Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
10756
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 15:19:16 -
[121] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Miss Dallocort wrote:I did make a support ticket to see what the GM would say but he said it was fine for them to continue it forever if they wanted. I was just asking on the forums to get some other peoples opinions. They're playing the game in accordance with the rules, and that is not a matter of opinion. If they want to keep you decced for the next decade, that's okay.
I always find people with questions like the OP to be odd, as if they didn't know what game they were playing at all. It's like someone being on a soccer field wondering why all the ball kicking and flopping was going on lol.
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2126
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 15:27:36 -
[122] - Quote
"Is it okay for someone to keep kicking the ball into my goal like that, is it considered harassment?" |
Miss Dallocort
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 15:29:50 -
[123] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:"Is it okay for someone to keep kicking the ball into my goal like that, is it considered harassment?"
While we're one the football analogy it would be more like a team of 2 vs a team of 300 with our team having heavy metal boots on preventing us from running. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
1038
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 15:47:18 -
[124] - Quote
Miss Dallocort wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:"Is it okay for someone to keep kicking the ball into my goal like that, is it considered harassment?" While we're one the football analogy it would be more like a team of 2 vs a team of 300 with our team having heavy metal boots on preventing us from running.
Well, no, it's not like that because that scenario would not be within the rules of soccer, whereas a huge corp stomping you across New Eden indefinitely is absolutely within the rules of Eve.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2129
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 15:58:29 -
[125] - Quote
Miss Dallocort wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:"Is it okay for someone to keep kicking the ball into my goal like that, is it considered harassment?" While we're one the football analogy it would be more like a team of 2 vs a team of 300 with our team having heavy metal boots on preventing us from running. I declared war on The Marmite Collective this year.
We're winning, by a huge margin. They outnumber us about 5 to 1.
Please stop citing member counts as if it actually has any bearing on anything. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
10756
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 15:59:05 -
[126] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Miss Dallocort wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:"Is it okay for someone to keep kicking the ball into my goal like that, is it considered harassment?" While we're one the football analogy it would be more like a team of 2 vs a team of 300 with our team having heavy metal boots on preventing us from running. Well, no, it's not like that because that scenario would not be within the rules of soccer, whereas a huge corp stomping you across New Eden indefinitely is absolutely within the rules of Eve. '
Damn, I wish I'd said that, that's perfect.
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
10756
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 16:00:16 -
[127] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:Miss Dallocort wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:"Is it okay for someone to keep kicking the ball into my goal like that, is it considered harassment?" While we're one the football analogy it would be more like a team of 2 vs a team of 300 with our team having heavy metal boots on preventing us from running. I declared war on The Marmite Collective this year. We're winning, by a huge margin. They outnumber us about 5 to 1. Please stop citing member counts as if it actually has any bearing on anything.
It's just easier to be a powerless victim than it is to fight back and risk losing lol. As in game, so in real life unfortunately for too many. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
969
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 16:49:05 -
[128] - Quote
Actually, I'd love something like wardeccing fees scaling depending on the area for aggression you specify. So for example, only one pipe of systems should be a lower cost than declaring war on anyone everywhere.
So taking that as an example, wardeccing a corp in only one system should be nearly free of charge, wardeccing them in a pipe of maybe 10-20 systems should be about the current costs, and deccing them in all of high would be slightly more expensive than currently. It would give a lot of reason to make a conflict local and drastically reduce the needed investment to only clear POSes in 2-3 systems or keep competing miners out of a couple belts in *your* homesystem.
Of course, that's just my opinion. |
Eve Solecist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2309
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 17:46:16 -
[129] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:Actually, I'd love something like wardeccing fees scaling depending on the area for aggression you specify. So for example, only one pipe of systems should be a lower cost than declaring war on anyone everywhere.
So taking that as an example, wardeccing a corp in only one system should be nearly free of charge, wardeccing them in a pipe of maybe 10-20 systems should be about the current costs, and deccing them in all of high would be slightly more expensive than currently. It would give a lot of reason to make a conflict local and drastically reduce the needed investment to only clear POSes in 2-3 systems or keep competing miners out of a couple belts in *your* homesystem.
Of course, that's just my opinion. Sorry, but what keeps literally anyone from simply moving over a few jumps, then?
Your idea doesn't make sense.
This one is one of my better posts. You should see the others ....
"I've tried to give up making sexual innuendos. But it's hard, so hard." -RoAnnon
ISD Ezwal > And then Ezwal comes along and takes all that space(s) away.
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2131
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 18:04:56 -
[130] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:keep competing miners out of a couple belts in *your* homesystem. Except nobody does this because declaring war on anyone for any reason is a horrible idea if you're not a dedicated PVP entity. |
|
Eve Solecist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2310
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 18:20:18 -
[131] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:Lloyd Roses wrote:keep competing miners out of a couple belts in *your* homesystem. Except nobody does this because declaring war on anyone for any reason is a horrible idea if you're not a dedicated PVP entity. Don't tell me what to do!
xD
This one is one of my better posts. You should see the others ....
"I've tried to give up making sexual innuendos. But it's hard, so hard." -RoAnnon
ISD Ezwal > And then Ezwal comes along and takes all that space(s) away.
|
Trajan Unknown
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 18:24:30 -
[132] - Quote
Just a general tip that might have been posted here already so my apologies if I repost something.
Why you not figure out where these people operate and get more flexible by going somewhere else and rebuild your little indy coorp there? I mean, when you have all your stuff and your area of operation in one system or one constellation it becomes easy to disturb or completely shut you down. I personally wouldn-Št even think about harassment I mean ransom people in EvE is popular and wide spread by a lot of people and the only case that I hurt of where it is harassment is, when you shut down the other ones choices. You have the choice to pay the ransom maybe they will come back a month or two month later and do the same again, maybe they won-Št - who knows? :)
|
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra Gallente Federation
310
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 20:20:17 -
[133] - Quote
Miss Dallocort wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:"Is it okay for someone to keep kicking the ball into my goal like that, is it considered harassment?" While we're one the football analogy it would be more like a team of 2 vs a team of 300 with our team having heavy metal boots on preventing us from running.
The Soccer ('Real' Football) analogy is kind of funny for me. In grade school, 4th grade or so, at recess a bunch of kids would play soccer but it was more like eve online null capital battles. It was always like 20vs.20 unorganized.
And your boot thing is funny because I liked wearing work boot like shoes to school. And one time I accidentally kicked a kick in the ankle while going for the ball. The weren't steel toes but probably felt about the same getting kicked by them. Boy was he mad.
I don't think anyone ever kept score but when the bell rang both sides would chant 'we won, we won' on their way into the building. That can sort of reflect the ganker mentality.
Oh look at that I just created content by socializing.
|
Eve Solecist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2325
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 20:55:12 -
[134] - Quote
Tuttomenui II wrote:Miss Dallocort wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:"Is it okay for someone to keep kicking the ball into my goal like that, is it considered harassment?" While we're one the football analogy it would be more like a team of 2 vs a team of 300 with our team having heavy metal boots on preventing us from running. The Soccer ('Real' Football) analogy is kind of funny for me. In grade school, 4th grade or so, at recess a bunch of kids would play soccer but it was more like eve online null capital battles. It was always like 20vs.20 unorganized. And your boot thing is funny because I liked wearing work boot like shoes to school. And one time I accidentally kicked a kick in the ankle while going for the ball. The weren't steel toes but probably felt about the same getting kicked by them. Boy was he mad. I don't think anyone ever kept score but when the bell rang both sides would chant 'we won, we won' on their way into the building. That can sort of reflect the ganker mentality. Oh look at that I just created content by socializing. YAY \o/ :D
This one is one of my better posts. You should see the others ....
