EVE Search - War Dec System Needs To Change.

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

War Dec System Needs To Change.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3313	Posted - 2015.07.29 08:28:25 - [1] - Quote Hello Now before you all go off at me for being a "noob" and "getting ganked" - I have never been ganked in a barge, i have not been killed in empire except when fighting war targets. I am posting this for the benefit of bringing new players into EvE. What's wrong with multiple war decs? In short, a lot, but, this has a direct effect on Null Sec & Low Sec, to claim it doesn't is the height of stupidity, why go to null to find fights when u can join a high sec griefer alliance that has thousands of war decs and targets in every system, half of which can't fight back? Easy kills, easy money, let's do it! No. This needs to change. Lol you think it effects Null Sec, You're An Idiot. I'm afraid not, the direct proof is that Null Sec, is empty, we roam in there all the time and in low sec, the areas of the game are dead, because what's the point in risking ships in "actual pvp fights" with other pilots who are trying just as hard to kill you, when you can blow up faction fit newish player mission ships n make billions? So what do u suggest? I suggest that corporations and alliances are limited to 5 war decs available. This in effect means that large alliances cannot turn high sec into there own personal Null Sec, it means they have to go to Null Sec to get a target rich environment. It would also mean less combat in market hubs and less strain on the servers. So to the point i recommend thus:@ Each corporation and alliance has a 5 war dec limit. This means they can ONLY declare 5 wars at any one time. Each corporation and alliance can only be declared war upon, 3 times. This prevents things like i.e Goonswarm being perma decked by every large griefer alliance in the game. For a corporation to declare war, they must have no fewer than 7 active members i.e 7 numbers. This would stop the alts of people who just like to **** mining corps off. This would in effect make "mercs" an actual play style as they would have to get out of hubs and look for their targets. I.e what real mercs do. These changes would force so called high sec griefer "pvp pilots" out of high sec and into low/null and would enhance that side of the game. You can see my personal killboard and know i PvP in low/null. So this is not me whining. We have a low sec HQ and if people are stupid enuff to get caught by war targets, that's there issue. I am a PvP pilot, i do "real" PvP, not high sec griefing. Bottom line is, this needs to stop I am just tired of new corps being slammed into the floor by griefer alliances and corps. It needs to stop and CCP need to do summit about it.
Kenrailae Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships. 456	Posted - 2015.07.29 08:35:42 - [2] - Quote War decs do need a limit. Source: Marmite +1 The Law is a point of View
Anthar Thebess 1242	Posted - 2015.07.29 08:51:13 - [3] - Quote I was , WTF But yes limiting offensive war number is good - as long as you can "get" unlimited number of wars. No limit on player count , or similar stuff. Maybe , rly maybe - block ability to join to corporation if it have any offensive wars , to prevent jumping. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3314	Posted - 2015.07.29 08:59:15 - [4] - Quote I just want to see CCP do something about this. We roam in Null/Low all the time and 9/10 systems are dead, why bother with null when u have risk free pvp in empire against new players? It needs to stop.
Valkin Mordirc 1308	Posted - 2015.07.29 09:41:06 - [5] - Quote Quote: What's wrong with multiple war decs? In short, a lot, but, this has a direct effect on Null Sec & Low Sec, to claim it doesn't is the height of stupidity, why go to null to find fights when u can join a high sec griefer alliance that has thousands of war decs and targets in every system, half of which can't fight back? Easy kills, easy money, let's do it! No. This needs to change. I shouldn't be forced to move to null if I want to PvP. Simple as that. Are Mass Wardecs a problem? Sorta kinda. Some limit needs to be placed, maybe. But when a corp is willing to put itself under the pressure of have over 5000+ Wartargets they are not really being Risk adverse as you imply. 5000+ players of a 300corps with little to no idea on what they are capable of can really bite Mercenary Alliances in the ass sometimes. Energy Alliance, Ultima Ratio, Stratagem, Nulli, Dredd- The Purification Project, all have proven to be a headache to many Mercenaries. Also the only reason mass wardecs happen is due to the increased warcost added years ago. No longer was War cheep. People needed to ban together pool isk in order to keep the warfund going. As more people joined Marmite, Forsaken and the such, the bigger the wallet got. The more the alliance could dec. With more people in the corp Merc Alliance could make Poco holding corps and defend them when needed. And take Poco's, making it again, more money to go to war. Next off, Highsec Mercs are not griefers. They paid isk to dec you. You were idiotic enough to think you could go mission in your battleship. If a pilot can afford a battleship how are they defenseless? How can they not 'fight back'? Players who die in highsec in a Mission fit Battleships are not weak, they simply refuse to fight back, they are weak because they allow themselves to be weak. Highsec Mercs are not griefers, they simply use a mechanic in game. If that is griefing then PL taking BR is griefing because they ruined 'Hero's Game'. Next off, Wardec is not profitable without a contractor to pay for services rendered, sometimes you get lucky and find a faction fitted Rattler or a Dead Space fitted Golem but those are far and few between and more often than not in my case, usally ger repurposed to my own ships rather than sold. Quote: Lol you think it effects Null Sec, You're An Idiot. I'm afraid not, the direct proof is that Null Sec, is empty, we roam in there all the time and in low sec, the areas of the game are dead, because what's the point in risking ships in "actual pvp fights" with other pilots who are trying just as hard to kill you, when you can blow up faction fit newish player mission ships n make billions? 1. How is 'your' PVP different from mine? Why do you consider yourself so special? Because you targets shoot back? How is it my fault that some jackwagon would rather self-destruct than fight me when I catch him? He had every option to fit for PVP but he chose not to. He made the choice, took that risk, and was punished for it. 2. Claiming nullsec is empty because Highsec Wardeccers stay in highsec is ******. Highsec Wardeccers stay in Highsec because other people stay in highsec. If you want to force (Which ruins the sandbox environment) to leave highsec, take away the ability to make ISK in highsec. IE Nerfing incursion payouts 3. Not every player fits stupidly bling in highsec more often than not it's just a T2 fitted . Wardeccers fit FAR more expensive to their ships. Quote: I suggest that corporations and alliances are limited to 5 war decs available. This in effect means that large alliances cannot turn high sec into their own personal Null Sec, it means they have to go to Null Sec to get a target rich environment. It would also mean less combat in market hubs and less strain on the server Forcing players down a linear path is game breaking to a Sandbox type game. Which is what you're trying to do. You intentionally trying to break a very dedicated core of players. Quote: Each corporation and alliance can only be declared war upon, 3 times. This prevents things like i.e Goonswarm being perma decked by every large griefer alliance in the game. Lol, So if I don't want to be decs I'll just make three alt corps and have them dec my corp so I can't be decced at all. Good plan bro. Quote: For a corporation to declare war, they must have no fewer than 7 active members i.e 7 numbers. This would stop the alts of people who just like to mining corps off. Um, what? The Aggressing corp has to have 7 members in order to dec? Or the Defending corp needs at least 7 players to be dec? Either way is flawed beyond belief. his would in effect make "mercs" an actual play style as they would have to get out of hubs and look for their targets. I.e what real mercs do. These changes would force so called high sec griefer "pvp pilots" out of high sec and into low/null and would enhance that side of the game. You can see my personal killboard and know i PvP in low/null. So this is not me whining. We have a low sec HQ and if people are stupid enuff to get caught by war targets, that's there issue. I am a PvP pilot, i do "real" PvP, not high sec griefing. Bottom line is, this needs to stop I am just tired of new corps being slammed into the floor by griefer alliances and corps. It needs to stop and CCP need to do summit about it. Yeah, you are an idiot. I don't care that you 'Know how to PVP in Low and Null" I've gone into Low and blown up before, it was fun. Doesn't mean I have any right to demand **. And yeah you are totally whining the amount of times you called Mercs griefers makes that horrendously apparent. TL;DR No, you're an idiot, and no. `#DeleteTheWeak`
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2071	Posted - 2015.07.29 09:53:13 - [6] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Hello Now before you all go off at me for being a "noob" and "getting ganked" - I have never been ganked in a barge, i have not been killed in empire except when fighting war targets. I am posting this for the benefit of bringing new players into EvE. What's wrong with multiple war decs? In short, a lot, but, this has a direct effect on Null Sec & Low Sec, to claim it doesn't is the height of stupidity, why go to null to find fights when u can join a high sec griefer alliance that has thousands of war decs and targets in every system, half of which can't fight back? Easy kills, easy money, let's do it! No. This needs to change. Lol you think it effects Null Sec, You're An Idiot. I'm afraid not, the direct proof is that Null Sec, is empty, we roam in there all the time and in low sec, the areas of the game are dead, because what's the point in risking ships in "actual pvp fights" with other pilots who are trying just as hard to kill you, when you can blow up faction fit newish player mission ships n make billions? So what do u suggest? I suggest that corporations and alliances are limited to 5 war decs available. This in effect means that large alliances cannot turn high sec into there own personal Null Sec, it means they have to go to Null Sec to get a target rich environment. It would also mean less combat in market hubs and less strain on the servers. So to the point i recommend thus:@ Each corporation and alliance has a 5 war dec limit. This means they can ONLY declare 5 wars at any one time. Each corporation and alliance can only be declared war upon, 3 times. This prevents things like i.e Goonswarm being perma decked by every large griefer alliance in the game. For a corporation to declare war, they must have no fewer than 7 active members i.e 7 numbers. This would stop the alts of people who just like to **** mining corps off. This would in effect make "mercs" an actual play style as they would have to get out of hubs and look for their targets. I.e what real mercs do. These changes would force so called high sec griefer "pvp pilots" out of high sec and into low/null and would enhance that side of the game. You can see my personal killboard and know i PvP in low/null. So this is not me whining. We have a low sec HQ and if people are stupid enuff to get caught by war targets, that's there issue. I am a PvP pilot, i do "real" PvP, not high sec griefing. Bottom line is, this needs to stop I am just tired of new corps being slammed into the floor by griefer alliances and corps. It needs to stop and CCP need to do summit about it. You guys are crying because we spanked you massively yesterday using only 2 people? If is nto the system fault that your guys undock procurers in system at the same time we are finishign killing your sleipnirs and maelstroms, and they warp those procures to the same belt as the fight is going on. Learn the BASICS of the game before you complain of anything. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1423	Posted - 2015.07.29 09:53:56 - [7] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Each corporation and alliance can only be declared war upon, 3 times. This prevents things like i.e Goonswarm being perma decked by every large griefer alliance in the game. For a corporation to declare war, they must have no fewer than 7 active members i.e 7 numbers. This would stop the alts of people who just like to ** mining corps off. These parts of your idea are not good. They are prone to exploitation or just plain pointless. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why** do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13852	Posted - 2015.07.29 11:42:08 - [8] - Quote People using the freedom they are intended to have is not a problem. Nevermind that your cute little suggestion would permit groups to setup alt corps to dec them and be completely immune. This is just another pathetic, self interested idea to functionally delete PvP from highsec. Reported for redundancy with the other pathetic self interested ideas to functionally delete PvP from highsec. "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.
