These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Corp Little Things & Friendly Fire Control

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Udonor
Doomheim
#81 - 2015-02-10 09:21:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Udonor
IMHO fleets are where people socialize. What you have actually identified is how unpleasant the mandatory EVE corp experience is. Like open bay prison or military barracks or homeless shelters. The player corp is particularly odious as people maybe forced to join with other incompatible strangers just to access certain features of the game like POS.

So how do you improve the EVE socialization experience if we remove corps as a necessity?

#1 Well fleets need a better "dating service". Some way for people to better and more quickly find the closest people who either are or expect to be logged on at the same time -- AND who are interested in pursuing the same goals in the same manner in the immediate future. (Closest can be by current location, jump clone locations or a specified target system.)

#2 Long term player socialization needs an in game (EVE only) facebook like facility with better contacts/friends facility such that they can remain in contact with people that continue to share long term interests and styles of play. Something with good calendar to record expected logon times and planned activities. Also a way to share fuzzy or precise location info for potential meetups. BY fuzzy location I mean region, constellation or number of shortest path jumps.
Ender Sai
Perkone
Caldari State
#82 - 2015-02-10 10:05:35 UTC
Came looking for reason to complain, left disappointed. 10/10
Katrina Bekers
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#83 - 2015-02-10 10:44:27 UTC
The space invader alien is just awesome.

*Golfclap* Katrin!

<< THE RABBLE BRIGADE >>
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#84 - 2015-02-10 11:01:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Basil Pupkin
Udonor wrote:

...(nonsense snipped)....
This measure practically kills off one of the most well loved ambush scam ganks in EVE.Joining corps then seeking out their most valuable ships and shipment for destruction and looting.

The ability to kill new corpmates with impunity provides an essential opportunity to provide a public service education on why only born-victims fly without PVP being their first and only consideration. Also good remedial training for carebears as to why
they should never trust anyone in EVE that you don't personally know and trust in the real world.

EVE needs more opportunities for "inside" gank jobs and theft, not less. Real life is not fair and EVE should be either.


It's not an ambush, not a scam, and not a gank, and it's definitely NOT loved.
It's dumb, even my dog can do it, 0/10 on content scale, abuse mechanics that deters all recruiting and makes hisec corps almost meaningless (grief decs make them completely meaningless, but that's another topic I'm not going to discuss, because if I do, butthurt devil pussies are going to come and derail it).

First of all, combat pvp in eve is poor, it's a mystery to me why should anyone ever want to do it, except he found an exploitable strategy which makes it profitable, in which case he's no different from a miner, or any other carebear in grind. Considering such a poor thing is just stupid, so no wonder no carebear worth his bear paws will never do it - it's just a boring mini-game you have to do occasionally, yawning and trying not to fall asleep while you're at it. Watching all them gankbears go "omgomgomg I'm so excited my ship is gonna pew there be boom omgomgomg" really reminds me of a dinnertime excitement I saw in the small monkeys cage in a zoo when bananas were served, it will never excite me or anyone smarter than the said cage inhabitants, because there's simply nothing exciting going on - some numbers will be tossed, some assets would disappear, so what?

Secondly, with this change eve is getting MORE opportunities for "inside" gank job and theft. It's just transited from "yay they accepted time to pew some barges for free" stupid zero-content past-time to actually being a job, where you have to infiltrate and be creative with your scams - this will be content. Why more? Because more corps will be willing to accept your entries. You got a new world opening for you. Just gotta stop being sore and start being creative, but all you do is crying.

Discussing tax and drawbacks is fundamentally wrong here, because this isn't a standalone change, but a fix to dumbmode awoxing, which opens unmatched opportunity to creative awox, which, unlike dumbmode awox, is content. So, I'm expecting more content, more opportunities, and more tears from people who told others to HTFU on a daily basis, and crying like little girls they are now, instead of following their own advice.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2015-02-10 13:31:35 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Ned Thomas wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Thank you CCPeeps for not giving in to risk-averse AWOXer tears and giving us this change as it were announced.

My FF would never be legal again.


So you'll be recruiting brand new players left and right after the 17th, correct?

My understanding was that this was supposed to enhance the ability to securely recruit, not the desire to do so in all cases. Have you determined otherwise?


My point was more that someone like Basil, who will applaud this change more than anyone, will gain the least benefit from it.

