These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Risien Drogonne
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2012-12-11 19:32:39 UTC
GreenSeed wrote:
give the militia guys a button on their UI that will warp them to any aggression on their vicinity.

make different types of aggression allow calling militia guys from different distances, if a system is under a lot of ganking allow militia from all the region to rain down on the pirates.

make militia factions reward LP for police actions, make pirate factions reward LP for pirate actions on systems they randomly mark as targets.

oh, and remove CONCORD, or reduce them to be some kind of emergency response ships that spawn on aggression doing some light reps on the aggressed and on the militia guys.

and finally change militia, so instead of a permanent commitment its a weekly "tour" at the end of the week you can go for another week or drop and go back to where you were before. maybe trow in a weekly increase in LP gains, maybe +5% per week, staking.


anyway, removing concord from one day to the other would be a bad idea, it has to be a gradual change over a year or so.

And when the player militia inevitably decides it likes ruling high-sec and turns to piracy, using its power to control everyone instead of just criminals? What then? A backup militia? Some kind of backup NPC enforcers?

Who polices the police if the police are players?
Capt Starfox
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#22 - 2012-12-12 00:24:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Capt Starfox
It's just not going to happened. Most of the ideas ARE good, but have to consider the player-base that would get the opportunity to "catch" the criminal. I may be wrong, but I want to say most are miners, mission-runners and some doing exploration (I'm not considering players camped at station). I liked the idea that Concorde does warp in, but doesn't insta pop the criminal when it comes times for Concord to attack, instead scrams and waits for players to show up and take part. How long is the warp scram? I'm assuming it would represent system security, so 1.0 would be... idk 45s? And 0.5 would be 20? Just examples to help everyone understand. But more importantly who's going to come? And who gets to find out? Should everybody find out.. even the station traders? Or just the ones already in a ship in system? If it's the former, then you could be looking at being able to bring in more people.. Maybe there's a PvP pilot in a PvP ship sitting in station doing the spins. If you go with the latter, well then I don't think very many people will show up unless they themselves, or that system in particular has great communication. But no matter how I look at this I see most players being too afraid to do anything and the ones that aren't, which will be a much smaller number, can't be everywhere all the time. And even if somehow high-sec players were motivated to always -no matter what- attack/warp-in/assist Concord against criminals, do you think the pirates wont come back with force, or simply come in from the start with force? I believe high-sec would be a war-zone if this happened... which would be greatTwisted

But I fear a lot of people would eventually leave.

PS: I loved the pvpve idea even if it was a joke, I forgot who wrote that, but that sounded way fun!

Abandon all hope ye who x up in fleet

Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2012-12-12 01:11:20 UTC
I love the idea of Eve vigilante justice and lynch mobs Bear

"Little ginger moron" ~David Hasselhoff 

Want to see what Surf is training or how little isk Surf has?  http://eveboard.com/pilot/Surfin%27s_PlunderBunny

Risien Drogonne
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2012-12-12 02:10:52 UTC
Surfin's PlunderBunny wrote:
I love the idea of Eve vigilante justice and lynch mobs Bear



Nullsec ---->
Anemonae Ambrosia
Royal Order of Security Specialists
#25 - 2012-12-12 03:04:36 UTC
We had the good old days where Concord was weak already. They used to have slower response times and much less dps. This allowed guys to gank with Logi backup, who never got targeted by concord, to do considerable damage. It was cried about so much CCP has buffed Concord on several occasions over the years. This current police force of Space Gods is the result of all the tears. I wouldn't expect CCP to ever go back.
Azirapheal
Hansa Mining og Industri
#26 - 2012-12-12 12:01:44 UTC
removal of concord would mean that most of the bears with high end modules missioning in high sec in order to pay for null/pvp would drop off, leaving those few victims we do get with barely enough dropped isk for us to live on.

HOWEVER

the logistics of running such a massive fleet i feel are not viable, on the scale that eve purports at least.

i vastly favour highsec pockets in predominantly lowsec, with many more routes created to dampen the risk of gate death lottery.

players have shown that we can take utterly lawless space and make it avaliable and safe for our alliance members.

i personally think that in 0.8 space and less, concord should not be present - but instead faction navy responds based on time - so 30 seconds a navy spawn appears in 0.8 with an increase of 30 seconds per .1 reduction in security.

the spawn should be based on the agressors ship, should be tankable (albeit harder than gate guns)

and should be based on pvp player setups.

they should also drop loot, and of course, any action taken against them '8including returning fire) results in an instant -10 with that faction,

this would lead to players actually roleplaying their respective factions better, as im pretty sure the minmatar state truly hates me alot more than s represented at the moment.
Thomas Gore
Blackfyre Enterprise
#27 - 2012-12-12 13:47:59 UTC
Risien Drogonne wrote:
Players can't be trusted to police an MMO. Ever.


And we have a /thread.

Willmahh
#28 - 2012-12-12 18:23:37 UTC
Have the placing of "legal" bounties cost something, in addition to ISK. Something that prevents people from spamming bounties; like LP, or even Sec Status.

Here are some ideas:


  • Perhaps the capability of placing bounties could be dependent on the player's credibility/respectability (LP or Sec Status) with factions.


    • Placing a bounty, no matter the ISK amount, would cost some credibility/respectability that would have to be earned back to do it again.



    • Someone who constantly places bounties would eventually "**** off" that faction and they would have to work up their reputation.


  • If Bounties were to cost LP, you could only use LP that is considered an Enemy to the targets faction (meaning the target has to have negative faction to the LP source)



  • Perhaps the higher the Sec Status of the target the more it costs to place a bounty on them. and i mean exponentially higher.


The problem isn't the bounty system, it is the loop holes and abuse of the bounty system.
Emma Royd
Maddled Gommerils
#29 - 2012-12-12 18:45:16 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.



ROFL good luck with that, if eve lost 2/3 of it's subscribers overnight then eve would die a fast death, no company could afford to lose 60+% of it's income and carry on as if nothing had changed.

There would be drastic shortages on the market, CCP would see the opportunity to introduce micro-transactions so you'd be buying stuff for rl isk, and there's be no other option since without the ship/ammo builders, who's going to build the shiny stuff you like to blow up?
Risien Drogonne
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2012-12-12 21:16:44 UTC
Azirapheal wrote:


players have shown that we can take utterly lawless space and make it avaliable and safe for our alliance members.

I think you sorta glossed over the important point there. Players are good at making space safe for their friends, not for everyone. Player police in high-sec would do the same thing: make space safe for their friends, not everyone.
Kira Vanachura
Green Visstick High
#31 - 2012-12-14 08:45:47 UTC
Risien Drogonne wrote:
Azirapheal wrote:


players have shown that we can take utterly lawless space and make it avaliable and safe for our alliance members.

I think you sorta glossed over the important point there. Players are good at making space safe for their friends, not for everyone. Player police in high-sec would do the same thing: make space safe for their friends, not everyone.

One of the reasons why alliances prefer to make space safe for their friends only is that they lack incentives to share the space with neutrals. Hence I pointed out a need to provide proper rewards to the capsuleer police force.
takedoom
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2012-12-14 09:17:33 UTC
Concord should be nerfed a bit. How about realistic warping timers other than just instantly showing up and killing everything in a 2000 AU radius in under 10 seconds.

http://spinthatdamnship.ytmnd.com/

Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries
VOID Intergalactic Forces
#33 - 2012-12-14 11:21:38 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
I feel that given the current status, if indeed a change is wanted, they should either allow super caps in highsec, or dumb down concord to make them tankable for a little while. Not insta-pop or anything, but like... grinding down a pos effect.

That would make things interesting. Would be nice to see a blob come into high sec and encourage a huuuge fight with concord to create a pvpve environment.

Or wait, that would be silly wouldn't it? Why on earth would devs want concord removed from highsec anyways?




You could tank concord at one point than a corp came in and laid seige to an entire high sec system killing concord and anything else that moved, you could also kill stations and that was fixed aswell

"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith

Lee Woods
Doomheim
#34 - 2012-12-15 14:53:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Lee Woods
The removal of CONCORD, why on Earth would anyone want that? Other than to harass those who make a living in high-sec because they choose not to venture out into the wilderness of null-sec.

IMHO, people who uphold the law in high-sec (and those that possess a humanitarian nature) should be able to work alongside CONCORD e.g. have a module or a probe that you can activate to call in CONCORD reinforcements, or be able to earn CONCORD-specialised weaponry/defensive modules.

For too long, the law breakers of this Universe have gotten away with murder (quite literally), and its' time the honest & virtuous were rewarded for their efforts and sacrifices to defend those that are weaker than them.

We do not want another Jita or Dodixie incident like that of which occurred earlier on this year, those aiding CONCORD should be allowed to bring whatever firepower they need in-order to defend the innocent, whereas the perpetrators should be dealt with swiftly.

Think of it like factional warfare but you join the side of CONCORD in maintaining peace.
Pyotr Kamarovi
Kamarov Financial
#35 - 2012-12-15 15:16:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Pyotr Kamarovi
Risien Drogonne wrote:
GreenSeed wrote:
give the militia guys a button on their UI that will warp them to any aggression on their vicinity.

make different types of aggression allow calling militia guys from different distances, if a system is under a lot of ganking allow militia from all the region to rain down on the pirates.

make militia factions reward LP for police actions, make pirate factions reward LP for pirate actions on systems they randomly mark as targets.

oh, and remove CONCORD, or reduce them to be some kind of emergency response ships that spawn on aggression doing some light reps on the aggressed and on the militia guys.

and finally change militia, so instead of a permanent commitment its a weekly "tour" at the end of the week you can go for another week or drop and go back to where you were before. maybe trow in a weekly increase in LP gains, maybe +5% per week, staking.


anyway, removing concord from one day to the other would be a bad idea, it has to be a gradual change over a year or so.

And when the player militia inevitably decides it likes ruling high-sec and turns to piracy, using its power to control everyone instead of just criminals?


Do you have any idea how awesome that sounds?

I can already picture the removal of CONCORD. The factions decide that they can no longer trust CONCORD to police their systems, and withdraw funding, causing them to become far less potent. Meanwhile, criminals are now hunted down by NPC and PC militia, actively in highsec, but also patrolling in lowsec, with rewards handed out to people who hunt down criminals. Faction warfare escalates to include the conquest of 0.7 and lower systems, with CONCORD as it is today only operating in 0.7 and above, and steadily being cut back further in future patches. Highsec is less safe, but the presence of - destructible - NPC police makes it at least much safer than lowsec.
Mike Adoulin
Happys Happy Hamster Hunting Club
#36 - 2012-12-16 12:58:13 UTC
Right now, you already get a sec status buff for blowing away outlaws (-5 sec status or lower) IIRC.

For everybody that wants CONCORD removed...remember why CCP uber buffed them to begin with?

Remember MoO?

I, personally, think removing stargates and giving every ship a jump drive would be a better way to get folks out in to null.....Smile

Everything in EVE is a trap.

And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)

You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.

Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.

Risien Drogonne
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2012-12-16 18:43:43 UTC
Kira Vanachura wrote:
Risien Drogonne wrote:
Azirapheal wrote:


players have shown that we can take utterly lawless space and make it avaliable and safe for our alliance members.

I think you sorta glossed over the important point there. Players are good at making space safe for their friends, not for everyone. Player police in high-sec would do the same thing: make space safe for their friends, not everyone.

One of the reasons why alliances prefer to make space safe for their friends only is that they lack incentives to share the space with neutrals. Hence I pointed out a need to provide proper rewards to the capsuleer police force.

What's their motivation for not abusing it and their power?
Risien Drogonne
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2012-12-16 18:45:27 UTC
Pyotr Kamarovi wrote:


Do you have any idea how awesome that sounds?

I can already picture the removal of CONCORD. The factions decide that they can no longer trust CONCORD to police their systems, and withdraw funding, causing them to become far less potent. Meanwhile, criminals are now hunted down by NPC and PC militia, actively in highsec, but also patrolling in lowsec, with rewards handed out to people who hunt down criminals. Faction warfare escalates to include the conquest of 0.7 and lower systems, with CONCORD as it is today only operating in 0.7 and above, and steadily being cut back further in future patches. Highsec is less safe, but the presence of - destructible - NPC police makes it at least much safer than lowsec.

Oh yah, so awesome Roll

I just can't wait to have "police" show up in my level 4 mission and start shooting me because I didn't pay them a "tax" to be able to mission in a 0.7 system.
El 1974
Green Visstick High
#39 - 2012-12-16 21:47:57 UTC
Risien Drogonne wrote:
Kira Vanachura wrote:
One of the reasons why alliances prefer to make space safe for their friends only is that they lack incentives to share the space with neutrals. Hence I pointed out a need to provide proper rewards to the capsuleer police force.

What's their motivation for not abusing it and their power?

Abuse should be prevented by the reward system. In FW and the bounty system this is accomplished by relating the rewards to the inflicted damage.
You cannot trust players not to abuse their powers. They will try. You cannot trust the players with any special powers and Concord cannot be instantly removed.
But now Concord is OP. There is no room for 'the good guys' to participate in the conflict between good and bad. They have no reason to organize themselves. That is why Concord should be gradually nerfed to make room for the capsuleers.
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#40 - 2012-12-16 23:50:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Felicity Love
Remove CONCORD for more than a few days (such as a "special" or LIVE event type weekend) and you DESTROY High Sec.

Destroy High Sec and several memorable things would happen in the short term, to the game economy, as pilots quickly ran out of barges, mission ships and freighters and, of course, sufficient ISK to keep the economy rolling.

Following that, many players would quit -- they'd quickly get tired of getting ganked, the "FUN FACTOR" effectively disappearing for those not into "involuntary" PVP.

CCP sees it's revenues take a nosedive ... see above, concerning players quitting.

Think it won't happen ? Or maybe some folks think removing "Concord" is just a great way to hit the "reset" button ?

OR... maybe CCP remembers "The SHITSTORM" from a couple of years ago....


Twisted

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )