open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] EVE Jail
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Dirk Mortice
Posted - 2010.05.09 19:11:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Counter-proposal: CONCORD stop rescuing people for free. It's unrealistic as hell (amirite?) and it is hugely unfair that the player merc corps should have their livelihoods WRECKED by unfair NPC competition. How could miners make a living if NPCs gave a million units of free minerals to anyone who asked? That's how unfair it is.

I propose that people should have to buy their protection from CONCORD like everything else. If you dont pay, they wont lift a finger to help. Fees should be roughly equivalent to what player mercs charge, with corp and alliance contracts available. 100 mill a week for an individual, or 500m for a corp or 2.5 bill for an alliance sounds about right - perhaps someone from REPO or NOIR could comment here?

Of course, there would be no obvious way to tell if someone was protected or not, but what the hey, sometimes you have to take risks, and hugely increasing the costs and penalties of playstyles we dont like are what whinethreads in the Assembly are all about right...?



I suggest that concord should be removed from the game entirely, thus allowing mercenaries to truly become important in EVE. If the general trend with NPC goods is to try and remove them from the game, should we not try and replace NPC services with player services as well?

Players could choose their protection racket of choice, and pay them weekly. This allows them to wear a tag with the ticker of the protection force. Should the player get shot, the protection force gains killrights on the aggressor, and should pursue them for "great vengeance"

Eve should become free-for-all with players ensuring safety, and not some stupid in game rules and automatic no-fee ultra powerful protection force


Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.05.09 19:24:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Counter-proposal: CONCORD stop rescuing people for free. It's unrealistic as hell (amirite?) and it is hugely unfair that the player merc corps should have their livelihoods WRECKED by unfair NPC competition. How could miners make a living if NPCs gave a million units of free minerals to anyone who asked? That's how unfair it is.

I propose that people should have to buy their protection from CONCORD like everything else. If you dont pay, they wont lift a finger to help. Fees should be roughly equivalent to what player mercs charge, with corp and alliance contracts available. 100 mill a week for an individual, or 500m for a corp or 2.5 bill for an alliance sounds about right - perhaps someone from REPO or NOIR could comment here?

Of course, there would be no obvious way to tell if someone was protected or not, but what the hey, sometimes you have to take risks, and hugely increasing the costs and penalties of playstyles we dont like are what whinethreads in the Assembly are all about right...?


This is a fantastic idea and a good example of critical thinking. Unlike the OP.

-Liang

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.05.10 10:43:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Malcanis
Counter-proposal: CONCORD stop rescuing people for free. It's unrealistic as hell (amirite?) and it is hugely unfair that the player merc corps should have their livelihoods WRECKED by unfair NPC competition. How could miners make a living if NPCs gave a million units of free minerals to anyone who asked? That's how unfair it is.

I propose that people should have to buy their protection from CONCORD like everything else. If you dont pay, they wont lift a finger to help. Fees should be roughly equivalent to what player mercs charge, with corp and alliance contracts available. 100 mill a week for an individual, or 500m for a corp or 2.5 bill for an alliance sounds about right - perhaps someone from REPO or NOIR could comment here?

Of course, there would be no obvious way to tell if someone was protected or not, but what the hey, sometimes you have to take risks, and hugely increasing the costs and penalties of playstyles we dont like are what whinethreads in the Assembly are all about right...?


This is a fantastic idea and a good example of critical thinking. Unlike the OP.

-Liang


Conceivably CONCORD could also offer a 30-day "free trial" of their protection service to every new pod pilot to drum up business.

And of course there could be refinements like paying more/less for faster/slower response by more/fewer ships.

The gameplay possibilities are interesting.

Qoi
Exert Force
Posted - 2010.05.10 10:49:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Dirk Mortice

I suggest that concord should be removed from the game entirely [...]

Should the player get shot, the protection force gains killrights on the aggressor, and should pursue them for "great vengeance"


Shocked

Crumplecorn
Gallente
Eve Cluster Explorations
Posted - 2010.05.10 11:02:00 - [35]
 

Edited by: Crumplecorn on 10/05/2010 11:04:17
Originally by: Adiu Tor
IMHO those who raise the "major" argument that EVE was intended to be hardcore or whatever have to realize that the game has evolved (undermined you would call it). The fact that there is a special industrial expansion is coming up shows that CCP concedes that the game has evolved and is no longer a pure PVP game.
CCP don't have to 'concede' anything as they determine the nature of the game.
Industrial content and harsh consequences ('hardcore') are not mutually exclusive.
PvP is not exclusive to combat, so an industrial expansion shows nothing.
EVE was never meant to be pure PvP, merely nonconsensual PvP.
I'm sure I could find some more wrong with this if I actually thought about it.



Originally by: Malcanis
Counter-proposal: CONCORD stop rescuing people for free. It's unrealistic as hell (amirite?) and it is hugely unfair that the player merc corps should have their livelihoods WRECKED by unfair NPC competition. How could miners make a living if NPCs gave a million units of free minerals to anyone who asked? That's how unfair it is.

I propose that people should have to buy their protection from CONCORD like everything else. If you dont pay, they wont lift a finger to help. Fees should be roughly equivalent to what player mercs charge, with corp and alliance contracts available. 100 mill a week for an individual, or 500m for a corp or 2.5 bill for an alliance sounds about right - perhaps someone from REPO or NOIR could comment here?

Of course, there would be no obvious way to tell if someone was protected or not, but what the hey, sometimes you have to take risks, and hugely increasing the costs and penalties of playstyles we dont like are what whinethreads in the Assembly are all about right...?
Also, supporting this. Or I would, if it had its own thread. Hint hint.

Random MonDistinct
Minmatar
Alternative Innovations
Unknown and Beyond
Posted - 2010.05.10 11:23:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Counter-proposal: CONCORD stop rescuing people for free.

There are broker fees, transaction fees, lab rent fees & so on, presume that taxes go to empire & the to local police :-)

Killer Gandry
Caldari
Shadow of the Pain
Posted - 2010.05.10 12:25:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Counter-proposal: CONCORD stop rescuing people for free. It's unrealistic as hell (amirite?) and it is hugely unfair that the player merc corps should have their livelihoods WRECKED by unfair NPC competition. How could miners make a living if NPCs gave a million units of free minerals to anyone who asked? That's how unfair it is.

I propose that people should have to buy their protection from CONCORD like everything else. If you dont pay, they wont lift a finger to help. Fees should be roughly equivalent to what player mercs charge, with corp and alliance contracts available. 100 mill a week for an individual, or 500m for a corp or 2.5 bill for an alliance sounds about right - perhaps someone from REPO or NOIR could comment here?

Of course, there would be no obvious way to tell if someone was protected or not, but what the hey, sometimes you have to take risks, and hugely increasing the costs and penalties of playstyles we dont like are what whinethreads in the Assembly are all about right...?


Now THIS sounds interesting.

Work it out a bit and post as a suggestion and I will surely support it.


Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2010.05.10 13:10:00 - [38]
 

Maybe we should have EVE Asylums, too. After every whacko post on AH, you are confined there for 36 hours of "rehab" which consists of listening to the devs chant "HTFU" in a menacing, monotonous drone the entire time.

Razz

Thumbs down, buddy.


Lani Sun
Posted - 2010.05.10 14:38:00 - [39]
 

this haz got be the dumbest idea ever.

not supporting

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2010.05.10 14:49:00 - [40]
 

If CONCORD can kidnap pirates, I contend pirates should be able to kidnap people as well. Much more realistic when it comes to paying a ransom.

Major PewPew
Garoun Investment Bank
Posted - 2010.05.10 18:23:00 - [41]
 

how much did Akhmendidfidsfrryfudosgiourepoeytopiurtwoi pay you to make this proposal?

Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente
Imperial Tau Syndicate
POD-SQUAD
Posted - 2010.05.10 20:55:00 - [42]
 


Zelda Wei
Caldari
New Horizon Trade Exchange
Posted - 2010.05.10 21:17:00 - [43]
 

Quote:

The Crying Pirate: Pirate Breaks Down in Court

This case could go from zero to FDLS in less than 60 seconds if the Obama administration isn’t careful. We’ve got a 16-year-old ‘pirate’ from Somalia in a New York courtroom crying poor mouth. What could go wrong? How long until a wave of public sympathy (and, in turn, world sympathy) forms for this guy?

A judge today ruled that Abdulwali Muse will be tried as an adult. It should be noted that in truth we have no clue how old this guy actually is. His mother claims he’s only 16 but the government thinks he’s much older. He’s a pathetic piece of art in the courtroom — Muse stands just 5′4″ and has a cast on one arm. He doesn’t understand our judicial system and he barely speaks English. If you buy the story his parents are selling, he’s a wayward child that skipped school and was missing for two weeks. If you buy the governments tale, he’s a dangerous ‘pirate’ hellbent on initiating a war on the high seas. By the time this whole thing is over they’ll be begging this kid to take a plea deal that admits guilt and accepts deportation back to his home country.


Supported for the pirate tears.

Hien Morisato
Posted - 2010.05.10 23:10:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Dirk Mortice
Originally by: Malcanis
Counter-proposal: CONCORD stop rescuing people for free. It's unrealistic as hell (amirite?) and it is hugely unfair that the player merc corps should have their livelihoods WRECKED by unfair NPC competition. How could miners make a living if NPCs gave a million units of free minerals to anyone who asked? That's how unfair it is.

I propose that people should have to buy their protection from CONCORD like everything else. If you dont pay, they wont lift a finger to help. Fees should be roughly equivalent to what player mercs charge, with corp and alliance contracts available. 100 mill a week for an individual, or 500m for a corp or 2.5 bill for an alliance sounds about right - perhaps someone from REPO or NOIR could comment here?

Of course, there would be no obvious way to tell if someone was protected or not, but what the hey, sometimes you have to take risks, and hugely increasing the costs and penalties of playstyles we dont like are what whinethreads in the Assembly are all about right...?



I suggest that concord should be removed from the game entirely, thus allowing mercenaries to truly become important in EVE. If the general trend with NPC goods is to try and remove them from the game, should we not try and replace NPC services with player services as well?

Players could choose their protection racket of choice, and pay them weekly. This allows them to wear a tag with the ticker of the protection force. Should the player get shot, the protection force gains killrights on the aggressor, and should pursue them for "great vengeance"

Eve should become free-for-all with players ensuring safety, and not some stupid in game rules and automatic no-fee ultra powerful protection force




lol those two posts made me laugh and thanks for making it easier to quote them both lol. Anyway I have ganked and I've been ganked both are equally amusing lol however I like the idea of being able to spray graffiti on the walls in a jail cell. Not so sure about your time frames though I saw someone who had better times which were in minutes that way it won't really effect player game play. Also restricted them to newbie ships/shuttles/special ships thus allowing them the ability to still play but limited. Though I've heard of people ganking in a newbie ship still yet to see it lol. Also, thought I saw an idea about the person who got ganked would have the ability to press charges. Love the idea but that one should cost isk being that you would have to hire a lawyer etc. yah-dah-yah-dah.

Nice counter by the way I'm still laughing in fact I think I screwed up a couple words above lol. CONCORD are police meaning the taxes from NPC corps/factions covers the cost in empire space. Just like your property and state income taxes if your in the united states covers city, county, and state police as well as your federal taxes covering federal police forces such as the FBI and U.S. Marshals. When you create a player corp you are essenially still paying those taxes with office rentals every month, What you purposed would be an awesome idea for sov space where a sov space holder could contract NPCs to police they're space. CONCORD and high-sec exist for the new players. If it was nothing but a free for all your new players wouldn't play long being they would constantly be getting destroyed you would end up with a group of veterans that would slowly diminish and leave the game for other games. Thus destroying EVE.

Anyway should give the pod the ability to avoid concord and the longer they avoid concord the higher they're bounty goes up. If they are caught the bounty vanishes but they also spend longer in jail. This would increase the number of bounty hunters something in this game I believe is seriously lacking. Also need a formal merc contracting system for mercs to really have a good job. But then again I guess you could just call that player funded missions.

Omega Flames
Caldari
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
Sanctuary Pact
Posted - 2010.05.11 01:37:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: I SoStoned
^^^ this, already in place.

I just vote that the aggression timer be extended per attack by 15 extra minutes, or a multiple of their negative security status, whichever is greater, to keep them bottled up in a station for a little longer after each attack. And/Or provide CONCORD with remote logistics support to the stricken vessel, boosting their shields by as much as they're DPS'ing the criminal.

And perhaps an age/SP limit on any attempt to suicide in highsec to lower the number of disposable alts used for such attacks.

Actually this idea aint bad at all imo.

eocsnesemaj
Keskerakond
Posted - 2010.05.14 10:15:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Dirk Mortice
Edited by: Dirk Mortice on 09/05/2010 11:09:07
http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa96/shotbydalonewolf/1177313659911.jpg


Changed to hotlink, don't ban me Shocked


This

Ogogov
Gallente
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2010.05.14 14:10:00 - [47]
 

Supported for pirate tears <3

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2010.05.14 14:44:00 - [48]
 

I would like to hope that most people would realise that my counter-proposal was a satire on how hideously one-sided the OP's proposal was.

The answer to the "problem" of non-consensual PvP in empire is, of course, tradable kill-rights integrated with a properly working bounty system. A player-based solution to a player-based problem.

Also: dont autopilot, dont put valuable cargo in a 500k ISK untanked hauler, dont go via the normal routes, use blockade runners etc etc etc.

Teinyhr
Minmatar
A Club for Reputable Gentlemen
Posted - 2010.05.14 16:03:00 - [49]
 

Supported, just to see griefer tears.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2010.05.14 16:21:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Counter-proposal: CONCORD stop rescuing people for free. It's unrealistic as hell (amirite?) and it is hugely unfair that the player merc corps should have their livelihoods WRECKED by unfair NPC competition. How could miners make a living if NPCs gave a million units of free minerals to anyone who asked? That's how unfair it is.

I propose that people should have to buy their protection from CONCORD like everything else. If you dont pay, they wont lift a finger to help.

You know, as a staunch carebear I would actually support this, provided Concord really came to rescue me, instead of just chasing you off and let your buddies pick up the loot.

But, in all earnesty, I could really envision a scenario where you can buy security packages from Cooncord; like D (cheapest) for pretty much what you get now; and A (like 100mil a month or so) for 'total protection'. Or whatever the numbers would be. See, the problem with 'mercs' is that they are notoriously unreliable: you pay them, and they turn on you, after all, because your enemy pays them double. But buying reliable security packages from Concord, that I would seriously consider.


Pages: 1 [2]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only