Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Hi,

First I ( this char ) is new in game, but I am not new to the game itself, tried it on few times since 2007.

Now on to the topic. It seems there are much posts from the nullbears saying that this and that must be nerfed in high-sec, particularly on income with same reason repeated ad nauseaum. Less risk in high sec, it's safe with concord, etc. I am against this idea, I think high sec is dangerous enough as it is

• You can gank anyone ( but Concord will pay you a visit)
• You can kill anyone while in war with them ( no concord, but currently have too many limitations )

Let's fix that shall we ? This is my idea.


1 ) People in NPC corp is immune to war dec. So make it possible to wardec NPC corp!

Make the starter NPC corps have time limitation. Their only members are newly created characters ( which join automatically ), and after some time they have to either join a player corp, or automatically moved to non-starter NPC corps. Only NPC starter corps may not be wardecced.

Corp that wardecced the NPC corp may not use/dock into the NPC corp station and will be attacked by its sentry. These will provide both strategic pros and cons to both side :)


2 ) War duration is too limitating, fixed to one week cycle, and wholly determined by the wardeccer. War lacks meaning.

Make it so that the wardeccer can set conditions of war. As soon as this condition is met, the war end immediately.
Example of conditions :-
1 ) Certain value of ISK/ships destroyed
2 ) The war target pay certain ISK amount/ provide certain item.
3 ) The war target stop his war on other corp/alliance
4 ) The war target surrender his POS/office/POCOs/Sov/ etc to the deccer.

Also, the war target is allowed to provide offer to wardeccer, with similar conditions as above, except that it has to be accepted by the wardeccer.

Of course, the ISK/items pledged is first verified and locked by the game in order to set the condition

The results is the warmongers can use intimidation to make lots of money. Pay or get killed. The victim is guaranteed to end the war by paying, as it's part of game mechanics. It's a win-win for both side.

The objective is to have more conflicts in high-sec, while still under the law of the empire.

3 ) Stagnant war may be ended before 1 week cycle
Make it so that while there is no loss from both side, the wardeccer may withdraw the wardec but have to pay certain penalty.
Also provide option for cease fire, has to be agreed from both side.

Tell me what you think. And sorry for my English, it's not my primary language

While I agree that people hiding in NPC corps to avoid war decs, is pretty cowardly, I would have to be persuaded a lot more to agree with having the NPC corps Dec'able.

It would really make starting out in Eve so much harder than it is now. And as we Eve players are a huge bunch of toolbags, there will be so many people preying on the new & weak.

Much as Eve is a PvP game, there are large amount of players who are not interested in PvP and want nothing to do with it. Denying them the chance to avoid decs will limit the enjoyment they have in Eve and can only harm the game as a whole.


As for your points:
1) Need to balance this carefully. Lots of players will not like this forced war.
2) Starting a war with a set condition is not a bad idea... however you can do the same thing via Evemail at the start of a war, whether the decker honors the condition is another matter (much like the ransom system)
Also what if your targets behave like total A-holes during the war, you may want to change the condition during the war.
3) Why would a decker pay for a weeks war then withdraw the dec by paying more?

NOTE: I know I sound like a carebear here, and I probably am. I am a supporter of the PvP aspect of Eve, but there has to be a balance or Eve will rapidly loose players.

In my opinion wars have very little meaning (especially in high sec) at the minute other than “your mamma”.

I think the best way to fix this would be to start moving station services into space and let them be player controlled similar to POCO’s right now.

The way I would see it is if station reprocessing facilities all got their tax increased or efficiency nerfed. Then systems (not all of them) would have a Facility spawn which can be found via on board scanner (anomaly) and captured by a player/corp/alliance. Once captured and onlined this facility can then reprocess ore at higher efficiency and a tax set by the player which can be variable depending on player standings. This would then become an extremely valuable corp/alliance asset that makes money and is worth fighting over.

To capture one all you have to do is reinforce it similar to a FW hub and then flip it.

You could also specialise these facilities like so:

Ore Processing Facility
Recycling Facility (turns T1 salvage into T2 salvage)
Scrap Yards (for reprocessing modules into minerals)
Research Facilities

The station facilities will still be available but would not be as efficient or cheap to use as in space facilities owned by players

Have you (the OP) thought about anything else related to his/er idea than "Force people to PVP!"? I doubt it. Because if s/he had, she would also have seen that lots of people join NPC corps to leave their player corp (PC) and want to join another. You cannot select freely which NPC corp to join, which means that if you leave your current PC into an NPC corp to join another PC, you would inherit the wardec to the new corp or wouldn't be able to join the new PC. That's definitely a good idea.

Also, I fail to see the problem of people "hiding" in NPC corps from terrible people (who don't give a thing if their target is in an NPC corp or not anyways, because they only suicide gank). It's the result of the actions of those who only see their own way of playing and force it onto others. It's thus a legitimate rebound and consequence of their egoism and egocentricity that people evade and avoid them. I think a change in mindset would do better to the game if you PVPs are so desperate to bring other people into PVP. Forcing them by removing every single place to play the game how other people want to play their game is not going to help.

PVP is in everything, and you're not safe anywhere. This is intended by the devs.

Yes, EVE is a sandbox and you're allowed to do anything you want. But so is everyone else, and a lot of times "what they want to do" will overlap (i.e. interfere with) "what you want to do".

"Griefing" is very much not allowed in EVE -- however, what you're labeling as "griefing" is not. Wardecs are fully valid regardless of who they are started by, and who the target is.

Stop playing the victim card, pull out some frigates, and shoot back.

IMO the only problem with the wardec system is the ability to leave and remake corps once decced.

This is a huge failing on the war system as declarations of war can be made void in a few minutes for less ISK than it took to declare war in the first place.

The system works for corps who hold assets, but the problem is that there isn't much incentive to hold assets in hisec. For corps that don't hold assets, wardeccing is just a waste of money.

IMO, If your corp is at war, you shouldn't be allowed to leave it. "due to the tenuous legal nature of your current employer" or something. This means that declaring war has dire meaning for everyone involved. If you're deccing, the target is _required_ to respond to that declaration or shack up, and thus you get your money's worth.

Baiscally, in war:
Defender's can't quit.
Attackers can't hire.

In addition, to make this mechanic more fair and less griefy, the CONCORD bribe should reflect the size of the war target corp. It should be more expensive to declare war on smaller corps so that people don't just lock little corps in to an inescapable war for pocket change. My thinking is that it should be financially stupid for a 1200 person corp to declare war on a 5 person corp, while it should be reasonable for the inverse to happen.