|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1649
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 17:53:31 -
[1] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:The game does not understand 'borders' in hi-sec. Nor can it fully grasp all the possible reasons one corp can have to wardec another. Best way to keep things sandboxy and incorporate everything from vengeance and hired hits to territory and even genocide, is to allow corps to wardec for whatever reason they want. This is a PvP game after all.
As a side note, by starting a Corp you are consenting to wardecs. It is not the wardeccers fault you dont know how to defend yourselves. This is what im talking about when the 'blind are leading the blind' and how corps like yours can hurt New player retention.
Did you know your Corp can mine together just as they can now without actually being in a Corp? Drop to an npc Corp and make a common chat channel for you all to use. Call it 'corp chat' and form fleets together without the risk of wardecs.
But seriously guys, social corps should be a thing.
Your chat thing just described a social group that isn't a corp, which is what you want.... oh wait, you want the convenience of corp hangars and other corp stuff w/out the inconvenience of being war dec'd.
Move along kid, you can't cherry pick.
TL/DR social corps shouldn't be a thing - risk aversion should have drawbacks. This is a Pvp game after all. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1671
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 18:46:33 -
[2] - Quote
The wardec system sucks. It has sucked since the last time they changed it. It went from a healthy meaningful way to work out differences to 'a dime a dozen' war dec corps. It needs repairing. The war dec system should NOT be a HS player farming mechaninc.
************************************************* The goal of the war dec mechanic should be:
A means for 2 player entities to settle their differences in the violent and meaningful way of their chosing across all regions of space with no interference from CONCORD, gate guns or other policing entities. (Contracting out your dispute resolution is fine) *************************************************
Start with that premise and move forward. The current mega dec for cheap and 'send me 10 million isk and I'll assist you' is garbage and takes all meaning, interest and value out of war decs.
Roll up 2 small corps. War dec 1 with the other. Count the assist offers that come rolling in. It's just dumb and not fun. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1678
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 12:49:22 -
[3] - Quote
I'm personally in favor of having an in space component that needs to be defended by the agressor to keep the war going. It doesn't have to be easy to knock over, it just has to be available to knock over.
Here's my thinking. It will separate the chaff from the wheat. (my opinion) A lot of the current merc and wardec corps are just around to farm players. (my opinion) I don't feel the current seal clubbing play is good for the game overall - I know the arguments as to "It keeps players subscribed" and all that other stuff. I have no desire to argue all that gabage. It's my opinion that the seal clubbing component of the current war dec system is bad for the game. (feel free to have a differing opinion, I'm cool with that, and I'm not going to change my mind, so please please don't throw the standard arguments to derail the point).... Where was I? Oh yes, the seal clubbing player farmers.... I (my opinion again) think a LOT of the current docking ring heros will fold within a week or 2 if they have to get out in space and defend something. As soon as you add a risk component to the agressor side of the equation a lot of them will fold up and move on.
So I'll qualify some terms: Docking ring hero - a risk averse ninny that uses HS and war dec mechanics to farm players not interested in combat. Mercs - guys that enjoy HS pvp. They will get out there and take the fights offered and see where the chips may fall at the end.
A little history. My corp (run by Hans Gates at the time - come back bro) was a reasonably successful merc corp back in 09. With success our numbers grew and so did the percentage of players lounging in corp just waiting for kills to be handed to them. We got in a few actual fights and a lot of our 'mercs' didn't log in or show up where potential loss was involved. Our leadership at the time ended up folding the corp and the core of the corp reformed under another banner in WH space. I loved HS warring / mercing for several years. I think it could return to a great way to play the game. Rigtht now the mechanics just plain suck. They need changed.
