These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Motivation for HS war decs
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tengu Grib
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#81 - 2014-04-17 21:49:13 UTC
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:
how about - neutral chars cannot rep a char with a capsuleer combat timer (the one that prevents log-off-ski for 30 min, herein CCT) without going criminal? - depending on how their safety is set up - if they're already repping someone who then incurs a CCT, then they'll either stop repping at the end of cycle, or get themselves concordokken, character who have all the same active wars can rep each other, members of the same corp, war allies, etc.....

actually - this would also prevent neutral repping of awoxers - I LIKE this idea....



If you're going to make that change, you would HAVE to also allow alliance members in a war to rep cross corp. Currently they cannot and get suspect timer for helping others who are also at war with the same people they are. Which is really dumb. But the criminal timer I'm ok with. I have neutral reppers which I can use, but it doesn't mean that I don't think they are bullshit. I'll continue to keep them available until CCP changes the rules.

Rabble Rabble Rabble

Praise James, Supreme Protector of High Sec.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#82 - 2014-04-17 23:35:39 UTC
also neut RR in low sec should not induce a criminal flag.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#83 - 2014-04-17 23:44:48 UTC
Tengu Grib wrote:
Again, under current mechanics and motivations I fully agree with you, and I actually lol'd at the chess club analogy.

What I'm trying to look at, is ways of encouraging a change in the way carebears see this game. I would like to provide them with incentive to come out of their PVE shells and experience the excitement of PVP. Eve allows you to be competitive at both Chess and football on the same character, you just have to make people want to do that.


Not being interested in football and putting all the effort you can to avoid it as long as you understand it can still happen is the very definition of playing the sandbox by the rules. The guy is doing exactly what he want in the sandbox. If he accept the rule fo EVE of never being immune to PvP, there is nothing wrong with doing things your way even if said way is to avoid PvP at all cost. You are only doing it wrong if you think a certain amount of effort (no matter how small or large you think that amount is) should grant you immunity.
Sarah Flynt
Red Cross Mercenaries
Silent Infinity
#84 - 2014-04-18 01:26:55 UTC
Tengu Grib wrote:

Sarah Flynt wrote:

You can only legally remote repair/boost members of your own corp/alliance, meaning: neutral logis will get CONCORD'ed.


So incursion fleets can't run logi? Neither can mission runners hanging out with friends?

That's why I added "unwanted effects on other areas of the game will have to be dealt with by refining it". The goal of this is to not allow neutral logis to interfere with a war. How this is done technically doesn't actually matter.

Currently wars are mostly decided by the people that are NOT in the corp and that's just wrong.

Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
Sir Dragon
Einherjar Yggdrasils
#85 - 2014-04-19 11:46:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Sir Dragon
There is more between helm and the havens than exists in your philosophies, friend.

What ever we would do in this case
we cannot take one side of the game and strangle it
in order to improve another side.

Sounds allright to add some incentive to fight.

But i would disagree that your mentioned exploit
about not having any ships loses via loging of and ecetera (dodging war).

For, it is juxtaposable (analogy / comparable) to saying
this gasoline-pump-meter does not tell me my
bank-budget
(well yes for you are used to thinking of your bank budget while you wonder how much gas you should pump;
where as it is just a gas pump... then we turn around and say EY! wtf Y that not tellin me my budget)

Its border line lame example but i think you'll get it..
and it reflects how tired i am from giving forum feedback for 3 + hours
Pantera Home Videos:    http://pktube.onepakistan.com/video/ck2ykdBrDRM/Pantera-Vulgar-Video-Full-Completo.html  ;  http://pktube.onepakistan.com/video/xpma3u7OjfU/Pantera-Watch-It-Go-Full-Completo-CD1.html ;    http://pktube.onepakistan.com/video/yyO9rAx8eoQ/Pantera-Watch-It-Go-Full-Completo-CD2.html .
Phaade
LowKey Ops
Snuffed Out
#86 - 2014-04-20 17:33:47 UTC
I'm So Pretty wrote:
The #1 reason carebears do not fight in wars is because the people wardeccing them treat them like they are sub-human. They look down on them, taunt them and put themselves on a pedestal above them.

