Agreed with everything, not much else to add.

---

(10-14-2023, 05:59 PM)Darius Wrote: No my point is that playing the game by also funding others is The Way to play corps.

Keyword also. A faction will not subside on only being able to fund others while not participating themselves, and that is the situation Corporate IDs find themselves in right now. I have no issue with corporates hiring mercenaries to reinforce their own security. The problem is that, currently, that is all they can do, hire mercenaries while their own security forces are impotent. Said security are needed to drive the activity so that hired mercenaries might follow, if the corporation in question wants to employ them.

---

(10-14-2023, 06:12 PM)TheSauron Wrote: The problem is that, currently, that is all they can do

You could push the RP right now with Freelancer IDed ships with Corporate IFFs, Freelancer ID can assist allies anywhere and matching IFF is considered alliance server rules-wise right now, no need to hire in spot, then effectively RP as Corporate security, albeit that would be a circumvention rather than a solution, but just giving ideas in case this doesn't go through.

And why Freelancer ID? Official corporate factions can make blanket bounty boards, then mercenaries (server rule-wise Freelancers, inRP corporate security) get to deal with targets marked by the company.

---

I think it might be an interesting idea to expand the ZoI on Border and Edge Worlds + bordering systems where the corporation has any kind of base (including POBs!)

Corpos would naturally need a base of operations. Since they don't operate carriers and military vessels that could engage in extended skirmishes it would make little lore sense for them to exert influence on the places where their presence is minimal.

This should play right into the expected siege rework and hopefully help to drive activity in corporate factions - hauling materials to establish presence, defending their newly claimed outposts, while sabotaging the efforts of the competition.

In essence making it seem like they are carving a space for themselves in the untamed and wild regions of Sirius.

I have, probably unsurprisingly, always liked the idea of more active corporate rivalries and corporate IDs.
You have to be a little careful with some of those lines, though.
If you changed the "can attack ships belonging to factions hostile to [house] to global, you have re-created the House Intel IDs. Like....that's the LSF & Co line. Probably a bit much for house corps.
You could certainly add "can attack combat ships belonging to [rivals] outside of house space. That'd be fine.
The wartime profiteering lines, the global "can engage in piracy against Corporate ships considered hostile", is indeed useless without house wars, but that's what it's for. If there is a war again, it'll be quite powerful. I guess you can use it against OSI as a Liberty corp. But it's "working" as intended.
What I'd actually really want to see is "Can engage in piracy against non-allied Corporate (maybe also Unlawful) ships outside of house space". That opens a bit of a can of worms in terms of who "allies" are by the rules, but the current limitations of 1-3 rivals means dangerous border worlds piracy isn't all that realistic.

I don't know if Corp ZOIs really need adjusting. Corporate IDs aren't heavily reliant on them. Since they have global ally clauses, they can join fights with their allies anywhere, and their piracy lines are also not ZOI restricted. There are probably some cases in which a corp could use an extension, though. Of course, their engagement lines are heavily limited by "hostile by [house]" instead of "hostile by [faction]", though changing this on a broad scale would also raise questions about who enemies by the rules actually are. Questions that already exist for factions that do have those lines.

I'm sure House corps could get some more generous piracy/engagement lines, but they probably shouldn't be turned into global multi-function IDs that combine the most powerful aspects of all others.

Oh, and to those people that will when this topic comes up always talk about "they should hire mercs": Sorry, hiring mercs isn't gameplay. If a corporate faction wants to do that, good for them, but they are gaining literally nothing in terms of the actual game from it. I don't blame any faction that doesn't have a BB. Mercenaries and Bounty Hunters and the bounty system frankly don't fit all that well in the type of game this is.

---

(10-14-2023, 06:43 PM)Karst Wrote: I have, probably unsurprisingly, always liked the idea of more active corporate rivalries and corporate IDs.
You have to be a little careful with some of those lines, though.
If you changed the "can attack ships belonging to factions hostile to [house] to global, you have re-created the House Intel IDs. Like....that's the LSF & Co line. Probably a bit much for house corps.
You could certainly add "can attack combat ships belonging to [rivals] outside of house space. That'd be fine.
The wartime profiteering lines, the global "can engage in piracy against Corporate ships considered hostile", is indeed useless without house wars, but that's what it's for. If there is a war again, it'll be quite powerful. I guess you can use it against OSI as a Liberty corp. But it's "working" as intended.
What I'd actually really want to see is "Can engage in piracy against non-allied Corporate (maybe also Unlawful) ships outside of house space". That opens a bit of a can of worms in terms of who "allies" are by the rules, but the current limitations of 1-3 rivals means dangerous border worlds piracy isn't all that realistic.

I don't know if Corp ZOIs really need adjusting. Corporate IDs aren't heavily reliant on them. Since they have global ally clauses, they can join fights with their allies anywhere, and their piracy lines are also not ZOI restricted. There are probably some cases in which a corp could use an extension, though. Of course, their engagement lines are heavily limited by "hostile by [house]" instead of "hostile by [faction]", though changing this on a broad scale would also raise questions about who enemies by the rules actually are. Questions that already exist for factions that do have those lines.

I'm sure House corps could get some more generous piracy/engagement lines, but they probably shouldn't be turned into global multi-function IDs that combine the most powerful aspects of all others.

Oh, and to those people that will when this topic comes up always talk about "they should hire mercs": Sorry, hiring mercs isn't gameplay. If a corporate faction wants to do that, good for them, but they are gaining literally nothing in terms of the actual game from it. I don't blame any faction that doesn't have a BB. Mercenaries and Bounty Hunters and the bounty system frankly don't fit all that well in the type of game this is.

I think this post was caused by me not mentioning this part, for which I apologize. All of the piracy and engagement lines are supposed to only be available within their now expanded ZoI, with the Sirius-wide piracy (and defense likely as well) scrapped altogether. There is no reason for Samura to be out hunting Kishiro in Omega-7.

---

We have tau lines already, besides maybe a couple times they weren't used by corps.

Also all corps have allied line, they can group with anyone.

Thing is - players rarely join corps to fight and pirate, those guys just join better IDs meant for this

(10-14-2023, 07:16 PM)Czechmate Wrote: those guys just join better IDs meant for this

It's exactly what Sauron is complaining about, that you have to use a better ID for pews because the ID sucks.

---

(10-14-2023, 07:16 PM)Czechmate Wrote: Thing is - players rarely join corps to fight and pirate, those guys just join better IDs meant for this

Which is exactly why I am advocating for Corporate IDs to be less ass for combat.

---

Also, one thing I might like to repeat is to consider a system of "floating" bonuses. Basically, the Corpos would "share" mining bonuses from an available pool that could be adjusted based on the amount of (daily, weekly?) kills in a contested resource-rich system.

This way it would potentially be worth it to engage in corporation-on-corporation violence because it would confer better bonuses for your Corporation and increase the amount of people willing to work for you. The competing Corporations could then launch a promotional campaign to fund a combat-capable fleet to "steal" back the bonus.