These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 v.s. Bot Miner Corp

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rex Aparte
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#101 - 2013-02-28 11:47:24 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Rex Aparte wrote:
Thinks the point of wardecs are for mining or indy or noob corps - check

Whines when said corp uses game mechanics to get out of a wardec they don't want to be in - check

Even calls it an exploit and wants game changed so corps that don't want to be at war get "trapped" for at least a week. - check

I find it so funny that people are a. proud of their "wardecs" and b. surprised when their foe doesn't want to fight, and cry about it all day long on the forums. As someone smarter than me said, go ahead and wardec the best hisec merc alliance. I guarantee you they won't try and get out of it. But then again, that won't give you the easymode free kills you're looking for. Then it would you docking up and dissolving your corp instantly. Cry. Moar.

If they are indeed botters, petition them, wardeccing them does nothing to help your cause.

This guy thinks wardecs have anything to do with anything other then one corp going to war with another.

You're not exempt because you're a miner.



And you're not guaranteed kills because you're a "pvper" (lol).
Rex Aparte
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#102 - 2013-02-28 11:59:06 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
EI Digin wrote:
Suicide ganking is basically a gigantic artificial hoop that players have to jump through in order to get any sort of reaction out of someone who you don't like, for legitimate reasons or not. It's a huge undertaking if you want to start suicide ganking someone, especially if you are a player who doesn't want to live in lowsec or nullsec, a poor player, or a new player.

You do get a reaction out of them when you declare war and they then surrender to you.

I am coming under the impression that it is something specific you want them to do, like you want them to fail at something, because you failed at it and you now hate them for it. Perhaps you want them to hate you back. If so then know that some players will always win the "hating game", because they just never hate another player and it is only a game to them, but they will only hate the game and themselves for failing at it. You just cannot get any reaction out of anyone just because you want them to.

It's not surrender when you disband your corp due to a wardec. It's exploitation of the NPC corps.

If disbanding the corp to get out of war was the intended method of surrender, there wouldn't be an actual option to surrender and high sec wouldn't be the only place this happens on a regular basis.

This seems to be the point some of you are neglecting, and I would guess because most of you understand this and won't admit to it because your afraid CCP would actually do something about it.

Every person the leaves a player run corp should be losing something significant. If those miners actually lost something, like the ability to mine just as well as before, they wouldn't disband corps as often.



High Sec is the only place this happens. Anywhere else, people can attack people freely, there is no other need for wardecs in the game. From your posts it is obvious you have no idea what you're talking about. You guys are the ones making wardecs a joke. You people who wardec easy victims, and then whine when they get out of the wardec. You cry, cry, cry, when that two day old mining in a destroyer used game mechanics put in place by CCP (read NOT AN EXPLOIT) to outsmart you. You want to make wardecs not a joke? Stop wardeccing people that don't want to fight. Or stop crying, I'm good either way.

If every "pvper" lost 50m every time they wardecced before they used their brain, oh wait...
dexington
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#103 - 2013-02-28 12:05:56 UTC
Rex Aparte wrote:
cry, cry, cry


Do you have any idea how stupid it makes you sounds when you repeat the same word over and over?, and no add in the occasional 'whine' is not helping.

I'm a relatively respectable citizen. Multiple felon perhaps, but certainly not dangerous.
Whitehound
#104 - 2013-02-28 12:17:18 UTC
dexington wrote:
Rex Aparte wrote:
cry, cry, cry


Do you have any idea how stupid it makes you sounds when you repeat the same word over and over?, and no add in the occasional 'whine' is not helping.

Crying is a repetitive task. One hopes to make others recognize it by repeating a word such as "cry". Or I could just say it goes on and on, and on and on, and on and on, and on and on ...

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Rex Aparte
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2013-02-28 12:21:08 UTC
Says this:

dexington wrote:
Rex Aparte wrote:
Who's the real carebear? The guy who uses game mechanics to his advantage, or the guy who cries on the forums about not being able to do whatever he wants, without a counter?


I'll say the guy whining when ccp fixes corp jumping is the real carebear.



Then when what I'm assuming is a real pvp entity wardecs the fake pvp entity, says this:

dexington wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Dante Uisen wrote:


I'm not sure we are playing the same game, eve online is supposedly taking place in a cold and harsh universe, it should be possible to wardec player run corporations.

you have wardecs. enjoy.


