I'm not sure we are playing the same game, eve online is supposedly taking place in a cold and harsh universe, it should be possible to wardec player run corporations.

it costs an entire 1.6 millions of isk


sighs

You've unfortunately stumbled upon the problems of corp hopping during war decs and npc corps in general.

Good luck trying to get CCP to fix them, we've been trying for years :(

EVE is becoming crowded, and the startling lack of resources and things to do for the industrialist that has developed over the past 8 months or so, is not a great way to retain players.

3-4 isk trit has not been seen since the end or 2011 start of 2012, that was when the trit prices started to grow, and was in the last quarter of 2012 the sell price started to stabilized around 6 to 6.3.

But the supply also seemed to stabilize, which would explain why the price did the same.

this post is just a reminder that every time you dodge a wardec you are forcing your style of gameplay on others without them having any sort of recourse

i surrender *completely ignores the aggressor and continues to do whatever they want*

working as intended

let's just ignore the whole part about where a player gets to run other players out of business and the only recourse that player has involves them being thrown out of highsec

Suicide ganking is basically a gigantic artificial hoop that players have to jump through in order to get any sort of reaction out of someone who you don't like, for legitimate reasons or not. It's a huge undertaking if you want to start suicide ganking someone, especially if you are a player who doesn't want to live in lowsec or nullsec, a poor player, or a new player.

It's not surrender ... bla bla bla.

Is this a game about competition and player interaction, or is this a single player game with a chat box tacked on?

Not exactly a surrender if all they do is immediately reform soon after quite often. Does not really make for a good argument at all regardless of what side of the fence you're on :/

Fairness is a two way street, not one. While it wouldn't be fair to go all hardcore on the mechanic, its also not fair for someone to spend 50 million for absolutely nothing of value to happen at all. Disband, reform, and all that happened is the aggressor lost 50 mil. I'm sorry, I'm against what a lot of the guys who want to expand wardecs are saying too, but ignoring this factor is just being self centered.

The difference is that one involves skill, the other doesn't, which completely kills the argument you were trying to make from the first sentence. Your efforts make or break that 30-40m. If you lose a lot of money during the war from losses, that's because of your own failings, or the other side catching you with your pants down. Different situation here.

And you'd be losing it due to your own doing. Your comparison would be like saying losing 30-40m gambling is the same as it using it to buy something, but instead of being given what you paid for, the seller runs away with the dough.

Yes, you paid the broker fee and you got to make your order. How would you feel about it if you paid your broker fee and the order wasn't created? And then you paid it again and the order wasn't created? And you paid it as many times as you could and the order was created maybe one time in twenty?

It's absurd to try and compare the brokers fee to the cost of starting a war, you might as well compare the sound of blue to the smell of yellow, they are after all both colors so if should be easy to compare.

personally, I think the cost of starting a corp should be on par with the war dec to stop that behaviour but trying to force people to fight is just a bad mechanic. if a corp has nothing to defend then there's no reason for them to fight unless they feel like it. they could corphop, dock up and log out or just go ninja ratting in null for a week to **** off the deccer, it makes no odds.

Its not only in the hands of other players. There's a certain skill to it, otherwise it wouldn't be profitable and you wouldn't be doing it as it'd be too unpredictable. ...

Market broker fees - similar to stock market. You pay a broker to help you buy some stock, and to make a profit you have to also take into account your broker fees. Or it could be taxes, or whatever.

War decs don't sound like anything remotely close to that. They're not comparable just because they cost money. The fact you're even trying to is frankly just as absurd as the arguments for individual war decs.



Noooot even close. Especially if say its 1-man noob vs 1-man noob and the defender still bails out. Skill had nothing to do with the bailout.

someone has to pay to start the war though, regardless of how other players can join it.

Do you have any idea how stupid it makes you sounds when you repeat the same word over and over?, and no add in the occasional 'whine' is not helping.

Also, to address this and what some may think from my posts - I'm not saying someone who is wardecced shouldn't be able to get out of it, there obviously has to be a way to get of it or it could devolve into griefing. I think it needs balancing is all, it's too quick and easy and there's virtually no downsides to it right now. A few little things, like allowing a period - say 24 hours - after dropping corp where you're still a valid target, making the cost of trashing a corp and recreating it something that's more significant, etc.

