These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Proposed Changes Empire Space and some supporting changes

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#241 - 2015-05-01 11:03:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Income generating or ISK generating?


Income. Both missions and incursions generate LP as an asset, and mining generates ore.

Those are activities that generate something into the game world. Just about everything else in the game, even manufacturing, simply moves assets around, alters them, or destroys them. (edit: I forgot about insurance, which generates isk in a somewhat roundabout fashion. But that is a whole other kettle of fish)

It's not just "anything you do that can possibly make money", I am, and have been, talking about activities that generate assets into the game.

But then, I have said that, what? At least twice now in this thread alone?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#242 - 2015-05-01 11:04:21 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Income generating or ISK generating?



Actually it's completely irrelevant to the thread at hand. This is about wardecs and making them more meaningful, encouraging people to be in player corps and fight back.

To do that, all NPC members should feel that any pressure applied equally, what we have is an attempt to only harm aspects of the game certain individuals dislike or are disdainful of.

War should be meaningful to all, not just the people you don't like.


The place for a risk/reward debate is elsewhere.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#243 - 2015-05-01 11:07:56 UTC
afkalt wrote:

Actually it's completely irrelevant to the thread at hand.


Proving that you didn't even read the OP before you jumped right in to trolling.


Quote:

War should be meaningful to all, not just the people you don't like.


Then let's just make the NPC corps at war with each other by default, permanently. Amarr vs Minmatar, Caldari vs Gallente. That'd fit the lore, too.

How do you feel about that idea?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#244 - 2015-05-01 11:17:37 UTC
so, I have an alt who does some market and hauls contracts. He's, by your logic, not generating income and should be excluded from wardecability. Or that other alt in his corp who just helps the first alt move stuff around from contracts. Oh, and then there is that alt who does some ransoming to gain more ISK. Do I understand that correctly? vOv

@afkalt
I don't know if that is irrelevant to the topic or not. If wardecs are meant to curb income potential, it should apply to each and every form of income. So far, some people like to exclude some forms of income generated in NPC corp safety.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#245 - 2015-05-01 11:22:35 UTC
I wouldn't really mind, so long as it affects all the people equally and that is key, you don't get to just hit one group whilst protecting another when it comes to war.

I hazard it would deliver a wrecking shot to CCPs balance sheet though, but it wouldn't bother me or my gameplay style in the slightest.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#246 - 2015-05-01 11:29:57 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Rivr Luzade wrote:
@afkalt
I don't know if that is irrelevant to the topic or not. If wardecs are meant to curb income potential, it should apply to each and every form of income. So far, some people like to exclude some forms of income generated in NPC corp safety.


I agree. I meant that just because player X does activity Y under the cover of NPCs, they should not be punished or pushed "just because" whilst player A does activity B under the cover of NPCs is rolling off freely.

My point was more the whole "income" thing is a highly selective viewpoint to preserve the actions of people taking full and complete advantage of NPC corp protection yet punish a subset of players. Whereas if the debate is really about making wars more meaningful and consequential that is thoroughly inappropriate.

Wars already disrupt player corp income pretty effectively to be honest, just people don't acknowledge it. Indys get hit hard, mission bears start sucking up NPC taxes or not running at all.

The proposition was to make wars better - via a stick. Yet selectively applied.

It is hypocritical to take the position of hating on NPC corps and war evasion (I refer not to you here) whilst using and defending those same tools to further their goals in game. The very notion is imbalanced by default.

If one suggests punishing mission bears, one must punish haulers/scanners/probers/traders/etc/etc. To do anything else is not about balance or wars but just to have a pop at the affected sub community (which should live in its own thread).
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#247 - 2015-05-01 13:17:18 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
so, I have an alt who does some market and hauls contracts. He's, by your logic, not generating income and should be excluded from wardecability.


Nope. I'm saying that, for a character that does their thing in a station, such as a trader, there is no need to rework their activity to be in line with risk vs reward.

They are not part of that equation.

Neutral haulers on the other hand, get out of that because the only real solution to stop people from using NPC corps to haul things would be to use the extremely heavy handed approach of barring them the use of certain kinds of ships, which I feel is quite uncalled for.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#248 - 2015-05-01 13:25:54 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
so, I have an alt who does some market and hauls contracts. He's, by your logic, not generating income and should be excluded from wardecability.


Nope. I'm saying that, for a character that does their thing in a station, such as a trader, there is no need to rework their activity to be in line with risk vs reward.

They are not part of that equation.

Neutral haulers on the other hand, get out of that because the only real solution to stop people from using NPC corps to haul things would be to use the extremely heavy handed approach of barring them the use of certain kinds of ships, which I feel is quite uncalled for.


You could go with something hilarious for haulers like intra "empire" import taxes.

Big smile
Noragen Neirfallas
Emotional Net Loss
#249 - 2015-05-01 15:34:17 UTC
OK perhaps my wording is the issue. The idea is to create more localized conflicts over resources while providing a way out for people who don't want to risk conflict. I also intended to make merc corps just that instead of the current alliances that exist. Decs for kills will always happen but the 'juicy' groups will likely also have PvP wings to hold their territory. Anybody not interested in this can make social corps. Also by hard limiting offensive wardecs assist or otherwise it should limit what is being referred to as a grief DEC.

