These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CCP... The Simple Solution to the NPC Corp Issue
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#441 - 2013-02-01 01:37:57 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
It is not unfair if it is available to everyone.

This is really a poor justification for pretty much anything.



"Unfair" is a poor justification, when the situation simply is not unfair.

That comment was not intended to be an argument justifying NPC corps. It was simply pointing out the fallacy of his argument for eliminating them.

My case for keeping NPC corps is that it allows a wider variety of playing styles, attracting a wider player base. Removing the NPC corps will not convert solo players and hard core carebears into people that play the way the PVPers wan them to play. All it will do is cause them to quit playing.

An argument that "It isn't fair" is BS since anyone can join an NPC corp at any time. Available to anyone = fair.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#442 - 2013-02-01 01:53:08 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
My case for keeping NPC corps is that it allows a wider variety of playing styles, attracting a wider player base. Removing the NPC corps will not convert solo players and hard core carebears into people that play the way the PVPers wan them to play. All it will do is cause them to quit playing.
While it may serve that purpose it also for many playstiles offers no cost for its benefits, which was the point you were replying to.

LHA Tarawa wrote:
An argument that "It isn't fair" is BS since anyone can join an NPC corp at any time. Available to anyone = fair.
No, available to anyone is not fair. When clearly better it can become compulsory, especially in a competitive environment. Fair on the other hand would counter advantages with penalties which would need to be more widespread regarding in space activities.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#443 - 2013-02-01 02:08:56 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
My case for keeping NPC corps is that it allows a wider variety of playing styles, attracting a wider player base. Removing the NPC corps will not convert solo players and hard core carebears into people that play the way the PVPers wan them to play. All it will do is cause them to quit playing.
While it may serve that purpose it also for many playstiles offers no cost for its benefits, which was the point you were replying to.


But, there are costs. Can't put up a POS, so can't do research in anything close to a timely manner. Can't take from your friend's cans without them abandoning them for anyone to take, or getting flagged a suspect. Can't easily create shared bookmarks. Can't easily share and alter group ship fits. Can't get group shared hangers in stations. Can't create 1000 contracts that just your friends can accept.

On and on.

Tyberius Franklin wrote:

LHA Tarawa wrote:
An argument that "It isn't fair" is BS since anyone can join an NPC corp at any time. Available to anyone = fair.
No, available to anyone is not fair. When clearly better it can become compulsory, especially in a competitive environment. Fair on the other hand would counter advantages with penalties which would need to be more widespread regarding in space activities.


If you want to argue that the benefits of joining a player corp should be increased, or even that the penalties for being in an NPC corp should be increased (like, say, a market tax, refining tax, etc), to coax more people out of NPC corps, okay. Unfortunately, most of those could be circumvented pretty easily by transferring stuff to another account.

However, coaxing more people out of NPC corps has not been the point of much of this thread, which instead has largely focused on total elimination of NPC corps as a way of making it possible to war dec anyone at anytime.


It is not, "Let's increase the carrot and stick" to get a higher % of players into player corps. Instead it has been "Eliminate NPC corps so there is no where to hide from a war dec".

First, I'd be okay with. Second? I'd quit playing.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#444 - 2013-02-01 02:24:12 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:

But, there are costs. Can't put up a POS, so can't do research in anything close to a timely manner. Can't take from your friend's cans without them abandoning them for anyone to take, or getting flagged a suspect. Can't easily create shared bookmarks. Can't easily share and alter group ship fits. Can't get group shared hangers in stations. Can't create 1000 contracts that just your friends can accept.

On and on.

Note I said for "many" players. Certainly not all. A station trader or hauler feels no effects. A miner has no restrictions placed on them. Given that 2 of the above must function in space and are most effective in ships with little to no aggressive or evasive capacity, the potential (since a wardec is at no time guaranteed) protections drawn from wardec immunity provide considerable value by allowing operations to continue. There is no counterbalance
LHA Tarawa wrote:

If you want to argue that the benefits of joining a player corp should be increased, or even that the penalties for being in an NPC corp should be increased (like, say, a market tax, refining tax, etc), to coax more people out of NPC corps, okay. Unfortunately, most of those could be circumvented pretty easily by transferring stuff to another account.

However, coaxing more people out of NPC corps has not been the point of much of this thread, which instead has largely focused on total elimination of NPC corps as a way of making it possible to war dec anyone at anytime.


It is not, "Let's increase the carrot and stick" to get a higher % of players into player corps. Instead it has been "Eliminate NPC corps so there is no where to hide from a war dec".

First, I'd be okay with. Second? I'd quit playing.

If indeed it ever comes to that then there would obviously need to be a choice made. If that is yours and this comes to pass, you must do what you feel the need to do.
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#445 - 2013-02-01 02:47:50 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
It is not unfair if it is available to everyone.

This is really a poor justification for pretty much anything.



"Unfair" is a poor justification, when the situation simply is not unfair.

That comment was not intended to be an argument justifying NPC corps. It was simply pointing out the fallacy of his argument for eliminating them.

