Wormholes

Why post on a forum when you can just click you fingers and suddenly no one batphoes, flys T3 or blobs?

Seriously some of you seem to have missed the entire point of this thread. Put you pitchforks away and got read the first 3 pages again.

Late to the party so I am just going to post some opinions in random order.

1. All things are forgiven by bob through the cleansing fire of combat.

1-A. Anyone who batphones when they are being evicted are not cowards, are not carebears, they are simply doing what they can to further their right to exist. Very rarely does an entity who gets evicted/system wiped recover from this. Its simply normal to call for help, not a cowards way out. If you truly believe that these people are cowardly, then you truly believe that all of europe are cowards because they called on everyone's aid they could during world war two. (inb4 RL=/=Eve. its a legitimate analogy) " I feel I must remind you that it is an undeniable, and may I say a fundamental quality of man, that when faced with extinction, every alternative is preferable. " -Rooster Teeth (I never thought a quote from red vs blue would actually come in handy in eve online)

2. "PVP in WH space is just dead" Seeing these words from any WH entity that, at a moment's notice, can put together 30-40 man fleets is just sad. The benefits from being in a large and powerful entity is blindingly obvious. At the same time, as you ALL know, you have the unfortunate downside of being in a large entity that can field 30-40 people at a moments notice. Therefore you get people who will simply roll their holes or run and hide in their pos at the first sign of you. I have, on more then a few occasions, scared corps in lower class wormholes to the point that they offered me money to not evict them. IDK where some lower class entities get the idea that large WH groups = eviction machines come from, but it has worked out well for me monetarily. While this is fun and dandy, I still dont get pvp out of them.

3. Evictions of PVP entities... As someone who faced down the largest fight in WH history and was part of and even larger fleet that had the potential of becoming an even bigger engagement, TL eviction, I can say that these are great conflict drivers. The problem is that now when someone wants to do an eviction, they prepare before hand for the response that comes from the other side of the camp. I can guarantee you that if VOC, SSC, KILL, HK, Treci, or any other major entity is going to be invaded for whatever reason. The attackers are going to make damn sure that they have overwhelming numbers before any batphones are ever rung. This is not conflict driving. This is blue balling yourself in advance.

4. I honestly dont see what the problem is with hot and sweaty no strings attached fleet battles. Is there really a downside if polarized roles into SYJ and they have a 40-50 vs 40-50 man battle with 2-3 caps on each side? Or is this not elite enough for you? Does elite pvp always have to include the total annihilation of your enemy? Or does it simply have to do with that feeling you get when you burn someone's holes down. Its like being a kid on the beach and kicking down sand castles. We worked hard on those, do you really need to kick them down?

5. And my final point. If you want major pvp you can always try what we, HK, did. Take all your dudes into someone's hole. Do not maintain hole control and burn down their POCOS all the while demanding fights. Throw in the threat of eviction if they dont come out to play. "If you dont come out to play im burning your house down." Then just sit back and wait. They will come. And if they dont... well you know what to do.

I honestly dont think that my next paragraph will ever actually happen. Its just a pipe dream that I sometimes fantasize about when I am bored or gassing an instrumental.

If you really want to get some massive pvp then I suggest a major battle royal between every major WH entity in existance. We find some vanilla c5-c5 (c5s over c6s because almost every single c6 is taken there are tons of c5s available) and we set up as neutral ground. For like a month straight we do not kill anyone in said hole... at all. Then when we all have our tech 3s and capitals. (Yes tech 3s and capital because tier 3s are the pussy way out.) WHen the time comes, someone lights a cyno at a safe and we all just warp there and fight. No one teams up with anyone. We all just have the largest battle royal in eve history, let alone WH history. Once it is all said and done, the smoke clears, the 2-3 people still alive warp off, we all go back to our homes and we run the sites that bob will have given us as we would have given unto him greatly.

There isn't anything wrong with it, my only issue is that (for the big alliances) it doesn't really matter if you win or lose. We give "gf" in local, return home and grind a few sites so that we can do it all again the next day.

The only way to really hurt people in wormhole is by pos bashing or completely evicting them. I don't think this is good for the growth of w-space but it's all we have.

IMO we need two things to revitalize W-space:

1. Something for big alliances to fight over to desuade them from being friends
2. Ways for small groups to hurt the big guys and incentives for them to do so.

Although we had many quality posts, I think the premise of the discussion was taken into a broader direction than was intended. Some people believe that wh pvp mechanics are as good as they can be (frankly this is not the discussion), some people think that pvp just being fun is enough (which I totally agree with, it is fun and I do it every time I can). But in any good mmo, incentives and drivers are always good. I am just saying just like the null change (I am not saying I want the same change, just using it as an "example"), we also can have drivers for conflict. Doesn't mean the pvp mechanics needs to change, just now we can have more of it. For instance a small change change to pos mechanics where ships actually drop from sma, and taking away the ability to self destruct ships in the poses shields, in my opinion, will add a conflict driver, where evictions will be little more feasible. More pvp is always good (I am not in any way saying we aren't getting enough now), just that more is always better.
I feel like I am repeating a few points, but since this post got very long, it seemed warranted.

So please if you wanna argue, argue if you are with or against adding conflict drivers, that doesn't interfere with the current pvp mechanics, because if we are going to discuss other things it will get out of hand (it did a little).

Just for the new readers, if the post got too long, you can go back and read the first 2-3 pages at least (someone else also suggested it) so you can have a clearer picture of what the main point is.

Having fun in fights in amazing (if it wasn't I wouldn't be playing this forsaken game), but it is ok if we had some form of mechanics to induce more of it.

Get it straight, your issue is with natural human behavior, where as my issue is that CCP do little to curb our behavior through game mechanics.

Polarized (or any other alliance) aren't just going to strategically weaken them selves by splitting their forces just because you don't like the way we play, so get that stupid idea out of your heads.

Get off your high (we no like blues) horse and suggest viable solutions instead of pointing at the obvious problem that will never be fixed by players action alone.

The reason it took years was because of that same moongoo .


Add a bonus for that 'risk vs reward' and what you will get as in null is even bigger blobs to reap those rewards with even less risk.Everyone in eve is risk averse but just on a different level and usually the ones who scream the loudest about risks - goons are a great example here with their high-sec has too lilttle risks - are the ones who make sure that when there is a benefit they will have it at as little risk as possible.The best way possible in eve for this is the human way , surround yourself with as many as you can at every cost.


Reading this thread to me is like reading nullthreads from 6 years back.The same problems arise and the same solutions are being named.Now i am no expert in wormholes but it is obvious that with such changes you will only make your 'problem' worse.Nullsec over the last years should by now have tought you that much .

"Hi, I'm in a big c5/6 alliance....We're the top dog! We've got constantina wire around all our entrances. We've got rabid guard dogs. 50 men stark raving mad with boredom sitting in our barracks looking for something to do who haven't been fed in days. We've got weapons of mass destruction ready at a moments notice to vaporize anyone who enters.......oh.......and we live 3000km from our nearest neighbor. Why you no play with us?!?"

Gee....I don't know.

On a more serious note......fact is, you guys are too big for 95% of the rest of w-space. And the nature of w-space places you, effectively, far far far away from the rest of the 5%. Congratulations guys....you're the biggest and baddest. Now, stop getting me wet with your tears.

5v5 cruisers at the sun? No ewar, kk?

Yep, the C5/6 guys are telling us what they want w-space to be more like....null....the other 95% of us are telling you what it is....not null....not supportive of big alliances....not supportive of huge fleet fight....but the c5/6 guys just won't accept it.

Given CCP stance that w-space should be nomadic....which ultimately is complete BS IMO, I doubt you C5/6 guys are going to get anything resembling what you want....but you might just fck it up for everyone else.