dont blame the rookie for wanting to learn the game when its really your lack of pvp skills, you chooe your targets by finding the newest players you can and using their lack of knowledge to your advantage, thats not skill nor is it justifiable in any way

please enlighten us on how a nado cant be used for sitting on undocks popping frigs before they have a chance to breath? and let us know what ships and fits you use for wardeccing rookie corps

Yeah, good job on the link, but you missed my point entirely. Instead of encouraging these newbies, you're talking down on them, making them feel like losers who should've figured things out on their own. This is a vast game, which requires a lot of information to be disseminated for players to become competent, but it still is just a game. You can't expect a week old player to have studied it up like he was preparing for an exam. We should be making new players feel welcome, even if you're going out blowing them up, instead of lambasting them for "not doing their homework."

you seem to be missing the point, 2 week old players dont know any of this stuff on how to avoid pro-wardeccers they too busy trying to leant the basics

In before "I can't be assed".

For goodness sakes I spent the time last night to explain to a newbie what a margin scam was, and last week I took some time explaining freighter webbing to some corpies.

Me. You will never find anyone more willing to support just about any and all forms of "griefing", and if I can help out newbies, surely someone whose heart aches as much as yours for their plight can help out.

The Rich irony is that the people deccing the noob corp and telling them they need to grow up are only deccing noob corps because they are just slightly less pathetic than them, if they were actually as good as they thought they were they wouldn't be doing it.

I obviously hit a nerve.

Enjoy your day hope when your mum shouts down to the basement you got what you wanted for dinner

I once tried to teach a friend to play, let him join my corp, and tried to teach him the EVEy ways. He was even worse then somebody telling me I was wrong.


He would go. "HUH?" With loud music and screaming children in the background, "Don't tank shield and Armor?"

I would go, "Yeah, they cancel each other out, Armor is slow, but gets a great buffer and low sig radius, Shield is fast but gets a high radius."


The loud music would respond, "EEEEENNNNNNNTTTTEERR NIIIIIGHHHHHTER, EXXIIIIIIIT LIIIIIGHT"

Me. "What?"


Loud music with a small voice, "Yeah okay"


Next day, he loses a harby to a lvl 3 mission that is dual tanked.

My personal view is that high sec should be more a PvE Carebear learn the ropes for new players place and give experienced players a safe, but not economically advantageous, place to earn ISK.

I am all for stiffening up CONCORD, making Ganking nigh impossible, and making the warded mechanics restrictive. This is not what the majority of the experienced player base wants

war decs are terrible and need to be looked at. They should generate combat, not one sided ganks, but the question is and always has been, how can it be changed to do just that?

But advising you with target research tools is a bit silly as your wardecced so the tagets will come to you and as a new player you dont have the skills or knowledge to compete with them, move to null or join faction warfare, learn to pvp and let the useless wardeccers play their little game as they wont go to nullsec

Stay away from trade hubs find a nice little system about 8-10. Jumps from any hub and your less likely to find war targets

Why? What does it matter to you if they want to sit in a corner and be left alone?

Lol, stop saying it's the fault of the target.

If the target was capable of fighting back

But that still doesn't change the fact that if a wardeccer ONLY decs targets that can't possibly fight back, the fact that none of there targets can fight back isn't the fault of the targets, it's the target selection criteria. It's like if you only pick rotten apples out of a batch, it's not the apples fault that all of your apples are rotten.

A 2 man industrial corp for example would stand no chance of fighting a 500 man merc corp

the fact is that some people do not have the skills, either character or personal to fight back.

It is funny though that you think that you get to decide if any crap is going to fly in this community, as if I'm supposed to care what you think, even remotely. You've pretty much guaranteed that I'll never take you seriously since you appear to be unable to comprehend basic English and leap to conclusions faster than flies on ****.

But please, continue to misunderstand posts and screech like a child. It's pretty hilarious to read.

Fake pvp is killing an industrial and thinking it should be viable for a gf in local, all the great stories of eve dont involve the 200 man highsec merc corps wardeccing the 50man mining corps because thats not great news and not even a cool story. Experienced players killing rookies is an even worse story

Stay in npc corps and dont give wardeccers the satisfaction, hopefully this will force them to low and nullsec where more great content can be made, i doubt it though as easy targets in null are few and far between

You seem to still be arguing against something I'm not stating. I never said that it's the fault of wardeccers that defenseless people exist, but it is their fault that the majority of their targets are defenseless, because they choose their targets specifically because they are defenseless. It's really not that hard a concept to grasp so I don;t know why you seem to be struggling.

You were right though OP, wardecs are pretty much for griefing. Most wardecs are set up against corps that either will not or cannot retaliate... war decs are terrible and need to be looked at. They should generate combat, not one sided ganks, but the question is and always has been, how can it be changed to do just that?

it's all of the noobs fault that they are unable to defend against people well experienced and prepared in wars, even though those same people could war with competent groups thus generating actual content?

No, they chose to be defenceless and by running away and hiding in a NPC corps were they learn nothing and I would wage that those newer player who hide in a NPC corps end up leaving because they experience very little that the game has to offer.

Those players who chose to fight and there are many way forms of PvP, even if that means cloaking up in system and laughing at the more experience players chasing their tails in local then so be it.

Those players who chose to fight back in what ever way they can are more likely to stick around as they get what Eve is all about.

These are the kind of players that make Eve stronger. The kind of players you want that will just hide in NPC Corps will do more damage to the long term health of Eve then anything else.

I would prefer 100 new players that understand and accept what Eve is then 10000 players who want what apparently you want and that is a High Sec where PvP is removed.

I dont take my sports car out on the weekend and overtake a bus and class it as a race so whats the difference, "hi mate i had a good race with a bus today totally thrashed it" not really a race was it? But but it was a person driving the bus so it must have been a race as he was going in the same direction as me

But it wasnt a race in the first place...

And that is your perception, my perception of your perception is fake pvp

And given CCP Falcon's recent and repeated statements(that he has told us are shared by most of CCP itself), it just really shows the depths of delusion that carebears can sink to.

In this context, "God" has literally come down from on high to tell you that you are not just wrong, but as wrong as it's possible to be while still physically existing.

And yet, like Satan, you persist, despite the Ultimate and Only Authority telling you in no uncertain terms that you are wrong.

This is not just a pvp game this is a game of many careers and a sandbox where people can be whatever they want which may not be pvp, you just assume that because you play eve you have to pvp and you have to be social and you have to do this, they dont have to do anything if they want industrial/trading/single player game then whats the issue.....

If this is just a pvp game then why is there mining, trading, haulling, missions etc etc all the things where people who dont want to interact with others dont have to

Well you summed it up with 1 word "competition" there is no competition i. A battleship killing a mining barge or 2 week old player through a wardec, doesnt matter how you paint it, versus means 2 or more people competing, one of the players aint competing so its invalid as much as you like to call it pvp i like to call it fake pvp

As i said its my perception of what real pvp is, player killing isnt the same as player vs player

Yes and thats 2 players competing to sell something, just like a race its 2 or more people competing to beat the other, just because a bus is on the same road doesnt mean he was in the race

nothing changes the fact if someone does not want to engage in pvp they have the tools there to avoid it, its a mechanic put in place to give the people who chose not to follow "your" way of playing the game.

if someone want to play the solo game because they do not have the time to dedicate into being social within a corp they can do missions or whatever they want to do, the do not have to engage in your game and on your terms

I do hope that my post above gets a clarifying response .......
... from the person it was addressed at.