Yup yup yup, Corp-hopping is a lame joke of a mechanic and just another inch of ground claimed by the carebear creep.

Even if we just go with a grace period of 24 hours - you claim that is "no different" from them being able to instantly drop corp? How on earth do you think that? It means they've got to sit docked for a full day - no missioning, mining, whatever. There's an actual downside, albeit a fairly brief, trivial one. But there is at least one, rather than none.

Being able to instantly drop corp at no cost what so ever is stupid. This isn't me acting entitled, it's simply the truth.

Frankly there's no reason to punish the aggressor for people not fighting them either... not that you agree since apparently you think something like the stock/commodities market is the same thing, but whatever.

Technically the defender is the one the won as they did more ISK damage and lost nothing beyond what it cost to make a new corp. So its more an instant loss.

It's not losing anything when you do that I have an issue with.

And nothing you said was an argument against my previous statement.

I believe you've missed the part where I was against expanding wardecs. But hey, whatever floats your boat. You want to resort to personal attacks, that's your problem. There's plenty of ways to provide protection without being a total **** to one side.

Buddy, the only person here who needs to "HTFU" is the guy insisting that the NPC corps are there for you to avoid a wardec, ....

Now you're just not listening. Nor paying attention to my corp in a subject where you probably should, ironically one of the few times corp would matter. I don't imagine I'm paying for any wardecs from E-UNI.

Obviously not because you keep insisting that I want to be able to wardec anyone freely when I at no point suggested that.

There just need to be a reason.

If you stop looking at fairness to some degree, it throws out any argument out the window.

When you're talking about balance for example, fairness is pretty much the only reason for it. Balance happens because its unfair to pilots of other ships, or other classes if you go in reference to other games. Anyone could fly the unbalanced ships, but it forces you into a play style, which violates a sense of fairness. You can't ignore it when making a game if you want it to be any good. Otherwise you could use the excuse that "oh, its just superior technology." which would be the real world explanation for such a thing.

Don't let it get to you man. He's found a broken game mechanic (highsec) and exploits it to enrich himself, as is the way of New Eden - from cloaky/stabbed faction war to convo spam gatecamps to gsc smartbomb shield. In a game of "he who abuses broken mechanics first and hardest wins", that just makes him a good player.

Well played, Whitehound - thanks for pointing out yet another reason for supporting James 315 for CSM.

Better question is where did you get the idea that its about how many of a ship is being used and not about why the ship is being used so much?

Have you ever considered that this is, perhaps, for comedic value, and to point out the irony of an utterly broken and pointless mechanic?

You're looking at it from the wrong standpoint.

And you'd be full of it because I'm looking at it from the standpoint actually used. Popularity of a ship has nothing to do with why balance changes are made. Its the reason why the ship is popular that gets looked at.

Ignoring the whole reason the Hulk and Hurricanes were popular in the first place. I'm not going to argue with someone using non sequitur. The Hulk was popular because it was by far the best mining ship, hands down, no question, it was the best. The others were brought up to par because they felt the Hulk was where they wanted mining ships in terms of overall ability. Hurricane was fairly similar. These are things CCP has in fact openly stated. And in fact has openly stated that there are balance issues in other ship types and tiers that they intend to address. In no part of their statements do they say "this ship is too popular, so we gotta change it." I mean, dear god.. REALLY? That's really how you think balancing works? I've never seen a more out of touch statement. Also your example has nothing to do with my belief of fairness, so doesn't require answering. I already stated my viewpoint about differing roles and how they apply to fairness.

...Finally we were thankfully able to resolve some of the outstanding balance issues with the two most problematic Battlecruisers (Drake and Hurricane)...

Let's modify that scenario a little, ...

ssh don't tell him that

Because generally its a sign ...

Not how it works at all.

...It wasn't one of the most popular classes. In fact, far from it. However it had an ability that was so powerful, so ridiculous, despite not seeming as such at a glance, that when people started discovering it, it was rapidly changed before there was any significant population shift...

Its not absolute evidence though. For example. Say a corp of 1000 joined and all on a whim decided, "hey, we're going to be a Gallente only corporation" and they start off ONLY flying Gallente ships. That's a population shift that wouldn't be able to applied to such statistics. Its not an unrealistic one either. Well, maybe not so much now, but still. There are lots of potential causes to population shifts. You're trying to use it as the sole factor to look at. You don't only look at one thing like that if you're using any kind of logical thinking.

What... in the holy ****... ok... you're just trolling, blocked.

It used to be popular to believe the world was flat. They were wrong.

Except the corp instantly dropping and reforming isn't a "win" for the aggressor. There are no goals I can think of that an aggressor may have in which that would be considered a "win". If they want gudfites? Not a win, as the other people skirted out of the war immediately. They want easy prey? Not a win. They want to disrupt a corporations activities for some reason (null logistics, general competition, grudges, etc)? Not a win, because you can't accomplish that if they can instantly drop and reform corp.

etc.

This is my entire bloody point, the ability to so quickly and easily drop and reform corps under a war means that goals of war deccing, the point of the system existing, can be completely undermined.

Couldn't really tell you if there's an EVE example, haven't seen enough, but the point still stands. Anyways, you may not have said its full proof evidence, but this whole conversation started because someone else did, which ultimately was the whole issue of why this is even a thing.

Whitehound appears to be a member of a small group of people who think that the only pvp in high sec should be ganking.

Instead of people going to war with each other and having reasons to fight, he'd rather the only people who do pvp in high sec be gankers as apposed to people who have legitemate reason to go to war, like industrialists.

The problem is one industrial corporations ability to use a wardec in the place where the bulk of all industry occurs, to limit the ability of another industrial corporation to outperform them.

So you're just a troll?

You know goddmaned well that as an industrialist every other person that builds the same items you build is a competitor and reducing your profits.



Edit: I'm beginning to seee what you're doing.
Troll enough, bait enough, and eventually the thread just gets locked.

That's fine. In that event, it costs something to deny your attacker their goals. Right now, it doesn't.




Oh God, how am I ever going to afford 1.6 Million ISK to reopen my corp? I'm going to have to send out the collection plate.

Sure, but you've denied that ship access to that location in space, and there are ways to keep the ship there.

What have you denied a corp who drops out of a wardec? They can keep the same name, corp ticker, and continue doing exactly the same thing they were doing.
...
Disbanding an alliance doesn't free anyone from a wardec, since the member corps continue to be under wardec for the duration. If you're asking for corps to be treated similarly to alliances, you're asking for players to continue being under the effect of a wardec after their corp disbands.
...
EVE's markets always give you what you pay for. CCP has said that wardecs represent paying for targets.
Nobody's asking for a refund. We're asking for the targets we paid for.

You were implying that the 1.6 Million ISK corp creation cost was a significant one to escape a wardec. It's not. The cost of the Wardec is irrelevant.

I never said there was. I'm simply saying that escaping a wardec needs to come with a significant cost since, as CCP has said, Wardecs are about purchasing targets. Docking up for a week is a significant cost. 1.6 million ISK is not.

Where did I say that I didn't know that it is currently (and always has been) cheaper to create a corp than declare war on it? I only said that the 1.6 million ISK creation fee is not a significant cost for escaping a wardec.


Why do you think that wardecs should be consensual corp duels? Because without a significant cost to evade them, that's all they are. Consensual.

You implied that the corp creation fee was a significant factor in disbanding a corp. I am saying that it is not.

I'm saying that CCP came up with a flawed plan to reach their stated goals, and that WarDecs are currently just as badly broken as they were before the patch. Their entire rationale for the scaling costs was that "wardecs are purchasing targets."

You can, however, impose costs on behaviors. If the purpose of wardecs is only to allow for consensual corp dueling, that's one thing (and a bad thing for the game). If it's to allow players to disrupt the activities of other players in HS, then imposing a significant cost for escaping them is important. Whether that's a counterbribe, or docking for a week, or whatever.



Maintaining an alt is a cost. If you want to pay that cost to be unimpeded by a Wardec, that's fine.

Before I bumped miners like yourself, I used to think all the posts like this were just some normal EVE players gently trolling each other and having a bit of a laugh among themselves. Now, I'm not so sure, that scares me a bit - that you might actually believe what you're posting on some level.

Mate, turn the mining lasers off for a few cycles, go outside, and have a long hard think about what you're posting.

never post while drunk....