Anthar Thebess 1244	Posted - 2015.07.29 11:50:29 - [9] - Quote No problem in altorps declaring additional wardecs, simply limiting insta corp changing can be benefit. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
Lugh Crow-Slave 1198	Posted - 2015.07.29 11:51:57 - [10] - Quote -1 Putting a limit does not fix the multitude of problems abs limits the game play of merchandise groups Not to mention in your system I can just Dec my friends and they Dec me now I'm immune Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2588	Posted - 2015.07.29 12:04:53 - [11] - Quote If they can afford the decs then let them have as many as they want. Its a two way street. Increasing your number of targets increases the amount of people that can team up and kill you. Whos fault is it really that you are so helpless? Its not like marmite only Dec noob corps... What I would like to see changed though: - No Corp hopping/joining aggressors during Dec - A way for defenders to end the Dec early by being not awful. - allies for both defenders and aggressors EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Suneai Fredegar Hohenstaufen Corporation 24	Posted - 2015.07.29 12:40:07 - [12] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Each corporation and alliance can only be declared war upon, 3 times. This prevents things like i.e Goonswarm being perma decked by every large griefer alliance in the game. For a corporation to declare war, they must have no fewer than 7 active members i.e 7 numbers. This would stop the alts of people who just like to **** mining corps off. That there would completely break the war system in EVE to an unusable state... Corporations that don't want to be declared upon by serious people will simply get a selection of their corporation/alliance members to make alt characters, a number of corporations with them with the assigned minimum number of pilots and then declare war enough times to lock their main corporation out of further declarations. A more suitable requirement would be that the declaring corporation/alliance needs to be of a proportional size to the target they are waging war against with the allocation being spread across all declarations... perhaps with a 40% buffer or something of that sort of arrangement. So if say you have a corporation with 500 members, the limit for who could declare on you is either a single corporation/alliance with up to 700 members or a selection of different aggressors that when combined are within that pilot limit. ...though honestly, I'm fine with how it is now and would rather not shake up the war system. As for your statement of low-sec/null being empty and the high-sec PVP alliances not wanting to risk travelling out to fight... we've had members of PIRAT, Marmite, Jelly and xXPIZZAXx all come visit out little island in low-sec for fights with the wars they declared on us. Even though they have to deal with some of the local pirates at the same time, it doesn't seem to discourage anyone who's targeted us. Sure with all the wars happening at once, we get blockaded into a station every now and then. When that happens most of us simply turn to having a nice bit of banter on TS and playing on our alts while it's happening, or jump clone over to another part of space.
Maldiro Selkurk CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X 330	Posted - 2015.07.29 16:10:50 - [13] - Quote There are already ways to avoid wardecs, inconvenient but not hard. If you have a 200 man corp and marmite or some other corp or alliance dec's you it isnt a secret you know about it and if you you dont take appropriate steps to protect yourself then the problem is you, not the system. Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Xe'Cara'eos A Big Enough Lever 311	Posted - 2015.07.29 19:23:57 - [14] - Quote my problem with this is that currently there is no incentive for a player to fit for PVP when missioning generally, and as such - are stupidly easy targets for a HS gank, and that is what HS kills nearly always are - straight up ganks, doesn't matter whether you suicide or not, it's a gank if the other player is hopelessly out-classed/outgunned For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Max Deveron Deveron Shipyards and Technology 215	Posted - 2015.07.29 20:11:02 - [15] - Quote The only idea i liked seeing posted in the past year so far about making any change to war decs was posted by Tor Bushido. Make it so that its more expensive for larger groups to dec smaller groups, and less expensive for smaller groups to dec larger groups. Start with the 50 million standard fee maybe, and use increments.... a posible example could be like: Agressor has 100 members(active or inactive) decs a group 50 man or smaller and has to pay 100 million Isk instead of 50 Same agressor dec's someone that has 200(twice their number) so it only costs 50million..... just a thought. To the OP...... -1
Mag's the united 19916	Posted - 2015.07.29 20:23:07 - [16] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: I am posting this for the benefit of bringing new players into EvE. As it does no such thing, I'll say no thank you. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 1928	Posted - 2015.07.29 21:18:40 - [17] - Quote I could support some sort of disincentive to make declaring multiple wars, or wars by large entities against smaller entities, more expensive, but I don't support hard limits. -1 Relatively Notorious By Association My Many Misadventures Inaugural C&P Thunderdome Champion
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2015.07.29 22:23:10 - [18] - Quote A huge load of crap and I'm going to take it down. Valkin Mordirc wrote: I shouldn't be forced to move to null if I want to PvP. Simple as that. Are Mass Wardecs a problem? Sorta kinda. Some limit needs to be placed, maybe. But when a corp is willing to put itself under the pressure of have over 5000+ Wartargets they are not really being Risk adverse as you imply. Hisec grief deccers are the most risk averse of all players, save maybe suicide wankers. When I see a grief deccer fight anywhere further than undock "safety zone" I may reconsider this evaluation, but in 1.5 years there haven't been a single case of that. Which means they are... chickens, basically. Valkin Mordirc wrote: Also the only reason mass wardecs happen is due to the increased warcost added years ago. No longer was War cheep. People needed to ban together pool isk in order to keep the warfund going. As more people joined Marmite, Forsaken and the such, the bigger the wallet got. The more the alliance could dec. With more people in the corp Merc Alliance could make Poco holding corps and defend them when needed. And take Poco's, making it again, more money to go to war. Gooby please, I can personally, as in single-handedly, keep half the marmite wardecs funded. War is not cheap, it's basically borderline free. Valkin Mordirc wrote: Next off, Highsec Mercs are not griefers. They paid isk to dec you. You were idiotic enough to think you could go mission in your battleship. If a pilot can afford a battleship how are they defenseless? How can they not 'fight back'? Players who die in highsec in a Mission fit Battleships are not weak, they simply refuse to fight back, they are weak because they allow themselves to be weak. Highsec Mercs are not griefers, they simply use a mechanic in game. If that is griefing then PL taking BR is griefing because they ruined 'Hero's Game'. That is the biggest bs in the whole post and the most cancerous line of thought seen ever. Fundamentally, eve combat PvP is "bigger sp blob always win". It's kinda obvious that people will refuse to fight back when there is not even if they can afford to, because there isn't even a shred of chance to win. If you are even close to winning, the griefer gets 10 neutral logi on him, docks up, or burns and runs away sacrificing a neutral jammer on you. Those are options you cannot fit back against no matter what, so people don't, and they are smarter than you, idiot. Valkin Mordirc wrote: Next off, Wardec is not profitable without a contractor to pay for services rendered, sometimes you get lucky and find a faction fitted Rattler or a Dead Space fitted Golem but those are far and few between and more often than not in my case, usally ger repurposed to my own ships rather than sold. "Getting free ships isn't profitable" (c) Idiot. Valkin Mordirc wrote: 1. How is 'your' PVP different from mine? Why do you consider yourself so special? Because you targets shoot back? How is it my fault that some jackwagon would rather self-destruct than fight me when I catch him? He had every option to fit for PVP but he chose not to. He made the choice, took that risk, and was punished for it. 2. Claiming nullsec is empty because Highsec Wardeccers stay in highsec is ******. Highsec Wardeccers stay in Highsec because other people stay in highsec. If you want to force (Which ruins the sandbox environment) to leave highsec, take away the ability to make ISK in highsec. IE Nerfing incursion payouts 3. Not every player fits stupidly bling in highsec more often than not it's just a T2 fitted . Wardeccers fit FAR more expensive ** to their ships. 1. Because "jackwagon" has less SP and thus can't win no matter what he fits. Self-destruction is his only option when he's caught. He takes it, he's smart. He doesn't, he's an idiot. He can't win so he shouldn't fight. 2. "Nerf hisec" is already done. Many times, in fact. Not enough for the griefers though, having free CONCORD removal tool at their disposal they are just stupid and lazy. 3. Because they are guaranteed to win due to eve faulty combat pvp system, they can afford to superfit their non-profitable ships with their non-profitable wars income sarcasm
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2015.07.29 22:26:46 - [19] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: People using the freedom they are intended to have is not a problem. Nevermind that your cute little suggestion would permit groups to setup alt corps to dec them and be completely immune. This is just another pathetic, self interested idea to functionally delete PvP from highsec. Reported for redundancy with the other pathetic self interested ideas to functionally delete PvP from highsec. hisec has too much, too free, and too easy griefing (it's not PvP when it's griefing). When we remove griefing so it becomes actually PvP, then it will be redundant. Until then, we need hundreds more threads like this.
Alana Charen-Teng Vatlaa Corporation 637	Posted - 2015.07.29 22:58:20 - [20] - Quote Aww, Highsec too dangerous for you? The fact that you use the term "griefer alliance" to refer to highsec wardec organizations betrays your carebear bias and invalidates any opinion you have. But the tears are great.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13860	Posted - 2015.07.29 23:01:09 - [21] - Quote Orca Platypus wrote: hisec has too much, too free, and too easy griefing (it's not PvP when it's griefing). If you think that, then one wonders what you must think of literally every other area of space, since it's easier, has less cost, and is much more easily applicable everywhere else. You know what? You're just playing the wrong game. Oh, and? Absolutely nothing you're talking about is "griefing". Griefing is strictly defined by the only people whose opinion matters. CCP. Highsec PvP is not griefing, no matter what the likes of you might say. "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.
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2015.07.29 23:25:42 - [22] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Orca Platypus wrote: hisec has too much, too free, and too easy griefing (it's not PvP when it's griefing). If you think that, then one wonders what you must think of literally every other area of space, since it's easier, has less cost, and is much more easily applicable everywhere else. You know what? You're just playing the wrong game. Oh, and? Absolutely nothing you're talking about is "griefing". Griefing is strictly defined by the only people whose opinion matters. CCP. Highsec PvP is not griefing, no matter what the likes of you might say. It's griefing in everything but CCP opinion on it, and I'm going to call things by proper names. I mean, even if you don't consider it griefing, you still can't call that pvp, because it has nothing pvp-ey about it.
Galphii Oberon Incorporated Get Off My Lawn 316	Posted - 2015.07.29 23:31:49 - [23] - Quote I can certainly attest to the quietness of nullsec. The main problem there seems to be a lack of conflict drivers - newsov encourages people to squat in their space, where they have no need to go anywhere else to meet their needs. Fights rarely happen for reasons other than boredom, so I can understand why people looking for spaceship explosions flock to highsec. It's a target rich environment. One of the larger problems in eve is the disparity between pve fit and pvp fit ships. You can't run pve content in pvp ships, so when pvp comes to you (sandbox, ladies and gents), you're gonna lose. Fixing this would go a long way to remedying pvp in general, but yeah, it's a big job so don't hold your breath. Still, I'd prefer that than applying arbitrary rules restrictions on wardecs. Oh, and skipping corps should be addressed too, it's far too easy to avoid a war. "Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13861	Posted - 2015.07.29 23:50:53 - [24] - Quote Orca Platypus wrote: It's griefing in everything but CCP opinion on it, and I'm going to call things by proper names. It's not the proper name. Unless you just stop playing EVE Online anyway, in which case it might be applicable. I would suggest Star Trek Online, it's much more suited to cowards and the weak minded. Quote: I mean, even if you don't consider it griefing, you still can't call that pvp, because it has nothing pvp-ey about it. Unless CCP has finally taken my suggestion and disqualified miners and haulers from counting as real players, then it is PvP by definition. No matter how you try to inject e-honor or other nonsense into it, it is still player versus player content. "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.
