"..CCP and the CSM have been feverishly discussing the total elimination of non-consensual wardecs, too."

WTF?

Now I'm not one to normally say "If 'x' happens I will resign my subscription", but if this asshattery happens I will.

I put about $400-500 annually into the EVE universe (above subscriptions) because I can't be bothered humping asteroids or day trading to fund my pvp. CCP needs to ask itself, do you want to lose players like me on your road to nerfdom?

(I almost quit when can-flipping and ganking got nerfed, doing this is without a doubt the last straw for me...)

p.s.
Yes, if this happens, someone can have my stuff.

F

A wardec where only one side wants to be in it isn't any less legitimate than a bounty that only
one side wants. We're not going to go to anyone and ask themif they'd like to accept the bounty placed on them

But that's what EVE is. Being eaten by every other shark out there.

As an attacker, if I didnGÇÖt do my research properly, maybe I chose the wrong guys, maybe they
were actually secretly setting up a trap for me, if I wardec those people, I should pay

>Quoting a Mittani article as fact.

Oh dear. Please don't do that.
Suffice to say that the actual CSM discussion is a lot more balanced.
http://community.eveonline.com/council/transcripts/2012/CSM_CCP_Meetings_December_2012.pdf
Check it out, goes from about page 66 onwards.

"..CCP and the CSM have been feverishly discussing the total elimination of non-consensual wardecs, too."

WTF?

Now I'm not one to normally say "If 'x' happens I will resign my subscription", but if this asshattery happens I will.

I put about $400-500 annually into the EVE universe (above subscriptions) because I can't be bothered humping asteroids or day trading to fund my pvp. CCP needs to ask itself, do you want to lose players like me on your road to nerfdom?

(I almost quit when can-flipping and ganking got nerfed, doing this is without a doubt the last straw for me...)

p.s.
Yes, if this happens, someone can have my stuff.

F

"Optimists might hope that Trebor's "get rid of wardecs" campaign at the Winter Summit was an isolated incident, perhaps the result of sampling one too many Icelandic delicacies. Sadly, this was not the case. In his own Crossing Zebras interview, Trebor confided that his effort to remove wardecs from EVE is moving ahead at full steam. To gain ammunition for the next anti-wardec push, Trebor proposed that CCP commission a study to determine whether wardecs are indeed driving away subscribers, as Ripard had posited. Incredibly, CCP accepted the proposal and has since conducted the study, according to Trebor--the conclusions of which he intends to use to support future anti-wardec campaigns."

I read this and look back on the points raised re: the hisec nerfs already done (removing can flipping, safeties, nerfing ganking) and I see more evidence of a move towards this than away from it. The previous actions by CCP and quoted material concerns me.

"Optimists might hope that Trebor's "get rid of wardecs" campaign at the Winter Summit was an isolated incident, perhaps the result of sampling one too many Icelandic delicacies. Sadly, this was not the case. In his own Crossing Zebras interview, Trebor confided that his effort to remove wardecs from EVE is moving ahead at full steam. To gain ammunition for the next anti-wardec push, Trebor proposed that CCP commission a study to determine whether wardecs are indeed driving away subscribers, as Ripard had posited. Incredibly, CCP accepted the proposal and has since conducted the study, according to Trebor--the conclusions of which he intends to use to support future anti-wardec campaigns."

I read this and look back on the points raised re: the hisec nerfs already done (removing can flipping, safeties, nerfing ganking) and I see more evidence of a move towards this than away from it. The previous actions by CCP and quoted material concerns me.

We have a game mechanic where 70% to 80% of the time its used, no one has a good play experience, on either side. The defenders just turtle for a week, and the aggressors get no action for their 50 million ISK. Yet we keep this mechanic in the game, presumably for those few times when it does get results (fights for a POS, moving a corp out of an area or rmutual fun wars). If it does not work most of the time, maybe some big change is needed?

The concern I share with Mittens is that non-consensual pvp mechanics are continually being nerfed from hisec. Carebears applaud, but many feel non-consensual pvp is what makes EVE special and different from other MMO's.

So there's the paradox, you can potentially get more subscribers in the short term with nerfing hisec, but what if your 'Facebook' then becomes less special and cool and turns into a 'Myspace'?

It used to be that acquired hard-won knowledge in EVE 'unlocked' the ability to collect tears from those less educated, and the circle of life continued. While still the case, this is now much less so...

You steal a can from a miner and drop it? He now just takes it back now with no repercussion, effectively killing can flipping. Hello-Kitty +1.
You want to gank a miner? Oops, again CCP has made this harder & less profitable to reduce occurances. Hello-Kitty +1
The Venture, a mining ship with built-in warp stab? Hello-Kitty +1

...and now we hear about the 'idea' or 'study' to make wardecs mutual only? Hello-Kitty +1,000.

Sure war decs are broken and need fixing, but killing it entirely is not the answer.

The concern I share with Mittens is that non-consensual pvp mechanics are continually being nerfed from hisec. Carebears applaud, but many feel non-consensual pvp is what makes EVE special and different from other MMO's.

So there's the paradox, you can potentially get more subscribers in the short term with nerfing hisec, but what if your 'Facebook' then becomes less special and cool and turns into a 'Myspace'?

It used to be that acquired hard-won knowledge in EVE 'unlocked' the ability to collect tears from those less educated, and the circle of life continued. While still the case, this is now much less so...

You steal a can from a miner and drop it? He now just takes it back now with no repercussion, effectively killing can flipping. Hello-Kitty +1.
You want to gank a miner? Oops, again CCP has made this harder & less profitable to reduce occurances. Hello-Kitty +1
The Venture, a mining ship with built-in warp stab? Hello-Kitty +1

...and now we hear about the 'idea' or 'study' to make wardecs mutual only? Hello-Kitty +1,000.

Sure war decs are broken and need fixing, but killing it entirely is not the answer.

The culture that free wardec evasion brings ensures that only those who don't know how to properly evade the mechanic will have to deal with it. If you can't evade a wardec, how can you possibly be smart enough to provide a good fight? This is why the statistic is so high, if you forced people who knew what they were doing into having to fight (and teach their friends and allies proper mechanics) this number would be a lot lower.

The concern I share with Mittens is that non-consensual pvp mechanics are continually being nerfed from hisec. Carebears applaud, but many feel non-consensual pvp is what makes EVE special and different from other MMO's.

So there's the paradox, you can potentially get more subscribers in the short term with nerfing hisec, but what if your 'Facebook' then becomes less special and cool and turns into a 'Myspace'?

It used to be that acquired hard-won knowledge in EVE 'unlocked' the ability to collect tears from those less educated, and the circle of life continued. While still the case, this is now much less so...

You steal a can from a miner and drop it? He now just takes it back with no risk, effectively killing can flipping. Hello-Kitty +1.
You want to gank a miner? Oops, again CCP has made this harder & less profitable to reduce occurances. Hello-Kitty +1
The Venture, a mining ship with built-in warp stab? Hello-Kitty +1

...and now we hear about the 'idea' or 'study' to make wardecs mutual only? Hello-Kitty +1,000.

Sure war decs are broken and need fixing, but killing it entirely is not the answer. Making wars mutual only will kill it.

Can flipping is still very viable, "if" you know how to do it.

Ganking a miner should not commonly be about instant profit. Other goals should be the motivating force.

The Venture is the most destroyed mining vessel in the game, by far.

The "study" was to determine what needs to be changed about the war dec system, not to prove they should be mutual only.

Nobody but you and James are suggesting there is any momentum toward removing the war dec mechanic.

"..CCP and the CSM have been feverishly discussing the total elimination of non-consensual wardecs, too."

WTF?