These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

Forum Index

EVE Forums » EVE Communication Center » EVE General Discussion » Why risk versus reward doesn't matter

Topic is locked indefinitely.

First pagePrevious page1011121314Next pageLast page

Why risk versus reward doesn't matter
Author

Previous Topic Next Topic

Murk Paradox

Ministry of War

Amarr Empire

Likes received: 760

#221 - 2013-04-06 13:47:23 UTC

Lord Zim wrote:

Murk Paradox wrote:

What crime is prevented by Concord?

Remove concord from hisec for a week, and you'll soon find out.

You mean the suicide ganker who killed someone would just be a ganker killing more people?

Trust me, if I could remove Concord, I would. But that's not the point. It's not up to me.

It's also a discussion (as of now) of comparing, which again, is terrible.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Lord Zim

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 2,451

#222 - 2013-04-06 13:50:18 UTC

Ace Uoweme wrote:

Nope.

If there was an explosion at a plant, and people are nearby and not moving out, you bet the cops will do what they have to to clear the zone. Perfectly innocent people even, but the zone is dangerous and room is needed for emergency personel.

And in the eve universe, people put less value at a life. You want to stay in a dangerous area? Sure, go right ahead.

Ace Uoweme wrote:

He doesn't need a warrant. He doesn't even need suspicion. To maintain law and order he can and will pull his weapon even on innocent folks to get them to obey. It's not the time or place to be a troll or worse.

In other words, let's make concord randomly stop and frisk innocents, hell let's even have them blow some of them up and claim "his ship looked just like the perp's, honest! what do you mean the perp's ship was a SUV and this is a small hatchback?", just like RL police.

I'm sure that'll be fun.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Lord Zim

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 2,451

#223 - 2013-04-06 13:56:32 UTC

Murk Paradox wrote:

They would if they were there. Are you saying Concord should just have patrols and be stationed at every poinjt of interest? Because the secodn you fired you're first shot you'd get blown up.

Does RL police have presence everywhere, at all times? No? Shockingly, nor does concord.

Murk Paradox wrote:

But that's not protection is it? It's punishment. It's avenging the transgressor. Since you shot that person in the face, and he died, hence why you got punished, they didn't really protect now did they?

And that's just like RL police putting someone in the slammer for shooting someone in the face.

Murk Paradox wrote:

You mean the suicide ganker who killed someone would just be a ganker killing more people?

You'd see that "that ganker" would kill everything he could get a warpscrambler on, not just a select few he knew he could kill before concord came and blew him up.

Murk Paradox wrote:

Trust me, if I could remove Concord, I would. But that's not the point. It's not up to me.

No, you wouldn't, because it would kill off hisec. This "protection" you claim concord doesn't provide is all that's keeping hisec from turning into a wasteland.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Murk Paradox

Ministry of War

Amarr Empire

Likes received: 760

#224 - 2013-04-06 13:57:31 UTC

Andski wrote:

Murk Paradox wrote:

What crime is prevented by Concord?

You can suicide gank somebody, but once you do, you can't suicide gank another person for 15 minutes because you'll get concorded. You also can't turn a grid into a bloodbath because anyone who engages while CONCORD sticks around is going to get instagibbed. I'm also not going to use Talos gangs to kill every mission runner in sight because unless they're shiny fit, I'm throwing a substantial amount of isk away each time.

So yes, CONCORD does prevent quite a bit of "crime" directly and indirectly HTH

Then why would you suicide gank that person in the first place? The crime wasn't prevented. It was cold, calculated, and worth the risk.

You KNEW you would get punished, and the punishment did not fit the crime. You KNEW there would be a loss, and took a chance that the reward would cover it.

You even KNEW it was going to happen and chose a less expensive ship that you knew could get the job done. Which is where Concord is teaching you to be a better ganker and protected YOUR assets, not the victim's.

Otherwise you COULD turn it into a bloodbath because of everyone else shooting you. That's everyone else doing Concord's job for them. Again, pisspoor "protection".

Concord does deter from most people from just shooting wildly sure. Highsec is "civilized" don't forget (=P) and it's known to be "bad" to shoot people.

But to pretend that it's protection is folly.

Murk Paradox

Ministry of War

Amarr Empire

Likes received: 760

#225 - 2013-04-06 13:59:27 UTC

Lord Zim wrote:

Ace Uoweme wrote:

Lord Zim wrote:

Murk Paradox wrote:

What crime is prevented by Concord?

Remove concord from hisec for a week, and you'll soon find out.

Not much would change, because players would be doing what they already are doing.

So much for prevention.

Oh, so you think hisec wouldn't turn into a total bloodbath until people stopped undocking, because griefers would kill everyone?

That's also proving how Concord ends up as a biproduct helping criminals become better at their job. Weeds out the weaklings.

The victims still die. The criminals get smarter.

Who loses more? The victim.

"Protection".

Ha.


