These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The end of Corpmate Awoxxing?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#501 - 2014-10-31 14:32:59 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

well tough **** because that threat is supposed to be there always,
they are talking about trying to make recruiting a bit less dangerous for a corp to do, i.e. they are looking at corparation mechanics and functionality, war mechanics will follow.

dont expect to be eble to avoid them forever outside of an npc corp veers


Ralph, there is no practical way to EVER make wardeccs go down to the individual player level. Can always just dock up for a week and play on alts. And if those get wardecced too, could either have yet another alt to farm null/wh, or just play another game for a few days. You can never compel conflict in Eve because you can never compel players to log in. So yes, I am mightily unconcerned about needing to face wardeccs, not to mention the CSM minutes suggesting that, if anything, the game is headed in the opposite direction.
Good Posting Reloaded
My Real Mind
#502 - 2014-10-31 14:33:23 UTC
Sol Project wrote:
Mr. Epeen... since when does the Project hide in anonymity?
That's what forum alts are there for, no?
Like... yours, no?

Or are all your chars called Epeen? Yes?

And the goodposting coward keeps running his big mouth, while hiding behind an alt.
Post with your main, I dare you.



Man i'm going to tell you a secret.

One time i went to pew pew you, yes, i went to Hek. And do you know what happened? Nothing, why? Because you never undocked. You won because you made me waste a few hours (2 days in fact).

You are a high sec F- and you know it. Keep getting mad Big smile
Brochan McLeod
Frigateer
#503 - 2014-10-31 14:33:51 UTC
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Haedonism Bot wrote:

...
Evasion as it exists today I'm actually ok with.

Shocked

If a wardec mechanic (or any mechanic) is to exist in EvE it should be meaningful and choice/consequence based. The way wardecs can be simply ducked today however breaks this fundamental concept. It also defies logic...

The aggressor followed the rules and paid CONCORD for war rights, but the defender corp disbands and re-forms under another name to immediately invalidate the war. Does the aggressor get a refund? Does the aggressor get a refund even based on percentage of defenders who drop corp? No. Even though the aggressor may have a 'legitimate' complaint against the defender, they get shafted by a mechanic set up to favor the defender who can 'opt out' of the war entirely...

But seriously, even then a refund doesn't quite cut it does it. In WWII, could Poland have just opted-out of getting blitzed by Germany or paid a UN imposed fee to have the war by Germany voided? Could the USA 'opt out' and prevent the Pearl Harbor bombings just by changing their fricken name from 'USA' to 'USA2'?

War is hell. It has implications. If a war mechanic is to exist, it must not be duckable.

F



So in short... if a PvP'er wants to PvP, shannanigans like awoxing is 'amazing gameplay' but ducking a wardec is a bad mechanic?

Also ive learnt in another thread that i mustn't compare real life situations with ingame mechanics... so much for the real war comparison.

Even the nicest person's patience has a limit!
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#504 - 2014-10-31 14:34:56 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
The ideas here to nerf NPC corps, make wardeccs more powerful, etc.... completely miss the point of the CSM minutes which is that casual PvE players are already not engaging with Eve due to the awoxxing mechanics, and end up playing solo, getting bored and quitting the game. What they would like to be able to do is participate in group PvE without outlandish risks of being blown up. If anything, I would expect the game to move towards catering to that large group of people which really isn't looking for a combat experience in highsec.

So basically you and your ilk want WoW with spaceships, or perhaps Hello Kitty online 'spaceships edition'?

GTFO.

F

No, what I would like to see is a game where new players can join and have a CHOICE of gameplay...

That game already exists, its called WoW. EvE puts the sensual in non-consensual, but you and your pansied ilk want to turn EvE INTO WoW.

GTFO.

F

Would you like to know more?
Sol Project
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
#505 - 2014-10-31 14:36:38 UTC
Good Posting Reloaded wrote:
Sol Project wrote:
Mr. Epeen... since when does the Project hide in anonymity?
That's what forum alts are there for, no?
Like... yours, no?

