These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Syllviaa
Hole Exploitation Inc.
#781 - 2014-11-01 05:05:26 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Thing is it does so by removing a stupid loophole. Can one of the opposition explain to me WHY it makes sense that I can shoot a guy in my corp but not a stranger? Why concord will react to one incident and not the other?

With dual mechanics we now have ways to 'test a tank' ignoring completely sisi server for the moment. So why did the awox mechanic make sense to you? I understand it made Eve 'dangerous' and allowed a certain type of gameplay but at the bottom of it . . . is there a logic to that rule?


If a guy steals a bunch of corporate stuff & is currently flying it in a freighter to the neatest trade hub, why shouldn't you be allowed to kill him & not have concord intervene?

RIP Richard A. Butt
Anthar Peva
Doomheim
#782 - 2014-11-01 05:13:08 UTC
Syllviaa wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
Thing is it does so by removing a stupid loophole. Can one of the opposition explain to me WHY it makes sense that I can shoot a guy in my corp but not a stranger? Why concord will react to one incident and not the other?

With dual mechanics we now have ways to 'test a tank' ignoring completely sisi server for the moment. So why did the awox mechanic make sense to you? I understand it made Eve 'dangerous' and allowed a certain type of gameplay but at the bottom of it . . . is there a logic to that rule?


If a guy steals a bunch of corporate stuff & is currently flying it in a freighter to the neatest trade hub, why shouldn't you be allowed to kill him & not have concord intervene?

Because people whinge without thinking about the negatives of what happens if they get what they want. (See: Exhumer/Barge buffs, giving us the battle Skiff.)
La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#783 - 2014-11-01 05:25:03 UTC  |  Edited by: La Rynx
Syllviaa wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
Thing is it does so by removing a stupid loophole. Can one of the opposition explain to me WHY it makes sense that I can shoot a guy in my corp but not a stranger? Why concord will react to one incident and not the other?

With dual mechanics we now have ways to 'test a tank' ignoring completely sisi server for the moment. So why did the awox mechanic make sense to you? I understand it made Eve 'dangerous' and allowed a certain type of gameplay but at the bottom of it . . . is there a logic to that rule?


If a guy steals a bunch of corporate stuff & is currently flying it in a freighter to the neatest trade hub, why shouldn't you be allowed to kill him & not have concord intervene?


Because the awoxer would not fly in a corporate ship. Since the awoxer works with a low sp alt he has to transport this stuff with a freighter alt anyway. Or contract Red Frog. No change here, since corporate steals are still possible.

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#784 - 2014-11-01 05:46:00 UTC
This is going to be really funny when someone accidentally shoots a logi pilot and gets concorded for the "oops" due to return targeting...
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#785 - 2014-11-01 05:53:29 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
CSM dude when is highsec reward going to be nerfed?


It isn't, too many players in other parts of the game partially finance themselves with said income. If you gutted that the ripples would go much further than you might expect.



Echoing what a few others have said, why is this the case? Having an absolutely secure, inexhaustible source of income in hisec basically asphyxiates content from existing in other security bands.

Part of the reason AWOXing and suicide ganking are so attractive is because HiSec is a target rich environment whereas other places are comparatively empty. People would have reason for conflict and interaction beyond HiSec if wealth were properly distributed.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#786 - 2014-11-01 06:16:42 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:

But what if we had not been able to shoot fellow corp members?

Then your war dec opponents would have got a kill to show how much he messed up by falling asleep mid fleet without even bothering to dock up in the nearest station.
Really, you try and make that a reason to keep an obscure exception to the standard PVP rules of highsec.
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#787 - 2014-11-01 06:26:18 UTC
Threadnought keeps going, but the whining continues. Let me keep it brief

Current Mechanic (yes, its a mechanic that you love to abuse)

Soandso(Corp A) <-(shoot) Awoxspie(Corp A) = No CONCORD, assume its .5 system.

Total safety, again, a mechanic that gives free rides and protection for you. Weird how CONCORD doesn't respond, and most likely your target will not be able to fight back because 1) Isn't trained for it 2) Cannot afford it now. Low and null is not changing, need corp aggression...go there.

Changed Mechanic

Soandso(Corp A) <-(shoot) Awoxspie(Corp A) = CONCORD asplodes you like a ballon, assume its .5 system.

No more safety for you. The mechanic changes, to the betterment of everyone. You found your Awox spie, set corp que to kick.

Rest of game didn't really change, you could adapt (but you don't and you will die), cause its so hard for you to socially engineer to gain their trust and drag them to low or null. Yes, it would be harder to gain their trust (but you are lazy as much as a highsec miner) to get them into the unsafe areas to kill them....but again no more free ride for you. You can still gank, just no more hiding in highsec with CONCORD protecting you.

This is how I see the fix taking place and what it is fixing, safe combat that you call "teaching that EVE is dark, HTFU" but for you its just F1 and good bye, to run off and arouse yourself to your killmail list. EVE isn't safe, it shouldn't be safe for everyone you included....want to get that juicy kill...work harder and drag them to an area you know CONCORD won't respond.

Corp aggression aside...Red vs Blue has done it for years....you can always make two corps and practice with no podding using wardecs (but again, war decs are not you get to decide to fight who you get to fight and just smash their face in just because, game is combat but there is no rule they have to fight back...but you can still shoot with CONCORD intervention). Single corps...You can always go to null/low/WH and just find a spot that's not near a warpable (again more work for you) that requires people to scan you down while you practice, without CONCORD to hide behind. Or Duel

CONCORD is what it is....but it is there to prevent total chaos to the game because highsec is the last area to retreat to when you have lost it all and need to rebuild , it is not a safe area for 1v1 duels and clay pigeon shooting to jerk off to the kill mails even though you can still do that when you get retribution from them. Highsec doesn't make that much isk since its been nerfed so much, most of you just lose it faster lower areas than in the high sec area cause you suck so bad at the game and cry when the smart guy is stock piling his isk with little loss, than go lose it at his discretion and not yours.
Omar Alharazaad
New Eden Tech Support
#788 - 2014-11-01 06:43:31 UTC
o.0
Pretty sure those words were english. Not exactly sure what that word soup was supposed to mean, however.
Blind-folded dartboard guesses...
1) go to low/null if you want pvp, because you are bad person if you do.
2) THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
3) I got nothing here. I get the vague sense that it's an anti-awox poast, but it keeps ganking my brain each reread.

Personal opinion? I would be sad to see awoxing go, as it's something that's uniquely EVE. Will it hurt me and mine? Nope.
Will it hurt others who have made entire careers out of it? Sure. Is it going to happen? Who knows? Until it's actually in the patch notes as a done deal it's no more of a real thing than WoD was.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#789 - 2014-11-01 06:55:59 UTC
Aqriue wrote:


No more safety for you.


Ironic, coming from an NPC alt.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Kaldi Tsukaya
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#790 - 2014-11-01 07:02:35 UTC
I have shot corp members, and also been shot. We have used the mechanic as a training tool for sparring and testing fittings and game mechanics. I also like the current mechanic as a rule-enforcer (we have a no afk policy) and will destroy anyone not responding in space. This was our founders policy and it will always be so.

DO NOT TAKE THIS MECHANIC AWAY!

I would STRONGLY urge a modified approach to the current mechanic:

Why not leave the choice up to a corp? The politics voting mechanic is good as it allows a vote. There is a waiting period, and notifications sent out to all corp members if/when the status changes. No surprises.

You could see what a corp's status is before joining, and (as a recruit) could make that informed decision.

I think this would be an acceptable change for most (except those die-hard awoxers, but you will still have the opportunity to sway a corp into voting this change in). It also allows the 'scamming' type to continue, by setting their corp status to allow corp-killing, while advertising that they are not...
It is Eve, after all Blink

~K~
Omar Alharazaad
New Eden Tech Support
#791 - 2014-11-01 07:07:27 UTC
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
I have shot corp members, and also been shot. We have used the mechanic as a training tool for sparring and testing fittings and game mechanics. I also like the current mechanic as a rule-enforcer (we have a no afk policy) and will destroy anyone not responding in space. This was our founders policy and it will always be so.

DO NOT TAKE THIS MECHANIC AWAY!

I would STRONGLY urge a modified approach to the current mechanic:

Why not leave the choice up to a corp? The politics voting mechanic is good as it allows a vote. There is a waiting period, and notifications sent out to all corp members if/when the status changes. No surprises.

You could see what a corp's status is before joining, and (as a recruit) could make that informed decision.

I think this would be an acceptable change for most (except those die-hard awoxers, but you will still have the opportunity to sway a corp into voting this change in). It also allows the 'scamming' type to continue, by setting their corp status to allow corp-killing, while advertising that they are not...
It is Eve, after all Blink

~K~


Interesting notion. I kind of like it actually, as it makes sense in putting the choice in the hands of the individual corps rather than spraying more orange safety foam all over high sec.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
#792 - 2014-11-01 07:11:03 UTC  |  Edited by: McChicken Combo HalfMayo
I spent some time in RvB earlier in the year and it was a lot of fun, especially for me as a new player. The lack of free-for-all combat that will result from this will hurt the popularity of the RvB community and is a nerf to content creation within the group.

The bolded words are important. The mechanic change here is meant to help new players (or so it's said), yet this change hurts the very communities that are frequented by new players looking to get into PVP gameplay.

Kaldi has the right idea. Corps should have a choice to enable/disable in-corp combat, pending a 24 hour delay. Modify the UI to make this obvious to new players joining corps, and have CONCORD send a mail to all corp members when the option is switched one way or another.

Apologies if this has been all mentioned already. I ain't reading 42 pages.

There are all our dominion

Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin
Ama Scelesta
#793 - 2014-11-01 07:23:41 UTC
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
I have shot corp members, and also been shot. We have used the mechanic as a training tool for sparring and testing fittings and game mechanics. I also like the current mechanic as a rule-enforcer (we have a no afk policy) and will destroy anyone not responding in space. This was our founders policy and it will always be so.

DO NOT TAKE THIS MECHANIC AWAY!

I would STRONGLY urge a modified approach to the current mechanic:

Why not leave the choice up to a corp? The politics voting mechanic is good as it allows a vote. There is a waiting period, and notifications sent out to all corp members if/when the status changes. No surprises.

You could see what a corp's status is before joining, and (as a recruit) could make that informed decision.

I think this would be an acceptable change for most (except those die-hard awoxers, but you will still have the opportunity to sway a corp into voting this change in). It also allows the 'scamming' type to continue, by setting their corp status to allow corp-killing, while advertising that they are not...
It is Eve, after all Blink

~K~


It seems like a good suggestion. The important part being no way to immediately switch between the settings and equally important being clear visibility to potential recruits. The positive affects of the change just require both the corp leadership and the recruited to be able to gain a certain level of protection for their assets. Making it optional and visible allows the majority of new players/NPC corp players to be funneled to protected corps, while keeping the choice of being vulnerable open to corps who make extensive use of intra corp hostilities.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#794 - 2014-11-01 08:06:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Aqriue wrote:
Total safety, again, a mechanic that gives free rides and protection for you. Weird how CONCORD doesn't respond, and most likely your target will not be able to fight back because 1) Isn't trained for it 2) Cannot afford it now. Low and null is not changing, need corp aggression...go there.

Not so weird how Concord doesn't respond.

The Corp CEO or recruiters gave the ok when they sent an invite.

You can pay 50 million ISK for Concord to ignore aggression in high-sec. Not unreasonable that Concord wouldn't respond in situations where a Corp has accepted a character as one of their own. But these are just game mechanics and justifications can be imagined to suit any point of view.

Aside from that, I don't really care much about the specific mechanic. What I do care about is the challenge and freedom of Eve.

It's what attracts me personally to the game. Remove the challenge and it's offers nothing over any of the thousands of other games on the market. The challenge and harshness of eve are its unique selling point to a large degree.

Nowhere in space should be safe to play in. You make your own safety at an inidividual level and a Corp level.

I don't personally see why this change is needed from a gameplay perspective. It's existed for 11 years. Gameplay and mechanics aren't the reason. It's purely about revenue and cow towing to the masses.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#795 - 2014-11-01 08:29:29 UTC
Oh is this still going?
Reiisha
#796 - 2014-11-01 09:04:56 UTC
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:
I have shot corp members, and also been shot. We have used the mechanic as a training tool for sparring and testing fittings and game mechanics. I also like the current mechanic as a rule-enforcer (we have a no afk policy) and will destroy anyone not responding in space. This was our founders policy and it will always be so.

DO NOT TAKE THIS MECHANIC AWAY!

I would STRONGLY urge a modified approach to the current mechanic:

Why not leave the choice up to a corp? The politics voting mechanic is good as it allows a vote. There is a waiting period, and notifications sent out to all corp members if/when the status changes. No surprises.

You could see what a corp's status is before joining, and (as a recruit) could make that informed decision.

I think this would be an acceptable change for most (except those die-hard awoxers, but you will still have the opportunity to sway a corp into voting this change in). It also allows the 'scamming' type to continue, by setting their corp status to allow corp-killing, while advertising that they are not...
It is Eve, after all Blink

~K~



You still have gangs and duels for that....

Also, literally the only people who are negatively affected by this change are griefers who get horny over easy kills of targets who cant defend themselves. You know, the ones calling themselves 'pvp'ers' but ironically never leaving highsec because low and null are 'too dangerous'.

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#797 - 2014-11-01 09:26:24 UTC
This thread shows clearly that people preying on noobs are quite a large and noisy collective...
ISD Atomic Dove
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#798 - 2014-11-01 09:41:18 UTC
I've cleaned this thread up a bit, removed an off topic post and profanities. Please remember to remain civil and treat others with respect.


Quote:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.


ISD Atomic Dove

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
Kaldi Tsukaya
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#799 - 2014-11-01 09:52:51 UTC
Reiisha wrote:


You still have gangs and duels for that....


So rather than teach a new player not to afk, i will either let the gankers kill & pod them or have to gank them myself?
If this change happens, I will just kick them from corp altogether, and nobody wins.
(btw, we have SRP so that's my ship I'm blowing up)

Quote:
Also, literally the only people who are negatively affected by this change are griefers who get horny over easy kills of targets who cant defend themselves.


I am certainly not a griefer looking for easy kills.

Quote:
You know, the ones calling themselves 'pvp'ers' but ironically never leaving highsec because low and null are 'too dangerous'.


Because pvp only happens in low and null? Seriously? We sell alot of combat ships and weapons...
Omar Alharazaad
New Eden Tech Support
#800 - 2014-11-01 10:15:16 UTC
If pvp was only meant to happen in null or low there would be no wardec mechanic. So yeah, that argument rings pretty hollow and has for many many moons.

I worry that they might actually listen to the suddenly very vocal 'Society For The Preservation Of Bad CEO's' and do something drastic here. AWOXing has been with EVE for just about forever and it's one of those things that has made EVE both famous and infamous over the years... it's a venerable tradition worthy of some respect. To suddenly do away with it by making a sweeping change would be, well, sad IMO.

If they change anything I would hope for a more even handed response, such as having the directors of individual corps and alliances be able to set the safeties for their organizations to suit their needs and/or playstyle.

There should be no Easy Mode for bad CEO's. CONCORD shouldn't be automagically there to protect them from being bad at running their corp.

Also... people shouldn't throw the word 'griefer' around so readily, as in EVE it has something of a different meaning than in other games.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.