Player Features and Ideas Discussion

RvB use wars for their niche of play, that is true.

Wars aren't the reason you join E-Uni however.

Ppl join e-uni to learn about the game or to teach new players. So u learn about wars and how to handle them by joining e-uni, and u can have fun doing so.



absolutely. Inexperienced corp CEO's make their players more vulnerable than they would be if they had joined a more experienced corp. This can often lead to a horrible experience when the corp gets decced.

Theres a seven part article on minerbumping.com on a guy who kept trying to pretend he was an experienced CEO when he wasnt. Luckily the CODE found him first and took the noobs of his corp to one side, explained what was happening and that they werent targets when the dec came.

^^CCP, please fix this.

It's an interesting dichotomy, to be sure.

Personally, I believe that erring on the side of player freedom is in the best interest of the game in general.

what would stop a corp thats 364 days old, leaving corp and making a new one? And if a new player is exempt from war decs for a year, it may be even more of a shock when that year runs out and all of a sudden hes under attack after a year of peace.

i understand where ur coming from when u say new bros dnt appreciate what joining a corp means sometimes. uve gotta kind of hope that new players learn to pick themselves up, dust themselves off and try again, hopefully having learned from the experience. If they dnt know how to do that, then is eve really for them? ur going to lose stuff whether ur young or old, ur going to get into fights u cant win whether ur experienced or not. It happens, its EVE.

And i also hope that new bros seek out experienced players and corps before they quit. Nothing can keep u safe more than an experienced player, nothing can teach u about the game better than an experienced player. I appreciate some players are determined to learn about the game on their own. I just hope they appreciate the very real handicap they give themselves.

I've only skimmed over about half of this but seriously.

1. Put logi on killmails, then MAYBE we can talk. From there if you know a certain individual always uses neutral logi, make some friends outside of your corp and ask them to run an anti logi squad for you. Good job, they just got some kill mails, and you probably did too because the only targets that can shoot the group shooting the neutral logi, are the neutral logi themselves.

2. How would adding an additional fee do anything? Also people have different goals for a wardec, whether it is to win the isk war, or simply to shut down certain logistics for a period of time. So a victory can't only be we killed more people then they did.

I'd prefer having the War Dec system modified in a way that makes each subsequent War Dec more expensive then the last. That way, the cost of declaring war exponentially increases based on how many active wars you already have that are active or pending to be active. I would even be in support of having the first three (3) War Dec's to be the same price and then the prices start to increase exponentially after the fourth and future War Dec's.

Ever since the change was made to be able to have more then 3 active War Dec's people have been abusing the system while many people have their corporations/alliances involved in 50, 100, or 200 active war dec's -- many of them simply going through the Recruitment adverts and declaring war on other people for no reason.

I found a website that appears to be from members of the CSM. They proposed a goal-orientated War Dec system in which there's a goal that gives both the aggressor and the defender the ability to control and thus conclude the War based on a Victory system. Here's a snipet:



I would further propose that if the aggressor, that is the entity that started the War, should lose the War based on the Victory Condition then some sort of penalty will be assed on that entity. For instance, you could penalize the aggressor if they lose a war that they cannot start any new wars or renew any active wars for one (1) month. Or that any active wars will be nullified.

What do you think?

The simple solution to the neutral logi problem is to make them flagged as wartargets for the remainder of the war, along with the suspect flag penalty. Aside from neutral support theres nothing absurdly wrong with the wardec system. No need to Concord anyone, just making them valid targets for the remainder of the war (regardless of what corp the logi pilot is in) is enough as it allows you to target them effectively. I honestly can't see any problem with this solution; it is far from gamebreaking and is genuinely fair.

Why do you want the logi to be risk free until needed first time? This doesnt seem simple to me, looks rather complex. Treating people differently based on their role in a fight, and this would mean you would suddenly be in war with parts of different corps.



So DPS, Scram, ECM, Neut etc should no longer be concorded if they engage illegally?



How is different treatment for the logi fair?

The price of a wardec versus the price of dissolving and reforming a corp. (the price of the latter is much, much lower by the way)

And a few clicks either way.

But that is entirely irrelevant to the fact that wardecs are 100% voluntary for the defender, thanks to the dec dodge exploit.