These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Players in NPC Corps should not be able to:

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Fey Ivory
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#161 - 2013-02-04 18:12:04 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Qaidan Alenko wrote:
Fey Ivory wrote:
Jenn

What it should cost i guess could be discussed, and i to some extent agree with you on a few levels... one of wich is when people(alts)in NPC corps run huge amount of goods in support of corps that is in war... i myself sell minerals ewen run them to station where people want them, i just have one principle i dont run "goods" if people are at war... im not sure if its possible, but if it is, is that if you pick up a contract from a part that is in war, and you transport that, you would be a "legal" wartarget for as long as you carry the goods... iwe talked to Nat about this and though im very pro for wardec imunity for NPC corps, it shouldent be used to affect those that do war... if that makes sense

Something like this I could get behind...

It could even be taken a step forward with using neutral (NPC Corp or even PRC) boosts/reps... you assist someone who is in an active war, you get flagged to the oposing side for the duration of the war as a collaberator.

You sound close to suggesting an embargo be made possible against corps.

After all, having some group under siege lacks impact if they can maintain their supply lines. This is a perfectly valid real world practice and strategy.

Does it make sense in game terms, however?

Would you just limit contracts naming the corp or it's members specifically?
Would you expand this to the market, so merchants can choose to only permit sales to blue clients?
(Allowing sales to hostiles would be traceable and grounds for a war dec, which while very real world based, may or may not be advisable in the game)

Economic support in a conflict is undeniably a major influence of success in warfare.


Honestly im not fully sure how to implement this and make it fully work... but vase idea is, if you have a contract from a corp that is at war, in your cargo, you get flagged towards those that are at war with that corp you carry the goods for... once you unload the "goods" you get unflagged... wich also opens up a interesting feature, your i your freighter carrying goods for corp A, that is in war with corp B... corp B shows up, and opens a link and asks you to jetison the cargo, wich will make you take a coleteral hit, but on the other hand, you get unflagged, as you drop the "goods", saving your constly freighter... in any case, was just a idea
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#162 - 2013-02-04 19:48:17 UTC
Buzzmong wrote:



I think the OP has posted these ideas simply because he wants to shoot someone who is in an NPC corp and is afraid of Concord and hasn't realised killing a wardec target still has an isk cost.


You didn't read the post. To clarify, no, the reasons you stated are not the reasons.

Thank you.
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#163 - 2013-02-04 19:55:05 UTC
A Player Run Corp does not have the ability to erect a POS out-of-the-box upon corp creation. There is a grind. Even if that grind is only performed by a 1-man corp which later accepts members.

I will state... again... for those that couldn't find the gumption to read the entire post... This has nothing to do with war, war decs, war targets, 'waaah you won't undock', 'waaah station games', or anything remotely concerning shooting at other players. Don't let the corp name confuse you.

And, for fun and cookies, I am adding a #6

#6. Anchor cans or secure cans in space

Thank you.
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#164 - 2013-02-04 20:03:58 UTC
Amenotep Polo wrote:
What is the deal with NPC corps, why do people keep on complaining about them?

Is it because they can't be decc'd? Hell if you want pvp i got news for you, high sec might not be the most optimal place.

Also, destroy npc corps and prices will skyrocket to the point that a frigate will be an hard loss.


Not complaining about the NPC corps as a whole. I feel they add a great service to certain parts of the playerbase.

The "complaint" (even though this is a Features & Ideas thread, and not a complaint thread) is about SOME of the actions players in a NPC corp can perform.

Once again, you are admitting to not reading the full post. In the full post, I stated this is not about wardecs or player vs player at all. I do not want PVP from new players, or even old players that DO NOT WISH TO ENGAGE IN PVP. Thank you for your completely irrelevant opinions about something I specifically went out of my way to inform you that I was not interested in.

Your comment about the economy is a waste of words. Because this thread is NOT about dissolving NPC corps. Yet another admittance on your part you showed no respect and didn't read the full post or any follow-up posts.

Thank you.
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#165 - 2013-02-04 20:07:08 UTC
De'Veldrin wrote:


Seriously? So if they dare to venture outside of their "reservations" everyone can shoot them? If I was a new player, I'd quit.


These suggestions, and I use that term charitably, are terrible, and very poorly thought through.


You didn't read the whole post. Nor did you read the second post where I changed the ideas based on the interaction of the thread over 6 pages of discussion.

Some of those ideas ARE poorly thought out. And if you would have read the whole post, you would have understood that and your negative opinion might have been a slight less... negative.

Thank you.
Mikhael Taron
Four Winds Industry
#166 - 2013-02-04 20:09:13 UTC
When I was running the tutorial missions they sent me into/through 0.7/0.6 sec space. Are those missions also to be banned?

If I want to stay in a npc corp and trade and mine within it then I shall, and you're not going to stop me. If I made myself a one-man corp then some dickhead (like you?) would almost certainly wardec me for the lulz, shafting my game. Don't respond with some variation of "so train combat and fight" because I may not WANT to play the game as you dictate. Being in NPC allows me to play as I wish, not as you want.

NPC players are hit with 11% tax on earnings and have no way to reduce it. For that level of tax I want something in return. Everything you complain about is paid for by that tax.

OP idea is a bad one.

-1

You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#167 - 2013-02-04 20:14:56 UTC
Ruskarn Andedare wrote:
Sol Weinstein wrote:

...

There are many aspects of this game that are ruined, just ruined, by actions of players in NPC corporations. The bounty thing is one of the major ones. Hopefully, someone out there will agree that the leash needs to be tightened on most of the people that use the NPC Corporation Exploit when performing harmful actions towards another player or corporation.

...


Please, please, please, could you list the aspects of the game being ruined by players being permitted to be in NPC corporations so we can judge the suggestions for their impact on the problems you see as well as their impact on new players, players booted from corp, casual players, pro griefers, etc.


I already did in the original post and the updated post below the original.

1. Bounties should not be able to be placed by players in a NPC corporation.
2. Cans and secure cans should not be able to be littered across the universe by players in a NPC corp.
3. Blanket protection should not be provided to a player when there is no chance of backlash. And this is important: "backlash" may or may not be only referring to direct PVP. Somewhere in this forum there is an idea about using standings to impact market orders and such. I personally would like to set all NPC corps to -10 and not let them buy my market orders. But that is just me. And, in the world of EVE, it would be an OPTION. A CHOICE of a player or corporation to use the feature.

Maybe the thread should not just be "what they shouldn't be able to do" and be changed into a thread about "ideas to finally fix some of the NPC corp mechanics to better coincide in a game that advertises Choices and Consequences as it's striving feature".

This is how we start a discussion about the problems in the system and possibly enact change. Some of the ideas are poorly thought out and I admitted that and changed the ideas. If you didn't educate yourself on the original post, or read all the follow up posts you are doing this thread (and yourself) a disservice.

Thank you.
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#168 - 2013-02-04 20:19:02 UTC
Mikhael Taron wrote:
When I was running the tutorial missions they sent me into/through 0.7/0.6 sec space. Are those missions also to be banned?



Once again, you didn't educate yourself on the original post or any of the follow up posts.

And, even if that change was implemented, there would be MANY things that would have to change in the game. Redoing some missions, or the simpler act of just removing them, would need to happen.

However, if you had the respect to read the original post and the follow up posts, you would see that the system restriction idea was removed.

Your ill informed and misplaced negative opinion has been noted and I thank you for your poorly placed response to my post.

Thank you.
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#169 - 2013-02-04 20:23:27 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Sol Weinstein wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


No, the ONLY possibvle motivation you could have is you want people to play just like you do



Wrong. It is not the ONLY possible motivation. And I'll prove that by....

Jenn aSide wrote:

I haven't read the thread


Thank you for giving an opinion on a topic you admit to not educating yourself on. You will be taken seriously when you read the thread, and all the follow-up posts.

Thank you.


ROFL,

So, you're really telling me that you didn't understand that I was agreeing with you Sol and being sarcastic to the people who were poo-pooing your idea? And then havign the nerve to tell ME to read lol.

You're just plain brilliant. -1 like.


My apologies, I misunderstood your post. It happens. But, you did state you didn't read the thread. How could that possibly help the discussion? Sorry to have upset you over this.

Thank you.
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#170 - 2013-02-04 20:30:19 UTC
The original post has been amended (again). Please go and read (or re-read) the entire original post so we may all have a discussion about the ideas.

Thank you.
Mikhael Taron
Four Winds Industry
#171 - 2013-02-04 20:44:54 UTC
Sol Weinstein wrote:
Mikhael Taron wrote:
When I was running the tutorial missions they sent me into/through 0.7/0.6 sec space. Are those missions also to be banned?



Once again, you didn't educate yourself on the original post or any of the follow up posts.

And, even if that change was implemented, there would be MANY things that would have to change in the game. Redoing some missions, or the simpler act of just removing them, would need to happen.

However, if you had the respect to read the original post and the follow up posts, you would see that the system restriction idea was removed.

Your ill informed and misplaced negative opinion has been noted and I thank you for your poorly placed response to my post.

Thank you.




Damn, you are so pompous! So, just to get into the spirit of things, I re-read your original post, and quote the same

Quote:

mended the post to reflect this. Read it all.

So the new list is:

1. Place bounties on players
2. Place bounties on corps
3. Rent manufacturing or research slots in any station that is not owned by their NPC corp
(This goes both ways. Those slots should be reserved for the members of that NPC corp.)
4. Anchor cans or secure cans in space.

I might add in "light a cyno", but since they have to do it while in some form of 'harms way', I suppose we can let this one slide.


Thank you.




  1. How has placing bouties on players or
  2. corps diminished the game? So bounties are placed on your toon/corp? This is a big deal?
  3. As long as players in player corps can no longer rent slots in NPC stations then that's fine. Quid pro quo.
  4. You're annoyed because you can't shoot at our cans? That can be the only reason for objecting to this, otherwise there is no difference



We pay 11% tax, are deprived of a LOT of features available to player corps, and STILL you're unhappy?

You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#172 - 2013-02-04 20:49:43 UTC
Mikhael Taron wrote:
Sol Weinstein wrote:
Mikhael Taron wrote:
When I was running the tutorial missions they sent me into/through 0.7/0.6 sec space. Are those missions also to be banned?



Once again, you didn't educate yourself on the original post or any of the follow up posts.

And, even if that change was implemented, there would be MANY things that would have to change in the game. Redoing some missions, or the simpler act of just removing them, would need to happen.

However, if you had the respect to read the original post and the follow up posts, you would see that the system restriction idea was removed.

Your ill informed and misplaced negative opinion has been noted and I thank you for your poorly placed response to my post.

Thank you.




Damn, you are so pompous! So, just to get into the spirit of things, I re-read your original post, and quote the same

Quote:

mended the post to reflect this. Read it all.

So the new list is:

1. Place bounties on players
2. Place bounties on corps
3. Rent manufacturing or research slots in any station that is not owned by their NPC corp
(This goes both ways. Those slots should be reserved for the members of that NPC corp.)
4. Anchor cans or secure cans in space.

I might add in "light a cyno", but since they have to do it while in some form of 'harms way', I suppose we can let this one slide.


Thank you.




  1. How has placing bouties on players or
  2. corps diminished the game? So bounties are placed on your toon/corp? This is a big deal?
  3. As long as players in player corps can no longer rent slots in NPC stations then that's fine. Quid pro quo.
  4. You're annoyed because you can't shoot at our cans? That can be the only reason for objecting to this, otherwise there is no difference



We pay 11% tax, are deprived of a LOT of features available to player corps, and STILL you're unhappy?


It is not that the bounties are a 'big deal'. It's just something that a NPC player should not be allowed to do (IMO).
No, I am not annoyed I can't shoot... so you didn't read the post or the other pages... What you think is not the ONLY reason. There is a difference. The difference is they should not be able to anchor cans in space while in a NPC corp.

I would also go on to point out that even PRCs should not be able to anchor cans willy-nilly in space and should require similar restrictions in accordance with POS erection. There should be a standing requirement. Again, IMO.