"I've tried to give up making sexual innuendos. But it's hard, so hard." -RoAnnon
ISD Ezwal > And then Ezwal comes along and takes all that space(s) away.
|
Eve Solecist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2326
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 21:15:44 -
[135] - Quote
*sighs*
The day ... ........ is saved! (i can be hired)
This one is one of my better posts. You should see the others ....
"I've tried to give up making sexual innuendos. But it's hard, so hard." -RoAnnon
ISD Ezwal > And then Ezwal comes along and takes all that space(s) away.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2053
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 21:17:37 -
[136] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote: Well, no, it's not like that because that scenario would not be within the rules of soccer, whereas a huge corp stomping you across New Eden indefinitely is absolutely within the rules of Eve.
Except.... It's actually not within the rules of EVE to do it indefinitely across the whole of New Eden if you are stomping them (Rather than a mutual fight).
There is a point at which actions become harassment, and that's when the target has made significant efforts to leave from being a target and you still are specifically following them. I.E. They would have to move regions and change corps in this case. And if the new perma wardec then followed them after they have done that, they then start to have a case for harassment, since it obviously isn't economic warfare, or a particular market hub location, as they have actually taken serious steps and are no longer in the same markets. Till they bother doing that though, absolutely, they take whatever happens. (Assuming it's not the Wardeccer themselves drumming up ransoms) |
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12652
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 21:28:47 -
[137] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Except.... It's actually not within the rules of EVE to do it indefinitely across the whole of New Eden if you are stomping them (Rather than a mutual fight).
Yes, it is. It's not harassment just because they're losing, carebear.
Don't believe me? Drop a line to the GMs, see what they say.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2053
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 21:38:43 -
[138] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Yes, it is. It's not harassment just because they're losing, carebear.
Don't believe me? Drop a line to the GMs, see what they say.
Except CCP have directly clarified that if you take serious attempts to avoid it, and the person continues repeatedly it does become Harassment, so no, in this case you are wrong.
Or rather you are right in what you said, but utterly wrong in responding to me, because I didn't say it's harassment because they are losing, and you didn't bother actually reading what I said.
If they attempt to avoid it, by closing the corp, moving significantly and joining another corp, and they are still being perma targeted by the same PLAYERS, and that part is important as CCP also clarified using other alts does not make it ok, then they start to have a case for harassment.
If they try and sit in the same system playing the same markets and wonder why they keep getting shot at on exactly the same gate, then sure it's not harassment no matter how long it goes on for, because they have taken no effort themselves. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12652
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 21:42:55 -
[139] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Except CCP have directly clarified that if you take serious attempts to avoid it, and the person continues repeatedly it does become Harassment, so no, in this case you are wrong.
Wrong.
If you keep ducking wars and want to call harassment, they're going to ask you why you're in a player corp in the first place.
Wars are never harassment.
Like I said, if you want to know the truth, you can ask. You won't, because you refuse to do anything that might challenge your narrative that PvP is "griefing" and "harassment".
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Danalee
Somalian Coast Guard Authority The Marmite Collective
1282
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 22:08:08 -
[140] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Complete and utter fantasy drivel. See, that's what get's me going... People like you climbing on their high horse - Unicorn is more aptly fitting - not held back by lack of facts or evidence of their 'fantasy du jour' and argue with people who know every single thing better....
I don't mind for the people in the know but would someone please think of the children/noobs?!
I'll prove you wrong. Just wait.
D.
Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority
Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
|
Eve Solecist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2344
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 22:30:08 -
[141] - Quote
Let me try to end this.
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Yes, it is. It's not harassment just because they're losing, carebear.
Don't believe me? Drop a line to the GMs, see what they say.
Except CCP have directly clarified that if you take serious attempts to avoid it, and the person continues repeatedly it does become Harassment, so no, in this case you are wrong. Or rather you are right in what you said, but utterly wrong in responding to me, because I didn't say it's harassment because they are losing, and you didn't bother actually reading what I said. If they attempt to avoid it, by closing the corp, moving significantly and joining another corp, and they are still being perma targeted by the same PLAYERS, and that part is important as CCP also clarified using other alts does not make it ok, then they start to have a case for harassment. If they try and sit in the same system playing the same markets and wonder why they keep getting shot at on exactly the same gate, then sure it's not harassment no matter how long it goes on for, because they have taken no effort themselves. Yeah, that's right.
Let's ... for the sake of argument ... ignore that self destructing the pod in station ... ... which is now doable as far as I remember ... ... will move you away from your current location.
Which means it's actually impossible to lock anyone down in a station. It also means that it's rather easy to move far away from someone and it takes that someone time to get back to you.
If I keep going after you daily and you can not possibly play any other way ... ... they will tell me to stop or I'm gone.
Constantly denying a player the ability to play without any other means is griefing.
This, though, only ever works under two conditions.
The first is that there is no way I can lock you down in a station ... ... unless I counter any counter you try to defend yourself with. (ignoring self destruction)
That would mean that you couldn't even safely undock in your pod. You can't buy yourself a ship and fit it with stabs. Nothing.
The second is that I am not offering you a way out. (see the GM decision about bumping in C&P)
A GM ruling forces me to offer you a way out ... ... whatever it might be! Some people do singing ransoms, I kid you not!
Most people seem to find this rather hilarious! :) (social interaction provides content)
Assume I've locked you down in Jita 4-4. Assume it's your clone's home station, for the sake of argument.
Whenever you undock ... you get locked up instantly and we start shooting. You can't even get out with your pod.
A smart, experienced player will try to use google to find a way out. There might be something he doesn't know. There's always something. Maybe he'll come up with something.
For example ... There's a moon in Jita which almost perfectly aligns with the undock of 4-4. Instaundock and you're out!
And here's the thing:
The whiny idiots who don't belong into this game ... ... would have petitioned, even though it's not possibly considered harassment.
If it was a new player who couldn't possibly know what to search for ... ... then I would get a big fat warning for harassing a new player.
And the smart player, the one who "get's" EVE ...
... a) apologises if he did bad things ... (and most likely pay up or something) ... b) asks for a way to get out ... ... c) both.
Different.
If you sit in a wormhole and I permacamp all holes ... ... and you sit in there for a week and we still do it ...
... and you petition, then ... ... as a noob the GMs might move you out and we'd never know.(chances ... it happens ... why not) ... as an experienced player, they would tell you to self destruct.
If I deliberately trap you in a hole, by collapsing the entry you just went through ... ... knowing you have no scanner and no probes on board and you petition ... ... then the GMs will tell you ... ... a) to ask a friend you probably don't have. ... b) that people have successfully posted on the forums when they got lost ... ... b) to speak to the endless void that is local and hope for a response ... ... c) to kill yourself. Ingame, of course.
Most people have absolutely no base to even discuss this topic ... ... because they aren't even properly thinking about it.
Common sense. It's really easy.
All you people do is go through personal issues you have with the other person ... ... but do so in the context of game mechanics.
This one is one of my better posts. You should see the others ....
"I've tried to give up making sexual innuendos. But it's hard, so hard." -RoAnnon
ISD Ezwal > And then Ezwal comes along and takes all that space(s) away.
|
Eve Solecist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2344
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 00:20:24 -
[142] - Quote
I'd also like to add that if I never made the appropriate spaces in my posts ... ... the citation in my signature wouldn't make any sense. (:
This one is one of my better posts. You should see the others ....
"I've tried to give up making sexual innuendos. But it's hard, so hard." -RoAnnon
ISD Ezwal > And then Ezwal comes along and takes all that space(s) away.
|
Lendren
The Obsidian Core TCC.
4
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 00:47:57 -
[143] - Quote
Eve Solecist wrote:Let me try to end this. Nevyn Auscent wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Yes, it is. It's not harassment just because they're losing, carebear.
Don't believe me? Drop a line to the GMs, see what they say.
Except CCP have directly clarified that if you take serious attempts to avoid it, and the person continues repeatedly it does become Harassment, so no, in this case you are wrong. Or rather you are right in what you said, but utterly wrong in responding to me, because I didn't say it's harassment because they are losing, and you didn't bother actually reading what I said. If they attempt to avoid it, by closing the corp, moving significantly and joining another corp, and they are still being perma targeted by the same PLAYERS, and that part is important as CCP also clarified using other alts does not make it ok, then they start to have a case for harassment. If they try and sit in the same system playing the same markets and wonder why they keep getting shot at on exactly the same gate, then sure it's not harassment no matter how long it goes on for, because they have taken no effort themselves. Yeah, that's right. Let's ... for the sake of argument ... ignore that self destructing the pod in station ... ... which is now doable as far as I remember ... ... will move you away from your current location. Which means it's actually impossible to lock anyone down in a station. It also means that it's rather easy to move far away from someone and it takes that someone time to get back to you. If I keep going after you daily and you can not possibly play any other way ... ... they will tell me to stop or I'm gone. Constantly denying a player the ability to play without any other means is griefing. This, though, only ever works under two conditions. The first is that there is no way I can lock you down in a station ... ... unless I counter any counter you try to defend yourself with. (ignoring self destruction)That would mean that you couldn't even safely undock in your pod. You can't buy yourself a ship and fit it with stabs. Nothing. The second is that I am not offering you a way out. (see the GM decision about bumping in C&P)A GM ruling forces me to offer you a way out ... ... whatever it might be! Some people do singing ransoms, I kid you not! Most people seem to find this rather hilarious! :) (social interaction provides content)All you people do is go through personal issues you have with the other person ... ... but do so in the context of game mechanics.
Much words. Such Ramble. Wow!
The short answer from this forum is no. Continuous wardecs are an intentional part of the game, and are not considered griefing or harassment. If you disagree, you can always petition a GM to see what they say. Arguing here is a pointless exercise because none of us really have any say in the matter.
|
Eve Solecist
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2348
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 01:00:01 -
[144] - Quote
It's completely unnecessary to quote a post that's so big and so close.
And too late you are, as well.
This one is one of my better posts. You should see the others ....
"I've tried to give up making sexual innuendos. But it's hard, so hard." -RoAnnon
ISD Ezwal > And then Ezwal comes along and takes all that space(s) away.
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
35990
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 01:17:00 -
[145] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Yes, it is. It's not harassment just because they're losing, carebear.
Don't believe me? Drop a line to the GMs, see what they say.
Except CCP have directly clarified that if you take serious attempts to avoid it, and the person continues repeatedly it does become Harassment, so no, in this case you are wrong. Or rather you are right in what you said, but utterly wrong in responding to me, because I didn't say it's harassment because they are losing, and you didn't bother actually reading what I said. If they attempt to avoid it, by closing the corp, moving significantly and joining another corp, and they are still being perma targeted by the same PLAYERS, and that part is important as CCP also clarified using other alts does not make it ok, then they start to have a case for harassment. If they try and sit in the same system playing the same markets and wonder why they keep getting shot at on exactly the same gate, then sure it's not harassment no matter how long it goes on for, because they have taken no effort themselves. Without a GM ruling, it's all just speculation.
The only word we have from CCP that I can remember in relation to wars is in the Grief Play article, where corporation wars are specifically identified as a standard part of conflict and not grief play:
https://community.eveonline.com/support/knowledge-base/article.aspx?articleId=336
The aspect of persistent targeting of a player as being harassment is only clarified from my memory in relation to bumping and judged on a case by case basis, no other form of persistent targeting has any official word from CCP:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=199310&find=unread
It would be kind of stupid if wardeccers couldn't follow a wartarget around to put pressure on them. Being disruptive to a persons play seems like a fairly common strategic objective of a war, especially once mercs are part of it, where they could have been specifically hired to achieve an outcome against a Corp or specific players. But that's all just speculation too. Only a GM can say.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
24290
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 01:29:46 -
[146] - Quote
Wardecs? I'm pretty sure CCP is ok with those.