For the record though, no, I don't expect this change to make recruitment any more safe than it already is. I also don't expect it to change anyone's recruitment practices in any significant way and I don't expect it will change anyone's willingness to join a corp in the first place.
Celly Smunt
Neutin Local LLC
#86 - 2015-02-10 13:37:48 UTC
I'm not sure if it has been mentioned, and if so, I apologize for being redundant.


You guys are aware that there's a bug in your picture right?

o/
Celly

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.
Virella d'Artan
Inner Circle Exploitation
#87 - 2015-02-10 13:56:02 UTC
@Punkturis
You really would love the tiles on the wall in our bathroom.
Three of the walls have an invaders in 10x10 tiles pixeled (and the 4th all 7 tetris blocks XD)
Celly Smunt
Neutin Local LLC
#88 - 2015-02-10 14:20:26 UTC
Ned Thomas wrote:
For the record though, no, I don't expect this change to make recruitment any more safe than it already is. I also don't expect it to change anyone's recruitment practices in any significant way and I don't expect it will change anyone's willingness to join a corp in the first place.


I can tell you right now that you are probably spot-on.
aside from the folks who recruit just to have bigger numbers of taxpayers to fatten their corp wallet in a safer manner, its likely that "most" recruiting will continue the way it has been in the past.
In the corps that "I" lead on my various toons, recruitment is done 99% of the time by invite only, and the remaining 1% would be a case where a friend referred a person to me(us) and vouched for that person.

Otherwise?, no one sets foot inside my corp, nor do they get access to my assets, ect ect ect.

If we still lived in high sec, this change might make "fight night" a little more difficult in the sense of preparation, but outside of that, very little is bound to change because of it in the recruiting area of the game if a person already has recruitment standards in place.


just my thoughts on it ofc
o/
Celly Smunt

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis
#89 - 2015-02-10 15:48:30 UTC
I don't know who this guy is to go making declarative statements about what is and isn't loved. If someone says it's loved, it probably is.

To me, it's not the corp AWOXing that really makes friendly fire important -- it's the practices and emergent dynamic from its avoidance.

A lot of people are commenting on this as a minor change from their perspective as players who only come to highsec to buy things or maybe run some missions, and otherwise live and die in low and null. That's not at all what this change is aimed at, and it's not who's really getting affected. Many corporations start out in high security space and many more stay there entirely. Step by step, the challenges that drive these people to become better, to learn to fit their ships well and pay any degree of attention to their surroundings and compatriots, are being removed. Certainly there are people who are just loners already right now, sitting in their own corporation and missioning by themselves... but simply allowing these people to join a corp with other players in it without risking being shot isn't going to bring them out of their shell any more. It's the people who DO want to be involved in the game, to some extent, that now have it easier for longer.

Think of it like a beach, perhaps. It starts out shallow, and gradually gets deeper and scarier until the waves are high and the water continues down you know not how deep. This change is mostly just shoring up the initial gradual deepening so you can wade farther out into the game without losing your footing, but at the expense of making it even steeper when you finally want to dive into Nullsec Majeure.

Perhaps someone today might think hey, I already fly with these people all the time, they don't shoot me even though they totally could and we're cool. It's already as easy as possible to kill each other, but we're not, because we're a unit. Let's go to lowsec or nullsec and see what we can do together. With Friendly Fire Off as the new de-facto standard setting for corporations, how much harder would it be for such a person to overcome their reluctance to try going the next step deeper into the game, like stepping from knee deep into treading cold water up to your neck?

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#90 - 2015-02-10 16:14:46 UTC
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Perhaps someone today might think hey, I already fly with these people all the time, they don't shoot me even though they totally could and we're cool. It's already as easy as possible to kill each other, but we're not, because we're a unit. Let's go to lowsec or nullsec and see what we can do together.


This is the part that really grinds me on this. The fact that you can do horrible no good very bad things to people in this game makes choosing not to do those horrible no good very bad things to someone a significant choice. It adds meaning to a playstyle, or at the very least it adds meaning to mine as I try very hard to be a decent fellow towards my corp mates and would rather work with them than against them. On the other hand, knowing that people can do horrible no good very bad things to me makes finding people I trust to fly with a meaningful effort. It all adds up to a guy like me feeling more invested in the game and the people I play it with.

I can understand all the reasoning behind making friendly fire an optional thing, but I still disagree with it. It removes impact from an individual's choices and degrades the idea of building trust, however slightly. And I'm not so sure it will add to the overall health of the game as it will now take new players longer to grasp the importance of building trust, which I believe is a key factor in player retention. It was certainly a part of the game that attracted me here in the first place.

