Crime & Punishment

You should always be allowed to escape back into the NPC corps. No matter which side of the conflict you are on. Not allowing that would be CCP cutting their own throats as people simply get disgusted and quit because they're locked into a situation that they don't find enjoyable.

But it needs to be done in a way that it can only happen in station (voluntary leaving) and kicking people out using director magic powers should only take effect if docked, offline, or at the next downtime (which still allows corps to kick people that refuse to dock).

*Joining* a corp that is the aggressor - maybe that needs to be adjusted so that you can only join at downtime, or you can't corp-hop more then once every 36-48 hours and apply that to everyone.

That was all me. Someone brought up how that's counter to Need For Speed, but barring that I think it provides actual motivation to be in a corp as well as a structure to fight over.

An alternative that would give a reason to be in a corp, although not give people something to fight over would be to make corporate management skills that allow CEOs to confer bonuses, even out of fleet or out of system. A couple refinements to this idea have been floating around in my head, too.

To be clear, I'm *not* suggesting anything major. Just enough to motivate and also allow differentiation of corp specialties. "Well, our corp hands out bonuses to warp speeds and cargo capacities. We're primarily a hauling corp."

Glad to see you got back in, mate, even if not in the top seven.

The D3's of our world--that is, our whole sandbox, not just any one aspect thereof--are needed, arguably now more than ever.

Fake-edit: I didn't think E-UNI had that big a bloc behind them; It seems I was wrong

Running with this idea, here's what comes to mind:

Create an anchorable Corporate Office. Each corporation can only have one, and a corp cannot exceed more than 5-12 members without it. There would be different varieties of COs as you described, allowing them to give various bonuses to members. The CO would become the new corporate headquarters and its location would be listed on the corp attributes.

The bonuses would have to be significant enough to matter, but no so significant that the wrong CO means you can't compete. Proximity to the CO could play a part in the bonuses in order to prevent COs being tucked away at inaccessible locations and used to pass bonuses. Another incentive might be to deny certain corp-level activities--like corp contracts and market orders--without the presence of a CO. I would definitely require a CO for any corp looking to join an alliance.

Bonuses could also be tied to a system's sec level, so that the higher you go, the lower the bonus gets. This encourages adventurous corps to dive into lowsec for the added bonuses.

If a CO is destroyed, the losing corp would have ~7 days to put up a new one, or be disbanded. They would work similar to POCOs as far as combat goes.

All numbers are arbitrary for the sake of presenting the idea.

In short
- Require COs for corps to grow beyond a handful of people
- Have COs offer compelling bonuses
- COs might be required to enable certain corp services
- Losing a CO gives you 7 days to replace it.

If you do not have roles, leaving a corp can be done immediately at any time. Leaving an alliance is also immediate, and as far as I'm aware can be done at any time. This is bad, but CCP has stated that when a corp leaves the war against them will be continuable.

As for leaving a corporation as a character, I think that the idea of entering a Withdrawing state while separated from the corporation is the best plan of action, assuming it can be designed.

POS anchoring in 0.4 does not have any standing requirement. You can't do moon mining in 0.4 of course, but who cares if it's just a POS for corp administration. Typically, 0.4 systems are the ones right next to high sec as well.



That's an issue with any anchorable structure proposal, whether it involves POSs or some new structure.

+2 votes here.

Shh! Don't tell anyone!

Ma Dudes... wot did I just listen to?

funny listening to "internet tough guys" who "abused" the current mechanics for years all of a sudden say it's "broken"

listening to Aleks always makes me feel like he's jamming sharp objects in my ears, FFS please stop, write it down and hand it to Widders or Darius to deliver.

golden moment of round table:

Alekseyev Karrde whining, "Darius, you can write this down. We have a record low number of mercs in the merc contracts channel. [blah blah sniffle snort wipe]"

Yes it's not because most people realize that your channel is irrelevant and unnecessary and that most corps who list there are terrible at what they do. It's not because we've been war deccing nearly every corp in that channel and negotiated cease fires based on them leaving - funny how you're the last to find out.

We are the terrorists of Eve, we don't dec industrialists, mission runners and miners. We dec mercs and tools who like to hurt small kittens.

We need a Terrorist Round Table to make it easier to frustrate wackos like Aleks and the irrelevant Noir. f1 monkeys and meat puppets who fly with him. Darius?

You should need 4.0 faction standings to anchor a POS in an 0.4 system. I know this because I have actually anchored POS in 0.4 before. If this is no longer the case that means that it changed quite recently. Additional sources: one, two, three, four, five.