These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

New corporation and Alliance type

Author
Lugh Crow-Slave
#21 - 2017-01-13 19:23:15 UTC
what you want is all the benefit of being in a corp with none of the risk. that's not how eve works
SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#22 - 2017-01-13 19:31:59 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Mala Zvitorepka wrote:
I prefer solution the other way. Make corps cost (flat X M/month), so it has some value to be in a larger 20+ member industrial corp than to have 20 corps with 1 member each, only sharing comms and being blue to each other. Double members = half the cost per member. But a much nicer target. Want to be safer or more cost efficient? You can't have both.
And to fix NPC corp alts, make those corps and even factions wardec each other every now and then, so you don't have perfect safety even then.
And to fix industrials that only sit in stations in total safety, make NPC stations not viable and perhaps even destructible in the wars mentioned above. They can still sit in player stations, but those might explode.

Problem solved. In a way you probably do not like :)

(and yes, this is my current main, which runs an alt corp.)


Making large corps so they can be wardeced isnt going to be cheaper it will be more expensive when your members are dying 23/7. This is the problem only now on steroids.

What need to station traders have for my suggestion, absolutely zero.


Quote:
Currently some white-knights do form up and protect any indy ship in distress if they can, i have tried to do so before myself. But if you have 500 people in indys flying around highsec space the dec mechanic will destroy you period, not maybe, it will happen since the dec corp makes a LOT of money killing you, while your group loses money because they make almost nothing killing their attacking dec corp. The financial realities are what make this not work and why most haulers are in NPC or one-man corps at the moment.



Oh FFS. If your members are killed 23/7 by wardecs, it's almost invariably your own damn fault.

The problem is that you want everything without having to compromise on anything.

"I want a 200 man corp of permanently AFK miners sitting within a few jumps of a major trade hub and I don't want to have to even think about security concerns because it's not fair," isn't a reasoned argument.

First of all, the larger wardec-everyone organizations? Yeah, they don't really "go hunting" all that often. They sit in a hub or on the pipes and blap whatever fat, stupid lemming trundles into them face first. There are VAST swaths of high sec - LITERALLY most of high sec - where you can take a good sized corp and go live almost entirely free of any war-related concerns. You just have to compromise on the convenience of living in a high-traffic area.

If you have 500 people flying around high-traffic areas of highsec while under a wardec, whose fault is that? Were they unaware of the wardec? Did they not know what it means? Why didn't they take steps to avoid faceplanting into a hostile force?

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#23 - 2017-01-13 19:59:11 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
So what's the downside?


They cannot wardec anyone or officially be associated with anyone or any group that does. This is basically the same benefit they get for being in an industrial corp.


So there is quite literally no reason that goonswarm federation, and every single other nullsec, whormhole, lowsec or...basically everyone who isn't a merc or a wardeccer should not become an industrial corp or alliance then?
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#24 - 2017-01-13 22:00:24 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
what you want is all the benefit of being in a corp with none of the risk. that's not how eve works



To be fair, this sounds eerily familiar to how wardecs currently work. Zero risk.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#25 - 2017-01-13 22:36:14 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Currently some white-knights do form up and protect any indy ship in distress if they can, i have tried to do so before myself. But if you have 500 people in indys flying around highsec space the dec mechanic will destroy you period, not maybe, it will happen since the dec corp makes a LOT of money killing you, while your group loses money because they make almost nothing killing their attacking dec corp. The financial realities are what make this not work and why most haulers are in NPC or one-man corps at the moment.


You do realize if you kill the ships of the corp that wardecced you without dying, you make ISK with their loot. Dock your industrials and reship to PvP. Or more logically, leave HS and go to null where you can be in alliances with standing defense fleets 24/7. Null is safer than HS as it is...
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#26 - 2017-01-13 23:14:00 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
while im willing to discuss counter-points of view, if your point is nothing more than mouthing off sarcastically dont expect a response from me.


Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

How would they mission run and also be protecting ships 23/7 ?