Or is it "to" ? I believe it's "at". Hm.

player versus player assumes both parties are competing in the same activity against each other i.e combat, my perception of you killing a 2 week old player who does not know how to fight and does not have the knowledge nor has he consented to it is not versus because he is not fighting back all you are doing is killing him you are not versing anyone you are using his lack of skills to your advantage to gain a cheap kill, tell me what could a 2 week old player possibly do to 3+ year old player to warrant being killed or wardecced? "oh because he wants to play the game so welcome to eve"

you can't expect people who have never fought and aren't trained for it

if PvP is of no interest to them, they don;t have to learn

It's a sandbox game where they can do what they want, and living in an NPC corp is a valid choice.

And wardecs are pretty broken. They should generate content filled fights, but 9 times out of time they generate ganks.

I never said "fake content", but there's good content and bad content. Some content is fun for all, for example gang fights, old school freighter transports, industrial warfare, etc. Some content is not fun for all: structure bashing, one sided fights, blueballing, etc. Would you seriously suggest that keeping bad content would be better than introducing more good content?

In what way? You want wardeccers to stop attacking corps who wont defend themselves, and you dont want to have to defend yourself.

How is that in any way a misrepresentation of what your point of view is?

I'm not sure I'd be okay with being safer in player corps to be honest. I ran my own one man player corp for years because I truly felt that I should be held accountable for the consequences of my own actions and words, be it on the forums or in game. Granted for the most of that time I was a peaceful, asteroid munching, red cross shooting awarebear, so I really didn't **** very many folks off.

Most of my opinions when it comes to safety in high sec are actually based off of the eight years plus I spent as a carebear doing carebear things. Only in the last couple of months have I discovered how much fun it can be to interact with others on a pvp level in this game. I used to despise pirates and pvp'ers way back in the days before I came to grips with the nature of EVE. Then I actually started to read the forums, pay attention to who was who, and what they actually had to say. My hatred dissipated as I started to comprehend that I had misunderstood the nature of the game from the start.

I now instead of seeing basement dwelling sociopaths everywhere saw that it was a myriad of people from all over the world playing a pvp game and simply enjoying all of what it had to offer. I had chosen to be a victim with the mentality with which I approached the game. I'd been infected by Everquest, Earth and Beyond, and the Gygaxian paradigm. In short, I had been trying to approach EVE as a themepark rather than a sandbox.

I'm better now. Hell, most of the time I don't even let you troll me too much, but I have my moments of weakness. You know I favor the dark and gritty side of EVE, hell you've made me go all honeybadger over it in the past. I just want our newbies to have a realistic understanding of what it's all about out there, and our vets to have the spine to stand up for what they represent. No hiding in the shadows for the established, face the consequences of your actions, or um, you know... STFU if you're not willing to back what you say with blasters, missiles or autocannons n laz0rz.

So therefore, no reason to remove NPC corps, so people can continue to avoid wardecs entirely in a nice, effort free way.

And it's not the changing the foundation of EVE online to change the balance of power between classes of players. That's done all the time. The problem is, when someone suggest anything that makes the tiniest reduction in risk to a carebear, you hear "MAKE ALL HIGHSEC RISK FREE", evidently because you have comprehension issues, and therefore you rush to incorrect judgements.

It doesn't have to, no, but then it's my opinion that it should a little. I believe there room for change without damaging the fundamental mechanics but opening up the game to a slightly wider range of players. Considering how many layoffs CCP are going though, more players are going to become a necessity at some point, and I'd rather see them in a smaller trickle from small changes now than in waves from panic changes later down the line. It's perfectly OK for you do disagree with that opinion, but it doesn't make me automatically wrong, and it certainly doesn't mean you can go ahead and misrepresent my opinions to give you ways to attack them.

See what I mean about misrepresentation? I never say wardeccing industrial corps is "bad" as in not a valid choice. It's a perfectly acceptable choice, I just don't think it has the right impact on the game. Much like how drone assist was removed because it was making null fights boring as sin, I think the wardec mechanics have become stale and need to be looked at.

There's a difference between one sided and two sided content. One sided content, which ganks are, only entertain one side, with the other not being entertained. The whining about the "blue doughnut", that's a response to one sided content, and it's why sov mechanics need a good beating. To be honest, most of the older mechanics need a good looking at, and wardec mechanics are not an exception.

And of course there's bad content. It doesn't mean that there has to be an imbalance in how much fun there is overall in a mechanic, but if there's all the fun on one side of it, and no fun on the other, it's a bad mechanic.

So you think that people that dont; play the way you do should be even more penalised.

Concord no longer being tankable for example. Mining barges being balanced out. New exploration type ships. Crimewatch changes. Stuff like that.

Not much more of that post warranted a response.

The risk of fighting an industrial corps is minimal, and the reward (as shown by many merc groups) is a 95+% efficiency and heaps of loot. The risk of taking on a competent PvP group is considerably higher, and the chances of a high efficiency and good loot considerably less.

So I'll repeat my opinion: wardecs should be more rewarding when taking on a challenge, and less rewarding when going after soft targets, with the end result being that wardeccers choose to pick fights with tougher targets.

Concord no longer being tankable for example [high sec dwellers in general vs gankers]. Mining barges being balanced out [Miners vs gankers]. New exploration type ships [Exploration site runners vs hunters]. Crimewatch changes [PvE players vs bait gankers]. Stuff like that.

]No, I just keep my responses to trolls minimal to save time.

So why do the NPC corps have to take a nerf but wardeccers who go after the weakest possible targets so they have minimal risk don't? Why not make NPC corps less appealing, and at the same time look at making it more beneficial for a wardeccer to go after a challenging target and less beneficial to go after a weaker one?

PErsonal attacks aside

I've covered this one multiple times. Yes, it's their choice, but so is the choice of target. There will ALWAYS be a weakest target and that's what the wardeccers would always aim for, because there is no BENEFIT to taking a challenge. Why not provide them a benefit for doing so? You are whining on about player choice, so give players a REASON to choose something better.

So EVE shouldn't give out a better reward for taking more risk? Thanks for explaining. Who are you again?

they run away to protect their precious isk efficiency.

Not I. I suggested adding more reward for more risk and reducing reward for low risk and you told me EVE doesn't work that way.

I believe you, honestly I do. I lay awake at night wishing I could be just like you.

Kell gets +1 for tenacity

He actually beat my stubborn streak.

Not many do that.

That running away is boring and I strongly believe EVE should try to bring people together to interact, and not make the most convenient option "run away and stay docked".

Am I? That's strange, because I distinctly remember suggesting that reward for NPC players be lowered (encouraging them to take more risk to keep their reward), encouraging wardeccers to choose (not be forced) to take more of a challenge for more reward, and discourage lower risk play with lessened reward.

A game for pansies

]I don't get involved in wardeccers. My high sec guys operate from NPC corps and my mains operate from null.

]Much like many people operating from NPC corps, I don't consider it entertaining to lose an unarmed hauler to 20 12 year olds who then proceed to pat themselves on the back chanting "GF" in local. And therein lies the issue. You can't expect NPC players to choose to put themselves out for nothing.

Thus increasing their risk

Or NPC corps stay the way they are, people continue to wardec soft targets and people continue to move into NPC corps to avoid them....

Again with the misrepresentation.

The only hauler I've lost in highsec (that I can remember at least) was me autopiloting with exploration BPCs that I thought were near on worthless but were supposedly worth 100m or so. I like that you change your tactic so much, it's just further evidence you don't actually have a point you just want to troll, which is why you keep contradicting yourself.

I just want CCP to change the game so Marmite drops their dec against my alliance and my logistics become easier. :(

If npc corps were bad for business, ccp would remove them, or force players to leave them. But they are still here, inmune to wardecs and with lower taxes than many null corps. If you don't like it that's fine but there isn't much you can do.

Are you saying that ccp cant do that job? "We don't like it but we don't know how to fix it", right? Don't be delusional, they don't touch npc corps for a reason.