These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Wardec matters once again

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lugh Crow-Slave
#81 - 2015-03-29 18:09:48 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

Data can be read any way you want usually.


No, that's just an attempt to turn something purely objective into something subjective so it can be dismissed. You don't get to argue with math.

People who get blown up early in their game lifetime renew their sub much more often.

The end.


Quote:
A large number ofthem could also be alts of players who are using them in PvP.


Nope. The presentation said they accounted for alts, and removed them from the data entirely.




wait your taking this info from an extremely small sample group over a very short time

rise also admitted that it probably wasn't representative of eve but was just a quick test with surprising numbers

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#82 - 2015-03-29 18:19:50 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:

wait your taking this info from an extremely small sample group over a very short time

rise also admitted that it probably wasn't representative of eve but was just a quick test with surprising numbers


Do you see any contrary data? I've seen them say this twice now in recent times, while the only thing contrary to it is the same tired, opinionated old carebear narrative some people have been spewing for a decade.

Turns out, they're wrong and they likely always have been.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Kaldi Tsukaya
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
Citizen's Star Republic
#83 - 2015-03-29 18:20:02 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:

Problem is no matter what CCP does they can be dodged and i would rather people drop corp then drop game


If they generate killrights when people dodge them, people won't do it for long.


So you can prevent anyone from leaving (without penalty) by keeping it under a wardec? Not the way to do it.
People who want to avoid fighting will just dock up, logoff and/or play on alts.

Have you ever had a smaller IndyCorp/Alliance and survived 3mo of continual wardecs from mercs? We tried to. We lost nearly 100B doing so. The harder we fought, the more the wars kept coming. In the end, leaving the alliance and docking up (and playing on alts) was the only way we survived. We also decided that space assets and mining fleets were a bullseye, and switched to manufacturing. We are much smaller and able to adapt and prosper now.

Point is, if you fight these large groups, it only attracts more attention and wars. Unless you roll, or merely refuse to fight directly, you will lose your space assets and too many ships.

You make some good points but your vitriolic views are slanted in one direction only.
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#84 - 2015-03-29 18:30:01 UTC
Not sure who you expect to support this, on the council. Sure won't be me.

As to only smaller groups attack bigger? No. Easily abused.

Lock folks in? Funny, I don't see, in that proposal that the decking corp would also be a locked door, no new members.

Biggest thing about wardecs I want to see fixed isn't wardecs, it is neutral logi and station games. But that would be another thread

this one I will not even bother following anymore as it is GNDN (Goes nowhere, does nothing)

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#85 - 2015-03-29 18:38:55 UTC
Kaldi Tsukaya wrote:

So you can prevent anyone from leaving (without penalty) by keeping it under a wardec? Not the way to do it.
People who want to avoid fighting will just dock up, logoff and/or play on alts.


People who want to avoid fighting do not belong in player corps to begin with.


Quote:

Have you ever had a smaller IndyCorp/Alliance and survived 3mo of continual wardecs from mercs?


Yep. Marmite decced my old alliance, the ROC, for a long damned time a while back, and I was missioning in a faction battleship the whole time. It's really not that hard, we even did corp ops in lowsec a lot of the time, too.


Quote:

Point is, if you fight these large groups, it only attracts more attention and wars. Unless you roll, or merely refuse to fight directly, you will lose your space assets and too many ships.

You make some good points but your vitriolic views are slanted in one direction only.


Yes, it is slanted in one direction. The one that isn't poison to player retention.

You've even said it yourself, when allowed to work correctly, wars promote conflict, generate content. That's not a bad thing.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#86 - 2015-03-29 18:39:41 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:


Biggest thing about wardecs I want to see fixed isn't wardecs, it is neutral logi and station games. But that would be another thread



so much this

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#87 - 2015-03-29 18:58:23 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:


Biggest thing about wardecs I want to see fixed isn't wardecs, it is neutral logi and station games. But that would be another thread



so much this


Besides the existing flags, what else needs done? Logi is already flagged for combat the literal instant they begin to heal, and docking is prohibited when aggressing another player.

What about that needs changed?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#88 - 2015-03-29 19:23:02 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:


Biggest thing about wardecs I want to see fixed isn't wardecs, it is neutral logi and station games. But that would be another thread



so much this


Besides the existing flags, what else needs done? Logi is already flagged for combat the literal instant they begin to heal, and docking is prohibited when aggressing another player.

What about that needs changed?



the fact that the logi is safe until it knows it is needed and then can chose to risk itself

if you are playing station games odds are you have a ship tanked well enough to survive the 2min

and i would also like to add neutral boosts as they don't even get flags

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
#89 - 2015-03-29 19:24:35 UTC  |  Edited by: McChicken Combo HalfMayo
God damn. I typed up a whole thing and then my computer went bonkers. I ain't doing that up again... but quickly:

On corporations and wardecs:
- The whole corporation and wardec system needs to be revamped in the same pass. Adding benefits to corp without fixing things like dec dodging would not be balanced and the opposite would just force players out of corps. More benefits for corps, more commitment to that corp in times of war.
- Any time I've said "industry" in this thread I am referring to all matters of making ISK besides trading, theft, etc.
- I don't think players that avoid fights belong out of corporations. It's players that can't accept the circumstances of wars that do not. The mission runner who scouts, rats aligned, carries ECM drones, and offers a 'gf' in local if he does die is a fine candidate for corporations. This kind of player deserves more reward for taking that risk when compared to the player sitting in the NPC corp or rolling a new corp for the 8th time.

On neutral logi and station games:
- Neutral logi in wars barely happens if you don't hang around trade hubs. This is EVE anyways. Expect the unexpected. Don't expect the hostile fleet of 5 to actually be just 5. This is how it is everywhere else.
- Station games is a separate thing entirely. This thread is about wars and corporations. Station games aren't a problem though. Refer to the above. Station games aren't honor duels. Expect the unexpected.

On player retention:
- It is possible that the players that get blown up in their first 2 weeks are the kinds of players that are looking for that kind of interaction. Their mentality leads them to more often enjoy the game and stay. I do think introducing players to PVP combat helps with retention but I wouldn't stretch the study to state that "shooting player = increase in chance of retention". It depends on the mentality of the player. There are going to be players that are turned off by the experience and quit and there are going to be players that think, "whoa, maybe I can do that too!".

"Quickly" Blink

There are all our dominion

Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#90 - 2015-03-29 20:12:23 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:

the fact that the logi is safe until it knows it is needed and then can chose to risk itself


O...kay? How, precisely, is that going to change so long as highsec still has Concord? Yes, the fact of the matter is that they will not be flagged until they commit a flag-worthy action, what's the problem with that?


Quote:

if you are playing station games odds are you have a ship tanked well enough to survive the 2min


And? Once again, what exactly are you going to do about it?


Quote:

and i would also like to add neutral boosts as they don't even get flags


Off grid boosting should stop existing entirely, that has nothing to do with wardecs. Are you and Mike just smokescreening here, or what?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#91 - 2015-03-29 20:24:56 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:

the fact that the logi is safe until it knows it is needed and then can chose to risk itself


O...kay? How, precisely, is that going to change so long as highsec still has Concord? Yes, the fact of the matter is that they will not be flagged until they commit a flag-worthy action, what's the problem with that?


Actually I'd agree with Lugh and Mike on this, by definition assisting a suspect should be a suspicious act. 'Aiding and abetting' would cover it I think...
Lugh Crow-Slave
#92 - 2015-03-29 20:27:22 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:

the fact that the logi is safe until it knows it is needed and then can chose to risk itself


O...kay? How, precisely, is that going to change so long as highsec still has Concord? Yes, the fact of the matter is that they will not be flagged until they commit a flag-worthy action, what's the problem with that?


Actually I'd agree with Lugh and Mike on this, by definition assisting a suspect should be a suspicious act. 'Aiding and abetting' would cover it I think...


this is already how it works now..... lol

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#93 - 2015-03-29 20:31:57 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:

the fact that the logi is safe until it knows it is needed and then can chose to risk itself


O...kay? How, precisely, is that going to change so long as highsec still has Concord? Yes, the fact of the matter is that they will not be flagged until they commit a flag-worthy action, what's the problem with that?


Actually I'd agree with Lugh and Mike on this, by definition assisting a suspect should be a suspicious act. 'Aiding and abetting' would cover it I think...


