These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Paying for CONCORD protection - ISK sink
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#1 - 2013-01-24 09:11:56 UTC
I had an idea.

- Players paying for CONCORD protection in high sec.
- Recurring subscription.
- CONCORD protection only available in empire space (hisec).
- Fees based on amount of skill points
- For new players 1 month free protection.
- Players whose security status is lower then -4 are not viable to get CONCORD protection - subscriptions halted.
- New office and service in concord stations - CONCORD bearou: Security assurance service

CONCORD will work as always, but only when player have ISK to pay monthly recurring fee.

Player can leave the service in any moment.

ISK sink achieved.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Mag's
Azn Empire
#2 - 2013-01-24 09:22:15 UTC
Bad idea.

This will favour those with ISK and means many in high sec will be without Concord.
Concord may not be liked by many, but it's a necessary in high sec.

As far as being an ISK sink is concerned, meh.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#3 - 2013-01-24 09:37:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Mag's wrote:
Bad idea.

This will favour those with ISK and means many in high sec will be without Concord.
Concord may not be liked by many, but it's a necessary in high sec.

As far as being an ISK sink is concerned, meh.


Meh? Why meh? ISKs are flowing into system at a higer rate than before, more active players. And since when you can get service like CONCORD in real life for free? Where is the point to have CONCORD in such a way it is today? It would add realism, and it will not favour those with ISK, it wil be something for something, When you are in Hi sec and you have protection it would make you a living and prospering entity, so you will have ISK for CONCORD, those with low security status are criminals, so they would be like outsiders into low sec - place where even CONCORD agents aren't safe, and nullsec - those who want to execute their law by themselves.

People are paying new order just to mine peacefully, why they would not pay CONCORD to be protected from criminal acts? If you live in highsec, you should pay for protection.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#4 - 2013-01-24 09:59:37 UTC
You are aware that most null and low-sec players have industrial, hauling, and trading alts in high-sec... right? And that many of them would be able to pay for this service while younger, newer players would not... right? And with the ability to evade war decs and hide in NPC corps being as easy as it is... you have, with this idea, effectively made those players immune to any sort of ship on ship violence.

No one should ever be immune to ship on ship violence. Not even rich players. Not even in high-sec.

Not supported.

How did you Veterans start?
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#5 - 2013-01-24 10:06:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Quote:
And that many of them would be able to pay for this service while younger, newer players would not


Wrong, new players have small amount of skill points, so they will pay small fees. 1 million for every 500 000 SP monthly, fair enough i think. Fee calculated at recurring rate monthly also.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Mag's
Azn Empire
#6 - 2013-01-24 10:07:02 UTC
Meh because it's a poor idea to create a sink, but overlooks the faucets that are the cause.

The point of Concord the way it is today, is to place fixed and known consequences on actions in high sec. That is a necessary for high sec, in order to keep it high sec. If you like this idea, then move to low where there is no Concord at all.

Yes it does favour the rich and it's disingenuous to say otherwise. Because you either pay, or get let people get a free ride off you.

But what's stopping people from taking action now? This idea doesn't help in that regard, it simply removes the consequences when people attack those who haven't paid.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#7 - 2013-01-24 10:12:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Quote:
This idea doesn't help in that regard, it simply removes the consequences when people attack those who haven't paid.


Yes, it would add more consensual pvp to high sec, and people who are willing to not pay, well, they are off to themselves, and their corporations. Those who want to stay safe, they will pay.

Quote:
Yes it does favour the rich and it's disingenuous to say otherwise. Because you either pay, or get let people get a free ride off you.


So if you don't want to pay for safety you don't belong to hi sec, where people have to work hard for their safety.

Quote:
Meh because it's a poor idea to create a sink, but overlooks the faucets that are the cause.


There are always faucets! You have to get ISK from somewhere. So there must be sinks too. This feature will add it.


CONCORD will protect only agains unlawful deeds against someone protected, only in high sec as it is now, but for fee. I made it clear now i think. When someone protected by CONCORD will make criminal act, they will be treated like a criminal, like today.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Mag's
Azn Empire
#8 - 2013-01-24 10:38:45 UTC
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Yes, it would add more consensual pvp to high sec, and people who are willing to not pay, well, they are off to themselves, and their corporations. Those who want to stay safe, they will pay.
It add more none consensual PvP for the sole purpose of creating an ISK sink. It doesn't add anything else.