Valkin Mordirc 1312	Posted - 2015.07.30 00:27:37 - [25] - Quote WOO! =D I haven't had someone respond to like this in ages. XD Quote: Hisec grief deccers are the most risk averse of all players, save maybe suicide wankers. When I see a grief deccer fight anywhere further than undock "safety zone" I may reconsider this evaluation, but in 1.5 years there haven't been a single case of that. Which means they are... chickens, basically. Lol, Where in Highsec are you going to see a fight happen? Three places, The Undock, A Gate, Or a mission pocket are going to be the top three spots. So yeah of ***** course you see them on the undock, it a popular place to be. All so, do you have some ill feelings going on here? Some angry feelings towards Mercs and Gankers? I feel some hostilities. Quote: Gooby please, I can personally, as in single-handedly, keep half the marmite wardecs funded. War is not cheap, it's basically borderline free. Oh the, I can totally do this so obviously other people can to, argument. You probably could fund half of the wars, the cheap 50mil ones. But about about the 500mil ones Marmite keeps paying for? Everyweek? Brave, Ivy, Pandemic H, all equals out to 1.5bil a week. Not counting the other 120+ wars going on right now as well. XD Quote: That is the biggest bs in the whole post and the most cancerous line of thought seen ever. Fundamentally, eve combat PvP is "bigger sp blob always win". It's kinda obvious that people will refuse to fight back when there is not even if they can afford to, because there isn't even a shred of chance to win. If you are even close to winning, the griefer gets 10 neutral logi on him, docks up, or burns and runs away sacrificing a neutral jammer on you. Those are options you cannot fit back against no matter what, so people don't, and they are smarter than you, idiot. EvE Combat is not, More SP equals better. If you believe that it's no wonder you're so angry and throwing a tantrum. Also ten neut logi + Combat toon+ ECM Jammer? Are insane? XD Who did you fight? Who can multibox that many toons without broadcasts? Quote:** 1. Because "jackwagon" has less SP and thus can't win no matter what he fits. Self-destruction is his only option when he's caught. He takes it, he's smart. He doesn't, he's an idiot. He can't win so he shouldn't fight. 2. "Nerf hisec" is already done. Many times, in fact. Not enough for the griefers though, having free CONCORD removal tool at their disposal they are just stupid and lazy. 3. Because they are guaranteed to win due to eve faulty combat pvp system, they can afford to superfit their non-profitable ships with their non-profitable wars income sarcasm Anybody with 20mil ish SP invested in combat is perfectly capable of killing me. Hell a spec out toon with 12mil sp can kill me under the right circumstances. I've only been playing since 2013 brostalin and Im not afraid of a 2003 player, you on the other seem to think, "More SP=Better". Which is absolutely ********, and limits your own fun in the game. Like Really. SP doesn't mean as much when you get past the 20mil mark. 2. How does that pertain to what I said? I was talking about forcing players down a linear path XD 3. Again you miss my point somehow completely and ramble off like a meth addicted cocaine fueled sweat shop worker. You seem mad bro. `#DeleteTheWeak`
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2015.07.30 01:29:20 - [26] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: It's not the proper name. Cherry picking a target which has no means to fight back and sitting docked and scared every time you are at 1% risk of losing a support frig in a fight is griefing or bullying, whichever term you prefer. It's the proper name. Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Unless you just stop playing EVE Online anyway, in which case it might be applicable. I would suggest Star Trek Online, it's much more suited to cowards and the weak minded. So it's a game for leet hisec pvp chickens, right? Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Unless CCP has finally taken my suggestion and disqualified miners and haulers from counting as real players, then it is PvP by definition. No matter how you try to inject e-honor or other nonsense into it, it is still player versus player content. CCP in fact did. They have taken away all means to fight from miners and haulers so they cannot qualify as a valid pvp target, since it doesn't even matter if a mining boat or hauler piloted or not in combat situation - they would die in an equal time regardless of having that pod inside or not. So this is player vs barge content, since the second player is irrelevant - a pure pve with a spectator. Your pvp aversion would be totally funny if CCP weren't so wrong about it.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13863	Posted - 2015.07.30 01:33:08 - [27] - Quote Orca Platypus wrote: Cherry picking a target which has no means to fight back and sitting docked and scared every time you are at 1% risk of losing a support frig in a fight is griefing or bullying, whichever term you prefer. It's the proper name. It's neither, you're just trying to apply a negative label to justify removing gameplay that is 100% within the rules, just because you don't like it. Too bad. Quote: CCP in fact did. They have taken away all means to fight from miners and haulers They did not take anything away. Those non combat ships do not have means to fight, which is the only thing that remotely comes close to justifying the fact that they are effort free, risk free ways to generate assets into the game world. Just because someone makes the choice to be defenseless by flying those ships should not make them immune to the actions of others. "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.
Mag's the united 19919	Posted - 2015.07.30 01:38:38 - [28] - Quote Ahh the old PvP limited definition argument. I think we're close to getting a house call in troll bingo. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2015.07.30 01:45:25 - [29] - Quote Valkin Mordirc wrote: Lol, Where in Highsec are you going to see a fight happen? Three places, The Undock, A Gate, Or a mission pocket are going to be the top three spots. So yeah of ***** course you see them on the undock, it a popular place to be. All so, do you have some ill feelings going on here? Some angry feelings towards Mercs and Gankers? I feel some hostilities. You should stop calling griefers by other names. It's not undock. It's "safety zone" - they only fight from a place they can instantly dock on sight of anything actually armed at. Undock is a big zone, and the griefers are never more than 1km away from the station - too scared. Valkin Mordirc wrote: Oh the, I can totally do this so obviously other people can to, argument. You probably could fund half of the wars, the cheap 50mil ones. But about about the 500mil ones Marmite keeps paying for? Everyweek? Brave, Ivy, Pandemic H, all equals out to 1.5bil a week. Not counting the other 120+ wars going on right now as well. XD 1.5 bil is my income from 5 hours of null pve. If you consider 1.5 bil a week big money, man, you're a spacepoor vermin. Get gud. Valkin Mordirc wrote: EvE Combat is not, More SP equals better. If you believe that it's no wonder you're so angry and throwing a tantrum. Also ten neut logi + Combat toon+ ECM Jammer? Are insane? XD Who did you fight? Who can multibox that many toons without broadcasts? Eve combat is "more SP always win", that's a proven fact - facts do not care if you believe in them or not. That fight wasn't mine, but an alliance mate who met Devils Warrior Alliance - the biggest hisec chickens of all. They refused to fight us 5v3 and only undocked when there was just 1 guy left - typical chickens. They brought a logi, ecm, and combat ships down on one guy and that's basically what other griefer chicken alliances do all the time anyway. Valkin Mordirc wrote: Anybody with 20mil ish SP invested in combat is perfectly capable of killing me. Hell a spec out toon with 12mil sp can kill me under the right circumstances. I've only been playing since 2013 brostalin and Im not afraid of a 2003 player, you on the other seem to think, "More SP=Better". Which is absolutely ****, and limits your own fun in the game. Unless you're 15 million SP yourself, 20mil SP toon cannot kill you. Unless you are 15 million SP and most of your skill are indy, 12 million SP toon cannot kill you. Don't worry, it took me a pair of years to realize the truth of the formula, and you will see it too. Valkin Mordirc wrote:** Like Really. SP doesn't mean as much when you get past the 20mil mark. 2. How does that pertain to what I said? I was talking about forcing players down a linear path XD 3. Again you miss my point somehow completely and ramble off like a meth addicted cocaine fueled sweat shop worker. You seem mad bro. SP stops meaning much when you are over 70mil mark. 20 mil is not even starter line, it's about 50mil when you get to be effective, and 70mil is where you are covered in everything relevant. 2. No, you were crying "nerf hisec" like a gewn would. 3. No, it's you who missed my point completely and don't even get the answer. You can superfit a ship you're not going to risk however you like, because "leet hisec pvp" against newbies is risk-free for a high SP char.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13866	Posted - 2015.07.30 01:47:20 - [30] - Quote Orca Platypus wrote: You should stop calling griefers by other names. Nothing you have described is griefing, Basil, it is all legal, intended gameplay. "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.
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2015.07.30 01:51:07 - [31] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: It's neither, you're just trying to apply a negative label to justify removing gameplay that is 100% within the rules, just because you don't like it. Too bad. It's both and it's one of the things that kills eve. I never said it is against the rules, I only said it needs to be tweaked to not be free and riskless. Too bad indeed. Kaarous Aldurald wrote: They did not take anything away. Those non combat ships do not have means to fight, which is the only thing that remotely comes close to justifying the fact that they are effort free, risk free ways to generate assets into the game world. Try building T2 item. At least one. When you quit after you fail, we will talk about "effort free". And risk free? There is market where you lose the price war, there are griefers which are risk free and effort free way of getting anything they want by ganking, etc. It's not even remotely risk free. It's far more risky than doing leet hisec player vs barge. Stop talking about things that take more than 40 IQ you have, you don't even understand them. Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Just because someone makes the choice to be defenseless by flying those ships should not make them immune to the actions of others. It's griefers who are immune to actions of others and that needs to change.
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2015.07.30 01:52:00 - [32] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Orca Platypus wrote: You should stop calling griefers by other names. Nothing you have described is griefing, Basil, it is all legal, intended gameplay. Griefing is legal, intended, and it doesn't stop being griefing just because it's allowed, and it only needs tweaking. Who's Basil?
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13867	Posted - 2015.07.30 01:58:34 - [33] - Quote Orca Platypus wrote: It's both and it's one of the things that kills eve. It's neither, and it's one of the few things in highsec that drives positive player retention. Quote: I never said it is against the rules, I only said it needs to be tweaked to not be free and riskless. It is not free, or riskless. A mechanic is not broken just because you are bad at the game. Quote: Try building T2 item. At least one. When you quit after you fail, we will talk about "effort free". I make a comfortable living selling T2 torps in Dodixie, actually. Pos fuel too. Quote: It's griefers who are immune to actions of others and that needs to change. We aren't immune to a damned thing, you're just too godawful at this game to be effectual at anything. Apparently, since you're crying about manufacturing, the easiest, most risk free thing in the game, too. "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.
Valkin Mordirc 1312	Posted - 2015.07.30 02:05:43 - [34] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Orca Platypus wrote: You should stop calling griefers by other names. Nothing you have described is griefing, Basil, it is all legal, intended gameplay. AH HA. I was wondering why he was so frustrating annoying. `#DeleteTheWeak`
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13868	Posted - 2015.07.30 02:08:10 - [35] - Quote Valkin Mordirc wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Orca Platypus wrote: You should stop calling griefers by other names. Nothing you have described is griefing, Basil, it is all legal, intended gameplay. AH HA. I was wondering why he was so frustratingly annoying. Yep, he strayed into Basil's talking points sometime yesterday, and that's when I figured it out. "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.