Or are all your chars called Epeen? Yes?

And the goodposting coward keeps running his big mouth, while hiding behind an alt.
Post with your main, I dare you.



Man i'm going to tell you a secret.

One time i went to pew pew you, yes, i went to Hek. And do you know what happened? Nothing, why? Because you never undocked. You won because you made me waste a few hours (2 days in fact).

You are a high sec F- and you know it. Keep getting mad Big smile

I too can make up **** that's not true, but I'm not you.

In any case... it looks more like you're the mad one here.......

Ladies of New Eden YC 117 by Indahmawar Fazmarai

Warning: NSFW! Barely legal girls in underwear!

Diana Kim > AND THIS IS WHY THE FEDERATION MUST BE DESTROYED!!
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#506 - 2014-10-31 14:37:11 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

well tough **** because that threat is supposed to be there always,
they are talking about trying to make recruiting a bit less dangerous for a corp to do, i.e. they are looking at corparation mechanics and functionality, war mechanics will follow.

dont expect to be eble to avoid them forever outside of an npc corp veers


Ralph, there is no practical way to EVER make wardeccs go down to the individual player level. Can always just dock up for a week and play on alts. And if those get wardecced too, could either have yet another alt to farm null/wh, or just play another game for a few days. You can never compel conflict in Eve because you can never compel players to log in. So yes, I am mightily unconcerned about needing to face wardeccs, not to mention the CSM minutes suggesting that, if anything, the game is headed in the opposite direction.

there clearly is if you form a ONE MAN CORP.

they are sanitised and heavily nda'd veers , the things they suggest are many and varied.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Good Posting Reloaded
My Real Mind
#507 - 2014-10-31 14:41:58 UTC
Sol Project wrote:
Good Posting Reloaded wrote:
Sol Project wrote:
Mr. Epeen... since when does the Project hide in anonymity?
That's what forum alts are there for, no?
Like... yours, no?

Or are all your chars called Epeen? Yes?

And the goodposting coward keeps running his big mouth, while hiding behind an alt.
Post with your main, I dare you.



Man i'm going to tell you a secret.

One time i went to pew pew you, yes, i went to Hek. And do you know what happened? Nothing, why? Because you never undocked. You won because you made me waste a few hours (2 days in fact).

You are a high sec F- and you know it. Keep getting mad Big smile

I too can make up **** that's not true, but I'm not you.

In any case... it looks more like you're the mad one here.......


It was a long time ago, and no, i'm not making crap up. I went to Hek and waited for you for hours. 2 days as i said. You never undocked. As i said, you use this game just like a chat room, you talk too much in local and in forums.

And no, i'm not mad now, and i wasn't wasn't mad at that time. I just wanted to play a game with you. A pvp game, but since you never undock, i will pvp you here when i please. Because i can.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#508 - 2014-10-31 14:42:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
Jenn aSide wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Clearly you don;t understand me at all, since I'm not at all a "bleeding heart" type. I'm just realistic about how much crap you can expect the average player to go through to play a goddamn video game. I know, you want people to come in, get massacred repeatedly, abused, scammed, insulted, attacked and destroyed at every turn, so the only people that make it through are the most hardcore. That's just not a realistic way to approach pushing out a form of entertainment.


And yet, here I am, after 7 years of surviving. EVE needs the right kinds of player not the 'just anyone' you'd like to see.


Every EVE player is a true Scotsman.

Regardless of the intended reasons for its inclusion, any given minigame will attract people who enjoy it for its own sake. There are people who contentedly munch rocks in high sec for years. Should we change mining to make it more interesting for more people? In a game with a live, player-driven economy, that's actually a delicate question. Are there enough people doing it now? Are they happy with things as they are?

The question is not whether a given arrangement can attract players, because the answer to that question is always 'yes'. The question is, does it attract enough players? For years, CCP was essentially content with the state of things, because the game was always growing. Now, they've suddenly lost some good people and clammed up about their numbers, and the number of people on the server is noticeably down even within my own timeline (I came in at the tail end of Incarna--and stayed! Hey, Incarna wasn't so bad after all, amirite?).