But hey, what do I know?
Soko99
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#91 - 2015-02-10 17:44:47 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Stuff



You make it sound as if AWOXING was so rampant that it needed to be stopped.

What your comments seem to overlook, is that sure, a player can OPT-IN to the challenges, but most people are risk averse and therefore will not. It was a forced RISK thrown onto people whether they wanted it or not. Now, it's only going to exist in a select few corps. What brought people to EvE and what keeps bringing people in, is the complexity of the game. CCP should not forget that the people that kept it going for the past 10 years were not the ADD instant gratification PS3-PS4 players, but those that planned ahead, schemed ahead, figured ways around the mechanics and basically created the stories and the legends that brought in others.

Now there's talk of removing attributes because it's too hard for newbies to learn to maximize with it, requests for an SP pool for newbies to allocate so that they can train the core skills, AFK tickers in local...
Soko99
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#92 - 2015-02-10 17:52:43 UTC
Ned Thomas wrote:
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Perhaps someone today might think hey, I already fly with these people all the time, they don't shoot me even though they totally could and we're cool. It's already as easy as possible to kill each other, but we're not, because we're a unit. Let's go to lowsec or nullsec and see what we can do together.


This is the part that really grinds me on this. The fact that you can do horrible no good very bad things to people in this game makes choosing not to do those horrible no good very bad things to someone a significant choice. It adds meaning to a playstyle, or at the very least it adds meaning to mine as I try very hard to be a decent fellow towards my corp mates and would rather work with them than against them. On the other hand, knowing that people can do horrible no good very bad things to me makes finding people I trust to fly with a meaningful effort. It all adds up to a guy like me feeling more invested in the game and the people I play it with.

I can understand all the reasoning behind making friendly fire an optional thing, but I still disagree with it. It removes impact from an individual's choices and degrades the idea of building trust, however slightly. And I'm not so sure it will add to the overall health of the game as it will now take new players longer to grasp the importance of building trust, which I believe is a key factor in player retention. It was certainly a part of the game that attracted me here in the first place.

But hey, what do I know?



These 2 quotes sum up perfectly how I see this change.

Thanks for being able to articulate it better than I.
Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
#93 - 2015-02-10 19:09:50 UTC
I am shocked I say, Shocked! Five pages of comments and no grrr C.O.D.E. buffed comments! Lol
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#94 - 2015-02-10 21:08:17 UTC
Soko99 wrote:

Also.. what shiny ships do you intend to AWOX with that 10 hour toon? People AWOX for the glory, awoxing a t1 fitted cruiser isn't going to make the news.



The 10 hour hero in a Gnosis with neutral logi can do considerable amounts of damage.
BadAssMcKill
Aliastra
#95 - 2015-02-11 07:44:37 UTC
Make ganking and scamming illegal too thx
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#96 - 2015-02-11 07:54:03 UTC
Iam Widdershins wrote:
I don't know who this guy is to go making declarative statements about what is and isn't loved. If someone says it's loved, it probably is.

To me, it's not the corp AWOXing that really makes friendly fire important -- it's the practices and emergent dynamic from its avoidance.

A lot of people are commenting on this as a minor change from their perspective as players who only come to highsec to buy things or maybe run some missions, and otherwise live and die in low and null. That's not at all what this change is aimed at, and it's not who's really getting affected. Many corporations start out in high security space and many more stay there entirely. Step by step, the challenges that drive these people to become better, to learn to fit their ships well and pay any degree of attention to their surroundings and compatriots, are being removed. Certainly there are people who are just loners already right now, sitting in their own corporation and missioning by themselves... but simply allowing these people to join a corp with other players in it without risking being shot isn't going to bring them out of their shell any more. It's the people who DO want to be involved in the game, to some extent, that now have it easier for longer.

Think of it like a beach, perhaps. It starts out shallow, and gradually gets deeper and scarier until the waves are high and the water continues down you know not how deep. This change is mostly just shoring up the initial gradual deepening so you can wade farther out into the game without losing your footing, but at the expense of making it even steeper when you finally want to dive into Nullsec Majeure.

Perhaps someone today might think hey, I already fly with these people all the time, they don't shoot me even though they totally could and we're cool. It's already as easy as possible to kill each other, but we're not, because we're a unit. Let's go to lowsec or nullsec and see what we can do together. With Friendly Fire Off as the new de-facto standard setting for corporations, how much harder would it be for such a person to overcome their reluctance to try going the next step deeper into the game, like stepping from knee deep into treading cold water up to your neck?


