| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jim Luc
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
29
   |
Posted - 2012.04.17 18:06:00 -
[151] - Quote
Xorv wrote:The article and it's ideas for Wardecs are terrible. The worst part is the structure idea, making you have to defend a static location gives all the power to blobs and is yet another blow to small gangs and guerrilla warfare.
So make it multiple locations located in the defender's systems? The attacker should have something valuable that can be lost, not just paying a bribe so concord looks the other way... Risk vs reward, amiright? |
Daneirkus Auralex
The Foreign Legion
Test Alliance Please Ignore
72
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 18:08:00 -
[152] - Quote
What if the aggressor corp could no longer dock at NPC stations for which the defender corp has high standings? |
Sigurd Sig Hansen
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 18:15:00 -
[153] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:Where the hell are you mining in highsec? Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:are you mining in highsec? Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:are you mining Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:mining
YOURE the one talking abouit indy corps and you berate me for asking about mining. nice job invalidating your own argument and showing youre just looking to troll.
I see you editted your quote too
Mining is the "Deadliest Catch" in this game |
Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
284
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 18:20:00 -
[154] - 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. |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
624
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 18:27:00 -
[155] - Quote
Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:YOURE the one talking abouit indy corps and you berate me for asking about mining. nice job invalidating your own argument and showing youre just looking to troll.
Yes, because you assumed my comments on income were based on a single person, or small number of people, mining.
MINING.
Lol. As I said in my original comment, a "300m a day operation" for a small industrial corp is pretty terrible. There is a reason industrial is not synonymous with mining.
Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:I see you editted your quote too
You mean the edit where I clearly typed "EDIT", and showed my addition?
--Will Support Your Terrible Forum Thread For ISK-- |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
624
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 18:30:00 -
[156] - Quote
Jim Luc wrote:Xorv wrote:The article and it's ideas for Wardecs are terrible. The worst part is the structure idea, making you have to defend a static location gives all the power to blobs and is yet another blow to small gangs and guerrilla warfare. So make it multiple locations located in the defender's systems? The attacker should have something valuable that can be lost, not just paying a bribe so concord looks the other way... Risk vs reward, amiright?
How do you define the "defender's systems"? My corp at the moment is an alt corp based in syndicate, could I now war dec a high sec care bear alliance and they'd have to come into syndicate with a structure grinding force to fight back against me?
That would certainly be entertaining at the very least.
--Will Support Your Terrible Forum Thread For ISK-- |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
595
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 18:54:00 -
[157] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:YOURE the one talking abouit indy corps and you berate me for asking about mining. nice job invalidating your own argument and showing youre just looking to troll. Yes, because you assumed my comments on income were based on a single person, or small number of people, mining. MINING. Lol. As I said in my original comment, a "300m a day operation" for a small industrial corp is pretty terrible. There is a reason industrial is not synonymous with mining.
It might sound odd, but "industry" is where all the mining skills reside.
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Sri Nova
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
58
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 20:03:00 -
[158] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:
How do you define the "defender's systems"? My corp at the moment is an alt corp based in syndicate, could I now war dec a high sec care bear alliance and they'd have to come into syndicate with a structure grinding force to fight back against me?
That would certainly be entertaining at the very least.
If the warring parties were banned from NPC stations. Then waging war from syndicate into high sec would place a huge amount of stress on your war party. This is why warring parties should be banned from NPC stations, it gives immediate need to get the war over and done with. While creating a need for logistics so they can run the war, with the bonus of putting both parties at risk . |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
627
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 20:07:00 -
[159] - Quote
Sri Nova wrote:Simi Kusoni wrote:
How do you define the "defender's systems"? My corp at the moment is an alt corp based in syndicate, could I now war dec a high sec care bear alliance and they'd have to come into syndicate with a structure grinding force to fight back against me?
That would certainly be entertaining at the very least.
If the warring parties were banned from NPC stations. Then waging war from syndicate into high sec would place a huge amount of stress on your war party. This is why warring parties should be banned from NPC stations, it gives immediate need to get the war over and done with. While creating a need for logistics so they can run the war, with the bonus of putting both parties at risk .
Well, I honestly can't argue with that well thought out and completely impossible to exploit idea.
--Will Support Your Terrible Forum Thread For ISK-- |
Serene Repose
Perkone
Caldari State
604
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 21:15:00 -
[160] - Quote
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 have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility toward every form of tyranny over the mind of man.-á |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power.
Cascade Imminent
670
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 21:41:00 -
[161] - Quote
lol npc forum alt opinion
if you remove pvp from high/lowsec, that should include market/economic pvp. So just disable all markets/bounties/mining/incursions in highsec and I'll consider agreeing with it |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
155
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 21:51:00 -
[162] - Quote
Jowen Datloran wrote:As long as high sec wars puts nothing at stake for the aggressor, consequently making it impossible for a defender to gain something from a victory, they will continue to be a "pay-to-grief" tool.
The war deck system should force all agressors a 100 million ISK per corp member deposit which if the agressor doen't kill more ships then it loses the deposit goes to the defender or if they corp hop after the war starts to evade loses. That way if the agressor never comes out to fight they are penalized for a frivlous war & greifers that corp hop 1/2 way after the start of a war are forced to pay 100 million deposit & lose the deposit to the defenders if they kill a few ships then leave when the heat later comes down on them.
To the whiners : CCP Soundwave "Incursions are not a big issue in terms of isk globally" |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power.
Cascade Imminent
670
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 21:52:00 -
[163] - Quote
no that's stupid, shut up |
Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
285
|
Posted - 2012.04.17 21:57:00 -
[164] - 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.
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
2266
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 05:45:00 -
[165] - Quote
YuuKnow wrote:Destination SkillQueue wrote:YuuKnow wrote:The article has good points. One has to admit that the War Dec system is really just a griefer enabler. CCP originally wanted a PvE zone and a PvP zone. Then they decided to create a PvP/griefer tatic in the PvE zone, and now they realize their mistake and can't figure out a way to fix it.
yk Your knowledge of EVE history and design is about as good(bad) as they article's author knowledge about wardecs. My knowledge of Eve history and design stretches back to release! http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=11087&page=1#1Probably before you could drive or vote. yk
Wow. Why don't you link your wallet size or SP count too to prove your argument right instead of actual arguments. They're all about as impressive and relevant to the topic as your character age. I'll admit, that my knowledge and authority on the matter only comes from interviews given by the founders of EVE, so my opinion might not be as good source of info as the opinions of random old guys without arguments, but I'll still rely on those interviews over you if you don't mind.
What they've consistently stated is that the design of EVE was to create a living universe where players could impact the world and make a difference. Elite is often cited as an example of what they were going for. They specifically didn't design seperate PvP or PvE zones and the wardec system isn't some kind of accident or mistake they made. It's all according to their original stated design and my protest to your post comes directly from the fact, that you're inventing your own imaginary design to interpret things instead of using the publicly stated design goals.
The differences between the "zones" in EVE do have reasons for existing, but it's based largely on pure PvP reasons. The difference is between unregulated and regulated PvP. This is a reasonable design, that enables players to play the game without having to constantly take part in ship PvP, acts as a safe haven for new players and allows older ones to recover from their wounds in relative safety. You're still very vulnerable to PvP though and even free for all PvP, if you're a part of a player organization. They're clearly not PvE or PvP specific zones and large parts of the PvE content is only available in the most dangerous PvP zones of the game. |
Lord RectAnus
Sardaukar Merc Guild
General Tso's Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 06:01:00 -
[166] - Quote
Burseg Sardaukar wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:Here is an example of how the Current Wardeck system was broken & I see no fixes in the next one..
Dailty Corp hopping:
Psychotic Monk
Security Status -1.9
The Skunkworks [SKNK.]
Member for 0 days
BIO Employment History Latest Forum Posts
Yea... this is a big problem, too. Accepting new members if you are an aggressor should not be allowed at all. On the other side, if you ditch from a corp in a war (or Alliance) you should have some sort of "stain" on your record.