Hit yourself.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Avellean Oriki
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#94 - 2015-03-29 20:58:26 UTC
The whole wardec system as it is now is garbage, its mainly used as a tool to grief people in game. An easy way to fix this would be to increase the cost of the wardec to something that will make a corp/alliance think twice before declaring war. If the cost started at the price of a plex or 1B Isk then the attacker would have to decide if it is worth declaring war instead of just wardecing every corp they felt like griefing. You cant expect people in small corps that consist mainly of new players to not dodge wardecs, they don't even stand a chance in a war.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#95 - 2015-03-29 21:04:27 UTC
Avellean Oriki wrote:
The whole wardec system as it is now is garbage, its mainly used as a tool to grief people in game. An easy way to fix this would be to increase the cost of the wardec to something that will make a corp/alliance think twice before declaring war. If the cost started at the price of a plex or 1B Isk then the attacker would have to decide if it is worth declaring war instead of just wardecing every corp they felt like griefing. You cant expect people in small corps that consist mainly of new players to not dodge wardecs, they don't even stand a chance in a war.


Well, that's got to be the least constructive post of the thread and, co-incidently I'm sure, the one that uses variations of the word "grief" the most.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#96 - 2015-03-29 21:08:35 UTC
Avellean Oriki wrote:
The whole wardec system as it is now is garbage, its mainly used as a tool to grief people in game. An easy way to fix this would be to increase the cost of the wardec to something that will make a corp/alliance think twice before declaring war. If the cost started at the price of a plex or 1B Isk then the attacker would have to decide if it is worth declaring war instead of just wardecing every corp they felt like griefing. You cant expect people in small corps that consist mainly of new players to not dodge wardecs, they don't even stand a chance in a war.


Given CCP's data on the matter, only one question remains.

Why do you hate EVE Online?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Madd Adda
#97 - 2015-03-29 22:25:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Madd Adda
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

Given CCP's data on the matter, only one question remains.

Why do you hate EVE Online?


Why do hate us for not playing the game like you want? If pvp is what you want, I'm sure there are those that would oblige you, happily.

Carebear extraordinaire
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#98 - 2015-03-29 22:33:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Madd Adda wrote:

Why do hate us for not playing the game like you want?


I don't. But the problem is that you've staked out a bad spot of territory. My playstyle is to kill people. Thing is, some of you insist that your playstyle demands that no one be allowed to kill you, ever. And you incessantly cry to CCP to make changes to that effect at my expense.

You're the ones who abandoned live and let live here, not me.

I would have been happy to just go about my business playing the game, but that isn't enough for you lot, it's "nerf, nerf nerf!", just because you cannot tolerate that my playstyle exists. And here's the best part. What you want? Has finally been revealed as harmful to the health of the game. The things you want drive away new players, literally boring their subscriptions to death.

So no, I don't hate you. But I am looking forward to seeing you finally get what you've earned over the past decade, and I'm happy to provide CCP with some ideas as to how it's going to happen.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#99 - 2015-03-29 22:42:47 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:

the fact that the logi is safe until it knows it is needed and then can chose to risk itself


O...kay? How, precisely, is that going to change so long as highsec still has Concord? Yes, the fact of the matter is that they will not be flagged until they commit a flag-worthy action, what's the problem with that?


Actually I'd agree with Lugh and Mike on this, by definition assisting a suspect should be a suspicious act. 'Aiding and abetting' would cover it I think...


Hit yourself.


*SLAP*

Nope wasn't enough still no sense...

Top tip: don't post whilst concentrating on cooking to impress the significant other in you life!
Iain Cariaba
#100 - 2015-03-29 22:44:31 UTC
Avellean Oriki wrote:
The whole wardec system as it is now is garbage, its mainly used as a tool to grief people in game. An easy way to fix this would be to increase the cost of the wardec to something that will make a corp/alliance think twice before declaring war. If the cost started at the price of a plex or 1B Isk then the attacker would have to decide if it is worth declaring war instead of just wardecing every corp they felt like griefing. You cant expect people in small corps that consist mainly of new players to not dodge wardecs, they don't even stand a chance in a war.

You do know that wardecs used to cost a lot more than they do now, right? And that it was pretty much the same thing then as it is now.