Player Features and Ideas Discussion

If they can't be arsed to turn up on three separate occasions at times designated by them as prime time, that suggests maybe they need to rethink their plans as clearly there are issues.

It's not like it's a 10 minute RF when everyone is sleeping - unless they are idiots.

Hell the RF timelines for citadels are not far short of a week anyway. If a side wants to put that effort in, uncontested, what's the problem? Fight or lose it.

What necessary mechanic?
The need to shoot targets in HS because you know they're weak?

I get that you're saying players to not need to be free of all aggression in HS, but a system that promotes picking on the little guys for easy kills or simple lulz is not the way to go about it.

We can agree that no one should be safe from wardecs.
Where we differ is that I don't think war decs should purely favor the aggressor and should not support picking on the little guy.

And no, this isn't a "cry about the little guy getting picked on" post.

This is a IT'S A FREAKING VIDEO GAME post.
It being a video game, it should be fair in order to promote grown and enjoy-ability.
Being in a 10 man corp that gets wardecced by a 200 man war alliance just because you're the little guy and it's super cheap is not fair, nor enjoyable and will hinder grown far more than it will promote.

Wars, the mechanic that constitutes fully half the risk left in highsec.





Cry more about how people use their player freedom.




If you want "fair", stop playing EVE Online.

Why? Because it offends you?

Wars exist to do one thing. Remove the presence of Concord in highsec, for a fee.

So anyone can do whatever they feel like doing with Concord removed. What people do is up to them.

I know you hate player freedom, but this is non negotiable.

On the contrary, you are the one that is inhibiting player freedom by insisting the current dec mechanics are fine, when in fact, they support YOUR preferred freedom, while hindering the preferred freedom of others and providing the no incentive or reason option to counteract.

Soo, who hates player freedom?


You do realize your argument is that your freedom trumps the freedom of others, right?

I swear, it's like having a religious freedom debate with a liberal.
Always assuming that religious freedom hinders their personal freedom so it needs to be stopped.


Tell me again why your preferences trump that of others?

When those mechanics are used, the attacker doesn't bother to fight and/or drops the war without anything to support the fact that they essentially lost.


We all know you're full of it when you suggest that the war mechanics favor the defender, otherwise, wars would be less prevalent and actually used for more meaningful things like keeping another SOV entity out of HS to hinder their supply chains, pushing a mining corp out of the area because they keep mining out all the belts.


The VAST majority of wars are used by people like you to get CONCORD free kills without having to go outside of HS, and then picking said targets based purely on weakness and ease of KM farming.

If wars heavily favored the defender, as you suggest, than you would not be doing them.

Again, you are determining player freedom based on the way YOU want Eve to be played.
There is no rule in the EULA that states that all players must engage in PVP activity.

You might also note, Eve is a PVP CENTRIC game. This is not because the sole purpose of the game is to kill other people, but because all actions in Eve effect all players of Eve, whether it be mining, missions, station trading, or actively engaging in combat against other players.

Even CCP will tell you that the idea of PVP Centric does not revolve around pvp combat.



If you look back at my comments, you will see that I am not suggesting the removal of War decs.
I am instead suggesting options to better war decs and give both sides a reason to actually fight.




HS is not already too safe... I sat in a system a few days ago and watched CODE (your alliance) prove this by suicide ganking several freighters in a short amount of time, all with bad standings.

Highsec may be less risky than low, but it is far from safe and you can check the kill boards on that, including your own.

Lol.. man, you love to twist everything around in your favor.
And no, that does not show how overpowered the defender's advantage really is.
That's actually a loss to the defender more so that the attacker.
Why?
Because the defender likely had to pay a large portion of isk in order to hire Mercs, and when those mercs don't get kills because the attacker ran scared, that is a loss to the defender.

They paid good money to watch you die, but instead you flee like a roach with the light turned on.

You wanted a fight, so fight.

You keep insisting that the current war mechanics support the premise of Eve being a PVP game, so why no PVP?

Oh, it's cause you don't want to pvp... You want to shoot at a person in a ship...


Just because there's another player in the ship doesn't make it PVP. That's no different than shooting an empty ship..



... And no, that's not what wars are for.
The war dec mechanics are intented to allow players to get kills at low risk.
It is intended to give players a way to settle an issue in HS, without the intervention of CONCORD.


They only issue they're currently being used for is, "That's a shiny ship in a weak corp and I wanna blow it up."


TBH, there would likely be more kills in HS if the wardec mechanics didn't exist...

Why do I say this? Well, when you dec someone, one of the two parties is likely to not undock until the war is over, and the kills that are caused are few a far between.

With that logic, that means more players would resort to suicide ganking which can easily be done every 15 minutes with targets that are willing to undock because they aren't actively targeted. I might also add, that would not include CONCORD kills.

System for wardecs is bad! They are just anoying!

Read also this