Player Features and Ideas Discussion

It is getting better all the time. Rules are evolving and relaxing in phases. New/old management is taking us back to what we were 3 years ago, before the political / ideological schism. (very much similar to this thread, actually) Stay tuned...

So your reply to an otherwise sensible suggestion is not to expand on why you think it wouldn't work, it's not to propose a mechanism by which Wars can be made interesting for both sides (note, I didn't use the word fun, one side or the other is probably not going to be having fun), it's not to become a proponent of the current mechanics with explanations as to why those mechanics are working in an effective, fair, balanced way.

Your suggestion is in fact the bog-standard reply heard whenever any change is proposed to a mechanic: This is a sandbox game & everyone should be forced to play the way I want them to play.

Your suggestions entirely revolve around your consideration that they are "pansy's" that don't wish to fight you. Putting aside the over-simplistic nature of your argument for a second, they don't HAVE to fight you. You do understand that the idea of a sandbox is that their play style is just as valid as your play style right?

This is how war-declarations in high security space currently work: You (the aggressor) force your preferred style of play on them (the defender) and effectively turn high sec into null sec for the two corporations/alliances involved.

Am I saying this is a bad thing? Not at all, I think there is plenty of room for that & war declarations have their place & can be useful but everyone goes on & on & on about how Eve is a game where non-consensual PVP happens. It is. High sec is a place where Concord will kill you for it. Now, I could basically expound upon the virtues of the standard argument whenever someone complains about "non-consensual" PVP & say "Deal with it. Concord kill people for non-consensual PVP, HTFU". However that adds nothing to the argument. Wars have a place but simply forcing them to play your game is neither a sandbox, nor "emergent", it's certainly not fun for them & in many cases they simply aren't prepared for it.

Your argument is that High-Sec should be low/null sec. You could make an argument for it, but I fail to see how it affects you as a player that people stay in High Security. You appear to be implying that (again) everyone should be forced to play the game the way you want them to play, with no explanation or rationalization as to WHY your chosen method of playing the game is any more valid than their method of playing the game?

The War Declaration mechanics as they are don't really work for me. The OP made a reasoned argument that would be a very small change that would move them to something other than a "griefing" mechanic by people who think that high sec "care bears" should be forced to move to null/low because "IWANNA, THAT'S WHY". There are legitimate uses for War Decs, such as another mining corp wanting another mining corp (or all corps) out of a system in High Sec that they want to mine, so they hire a merc corp to "take care of the problem" giving them at least a week's free access to the goodies, possibly more. As there are good reasons for war decs to exist I don't think the mechanic proposed in the OP is necessarily a good one, I also think it unfairly penalizes smaller Corps who simply wouldn't be able to afford the "counter-bribe" proposed in the suggestion, however it has the benefit of being a very small change that wouldn't take long to implement.

Personally I would like to see ways to win a war besides blowing up more of the enemies stuff than you or waiting the requisite week. I would like to see something like the below (I have made no attempt to seriously balance this, it's just an example of the kind of thing I would like to see):-

Once a war starts there is no time limit - the war is effectively endless subject to the following limitations.
1: The declaring corp sets a "win-condition" that can be anything from killing a certain number of ships, destroying a percentage of defending corps assets (taken at the time the war-dec was issued), forcing a "tribute" of an amount of ISK (effectively the current ransom system but actually enforced). There could be others but I've not had my morning coffee yet, no doubt others can & will add more "win-conditions" for aggressors. (The list of defending win-conditions could also be used but as aggressor why would you want mining win-conditions?)

2: The Defending corporation gets to set a "win-condition" that likewise can be anything they want from the list above as well as things like: Mining a certain amount of ISK worth of ore, scaled based on membership, during the period under which the war was active. All of the ore would need to be deposited in an office for the corporation in a special hangar & would be unable to be sold until war was completed. Keeping their ships safe and losing less than a set value in ISK of ships....... TBC

So if im an aggressor I can choose a stupidly difficult objective dor myself and have a longer war dec for cheaper? Or if im a defender I can set myself a stupidly easy objective and remove the dec in minutes? Thats not really going to work.

Set a hard limit? But larger mining corps can mine much more quickly than smaller corps. So smaller corps are shafted again. Make the limit per member? What about inactive members?

Cant see it working.

Ignorance at its finest.


I have explained about 11 times by now, but we already learned that you're ignorant, illiterate and inexperienced enough to not take it until we get to like 15 explanations. Here goes number 12:
1) ppl wardeccing have nothing more than a bigger skillpoints blob, which ensures victory at no risk. Otherwise they won't wardec.
2) Allies is a myth born from tears of failed griefers attacking a fake indy/mining bait corp. Since there is nothing to hit, and defending is pointless, allies bring zero help outside of raising the risk of a griefer losing ship to the unacceptable 0.1%.
3) Mining corp would never war dec anyone, so stop bringing arguments in line of "what if Luxembourg attacked France". It won't happen, and discussing it is just stupid. Should France attack it, though, it would be at an infinite advantage, just like our griefers in question.
4) Agressor has infinite advantage by easily and immediately shutting down any possible hisec activity of a target corp. There is no defense against war dec other than spinning ships, and you cannot go offensive, because enemy would either blob you, or spin their own ships until they can blob you.
5) They are not better prepared, not more experienced, definitely not intelligent, and their strength lies in the fact they have a bigger blob, which is the cornerstone of eve combat pvp - blob with most skillpoints is always a winner.


1) Joining the alliance doesn't end war dec, you still can't mine or haul, and go out of alliance territory probably won't happen as well. Bad advice is bad as always.
2) Oh gee, now you're saying something should and something should not be a target "because the great me said so" (c) You. Get back to earth and bring some logic.
3) The common phenomenon of war decs without kills means that there is no incentive to fight. Because you can't win against superior blob, pvp in eve is generally zero fun to try it without the benefits of winning, and you're forced to do something you don't like by someone who's dumber than a lobster, but has bigger blob than you. It's absolutely logical that the winning move is to stick out a middle finger from a station window to the attacker and unsub until he gets bored.
Give me incentive to undock, bother finding allies (and dealing with their boredom of waiting for blob which never comes if it's smaller, or dealing with their losses if a larger blob comes), bother training zero-fun eve peeveepeepeepeepeepee ship skills, etc. Right now, I have none, and no suggestion in this thread gave me any.

In your parlance, this would be a Coolstory.

I remember back in July Marmite declared war on us. It was an underwhelming affair, they got 8 kills and we didn't get any. About 3/8 of the kills happened in Jita, all of the kills happened in high sec, and half of them were Solo Kills. (Since you are a bit slow, a solo kill is nearly the opposite of a kill by a hundred man blob, for your information). Did we start staying docked to keep the losses low? No. You can find the evidence of my words in game, unlike the 'evidence' of a huge blob descending on you in Teonusude.

The notion that you are 'Agressive' and yet will unsub for a two months because of a week long wardec is laughable (Maybe this is another Coolstory you seem to like talking about). It's more like others controlling your game.

To answer your question in a previous post of yours. Yes, it is your fault that the war dec button exists. Ganking people who are making so much money off of high-sec mining that they think that they are rich is what the war dec button is for. High-Sec POSes came after the war dec button was put into the game. If anything, the continued existence of your risible corp (Yes I looked up your killboard stats) is evidence that war decs have been over nerfed and need to be made easier. Also it is your fault that your only recourse to action is to go play WoW for two months! If you have set up things right a high-sec griefer war dec should be like water off of a platypus's back.

Finally, You keep whining about how you can't mine or haul during a war dec. Quick Question? How do faction warfare corporations make money? They fly faction ships and are by definition at war constantly. What about Eve-Uni who's members you ignore on this very thread? Some of them live in Syndicate and gank people. They seem to always have enough money to get ganking ships and to help newbies. I think that this notion that you are some Uber miner seems to be just another one of your made up Coolstories which nobody with any sense should believe.

I nearly wet myself at this line!!!

At least it's true.


Now that is a coolstory.


I've been hit by war dec 4 times and unsubbed just once. But that will not stop you and your UNSUB PANSY jammed track, I guess.


The whole argument that mining makes money shows you really never mined... you see, mining for profit took a Fozzie to the knee in Odyssey patch and DIED. The profits of mining simply collapsed so far below that half-assed null solo ratter is now making more than perfect miner in a perfect fleet. Now the only people who mine are newbs, people who cba to haul mats from Jita, and bot fleets.
War deccing bot fleets is understandable, but their owner will get them to neutral corp anyway; people who cba to haul will stop mining and start using red frog and Jita alts; That leaves the only mining target all griefers would naturally prefer - newbies. And f*** me, I think war deccing and griefing newbies is damn wrong thing to do.
If anything, check my employment history more thoroughly, if you're checking anyway. Having an alt in Platypus does not mean I'm in any way associated with Platypus. They aren't even aware I'm active.
And not even once, not for a second in my life I have touched WoW.


There are zero, zero and zero possibilities to set up in any way to prevent hisec griefing, that is the truth of overpowered war dec.
Faction warfare is an ISK printer. They don't need any other activity to generate income. That, and the fact that npc chase off faction warfare opponents, is enough to assume they're mostly unmolested.
Eve-uni had no-grief policy last time I checked.
Knowing that null ratter beats perfect miner in perfect fleet by income, I don't find their wealth surprising.
And once again, I haven't mined since Fozzie killed mining.

What makes you think griefer corp should have the benefit of shutting down every corp which didn't ask their permission to play eve, while being invulnerable themselves?

What makes me think banding up and hitting weak targets is unfair? Nothing. It's ugly, bullish, and destroys the game, but not unfair.

What is unfair is lack of options smaller groups have to counter that. Joining a larger group is a poor option, trying to fight the superior SP blob is suicidal option, and the only real options they have are listed in my last post - in case you're too lazy, illiterate, or ignorant, or didn't-read-lol person altogether, I will remind you that neither of those options include undocking.

What makes you think that somebody forcing you to not undock for as long as he sees fit is not overpowered?

Aggressor has special power of superior SP blob. If you don't have it, you'll never war dec anyone and never be an aggressor.

Posting on a thread full of clueless themepark carebears that don't understand the nature of sandbox mmo-rpg games.

With a face like yours, you could've just speak the typical 10 IQ line along "didn't read lol" pattern.