EVE Search - Wardec rebalance reviewed

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Wardec rebalance reviewed

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ralph King-Griffin Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance 18927	Posted - 2016.11.03 18:31:42 - [31] - Quote Lann Shahni wrote: it seems a little like the guy whit big stick, beating up the guy with none, while telling him it's fair! and it's his own fault for not having the stick! and ... in a game where anyone is allowed to hit anyone as hard and often , with as big a stick as they choose, it very much is your fault for not having one. We're Back in Business , have your very own Meeny Faced Bastards on call today =]\|[=
My Dream Albion Scientiic Projects 9	Posted - 2016.11.03 18:42:55 - [32] - Quote Daichi Yamato wrote: My Dream wrote: your points are valid but dont forget this veiw infringes on the sandbox players right to play in a peacefull social way many social corps get ganked and the players quit because the gankers gameplay choice means they cant get on with there choice of sandbox mode if eves truely a sandox then it should provide a home for all types of player It is a home to all types of player, but you are dead wrong if you think you have a right to be left alone. EVE is a PvP game, and that means at ALL times. So you dont have to seek out PvP, but it can happen at anytime by the very nature of the sandbox. Quote: You consent to PvP when you click "undock". Quote: There is no such thing as "a fair fight" or "an unfair fight". There's only a fight. Circumstances are irrelevant. Source Thats what a sandbox really is. stop using the term sandbox and atleast have the honesty to say you want eve to be a PVP themepark frankly theres nothing more carebearish than forming a gank squad against week old newbros and pretending its PVP
Jonah Gravenstein Machiavellian Space Bastards 27036	Posted - 2016.11.03 18:58:27 - [33] - Quote My Dream wrote: your points are valid but dont forget this veiw infringes on the sandbox players right to play in a peacefull social way I take it that you're ok with the carebear view that seeks to curtail and infringe on the activities of those that choose to prey on them? Quote: many social corps get ganked and the players quit because the gankers gameplay choice means they cant get on with there choice of sandbox mode Sandbox means that you can try to play the way that you want to, it also means that other people can also try to play the way that they want; even if that choice means interfering with the game play of others. The whole game is biased towards promoting the conflict that happens when your playstyle meets that of somebody else. Quote: if eves truely a sandox then it should provide a home for all types of player It does provide a home for all types of player. Eve is a PvP sandbox with PvE elements, if someone is not willing to defend their right to engage in the playstyle they choose then they're playing the wrong game I'm what many would call a bear, I play Eve for the PvE and to shoot the breeze with the various people I've meet along my journey through it. Wardecs aren't a problem, they're trivial to avoid without resorting to the commonplace and easy option of rolling or dropping corp. If more people thought about what they were doing when they undock, with or without an active war, they wouldn't make themselves easy meat for other players. Civilised behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business. New Player FAQ Feyd's Survival Pack
Ralph King-Griffin Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance 18928	Posted - 2016.11.03 19:04:37 - [34] - Quote My Dream wrote: your points are valid but dont forget this veiw infringes on the sandbox players right to play in a peacefull social way Might=Right you want peace and tranquility , you are welcome to it if you can make it so despite all of us. thats truer to the sandbox ideal than having your padded little corner where only "kind hands" and soothing words are allowed. We're Back in Business , have your very own Meeny Faced Bastards on call today =]\|[=
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 2886	Posted - 2016.11.03 19:05:05 - [35] - Quote Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Only problem I have with wardecs as such is that the defenders have no way to 'win' and end the war. CCP will never give defenders a way to end the war. Not only is that too much power for large groups who can then just blob their way out of any war, it is completely incompatible with how the structures are suppose to be exploded. You need two wardecs to even have a chance to explode one of them, and CCP will never let you out of having to defend your structure in highsec by the fiat of an ending war. That said, I am not against some sort of structure that the aggressors are encouraged or forced to use so there is something at risk and for the defender to counter-attack. That could actually generate some some player-player content, not kill interaction like this perrenial bad idea of giving players the ability to end wars. Eve is a full-time, PvP sandbox game. How is it compatible to given players the ability to make themselves immune to attack from the other players even as a reward for fighting? The 8 Golden Rules of Eve Why Do They Gank?