CCP Falcon reverses membership requirement for Alliance Logos after wardec threat.
fluorescent adolescent
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12654
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 01:43:46 -
[147] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote: I've never seen where CCP have said this:
Except CCP have directly clarified that if you take serious attempts to avoid it, and the person continues repeatedly it does become Harassment, so no, in this case you are wrong.
Can you link that clarification?
It doesn't exist, he's extrapolating from the bumping ruling.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
3933
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 01:53:18 -
[148] - Quote
I can't bear to read to the end, so much overblown shite. Sorry. Some not especially skilled at PVP (high sec types) just sit around and wardec people, hoping for fun and profit. Could be because they were patrolling the Recruiting forum (whatever it's called), or the Recruitment channel (whatever it's called), or because they just saw you in Local. Any delusional reason that they might think a 2-man corp might provide KB padding. Or more pathetic yet, ISK! Or they may have multi-wardecs going, and shopping for fights.
Whatever, a hyperactive hyperdrive ADHD move, if they can't enforce it with some patience and waiting for you to move. And you're in control of that. And playing GTA while waiting.
My advice to you: Do not ever look up "worst guitar solo" on Youtube. You will be sorry. No joke. Really and truly sorry.
|
Royal Imperious
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 04:13:05 -
[149] - Quote
Royal Imperious wrote:Just play denial games with the Deccers. Grief the griefers.
1) Log on, make sure they notice you, get in a fast (but not too fast ) ship. Set course for the middle of nowhere and watch them chase you across the universe, then laugh at them (quietly).
2) Log on, make sure they notice you, then jump clone 20+ jumps away, then go back to step 1)
Bonus: do this while playing with an out of corp alt.
Scipio Artelius wrote:Royal Imperious wrote: Grief the griefers. Someone who wardecs you is not a griefer, but you advocate griefing them? Is that the take away message of your post - you are in favour of griefing others.
No, I'm not in favor of griefing others, however I am very much in favor of returning that favor!
If the wardec has a point (any point) eg: denying you access to a certain space/route or any other strategic objective (including extracting ransom) then by all means this isn't a grefing wardec.
But consider this scenario I have been in multiple times:
1) Small corp gets decced by random 5-10 man corp for no apparent reason 2) Contact the deccers and offer them 25mil (half of the 50 mil to dec). This is to give an early incentive to end a pointless war. The deccer is not going to get more than 25 and certainly not more than 50 (which would make the dec profitable and furthur incentivize the dec. 3) The deccer is told that if the offer is rejected there will be no targets to shoot regardless. ... 4) The deccer asks for .... [Insert ridiculous amount of isk here] bil (because he/she is an idiot and doesn't understand the above logic and is adament the decs will continue until they are paid.) 5) No furthur communication with the deccers is permitted past this point. The deccer parks an alt in our home system. 6) We all wait x weeks (while playing with out of corp alts) until the deccer gets tired of losing isk for no good reason. 7) Dec ends
This whole thing (that repeats) over and over accomplished absolutely nothing other than the isk the deccer sunk into concord (Yay! lower inflation for all) and a waste of time on our end dealing with all this crap.
There was no tears, no fun, no gudfights, just a giant waste of time. Decs need to have an objective and an outcome of consequence (snap thats what eve is supposed to be all about).
No objective = no point = nothing more than annoying other players. So if you are going to waste my time (grief me), guess what, I'm going to waste yours (grief you). Now we have come full circle. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2138
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 06:27:27 -
[150] - Quote
This is why carebears are horrible at diplomacy. They can't do basic math and apparently don't understand the concept of value either.
I mean wow, there's so much wrong with that post that it boggles the mind. First and foremost if it costs someone 50 million to be at war with you, and they want to be at war with you, why the crap would they ever accept 50 million to not be at war with you, let alone 25 million? They'd lose both the desirable condition that they'd paid money to create (being at war with you to begin with) and then also be down 25 million isk.
They'd stand to gain nothing by accepting it and they'd lose both money and the thing they paid for in the first place. Only a total moron would even think that's a viable offer to make. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |