These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Regarding the war deck issue, possible fix [My 6 years experiences]

Author
Rellik B00n
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2013-01-20 17:06:32 UTC
Gillia Winddancer wrote:
Rellik B00n wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
I. If we faced them corp to corp we would win, however these targets would never want to fight and stayed docked.



Guerrilla warfare is a form of irregular warfare in which a small group of combatants including, but not limited to, armed civilians (or "irregulars") using military tactics, such as ambushes, sabotage, raids, petty warfare, the element of surprise, and extraordinary mobility to dominate a larger and less-mobile traditional army, or strike a vulnerable target, and withdraw almost immediately.


the 'picking off of newbies' is almost irrelavant - they almost certainly picked your corp because it was big and there would always be targets online somewhere.

EvE has few enough chances for guerilla warfare as it is without limiting it further.


Yeah, cause you know, like in real life guerilla warfare you have omnipotent intel tools that instantly tells you that enemies are present nearby making it impossible for said tactic......oh wait, actually I just may be wrong on that bit.



apparently you failed to read the part where is said:

I said wrote:
EvE has few enough chances for guerilla warfare as it is without limiting it further.
[Of a request for change ask: Who Benefits?](https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=199765)
Gillia Winddancer
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2013-01-20 17:13:22 UTC
Rellik B00n wrote:
Gillia Winddancer wrote:
Rellik B00n wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
I. If we faced them corp to corp we would win, however these targets would never want to fight and stayed docked.



Guerrilla warfare is a form of irregular warfare in which a small group of combatants including, but not limited to, armed civilians (or "irregulars") using military tactics, such as ambushes, sabotage, raids, petty warfare, the element of surprise, and extraordinary mobility to dominate a larger and less-mobile traditional army, or strike a vulnerable target, and withdraw almost immediately.


the 'picking off of newbies' is almost irrelavant - they almost certainly picked your corp because it was big and there would always be targets online somewhere.

EvE has few enough chances for guerilla warfare as it is without limiting it further.


Yeah, cause you know, like in real life guerilla warfare you have omnipotent intel tools that instantly tells you that enemies are present nearby making it impossible for said tactic......oh wait, actually I just may be wrong on that bit.



apparently you failed to read the part where is said:

I said wrote:
EvE has few enough chances for guerilla warfare as it is without limiting it further.


Oh, my bad, I sort of assumed that you were one of those who thought that removing instant info tools would be like limiting EVE even further instead of the other way around.
Hatch Nasty
Solus Inter Astra
Independent.
#23 - 2013-01-20 17:39:04 UTC
Personally, I think the concept of war decs (paying a bribe to CONCORD so you can kill other players in hi sec) doesn't really make sense from a logic/lore perspective anyway. And I see how it is often abused as a griefing or extortion tool. So, I would be fine with CCP ditching the mechanic altogether...

...provided they simultaneously shrunk Empire space, expanded low sec and npc null, and pushed most resources out of the "safe zone."

Then corps can go to war with each other all they want outside of the Empire in the no man's land, and you don't need a hokey declaration system to do it. Wars will become something that happens in the badlands. Empire can be a safe (almost - suicide ganking still an option) zone, but should be smaller in scope and much less profitable. Think "walled city." Empire might be the place where people build markets, warehouses, and factories, whereas the wild west is where all of the raw materials are obtained and the wealth is created.

Maybe the next expansion could be EVE Online: Collapse. All the Empire factions go broke, and they are forced to shrink their controlled territories. "We mined out every belt we had in Empire space, there are no rocks left, we're all out of money, and we can't keep paying all these Navy guys and CONCORD duties to patrol space. So we're pulling back from the fringe systems and just policing the core systems of each region. Good luck, pilots. You're on your own out there now."
flakeys
Doomheim
#24 - 2013-01-20 17:41:22 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
luZk wrote:
You got it backwards. If you're safer in null it means something is wrong with null not the other way around.Attention

Null isn't safer than highsec.



Uhm in regards to how safe it was in the old days then hell yes null is safemode now .....

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.

Keno Skir
#25 - 2013-01-20 18:07:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Keno Skir
NickyYo wrote:
Change wardec mechanics for me because nasty men kicking sand at me.


Assuming what you say is true, all the corps you mentioned were crap and incapable of looking after their assets or training their new players to survive / fight. New players in hisec are perfectly safe in the starter corp.

What eve needs is an EVEN BIGGER warning when a player enters into a PLAYER CORP. Being in a player corp is not something you are just entitled to do. If more players were prepared to shift their weight and actually do something for their corp instead of sitting around running missions and complaining their faction battleships keep getting popped by "nasty griefers".

By being part of a PLAYER CORP you are saying :

"I am prepared to fight my own battles now, or my corp is prepared to protect me while i learn how. If i was not prepared to fight my own battles or did not have a corp prepared to protect me while i learn i would of course stay in the safety of an NPC corp"

So then when somebody decs you, you know all the players who leave are the ones who weren't worth having because they didn't understand the above easy principal.

It is not up to the game to change to make things easier on you or your corp because you do not understand the principal i have outlined. CCP have clearly spelled out for you that the NPC corps are for those who dont want to get wardecced. What i believe is happening here is everyone wants their own special little group name and logo but don't want any of the nasty combat that comes with it.

Don't start or join a PLAYER CORP unless you are prepared to deal with the consequences.
NickyYo
modro
The Initiative.
#26 - 2013-01-20 18:11:37 UTC  |  Edited by: NickyYo
Keno Skir wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
Change wardec mechanics for me because nasty men kicking sand at me.


Assuming what you say is true, all the corps you mentioned were crap and incapable of looking after their assets or training their new players to survive / fight. New players in hisec are perfectly safe in the starter corp.

What eve needs is an EVEN BIGGER warning when a player enters into a PLAYER CORP. Being in a player corp is not something you are just entitled to do. If more players were prepared to shift their weight and actually do something for their corp instead of sitting around running missions and complaining their faction battleships keep getting popped by "nasty griefers".

By being part of a PLAYER CORP you are saying :

"I am prepared to fight my own battles now, or my corp is prepared to protect me while i learn how. If i was not prepared to fight my own battles or did not have a corp prepared to protect me while i learn i would of course stay in the safety of an NPC corp"

So then when somebody decs you, you know all the players who leave are the ones who weren't worth having because they didn't understand the above easy principal.

It is not up to the game to change to make things easier on you or your corp because you do not understand the principal i have outlined. CCP have clearly spelled out for you that the NPC corps are for those who dont want to get wardecced. What i believe is happening here is everyone wants their own special little group name and logo but don't want any of the nasty combat that comes with it.

Don't start or join a PLAYER CORP unless you are prepared to deal with the consequences.

TLDR;

I guess you're now kicking the sand ey?
Thing is bro, CCP is losing subscriptions due to the war deck system its a FACT! Instead of slamming my ideas to try stop the removal of wardecks in high sec why don't you provide constructive solutions for CCP?

I forsee the next winter expansion having removed highsec war decks altogether, we need to come up with solutions and push it on CCP! every idea out there is waiting to be thought off!

..

Keno Skir
#27 - 2013-01-20 18:20:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Keno Skir
NickyYo wrote:
TLDR

I guess you're now kicking the sand ey?


You didn't read my post and I'M kicking sand? I'd be more worried about how everyone else did read it and now you don't even understand why you look so silly.

I actually think you did read it Cool

I read all your posts, that's how i know you havn't the slightest clue what you're talking about.

You said you were at war but the enemy didnt want to come out and fight unless they thought they could win...

SURPRISE SURPRISE...

fool.
NickyYo
modro
The Initiative.
#28 - 2013-01-20 18:30:53 UTC  |  Edited by: NickyYo
Keno Skir wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
TLDR

I guess you're now kicking the sand ey?


You didn't read my post and I'M kicking sand? I'd be more worried about how everyone else did read it and now you don't even understand why you look so silly.

I actually think you did read it Cool

I read all your posts, that's how i know you havn't the slightest clue what you're talking about.

You said you were at war but the enemy didnt want to come out and fight unless they thought they could win...

SURPRISE SURPRISE...

fool.


The situation of how the events occured in game is not the problem.
The problem is mass amounts of players are quiting because of war deck harrasment, proof is in the pudding or shall i say CCP's satistics.

Did you even read the CSM minutes?

..

Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#29 - 2013-01-20 18:32:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Arduemont
Although I hate Nicky's posts in general, I have to say I agree with him on this point. War decs really do make new players quit. I have run two n00b corps myself, both times the same things has occurred. You build up a player-base and then a war dec comes in, and half the corp goes afk, alot of them leave, especially if you get a few war decs in a row.

Don't get me wrong, as a more experienced PvPer, I love the war decs. But the newer players just dont. And frankly that's understandable. Took me a good part of a year before I was any good at PvP, and I always felt the same way about war decs when I was new.

Don't misunderstand me, the proposed bidding war thing is a horrible idea.

Saying the corps were crap is just ridiculous though. If you are specifically looking to hire new players, then your achieving your target market if your players are terrible at PvP. Teaching new players to PvP is easy, but getting them to actually want to learn, is very very difficult indeed. And let's face it, wanting to PvP, is not a prerequisite for an industrial corp.

That above easy prinicple you like so much is never told to them. The newbs don't know that. If they're only two weeks old into the game, no one has told them that. Besides, you can't defend n00bs when your not online. The newb corp I ran had 5-6 competant PvPers, and that's it. If none of them were online, the entirety of the rest of the corp had no choice but to dock up, or lose ships.

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#30 - 2013-01-20 19:07:15 UTC
Arduemont wrote:
That above easy prinicple you like so much is never told to them. The newbs don't know that. If they're only two weeks old into the game, no one has told them that. Besides, you can't defend n00bs when your not online. The newb corp I ran had 5-6 competant PvPers, and that's it. If none of them were online, the entirety of the rest of the corp had no choice but to dock up, or lose ships.

If only highsec was a lot safer, think of the newbies, vote for more NPC protection.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Flag Bravo
#31 - 2013-01-20 19:31:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Flag Bravo
The latest war dec macanic is without doubt killing a lot of young enthusiastic corps. Where the ceo and friends have worked their socks of to try and make a success of it, only resulting in it all going down the toilet for the fun of a few griefers. Not good.

I like the ops idea, it could very well work.
CCP don't seem to understand that there are many players that love the none pvp side of eve, as they attempt to force pvp on these people, even in what is to a certain point, suppose to be a safe haven.

People want to pvp, want to war, want to kill. Head out to low-sec, knock yourselves out.
Sala Kyss
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2013-01-20 19:34:51 UTC
You just need to stop making posts in general, your trolling opinions are terrible
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#33 - 2013-01-20 19:53:41 UTC
luZk wrote:
NickyYo wrote:
luZk wrote:
You got it backwards. If you're safer in null it means something is wrong with null not the other way around.Attention


For newbie players, null is safer than highsec.



Yes that's because null is broken.


Null isn't so much broken, as Null Alliance Sov holders have such control over there space that any threat is significantly decreased.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#34 - 2013-01-20 21:40:59 UTC
flakeys wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
luZk wrote:
You got it backwards. If you're safer in null it means something is wrong with null not the other way around.Attention

Null isn't safer than highsec.



Uhm in regards to how safe it was in the old days then hell yes null is safemode now .....

Prove it.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Jason Xado
Doomheim
#35 - 2013-01-20 21:56:22 UTC
NickyYo wrote:
null is safer than high sec!


In my humble opinion there is no reason null sec should not be just as safe as high sec given a level of effort from the soverign alliance. If with a reasonable amount of effort and commitment an alliance cannot make a null sec system "almost" as safe as high sec then there is a game mechanic problem. Of course an enemy alliance should be able to apply the same amount of effort and commitment to remove the "safe".

I for one would love to see the removal of all developer created NPC control and give the power to the players.

Just a humble opinion.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#36 - 2013-01-20 22:19:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Natsett Amuinn
They're meaningless because there's nothing being faught over. It's just wardecing for targets.

Give high sec something worth winning and losing, like control over T2 manufacturing and player run stations for the refining of ores, and high sec wardecs would have a point.

There's nothing you can do to the wardec mechanics that will solve anything. The mechanics aren't the problem.


When null sec has a war sov is at stake.
High sec needs an equivilent mechanic to encourage growth within high sec corps and to give people valid reasons to go to war.

High sec industrial corps should want to go to war with other high sec industrial corps in an effort to disrupt operations and gain an advantage on the market. This isn't possible with the way high sec works currently.
Anna Karhunen
Inoue INEXP
#37 - 2013-01-20 22:34:09 UTC
One possible solution/additional feature about war declarations could be that if corporation declares war, then any war declarations against that corporation could get discount/be free for certain period of time, preferably months. The discount list could be shown somewhere, so that people would know that these corporations at least profess wanting to have a bit of war in their life.

I am sure this idea too has its drawbacks and unintentional consequences.

As my old maths teacher used to say: "Statistics are like bikinis: It's what they don't show that's interesting". -CCP Aporia

Merovee
Gorthaur Legion
Imperium Mordor
#38 - 2013-01-20 22:52:29 UTC
War dec in hi-sec should be limited to corp size/sec system

eg. large corp = 0.5 to 0.8 , medium corp = 0.5 to 0.7 small corp 0.5 to 0.6

Empire NPC corps member should have restrictions of movement and are blocked moving into enemy Hi-sec empires. This means offices would have to moved out of Hi-sec space.

NPC corps would be linked the FW in low-sec so that any system that empire controls will allow the Empire NPC corps to attack any member of a enemy npc corp.

This would allow pvp encroachment on new players and hi-sec industrial corps, and at the same time saving safe areas for them to retreat to with the cost of restricting their game play.Blink

Empire, the next new world order.

Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#39 - 2013-01-20 23:11:09 UTC
Merovee wrote:
War dec in hi-sec should be limited to corp size/sec system

eg. large corp = 0.5 to 0.8 , medium corp = 0.5 to 0.7 small corp 0.5 to 0.6

Empire NPC corps member should have restrictions of movement and are blocked moving into enemy Hi-sec empires. This means offices would have to moved out of Hi-sec space.

NPC corps would be linked the FW in low-sec so that any system that empire controls will allow the Empire NPC corps to attack any member of a enemy npc corp.

This would allow pvp encroachment on new players and hi-sec industrial corps, and at the same time saving safe areas for them to retreat to with the cost of restricting their game play.Blink

No thanks.

What do you consider large, medium, and small?
Would 1000 be medium? Is 500 small?

So a corporation with 25 members can fly around entire swaths of high sec with full CONCORD protection?


There's nothing wrong with the wardec mechanics.
You're given no reason to fight. If you have no reason to fight, you have no reason to grow. When you don't grow you don't have any incentive to stay in the corp when there's a wardec.

Disbanding a corporation is the easiest way to deal with a high sec wardec when you're a small corp.

You wouldn't tell your members to drop corp until the wardec is over if those members were losing something significant by doing so.
Aza Ebanu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2013-01-20 23:28:46 UTC
The problem with War dec system is that its a bribe not a war. It is at most a shadow of a gang war or a family feud. The problem is that it is so exclusive. A corps loyalty to an empire should factor in in high sec wars too. High sec griefer corp decs indy corp with high faction standing. War dec has essentially declared war on Empire faction, indy corp receives support from faction nation. It could at least work for FW corps though. Write it in as an appeal to Empires for support that concord wont give. The indy corp could even pay for support like the griefers pay for concord to turn a blind eye.
Previous page123Next page