These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

why do players stay in npc corps?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#281 - 2015-03-14 22:30:35 UTC
Caladin Brood wrote:
They dont bother me as i dont bother about isk or killboards, it is just a prime example of how a new player who does not know anything is introduced to eve, luckily for me it was a alt an not a actually "new player" experience, if it was a new player experience i'd a just lol'd an been thankfull for the trial

Which Corp was this?
Caladin Brood
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#282 - 2015-03-14 22:39:47 UTC
Doesnt matter, naming a corp on these boards just invites more decs, same as disagreeing with ppl
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#283 - 2015-03-14 22:45:11 UTC
WarDecs are abused and often NPC corps offer the only recourse to being continually harassed.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#284 - 2015-03-14 22:58:48 UTC
Syn Shi wrote:

And the definition of sandbox is everyone is allowed to play the way they want.



Nope.

You can try to succeed at whatever you want.

But you don't get to automatically succeed at whatever you try. Since EVE is a PvP game, other people get to have their say.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
ProBear Johnsson
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#285 - 2015-03-14 23:56:11 UTC
.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#286 - 2015-03-15 00:18:41 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Caladin Brood wrote:
why? ok case in point, i decided to try a new char out an joined a brand new corp, social blah de blah

boom wardec
boom wardec
boom wardec
boom wardec
boom wardec
boom wardec
boom wardec
boom wardec
boom wardec
boom wardec

make of it as you will, but to put it simply, to retain new players this needs to stop

Sorry you had 10 wardecs like that, but they aren't that bad.

If you are in the right Corp, they are easily managed and everyone continues to have fun.

Wardecs aren't something to be scared of or ticked off about. The worst that happens is a lost ship and pod, both of which are expendable tools in this game anyway. But that can mostly be avoided in a good Corp.


They are not manageable, as eve combat pvp is a) boring b) not accessible to people without at least 50 million SP.
Being camped is not fun. Being unable to undock is not fun. Go ask eve uni how many "students" they lost to lockouts.

The only way to avoid a ship loss is dropping corp. If you undock in a grief dec, most of the time you will get tackled by a neutral alt, which will hold you still just long enough for a grief deccer ceptor to arrive.

Losing a ship and a pod in a fight is very frustrating and will deter even me from continuing to play eve. Even if it's just a frigate and empty pod - every time I lost some of those I took a break from eve for a few months. Mostly by unsubbing. And that is me, who has 11-figure wallet, and has never been caught in a barge or pve ship with my pants down. Imagine what it does to a new player and you'll get the picture.

While I do not talk about war decs, grief decs I believe to be #1 source of bad retention.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#287 - 2015-03-15 00:41:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Basil Pupkin wrote:
They are not manageable, ...

They are totally manageable. We have 2 wardecs against us at the moment.

As a pvp Alliance, we have no problem with that whatsoever and we have many new players, none of whom are worried either because we help them manage the issue.

As for eve-uni, they teach people to be an F1 monkey. Great to go to for non-pvp related training, but if you want to learn pvp, don't join eve-uni.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#288 - 2015-03-15 00:57:25 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:

While I do not talk about war decs, grief decs I believe to be #1 source of bad retention.


You believe wrong.

CCP themselves have stated that they can find zero link between non consensual PvP and retention.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
#289 - 2015-03-15 01:16:24 UTC
Niobe Song wrote:
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:
Thorn en Distel wrote:
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
So 13 pages in and I have yet to see anybody give a good reason why players should leave a NPC corp if they are based in HS and even low sec depending on what they are doing


For the very same reason we support a football team, for the very same reason we wave a flag. for the very same reason we feel pride in what we create.

good enough ?






Not really....


what would it take to get you to join a real corp then ?



I'm in a real corp. If you mean what would make me join a player run corp...nothing. There is absolutely nothing that will make me leave CAS. You can cry and kick and scream and start as many threads on the topic as you like. But if CCP ever does anything to really obliterate the NPC corps I'll just unsub my accounts.


i'm not crying nor screaming.nor kicking, nor have i ever started a thread about NPC corps. if you're just another,, hey CCP if you change something i'll leave,, then away you go now, because it's never long in EVE before shite changes.
i couldn't care less really, EVE is all about what you want to do personally, so if being in an NPC corp is what you want. then knock yourself out. but strange that you wave your CAS flag. well at least you get being in a group isn't a bad thing at all.
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#290 - 2015-03-15 01:35:47 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:

And the definition of sandbox is everyone is allowed to play the way they want.



Nope.

You can try to succeed at whatever you want.

But you don't get to automatically succeed at whatever you try. Since EVE is a PvP game, other people get to have their say.



If you are so much into pvp why are you hiding in hi-sec and avoiding other like minded individuals.

Answer: Because they shoot back and that isn't what you want.


Code showed how much into pvp they were when they all logged out of the tourney due to ships being banned.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#291 - 2015-03-15 01:43:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Syn Shi wrote:
If you are so much into pvp why are you hiding in hi-sec and avoiding other like minded individuals.

What? There is no pvp in highsec and no one that wants to pvp in highsec?
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#292 - 2015-03-15 01:48:33 UTC
Syn Shi wrote:

If you are so much into pvp why are you hiding in hi-sec and avoiding other like minded individuals.


Oh, that's easy. Because highsec has more targets, and more deserving targets. No one needs PvP visited on them more than the people who insist that it shouldn't happen.

Cry more about how I'm allowed to make a choice you don't like.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Harrison Tato
Yamato Holdings
#293 - 2015-03-15 01:59:38 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:

And the definition of sandbox is everyone is allowed to play the way they want.



Nope.

You can try to succeed at whatever you want.

But you don't get to automatically succeed at whatever you try. Since EVE is a PvP game, other people get to have their say.



Hmm. The only place I see succeed written is in your response.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#294 - 2015-03-15 02:07:16 UTC
Harrison Tato wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:

And the definition of sandbox is everyone is allowed to play the way they want.

Nope.
You can try to succeed at whatever you want.
But you don't get to automatically succeed at whatever you try. Since EVE is a PvP game, other people get to have their say.

Hmm. The only place I see succeed written is in your response.

It's just a comment. The language doesn't have to be interpreted so literally.

I think it's reasonable to think that most people don't set out to fail at doing something. So, when the original comment of "everyone is allowed to play the way they want" is made, it's probably not unreasonable to conclude they are trying to achieve something they want to do.
Harrison Tato
Yamato Holdings
#295 - 2015-03-15 02:19:56 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Harrison Tato wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:

And the definition of sandbox is everyone is allowed to play the way they want.

Nope.
You can try to succeed at whatever you want.
But you don't get to automatically succeed at whatever you try. Since EVE is a PvP game, other people get to have their say.

Hmm. The only place I see succeed written is in your response.

It's just a comment. The language doesn't have to be interpreted so literally.

I think it's reasonable to think that most people don't set out to fail at doing something. So, when the original comment of "everyone is allowed to play the way they want" is made, it's probably not unreasonable to conclude they are trying to achieve something they want to do.


Whatever floats your boat. I think he was being infintile because the idea of another player ignoring or avoiding him hurts his feewwwingsss.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#296 - 2015-03-15 02:21:01 UTC
Harrison Tato wrote:

Whatever floats your boat. I think he was being infintile because the idea of another player ignoring or avoiding him hurts his feewwwingsss.


*infantile.

At least spell it correctly, if you're going to try and insult me.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#297 - 2015-03-15 02:25:01 UTC
Harrison Tato wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Harrison Tato wrote:

Hmm. The only place I see succeed written is in your response.

It's just a comment. The language doesn't have to be interpreted so literally.

Whatever floats your boat.

Should I take that literally, or is it just a general statement?
Niobe Song
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#298 - 2015-03-15 02:26:20 UTC
Why do NPC corps bother people so much? If it is just the fact that the people you wardec can jump to a NPC corp to avoid you then shouldn't you be going after that specific mechanic? Or look at wardec as a whole?

What about me being forced out of an NPC corp would make your game play experience more enjoyable?
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#299 - 2015-03-15 02:29:37 UTC
Niobe Song wrote:
Why do NPC corps bother people so much?


Their risk/reward ratio is hugely skewed.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#300 - 2015-03-15 02:31:44 UTC
Niobe Song wrote:
Why do NPC corps bother people so much? If it is just the fact that the people you wardec can jump to a NPC corp to avoid you then shouldn't you be going after that specific mechanic? Or look at wardec as a whole?

What about me being forced out of an NPC corp would make your game play experience more enjoyable?

I don't think it bothers anyone as such.

The OP was just a general question since CCPs data suggests that players that remain in an NPC Corp quit Eve earlier than players that move to player run Corps.

The thread was prompted by the friendly fire safety switch, which was introduced because CCP believe that one of the reasons Corps don't recruit is because of awoxing.

So the discussion is the other side of the coin so to speak.