These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Restrict NPC Corporation Posting Abilities.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#221 - 2014-05-19 18:53:11 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Being able to war dec a corp thus its players creates player driven content. Eve is all about player driven content. So that small thing can actually lead to much bigger things, the butterfly effect.

As you have said, currently there is so little disadvantage of being in a NPC corp that people do not bother bother to fight for what they have built, they simply leave, wait and then rejoin or not even bother joining another corp.

How is this a good thing?

NPC corps have lead to player driven corps in HS being worthless.
No, that's not what I said at all. I said it saves me from having to press a few buttons whenever a dec comes in for a tax, both are similarly trivial. Also player driven corps are already worthless on their own. That's why people spend their time in NPC corps. Player corps outside of actually owning in space assets are just a liability with no change to behavior or gameplay.

Prince Kobol wrote:
Rubbish. The reason people do not defend against a war dec is because the penalty of leaving their corp and staying in a NPC corp is nil. On top of this those people quickly learn that it is easier to stay in a NPC corp thus they begin to have the mind set you have now. That is why NPC corps are a negative force in the game. They create risk averse players like yourself.

In you world fighting is never an option because it is always easier just to run and hide. This means the notion of even working with other players is alien to you.

If the penalty of NPC Corps was high enough then the option of defending what you have built becomes the priority. The need to talk to other groups, to band together and work with others becomes the more attractive option for all. This then in turn teaches players how to work and fight together and from there anything can happen.
This is completely wrong. The reason people don't fight is because they have nothing to gain by it and will lose more than if they did nothing at all. It has nothing to do with risk aversion, but rather the capacity for simple logic. They have no reason to expend time and resources for a fight thrust upon them arbitrarily against an opponent who has very likely ensured all of their own vulnerabilities are safely out of harm's way.

NPC corp membership is on no way responsible for that state of affairs. If you got rid of them completely it wouldn't provide a single reason to fight. This is especially true since most corps have nothing to lose by doing nothing. There isn't anything to defend. If what you have consists of your assets locked in a station and your activities then avoiding the dec IS the best way to defend what you have.

You can call this risk averse all you want, but in the end it's the smart thing to do for people who don't want a fight. Putting them in small collectives with the same rules doesn't change this.
Marsha Mallow
#222 - 2014-05-19 19:18:19 UTC
Meytal wrote:
I actually considered this in my previously reply, but like ISD LackOfFaith mentioned, it's easily to manipulate if you have 10,000 monkeys at your disposal. In fact, that would be even better for the large blocs than what they're asking for now.

EVE is just too small and too polarized of a community for something like that to work, and many of the game features and mechanics just aren't designed with the idea that a HUGE group of people would band together and work to game the system, unfortunately. :-/

I like parts of your suggestion, but I suspect it won't be enacted for various reasons. The ISD response re non-trivial code changes being unlikely at the moment is a shame (we really need a view first unread post button sometime) and the forums in general seem in need of development.

If you strip out the karma elements of the proposal, it's effectively just automating forum gags based upon the number of times moderated. Don't see any reason how many likes people get should affect gags anyway, that's almost allowing people to abuse the rules provided they are well liked, and per your comments it'd be quite easy to manipulate. It's probably too harsh a policy to realistically expect implementation (having said that so is the proposal in the OP).

A lot of people are scrubbed as part of chains of responses which have gone off topic, or they are quoting another rule breaking post, but often replying themselves within the rules. It would discourage people from responding to those types of posts and inadvertantly allowing discussions to be pushed off course, but they'd go berserk on being gagged, and I'm not sure there's a way to automate working out who is at fault in those scenarios. You could exclude everyone from being counted if their posts tie upto an earlier one scrubbed - but that'd allow everyone replying to offtopic posts to break the rules too. This sort of thing really highlights the difficulties in automating both moderation and issuing penalties - based on the tools at hand and varieties of infraction it looks like it needs to be a person making the final decision.

Kobol and Tyberius - with all due respect, discussion of NPC corps is related to this but not really the focus of the discussion. I'm sure plenty of people would contribute to debating NPC corps if you stick up a thread for it :)

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day
Meytal
Doomheim
#223 - 2014-05-19 19:49:18 UTC
Marsha Mallow wrote:
I like parts of your suggestion, but I suspect it won't be enacted for various reasons. The ISD response re non-trivial code changes being unlikely at the moment is a shame (we really need a view first unread post button sometime) and the forums in general seem in need of development.

