This, simple and effective.
1 Like
The only thing thatâs even been remotely suggested is Corp hanger.
Just certain people are claiming it will destroy highsec to simply have social corps exist even with all the usual limits for players in npc corps. So brisc was listening to them and proposing a player limit based off their fears.
The agenda and trolling here is sick and off the charts.
Their is no depths of twisting and lies these people wont sink to inorder to get what they want, in their own interest, regardless of those of the game.
Its almost like, probably, they are being paid for it, and take shifts.
Corp hangars would be too much. Itâs the only reason i started a corp, corp wide asset sharing and organisation.
If an industry corp doesnât want structures they have little need for a corp beyond its hangars.
And we really donât need a member limit. Everything you can do in a social corp can be done with a chat channel now.
1 Like
There is more to it than that.
Read my post above to Brisc with 10 questions on how they would be implemented.
No, theyâre not too much.
Think why we even have this discussion. Itâs because some people donât want to fight. Some do and we donât need to think about them. Those who donât will however create normal corps as before if they donât get all the simple features, too. Assets in space, which gives significant bonuses, do go too far, but corp wallets, hangars and organisation is no problem at all. If youâre not willing to make this concession then why do you even want social corps? We have NPC corps and players can remain in them for all I care. So you either got to make this good or not at all.
1 Like
Ok:
1- rolls can probably be kept the same for the most part. Theyâll just have missing features.
2- Doesnât have to cost anything but a small fee would stop spam.
3- no
4- they can form/join social alliances. (or maybe they can join alliances but are exempt from decs)
5- yep. Someone with rolls can kick you just like now. See 1
6- see 5
7- no all members still pay npc tax. Social corps should not have a wallet.
8- can have an hq, but no hangars. It has no wallet to pay ârentâ.
9- on and off switch like âfriendly fireâ. Can have a week transitions period. Full corps must unanchor all structures, close all offices and corp hangars, empty wallet before they can become a social corp.
Or we just say itâs a one way ticket. You cannot turn a full corp into a social corp.
10- members list work normal with social corps.
If this is what players want, then itâs not your choice to make. You cannot herd players. If you donât give them what they want then why do you even care for what they should be given? We can certainly keep it the way it is right now.
If Social Corps are introduced as detailed here, HS Corps will be obliterated over a mere matter of months, by NS proxy Social and Player Corps in HS, with overwhelming economic, military and political force.
Player attrition due to leaving will explode, as they have no way to compete, even if they tried.
Iâm afraid its a problem. They main reason to make a corp for small indy corps is hangars.
So by denying them will they just go back to making normal corps and when a wardec comes will they dodge it just as they do now.
What is the gain of denying it? There isnât any. And if we donât give them what they want, but we want to deny them the features, then we donât even need to give them anything.
So make up your mind. Do you want to deny them their social corp or do you want to give it to them?
Now they are trying to bury the reasons why not, under mountains of trash posting.
The WHOLE point in social corps is to differentiate players who just want to play together and ones who want to have the benefits of a corp.
The price of hangars and a wallet is the chance of wardecs. This is normal risk/reward.
You canât give them hangars. There will be no reason for small industry groups to be in a normal corp. And with a wallet you start getting mission running corps that are just there to skim corp tax off of other players.
You canât do it sorry.
It is not what players want.
Its what players posting for powerful agenda entities, want, for the reasons I detailed earlier.
And they also want you to muddy the waters on any resistance to it, as you and others are doing.
Then we donât give them social corps. We already have NPC corps and they can simply create a private chat.
You donât seem to understand the problem here. The problem is about wardecs, not corps. We have a spam of wardecs going on, primarliy because there are so many corps out there that one cannot tell who will fight back. So they spam.
The only way to give sense back to wardecs is to give those who donât want wardecs the option to bail out. It could be as simple as a switch in the current corp interface, saying, âenable/disable participation in corporate warfare (also disables placement of structures in space)â.
But now youâre focused on creating something where you donât even know why you want to create it and you just ignore those who caused this problem in the first place. It will just continue to be a problem if you donât address it. Itâs just not about corp mechanics.
1 Like
This.
Its a bad idea with horrific repercussions.
The Social Corp suggestion, as presented, would be disastrous to EVE.
HS Player and Social Corps would be obliterated and defunct, in short time.
I am not in favour of social corps, as it is going to miss the issue, it is a glass ceiling in terms of development, because once you want to do more stuff you become open to the imbalance in hisec. But if it was this is what I would do.
-
Suggest same structure as current, so no issue in changing between being a normal corp and a social corp.
-
Same as a normal corp.
-
For me no.
-
No.
-
Yes, by the CEO and directors as per now.
-
Same as current corps.
-
Tax should be NPC tax rate and goes to the Empire in which the corp HQ is located.
-
Yes to both. Social also means sharing stuff.
-
Payment of a fee the same cost as setting up a new one, can go both ways, and can be done once all structures are destroyed or unanchored / transferredâŚ
-
This is obviously standing based, but yes.
I understand that what will happen is that nullsec alliances will use them as logistics corps, the corp hangers being especially useful. I am assuming that the CEO will be able to set friendly fire yes/no.
What you are suggesting is that they will then be used as safe indy corps and that the main nullsec alliances will control the structures and allocate bonuses based on standings. Yes it could end up being used as a recruitment arm of certain nullsec alliances and in which they can hide their indy alts.
To be blunt I do not see social corps as the way to do it because the issue is with hisec and how the players have developed within it, and have never really paid much attention to going into the detail of social corps because of that.
If only that were true, no they just want targets to farm and spamming wars is to give them a chance that someone will go through the pipes or visit the hubs so they can farm them, it is nothing more than that.
Youâve got me (and hisec players) so wrong.
The reason a lot of people start/join corps is because they are told to by the players, by the game. They donât fully appreciate this puts them in a position to be wardecced or what wardecs fully mean.
Being part of something gets players interacting and investing. Just a group to call âfriendsâ a âhomeâ and an âidentityâ. They DONâT need corp hangars and wallet for that. These are NOT the reasons new players stick around.
So why do we need them when we have npc corps?
- Can you make a killboard for your npc corp?
- Can you find npc corps via corp adverts to find like minded players?
- Can you leave a bulletins board and corp wide messages?
- Do you get a corp logo?
- Do you get to name your corp?
- Is it easy to make corp wide fleet adverts?
Thereâs no identity or ownership with an npc corp. And for ALL those players that are already using chat channels whilst they are in npc corps, wouldnât it be nice if the game supported what you were already doing rather than having to do work around after work around?
Yeah, social corps are not the same as npc corps. They would honestly be a god send to the playerbase. But they donât need hangars and wallets. I need hangars and wallets, but social corps donât.
4 Likes
*sips water*
1 Like
Thatâs not a problem, itâs a strategy, and itâs as old as civilisation itself. They are the classic roadside bandits. I think itâs awesome that they choose to do this. Why wouldnât you want to have this in EVE?