Ok, let me put it this way;
Do you think that CONCORD is a good alternative to giving players the agency to do something about the situation themselves?
In a game with 7800+ star systems (dixit ccp) it is real counterplay. If more people discovered this type of gameplay, instead of flocking together like wildebeest in Caldari hisec, gankers would spend more time mining.
Seems like removing a piece of a thing to replace it with an artificial thing to me.
You never did sell me on the idea that NPCs are a better alternative to players.
Sure its anecdotal, but players never made me quit. Stupid unkillable NPCs that cheat sure have come close to it several times.
Whats the point in it being online if its just NPCs anyway.
4 Likes
Players already have agency.
If we discard all the things they can do to counter the ganking playstyle and pretend they don’t exist.
Then Concorde is still just a necessary balancing tool but not an alternative to player agency. It’s about removing the gankers ships not protecting the gankee.
I suppose there is a world in which we could claim that Concorde let’s people get kill mails they wouldn’t otherwise by whoring on Concorde killmails. I don’t feel that gives players agency. That just lets a group of players who are happy with a little deus ex machina get some kills on their board.
No I dont really think you are following me.
No matter how much Opsec you do, there’s still a chance youll get ganked. Or you just fall asleep, or become bored with the PvE tasks designed to make you bored and get ganked.
So once you are ganked, why is your agency removed, and NPCs turn up?
You have no agency once the gank starts, as its over in seconds and either you die and they die or they die.
EDIT: Think of it this way: If we dont want NPC gankers, why do we stand for NPC AGers?
Yes I agree. Concorde doesn’t give anyone agency.
It’s just a balancing tool.
All of the player agency happens before you get ganked and that is no different than being caught by any overwhelming force in pvp.
1 Like
Right, but wouldnt it be better if you DID have some agency?
Ach tbh Im just brainstorming.
Id prefer if ships werent disposable, didnt explode in seconds, combat was tactical, and you have lots of options for what to do.
But eh, it is what it is
1 Like
If everything had more HP then logi would be king and combat would be pure attrition.
Combat can still be tactical. I know you don’t think much of null sec. However I’ve seen a much smaller force have a great time controlling an engagement in null through the judicious use of pings and utilising fast high damage ships to divide a larger force and catch stragglers unawares and then get away.
A surprising number of gankees could take a ship or two with them if they didn’t panic also. If they were fit for travel and not dps they could probably take even more. You don’t need your full 3k dps to kill a catalyst in a marauder and your prop mods likely won’t help you. If you travelled with a couple of webs and low slots full of extra tank you might even be able to kill enough to survive the gank.
Why wouldnt Logi get changed if HP was increased?
It is now. Its called N+1
Not really gonna help barges or haulers though.
There’s that Iteron with a drone bay. Is it EVER used in combat with people?
Agree transport ships are a bit of a non event when it comes to combat, however they can be turned into pretty decent bait tanks with the right fit.
One drone though people would just defang and you wouldn’t have the DPS for even one catalyst.
Mostly because the NPCs that have replaced gankers so far are far from balanced. You may scoff but Iif I get ganked by a person, I know they havent cheated. If its by an NPC, I know they do cheat.
Right, which is the opposite result of removing humans from the equation.
Right, so remove CONCORD and give everyone more of a chance to decide their own fate.
Yes, the NPCs are the part of the game that nearly made me quit.
Yup and I dont want that to be NPCs either.
There’s already far too many NPCs in EvE, from the utterly pointless HS rats to the utterly unkillable ones.
I happen to disagree that the game itself is interesting enough without a human element to measure yourself against.
1 Like
Im pretty sure its 5 lights. But anyway, the point is why does it have it if its so useless?
Give it a reason to exist.
I actually think it’s for ewar drones. However I often think this when ignoring the turret slots on my haulers.
Cept you can always gank the gankers. There is literal counterplay. People are just lazy 
But I think we all agree that mining lasers should do targeted damage to ship modules.
Yes but only while overheated.
Sure I can accept that.
But when they overheat, they only damage themselves from it , not the whole rack.
And these two opinions are extremes that I dont share vOv
Not really, its still open to everyone, unlike Nullsec. And how would it be the same if combat was completely different in HS than it is now in Nullsec? Do you think there should be an active counterplay to ganking or not? Because youd need to explain how you can have that AND CONCORD, otherwise theres no point in the active counter, like you believe the case is atm.
Lucas, if you are going to try and tell me how I think, then you know we are done, right?
1 Like
The best idea I could come up with for a CONCORD compromise was some sort of module or mode that could be activated that would make the ship immune to illegal weapons fire for a period of time and extending the CONCORD response time by the same amount. You’d probably have to delay FacPo as well, though, which probably has other knock on effects.
This is all a dead end line of reasoning, though, because it wouldn’t really satisfy many people. People are either accepting of the way things are or want to make ganking harder. Few people want an opportunity to interject themselves into a gank in progress but are perfectly willing to bang on it as a talking point to support the removal of ganking.
For some reason unrelated to Eve, this makes me want to scream “There are 4 lights!”
3 Likes
Again, if you ignore changing the combat system as the basis for CONCORD removal, sure. Again, except including access issues, and general ease of everything else that HS currently provides.
I cant think of a playstyle would be killed off by making ships take longer to destroy.
Yeah, sorry we are done Lucas. Thanks anyway.