These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Recruitment and Awoxers
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Adunh Slavy
#21 - 2013-05-29 21:37:47 UTC
Perhaps at first glance, this may not sound like a way to fix the awox issue, but would go some distance to helping reduce the incentive - FIX CORP ROLES!!!

If corp roles went beyond 16 bits, there could even be a corp role for "allow awox ass-hattery" so you could have inter corp tournaments and other such things with out having to worry about that one guy that likes to bring a disco noctis, hold full of cap boosters, to a friendly frig brawl.

Not to mention allowing new players into a corp and letting them do things with out having to worry about a newbie accidentally screwing something up.

For a game that relies so heavily on social links, to maintain subscriptions, you'd think this sort of thing would be a priority. Guess corp roles just aren't as sexy as blinking lights.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Dyvim Slorm
Coven of the Morrigan
#22 - 2013-05-29 21:39:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Dyvim Slorm
Digital Messiah wrote:
The easiest solution to awoxers is making engagement rights the same as non corp mates. It should be an option to allow someone or your corp to openly engage you. Not something that is automatic. Literally a mechanic that works to only grief members. Unless I am missing the need for friendly fire?


Friendly fire is good for testing ship setups, hardening up newbies and for corp tournies. I don't think it would be good to get rid of it, but possibly have a switch so it can only happen when the CEO sets it maybe.

Still, I take Andski's point, maybe do some checking first to eliminate most of the grief.
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2013-05-29 22:02:41 UTC
Dyvim Slorm wrote:
Freighdee Katt wrote:

Or CCP could just fix this incredibly stupid mechanic. Problem solved.


I think this was stopped because if you were wardecced you could kick the player while they were in space but the corp tag wasn't updated, so if attacked the attacker got concorded even though the target looked valid. There may have been other issues as well, can't remember now.

Broken mechanic is broken. The fix for it is to fix it.

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Tiven loves Tansien
Doomheim
#24 - 2013-05-30 00:54:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Tiven loves Tansien
We have corporations in EVE, not guilds, clans or families.


Lives are being lost and ruined when trust is given to the wrong people.



Corporations get screwed every day in real life when trust was given to the wrong people (Yahoo).




Now tell me a good reason WHY SHOULD THIS NOT HAPPEN IN EVE?





learn to deal with it if you are a little yellow bird and can't EVEN TRY to prevent it
Adunh Slavy
#25 - 2013-05-30 01:28:37 UTC
Tiven loves Tansien wrote:

Corporations get screwed every day in real life when trust was given to the wrong people (Yahoo).

Now tell me a good reason WHY SHOULD THIS NOT HAPPEN IN EVE?



Real life has things like, courts, judges, jails and a real thing called, dying.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Tarsas Phage
Sniggerdly
#26 - 2013-05-30 02:11:46 UTC
Because snuggling up inside a corp is suppose to be safe, care-free and riskless because that's the Eve way?

More like "I don't like surprises which make me feel endangered, thus we must change game mechanics to compensate for a potential source of disruption in my daily care-free routine"
Lady Areola Fappington
#27 - 2013-05-30 02:55:31 UTC
From a friendly AWOXer to corps who want to be more on-the-ball:

Anyone who's perfectly willing to hand over a full API at the drop of the hat should be suspect.

I mean, it's not like I have a stable of perfectly clean alts just waiting to join your newbie friendly mission-running and mining corps....

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
Adunh Slavy
#28 - 2013-05-30 03:29:17 UTC
Tarsas Phage wrote:
Because snuggling up inside a corp is suppose to be safe, care-free and riskless because that's the Eve way?


Oh are you afraid if your alt can't crap on people your game will be ruined? Is being an ass that important to you?

There's a big difference between war decing someone and having to deal with **** poor code.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Xearal
Dead's Prostitutes
The Initiative.
#29 - 2013-05-30 03:43:19 UTC
'Friendly Fire' is also a good mechanic to discipline people sometimes.

For instance, when someone is flying a freighter/industrial during wartime without scouts and whatnot, this is basicly asking your wardeccers to come shoot the pinata. Better to kill the pinata and deny it to them.