It's nothing more then a corporation dueling option, where you are allowed to refuse the invitation.


So apparently, when people "pvp" with noobs and carebears through wardecs, there are exploits that need to be fixed. But when real pvpers want to pvp with fake pvpers it's just "an option, where you are allowed to refuse the invitation". Tell me why I should take anything you say seriously?
dexington
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#106 - 2013-02-28 12:30:15 UTC
Rex Aparte wrote:
So apparently, when people "pvp" with noobs and carebears through wardecs, there are exploits that need to be fixed. But when real pvpers want to pvp with fake pvpers it's just "an option, where you are allowed to refuse the invitation". Tell me why I should take anything you say seriously?


Do you know what non-consensual pvp means?, it's kind of one of the core elements of eve. I guess you are one of players who need special treatment because eve is to hard, so please don't talk about being taken serious.

I'm a relatively respectable citizen. Multiple felon perhaps, but certainly not dangerous.
Rex Aparte
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2013-02-28 12:40:21 UTC
dexington wrote:
Rex Aparte wrote:
So apparently, when people "pvp" with noobs and carebears through wardecs, there are exploits that need to be fixed. But when real pvpers want to pvp with fake pvpers it's just "an option, where you are allowed to refuse the invitation". Tell me why I should take anything you say seriously?


Do you know what non-consensual pvp means?, it's kind of one of the core elements of eve. I guess you are one of players who need special treatment because eve is to hard, so please don't talk about being taken serious.




Ah, non consensual pvp. To me that means forcing pvp onto someone regardless of consequences, like ganking - which is a great element of eve. Just say what you really want, non consequential pvp. Why gank, when if I got my way I could trap all those people I would have had to gank into a never ending "war" that has no downside for me. There will always be a counter.

Eve is hard, I live in a C4 wh/C2 static, I pvp every single day, no fake ass wardec necessary, so please don't talk to me about special treatment.
Wacktopia
Fleet-Up.com
Keep It Simple Software Group
#108 - 2013-02-28 12:45:58 UTC
Dante Uisen wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
wardecs are a joke


didn't ccp mention something about their vision of wardecs and hi-sec corporations, was that the war should be mutual.



Someone at CCP mentioned it as part of the CSM7 meeting minutes but then later recounted that they merely said that such as to be able to represent a non-biased input opinion and to spark thought.

I think that given it was a fairly open conversation you really cannot read too much into the statement other than it was thrown in there to spark a conversation.

Kitchen sink? Seriousy, get your ship together -  Fleet-Up.com
dexington
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#109 - 2013-02-28 12:56:15 UTC
Rex Aparte wrote:
Ah, non consensual pvp. To me that means forcing pvp onto someone regardless of consequences, like ganking - which is a great element of eve. Just say what you really want, non consequential pvp. Why gank, when if I got my way I could trap all those people I would have had to gank into a never ending "war" that has no downside for me. There will always be a counter.


Ganking will always be an option, but in hi-sec concord will defend you if attacked, that system is working pretty well.

When you decide to leave the NPC corporations and start or join a player run corporation, you abandon the wardec protection that the NPC corporations provide, this is to some degree comparable with leaving hi-sec. You don't need to pay the npc tax, you can set up pos, form and alliance etc., but it comes at the cost of being legit war target of other players.

Currently the system is not working, and it is just as broken as the old bounty system.

I'm a relatively respectable citizen. Multiple felon perhaps, but certainly not dangerous.
Skeln Thargensen
Doomheim
#110 - 2013-02-28 13:12:25 UTC
dexington wrote:
[quote=Rex Aparte]When you decide to leave the NPC corporations and start or join a player run corporation, you abandon the wardec protection that the NPC corporations provide, this is to some degree comparable with leaving hi-sec. You don't need to pay the npc tax, you can set up pos, form and alliance etc., but it comes at the cost of being legit war target of other players.