Yeah, you're probably right. And, btw, "View First Unread Post" would be absolutely amazing.

Marsha Mallow wrote:
If you strip out the karma elements of the proposal, it's effectively just automating forum gags based upon the number of times moderated. Don't see any reason how many likes people get should affect gags anyway, that's almost allowing people to abuse the rules provided they are well liked, and per your comments it'd be quite easy to manipulate. It's probably too harsh a policy to realistically expect implementation (having said that so is the proposal in the OP).

In a sense it is an automatic forum gag, but instead of being run by community rule, a la Slashdot, it would be driven by moderators (ISD, CCP, etc), the ones we generally trust to be more impartial than the average troll.

Something else I considered was tying all EVE communication together, since it's somewhat similar. It might be more encouraging for someone to keep his or her forum troll alt under control if it had a chance to impact using Corp chat or Fleet chat in-game. I don't know if that's going too far or not though.

But yeah, the non-trivial code changes would seem to make things less likely to happen :-/
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#224 - 2014-05-19 19:58:24 UTC
Meytal wrote:
hmskrecik wrote:
ISD LackOfFaith wrote:
hmskrecik wrote:
Maybe you want to take a look at moderation and metamoderation as implemented on slashdot.org site. Probably is not perfect but seems to be working so far.

That's an even more non-trivial change to the system, considering Slashdot uses a nested comment system, not a linear thread system like the Eve Forums do.. Also, posters on the Eve Forums have personal agendas which may (will) shine through, especially since Eve players actually have stuff to gain/lose partly based on what goes on in the forum. So, it might work, or it might not, but it's hard to code regardless.

Well, I didn't say to use slash engine. :) But just take a look how moderation there works. Maybe it's not something which could be implanted here but maybe there will be an idea or two worth stealing. Though probably even then it would mean major rework of EVE forum.

(For the record, I wouldn't say no to nested, thread-like comments)

I actually considered this in my previously reply, but like ISD LackOfFaith mentioned, it's easily to manipulate if you have 10,000 monkeys at your disposal. In fact, that would be even better for the large blocs than what they're asking for now.

EVE is just too small and too polarized of a community for something like that to work, and many of the game features and mechanics just aren't designed with the idea that a HUGE group of people would band together and work to game the system, unfortunately. :-/

I'm not claiming slashdot moderation would perfectly work on EVE forums, or that it would work at all. I'm just saying to look at it so maybe some ideas appear.

As for manipulation, mind you there are not just posts moderated, the moderation votes are being scrutinized too. If you didn't delve into details I recommend you do, this system is quite clever.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#225 - 2014-05-20 03:43:19 UTC
afkalt wrote:


But none of that address the question of: If the trolling can be mitigated - what benefit does it bring?

It might even be better that peoples corps are hidden and posts are taken on merit.




@Prince Kobol: You know nothing about me, stop judging because I'm arguing the devils advocate and I can see the bigger picture. It's funny, you think I'm a risk averse carebear because I post with an ancient alt - so ancient it's never been through the portrait generator. But yes, I'm totally "hiding" in an NPC corp because I'm scared. It is simply a convenient mask which means my other business interests may go on unimpeded. I make an effort to not troll, to post constructive and considerately and for the most part I believe I do so.

As I've said, the forum issue is trolling - I see no point in changing stuff once that is fixed. The whole NPC corp issue is a different ballgame and it's not a debate I've any interest in partaking further in with you as you're fixated in your beliefs and there's little point in further discourse. These corps have a place in the game, that you hate that is your right, but I believe that place is useful.


You have to be kidding me, that question you pose is answered in the OP it will increase forum quality which makes it a more valuable resources for literally everyone in the game.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#226 - 2014-05-20 03:51:23 UTC
hmskrecik wrote:

Are you deliberately pretending to miss the point or my English is so bad? The point which I'm driving home is that things should be kept on their level: RL stuff in RL, game stuff in game and forum stuff in forum. And while we're at it, forum is not the part of the game, it's part of game community which while very closely related, is not the same thing.

And about Goon conspiracy, I am paranoid but not THAT paranoid. I just don't believe this solution will fulfill stated goal. It has been already shown in this thread that trolls WILL find way around it and at the same time you failed to dispel the concern that this tool may be used for other purposes, like silencing dissenting opinions for example. Which actually surprises me. From the handful of posts crafted by some Goons I got impression that you folks tend to have keen eye to spot possible misuses and unintended consequences. If you fail to see such obvious flaw it means either your eye in particular is not so keen, or that the consequence is intended.