Lord Zim Gallente Federation Likes received: 2,451	#226 - 2013-04-06 14:00:10 UTC Murk Paradox wrote: But to pretend that it's protection is folly. Again, remove concord and watch hisec turn into a wasteland because this "protection" you claim doesn't exist is all that's keeping hisec alive. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home. RIP Vile Rat

Ace Uoweme

Republic Military School

Minmatar Republic

Likes received: 517

#227 - 2013-04-06 14:00:11 UTC

Lord Zim wrote:

Oh, so you think hisec wouldn't turn into a total bloodbath until people stopped undocking, because griefers would kill everyone?

They already do kill. That's not prevention.

If CONCORD was to actually protect against and prevent crime -- in a game -- that wouldn't happen. Devs can program the game to instant kill offenders the second they engage in offensive acts (like disarming the safety to attack a none criminal or non war-decced player).

So it's a very moot point.

Issue here is the protection and prevention is selective and slow. It's allowing the suicide ganker to gank before CONCORD arrives. Coming after the effect to administer justice, is ineffective protection and prevention, especially in a game where CONCORD could have instant warp and gib weapons.

It's selective as a means to allow it to happen. Much like issuing service weapons without ammo and taking a scenic route to get to the crime scene.

_"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." _ ~George Orwell

Lord Zim

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 2,451

#228 - 2013-04-06 14:07:02 UTC

Ace Uoweme wrote:

They already do kill. That's not prevention.

Except the fact that everyone else ISN'T killed is a direct result of this prevention. Remove concord from hisec, and hisec turning into a complete and utter wasteland would be the direct result of the removal of this "protection" you claim doesn't exist.

Ace Uoweme wrote:

Issue here is the protection and prevention is selective and slow. It's allowing the suicide ganker to gank before CONCORD arrives.

No, the "protection" isn't "selective", nor is it "slow". If I blow up someone, I will get blown up, and the only people saying it's "slow" are the ones who want hisec to become a carebear's promised land of fluff.

CCP has specifically, and repeatedly, said that if I want to kill someone in hisec, I shall have the opportunity to do so. Your idea of "concord shall blow up anyone who does anything aggressive" implies that hisec aggression should be impossible in any way, shape or form. You can **** right off with that implication.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

baltec1

Bat Country

Pandemic Horde

Likes received: 19,001

#229 - 2013-04-06 14:09:02 UTC

Murk Paradox wrote:

Look up what M0o did when you could tank corcord. Tell me again that the victim of today loses more than back then.

Andski

Science and Trade Institute

Caldari State

Likes received: 11,585

#230 - 2013-04-06 14:17:29 UTC | Edited by: Andski

Murk Paradox wrote:

words

i said prevention, not protection

thanks for reading my post

it doesn't prevent you from being ganked it prevents hisec from becoming a Darkfall-esque fragfest

big difference there i dunno if you can see it

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." - Abrazzar

Murk Paradox

Ministry of War

Amarr Empire

Likes received: 760

#231 - 2013-04-06 14:20:13 UTC | Edited by: Murk Paradox

Lord Zim wrote:

Murk Paradox wrote:

They would if they were there. Are you saying Concord should just have patrols and be stationed at every poinjt of interest? Because the secodn you fired you're first shot you'd get blown up.

Does RL police have presence everywhere, at all times? No? Shockingly, nor does concord.

They do for every single person who commits a crime. Don't believe me, get a fleet of 20 gankers and have them all shoot 1 target in highsec. 20 concord will show up. Because Concord punishes, not protects. Twisting words as "indirect" or "deterrent is protection" doesn't save the one who died. Sorry.

Lord Zim wrote:

And that's just like RL police putting someone in the slammer for shooting someone in the face.

Yes, that proves my point. Punishment not protection. But does not prevent the original.

Lord Zim wrote:

You'd see that "that ganker" would kill everything he could get a warpscrambler on, not just a select few he knew he could kill before concord came and blew him up.

That's just a mechanic of the fact it's a game, not RL, and without RL risks. Using RL is a bad comparison as we all know.

Lord Zim wrote:

No, you wouldn't, because it would kill off hisec. This "protection" you claim concord doesn't provide is all that's keeping hisec from turning into a wasteland.

I don't like highsec. Just because I'm in a discussion about a mechanic or talking about poor mechanics or word wrapping, does not mean I am pro highsec.

Lord Zim

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 2,451

#232 - 2013-04-06 14:24:55 UTC | Edited by: Lord Zim

Murk Paradox wrote:

Nor should it. Hisec is supposed to be safer than low or null, it's not supposed to be safe. That's just the idea of some fluffy carebear who dreams of a fluffy la-la land where nothing bad happens. **** that.

Murk Paradox wrote:

Yes, that proves my point. Punishment not protection. But does not prevent the original.

And here I thought your point was that concord was so different from RL police.

Murk Paradox wrote:

I don't like highsec. Just because I'm in a discussion about a mechanic or talking about poor mechanics or word wrapping, does not mean I am pro highsec.

Considering hisec is where literally everything is made, losing hisec would have a hilarious effect on your playstyle as well, and probably kill off the game as a whole.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Murk Paradox

Ministry of War

Amarr Empire

Likes received: 760

#233 - 2013-04-06 14:31:32 UTC

Lord Zim wrote:

Murk Paradox wrote:

But to pretend that it's protection is folly.

Again, remove concord and watch hisec turn into a wasteland because this "protection" you claim doesn't exist is all that's keeping hisec alive.

But the punishment is still there. YOU remove Concord. I'm ok with that.

Lord Zim

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 2,451

#234 - 2013-04-06 14:33:44 UTC

Murk Paradox wrote:

Lord Zim wrote:

Murk Paradox wrote:

But to pretend that it's protection is folly.

Again, remove concord and watch hisec turn into a wasteland because this "protection" you claim doesn't exist is all that's keeping hisec alive.

But the punishment is still there. YOU remove Concord. I'm ok with that.

That statement doesn't even make sense.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Murk Paradox

Ministry of War

Amarr Empire

Likes received: 760

#235 - 2013-04-06 14:34:43 UTC

baltec1 wrote:

Murk Paradox wrote:

Look up what M0o did when you could tank corcord. Tell me again that the victim of today loses more than back then.

You mean when cops used to walk around with just billy clubs and used horses to go posse up and chase the horse wranglers? Oh wait, different time and place, got it =P.

Tell me baltec1, if Concord "protects" why do you still gank freighters? How is the freighter protected?

Murk Paradox

Ministry of War

Amarr Empire

Likes received: 760

#236 - 2013-04-06 14:39:00 UTC

Look, I know you guys want to think I'm complaining about Concord. I'm not. Take it away, make it everywhere. I don't care one whit either way. I'll play the game however it's presented to me.

But don't for one second pretend it's anything other than it is. It's not the real police. It's not comparable to the real police.

I don't even like highsec. I hate the new crimewatch system. I hate changing my safety to different modes whether I feel like podding someone or not. I can't stand station games, I hate how busy trade hubs are.

All of which has only one thing to do with Concord... and that's the fact they are both highsec.

But when you have someone say "oh look it's like RL police" and then say after "see, comparing to RL is bad" I'm going to point it out.

Stain and Syndicate do not have Concord. Moot point to imply I care about Concord.

Lowsec roams I have laughable gateguns to worry about if I go GCC, unless I'm in a frigate then I care.

Beyond that... go ahead, remove Concord. Take the **** out. Burn Jita. I'll come help if you want.

But a game is a game is a game is not real life. Stop trying to insist that you need to compare.

I do applaud you for trying todefend your buddy, but you should just let him man up instead.

Murk Paradox

Ministry of War

Amarr Empire

Likes received: 760

#237 - 2013-04-06 14:40:37 UTC

Andski wrote:

Murk Paradox wrote:

words

Join in the conversation or see your way out. The comparison is the fact people are saying Concord protects. We are disagreeing with that.

I don't think you noticed the difference, maybe you should.

But thanks for reading my post sir.

Murk Paradox

Ministry of War

Amarr Empire

Likes received: 760

#238 - 2013-04-06 14:41:21 UTC

Lord Zim wrote:

Murk Paradox wrote:

Lord Zim wrote:

Murk Paradox wrote:

But to pretend that it's protection is folly.

Again, remove concord and watch hisec turn into a wasteland because this "protection" you claim doesn't exist is all that's keeping hisec alive.

But the punishment is still there. YOU remove Concord. I'm ok with that.

That statement doesn't even make sense.

You keep saying "I" need to remove Concord. I'm saying you need to.

baltec1

Bat Country

Pandemic Horde

Likes received: 19,001

#239 - 2013-04-06 14:44:07 UTC

Murk Paradox wrote:

I'll let you in on a secret.

Over any given month we gank less than one percent of all freighter traffic, infact its more like 0.001%. The fact that concord is there is enough to protect just about all frighters in high sec.

Also, in the uk we still use battons and horses.

Lord Zim

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 2,451

#240 - 2013-04-06 14:45:20 UTC

Murk Paradox wrote:

How is the freighter protected?

Does every freighter, everywhere, get ganked, every day? No? Well, that's because of the protection afforded to it by concord.

Murk Paradox wrote:

But don't for one second pretend it's anything other than it is. It's not the real police. It's not comparable to the real police.

Except "the real police" does nothing until you've actually committed a crime, just like concord.

Murk Paradox wrote:

But when you have someone say "oh look it's like RL police" and then say after "see, comparing to RL is bad" I'm going to point it out.

It is "like RL police" in the form that they don't shoot someone before they've shot someone else.

Murk Paradox wrote:

Join in the conversation or see your way out. The comparison is the fact people are saying Concord protects. We are disagreeing with that.

And you're wrong, since concord does protect.

Murk Paradox wrote:

You keep saying "I" need to remove Concord. I'm saying you need to.

"You" apparently need to have concord removed to actually see the protection which concord imparts on hisec.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

First pagePrevious page1011121314Next pageLast page