Currently the system is not working, and it is just as broken as the old bounty system.


nope because your continued membership of that corp is entirely voluntary and you would want to leave if your CEO and corpmates decide to dock up for the remainder and that's not how you want to play it. player corps are opt in and NPC holding corps are always the default for everyone other than new players.

forums.  serious business.
Rex Aparte
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#111 - 2013-02-28 13:19:11 UTC
dexington wrote:
Rex Aparte wrote:
Ah, non consensual pvp. To me that means forcing pvp onto someone regardless of consequences, like ganking - which is a great element of eve. Just say what you really want, non consequential pvp. Why gank, when if I got my way I could trap all those people I would have had to gank into a never ending "war" that has no downside for me. There will always be a counter.


Ganking will always be an option, but in hi-sec concord will defend you if attacked, that system is working pretty well.

When you decide to leave the NPC corporations and start or join a player run corporation, you abandon the wardec protection that the NPC corporations provide, this is to some degree comparable with leaving hi-sec. You don't need to pay the npc tax, you can set up pos, form and alliance etc., but it comes at the cost of being legit war target of other players.

Currently the system is not working, and it is just as broken as the old bounty system.


Ok, that was very respectable so I shall be too. In my opinion, it should not be called wardec, it should be called "bribe". I haven't seen one person in this thread that didn't at least allude that what it is, is a bribe to look the other way. So lets just cut out all the bs and call it "Bribe Concord". You want to force pvp onto someone without losing your ship, bribe Concord. The counter for this will be the same button. The corp that is under attack can also "Bribe Concord" to once again protect them. Why would this option not work?
dexington
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#112 - 2013-02-28 13:27:09 UTC
Rex Aparte wrote:
dexington wrote:
Rex Aparte wrote:
Ah, non consensual pvp. To me that means forcing pvp onto someone regardless of consequences, like ganking - which is a great element of eve. Just say what you really want, non consequential pvp. Why gank, when if I got my way I could trap all those people I would have had to gank into a never ending "war" that has no downside for me. There will always be a counter.


Ganking will always be an option, but in hi-sec concord will defend you if attacked, that system is working pretty well.

When you decide to leave the NPC corporations and start or join a player run corporation, you abandon the wardec protection that the NPC corporations provide, this is to some degree comparable with leaving hi-sec. You don't need to pay the npc tax, you can set up pos, form and alliance etc., but it comes at the cost of being legit war target of other players.

Currently the system is not working, and it is just as broken as the old bounty system.


Ok, that was very respectable so I shall be too. In my opinion, it should not be called wardec, it should be called "bribe". I haven't seen one person in this thread that didn't at least allude that what it is, is a bribe to look the other way. So lets just cut out all the bs and call it "Bribe Concord". You want to force pvp onto someone without losing your ship, bribe Concord. The counter for this will be the same button. The corp that is under attack can also "Bribe Concord" to once again protect them. Why would this option not work?


I guess some sort of bribe system could work, it would add a lot more consequence for both parties, and could also solve the problem with griefing being to easy or people being trapped in endless wars.

I'm a relatively respectable citizen. Multiple felon perhaps, but certainly not dangerous.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#113 - 2013-02-28 13:46:39 UTC
Rex Aparte wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Rex Aparte wrote:
Thinks the point of wardecs are for mining or indy or noob corps - check


The purpose of war decs is to let me fight anyone I want even in highsec. Be that because they're botters, or because they're part of the logistics for null sec operations, or because they insulted me, or because of any other reason at all.

The point of war decs is to let you fight someone. That's it. You can be butthurt if someone targets "weak" corps, but thats up to them - it is not, as you incorrectly imply - missing the "point" of war decs. It's absolutely on point.

War decs do not and should not have a requirement to be "fair fights", or mutually agreed upon, despite what some themeparking idiots (including the odd csm member or ccp dev) says.



Is butthurt that the weak people he wardecs, can get out of said wardecs. - check

You're missing my point entirely. Wardec whoever the hell you want. Just don't cry about it when the mining corp you wardecced surprisingly doesn't want to fight you! Wardeccing those corps is an option, but not the point. If you wardec someone who doesn't want to fight you, expect to be disappointed.

Who's the real carebear? The guy who uses game mechanics to his advantage, or the guy who cries on the forums about not being able to do whatever he wants, without a counter?


Except some of the mechanics for dropping corp and evading war decs are currently just... bad. I'm not saying that if you war dec someone you must be guaranteed the GoodFites or easy kills you desire, and that there shouldn't be avenues for them to surprise you or deny you what you want, but the current mechanics are very, very crappy and not conducive to good gameplay for anyone.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#114 - 2013-02-28 13:53:16 UTC
GreenSeed wrote:
say a player cant run from a wardec, when is the war over? is it when he cant undock anymore? and if so, hows that any different from griefing?

eve is a cold harsh place, but griefing will get you banned.


Also, to address this and what some may think from my posts - I'm not saying someone who is wardecced shouldn't be able to get out of it, there obviously has to be a way to get of it or it could devolve into griefing. I think it needs balancing is all, it's too quick and easy and there's virtually no downsides to it right now. A few little things, like allowing a period - say 24 hours - after dropping corp where you're still a valid target, making the cost of trashing a corp and recreating it something that's more significant, etc.
Galaxy Pig
New Order Logistics
CODE.
#115 - 2013-02-28 14:12:49 UTC
Yup yup yup, Corp-hopping is a lame joke of a mechanic and just another inch of ground claimed by the carebear creep.

Highsec is owned by players now. Systems 0.5-1.0 are New Order Territory. All miners and other residents of Highsec must obey The Code. Mining without a permit is dangerous and harmful to the EVE community. See www.MinerBumping.com
Whitehound
#116 - 2013-02-28 14:25:23 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Also, to address this and what some may think from my posts - I'm not saying someone who is wardecced shouldn't be able to get out of it, there obviously has to be a way to get of it or it could devolve into griefing. I think it needs balancing is all, it's too quick and easy and there's virtually no downsides to it right now. A few little things, like allowing a period - say 24 hours - after dropping corp where you're still a valid target, making the cost of trashing a corp and recreating it something that's more significant, etc.

It is pointless.

If they are sitting docked at a station while waiting for roles to drop or for some other cool-down makes no difference to the outcome when they could get out instantly. It only turns into a "kick in the back on their way out" and this is not necessary.

Somehow the obduracy displayed here by some when they insist on their little war reminds me of this and it might it be a good idea to give you a pop-up note saying "No, you cannot do this."

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Whitehound
#117 - 2013-02-28 14:29:43 UTC
Galaxy Pig wrote:
Yup yup yup, Corp-hopping is a lame joke of a mechanic and just another inch of ground claimed by the carebear creep.

James 315 does it all the time, just so you know.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#118 - 2013-02-28 14:35:34 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Also, to address this and what some may think from my posts - I'm not saying someone who is wardecced shouldn't be able to get out of it, there obviously has to be a way to get of it or it could devolve into griefing. I think it needs balancing is all, it's too quick and easy and there's virtually no downsides to it right now. A few little things, like allowing a period - say 24 hours - after dropping corp where you're still a valid target, making the cost of trashing a corp and recreating it something that's more significant, etc.

It is pointless.

If they are sitting docked at a station while waiting for roles to drop or for some other cool-down makes no difference to the outcome when they could get out instantly. It only turns into a "kick in the back on their way out" and this is not necessary.

Somehow the obduracy displayed here by some when they insist on their little war reminds me of this and it might it be a good idea to give you a pop-up note saying "No, you cannot do this."


Even if we just go with a grace period of 24 hours - you claim that is "no different" from them being able to instantly drop corp? How on earth do you think that? It means they've got to sit docked for a full day - no missioning, mining, whatever. There's an actual downside, albeit a fairly brief, trivial one. But there is at least one, rather than none.

Being able to instantly drop corp at no cost what so ever is stupid. This isn't me acting entitled, it's simply the truth.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#119 - 2013-02-28 14:36:58 UTC
William Cane wrote:
Because this maks them safe and sound to continue on about their merry way.


There are a lot of people that fund their accounts with PLEX. Inability to "continue about their merry way" means they can't fund their accounts, and unsub.

CCP will ensure there are mechanisms in place that allow players to "continue about their merry way" because the alternative is a significant portion of the player base being forced out of the game.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#120 - 2013-02-28 14:43:08 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Galaxy Pig wrote:
Yup yup yup, Corp-hopping is a lame joke of a mechanic and just another inch of ground claimed by the carebear creep.

James 315 does it all the time, just so you know.

really