Assembly Hall

Why do we need CONCORD?

It is clear that CCP wants grossly inflated and ongoing rising prices on the market by permitting suicide gankers to come to high security to suicide gank players who make us ships at good prices.

EVE is not for the faint of heart to begin with, yet I nearly fell out of my chair when I saw an ad on my client talking about a newbie friendly EVE. Surely newbs wise up on just how newbie friendly EVE is when they get their covetor or transport ganked before they have a chance to figure out how to make isk in the game to replace it or have a chance to find the right corp or alliance to teach them the ropes. Even taught the ropes they will die in the same spectacular fashion.

Hulkageddon is everyday now!

EVE did not always have CONCORD. CONCORD was put in place with the intention of created a secure zone for fledgling pilots to thrive until they got the nerve and know-how to spread their wings for greater reward elsewhere.

CCP has validated, if not acquiesced, the practice of subverting CONCORD to kill carebears and newbs.

Why have CONCORD? Why not just roll back to pre-CONCORD days and make everything CONCORD free?

That is my proposal.

Inflate prices to record highs (as they are now), kill everyone without interference, show the newcomers that they dont stand a chance and buy tons of plexes from, errm CCP, to replace your ships and modules.

Ban CONCORD from the game plz. Seriously.

---- Renamed it appropriately by me :)

No.

Am i missing something or are you going against your own idea? Haha

CONCORD does exactly what it's supposed to do. It's intended to provide consequences to any unprovoked aggression in highsec. It is not intended to make it impossible to attack players in highsec, it simply provides consequences if such an attack does happen.

So, no, I'm not supporting it at all.

No, it wasn't.



How is Concord being "subverted", exactly? Do you even know what that word means?


Your whining has proceeded from a flawed premise. If CCP had wanted you to be safe from PvP in high security, they would have simply made it impossible to engage in PvP combat in high security. This could be done, trivially. Instead, they:

1. Intentionally opted to leave PvP combat as a permissible action in high security.
2. Intentionally implemented a system that only provides consequences - not prevention - in the form of concord.
3. Intentionally balanced that system so that its response time varies based on system security, which carries the obvious implication that it is not supposed to be wholly effective in PREVENTING PvP actions in high security.

These are all of the INTENTIONAL design decisions that went into Concord in lieu of simply rendering PvP impossible in high security. Ergo, nothing is being "subverted" - the system is working as intended.

No it doesnt.

There is no whining here except by your post about me having the audacity of identifying a problem on the forums. You are so concerned that someone mentioned it that you had to post all of that in response. Stop emo raging and discuss it like an adult... enless ofc you are not an adult then I understand your post and the lack of intellectual discussion behind it.

The system does not work as intended any longer. It is infact broken. So, either fix it or roll it back.

Precisely :)

There is no vote here. If you don't like the topic or can't add anything intelligent to it, go troll elsewhere

Whether it directly impacts you or not, you clearly want it to work in a certain fashion and that is clearly in conflict with how it is intended to work.

That aside, you seem to really struggle with the fundamentals of logical reasoning.

You haven't, thus far, made any credible argument that it doesn't work as intended. All of your posts have proceeded from the faulty premise that Concord is intended to provide safety in High Security, when it is common knowledge that this is not its intent.