Having an agressor asset in space that could end the conflict if removed by the defender does several things. 1. It creates an avenue for content. Only players can create content so obviously some defenders will decline, BUT if folks want to fight, there is a place where space violence can be initiated where ships don't have the option to dock up and cheese out. 2. It will remove the docking ring heros from the arena. (my opinion) There are a good number of 'HS PVP' guys that wouldn't be able to come to terms with losses as a part of doing business. These lesser ninnies would walk away quickly. 3. Giving the defenders the ability to fight out in space and actually bring down ships will go a long way toward brining more newbros into the fold. (defenders winning 3 out of 50 is three times as good as defenders winning 1 out of 50 - this is NOT hard to understand) (If a HS merc group can't come to terms w/ 3 out of 50 - GTFO) 4. It gives an avenue for the war dec'd masses to work together and overcome a large HS PVP entity. That would be the first M in mmo.
Again, the in space asset doesn't have to be easy to remove, it just has to be removable. Think of it as a content beacon calling out to all involved parties. I would be in favor of modelling the in space thingerdoodle after current POS mechanics. You can hit it and put it in RFO. The owners get a timer that counts down when the final destruction will occur. A place to meet in space and commit to combat. What could be better? |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1678
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 12:56:28 -
[4] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Jason Quixos wrote:An interesting read. Page 6 has been the most level so far. I am still not sure about announcing the WarDec Project on the eve-o forums, but the pace and momentum of player suggestions towards the current WarDec system is growing. The link is there now, you should check it out if you are interested in WarDec issues. With deployable structures idea, how does someone WarDec a null-bloc like the Goons, for example? They would become immune to Wars in high sec. Some decent ideas there, although I think several of you are missing a key issue. Wars don't have "meaning" right now because highsec corps do not have meaning. Highsec corps are little more than a chat channel and a corp ticker. That needs to be addressed above all else, if you are discussing wars. The Citadel patch will be integral to that. If Citadels are able to provide tangible, powerful, and above all else unique benefits, then corps become something worth actually being in, and that means they become something worth protecting. Basically, any discussion of wars right now is stabbing in the dark until we know more about what benefits Citadels will bring to highsec corps. [edit: Also, why is Neville Smit even part of the discussion? Seems he has a clear agenda to remove, not improve, content.
Sadly, CCP is providing space magic with citadels. The teleportation of goods only serves to remove value from taking out a citadel. The only 'value' to citadel removal will be the cost of its construction. If you 'just one more nerf' guys want to focus on something - space magic will be tearing a good chunk of Eve's soul out when it is put in the game. It's not a step towards WOW in space - it's a freaking quantum leap in that direction.
The few attackable assets currently stored in POS will quickly be secured (yeah secured - wtf???) in the new citadels. Not just secured, but secured with magic (if you have any other word to describe teleportation - I'm all elf ears) |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1678
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 13:33:47 -
[5] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote: Here's my thinking. It will separate the chaff from the wheat.
No. It will functionally delete small corps and one man shows and force conglomeration into bigger and bigger groups. Then in six months we'll hear how wars need to be nerfed again because it's unfair that the dumbass carebears don't stand a chance against the groups you forced to conglomerate together. (which is exactly what happened in the past with the cost hike and the ally mechanic, and now they're back to crying for more nerfs) The idea is a very literal non starter. Quote: Think of it as a content beacon calling out to all involved parties.
I'll think of it like what it is. Putting on leg weights to hobble one side, just for having the temerity to actually be the aggressor. How about the mechanic actually be fair, be equitable to both sides, like it more or less is right now? Why are you people so married to handicapping the side that wants to initiate conflict in the first place? Quote: What could be better? An actually balanced mechanic that doesn't arbitrarily handcuff one side? Yeah, that. Something with game balance in mind, instead of, as you openly admit you're trying to do, punishing gameplay you don't like.
I love (well loved) HS warring. It was great fun. I don't want to punish it - I want to make it meaningful. I also want to get it off of the stations. I can pretty much sit in a rattler w/ links and crystals and ride out any agression timers and dock if I need to. I can sit in a brick tanked T3 and w/ 1 or 2 logi ride out any agression timers. I'm trying to change game play that isn't fun or interesting. I'm trying to put something of value in harms way so there is meaningful combat.
