These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Balshem Rozenzweig
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#861 - 2014-11-01 23:41:38 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Balshem Rozenzweig wrote:
The topic started as discussion about newbie retention. I cannot imagine how a newbie could be repelled by awox. If he knows about it he already has enough tools (google?) to avoid/minimalise damage.


That'd be the newbie /being/ awoxed, repelling them.


but there's shitton of things repelling them already. Why would awox be the one that requires so much attention? Awoxing at least attracts some kind of people. It did entertain me and I've never done it.

I feel repulsed by people "offering duels" to newbies. They farm kills. Awoxer is a paragon of society compared to that activity. You don't go all physical with it.

If there's hard data showing that newbies tend to leave because of being awoxed, and you can verify it's not a scape goat for the leaving people (cba with the game AND there's awox ) then ok. I can't believe it to be true.

Devs should attempt to communicate their idea of the game better imho. That would solve a lot of crap. Maybe make people realize than loosing a ship is what the game is about, not a personal failure? Because this is what their friendly carebears will tell'em.

I'm sorry to be the one to tell you that but eve has almost nothing to offer aside from pvp when it comes to instant gratification. Industry is cool, but I would imagine a niche thing. People do exploration out of boredom. It is futile currently. You can go wormhole but that's SP intensive. What do you have left? PVE? The repeatable missions? You call people sticking to that not a niche? You expect new player retention from that?

I can understand how the burner missions and such (future) additions are suppose to change that. I'm really happy for that even though I probably will not bother to even try that. But for here and now you can say pve in eve is unimaginative, and the pvp/griefer crowd are the people trying to plug that hole with content creation.

If I was to make newbie experience better I would do precisely what I wrote in my last post - create a series of up to date and clean articles explaining various possibilities in eve, and then some player written comments about going thru given path.

There's not a problem you can't solve without a love of text.

mynnna wrote:
going full maternal over stuff


I came to usually respect your opinion. Where did you guys get the awox idea from? What data was it?

I'd like to see, for example, what percentage of people leaving game came to contact with an awoxer, how many bothered to join a corp, how successful the joint corp was.

"NUTS!!!" - general McAuliffe

Lady Areola Fappington
#862 - 2014-11-01 23:42:46 UTC
I do agree with the idea that awoxing as it exists currently is entirely too easy, but on the flip side, I don't think the "shooting your corpmates" should totally go away.

Maybe a compromise. Add a new corp role, "security officer". THEY have the ability to shoot corpmates with no concord response. Of course, let the target return fire via limited engagement and all.

Simple fix. Awoxing is made a little harder in that you need some social engineering to pull off. You can still catch out people who aren't paying attention, but there's still a degree of "protection" in there.

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

Mharius Skjem
Guardians of the Underworld
#863 - 2014-11-01 23:54:46 UTC
Lady Areola Fappington wrote:
I do agree with the idea that awoxing as it exists currently is entirely too easy, but on the flip side, I don't think the "shooting your corpmates" should totally go away.

Maybe a compromise. Add a new corp role, "security officer". THEY have the ability to shoot corpmates with no concord response. Of course, let the target return fire via limited engagement and all.

Simple fix. Awoxing is made a little harder in that you need some social engineering to pull off. You can still catch out people who aren't paying attention, but there's still a degree of "protection" in there.


Very good idea +1 from me.

A recovering btter vet,  with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve...

Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...

Balshem Rozenzweig
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#864 - 2014-11-02 00:00:17 UTC
Ama Scelesta wrote:
...


This is actually the best answer I read so far from the anti-awox side in this thread.

I personally think that requirements are there to be met. People doing all the corporation security, the mistrust to a new bro are the unique flavor of eve and add to the game. My worst MMO nightmare was getting into guilds that weren't focused and as such did nothing together/at all. Requirements usually mean the corp is filled with people that met them, ya know.

If high sec corps stop inviting players cause of possible awox. Well - I have no idea what to answer for that. I guess I wish there were better corps in high sec, but that's just that - a wish. Why would they start a corporation if they are afraid to recruit though?

As for chances to keep the new player in eve - I'm currently in my first week of playing darkfall. I spend most of the time in that game afk farming since, just like in eve, it's not that bad to do it. I'm not even interested in joining a clan yet. It has nothing to do with my decision if I keep subbing the game or not. First thing I have to consider is that if I will have the time and money to do it. Aside from that it comes to the game itself. If Darkfall fails to deliver content or a promise of content I will not keep playing it. If there's no hunts, no battles, no drama, no thievery, no loss and no gain I will not care enough to play another game that has elves and swords in it. I don't care if that game is safe. I care if it can be fun.

Members of my non existent clan certainly won't influence my decision (not enough time atm to get into one and show some effort).

I have no idea how long will I stay with the game. I expect to be without a clan for the entire first month. I will scout things out, try to do them on my own, so I can decide which activity is for me. Then I can start to talk with people about doing it in their clan.

Everything totally unconnected with possibility of being betrayed/killed.

"NUTS!!!" - general McAuliffe

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#865 - 2014-11-02 00:04:33 UTC
Balshem Rozenzweig wrote:
Ama Scelesta wrote:
...


This is actually the best answer I read so far from the anti-awox side in this thread.

Agreed, Ama actually uses reasonable points to examine why awoxing can be an issue. I still wholeheartedly disagree, but think you for getting more detailed than the harassment claims from most of the community Ama.

Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information.

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#866 - 2014-11-02 00:12:50 UTC
44 pages later and still no one has properly addressed the key point here - how do you spur greater social engagement by new players in highsec?

As I see it there are 3 reasons why no rational player should join a PvE highsec corp:

1. awoxxing
2. wardeccs
3. theft

Removing one of those barriers still leaves the other 2. Another important question is what benefit do highsec PvE corps offer?

From what I can tell you can do essentially all highsec activity - mining, mission running, incursions, manufacturing, etc... without a corp. So what real benefit does the corp bring you?

So it seems to me that in the current setup joining a corp exposes you to terrible risks with no countervailing benefits. This makes rational highsec PvE players, such as myself, choose to stay in NPC corps or go to 1 man corps. Presumably this social isolation is bad for the game, and causes many players to quit the game.

What can be done to make players actually WANT to join highsec corps, and to make them a positive force in the game? In other games it's easy and risk free to join clans/guilds, etc... because you can't do any real harm or have any real harm done to you. Is there a way to encourage that kind of positive social interaction in Eve?
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#867 - 2014-11-02 00:21:23 UTC  |  Edited by: La Nariz
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
"It makes sense" that highsec reward would be lower than areas with less safety but I don't see you championing that mike.

Possibly because it actually already is, and you (And I do mean you personally here) are just trying to drive it so far down that the residents of high sec will be desperate for any scraps you give them. You just use bad statistics from biased experiments to try and claim otherwise.

RvB can still brawl, it will just actually be Red vs Blue now in highsec. Want a free for all brawl, take it to low or null.
Corp brawls, go to low sec. Or null sec. Plenty of low sec pockets where you only ever see 2 or 3 people and they aren't going to warp into a ball of a dozen.
Webbing freighters. Duel mechanic exists. Hey look, opportunity for betrayal & ransoms if you put a little effort into getting them to trust you to web them. So awoxing is still possible in high without needing to be able to automatically shoot your corp mates.

It does make sense to remove an exception from the rules of highsec that dates to pre crimewatch 2.0 and is no longer required.
And it breaks nothing of significance. And gets some of those things into low sec as well.


It isn't and you're late to the party mike already admitted it isn't and that they are not considering fixing it.

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

Good Posting Reloaded
My Real Mind
#868 - 2014-11-02 00:23:17 UTC
Why do i see Veers with terrible standings? He's the man eve needs, i would set him +15 if i could.
Mharius Skjem
Guardians of the Underworld
#869 - 2014-11-02 00:25:31 UTC
Awoxing as it stands is actually an important part of life in eve, for most people it's an opportunity to wreak revenge for past misdeeds, or an opportunity to unleash the demi god within and cause some bad karma. What makes that attractive is the thought that you just might get away with it.

A concord response guarantees that you won't get away with it, concord is applying the sanctions that the awoxed players should be coming up with.

CCP is replacing opportunities for human interaction and human angst that drives emotional engagement with automated ones that ensure that awoxers won't get followed or hounded by the Corp mates they've betrayed.

Concord shouldn't be a replacement for player punishment.

A recovering btter vet,  with a fresh toon and a determination to like everything that CCP does to Eve...

Don't take me too seriously though, I like to tease a bit on the forums, but that's only because I love you...

Brochan McLeod
Frigateer
#870 - 2014-11-02 00:28:50 UTC
I'd be more concerned that appearantly people are leaving the game before they get a chance to get hooked on it.

If that is happening on such a scale that CCP finds it unavoidable to remove a given mechanic then maybe everybody will just have to swallow and get on with it?

Also, when i re-joined this game two months ago i was greeted with two Corp invites.

- The first was in German, stating i needn't bother to reply if i didn't speak German.
- The second one had a list of do's and don'ts as long as my flippin' arm. It ended with requiring a full API ? Yeah right. Maybe check up my arse for any hidden contraband as well? .. yes, no?

If there is a Red versus Blue floating about and an Eve University and the likes, then why the hell aren't THEY out there reeling the newbies in and educating them?

Offer them an education that touches all the bases and then kick em out. To get them in... make them offers they cant refuse (Reputation with chosen faction, a bunch of cash, a few nice frigats etc..) Kindof like the tutorial does but then in a more 'live' fashion.

Anyway, there are probably lots of creative ways to pull people in and make em enthousiastic for the game.

Questioning CCP's ability to evaluate the data and exit polls is NOT one of em... seriously, the sheer arrogance.

Even the nicest person's patience has a limit!

Brochan McLeod
Frigateer
#871 - 2014-11-02 00:37:31 UTC
Good Posting Reloaded wrote:
Why do i see Veers with terrible standings? He's the man eve needs, i would set him +15 if i could.


Why dont you good folks stop with the childish bashing? Come up with a few idea's or be out there making stuff better.

How old are you anyway?

Even the nicest person's patience has a limit!

Black Pedro
Mine.
#872 - 2014-11-02 00:45:39 UTC
Ama Scelest wrote:

The problem isn't new players per se and informing can only go so far, especially when rational calculation easily works against joining a corp. There is a reason why public education campaigns struggle to alter how people behave and this is just a game. They want to play and not listed to you preach to them and they're not staying around long enough for you to get retries. It also won't be effective, if the rational calculus isn't altered at all.

The real problem with free aggression within a corp is the damage done to the ease of forming social connections, that is vital to all MMOs. Any game is more fun when you can play it with people you like and you're likely to stay subscribed longer, if you find a group you feel comfortable with. Not everyone cares about intra corp aggression, but others do. Some people form social connections easily, but some struggle even when they want to do it. Some people come from large outside social networks, some might not even have a single friend here or be socially skilled. The symptoms are too many people not interacting with others in meaningful ways, staying forever in NPC corps or player corps composed of their alts or only people they know in real life. It is bad for the players, since they won't have as much fun. It's bad for CCP, since they tend to lose those players very quickly.CCP needs to keep thinking up better ways to facilitate forming those connections as their future as a company is tied to them.

Creating player corps where awoxing isn't possible will open up those all important social connections to more people previously struggling to make them. Hopefully such changes would be accompanied by security updates to corp management and corp roles too. That will allow CEOs to ensure people coming to their corp can't ruin their day just by being in their corp. In order for them to do damage, they'd have to do proper infiltration, gain trust to make the corp members and have them put themselves in a vulnerable position by their own actions. For the corp that would mean they can lower recruiting standards to include more people outside their current trusted core group.

From a grunt perspective it means more opportunities to join groups, with less hassle in the joining most corps and lowering the barrier to send the application in the first place, since just joining doesn't mean giving every person in the corp the permission to fire on you without CONCORD interference. Currently it just makes the most sense in too many situations to not be in player corps you can't control. No benefits, more risks. No amount of informing will alter that fact. That calculation needs to be changed closer to the point where it makes no sense to not be in a proper player corp. There will still be people who don't think it makes sense after the changes, but effort needs to be put forth to reduce the number of people making that choice.


I get this sentiment, but this isn't going to happen. Risk-adverse players that are currently happy in NPC corps aren't going to change their mind because of this minor change - wardecs are the issue for them not awoxing. And the idea that corps will "lower their standards" and now let more risky new players in is also unrealistic. For corps operating outside highsec this awoxxing change has no effect, and for the remaining highsec corps, there are other risks associated with potential spies that are significant enough to limit the access of low SP characters that are not changed by the removal of awoxing. Serious corps interested in taking and training new players already have separate training corps set up to reduce the risk of awoxxing so this change does not alter the "rational calculus" significantly.

All this will do is stimulate the proliferation of small, disorganized highsec corps that honestly do not have much to offer to a new player. We should be encouraging new players especially to join larger, organized corporations that already can manage the risk of recruitment and that have the resources to train new players. We should not protect small, we-do-everything-but-really-do-nothing corps from spamming invites risk-free in rookie systems by eliminating all the risk of taking on new members.

But I agree completely that more needs to be done to get players into a social network as you say but that need is best met through changes to NPC corps and to the new player experience. Help get people into competent corps that can train them in what they are interested after they have finished the tutorials, and add some disincentives to stay in a NPC corp forever.

Removing awoxing will do nothing other than make highsec even safer and needlessly remove an interesting tool from the sandbox which is not only useful in the course of training corporation members and other intra-corporation operations, but has resulted in some pretty memorable stories over the years. In fact, it could make things worse by increasing the number of rookies who end up stuck in tiny, do-nothing highsec corps where they will just get bored after a few weeks and quit the game.




Good Posting Reloaded
My Real Mind
#873 - 2014-11-02 01:10:23 UTC
Brochan McLeod wrote:
Good Posting Reloaded wrote:
Why do i see Veers with terrible standings? He's the man eve needs, i would set him +15 if i could.


Why dont you good folks stop with the childish bashing? Come up with a few idea's or be out there making stuff better.

How old are you anyway?



I wasn't being sarcastic, i said that because i agree with him. And why do you want to know my age? Do you want a date or something? Sure we can talk honey.
Brochan McLeod
Frigateer
#874 - 2014-11-02 01:17:40 UTC
Good Posting Reloaded wrote:
Brochan McLeod wrote:
Good Posting Reloaded wrote:
Why do i see Veers with terrible standings? He's the man eve needs, i would set him +15 if i could.


Why dont you good folks stop with the awesome chitchat? Come up with a few idea's or be out there making stuff better.

How old are you anyway?



I wasn't being sarcastic, i said that because i agree with him. And why do you want to know my age? Do you want a date or something? Sure we can talk honey.


There, fixed it, sorry precious.

While im here, you have any thoughts on my idea?...

Oh, and I know you all have large ego's but it wasnt a request for a date ... hihi P

Even the nicest person's patience has a limit!

Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#875 - 2014-11-02 01:20:55 UTC
I also don't see how killing corpmates is a broken mechanic. It's the only risk inherent to recruiting someone to a corp, and I was under the impression that no action in this game should be without risk. As I tried to point out in my quick little story, there is a remarkably easy work around to the problem available to players as is. Sure, it was a fun experience for me, but it also shows that removing an awoxer is not that hard and can be fun for all involved.

No, I do not believe suicide ganking and corporate theft are risks of recruiting someone. Suicide ganking is a risk of being an overpriced or easy target (and why would someone who wants to gank join a corp?), corporate theft is a risk of giving people power in your corporation. Spies are barely a risk, because any spy that is watching someone where Concord exists isn't worth their time. High sec war deccers have locator agents, watch lists, and alts that can get eyes on a target.

As to the issue of retaining new players, you will not retain anyone who gets offended by an awox. That person will leave the game the moment some other nefarious individual comes along and does something "mean" to them. For that person, the reason they were offended by the game is that another living, breathing human being ruined their day. It won't matter if it's a gank, a scam, a theft, or whatever else. It's the fact that an actual person did something to them that they didn't like. I've often said, if any criminal activity in Eve were preformed by an NPC character, no one would complain. For example, belt rats in high sec are fully capable of killing mining vessels very easily without Concord intervention. To my knowledge, no one is calling for their removal or asking that they be made less difficult.

As for getting people into player corps, there will always be a large number of people who join this game because they want to do things that do not involve other players. Those people will always remain in NPC corps and the most they want to do with other players is maybe an occasional conversation in local. There's also the issue, statistically, of people in player corps having alts in NPC corps (though I'm not sure how those players are looked and am talking about something I don't know here). Finally, the bigger detraction for folks in high sec to join player corps is the threat of the war dec. From my experience, the standard response to a war dec is for a player to drop corp and go back to an NPC corp until the dec blows over.

Finally, the "it doesn't make sense" argument. Sure it does. Lore wise, why would Concord give a crap about two people in the same capsuleer organization doing anything to one another? We may as well give people suspect timers for looting a corp mate's wreck. Logic wise, there is a benefit to having the ability to shoot friends without consequence in that it provides for some quick and easy fleet training (such a thing will be a real pain in the ass unless duels or the dojo can provide for large engagements) and that benefit outweighs whatever risk is involved in my mind. Fun wise, the quick and easy ability to grab a frigate and fight a corp mate without having to go through a series of clicks is pleasant and a nice way to break up a slow evening.

I am not an awoxer and have no interest in the play style. I understand entirely why the ability exists though, and am fully supportive of keeping it for a multitude of reasons. In no way do I think it is a broken system, that it can be some how improved upon, or that it overwhelmingly discourages player interaction and retention.

Alrighty, said my peace.
Marsha Mallow
#876 - 2014-11-02 01:36:26 UTC
You know, Ned's awox story and mine were modded for being offtopic. As were a couple of remarks that had swearing, whilst the CSM ones were left untouched. Sorry for discussing moderation, but I'm guesing not only is the topic about to be nuked and locked, but anyone baited into answering back might earn a ballgag.

It's almost like there's a concerted effort here to either shut down or derail the discussion.

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day

Michele Bachmann
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#877 - 2014-11-02 01:40:01 UTC
Brochan McLeod wrote:
[quote=Ima Wreckyou]

People can play this game any way they want... i think thats why its called a sandbox.

Not everyone is interested in chasing others and pretend they are the cronies of a crazed Sheriff of Nothingham-ish ganker... yelling 'I AM THE LAW'.

Personally i was drawn in by the sheer endless possibilities of gathering materials, producing goods and make my own spaceships. PvP is just a thing others do and it ups the tension a bit, making it more interesting for me and the likes of me.

I played in 2012 for some time and stopped because i got shot in the face at every turn. In between beeing locked up in a station cos of constant wardecs. I dont blame the CEO of that but rather the games inability to grant a somewhat safe way to do my stuff.

I didnt get that so i left. (had a tiny other prob as well but hey...)

And now im back... with a different toon and a different plan.
Seeing the makers of EvE are finally watering the wine a bit so more folks can enjoy this great game, seems a good developement to me. Big smile






If you think pvp is 'something others do' and you should be exempt in some way you belong in the the dumpster behind the loony bin.



Syllviaa
Hole Exploitation Inc.
#878 - 2014-11-02 01:41:25 UTC
La Rynx wrote:
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.


Lets assume here that the guy who just stole a bunch of stuff isn't awoxing (which I didn't imply in the first place). Why should the rest of the corp be allowed to shoot him without concord intervention? Why should game mechanics protect him?

RIP Richard A. Butt

Syllviaa
Hole Exploitation Inc.
#879 - 2014-11-02 01:43:58 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 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.[/quote]

Lets assume here that the guy who just stole a bunch of stuff isn't awoxing (which I didn't imply in the first place). Why should the rest of the corp be allowed to shoot him without concord intervention? Why should game mechanics protect him?

La Rynx wrote:
Or contract Red Frog. No change here, since corporate steals are still possible.


You're assuming that this is the way things always happen. It isn't.

RIP Richard A. Butt

Ned Thomas
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#880 - 2014-11-02 01:44:04 UTC
Marsha Mallow wrote:
You know, Ned's awox story and mine were modded for being offtopic. As were a couple of remarks that had swearing, whilst the CSM ones were left untouched. Sorry for discussing moderation, but I'm guesing not only is the topic about to be nuked and locked, but anyone baited into answering back might earn a ballgag.

It's almost like there's a concerted effort here to either shut down or derail the discussion.


Was I modded? I didn't notice. I was under the impression that we were discussing removing the ability to kill corpmates without Concord intervention and why that would or would not be a good thing. If my post was modded for some reason, I'd love to know how it did not fit into such a discussion.