Thank you.
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#173 - 2013-02-04 20:56:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Sol Weinstein
Mikhael Taron wrote:


NPC players are hit with 11% tax on earnings and have no way to reduce it. For that level of tax I want something in return. Everything you complain about is paid for by that tax.



I fixed this for you.

NPC players that aren't smart enough to trade their goods to an alt are hit with 11% tax on earnings only in three areas of the game, ratting bounties, mission bonus/payouts, market transactions, and have no way to reduce it, other than join a Player Run Corporation or by use of an alt in a PRC. For that level of tax I want something in return, even though I will ignore the fact that a mere 11% affords me virtually complete protection from PVP unless I choose to go into the areas of space that allow me to be shot at without CONCORD protection, and absolutely no form of backlash for any of my actions or Choices™. Everything you complain about is paid for by that completely avoidable, or such a small amount that I can basically ignore it, tax.

You're welcome.

Thank you.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#174 - 2013-02-04 21:37:51 UTC
Sol Weinstein wrote:
I will state... again... for those that couldn't find the gumption to read the entire post... This has nothing to do with war, war decs, war targets, 'waaah you won't undock', 'waaah station games', or anything remotely concerning shooting at other players. Don't let the corp name confuse you.


And I will state...again...as others have, that you do a completely **** job of laying out your arguments as to WHY these things are problems. Hence your proposed "fixes" are without base or merit.

Try again.

As an example, you state in your OP

Quote:
There are many aspects of this game that are ruined, just ruined, by actions of players in NPC corporations. The bounty thing is one of the major ones.


Just saying it doesn't make it so. You fail to put forth any convincing argument to back up that statement?

How does a player in an NPC corp ruin bounties? As far as I am aware while you cannot put a bounty on an NPC corp, you can put a bounty on a player in an NPC corp.

If a player in an NPC corp is suicide ganked, why shouldn't he be allowed to place a bounty on his attacker for revenge?
Buzzmong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#175 - 2013-02-04 22:16:50 UTC
Sol Weinstein wrote:
Buzzmong wrote:



I think the OP has posted these ideas simply because he wants to shoot someone who is in an NPC corp and is afraid of Concord and hasn't realised killing a wardec target still has an isk cost.


You didn't read the post. To clarify, no, the reasons you stated are not the reasons.

Thank you.


Haha, really they're not?

How odd, because people have repeatedly asked you what the actual problem is, but thus far you've declined to answer that question. Of course, I'm well aware if killing people is your objective you can't very well say that, as it'll undermine anything you say.

Now, if you'd be so kind and gracious as to actually spell out how people being in NPC corps is having a direct or indirect negative effect on everyone rather than just saying they do, then it would be much appreciated.

Thank you.
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#176 - 2013-02-04 22:19:47 UTC
Sol Weinstein wrote:
1. Place bounties on players
2. Place bounties on corps
3. Rent manufacturing or research slots in any station that is not owned by their NPC corp
(This goes both ways. Those slots should be reserved for the members of that NPC corp.)
4. Anchor cans or secure cans in space.

Sounds good to me.

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#177 - 2013-02-05 01:45:04 UTC
Buzzmong wrote:
Sol Weinstein wrote:
Buzzmong wrote:



I think the OP has posted these ideas simply because he wants to shoot someone who is in an NPC corp and is afraid of Concord and hasn't realised killing a wardec target still has an isk cost.


You didn't read the post. To clarify, no, the reasons you stated are not the reasons.

Thank you.


Haha, really they're not?

How odd, because people have repeatedly asked you what the actual problem is, but thus far you've declined to answer that question. Of course, I'm well aware if killing people is your objective you can't very well say that, as it'll undermine anything you say.

Now, if you'd be so kind and gracious as to actually spell out how people being in NPC corps is having a direct or indirect negative effect on everyone rather than just saying they do, then it would be much appreciated.

Thank you.


Wrong, I posted those answers a few posts up. I will kindly ask you to read all the posts in a thread before making accusations.

Thank you.
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#178 - 2013-02-05 01:51:01 UTC
Derath Ellecon wrote:
Sol Weinstein wrote:
I will state... again... for those that couldn't find the gumption to read the entire post... This has nothing to do with war, war decs, war targets, 'waaah you won't undock', 'waaah station games', or anything remotely concerning shooting at other players. Don't let the corp name confuse you.


And I will state...again...as others have, that you do a completely **** job of laying out your arguments as to WHY these things are problems. Hence your proposed "fixes" are without base or merit.

Try again.

As an example, you state in your OP

Quote:
There are many aspects of this game that are ruined, just ruined, by actions of players in NPC corporations. The bounty thing is one of the major ones.


Just saying it doesn't make it so. You fail to put forth any convincing argument to back up that statement?

How does a player in an NPC corp ruin bounties? As far as I am aware while you cannot put a bounty on an NPC corp, you can put a bounty on a player in an NPC corp.

If a player in an NPC corp is suicide ganked, why shouldn't he be allowed to place a bounty on his attacker for revenge?




You will be given the same instructions as the other people: please read all the posts in this thread on all the pages.

I gave my reasons and I suggest you give the thread and posters the respect of reading them.

Thank you.



It's not news to anyone that players use alts in the safety of an NPC corp to do their "dirty work". It's not news. It never will be. And most people will gladly admit it.

If a NPC corp member gets suicide ganked, then they just got a lesson in what not to do. Don't be away from your keyboard or alt-tabbed on your facebook account. Stay aligned to a celestial or other warpable location. Fit some form of tank or use a ship that can't be ganked so easily. And even these things are not guarantees. Sometimes, being in a PRC is enough reason NOT to be targeted because it usually means that the player isn't just hiding in an NPC corp. And that there might be some real people behind the keyboard.

Why shouldn't he be allowed to set a bounty? Because he is in a NPC corp.

Thank you.
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
#179 - 2013-02-05 02:01:16 UTC
Everyone:

There is no "argument" here. Therefore, I can't give you answers to my "argument". This is an idea thread. The things I posted are ideas. And some of them have been changed or deleted through the discussion that has taken place over 9 pages so far.

I don't have to "defend" my reasons. Why? Because these are ideas. If you don't agree with them, and also refuse to take part in a meaningful discussion about them, then I refuse to "defend" my reasons. Why? Because you have already shown me that you don't agree and don't want to discuss the issues. The point of the thread is to discuss the ideas and find their strengths and flaws. And to find people who also agree that Something Needs To Be Done About The Players Who Use NPC Corporations To Abuse The Game Mechanics. Otherwise known as An Exploit. All of you asking "explain what this mystical exploit is" just got your answer.

I find it quite interesting that most of the people keep talking about the removal of the bounties. Yet, no one has said anything about preventing NPC corporations from anchoring cans or secure cans in space. Or the idea of NPC restricted lab slots. Every single disgruntled pilot is only focusing on the bounties. Interesting. Is it because you know damn well that you are abusing them? It is my opinion that you are aware of your abuse.

There is a part of me that would also suggest that players IN a NPC corp would be PROTECTED from bounties. Can't get them OR give them. Maybe the old system needs to be put back in place. NPC players need to have the old -2 secstatus in order to receive a bounty. I don't know. This is why the post was made. To discuss it. So, please wipe the foam from your mouth before you attack an idea or make accusations against me or my ideas.

Thank you.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#180 - 2013-02-05 03:11:46 UTC
Sol Weinstein wrote:
You will be given the same instructions as the other people: please read all the posts in this thread on all the pages.

I gave my reasons and I suggest you give the thread and posters the respect of reading them.

Thank you.



Not too far up the thread you said you updated the OP. Now I have to read through the entire 9 pages, hoping to not miss some small piece?

The fact that you maybe answered those questions 8 pages later is proof of your failure to outline your proposal (both it's justifications and fixes) in your original post.

Good luck however with your arguments. Happily given your inability to formulate anything in a concise manner couple with your overly arrogant attitude will pretty much ensure something this stupid will never get implemented.