I want to move the combat off the gates and stations. This is the only way I see to do it.
I don't really care about 1 man war dec corps (I'll just play the mmo card and leave it at that). Small corps do fine if they are pvp capable. Sure they'll lose from time to time, but unlike a lot of the HS elite pvp forum guards - I know that losing a few ships as a pvp gal is part of the playstyle.
If you feel hobbled because you own a thing in space that you can fight at and around - I'm not sure how to help you. For guys that log in to pvp (actually fight with and agains folks in pvp capable ships) this is all good. For folks that want to club seals and high five over it w/ no losses - It would be problematic.
A personal note - I would love to get my corp back into some limited HS warring and possibly a few contracts, but the current mechanics are just not worth it. The system is pretty broken right now. If there was an in space component to placing a war dec - I'd warp to it immediately, r-click it and rename it "COME AT ME BRO" every time I dropped a war dec on someone. I'd publish directions to it. I'd put a big blinky light on the thing that could be seen 4 systems out if that were an option.
That's where I'm coming from. Actual in space fighting where there is no dock/jump option, only the option to commit to the fight. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1678
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 13:35:41 -
[6] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote: Sadly, CCP is providing space magic with citadels. The teleportation of goods only serves to remove value from taking out a citadel. The only 'value' to citadel removal will be the cost of its construction. If you 'just one more nerf' guys want to focus on something - space magic will be tearing a good chunk of Eve's soul out when it is put in the game. It's not a step towards WOW in space - it's a freaking quantum leap in that direction.
The few attackable assets currently stored in POS will quickly be secured (yeah secured - wtf???) in the new citadels. Not just secured, but secured with magic (if you have any other word to describe teleportation - I'm all elf ears)
Don't get me wrong, the asset safety mechanic needs to die in a fire. Even the very concept is a poisonous, anti sandbox mechanic. If it goes to live in the proposed iteration, it will be the very worst mechanic ever added to the game, worse even than Concord under Greyscale, curse his name. But unfortunately, we don't have a thread for that.
I find it confusing that you are so against an agressor asset in space, but clearly uderstand the value of having destructable assets in harms way as a content generator.
What's the difference in you thinking on what I see as 2 peas in the same pod?
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1696
|
Posted - 2015.12.21 12:50:54 -
[7] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I'm the one flagging myself to other people, they have exactly as much ability to apply consequences to me as I do to them. It's fair, and that's why you hate it.
Frankly, no they don't. That's why most people wardec their targets, because they know their targets are not as capable as them. The 'oh but they could' argument is silly, and you either know it or have become so utterly self delusional there is no hope left for you. This however, doesn't mean I think the 'fix' to wardecs suggested here is appropriate, it's a total waste of time that still allows for grief decs to be rolled onto a target corp repeatadly, and any system that needs the restrictions proposed to try and stop that is a major issue. Wardecs also are about to get one of their biggest buffs in the entire history of EVE with Citadels, since Citadels can not be removed from risk. And once that happens I believe wardecs will show as currently too powerful a tool that was only kept in check by how easy it was to dodge a wardec. But I'm quite ok with waiting till Citadels come out, people start adopting them and seeing what the Meta actually does with wardecs before suggesting any changes.
Why would anyone attack a citadel in any region of space? It's a lot of time and effort for ZERO LOOT. There may be some SOV reasons in null, but do you really think someone is going to spend all the time and effort necessary to dunk a citadel in empire space for no loots? I don't see it.
I really don't see anyone doing it for personal vengeance at this point either. It will go like this: You commit some act that deeply offends me. I turn to the war dec system to destroy your citadel in Kisogo. Sure I won't get any loot but I'm gonna burn your stuff to the ground. I declare war on you. You use the current garbage war dec mechanics and pull in 30 assists. Now I'm facing 40 times the guns that I can handle. So faced with no loot and you inviting 700 of your closest friends to the fight - my anger at you offencs is no longer sufficient to settle up with you. I drop the dec or let it expire. I've been defeated by space magic and crappy war dec mechanics before I fit a DCII to my thorax of doom.
TL/DR: CCP please, you're killing the game from the inside. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1713
|
Posted - 2015.12.23 17:05:20 -
[8] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Not if they can't defend it, they're not. Playing the game wrong isn't a playstyle anyway.
Good point.. If they're not able to defend their play style, they're not free to actively engage in said activity. If only there was a play style within Eve where you didn't have to defend yourself in order to do said activity... Oh yeah.. Wardecs.. Totally forgot about those.... You continually make claims that if one cannot defend their play style they're playing it wrong, yet your entire purpose for being here is to stop a change that would require you to defend your play style... Seems a bit ironic really....
Irony isn't the same as hypocracy. Choose your words better next time! |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1714
|
Posted - 2015.12.23 17:10:19 -
[9] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:
Irony isn't the same as hypocracy. Choose your words better next time!
My bad... I was a bit sleepy when I wrote that.
You know me, I'm just here to help! |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1715
|
Posted - 2015.12.24 13:35:21 -
[10] - Quote
Morgan Agrivar wrote:Highsec wardecs have become my career choice. Like Iain Cariaba said, the defender has access to the same tools I do when hunting down war targets. I urge them to use it. If they don't have access to locater agents, that is not my fault. I got access to them cause I did mission running and now I am enjoying the benefit of something that I initally did not intend to use them for.
I urge the carebears of highsec to rise up and stand up against the ruthless agressions of higsec wardec corporations like mine. Hell, they might actually enjoy themselves and use a brain cell or two that is not needed in mining.
If that is really what you want, then you should be in favor of an agressor structure as a place for everyone on both sides to gather and use violence on each other. |
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1715
|
Posted - 2015.12.24 13:46:52 -
[11] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:And that would completely force wardec players to conglomerate once again to offset those unreasonable costs, and cripple smaller and solo groups.
The answer is no.
There are already big conglomerates rife w/ bad docking ring hero pilots, so that part doesn't even make sense.
It would only cripple small and solo operations that were bad at eve. The proof is that any small group can make insane profits suicide ganking, so the cost of a war dec would have to measure in the billions to make it an isk losing proposition. Small skilled groups will always be effective - my corp is an example - The last wardec corp that engaged us (though they were cool guys and we had fun - thanks!) didn't do well at all. Are you suggesting you feel the need for a 'free pass' for small and solo groups that are bad at eve and bad at HS pvp (this brings into questions both your personal motives AND abilities).
Your no answer is baseless and borderline cowardly. I find your credibility lacking. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1717
|
Posted - 2015.12.24 15:59:03 -
[12] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote: There are already big conglomerates rife w/ bad docking ring hero pilots, so that part doesn't even make sense.
Of course it makes sense. Do you want every corp to be Marmite? Or do you want to encourage more active groups and smaller group content? You don't fix what you claim as a problem with more of what caused it in the first place. Quote: It would only cripple small and solo operations that were bad at eve.
No, it would cripple anyone who doesn't have as much money as a larger group. Which is anyone smaller. Oh, especially groups that don't just mindlessly PvE all the time. You might as well just bring back dec shield, as allow carebears to pay their way out of a wardec.
You're just too hooked on the mass dec player farming concept. You need to let go of thinking "HS pvp" and the current "player farming" are the same thing. You can't cripple a small good group of pvp pilots. You can take away the 100+ active dec target farming, but you can't take away the fun from a small gang of pvp pilots.
The disconnect is that fun to you is player farming - it isn't pvp. Just come out and say it "I (kaarous Aldurald) enjoy farmping players in HS. Furthermore, I am a risk averse docking ring hero and am not actually interested in actual pvp. I will make up rediculous arguments and say anything I need to in order to maintain my risk averse playstyle"
The actual difference to your line of arguments compared to the rage raging of a mission bear who just lost a CNR is very little. I doubt you'll ever see that, but you are just as attached to player farming as that bear was to his CNR. You're hanging on for dear life and outright reject any suggstion that will reduce the number of active decs you can have in the air at once or bring combat out of the docking ring.
We're trying to add meaning and risk to pvp and you're hanging on to player farming as if your CNR depended on it. We'll never see eye to eye. I want pvp and you want player farming. They aren't the same thing. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1727
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 14:31:24 -
[13] - Quote
We need an agressor structure. It needs to have a timer. The defenders have the option to come out and put the agressor structure in RFO. The agressor gets to set the timer to come out of RFO at the time of his choosing when he declares the war (so it can be set for peak time for the agressing party - no off peak issues for the agressor). The structure has to be difficult to put into RFO and it has to be difficult to destroy. 3 dudes in oracles should not be able to dunk it in an hour.
The result: If the agresees get their poop together they can force the war to end early, but only through mighty, epic and heroic combat in 2 stages. The first at a timing of their choosing (to RFO the structure) and the second at a time picked by the agressor (by setting the time for the structure to come out of RFO).
Benefits:
1. True pvp is enabled (but not forced) around the structure where combat can take place free of docking rings and gates where commitment to the conflict is required of both sides. 2. The agressee is not required to address or interact with the structure. They can run, hid, dock or if they desire get some pvp out in the open where ships can be lost, glory can be had and so on. 3. Both sides of the war dec have actual assets in space that may or may not be defended. (In the case where the agressor initiates a war dec against a corp w/ no in space assets... well, their choice to do so) 4. This structure will be a content beacon drawing those who actually want to pvp (not player farm) to an open area free of timers and all that other cumbersome stuff known as 'mechanics'. Both sides will still have the option to stay in the docking rings if they so choose. 5. This would add an additional option for the conduct of pvp in HS. It would move wardecs a bit away from player farming and a bit towards pvp. (For this discussion pvp is where 2 sides BOTH interested in blowing the other guys up meet and explodes ships and player farming is where one side ganks folks as they undock with non hostile intentions - there is also a lot of gray stuff between these 2 extremes - we all know deep in our own little black hearts where we are on the spectrum)
Drawbacks:
1. There are a good number of HS agressors that are like totally afraid of the space between gates and stations where you actually need to commit to a fight and risk losing a ship. 2. There are a good number of HS agressors that aren't interested in pvp, they just want to farm players in HS. 3. There are some really vocal player farmers that rally against any suggestion that would move HS war decs toward pvp and away from player farming.
Question: Why are certain HS war deccing groups so against (dare I say afraid of?) having a content beacon planted firmly in space that declares to all the agressees "Come, come if you dare, try to defeat me"? (personally I would be inclined to clown the agressees by putting it in RFO myself w/ an alt corp to make it extra vulnerable to draw them to it - bait structure would be my term for it)
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1727
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 15:05:36 -
[14] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:We need an agressor structure.
No, we don't. What we need is to make player corps worth more than just a corp ticker and a chat channel. Wars have as much or as little meaning as corps do.
Giggle - you're scared to pvp off a station.
The reason corps currently have no value is in part because of the current war dec system. I'll give you an example (made up example - let's not get all covered in ouchy feelings here):
Your risk averse docking ring hero garbage playstyle of choice offends me deeply. When you claim what you do is PVP I get even more deeply offended. As we are both in corps and as you live in HS I have the option to wardec you. This act should have meaning. It should be a way for me and my pvp corp to cut your risk averse player farming corp from the CONCORD protected herd and do a happy dance all over your smoking corpses. BUT, ALAS the current borked mechanics allow you not only to hide in docking range, but you can also invite several 100 of your closest friends into the conflict. It's no longer me and you corp to corp (feel free to insert man to man) - it's me against a couple hundred dudes. The current mechanics make it too easy for you to turn a meaningful conflict between 2 player entities into a 700 man circus where 650 of the clowns don't give a ratsassamatass about any reasoning behind the war dec.