As with all changes under the New Normal, CCP can tweak or change anything that isn't working quite right in a matter of weeks. The recent releases have demonstrated that they are quite willing to do follow up on changes, so that old concern about their fire-and-forget development style can be put to rest.

I'll just put it this way: if CCP is suddenly worried about retention enough to consider not only making this change, but putting an entire team together to reconceptualize the entire NPE, which has never been a priority for CCP before, then maybe it's become important enough to the health of the game for them to change their minds about things they were OK with before.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#509 - 2014-10-31 14:43:36 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

well tough **** because that threat is supposed to be there always,
they are talking about trying to make recruiting a bit less dangerous for a corp to do, i.e. they are looking at corparation mechanics and functionality, war mechanics will follow.

dont expect to be eble to avoid them forever outside of an npc corp veers


Ralph, there is no practical way to EVER make wardeccs go down to the individual player level. Can always just dock up for a week and play on alts. And if those get wardecced too, could either have yet another alt to farm null/wh, or just play another game for a few days. You can never compel conflict in Eve because you can never compel players to log in. So yes, I am mightily unconcerned about needing to face wardeccs, not to mention the CSM minutes suggesting that, if anything, the game is headed in the opposite direction.

there clearly is if you form a ONE MAN CORP.

they are sanitised and heavily nda'd veers , the things they suggest are many and varied.


Well, presumably you were not at the meetings and are not bound by an NDA. So how would you propose dealing with the elite PvP response to a wardecc of docking up for a week and playing on alts? Remember that people might do this because they are actively evading the wardecc, or they might just be busy with work, on vacation, bored of Eve, etc....
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#510 - 2014-10-31 14:45:05 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

well tough **** because that threat is supposed to be there always,
they are talking about trying to make recruiting a bit less dangerous for a corp to do, i.e. they are looking at corparation mechanics and functionality, war mechanics will follow.

dont expect to be eble to avoid them forever outside of an npc corp veers


Ralph, there is no practical way to EVER make wardeccs go down to the individual player level. Can always just dock up for a week and play on alts. And if those get wardecced too, could either have yet another alt to farm null/wh, or just play another game for a few days. You can never compel conflict in Eve because you can never compel players to log in. So yes, I am mightily unconcerned about needing to face wardeccs, not to mention the CSM minutes suggesting that, if anything, the game is headed in the opposite direction.

there clearly is if you form a ONE MAN CORP.

they are sanitised and heavily nda'd veers , the things they suggest are many and varied.


The wardec mechanic will probably be revisited but don't get your hopes too high about what they will turn to. My guess is they will always leave wardecs on a corp/alliance level thus never applying to a character if he left the corp. As I said in my previous post, it's all linked to the fact that corps represent nothing of value. A country has it's territorial integrity to care about while a corp does not. This is why people will most likely always say "**** it" when they get declared war upon and don't happen to be interested in waging a war. The corp does not have anything tangible to care about so people go the most efficient way and just drop because there is no point at all to defend a worthless shell.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#511 - 2014-10-31 14:58:53 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Again, completely misrepresenting my point of view. I don't want "anyone" to play, I'd just like more than is currently being catered to. Again, it's not all of one or all of the other.


How do you know that the "more" can be compatible with this kind of game. The "more" different types you try to cater to, the more you water down a game. Games need a focus and focus means excluding things (and people).

Can you name one game that does what you say EVE should do and is successful/alive?


Quote:
Observed behaviour is difficult to prove. Prove that it wasn't less common for people to be attacked as a noob during the infancy of the game when the population was lower.


"Observed behavior" is as unreliable as eye witness testimony (I once spent time assigned to a Conviction Integrity Unit).
This is why I don't mention behavior i observed (most of the time) but the actual mechanics of the game and things that can be measured and proved. This is the disconnect here, as you are relying on biased, faulty memory and faith.

Perceptions are often faulty, that's why we have EVIDENCE.