I fully support the idea of the aggressor being unable to scoop new members/corps mid-war. Like it was mentioned in the article, the aggressor has all the time in the world to prepare for the war because THEY know it's coming and choose when to start it so they should have everything they need at the start of the war and should not be allowed to call reinforcements because they decide they need bigger guns or what-not. Example being, a corp declares war on another corp/alliance that's in low sec and half way through the war, the aggressor scoop dreadnought pilots to siege the defending corp's POS's. That should be allowed. Yes I know they could ask for the dreads to do it anyway without scooping, but my point still stands that the scooping should not be allowed. |
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
384
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 07:53:00 -
[167] - Quote
Jowen Datloran wrote:As long as high sec wars puts nothing at stake for the aggressor, consequently making it impossible for a defender to gain something from a victory, they will continue to be a "pay-to-grief" tool.
Now that CCP is updating kill mails to include the value of the destroyed items, then how about this one:
If, by the end of a war*, the aggressing corporation fails to destroy more assets value than the defending corporation every person who has been a member of the aggressing corporation at one time during the war declaration receives a -2.0 (up to discussion) to personal security status. Now THAT is putting something at stake, though the defending corp still does not gain much from winning.
*: A war ends when either the aggressing corporation stops paying or is forced to surrender. If the defending corp surrenders there will be no security standing penalties to the aggressing corp.
Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook-á |
Phony v2
Dark Circle Enforcement
Templis Dragonaors
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 08:39:00 -
[168] - Quote
I agree with almost everything he proposes for a new wardec system. Except for how he would integrate player owned structure's into it.
AMERICA! That's why.-á |
Norxil
Best Path Inc.
Ethereal Dawn
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 08:49:00 -
[169] - Quote
Well... there isn't really a true or false solution to this problem, only a good or bad solution but you will know after it has been implemented.
One thing I do like about the article that there needs to be some reward for de attacker and the defender. They both need to be rewarded for the kills they make. Docking up and refuse to fight should be discouraged, both for the attacker and defender.
One thing the author talks about is the PvP alt corps.. but what about the PvE alt corps? If he thinks PvP alt corps are bad because they mitigate the risk, same goes for PvE alt corps.. how many big alliances have an alt corp to trade and move stuff safely?
I think the wardec system should go altogether and a new system should be in place. Instead of wardeccing, everybody should have an option to pay a fee for protection, either from Concord or a merc corp or even no fee at all.. Players who do not pay a fee have the most risk to be attacked where people with protection from Concord have the less risk to be attacked but pay a price for it. This makes PvP and PvE alot more fluent. |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
211
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 08:55:00 -
[170] - Quote
CCP's proposal of how to determine the size of the warfee is bad. Not only does it protect the large corporations and leaves the smaller ones vulnerable, it also is very messy. Here is a more elegant solution:
Corporations are divided into size-classes each with a pricetag
1-10 (15M)
10-25 (25M)
25-50 (40M)
50-100 (75M)
100-250 (150M)
250-500 (350M)
500-1000 (600M)
1000+ (750M)
The cost of war is the sum of the price-tags belonging to both corporations.
So a 60 player corporation declaring war on a 14 player corporation would weekly cost 100M ISK. It is relatively cheaper to wardec larger corporations than smaller ones, because they are supposed to be more capable to defend themselves.
http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/Tobiaz/sig_complaints.gif
How about fixing image-linking on the forums, CCP? I want to see signatures! |
Liam Mirren
448
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 09:08:00 -
[171] - Quote
The whole idea is dumb as fck, made up by folks who clearly have no understanding of how things really work.
Not being able to cancel a war halfway the week means you can't offer a ransom to be "left alone" until a full week has passed, it does nothing for the "oops, the deccers got into something they can't handle" because if push comes to shove that really isn't going to make any difference. In short, a dumb idea made up by a clueless person.
Basing cost on corp size is also ******** as fck, at least with the current numbers shown. I'll be the first one to agree that right now decking a corp is hilariously cheap but the suggested cost is just dumb and, again, can only have been dreamt up by someone who clearly doesn't like PVP or doesn't understand what EVE is about... quantity over quality, really?
Actually, the proposed ideas on fanfest (and round table issues afterwards) really show that the guys working on it should go do something else, like revamping mining or something. I know this all sounds harsh but I have zero respect for people who decide to implement changes to things they have no clue on.
Excellence is not a skill, it's an attitude.
My guides: http://mirren.freeforums.org |
Xanthia Grint
Phoenix Security Consolidated
3
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 09:17:00 -
[172] - Quote
I think his ideas for structures is a damn good idea
Would completley revamp wars in eve and stop the griefer **** easily enuff
|
Tobiaz
Spacerats
212
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 09:19:00 -
[173] - Quote
Arbitrary objectives are just ridiculous and won't do anything except open doors to exploits. And besides that: shooting structures in empire is just horrible.
http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/Tobiaz/sig_complaints.gif
How about fixing image-linking on the forums, CCP? I want to see signatures! |
Avila Cracko
340
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 09:29:00 -
[174] - Quote
Liam Mirren wrote:
Actually, the proposed ideas on fanfest (and round table issues afterwards) really show that the guys working on it should go do something else, like revamping mining or something. I know this all sounds harsh but I have zero respect for people who decide to implement changes to things they have no clue on.
And you know whats the funnest part???
CCP put one whole DEV team on WAR decs.
And whole team wants to solve all problems with tweeks in few simple formulas.
Sorry, but I don't see where is DEV time spent here.
When i heard that CCP put DEV team on this problem i thought there will be whole revamp of War Decs and we are getting nothing.
And you saw FanFest presentation?
DEV that hold that part of presentations didnt even wanted to be there
and all people that asked him questions on the end were concerned and got the same kind of "no answer".
And you could clearly see that DEV had no idea what he is talking about.
When person who do the job is not into it, you get nothing.
Sorry but i don't see that any real work is getting done here.
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. |
Liam Mirren
448
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 09:36:00 -
[175] - Quote
Avila Cracko wrote:Liam Mirren wrote:
Actually, the proposed ideas on fanfest (and round table issues afterwards) really show that the guys working on it should go do something else, like revamping mining or something. I know this all sounds harsh but I have zero respect for people who decide to implement changes to things they have no clue on.
And you know whats the funnest part??? CCP put one whole DEV team on WAR decs. And whole team wants to solve all problems with tweeks in few simple formulas. Sorry, but I don't see where is DEV time spent here. When i heard that CCP put DEV team on this problem i thought there will be whole revamp of War Decs and we are getting nothing. And you saw FanFest presentation? DEV that hold that part of presentations didnt even wanted to be there and all people that asked him questions on the end were concerned and got the same kind of "no answer". And you could clearly see that DEV had no idea what he is talking about. When person who do the job is not into it, you get nothing. Sorry but i don't see that any real work is getting done here.
Quite. Mind you, I'm not "attacking" the guy in question, it's nothing personal. I'm raging against the decision to put someone in charge of stuff he has no affinity with, something so important and fundamental in EVE as wars.
Excellence is not a skill, it's an attitude.
My guides: http://mirren.freeforums.org |
Avila Cracko
340
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 10:14:00 -
[176] - Quote
Liam Mirren wrote:Avila Cracko wrote:Liam Mirren wrote:
Actually, the proposed ideas on fanfest (and round table issues afterwards) really show that the guys working on it should go do something else, like revamping mining or something. I know this all sounds harsh but I have zero respect for people who decide to implement changes to things they have no clue on.
And you know whats the funnest part??? CCP put one whole DEV team on WAR decs. And whole team wants to solve all problems with tweeks in few simple formulas. Sorry, but I don't see where is DEV time spent here. When i heard that CCP put DEV team on this problem i thought there will be whole revamp of War Decs and we are getting nothing. And you saw FanFest presentation? DEV that hold that part of presentations didnt even wanted to be there and all people that asked him questions on the end were concerned and got the same kind of "no answer". And you could clearly see that DEV had no idea what he is talking about. When person who do the job is not into it, you get nothing. Sorry but i don't see that any real work is getting done here. Quite. Mind you, I'm not "attacking" the guy in question, it's nothing personal. I'm raging against the decision to put someone in charge of stuff he has no affinity with, something so important and fundamental in EVE as wars.
I am not attacking anybody.
I am just disappointed with everything thats (not) happening.
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. |
JinSanJong
Comply Or Die
Drunk 'n' Disorderly
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 12:07:00 -
[177] - Quote
Hmm im not sure. I still think the new mechanics looks a bit messy, its like someone has said we need to fix that so we shall just put some blanket mechanics in, with no real thought around wars at all.
I mean making the cost higher to dec large alliances, ok I can see a point here, more targets, more cost, but this depends on how much more tha cost is going to be. Sometimes the only way to actually fight back to the larger alliances is to war dec them in empire, because you are just goingto get blobbed in nullsec. So i am hoping this isnt the CSM 0.0 whiners crying they get shot on the jita undock and CCP protecting their already risk free game as it is.
I agree something has to be 'fought over' Most wars start because you want something, there isnt just a war to kill people, theres some end game. I like the idea of some war chest that you win, but if its just a dec fee, its not going to much and not worth fighting over, so maybe something more considerable perhaps?
Maybe you should actually put something on the line thats valuable? Maybe POCOS? Could be the prize? Becuase thats really all you can 'own' in non nullsec areas.
Maybe we make sov in highsec/lowsec, radical I know but the only way you can shoot something that belongs to someone in highsec/lowsec is by war deccing them. You can only war dec them if they actually have sov, the end game is to take the sov, wars still last a week at a time, in order for each side to try regain sov. I do think that we would need to severely limit the number systems any one alliance/corp can hold, infact a constellation at max, no more.
If someone declares war there has to be something that says 'you lost idiot' dont try wardec me again consequence, not jsut a war dec, opps we losing lets stop paying the dec fee. I think one good idea is if an attacker retracts a war becuase they are losing or whatever, the defender has the chance to carry on that war for free for another week.
|
Roime
Shiva Furnace
490
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 12:33:00 -
[178] - Quote
If the agressed party does not fight the agressor, their POSes should be automatically transferred to the aggressor, and the cost of the wardec should be compensated from their corp wallet.
Same would go for whichever party loses the war, they have to pay the costs of the winner and give up their in-space assets.
Defenders have the right to extend the war for free, for an equal time they have been decced.
Aggressors get a global suspect flag in hisec, as they have paid CONCORD to look elsewhere.
This is Sparta. |
Bane Necran
317
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 12:35:00 -
[179] - Quote
Avila Cracko wrote:When i heard that CCP put DEV team on this problem i thought there will be whole revamp of War Decs and we are getting nothing.
This is a disturbing trend i've noticed since Dominion, which was supposed to dramatically change war dynamics in 0.0. They start off saying one thing, but then back down later and only tweak it slightly. I sometimes wonder if devs playing the game along with players makes them sympathetic to whines of a vocal minority, when they should instead soldier on with what's best for the game overall.
But in this case, i still think war is war, and it's never 'fair'. You can either have wars in hisec along with all the unfairness war brings with it, or you remove the ability to have hisec wars altogether. Anything else and it's simply not war anymore.
Now, if only they'd allow the same sort of 'unfairness' in 0.0 wars, instead of catering to casuals. |
Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
69
|
Posted - 2012.04.18 12:49:00 -
[180] - Quote
It should cost more to wardec young corps and alliances rather than less. After all, old/large alliances is where the isk is really made. It also promotes dual accounts+ spies/ganking freighters, which is great for drama and CCP.
Its far too easy for large/old entities to deal with war but far harder for small/young entities.
The already present problem gets amplified with the disability of small/young entities to deal with war or in most cases not deal with war(logoski).
Once again CCP, provide functionality to make a stand and win the war, at least for small/young entities.
Nobody cares about large/old entities since they already made it! Its the small/young entities that need to make it pass that steep hill of wardecs + experience + isk + character skills + getting corporation numbers higher + getting fc/logi/logistics/miners/manufactureers and pvpers. This will promote growth in EVE overall and there will be a larger amount of mid level entities which is what you want in ANY world economy and if EVE is trully an economy in itself then this is were you want to be!!! |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |