Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I don't understand what exactly? That null sec and it's rich alliances are irrelevant or that this still favours the rich?

You've just proved my point, by stating that new players would need to hand over the few mill they made.

As it stands now.
Player A has 4 Million and a fitted, insured ship. He goes out to run a mission and gets suicide ganked.
Consequences are as follows:
1. He has an insurance payout, plus his 4 million ISK to help replace his stuff.
2. The suicide ganker loses his ship and gets a security hit.

Under this change.
Player A has 4 Million and a fitted, insured ship. He pays 4 million to Concord and goes out to run a mission. He gets suicide ganked.
Consequences are as follows:
1. He has an insurance payout, but doesn't have 4 million to help replace his stuff.
2. The suicide ganker loses his ship and gets a security hit.

OR

Player A has 4 Million and a fitted, insured ship. He doesn't pay concord and goes out to run a mission. He gets suicide ganked.
Consequences are as follows:
1. He has an insurance payout, plus 4 million ISK to help replace his stuff.
2. The suicide ganker keeps his ship and doesn't get a security hit.

So it's either get screwed over by handing over your ISK, or keep the ISK and remove all current consequences.

And what for? To create an poor ISK sink? Or is this simply a bad way of turning high sec, into some mix of null and low?

I wouldn't EVER use this feature, but would love the no consequence situation you've given me. But hey, they didn't pay. Amirite?

So I should pay 85 mil Isk a month above the already 550 mil Isk a month I pay for the PLEX.

-1
NOT SUPPORTED.

Great idea, new pilots in hs sacrifice their 1st born to concord for peace. And instead of corp/alliance billing, every TCU gonna automaticlly tax the **** out of nell sec fella.

Noone is space rich anymore, let's fight in free noob ships.

Approve?

Sure.... but under these conditions:

1. Name changed from Concord to Vengeance Inc. Concord is not involved, these are mercenaries.

2. High Sec? No no no.... Strictly low sec. And no, not in null sec at all.

3. No local chat pilot roster. The idea your corp might purchase a contract at the last minute when they spot a neut entering the system is an exploit, like buying flood insurance during a hurricane warning.
You need to guess that you will need it. When a hostile pilot is already warping to you it's too late.
Also, this deterrent level mechanic in addition to local chat's highly effective warnings are simply too OP together.

Contracts not sold monthly.
Contracts sold per number of events responded to, with possible bulk discounts. Prepay only.

And by events, they don't care whether it's a fleet of super carriers, or a single noob ship deliberately wasting your ISK since they know you bought the contract.

But what will you do, when CONCORD stops doing it for free?

If you feel like paying 100 mil for a frigate because pvpers gank the hell out of miners all day and the industrialist leave eve online for other games, droping the subs and populations of Eve sure.

people like you make me sad. You need to go study How Economics and Industry works. And why you as a PvPer would be flying around in your pod instead of a ship if this happened.

Without Industry, you could not play eve. and The vast majority of items in eve comes from the highsec carebear who is protected by concord.

Also you cant make money to pay concord if you are constantly exploded trying to make said money by griefers.

If this is about getting more targets, by making it harder to be protected the way high security space is now, you are using the wrong approach.

Only a complete idiot volunteers to be downrange at a shooting gallery. That's not a game, that's a countdown to losing.
The nerf high sec suggestions ignore this. This is currently a nerf high sec thread.

You want more targets? You need a level playing field. They need the same chance to pop you, as you do to them.

It is no secret that PvE ships, especially miners most of all, are poorly prepared to fend off PvP engagements. Trying to force more of these into your targeting range is cheap, and they know this too.

Make mining something that gives the miner a chance to WTFBBQ the guy coming to PvP them, instead of being just another helpless target that should have ran when they saw you coming.

You attract more flies with honey than with vinegar-- old saying.

Again Concord punishes, it does not protect. Protection is derived from the fact that Concord punishing, is now a constant.

Also why should players have the wanted sign removed? Bounties are a player driven mechanic. Concord standings are irrelevant in that regard, just as any payment to them would be.

But one thing is for sure, as soon as any player gets a Concord star, they'll demand it gives more than simple punishment.

Bad idea is still bad and getting worse.

Ahh... I see your problem, specifically as to why you are suggesting this idea and discovering so many against it.

You are not showing any empathy to the pilots whose play style you are suggesting changes to.
Keep in mind I did not say sympathy, but just basic empathy.

You are making assumptions regarding what they would accept in exchange for the benefits these changes would bring you.

While a few players would sign up for almost anything, just for lulz, I feel safe in saying the majority are not interested in having their play style altered at their expense for the benefit of those wanting to shoot more of them as targets.

And null being a solution? The players with the time and social contacts who are interested in that... they already ARE in null.