These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Wardec Defender Abilities

Author
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#41 - 2016-11-29 19:53:28 UTC
Honestly, lads, the state of play in eve must be pretty Damn good if wars are killing eve now.

I mean generally speaking it's got to be when something as trivially side stepped (to the point of being practically voluntary)
as war is killing the game.

Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#42 - 2016-11-29 20:11:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Teckos Pech wrote:
Return of the watchlist or something like it?

Yes and no.

The watchlist functionality is gone. CCP removed it for a specific reason and I don't think there is much chance they would bring it back unless it is severely limited.

The main reason being, if it is just bought back into the game based on a structure and applies cluster wide, instantly all the intel on super and titan pilots could be regained, merely by the lowsec and nullsec groups declaring war on each other after anchoring a structure.

In a basic, structure = watchlist proposal, it totally undoes the change that was recently made.

None and buckly's chance in my view.

So it either has to be range limited, or a different solution found to make the use of locator agents useful again.

I was previously in favour of bringing back the watchlist capabilty, but lately I'm kind of in favour of a new solution. Move forward, rather than back; but I have absolutely 0 idea about what a way to move forward would look like, not that my opinion carries any weight anyway.
Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#43 - 2016-11-29 20:25:40 UTC
One problem with forcing aggressors or anyone to have a structure is that EVE is played 24/7 (minus down time) but small groups may not be present for all those hours. This is why structures have had multiple timers, some of which can be configured to allow defense when a group is online. Basically we would either need a POS mechanic like stront, or setting times like a POCO or citadel vulnerability to give the group defending the structure a chance to fight when active. Otherwise, start an AU based merc group and you could rule all of hi sec.
Neuntausend
Rens Nursing Home
#44 - 2016-11-29 20:29:56 UTC
A corporation that can field Titans should be able to blap a structure like that. Maybe limit such a structure to one per corporation/alliance and limit it to show only the online status of characters involved in an active war with the holding corporation. That way, a corp can have intel, as long as it can defend the structure, and once blapped it would take a couple days to redeploy.

Sure, this mechanic could still be played to a degree, by creating multiple alt-corps, declare war on the target with all of them and deploy the structure. However, that's a lot of work to establish and maintain, and thereby invalidates the criticism of "free intel", and the opposing force could tell how many spying posts there are by the number of one-man wardecs thay have.

I'd even be ok with this structure only working in empire space, thereby allowing known mom- and titan pilots to mask their online status if they so wish, with the side effect of encouraging alliances to stage their supers out of null as opposed to lowsec.

There surely is a way to make this work, but as far as I am concerned, there needs to be some way of telling whether the people you supposedly are playing against are even actually playing. And with a structure, that would give the opposing forces a nice target to shoot at as well as a means to take the intel away again.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#45 - 2016-11-29 20:56:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
I had proposed in another thread that an OA which gives online data for people in the same Constellation which can be blown up when activated, but goes into a RF timer type approach inactive and then destroyed, they need to be fully repped for use if RF'd.

Only one can be placed per system and has to be manually on-lined. The Structure would have fuel requirements and of course need to be defended and more importantly does not give the data for free. At the same time I would keep the current restrictions on locator agents, but I would include online or offline status in their report.

The objective was to push the Mercs to have a network in their hunting areas and enable people to set up such networks across Eve, but they can be destroyed or reinforced and destroyed or repaired.

Then Mercs can use both methods as can capital hunters, but both have to do some leg work, also people wanting to guard themselves against this data need to shoot them. I do have a debate on whether requiring them to have a war to work, but they could work on a maximum number of entities, they would work at an alliance or corp level, the corp level would be able to check for a lot less targets.

I would not have them work all the time, but do a sweep every fifteen minutes so as to reduce server load.

Only CCP can really work out the impacts of such an idea, but one of the advantages was that it would give people who were attacked something to shoot that had real value which would cause fights to happen and enable hunters to operate in hisec.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Neuntausend
Rens Nursing Home
#46 - 2016-11-29 21:40:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausend
Constellation would be too harsh of a limitation, I think. There are too many constellations, and it is too easy to just move to a different one. With a thousand guys fighting another thousand guys, those could realistically be used, but with a thousand war targets, the chance to run into some of them while they are online is high enough already.

The wars where knowing whether the targets are online is kind of crucial are the small ones. Twenty dudes chasing around another twenty dudes or so. But twenty dudes won't be able to maintain an empire wide network of structures with fuel requirements and all. If on the other hand the targets stick to just a constellation or three, then this structure wouldn't really be required, because it doesn't take a lot of time to just fan out, check all the systems in a constellation and see if the targets show up in local.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#47 - 2016-11-29 22:58:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Return of the watchlist or something like it?

Yes and no.

The watchlist functionality is gone. CCP removed it for a specific reason and I don't think there is much chance they would bring it back unless it is severely limited.

The main reason being, if it is just bought back into the game based on a structure and applies cluster wide, instantly all the intel on super and titan pilots could be regained, merely by the lowsec and nullsec groups declaring war on each other after anchoring a structure.

In a basic, structure = watchlist proposal, it totally undoes the change that was recently made.

None and buckly's chance in my view.

So it either has to be range limited, or a different solution found to make the use of locator agents useful again.

I was previously in favour of bringing back the watchlist capabilty, but lately I'm kind of in favour of a new solution. Move forward, rather than back; but I have absolutely 0 idea about what a way to move forward would look like, not that my opinion carries any weight anyway.


Yes, it does. I don't see that as a problem, though. After all, if those groups all declare war on each other for just that reason...well they really wanted the watchlist functionality then didn't they? P

Edit: Since war decs really only apply to HS...just limit the watchlist feature to HS. If the pilot is in HS it returns information, if not it returns nothing.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#48 - 2016-11-29 23:27:14 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
I had proposed in another thread that an OA which gives online data for people in the same Constellation which can be blown up when activated, but goes into a RF timer type approach inactive and then destroyed, they need to be fully repped for use if RF'd.

Only one can be placed per system and has to be manually on-lined. The Structure would have fuel requirements and of course need to be defended and more importantly does not give the data for free. At the same time I would keep the current restrictions on locator agents, but I would include online or offline status in their report.

The objective was to push the Mercs to have a network in their hunting areas and enable people to set up such networks across Eve, but they can be destroyed or reinforced and destroyed or repaired.

Then Mercs can use both methods as can capital hunters, but both have to do some leg work, also people wanting to guard themselves against this data need to shoot them. I do have a debate on whether requiring them to have a war to work, but they could work on a maximum number of entities, they would work at an alliance or corp level, the corp level would be able to check for a lot less targets.

I would not have them work all the time, but do a sweep every fifteen minutes so as to reduce server load.

Only CCP can really work out the impacts of such an idea, but one of the advantages was that it would give people who were attacked something to shoot that had real value which would cause fights to happen and enable hunters to operate in hisec.


What this would do is give dramatic advantage to the largest, most active mercenary alliance and utterly screw over everyone else who lacks a huge continuous income to pay for upkeep and lacks the numbers to routinely defend large numbers of structures. Not just other mercenaries trying to compete with them, but the defenders in wars as well.

The ability to fight a war effectively is contingent on the ability to actually find the enemy, everyone involved in a war deserves to have that functionality available to them, not just the largest, wealthiest, dedicated mercenaries with the biggest fleets.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#49 - 2016-11-30 06:48:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
I had proposed in another thread that an OA which gives online data for people in the same Constellation which can be blown up when activated, but goes into a RF timer type approach inactive and then destroyed, they need to be fully repped for use if RF'd.

Only one can be placed per system and has to be manually on-lined. The Structure would have fuel requirements and of course need to be defended and more importantly does not give the data for free. At the same time I would keep the current restrictions on locator agents, but I would include online or offline status in their report.

The objective was to push the Mercs to have a network in their hunting areas and enable people to set up such networks across Eve, but they can be destroyed or reinforced and destroyed or repaired.

Then Mercs can use both methods as can capital hunters, but both have to do some leg work, also people wanting to guard themselves against this data need to shoot them. I do have a debate on whether requiring them to have a war to work, but they could work on a maximum number of entities, they would work at an alliance or corp level, the corp level would be able to check for a lot less targets.

I would not have them work all the time, but do a sweep every fifteen minutes so as to reduce server load.

Only CCP can really work out the impacts of such an idea, but one of the advantages was that it would give people who were attacked something to shoot that had real value which would cause fights to happen and enable hunters to operate in hisec.


What this would do is give dramatic advantage to the largest, most active mercenary alliance and utterly screw over everyone else who lacks a huge continuous income to pay for upkeep and lacks the numbers to routinely defend large numbers of structures. Not just other mercenaries trying to compete with them, but the defenders in wars as well.

The ability to fight a war effectively is contingent on the ability to actually find the enemy, everyone involved in a war deserves to have that functionality available to them, not just the largest, wealthiest, dedicated mercenaries with the biggest fleets.


Why would it give an advantage just to the largest, I think it would more likely give an advantage to the most active and there is a difference. Yes the richer, bigger more active ones can afford to be a bit more loose with them, but the smaller ones will play smart and they do not have to be massively expensive either. For a start I would have some set up in the constellations I normally use, ready for action so to speak, or I may not and put them up when needed, there will be a number put up by various entities and people will have to find the ones owned by their enemies to shoot them which will give a job to skilled probers, they will also cause points of conflict of an OA with value which is far superior to some structure based around shoot the flag type game play which I have to say severely turns me off.

You create your own luck in Eve, and this type of warfare does not have to monolithic and slow but dynamic and sneaky.

People deserve to have that functionality if they put the effort in, and the smallest could just use the locator agent which will say if the person is online or offline and of course watch list OA's dropped in the constellations where their prey is likely to be operating.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#50 - 2016-11-30 15:26:01 UTC
Because Vendetta Mercenary Group would blow up any of those structures that they could find that didn't belong to them. And if you happen to not be able to beat them in a fleet fight (IE you're literally anyone who lives in highsec) you lose your access to a vital functionality. Having them in a limited area wouldn't be useful because people frequently move long distances in highsec and in your suggestion the results are too infrequent to have any defensive value.

Moreover, realistically the average carebear just wouldn't even attempt to use them.

I appreciate that you're trying to come up with an idea that provides useful functionality while also having counterplay, but having to maintain a massive structure network in order to gain access to something as vital as the ability to find the people you're at war with would disproportionately benefit big, wealthy, powerful mercenary organizations and leave everyone else in the dust.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2016-11-30 15:43:57 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:

Edit: Since war decs really only apply to HS...just limit the watchlist feature to HS. If the pilot is in HS it returns information, if not it returns nothing.

This just occured to me. What would be cons of this solution?

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#52 - 2016-11-30 15:54:29 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

Edit: Since war decs really only apply to HS...just limit the watchlist feature to HS. If the pilot is in HS it returns information, if not it returns nothing.

This just occured to me. What would be cons of this solution?

Not much.
IMHO the API's ability to write contracts would need to be removed if we were to bring it back though.
A part of the balance of the old system was the pain in the arse that was doing the contacts.
With the API as is , watchlists are just too easy to put together.
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#53 - 2016-11-30 15:59:09 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

Edit: Since war decs really only apply to HS...just limit the watchlist feature to HS. If the pilot is in HS it returns information, if not it returns nothing.

This just occured to me. What would be cons of this solution?

As Ralph mentioned, not much.

