Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Noragen Neirfallas
Somalian Coast Guard Authority The Marmite Collective
346
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 07:58:01 -
[1] - Quote
Introduction Hey I couldn't bring myself to use a forum alt's post anymore because well this is C&P. Ok keep it constructive I think we all got our bitching out on the other thread already with 16 pages and possibly 5-6 decent posts.
Why do you think they are/aren't broken? What can we do to improve and/or fix the current mechanics?
Couple of protocol things. Don't use forum ALT's on this and let it descend into bickering. If you have a question about mechanics post it as a question. If you have a suggestion post it as a suggestion. Whining will be trolled by someone.
My experience I personally have been on the Eve Uni side of wars, The Null-sec renter side, in Nulli for wars, in a wormhole corp for wars and finally I am an evil High-Sec wardeccer myself. I started the game as all newbros do/did with no clue what I was doing and thankfully got pointed to Eve Uni. There on day 1 or 2 I lost my precious itty 2 full of my evely possessions (maybe 6mil's worth). As a result I joined the Uni's standing fleets to combat these 'Evil' guys and found a form of PvP like I had experienced in no other game. I learn't from the more experienced guys and in my second month in game I bagged my first solo PvP kill against a Marmite of all people. This combined with a desire for vengence had me sign up fro 6 more months of this game as I decided it was like no other I had played.
Now I feel that wars in High-Sec are necessary as it forces players to realize they will have interactions with others at times that may not be convienient. They will lose ships to others and the sooner this happens the better. I personally do not use in corp haulers anymore. Good thing I got that down pat before I had a really really stupid loss .
As part of the Null/WH community High-Sec wars had little to no impact on me however I did see comrades lose things. I myself like to be immersive and if i live somewhere I really live there.
As a evil wardeccer I can see issues with cost of wars as they currently are yet I don't feel increasing the cost is going to fix it. 50Mil isk Wars becoming 100Mil isk wars won't solve the issue. I would welcome all ideas on this subject.
I have only seen the current system and feel that it works but would be happy to review that position with somebody else providing a reasonable well thought out idea that could improve the current system or even replace it.
Issues Now the only issues I see in High-Sec wars are POS's. I think that large towers are far too efficient and cheap in their current format and that the only people who can effectively threaten this asset are awoxers and large groups like the Highsec mercenaries. There is no means in which a average 20-30 man sized corp can take on one of these if it is setup properly. I feel they take copetition away from smaller groups wanting to contest systems/resources in High-Sec. This is my personal observation and I look forward to hearing what you all think.
PS no forum ALT's
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
Danalee
Somalian Coast Guard Authority The Marmite Collective
1368
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 08:27:26 -
[2] - Quote
I think it's broken in a way that it lacks meaning.
The way forward should in my opinion be a combination of things; - Having a CORP/Alliance shouldn't be as empty as it is. -> maybe each corp should have a structure by default? A home base of sorts? -> maybe the system where the structure resides could have a form of boosts of the cop's chosing? -> maybe destroying/entosising (is that a word?) this structure would mean defeat for the corp? -> maybe defeat would result in bad stuff happening to the corp? A fixed tax that goes to the winner untill the warfees are covered? dunno... ideas welcome.
- NPC corps should be a thing for newbies only. Real newbies.
- Wars should have goals for both parties and the fees should be adapted to those goals.
D.
Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority
Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12766
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 08:33:27 -
[3] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote: My thoughts on the matter are as follows:
First, severe nerfs to NPC corps. Only player corps should be capable of using L4 mission agents and receive LP from Incursions, and NPC corp players older than 90 days have an additional 10% tax on top of normal.
If being in a player corp is the optimal choice for generating personal income, then being in a corp becomes something worth fighting for. That will never happen so long as NPC corps have so few functional penalties/limitations. Doing this also takes a step towards rebalancing risk vs reward, since NPC corps give up almost nothing in exchange for a huge buff to safety.
Secondly, the dec dodge exploit must be either removed or harshly punished. There are a number of ways this can be done, and I personally favor the generation of killrights against a player who drops to an NPC corp during an active war(or anyone who rejoins a player corp within 72 hours after having dropped, perhaps). Regardless, the ability to fold a corp and make it over again in a matter of minutes must be removed. Therefore, corp creation price should increase, and possibly have a cooldown associated with specific characters creating a corporation after having left one. Furthermore, any corp that dissolves during an active war has it's name and corp ticker suspended, and given to the attacking corp as a trophy.
Thirdly, player corps would receive the ability to improve mission LP rewards in a specific consellation via a starbase module. Only one can exist per constellation, so if you want the bonus you have to destroy the starbase of the current owner. The map would show which corp controlls the module, and what system it is located in. This incentivizes PvE corps to fight amongst themselves for better territory, as well as give player corps reasons to have assets in space for reasons besides industry and manufacturing.
To summarize:
Only player corps can access L4 missions or receive LP from incursions. NPC corp taxes are raised +10% for players over 90 days old. Killrights generated against dec dodging. Corps that dissolve during an active war have their names and ticker lost, given to the attacker as a trophy. Corp creation price increase. Corp creation cooldown after leaving a player corp. Highsec ESS as a starbase module, one per constellation. Boosts LP given from mission rewards to corp members.
And then, player corps are worth fighting for. The defender has a stake in the game, the rewards that come with being in a player corp. The typical highsec corps also have a reason to fight one another, for control of the constellation.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Somalian Coast Guard Authority The Marmite Collective
352
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 09:42:51 -
[4] - Quote
I like what I'm reading. Will revise op when I get home
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
Lachesiss
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
381
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 10:04:25 -
[5] - Quote
*Ban alt reps* This means any alt repping is slaughtered by concord. Not this flashy yellow crap. Alts would have to join the corps that are actually in the war.
*Ban fighting on the main trade hubs* Actually stuff it ban it system wide on main trade hubs and anybody at war cannot enter the trade hub system.
Bring back the 3d hologram naked chick in gallente stations. It would take there mind off aggression.
Ahh sod it make all of eve null and we can just kill each other everywhere.
Blimey these Mojito are strong *Hic*
On the third day after your birth myself and my sister's will come to you and decide your fate.
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Somalian Coast Guard Authority The Marmite Collective
357
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 10:09:32 -
[6] - Quote
Lachesiss wrote:*Ban alt reps* This means any alt repping is slaughtered by concord. Not this flashy yellow crap. Alts would have to join the corps that are actually in the war.
*Ban fighting on the main trade hubs* Actually stuff it ban it system wide on main trade hubs and anybody at war cannot enter the trade hub system.
Bring back the 3d hologram naked chick in gallente stations. It would take there mind off aggression.
Ahh sod it make all of eve null and we can just kill each other everywhere.
Blimey these Mojito are strong *Hic* Lol. I agree with reps and boosts forced in alliance/whomever assisted the war. As far as suspect games go I think that is another kettle of fish
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
Valkin Mordirc
901
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 10:14:05 -
[7] - Quote
Reserved (Long post incoming.)
#DeleteTheWeak
|
Solonius Rex
F0RCED ENTRY Get Off My Lawn
190
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 10:14:16 -
[8] - Quote
I think the corp system itself is broken.
First off, single-man corps should not exist. Corps should have a minimum number of people requirement, say around 20 people, and that if you are inactive in a corp for more than 3-4 months, CCP automatically drops you from that corp and places you back in the NPC corp. Corps that drop below the 20 man minimum, are given 24 hour notice before they are closed, and everyone is kicked.
Secondly, leaving a corp should have penalties. NPC corps should have higher tax rates, around 30%, and if you drop corp, you cannot join another corp for 1 week. This will prevent people from lightly hopping around corps, which i think is stupid.
Thirdly, friendly fire off should have penalties. Concord should charge your corp a premium for the ability to protect your members. This should come in the form of a minimum fee, plus taxes, that is charged to the corp. Once you stop paying, friendly fire turns back on again with a 24 hour notice.
With that in mind, any corp that is in a war, or gets wardecced, should be subject to stricter penalties if people wish to drop corp during wars.
We need to make corps meaningful in order to make wardecs meaningful. |
Valkin Mordirc
901
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 10:15:04 -
[9] - Quote
(Also reserved as a just in case)
#DeleteTheWeak
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Somalian Coast Guard Authority The Marmite Collective
357
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 10:16:04 -
[10] - Quote
Valkin Mordirc wrote:(Also reserved as a just in case) lol
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
|
Valkin Mordirc
905
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 11:18:57 -
[11] - Quote
In Summary.