P.S. Harassment is a choice too.


No I'm telling you that I don't agree with you and I think your position is wrong in this context. The EVE forums are only accessible with an active sub and provided by CCP therefore they are part of the game so anything that goes on in them is part of the game. However if you decide to go out of the game to something like tmc dot com forums then sure that can stay separate its not part of the game and not something provided for us by CCP.

Your goonspiracy bleeds through man just recognize it and remove it before you hit post.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#227 - 2014-05-20 03:54:35 UTC
Meytal wrote:
:words:


Meytal I want to take your posts seriously but, you have to drop the goonspiracy first. I'm not going to fall for one of the derails this thread was created to try and address.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#228 - 2014-05-20 03:55:32 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Being able to war dec a corp thus its players creates player driven content. Eve is all about player driven content. So that small thing can actually lead to much bigger things, the butterfly effect.

As you have said, currently there is so little disadvantage of being in a NPC corp that people do not bother bother to fight for what they have built, they simply leave, wait and then rejoin or not even bother joining another corp.

How is this a good thing?

NPC corps have lead to player driven corps in HS being worthless.
No, that's not what I said at all. I said it saves me from having to press a few buttons whenever a dec comes in for a tax, both are similarly trivial. Also player driven corps are already worthless on their own. That's why people spend their time in NPC corps. Player corps outside of actually owning in space assets are just a liability with no change to behavior or gameplay.

Prince Kobol wrote:
Rubbish. The reason people do not defend against a war dec is because the penalty of leaving their corp and staying in a NPC corp is nil. On top of this those people quickly learn that it is easier to stay in a NPC corp thus they begin to have the mind set you have now. That is why NPC corps are a negative force in the game. They create risk averse players like yourself.

In you world fighting is never an option because it is always easier just to run and hide. This means the notion of even working with other players is alien to you.

If the penalty of NPC Corps was high enough then the option of defending what you have built becomes the priority. The need to talk to other groups, to band together and work with others becomes the more attractive option for all. This then in turn teaches players how to work and fight together and from there anything can happen.
This is completely wrong. The reason people don't fight is because they have nothing to gain by it and will lose more than if they did nothing at all. It has nothing to do with risk aversion, but rather the capacity for simple logic. They have no reason to expend time and resources for a fight thrust upon them arbitrarily against an opponent who has very likely ensured all of their own vulnerabilities are safely out of harm's way.

NPC corp membership is on no way responsible for that state of affairs. If you got rid of them completely it wouldn't provide a single reason to fight. This is especially true since most corps have nothing to lose by doing nothing. There isn't anything to defend. If what you have consists of your assets locked in a station and your activities then avoiding the dec IS the best way to defend what you have.

You can call this risk averse all you want, but in the end it's the smart thing to do for people who don't want a fight. Putting them in small collectives with the same rules doesn't change this.


If there were advantages to player corporations over NPC corporations would you be so opposed to the change I suggested?

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#229 - 2014-05-20 04:13:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
La Nariz wrote:
If there were advantages to player corporations over NPC corporations would you be so opposed to the change I suggested?
I'd be less opposed, but not completely in favor. If there were more significant reasons to enter player corps such a change would be less likely to claim actual mains which happen to be in NPC corps with the same dragnet that was used to capture posting alts with purely negative intentions. Which is a big pro in your favor.

That said the primary issue still remains in that with the limits you propose it becomes impossible for older characters who still remain in an NPC corp to have on topic conversations regarding game mechanics outside of NC Q&A, which will degrade the use of that forums for real new players.

Of course depending on the difference in corp types the counter to that point may be that even on a posting alt it makes sense to have them in a corp and thus it becomes a natural workaround.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#230 - 2014-05-20 04:21:04 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
If there were advantages to player corporations over NPC corporations would you be so opposed to the change I suggested?
I'd be less opposed, but not completely in favor. If there were more significant reasons to enter player corps such a change would be less likely to claim actual mains which happen to be in NPC corps with the same dragnet that was used to capture posting alts with purely negative intentions. Which is a big pro in your favor.

That said the primary issue still remains in that with the limits you propose it becomes impossible for older characters who still remain in an NPC corp to have on topic conversations regarding game mechanics outside of NC Q&A, which will degrade the use of that forums for real new players.

Of course depending on the difference in corp types the counter to that point may be that even on a posting alt it makes sense to have them in a corp and thus it becomes a natural workaround.


