be a solution, However CONCORD needs to scale to the point where they will eradicate what is engaged, to prevent 0.9 systems from turning into a battlefield.. Lol imagine the ibis fights.

Higher security systems scale concord's power faster. etc.

Situation:
0.7 system, Raven is running missions, Pirate gang drops in ontop of the raven and begins aggression. Same concord response time, only the pirates have a fighting chance. Concord is wailing away at the pirates while they try and kill the raven, more concord ships show up over a period of time, dictated by sec status of system. Hopefully this can make for some interesting engagements.


This is coming from a player that lives in high sec atm as well. Its pretty hard seeing a hulk just sitting by itself. and knowing that if you attack it, you just die.

inb4 HTFU move to low/null/WH: I prefer null honestly, but with the coalitions, its not fun. Besides, this isnt a NERF CONCORD post, its just a suggestion.



I think you miss the point of high sec... If you want to go see a hulk sitting by itself and want to kill it, then go to low sec or null and do that. People live in high sec precisely so you and people like you CAN'T do that. Like I have said before, not everyone wants to PVP. If you (cowardly) want to attack a defenseless ship, then go low.

You say that you prefer null but it isn't fun with the coalitions, well high sec would not be fun for a vast number of people if there was a real good chance that someone like you were to come and gank them every time they undocked their Exhumer.

As for the thing with slowing down Concord, my understanding is (and I could well be wrong) that the lower the sec status of a system, the slower concord are to respond already.

In short, Concord is there to protect those who do not want to engage in PVP. If you do want to PVP then move out of high sec.

Eve has a place for most people, don't try to turn it into a place for one group only.
Wescro2
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2012-12-26 16:20:38 UTC
Thomas Gore wrote:


The first thing the gankers learn is to light a false flag at some distant corner of the system and then commit the real crime while the police players are busy warping to the false alarm site. By the time they arrive to the site of the real crime the gankers are already gone and left only a smoking wreck of their victims.

This could probably be somewhat helped by putting a "CALL THE POLICE" button in the UI, which anyone who have been illegally aggressed could push. Again it could be misused, but at least the player misusing it could be punished.

Again, it sounds cool in theory, but history has shown it just won't work, unless there is a huge payout for acting as a police. And if there was, someone would find a way to exploit it.


That actually sounds like both creative and emergent gameplay. False flag drawing the police is an actual tactic that was used, regrettably effectively, by the Norway Utoya Island shooter Anders Breivik, who set up a bomb in the city while he went on a rampage on the island.

Tragic as the shooting was, one can see an effective tactic for it is, and good tactical game play should define Eve.
XminotaurX
Black Aces
Goonswarm Federation
#78 - 2012-12-28 02:30:58 UTC
add a beacon....the beacon scrams/webs the aggressors for 10 minutes
in addition it adds a warp in/gate for white knights
the aggressors can fight back but ultimately they will be destroyed
Flurk Hellbron
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#79 - 2012-12-28 02:48:17 UTC
I just removed Concordokken from WH'space and null...? OK?
Shrink high sec space...............
lollerwaffle
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#80 - 2012-12-28 10:33:37 UTC
To address some points below by random NPC corp alt. Note I'm neither for nor against removal or changing CONCORD, whatever happens, happens.

Kyril Bonfiglioli wrote:
Surprise, surprise... The goons would like to see PVP everywhere. In other words, they want to be able to kill anyone, anywhere with impunity. You have low and null sec for that. Not everyone wants to engage in PVP. I certainly don't. Eve is big enough to allow the relative safety of high sec. Also the model CCP have now is a real winner resulting in a growing membership while other MMO's are steadinly losing memberships.


Tinfoil-hattery. While not everyone wants to engage in PVP, they should certainly accept that PVP may happen to them, and actively learn how to avoid being in a non-consensual PVP situation.

Kyril Bonfiglioli wrote:
High sec is a good "nursery" for new players to learn the game and then decide what they want to do in the game, and yes, that means that they may wish to engage in PVP and head to null, but imagine if every time you undocked you got blown out of space... That doesn't sound like fun to me... I would quit imediately.


I don't view high sec as a 'nursery' for new players (or old). It is merely a difference area of space with different rules of engagement. PVP is not restricted to null or low ONLY. If someone was really out to get you, with organization, they could still blow you out of space everytime you undocked, even in the current status.

Kyril Bonfiglioli wrote:
Goons need to realise there are actually others in the game that enjoy different playstyles without being annoyed by them.


You should really keep the tinfoil hattery out of your arguments, it just weakens them.

Kyril Bonfiglioli wrote:
I think you miss the point of high sec... If you want to go see a hulk sitting by itself and want to kill it, then go to low sec or null and do that. People live in high sec precisely so you and people like you CAN'T do that. Like I have said before, not everyone wants to PVP. If you (cowardly) want to attack a defenseless ship, then go low. You say that you prefer null but it isn't fun with the coalitions, well high sec would not be fun for a vast number of people if there was a real good chance that someone like you were to come and gank them every time they undocked their Exhumer.


Aside from the reasons that you don't see hulks randomly mining on their own in low and null (apart from in secured space), if someone saw ANY mining ship, they have an option to destroy it, and face whatever consequences come their way. Again, high sec is NOT a safe zone, it is merely 'safer'. Throwing insults about the supposed 'cowardice' of other players is a good way to get your arguments dismissed.

People CAN do that under the current mechanics, they just have to be prepared to accept the consequences, whether they are provided by NPC as it is now, or by players (as has been brought up in this thread).

Kyril Bonfiglioli wrote:
In short, Concord is there to protect those who do not want to engage in PVP. If you do want to PVP then move out of high sec.

Eve has a place for most people, don't try to turn it into a place for one group only.


This is where you fall short. Concord is not there to protect those who do not want to engage in PVP. If they were, everyone would get a Concord escort every time they undocked. They merely provide consequences to 'illegal' combat in high sec.

Again, high sec was never meant to be a PVP-free zone, so saying 'take your PVP out of highsec' doesn't work here. If high sec was meant to be a PVP free zone, CCP would never introduce all the mechanics that make it possible for people to engage in PVP.

EVE DOES have a place for most people, however, those people must also accept that there are other types of people out there and be prepared for interactions with said types.

tl;dr whatever.