EVE Search - Wars being abused by bored PvPers/pirates

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Wars being abused by bored PvPers/pirates

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.16 11:03:00 - [1] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 16/11/2004 11:05:52 A system in which carebear empire dwelling corporations are totaly immune to war declarations is imbalanced. It can too easily be exploited by people who wish to provide the resources for the activities of alts / 2nd accounts thus rendering them economically immune. You can't touch their production, you can't harm them. I honestly can't think of any way around it. As for the second paragraph of the initial post... do you honestly believe that someone who is bored of 0.0 PvP will actually enjoy hunting a small carebear corp in empire for more than a week? Be patient, buy protection, buy them out, try to fight them alone... the list goes on and on you options are endless. The system is same for all. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.16 11:03:00 - [2] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 16/11/2004 11:05:52 A system in which carebear empire dwelling corporations are totaly immune to war declarations is imbalanced. It can too easily be exploited by people who wish to provide the resources for the activities of alts / 2nd accounts thus rendering them economically immune. You can't touch their production, you can't harm them. I honestly can't think of any way around it. As for the second paragraph of the initial post... do you honestly believe that someone who is bored of 0.0 PvP will actually enjoy hunting a small carebear corp in empire for more than a week? Be patient, buy protection, buy them out, try to fight them alone... the list goes on and on you options are endless. The system is same for all. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.16 12:39:00 - [3] Originally by: DarkMatter Why is it that PK'ers assume that the rest of the community needs them to make the game fun? We don't, but don't whine when you are affected by PvP in a game that supports it. That's Seleene's main issue, people wanting a different treatment from the game than what everyone else gets. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.16 12:39:00 - [4] Originally by: DarkMatter Why is it that PK'ers assume that the rest of the community needs them to make the game fun? We don't, but don't whine when you are affected by PvP in a game that supports it. That's Seleene's main issue, people wanting a different treatment from the game than what everyone else gets. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.16 14:53:00 - [5] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 16/11/2004 14:57:02 I am not talking about individuals Riddari. I am talking about corps. Of course a person makes more money in 0.0 Riddari that's the whole point of 0.0. I ain't discussing this, don't play dumb. It doesn't even have to be a second account corp it can even be a friendly corp to a PvP corp, or it's mining division in a different corp. You make more money in 0.0 when you are allowed to do so. It becomes pointless when your enemy knows that X empire corp is assisting you financially but can't touch it because CCP put some sort of restriction on War Decs. Any notion of curbing War Declarations vs Empire based corps hurts this aspect of PvP irepairably and further imbalances 0.0 PvP. The worst part concerning these types of complaints is that people are focused on the reason they got War Decced, as if that should be the criterium of a "legitimate", as viewed by the opressed, war or not. These people complain in a way that shows that if they had been war decced for a reason they approved all would be fine and dandy... which is completely false. Wether someone war decced you because he didn't like the colour of your ship or because he was a financial rival who wanted you out of the area the end result is the same: YOU WILL HAVE TO, IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, PARTICIPATE IN PVP. So stop all this: BORED / PIRATE / LAMER / PKER war decs me for some odd reason blah blah blah. Voice it properly: I don't want to even be subjected to the limited type of war decced PvP. And the answer to that is NPC corporations. If the workings of those don't satisfy you Riddari then the problem lies there and not with player corps. Every other system belongs in games like WoW or EQ. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.16 14:53:00 - [6] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 16/11/2004 14:57:02 I am not talking about individuals Riddari. I am talking about corps. Of course a person makes more money in 0.0 Riddari that's the whole point of 0.0. I ain't discussing this, don't play dumb. It doesn't even have to be a second account corp it can even be a friendly corp to a PvP corp, or it's mining division in a different corp. You make more money in 0.0 when you are allowed to do so. It becomes pointless when your enemy knows that X empire corp is assisting you financially but can't touch it because CCP put some sort of restriction on War Decs. Any notion of curbing War Declarations vs Empire based corps hurts this aspect of PvP irepairably and further imbalances 0.0 PvP. The worst part concerning these types of complaints is that people are focused on the reason they got War Decced, as if that should be the criterium of a "legitimate", as