Correct me if I'm wrong but, your main objection is that it will get some false positives and take mains instead of npc troll alts? How would you change this up to avoid that?

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#231 - 2014-05-20 04:55:26 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but, your main objection is that it will get some false positives and take mains instead of npc troll alts? How would you change this up to avoid that?

My objection is based in 3 parts:

1. Incidental removal of the ability for active characters to post
2. Degradation of the remaining forum sections where those characters can post since the majority of topics would be off topic for the areasleft available
3. Unlikely long term affect. Even in the case of CAOD it should be noted that the bar is set far higher in that a single player would need 4 accounts to meet CAOD posting requirements without help, but only an empty character slot and another 2 minutes compared to now to bypass the proposed change.

As far as how to avoid the one you specifically asked about, I'm not sure. Activity is a difficult bar as people do a lot of different things in the course of play and tagging and one aspect alone is begging to be exploited. Corp membership is easier to track, but arguably more east to "exploit".

Reputation is another potential way, but that usually serves more as a tool to bury dissent to commonly accepted ideas rather than promote good posting.

In the end I'd have to say I don't have an answer since everything can be gamed and is more likely to be gamed by people who want to be disruptive than those who don't.
Mithandra
B.O.P Supplication For Glorious
Dracarys.
#232 - 2014-05-20 08:07:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Mithandra
To sum the arguments up in this thread

I don't like it so CCP must change it (paraphrased from Wall of Text).

counter argument

STFU, Blah Blah HTFU (with exerpts from wall of text inserted into new wall of text)

Counter counter argument

you know nothing about me, I know what I'm talking about, I've played this game for blah blah years. New wall of text

Counter counter counter argument

This isn't real life, THIS IS EVE !!!!! (exerpts from walls of text, creating new wall of text)


If someone PAYS to play this game whether in plex or cash that account is entitled to post until they get hit with the ban stick. That's it.

*edit - The only change I can see being viable is to only allow posts from characters in training, but then that would be me forcing people to play the way I want them too. Bugger, fell on to my own sword there.

Eve is the dark haired, totally hot emo gothchild of the gaming community
Dave Stark
#233 - 2014-05-20 08:12:55 UTC
Mithandra wrote:
To sum the arguments up in this thread

I don't like it so CCP must change it (paraphrased from Wall of Text).

counter argument

STFU, Blah Blah HTFU (with exerpts from wall of text inserted into new wall of text)

Counter counter argument

you know nothing about me, I know what I'm talking about, I've played this game for blah blah years. New wall of text

Counter counter counter argument

This isn't real life, THIS IS EVE !!!!! (exerpts from walls of text, creating new wall of text)


If someone PAYS to play this game whether in plex or cash that account is entitled to post until they get hit with the ban stick. That's it.


no, they're allowed to use the services ccp allows them to use. if ccp say you can't post with npc forum alts, you won't be able to.
Shivanthar
#234 - 2014-05-20 08:19:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Shivanthar
Roll

The title should be "Post corporations' NPC-reducing abilities." Which is missioning and incursion finish rate. That would be more peaceful (=^.^=)

_Half _the lies they tell about me **aren't **true.
Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#235 - 2014-05-20 08:26:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
I'm strongly objecting to this nonsense. We have pretty overblown lobby of huge corporations'/alliances' interests already, and this one will finally end any opposition to their biased judgements. Thats aside from the fact that it's pretty infeasible one as its too easy to create corp just for yourself currently, and any wardecs to it could be easly circumented by killing it and creating another.

If you want to rise a quality of forum posts this much, it should be reasonable to restrict characters under 3 to 6 months of active subscription, but nothing even similar to what you offered. Basically, you are giving a right to speak their minds freely to some month old alts, but not to the 4 years eve veteran, who prefers playing solo now. Highly immature proposal, not to say troll kind one.

Edited: but idea to restrict posting to one specific selected character on each account seems legit to me.

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#236 - 2014-05-20 12:06:18 UTC
Ray Kyonhe wrote:
it should be reasonable to restrict characters under 3 to 6 months of active subscription, but nothing even similar to what you offered. Basically, you are giving a right to speak their minds freely to some month old alts, but not to the 4 years eve veteran, who prefers playing solo now.


Age of a character has absolutely no bearing on the quality of their posts - just look at Dinsdale, E-2C Hawkeye, etc.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#237 - 2014-05-20 16:05:37 UTC
Ray Kyonhe wrote:
I'm strongly objecting to this nonsense. We have pretty overblown lobby of huge corporations'/alliances' interests already, and this one will finally end any opposition to their biased judgements. Thats aside from the fact that it's pretty infeasible one as its too easy to create corp just for yourself currently, and any wardecs to it could be easly circumented by killing it and creating another.

