EVE General Discussion

Let me clarify the part you so clearly avoided digesting and 'forgot' to quote from my original response...

Social corporations are intended to allow risk-averse players to have their cake and eat it too, to be part of a player organization *without risk* while still hiding out in an NPC corp and be immune to wardecs.

PERIOD.

That is all this social corp movement is about, giving pansies more cake in the comfort of hisec without a risk or conflict counter-weight.

THAT IS NOT EVE.

Tell me CCP, why after a long list of nerfs to hisec agression mechanics, are you pursuing this 'social corp' bullcrap, while leaving the obvious exploits in wardec dodging unclosed? We are by my count at a -13 to baseline HTFU, and we are STILL talking about fricken nerf candy for the carebears?

Seriously CCP, why don't you just lock everyones safeties to 'GREEN' upon entering hisec and be done with it? Your doing the nerfs in small paper cuts to go 'unnoticed'...fricken COWARDS.

There once was a dream that was EvE online, this is not it. THIS IS NOT IT.

F

No. Just no. You fail at even understanding the basic idea here. That is not why i fly NPSI, it is not why any of us fly NPSI with these public social groups. We do for fun and pvp. Most of us are not in NPC corps, we can be wardec and indeed are often close to constantly wardeced. We are not avoiding anything.

Why the actual **** are you calling anyone "princess" in a conversation where you clearly want to be taken seriously?

You may as well start every post by announcing "I'm a total sperg please ignore me."

Can chat channels be wardecced? Yes or No.

1. Citation Needed
2. If you're going to call me Princess, I demand a crown.
3. If you don't know why social corps are needed or what purpose they fulfil, you should really STFU instead of HTFU.

Excellent point, further invalidating the need for social corps at all. If people wanting social corps can today just use chat channels to organize, then what is the point of a formal 'social corp' construct?

WARDEC AVOIDANCE.

Think you shot yourself in the head there dude. :)

I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.

You also missed my point entirely. Chat channels cannot be wardecced because they are a group of people who socialize, corporations can be wardecced because they are an entity that owns things. Unless you're doing the spaceship equivalent of declaring a "war on terror" or a "jihad on freedom" your war is pointless and changes nothing. To that extent, there is still the need for tools or an organizational structure in order to facilitate the creation of these social groups and allow new people to find them.

something something interact with real players something something.

Seems I struck a nerve, calling out what 'social corps' are really about; carebears be getting all riled up that the cat is out of the bag that its all about just making un-wardecable corporations.

It really is simple to fix kids though, as I said, I am flexible....

If you want the benefits of corporation mechanics with your 'corp lite' construct, then membership in said corp lite should allow for incoming wardecs, including those NPC members within.

Done. If we can simply agree on that, I am ok with corp lite.

Problem is, you pansies will never agree to those terms will you, because deep down YOU KNOW this whole social corp concept is just smoke and mirrors for creating un-wardecable corps.

Having your cake and eating it too IS NOT EVE.

Prove me wrong. Go on. Everyone who says I am out to lunch here, simply confirm support for that proposal; that everyone joining a corp-lite or social corp will become subject to war declarations just like a regular corp, and we can all move on.

I wont hold my breath. Sperg on o' carebears, sperg on.

F

Do you, or do you not, support the concept of corp-lite's or social corps being wardeccable? Yes or No.

Game. Set. Match.

some people just don't know what to do when there aren't 20 neutral logi to support their fight against targets that can't fight back.

What are people envisioning for in-game social organizations?

Some brainstorming thoughts of mine, without consideration of their worth or completeness

Social groups are a collection of in-game tools to foster discussion, cooperation and interaction outside existing EVE alliances/corps.

• Shared calendar to post events, triggering in-game notifications
• Discussion mailing list
• Fittings library
• List of all kills and losses by members
• List of current active fleets available to be joined
• Friends/enemies list (possibly just a list, but maybe with the ability to "import standings" for such entities?)
• Buy/sell market orders private to the group (this idea bothers me actually, but just throwing it out there)

Social groups, similar to player corps, have founders, organizer, and roles.
Founder starts as organizer, but that can be transferred.
Roles can be granted by the organizer and include:

• Recruiter - can approve applications and kick members
• Moderator - can mute players in chat channels and revoke posting privileges to mailing list
• Scheduler - can add and remove calendar items
• Editor - create and edit MOTD, fittings library, and frenemy lists
• Etc

Social groups can NOT do the following:

• Share hangars or wallets
• Co-own structures or sovereignty
• Allow friendly fire
• Divulge members' locations

Players must apply to, and be accepted by, groups in order to participate.
A social group UI window will list all groups including name, number of members, last activity date, description...
The NPE will emphasize such groups to new players and advocate for their use.
Players may leave groups at any time without any delay.
Players may be members of multiple groups at the same time.


ps - off topic, but regarding highsec, ganking, wardecs and the like... I think the current mechanics would be great with one little tweak... Namely, zero consequences for aggressing a ship that has any offensive modules or drones fitted. (A POS would still be subject to CONCORD protection outside of a wardec.) So Ivicek can sit next to Jita 4-4 at his optimal and trade Tornados for multi-billion blockade runners all day long - but I can also aggress him in my Vexor because CONCORD figures he's in a combat ship and should be able to take care of himself. Similarly, Ivicek can proactively engage my Vexor without worrying about being CONCORDed for the exact same reason. Fleets of Catalysts and Taloses can still move around looking for Retreivers. But fleets of Police Pursuit Comets can fly around looking for Catalysts. And Gilas can fly around looking for Comets. Etc. Wardecs would continue allowing non combat ships and POSes to be shot without CONCORD interference, like normal. But 3rd parties can get involved and support either side. Or shoot both sides. And in turn be subject to involvement by 4th parties. (This would really screw with highsec Incursion and security mission runners, though.)