Valkin Mordirc 1314	Posted - 2015.07.30 02:10:12 - [36] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Valkin Mordirc wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Orca Platypus wrote: You should stop calling griefers by other names. Nothing you have described is griefing, Basil, it is all legal, intended gameplay. AH HA. I was wondering why he was so frustratingly annoying. Yep, he strayed into Basil's talking points sometime yesterday, and that's when I figured it out. As soon as you mentioned it. The penny dropped. `#DeleteTheWeak`
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2590	Posted - 2015.07.30 03:01:49 - [37] - Quote Orca, your ignorance is so over grown and your butthurt so deafening that every thread you touch loses all perspective and becomes about debunking your baseless 'facts'. Why post at all if you can never post in a manner that will be taken seriously and best achievement is to stifle discussion? EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Max Deveron Deveron Shipyards and Technology 216	Posted - 2015.07.30 03:14:26 - [38] - Quote Wow, just wow...... Karrous either you came in here to derail the thread or you got baited and trapped into the proverbial 5 yr old argument of "thats what youare but what am i" theme. but please continue guys cause of at this moment none of you are on topic anymore
Sitting Bull Lakota The Noble House of Borgia 3	Posted - 2015.07.30 04:05:19 - [39] - Quote Why are you guys arguing definitions of PvP and "Griefing" with a forum alt? Right now I can buy a 2 week wardec against any +2k member corp/alliance for $20 USD. There aren't many of those ingame, and I'm a bit too cheap for that anyway. Right now I can buy a 20 week wardec against any corp under 51 members (most of them) for $20 USD. The general lack of disruption and surplus of safety in high sec have allowed denizens of the high sec pve community to inflate the price of plex to the point that I am only too pleased to buy one whenever I feel like I need iskies. I blow $20 bucks in a week without thinking about it. It takes me a lot longer to blow through 1bil isk in EvE. You wanted it safe so you could make more isk in peace. Well, now I can bring the average corp's operations in high sec to a grinding halt for 5 months all for the price of a 14" pepperoni pizza and breadsticks. I don't know if that is good or bad, but it sure is easy. We should give maps to the people who don't have maps, that way the people who are in the iraq who don't have maps won't be confused. -My cousin's suggestion (he doesn't eve, but he does enjoy pizza)
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3323	Posted - 2015.07.30 07:56:21 - [40] - Quote The replies are about what i expected. Griefer alliances picking holes for no reason. Oh and the dude from TPOH - Im in brussels with work for a week, if id have been online n fcing that fleet i'd have owned ur ass so quick ud be wondering what had happend. get a clue
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13876	Posted - 2015.07.30 08:05:51 - [41] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: The replies are about what i expected. Griefer alliances picking holes for no reason. There's plenty of reason. Your ideas are not only terrible(seriously, lay off the drugs), they go against the core values of EVE Online. "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.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1463	Posted - 2015.07.30 09:13:16 - [42] - Quote Sitting Bull Lakota wrote: ... all for the price of a 14" pepperoni pizza and breadsticks. ... Dammit you just made me hungry On the More SP= Better argument that's utter rubbish, I have ~35 mil SP no and a 12mil combat focused pilot would most likely kill me in BC or BS combat, in frigate or destroyer combat we'd be evenly matched as we would both have all tech II fit ships, or I could equally match them in two of the tech III destroyers. And there is the point, we would be evenly matched because we both have maxed out skills for those hulls even though I have roughly 3x more SP. If you take a fleet of maxed out frigate pilots into the shattered WH's you can only meet other pilots in the same class frigate with probably the same maxed out skills no matter what the SP disparity of the pilots overall. As for wardecs I agree they need changing but entirely disagree with the OP's proposals to do so. The changes need to be tied to the new structures and worked around those.
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3324	Posted - 2015.07.30 09:51:09 - [43] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Iam The Flash wrote: The replies are about what i expected. Griefer alliances picking holes for no reason. There's plenty of reason. Your ideas are not only terrible(seriously, lay off the drugs), they go against the core values of EVE Online. Yeh u need to grow up, i haven't done drugs since college n that was 18 years ago, i don't drink either, so get a clue code member against war dec changes, what a surprise.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13876	Posted - 2015.07.30 09:54:17 - [44] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Yeh u need to grow up, i haven't done drugs since college n that was 18 years ago, i don't drink either, so get a clue You're high right now, aren't you? It's okay to admit it, admitting that you have a problem is the first step to getting help. Quote: code member against war dec changes, what a surprise. I opposed things like this long before I was in CODE, and if that alliance folds tomorrow I will continue to oppose it. Because they are bad for the game, and are only proposed out of pure, disgusting selfishness. "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.
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3324	Posted - 2015.07.30 10:25:42 - [45] - Quote Oh so u think that new players should be driven out of the game non stop by idiots like you? I.e griefer alliances doing everything they can to gank n kill people non stop? Excellent job mate, well done, why don't ccp just turn all high sec in null then let's do that you're a joke
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2079	Posted - 2015.07.30 10:29:00 - [46] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: The replies are about what i expected. Griefer alliances picking holes for no reason. Oh and the dude from TPOH - Im in brussels with work for a week, if id have been online n fcing that fleet i'd have owned ur ass so quick ud be wondering what had happend. get a clue ahuahauah a omg lol whuwhuwhuwhw that is so funny that is borderline mind damaging. You probably just managed to get a infinite war manteinance set to your corp now. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2079	Posted - 2015.07.30 10:30:37 - [47] - Quote Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Sitting Bull Lakota wrote: ... all for the price of a 14" pepperoni pizza and breadsticks. ... Dammit you just made me hungry On the More SP= Better argument that's utter rubbish, I have ~35 mil SP no and a 12mil combat focused pilot would most likely kill me in BC or BS combat, in frigate or destroyer combat we'd be evenly matched as we would both have all tech II fit ships, or I could equally match them in two of the tech III destroyers. And there is the point, we would be evenly matched because we both have maxed out skills for those hulls even though I have roughly 3x more SP. If you take a fleet of maxed out frigate pilots into the shattered WH's you can only meet other pilots in the same class frigate with probably the same maxed out skills no matter what the SP disparity of the pilots overall. As for wardecs I agree they need changing but entirely disagree with the OP's proposals to do so. The changes need to be tied to the new structures and worked around those. We have examples well within our ranks. I have more than 150 M sp, but i am not even a quarter as effective or as good as some ofmy corp members with 30M sp. But I am still far far better than anything the corp of the OP has deployed yet :) "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13877	Posted - 2015.07.30 10:37:41 - [48] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Oh so u think that new players should be driven out of the game non stop by idiots like you? I think that CCP themselves has conclusively shown that killing new players is one of the best things you can do to drive positive player retention. And I also think that anyone who quits this game because they are allowed to lose is no big loss. Quote: I.e griefer alliances doing everything they can to gank n kill people non stop? Killing other players is not "griefing", period. The rules permit it, and it's intended gameplay. Deal with it. "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.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2080	Posted - 2015.07.30 10:42:23 - [49] - Quote And lets be lear. THE OP is complainign becaue his corp lost navy vexors, maelstroms and Sleipnirs . If you are flying a sleipnir you are NOT a noob SP wise. I personally avoid killing clearly very new characters, and when it is a couple months old I do not forget to send him an eve mail explaining what he did wrong. How much good advice the veterans on the OP corp gave to his newer members? Clearly not much.. because undocking a mining barge and warping it to the middle of a fight would not happen otherwise. I am 100% sure than I have tought a lot mroe about eve to new players than all these whiny corp leaders that jsut come to the forums saying his corp should not be the target of wardecs. THEY are the cancer of this game, not us. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2080	Posted - 2015.07.30 10:46:00 - [50] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Oh so u think that new players should be driven out of the game non stop by idiots like you? I.e griefer alliances doing everything they can to gank n kill people non stop? Excellent job mate, well done, why don't ccp just turn all high sec in null then let's do that you're a joke It is no where like null. Were were paid and had to pay money to e able to war dec you. We have to find you, and local is warning 100% of time when we get into system. Your members on other hand are completely unable to notice flashy red signs in local and warp of. Even worse they are compeltely unable to talk within corp to realize that a fight is goign on and they warp pve ships into the same place. Your corp shown an huge amount of incompetence. Face it... What drive people away from the game is being lead by a horrible CEO and corp members that cannot even car to warn their mates that they should not do certain things. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2080	Posted - 2015.07.30 10:47:23 - [51] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Iam The Flash wrote: The replies are about what i expected. Griefer alliances picking holes for no reason. There's plenty of reason. Your ideas are not only terrible(seriously, lay off the drugs), they go against the core values of EVE Online. Yeh u need to grow up, i haven't done drugs since college n that was 18 years ago, i don't drink either, so get a clue code member against war dec changes, what a surprise. Again an amazing show of ignorance of yours. Code does not wardec. Changes to wardec would not impact them at all. You cannot expect to be taken seriously when you manage to show complete lack of knowledge of the game. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Suneai Fredegar Hohenstaufen Corporation 26	Posted - 2015.07.30 10:55:42 - [52] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: The replies are about what i expected. Griefer alliances picking holes for no reason. Really griefer alliance? I'm in a corporation full of less than a month old pilots who've never experienced EVE... hell, a lot of them haven't even looked at it before. We're currently dealing with 12 war declarations right now and the new players seem to be handling the situation and enjoying the game just fine. Quite simply, everyone is picking holes because the restrictions you propose would completely ruin the war system and make it possible and stupidly easy for too many corporations/alliances to become immune to real declarations.
Ju0ZaS Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 90	Posted - 2015.07.30 11:16:59 - [53] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: This would in effect make "mercs" an actual play style as they would have to get out of hubs and look for their targets. I.e what real mercs do. Idk, we've been doing that all the time regardless of having 50 decs some times. And unlike Marmite and such we did not only gank you, we took fights against you, and came to your lowsec. And the players don't look all new. Maybe they need a little coaching, but they seemed like they had an idea of what they were doing when they came in a gang for us. I'm not gonna argue about the war deccing mechanics in eve. In fact there are some aspects I don't like about them either. But instead of bitching you should try to figure out how to adapt. Maybe you should think of this as practice for your noobs considering you can't find **** in null. Frankly, if you were living in an active null area you'd probably be seeing the same results as in highsec right now. Are you going to fight me or do you expect to bore me to death with your forum pvp?
Karra Masamune Intelligence Operation NetCorp Khaos Legion 5	Posted - 2015.07.30 12:40:45 - [54] - Quote I do agree war decs need to change but, capping number of decs is like saying lets cap number of sov systems alliance can hold or amount of POS they can use for moon mining, etc etc... Wars are easy to avoid, you leave corporation / create new one, move members (sure you lose ability to place POS for a week). Dec cost is 50 mill (up to 500 mill), creating new corporation is 1.7 mill, it is between 2941.18%-29411.76% more expensive to declare war then to avoid it, sure it's annoying to move people especially for larger corporations but I did see up to 100 people or so swap corporation in a day. On other hand creating alliance is 1 bill (on top of 40 days of useless skills), where you don't get any benefits except that you are pulled in war together and delayed alliance chat (usually you can't see how many people are online). You don't have alliance bookmarks, access to alliance POS (except hiding in shields), or alliance hangar, but you do get 2 mill tax per month per corporation in alliance. Still cost of creating one is 62507.81% higher then creating new corporation, where Dec cost is still between 50 and 500 mill. 1st. To fix some parts of it would be to bump cost of creating new corporation to lets say 250 mill (new people will mostly join existing corporation, where they can learn about eve, instead of creating their own). On top of that I would add tax that is paid by corporation for each member that joins (one time) lets say 5-10 mill so that people are more inclined to protect it, hide in wh space, fight, hire mercs or even pay surrender. 2nd. With changes to cost of creating corporation and joining, wars could be more expensive, but still less then cost of creating new corporation, lets say decs would be between 125-500 mill (50% cost of new corporation + additional cost for every subscribed member over 51 etc..) . 3rd. There should be more of a benefit of owning alliance in high sec, for example alliance office hangar (with better way of limiting who can take what and logs of who put what in and took what out etc.), shared POS access for whole alliance, maybe even things like alliance insurance that is slightly cheaper, etc. 4th. Regarding surrender, if accepted it should make alliance/corporations unable to declare war against that specific alliance/corporation that did surrender for at least 1 month if not 3 months. 5th. Issue with NPC corporations and this is a bit more complicated to fix, mostly incursion runners and some missions runners lose isk on tax (LP not included), where traders, site runners, miners, explorers aren't affected by it as they hunt for loot and not bounties. Even if NPC tax is increased only few type of players would be affected by it. So one of the possible fixes maybe a bit extreme for it would be limitation to market, trade between players and contracts to lets say only rookie systems. That way people would be forced to be in corporation, they would have reason to fight for it, to hire mercs, to negotiate deals, hide in wh, join null alliance, etc... I'm sure there still would be a way to work around all this but at least it would be much more annoying then it is. This kind of change would probably alienate some people from game, but at same time it would be more of a sandbox game as NPC corporations would be only there for standings, missions and to protect newbys. Obviously this idea needs more work but it's much better then stuff like "Lets start capping stuff I don't like that aren't even related to what I do, because I can't find where to PVP in null." and maybe stop blue balling everyone around you. If anything bunch of high sec people did move to null because of high sec wars as they feel safer in null...