Shae Tadaruwa Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 1228	Posted - 2016.11.03 19:32:26 - [36] - Quote Donnachadh wrote: Shae Tadaruwa wrote: And what advantage for wardeccers are you proposing to balance for these nerfs to their play? None? Didn't think so. You don't like a style if play so you propose nerfs to it to suit you better. Typical Carebears thinking. And yours is typical war dec player thinking, just say no to any changes instead of offering a compromise proposal. War decs in high sec are a major problem that needs to be addressed and the unwillingness to change as displayed by your comments here only deepens the problems. The CSM has taken note of the war dec problems and has started looking into them (see link above in Scipio Artelius post) and how they might be changed. Instead of the attitude you display here which makes you a part of the problem perhaps you could become a part of the solution by offering counter proposals, or ideas to change the parts of the OP idea you do not like. Scipio Artelius thank you for the link, that is an article I had not seen. Interesting ideas and hopefully I will have time this weekend to watch the video clip. Various forms of structure based war decs have been proposed here on many occasions and they have usually met with nothing but negative comments from the war dec crowd, one has to wonder if this idea will fare any better. My personal thoughts in basic are simple. Both sides need to have a way to win the war by virtue of force. Defenders win the war ends immediately, aggressors wins the war continues. Unlike current mechanics the aggressors need some way to end a war when they want, a way that does not require them to surrender but still allows them to end the war before the current week is up. Relative size of aggressor versus defenders needs to be looked at and controlled as well, and yes I would encourage removing or altering the current allies mechanic as a part of this because it does not work well especially for the aggressors. War decs need to have an element of enjoyment for both sides. Not sure it is possible but that should be a consideration in any changes as well. Bullshit. Don't be such a weak minded wanker. I'm not a wardeccer. I'm an industrialist and hauler. Dumb stupid, wrong assumptions that are typical of you. Change is fine. This sort of "get out of jail free Carebear" proposal is BS. Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Jonah Gravenstein Machiavellian Space Bastards 27037	Posted - 2016.11.03 19:43:36 - [37] - Quote Shae Tadaruwa wrote: I'm not a wardeccer. I'm an industrialist and hauler. Dumb stupid, wrong assumptions that are typical of you. Change is fine. This sort of "get out of jail free Carebear" proposal is BS. As a serial killer of NPC'd and small time industrialist, I get this a lot. Some people don't understand that while we may share their general playstyle we don't share their viewpoint or opinions, because they often bear no relation to the actual game and are generally shite. Civilised behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business. New Player FAQ Feyd's Survival Pack
Ralph King-Griffin Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance 18930	Posted - 2016.11.03 19:50:22 - [38] - Quote I'll just point out here that we are where we are explicitly because of aggressive, targeted wars being gutted. This was not an issue six months ago and it's not an issue that will be sorted by further restraints upon solely the aggressors. Listen to the roundtable, we are far more open to restructuring wars abd thew way they function than ye realise, just only if that restructuring makes sense and is reasonable for all. Structures like the one suggested in the op came up and vimsy explained at length what the issues with it were. In short : ok so ye say "whooo , something in space i can target wheeeee" fine, in principal thats understandable given how much neutral alt-play comes with mercing these days. i get that i do. what vimsy and i been trying to point out is that the best way to defend these things will invariably be to plant a blob on them, or have one on stand by. if you cant field the sort of blob required you will not be inclined to try and rub shoulders with the sorts of lads that can because the will beat the ever living **** out of you. so you dont bother signing up for a ploughing from the estabelished lads at all, you join an alliance that has this setup already, or you grow to avoid getting battered, to sustain interest for your increased numbers you need to get more content (more wars), go to choke points and catch the through traffic. without some seriously tight knit and extremely patient and dedicated guys you have to do this because of the colossal level of work required to actively track and hunt . (and why were we having this conversation again?) We're Back in Business , have your very own Meeny Faced Bastards on call today =]\|[=
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 45368	Posted - 2016.11.03 22:40:22 - [39] - Quote My Dream wrote: your points are valid but dont forget this veiw infringes on the sandbox players right to play in a peacefull social way many social corps get ganked and the players quit because the gankers gameplay choice means they cant get on with there choice of sandbox mode if eves truely a sandox then it should provide a home for all types of player As this is a wardec thread, I don't quite see how it infringes on any players choice to play peacefully. NPC Corps are 100%, completely immune from wardecs. Any player, wanting to avoid wardecs and never have any aggression associated with the mechanics can simply choose to be in an NPC Corp. They can still play socially. Nothing about being in an NPC Corp prevents that. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 3588	Posted - 2016.11.03 23:17:56 - [40] - Quote My Dream wrote: [quote=Daichi Yamato] stop using the term sandbox and atleast have the honesty to say you want eve to be a PVP themepark frankly theres nothing more carebearish than forming a gank squad against week old newbros and pretending its PVP You don't know what a sandbox or theme park is do you? Like the others, i only occasionally pvp and that's mostly in faction warfare. I honestly haven't decced in a long time. But this is a full pvp sandbox game whether you like it or not. The quicker you understand that the better off we will all be. 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" Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Aatch Bland 1 Eyed Catfish 2	Posted - 2016.11.04 02:39:31 - [41] - Quote Honestly, the only thing I'd say is wrong with the current war-dec system is how the fee is calculated. It's cheaper to dec a small corp than a large one, and large corps have more ISK to bring to bear to start with. If the fee was based on the difference in sizes, it might help balance things out. As it stands now, it's far more profitable to wardec a small corp than it is a big one, since small corps are cheaper to wardec and have fewer members with which to fight back.
