Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Guys, I don't think they lost the tower OP is actually talking about. The one they lost was way back in April. This time around they caught a Marmite dec. I'm sure the tower is actually entirely coincidental.

I do feel we are getting a bit of topic, as much I feel honored that you take an interest in my current and past affairs!
It's not what this thread is specifically about, though they may have triggered my train of thought!

It's about if the current wardec system is fair for all sides!

I argue that it is not, that as is, it heavily favors the attacker!
And this is why,
The attacker can pick his targets, more or less chose how much risk!
Attacker can gather all he likes at forehand, giving him a tactical advantage!
The attacker can choose when start and end war!
Attackers is allowed there favorite playstyle pvp!
Attacker risk wery little since they pick targets that can easily defeat!
Attacker can gain a lot of idk if they can catch their target off gaurd
This only cost 50 millions
And only 24 hours wait

Defender
Have no control over when and ho attacks them
They don't when and where
They very little to no time to prepare
They no Intel
If caught off guard they stand to lose from millions to billions
They have nothing to gain
It disrupt their favorite playstyle for days if not weeks

Increasing the war delay to a week would give the defender a chance to mount a defence, gather allies or negotiate a truce

Increasing the cost to initiate a war would prevet pll from turning high sec into their own private nul sec

It specifically exists to enable others to attack you and disrupt your playstyle.

You have no right whatsoever to farm endlessly without consequence.

If you think otherwise, you don't belong in a player corp.



That's what it's for. You see, highsec isn't really supposed to exist the way it does. Hence wars.

But your entire assessment of the "balance" is based on your own incompetence, so what makes you think your perspective is reasonable?


Most of what you view as "unfair" to the defender are problems that are trivially dealt with by a competent CEO. You don't know how to deal with them, so you're pretending like they're insurmountable and unfair.

This, despite people taking the time to explicitly tell you how those problems are easily dealt with means you're being willfully obtuse.


Here, answer this: If defenders are so woefully disadvantaged, how is it that the only times my single-player, pure-industrial corporation has ever received any wardecs have been during periods when I've stopped playing entirely, and left assets idly floating in space?

Shouldn't there be hordes of barbarians at my gates?

Let's break this midden heap into its two categories:


1. It only favors the attacker when the defender lets it do so. By refusing to take the necessary precautions and prepare, in advance, for a war, you allow the attacker to dictate the terms
2-4. Beause they choose to prepare for war, while you do not, does not make the wardec mechanic unbalanced. It is your own fault that the attacker has the advantage.
5. So you are allowed your favorite playstyle, but no one else is, huh? Nope, if you want to play isk-farmer with 100% security, you need to unsub.
6. This is called "good strategy." It is called dumb, idiotic, or worse, to start wars you cannot win.
7. The only time a wardeccer can "gain a lot of isk if they catch their target off guard," is if their target it too stupid to read their mail, see the wardec announcement made at least 24 hours prior, and undocks something blingy.
8. Price of wardec is irrelevant;
9. If you would prepare in advance, which is just smart if you operate in highsec, then 24hr notice is more than enough to get everything in position to defend yourself.


1-2. Irrelevant. You should be prepared for a wardec from anyone all the time.
3. You should already be prepared. The 24hrs should be spent making sure ships are fit and ready and in-space assets have been transitioned from industry to dickstar mode.
4. You have every intel source available to you that they have. It's your own fault if you don't use them.
5. If you get caught off guard, then you failed in doing every single thing you should have done to prepare.
6. Sure they have something to gain. It may be they were hired, are after the killmails, or even just your tears. As you've been told several times, in a sandbox, "I just want to," is a valid reason.
7. This is a sandbox game, you are entitled to nothing. If you want to keep people from kicking down your sandcastle, you're going to have to put the little plastic shovel and bucket down, pull up your big boy undies, and stand between your sandcastle and the guy trying to kick it down.

But the defender does not have only run & hide as viable tactics.
The defender can recruit and fight back instead.

The fact the choice is normally made to run & hide does not remove the other tactics. In the case if the defender is winning the attacker is left with only the option to run & hide, at which point the attacker has had their playstyle denied by their own wardec.

I may even agree with the run & hide tactic normally, because of the meta behind most wardecs simply being trade hub sniping or 'for lolz', rather than for tactical or strategic purposes, but with Citadels on the way this meta will at the least be shaken and stands a good chance of a significant change. Which means that now is not the time to be changing wardecs at all.

Okay, but make forming a corporation cost 1 billion then.

Thanks for your response, and agree to your point to some degree, at least for corporations that the network to marshal the manpower needed, sadly i think few have!
But do thing many corp could and would mashal a defense, if at least try walk in some honor!

I have keep up coming updates, but if it entails major changes to high sec, now would not be the time to start charging the wardec system until we can se the full effect of that!

Trying to hammer 2 nails at same time most like hurt your fingers!

I know you are being facetious when you say that, but I think corp formation costs could be looked at.

Bottom line, nobody wants undue burdens for any playstyle in EvE. Burdens yes, but not undue burdens. So there have to be reasonable hurdles, but corp formation seems unreasonably cheap. It's been said that the wardec cost of 50 mil is pretty much nothing. I believe the same could be said for forming a corp - especially since either tax evasion or income through corp activities is at stake, why not bring the corp formation cost up to 50 mil? If you're making a genuine corp, it's still a tidbit sum and you'll more than make that back in your first few days of whatever you're doing. If you plan on putting down structures, those cost way more than that anyway.

500 mil is probably too high, nobody would get wardecced anymore unless it was mutual. But it should be increased. When nearly everyone is wardecced most of the time, it's kind of silly. CCP should check their charts and increase it a bit at a time until it becomes more common to not be wardecced.