Until the mercs/ganker community learns to show respect to all players irrespective of their career choice, carebears will continue to do everything in their power to avoid interaction with such players. They will group all merc and gank corps into this category. No amount of monetary incentive is going to change this. They just don't want to play video games with them.

My old industrial corp was wardecced by 6 seperate entities over time. 5 of them were mercs; we never undocked once to fight them. The 6th was an industrial corp that didn't like our presence in their area. We undocked and fought them several times with a smile on our faces.

Considering you're an enforcer for CODE., do you really question why carebears refuse to play video games with you?



Baaahahahahaha

Grow a pair of nuts.


That said, OP points are all valid. Rewards would be a good incentive.
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#87 - 2014-04-20 18:33:03 UTC
The reason is killmails. what are you talking about?
PlatinumMercSEAL
Center for Advanced Studies
#88 - 2014-04-30 23:49:41 UTC  |  Edited by: PlatinumMercSEAL
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

If your target has nothing to lose, maybe you are selecting the wrong targets.


Lol, do you hear yourself? Wardecs are only really used in highsec. Highsec corps, by their very nature, tend to not have assets worth fighting for. The summer changes are trying to change that, but the fact remains that the system is broken because it is too easily avoided.

I wonder, what on earth did you hope to gain with that asinine statement?

I snipped out the middle of your post because it was you attacking a strawman, of motivations you made up. At least please try to debate the point.

Quote:

You are attacking an entity which has nothing to lose and expect it's members to fight over that nothing. I think you need to rethink what you are hoping for.


No, dumbass. How about you actually read what I've said on the matter?

I want them to have things to fight over, and to lose something when they don't. I want wardecs to have a purpose. But that can NEVER be achieved so long as it takes 5 minutes and a few million isk to dodge any wardec, ever.


Who's fault is it that you target corps which have no assets to defend? I heard some corps have POCO and they like the money it generat. How about you wardec those corps? Maybe they will find it worthwhile to defend them. Or one with many POS in high sec?

Maybe you aren't after corp assets?

I may have fallen behind 2 weeks on the subject, (college work can be a pain) but I have to agree with Frostys here. What is the benefit to the aggressors? Though there isn't any benefit to attacking such corps, but I can probably think of a few special situations, like being paid by another corp to war dec the corp. Sadly, that is rare.

Where is the competition between industry corporations? Twisted Now it will never happen, and you can thank the genius behind the 50+ million ISK war fee! X

Captain PlatiumMercSEAL, Deep-Space Wraiths (Independent Null Sec Mercenary Corporation)
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#89 - 2014-05-01 00:05:19 UTC
PlatinumMercSEAL wrote:

I may have fallen behind 2 weeks on the subject, (college work can be a pain) but I have to agree with Frostys here. What is the benefit to the aggressors? Though there isn't any benefit to attacking such corps, but I can probably think of a few special situations, like being paid by another corp to war dec the corp. Sadly, that is rare.

Where is the competition between industry corporations? Twisted Now it will never happen, and you can thank the genius behind the 50+ million ISK war fee! X


This is the failing in thinking of all carebears, honestly.

Why, when we are playing a sandbox game, do I need a reason to shoot you? Why do you think I should require a "benefit"?

"Because I can" is always a good enough reason in a sandbox game.

As for competing between industry corps, wardec corps will now get more business taking down POS setups. With the coming industry changes, having assets in space will be highly incentivized.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
PlatinumMercSEAL
Center for Advanced Studies
#90 - 2014-05-01 00:08:44 UTC  |  Edited by: PlatinumMercSEAL
I did some thinking on how to penalize for staying docked with war targets outside of station, decrease their efficiency in industry and trade.
-remote skills
-refining
-time on blueprint usage/research
-PI

Nerf the station based skills for corporations and its members that are at war when there is a war target within 150 km from the station they are currently in, whether they are online or offline. I originally thought system, but we don't want safe spots to become an issue. I do think the combat corp should earn that affect on the other corp, not just sit in a safespot. This wont cost them a lot in fees, but will give an incentive to fight. It should also follow them when they leave corp until the war is over for that corp.