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2590	Posted - 2015.07.30 13:10:34 - [55] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Your corp shown an huge amount of incompetence. Face it... What drive people away from the game is being lead by a horrible CEO and corp members that cannot even car to warn their mates that they should not do certain things. ^^^^ Corp leadership is more influential on NPE than wardecs and ganking. New players can enjoy a war Dec, Even On the losing side, when lead by CEOs who are not awful. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Ju0ZaS Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 90	Posted - 2015.07.30 13:12:50 - [56] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: The replies are about what i expected. Griefer alliances picking holes for no reason. Oh and the dude from TPOH - Im in brussels with work for a week, if id have been online n fcing that fleet i'd have owned ur ass so quick ud be wondering what had happend. get a clue Just be carefull not to drop the soap. Are you going to fight me or do you expect to bore me to death with your forum pvp?
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2590	Posted - 2015.07.30 13:23:04 - [57] - Quote Karra Masamune wrote: 1st. To fix some parts of it would be to bump cost of creating new corporation to lets say 250 mill (new people will mostly join existing corporation, where they can learn about eve, instead of creating their own). On top of that I would add tax that is paid by corporation for each member that joins (one time) lets say 5-10 mill so that people are more inclined to protect it, hide in wh space, fight, hire mercs or even pay surrender. Social Corp plug Start one for free! EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3324	Posted - 2015.07.30 13:54:05 - [58] - Quote Ju0ZaS wrote: Iam The Flash wrote: The replies are about what i expected. Griefer alliances picking holes for no reason. Oh and the dude from TPOH - Im in brussels with work for a week, if id have been online n fcing that fleet i'd have owned ur ass so quick ud be wondering what had happend. get a clue Just be carefull not to drop the soap. Rest assured that if i wasn't in Brussels with work, u'd have lost ur silly sansha ship in seconds, there was no qualified fc online, u got lucky, end of story Get a clue griefer
Ju0ZaS Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 90	Posted - 2015.07.30 14:33:22 - [59] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Ju0ZaS wrote: Iam The Flash wrote: The replies are about what i expected. Griefer alliances picking holes for no reason. Oh and the dude from TPOH - Im in brussels with work for a week, if id have been online n fcing that fleet i'd have owned ur ass so quick ud be wondering what had happend. get a clue Just be carefull not to drop the soap. Rest assured that if i wasn't in Brussels with work, u'd have lost ur silly sansha ship in seconds, there was no qualified fc online, u got lucky, end of story Get a clue griefer You're so cute... Are you going to fight me or do you expect to bore me to death with your forum pvp?
Alexander McKeon Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion 124	Posted - 2015.07.30 14:33:31 - [60] - Quote Member of a hardcore carebear alliance checking in with a simple question: what was the last time any of the dec corps stood and fought against a 20-30 man fleet, as opposed to docking up in order to maintain KB efficiency stats? Regarding the topic: let's face it, 50m is nothing more than random pocket change on a corporation level, and a competent individual could finance a dozen wars per week without working too hard at it. Paying 50m to effectively shut down a corp full of newbies who are just learning the game is not good for EVE's longevity, and yet happens all the time. Scenario A) Wardec corp attacks casual hisec corp who are bad at eve, they loose stuff and are encouraged to not play for a week and may eventually quit the game before they learn it well enough to stick with it. This is not good for new player retention, which we as a community desperately need. As it stands, wardec mechanics are working against this goal and should be revised (though not eliminated). Scenario B) Wardec corp engages a similar sized entity who do stuff in hisec and do weekend pvp roams in low. The defender gets their ships over to hisec and engages the wardeccers who stand and fight even if victory isn't certain. Good fun is had by everyone; this is the Unicorn Scenario. Scenario C) Wardec corp engages a large pvp-capable entity which dispatches small fleets to patrol active areas. Wardec corp docks up in order to preserve their KB statistics, no pvp occurs, and for a very modest isk cost and no actual fighting you've forced a much larger group to stop ordinary operations in lieu of suffering losses they're smart enough to avoid, costing them many times the wardec fee. This sort of asymmetrical risk v. reward is poor game design and keeping control over the war entirely in the aggressor's hands doesn't help either. I shouldn't have a "pay isk to prevent [300 man hisec corp] from doing normal hisec stuff" button. Looking at the killboards of several major wardec corps, it's quite clear that the risk incurred through the act of a declaration against most targets is miniscule relative to how much they kill. I for one am a fan of a slightly more balanced equation. What I'd like to see; when a corporation declares war, a greatly increased wardec fee is put into escrow and their HQ system (which must be in hisec) spawns command nodes which can be fought over in a manner similar to nullsec ones. If the defenders succeed in node capture events, the dec ends immediately and they get a period of immunity in addition to the entire dec fee for their troubles. Should the war end by the attackers not renewing it, they get 90% of the isk put into escrow back. Against defenders unable or unwilling to fight, this would function exactly like the current system. It would however provide an incentive not to declare war against entities which you are completely unable to contest in an open fight, and possibly create additional conflict spots at the command nodes. Punishing attackers who have neither the ability nor intention to actually fight against organized resistance would eliminate much of the poor game design currently present, and might even lead to interesting scenarios where a bunch of brave newbies band together against the 'evil' corps stopping them from mining and missioning, learning some pvp in the process and increasing how attached they are to EVE. I feel that such a system would eliminate the feeling of helplessness and lack of control many hisec corps cite as reasons for disliking wardec mechanics.
Juan Mileghere Incident Command Spooky Scary Skeletons. 34	Posted - 2015.07.30 16:47:09 - [61] - Quote I've three things to say, Too many solutions with people who think their Idea is perfect and too little agreement on what needs done and fixed and then we have a nice recipe, 1 flamewar Someone ought to set folks down in a room, yes an actual room where you see people and figure this out, at least then either this would get solved or we could bring in Jerry Springer and well... you know... Look, Decs are a high-sec issue for a reason, and I have some feeling that has to do more with the high population density of high-sec more than anything else, fix that and lets see how it goes from there, then again the thing with low, null and WH is that people do not want to interact with the community, they want to play a game and they act like it's a single player game, get people to interact and you will get more content, or at least more better content. Blobbing Explained
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3324	Posted - 2015.07.30 17:06:06 - [62] - Quote The population of high sec is high because it's a newbie friendly zone, not safe, but newbie friendly There is also a MASSIVE griefer presence in high sec Marmite Persuit Of Happiness Break-A-Wish Bad Neighbours Zero Compliance Guardians Of The Galaxy Aborted F There is literally thousands of griefers in high sec whose sole intention is to kill as many new players as possible to get killboard results. Now with high sec as it is, null sec dead EXCEPT for high desnity station systems and lets face it, low sec is dead as hell except for a few FW systems. No, this war dec mechanic needs to stop.
Juan Mileghere Incident Command Spooky Scary Skeletons. 34	Posted - 2015.07.30 17:12:16 - [63] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: The population of high sec is high because it's a newbie friendly zone, not safe, but newbie friendly There is also a MASSIVE griefer presence in high sec Marmite Persuit Of Happiness Break-A-Wish Bad Neighbours Zero Compliance Guardians Of The Galaxy Aborted F There is literally thousands of griefers in high sec whose sole intention is to kill as many new players as possible to get killboard results. Now with high sec as it is, null sec dead EXCEPT for high desnity station systems and lets face it, low sec is dead as hell except for a few FW systems. No, this war dec mechanic needs to stop. So it's just new guys and griefers? I call BS big time High-sec Missioners, Incursioners, Traders, Miners, Industrialists Look, gankers and deccers are in HS for those people or for 0.0/Low-sec people who don't use alts for logistics Blobbing Explained
Tabyll Altol Breaking.Bad Circle-Of-Two 98	Posted - 2015.07.30 21:11:04 - [64] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Hello Now before you all go off at me for being a "noob" and "getting ganked" - I have never been ganked in a barge, i have not been killed in empire except when fighting war targets. I am posting this for the benefit of bringing new players into EvE. What's wrong with multiple war decs? In short, a lot, but, this has a direct effect on Null Sec & Low Sec, to claim it doesn't is the height of stupidity, why go to null to find fights when u can join a high sec griefer alliance that has thousands of war decs and targets in every system, half of which can't fight back? Easy kills, easy money, let's do it! No. This needs to change. Lol you think it effects Null Sec, You're An Idiot. I'm afraid not, the direct proof is that Null Sec, is empty, we roam in there all the time and in low sec, the areas of the game are dead, because what's the point in risking ships in "actual pvp fights" with other pilots who are trying just as hard to kill you, when you can blow up faction fit newish player mission ships n make billions? So what do u suggest? I suggest that corporations and alliances are limited to 5 war decs available. This in effect means that large alliances cannot turn high sec into there own personal Null Sec, it means they have to go to Null Sec to get a target rich environment. It would also mean less combat in market hubs and less strain on the servers. So to the point i recommend thus:@ Each corporation and alliance has a 5 war dec limit. This means they can ONLY declare 5 wars at any one time. Each corporation and alliance can only be declared war upon, 3 times. This prevents things like i.e Goonswarm being perma decked by every large griefer alliance in the game. For a corporation to declare war, they must have no fewer than 7 active members i.e 7 numbers. This would stop the alts of people who just like to **** mining corps off. This would in effect make "mercs" an actual play style as they would have to get out of hubs and look for their targets. I.e what real mercs do. These changes would force so called high sec griefer "pvp pilots" out of high sec and into low/null and would enhance that side of the game. You can see my personal killboard and know i PvP in low/null. So this is not me whining. We have a low sec HQ and if people are stupid enuff to get caught by war targets, that's there issue. I am a PvP pilot, i do "real" PvP, not high sec griefing. Bottom line is, this needs to stop I am just tired of new corps being slammed into the floor by griefer alliances and corps. It needs to stop and CCP need to do summit about it. No. Highsec is safe enough the only way to figh legal is wardecs if you take away one source of destruction. And this game is based on destruction. -1
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2590	Posted - 2015.07.30 21:27:26 - [65] - Quote Juan Mileghere wrote: High-sec Missioners, Incursioners, Traders, Miners, Industrialists Look, gankers and deccers are in HS for those people or for 0.0/Low-sec people who don't use alts for logistics Many war deccers ARE high sec missioners, incursioners, traders, miners and industrialists. True its far fewer since decs were nerfed and made less accessible, but you still get corps who part time PvP with wardecs. As for decs being made more expensive: Hell no. This only makes it even less accessible to smaller poor corps whilst the big rich corps are unaffected. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Arthur Aihaken Perkone Caldari State 4527	Posted - 2015.07.30 21:35:11 - [66] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: I am just tired of new corps being slammed into the floor by griefer alliances and corps. It needs to stop and CCP need to do summit about it. It's not a coincidence that many corporations are being shuttered while players migrate to NPC corps en masse... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2591	Posted - 2015.07.30 22:36:32 - [67] - Quote Wardecs have been around forever and were last changed in 2012. Whatever you have that suggests any significant shift of players from player corps to npc corps can be atrributed to wardecs id like to see. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13885	Posted - 2015.07.30 22:51:43 - [68] - Quote Alexander McKeon wrote: I feel that such a system would eliminate the feeling of helplessness and lack of control many hisec corps cite as reasons for disliking wardec mechanics. They're not helpless, they're just stupid. Was Brave "helpless" against you? No, they were just led badly and told to do the wrong things. The problem is the carebear corps that exist at all, with toxic leadership that perpetuates failure. Not a damned thing needs to be changed about a mechanic just because some people are bad at the game. That'd be a real Sort Dragon move. "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.
Mag's the united 19926	Posted - 2015.07.30 22:57:10 - [69] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: The population of high sec is high because it's a newbie friendly zone, not safe, but newbie friendly There is also a MASSIVE griefer presence in high sec Marmite Persuit Of Happiness Break-A-Wish Bad Neighbours Zero Compliance Guardians Of The Galaxy Aborted F There is literally thousands of griefers in high sec whose sole intention is to kill as many new players as possible to get killboard results. Now with high sec as it is, null sec dead EXCEPT for high desnity station systems and lets face it, low sec is dead as hell except for a few FW systems. No, this war dec mechanic needs to stop. I agree. I play chess and I'm appalled by just how many griefing murderers there are playing that game. I can also take large leap of logic and say it's the reason many games nights in houses have not taken place for so long. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Valkin Mordirc 1318	Posted - 2015.07.31 04:55:11 - [70] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: The population of high sec is high because it's a newbie friendly zone, not safe, but newbie friendly There is also a MASSIVE griefer presence in high sec Marmite Persuit Of Happiness Break-A-Wish Bad Neighbours Zero Compliance Guardians Of The Galaxy Aborted F There is literally thousands of griefers in high sec whose sole intention is to kill as many new players as possible to get killboard results. Now with high sec as it is, null sec dead EXCEPT for high desnity station systems and lets face it, low sec is dead as hell except for a few FW systems. No, this war dec mechanic needs to stop. Woa woa hold on there cowboy. I thought Guardians of the Galaxy were an FW corp? So just by simplely wardecing you become a griefer? Also really Zero Compliance? Gankers are now griefers to. It no longer pertained to just wardecs. YAY! It's now another Nerf Highsec thread. Aborted F is a two man/onemainonealt corp, how is "HEY YOU 30 TWATS OVER THERE! COME ERE AND FITE MEH" considered griefing to you? BAW and POH are gentlemen and scholars, Sir. Bad Company has some pretty okay dudes in it, I suppose. I wouldn't know honestly I just assume the best of people. Unlike you...apparently. Im also a little miffed you did add my corp to the list. >.> EDIT: Like really, Alliance name is We Didn't Mean It, we war dec. And our Alliance ticker is WEDID. DO YOU NOT SEE THE HUMOR. `#DeleteTheWeak`
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3324	Posted - 2015.07.31 08:01:05 - [71] - Quote Valkin Mordirc wrote: Iam The Flash wrote: The population of high sec is high because it's a newbie friendly zone, not safe, but newbie friendly There is also a MASSIVE griefer presence in high sec Marmite Persuit Of Happiness Break-A-Wish Bad Neighbours Zero Compliance Guardians Of The Galaxy Aborted F There is literally thousands of griefers in high sec whose sole intention is to kill as many new players as possible to get killboard results. Now with high sec as it is, null sec dead EXCEPT for high desnity station systems and lets face it, low sec is dead as hell except for a few FW systems. No, this war dec mechanic needs to stop. Woa woa hold on there cowboy. I thought Guardians of the Galaxy were an FW corp? So just by simplely wardecing you become a griefer? Also really Zero Compliance? Gankers are now griefers to. It no longer pertained to just wardecs. YAY! It's now another Nerf Highsec thread. Aborted F is a two man/onemainonealt corp, how is "HEY YOU 30 TWATS OVER THERE! COME ERE AND FITE MEH" considered griefing to you? BAW and POH are gentlemen and scholars, Sir. Bad Company has some pretty okay dudes in it, I suppose. I wouldn't know honestly I just assume the best of people. Unlike you...apparently. Im also a little miffed you did add my corp to the list. >.> EDIT: Like really, Alliance name is We Didn't Mean It, we war dec. And our Alliance ticker is WEDID. DO YOU NOT SEE THE HUMOR. u do realise that guardians live in amarr n have a war dec list as long as my arm and do not do FW? GET A CLUE
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13896	Posted - 2015.07.31 09:53:44 - [72] - Quote Valkin Mordirc wrote: So just by simplely wardecing you become a griefer? Looks like that's what he's saying to me, yeah. Use of a game mechanic he doesn't like is "griefing". "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.
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3324	Posted - 2015.07.31 09:58:01 - [73] - Quote U know damn well that's not what i am saying. He thinks guardians of the galaxy alliance are a FW alliance, i think not. Look at u both, clearly griefers and simply picking fights every thread like this u people jump on it n start trolling its pathetic
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13896	Posted - 2015.07.31 10:04:18 - [74] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: U know damn well that's not what i am saying. I really don't. So far you've referred to pretty much anyone who is currently actually using the mechanic as "griefers". It sure looks like that's what you mean to me. "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.
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3324	Posted - 2015.07.31 11:02:43 - [75] - Quote Right so any corp who war decs in EMPIRE to shoot new players and miners is not griefing? This is your argument? Ofc they are and to claim otherwise is pure stupidity. If you want PvP you go to low sec and null sec and fight against players who are trying equally as u to kill u. That's PvP. Ganking PvE fit ships, barges, freighters, all of it, is griefing, its as simple as that, your not doing it for the ISK, your doing it to get a decent killboard. I.e PvP against those who don't want to PvP. It's as simple as that No argument u make against it will change the fact of what it is, war decking mining and mission corps is not pvp, its not fun for them, its griefing, the amount of new players i have seen quit, is astounding. Don't try to justify griefing as legal game play, because whilst it may be, it doesn't stop the fact it's disgusting behaviour and it causing a direct effect on null and low sec because new players do not stick around long enuff to go the full haul. And you bloody well know it
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2594	Posted - 2015.07.31 11:26:27 - [76] - Quote What you call griefing is what this game is about. Its a PvP game at its core and Its a PvP game for everyone no matter where you are. no matter what you do. No thats not a problem. That is in fact the entire point. Look at my Sig. Dont like it? Dont play. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13897	Posted - 2015.07.31 11:38:46 - [77] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Right so any corp who war decs in EMPIRE to shoot new players and miners is not griefing? My argument is that wardecs are not griefing, by definition. Griefing is a very specific thing, defined by CCP, that is punishable. Wardecs do not fall under that category in any way. Quote: If you want PvP you go to low sec and null sec and fight against players who are trying equally as u to kill u. That's PvP. Nope to both. PvP is, by definition, "player versus player". No part of that indicates that the other person has to be trying to kill me. Secondly, EVE Online is a PvP game, and PvP belongs everywhere including highsec. "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.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1471	Posted - 2015.07.31 11:41:01 - [78] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Right so any corp who war decs in EMPIRE to shoot new players and miners is not griefing? This is your argument? Ofc they are and to claim otherwise is pure stupidity. If you want PvP you go to low sec and null sec and fight against players who are trying equally as u to kill u. That's PvP. Ganking PvE fit ships, barges, freighters, all of it, is griefing, its as simple as that, your not doing it for the ISK, your doing it to get a decent killboard. I.e PvP against those who don't want to PvP. It's as simple as that No argument u make against it will change the fact of what it is, war decking mining and mission corps is not pvp, its not fun for them, its griefing, the amount of new players i have seen quit, is astounding. Don't try to justify griefing as legal game play, because whilst it may be, it doesn't stop the fact it's disgusting behaviour and it causing a direct effect on null and low sec because new players do not stick around long enuff to go the full haul. And you bloody well know it I'm not used to agreeing with Kaar on wardecs but in this case he's right. They are not griefing, they are a tool at the disposal of hisec corps to mess with other player corps. Likewise there are tools for use by hisec player corps to counter wardecs, learn to use them. By joining a player corp you are tacitly agreeing to being open for wardecs. If you do not want wardecs stay in NPC corps (like CODE do ). Otherwise accept it as a part of the game and learn to adapt to it. This would only become griefing if it was targeted at individual players, if the deccing corp followed you from corp to corp deccing each one in turn and then ganking you in between whilst you are in NPC corps. Then it would be griefing.
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3324	Posted - 2015.07.31 11:48:58 - [79] - Quote Yeh so abscially what ur saying is tough ****, if i want to kill u n drive u out the game because u have no SP to defend urself screw u n screw ccp well done GROW UP
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1471	Posted - 2015.07.31 11:59:53 - [80] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Yeh so abscially what ur saying is tough ****, if i want to kill u n drive u out the game because u have no SP to defend urself screw u n screw ccp well done GROW UP Oh the irony in your use of language followed by telling me to grow up... Reading comprehension failure too I think as I said nothing of the kind. I pointed out that all of the tools required to avoid a wardec are there. As are all of the tools required to fight a wardec should you choose to do so. Note that as I have previously said here I believe that wardecs need change but not in the way the OP suggests. Try the search function and find a multitude of previous 'Change Wardecs' threads where I've put forward various constructive proposals. None of which involved screwing anything as far as I remember.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13898	Posted - 2015.07.31 12:05:23 - [81] - Quote Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: This would only become griefing if it was targeted at individual players, if the deccing corp followed you from corp to corp deccing each one in turn and then ganking you in between whilst you are in NPC corps. Then it would be griefing. Hilariously, even this is not griefing. You can follow one specific guy around with wars all you want, and the GMs will just tell him to drop an NPC corp if he doesn't like it. "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.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1471	Posted - 2015.07.31 12:12:43 - [82] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: This would only become griefing if it was targeted at individual players, if the deccing corp followed you from corp to corp deccing each one in turn and then ganking you in between whilst you are in NPC corps. Then it would be griefing. Hilariously, even this is not griefing. You can follow one specific guy around with wars all you want, and the GMs will just tell him to drop an NPC corp if he doesn't like it. That's why I included ganking you specifically whilst in NPC corps which I believe would then give a case for a griefing complaint.. By joining player corps however (no matter how new they are) you are accepting the risk of wars. Just as the wardeccer must currently accept the risk that the players will just roll corp. All the tools currently exist to deal with wars as they stand right now so until there's a full overhaul alongside the new structures being delivered any other changes would be pretty pointless.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2595	Posted - 2015.07.31 12:32:30 - [83] - Quote Lol at the very worst you're being driven out of your Corp. Not the game. If you want to be in a Corp with friends but dont want to be decced, then support the social Corp idea. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13898	Posted - 2015.07.31 12:44:23 - [84] - Quote Daichi Yamato wrote: Lol at the very worst you're being driven out of your Corp. Not the game. If you want to be in a Corp with friends but dont want to be decced, then support the social Corp idea. Or just join a blasted chat channel. "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.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1471	Posted - 2015.07.31 13:25:51 - [85] - Quote Daichi Yamato wrote: Lol at the very worst you're being driven out of your Corp. Not the game..... Pretty much my point, you can't be griefed with wardecs alone.