My case for keeping NPC corps is that it allows a wider variety of playing styles, attracting a wider player base. Removing the NPC corps will not convert solo players and hard core carebears into people that play the way the PVPers wan them to play. All it will do is cause them to quit playing.

An argument that "It isn't fair" is BS since anyone can join an NPC corp at any time. Available to anyone = fair.



I thought ppl liked that eve eschewed fairness in favour of bias and imbalance ??

surely 'fairness' has the potential to reduce the quantity and quality of harvestable tears .........
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#446 - 2013-02-01 02:55:20 UTC
I don't know.

This threadnaught has been going on and on despite my personal feelings that it should just die and go away.

The only thing that has been said in this thread has been "WAAAAH WAAAAH! I HATE THE WAY PEOPLE IN NPC CORPS PLAY! I WANT THE GAME DEVELOPERS TO CHANGE THE GAME BECAUSE THEY MAKE ME FEEL BAD ABOUT MYSELF!"

Seriously HTFU and just gank some people in NPC corps if they make you feel less of a person.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#447 - 2013-02-01 03:07:17 UTC
oh look it's the guy who claimed incarna was a success because player count is higher now then it was in 2010
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#448 - 2013-02-01 03:18:43 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
oh look it's the guy who claimed incarna was a success because player count is higher now then it was in 2010


Lies. Not one byte of text of mine proported that Incarna specifically was a sucess. I stated EvE as it is now is sucessful simply because of the highest subscription numbers ever. Sure you can chalk it up to Chinese subs, but more people are playing on the weekends (say 50,000+) are playing currently than in previous versions of the game.

I stand by my statement that EvE as it stands now is more sucessful than ever before.

Or are those 50,000 concurrent players mearly a false figure provided by CCP on the login screen to say EvE isn't dying.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#449 - 2013-02-01 04:08:57 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
oh look it's the guy who claimed incarna was a success because player count is higher now then it was in 2010

Incarna, the greatest success of our time.

EVE is dying.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#450 - 2013-02-01 04:32:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Captain Tardbar wrote:
I stated EvE as it is now is sucessful simply because of the highest subscription numbers ever. Sure you can chalk it up to Chinese subs, .


Really I could just quote this here and leave it at this.

But no, you went above and beyond that and argued that specific expansions were successful because of present (Serenity boosted) sub numbers. Here's you arguing that Dominion was a successful expansion, and that Retribution and Incursion were successful because 'subs are higher today then 2010'. I point out that by that logic, Incarna could be considered a successful expansion because 'subs are higher today then 2010'.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#451 - 2013-02-01 04:53:38 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
I stated EvE as it is now is sucessful simply because of the highest subscription numbers ever. Sure you can chalk it up to Chinese subs, .


What part of 50,000 current connected users do you not understand?

Or are you calling CCP liars?

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#452 - 2013-02-01 05:05:54 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
I stated EvE as it is now is sucessful simply because of the highest subscription numbers ever. Sure you can chalk it up to Chinese subs, .


Really I could just quote this here and leave it at this.

But no, you went above and beyond that and argued that specific expansions were successful because of present (Serenity boosted) sub numbers. Here's you arguing that Dominion was a successful expansion, and that Retribution and Incursion were successful because 'subs are higher today then 2010'. I point out that by that logic, Incarna could be considered a successful expansion because 'subs are higher today then 2010'.

Incarna was a Great Leap Forward.

Yeah, totally made that reference. Unsubs, if you get ~what I mean~

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#453 - 2013-02-01 05:07:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
It is not unfair if it is available to everyone.

This is really a poor justification for pretty much anything.



"Unfair" is a poor justification, when the situation simply is not unfair.

That comment was not intended to be an argument justifying NPC corps. It was simply pointing out the fallacy of his argument for eliminating them.
Unfortunately, the only fallacy made was yours. As stated, a mechanic available to everyone does not make it 'balanced'. Being able to logoff instantly, in the middle of PVP for example, is not a balanced mechanic despite being available to everyone, so CCP actually balanced that by removing the ability to instantly logoff and instituted cooldowns and timers. Likewise, being able to "NPC Corp" out of PVP in a competitive game that involves PVP is imbalanced and should be removed.

Quote:
My case for keeping NPC corps is that it allows a wider variety of playing styles, attracting a wider player base. Removing the NPC corps will not convert solo players and hard core carebears into people that play the way the PVPers wan them to play. All it will do is cause them to quit playing.

An argument that "It isn't fair" is BS since anyone can join an NPC corp at any time. Available to anyone = fair.
Did drastically nerfing highsec PI so that low/null/wh PI became worthwhile cause the solo players/'hard core carebears? No. Did moving datacorse to lowsec for FW cause some carebear exodus? No. Even the angriest and most easily outraged carebears like Dinsdale Piranha are still here, shitting the forum up. Removing wardec immunity would put everyone on equal footing, raising costs by people shooting each other and engaging in emergent content and gameplay, but those costs would ultimately be passed along to the consumer, would they not?

Or is the only way your playstyle viable is by having serious competitive edges over everyone who partakes in a player corporation?
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#454 - 2013-02-01 05:15:04 UTC
In the two short years I've played this game and followed these terrible forums, players have always suggested that player numbers have plateaued, despite the fact that the game keeps growing.

It will eventually plateau but CCP doesn't need to cater to risk-averse, asocial carebears and give them special treatment and exceptions to the "multiplayer" aspect of this game in order to grow their game.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#455 - 2013-02-01 05:19:38 UTC
For one the benefit of wardec immunity hardly comes at a cost - an 11% tax that only affects bounties and mission rewards doesn't affect those who run Mackinaws for 60 hours a week in any way, since Orcas still work perfectly. Even with player corporations, wardecs are easily dodged; use a character on another slot as the CEO and drop corp whenever a wardec occurs in order to avoid that 11% tax.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Diablo Ex
Nocturne Holdings
#456 - 2013-02-01 12:09:29 UTC
Well, if I have learned anything from this thread, it is a confirmation that the #1 reason to be in a NPC Corp is simply to avoid conflict. It won't matter how much they raise taxes. I will therefore conduct War on them by other means.

Diablo Ex Machina - "I'm not here to fix your problem"
El Cymech
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#457 - 2013-02-01 12:22:53 UTC
Diablo Ex wrote:
Well, if I have learned anything from this thread, it is a confirmation that the #1 reason to be in a NPC Corp is simply to avoid conflict. It won't matter how much they raise taxes. I will therefore conduct War on them by other means.


I love conflict, but no I am not going to be your chew toy in my week old character, go pick on someone else. Come to DUST, I will tear you apart and you can do the same because it's basically an EVEN fight. You don't want that, you want to be a bully and kill noobs in a tech 2 strat cruiser, no thanks man.
Dave Stark
#458 - 2013-02-01 12:27:22 UTC
Diablo Ex wrote:
Well, if I have learned anything from this thread, it is a confirmation that the #1 reason to be in a NPC Corp is simply to avoid conflict. It won't matter how much they raise taxes. I will therefore conduct War on them by other means.


i wouldn't say that's true.

however, given the choice between a corp that gives you nothing. or a corp that gives you war dec immunity. it's a no brainer which you choose.

as i've said before, if you don't want people in NPC corps, give player corps something to offer the people who are in npc corps. i've been scanning the recruitment forum almost daily for over a month looking for a corp that can offer me anything of use, and i keep coming up empty.
Jimmy Gunsmythe
Sebiestor Tribe
#459 - 2013-02-01 18:38:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Jimmy Gunsmythe
1. If you are even thinking about complaining about Eve and use the word unfair, just go. Eve has never been fair, nor will it ever be fair. If it ever is, expect it to fade away soon afterwards.

2. CCP should never cater to one group, but to all groups or none. As soon as you do that, you've lost.

3. I think things like Sov warfare/grinding, clone costs and standings grind for JCs should certainly be looked at WAY before this 'issue' of NPC corps should ever come up. Personally, I'm saddened to hear that an oft-relied upon and much maligned mechanic is needed to spread strife and fear now. The lack of such a thing previously never stopped anyone from either just flat out ganking or getting creative in the past.

John Hancock
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#460 - 2013-02-01 20:52:40 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Unfortunately, the only fallacy made was yours. As stated, a mechanic available to everyone does not make it 'balanced'.


If I had said that NPC corps are "balanced", then you would have a point. I didn't, so you don't.

If the point i was refuting was "NPC corps should be changed because they are unbalanced", and I used an "it is available to everyone" argument to disprove balance, again, you would have a point. I didn't.

The argument for total removal of NPC corps was "they are not fair". Against that lame argument, "They are available to everyone" is a sequitur point.


Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:

being able to "NPC Corp" out of PVP in a competitive game that involves PVP is imbalanced and should be removed.


They can't NPC Corp their way out of PVP since they can still be suicide ganked.

IF the only aspect of EVE Online was ship-to-ship PVP, then MAYBE you would have a point. However, there are MANY other kinds of interactions than just ship-to-ship exchange of ammunition.

There are interactions where people work together to achieve things. There are interactions where we are competing for the same resources in a race to the loot. There are market games. Scams. Spying. Out and out theft.

It seems the basis of your argument that the only thing EVE is, or is it "should be", about is ships trading ammo in game.

That is where you are wrong.

That is only one aspect of EVE! EVE has MANY aspects, many ways of playing, and all can co-exist.



Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:

Did drastically nerfing highsec PI so that low/null/wh PI became worthwhile cause the solo players/'hard core carebears? No. Did moving datacorse to lowsec for FW cause some carebear exodus? No.


Are you seriously trying to compare a small nerf to total removal of NPC corps? Seriously?

Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:

Or is the only way your playstyle viable is by having serious competitive edges over everyone who partakes in a player corporation?


In case you haven't read my previous posts, my alts are all in a player corp, run by me, of me, and for me.

But, yes... There has to be a way for me to avoid war decs, or I'd simply be unable to raise the 2 billion+ ISK a month I need just to buy PLEX to keep my accounts subbed.