Quote:
So my opinion must be flawed while you're is obviously perfect? Get over yourself.


i'm sorry if Evidence based thinking annoys you. It generally has that affect on emotional thinkers. But your flawed way of thinking is not my fault.

Quote:
Well chances are the change is coming. CCP and the CSM seem to want it as do a fair portion of players. So HTFU.


Don't have to as the change doesn't affect me. But you can't claim to love a game and want the best for it's developer while at the same time not being honest enough to admit that a change could be detrimental to that community down the line. The fact here is that you probably like this change because of the perception that it hurts awoxxer/ganker types that you demonstrate time and again that you hate.

That's why such prejudice is bad, because the reality will probably be this : no long term negative impact to ganker types and no positive gain for the people you claim to champion (new players).

My concern is for this game we are playing, I understand that some of you have good intentions (the thing the road to hell is paved with btw) and this is even more true of CCP. But it's flawed thinking, the same kind of flawed thinking that led to other bad things like incarna/monocle gate and the blue donut etc.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#512 - 2014-10-31 15:00:36 UTC
I can't help but compare this thread to many like it in the past about mechanic changes. CCP changes mechanics when they become so commonplace that everyone is 'abusing' it. When they become disruptive to the average player as opposed to the elite forum warriors.

Ghost training, nano HACs, greifing noobs in starter systems, greifing noobs in tutorials and many more. It's a long list but those few examples jump to mind.

CCP is stuck here. It's their game and they have an interest in keep it viable for all players. Not the just the elite who can jump to another game once their selfish gameplay destroys the player base of this one. They don't make these changes without giving it a lot of thought. It's their RL corporate ass on the line if they make the wrong call. They have everything to lose if the screw up (read, Incarna).

I'm going to trust CCP on this way more than a bunch of asshats with no vested interest in whether this game survives or not. CCP have made some major blunders in the past, but I believe they learned from them and I like the direction this game is going. Not just making awoxing have consequences, but the overall thought they are putting into bringing the fun back into the game. Many players are happy with the stagnation we've seen over the last while and are satisfied with their little empires that add nothing to the game but entitlement and maintaining the status quo. But CCP is not.

That's a good thing for CCP and EVE.

Mr Epeen Cool
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#513 - 2014-10-31 15:10:06 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:


Every EVE player is a true Scotsman.

Regardless of the intended reasons for its inclusion, any given minigame will attract people who enjoy it for its own sake. There are people who contentedly munch rocks in high sec for years. Should we change mining to make it more interesting for more people? In a game with a live, player-driven economy, that's actually a delicate question. Are there enough people doing it now? Are they happy with things as they are?

The question is not whether a given arrangement can attract players, because the answer to that question is always 'yes'. The question is, does it attract enough players? For years, CCP was essentially content with the state of things, because the game was always growing. Now, they've suddenly lost some good people and clammed up about their numbers, and the number of people on the server is noticeably down even within my own timeline (I came in at the tail end of Incarna--and stayed! Hey, Incarna wasn't so bad after all, amirite?).

As with all changes under the New Normal, CCP can tweak or change anything that isn't working quite right in a matter of weeks. The recent releases have demonstrated that they are quite willing to do follow up on changes, so that old concern about their fire-and-forget development style can be put to rest.

I'll just put it this way: if CCP is suddenly worried about retention enough to consider not only making this change, but putting an entire team together to reconceptualize the entire NPE, which has never been a priority for CCP before, then maybe it's become important enough to the health of the game for them to change their minds about things they were OK with before.


All of this is completly besides the point.

I don't care about or even comment about CCPs motivation for doing anything, because the motivation doesn't matter. The RESULT does. i'm going to have to go back on a pledge and like my oft linked 2011 dev blog again, simply becuase iot's the best way to explain what I mean.

