Haedonism Bot
Revolutionary Front
New Creation Collective
383
   |
Posted - 2013.06.04 09:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
Quote:The only stipulation I would add is that any corp or alliance wanting to declare unprovoked war needs to have assets that the other side can attack. There should be a goal in a war. Currently it is nothing more than a means to circumvent high sec rules. It is just pointless fighting for the sake of fighting with no end until the issuer decides it doesn't want to play anymore. That is not a war by any means. If I was to guess - and it's only a guess - the PvP crowd are the loudest at the table and weren't satisfied with the slim pickings in low/null so CCP caved in.
Your sense of history is pretty much opposite of the way it actually went down. The fundamental principle of this game is expressed in its name - Everybody Versus Everybody. In the early days EVE was intended to be pretty much a PvP free for all. High security meant more security than low or null, but still fundamentally a PvP free for all. Over the years, lots of whiney care bear threads (much like this one) appeared on the forums crying for more security in high sec, and little by little CCP caved under the pressure. Nerf after nerf has made highsec the almost-safe-almost-themepark that we have today. And yet still the care bears cry for more nerfs to high sec PvP, as you have shown us.
War decs are not a means of "circumventing highsec rules", they are a fundamental and indispensible part of highsec rules, which has existed almost since the beginning of EVE. If you want an example of a mechanic that truly amounts to a circumvention of highsec rules, look at the way and defending corp in a wardec can simply disband and reform, nullifying the wardec and hitting the aggressors for the fee.
I do, however, agree with you that the wardec system could use another look by the devs. The main issues with it are wardec evasion on the part of the defenders, and cost of wardec fees. Your idea of forcing the aggressors to slap up a small tower somewhere just amounts to an additional fee, which would be negligible for the major wardec corps and would pose an obstacle for smaller corps looking to get into the game.
It would be nice if the system had more consequences for aggressors losing a war, and rewards for winning it, but I'm not sure what that could realistically look like. The idea should be to encourage more conflict, not to discourage it, and to provide incentive even for industrial and PVE corps to fight wars. I would love to see a situation where industrial corps were fighting each other over control of the highsec ice belts, for example.
Join the Revolutionary Front and liberate New Eden from it's stuff.
|