Ralph King-Griffin Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance 18935	Posted - 2016.11.04 02:46:48 - [42] - Quote And if you were to watch the roundtable you would see that the Merc community (or those of us present) unilaterally agree with you about this We're Back in Business , have your very own Meeny Faced Bastards on call today =]\|[=
Aatch Bland 1 Eyed Catfish 2	Posted - 2016.11.04 02:58:55 - [43] - Quote Heh, I read the article linked earlier and you're right. I'm surprised that the cost, at the very least, hasn't been changed given that it seem fairly obvious.
Honzas Krutas Czech Interstellar Incorporated 1	Posted - 2016.11.04 09:11:21 - [44] - Quote Hi as a new player I could add some new thoughts about the wardeck issue that those two groups arguing here might not see. My personal experinces were these: - huge number of groups and solo players ganking new players in highsec, they are picking up t1 industrials, they do not care about obvious botting freighters on autopilot route (hows that it still flies CPP?) and all of that outside the war - EVE basically forces new player to join a new corporation and all over the starting areas are mobile depots aiming for new players to join a corporation. Nowhere is written that then you can get war anytime and newbies are a target no.1 in any war because they lacks knowledge of how to recognize they are in warl, with whom etc. - players declaring a wars/ganking are years and miles stronger by skills and experience than their target. I have yet to see a wardeck between two similarly strong corporations. So far it was always bigger/older/more experienced corp declaring a war to small/new/non pvp corps only - ganking corps are declaring multiple wars (probably max) in order to get higher chance of finding a war target in the area where they gank. They do not care about fighting, they just want to gank a lonely target in highsec - ganking corps are joining into multiple wars as ally in order to avoid wardeck limits and payments, again for same purpose - majority of the wardecked corp players are either sitting in station till war ends or they leave corporation - if a structure is packed up, there is no winner or loser in war and majority of wars ends with concord "length safety mechanism" The problem here is that there are no safety mechanism. Yes eve is unique in a way its harsh world where all kind of things are possible, but does it mean the current system is perfect? Hardly. I don't know how it should work, thing is that eve is so different that mechanisms from other games would probably not worked here at all. However starting with notifying player that entering a corporation will then expose him to be part of the war an PvP and not "forcing new player into corporations" by opportunity system would be a good start. Other games usually have multiple safety systems such as that too big corporation cannot declare war to small corporation (varios methods of calculating that, not just per number of members). However thats not going to work here since basically every big corp has a detached small corps operating under different terms or in certain region. And I am not sure what does fighting for some objective as proposed by OP helps here. It will still come to the fact that the one who declares a war knows in advance they are stronger/smarter and are going to win. So essentially nothing would have changed in most of the wardecks, the weaker side would not fight. But maybe its a good start. There would be less wardecks and it might help against the kind of war my corp is in atm where 2 players are camping our hg sectors in cloak whole day preventing us to mine and waiting for lonely mining/industry to appear in a time of day where we won't outnumber them. Once we group up they just use cloak in their safe spot and goes afk. Very funny. Modding is fun. Please add more customization into EVE!
Revis Owen The Conference Elite CODE. 423	Posted - 2016.11.04 11:54:29 - [45] - Quote Honzas Krutas wrote: 2 players are camping our hg sectors in cloak whole day preventing us to mine This is the point where I lol'd and concluded you are in a corp with "leadership" that has absolutely no competence. RUN! A real corp with halfway competent leadership would be using the tools available to all to easily deal with the situation you describe. Agent of the New Order http://www.minerbumping.com/p/the-code.html If you do not have a current Mining Permit, please contact me for issuance.
My Dream Albion Scientiic Projects 9	Posted - 2016.11.04 12:14:42 - [46] - Quote Revis Owen wrote: Honzas Krutas wrote: 2 players are camping our hg sectors in cloak whole day preventing us to mine This is the point where I lol'd and concluded you are in a corp with "leadership" that has absolutely no competence. RUN! A real corp with halfway competent leadership would be using the tools available to all to easily deal with the situation you describe. i actually agree with you on this . theres to many guys with no leadership skills recruiting newbros with no plans for pilot safety . all it leads to is the new player having a bad experiance of eve and quiting before theve even really started id highly recommend him and his friends join EVE UNIVERSITY so the can learn game in a competant enviroment
Ralph King-Griffin Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance 18937	Posted - 2016.11.04 13:02:45 - [47] - Quote My Dream wrote: Revis Owen wrote: Honzas Krutas wrote: 2 players are camping our hg sectors in cloak whole day preventing us to mine This is the point where I lol'd and concluded you are in a corp with "leadership" that has absolutely no competence. RUN! A real corp with halfway competent leadership would be using the tools available to all to easily deal with the situation you describe. i actually agree with you on this . theres to many guys with no leadership skills recruiting newbros with no plans for pilot safety . all it leads to is the new player having a bad experiance of eve and quiting before theve even really started id highly recommend him and his friends join EVE UNIVERSITY so the can learn game in a competant enviroment The colloquial name for a corporation like this is "Punching Bag". Definitely a crappy place for an newbro, get out ASAP. We're Back in Business , have your very own Meeny Faced Bastards on call today =]\|[=
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 1057	Posted - 2016.11.04 13:54:18 - [48] - Quote Daichi Yamato wrote: EVE is a PvP game, and that means at ALL times. Again with this lie that EvE is a "PvP" (insert traditional shoot each other in the face definition) game. EvE is a sandbox that has many play styles and yes PvP is one of those play styles. In fact given that most items in EvE are player made and that CCP is pushing the game even further in that direction one could argue that resource procurement and manufacturing are the single most important play styles in EvE because without them you would have no ships to fly and no weapons and ammo to shoot people with. John Yatolile wrote: nothing in eve needs enjoyment for both sides News flash this is a game we ALL play for enjoyment, when there is no enjoyment in it people stop playing. Wondering if you read the article in this link, it mentions that there needs to be an element of enjoyment for both sides in the war dec equation. I have not had time to sit and watch the video yet but one would surmise that this mention of an element of enjoyment came from the video of the warr dec round table, if that is correct then even the collected group of CSM and players involved would disagree with you on the enjoyment for both sides aspect of war decs. But hey if you want to continually see the rosters of the corps you waste ISK to war dec reduced to zero because of dodging tactics hey I am OK with that I am perhaps one of EvE's greatest war dec dodgers, I have had lots of practice and frustrated a lot of war dec players along the way. You simply cannot imagine how much fun it is to un-dock a blingy mission ship right in full view of those who just a few minutes ago were your aggressors in a war dec knowing that there is nothing they can do that will not get them destroyed by Concord and knowing full well that because NPC corp you cannot be war decced. On the other hand if you want to actually see some war in your war decs I suggest that a change of attitude may be in order.
