CONCORD PANIC BUTTON for HISEC space

(Bait'er De'Outlier) #1

How about making the CONCORD reaction a little more realistic by not having them automatically respond to aggression at locations away from gates or npc stations in HISEC space unless called for by players involved in the action?

Concept is for ships run by players only.

Add a red panic button icon to the system display that summons CONCORD once an otherwise criminal attack has been commenced and the player whose ship is being attacked pushes the shiny red button to summon help.

Lack of pressing the button would imply consent or negligence on the part of the attacked player. All other aspects of the aggression mechanics game could stay the same such as lockout/loss of sec status being attacked by CONCORD if the attacker lands on grid with CONCORD while under the criminal timer etc.

7 Likes
(Scipio Artelius) #2

“more realistic”?

What’s realistic about flying space ships, being an immortal clone, living 20,000 years in the future?

How can CONCORD be realistic at all in an environment that is complete fantasy?

Aside from that, there isn’t really much detail in this proposal.

If you hit the button, do CONCORD then instantly appear? That is, is this a proposal that would allow people to shorten the response time of CONCORD? Or is it only intended to delay CONCORD?

If it’s designed to be able to shorten CONCORD’s response, then absolutely no. With moon mining in 0.5 space, ganking is one of only a couple of ways to deal with competition that don’t own the structure on the moon. If they can shorten the response time, that would be a bad thing.

If it’s only designed to lengthen the response time, then it isn’t needed. Either people already know they’ll survive the gank, so can just do what thyey were going to do, or they won’t survive the gank and extending CONCORD’s response does nothing to help them.

4 Likes
(Nevyn Auscent) #3

So… Alpha gank and warp off instantly before they have time to press the button… now risk free and cost free ganking…
Can’t see how this could possibly go wrong.

8 Likes
(Ma'Baker McCandless) #4

repeatedly spams the 911 button

3 Likes
(Qia Kare) #5

The intention I am certain is to require a player to be at the keyboard to get their CONCORD assistance. It’s probably not aimed at changing anything mechanically for a pilot who is aware of their surrounds.

If the mechanic described does not do this, then prefer to suggest edits so that it does and critique it on that basis.

3 Likes
(Nevyn Auscent) #6

There is no particular need to do that.
There are much better ways to give at keyboard players better rewards, than giving gankers a free pass if they find someone who’s stepped out for an urgent bio, or a cat being a pain, or a baby needing a nappy changing or or or…
Basically, there is no point where ganking should ever be free.

4 Likes
(Scipio Artelius) #7

I don’t personally think that should ever be a requirement. AFK players deserve to have their ships destroyed and I have no respect for AFK play (even though I also do it if I’m in highsec).

However, to a character in the game, it shouldn’t be relevant whether the player behind the character is at their keyboard or not, and CONCORD shouldn’t care. If a criminal act is performed, they should respond.

1 Like
(Qia Kare) #8

I am just tryin’ to help the man be understood and get the feedback he’s trying to get. I know it’s a touchy subject for many, and because of that if the conversation gets off on the wrong foot from the beginning, it can be terribly hard to get it back on track again.

4 Likes
(safira jomita) #9

Think you don’t understood it right… that would not shorten the response time but yes delay it, cause now the player reflexes and reaction time will be added to response time. When a player hit the button(available only if under attack) then the normal response timer get started.

1 Like
(Cypr3ss Deteis) #10

I appreciate this.

However feel you may be off the mark a little, because OP says:

And afaik any AFK Gank is going to occur ~10-15 km off a gate/station, as the AFK player auto-pilots in.

To me it sounds more like he’s looking for a way to engage in HS antics (mission intrusion, perhaps?) and be able to ‘deal with the threat’ alone (or try to) before calling in CONCORD (when it all goes horribly wrong).

At least that’s my take on it.

Either way though, I don’t think it’s a great idea, we’d just get a raft of complaints re ‘ganked before i could call for help’ and/or nuthin but Concord in mah mission so I’m safe (as has been mentioned a few posts up).

Regards,
Cypr3ss.

(safira jomita) #11

Also would bots be able to hit the button ? If not botting in eve is solved xD

(Cypr3ss Deteis) #12

Heh, if you’re able to determine a bot from a player, you’ve already solved the botting problem, and should probably submit your CV to CCPs Security department :slight_smile:

Regards,
Cypr3ss.

3 Likes
(safira jomita) #13

No, I’m actually asking if a bot could press the button, really not sure . If not, free bot ganking!

(Cypr3ss Deteis) #14

Ahh, then yes, they could, as it would be (I’m assuming) a button on your overview, so once ‘re-programmed’ to know about that button the bot is good to go. In the same way a bot can target rats as an e.g.

Regards,
Cypr3ss.

(safira jomita) #15

Dam Skynet

1 Like
(Qia Kare) #16

I know this gentleman from Jel, where I used to mine. There was a not insignificant ganker presence in the belts, well away from any gates or autopiloting at the time. I would speak to Mr. Outlier, and I would carry on a wary but cordial conversation.

Basically I think he’s after a barge or Orca, the like that he might catch me piloting. He once (that I know of) ran for CSM, and I believe the health of the game and player interaction weighs on his mind, and I interpreted what he had to say on the basis of my history with him.

I could be well off the mark. I haven’t spoken to him in some years, but I remember him, and he was a good guy who deserves some good feedback.

2 Likes
(Cypr3ss Deteis) #17

Ahhh… so this is the point I admit I didn’t even think about mining in belts… my bad. :blush:

And that, by admission, probably means you’re spot on and my previous comments can safely be ignored :slight_smile:

Thanks,
Cypr3ss.

1 Like
(Qia Kare) #18

All earnest feedback is good feedback, I think.

1 Like
(Solecist Project) #19

Yes! That’s a great idea!
Punishment for being afk!

■■■■ yeah!
I want it!
I WANT IT I WANT IT I WANT IT!

PLEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

The effects on our society and culture would be ABSOLUTELY PHENOMENAL!

:smiley:

3 Likes
(Solecist Project) #20

BUT DAAAAD, WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY???

People will start appearing afk while being atk, baiting gankers!
People will start respecting being at the keyboard!
People will stop being away from the keyboard!

It’ll teach EVERYONE not to be afk!

Yes, bots can still press the ■■■■■■■ button, but their situation simply doesn’t change at all, just like it wouldn’t really change for anyone who is at the keyboard anyway!

With such a feature implement, eventually we would be right back at where we are now, with the HUUUUGE difference that people would not be afk anymore, because it’d mean certain death!

The one big factor that enables afk gameplay in highsec is the fact that CONCORD spawns all by itself, while there’s no actual reason for it to do so! We absolutely can and should require people to pay attention to the game while they’re playing it!

:smiley:

Marvellous! :smiley:

4 Likes