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3324	Posted - 2015.07.31 22:37:14 - [86] - Quote Not the point None of what any of u are saying is the point
Mag's the united 19933	Posted - 2015.07.31 23:45:41 - [87] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Not the point None of what any of u are saying is the point And you don't even have a point. The funniest thing about all this is your belief that those who do not want PvP, should be somehow left alone. Yet here they, are playing a game that is PvP centric and has been that way since day one. It's rather like playing Monopoly with someone, then complaining when they charge you for landing on a street they own and want the rules changed to stop it. Do war decs need a change? Well yes, they are far too easy to avoid at the moment. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Valkin Mordirc 1333	Posted - 2015.08.01 00:32:01 - [88] - Quote Also on the note of Trolling. I troll sometimes. But normally my trolling is more like sarcastically making fun of you to prove a point. I enjoy it immensely. Also I got to differnt guardians mixed up. There's the wardeccing guardians of the galaxy and then the FW guardians of the gate. Whoopies. XD Also it's really funny how you are calling everyone griefers and pathetic, that they are immature. And it's seem incredibly difficult for you to spell "You" correctly. Like. My Grammar is pretty bad, and if it wasn't for spell check, my spelling would probably be worse. And I'm telling you, that your bad. That's like....really bad yo. `#DeleteTheWeak`
elise densi Rogue Clones Yulai Federation 51	Posted - 2015.08.01 07:37:26 - [89] - Quote i live in nullsec some time now yes wardecs come and go but its not that mutch of an issue using our of ally alts etc to move in stuff the main issues also is new corps cant grow in highsec anymore let alone alliance forming when u get basicly perma wardecced this is also a main reason why eve doesnt get newer players into the game example new player joins a corp 1 day later corp gets wardecced new player is new he gets killed and he quits higher wardec costs for corp and alliance and limits would be mint to have 1-5 max wardecs
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13900	Posted - 2015.08.01 12:22:46 - [90] - Quote elise densi wrote: the main issues also is new corps cant grow in highsec anymore let alone alliance forming when u get basicly perma wardecced this is also a main reason why eve doesnt get newer players into the game Except that, according to CCP themselves, both of those statements are a lie. In fact, being killed early on in their EVE career makes them more likely to resub. Quote: higher wardec costs for corp and alliance and limits would be mint to have 1-5 max wardecs No. You do not get to talk about nerfing wardecs until the dec dodging exploit is removed. Until they're not 100% voluntary with no consequences for leaving, nothing about it warrants being nerfed. "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.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2596	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:11:41 - [91] - Quote elise densi wrote: i live in nullsec some time now yes wardecs come and go but its not that mutch of an issue using our of ally alts etc to move in stuff the main issues also is new corps cant grow in highsec anymore let alone alliance forming when u get basicly perma wardecced this is also a main reason why eve doesnt get newer players into the game example new player joins a corp 1 day later corp gets wardecced new player is new he gets killed and he quits higher wardec costs for corp and alliance and limits would be mint to have 1-5 max wardecs Allow me to show you what you've just done; -WHs pay too well and are too safe. Example, I day trip into a C6 with my buzzard and solo 2 anoms and make 300billion off salvage in 10 minutes.- New corps cant grow in hisec anymore? Since when? Do you have all the information of every noob Corp that has ever started? Can you give actual examples of all these perma-decced noob corps? Names? Links? ANYTHING? The only thing in this post that is remotely true is that null sec groups use alts. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1488	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:26:12 - [92] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: ... In fact, being killed early on in their EVE career makes them more likely to resub. [quote] I'm really not sure what this statement shows to be honest. I think it more likely shows that those who stay in Eve are the folks more willing to take risks and lose ships (as opposed to being killed is good for you!). An example would be my first month where i set myself a target to plex after the first signup month. To do so I mined better ore in losec, lost ships doing so but on balance achieved my goal. Being killed didn't make me more inclined to stay, but enjoying the kick from taking the risks did. [quote=Kaarous Aldurald]No. You do not get to talk about nerfing wardecs until the dec dodging exploit is removed. Until they're not 100% voluntary with no consequences for leaving, nothing about it warrants being nerfed. As wardecs stand right now I'm fine with this as corps can also check war histories to not dec rolling corps. This all needs a damn good looking at when the new structures come in though.
Lugburz SUPER GOOSE SQUAD Sons of Seraphinus 6	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:29:01 - [93] - Quote Actually highsec war decs do affect null operations specifically those that are dumb enough to have their jump frieghter guys not only in alliance but also on ap through hs. These wardecs hinder trade and supply lines to and from nullsec, imo what needs to change isnt the wardec itself but the players attitude towards it. In most null alliances you are actually specifically told not to operate in highsec whilst at war... wtf kind of stupidness is that? In reality what should happen, especially with larger groups is that they should form up and go fight, this would make the contracts groups like pursuit of happiness and marmite often take less appetising if they already have several decs up. In honesty i think thats what was intended but most null secers are miners or anom runners and wont fight.. its the same reason a lot of them are complaining about fozzie sov and being 'forced' to take a proactive approach rather than simply docking up.. You want easy made isk run incursions and remain in an npc corp; you want to interact with the rest of space and eve.. help defend your corpies and alliance folk and the image your all 'technically' portraying when some neut comes in local and you start spamming crappy smack talk like your an actual valued member.
Colt Blackhawk Viper-Squad pwn-O-graphy 310	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:44:17 - [94] - Quote I am really no highsec bear but CCP needs to do something about highsec. Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the ** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? CCP is really cutting off some customers from the game here completely. All these psychopaths who gank and wardec highsec bears can go to madhouse where they belong to and basta. This is not fighting, this is not pvp, this is simply destroying the game for other players by ganking and permawardeccing them. You can-¦t tell me that a catalyst idiot ganking peeps in high has good fights. Honestly every damn idiot could do that and no one can seriously tell me it is fun. This is not about fun, this is about saddism and nothing else. I would go even further and say we need something like super highsec without ganking and like that for people who REALLY only want to do some occasional pve. I really don-¦t know why CCP refuses something like that to a special customer group. [09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f** amarr flag and s* on their smoking wrecks.
Karra Masamune Intelligence Operation NetCorp Khaos Legion 8	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:51:09 - [95] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: I am really no highsec bear but CCP needs to do something about highsec. Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the ** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? CCP is really cutting off some customers from the game here completely. All these psychopaths who gank and wardec highsec bears can go to madhouse where they belong to and basta. This is not fighting, this is not pvp, this is simply destroying the game for other players by ganking and permawardeccing them. You can-¦t tell me that a catalyst idiot ganking peeps in high has good fights. Honestly every damn idiot could do that and no one can seriously tell me it is fun. This is not about fun, this is about saddism and nothing else. I would go even further and say we need something like super highsec without ganking and ** like that for people who REALLY only want to do some occasional pve. I really don-¦t know why CCP refuses something like that to a special customer group. It's high sec it's not without RISK, if you want to do PVE do it smart, a bit less dps a bit more tank, or don't over bling your BS, or just use second character to scout ahead, or be in one of those intel channels where people say "watch out they are ganking in [insert system name]" etc etc etc There are ways to do it, but you need to be smart about it and not lazy about it, also being cost efficient helps a lot especially with how ship insurance work. I did forget, you can do 1 man corp that will almost never be deced, and even if someone does dec it you make new one before war start.
Lugburz SUPER GOOSE SQUAD Sons of Seraphinus 6	Posted - 2015.08.02 11:51:36 - [96] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: I am really no highsec bear but CCP needs to do something about highsec. Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the ** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? CCP is really cutting off some customers from the game here completely. All these psychopaths who gank and wardec highsec bears can go to madhouse where they belong to and basta. This is not fighting, this is not pvp, this is simply destroying the game for other players by ganking and permawardeccing them. You can-¦t tell me that a catalyst idiot ganking peeps in high has good fights. Honestly every damn idiot could do that and no one can seriously tell me it is fun. This is not about fun, this is about saddism and nothing else. I would go even further and say we need something like super highsec without ganking and ** like that for people who REALLY only want to do some occasional pve. I really don-¦t know why CCP refuses something like that to a special customer group. wrong, you want safe pve rejoin npc corp as they cant be decked. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=437679&find=unread
Colt Blackhawk Viper-Squad pwn-O-graphy 310	Posted - 2015.08.02 13:21:13 - [97] - Quote Lugburz wrote: Colt Blackhawk wrote: I am really no highsec bear but CCP needs to do something about highsec. Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the ** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? CCP is really cutting off some customers from the game here completely. All these psychopaths who gank and wardec highsec bears can go to madhouse where they belong to and basta. This is not fighting, this is not pvp, this is simply destroying the game for other players by ganking and permawardeccing them. You can-¦t tell me that a catalyst idiot ganking peeps in high has good fights. Honestly every damn idiot could do that and no one can seriously tell me it is fun. This is not about fun, this is about saddism and nothing else. I would go even further and say we need something like super highsec without ganking and like that for people who REALLY only want to do some occasional pve. I really don-¦t know why CCP refuses something like that to a special customer group. wrong, you want safe pve rejoin npc corp as they cant be decked. Wrong. You can be ganked. Probably eves no1 new player killer. [09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f** amarr flag and s* on their smoking wrecks.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1489	Posted - 2015.08.02 13:24:51 - [98] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: ... wrong, you want safe pve rejoin npc corp as they cant be decked. Wrong. You can be ganked. Probably eves no1 new player killer.[/quote] 'Safe' PvE should only come from players taking the appropriate precautions for their style of play. Nothing is truly totally safe in Eve and nor should it be. I believe you are still told this from the very start too.
Lugburz SUPER GOOSE SQUAD Sons of Seraphinus 6	Posted - 2015.08.02 13:41:24 - [99] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: wrong, you want safe pve rejoin npc corp as they cant be decked. Wrong. You can be ganked. Probably eves no1 new player killer. I dont view ganking as pvp but either way it is a part of eve and always has been, it also has nothing what ever to do with war decs [unless it causes one] so im actually at a loss as to why you feel it relevant here? In effect if you do not wish to aid your corp or alliance when it is threatened or you are simply not willing or uninterested in pvp the option is there to remain or be in an npc corp; the rest of eve and its dangers are all associated with 'risk vs reward' and as such utalises the player base to add danger and challenges that AI will never (in any game i think?) be as hmm... as unpredictable and dangerous as only humans can be. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=437679&find=unread
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3327	Posted - 2015.08.02 14:35:27 - [100] - Quote You won't convince them. Just wait till fozzie sov fully hits n null falls apart n CCp realise most of there "pvp" pilots are nothing more than griefers in empire They want to "pvp" in empire, with booster alts, safe stations, the ability to run like cowards the second it looks like there gonna loose Its incredible. Hell ive killed more people in low/null than most of these high sec idiots ever have, they have no concept of true pvp, just there stupid griefer version of pvp
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3327	Posted - 2015.08.02 14:36:13 - [101] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: elise densi wrote: the main issues also is new corps cant grow in highsec anymore let alone alliance forming when u get basicly perma wardecced this is also a main reason why eve doesnt get newer players into the game Except that, according to CCP themselves, both of those statements are a lie. In fact, being killed early on in their EVE career makes them more likely to resub. Quote: higher wardec costs for corp and alliance and limits would be mint to have 1-5 max wardecs No. You do not get to talk about nerfing wardecs until the dec dodging exploit is removed. Until they're not 100% voluntary with no consequences for leaving, nothing about it warrants being nerfed. We will talke about whatever the hell we please codemonkey. You and your attitude are disgusting, period Go back to hiding behind ur mums skirt
Mag's the united 19944	Posted - 2015.08.02 15:18:24 - [102] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: You and your attitude are disgusting, period Go back to hiding behind ur mums skirt Irony. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Avvy Republic University Minmatar Republic 31	Posted - 2015.08.02 17:04:10 - [103] - Quote Valkin Mordirc wrote: Forcing players down a linear path is game breaking to a Sandbox type game. It certainly is. A sandbox is about choices, being a PvP sandbox means you can choose which toys you wish to play within the sandbox but you can't choose which toys are used against you.
Iam The Flash Evil Monkey Asylum 3327	Posted - 2015.08.02 19:33:07 - [104] - Quote Mag's wrote: Iam The Flash wrote: You and your attitude are disgusting, period Go back to hiding behind ur mums skirt Irony. Oh how?
admiral root Red Galaxy 2904	Posted - 2015.08.02 19:49:02 - [105] - Quote OP is absolutely right - wardecs need to change. CCP could make a good start by going back to war evasion being an exploit, lowering the cost of wars, getting rid of the silly NPC fees that defenders have to pay and ending the aggressor being able to chicken out when their victim makes the war mutual and starts kicking ass. No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13910	Posted - 2015.08.02 22:07:46 - [106] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the **** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? The real question is: why are they playing a PvP sandbox game if they don't want to PvP? You're playing the game wrong, and you're playing the wrong game. "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.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2597	Posted - 2015.08.02 22:18:38 - [107] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: I would go even further and say we need something like super highsec without ganking and **** like that for people who REALLY only want to do some occasional pve. I really don-¦t know why CCP refuses something like that to a special customer group. Because this is a PvP game at its core, with: PvP mining PvP market PvP hauling PvP combat Everything you do carries an element of risk and competition from other PLAYERS. Its the entire point of the game There is however the test server for your 'super hi-sec'. But you might as well whine that call of duty doesnt have dinosaurs for people who are only REALLY interested in dinosaurs. They are really cutting themselves out the market. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Colt Blackhawk Viper-Squad pwn-O-graphy 311	Posted - 2015.08.03 06:32:38 - [108] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Colt Blackhawk wrote: Let us face it: Yes there are players who simply want to do some occasional PVE and nothing else. Actually you can-¦t do that in high without getting forced to do PVP. But why the ** we try to force players into pvp when they don-¦t want it? The real question is: why are they playing a PvP sandbox game if they don't want to PvP? You're playing the game wrong, and you're playing the wrong game. Look my KB and you see I have nothing to do with highsec. Just saying that * like you should realise there are people who do not want do pvp. And actually CCP has nothing to offer for them tbh. Eve needs new players, so why not offer these people as paying customers some enviroment? [09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f** amarr flag and s* on their smoking wrecks.
Barrogh Habalu Forever Winter Absolute Zero. 986	Posted - 2015.08.03 09:35:07 - [109] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: I suggest that corporations and alliances are limited to 5 war decs available. BRB making a few shell corps to start 5 permadecs and make myself dec immune. Iam The Flash wrote: Each corporation and alliance can only be declared war upon, 3 times. This prevents things like i.e Goonswarm being perma decked by every large griefer alliance in the game. BRB making even less shell corps to make my alliance permanently undecable. Iam The Flash wrote: For a corporation to declare war, they must have no fewer than 7 active members i.e 7 numbers. BRB making a bunch of free alts to pull of previous two plans. Tl;dr: please, think before posting. Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13912	Posted - 2015.08.03 11:35:43 - [110] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: And actually CCP has nothing to offer for them tbh. Eve needs new players, so why not offer these people as paying customers some enviroment? Why make the game something that it's not, in order to cater to functional non customers? "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.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2597	Posted - 2015.08.03 11:38:24 - [111] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: Eve needs new players, so why not offer these people as paying customers some enviroment? sigh - Any product that is safe, quick and easy to acquire (like the rewards in your 'super hi-sec)' rapidly loses value in a player driven free market (like EVE's) to the point that it becomes worthless. This includes isk and is in fact exactly what happened in Ultima-online. - For anything to have value in EVE's market it must be risky, time consuming and/or difficult to acquire. The fact that every reward system in EVE is tied to the free market dictates that everything you do, no matter where or how you do it, is competitive. There is no choice in this. None. So whilst you might think its fine to let players be lonely and acquire wealth, every isk cent they use affects other players game for better or worse. And no, you do not get to affect other players game without having them affect you back, and when they do they can choose whatever tool in the sandbox to do it. If that means excessive weapons fire, thats just tough **. Welcome to the PvP sandbox. The only way to have your 'super hi-sec' not crash the EVE market would be to make everything inside very time consuming to acquire, give it an entirely separate server (oh look, sisi**) or unique set of rewards, hopefully including its own currency, but the latters not going to happen. TL:DR EVE is a PvP game at its very core and everything within is PvP. Get with the program or GTFO. True theres nothing wrong with more players. But the right kind of player. This is not a game for people who want to be left alone to do their own thing. Player interaction is not optional. It is instead the primary content of the game, and can never be optional without breaking core gameplay. It does not need hand holding like 'every other MMO'. It does not need safe zones like 'every other MMO'. It does not need to be uncompetitive like 'every other MMO'. The very reason we play this game is because its not 'every other MMO'. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Noc Raylicinn Blood Raider Militia Drip 0	Posted - 2015.08.04 21:05:26 - [112] - Quote If CCP ever decides to change war decs again they should focus on the aspects of regional game play. Instead of the dec applying to the entirety of empire space it would be based on region. Aggressors could dec anyone anywhere and choose which regions the dec applies. Defenders could fight for their home/space or relocate outside of the war zone. It would still be possible to declare war in all regions (perhaps a bit more expensive). The same elements are there, aggressors could choose to kick a corp out of a region, block trade hubs, stop mining/industry, except there is an out for the defender. The price for getting out (beyond what we already have) is to relocate, stay out of the main trade hubs, generally operate in the fringe regions of empire.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13939	Posted - 2015.08.04 22:53:10 - [113] - Quote Noc Raylicinn wrote: If CCP ever decides to change war decs again they should focus on the aspects of regional game play. Instead of the dec applying to the entirety of empire space it would be based on region. Aggressors could dec anyone anywhere and choose which regions the dec applies. Defenders could fight for their home/space or relocate outside of the war zone. It would still be possible to declare war in all regions (perhaps a bit more expensive). The same elements are there, aggressors could choose to kick a corp out of a region, block trade hubs, stop mining/industry, except there is an out for the defender. The price for getting out (beyond what we already have) is to relocate, stay out of the main trade hubs, generally operate in the fringe regions of empire. The part most people fail to realize is that wardecs right now are "broken" fully in favor of the defending party in just about every way. Therefore, if you're going to weaken wardecs so severely, you need to give something, and a large something at that, back in return. Otherwise you are just savagely nerfing the wardec corps who roam around looking for targets, and not touching the ones who just camp trade hub undocks. So what about wars will you be buffing in exchange for making them about 1/20th as effective? "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.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2600	Posted - 2015.08.04 22:59:54 - [114] - Quote Noc Raylicinn wrote: If CCP ever decides to change war decs again they should focus on the aspects of regional game play. Instead of the dec applying to the entirety of empire space it would be based on region. Aggressors could dec anyone anywhere and choose which regions the dec applies. Defenders could fight for their home/space or relocate outside of the war zone. It would still be possible to declare war in all regions (perhaps a bit more expensive). The same elements are there, aggressors could choose to kick a corp out of a region, block trade hubs, stop mining/industry, except there is an out for the defender. The price for getting out (beyond what we already have) is to relocate, stay out of the main trade hubs, generally operate in the fringe regions of empire. not all wardecs are about territory or just kicking someone out. No. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Sirran The Lunatic Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 21	Posted - 2015.08.04 23:16:48 - [115] - Quote I am appalled and shocked someone would suggest that they in any way limit risk-averse (anything).
Noc Raylicinn Blood Raider Militia Drip 0	Posted - 2015.08.05 03:47:43 - [116] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Noc Raylicinn wrote: If CCP ever decides to change war decs again they should focus on the aspects of regional game play. Instead of the dec applying to the entirety of empire space it would be based on region. Aggressors could dec anyone anywhere and choose which regions the dec applies. Defenders could fight for their home/space or relocate outside of the war zone. It would still be possible to declare war in all regions (perhaps a bit more expensive). The same elements are there, aggressors could choose to kick a corp out of a region, block trade hubs, stop mining/industry, except there is an out for the defender. The price for getting out (beyond what we already have) is to relocate, stay out of the main trade hubs, generally operate in the fringe regions of empire. The part most people fail to realize is that wardecs right now are "broken" fully in favor of the defending party in just about every way. Therefore, if you're going to weaken wardecs so severely, you need to give something, and a large something at that, back in return. Otherwise you are just savagely nerfing the wardec corps who roam around looking for targets, and not touching the ones who just camp trade hub undocks. So what about wars will you be buffing in exchange for making them about 1/20th as effective? I would argue that 1/20th as effective is not an accurate statement. It would not be a "savage" nerf to empire wars. Unless the game population distribution deviates significantly from the last 10yrs there are a handful of regions that provide endless targets. How many regions would sane person want to roam? Specific targets could still be decced wherever they are. There isn't a reason big war decs would not be taken out that cover all regions. 50 mil isk to cover all of empire space is dirt cheap and essentially makes the war disposable for the aggressor corp. The result is mass semi-coherent war deccing as clearly demonstrated by viewing the Wars tab in the corp interface. Somewhere near 10-20 mil per region or a bulk ~ 200mil for all of empire sounds more sensible than current war costs. The poor minmitar women and children would still have access to affordable war decs.
admiral root Red Galaxy 2917	Posted - 2015.08.05 05:13:57 - [117] - Quote Noc Raylicinn wrote: I would argue that 1/20th as effective is not an accurate statement. It would not be a "savage" nerf to empire wars. Unless the game population distribution deviates significantly from the last 10yrs there are a handful of regions that provide endless targets. How many regions would sane person want to roam? Specific targets could still be decced wherever they are. There isn't a reason big war decs would not be taken out that cover all regions. 50 mil isk to cover all of empire space is dirt cheap and essentially makes the war disposable for the aggressor corp. The result is mass semi-coherent war deccing as clearly demonstrated by viewing the Wars tab in the corp interface. Somewhere near 10-20 mil per region or a bulk ~ 200mil for all of empire sounds more sensible than current war costs. The poor minmitar women and children would still have access to affordable war decs. It's trivial to avoid wardecs under the current setup and your proposed change would make it even easier. With that in mind: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: So what about wars will you be buffing in exchange for making them about 1/20th as effective? No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff CODE. forum - everyone's welcome (no shiptoasters)
Mag's the united 19966	Posted - 2015.08.05 05:48:19 - [118] - Quote Iam The Flash wrote: Mag's wrote: Iam The Flash wrote: You and your attitude are disgusting, period Go back to hiding behind ur mums skirt Irony. Oh how? I've heard of writers block, but that tends to happen before not after. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. CODE. 13947	Posted - 2015.08.05 06:11:18 - [119] - Quote Noc Raylicinn wrote: I would argue that 1/20th as effective is not an accurate statement. I would ask you how many regions you think there are in highsec. Quote: Somewhere near 10-20 mil per region or a bulk ~ 200mil for all of empire sounds more sensible than current war costs. The poor minmitar women and children would still have access to affordable war decs. And once again, what are you willing to give up in exchange for such a large nerf? You're proposing a literal 400% increase in wardec costs. (Nevermind that this will just push wardec groups into even bigger alliances, just like the last price hike did. Then you lot will be crying in less than half a year about how "unfair" it is that the average shitbag highsec corp can't compete, when you're the one who forced them to conglomerate to begin with) "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.
Arden Elenduil Unlimited Ripoff Works 374	Posted - 2015.08.05 09:12:30 - [120] - Quote They should just return to the good old days of 2m per dec and a max of 3 per corp, with 50m for an alliance dec but unlimited decs. Those were the days

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]

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.