Ralph King-Griffin Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance 18937	Posted - 2016.11.04 14:34:26 - [49] - Quote Donnachadh wrote: Daichi Yamato wrote: EVE is a PvP game, and that means at ALL times. Again with this lie that EvE is a "PvP" (insert traditional shoot each other in the face definition) game. EvE is a sandbox that has many play styles and yes PvP is one of those play styles. In fact given that most items in EvE are player made and that CCP is pushing the game even further in that direction one could argue that resource procurement and manufacturing are the single most important play styles in EvE because without them you would have no ships to fly and no weapons and ammo to shoot people with. John Yatolile wrote: nothing in eve needs enjoyment for both sides News flash this is a game we ALL play for enjoyment, when there is no enjoyment in it people stop playing. Wondering if you read the article in this link, it mentions that there needs to be an element of enjoyment for both sides in the war dec equation. I have not had time to sit and watch the video yet but one would surmise that this mention of an element of enjoyment came from the video of the warr dec round table, if that is correct then even the collected group of CSM and players involved would disagree with you on the enjoyment for both sides aspect of war decs. But hey if you want to continually see the rosters of the corps you waste ISK to war dec reduced to zero because of dodging tactics hey I am OK with that I am perhaps one of EvE's greatest war dec dodgers, I have had lots of practice and frustrated a lot of war dec players along the way. You simply cannot imagine how much fun it is to un-dock a blingy mission ship right in full view of those who just a few minutes ago were your aggressors in a war dec knowing that there is nothing they can do that will not get them destroyed by Concord and knowing full well that because NPC corp you cannot be war decced. On the other hand if you want to actually see some war in your war decs I suggest that a change of attitude may be in order. Asterothi (the author of the article) dosent live or PvP in highsec so ... Watch the roundtable. We're Back in Business , have your very own Meeny Faced Bastards on call today =]\|[=
John Yatolile Thrashers Unlimited 4	Posted - 2016.11.04 15:51:00 - [50] - Quote Donnachadh wrote: News flash this is a game we ALL play for enjoyment, when there is no enjoyment in it people stop playing. Wondering if you read the article in this link, it mentions that there needs to be an element of enjoyment for both sides in the war dec equation. I have not had time to sit and watch the video yet but one would surmise that this mention of an element of enjoyment came from the video of the warr dec round table, if that is correct then even the collected group of CSM and players involved would disagree with you on the enjoyment for both sides aspect of war decs. But hey if you want to continually see the rosters of the corps you waste ISK to war dec reduced to zero because of dodging tactics hey I am OK with that I am perhaps one of EvE's greatest war dec dodgers, I have had lots of practice and frustrated a lot of war dec players along the way. You simply cannot imagine how much fun it is to un-dock a blingy mission ship right in full view of those who just a few minutes ago were your aggressors in a war dec knowing that there is nothing they can do that will not get them destroyed by Concord and knowing full well that because NPC corp you cannot be war decced. On the other hand if you want to actually see some war in your war decs I suggest that a change of attitude may be in order. I just play it to murder and get murdered in null sec I don't see why you have to force others to lower their enjoyment just so you can have yours Also I don't see why undocking in a mission ship after dodging feels good, it means they won and were able to inconvenience you I don't need war in war decs, I get my pvp elsewhere

Ghaustyl Kathix Rising Thunder 86	Posted - 2016.11.04 18:28:25 - [51] - Quote Lann Shahni wrote: 1. i do not propose an end to war in high, just rebalancingto make it more fun and enging, giving both sides a reason to fitgh Except carebear corps still won't fight. Even if every war-dec nerf proposed gets in, carebears will complain about war-decs, will still complain that this forced PvP is ruining their game, and still wouldn't come out to fight. Lann Shahni wrote: 3. eve is sandbox, with pvp elements, not a PVP sandbox, and there should be palce for every one play, PVP and PVE alike! I think this misunderstanding is your problem. Eve is very fundamentally a PvP-focused game. Even some of the most central PvE activities, like incursions and market trading have some themes of PvP (in the case of incursions, contesting sites). You would probably argue that the recent Purity of the Throne event, for example, was entirely PvE, except I've gotten some good PvP out of it. Conflict is the main driving force in this game; without PvP there wouldn't be much of a reason for any of the PvE activities like industry. Lann Shahni wrote: I simple thought, a lot the high sec "PVP" players say they are doing for the PVP content! why not go low/nul or WH? Each area of space is its own different animal and has its own style of PvP. I prefer wormholes, myself. Some people love low-sec's style of PvP and can't stand null, for example. Some people like the different brand of PvP that high-sec provides. I can imagine a lack of capital ships is one feature some people like. Several war-dec nerfs have already been implemented (removal of the watch-list being the latest), and that has forced high-sec war-dec entities into methods of play that is less fun. Removal of watch-list has forced many entities to camp on trade hubs and war-dec anything they can find, rather than going out to hunt targets. Nerfs in the past have forced smaller war-dec corps to consolidate into larger corporations and alliances (that are less possible for smaller groups to fight). This behavior isn't because they're risk-averse, it's so that they can get any targets at all. The past has shown that more nerfs only make the problem worse.