If you want to rise a quality of forum posts this much, it should be reasonable to restrict characters under 3 to 6 months of active subscription, but nothing even similar to what you offered. Basically, you are giving a right to speak their minds freely to some month old alts, but not to the 4 years eve veteran, who prefers playing solo now. Highly immature proposal, not to say troll kind one.

Edited: but idea to restrict posting to one specific selected character on each account seems legit to me.


The :effort: wall is higher than a one man corporation as the ISD stated it takes 10+ active accounts in a corporation for people to be able to post in CAOD. My suggestion is applying that same restriction to all other forums except for new citizens, recruitment, character baazar and f&i.

The problem with your solution is that it is detrimental to newbies. Under your suggestion they cannot venture to new citizens to ask questions.

Why could you not play solo while using a corporation as a basic general chat channel? That would allow you and the other solo enthusiasts to play solo while still retaining posting abilities.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#238 - 2014-05-20 16:09:33 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
hmskrecik wrote:

Are you deliberately pretending to miss the point or my English is so bad? The point which I'm driving home is that things should be kept on their level: RL stuff in RL, game stuff in game and forum stuff in forum. And while we're at it, forum is not the part of the game, it's part of game community which while very closely related, is not the same thing.

And about Goon conspiracy, I am paranoid but not THAT paranoid. I just don't believe this solution will fulfill stated goal. It has been already shown in this thread that trolls WILL find way around it and at the same time you failed to dispel the concern that this tool may be used for other purposes, like silencing dissenting opinions for example. Which actually surprises me. From the handful of posts crafted by some Goons I got impression that you folks tend to have keen eye to spot possible misuses and unintended consequences. If you fail to see such obvious flaw it means either your eye in particular is not so keen, or that the consequence is intended.

P.S. Harassment is a choice too.


No I'm telling you that I don't agree with you and I think your position is wrong in this context. The EVE forums are only accessible with an active sub and provided by CCP therefore they are part of the game so anything that goes on in them is part of the game. However if you decide to go out of the game to something like tmc dot com forums then sure that can stay separate its not part of the game and not something provided for us by CCP.

Your goonspiracy bleeds through man just recognize it and remove it before you hit post.

I can assure you that the tinfoil lining my cap is there only at the firmest insistence of my doctor.

Even if I was a conspiracy loonie, this fact in itself still wouldn't invalidate my concerns which you consistently dodge parroting "it would improve forum quality".

First, you haven't shown how the improvement could be achieved given trolls could easily bypass this measure.

And second, you didn't come clear from possibility of its abuse reaching way beyond keeping quality of posts.

The fact that posting on forums require active subscription (this is the answer to your question, Shivanthar) does not change the fact that forums are governed by maybe overlapping but still distinct set of rules than the game itself and what you propose boils down to cover them by the same jurisdiction, something which *I* do not agree with.
Josef Djugashvilis
#239 - 2014-05-20 16:15:41 UTC
Dear La Nariz, don't like to read NPC posts?

Then don't.

If only all of Eve was this easy to fix.

This is not a signature.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#240 - 2014-05-20 16:19:43 UTC
hmskrecik wrote:

I can assure you that the tinfoil lining my cap is there only at the firmest insistence of my doctor.

Even if I was a conspiracy loonie, this fact in itself still wouldn't invalidate my concerns which you consistently dodge parroting "it would improve forum quality".

First, you haven't shown how the improvement could be achieved given trolls could easily bypass this measure.

And second, you didn't come clear from possibility of its abuse reaching way beyond keeping quality of posts.

The fact that posting on forums require active subscription (this is the answer to your question, Shivanthar) does not change the fact that forums are governed by maybe overlapping but still distinct set of rules than the game itself and what you propose boils down to cover them by the same jurisdiction, something which *I* do not agree with.


I did show this from the OP:

The OP wrote:

There has already been a precedent set for this idea by CAOD; in CAOD NPC alts cannot post and the quality of that forum is significantly better than other forums albeit slower.


The only thing that would be abuse is if people are somehow using this to doxx you or harass you in real life. Which if that's the case contact your local law enforcement and CCP to handle it.

Non-consensual pvp, which is one of many potential consequences, is not abuse and its up to the GM team to determine if its harassment.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133