Wars,
Wars need to be limited. I hate that I'm saying that but they do. Maybe skill based on how many you can run at a certain time. That would make it so that it not necessary for merc Alliances to form.
Cost, Wardec cost need to change as well. Corps need to be shielded at creation but only for a week. Then after the War Dec shield ends, they are dec able. The Wardec should cost will depend on a few things. Member count, Corp lifetime, should be to major factors. A new corps just made with 5 members SHOULD be more expensive than a 300 man corp that's been around for a year.
Corp creation, Corp need to have more value. Make them cost more, maybe in long run add more benefits that tie into NPC standings.
Recurring Wardecs, If you want to dec somebody for say, 3 weeks and it cost 50mil per week. It should paid up front for 150mil. The attacker can then add more time to after that, but it should have an increased amount added on so instead of costing 50mil maybe 100mil or 75mil.
Corp droppers should retain, combat timers with them. Combat timers that drop if the pilot is killed with in the grace period.
I think that covers everything?
#DeleteTheWeak
|
Solecist Project
The Scope Gallente Federation
20863
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 13:02:43 -
[12] - Quote
I know this will get lost in here ... ... but I want to once again quote CCP Tuxford's trolling ...
When you enter New Eden you are at war with everyone ... ... and you have to declare peace!
A peace-tax makes SO MUCH MORE SENSE IN THIS GAME than a war tax .....
Jokarz > you got owned?
Chris Justice > just a bit
Chris Justice > They were pulsing smart bombs at the point we all warped in. insta death.
Lev Arturis > pervs got 59 killmails
PERVS doing lowsec DD
|
Solecist Project
The Scope Gallente Federation
20863
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 13:04:55 -
[13] - Quote
Anyway ... this isn't GD ..... so please accept my apology for this question ....
... is there a point to give actually though-out input?
Jokarz > you got owned?
Chris Justice > just a bit
Chris Justice > They were pulsing smart bombs at the point we all warped in. insta death.
Lev Arturis > pervs got 59 killmails
PERVS doing lowsec DD
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Somalian Coast Guard Authority The Marmite Collective
368
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 13:26:15 -
[14] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Anyway ... this isn't GD ..... so please accept my apology for this question ....
... is there a point to give actually though-out input? Yah if this gets good ill mail it off to various 'people'
Besides this is where the cool people hang out. they can move it once the content is down
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
Solecist Project
The Scope Gallente Federation
20865
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 13:41:13 -
[15] - Quote
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:Solecist Project wrote:Anyway ... this isn't GD ..... so please accept my apology for this question ....
... is there a point to give actually though-out input? Yah if this gets good ill mail it off to various 'people' Besides this is where the cool people hang out. they can move it once the content is down Mail it? Why? Wouldn't a sufficiently supported thread in F&I be better?
This sounds like you want to gather ideas for others to claim for themselves. :p Paranoia is strong in me when it comes to this.
Jokarz > you got owned?
Chris Justice > just a bit
Chris Justice > They were pulsing smart bombs at the point we all warped in. insta death.
Lev Arturis > pervs got 59 killmails
PERVS doing lowsec DD
|
Tora Bushido
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
2319
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 13:53:25 -
[16] - Quote
Lachesiss wrote:*Ban alt reps* This means any alt repping is slaughtered by concord. Not this flashy yellow crap. Alts would have to join the corps that are actually in the war.
*Ban fighting on the main trade hubs* Actually stuff it ban it system wide on main trade hubs and anybody at war cannot enter the trade hub system.
Bring back the 3d hologram naked chick in gallente stations. It would take there mind off aggression.
Ahh sod it make all of eve null and we can just kill each other everywhere.
Blimey these Mojito are strong *Hic* I like them all, including the Mojitto's !
YOU EITHER LOVE US OR WE HATE YOU - DELETE THE WEAK , ADAPT OR DIE !
|
March rabbit
Federal Defense Union
1598
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 13:59:25 -
[17] - Quote
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:PvEers have a goal Yea, make overall game significantly worse to 'make them interested'
This approach will get you much support!
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Somalian Coast Guard Authority The Marmite Collective
369
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 14:13:18 -
[18] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Noragen Neirfallas wrote:PvEers have a goal Yea, make overall game significantly worse to 'make them interested' This approach will get you much support! Feel free to post constructively below. Or don't just avoid the urge to troll needlessly
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
March rabbit
Federal Defense Union
1598
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 14:59:57 -
[19] - Quote
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:March rabbit wrote:Noragen Neirfallas wrote:PvEers have a goal Yea, make overall game significantly worse to 'make them interested' This approach will get you much support! Feel free to post constructively below. Or don't just avoid the urge to troll needlessly Well... I can only say that approaching the problem only from Merc side will not give any good results. You see only one side: you want people to wardec and kill. You don't see it from other side. From side of players who does not want to be decced and killed.
Try to approach the problem from other side: what needs to be changed in the game to make PVE players MORE interested in fight? I can say that it's mostly PvPers who make PvEers evade PvP at all cost. Duels and suspect baits - once you have seen it you will never accept duel request or open fire to some suspect. Even more - you WILL warn your friends. Result: the little opportunities for learning to PvP in high-sec are gone.
I think fixing duels and suspect games would increase people's interest in high-sec PvP for the start. - no neutral logi for duels and suspects - no OGBs for duels - maybe disable bumping function when in duel Not sure if this would provide more PvP players but it will stop to make people to evade it.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Somalian Coast Guard Authority The Marmite Collective
371
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 15:43:15 -
[20] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Noragen Neirfallas wrote:March rabbit wrote:Noragen Neirfallas wrote:PvEers have a goal Yea, make overall game significantly worse to 'make them interested' This approach will get you much support! Feel free to post constructively below. Or don't just avoid the urge to troll needlessly Well... I can only say that approaching the problem only from Merc side will not give any good results. You see only one side: you want people to wardec and kill. You don't see it from other side. From side of players who does not want to be decced and killed. Try to approach the problem from other side: what needs to be changed in the game to make PVE players MORE interested in fight? I can say that it's mostly PvPers who make PvEers evade PvP at all cost. Duels and suspect baits - once you have seen it you will never accept duel request or open fire to some suspect. Even more - you WILL warn your friends. Result: the little opportunities for learning to PvP in high-sec are gone. I think fixing duels and suspect games would increase people's interest in high-sec PvP for the start. - no neutral logi for duels and suspects - no OGBs for duels - maybe disable bumping function when in duel Not sure if this would provide more PvP players but it will stop to make people to evade it. So you feel that increasing income for PvE'ers in battles with other PvE'ers over PvE based objectives Would not encourage PvP in highsec? what would encourage PvP in highsec then? I'm all ears on changes to assist with this idea but this isn't the post on how to fix suspect mechanics to be honest. That's a whole new kettle of fish that also needs to be looked at. Lets look at one major issue on this thread and I'll do a suspect mechanics thread another day.
Again not trolling but if income isn't a motivator what is? Also I was a unista. I can appreciate what it is like to be wardecced constantly and how hard it is under current mechanics to deal with it. While I am currently on the other side of id it's not so long ago that I dont remember what it was like .
Now for a story. There was once a group of bears called The Foundation To Protect Endangered Carebears. These lads were by far some of the most beary bears the game has ever seen. But they had enough in their ranks that were willing to give PvP a go. After one battle with them where they tried to drop on our small fleet that turned out to not be so small (we had even numbers in the area we just weren't expecting a fight) we convoed them and worked out a bit of a deal where we would take some 'fair' fights with them every day we could both get numbers and school them in similar PvP. Now while killing them was an actual contract and we couldn't give up going for their PvEers too their PvP lads were more solid for this. This small alliance claimed a decent sized section of highsec for themselves and through one means or another began to drive out all competition in the area. Their motivation was ownership and this simple motivation pushed career miners and mission runners to band together and form some of the worst PvP fleets you have ever seen . But they had fun and they took the space from their less aggressive competitors. Had they continued at that rate they may very well have 'owned' half of amatar space by now and certainly could go toe to toe with any merc corp.
I feel if you combine 'ownership' and 'ISK rewards' together in highsec and lowsec with a new set of structures that lets everybody know you live here and rewards you for living here it will not only improve highsec and lowsec but will also drive competition for the better areas and thus will attract people to form bigger highsec groups to compete over these while at the same time allowing the smaller groups to get into 'less desirable' areas and grow there while not really getting picked on by anybody due to the changes i proposed in declaring war on others. I would be intrested to hear your thoughts on this?
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
|
Solecist Project
The Scope Gallente Federation
20877
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 16:37:04 -
[21] - Quote
until inevitably the goons come and take it away ... ... and that will happen.
They will make code look like the children's party it is .........
Wow i have lost all my enthusiasm. sometimes ignorance is more fun.
Jokarz > you got owned?
Chris Justice > just a bit
Chris Justice > They were pulsing smart bombs at the point we all warped in. insta death.
Lev Arturis > pervs got 59 killmails
PERVS doing lowsec DD
|
March rabbit
Federal Defense Union
1599
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 16:55:06 -
[22] - Quote
Noragen Neirfallas wrote: So you feel that increasing income for PvE'ers in battles with other PvE'ers over PvE based objectives Would not encourage PvP in highsec?
.... I feel if you combine 'ownership' and 'ISK rewards' together in highsec and lowsec with a new set of structures that lets everybody know you live here and rewards you for living here it will not only improve highsec and lowsec but will also drive competition for the better areas and thus will attract people to form bigger highsec groups to compete over these while at the same time allowing the smaller groups to get into 'less desirable' areas and grow there while not really getting picked on by anybody due to the changes i proposed in declaring war on others. I would be intrested to hear your thoughts on this?
Well. - we already have it in 0.0. Did it make PvE players fight? Or it made overall more fights? - (thanks to Sol for reminding) we already have Customs Offices in high-sec. Did they make PvE players engage in PvP? And Customs Offices are "ownership + bonuses" in refined form. - you mentioned 'PvErs against PvErs' but where are PvPers then? You said 'they will assist'. Lol. They will wardec anyone around knowing that targets have no choices.
Let's compare pros and cons here: Corporation: + (small) bonuses to mission rewards and mining (in constellation or in one system?) + 'ownership' of piece of space - creation payment - management hurdle (minimal number of players, etc...) - wardecs (constant if you try to own good place) and losses - freedom - you cannot leave the corp - with constant wars you will have everything from 'killright' to 'personal wardec'. And wars will be constant - you cannot take vacation or go to cinema with wife/kids - your corp needs meatshild to defend that structure - you cannot just move to other end of universe - you will lose bonuses from that structure you need to have and defend - you cannot use good fits for PvE - you always need to be ready for PvP so you lose PvE efficiency
NPC: - taxes and penalty to mining - no lvl4s (just blitz lvl3s and you fine) - did i miss something?
Again: You make the game as a whole worse for PvEers and say "you can get some of your losses back if you additionally do X,Y and Z. These tasks will take your ISK. And it will take your time which you could spend doing what you like to do...... Yea, don't forget that you WILL lose your stuff trying to do these things to more experienced and organized players". Personally i'm trying to put myself into such situation.... For now i think i would either: 1) accept losses (taxes, no lvl4s) and ignore new system 2) add alts to my account and switch between them while in war 3) move to 0.0 renter empire In both cases you got nothing in high-sec. Yes, you did hurt my PvE playstyle so maybe that was what you really wanted to achieve?
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
589
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 17:24:51 -
[23] - Quote
Customs Office ownership was never going to be a motivator. Hisec Planetary Interaction is a joke, and one can get better profits by doing it in lowsec or null. People who do use planets in hisec use them as manufactories for the tier 4/5 commodities.
Besides if I want to use a planet in hisec and don't want to pay high fees, I can just negotiate with the people who own the POCO for blue status and get a lower tax rate; or just hire a merc corp to blow it up so I can put down another.
Also, for a POCO to actually make some isk for that corp, it has to own a lot of them and the tax rate has to be set at a price people are willing to pay to use that planet.
So yeah, hisec POCOs are not a big conflict generator.
Maybe make it so that wardecs actually payout substantial isk to the winner, but in a way that can't be exploited; which I can't think of.
I do like the idea of a hisec iHub in each system that a corp can own and it increases their isk generation, but can only switch hands through a wardec. However, it would have to be implemented in a way that could not be abused. Main type of abuse in that system would be that a big alliance would go out and take them all, and then no one could take them back because that alliance was too big to take on. Kinda like the CFC in hisec. The hisec blue donut if you will.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
249
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 20:05:19 -
[24] - Quote
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:Lachesiss wrote:*Ban alt reps* This means any alt repping is slaughtered by concord. Not this flashy yellow crap. Alts would have to join the corps that are actually in the war.