Minerva Arbosa Astrocomical Warped Intentions 26	Posted - 2016.11.04 20:50:16 - [52] - Quote Last I heard locator agents still work pretty well on tracking down targets and such. So does doing your own research on where players might be before initiating war decs.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 45374	Posted - 2016.11.04 22:36:26 - [53] - Quote Minerva Arbosa wrote: Last I heard locator agents still work pretty well on tracking down targets and such. So does doing your own research on where players might be before initiating war decs. Although I'm not a merc, I hope I understand fairly well the impact of the watchlist changes to be able to explain why it isn't so simple as that. Prior to the watch list changes, which were made to reduce intel about capital pilots, the wardec/Marc community used locator agents all the time. When a watchlist notification reported an enemy online, they ran locates to find them so they could go hunt them down. However, locator agents work whether a character is logged in or not. Once the watchlist changes occurred, the use of the same appproach resulted in hunters chasing ghosts who weren't even online. That alone isn't necessarily bad, however the resulting optimal wardec strategy that has resulted, is bad. Why continue to hunt ghosts when instead you can just hug a trade hub and blanke wardec everything? That's the new optimal approach because chasing people who aren't online is boring as ****. Easier and more fun to wardec everything and let the content come to you. For many mercs that approach sux, so a lot of the true hunters stopped and either play much less or do different things now. Others just joined the other wardec groups red lying in larger groups that need to wardec even more Corps/Alliances to ensure enough content for their members. At the end of the day, mercs and wardeccers are just playing the game for fun like the rest of us; and they choose to play it their way, just as we choose to play it our way. There is nothing wrong with any of those choices. So for those of us that don't wardec, it's actually in our best interest to make proposals that support the ability of small groups and mercs to play effectively, not to make proposals that further encourage the blob approach. Small groups that will actually fight create opportunities for defenders to attack them. Large blob groups are either too big to attack, or they just dock up because they are only interested in consuming people, not being consumed. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
DSpite Culhach 310	Posted - 2016.11.05 01:57:04 - [54] - Quote Playing EVE has basically screwed up my view into other games permanently, and probably in a good way. I play Warframe quite a bit, because I can play it in "small bites" as these days my attention span is lacking, and you would not believe how much petty complaining goes on in that game, a game may I add, totally free, and that is totally non competitive in any way, but they still feel entitled about everything. EVE revolves around making other people lose more stuff then you. Regardless of what "measures" you choose to put in place, it does not change that fact, and people will just find new ways to workaround your trying to stop them. Even if Wardeccing was made impossible in Hisec, dedicated people would just move to infiltrating Corps and just stealing all your stuff that way. It is just the EVE way. I agree somewhat that Wardeccing is being used as a one-trick pony in many cases just so some Corps can keep their own Hisec safety and kill at will, but I honestly don't know how to make that more manageable. I kind of dislike the current system in the same way I dislike the bounty system, where basically it has to be examined from the point of view that people with too much time on their hands will just find way to abuse it. Heck, look at how Faction Warfare was manipulated once to be just an ISK printing machine. I apparently have no idea what I'm doing. http://users.tpg.com.au/marpia/EVE_Online.html
Azazel Shardani Viziam Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2016.11.05 05:27:56 - [55] - Quote This is a Pvp game, we have to accept it, period. We can easily agree that no matter what limitations are put in place, they will be easily abused. If you put a cap on current war declarations, what stops you to collaborate with others to fill the queue to stop others from declaring on you. nothing! You will be able to avoid Pvp by getting friendlies to keep you safe.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 4526	Posted - 2016.11.05 06:13:12 - [56] - Quote Ralph King-Griffin wrote: And if you were to watch the roundtable you would see that the Merc community (or those of us present) unilaterally agree with you about this I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 4526	Posted - 2016.11.05 06:44:55 - [57] - Quote Minerva Arbosa wrote: Last I heard locator agents still work pretty well on tracking down targets and such. So does doing your own research on where players might be before initiating war decs. They do still work, the difficulty is that there is no way of knowing who it is you need to run a locator agent on and that in high security space, where people can move with near total freedom and were there's no real need to be in any particular place at any particular time. Addi tonally