Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lyn Farel]

It is not because CONCORD does IC shenanigans that make no sense - like permitting wars - that it becomes an excuse for implementing another stupid shenanigan in the same vein which will obviously make even less sense ICly.

They should create a parallel underworld, indeed. That would also reinforce the pirate factions at the same time.

[Shaalira]

I'll play devil's advocate here.

Explaining via parallel underworld creates more problems than it purports to solve.  How do 'illegal' wars circumvent CONCORD hi-sec safeguards?  Why are there standardized fees, information transparency, and a total lack of fraud in a system maintained by a criminal underworld?  How did a 'parallel underworld' come to be when the pirate factions are as diverse and divided as the traditional empire governments?  They're not exactly all BFF.  You're essentially pulling a criminal Yulai Convention out of a hat.

Here's an alternative pitch:  CONCORD provides these services because it's an in-character and pragmatic decision for the organization to make.

Consider the following data points about CONCORD:
-  It was founded under joint agreement by five diverse interstellar nation-states, each with fundamentally different value sets and moral outlooks.  The organization draws personnel from all of these empires.   This implies an organizational moral ambivalence or moral relativism concerning basic ethical concepts such as justice.  What unifies the organization is its mission.  "The ever-expanding bureaucracy of CONCORD has become a-empirical, swearing fealty to no one race."
-  Nowadays, CONCORD's upper echelon isn't even drawn from the five empires but "rise from the ranks of its own employees."
-  CONCORD's power was initially limited, but grew over time as the organization's financial independence became established.  This financial independence is based on revenues arising from interstellar trade - customs, licenses, contraband confiscation.  The SCC is a branch of CONCORD.
-  CONCORD maintains a DED branch that targets high-profile criminals and criminal organizations.  The definition of criminality is, of course, based on the laws of CONCORD's constituent 5 nations.  (Hence, while Sansha's 'Nation' possesses the features of a sovereign entity, it is relegated to a 'pirate faction' by the CONCORD narrative.  It's simply not one of CONCORD's constituents).  One of the major duties of the DED is assisting customs efforts, using its advanced technology.
-  While CONCORD regulates the new capsuleer class with direct violence, it also channels capsuleer energies via incentives.   The most basic of these are automated bounties.  At the higher levels of refinement, such as the measures taken to counter Sansha strikes, capsuleers are herded into fleets and directed against targets using military-style missions.  Even capsuleers that have fallen out of favor with CONCORD can win back their security ratings by directing guns at approved targets.  Because of automated CONCORD incentives, the majority of capsuleers are predisposed towards shooting the pirate factions and winning favor with the empire governments.


Starting off these lore points, what I see is an organization that is fundamentally amoral.  It takes no stand concerning slavery, except when slaves are being shipped across boundaries an illegal contraband.  It professes no opinion on democratic self-rule versus centralized megacorp control, except when the State designates privately-owned small-arms as illegal contraband.  What it is concerned with is maintenance of the status quo, which is the dominance of, and the precarious balance between, the five founding nations.  CONCORD also has a vested interest in expanding interstellar trade.

The events leading to the Empyrean War threatened the status quo.  With peace out of the question, CONCORD opted for the lesser evil of a controlled proxy-war fought largely by capsuleers over stretches of underdeveloped low-sec space.  With the conflict clearly bounded into a well-paid ceremonial bloodsport, akin to the limited warfare of feudal samurai or knights, CONCORD avoided the "danger" of a decisive victory by any one nation or alliance of nations.   A scenario of a single dominant Empire would have rendered CONCORD obsolete.   Low-intensity conflict, however, could perpetuate the balance indefinitely.

The rise of the capsuleer class is another threat to the status quo.  Fortunately, capsuleers are an egotistical and garrulous bunch, who are concerned mostly with shooting, romancing, trolling, and politicking each other.  They pay scant attention to the baseliner population, dismissing non-capsuleer vessels as "rats" - vermin that aren't even worthy opponents in space.  Additionally, capsuleers have been a major boon to interstellar trade and industry, individually contributing on a scale comparable to planetary economies.

