How do hisec miners compress ore if not in a pos?

You sound as if you disapprove of people picking their battles and only engaging in those they think they can win. I call it smart.

Yeah, in that it's not used in any way because dec dodging is better, cheaper, and has no consequences.

Though actually, we could kill two birds with one stone. One of the suggestions was to make the defender pay the cost of the war dec to disband, why not just use that to make the surrender mechanic viable?

50 million ISK is the fixed price for a surrender, and once the defending corp pays, the war ends. If we can bribe CONCORD to look the other way, ought to be able to bribe them to pay attention again.

All the suggestions for 'fixing' war decs seem to boil down to , "The attacker should be in absolute control of the war at all times, and the only option for the defender should be to either accept it, or to spend a week in an NPC corp as punishment ."

Sort of like small industrial/mining corps picking their battles and avoiding war decs that they can't possibly win?

So when a 'PVP'er' avoids fights where he might actually lose and goes after easy pickings: Playing smart, picking his battles.

When a non PVP'er avoids fights they are pretty much guaranteed to lose?: Abusing game mechanics! Ruining EVE! Playing the wrong way!

You miss one important point that goes with more people in Hi-Sec....they aren't there for the pvp. Only conclusion I can come to is if someone is in hi-sec for pvp what they are really looking for is easy kills.

And if someone brings more people, get some friends of your own. That's what they say to all the miners and haulers. There are many avenues open for someone to get the war they want.

^^ This.

Sort of like small industrial/mining corps picking their battles and avoiding war decs that they can't possibly win?

So when a 'PVP'er' avoids fights where he might actually lose and goes after easy pickings: Playing smart, picking his battles.

When a non PVP'er avoids fights they are pretty much guaranteed to lose?: Abusing game mechanics! Ruining EVE! Playing the wrong way!

Or it's not used in any way because it's entirely up to the attacker as to whether or not to take it, or to just keep farming your corp for another week.

All the suggestions for 'fixing' war decs seem to boil down to , "The attacker should be in absolute control of the war at all times, and the only option for the defender should be to either accept it, or to spend a week in an NPC corp as punishment ."

Though actually, we could kill two birds with one stone. One of the suggestions was to make the defender pay the cost of the war dec to disband, why not just use that to make the surrender mechanic viable?

50 million ISK is the fixed price for a surrender, and once the defending corp pays, the war ends. If we can bribe CONCORD to look the other way, ought to be able to bribe them to pay attention again.

Is Eve a PvP game or not?

If you are playing Eve then it doesn't matter what area of space you are in, you accept that this is PvP game and thus accept that anybody at anytime can shoot at you

[

So in other words, you guys think that anyone with 50M isk can be immune to wardecs? Why even bother having wardecs if thats going to be the case?

The difference is that one party is using existing game mechanics for what I think we can all assume to be their intended use. The other party is using game mechanics to circumvent other game mechanics. That sounds like an exploit to me...

Or fight back, or pay someone else to fight back. or evade in a way that's still playing the friggin video game.

I can understand cowardice in real life, because their is no respawning in real life. I don't get it at all in a game. When gankers, war deccers, pvp'rs, whoever come at me in a game I'm like "Game on, Hoe, watch me escape like Houdini on your ass".

If i wasn't like that, the LAST game id choose would be an open world non-consensual pvp sandbox. i simply don't understand that level of weakness in a virtual environment nor do i understand why people make stupid choices (like playing EVE when they don't have an EVE mentality) and stick with them rather than cut their losses.

PvP is not entirely PEW PEW. Tell me exactly how a Jita station trader accepts that anyone at any time can shoot at them.

Is Eve a PvP game or not?

If you are playing Eve then it doesn't matter what area of space you are in, you accept that this is PvP game and thus accept that anybody at anytime can shoot at you

If you come to shoot me I have several choices to make..sit there and get shot in the face, shoot back if possible, or duck and run for cover.

Therein lies the issue, some think ducking is not cool.

The Jita station trade accepts that anyone can shoot at them IF THEY UNDOCK. If he stays docked and station trades he's subject to market pvp.

How do you get that "EVE is just pew pew" from a poster saying "EVE is a pvp game, no matter what space you are in you can get shot"? Does a poster have to write a dissertation every time they post about the non-consensual pvp nature of the game?

The Jita station trade accepts that anyone can shoot at them IF THEY UNDOCK. If he stays docked and station trades he's subject to market pvp.

They choose this game because it is a sandbox, thus you can choose what you want to do. They don;t wants to shoot stuff and want to avoid being shot, so they do. Stop complaining that they aren't doing it the way you would like them to.

And the thing is, the changes being asked for wouldn't make them start dodging like you do, they would simply find another way of not being shot, and if that meant playing on alts or staying docked, that would still be the case.

I already established that a while back.

Evading me in the game is just fine. Abusing an exploit to get around an intended game mechanic is not.

The end.

If anyone with 50M isk can get a free pass for consequence free PVP regardless of security status, reasonable that 50M should be the price of retaining the limited protection of high sec.

The difference is that one party is using existing game mechanics for what I think we can all assume to be their intended use. The other party is using game mechanics to circumvent other game mechanics. That sounds like an exploit to me...

Hmm. "There's a game mechanic I don't like that lets people counter a game mechanic I do like. Must be an exploit!" .

I asked you about the exploit several pages ago, you still haven't answered though.

The surrender mechanic is the intended way to dissolve a wardec you don't want.

Dec dodging is not, and is thus unintended. Since it's used to bypass normal game mechanics, that makes it an exploit, pretty much by definition.

PvP is not entirely PEW PEW. Tell me exactly how a Jita station trader accepts that anyone at any time can shoot at them.

Kaarous, I have to be honest, I wouldn't call it an exploit myself. It is a current feature of the game working maybe not quite as intended, maybe working exactly as intended, I don't know myself, it's hard to tell. Who knows, maybe the implementation of the surrender system and the last round of wardec changes along with it are a step towards a full rebalance of the wardec system. You know how CCP do these things sometimes, in bits and pieces. It sure as hell wouldn't be the first time.

I disagree with you that it's an exploit I'm sorry, it just seems over the top tbh. There are more sensible arguments in favour of making it more difficult to avoid wardecs, although most of them have already been discussed and this thread is becoming incredibly repetitive and redundant.

I'm not complaining about people not playing like me, I'm complaining about people who don't want to play at all (but who still want to exist in a video game).

They don't want a sandbox, in a sandbox the mean kids can throw sand at you. They want a themepark where the powers that be protect them from the mean kids. Me, i belong in this sandbox because i find a way to make the mean kids who throw sand at me into my prison bitches that I may or may not sell for cigarettes depending on how horny I get that week.

I simply do see the sense in being in a voluntary situation I don't like, life is too short for that. if i hated war decs or gankers or non-consensual pvp as much as you guys do i'd just play Star Trek online full time instead of splitting my time between there and here.

Staying docked is a perfectly valid counter. I don't give a flip about what anyone does, as a philosophical matter, I would like for the game to have a more consistent rule set.

What's inconsistent? You can disband and reform your corp any time you want. In or out of a war.

This is very disingenuous. Re-read my post. One mechanic (wardecs) is intended, the other "mechanic" of dropping corp to avoid the wardec is surely not intended. If it were, then I would ask again, "why even have wardecs?"

You really need to learn to read.

You miss one important point that goes with more people in Hi-Sec....they aren't there for the pvp

To me PvP is player v player, whether it be shooting, market trading, POCO's or anything else. The second you log onto Eve you accept by default that whether you like it or not another player can interact with you in any way they see fit for what ever reason using what ever mechanics have been put in place.

And since that is being used as an exploit to get around the use of the surrender mechanic, that needs to stop being an option.