if you get to a system which the locator said the individual is in and they aren't there the only way to verify if they moved or logged off is to run another locator after you arrive and wait for the result and if it indicates another system, move to that system and repeat until you either find them or it tells you they're in the same system as them, but they aren't present in local. This means that if you're at war with more than a tiny handful of people you will spend hours upon hours scouting individuals who simply are not present in the world at all, which is further exacerbated by the long cooldowns and low availability of locator agents. You may think "It's not that much worse, is it?" and the answer is yes it is, actually hunting people using locator agents was not a particularly fast process before and was sufficiently a pain in the ass that trade hub campers existed. Now because of the huge amount of time you'll spend chasing characters that may not even have logged in for months a process that would previously have taken 40 minutes will take you 18+ hours. Locator agents are not a substitute for the watchlist, the watchlist was the reason why locator agents worked at all.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn Singularity Syndicate 2095	Posted - 2016.11.05 12:02:29 - [58] - Quote The cost element of wars seems arse about face. A wardec is basically bribing CONCORD to ignore aggressive acts. The cost of the wardec should maybe be some fixed cost plus an amount that is a function of the difference between the number of members in the corp. E.g. a 10 man corp is wardecced by a 100 man corp. The fixed cost is say 50 mil, then another 1 mil per each player the aggressor has more than the defender, so in this example an additional 90 mil. This is effectively paying CONCORDto ignore each member of the corp. The numbers are just for example, the principle being that a small corp attacking a large corp pays the base cost. A large corp attacking a small corp pays a lot more. Even sized corp wars would pay roughly the base cost. This would allow small dedicated merc companies to flourish, but also give a corp with mumbers to fight back against such corps. The allies mechanism would need to go though. If another corp wants to help you they should also wardec the opponent. This makes being an ally a real decision with associated risk and cost. Potentially tie this to a method for a defender to 'win' and wars would hopefully become more two-sided affairs that all can feel invested in.
Ralph King-Griffin Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance 18947	Posted - 2016.11.05 13:28:36 - [59] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: Ralph King-Griffin wrote: unilaterally I don't think that word means what you think it means. . Evidently I can't tell the difference between unilaterally and unanimously in the wee hours of the morning. Damn you vimsy and your literacy! We're Back in Business , have your very own Meeny Faced Bastards on call today =]\|[=
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 1057	Posted - 2016.11.05 14:20:29 - [60] - Quote John Yatolile wrote: I don't see why you have to force others to lower their enjoyment just so you can have yours Let me re-phrase that for you so that it more accurately conveys the real situation and your real meaning. As a PvP player my fun is more important that your fun as a PvE player. Yet another of the tired, old and to be honest ridiculous comments we get from members of the war dec groups. And one has to wonder if you are so concerned about fun why do you ruin other players ability to have fun by declaring war on them? Oh silly me I forgot you are a PvP player and YOUR fun is more important than those you war dec. John Yatolile wrote: Also I don't see why undocking in a mission ship after dodging feels good, it means they won and were able to inconvenience you No body has EVER inconvenience me in this game and no one EVER WILL, I have to many alts that can do the same thing this character can, alts you could spend decades trying to find but never will. Mine and the industrial characters and activities of the group of real life friends I fly with are buried under so many layers of alts, alt corps and the use of NPC stations as well as low sec that you and every other war dec player in the game combined will NEVER be able to find them much less disrupt them, so there is no inconvenience there either. And while we go about the things we do unhindered by your useless war decs we do so with the knowledge that it cost you (or someone else) at least 50 mil per week for the privilege of failing miserably at trying to disrupt the things we do for fun and profit. I did not expect people like you to understand the whole enjoyment of un-docking a blingy mission ship in front of those who had you war decced just a few minutes ago thing. And no they have not inconvenienced me, I am still getting to do EXACTLY what I want to do, not only that but I can do it right in front of them. To be short it is the ultimate f* you kind of thing, you can try but you cannot affect me or my game play style. John Yatolile wrote:** I don't need war in war decs, I get my pvp elsewhere Then one has to ask why do you care what happens to war decs if you do not need them to get your PvP?



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.