Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Better late than never. This should have happened years ago, along suicide tanks and wardeccing, awoxing is one of the main reasons for the negative growth is EVE.

If you cant even answer my question, what the **** are you doing posting in favor of its removal??

I get that Eve is supposed to be a harsh, cold universe and all, but one of the major downsides to Eve is that it has historically been very hard to join up with other players and work together. This denies many people the social aspect of Eve and that really hurts retention.

This comic is very appropriate.

I don't want to see Eve become truly less dangerous, but I also really don't give a **** about some highsec AWOXer having to adapt his gameplay if it results in a few more retentions.

Wardeccing has a time and a place, for highsec, whether you feel a corporation should be allowed to wardec as many as 120 others at any time is a different matter.

Whether people should even be allowed to exist in an NPC corporation after joining a player corporation is another question. Whether highsec is too big, too many missions, too high payout, too much ore, too many moons for POS, POS guns even being allowed, wardecs being a *thing*, bumping, Globby tactics, the lack of a diverse resource economy, gluttony of accounts, too many alts, not enough gate pirates, AFK cloaking, ISBOXing (it's still happening, reporting is a proactive process), Awoxing of the weak, needing the weak to awox, being weak enough to need to awox, weapon and ship imbalance, no caps in highsec (due to change apparently, under consideration etc) and all the spectrum of events that flow from these things.

There's dozens of failures in the game that cumulatively are pushing new players out. And CCP have said they're finnicky about touching them because highsec carebears constitute the greater portion of their playerbase. If movements like CODE were having serious implications for sub counts you think CCP wouldn't have outlawed them and IP banned them? Like they do to exploiters? Oh Jesus no don't be so naive, CODE and it's flunky pretenders would have been extinguished years ago. Don't **** with CCP's bottom line. IIRC even the guys who pulled a fast one on the original FW revamp LP award system got banned despite it all being clearly above the belt.



I don't think you really grasp the issue. The issue isn't really awoxing the issue is why we've been led to this scenario in the first place.

If thats what its really about, catering to the masses of carebears, then EVE has pulled/is going to pull an 'ultima online'.

If i ever believe thats whats happening, i will be QQing.

But you still havent said why YOU are in favour of removing it. You still havent answered my question.

Why cant crimewatch deal with this? If it can be made to start a Criminal timer, why cant shooting corpies start a LE?

Quoting some relevant parts.

Probably because this "integral part" is having a significantly detrimental effect on people experiencing the other "integral parts" of EVE.

Ya'll yelling slippery slopes and death of hisec, would you care to explain how you got into this argument now seeing how this discussion wasn't as vibrant when CONCORD was made invincible?

I think you're too attached to the status quo of things to imagine a system which will benefit every walk of life more in the long run. Yes, removing PvP options is not the ideal situation, but the targets are still there. If they undock, they consent to PvP and are as valid targets. It takes, what, a handful over a dozen catalysts to pop the most blinged out mission boat (theyr'e not ships, ships are for PvP)?

If CCP's projections of player retention come to fruition with this change and they can continue to work towards the total removal of safe NPC corps from hisec then this first step is an easy one to implement and revert at any point. Of course, you'd see this if you read this whole post and didn't take the bait on first 2 paragraphs, we'll see.

Another important feature removed