Test Server Feedback

It's hard for the developers to remember that they're supposed to be robots for you.

See my post just above. My primary role in this thread is to point devs to good posts, facilitate an open but constructive discussion and keep my own awareness of the state of Sisi high.

Explain how?

A neat conspiracy theory doesn't a fact make.

Large alliances generally do NOT wardec. When they do, they will be less affected by small corps dogpiling the wardec than literally anyone else. It's small corps getting dogpiled that this change aims to stop. That Jade's "shoot goons for free!" manifesto suffers from this change is not a driving factor. The client has a map browser that shows sov - use it to go shoot them for free all day every day, they'll welcome it.

You need to think through the logic of that statement because as it stands, there is only ONE alliance that would benefit in ONE persons opinion and that person is trying to make you basically think what I quoted you saying here.

GSF themselves have said they WANT everyone in highsec to be shootable, so all this hand wangling that they've had CCP change the game to suit the opposite of their stated aims is ridiculous.

Simply, show me a single post, anywhere, at any time, where a single member of a "large alliance" has asked for this change because it benefits them ... or otherwise complained the Inferno system hurts their goals. In fact, simpler, try to find a member of a "large alliance" posting about the Inferno changes without mention about how well it is working FOR them currently.

You can't, all these statements that it's "what they wanted" are coming solely from the words of one person with a very very very long standing grudge with the "large alliance" he is trying to slander by whipping a gamechange mechanic into something it's not.

Please, stop it. It is complete lunacy.

I don't think the 1.1 changes are the *final* solution to wardecs in EvE, and that is what we should be discussing and not fabricating interest groups that don't exist.

lol why would goons or any large alliance care the f*ck about wardecs? There almost 24/7 wardec'd anyway, thats what alt-corps are for, hauling our **** to lowsec and nullsec to get it to where it needs to go and bypassing wardecs... The majority of nullsec could give a rats a$$ about the wardec system.

Although i do wish there was a way for nullsec alliances to "nullsec only" wardec each other so we could take advantage of the war tracking system, but it would give no low or highsec rights to either side, just would be an active nullsec war for tracking kills and stuff.

I believe that Mercs, and Small corp pile-ons can exist side by side. The examples given have been far too specific, i.e. only 1 scenario heavily looked in to, Merc's should be hired, to accomplish a specific task, Destroy this Pos, inflict this much damage to this corp, but Merc's shouldnt be looking at getting into long scale warfare. Thats not the role of a Merc.

It has been mentioned that when the CSM voted on this they voted in favour of changes, but that it wasnt unanimous, I would love to see how each CSM voted, and what the options were, to be sure that my CSM rep is representing the views of its constituency as elected to do.

If CCP arent concerned with creating a "Fair" fight, why do they Rebalance ships/modules etc? Is it because they see that these are overpowered and therefore arent working as intended? But a stupidly unbalanced wardec of 9000 vs 100, with a cost of 50 Million vs 500 Million is working as intended? The answer to the 10:1 isnt Merc's, as much as you want it to be. Its player created content, "you want to fight me?, ok let me just see if I can get a few friends, to even the odds" as what happened in this case.

The fact is the Wardec change, actually prohibits combat and ship losses. If a corp gets wardeced and the odds are so heavily stacked they have no chance of winning, they simply will stay docked.

If CCP put themselves in the situation of Jade, what would they of done as CEO of a corp which is facing insurmountable odds, would you have dared to undock, cower in the face of adversity? Jade decided to do the opposite, actively encourage conflict get as many people as they could to help them, and this is apparently the system not working as intended.

Problem is he (like you Khanh'rhh) are still not really seeing the point here. This is not (and never has) been about making two seperate war declaration systems. Its about a single declaration and ally system that scales appropriately, allows attackers and defenders a competitive playing field and works for any size of war from the tiniest 20vs20 up to the 9000 vs 100 (+38 ally) dogpile.

The simple solution I have proposed (defender allies are billed for only when the defensive coalition grows larger than the attacker) resolves the issue. Nobody thus far has been able to tell us convincingly why this is a bad idea.

Soundwave's attempt was "eve isn't fair, wardecs are not supposed to be balanced." But that cuts both ways. If Eve isn't fair and wardecs are not supposed to be balanced then WHY can't the defender sometimes turn the table on the attacker and bring a huge boatload of allies into the war and gain the advantage for a change? If there is no automatic right to fairness and balance then why are things being altered to ensure that only the Attacker gets protected in the new system.

The sad reality is that to Soundwaves vision wardecs ARE BALANCED, (they just happen to be balanced to advantage a large alliance attacker only.)

This argument has gone on and on because nobody is really providing meaningful critique of the proposed solution from the other side.

We've had it confirmed that the CSM was universally opposed to this wardec change. Alekseyev Karrde says it does absolutely nothing for the merc profession. The only people here defending are a subset of those people in the camp that are benefited by it (large alliances involved) or Soundwave on the grounds that "eve is neither fair nor balanced."

What I'd like really is for somebody to stand up and say "okay this is my idea, I was the one who pushed for it and this is why."

Because currently we're reading that the CSM disowns it.
General player feedback is negative.
Nobody (not even you Khan'hrrn) believes it will help the merc profession.

So who the heck is driving this change and will they please stop.

Developers don't "like" posts as a rule. Subscribe to the thread or keep an eye on "Dev Posts"

Sorry, just had to comment...

(<-- Please note the CSM tag here.)



I am not opposed to this change, therefore the CSM can not be "universally opposed" to it.


Please, either try harder with the misinformation, or please, just give up Jade.

There are people much better at making stuff up and blowing things out of all proportion than you are, and you're just looking like an amateur.

/emote facepalms with a deep sigh

Listen Hans ... Get your act together seriously. The CSM on this thread is all over the place. Spend less time trying to forum warrior the indefensible to cover up the gaps in your collective stories and more time getting this sorted out. I'm tired of seeing your facepalms and sighs.

If I'm told by the CSM member with the greatest knowledge of wardecs and merc profession on the CSM that at the summit 2 weeks ago



And I go on to reference this post. I don't expect to be called a liar by another CSM member trying innept damage control a couple of posts later.

Sort it out.