Bagrat Skalski wrote:
So if you don't want to pay for safety you don't belong to hi sec, where people have to work hard for their safety.
People don't work hard for it now, this change will not help that in any way. Like I said, what's stopping you from taking action now? Beating people with this stick, won't change anything for the better.

Bagrat Skalski wrote:
There are always faucets! You have to get ISK from somewhere. So there must be sinks too. This feature will add it.
It's not a good idea for the reasons outlined. You're breaking another mechanic, in order to create this sink. That makes it all the way wrong from the start.

Bagrat Skalski wrote:
CONCORD will protect only agains unlawful deeds against someone protected, only in high sec as it is now, but for fee. I made it clear now i think. When someone protected by CONCORD will make criminal act, they will be treated like a criminal, like today.
Concord do not protect and will not protect with this idea. They punish. You're asking for that punishment to be based on whether you pay or not. That means it favours the rich and removes consequences. Concord punishment should not be based on ISK.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#9 - 2013-01-24 10:44:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Quote:
Concord punishment should not be based on ISK.


Everything should be based on ISK. Like in real life. No one will protect you agains the hordes of criminals, if you don't even want to be protected, and pay for the CONCORD to have your ass saved by using force against someone who want to destroy your ship.

You may think about it now: "carebear heaven"... for a price. For free you can get torpedo to the bridge.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#10 - 2013-01-24 10:53:26 UTC
So you propose taking out suicide from suicide ganking? No subscription means no CONCORD spawning at belt to avenge you, right?

Good luck with that.

Miners demand banning of bumpers because they don't wanna pay 10 mil fee and you wanna to make them happy by CONCORD extortion racket? Brilliant.

Infact that would be loltastic because I am sure 50% of usual gank targets could be exploded risk free.

Invalid signature format
Mag's
Azn Empire
#11 - 2013-01-24 10:57:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Quote:
Concord punishment should not be based on ISK.


Everything should be based on ISK. Like in real life. No one will protect you agains the hordes of criminals, if you don't even want to be protected, and pay for the CONCORD to have your ass saved by using force against someone who want to destroy your ship.

You may think about it now: "carebear heaven"... for a price. For free you can get torpedo to the bridge.
They already included a 11% tax rate to cover lore. But this isn't real life and it shouldn't be based on it. It's sole purpose is to enable high sec, to be high sec.

But again, Concord does not protect. Not now, not with this change. They punish.

Criminal acts are criminal acts and the punishment of said acts, should not be decided upon by ISK in high sec.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#12 - 2013-01-24 10:59:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
So you propose taking out suicide from suicide ganking? No subscription means no CONCORD spawning at belt to avenge you, right?

Good luck with that.

Miners demand banning of bumpers because they don't wanna pay 10 mil fee and you wanna to make them happy by CONCORD extortion racket? Brilliant.

Infact that would be loltastic because I am sure 50% of usual gank targets could be exploded risk free.


Whole point is to add consequences to living in High sec, a financial stress that is made for living in controlled, relatively safe area.

Quote:
They punish.

They also protect by punishing in time. And this alone is worth of paying.

Quote:
Criminal acts are criminal acts and the punishment of said acts, should not be decided upon by ISK in high sec.

Criminal act against unruly, not submissive or conforming to rule, should not be a criminal act. The rule should be, pay for protection.

Quote:
It's sole purpose is to enable high sec, to be high sec.

My idea wil enable more consequences for living in highsec. Simple as that.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Mag's
Azn Empire
#13 - 2013-01-24 11:19:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Whole point is to add consequences to live in High sec, a financial stress that is made for living in controlled, relatively safe area.
Which favours the rich and is bad for that fact alone.

Bagrat Skalski wrote:
They also protect by punishing in time. And this alone is worth of paying.
No, they still only punish.

The protection is derived from the fact that they do punish and that this is a constant.. You're asking for that punishment to be reliant upon ISK. This will have the negative effect of making punishment a none constant. Therefore making high sec risker for all and giving less of this derived protection.

Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Criminal act against unruly, not submissive or conforming to rule, should not be a criminal act. The rule should be, pay for protection.
Your idea ignores rules, in favour of ISK.

Bagrat Skalski wrote:
My idea wil enable more consequences for living in highsec. Simple as that.
No it removes consequences, in favour of creating a poor ISK sink.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#14 - 2013-01-24 11:31:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Quote:
This will have the negative effect of making punishment a none constant. Therefore making high sec risker for all and giving less of this derived protection.

When you pay, you get constant protection. Consequence. You give **** about it? Whole world awaits. As a capsuleer, you are free in your choices.

Quote:
No it removes consequences, in favour of creating a poor ISK sink.

There is only one rule, you have to pay for everything. It makes rule of consequence dominant. And ISK sink.

Fixed Tax should be nothing but another one consequence for using stations for industry jobs, and empire space for POSes.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#15 - 2013-01-24 11:35:59 UTC
Bagrat Skalski wrote:

Whole point is to add consequences to living in High sec, a financial stress that is made for living in controlled, relatively safe area.

My idea wil enable more consequences for living in highsec. Simple as that.


Financial stress is irrelevant to rich and would harm poor or just starting players.

You wanna risk free ganking - declare war and blap them to your heart's content.

Your proposal is based on wrong assumption that NPC should be a side in pvp conflicts.
You could also propose that NPC traders should undercut player's market orders unless bribed not to do that.

Go play X3 if you wanna meaningful NPCs, what Eve needs is more player interactions and immersion not less.

Invalid signature format
Mag's
Azn Empire
#16 - 2013-01-24 11:37:16 UTC
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
When you pay, you get constant protection. Consequence. You give **** about it? Whole world awaits.
I see you missed the point. Your idea has a negative affect against everyone, not just those who have paid.

Bagrat Skalski wrote:
There is only one rule, you have to pay for everything. It makes rule of consequence dominant. And ISK sink.

Fixed Tax should be nothing but another one consequence for using stations for industry jobs, and empire space for POSes.
Paying ISK is not a consequence, it's a poor side step mechanic that favours the rich.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#17 - 2013-01-24 11:41:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Mag's wrote:
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
When you pay, you get constant protection. Consequence. You give **** about it? Whole world awaits.
I see you missed the point. Your idea has a negative affect against everyone, not just those who have paid.

Bagrat Skalski wrote:
There is only one rule, you have to pay for everything. It makes rule of consequence dominant. And ISK sink.

Fixed Tax should be nothing but another one consequence for using stations for industry jobs, and empire space for POSes.
Paying ISK is not a consequence, it's a poor side step mechanic that favours the rich.


Favors the rich? You can be rich and live in null, look at those alliances. You think they have no ISK? And they don't have concord too. And look at new players, they will have one month free protection, and then they will decide, what to do, pay minimal amount of ISK for protection, or go into null. If they are low on ISK they can stay in station and beg for money.

Quote:
Your idea has a negative affect against everyone


Only everyone who didn't paid. Consequence.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Mag's
Azn Empire
#18 - 2013-01-24 11:46:40 UTC
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Favors the rich? You can be rich and live in null, look at those alliances. You think they have no ISK? And they don't have concord too.
Yes, favours the rich. They have money and don't care about a few mil, but would still be affected by this change.

What relevance does null and it's rich alliances have?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#19 - 2013-01-24 11:50:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Mag's wrote:
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Favors the rich? You can be rich and live in null, look at those alliances. You think they have no ISK? And they don't have concord too.
Yes, favours the rich. They have money and don't care about a few mil, but would still be affected by this change.


I see you don't understand, new players could make few mil too in a month.
And there is nothing what stops them from leaving those few milions in CONCORD hands.

Custom ship skins, character creator style "repaint". Bring it!
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#20 - 2013-01-24 11:50:12 UTC
I would support this idea under two conditions:

1: The subscription fee should not be excessive. No one want to pay stupid amounts just to have a little security. That security being already balanced by low income potential.

2: The fee should only apply to those with negative security status. Law abiding citizens should not have to pay extra to recieve the same protection afforded to those who are not.

Friends
123Next page