I’m not in the “forcing structures on groups” camp, I’m in the “wardecs got changed before so they can get changed again” camp 
And no it’s not to create content for myself or whatever, it’s because I don’t like seeing newbies sucked into a hell hole and there’s nothing we can do about said hell hole.
I agree !! But why does the existing anti-gank group not grow ? It involves pvp , that’s why. They will never grow. Groups like that reach a steady state, if they’re lucky. If they’re unlucky, it remains a romantic idea. There are plenty of hugely powerful groups that do take in new pilots, and who do retaliate if challenged. Do we see pilots, gank and wardec victims flock to them ? Nope. Reason ? It involves PvP.
We can yell it all day long, stand and fight, but …
It’s not because it involves PvP. Plenty of groups grow that involve PvP.
The actual reason is that there’s no incentive for it. There’s no profit, no gain of any sort, nor even the illusion of one. Plus there’s little satisfaction even in succeeding at it, since the result is generally the same either way for the gankers (they get Concorded) and the escapee is probably AFK on auto-pilot.
Gankers get loot, they get to watch their target blow up, they feel like dodgey pirates, they convince themselves they’re the best players with the most knowledge of EVE. (Just ask them, they’ll be happy to tell you.)
Wardec corps get kills, drops, structure bashes, bribes, payoffs. The members get to swagger around and brag about their huuge “kill count” - by which they mean, the list of fights on zKill where they did zero damage but were part of the 100+ F1 monkeys in the fleet.
Nullblocs get to own the most profitable space and farm it endlessly. WH corps pretty much the same.
Behaviors that get amply rewarded multiply. Behaviors that have no particular incentive languish and disappear. Yes, it sounds a bit too much like a Skinner box but that’s the way games operate.
If anti-ganking paid well (even in some non-financial fashion), it would happen more. If recruiting members to a corp and helping them advance and progress within EVE paid off, it would happen more. Otherwise, people are relying on those rare individuals who will organize, support and maintain something just for the fun of it to keep the content ball rolling.
Like Red v. Blue back in the day, dead from malnutrition. Or the original Resource Wars concept, could have been turned into something quite good but they borked the reward structure and it was DoA.
Not everybody can be induced to PvP or to join a corp or even to support the corp they’re in. But the odds go up when there’s an incentive to do so.
Right. The incentive, usually, is that the game opens up wide when one does join a good group. PvP is a reward in itself, but only if one is so inclined. I don’t get loot off a pvp combat grid, lol. It costs me isk to do it.
What would be an example of an “incentive”, as you suggest ?
The desire to compete and then doing so should be all the reward needed. Sandcastles in sandboxes aren’t built to profit off if, they’re built plant your flag right up there and cast out a challenge.
That’s a pretty notion, but it doesn’t hold up that well against reality.
If there were zero drops from ganking, just “the desire to compete”, do you think it would hold the same interest?
If null wasn’t farmville, do you think megablocs would fight huge wars over it just to say “My flag flies here?”.
Humans are economic creatures, and most human activity is driven by some sort of “how will this benefit me/what will this cost me?” rationale. The same holds true for games.
There’s a difference between “if you secure your area you get to make iskies” and “I need to be paid to do pvp otherwise I cba”. It’s a nuanced difference but a difference nonetheless and yes I realise that most people won’t see it this way.
It’s true, much better than being a non-player character like Kezrai.
That’s the potential pay-off, in the long run, if the group you join turns out to be a good one.
This is the “barriers to participation” part of the earlier post. How do players know what is a good corp vs a bad one? Where do they find out about the benefits of joining a corp? (Not in the NPE, that’s for sure.) A newer player who decides a corp is the way to go has a quite uncertain path in front of them: what does the corp expect? What do I need to bring to the table? What benefit will I get from Corp X?
CCP has pointed out that being actively recruited by a corp has far greater chance of good results than players blindly seeking a corp to join.
As for incentives, that’s a bit trickier. EVE has a pretty narrow set of incentives/rewards (I’ve written about this in the past). ISK, SP, LP, Evermarks, Plex. And the LP is mostly only “ISK with a conversion step involved”.
Other games have reputation systems, faction systems that are more developed than EVE’s standings, glory/honor/infamy systems, stats/bonus systems to game mechanics. It’s a topic more involved than I have time for here, but some quick ideas:
Incentives is a thorny issue because as soon as you add any, you add the whole range of “is it abusable/exploitable/mass farmable? Does it reduce the value of other rewards? Does it eliminate other activities as players focus on a new one?” It’s really a whole topic of its’ own, not best to derail someone else’s thread with (imo).
Why do you want to take agency from players? It’s a freakin sandbox. If I want to re-enact battlestar galactica, or vga planets or some such, let me.
Next you’ll want us to join a PC corp to fly a ship.
You mean like a killboard?
Gotta love the way the people who rattle on with the most venom against ‘F1 monkeys’ and people’s ‘kill count’ have likely never pressed the F1 key in their entire lifetime’s worth of spinning their ship in dock and theorycrafting an Eve that nobody has ever actually experienced.
This forum seems to be increasingly divided between those who actually play Eve on a regular basis and self proclaimed experts who’d like you to think they do but who hate killboard because it shows they’ve rarely ever undocked and experienced the Eve they claim expertise on.
This a sandbox game, why do you want to force anyone to do anything??
Sounds like spite to me.
It is a bad idea because it would punish players for no apparent reason except jealousy and spite.
The game is punishing enough. Please come up with an idea to help players. That would be more constructive as a thread.
Always winterize your pipes.
I don’t see the point in even trying to argue, it doesn’t seem like you have even played the game more like your friends have played it for you.
Are you saying she hasn’t participated in real PvP yet?
What is real PvP?
Cause this game offers make believe interactions along with graphics that look cool when stuff is blown up!
I guess it’s like reality, some have their own perception of it and define it differently than the rest. This is why when you mention verifiable factual information some people still pretend it is untrue. 
I believe there would be big incentives to split the members among different alliances.
For example a “corporation” like F.13 - Union of Russians has a 5% tax on Isk and LP. Thats big isk being drained when you have 8k members. I am pretty sure that its corp CEO (Charon | Bigsutener | Killmail | zKillboard) would happily create 3 alliances more.
After all, you can take a look at AO, they are spreaded across who knows how many alliances…
This is real PvP
Courtesy: Hell Let Loose.
o7
That’s plain stupid.
No explanation, no argument, no prevision, no knowledge of the game.
“hot take : players I don’t like should suffer pain for no reason”.