*Ban fighting on the main trade hubs* Actually stuff it ban it system wide on main trade hubs and anybody at war cannot enter the trade hub system.
Bring back the 3d hologram naked chick in gallente stations. It would take there mind off aggression.
Ahh sod it make all of eve null and we can just kill each other everywhere.
Blimey these Mojito are strong *Hic* Lol. I agree with reps and boosts forced in alliance/whomever assisted the war. As far as suspect games go I think that is another kettle of fish
I would like to see suspect games on hubs go away in highsec, thus forcing people to actually go out and work for kills and fleet fights in highsec wouldn't be a giant game of whackamole on station.
That's my personal bias. I would like to see the many people who do this all day forced to actually play the game. But I know it willnever happen.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
249
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 20:27:13 -
[25] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Customs Office ownership was never going to be a motivator. Hisec Planetary Interaction is a joke, and one can get better profits by doing it in lowsec or null. People who do use planets in hisec use them as manufactories for the tier 4/5 commodities.
Besides if I want to use a planet in hisec and don't want to pay high fees, I can just negotiate with the people who own the POCO for blue status and get a lower tax rate; or just hire a merc corp to blow it up so I can put down another.
Also, for a POCO to actually make some isk for that corp, it has to own a lot of them and the tax rate has to be set at a price people are willing to pay to use that planet.
So yeah, hisec POCOs are not a big conflict generator.
Maybe make it so that wardecs actually payout substantial isk to the winner, but in a way that can't be exploited; which I can't think of.
I do like the idea of a hisec iHub in each system that a corp can own and it increases their isk generation, but can only switch hands through a wardec. However, it would have to be implemented in a way that could not be abused. Main type of abuse in that system would be that a big alliance would go out and take them all, and then no one could take them back because that alliance was too big to take on. Kinda like the CFC in hisec. The hisec blue donut if you will.
This is a problem I've got at before. If you try to generate conflict by creating new and significant sources of ISK that are campable, the biggest blob is going to camp them while they farm the ISK.
I just don't see a way to fix wars so that you can make them unavoidable without breaking the game. If you make them impossible to dodge, it will be absolutely possible to wardec a player out of the game.
|
Danalee
Somalian Coast Guard Authority The Marmite Collective
1385
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 21:02:25 -
[26] - Quote
Please stop trolling with the premise that when you wardec someone he/she has no options at all.
D.
Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority
Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12778
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 21:59:39 -
[27] - Quote
To anyone saying that neutral logi should be removed.
Sure, so long as it applies equally, that you can only rep someone in your corp or alliance. Not just in a war, but across the board.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
Mobadder Thworst
Perkone Caldari State
298
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 22:21:23 -
[28] - Quote
Sorry I'm late, was over at the swimsuit competition. I have never felt so pretty!
I think the problem with wars right now is that they are too impersonal. The high costs have destroyed the small local war dec vender. Those people who used to provide that excellent service and personal interaction had to get jobs with large impersonal merc corporations who only know you are a flashie.
A local 3 person corp just can't make a go at it anymore with costs and structure being what it is..
Those small corps made it possible for targets and aggressors to really get to know each other and have fights.
The small local war dec corps were fun and much easier to defeat. I think they were good content.
I can lament the death of can flipping now, if you want to see tears. Tragedy, it's just tragedy... |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
5382
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 22:28:41 -
[29] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:To anyone saying that neutral logi should be removed.
Sure, so long as it applies equally, that you can only rep someone in your corp or alliance. Not just in a war, but across the board. lol, why? That would basically destroy NPSI, one of the few places decent and challenging PvP exists.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12779
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 22:30:27 -
[30] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:lol, why?
Because if you're going to make heavy handed mechanics like Concording people who rep others, then it should apply equally.
Quote: That would basically destroy NPSI, one of the few places decent and challenging PvP exists.
Good. If people are going to propose ideas that are so blatantly one sided, they should have it pointed at them, so it exposes what a goddamned awful idea it really is. If you aren't willing to yourself deal with something you want inflicted on others, then it's wrong, simple as that.
You forgot that it destroys the incursion communities as well, by the way.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
Best Meltdown Ever.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |