Corp Skills - encouraging players to join and stay in corps

(Lugh Crow-Slave) #73

Even then you don’t solve the mandatory or useless problem

(Cade Windstalker) #74

Pretty much this. The fundamental problem with this sort of setup is that anything good enough to actually encourage people to be in a corp ends up feeling like a punishment for anyone who isn’t in one big enough to basically keep the bonuses going 100% of the time (or as close as the system allows).

There’s already a large incentive to leave an NPC corp and go do stuff. This sort of system takes that tax incentive and turns it into something that actively punishes people in smaller corps, in NPC corps, and basically anywhere that’s not at least a few hundred people by making them worse at combat.

As they said to the man who said he had invented a fecal matter powered airplane: “This #$%^ will not fly!”

(Max Deveron) #75

some already think its mandatory to be in certain groups for “gameplay style”

Besides if anything like that system was implemented, it could be a punishment as well…

Linemembers screw up turn the bonus off or dont re-up them.

Thing is that if you have several different bonus types, only 2 can be active at one time…
So internal politics? as if we dont have that already.

(Max Deveron) #76

Sorry Cade,

The OP already said the idea would not or most likely would not work in EvE.
I only gave an example of how to tweak the idea down a slightly different path.

Was not the idea of this OP to foster getting people out of NPC corps, to make people learn Corp mechanics and create corps and alliances?

And im not sure how a smaller corp would be punished in this type of system? havent even seen any discussion on what possible “bonus” could exists and/or be acceptable.
So not going to quote you, but your reply makes you sound more like the trollish mob squad type of people railing for/against an idea just because…

sure you are not under new management?

(Cade Windstalker) #77

If you read up you’ll find my objections to anything that essentially forces people out and into a playstyle they don’t want due to a stats disadvantage. If someone wants to stay in an NPC corp, for whatever reason, then that’s fine.

If whatever bonus this is costs enough for the cost to matter at all to anyone larger than a small corp then it’s likely to be prohibitive to a small corp.

If you make it scale off of corp or Alliance size then that creates an incentive to kick even slightly less active or AFK members, especially at the sizes between “very small active corp” and “Goons/NC/PL/ect”.

(Max Deveron) #78

Not sure how such as what i proposed would force anybody from a NPC corp, it still a choice a player makes base on things that go beyond the scope of this, there are reasons people bounce in and out of NPC corps all the time.

The cost i mentioned was using or repurposing the Charters from LP stores for this to pay as a currenecy for these “bonus”. This means acquiring LP, using the LP store, and keeping the LP costs for the charters the same. Now as to how many charters you would need for bonus, idk that would be up to CCP in such a system.

Also it would require the CEO or Director’s to use the acquired bonus not line members, so the CEO/Directors are the ones that would have to acquire the Charters, and if they want to “try” and force line members to buy these charters…well i wont get into the discussion of good/bad leadership of corps here.

(Lugh Crow-Slave) #79

yeah great plan force people into a game play they don’t enjoy.

either the bonuses will be too good to pass up or not be worth the time.

if they are to good to pass up then you are now forcing people to grind up LP that’s just bad

(Cade Windstalker) #80

What I’m saying is that joining a corp should never feel mandatory to succeed in something like solo PvP. The whole concept of stats bonuses for corp participation is fundamentally flawed in this respect. Then again IMO so is the core concept of what OP hopes to achieve with this. You’re not actually making people more social if you force them into corps, you just have a lot of people doing the same things they always did but with a different acronym next to their name.

I was just going with “costs” as a nebulous concept. The whole charters thing has its own issues, since you either force corps to have a mission running group as part of their membership, or people buy the charters off the market which probably ends with them being pretty cheap (just look at Faction Ammo).

In either case the core issue is the second part, how many of the things you need.

They still need to fund the whole thing somehow, whether that’s off of taxes or something else.

The problem remains the same now matter how you slice this.

(Max Deveron) #81

Ok, not to derail the thread but…

No one gets forced into anything now or with this idea.
I will use one of my own corpies as an example…
He has issues with not wanting to play as Alpha, but he wants to plex his accounts if he can without paying RL cash, only if he does he then quit playing far beyond his ability to re-plex in the time left to do so.
I have explained to him how to do missions and use the LP for ISK making.
How to run missions and grind rat loot to build things for himself.
How to use scouts and mine in nullsec, or even run anoms there.
How to go scanning for stuff.
How to fit ships for different tasks.
How to gank for cash
How to do a great many things in the quickest amount of time to make the ISK he needs/wants.

I never force my people to do anything, but yes i get frustrated a little when someone makes the same complaints over and over on the same issues over and over…it gets tiring, will i give up on them? no.

But on the other hand, I wont hand out plex or pay for his subs. As a CEO it has been I feel my responsibility to provide the ability to use our Corp Prints fro personal gain, to provide an Ore buy program that competes with Jita prices, and provide SRP when necessary, for example I won SRP exhumers in nullsec, but i will a barge, if someone doesnt want to listen to me on that respect when buying such things out of their pocket there is nothing i can do. Want to fly an exhumer then do it, just dont come crying when you cant plex when i wont replace it because you lost it.

But really back on topic…
The onus should not be on the Linemembers of a corp for this.
If a corp says they provide these type of bonus’s then the CEO and any Directors better get up off their rear ends and provide it, not make a hostile environment expecting their members to provide it, they didnt advertise it, the CEO did.

(voetius) #82

Back to the original topic.

I can see the reasons why people think this has some demerits but consider that CCP are already doing something like this.

At the moment there is a penalty for being in an NPC corporation (11% tax on bounties) so there is a disadvantage to being in an NPC corp. versus being in a player corp. where you can set your own tax rate.

Giving benefits to someone for being in a player corp. is equivalent to penalising people for not being in a player corp. and personally I think carrots are better than sticks.

(Lugh Crow-Slave) #83

we are not talking about gun to their head forcing

we are talking about giving people in corporations a major advantage over those who are not. All that is doing is making a particular playstyle far less viable. and the independent play style is not in need of such a nerf.

(Lugh Crow-Slave) #84

except that tax only applies to people running missions and so only effects a very narrow npc playstyle and can be negated by joining a 1 man corp.

now if these bonuses are so easy to get that one person can do it then they may as well simply be an automatic boost when in a corp.

(Max Deveron) #85

under the guise of that argument, then yes i can see your point now. and it could be a valid one.

(Cade Windstalker) #86

While that’s a fine sentiment it doesn’t really change the basic math here. Whether a corp makes money off of renters in Null, moon goo, member tax, or something else entirely you still have the same broken incentive structure for something like this.

If it’s a flat cost and the cost is enough to matter to anything other than a small corp then a small corp is going to have trouble paying it.

If it’s a scaling cost then anyone who isn’t either over the cap on said cost or at Goons/NC/PL levels of rich has a pretty strong incentive to cull inactive members who aren’t contributing to paying for this bonus.

You can wax philosophical about how corp leadership should behave, in your opinion, all you like but that doesn’t change the basics of what something like this incentivizes.

This isn’t equivalent though.

The tax is a pretty soft penalty, all things considered, and it doesn’t even affect all forms of ISK income.

It also has no impact on the performance of your ship, so there’s no performative difference between someone in an NPC corp and someone in a player corp. The core concept of the idea being discussed here would change that.

(Max Deveron) #87

1.) There is NO scaling cost, ever, at all, zip no nada in what i said, get that crap out of your mind right now.
Here’s an example of what im talking about: 100 charters = 500 LP to purchase…now for theoretical purposes, lets say a “5% yield Bonus” costs 100 charters and lasts 72 hours thats more than affordable for anybody even a 1 man corp…if you do missions and gain LP.
2.) Being LP based, ISK and taxes have nothing to do with the system at all, ISK does not matter in this, period!

Now lets make some more stuff up…
5% yield bonus, 5% duration bonus, (can only have 1 active at time not both). (direct mining bonus)
5% reprocessing bonus, 5% manufacturing speed bonus, 5% Research Time bonus (can only have 1 active at a time)
5% tracking bonus, 5% Raw HP bonus(lets assume all 3 types exist), 5% velocity bonus (only 1 can be active at a time.)

Ok so we have some hypothetical mining, industry, and pvp categories.
Now you are limited to having only 2 bonus active at any 1 time, in total…you have to choose.
And lets cut the directors out completely.
The bonus(s) have to be activated by the CEO by spending the required charters for each one, and if he wants to change a bonus before it ends then he can do so, no refunds on previously spent charters…so you let the current bonus run out or you dont.

without getting really detailed thats about it in a nutshell.
If a small corp has some one that 1 day speaks up and say hey dude i got some charters can we get this bonus when there isnt any running then thats up to the CEO (im sure not listening to corpies on the matter will eventually bleed members to other corps.)

If the CEO goes on hiatus, forgets, or no longer cares then i guess the line members are SOL, all this system does is provide a tool for a responsible CEO to provide incentive for recruitment, its a CEO level role and for the most part has nothing to do with the membership at all,

It however does have very much do with a CEO getting and keeping members in his corporation for a certain style/category of gameplay. It only comes down to the question of a CEO asking: Do i want others in my group? How can i get them to join? What do i offer? Do i have the time for this crap?

Already the same questions being asked and answered today already.

the point was there is no xtra incentive if the CEO is garbage.

(Cade Windstalker) #88

I was simply giving an example of the two most likely ways a cost could be implemented.

If you make the cost laughably cheap then what’s the point in having a cost at all?

Sure it does, no where near every corp has people who run missions with any regularity. That means that the easiest way for the majority of players to get these charters is going to be purchasing them off the market with ISK.

Here’s the issue with this. Even if you have enough different bonus types to force some kind of choice you can still get around a lot of it by making multiple corps, for which there is very little cost or penalty.

On top of this you’re still proposing pretty much required bonuses to be competitive, whether it’s mining or PvP.

No matter how low you cost these things that’s still a pretty substantial penalty for anyone who doesn’t, for whatever reason, want to be in a Corp and it completely defeats the point of the original idea which was to push more people into corps, since this is easily paid by an individual in a solo corp.

(Max Deveron) #89

well considering i took the idea from a different game in which i dont really know the mechanics there for it you simply have to go with the idea that i just threw some arbritrary numbers out there…besides if it was laughably cheap i guess: annoying would be the correct answer?

ok, thats not any different then what people do with anything else today. So whats the exact debate?

I see no issue with the first part, i highly doubt people would be switching corps every day or every few days because of the bonus type.

2nd, ill go with mining…sure be competitive, believe its the only…ill just gank and wardec someone till they think otherwise.

3rd if a person wants to be in a solo corp, then let them, in no way will that person/corp ever be on the same level or competitive with those that work/play as group, meaning members doing a part of something that goes into a larger task. just like now.

(Lugh Crow-Slave) #90

anyone else enjoying watching as max argues individual points out of context with one another?

(Cade Windstalker) #91

So we’re kind of back to the issue of if the cost is enough to matter for a medium sized corp then it’s going to be fairly punishing for a small one, and if it’s enough to matter for a large one then it’s going to be punishing for everyone else.

You were saying that, somehow, tax didn’t play into this. I was simply pointing out why that’s not the case.

You wouldn’t, you’d put your miners in a corp that always gets mining bonuses, your manufacturers or refiners or whatever in a corp that gets those bonuses, ect.

First off, this is kinda ridiculous in general. Even just for the high-sec case. Ganks have nothing to do with being in a corp or not, and it’s impractical verging on the impossible to war dec every single corp out there. As much as people complain about High Sec wardecers they rarely bother with smaller or one-man corps unless they’ve been paid to blow up a Citadel or something, or they know they can get an easy kill or two on something expensive in the week or so the 'dec will be active.

Plus wars have pretty much zero impact on Low, Null, and W-space, so for anyone operating outside of High Sec this is a pure bonus.

Oh and if it’s cheap enough to not really impact a small corp then it’s cheap enough that you can just recycle the corp to avoid a 'dec, the same way people do now.

Yes, which begs the question why a system like this is even needed. Especially considering in some way NPC corp players are more group oriented than many player-corp ones.

(Agondray) #92

that large incentive only applies to bounties. doing anything else not bounty based and its good to be in an npc corp free from war

Wardecs are not the problem