As most wars in the real world go, when the enemy controls the area, it usually does it best to jam enemy communications, which would be remote industry and trade for high sec industrialists. This sounds realistic and fair to me.

Captain PlatiumMercSEAL, Deep-Space Wraiths (Independent Null Sec Mercenary Corporation)
oohthey ioh
Doomheim
#91 - 2014-05-01 08:05:27 UTC
I'm So Pretty wrote:
The #1 reason carebears do not fight in wars is because the people wardeccing them treat them like they are sub-human. They look down on them, taunt them and put themselves on a pedestal above them.

Until the mercs/ganker community learns to show respect to all players irrespective of their career choice, carebears will continue to do everything in their power to avoid interaction with such players. They will group all merc and gank corps into this category. No amount of monetary incentive is going to change this. They just don't want to play video games with them.

My old industrial corp was wardecced by 6 seperate entities over time. 5 of them were mercs; we never undocked once to fight them. The 6th was an industrial corp that didn't like our presence in their area. We undocked and fought them several times with a smile on our faces.

Considering you're an enforcer for CODE., do you really question why carebears refuse to play video games with you?



nope, thats maybe ture for you but not for any carebear corp i have joined.
motie one
Secret Passage
#92 - 2014-05-01 08:35:44 UTC  |  Edited by: motie one
There seems to be a basic disconnect with reality in this entire concept.

The first disconnect is that Carebears need to be cured. No, no they don't they are quite happy not being what they are choosing not to be. They do not want to be you!

The second disconnect is that carebears would Love to be a victim if they were given a few shineys. No, no they wouldn't

The third disconnect is that a few industrialists could give good fights to a Wardec collective, no, they would be victims.

The fourth disconnect is that Carebears should be forced to be victims if they are not willing, it is good for the game. Exactly whose game? Certainly not theirs, It is not their role to exist for your pleasure.

People are not Stupid, they know when they are just exploited for some one else's pleasure. Do not expect them to suddenly like it.

If carebears or frankly anyone who drops out of corp or stays in station, wanted to PvP against unwinnable odds well there's always a few gatecamps between Hs and null, and sometimes they go on little roams and have fun. They die, good game.

Being a victim that can be killed at any time in HS is not so much fun, as you are just a pawn in someone else's game, played for their pleasure, and played for their satisfaction. What the hell is good for them, or could ever be, in that
motie one
Secret Passage
#93 - 2014-05-01 08:49:21 UTC  |  Edited by: motie one
Tengu Grib wrote:
Again, under current mechanics and motivations I fully agree with you, and I actually lol'd at the chess club analogy.

What I'm trying to look at, is ways of encouraging a change in the way carebears see this game. I would like to provide them with incentive to come out of their PVE shells and experience the excitement of PVP. Eve allows you to be competitive at both Chess and football on the same character, you just have to make people want to do that.



No, no you want victims,
And you want CCP to force them to jump in front of your guns.
You do not want PvP you want low cost, low effort ganking.
There is a great difference between Pvp and ganking. So you want carebears to experience the excitement of being ganked?Lol


What makes you "special"?
Why Should CCP force paying customers to exist for your pleasure.
See above post for a more detailed explanation.

And you are right, your original post was as you described it a random thought, carebears do not wish to be elite, highly respected HISec warriors. Because those words do not belong in the same sentence without bullshit being included.

Lazy ganker wants more free kills works much better. Just drop the pretence of being anything else, it is much less stress.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#94 - 2014-05-01 10:57:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
motie one wrote:
stuff about carebears = "victims"


You're not a "victim" if you don't want to be. I'm a pretty solid carebear (seriously, have had 5's across the board in mining since like 2009 [edit -- and **** you CCP for taking away my public display of such]), and never feel that I'm a "victim" if I'm dec'd.

Last time I was in a corp that had people, we gave them this breakdown (paraphrased a bit):

1. We've gotten dec'd by mercs ... it means stuff. Best guess is they're working for [other mining corp] that we've been cnstantly out-mining.
2. within the next 12 hours, give me or [other dirs] your top three frigates to fly
3. Here are 5 of each of them (fitted). We expect you to lose them with us.
4. oh, and I'll personally pay 10m ISK per corpse.
5. We've found the mining corp's POS 1 jump over. We'll plan to retaliate shortly. POS bash is sucky, and even more so because we're in hisec ... but they started this, we're gonna finish it.


War goes by, we lose a handful of frigates (lol T1 trash fits) ... but end up coming out (barely) on top in the ISK war (and one guy gets two pods).

Few weeks later, we dec that mining corp, and remove their POS. Unfortunately while it was a loot pinata setup, there wasn't anything overly special in the labs.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#95 - 2014-05-01 12:13:13 UTC
PlatinumMercSEAL wrote:
I did some thinking on how to penalize for staying docked with war targets outside of station, decrease their efficiency in industry and trade.
-remote skills
-refining
-time on blueprint usage/research
-PI

Nerf the station based skills for corporations and its members that are at war when there is a war target within 150 km from the station they are currently in, whether they are online or offline. I originally thought system, but we don't want safe spots to become an issue. I do think the combat corp should earn that affect on the other corp, not just sit in a safespot. This wont cost them a lot in fees, but will give an incentive to fight. It should also follow them when they leave corp until the war is over for that corp.

As most wars in the real world go, when the enemy controls the area, it usually does it best to jam enemy communications, which would be remote industry and trade for high sec industrialists. This sounds realistic and fair to me.


yeah, absolutely not. Keeping them docked prevents their activity enough.

@motie

didnt read the thread then?

The idea is not to force them anywhere. merely give incentive to fight back. The defenders can still chose not to undock should they decide for themselves that the incentive is not worth it.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
motie one
Secret Passage
#96 - 2014-05-01 12:13:36 UTC  |  Edited by: motie one
Velicitia wrote:
motie one wrote:
stuff about carebears = "victims"


You're not a "victim" if you don't want to be. I'm a pretty solid carebear (seriously, have had 5's across the board in mining since like 2009 [edit -- and **** you CCP for taking away my public display of such]), and never feel that I'm a "victim" if I'm dec'd.

Last time I was in a corp that had people, we gave them this breakdown (paraphrased a bit):

1. We've gotten dec'd by mercs ... it means stuff. Best guess is they're working for [other mining corp] that we've been cnstantly out-mining.
2. within the next 12 hours, give me or [other dirs] your top three frigates to fly
3. Here are 5 of each of them (fitted). We expect you to lose them with us.
4. oh, and I'll personally pay 10m ISK per corpse.
5. We've found the mining corp's POS 1 jump over. We'll plan to retaliate shortly. POS bash is sucky, and even more so because we're in hisec ... but they started this, we're gonna finish it.


War goes by, we lose a handful of frigates (lol T1 trash fits) ... but end up coming out (barely) on top in the ISK war (and one guy gets two pods).

Few weeks later, we dec that mining corp, and remove their POS. Unfortunately while it was a loot pinata setup, there wasn't anything overly special in the labs.


I am sure you agree, that that is the more unusual and rare example of a wardec. Nicely handled, a job well done. That is Probably consistent with the original intention by CCP.

Somehow things are mainly not quite working as originally intended, unless they really are hiding a few psycopaths behind closed doors.......
motie one
Secret Passage
#97 - 2014-05-01 12:15:35 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
PlatinumMercSEAL wrote:
I did some thinking on how to penalize for staying docked with war targets outside of station, decrease their efficiency in industry and trade.
-remote skills
-refining
-time on blueprint usage/research
-PI

Nerf the station based skills for corporations and its members that are at war when there is a war target within 150 km from the station they are currently in, whether they are online or offline. I originally thought system, but we don't want safe spots to become an issue. I do think the combat corp should earn that affect on the other corp, not just sit in a safespot. This wont cost them a lot in fees, but will give an incentive to fight. It should also follow them when they leave corp until the war is over for that corp.

As most wars in the real world go, when the enemy controls the area, it usually does it best to jam enemy communications, which would be remote industry and trade for high sec industrialists. This sounds realistic and fair to me.


yeah, absolutely not. Keeping them docked prevents their activity enough.

@motie

didnt read the thread then?

The idea is not to force them anywhere. merely give incentive to fight back. The defenders can still chose not to undock should they decide for themselves that the incentive is not worth it.



My post clearly explains why the idea has absolutely no possibility of working.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#98 - 2014-05-01 12:28:35 UTC
i see a bunch of misconceptions uve have

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#99 - 2014-05-01 12:34:04 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
PlatinumMercSEAL wrote:

I may have fallen behind 2 weeks on the subject, (college work can be a pain) but I have to agree with Frostys here. What is the benefit to the aggressors? Though there isn't any benefit to attacking such corps, but I can probably think of a few special situations, like being paid by another corp to war dec the corp. Sadly, that is rare.

Where is the competition between industry corporations? Twisted Now it will never happen, and you can thank the genius behind the 50+ million ISK war fee! X


This is the failing in thinking of all carebears, honestly.

Why, when we are playing a sandbox game, do I need a reason to shoot you? Why do you think I should require a "benefit"?

"Because I can" is always a good enough reason in a sandbox game.

As for competing between industry corps, wardec corps will now get more business taking down POS setups. With the coming industry changes, having assets in space will be highly incentivized.


"Because I can" is indeed a good enough reason to try wardeccing any deccable corp in EVE. The fact that it is a good enough reason to start it does not mean you should get anything out of it. Choosing the right target goes a long way into getting what you want. If you make a war with a corp who has assets in space or is a PvP corp, chances are much higher for you to get kills or at least fights than if you wardec a corp made out entirely of missionners for example.

You will never need a REASON to shoot anybody in EVE. What you will always need is a CONDITION to make shooting that same target without CONCORD punishing you for it.

Killrights works.
Doing it in low/null/WH space works.
Doing it to them while they are a member of a corporation/alliance you are at war with works.
Doing it while they are flagged as criminal works.
Doing it in a limited engagement works.

Your sandbox has rules. Most of them are punitive after you did something which mean you can still do it as long as you are willing to deal with it. The industry changes will most likely work out in your favor so grow yourself fat while feasting on kills from wardecced corps or abandoned towers if everybody leaves it...
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#100 - 2014-05-01 12:39:32 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Some points:

1) PvP is not limted to pewpew.
2) PvP is not limted to pewpew.
3) PvP is not limted to pewpew.
4) See point 1.

You realise you'll never be make people fight who don't have either desire to, or something to lose?

Not ever, not in a million years.

Even if you changed every game mechanic to allow it, all that would happen is they stop playing. Fundamentally people do what is fun to them - if they are avoiding pewpew it's because they dont like it and don't find it fun.

The obvious result of "forcing" people to engage in what they dislike is them firing up a game they do like. Irrespective of what that makes you think of them, it matters not a jot to them. What do people care if pirate_12345 in a game they don't play thinks of them? Betting it's slightly less than the square root of nothing.


In addition if we set that aside for a moment - consider what would happen? Do you think the big nullblocs wouldn't just roll up into high sec, wardec every single person left and shutdown all the hubs everywhere? They would and I guarantee they'd do it, just for the jollies. Frankly I'd be disappointed if they didnt - but that wouldn't be allowed to happen.

I'm sure it all sounds fun and everything until there are no bears left to build your ships or mine the ore.


TL;DR: Expecting other people to play the sandbox YOUR way is fundamentally flawed from the outset.