How does CONCORD control capsuleers while profiting off of them?  The same way they handle interstellar trade:  regulations, punishments for breaking regulations, and paid-for licenses to bypass regulations.  After all, CONCORD isn't against violence per se.  They pay well if a capsuleer pops a few Angel Cartel ships.  And if you decimate a Sansha fleet, you may even get a pat on the back.  It's unsanctioned violence that's problematic.

A capsuleer launches a suicide attack on another capsuleer in hi-security space, without CONCORD sanction.  Punishment is applied swiftly and efficiently.  Is the victim compensated or the rationale behind the attack explored at all?   No, that's not CONCORD's concern.  What is established is that there's a rule, and breaking that rule incurs a penalty.

If you want to bypass that rule, you can pay a modest fee (modest by capsuleer standards) for a license.  Renewing this license, also known as a wardec, is made easy by automatic deductions from your account.

What is a bounty but a transaction?  And CONCORD profits from all interstellar transactions by means of the SCC.  The sheer scale of capsuleer transactions means that processing and brokering fees alone probably account for an entire service economy ecology.

And if these sanctioned modes of violence allow capsuleers to focus on shooting each other rather than threatening the status quo, all the better.

[Lyn Farel]

Explaining via parallel underworld creates more problems than it purports to solve.  How do 'illegal' wars circumvent CONCORD hi-sec safeguards?  Why are there standardized fees, information transparency, and a total lack of fraud in a system maintained by a criminal underworld?  How did a 'parallel underworld' come to be when the pirate factions are as diverse and divided as the traditional empire governments?  They're not exactly all BFF.  You're essentially pulling a criminal Yulai Convention out of a hat.

What are "illegal" wars ? I do not see any illegal wars, since they are all condoned by CONCORD.

Also, I do not see why there would be any standardized fees, information transparency and total lack of fraud in a criminal system, indeed. It could be, but hardly I think. How does that make CONCORD a criminal underworld ? I am not sure to understand.

Just in case, I never said that the war system should be put under another organization than CONCORD, it would make even less sense since CONCORD is the one enforcing the law in space. I can understand that CONCORD wants to see capsuleers hunting each other (divide and conquer), but even that feels totally stretched to me, considering how capsuleers can be crushed like cockroaches at any time, and taking their technology into account. Capsuleers are dependant lucrative puppets, nothing more.[/quote]

-  It was founded under joint agreement by five diverse interstellar nation-states, each with fundamentally different value sets and moral outlooks.  The organization draws personnel from all of these empires.   This implies an organizational moral ambivalence or moral relativism concerning basic ethical concepts such as justice.  What unifies the organization is its mission.

I don't disagree, but I don't agree either. It can perfectly be that moral relativism that leaded them to a new brand of ethics. Somehow, I tend to see them somewhere in the middle, like the big amoral administration that they have become, while retaining a lot of their idealistic elements. 

-  Nowadays, CONCORD's upper echelon isn't even drawn from the five empires but "rise from the ranks of its own employees."

It can also empahize on what I said above : to the contrary, breeding their own elements with a complete control on their beliefs and purpose can either lead to completely amoral developpement, as well as a very ethical code not restricted/stained by any foreigner biased empire.

-  CONCORD's power was initially limited, but grew over time as the organization's financial independence became established.  This financial independence is based on revenues arising from interstellar trade - customs, licenses, contraband confiscation.  The SCC is a branch of CONCORD.

Same as above. It does not prove anything to me. That's not because they are financially independant that they suddenly became amoral.

Funnily enough, but that's only my personnal interpretation here, I see CONCORD as a pragmatic, quite relativist organization when it was founded by these 5 empires. A kind of compromise between 5 very different mindsets, having to juggle between each of them constantly while still having a lot of ties and dependance towards their 5 creators. However, now that they have become independant and act like an allmighty intergalactic police, mandated by 5 factions at the beginning and so still retaining a full legitimacy, their moral compass can actually have become very rigid and idealistic, which might well be pissing 4 of these factions off. I am pretty sure CONCORD has become a big annoyance for them now.

