These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

"CSPA" charge to view corp history and age?

Author
INSANE INSANE
Doomheim
#1 - 2012-02-15 21:33:55 UTC
I don't want it removed completely, just a charge for people who wants to see it, maybe a fixed price of a few million or a personal set value just like eve-mail.

It's not way out of line i think, might give newer players a boost when its not instantly rightclick and see how old a player is to assess the situation.

Also works the other way around, when a 2011 character might not even consider shooting at a 2003 just because of the years put behind training.

Maybe its not as easy to set a charge for it, but i def. think some change would benefit the eve universe.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#2 - 2012-02-15 22:01:56 UTC
Adding a charge makes the employment history screen much harder to use in combat, for newbies and vets alike, due to the extra reaction time required.

Also, have you considered the implications of this change? I forget who it is, but there is someone whose sig is something to the tune of "Any proposed change with the motivation to 'help newbies' will inevitably help vets more."

Price: The price will either be a) completely inaccessible to newbies, or b) so inconsequential that anyone 1+ week old can pay it without blinking. Being able to set the price yourself would lead to everybody setting insane prices for the info.

Recruitment: Corp history would have to be removed from the API, which would make for a ton more painstaking clicking for recruiters. If the prices were settable, it would also be impossible to trust any possible recruit with a high price on his corp history. It would lead to a lot more corp infiltrations, etc. Don't make recruiters' jobs harder; we need more people in player corps, not fewer.

Changes very little: I started playing in 2009, never use learning implants, and even took a few multi-month hiatuses. In 2010, I killed a "pro" 2005 player's Crusader using a Malediction. Similarly, I was killed a couple months ago by a 2011 player in a 1v1. Anyone with real PvP experience knows character age is largely irrelevant.

I'm all for limiting the actual over the top intel in Eve: fittings on killmails, npc and player kill counts in 0.0, local, etc. Employment history is fine as is.

Edit: Also, F&I is that-a way -->

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#3 - 2012-02-15 22:05:43 UTC
If you don't engage someone based on their character's age... you're doing it wrong.

Character age =/= more SP
(they might have let their sub lapse for a year or so)

More SP =/= better than less SP
(it depends on where your SP are applied, what ship you are in, and what your opponent is flying)
Xercodo
Cruor Angelicus
#4 - 2012-02-15 22:10:07 UTC
CSPA stand for "CONCORD Spam Prevention Act"

Asking the server what someone's employment history is does not constitute as spam.

The Drake is a Lie

Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2012-02-15 22:30:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Vera Algaert
I remember looking at the opponent's character age (and usually deciding not to engage) when I first started with pvp...

this thread made me chuckle because when reading it I realized that I haven't done this in a very long time.

at some point I realized that there is only so much SP that applies to any given setup: whether you are facing a 2003 character or a specialized 2010 character doesn't really matter if the 2010 character is flying the setup he is trained for - and that's something you can't know before engaging him.

my main is a 2008 character with about 55m SP so I guess a newish player might be moderately scared of him - however, my main is good at a few things (general support & gunnery skills, amarr T1 ships & capitals) and terrible at pretty much everything else.

If I were to engage you in a stealthbomber you would probably just laugh at my lack of damage output as I only have Torpedoes III and CovOps IV along with generally mediocre missile skills.
If I were to attack you in a Pilgrim/Curse my fitting would be either very expensive or pretty gimped as I never got around to training Recon V - a skill that many pvp-oriented 20-30m SP characters do have.
I can't even sit in Gallente battleships much less use hybrid weapons or fly them effectively.
and the list goes on and on ....

Character age doesn't tell you anything useful - maybe you are dealing with an alt that hasn't trained any skills for 90% of his life, maybe you are dealing with a character that has most of his skills in Science/Industry, maybe the character was sold on the bazaar and the new owner has no clue how to use it, ..... or maybe you are dealing with a super specialized pilot that outperforms you despite having half your overall SP.

Looking at character age only makes you run from fights that you might win or feel bad for ganking newbies. You should engage based on ship types, tactical situation and chance of the other guy pulling backup out of his hat. Not based on character age. Getting to the point where you yourself realize that character age doesn't matter is an important step in "learning" EVE (that shouldn't be taken away).


Corp history can occasionally give you decent clues about a pilot's background and likely areas of expertise. But I don't think this is a problem.
Knowing that my main spent a lot of time in 0.0 some of which in large alliances but no time in low-sec/pirate corps would tell you a lot more about me than the character age or SP.

.

Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#6 - 2012-02-15 22:41:04 UTC
INSANE INSANE wrote:
I don't want it removed completely, just a charge for people who wants to see it, maybe a fixed price of a few million or a personal set value just like eve-mail.

It's not way out of line i think, might give newer players a boost when its not instantly rightclick and see how old a player is to assess the situation.

Also works the other way around, when a 2011 character might not even consider shooting at a 2003 just because of the years put behind training.

Maybe its not as easy to set a charge for it, but i def. think some change would benefit the eve universe.


Any PVP advantage you can gain from looking at a character's age is so small that I haven't done it in literally years. Stop making up excuses and get to the pew pew.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Lord Jita
Lord Jita's Big Gay Corp
#7 - 2012-02-15 22:43:10 UTC
Corp history should have an option to be hidden period. Noone walks around with their résumé taped to their head.
RiskyFrisky
Halliburton Heavy Industries
#8 - 2012-02-15 23:04:31 UTC
Actually no. I'm quite proud of my corp history of BSOD.
Ajita al Tchar
Doomheim
#9 - 2012-02-15 23:19:21 UTC
Any CSPA charge would be either terrible or inconsequential, basically. Also, why should someone's employment info or corp's alliance info be hidden from others? Make choices, live with the consequences, work harder to convince others that repeated membership in decshield alliances doesn't mean you're total carebears.

I like to look at corp histories sometimes for multiple chars to see if any connection can potentially be made between them. Like say a group of people from corp [ABC] in one system, one person from corp {EFG} in another, but oh look, that person's previous corp was [ABC] and the people from [ABC] seem to be keenly aware of what's going on at the gate in the system where the [EFG] char is. Never 100%, but slowly webs form.

Free intel is delicious. Everyone should post all of their kills all the time, too, public killboards are invaluable for those who really like intel and have a good memory Twisted
Aiwha
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#10 - 2012-02-15 23:22:37 UTC
Hell ******* no.

Sanity is fun leaving the body.

Jita Alt666
#11 - 2012-02-15 23:22:50 UTC
Lord Jita wrote:
Corp history should have an option to be hidden period. Noone walks around with their résumé taped to their head.


Linkedin/Facebook/OldFriend beg to differ.