Likewise.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Lugh Crow-Slave
#27 - 2017-01-14 04:49:42 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
what you want is all the benefit of being in a corp with none of the risk. that's not how eve works



To be fair, this sounds eerily familiar to how wardecs currently work. Zero risk.



there is still risk. WT are easy to trap and they tend to fly bling ships for some reason
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#28 - 2017-01-14 05:13:08 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
what you want is all the benefit of being in a corp with none of the risk. that's not how eve works



To be fair, this sounds eerily familiar to how wardecs currently work. Zero risk.



there is still risk. WT are easy to trap and they tend to fly bling ships for some reason

The main difference between the current wardec mechanics and this proposal is that it isn't the wardec mechanics that limit the risk, it's the players.

This proposal involves eliminating risk from the game right in the mechanics themselves, with unfortunately no real downsides to balance that low risk.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#29 - 2017-01-14 06:08:32 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
what you want is all the benefit of being in a corp with none of the risk. that's not how eve works



To be fair, this sounds eerily familiar to how wardecs currently work. Zero risk.



there is still risk. WT are easy to trap and they tend to fly bling ships for some reason

The main difference between the current wardec mechanics and this proposal is that it isn't the wardec mechanics that limit the risk, it's the players.

This proposal involves eliminating risk from the game right in the mechanics themselves, with unfortunately no real downsides to balance that low risk.



station mechanics remove a lot of the risk in war dec. I wish they worked like citadels if you are pointed/scrammed no docking
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#30 - 2017-01-14 07:41:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
station mechanics remove a lot of the risk in war dec. I wish they worked like citadels if you are pointed/scrammed no docking

How does they work differently for an attacker or a defender?
Lugh Crow-Slave
#31 - 2017-01-14 08:50:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
station mechanics remove a lot of the risk in war dec. I wish they worked like citadels if you are pointed/scrammed no docking

How does they work differently for an attacker or a defender?



who said they did?
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#32 - 2017-01-15 10:42:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Danika Princip wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
So what's the downside?


They cannot wardec anyone or officially be associated with anyone or any group that does. This is basically the same benefit they get for being in an industrial corp.


So there is quite literally no reason that goonswarm federation, and every single other nullsec, whormhole, lowsec or...basically everyone who isn't a merc or a wardeccer should not become an industrial corp or alliance then?


This is a good point. Since the proposal is based on the idea of being able to fly under a common banner and function to a degree as a corporation or alliance perhaps making them less desirable as a general option is a good idea. The following ideas are just that, not fine tuned but only presented as possible options to make choosing this new corporation type much less desirable in general and more for its intended purpose.

1) You could only join a fleet with your own members.
2) You could not join a fleet, even of your own members, for certain non-industrial goals like running incursions or security missions.
3) You could still participate in solo activities like running missions you simply couldnt fleet up to do them.
4) You could move from an NPC corp to an industrial corp instantly or from one industrial corp to another instantly but you would have to go through a one week cool-off period before you could join a traditional corporation and during this time you would still be under all the restrictions of being in an industrial corporation. The reverse is also true, if you are in a traditional corporation you would have to go through a one week cool-off period before joining an industrial corporation
5) The corporation is designed mostly to allow you to do things like have a corporate wallet, have corporate offices and the like and other restrictions might be necessary to ensure that choosing to be in and industrial corporation wasnt the go to choice for every corporation or every player.

I mentioned this in an earlier post that fine tuning of the idea would need to be done both before and after industrial corporations were created and the ideas above might represent that type of tuning.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#33 - 2017-01-15 10:52:50 UTC
Mala Zvitorepka wrote:
I prefer solution the other way. Make corps cost (flat X M/month), so it has some value to be in a larger 20+ member industrial corp than to have 20 corps with 1 member each, only sharing comms and being blue to each other. Double members = half the cost per member. But a much nicer target. Want to be safer or more cost efficient? You can't have both.
And to fix NPC corp alts, make those corps and even factions wardec each other every now and then, so you don't have perfect safety even then.
And to fix industrials that only sit in stations in total safety, make NPC stations not viable and perhaps even destructible in the wars mentioned above. They can still sit in player stations, but those might explode.

Problem solved. In a way you probably do not like :)

(and yes, this is my current main, which runs an alt corp.)


Most of what you propose has nothing to do with the topic at hand but i will address one point. The problem is that we cannot form corporations now, your proposed financial punishment for small corps makes the problem even worse and we still could not form larger groups for the reasons i stated.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Dolorous Tremmens
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2017-01-15 19:49:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Dolorous Tremmens
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
So what's the downside?


They cannot wardec anyone or officially be associated with anyone or any group that does. This is basically the same benefit they get for being in an industrial corp.


So there is quite literally no reason that goonswarm federation, and every single other nullsec, whormhole, lowsec or...basically everyone who isn't a merc or a wardeccer should not become an industrial corp or alliance then?


This is a good point. Since the proposal is based on the idea of being able to fly under a common banner and function to a degree as a corporation or alliance perhaps making them less desirable as a general option is a good idea. The following ideas are just that, not fine tuned but only presented as possible options to make choosing this new corporation type much less desirable in general and more for its intended purpose.

1) You could only join a fleet with your own members.
2) You could not join a fleet, even of your own members, for certain non-industrial goals like running incursions or security missions.
3) You could still participate in solo activities like running missions you simply couldnt fleet up to do them.
4) You could move from an NPC corp to an industrial corp instantly or from one industrial corp to another instantly but you would have to go through a one week cool-off period before you could join a traditional corporation and during this time you would still be under all the restrictions of being in an industrial corporation. The reverse is also true, if you are in a traditional corporation you would have to go through a one week cool-off period before joining an industrial corporation
5) The corporation is designed mostly to allow you to do things like have a corporate wallet, have corporate offices and the like and other restrictions might be necessary to ensure that choosing to be in and industrial corporation wasnt the go to choice for every corporation or every player.

I mentioned this in an earlier post that fine tuning of the idea would need to be done both before and after industrial corporations were created and the ideas above might represent that type of tuning.


You don't understand the breakable aspect of this. There are official standings and they are marked in colors. all that would happen is that larger meaner entities would move all their industry alts to industry corps and set them blue.

To forestall the next "idea" that you could not set standings with an industry corp, there are already unofficial standings that exist as handshake/gentleman's agreements out of game and are not represented in game for purposes of espionage and reputation.

There seems to be a lot of "saving the phenomenon" happening. The wardec system isn't perfect but being exmept from it would be broken.

Get some Eve. Make it yours.

Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2017-01-16 17:40:17 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
So what's the downside?


They cannot wardec anyone or officially be associated with anyone or any group that does. This is basically the same benefit they get for being in an industrial corp.


So there is quite literally no reason that goonswarm federation, and every single other nullsec, whormhole, lowsec or...basically everyone who isn't a merc or a wardeccer should not become an industrial corp or alliance then?



As far as this single concern goes:


Restrict Industrial corps from owning/anchoring structures(citadels/towers, not MTU's).

Also lock them into safety yellow/green.



As pointed out, it's impossible to limit them via standings because of out of game gameplay, and it's pretty well impossible to limit what exactly a fleet is going to do.


It also forces them to still have something that can be attacked, or use NPC stations, and allows them to rep/assist each other/defend themselves, but limits their ability to attack others.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal

Lugh Crow-Slave
#36 - 2017-01-17 01:35:40 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
The problem is that we cannot form corporations now



here i could have sworn i ran an alliance geared around building up mostly indi corps made by new players. guess i must have dreamed it since such corps cannot be formed now.
Code Redd
Free Terrans League
Legendary-Rejects
#37 - 2017-01-17 02:30:41 UTC
OP, i take your suggestion and raise it to... reasonable... maybe.

New type of corp--indy corp. Cant be war dec'd at all, UNLESS they have a citadel, in empire space. If they have one of those, they can be dec'd. They can have them in null.

Second, they are safety-locked GREEN. Cant even switch to yellow.

Third, they have a BASE tax rate of 11%, that goes directly to CCP. The corp tax rate can be higher than that, but the first 11% goes to CCP.

Fourth, like yours, they cannot join FW, or any other war-decable organization. An alliance too can be an industrial type .. but it would compound the tax rate, so the base rate would be 22%. The tax rate would also apply to LP rewards in missions and incursions.

This, i feel, would discourage them from using the corps as shelters for mission runners. It would totally disable the use of the corp for gankers and pvprs alike (outside null sec).

It has some strong drawbacks, and some strong upsides.
Nat Silverguard
Aideron Robotics
#38 - 2017-01-17 12:43:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Nat Silverguard
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Why is it unrealistic to have a combat wing? What about mission runners in your corp?


because once your combat wing enjoyed the combat they will want to do combat and will drift away from the indy stuff.

that's what happened to my corp (years before i joined), there's even an article about them when they were still an indy corp.

http://www.gameskinny.com/5b56a/exploring-eve-online-4-the-aura-of-aideron-robotics

Just Add Water

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#39 - 2017-01-20 16:16:41 UTC
Dolorous Tremmens wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
So what's the downside?


They cannot wardec anyone or officially be associated with anyone or any group that does. This is basically the same benefit they get for being in an industrial corp.


So there is quite literally no reason that goonswarm federation, and every single other nullsec, whormhole, lowsec or...basically everyone who isn't a merc or a wardeccer should not become an industrial corp or alliance then?


This is a good point. Since the proposal is based on the idea of being able to fly under a common banner and function to a degree as a corporation or alliance perhaps making them less desirable as a general option is a good idea. The following ideas are just that, not fine tuned but only presented as possible options to make choosing this new corporation type much less desirable in general and more for its intended purpose.

1) You could only join a fleet with your own members.
2) You could not join a fleet, even of your own members, for certain non-industrial goals like running incursions or security missions.
3) You could still participate in solo activities like running missions you simply couldnt fleet up to do them.
4) You could move from an NPC corp to an industrial corp instantly or from one industrial corp to another instantly but you would have to go through a one week cool-off period before you could join a traditional corporation and during this time you would still be under all the restrictions of being in an industrial corporation. The reverse is also true, if you are in a traditional corporation you would have to go through a one week cool-off period before joining an industrial corporation
5) The corporation is designed mostly to allow you to do things like have a corporate wallet, have corporate offices and the like and other restrictions might be necessary to ensure that choosing to be in and industrial corporation wasnt the go to choice for every corporation or every player.

I mentioned this in an earlier post that fine tuning of the idea would need to be done both before and after industrial corporations were created and the ideas above might represent that type of tuning.


You don't understand the breakable aspect of this. There are official standings and they are marked in colors. all that would happen is that larger meaner entities would move all their industry alts to industry corps and set them blue.

To forestall the next "idea" that you could not set standings with an industry corp, there are already unofficial standings that exist as handshake/gentleman's agreements out of game and are not represented in game for purposes of espionage and reputation.

There seems to be a lot of "saving the phenomenon" happening. The wardec system isn't perfect but being exmept from it would be broken.


This idea is 'forming' not completed. I have zero problem with any alliance forming an indy wing and setting it to blue, this is essentially being done already just using the bootstrap of having them in NPC corps or small corps. i do see now that such restrictions as set for above would have little impact unless they were set account wide, which still could be gotten around but cost more.

The basic idea is a restricted type of corp / alliance that can perform basic functions like having a corp wallet, offices etc and not be wardec'd. Large alliances having an indy wing isnt a problem since the ships protected would be restricted to only a few types, like mining ships and hauling vessels which have little combat utility. Those ships could already form a fleet and attack in highsec space i have seen an entire fleet of industrials that did kill an industrial ship so there is no real difference for them than they can do now, it is just so infeasible to take out a tanked skiff for instance in 50, 100? i dont know how many it would take of industrial ships just to kill one miner and as i mentioned there is nothing from stopping them from doing that already.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#40 - 2017-01-20 16:21:53 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
So what's the downside?


They cannot wardec anyone or officially be associated with anyone or any group that does. This is basically the same benefit they get for being in an industrial corp.


So there is quite literally no reason that goonswarm federation, and every single other nullsec, whormhole, lowsec or...basically everyone who isn't a merc or a wardeccer should not become an industrial corp or alliance then?



As far as this single concern goes:


Restrict Industrial corps from owning/anchoring structures(citadels/towers, not MTU's).

Also lock them into safety yellow/green.



As pointed out, it's impossible to limit them via standings because of out of game gameplay, and it's pretty well impossible to limit what exactly a fleet is going to do.


It also forces them to still have something that can be attacked, or use NPC stations, and allows them to rep/assist each other/defend themselves, but limits their ability to attack others.


Restricting them out of structures seem reasonable, the locking them out of going red could be tried and see if serious problems develop or not but i see no problem with it out of hand.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Previous page123Next page