Player Features and Ideas Discussion

War is the continuation of politics by other means.
War is thus an act of force to compel our enemy to do our will.

- Carl von Clausewitz

As I understand it, null sec and possibly wormholes are the only places where this definition of war stands up (certain systems have valuable resources or strategic importance) and the only places where a declaration of war is not necessary.

In high sec, corps war dec other corps simply because they want to shoot them. This is not war, since there are no strategic or political goals and no consequences for the loser (other than some lost ships.) To make an analogy, hi sec 'war' declarations are like ****** (or Churchill) declaring war on the enemy in order to merely shoot their planes down. It makes no sense and is a weak link in the chain of realism and suspension of belief in Eve Online.

I know the war dec mechanic makes 'content' for players, but there must be a better way, a more realistic approach which will ultimately lead to more satisfying gameplay than the current way.

I do not have the specifics, but I suggest the following as avenues for discussion:

1. Declarations of war must have types of goals attached to them. These goals must be measurable and limited in time.

2. When the outcome of the war is known, there must be consequences as in any war. The loser must lose something and the winner must gain something. That is the nature of war.

3. The definition of the goals will take into account and solve the problem of small corporations war deccing large corporations that they could not hope to destroy in any plausible war simulation.

As an example, perhaps camping the enemy's home system for a specified continuous period of time might be one of the goals. Perhaps holding a system, protecting a POS might be another.

All I am saying is the present mechanic does not meet the same standards of realism that can be found in the rest of Eve Online. Thank you for reading and for your comments.

Ideally there would be a choice of goals so as not to be too arbitrary. That would be better than no goals at all which is the most arbitrary...

1. many things can't be measured in eve. War dec to shut down an entity. Invade their system with 400 peeps, they only have 100 online and the stay docked up. They are shut down...maybe not how you like it but they are shutdown.

2. Its on the war deccer to pick fights with a prize. Test and goons....who ever wins is getting something. Empire dec bears if they want something need to dec corps with something to take. They want the moon spot a pos is at, well they will get it. Dec'ing a miner corp well you don't get crap, they dock up most times. latter is not giving out a physical prize...don't like that aspect well then don't dec miner corps.


3. Some people jsut like the challenge. Also the goal may not be destroy the big guy, just make thier life suck. . Example: NC/IT war NC hired pl to harrass IT in garrison to force them to pull off the front lines in PB/tribute. They did this well. Small guy had the big guy going wtf (we in IT were bouncing all over daily on jc ops in the worst of times). Also worth noting it was thier harassment that laid down some framework for IT's eventual failscade. 2 front war was burning us out...making for some disgruntled members. Thus started the small embers that other stuff added over time to make that fire grow much bigger that became IT's failscade.

Again you don't get this in empire...they generally don't run 2 front wars.


Solution: leave empire...keep on dec'ing bears in empire besides lol kills you don't get much out of it unless they have a pos spot to steal really.

EVE is a game. I think war decs for the sake of fighting is a valid goal in and of itself.

It'd be nice if there were more incentives to start wars in highsec, and more reasons to actually put up a fight in reponse instead of instantly quitting and reforming corp at virtually no cost

but the "I dont like you and want to shoot you" option should always be preserved

Have you ever heard of 'Guerrilla Warfare'?

Why shouldn't a small corp be allowed to dec a large one? Maybe their goal in the war is simply to be an annoyance. It's a pretty good goal if you ask me. A lot better than a large corp decing a small one.

IV said this before, and ill say it Again. Speciel with the new Ice Belts.

At WAR start agressors sets up an IHUB in a constallation. This IHUB has to be destroyed or defended.
If defended, Like in FW the losing side will no longer be able to dock in that constallation or simular.

This would make high sec WAR worth while.

And industrial corp wiping out all Ice in an area, would become an interesting target for another indutrial corp in area, to hire Mercs and have the kicked out, so they can get the resources.

Same goes for Traders in trade hubs, or high sec greifers not comming along with other greifers moving into their area.

Make high sec war area WARs.

You could easily do this, just keep in mind, that transport are often done on alt due war, and really doesnt matter. For small Corporations they can always use Red Frog, to carry on.

The Only reason High sec war exist is so that corps who know they can dominate smaller corps can get there grief on.

Some good points guys. You are in the process of convincing me I am wrong. At least I don't have a clear alternative. Thanks for the comments, I will have to think some more on this.