This has been the suggested approach in a couple of the threads in F&I
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#54 - 2016-11-30 16:05:20 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Because Vendetta Mercenary Group would blow up any of those structures that they could find that didn't belong to them. And if you happen to not be able to beat them in a fleet fight (IE you're literally anyone who lives in highsec) you lose your access to a vital functionality. Having them in a limited area wouldn't be useful because people frequently move long distances in highsec and in your suggestion the results are too infrequent to have any defensive value.

Moreover, realistically the average carebear just wouldn't even attempt to use them.

I appreciate that you're trying to come up with an idea that provides useful functionality while also having counterplay, but having to maintain a massive structure network in order to gain access to something as vital as the ability to find the people you're at war with would disproportionately benefit big, wealthy, powerful mercenary organizations and leave everyone else in the dust.


I know VMG are good, but they are not all powerful, not just hisec people operate in hisec, I saw one of their pipe camp fleets get smashed by Hard Knocks Citizens a while back. I do not think that VMG are omnipresent, these things will need to be probed down and blown up and they could become ten a penny.

The fifteen minute gap between sweeps may need adjustment and that is a decision that CCP would have to make in terms of impact on their servers, maybe every five minutes would be OK.

I would use them, but the most important thing is to give back this intel with something that will be a conflict driver, I noticed that a lot of people don't bother fighting because they think that they cannot do anything, and this is something that they can hit if they put their minds to it and it has real value. My focus is actually on pushing hisec players to fight back while giving back key intel but make it cost something to have.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#55 - 2016-11-30 17:34:52 UTC
You don't need to be omnipresent to defend structures, that's the entire point of reinforcement timers and vulnerability windows. It's a point of fact at this point that the only time VMG actually loses a fight on a structure is if someone from nullsec shows up with a fleet with massive numerical superiority.

The average joe in highsec isn't going to be able to destroy structures belonging to a group like that who routinely put up routinely fart out 50 battleships and a dozen logistics on citadel offense/defense contracts.

Also note that I'm not trying to make an argument specifically about VMG, rather what I'm saying is that requiring the establishment of a massive infrastructure network that requires constant defense in order to be able to fight wars properly benefits the powerful and the wealthy dramatically more than anyone else. Why would you try and build, maintain and defend that yourself when an established group already has it set up and can defend it against basically anyone who would have an interest in destroying it?

I don't hate your idea on principle, if they're cheap as hell, like a mobile depot or something, provide legitimately useful and frequent information and have sufficient range that you don't have to maintain a massive network of them (which you would if they only worked within a constellation, since regions often have a dozen or more constellations) then it's better than nothing. But if they're expensive, require a huge amount of upkeep and you need a lot of them the end result would be to benefit the people with the most power.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#56 - 2016-11-30 18:35:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
You don't need to be omnipresent to defend structures, that's the entire point of reinforcement timers and vulnerability windows. It's a point of fact at this point that the only time VMG actually loses a fight on a structure is if someone from nullsec shows up with a fleet with massive numerical superiority.

The average joe in highsec isn't going to be able to destroy structures belonging to a group like that who routinely put up routinely fart out 50 battleships and a dozen logistics on citadel offense/defense contracts.

Also note that I'm not trying to make an argument specifically about VMG, rather what I'm saying is that requiring the establishment of a massive infrastructure network that requires constant defense in order to be able to fight wars properly benefits the powerful and the wealthy dramatically more than anyone else. Why would you try and build, maintain and defend that yourself when an established group already has it set up and can defend it against basically anyone who would have an interest in destroying it?

I don't hate your idea on principle, if they're cheap as hell, like a mobile depot or something, provide legitimately useful and frequent information and have sufficient range that you don't have to maintain a massive network of them (which you would if they only worked within a constellation, since regions often have a dozen or more constellations) then it's better than nothing. But if they're expensive, require a huge amount of upkeep and you need a lot of them the end result would be to benefit the people with the most power.


