These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Improve Hi Sec Wars

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Velenia Ankletickler
Silverflames
#241 - 2014-06-03 13:13:56 UTC
Velicitia wrote:


Ask and ye shall receive.


The above rulings about "grief play" (and a wardec not constituting as such) apply to your comments as well.


The link you give, has as argument for the wars not being considered grief play the following "A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making others’ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way."

I have boldfaced the important part. It would seem the changes to the war dec system, is actually in conflict with the basis of how CCP understands "grief play".

But enough of the off-topic discussions please, enough of the posts in this thread is about off-topic and personal attacks. The topic is "Improve hi sec wars".

If you have no suggestions for how to make hi sec wars better, or arguments for why a suggestion is good or bad, please go troll somewhere else.
Cassandra Aurilien
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#242 - 2014-06-03 13:54:11 UTC
Velenia Ankletickler wrote:
Cassandra Aurilien wrote:


Do you also want a Logi who reps someone who has engaged a suspect to be Concorded as well, as they too are interfering in a conflict?


Since the logi has valid engagement with the suspect, no.

Repping the enemy of X, is hurting X.


The logi does not have a valid engagement.

The mechanics that govern a logi repping someone who is engaging a suspect are the same as those in the war dec you are complaining about.

In both cases, they are interfering with an engagement, making them go suspect. The person attacking the suspect creates a limited engagement between them and the suspect. When the logi repairs that person, they interfere, thus making them into a suspect. In your version, this becomes Concordable. Giving you killrights, or making them a war target for their interference, sure, that makes sense. Killing them, not so much.

Also, repping the enemy of X is not hurting X, it is helping the enemy of X. (Or sensor boosting, or whatever.)

You do realize that you can use this to your advantage as well, correct? Once that logi goes suspect, they can be engaged by anyone outside of your corp, without those you are at war with being able to legally attack the attackers.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#243 - 2014-06-03 13:55:13 UTC
The part you should have paid more attention to is "in any way".

If they even salvage the wrecks, they are profiting. If they are even theoretically in competition with you in the local market, they are profiting.

If they ask for ransom, they stand to profit from it. If they could potentially increase their reputation as mercenaries to entice further employers, they stand to profit from it.

"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.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#244 - 2014-06-03 14:56:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
Velenia Ankletickler wrote:
Velicitia wrote:


Ask and ye shall receive.


The above rulings about "grief play" (and a wardec not constituting as such) apply to your comments as well.


The link you give, has as argument for the wars not being considered grief play the following "A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making others’ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way."

I have boldfaced the important part. It would seem the changes to the war dec system, is actually in conflict with the basis of how CCP understands "grief play".

But enough of the off-topic discussions please, enough of the posts in this thread is about off-topic and personal attacks. The topic is "Improve hi sec wars".

If you have no suggestions for how to make hi sec wars better, or arguments for why a suggestion is good or bad, please go troll somewhere else.



It's a two-part clause. The first part (which you've quoted) defines grief play. The second part explicitly states that wardecs are not considered "grief play" in most (pretty much "any") circumstances.

The only problem with hisec wars is that you get so many people incorrectly rallying behind the "it's griefing!!!" mantra, when CCP has explicitly said that it is not.


Now, the other key aspect of "grief play" is that the aggressor has to be either:

1. Not profiting in any way.
2. Over the top with things.


The first point is pretty easy:
- "I got paid by Kaaros to nuke 20 of Velenia's retrievers"
- "I got paid by Cassandra to dec Velenia's corp for 3 weeks".
- (etc.)

The second is also pretty straightforward
- If you chase someone 37 jumps (and DO NOT have a contract for 10 corpses or something), then you're probably griefing

All instances of perceived griefing MUST be reported to CCP, and then they will look into it (9/10 times, they are likely to just tell you to HTFU).

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
#245 - 2014-06-03 16:39:42 UTC
Velenia Ankletickler wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
if someone decs u and then doesnt come anywhere near u then whats the problem?


That I can't strike back and make them _very_ sorry they inconvenienced my corp by forcing one of us to spend 30-60 minutes researching if they are a thread.


look for them. stop being lazy. stop asking the game to make an easy mode for u.

and how do u know the ppl deccing u are not profiting in any way?

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
Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#246 - 2014-06-03 18:02:55 UTC
Seems like reasonable proposal, indeed.

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link
Velenia Ankletickler
Silverflames
#247 - 2014-06-03 20:26:35 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
The part you should have paid more attention to is "in any way".

If they even salvage the wrecks, they are profiting. If they are even theoretically in competition with you in the local market, they are profiting.

If they ask for ransom, they stand to profit from it. If they could potentially increase their reputation as mercenaries to entice further employers, they stand to profit from it.


When aggressor only decs the war to have target opportunities, but doesn't care about the war. Nothing of that happens. The only thing of what you mention that is affected is their rep as mercs, but it goes down from another 0 kill war, and not up.

That is current problem in hi sec wars, that some of would like fixed. The wars that actually have a single kill are few these days.
Katia Echerie
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#248 - 2014-06-03 20:43:53 UTC
Frankly, theres not much wrong with wardecs themselves. They work as intended. Just because you don't want to get wardeced as it is interfering of your gameplay it doesn't mean its broken. A reasonable fee was paid for the simple right to kill you without interference. The only thing that is odd is high-sec combat mechanics. Basically it allows you to decide whether to comit assets to a fight after it has started. That is the only thing that is different from any other combat in EVE. In low-sec, wormhole space and null you have what you bring to the field and its all engageable from the get go. High sec just makes it so that support assets can be inserted on a need basis. Hence the only thing that is broken is the ability to have logistics support unengageable before they are used, and then only engageable for 15 min after their use. Making it so they are valid targets for the entire conflict (or at the very least until they are killed once) is the only real necessary move.
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#249 - 2014-06-03 22:20:49 UTC
I have removed a rule breaking post and the one quoting it.

The Rules:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#250 - 2014-06-03 22:24:12 UTC
Velenia Ankletickler wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
The part you should have paid more attention to is "in any way".

If they even salvage the wrecks, they are profiting. If they are even theoretically in competition with you in the local market, they are profiting.

If they ask for ransom, they stand to profit from it. If they could potentially increase their reputation as mercenaries to entice further employers, they stand to profit from it.


When aggressor only decs the war to have target opportunities, but doesn't care about the war. Nothing of that happens. The only thing of what you mention that is affected is their rep as mercs, but it goes down from another 0 kill war, and not up.

That is current problem in hi sec wars, that some of would like fixed. The wars that actually have a single kill are few these days.


Are you actually telling me that they are not salvaging or even looting your wrecks?

"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.
Velenia Ankletickler
Silverflames
#251 - 2014-06-03 22:26:42 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Are you actually telling me that they are not salvaging or even looting your wrecks?


Those wrecks only exist in your imagination.

Try actually read the posts in the thread.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#252 - 2014-06-03 22:30:50 UTC
Velenia Ankletickler wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Are you actually telling me that they are not salvaging or even looting your wrecks?


Those wrecks only exist in your imagination.

Try actually read the posts in the thread.


Oh, so you're telling me that if they caught you, they wouldn't loot your wreck. Gotcha.

"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.
Velenia Ankletickler
Silverflames
#253 - 2014-06-03 23:13:17 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

Oh, so you're telling me that if they caught you, they wouldn't loot your wreck. Gotcha.


No, I am telling you there are no wrecks, because the war was just a random act of removing hi sec mechanics with no attempt to gain profit.
Next Zunn
Doomheim
#254 - 2014-06-03 23:38:24 UTC
I don't see how OPs suggestions would change anything TBH

Suspect flag already makes interfering in a war a risk. No idea what the other suggestion aimed to accomplish, 100m isn't an amount of money that will deter anyone.

High sec is far too save, if anything more power should be given to war decrees.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#255 - 2014-06-03 23:48:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Corraidhin Farsaidh
Next Zunn wrote:
I don't see how OPs suggestions would change anything TBH

Suspect flag already makes interfering in a war a risk. No idea what the other suggestion aimed to accomplish, 100m isn't an amount of money that will deter anyone.

High sec is far too save, if anything more power should be given to war decrees.


bear in mind any time you increase risk you have to increase reward...hisec isn't too safe, it's supposed to be lo risk lo reward. I think making the interfering logi a war target would be fine, I'd even be happy if the logi dragged their corp into the war at the appropriate cost. Do you think the Germans ignored it when the neutral americans started shipping goods to the UK in WWII? It make sno sense for someone to interfere with a war without their corp becoming a combatent.
Next Zunn
Doomheim
#256 - 2014-06-04 00:11:06 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Next Zunn wrote:
I don't see how OPs suggestions would change anything TBH

Suspect flag already makes interfering in a war a risk. No idea what the other suggestion aimed to accomplish, 100m isn't an amount of money that will deter anyone.

High sec is far too save, if anything more power should be given to war decrees.


bear in mind any time you increase risk you have to increase reward...hisec isn't too safe, it's supposed to be lo risk lo reward. I think making the interfering logi a war target would be fine, I'd even be happy if the logi dragged their corp into the war at the appropriate cost. Do you think the Germans ignored it when the neutral americans started shipping goods to the UK in WWII? It make sno sense for someone to interfere with a war without their corp becoming a combatent.


I would agree with you if that were true. Truth is high sec mining and level 4 mission running are both very lucrative with minimal risk if you understand what EFT is. If the player base is unwilling to accept nerfs to both of these things, then they need to accept greater risk.

At the moment high sec has high rewards with little risk.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#257 - 2014-06-04 03:37:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
Velenia Ankletickler wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
The part you should have paid more attention to is "in any way".

If they even salvage the wrecks, they are profiting. If they are even theoretically in competition with you in the local market, they are profiting.

If they ask for ransom, they stand to profit from it. If they could potentially increase their reputation as mercenaries to entice further employers, they stand to profit from it.


When aggressor only decs the war to have target opportunities, but doesn't care about the war. Nothing of that happens. The only thing of what you mention that is affected is their rep as mercs, but it goes down from another 0 kill war, and not up.

That is current problem in hi sec wars, that some of would like fixed. The wars that actually have a single kill are few these days.



well, how do you know that the sole purpose is for "target opportunities"?

I mean, wardecs cover the range from "you're an idiot, and need shot in the face; repeatedly" to "those guys want you outta this system" to "you guys really gotta stop supplying [alliance] with stuff". Most of the time, you're not gonna know what the wardec was for, and the chances of this go down drastically if you're part of the war in the first place.

A zero-kill war can mean multiple things:

1. Defender logged off for the week.
2. Attacker had bad intel, and defender actually lives in W-space (so no locator agents).
3. Defender dropped corp, and left holding alt in CEO position (pretty much #1)
4. Attacker is a merc, and the job is "blockade"
5. Defender is better than the attacker thought, and doesn't lose ships.
6. Defender paid off the attacker, and it was accepted
7. Probably more stuff I'm not thinking about.

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
Velicitia
XS Tech
#258 - 2014-06-04 03:43:04 UTC
Katia Echerie wrote:
Frankly, theres not much wrong with wardecs themselves. They work as intended. Just because you don't want to get wardeced as it is interfering of your gameplay it doesn't mean its broken. A reasonable fee was paid for the simple right to kill you without interference. The only thing that is odd is high-sec combat mechanics. Basically it allows you to decide whether to comit assets to a fight after it has started. That is the only thing that is different from any other combat in EVE. In low-sec, wormhole space and null you have what you bring to the field and its all engageable from the get go. High sec just makes it so that support assets can be inserted on a need basis. Hence the only thing that is broken is the ability to have logistics support unengageable before they are used, and then only engageable for 15 min after their use. Making it so they are valid targets for the entire conflict (or at the very least until they are killed once) is the only real necessary move.


Or you bring in your own "neutrals" and have them engage the now completely-valid-to-anyone logis. There's nothing the WT's can do (since shooting a suspect ONLY gives you a LE timer with that particular pilot).

Few tackle frigates, and some Griffins (I think?), and the Logi are shut down pretty much permanently.

Obviously, this won't work in close proximity to a station or a gate, where they can simply wait out their timer and dock/jump ... but that's why _you_ have to set the engagement stage (e.g. your POS, a planet, an empty moon, an asteroid belt, 100km off a gate/station, etc.)

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
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#259 - 2014-06-04 21:22:29 UTC
Removed some off topic posts.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
#260 - 2014-06-04 22:04:53 UTC
If your looking Hi Sec PVP action without War Decs follow the CODE alliance around when they attempt to gank Orca's and Freighters.

Getting Free Kills From CODE. - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=349557