Shouldnt the Bar be raised to create corporations?

I agree with you, even starting a corp myself very soon, I think starting a corp should cost at least 500 mill

Nah. I think anyone should be able to create a corp. That goes for social, friends only, or casual corps too. I’m kinda disappointed that it takes 2m to create a corp, but I guess it’s not too bad with the terrible inflation we have today.

Why exactly?

The new wardec change is going to lead to a bunch of 1 man corps being created. They will recruit other players to farm corp tax, but there’s going to be very little social interaction.

If social interaction and getting people out of npc corps was all they needed, they could have went with the social corp that the players were proposing…

1 Like

No. No

Because there is little difference between an NPC corp and a player made corp in terms of not being able to be wardecced, and yet the tax rate can be zero on player run corps.

Because we should have accountability for corporations that cannot be wardecced anymore.

Because it used to be that players would realize how crap of a corp you were in when a simple wardec prevented you from doing anything, and the CEO was incompetant enough that he couldnt do anything either.

The problem with this is that were ignoring the fact that a lot of people have created a lot of crappy corps that are currently closed right now due to inactivity. The bar was already set low to begin with, and with the wardec changes, it changes the dynamic of player corps.

K, k.

1 Like

Because of players with these ideas…

Yes, absolutely. The fact that absolutely everyone can create a corporations not only devalues them all, but also caused a rather chaotic situation for society. Most people have no ■■■■■■■ clue how damaging this actually is. They don’t see beyond the length of their noses.

I think players are trying to change the original intent of corporations.
I don’t agree that should be changed.

Trying to cloak that change into a balance issue is intellectually dishonest in my opinion, and indirectly trying to force people into game-play you think they should be doing instead the game-play they prefer, given the existing mechanics.

2 Likes

Do we know the “new” social type corps also can set tax to zero?

I fully agree

There aren’t new corps. They are the same corps as now. Only wardec mechanics are changing with a new feature called eligibility.

I don’t think there is any plans to change corps…

Corps do provide benefits and should be balanced.

It’s really hard to find a decent corp now. There’s too many managed by people that don’t know what they are doing or ones that are there just to skim corp tax from other players. They obscure corps lead by competent players.

It is surely having a damaging effect on the npe.

Seems to be a bit to much “micro-managing” the player-base in my opinion.

1 Like

Again, how so.

Please post what exactly you disagree with or find is a bad idea, instead of just saying "Because of this ".

So, in your opinion, what is the original intent of corporations?

Again, how so.

No one is saying we should get rid of the ability to create new corporations. The mechanic will still exist. Its not like there will be no one that will be able to create corporations unless they were a 10 year veteran or something.

The thing is, though, that people will try to protect something that theyve invested more into. Killah Bee told everyone to dock up their faction supers. Why? Because of the cost of such ships and the negative impact they will have on their killboard. Did Killah Bee tell all the Ceptor pilots to dock up, too? Of course not. Ceptors are a dime a dozen.

The more expensive a thing is, the less of a chance that we will abandon it and let it fall/fail.

I believe that the original intent of corporations is to provide a hub for like-minded individuals to gather and socialize, to promote conflict between groups, and to protect their corporation from outside threats.

Id like to see more corporations to be active. I dont mind seeing new corporations rising, but if given the choice between 100 corporations being created where 90 of them will go inactive and close in 5 months, and only 30 corporations created and 20 of them will stay active and social, ill take the 30. Im a quality over quantity guy, and i honestly think that the quality of a corporation will help what I believe to be the original intent or corporations.

But im open to discussion and for people to change my mind. What im not open to, however is a simple “No youre wrong. Youre a bad man. Me no rikey, you bad person.”

2 Likes

Heh, I’d have better odds at the track, and that isn’t the point is it… :wink:

1 Like

Unless you post actual arguments and compelling reasons, then yes, youd have better odds at the track.

Otherwise, you will find out that just posting the equivalent of a “no u” will not convince a lot of people.

The problem is your proposal does nothing but force you to grind some isk to make a corp.
It doesn’t provide any deeper engagement in it after that.
And therefore it is pointless at it’s objective. There is nothing to say that those good CEO’s would be able to grind the isk, there is nothing saying that poor CEO’s could not grind the isk.

TLDR: Grind barriers are bad.

2 Likes

One must be willing to change their mind. Obviously we know where some are in regard to that. :smile:

1 Like