viewed by the opressed, war or not. These people complain in a way that shows that if they had been war decced for a reason they approved all would be fine and dandy... which is completely false. Wether someone war decced you because he didn't like the colour of your ship or because he was a financial rival who wanted you out of the area the end result is the same: YOU WILL HAVE TO, IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, PARTICIPATE IN PVP. So stop all this: BORED / PIRATE / LAMER / PKER war decs me for some odd reason blah blah blah. Voice it properly: I don't want to even be subjected to the limited type of war decced PvP. And the answer to that is NPC corporations. If the workings of those don't satisfy you Riddari then the problem lies there and not with player corps. Every other system belongs in games like WoW or EQ. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.16 15:18:00 - [7] Originally by: Riddari He even has the gall to imply and that I don't participate in PVP? You misunderstood me if you got that impression, or i worded my arguments poorly. I know you well enough. Hence i implied you were playing dumb when you mentioned that you can make more money in 0.0 than in empire but failed to mention that it's much easier for someone to put a hold in yer moneymaking in 0.0 than in empire. Moneymaking was only brought up by me because you mentioned that something should be done about war decs and empire space. I brought it up to illustrate how it could potentially imbalance the current PvP situation. Quote: What interests me most is that players who focus mostly on combat whine more about those that don't wish to partake in combat, because the non-combat people CAN MAKE MONEY IN PEACE in Empire? This is the core of the argument and i thought i made it clear when i answered Darkmatter. What Seleene and i said is that we don't have a problem with the guy who sits and mines all day long. We have a problem with the guy who sits and mines all day long and when he is war decced or affected by PvP, in some other way supported by game mechanics, starts complaining about how unfair it is for him. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.16 15:18:00 - [8] Originally by: Riddari He even has the gall to imply and that I don't participate in PVP? You misunderstood me if you got that impression, or i worded my arguments poorly. I know you well enough. Hence i implied you were playing dumb when you mentioned that you can make more money in 0.0 than in empire but failed to mention that it's much easier for someone to put a hold in yer moneymaking in 0.0 than in empire. Moneymaking was only brought up by me because you mentioned that something should be done about war decs and empire space. I brought it up to illustrate how it could potentially imbalance the current PvP situation. Quote: What interests me most is that players who focus mostly on combat whine more about those that don't wish to partake in combat, because the non-combat people CAN MAKE MONEY IN PEACE in Empire? This is the core of the argument and i thought i made it clear when i answered Darkmatter. What Seleene and i said is that we don't have a problem with the guy who sits and mines all day long. We have a problem with the guy who sits and mines all day long and when he is war decced or affected by PvP, in some other way supported by game mechanics, starts complaining about how unfair it is for him. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 08:23:00 - [9] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 17/11/2004 08:26:26 Originally by: Riddari How do carebears force gamestyle changes on combat people? By asking not to be shot? No, by asking for game mechanic changes that affect a larger chunk of the PvP aspect, simply because they don't want to be shot. Btw you didn't reply to my last paragraph in my last post :P Bad form. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 08:23:00 - [10] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 17/11/2004 08:26:26 Originally by: Riddari How do carebears force gamestyle changes on combat people? By asking not to be shot? No, by asking for game mechanic changes that affect a larger chunk of the PvP aspect, simply because they don't want to be shot. Btw you didn't reply to my last paragraph in my last post :P Bad form. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 09:59:00 - [11] Originally by: Riddari Ummm, I don't get it. I think of this as a flaw of game dynamics that he can be killed in 1.0. How is it a flaw when even CCP calls the Concord Sactioned Wars? Sounds perfectly correct to me. Quote: The thought that they can be killed by some random corporation in a 1.0 system never occured to them and it's a shock for them to find out that their playing time is now being blocked by some bad-ass battleships who would rather mess around in safe Empire than where other battleships roam just as dangerously. Everyone has the right to choose who to fight and who to not fight. Those bad-ass battleship pilots you mentioned are subject to the very same rules that the guy in 1.0 space. They can be war decced as well. It can't get any fairer than that without destroying the game. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 09:59:00 - [12] Originally by: Riddari Ummm, I don't get it. I think of this as a flaw of game dynamics that he can be killed in 1.0. How is it a flaw when even CCP calls the Concord Sactioned Wars? Sounds perfectly correct to me. Quote: The thought that they can be killed by some random corporation in a 1.0 system never occured to them and it's a shock for them to find out that their playing time is now being blocked by some bad-ass battleships who would rather mess around in safe Empire than where other battleships roam just as dangerously. Everyone has the right to choose who to fight and who to not fight. Those bad-ass battleship pilots you mentioned are subject to the very same rules that the guy in 1.0 space. They can be war decced as well. It can't get any fairer than that without destroying the game. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 10:32:00 - [13] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 17/11/2004 10:41:07 Originally by: Riddari Quote: Destroying the game Quote: Splitting into two games Strong assumptions, I hope you have a lot more to back it up than this. Most combat in EVE happens in low sec and 0.0 anyways. Why removing it from high security systems for non-consentual war would break EVE and make it have to be sharded, is something I can't quite foresee. Because allowing for 100% safe havens will lead to exploitation. CCP atm is striving to give warfare a more complete shape. It is trying to lay in foundations which would allow for actual victories. Any system that allows any corporation to operate within part of the gameworld with complete immunity works exactly the opposite to this. There is no possible way to allow for separation of who can be subject to non consentual PvP and who can't without imbalancing other major aspects of the game. Secondly having people that cannot be touched within the same gameworld as everyone else completely ruins the immersion that the gameworld strives to provide... this however is a weaker point cause CCP has failed greatly at this, providing good immersion that is. Julien said it many time before, it's like someone asking that NPCs put sell orders for all ships and modules in the market. "Why do i have to suffer from a player taking advantage of the market/region/price war/bpo availability... i want NPCs to provide those materials too so i don't have to interact.." It's ain't possible, interaction has to be able to go both ways always. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 10:32:00 - [14] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 17/11/2004 10:41:07 Originally by: Riddari Quote: Destroying the game Quote: Splitting into two games Strong assumptions, I hope you have a lot more to back it up than this. Most combat in EVE happens in low sec and 0.0 anyways. Why removing it from high security systems for non-consentual war would break EVE and make it have to be sharded, is something I can't quite foresee. Because allowing for 100% safe havens will lead to exploitation. CCP atm is striving to give warfare a more complete shape. It is trying to lay in foundations which would allow for actual victories. Any system that allows any corporation to operate within part of the gameworld with complete immunity works exactly the opposite to this. There is no possible way to allow for separation of who can be subject to non consentual PvP and who can't without imbalancing other major aspects of the game. Secondly having people that cannot be touched within the same gameworld as everyone else completely ruins the immersion that the gameworld strives to provide... this however is a weaker point cause CCP has failed greatly at this, providing good immersion that is. Julien said it many time before, it's like someone asking that NPCs put sell orders for all ships and modules in the market. "Why do i have to suffer from a player taking advantage of the market/region/price war/bpo availability... i want NPCs to provide those materials too so i don't have to interact.." It's ain't possible, interaction has to be able to go both ways always. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 11:55:00 - [15] Originally by: DarkMatter Quote: How in the hell did this thread get any further than Discorp's post about 'don't like war decs? don't join a corp' post. Seriously, what more needs to be said? Is Discorp a DEV? I think not! Carry on... Uhm Mr. Smartass, NPC corps being undeclarable is a feature of the game.... people responsible for features of the game are the Devs. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 11:55:00 - [16] Originally by: DarkMatter Quote: How in the hell did this thread get any further than Discorp's post about 'don't like war decs? don't join a corp' post. Seriously, what more needs to be said? Is Discorp a DEV? I think not! Carry on... Uhm Mr. Smartass, NPC corps being undeclarable is a feature of the game.... people responsible for features of the game are the Devs. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 13:45:00 - [17] Originally by: Riddari By war declaring him you are admitting that in raw mining, refining and hauling power you are inferior and have to resort to the millenia old tactic of hitting him with a big rock? Resourcefulness my dear Riddari. Wether your idea is the most original yet, or wether it is the oldest trick in the book it matters not. The winner is the one that is still "standing" (financially or militarily) in the end, everything else is just means to this end. You said it yourself EVE allows for diverse means of PvP interaction. As soon as you start taking out/restricting parts of this PvP interaction you start to kill EVE. When you compete with someone it is expected that you will utilise your strongest points to emerge victorious. Restricting war declarations because to some they seem random is wrong. You are basically proposing that half of EVE competes under the full conditions of EVE gameworlf while the other half competes under conditions that benefit them... tell me please where is the logic in this? Quote: Everyone is always dragging up real life situations and abusing them to bend them to EVE game mechanics. Tell me when was the last time Coca-Cola hired Blackwater to take out Pepsi's delivery trucks? Coca-Cola hiring third party to neutralise Pepsi = Unlawful Act. Corp X hiring third party to neutralise Corp Y = Concord Sanctioned = Lawful. Quote: And making it viable for those that don't have the slightest interest in firing a gun or a missile to take part in that grand vision is vital for EVE's future. It already is as viable it can be for those people you mention. Further separating them from the combat aspect of the game DESTROYS the current gameworld, it's immersion and a great part of the interaction. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 13:45:00 - [18] Originally by: Riddari By war declaring him you are admitting that in raw mining, refining and hauling power you are inferior and have to resort to the millenia old tactic of hitting him with a big rock? Resourcefulness my dear Riddari. Wether your idea is the most original yet, or wether it is the oldest trick in the book it matters not. The winner is the one that is still "standing" (financially or militarily) in the end, everything else is just means to this end. You said it yourself EVE allows for diverse means of PvP interaction. As soon as you start taking out/restricting parts of this PvP interaction you start to kill EVE. When you compete with someone it is expected that you will utilise your strongest points to emerge victorious. Restricting war declarations because to some they seem random is wrong. You are basically proposing that half of EVE competes under the full conditions of EVE gameworlf while the other half competes under conditions that benefit them... tell me please where is the logic in this? Quote: Everyone is always dragging up real life situations and abusing them to bend them to EVE game mechanics. Tell me when was the last time Coca-Cola hired Blackwater to take out Pepsi's delivery trucks? Coca-Cola hiring third party to neutralise Pepsi = Unlawful Act. Corp X hiring third party to neutralise Corp Y = Concord Sanctioned = Lawful. Quote: And making it viable for those that don't have the slightest interest in firing a gun or a missile to take part in that grand vision is vital for EVE's future. It already is as viable it can be for those people you mention. Further separating them from the combat aspect of the game DESTROYS the current gameworld, it's immersion and a great part of the interaction. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 14:31:00 - [19] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 17/11/2004 14:39:47 Quote: These wars in empire really dont have any consequences other then you getting to harrass me out of the game i wanted to play that evening. The game you wanted to play that evening involves PvP, in many forms. It's an online game which involves other people. They can interact with you as they see fit as long as it remains within the game rules. Anyone who comes into an online game without having accepted the fact that at some point or another he WILL be affected by people in situations where concession won't be required, shouldn't be playing an online game. Quote: As far as invoking THE END OF EVE DOOOOOOOOOOM. Right... Empire exist for a reason. It was a good idea. They are just working disharmoniously with their concept of empire versus 0.0 when they allow nearly random PK'n in empire. It is impossible to clasify and grade the reasons behind war declarations. Calling it nearly random is simply assumptions. It doesn't matter since no means exist to clasify which war declaration has valid reasoning without imbalancing the game and present exploitable situations. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 14:31:00 - [20] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 17/11/2004 14:39:47 Quote: These wars in empire really dont have any consequences other then you getting to harrass me out of the game i wanted to play that evening. The game you wanted to play that evening involves PvP, in many forms. It's an online game which involves other people. They can interact with you as they see fit as long as it remains within the game rules. Anyone who comes into an online game without having accepted the fact that at some point or another he WILL be affected by people in situations where concession won't be required, shouldn't be playing an online game. Quote: As far as invoking THE END OF EVE DOOOOOOOOOOM. Right... Empire exist for a reason. It was a good idea. They are just working disharmoniously with their concept of empire versus 0.0 when they allow nearly random PK'n in empire. It is impossible to clasify and grade the reasons behind war declarations. Calling it nearly random is simply assumptions. It doesn't matter since no means exist to clasify which war declaration has valid reasoning without imbalancing the game and present exploitable situations. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 14:53:00 - [21] Quote: That gaming will rub off on your real life character Utterly pathetic. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.17 14:53:00 - [22] Quote: That gaming will rub off on your real life character Utterly pathetic. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.18 08:22:00 - [23] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 18/11/2004 08:26:32 Originally by: DarkMatter Your analogy does not fit. If it were two empires, or alliances going at it over property, or territorty of some kind, then yes. A better analogy to Empire Griefer wars would be: A manager, who works at Wal-Mart, is getting sick and tired of price under-cutting by the Kmart across the street. The manager says "that's it! These bastards will pay!" He walks over to a phone and makes a page "All employees to the sporting good's section, plz pickup a shotgun and some ammo, and meet me out in front of the store" They all gather in front of the store, proceed to walk across the street, and attack the workers at Kmart, griefing the hell out of them... All while the local authorities sit and watch... Maybe you can get away with this in some less secure country (0.0 sec rating), but not here in the USA (1.0 - 0.5 sec rating) I'm talking about corporations, groups of ppl who live & work within an entity. You are talking about the entities themselves... (CA, SA, Gallente, Thukker... etc...) Whitedwarf you need to practise reading comprehension. I already told Riddari so i ll tell you as well. Wallmart attacking Kmart = Unlawful act. Bob's Corp war declariong Jim's Corp = Concord Sanctioned = Lawful Act. Welcome to EVE. Answer me this Whitedwarf: How do you indentify a Grief War? Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.18 08:22:00 - [24] Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 18/11/2004 08:26:32 Originally by: DarkMatter Your analogy does not fit. If it were two empires, or alliances going at it over property, or territorty of some kind, then yes. A better analogy to Empire Griefer wars would be: A manager, who works at Wal-Mart, is getting sick and tired of price under-cutting by the Kmart across the street. The manager says "that's it! These bastards will pay!" He walks over to a phone and makes a page "All employees to the sporting good's section, plz pickup a shotgun and some ammo, and meet me out in front of the store" They all gather in front of the store, proceed to walk across the street, and attack the workers at Kmart, griefing the hell out of them... All while the local authorities sit and watch... Maybe you can get away with this in some less secure country (0.0 sec rating), but not here in the USA (1.0 - 0.5 sec rating) I'm talking about corporations, groups of ppl who live & work within an entity. You are talking about the entities themselves... (CA, SA, Gallente, Thukker... etc...) Whitedwarf you need to practise reading comprehension. I already told Riddari so i ll tell you as well. Wallmart attacking Kmart = Unlawful act. Bob's Corp war declariong Jim's Corp = Concord Sanctioned = Lawful Act. Welcome to EVE. Answer me this Whitedwarf: How do you indentify a Grief War? Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.18 09:25:00 - [25] Quote: The reason behind our declaring war on Clankillers are that you are clearcut griefers, no other reason needed. But when others give similar responces to justify their war decs... they are deemed Griefers. Whatever. At least you guys are fighting back so at least you are using the game and not the forums to correct what you deem wrong. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.18 09:25:00 - [26] Quote: The reason behind our declaring war on Clankillers are that you are clearcut griefers, no other reason needed. But when others give similar responces to justify their war decs... they are deemed Griefers. Whatever. At least you guys are fighting back so at least you are using the game and not the forums to correct what you deem wrong. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.18 12:07:00 - [27] Originally by: Dsanta Edited by: Dsanta on 18/11/2004 11:06:15 here is a grief war: my old corp(A) that im the founder of declared war on another corp that has had probs with the corp i was in at the time(B). they saw me in (B) and saw i was the founder of (A) and ignored (A)s war and declared war on (B) to get at me and grief me. after a wk of dodging them i joined a diff corp. Hello? why would it be griefing to declare on a third corp that had ex-members of a corp that had already war decced them? Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.18 12:07:00 - [28] Originally by: Dsanta Edited by: Dsanta on 18/11/2004 11:06:15 here is a grief war: my old corp(A) that im the founder of declared war on another corp that has had probs with the corp i was in at the time(B). they saw me in (B) and saw i was the founder of (A) and ignored (A)s war and declared war on (B) to get at me and grief me. after a wk of dodging them i joined a diff corp. Hello? why would it be griefing to declare on a third corp that had ex-members of a corp that had already war decced them? Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.18 12:18:00 - [29] I read your petition thread dsanta.... one word: PATHETIC. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.11.18 12:18:00 - [30] I read your petition thread dsanta.... one word: PATHETIC. Pain is meant to be felt

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.