These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

War Dodge Clarification Needed

Author
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2013-02-25 04:05:40 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
What I am not new to is declaring war on people and them getting blown up over and over again and trying every game mechanic they possibly can to get out of it and at no point opening a convo with anyone and asking what exactly they can do to make us stop shooting them.


Because most people who do that sort of thing will just continue to amuse themselves even after that. Maybe you're the exception, but you'd be just that, the exception.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#62 - 2013-02-25 04:13:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Vimsy Vortis
Says you, some random in EVE university who speaks for absolutely nobody in the griefing community.

I mean it's not like I personally have extensive experience in this area and know that you're completely wrong or anything.

My corporation started out as 4 dudes in t1 frigates declaring war on 10 man mining corps, right now we're the highest efficiency mercenary corporation in highsec and we've been in communication with a whole bunch of similar groups doing the same thing the entire time and guess what? Turns out that they were actually populated by people, not mysterious internet creatures called "trolls" that don't respond to reason. If you can provide someone who has declared war on you an adequate alternative to being at war with you they will accept those terms nine times out of ten.

If the message you want to push is that aggressors in wars cannot be talked to and there need to be mechanical get-outs for wars because of it then you're a liar trying to serve an ulterior motive.
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#63 - 2013-02-25 04:20:56 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
You underestimate trolls being trolls. Some people just like to watch the world burn and take every opportunity to make it happen.


Keep in mind you are talking to a person whose alliance raised $1000 (but didn't spend and refunded the money because everyone stopped caring) to send an official cease and desist letter off to Sony to screw with the PlanetSide 2 guild that used our name for fun.

You can't possibly educate someone who was once blue to Goonswarm Federation of all alliances on successful trolling and griefing.
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2013-02-25 04:24:03 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Says you, some random in EVE university who speaks for absolutely nobody in the griefing community.

I mean it's not like I personally have extensive experience in this area and know that you're completely wrong or anything.


Years of gaming says otherwise. You can claim all you want, but I gave up messaging people about that kind of crap when I was 13 because it just fueled them further. Most times when I first start the game.
Setima Demedici
Setima Demedici Corporation
#65 - 2013-02-25 05:49:07 UTC
I have no problem with corps disbanding because a war dec. But there should be some sort of penalty to that corp because .... well, they did just LOOSE a war.

I would like to see something like this:

1. If a war dec corp wants to disband, they should have to pay what ever fee's the dec'er paid to start the war, minus a pro-rated % based on how long the war was live.
1a. If they disband during the 24 hr warmup there should be an extra isk penalty added.
2. These fines can be paid by the corp or divided among each member on a % basis.
3. If players/corp do not have the isk to pay the penalty, then they can still disband but each member of the corp that did not pay carries a personal war dec against them.
4. No one in that leaves a corp with an active war dec should be able to join a new corp for the week that the war dec would have lasted unless they have paid their fee.
4a. No one that leaves a corp with an active war dec should be able to create a new corp for the week that the war dec would have lasted even if they paid any fees. This would stop corp recycling
4b. Add a flag that follows each player that left war dec'ed corp and did not pay that would raise the NPC tax to 25% for the duration of the flag. This flag would last for how ever long the original week the war dec would have lasted.

This would give members of a war dec corp a way to get out but would not allow them to get away scott free. This would also force the members of the corp to look at other ways of dealing with an unwanted war dec. I am sure there are pvp corps out there that would love to have new pew pew targets that could be recruited as allies. This would also introduce diplomatic player interaction to corps that would not normally experience it.

Or not. I could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.

315 for CSM - 'nuff said

Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#66 - 2013-02-25 05:49:16 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
There is no difference between a shell corp which folds because of a wardec and one that forms seconds afterwards and contains the same players. Or a corp with 20 members then when a wardec hits has 1 member and 19 "friends and allies", then when the wardec ends has a recruitment spree.

You're not fooling anyone, you're just abusing the fact that you can drop a form of non-consensual PVP at your whim, which is an exploit because there's nothing anyone can to do stop you.

That's because high sec wars are not intended to be a form of non-consensual PvP.

