EVE Search - Hiding from wardecs.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Crime and Punishment

Hiding from wardecs.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2528	Posted - 2015.06.12 19:04:33 - [1] - Quote Demerius Xenocratus wrote: Enjoy being ganked by a T3 blob. *if you undock solo against typical highsec pvp'ers. Undocking solo against a more experienced aggressor without having a good reason to expect to win is a dumb idea in any scenario. Fun story. The proliferation of the highsec T3 fleet happened in response to a downturn in resistance offered by defenders that happened around the time that dec-shield was a thing. Prior to that is was typical for people to fly the least threatening thing they could use while still being combat effective, because presenting a target that was minimally threatening encouraged defenders to actually mount a resistance. However the likelyhood of defenders mounting any kind of resistance whatsoever, regardless of the type of ship the aggressor is in became so low that it became more practical to just fly the thing most capable of catching and killing any given individual ship you could locate, hence T3s became the order of the day. In an environment where I can keep 20 members of a 70 man alliance docked up in a station just by being in system with them, completely by myself without any possibility of them attempting to engage me regardless of what I am in, there's no reason for the rest of my corp members to not by flying around in T3s picking off their oblivious mission runners. I'm looking at Vae. Victis. on that one, worst alliance ever.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2532	Posted - 2015.06.14 10:51:37 - [2] - Quote OP your corp sounds terrible, I'm going to do things to them starting next weekend. Fun haters must be punished.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2534	Posted - 2015.06.14 18:47:05 - [3] - Quote I like how you implied that things that happen in lowsec are actually piracy. Which is absolutely hilarious. Also if you want to kill an aggressor in highsec your best bet is to find one or two of them with a neutral scout and follow them around as they try and hunt somebody down, then drop on them with 5-10 of your closest, least incompetent friends. People like us are so not threatened by the activities of a defender that we're typically not paying very much attention to what's going on outside of the specific individual we are targeting and will engage basically any single ship without even looking at who it belongs to so we'll easily fall for traps. At some point I should probably write a guide on how to kill me.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2541	Posted - 2015.06.15 14:03:37 - [4] - Quote Blueballing individual fights you can't win makes sense. Blueballing an entire war by nor undocking at all on the assumption that it will result in a shorter war is questionable at best. For one its not fun or interesting for you, secondly there's also no guarantee that corp members will all do it and not decide to go mining by themselves and die anyway, thirdly there's might not even work, god knows I've kept corps that refuse to undock decced for multiple weeks just to see how long it takes for them to start losing members. Blueballing should really be used as a part of a larger guerilla strategy for maximum fun and effectiveness.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2545	Posted - 2015.06.16 02:59:57 - [5] - Quote I think what you are talking about and what I am talking about is not quite the same thing.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2550	Posted - 2015.06.16 19:12:44 - [6] - Quote The best is when your diplomats are me and Yuller since our ideas of "sort it out" are to make it worse, escalate the situation and otherwise make everything go as badly as possible. It's even worse if we're both there daring each other to "just dec all of them".
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2562	Posted - 2015.06.18 02:49:21 - [7] - Quote If only they often sat in the same spot suspect flagged for hours at a time. Or had hundreds to thousands or even tens of thousands of other people they're at war with who you could cooperate with.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2624	Posted - 2015.06.24 14:01:21 - [8] - Quote Leto Thule wrote: Lucas - yeah, your right. But I don't know how much I care about 1 man corps. Personally I think if you close the corp you should have a fine which is paid to the wardeccer. I mean they "won", right? Actually that sounds awesome. Both fatigue ideas are good as well. However... Wardec fatigue would, I think, mirror image the current problem. Without consequence, you would see wardec corps reforming to drop the fatigue. Highsec war is broken, on both sides. Personally I never understood war in highsec, as there are very few corps that actually use it to gain moons or POCOs or whatever highseccers do. It's good for lols and killing people who don't know how to fit or fly. Yes, I know sometimes that's fun, just not my cup of tea most of the time. Actually a lot of people use wars to get POCOs however because everything about the war system is so heavily biased in favor of the defender that 90% of the time they hire mercs to do it for them. Moons are less common because frankly they're an abundant resource and the difficulty of destroying a properly set up tower as well as the nuisance of POS reinforcement timers makes contracts to destroy them incredibly expensive. War fatigue timers would be enormously detrimental to mercenaries as they'd place a hard mechanical limit on your ability to take contracts, it would also be incompatible with the way corporations leaving alliances generates new wars. I also don't see how imposing limits on aggression would in any way improve highsec gameplay, which is already becoming increasingly devoid of ways for people to initiate conflicts. Similarly restrictions on people doing what they want regarding their corporation membership just prevents people from being part of the group they want to be in and ultimately if someone doesn't want to be at war and has nothing invested in their corporation they wouldn't be heavily impacted by being in an NPC corp anyway. The way to approach collapsing and reforming corporations as well as the ridiculous levels of passiveness of players in highsec corporations is to make corp membership and a corp being well established more valuable to players and worth defending. Adding punishments to running away and arbitrary limits on aggression would just annoy everyone involved.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2627	Posted - 2015.06.24 14:19:20 - [9] - Quote That doesn't even make sense.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2629	Posted - 2015.06.25 01:10:10 - [10] - Quote The only complaint I have about people rolling corps is when they do it before a war actually becomes live. Having never actually been able to shoot those people I feel like I should get the cost of declaring war refunded. In all other instances I couldn't care less.

Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2631	Posted - 2015.06.25 10:56:50 - [11] - Quote Veers Belvar wrote: Vimsy Vortis wrote: The only complaint I have about people rolling corps is when they do it before a war actually becomes live. Having never actually been able to shoot those people I feel like I should get the cost of declaring war refunded. In all other instances I couldn't care less. Just be more careful about who you dec, it's meant to be a scalpel, not an axe. I personally am extremely careful about who I declare war on and I think I've had people roll their corps on me maybe 3 times ever. Considering I declare several hundred wars a year that's pretty good. The specific part about rolling a corp before a war goes live that I dislike is that the cost of declaring wars was justified by CCP as "paying for targets" while I personally don't see it like that paying a fee but never getting any targets is contrary to that. If the fee I pay to declare a war is because I am paying for targets, if I get no targets I shouldn't have to pay.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2633	Posted - 2015.06.25 13:16:54 - [12] - Quote That is a really dumb way to suspect bait. He should just have a random alt alt drop a depot in a safe off grid safe and use that to get his timer. Then he can have his alt shoot him all day without any interruption to his suspect timer. Using cans for anything is archaic.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2633	Posted - 2015.06.25 14:56:13 - [13] - Quote Because the cost is justified as "paying for targets" if I get no targets I should not be paying. Alternatively CCP could drop the pretense that you are paying for targets when you declare a war (because you really aren't) and admit that the entire purpose of cost scaling was specifically to benefit e-uni. Basically I have a really old grudge against a really transparent and dishonest explanation given for a particular mechanic and feel that CCP have been really hypocritical about other mechanics that should logically be affected by the same principle. I think I might have been playing eve too long.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2635	Posted - 2015.06.25 15:50:08 - [14] - Quote Petre en Thielles wrote: Vimsy Vortis wrote: Because the cost is justified as "paying for targets" if I get no targets I should not be paying. Alternatively CCP could drop the pretense that you are paying for targets when you declare a war (because you really aren't) and admit that the entire purpose of cost scaling was specifically to benefit e-uni. Basically I have a really old grudge against a really transparent and dishonest explanation given for a particular mechanic and feel that CCP have been really hypocritical about other mechanics that should logically be affected by the same principle. I think I might have been playing eve too long. You are paying for the chance at a target. Move to low/null/WHs and you can get targets for free. Why not do that? No I'm not I am very specifically paying to be able to shoot the members of the corporation or alliance I'm declaring war on, hence the cost goes up based on the quantity of people in that group. Keep in mind that this is not how I personally feel, it's how CCP justified their decisions for the current war declaration pricing system, even though huge numbers of players called it out as making no sense. If CCP are telling the truth and the concept behind the war pricing structure really is that I am paying for targets then I should either get the targets I pay for or be refunded. If it is not the case that I am paying for targets (which is and always has been the reality) then CCP needs to admit that the pricing structure is designed entirely to provide more CONCORD-PROTECTED protection to the large groups that are the least in need of it whowever jus so happen to hAve had lits of CSM representation when those changes happened. Until such a time I maintain that if I don't get the targets I pay for I should be refunded on principle. Also we literally just spent a month in nullsec. It was the most boring thing imaginable.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2639	Posted - 2015.06.26 13:17:29 - [15] - Quote Holysheet has never been a good poster, he's been a raging idiot the entire time I've been aware of his existence which is several years at this point. The funny thing is I actually sympathize with his gripes with marmite.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.