Besides, where's the fun in not having the possibilities of some corp member suddenly opening fire on you?

Like the OP said, HTFU and do your homework. This kills off 90% of the idiots that try this.
Same goes for corp thieves etc. I know of a couple, and I tend to annoy them by informing whatever corp they join that they are a corp thief.

Does railgun ammunition come in Hollow Point?
Digital Messiah
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2013-05-30 04:44:00 UTC
Dyvim Slorm wrote:
Digital Messiah wrote:
The easiest solution to awoxers is making engagement rights the same as non corp mates. It should be an option to allow someone or your corp to openly engage you. Not something that is automatic. Literally a mechanic that works to only grief members. Unless I am missing the need for friendly fire?


Friendly fire is good for testing ship setups, hardening up newbies and for corp tournies. I don't think it would be good to get rid of it, but possibly have a switch so it can only happen when the CEO sets it maybe.

Still, I take Andski's point, maybe do some checking first to eliminate most of the grief.

Before I respond lets talk about risk vs reward of a corp awoxer
Pros:
1. May receive a ransom fee, medal, or kill mails.
2. Is able to loot some of the items from the destroyed ship/s.
3. Can cause endless havoc if abuse of "flying in space" is used properly 23 / 7.
4. Can look up every member and age in corp beforehand. Intel is practically free to see if anyone will be able to stop them.

Con:
1. Receives a corp history littered with names and short duration.
2. May die in the process, will most likely get away with pod. "hope every corp has an interceptor pilot"

You tell me if the risk vs reward really matches up?

Changing corp to automatically have concord rights in my opinion is more like how eve is in "HIGH SECURITY" space. If you are in 0.0 - 0.4 it would be the same system. If you want to suicide gank corp mates than you still can. You will just take a security hit and get concorded. So maybe the awoxers and hazers should HTFU?

Something clever
Capt Starfox
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#31 - 2013-05-30 05:08:27 UTC
Digital Messiah wrote:

Pros:
1. May receive a ransom fee, medal, or kill mails.
2. Is able to loot some of the items from the destroyed ship/s.
3. Can cause endless havoc if abuse of "flying in space" is used properly 23 / 7.
4. Can look up every member and age in corp beforehand. Intel is practically free to see if anyone will be able to stop them.

Con:
1. Receives a corp history littered with names and short duration.
2. May die in the process, will most likely get away with pod. "hope every corp has an interceptor pilot"

You tell me if the risk vs reward really matches up?

Changing corp to automatically have concord rights in my opinion is more like how eve is in "HIGH SECURITY" space. If you are in 0.0 - 0.4 it would be the same system. If you want to suicide gank corp mates than you still can. You will just take a security hit and get concorded. So maybe the awoxers and hazers should HTFU?


Sounds to me like you need to HTFU. Yours Cons are drastically too short. An awoxer, once exposed and littered with a dreadfully long Corp history will find that it becomes more and more difficult to infiltrate Corps. Thus, the Career of an awoxer is almost always guaranteed to inevitably end at some point. Unless the player has lots of patients and great lies. Once the player decides that it has become too difficult to work as an awoxer, that player is doomed to spend the rest of his/her days in an NPC Corp, what fun. (Yes, there are certain players who will continue to awox no matter what and those individuals once accepted into a Corp do deserve a medal).

So I would say that there is a 3 and a 4 on the Cons list that you failed to mention, probably because you haven't tried awoxing before, so you don't fully appreciate what you're talking about.

Abandon all hope ye who x up in fleet
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#32 - 2013-05-30 05:25:48 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Tarsas Phage wrote:
Because snuggling up inside a corp is suppose to be safe, care-free and riskless because that's the Eve way?


Oh are you afraid if your alt can't crap on people your game will be ruined? Is being an ass that important to you?

There's a big difference between war decing someone and having to deal with **** poor code.


There is a big difference between a War Dec and an AWOX. One is Declaring war, the other is a form of espionage (assassination, specifically).

Why shouldn't people you invite into your trust be able to betray that trust in a game whose cornerstone is "the risk of having your day ruined by other people"?

"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built and we want to keep that (infact, this is much more representative of the consensus opinion within CCP)." -CCP Solomon

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Digital Messiah
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2013-05-30 05:58:46 UTC
Capt Starfox wrote:

Sounds to me like you need to HTFU. Yours Cons are drastically too short. An awoxer, once exposed and littered with a dreadfully long Corp history will find that it becomes more and more difficult to infiltrate Corps. Thus, the Career of an awoxer is almost always guaranteed to inevitably end at some point. Unless the player has lots of patients and great lies. Once the player decides that it has become too difficult to work as an awoxer, that player is doomed to spend the rest of his/her days in an NPC Corp, what fun. (Yes, there are certain players who will continue to awox no matter what and those individuals once accepted into a Corp do deserve a medal).

So I would say that there is a 3 and a 4 on the Cons list that you failed to mention, probably because you haven't tried awoxing before, so you don't fully appreciate what you're talking about.


Look I get that it is a game mechanic, but it is one for the simple reason that CCP won't take a look at corp roles / rights. I am asking they change the roles. And you are right I have never been an awoxer. I like to earn my kill mails with people I like. I also don't like creating characters so i can someday throw them away or become like psychotic monk... You say you are entitled to this form of game play but you strip another desired game play from everyone else. Why are you being so closed minded and forceful to make everyone play by your views?

Corp shaming is on the same terms of **** shaming. You are blaming the injured party to find a solution to problems they didn't create nor wanted. But why would I expect anything less? It is a video game however. And as such can be coded so that everyone is happy. Don't like my take on the issue? Than you should come up with a solution more practical than mine. Also with a majority of players being in high sec, carebears, and all that, don't assume everyone who plays eve wants your play style and views.

Something clever
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#34 - 2013-05-30 06:39:34 UTC
Digital Messiah wrote:
You say you are entitled to this form of game play but you strip another desired game play from everyone else. Why are you being so closed minded and forceful to make everyone play by your views?


Irony....



Quote:
Corp shaming is on the same terms of **** shaming. You are blaming the injured party to find a solution to problems they didn't create nor wanted. But why would I expect anything less? It is a video game however. And as such can be coded so that everyone is happy. Don't like my take on the issue? Than you should come up with a solution more practical than mine. Also with a majority of players being in high sec, carebears, and all that, don't assume everyone who plays eve wants your play style and views.


Nope, it's quite different, and trying to conflate the two is just bad.
You literally signed up for this. When you sign up for and pay to play a game, you sign up for and pay for all parts of that game. This is a game mechanic that you have every opportunity to know about and many tools to counter.

Also,
CCP Wrangler wrote:

EVE is a dark and harsh world, you're supposed to feel a bit worried and slightly angry when you log in, you're not supposed to feel like you're logging in to a happy, happy, fluffy, fluffy lala land filled with fun and adventures, that's what hello kitty online is for.


If you're looking for a game coded so that everyone is happy all the time, you've found the wrong game.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2013-05-30 06:50:33 UTC
Andski wrote:
If you can't be bothered to protect your members from awoxers by checking on who you recruit before simply clicking them in, you don't deserve to run a corp. Look at their killboards, look at their history and stop asking CCP to shield you from the consequences of your incredibly bad decisions.

perfect

and completely missed the point of the thread

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Tah'ris Khlador
Space Ghosts.
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#36 - 2013-05-30 07:09:08 UTC
Digital Messiah wrote:
A simple and effective method to leave a pilot black listed is to post on http://evewho.com/. Posting a screen shot will help increase validity of players such as Maxwell Hekami or SharpNine Sasen. For those who don't want it to be harder to be an awoxer, I'm sorry. For those who hate spending thirty minutes to an hour contacting old corps, checking countless api's, looking for information that isn't there. Use eve who and make it easier for everyone else.


People read EVE-Who character comments? Shocked Going to have to start posting on randoms about how they're safari alts.

Member of the Pink Pony Killboard Padding Alliance
Inxentas Ultramar
Ultramar Independent Contracting
#37 - 2013-05-30 07:49:45 UTC
I agree corp roles are extremely limiting in what you can do with them. On the other hand I feel they are adequate to protect yourself against thieves and awoxers. Just as computer security works by not making it impossible, but by making it as time-consuming and boring to awox or steal from you.

I feel the best weapon agains betrayal is to base enablement on previous selfless contributions: make sure that you only put people in places of power that would see their own efforts and work destroyed should they betray your group. It's easy to steal from a faceless scrub you don't know, then it is from people who's company you genuinely enjoy and with who you can have a really good time. You won't prevent deliberate awoxers by involving people as much as you can, but it prevents discontent members who might turn on you for personal profit once they get bored.

As soon as an awox happens and you can't kick the dude from the corp untill you pod him or he logs, you are dealing with exactly the same situation (in space) as being wardecced by a single individual. Except that you don't get a 24hr heads up, but agression rules are the same. Unless you are dealing with half your corp going awox on you, incidental infiltrations are, just like wardecs, a method to test your resolve and ability for damage control. Working as intended I'd say!
Capt Starfox
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#38 - 2013-05-30 12:51:02 UTC
Digital Messiah wrote:

Look I get that it is a game mechanic, but it is one for the simple reason that CCP won't take a look at corp roles / rights. I am asking they change the roles. And you are right I have never been an awoxer. I like to earn my kill mails with people I like. I also don't like creating characters so i can someday throw them away or become like psychotic monk... You say you are entitled to this form of game play but you strip another desired game play from everyone else. Why are you being so closed minded and forceful to make everyone play by your views?

Corp shaming is on the same terms of **** shaming. You are blaming the injured party to find a solution to problems they didn't create nor wanted. But why would I expect anything less? It is a video game however. And as such can be coded so that everyone is happy. Don't like my take on the issue? Than you should come up with a solution more practical than mine. Also with a majority of players being in high sec, carebears, and all that, don't assume everyone who plays eve wants your play style and views.


I never said that I personally felt entitled to play Eve as an awoxer. You're right, at the end of the day this is just a video game. You are more than welcome to your opinions on this issue; however, when you start talking about "removing" game mechanics that allow awoxing you're also going to get comments from those against that type of mentality.

Believe it or not I spent some time considering this. If I were a CEO of a Corp and I was recruiting, I would personally check the api's of all applicants. Those who seemed to pass I would invite to teamspeak or mumble. Those who didn't I would ask questions pertaining to whatever it was that made me suspicious (Industrialist with no indy skills for example). On TS/mumber I would try to get to know the person a little bit, nothing crazy 5-10 minute conversation to try and see if my Corp is really what the applicant is looking for. During this stage I would be conducting background checks and asking additional questions that may come up.

But then again, I'm a negative ten pirate who doesn't trust anyone in this game. It's easy for me to understand what the proper way to recruit is vs. what is not. Corps/CEO's who don't check api's and hit the "accept" button, it is their fault why their Corps get awoxed; no one else. I'm not trying to enforce my style of gameplay, merely trying to help people understand that they need to be aware of their surroundings, put forth the effort and actually check what they're getting into (accepting), and who's fault it really is. Don't get mad at your awoxer, get mad at your CEO, or whoever handles Corp applications.

Abandon all hope ye who x up in fleet
Adunh Slavy
#39 - 2013-05-30 13:32:38 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:

Why shouldn't people you invite into your trust be able to betray that trust in a game whose cornerstone is "the risk of having your day ruined by other people"?


And CCP wonders why so many new players can't find corps and leave the game after a few months.

Forcing trust is not a good mechanic, let the awoxer earn his right, not just be handed to him.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Adunh Slavy
#40 - 2013-05-30 13:38:35 UTC
Capt Starfox wrote:

....
You're right, at the end of the day this is just a video game.
....


Followed by a description of lots of effort that isn't all that much fun.

It's a game, not a job.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt