Jesus… don’t ask me for permission to post here.
Just being polite. It was also meant to be rhetorical, like a “hello how are you?”, or a “mind if I cut in?”.
1 Like
No. Because getting ganked by a war target or by a player isn’t going to change with your suggestion. In fact it directly negatives the NPC corps more than the PC corps for anyone who just starts the game or has remained in an NPC corp because they don’t care for the political system that PC corps build up.
Some people just want to play the game content that exists with npc agents. Changing their concord timers means NOT being in a pc corp puts them at higher risk for no benefit.
So if you’d like to say “lets make it so that people who switch corps nerf their concord protection” is not going to change the people who gank war targets. It’s going to make people log off for 7 days so they get their status of being protected by concord back which can then instantly be nullified if the war harrassers repeat it. And then it repeats again, and again, and again. It promotes harassment as a way to make concord timers longer for ganking. This would then “solve” ganking in war by improving it for the gankers not in war as they can risk less for the same benefit.
1 Like
I believe what he means is that you, saying ganking doesn’t get solved, is a red herring, because he has no interest in solving it. He is only being polite about it.
When you look at my question above then we should first agree on ganking being a problem that can be solved, and if so, how.
Just axing a suggestion, because it doesn’t solve ganking is not constructive.
Then why declare the war target ganking an issue when it is a non issue?
Right now ganking isn’t really needing a fix. But if we apply a change to it with if you left a player corp you are now twice as vulnerable as you used to be inside it we promote not undocking even more to avoid a negative that will remain regardless as gankers really don’t care if you left a corp or not. A solution for a penalty addition which really doesn’t apply to the initial problem of the person trying to dodge the war by leaving the corp in the first place.
Remember when I said it flags the characters rather than just leaves a single corp/alliance as a target. That removes dropping from a corp as a solution for at the minimum a week.
First: anyone just starting out does not have anything worth attacking. And if they are attacked, the second big hurdle still comes into play - the attacker still gets negative sec status, loses his ship, and has a killright issued. For all of your wanting to protect newbies - a completely irrelevant tangent every time it comes up, there’s nothing they will be able to do that will protect them in thirty seconds of bombardment that they also could have done to protect themselves for fifteen seconds. Just random numbers, but you get my point. Of all the pilots flying around New Eden, newbies would be the least effected by such a change because there was nothing they could do anyway nor anything worth taking.
Second…
That sounds like a benefit to me. Even if it isn’t something you want to quantify as a benefit, it is still a consequential choice - something EvE is supposed to be founded on.
Also I want you to clarify something for me. You make repeated remarks about “ganking war targets”. I’m having trouble understanding precisely what ideas you’re trying to convey. Traditionally, “ganking” is shorthand for “suicide ganking”. The problem is that you can’t suicide gank a war target because the suicide part doesn’t apply during war. It’s just a good, clean kill. You can’t suicide gank something you have every right to shoot. So…the target has to have Concord protection for the term to make sense, but then it isn’t a war target. You might be using “ganking” to refer to a quick kill of a war target and there is a basis for using the term like that, but if that’s the case, it’s a war target and Concord doesn’t apply so it wouldn’t be a part of this discussion since that doesn’t change with anything I proposed or anything I’ve seen in this thread.
Moving on from that…
Yes. Quite. Again, that’s the point. You can hike NPC taxes all you like, but that doesn’t effect anybody else that might be hiding in NPC corps. Industrialists, out-of-corp scouts, etc. NPC taxes are effectively meaningless in the grander scheme of creating real reasons to move out of the NPC world and into the vast player experience. The only thing that does matter for them is the NPC protection they enjoy while undocked.
Which they already do, quite often. I find that problematic, but any wardec is going to do that. If your goal is to not scare the goldfish, then anything short of removing wardecs is an immediate failure. And removing wardecs is an immediate failure. So you lose either way. Nothing I, or anybody else, proposes is going to change that, so you shouldn’t be considering that, lest you fail straight out of the gate.
That you can still avoid being killed legally, but you have to defend yourself longer should you find yourself under attack illegally, is a fine balance to have. Also you put the emphasis in the wrong place here. It does not promote harassment as a way to make Concord timers longer for ganking. That’s a consequence of rolling a corp to avoid a wardec. It promotes having and keeping strong corp and social connections.
You also seem to be perpetuating these wars as some sort of end-all-fun for people in them. People log on and off all day, people move to different constellations, and there’s no real watch list anymore. Like, you don’t have to fear wars like you once did. 99% of the time any individual pilot can fly exactly as he used to, and never be bothered by it. Because people are rarely going to try hunting you down because they’re never sure you’re online.
1 Like
So by not choosing to be in a player corp we should punish players?
I think your getting this all wrong. He wants to use ganking as a force to drive players from NPC corporations.
Players don’t have to dock up as a result of this. It’s not like all players in all NPC corporations are suddenly under attack. The suggestion also doesn’t remove choice for these players, because they not only can choose to join a player corporation, but the suggestion is meant to make them.
Of course I agree that we do have players in NPC corporations who don’t want to leave them. But we also have discussed options here already, such as social corporations, which will help with this.
Tell me one time a ganker would go “wait, we only need 1 person to gank this target quickly because they’re in an NPC corp.”
It’s not a punishment, any moreso than an Alpha player training slower than Omega. If you want Omega, you pony up cash or ISK. If you want more Concord protection, you join the player community in way where you are more interactable than sitting in an NPC corp.
1 Like
Irrelevant. Read the entire comment, please. Let’s not pick apart statement by statement but try to actually talk about solving something, even just for the intellectual challenge, before we dismiss every suggestion, because it doesn’t magically solve it all.
As I’ve said above, is he driving players from NPC corporations, but without controlling where they move to. That’s where one can use social corps to serve as a bucket to catch those who want to evade wars.
Congratulations. We now have an explosion of player corps of 1 for people not interested.
1 Like
Which wouldn’t work as a workaround for what I stated, either. Also, again, stating a problem that already exists and can’t be fixed…I already talked to you about this. You’ve instantly failed straight out of the gate.
Hence the social corps.
That’s kinda exactly what the npc corps are… so we’d be shoving people out of an npc corp into what is effectively an npc corp. The solution is to repeat the problem.
No. In order to create a corporation does one need to train a skill. So some will just look for a corporation rather than train a skill only to be in a 1-man corporation. Might well be they dislike being in a 1-man social corp more than being in a 200-player strong NPC corp and choose something in the middle.
I have an alpha clone in a corporation of 1 which didn’t need any training to create.
Did the Alpha clone choose to be in a 1-man corporation for a specific reason? 
I didn’t think one could create corporations without at least training the skill. If I’m wrong then that’s not helpful when corporations are this easy to create these days.
Yes. When I want to shooty stuff in level 2’s because I like watching the explosions occasionally I’m not interested in listening to 300+ people spamming newbie corp chat. I cut out lag. I also gave myself fleet hangars and LP farming ability.
It only increases the quantity of players allow in a corp before you hit a hard cap.
Well, I suppose when we leave it as is then we can only hope for the best and that the players moving away from NPC corps find it more beneficial to play in a group than alone.