And defender corp members who drop cannot re-join for 7 days either.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Setima Demedici
Setima Demedici Corporation
#67 - 2013-02-25 05:51:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Setima Demedici
Vincent Athena wrote:
EI Digin wrote:
There is no difference between a shell corp which folds because of a wardec and one that forms seconds afterwards and contains the same players. Or a corp with 20 members then when a wardec hits has 1 member and 19 "friends and allies", then when the wardec ends has a recruitment spree.

You're not fooling anyone, you're just abusing the fact that you can drop a form of non-consensual PVP at your whim, which is an exploit because there's nothing anyone can to do stop you.

That's because high sec wars are not intended to be a form of non-consensual PvP.

And defender corp members who drop cannot re-join for 7 days either.



Since when were they not intended to be non-consensual?

315 for CSM - 'nuff said

Angelique Duchemin
Team Evil
#68 - 2013-02-25 06:05:35 UTC
Takseen wrote:
If you could bypass CONCORD for a measly wardec fee there'd be precious little point to having them at all.



This is an interesting point. If you where indeed locked into the wardeced corp then couldn't a pirate kill people at will in jita for 50 mill? That would pay for itself with the first hauler.

The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity.

EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#69 - 2013-02-25 08:40:49 UTC
The pirates would have to wait 24 hours, which would mean that hauler would come and go until the wardec goes active. If you're in something like a blockade runner you can easily fly around and not get caught if you use your cloak + mwd properly. It's a pretty bad idea to go to Jita when you're wardecced by anyone regardless, unless you have scouts.

But it's a legitimate reason to use alternate trade hubs, or to hire someone else who isn't wardecced to haul things for you.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#70 - 2013-02-25 09:07:50 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:
Problem is a lot of those mechanics aren't particularly visible and not always particularly cost effective. Try to imagine a small corp being forced into a corp war. They don't have much in the way of experience, cash or skill, but a larger corp decides to lock them down. Even mercenaries were made more visible, perhaps they can't afford them. In the end, it allows them to essentially fall into a grief situation. Now you can say it doesn't count because it falls under game mechanics, but there is more to it than mechanics. It still unnecessarily drives people away, and its not going to be just because the game isn't for them. Being tormented is something that can drive away even the best players. Its worse than market PvP and all that, because that's more a direct competition, not necessarily you being singled out. Not sure if I'm explaining this well, but typically combat is a bit harsher.
There is one game mechanic that has always existed game-wide and doesn't necessarily cost anything. Diplomacy is the any corp's best bet for survival. They could join an alliance, they could find friends and ~blue the universe~, there are so many diplomatic options. Small, poor, inexperienced entities packed full of new players like Dreddit and Goonswarm have been using diplomacy to practically take over portions of the game. Take notes from the big blue donut stereotype you like to use, highsec.

well. show me someone outside of this blue doughnut who will say this is good for game as a whole? Not sure. Eve Online is about conflict and wars and not about blue ISK-farms.

So if you force people into these alliances/groups you hurt the game.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Lin Suizei
#71 - 2013-02-25 09:22:54 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
well. show me someone outside of this blue doughnut who will say this is good for game as a whole? Not sure. Eve Online is about conflict and wars and not about blue ISK-farms.

So if you force people into these alliances/groups you hurt the game.


Or these players and don't want to be involved in the war system could say, remain in the employ of an NPC corp.

A revolutionary idea, I know.

Lol I can't delete my forum sig.

March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2013-02-25 09:26:19 UTC
Lin Suizei wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
well. show me someone outside of this blue doughnut who will say this is good for game as a whole? Not sure. Eve Online is about conflict and wars and not about blue ISK-farms.

So if you force people into these alliances/groups you hurt the game.


Or these players and don't want to be involved in the war system could say, remain in the employ of an NPC corp.

A revolutionary idea, I know.

sure you right, this is revolutionary idea.

because people like you always say "remove NPC corps", "move players after 2 months of play time into some FW corp" or similar stupid things
Lol

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

rareden
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2013-02-25 09:28:11 UTC
0Lona 0ltor wrote:
I'm about to submit a petition regarding a corp who's members drop and then rejoin corp during war. Is this an exploit I've read so many posts saying it is and so many saying it's not?

Why does CCP not simply lock corps when they are dec'd to prevent such exploits? or place a 7 day timer on leaving corp so the War Dec'r gets his war dec for the full 7 days.

Another option would be for CCP to charge ISK to move corporations to prevent people war dodging.

its not an exploit unfortunately, people have no incentive to remain in corps after a war dec. they should not be allowed to leave for a certain time. another example of ccps love for carebears
Lin Suizei
#74 - 2013-02-25 09:53:58 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
because people like you always say "remove NPC corps", "move players after 2 months of play time into some FW corp" or similar stupid thingsLol


Yep, "people like me", all six of us in Placid who will give gf's at around downtime.

What do you propose then, to fix the ridiculous nature of highsec wars, which are now completely consensual, and heavily punishing the attacker if the defender doesn't want to fight?

Lol I can't delete my forum sig.

0Lona 0ltor
Adeptio Gloriae
#75 - 2013-02-25 10:06:25 UTC
This does really need adressed. A corp that is war dec'd should have a 7 day timer on leaving the corp or the war dec should follow players for the seven days who choose to bail. You pay the fee for 7 days and you should get those 7 days.

Can someone from CSM please support this or a future candidate put it forward, I'm looking at you James 315 as you'll get my vote. I'd like to see and hear people piping up about this at fan fest too please.
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#76 - 2013-02-25 10:09:32 UTC
0Lona 0ltor wrote:
This does really need adressed. A corp that is war dec'd should have a 7 day timer on leaving the corp or the war dec should follow players for the seven days who choose to bail. You pay the fee for 7 days and you should get those 7 days.

Can someone from CSM please support this or a future candidate put it forward, I'm looking at you James 315 as you'll get my vote. I'd like to see and hear people piping up about this at fan fest too please.


Really don't think any solution that makes people more afraid to join a corp in the first place is a good idea, frankly. Definitely think if the aggressor should get refunded though if certain things happen.
0Lona 0ltor
Adeptio Gloriae
#77 - 2013-02-25 10:13:08 UTC  |  Edited by: 0Lona 0ltor
Well another point I'd like to make is that older players have no business being in npc corps in the first place. If you leave a corp you should be placed into generic corp which would be decable and awoxable. Being able to hide within an NPC corp is a joke. NPC corps should be for new players to the game and not a skirt for cowards to hide under.

A quick fix would be for the NPC corps that exist now to be war dec'able while placing new players into non dec'able school corps for a maximum fair time frame.
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2013-02-25 10:20:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Aren Madigan
0Lona 0ltor wrote:
Well another point I'd like to make is that older players have no business being in npc corps in the first place. If you leave a corp you should be placed into generic corp which would be decable and awoxable.

No part of corp wardecs leads me to believe that they want to take away people's freedom of flying solo if they wish. They want to be unaffiliated and undisturbed, why shouldn't that be their choice? Doesn't automatically mean they're antisocial, just means they want to be kept out of the politics. Asking for such a thing is just asking for unorganized easy targets that you don't have to particularly worry too much about reinforcements against. Its just an unlocked door to CONCORD free piracy. There is no reason that someone should HAVE to join a corp or make their own without to avoid being freely ganked where ever they go.

Plus it goes against the risk = reward philosophy. You'd have more risk for zero reward.

EDIT: To put it another way, why should being out of a PC corp be about as dangerous as being in null sec solo?
Lin Suizei
#79 - 2013-02-25 10:31:24 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
They want to be unaffiliated and undisturbed, why shouldn't that be their choice?


Because belligerent undesirables want to disturb them.

Lol I can't delete my forum sig.

Kinis Deren
Mosquito Squadron
D0GS OF WAR
#80 - 2013-02-25 10:35:23 UTC
This thread scores high on the stupid index.

What next, force war dec'd players to only ever log in on their war dec'd character? Force them to never log off or leave the keyboard if war dec'd?Roll