-  CONCORD maintains a DED branch that targets high-profile criminals and criminal organizations.  The definition of criminality is, of course, based on the laws of CONCORD's constituent 5 nations.  (Hence, while Sansha's 'Nation' possesses the features of a sovereign entity, it is relegated to a 'pirate faction' by the CONCORD narrative.  It's simply not one of CONCORD's constituents).  One of the major duties of the DED is assisting customs efforts, using its advanced technology.

Yes, for the very reason that CONCORD was founded upon the common principles of every founding nation, so it shares the same basic common principles that mostly embraces their definition of criminality. It is also why slavery is not considered by them as criminal, even if they do not allow it in their space (which is an internal policy, probably pointing again at certain ethics on their behalf).

-  While CONCORD regulates the new capsuleer class with direct violence, it also channels capsuleer energies via incentives.   The most basic of these are automated bounties.  At the higher levels of refinement, such as the measures taken to counter Sansha strikes, capsuleers are herded into fleets and directed against targets using military-style missions.  Even capsuleers that have fallen out of favor with CONCORD can win back their security ratings by directing guns at approved targets.  Because of automated CONCORD incentives, the majority of capsuleers are predisposed towards shooting the pirate factions and winning favor with the empire governments.

If bounties still concerned criminal elements, I would tend to agree. However with the new system, you can put a bounty on everyone. That is more or less like any bounty hunter underworld organization, not a law enforcement agency. You do not enforce law by allowing some of your citizens to shoot at others for money. Or maybe CONCORD are suddenly thinking like what the Cartel would do.

Starting off these lore points, what I see is an organization that is fundamentally amoral.

It is funny but when I read the CONCORD lore for the first time, I had the complete opposite feeling. Of course, Eve is grim and gritty, so CONCORD must be at least a little (and it is), but my main feeling overall is that they are more bound to ethics than the opposite. 

It takes no stand concerning slavery, except when slaves are being shipped across boundaries an illegal contraband.  It professes no opinion on democratic self-rule versus centralized megacorp control, except when the State designates privately-owned small-arms as illegal contraband.  What it is concerned with is maintenance of the status quo, which is the dominance of, and the precarious balance between, the five founding nations.  CONCORD also has a vested interest in expanding interstellar trade.

As I said above, the Amarr bloc was a founding member, prone to slavery. However, CONCORD laws make slavery illegal in their space, which is quite telling imo. Also, the moral side of slavery is yet another debate that has been had a bajillion times already, depending on how it is implemented. CONCORD is not interested in fighting slavery, CONCORD is interested in fighting the enemies of the core civilizations, which are for most of them consituted of criminals or direct threats to them. CONCORD is also supposed to regulate capsuleer activities since nobody else can do it properly.

The events leading to the Empyrean War threatened the status quo.  With peace out of the question, CONCORD opted for the lesser evil of a controlled proxy-war fought largely by capsuleers over stretches of underdeveloped low-sec space.  With the conflict clearly bounded into a well-paid ceremonial bloodsport, akin to the limited warfare of feudal samurai or knights, CONCORD avoided the "danger" of a decisive victory by any one nation or alliance of nations.   A scenario of a single dominant Empire would have rendered CONCORD obsolete.   Low-intensity conflict, however, could perpetuate the balance indefinitely.

The event leading to Empyrean Wars are not comparable to me since they involve 4 of CONCORD's founders. Capsuleers, who are under its direct care, were the perfect tool to be offered to the Empires - like feudal warfare indeed, i like that analogy - to prevent that full scale war to happen. So here, they allowed it out of necessity.

I do not see how allowing capsuleers to cause havoc in high security space (or even in low) is done out of necessity. We can still resort to the argument of channeling their energies, divide and conquer, or anything in that vein, but you usually do not allow that right in the middle of a crowded street... And anyway, as I said above, CONCORD seems to be able to shut down instantly any capsule to their whims. They simply do not need that kind of gimmick to my mind, that just feel completely out of place, totally stretched.

[Shaalira]

The situation seems to run counter to your impression of CONCORD.
-  If CONCORD can shut down capsuleers at its whims, why allow a thriving outlaw capsuleer population to exist?  Why allow such large numbers of capsuleers to 'switch sides' and run missions and kill empire ships on behalf of the pirate organizations?  How can True Slave capsuleers exist (and operate in hi-sec space) if CONCORD holds such eminent power over capsuleer actions?
-  Allowing combat to happen in the middle of a 'crowded street' is not a very good analogy when we're talking about open space lanes measured in kilometers and AU, where the use of area effect weaponry that can affect bystanders are either preemptively disabled or punished immediately.  Two capsuleers duking it out in front of a trade hub are as much a threat to neutral parties or station denizens as a holovid broadcast.
-  Capsuleers aren't treated as 'citizens' by CONCORD.  They're treated as independent actors who can go where they want and do what they want, subject to penalties and payments depending on if their actions match the CONCORD agenda.   If CONCORD held such absolute power over capsuleers as you suggest, and consider capsuleers as a 'citizenry' that they held responsibility over, capsuleers wouldn't be permitted to do things like fight for anti-CONCORD organizations, or moving en masse to space outside of CONCORD's jurisdiction to set up their own sovereign entities.
-  Talk of developing an independent ethos is fairly unconvincing given the lack of details on what such an ethos would be aside from fulfilling its own mission statement.  Legalism without regard to the moral valuation underlying the law (accepting empire law at face value and enforcing it without question) is little more than protection of the status quo.

Let's talk economics.

Capsuleers are major economic actors who have increased industry output and trade well beyond pre-Empyrean levels.  However, capsuleers are a miniscule population, especially when compared to a baseline population of untold billions who live on thousands of Earth-like worlds, many terraformed.

Capsuleers consumption of traditional goods is negligible.  While I'm sure many enjoy traditional luxuries such as fine foods, clothing, and catering to bodily pleasures, their numbers are just too small to create the aggregate demand needed to support the supply output.   Where is the demand coming from?

The new Empyrean economy is based around space ships, space ship components, and in-space infrastructure.  Empyreans dabble in planetside industries in order to extract materials necessary either for the repair of space ships or the creation of space stations.   Demand is sustained by other Empyreans wishing to buy these products.   But again, we run into a demand shortfall problem if we consider only natural decay or obsolescence (which is negligible).

What sustains the capsuleer demand for their own products?  Conflict and destruction.  Capsuleers are largely responsible for blowing up the assets of other capsuleers, thus maintaining the aggregate demand needed to sustain a booming economy.  Permitting legal capsuleer wars within CONCORD's jurisdiction doesn't just allow CONCORD to profit off of fees while keeping the capsuleer population divided, it also benefits the greater interstellar economy.  And interstellar trade is something CONCORD has a vested interest in expanding.


We can argue about personal impressions of the lore until the sun goes down.  However, the theory on a morally ambiguous and self-interested CONCORD better fits what actually goes on in the gameworld.   Accepting a premise of an ethical and just CONCORD contradicts what CONCORD actually permits (nay, encourages!) to happen in its jurisdiction.  The less of a divide between RP and actual in-game events, the better.

[Lyn Farel]

The situation seems to run counter to your impression of CONCORD.
-  If CONCORD can shut down capsuleers at its whims, why allow a thriving outlaw capsuleer population to exist?  Why allow such large numbers of capsuleers to 'switch sides' and run missions and kill empire ships on behalf of the pirate organizations?  How can True Slave capsuleers exist (and operate in hi-sec space) if CONCORD holds such eminent power over capsuleer actions?

Why indeed ? Makes no sense. The same way that the opposite point of view possesses a lot of similar inconsistencies. Why cannot we fire at planets, civilian ships, why aren't we able to cause any damages to stations or space objects rendered invulnerable by game mechanisms ? Why are we cut into pieces within a few seconds when facing CONCORD police in high sec while missions against CONCORD makes them appear like standard weak and squishy NPCs ? (and how is that we kill millions of NPC battleships everyday, depleting the whole population, and how is that Newtonian physics are not respected in space, etcetc ?)

I am trying to conciliate the two, to the risk of actually combining both flaws... But meh. 

Also, I consider that True Slave Capsuleers do not exist inside the law of CONCORD. True Slave Capsuleers are out of the CONCORD registry and owned specifically by Sansha's Nation. The same way, but in more extreme, I believe, that state capsuleers belong to their faction which is responsible for them (see what happens when Noir decides to crash into a station... could we do the same ?). Player capsuleers voluntarily left their national academies to go freelances, so they are put under CONCORD jurisdiction. The game limits are obvious.

-  Allowing combat to happen in the middle of a 'crowded street' is not a very good analogy when we're talking about open space lanes measured in kilometers and AU, where the use of area effect weaponry that can affect bystanders are either preemptively disabled or punished immediately.  Two capsuleers duking it out in front of a trade hub are as much a threat to neutral parties or station denizens as a holovid broadcast.

Oh, pragmatically, yes, definitly. Would you however allow military unfaillible selective devices shoot at each other in the middle of a street, large or narrow, whatever, with the justification that they will obviously never harm anyone since they aim accurately at their targets ? What would all the mortal non-capsuleers flying around think of that, however ? I know that I wouldnt like myself to see weapons of the apocalypse firing huge beams of destructive power near me, even if they are supposed to never cause any harm to me.

PR wise, it's difficult to believe, I think, even in a gritty universe (especially where politics are ubber important here). But well, I think your point is valid anyway.

-  Capsuleers aren't treated as 'citizens' by CONCORD.  They're treated as independent actors who can go where they want and do what they want, subject to penalties and payments depending on if their actions match the CONCORD agenda.   If CONCORD held such absolute power over capsuleers as you suggest, and consider capsuleers as a 'citizenry' that they held responsibility over, capsuleers wouldn't be permitted to do things like fight for anti-CONCORD organizations, or moving en masse to space outside of CONCORD's jurisdiction to set up their own sovereign entities.

Citizens was a bad choice of word on my behalf, since I wanted to put the emphasis on my analogy. But I can admit that it was a little stretched.

Let's talk economics.

Capsuleers are major economic actors who have increased industry output and trade well beyond pre-Empyrean levels.  However, capsuleers are a miniscule population, especially when compared to a baseline population of untold billions who live on thousands of Earth-like worlds, many terraformed.

Capsuleers consumption of traditional goods is negligible.  While I'm sure many enjoy traditional luxuries such as fine foods, clothing, and catering to bodily pleasures, their numbers are just too small to create the aggregate demand needed to support the supply output.   Where is the demand coming from?

The new Empyrean economy is based around space ships, space ship components, and in-space infrastructure.  Empyreans dabble in planetside industries in order to extract materials necessary either for the repair of space ships or the creation of space stations.   Demand is sustained by other Empyreans wishing to buy these products.   But again, we run into a demand shortfall problem if we consider only natural decay or obsolescence (which is negligible).

What sustains the capsuleer demand for their own products?  Conflict and destruction.  Capsuleers are largely responsible for blowing up the assets of other capsuleers, thus maintaining the aggregate demand needed to sustain a booming economy.  Permitting legal capsuleer wars within CONCORD's jurisdiction doesn't just allow CONCORD to profit off of fees while keeping the capsuleer population divided, it also benefits the greater interstellar economy.  And interstellar trade is something CONCORD has a vested interest in expanding.


We can argue about personal impressions of the lore until the sun goes down.  However, the theory on a morally ambiguous and self-interested CONCORD better fits what actually goes on in the gameworld.   Accepting a premise of an ethical and just CONCORD contradicts what CONCORD actually permits (nay, encourages!) to happen in its jurisdiction.  The less of a divide between RP and actual in-game events, the better.

That's true. I am not debating the fact that CONCORD condones capsuleer wars (just that it seemed a bit stretched), but your pov based on economics makes sense to me, even if that's a little far from their actual mandate. The only thing that it can point out actually, is a strong ethos and morale on their behalf if they are so much interested in the well being of baseliner economy, which is not quite the field they are supposed to bolster in the first place. Why would they help baseliner planetside economies considering what is their mandate in the first place, if not for ethics and ideals ?

However, I disagree with your statement that your pov is what better fits to the gameworld. To your opinion, maybe. To my opinion, neither yours or mine really does, since both are full of inconsistencies due to gameplay limits (and/or devs not caring enough about rational RP reasons).

[Shaalira]

That's true. I am not debating the fact that CONCORD condones capsuleer wars (just that it seemed a bit stretched), but your pov based on economics makes sense to me, even if that's a little far from their actual mandate. The only thing that it can point out actually, is a strong ethos and morale on their behalf if they are so much interested in the well being of baseliner economy, which is not quite the field they are supposed to bolster in the first place. Why would they help baseliner planetside economies considering what is their mandate in the first place, if not for ethics and ideals ?

A strong ethos and sense of morality is not necessary because they have a pragmatic and self-interested reason to expand interstellar trade.  See CONCORD's history:

For the first few decades of its existence CONCORD wielded very limited power, but in recent years their authority has grown alongside that of inter-stellar trade, ... The root for this development lies in the evolution of CONCORD itself. It’s no longer simply a neutral ground for the empires to hammer out diplomatic agreements - it has become an independent institution setting its own rules and regulations and, more importantly, is both willing and able to uphold them. .... The only hold the empires have had on CONCORD, that of financial support, is waning day by day as the revenues garnered through customs, confiscation of illegal goods, selling licenses, and more, are steadily increasing.

Emphasis mine.

In other words, CONCORD's power and independence as an organization is dependent on revenues earned through its control of interstellar trade.  Expanding interstellar trade expands its revenue base and solidifies its autonomy vis-a-vis the empire governments.

[BloodBird]

The only problem I have with the new bounty-system, *as I understood it* is this;

Player A is a high-sec hauler. He hauls from a to b all day every day and is happy and content to do this. It's what he pay his sub for and what he does.

As he is part of a player corp he face two dangers - war-decs and random suicide-attacks. The former could happen but grants warning, the latter is so rare that he can neglect the danger by never traveling with cargo to valuable to NOT gank him. As a consequence, his Iteron 5 goes unmolested for years.

Player B is a ganker. He get's his fun and pays his sub to go suicide-gank random people that it's worth it to gank. After all, there are many haulers out there, and most seem to haul cargo to inexpensive to warrant his lost ship(s). As such he has ignored player A because it's not profitable to gank him.

Player C is a bored rich guy with dozens of billions of isk and little to do. The new bounty-system goes live and he goes out randomly setting hundreds of million on random people. He throws a 100 mill bounty or somesuch on Player A for the hell of it.

Suddenly Player B has a financial reason to gank Player A - now the cargo+bounty for the ship is worth his expenses and then some. Player A's life is now ruined - his corp got perma-decced to the point that he was entierly stuck in station. Leaving for NPC corp did nothing as people looking to pop him would keep suiciding anything that was worth killing.

And that's not even accounting for the people who suicide gank just for lulz, with no care to what it is or who it is or what they lose. Before they would do it for the hell of it, now they do it for the hell of it and to cash in the bounties and make it even simpler to replace their lost hardware.

In short, the bounty-system would not 'punish' 'criminals' with low sec-rating, it would be used as a griefer's tool to target anyone and everyone for harassment.

There is always a danger of being attacked in high-sec or decced or whatever, but if anyone can set a bounty on you for no reason at all and with no checks to who can become wanted, anyone else now have an extra excuse to gank/dec you. This system can easily be miss-used.

[Shaalira]

Why indeed ? Makes no sense. The same way that the opposite point of view possesses a lot of similar inconsistencies. Why cannot we fire at planets, civilian ships, why aren't we able to cause any damages to stations or space objects rendered invulnerable by game mechanisms ? Why are we cut into pieces within a few seconds when facing CONCORD police in high sec while missions against CONCORD makes them appear like standard weak and squishy NPCs ? (and how is that we kill millions of NPC battleships everyday, depleting the whole population, and how is that Newtonian physics are not respected in space, etcetc ?)

I am trying to conciliate the two, to the risk of actually combining both flaws... But meh. 

Technically, Dust will allow podders to fire at planets.  The circumstances that allow this are still vague.

We can fire at civilian ships.  Try shooting up the grey crosses traveling from station to station for loot.  You can do this in both hi-sec and low-sec, and you can even get away with it with your ship intact in hi-sec.

The disparity between police CONCORD and squishy NPC CONCORD is the big one, and probably the one that you can attribute the most to game mechanic demands.  A handwavy explanation involves CONCORD supported by its full infrastructure in hi-sec space, and CONCORD forces caught out in low-sec where they're operating in unfriendly territory.