Corps are somewhat meaningless (in HS) because of the assist mechanic. 1 flag can no longer wage war agains another. It's a big meaningless mess. YOUR coveted and protected garbage mechanics are creating the problem you are citing. Either you can see that and are chuckling behind your faceless keyboard or you can't. Your understanding of the quandry isn't necessary for it to exist.
The punch line: My corp can't war dec your corp and pound the risk aversion out of you because of the assist mechanic. You have the easy option to spiral it meaninglessly out of control. This is your fault and your are defending it vigorously. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1732
|
Posted - 2015.12.31 13:17:16 -
[15] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote: Giggle - you're scared to pvp off a station.
Hardly, you just have big, huge blinders on for your own personal crusade. No one gives a **** if you hate station games, there's no reason to change one single thing about this game for that. Cry more. Take your bogus e-honor somewhere else.
I'm not on a crusade. The beauty of the agressor structure is that you can sit on your undock while your agressor structure and your war dec get burned to the ground by folks that aren't afraid to pvp off station. You still have the same options you do now. I'm giving you (I know I know - I am a kind and thoughtful dude) and others an additional option. You still have free choice. There is a real possibility that there are more risk averse corps out there that you could dec that wouldn't attack your structure. I'm putting an additional toy in your sandbox.... why you no want??
As you are accustomed to offering simple counters to many situations. I'll offer you a simple counter to someone blowing up your agressor structure - you can defend it. I've been given assurance from the highest levels of CONORD that they will not get involved if you choose to defend your assets in space from players involved in a sanctioned war dec.
I'm offering an addition means to create content that has a simple counter. I'm trying to help you get more pvp. Why do you resist more pvp opportunities?
The real question I want answered by you is this:
Why, being that you have the option to defend your structure at a time of your choosing, are you so against having an agressor structure? The you in this question is YOU. I'm not looking for generalizations and big unbrella reasonings. Why don't YOU like it? |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1732
|
Posted - 2015.12.31 19:13:40 -
[16] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:lol.... Dang...
I'm not even sure where we're at anymore, lol.
To catch everyone up. The war dec system is broken. Folks are putting up ideas on how to make it better. There is one lone dude white knuckling his grip on the current broken system because he thinks we should all claim to be mercs and HS pvp types while dropping 100 war decs and farming non combatants. There are several reasonable ideas to repair the broken system. There are several bad ideas that would break it even more. The lone defender of the current mess is so mired in his circular logic that he's probably not sure how to answer anything at this point (NO and YOU"RE A LIAR do get repeated a good amount)
I'm actually OK with the defender putting up some isk two create to in space structures. If the defenders structure goes down then they have to re-pay the kitty daily to create the structures. If the agressors structure goes down then the war is over. It's reasonable.
The insane demand to make the defender pay 10x the war dec cost is..... insane. Paying the same price the agressor corp did is more than fair. The location of the structures would be picked by the defender as he's paying to put them in place. Like the original dec fee - no one gets the isk. You're paying CONCORD for the ability to end the dec sooner, so that's who gets the isk.
To further expand on this idea - the defender can also put up a fraction of the war dec cost to single out any of the assisting parties. As an example. A war decs B for 100 isk. Through whatever process happens there are now 5 corps assisting B against A. If A wants to single out on of the assisting parties and lock them out of the war they can pay 20 isk (1/5 because there are 5 assiting corps) to establish structures that specifically involve corp A and a specified assister of B. This would provide some intersting options and allow a defender to quickly and cheaply put random disinterested assisting parties on the sidelines. If the assister cares enough (or is paid enough) he'll show up to defend his structure.
I can forsee a lot of complexity spiralling out of this format. Choices could be made and with choices comes meaning.
Anyway there is some good reading if you're interested (ranging from solid ideas to wacky bear demand to irrational circlespeak). Theres a little bit for everyone in this thread. |
|
|
|