EVE General Discussion

Wow, I don't have a very high opinion of what you usually post, but this makes a lot of sense. (I am drunk right now so that may be the reason) I think the restrictions should not include the low null sec parts though and as this is a somewhat considerable nerf to NPC corps I might also argue it should be restricted to the allied factions instead of your faction only and you can go to the opposite factions space but Fac Po will enage like you have terrible standings.

The point behind not being able to go into low sec is to keep players from doing low roams all the time, without taking the risks of potentially being war decced for their actions.


As far as the limitations to faction territory, I suggested this limitation more specifically for casuals and traders.

You're allowed to be casual, but you're not gonna be able to move around very much.

ok...
So, i'll give you a more logical answer.

No... It's idiotic and potentially game breaking to allow NPC corps to be war decced.

It punishes players for swapping corps and/or getting kicked from corps because they're too inexperienced, or someone on a power trip decided to rage drop some people over a hot drop.

Sure. Tell me how you really feel

I was procrastinating changing the brakes on a truck.. for losing what I think is the "feel" for it (for lack of a better word), not having done it in a while. I'm going to stop using posting an excuse and get to it.

Maybe this debate has no end, like all debates of its kind.

Yeah. And don't forget the Awoxers either, Kaarous.

Whooie! Did they ever throw a fit. But y'all are still here after declaring your hate for the game that CCP destroyed with balance. None of you left. CCP didn't cave to your pathetic cries of falling skies and mass unsubs. No, you just moved to the next most risk averse PVP you could find. Like the ISBoxers are still here. Still multiboxing. Just adapted.

There's one thing that everyone has in common in this game. From the fluffiest carebear to the most heartless alliance leader, they all fill the forum with anger, threats and tears when it's their EVE that CCP is looking to fix.

Mr Epeen

Interesting idea worth fleshing out. This would have little impact on those using NPC corps because they are new, casual, or rebuilding some ISK while between gigs as they can easily do that in a single region or two, but it would put a serious crimp on veterans exploiting NPC corps for free safety.

It would be interesting for the economy too as haulers could still use NPC corps, but would have to switch out cargo at "depots" which would organically spring up on the borders of the empires. This likely might also have the effect of decentralizing trade from Jita a bit, and increase the economic activity at these border systems, at least for common trade goods.

The first problem I see is that friends that join the game together might end up on opposite sides and unable to play together but this is a problem common to many MMOs and could be mitigated by allowing players to switch NPC corps and "defect" to another empire's NPC corp with some time interval.

This is something CCP should consider when the "Empire's are losing their grip" storyline gets advanced sometime in the future.

Thank you. Was that really so hard?

It might help to explain my overall objective (currently):

Firstly, CCP Rise talks in the video about player expectations, about matching the game to fit player expectations, but also about managing player expectations. Well, in this thread, there are some people who seem to have some misaligned expectations, you and Kaarous are two such people. It seems that, perhaps, it is that you use most games and maybe most things in life as if they were passive objects, toys. You seem to expect that people on the forums and maybe in-game are supposed to just accept your terms of use. This is just my honest assessment of what I think your problem is. I could be wrong. Either way, part of what I am trying to do is to realign your expectation to an understanding that, sometimes, some toys passively accept use and abuse on whatever terms you choose, but sometimes, some toys blow up in your face when you don't use them "the right way". If you learn to think this way, it will be easier for you to accept new players into the game, not just as toys to play with and break, not just as live prey, not just as content, but as your fellow competitors, worthy of your respect.

Second, at the end of the talk, the very first question asked by the audience was about new players being diverted from the desired NPE by other players. (Some dude got ganked doing a tutorial; I think.) CCP Rise mentioned more circumstances under which a new player might not be able to get back on track. From my perspective, recruiting new players from the starter corp too early is exactly such a circumstance. The NPC starter corps are mechanisms that CCP deliberately put into the game. If you look at how they function, they serve to put players together with other players. Similarly, the local channel serves to put players together, not just physically, but socially. People going into NPC corps to disparage them, to recruit new players to be cannon fodder or victims or sheeple, these are instances of more entrenched EVE players diverting new players from the desired NPE. In wormholes, many times in null, corporation leadership will discourage their corporation members from talking in local. Again, this is a diversion, not from the intended NEW player experience, per se, but from the intended player experience, generally. Some people have argued that NPC corps should even cease to exist, which would literally divert every new player, going foward, from a part of the intended NPE as it currently stands.

So, I'm here to try to protect what I think is a useful part of the NPE as it currently stands and I'm also here to teach you to stop trying to break it.



This was not in the video you linked. (Both of your links point to the same exact thing, BTW.) If you have any more data or such a statement from CCP, please link it.
What is said in the video is that players who have "rich" experiences, such as joining player corporations (more often), tend to have of a more lasting relationship with the game. It did not say that player corporation participation was indicative of players having more "rich" experiences. You are claiming activity 'x' leads to activities 'y', and 'z', and thus outcome 'n'. The video claims that activities 'x', 'y', and 'z' indicate a greater likelihood of outcome 'n'. The video does not say why players are more likely to engage in activities such as 'x', 'y', or 'z'.

.

I always felt the NPC corps as they stood should have been a progression of Newbie Corp -> NPC Corp -> Faction Warfare Corp, with a visible mechanics slide as you go from one to the next. At present, the NPC and Newbie corps are functionally indistinguishable, with a massive leap in to Faction Warfare. Really, the Newbie Corp should be kept as-is, with some time restriction before you are nudged out the door in to the NPC corp (or opportunity or tutorial-based, or even time-in-game or sp cut-off, so that anyone actively playing gets the boot in to the NPC corp, but a trial player doesn't come back after two years hiatus to find they've been ejected despite never leaving the system they started in), and at that point, "NPC politics" similar to how you are describing come in to effect, a sort of Faction Warfare light. I say this as someone gleefully exploiting the current setup to the max; my 5-year-old hauler alt is still in the Newbie Caldari Corp, and I have no intention for her ever to leave it.

When you discuss the poster rather than the post.

That should make it clear enough.