Population issues concerning crews and battleship losses are an interesting subject, but unrelated to the issue of CONCORD's motives.

The same way, but in more extreme, I believe, that state capsuleers belong to their faction which is responsible for them  (see what happens when Noir decides to crash into a station... could we do the same ?)

The Broker did the actual crashing.  That character operates under so few restrictions that it's more accurately termed a plot device.

Oh, pragmatically, yes, definitly. Would you however allow military unfaillible selective devices shoot at each other in the middle of a street, large or narrow, whatever, with the justification that they will obviously never harm anyone since they aim accurately at their targets ? What would all the mortal non-capsuleers flying around think of that, however ? I know that I wouldnt like myself to see weapons of the apocalypse firing huge beams of destructive power near me, even if they are supposed to never cause any harm to me.

The opinions of potentially offended mortal non-capsuleer bystanders don't really amount to too much.

No, seriously.  Capsuleers shooting each other in hi-sec space is constitutes a minority of the violence there.  The majority of apocalyptic huge beam firing in hi-sec space is done by capsuleers directed at non-capsuleer targets by empire authorities.

[Seriphyn]

What I'm interpreting Shaalira to be saying is the common "Capsuleers in their own bubble" thing, but not in an immersion-breaking sense. More like how, during medieval times, knights and nobles were up in their ivory towers and took it so damned seriously even if 99% of the world didn't care or weren't affected by their high class nonsense. Shaalira already used that example.

I think what CONCORD may be trying to do here is limit the collateral damage of capsuleers by codifying their rules of engagement properly, so that they do not waste CONCORD resources (ie. CONCORD spawns) in their petty nonsense. That way, the empires can reap the economic and military benefit of the capsuleers without being too damaged by their continuing existence. Sure, people die to capsuleer-on-capsuleer combat, but it might be rationalized as "Well reduced crew numbers" and "Hey, those guys signed up for it, let's not worry about them".

Maybe Shaalira can confirm that approach.

[Myyona]

Bloodbird: If guy 'A' is flying around in a Iteron 5 the additional gain opportunistic people would get for doing a suicide run against him would be 20% (afaik) the value of a Iteron 5 + fittings... As so, not much more than any regular gank under the current rules.

Besides, I might be pessimistic, but I believe there are tons of gank-bears hanging around high sec, and with the new risk it brings to initiate unprovoked aggression in high sec, these bears will be a lot less trigger happy. (Not implying that I want suicide ganking out of high sec,  but if you are 'hardcore' you better start acting like it).

[Merdaneth]

TPlayer C is a bored rich guy with dozens of billions of isk and little to do. The new bounty-system goes live and he goes out randomly setting hundreds of million on random people. He throws a 100 mill bounty or somesuch on Player A for the hell of it.

The bored rich guy with dozens of billions might have ganked Player A for the hell of it before the new bounty system. Or he might hire a merc corp to declare war on random high-sec industrialist corps for the hell of it. No change here.

All game checks and balances are broken by bored players with billions of isk and nothing to do. That doesn't indicate any inherent flaw in the system.

[Shaalira]

Maybe Shaalira can confirm that approach.

More-or-less.  People are a renewable resource.  Particularly in a setting where terraforming is common and 'terran' worlds are in abundance.

However, I think I'll leave this debate track before it completely sidetracks a thread about expansion reactions.  The nature of CONCORD's in-character thinking is something best discussed in another forum/topic.



As to BloodBird's concern, let's run the math on the proposed scenario.

An Iteron V is an inexpensive 1.5-2m ship, modules can bring the cost up to 10m, or more if rigs are used.  With 5 mid slots, it can tank itself well enough to withstand dessie gankers, requiring either a coordinated effort by several dessies or a larger gank ship.

This places the cost of ganking the ship at roughly 15-20m+.  More if a BC is used.  Insurance no longer covers ships blown up by CONCORD.

