| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
278
|
Posted - 2012.04.16 20:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
First off, I can see that this guy is a total carebear. Also, most of that article is complete rubbish and I can't help but notice total bias.
To start, I notice that he focuses on the attacking corps being able to 'weasel' their way out of a war should things go south, like not re-upping the war. 1) I would think this is good news for the corp that got wardec'd. I am pretty sure that in many cases they really don't want the fight but if they can scare off the dog then great. 2) I can't help but notice that the narrator conveniently left out Dec-shields but focuses on the dec'd corps being so helpless. A corp is only as helpless as they let themselves be. 3) He talks about Merc's not really being a boon as the wardec corp again can just weasel out of the situation. Again, I point to #1. Isn't this the goal, to get the monkey of your back?
Second, I find his comment about pvp corps being shell corps loaded with alts and how they will always pick weak or industrial targets to be complete bull. I am not an alt. My corp is not a shell corp. And we do not strictly go after weak targets. And I know my corp is not the only corp that works to these standards. In fact back when I was in Warsmith's we would regularly be hired as mercs to go after other grief corps. Simply put the Narrator is factually wrong here.
The above also coincides with point three, that these small shell corps have 0 risk when attacking larger corps. Again, a corp is only as helpless as it allows itself to be. If they decide to dock up and do nothing then that is their choice, just let it be known that there are tons of other options out there. And as I said, we are not always risk free. We may know how to fit a ship better than some corps and know how to use them, but numbers are still numbers, and if the larger corp that we're attacking suddenly decides to fight in numbers, there is very little we can do.
And Four, he doesn't even touch on half of the mechanics that CCP is planning on implementing. In fact most of the article reads like your typical thread where he makes several factual mistakes, and comes up with some idea that naturally will 'fix' everything.
That is a horrible article. |

Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
282
|
Posted - 2012.04.16 20:54:00 -
[2] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote: Dec-shields under the proposed changes are going away. Assuming this article is a response to that, the omission is entirely relevant.
Nothing is stopping a player from corp hopping into an alt corp. There is more than one form of dec-shield out there.
Tyberius Franklin wrote: Calling him factually wrong would be like stating it never happens. If no one had alts then perhaps this could be considered valid, but the idea that no one has ever thought of having their means to continue business as usual in a different corp from the one they are using to declare war for whatever reason is laughable.
No it is not like saying it never happens. I know there shell corps out there, you know that there are shell corps out there. But he is stating that we are all alt corps and we only pick on weak players and industrials. That is factually wrong. We are the big bad boogy to many carebear corps and they commonly tell campfire stories about us to each other. How would a corp know what the other corp does once their own war has ended.
Tyberius Franklin wrote: This again goes back to target selection. Knowing your opponents numbers and activity provides an invaluable potential resource for an attacker who also has the initiative. It allows you to ensure you have all reasonable advantages. Why would someone who is trying to accomplish anything other than getting blown up want to undock to that?
I've said it twice and I'll say it again, a corp is only as weak as they allow themselves to be. You don't want to do your homework on the people who are attacking you, fine. You don't want to seek help in removing the problem, fine. You don't want to learn how to fight, fine. You have the tools, if you choose not to use them then don't look to blame anyone but yourself. |

Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
282
|
Posted - 2012.04.16 20:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
bornaa wrote:
And what about "one little problem" that attackers are in 99% alts in alt corp that don't need to play at all on that alts to play EVE and defenders don't have that privilege so they actually cant play at all???
Citation please. Where is your number coming from? |

Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
282
|
Posted - 2012.04.16 21:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I get a wardec. I look up my opponent. I see characters significantly older than mine who are very PvP active. My chances of doing serious damage with my character/players skills and numbers available are slim.
Character age is another misconception among players. He can never have more than 5 points in any one skill just like you. Having said that, if a ship set up requires 12 million points to fly then it requires 12 million points. Having points in lasers will not help your blaster boat. Having points in negotiation will not help your armor one bit. A character having more points does not make him automatically better. |

Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
282
|
Posted - 2012.04.16 21:23:00 -
[5] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote: Most <> All. I'm not even arguing that "most" is an entirely accurate word in this case. But dismissing the argument and saying it's factually wrong is like stating it isn't reasonably prevalent or worth considering.
I don't think you and I are on the same page here. I'll will show you 2 quotes and what I am talking about.
massively wrote: The main issue is that it's hilariously biased in favour of the aggressor, who can prepare for the war and will always pick weak or industrial targets.
That line is factually wrong. We do not always pick weak or industrial targets. He should have placed a word like 'generally' in there.
Massively wrote:As most empire wardecs are initiated by small shell corps full of PvP alts, the attacking players won't mind logging out for a few days if the war backfires.
Unless he can provide proof, this again is factually wrong. Always back up your claims.
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Knowing you are up against a superior force doesn't suddenly put you on equal terms. Shelling out isk for defense doesn't guarantee success, and it certainly doesn't mean you can go around acting as normal with no issues. Fighting back doesn't guarantee a favorable outcome. There is no such thing as winning simply by disallowing weakness.
Lesson number 2 - Life is not always guaranteed. Many of my fights don't end up the way I plan them, I certainly wouldn't expect it any other way.
|

Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
282
|
Posted - 2012.04.16 22:07:00 -
[6] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Tobiaz wrote: The empire wardeccers are the predators killing off both the sickly and the obese, before they infect to many newborns.
That's not war, that's stealing purses from old ladies and lollipops from babies. This moral argument of weeding out the weak is a just an attempt to justify greifing carebears. If one wants to help "weakling" newbies, go recruit some instead of trying to justify teaching them a lesson with the big epeen gun. War in Eve should be fun, not dreaded. Creating clear goals for both sides will help in this regard.
On the same note the 'weaklings' can just ask. You would be surprised how many 'griefers' offer good solid advice. I spent some time in one such 'griefer' corp which helped me quite a bit, and I also learned first hand that they weren't just about going after only weak and industrial targets. In fact we were hired often by corps that we had dec'd at some point to go fight another corp that was dec'ing them currently. |

Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
283
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 02:02:00 -
[7] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote: the article wrote: Nobody will fly a mining ship, hauler, freighter, or expensive mission-running ship while a war is in progress, Even though they already do, frequently. Just sayin.
Yep, you'd be surprised how often this happens. The last war that we just came out of we racked up a few mining barges and scored ourselves a free mission Harbinger that the pilot simply bailed out of. I don't think the other corp even bothered to put us on the ever so useful watch list which makes a wonderful first warning that trouble is coming. |

Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
284
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 18:20:00 -
[8] - Quote
Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:Simi Kusoni wrote: If you honestly believe a small industrial corp pulls a total of 300m a day then you've been doing something drastically wrong in Eve. Maybe some very bad one man operations pull that little, but for most players 300m is the equivalent of two, maybe three hours gameplay.
Where the hell are you mining in highsec?
Probably any old belt. Though you are restricting it solely to mining or bot as some of us call it. Industrial's build and sell as well and it's easy to have all 3 going at once. |

Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
285
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 21:57:00 -
[9] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:CCP - Your board sucks. It reeks of having lost control of your technology. Not a comforting feeling.
War should be the province of player sov. Since sov is only holdable in 0.0, it can only occur in 0.0. (Try counting how many "problems" this present system has which that would solve.) Hi and Lo sec already have existing sov. Only Minmatar, Amarr, Caldari and Gallente can declare war in their specific zones. Their wars are on their borders, ipso facto.
This would solve the abuses of the War Dec, removing it from the reach of griefer corps. It would remove the absurdity of thinking you can declare and operate a war in someone else's sovereign domain...what is CONCORD being paid for but to maintain order?
Further, it would provide the much needed incentive to move players from hi to null sec as a matter of player development and maturation. It would return the goal of "being good enough to play in null sec." This in turn would open the flood gates for null sec recruitment, thus making competitive the obtaining of new players. Not to mention...though I will....provide an incentive for the better players, to turn their attention to newer players...give a reason to help them develop. Null sec's warrior draft system.
This would create meaning to the phrase, "If you want to play (EVE) with the big dogs, you have to get off the porch." The "endgame content" would become more significant to the newer players. It would even give the older players another dimension to the game that would require organization and planning. He who doesn't recruit from the welling ranks becomes outnumbered. It would also make it rather risky to try to settle with a handful of people "you know you can trust" and make people start running a few risks...you know - the ones that like to pretend they're doing that already.
Look at the map. Empire is tiny compared to null. The game should be played out there. The rules should be made out there. Hi and lo should be boring. "Nothing ever happens in hi or lo," is how you get people out of there into the real space.
May the whining begin.
I'm sorry but I have to disagree with this post. One of the crowning achievements of eve is that endgame has a different meaning for everyone. My ideal endgame does not include being random ship #3746 sitting at a gate waiting for some guy on TS to tell me to shoot at something, while the main branch of the fleet is actually having fun cleaning out the system of POS's. I am at my current endgame and I am enjoying it. Maybe some day my endgame will change and I will enjoy that version as well. If I want to go back to linear, which is what you are suggesting, well I've got plenty of games to choose from.
|
| |
|