I know this is not about VMG as such, but they are the top level benchmark, but when you say 50 BS is that combined with Public-Enemy and P I R A T? I will need to look up their last citadel kill, I know they picked up some new corps recently but had not checked their numbers which I should as I am at war with them which I instigated by deccing one of their known to me alt corps. EDIT: 20 Rattlessnakes plus logi on a Fortizer which is getting there, good to see such numbers.

I did say that while it is operating it can be blown up without a reinforcement timer for that very reason, it was to make it so people chance their arm so to speak. If it is not operating in other words giving data, it goes through a reinforcement stage. That was because of the very issue you mention.

In terms of infrastructure I also said that they should be fairly cheap throw away items say 30m to 60m in value, they should be able to be put down quickly and can be scooped like mobile depots in terms of the RF timer if RF'd when inert.

These things can be placed anywhere in a system and you put one anywhere in a Constellation to get that data, so they are not going to be easy to track down as they will need to be probed.

You are on the same wave length as me then in terms of how cheap and easy they should be, and the reasons for it, getting hisec players back from the defeatist give up attitude they have now is important for all of us, and having something that people can feel that they can have an impact with to impede those that war dec them is going to change attitudes, or at least I hope it will. Perhaps I am an idealist, but a lot of people like the idea of being able to resist in some way and if this means they go out in something even if its cheap to blap something like this it is creating some content.

Thanks for going through this as you have, you are one of the players who I respect and it helps in pushing others to at least give it an assessment. and think about the affects..

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#57 - 2016-11-30 18:51:13 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Perhaps I am an idealist, but a lot of people like the idea of being able to resist in some way and if this means they go out in something even if its cheap to blap something like this it is creating some content


Get rid of killboards and people would do this. Killboards simply mean people refuse to fight if they don't know they can win, because for some reason in this game stats matter more than actually having fun.
Natural CloneKiller
Commonwealth Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#58 - 2016-11-30 19:31:57 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Because Vendetta Mercenary Group would blow up any of those structures that they could find that didn't belong to them. And if you happen to not be able to beat them in a fleet fight (IE you're literally anyone who lives in highsec) you lose your access to a vital functionality. Having them in a limited area wouldn't be useful because people frequently move long distances in highsec and in your suggestion the results are too infrequent to have any defensive value.

Moreover, realistically the average carebear just wouldn't even attempt to use them.

I appreciate that you're trying to come up with an idea that provides useful functionality while also having counterplay, but having to maintain a massive structure network in order to gain access to something as vital as the ability to find the people you're at war with would disproportionately benefit big, wealthy, powerful mercenary organizations and leave everyone else in the dust.

Are you a jedi...
Estuary Algaert
Petulant Luddite GmbH
#59 - 2016-11-30 19:34:15 UTC
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Perhaps I am an idealist, but a lot of people like the idea of being able to resist in some way and if this means they go out in something even if its cheap to blap something like this it is creating some content


Get rid of killboards and people would do this. Killboards simply mean people refuse to fight if they don't know they can win, because for some reason in this game stats matter more than actually having fun.


I don't feel that the removal of the boards would do this. IMO, it is the repeatedly reinforced perception/reality that they cannot win. Neutral interference, sudden corp joins, and sometimes just the sheer size of the aggressing corp play into this. And ya know, a lot of times they are right. Hopefully (defiantly not holding my breath) HS war mechanics get another overhaul here in the future to bring them into something that is fun and rewarding for both sides on the good days and at least a *meh* on the worst days. Until then I'm gonna just file it away in the same section I keep my hopes in as bounty hunting.
Doddy
Excidium.
#60 - 2016-11-30 19:34:35 UTC
Tom Gerard wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
stuff


Currently the logical solution is to corp-swap, this bloats corp history and doesn't provide gameplay for anyone.


No, the logical solution is to kill the agressors or employ somebody else to do so.