So to rework it how does this sound NPC corps 10% tax. SC 0% tax before player tax. PC 0% tax before player tax. PC can anchor the proposed structures. High sec gets 10% less base yields to balance the equations

How does this sound?

Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragens basically the Chribba of C&P - Zimmy Zeta

Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop

ISD Buldath favorite ISD

'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King Griffin
Tengu Grib
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#250 - 2015-05-01 15:41:19 UTC
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:
OK perhaps my wording is the issue. The idea is to create more localized conflicts over resources while providing a way out for people who don't want to risk conflict. I also intended to make merc corps just that instead of the current alliances that exist. Decs for kills will always happen but the 'juicy' groups will likely also have PvP wings to hold their territory. Anybody not interested in this can make social corps. Also by hard limiting offensive wardecs assist or otherwise it should limit what is being referred to as a grief DEC.

So to rework it how does this sound NPC corps 10% tax. SC 0% tax before player tax. PC 0% tax before player tax. PC can anchor the proposed structures. High sec gets 10% less base yields to balance the equations

How does this sound?


What about the situation where I truly despise my war targets and want to crush the very life out of their corporations and their morale? Under your suggested system such a vengeance war would not be possible, or at least it's effects rather easy to avoid. Or depending on how it's setup, some corporations might be vulnerable to it, but others not. But why should I not be allowed to single out an entity which has grieved me in some way, and crush them under my boot?

If anything such wars are a more integral part of what Eve's war decs need to be capable of than mundane competition over resources and territory.

Rabble Rabble Rabble

Praise James, Supreme Protector of High Sec.
Noragen Neirfallas
Emotional Net Loss
#251 - 2015-05-01 15:50:53 UTC
Tengu Grib wrote:
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:
OK perhaps my wording is the issue. The idea is to create more localized conflicts over resources while providing a way out for people who don't want to risk conflict. I also intended to make merc corps just that instead of the current alliances that exist. Decs for kills will always happen but the 'juicy' groups will likely also have PvP wings to hold their territory. Anybody not interested in this can make social corps. Also by hard limiting offensive wardecs assist or otherwise it should limit what is being referred to as a grief DEC.

So to rework it how does this sound NPC corps 10% tax. SC 0% tax before player tax. PC 0% tax before player tax. PC can anchor the proposed structures. High sec gets 10% less base yields to balance the equations

How does this sound?


What about the situation where I truly despise my war targets and want to crush the very life out of their corporations and their morale? Under your suggested system such a vengeance war would not be possible, or at least it's effects rather easy to avoid. Or depending on how it's setup, some corporations might be vulnerable to it, but others not. But why should I not be allowed to single out an entity which has grieved me in some way, and crush them under my boot?

If anything such wars are a more integral part of what Eve's war decs need to be capable of than mundane competition over resources and territory.

If they are in a PC DEC away just don't have too many such enemies at once Blink. If they stick to a SC/NPC Corp you got all the same options as current NPC/ DEC dodgers. Gank them lol.

Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragens basically the Chribba of C&P - Zimmy Zeta

Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop

ISD Buldath favorite ISD

'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King Griffin
Noragen Neirfallas
Emotional Net Loss
#252 - 2015-05-02 02:18:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Noragen Neirfallas
I also note this cut off discussion. No more ideas or objections based on reason?

Also I don't ever see the Leech structure being a thing I added it cause it sounds interesting without actually adding resources into the game. It would take up a moon anchor spot like a POS so you couldn't have both in one spot.

Also @ all the POS discussion. POS's in Highsec take a stupid amount of manpower and man hours to destroy. It's never worth it with how easy it is to take your assets out/deny them so that's why POS's wont drive conflict. As things stand there are what a half dozen dedicated high-sec groups even capable of taking down a properly defended large POS.

This is why I proposed entosis link structures because if 2 20 man corps wanna fight over some back end constellation nobody has ever heard of they can. If 2 500 man mega corps wanna brawl it out over Aulari (Osmons Constellation) They also can. However if a 20 man corp wants a Corp Struct in Osmon they only have to compete with the moon spaces available so if they have PvP capabilities they will be able to place one over a group that doesn't. But this doesn't count out the non PvP corps they simply get no 'bonus' for not risking the PvP and staying in a non deccable corp. People will choose a corp based on play style.

Perhaps remove corp size restrictions from the OP?

Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragens basically the Chribba of C&P - Zimmy Zeta

Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop

ISD Buldath favorite ISD

'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King Griffin
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#253 - 2015-05-02 02:33:47 UTC
If the intended result of this proposal is to kill small corporations, it will definitely succeed at it. What I see happening is that this will simply drive more players into NPC corporations (where they'll have to just work a little harder to offset the additional tax hit) and you'll see larger mercenary corporations (maybe) attacking each other over the constellation-area structures to gain a +15% boost to their PvE activities. On the other hand, they may just divide up high-sec in a similar fashion as was done for POCOs.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Noragen Neirfallas
Emotional Net Loss
#254 - 2015-05-02 02:42:45 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
If the intended result of this proposal is to kill small corporations, it will definitely succeed at it. What I see happening is that this will simply drive more players into NPC corporations (where they'll have to just work a little harder to offset the additional tax hit) and you'll see larger mercenary corporations (maybe) attacking each other over the constellation-area structures to gain a +15% boost to their PvE activities. On the other hand, they may just divide up high-sec in a similar fashion as was done for POCOs.

except for the part where the social corps aren't wardeccable and small corps are currently dead in high sec as is. Infact any time a corp approaches 20-30 members its ground into the dust by the mercenaries. These changes coupled with the limited number of decs will mean that smaller corps are much more likely to thrive and larger corps would need to PvP in order to hold onto valuable constellations. also there are a lot of constellations about the place highsec could hardly be divided up between a few groups...

Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragens basically the Chribba of C&P - Zimmy Zeta

Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop

ISD Buldath favorite ISD

'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King Griffin
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#255 - 2015-05-02 03:37:00 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
If the intended result of this proposal is to kill small corporations, it will definitely succeed at it.


One wonders on what merit those small PvE corps that depend on dec dodging exist in the first place.

As far as personal income, making player corps worth fighting for would incentivize people to not recruit so one sidedly, and then they'd be capable of fighting back.

Would it destroy the current paradigm of highsec corps? Probably, but that's not a bad thing.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#256 - 2015-05-02 05:48:26 UTC
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:
also there are a lot of constellations about the place highsec could hardly be divided up between a few groups...

That coming from Marmite, who together with RVB just kicked PIRAT around in the Domain area only to let small corps' pocos fall back to PIRAT is almost comical.

Currently, there is no point in small corps holding assets in economical areas unless they do it by the security by obscurity paradigm, neither will it be after such a change. They would, just as now, be forced to go to less and less attractive areas of space, where no one cares to go, and where they have less means to make money and where transportation cost, for instance, eats up a lot of the potential profits of production. I indeed see a lot of strive here.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Noragen Neirfallas
Emotional Net Loss
#257 - 2015-05-02 06:06:17 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:
also there are a lot of constellations about the place highsec could hardly be divided up between a few groups...

That coming from Marmite, who together with RVB just kicked PIRAT around in the Domain area only to let small corps' pocos fall back to PIRAT is almost comical.

Currently, there is no point in small corps holding assets in economical areas unless they do it by the security by obscurity paradigm, neither will it be after such a change. They would, just as now, be forced to go to less and less attractive areas of space, where no one cares to go, and where they have less means to make money and where transportation cost, for instance, eats up a lot of the potential profits of production. I indeed see a lot of strive here.

How do you propose our groups like PIRAT and Marmite A could continue to exist with these changes and B could/ would hold more then one area at a time

Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragens basically the Chribba of C&P - Zimmy Zeta

Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop

ISD Buldath favorite ISD

'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King Griffin
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#258 - 2015-05-02 06:16:40 UTC
By lack of opposition. You should realize full well that, when you take the past into consideration, no change to encourage more corporation activity and fight for what you want to keep has resulted in any significant change of behavior in players. They always chose the path of least resistance.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#259 - 2015-05-02 06:33:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:
except for the part where the social corps aren't wardeccable and small corps are currently dead in high sec as is. Infact any time a corp approaches 20-30 members its ground into the dust by the mercenaries. These changes coupled with the limited number of decs will mean that smaller corps are much more likely to thrive and larger corps would need to PvP in order to hold onto valuable constellations. also there are a lot of constellations about the place highsec could hardly be divided up between a few groups...

Except why pay $50-million for effectively the same benefits of an NPC corporation? As soon as you hit 20 members you have the options of capping membership, disbanding or paying another $200-million to upgrade your corporation - at which point you can be ground into the dust by the mercenaries.

You can count the number of alliances that effectively hold the vast majority of high-sec POCOs on one hand. And these are system-specific. How would constellation-wide be any different?

With respect to small high-sec corporations, I agree with your assessment. Between AWOX'ing and WarDecs they've been effectively harvested for entertainment. And that's before we even get into things like ganking, off-grid boosting and neutral rep'ing alts. High-sec is the shallow end of the kiddy pool. Maybe it's long overdue for some of the larger corporations to be relocated to low-sec.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Noragen Neirfallas
Emotional Net Loss
#260 - 2015-05-02 06:43:59 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
By lack of opposition. You should realize full well that, when you take the past into consideration, no change to encourage more corporation activity and fight for what you want to keep has resulted in any significant change of behavior in players. They always chose the path of least resistance.

But there are no benefits short a pos for a corp. This gives a significant benefit. As far as a merc group controlling these they may take one for an ALT corp but the current alliances that do this would likely fragment and being mercs wouldn't have any interest in holding a bunch of pave structures on ALT corps. One suggestion to stop this was adding a requirement of activity in the constellation before you could contest a structure.

Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragens basically the Chribba of C&P - Zimmy Zeta

Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop

ISD Buldath favorite ISD

'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King Griffin