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/those-anomaly-changes-in-full/

Quote:
Expected consequences

Some alliances will immediately start wanting to look for better space
In the longer run, there'll be more conflicts going on, with more localized goals
Newer alliances will have an easier time getting a foothold in nullsec
Coalitions will be marginally less stable
Alliances will have to choose more carefully what space they develop, where their staging systems are, and so on (low truesec systems generally tend to be in strategically inconvenient places)


This is an example of GREAT intentions by ccp and reasonable thinking., the result was that null sec went from THIS to THIS lol. it's because they didn't understand or take into account how the game fit together, or how humans react to nerfs/barriers. They are doing this again with the jump drive nerfs and jump fatigue. Removing inter-corp aggression possibilities would be a smaller high sec focused version of the above thinking.

ie, People think it would make things better for them or people they support (new players) when the most likely outcomes are either no change or things get worse.

At this point i know that no amount of talking about it is going to change it, because CCP doesn't change course till things get so bad they have to. And it's all good, it's just a game (I'm not the guy who owns CCP thus my stake in this game is "what do I do with my time after the wife leaves for work " lol).

It is just frustrating seeing the same failed thinking applied to a game I enjoy over and over and no almost one is smart enough to see it coming.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#514 - 2014-10-31 15:11:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
Veers Belvar wrote:
Well, presumably you were not at the meetings and are not bound by an NDA. So how would you propose dealing with the elite PvP response to a wardecc of docking up for a week and playing on alts? Remember that people might do this because they are actively evading the wardecc, or they might just be busy with work, on vacation, bored of Eve, etc....


To paraphrase the rapscallions, logging in to EVE is consent. So if you want to make the choice for other people about whether and where they're in PVP, you have to do it after they've already logged in, because otherwise they can refuse consent with 100% effectiveness by not logging in. That's why CCP introduced those nice, long logout timers that can be reset simply by activating an offensive module on the logged-out ship. With no price to pay for the tactic of suddenly and unilaterally withdrawing consent, anyone in a valuable ship could just leave.

Getting rid of the ability to shed decs by dropping corp will not force anyone to do anything in game. It may very well convince them to go dark for a while. That's why Feyd had to fall back on a real-world war analogy, because Poland couldn't simply log out of Earth for a while and go play a different country on another planet.

But in EVE, Poland can pop up in Qo'noS for a week, or it can log in an alt country in South America (just as Brazil could log in Germany, its wardec country with minimal assets to lose, to target Poland, while sitting fat and unmolested a long way away). And that's why wars and bounties, to the extent that they are at all modeled on real-world conflict, will always be ridiculous and broken in EVE: in a game that you actively decide to log in to, anything other than a sudden ambush is essentially consensual PVP. Which means that it has to be fun for everyone involved or it doesn't happen.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Dave Stark
#515 - 2014-10-31 15:13:43 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
I can't help but compare this thread to many like it in the past about mechanic changes. CCP changes mechanics when they become so commonplace that everyone is 'abusing' it.


if people bothered to do basic recruitment checks, then nobody would be able to abuse anything.

it's just ccp legislating for stupid once again.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#516 - 2014-10-31 15:15:46 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
I can't help but compare this thread to many like it in the past about mechanic changes. CCP changes mechanics when they become so commonplace that everyone is 'abusing' it. When they become disruptive to the average player as opposed to the elite forum warriors.

Ghost training, nano HACs, greifing noobs in starter systems, greifing noobs in tutorials and many more. It's a long list but those few examples jump to mind.

CCP is stuck here. It's their game and they have an interest in keep it viable for all players. Not the just the elite who can jump to another game once their selfish gameplay destroys the player base of this one. They don't make these changes without giving it a lot of thought. It's their RL corporate ass on the line if they make the wrong call. They have everything to lose if the screw up (read, Incarna).

I'm going to trust CCP on this way more than a bunch of asshats with no vested interest in whether this game survives or not. CCP have made some major blunders in the past, but I believe they learned from them and I like the direction this game is going. Not just making awoxing have consequences, but the overall thought they are putting into bringing the fun back into the game. Many players are happy with the stagnation we've seen over the last while and are satisfied with their little empires that add nothing to the game but entitlement and maintaining the status quo. But CCP is not.

That's a good thing for CCP and EVE.

Mr Epeen Cool


You forgot to use words like "equality" and terms like "the 99% won't stand for this anymore". i mean, you can taste unrealistic ideological egalitarianism oozing off posts like this.

You don't get it. Many of our peers don't either. Trying to cater to "all" players is a fools errand. Trying to cater to ANY players is likewise foolish. CCP made a sandbox game, beyond the eula terms they should not care about what people do in it so long as someone is still in it.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#517 - 2014-10-31 15:17:34 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
I can't help but compare this thread to many like it in the past about mechanic changes. CCP changes mechanics when they become so commonplace that everyone is 'abusing' it.


if people bothered to do basic recruitment checks, then nobody would be able to abuse anything.

it's just ccp legislating for stupid once again.


That only helps for corps not accepting an awoxxer, and it doesn't help if this is going to be the first awoxx.

It is of no use for players who are recruited into a corp and them ambushed and killed for giggles. And with that unfortunately being a not uncommon occurrence, players respond by staying in NPC corpland.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#518 - 2014-10-31 15:22:24 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
All of this is completly besides the point.


No, actually, it is the point.

Your argument is that CCP is a fire-and-forget developer, which is why you have to go back to 2011 for your example. Intent matters now, because if CCP "fixes" new player retention now the way they "fixed" nullsec in 2011, they'll be back iterating on the change in a matter of weeks, not years. Their measuring tools are also much better than they were then, and so is their level of communication with the player base. So their intent matters more now than it did then, because they're better able to line the consequences of their actions up with their intentions. They have a fairly powerful incentive to, since their company has seen better days.

This is also a much smaller change than a complete sovereignty overhaul. If this doesn't work, I don't imagine it will take much developer time or effort for CCP to say, "whoops, never mind," and turn on whatever flag they're about to turn off.

In fact, the greatest possible threat to this change's effectiveness are players who are stuck in their conception of the way things are, ignoring the change and continuing to turtle up and ignore new players because they aren't willing to evolve with the game or its developer.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Cephelange du'Krevviq
Gildinous Vangaurd
The Initiative.
#519 - 2014-10-31 15:29:29 UTC
I've said it numerous times before and will continue to say it (so long as it remains true): EVE rewards those that pay attention and learn from their experiences (both good and bad). Part of that learning curve also involves keeping perspective that this is a game.

Yep, a lot of time and effort is put into acquiring/accruing resources, including contacts. Losing some of those can be frustrating and even a little maddening, especially if it was avoidable through some common sense. That's a key lesson learned when shopping for a corp to join and even more so forming a corp and recruiting folks.

Unlike the majority of other MMOs out there, there are significant (in game terms) consequences for not keeping your head on a swivel (aka situational awareness) and being on top of your game. If this was still the game's first few years, I could understand not being sure how to screen recruits, etc. This game is 11 years old; there is a plethora of resources to be found via a quick online search through your search engine of choice. There is literally no excuse a new player can't be well informed before they even create an account.

This change might (and that's a slim "might," in my opinion) increase new player subscriptions by significant numbers, but it would dilute the playerbase in terms of quality. Those that would leave due to AWOXing will still leave due to ganking/griefing/wardecs, for the most part.

CCP, please reconsider this proposed change. There is very little to be gained from it and more to be lost, in my opinion.

"I am a leaf on the...ah, frak it!"
Dave Stark
#520 - 2014-10-31 15:30:32 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:
I can't help but compare this thread to many like it in the past about mechanic changes. CCP changes mechanics when they become so commonplace that everyone is 'abusing' it.


if people bothered to do basic recruitment checks, then nobody would be able to abuse anything.

it's just ccp legislating for stupid once again.


That only helps for corps not accepting an awoxxer, and it doesn't help if this is going to be the first awoxx.

It is of no use for players who are recruited into a corp and them ambushed and killed for giggles. And with that unfortunately being a not uncommon occurrence, players respond by staying in NPC corpland.


we've already been through the myriad of ways to defend yourself should your recruitment standards are low.