CCP hard data own your points.

And yet they are short of fixing the issue with how one-man corps are the only sensible option for an amazingly large group of subscribers who get all risk and no reward from playing with others.
Devil Seven
GeoCorp.
The Initiative.
#97 - 2015-02-11 08:55:40 UTC
I don't like the FF BS but if CCP wants to make eve more safe and WOW like which sucks and is failing. star citizen is going to have easier time getting players but that's not why I'm here die to the FF BS it coming to reality there needs to be 2 things that happen. 1.) There need a to be a monthly fee for concord support since they are safer and can make more isk and which limits the risk vs reward. 2.) NPC Corps need higher tax and be able to be war deced (as cost for the war would be high) I think that would make a lot of players happy as I know many that are planning to kill off many corps in protest to this
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis
#98 - 2015-02-11 11:33:18 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
CCP hard data own your points.

Nice anecdote, I'm totally convinced.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis
#99 - 2015-02-11 11:42:11 UTC
Devil Seven wrote:
I don't like the FF BS but if CCP wants to make eve more safe and WOW like which sucks and is failing. star citizen is going to have easier time getting players but that's not why I'm here die to the FF BS it coming to reality there needs to be 2 things that happen. 1.) There need a to be a monthly fee for concord support since they are safer and can make more isk and which limits the risk vs reward. 2.) NPC Corps need higher tax and be able to be war deced (as cost for the war would be high) I think that would make a lot of players happy as I know many that are planning to kill off many corps in protest to this

Making it possible to declare war on NPC corps, as fun as that sounds to me, is an awful idea.

And a simple ISK fee for friendly-fire-off (FFO?) corporations isn't going to be nearly enough, either. Time and again it's been proven that simple barriers like ISK are simultaneously way too easy to overcome and discouraging to people who are starting out. Plus, if the idea is to make it easier for new players to ease into the game, forcing them to have the more dangerous type of corporation off the bat because they're new and poor is exactly the opposite of what they're trying to achieve here.

No, there should be hard restrictions on the functionality of a corporation that is set to FFO. If they want to be a mover and shaker, make big money, and get things done they should have to turn the setting off. As I suggested earlier, perhaps you should be unable to anchor POSes and POCOs in a FFO corporation. You should certainly not be able to declare war on others. These are the kinds of restrictions that will have a meaningful impact; just setting some soft boundary like ISK paid isn't going to change anything or make the situation any better.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#100 - 2015-02-11 15:03:54 UTC
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Devil Seven wrote:
I don't like the FF BS but if CCP wants to make eve more safe and WOW like which sucks and is failing. star citizen is going to have easier time getting players but that's not why I'm here die to the FF BS it coming to reality there needs to be 2 things that happen. 1.) There need a to be a monthly fee for concord support since they are safer and can make more isk and which limits the risk vs reward. 2.) NPC Corps need higher tax and be able to be war deced (as cost for the war would be high) I think that would make a lot of players happy as I know many that are planning to kill off many corps in protest to this

Making it possible to declare war on NPC corps, as fun as that sounds to me, is an awful idea.

And a simple ISK fee for friendly-fire-off (FFO?) corporations isn't going to be nearly enough, either. Time and again it's been proven that simple barriers like ISK are simultaneously way too easy to overcome and discouraging to people who are starting out. Plus, if the idea is to make it easier for new players to ease into the game, forcing them to have the more dangerous type of corporation off the bat because they're new and poor is exactly the opposite of what they're trying to achieve here.

No, there should be hard restrictions on the functionality of a corporation that is set to FFO. If they want to be a mover and shaker, make big money, and get things done they should have to turn the setting off. As I suggested earlier, perhaps you should be unable to anchor POSes and POCOs in a FFO corporation. You should certainly not be able to declare war on others. These are the kinds of restrictions that will have a meaningful impact; just setting some soft boundary like ISK paid isn't going to change anything or make the situation any better.


You people have the wrong perspective on this whole issue. Since you think that the default is "FF legal", you think some extra protection has been added, however, it was clearly stated that it was made optional ONLY because RvB wanted their hisec free-for-alls. The default if "FF illegal", "FF legal" is self-wardec mode, while "FF illegal" is the default intended behavior, which should've been that way ever since crimewatch, but got delayed due to hurr-durr freighter webbing I-cant-manage-my-safety derpettes. Once again, treating the default intended mode as "extra" is wrong, and the fact it were broken before doesn't justify this mistake in thinking.

I'm glad CCP gets it done right.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.