With cargo having a 50% drop rate, this means it's barely worth suicide-ganking the ship if it has at least 40-50m in cargo.  Ideally, suicide gankers will go for more valuable hauls as each suicide gank incurs sec status loss and requires replacement ships.  Both involve an investment of time above and beyond the base value of gank ships.  And if you're involving several suicide gankers, that means a time investment made by more than one person.

How does a bounty affect things?   Each kill only claims a 20% portion of the lost ship.  This means a 50m Iteron V (10m ship + 40m cargo) will yield a 10m isk bounty.

This has a marginal effect on suicide-ganking calculations, and theoretically the pilot merely has to adapt to the bounty by carrying 10m isk less in cargo each run.

Will a hi-sec griefer corp pony up a 50m wardec for a return that low?  Not too likely.  Will they expend the effort in perma-camping a hauler that only flies Itty Vs?  Highly improbable.

Will the 100m bounty 'ruin' that character's life, in Bloodbird's words?  Doubtful.   What about a 1bn isk bounty?   Well, since the payout per kill is dependent on what the hauler flies, a larger bounty only means that more kills will be paid out.  It'll still be a marginal return if the pilot in question is using such a cheap hauler and sticking to low-value cargo.

And if the hauler switches to station-trading during the duration of the (improbable) wardec and never undocks, then he's utterly invincible.

In other words, a random bounty just adds a minor incentive.  Whether a pilot is a juicy target or not still depends mostly on their own actions.

[BloodBird]

The example with the Itty 5 and the 100 million was just that.

Bored rich gankers or 'cause max damage' type-players was lambasted as griefers yesterday, they will tomorrow. However tomorrow they can also add bounties on others for no reason other than to inconvenience them and get other non-'griefers' to help out.

In short the concern is that it will become a fad to serve out bounties so that it will become lucrative to declare war on everyone in high-sec for the sake of deccing everyone in high-sec. Or ganking them, or anything that goes towards "ruining their lives", as it was.

The people whose interest is described as griefing are not going to stop, as mentioned. But now it could be more easy to do so as you can, among the other tools available to you, set bounties on people and their corporations and alliances so as to negatively impact them. When you no longer have time or desire to dec that alliance you have kept in station for a month but want them inconvenienced, drop bounty money on them. Others can and will pick up where you left off.

In the end ofc, this is just assuming a 'worst-case' type of event in response to the new mechanics. It is a concern of mine, but won't have to be nearly as wide-spread as feared. On the other hand, the system is universally an improvement and will benefit all players, far more than the old and broken one ever did.

[Gesakaarin]

I tend to agree with Shaalira here. For CONCORD it's far better to isolate and contain capsuleers by having them focused on killing and destroying each other rather than potentially having them upset the established order of things with their signatories. By providing outlets for violence and the use of nominal incentives they create system where capsuleers are more or less contained in their own little bubble and the interstellar framework is more or less maintained.

It's a pragmatic policy that allows CONCORD to focus on other threats to the peace and strengthens their own position because they don't have to respond to each and every dubious and questionable act capsuleers may commit in the course of their careers.

I'm not sure why CONCORD should be the 100% perfect UN/Space Police when it seems New Eden is a dog eat dog world for a capsuleer and I don't think one will get much sympathy or outrage when another capsuleer attempts to "grief" them from the average joe if one considers the prevalent sterotype of the class is one of supposedly powerful technological ubermensch.

"Oh no, someone put a multi-million ISK bounty on you so they could destroy your multi-million ISK spacecraft? Yeah, first world problems for you I guess, it would take a couple of lifetimes for me to make that sort of cash."

In short, since I think the number one concern the average citizen has is not getting shafted by capsuleers there's really very little pressure for CONCORD to change how it manages the capsuleer class and in particular how they conduct acts of violence against each other.

[Louella Dougans]

the difference in game mechanical behaviour between CONCORD ships that punish people for aggression, and the mission CONCORD ships is not confined to pirate faction missions.

There is a mission, given out in highsec by gallente agents, a level 1 mission, "For the greater good", and one part involves you shooting a CONCORD frigate. With no consequence to you.

This single mission, imo, bursts the argument about "highsec infrastructure" making the CONCORD ships so omnipotent, and the mission CONCORD/DED ships in pirate missions so puny.

:game mechanics: