or just sort your standings properly.

Why is this needed? For a few reasons:

1) It'll help players figure out who are friendly to each other. Example: Alliance A wants to fight Alliance B, but are wary of Alliance C coming to help Alliance B. A quick check of the Peace Agreement tab could help!

2) It'll prevent awoxing. Nobody likes blue-on-blue incidents and they turn things messy in a real hurry. This system would eliminate a rogue alliance member causing a ruckus before they leave/are kicked.

3) There's too much war in Eve! We should be able to promote peace and diplomacy rather than war and hostility if we want to. This system would give us a tangible, workable way of doing that.

3) There's too much war in Eve! We should be able to promote peace and diplomacy rather than war and hostility if we want to. This system would give us a tangible, workable way of doing that.

Literally standings

Highsec awoxing is going, why would we want to restrict PVP anywhere else?

95% of wars are dull, terrible and so laughably easy to circumvent they aren't really relevant. If that were fixed first maybe an official, mechanical 'peace' might have a point. I'm not sure preventing Blue on Blue violence would be it though.

what? shame on you.

this is a game about non-consensual PvP, competition and space ships blowing up. The one thing that it is lacking is wars.

You can promote peace and diplomacy, by not shooting people and being diplomatic. But its not something you turn on and off for other people with a switch! If they change their mind then thats their choice. Maybe you should have been more diplomatic with them.

There are many areas of this game outside of PvP. Some people like PI, others like Industry, and many live for Incursion running.

There are many areas of this game outside of PvP. Some people like PI, others like Industry, and many live for Incursion running.

Regardless, I am proposing a system for those who mutually agree to peace. It's not mandatory, it doesn't over-ride the current standings mechanics, and it doesn't try to eliminate "non-consensual" PvP. It's an added measure that those with peace in mind can elect to do.

Just an fyi,

PvP = competition. which is an integral part to every activity you just mentioned.

What your proposing is either a superfluous addition to contacts or its to prevent the freedom of players to do as they wish when they wish, specifically, changing their minds about you or scamming you. Both of which are interesting and legitimate aspects of the game.

It adds nothing to the game, it takes away freedom from the game.

please no.

There are many areas of this game outside of PvP. Some people like PI, others like Industry, and many live for Incursion running.

PvP in Eve is traditionally known as Player vs Player combat.

If we could see another entity's standings towards other entities then yes, this idea would have a bit less worth. But we can't, so it doesn't.

You are misinformed. Those "non-PvP" activities are very much PvP in their own right because they either feed or create conflict between players.

In fact... the entire EVE economy is based upon warfare, destruction, and feeding warfare and destruction.
(NOTE: this is why harvesters, industrialists, traders, and haulers are open to unwanted warfare and ganking... because they can profoundly affect PvPers with their activities for better and worse... and in some cases initiate ship-on-ship violence themselves to boost sales).


In short:

more war and conflict = healthier economy

Yeah... I know that statement does make me sound like a massive douche. But you can't really bullshit what something is when that is how it was designed (and intentionally so) in the first place.


If both sides have agreed to be "blue" to each other... they are "at peace."

And just like an actual "peace treaty"... it is nothing more than a parchment of paper filled with words. Its true power comes from the rank-and-file (and not "the management") who choose whether or not to honor it... and likewise for the other side.

Some of the better wars in EVE's history have been started because "management" couldn't control the "underlings" who wanted war over peace (or one side went back on their word).

This is why trust is such a valued "commodity" in EVE.


I do not see why we need to introduce mechanics to give more power to "management" or force "trust" between people.

FYI: this actually existed in the past. It was removed because "it gave too much intel to everyone else. Standings should remain a 'personal thing' between specific entities and be a 'matter of trust.'"

But that seems silly, much like trying to use words such as "superfluous" in a conversation where a simpler word can get the point across without having to reference a thesaurus; and all of this being an effort to prove your intellectual superiority.

my alliance can decide for me (look at your second point in the OP). I have to leave and probably wait a 24 hour timer before i can change my mind about you. and thats assuming i want to overtly attack you. what if i want to do something more sneaky?