Why does it cost about 12$?
And how are there so many corporations with only 1 player and innactive?
Me and my friends rly would like to have some sort of a “clantag” but the active clans are all full or nearly full so me and my friends cant join a clan together.
I would rly like to understand the purpose behind those high costs 4 clancreation in a team base multiplayer game.
hmmm House Harkonnen may have place for you …how many are "you guys?"and how about coming into star conflict TS…ill be on in about 2 hours
i personally think it should be increased to 25$ per a corp creation. It should also cost rl money to expand them (but that method should simply just be faster then an alternative way of exp or clan related levels based on various thing).
further, clans should have a minimum amount of people per the first 72 hours, and when they reach 4 or less they get another 72 hours to get the population back up. if they don’t they should disband and refund the amount or 50% of it. this will help prevent inactive corps (ie players joining dead corps) or sneaky abusive stuff by alts.it also prevents corp spam, which clutters the game, causes abuse etc
this would probably reject many players which are not willing to pay such amounts of money …
the price and the goods need to be in a reasonable relation…12$ might be a little to high 10$ may do the trick…
A system to prevent mass corp creations is a nice thing but to prevent corp creation cause it costs rl money is a wrong way in my opinion. Cause a casual player like me will and can never afford something like this.
no, its an excellent way to do it, every other game we see that some other ways does not work.
as a result, you get 234902340-29340-23940230-23940-39 guilds, clans etc.
this causes a major effect on the community. Why you may ask?
if people do not fear recompense for leaving a corp, they will treat it poorly, if they treat it well and act well, you get good behavior. this lightens the loads, reduces gm support ticket times (coming soon) and so forth,
Eve had a counter-mechanic, that worked, corp history, if someone had been in lots of corps, it was clear they were often leaving, suggesting they are thieves or trouble makers. this allowed for long-duration corporations in eve. Most i know of lasted at least 2-3 years. This makes eve very strong in a community sort of sense. (well at least in 0.0)
this money cost, or raising it will put value on corporations, preventing people from joining around over and over again, increasing things like trolling, and so forth. we just dont need that in our community. It is superior to have a community like eve, as opposed to World of warcraft. However, it is also superior to have simplicity in the game design like wow, as opposed to eves very complex nature.
if Starconflict can get both of these right, it will be the foundation of a perfect mmo-game, that i am sure will challenge blizzard for its spot as lead gaming-company / mmo in the world.
i personally think it should be increased to 25$ per a corp creation. It should also cost rl money to expand them (but that method should simply just be faster then an alternative way of exp or clan related levels based on various thing).
further, clans should have a minimum amount of people per the first 72 hours, and when they reach 4 or less they get another 72 hours to get the population back up. if they don’t they should disband and refund the amount or 50% of it. this will help prevent inactive corps (ie players joining dead corps) or sneaky abusive stuff by alts.it also prevents corp spam, which clutters the game, causes abuse etc
???
Why is it bad to have many corp ?
We dont care about inactive corp. We only care about the best corps.
its not because of inactive corps, but they are also a problem.
its because with 500000 corps, you get
abuse from players going from one corp to the next
theift/corp theives going from one corp to the next
trouble makers going from one corp to the next
also if there is less corps, it means that all corps around will likely be more active, removing the possibility of you joining a “inactive corp”
I thought people choose who come in their corp.
Then only active corps are good.
For example : in real life, it’s free to create games. There are good games with active community, and bad games with inactive community.
I’m not ultra-liberal and I’m not against communism, but I think we can just let people make groups and prove by playing and winning what is the best corps.
In your mind, we should force players to create less corps. It sounds to me like the contrary of freedom.
And personnaly, I dont want to be in a 100 members corps. I prefer tiny corps where I know every members. Then we can play all together, elaborate good strategy and go to win.
I think feyd is right.
And i think also of the people, who cannot afford such high prices. Are they, because of this, bad corp leaders?
Its all about a big offer of clans, some take the game serious, others play with friends or just want to have some fun. If we have many corp, the chance for a single player is better to come into a corp in which he feels good and fits to his play style.
If a clan gets inactive, who cares? And there will always be some clanhoppers, they will get their reputation soon.
hmmmmm Excalibur4 you just about took the words from my mouth
clan creation does not limit clan styles, nor force them to grow larger. these are things always dependent on the leader, regardless of mechanics. this set up just prevents unneeded spam, which creates an atmosphere where people abuse.
it will make the community much better, believe me, they will be forced to respect each other, other wise they will not get a corp.
this allows trouble makers to be dealt with by the community, as well as the staff. it will lower gm time, because of qq spam resports, and will cause the players to conduct them self well behaved.
i mean, its not a must, but its a major plus.
its left to the gms and community to decide do they want corp spam, with theives, trolls, and so forth abroad, or do they want to make the game hostile to this people, ultimately causing them to leave, and allowing more mature, team-related players to stay (like in eve). lastly, it makes money for the game.
an alternate solution is to make corp history like in eve.