These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dodging Wardecs

First post
Author
ashley Eoner
#181 - 2014-09-10 13:39:05 UTC
Oddly enough I don't have issues with people dodging my wardecs.. The fact that I don't dec one man corps or newbies might have something to do with that though.


HTFU and dec people who have stuff to defend or are capable of defending themselves. Otherwise ganking is available and easier then ever (and cheaper then ever). Don't worry you only lose .13 sec status if you don't pop the pod AND you get a free PVP fight sometime in the next month. WIN WIN!! If that's too much of a sec loss spend a little isk on tags and you'll make it back instantly. Hit someone with a bounty while having friends in fleet on grid and you can potentially easily make back your isk even.





Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#182 - 2014-09-10 13:40:13 UTC
Roushar Prhizer wrote:

Your target selection should be:
"Does this group have a reason to fight me if I war dec them. If they decide to fight are we ready?"

The end. Because if the answer is no, you will get no fights. If it is yes, you will get fights.

Choose better targets.


"Do these people play EVE Online and fly space ships" If yes, DEC if you want to, if no, don't.


Fixed that for you.
Roushar Prhizer
Doomheim
#183 - 2014-09-10 13:40:30 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Roushar Prhizer wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

In particular, I want highsec corps to actually justify their existence instead of being a glorified chat channel.



This is the main issue. People are targeting corps that are essentially a chat channel with (I hope) lower tax rates. Stop doing that, and the outcomes will be better.


You mistake the correct course of action.

The only way to fix that is for that kind of corp to stop existing. If they aren't doing anything with the game anyway, they should be chased away from a player corp. And when they run, their 7 day cooldown should start up. That would actually make it have some meaning to have decced them.

In addition, player corps should be the sole optimal course of action for pretty much every activity. This would make being able to keep a player corp up and running a valuable and profitable thing, something people are willing to work for, and defend.



Your mistake in truth. You are attempting to decide how people should play the game. You are attempting to limit other players activity so that you do not have to adapt yours. How people play the game is not under your control. Only your actions are controllable by you. Complaining that people do not react the way you think they should, is not the correct course of action.
Valkin Mordirc
#184 - 2014-09-10 13:41:08 UTC
On a note of fighting a wardecer, Remiel Pollard is right, certain members of Merc corps are hilariously predictable.


Go to fight war target on station, Shoot at WT, WT docks, comes out in Vindi.

There are a myriad of ways to counter this. And this sort of sequences of events happens all the time. Wardeccers love dem Vindi's.


Wartarget camps a station with a insta-locked Thrasher.


Warp in at range with a Naga/Tornado Alpha him into obvious oblivion, < I've done this multiple times, getting the same person four times.


Also Corps that blanket dec have a supreme disadvantage when it comes to trade hub camping. It is really hard to keep up on 'local chat situational awareness" In places like Amarr and Jita. You wouldn't be able to tell when you have ten wartargets of a corp jumping into system to merc you, or they're just so happens ten random people along with the all the other wartargets.

#DeleteTheWeak
Roushar Prhizer
Doomheim
#185 - 2014-09-10 13:42:08 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Roushar Prhizer wrote:

Your target selection should be:
"Does this group have a reason to fight me if I war dec them. If they decide to fight are we ready?"

The end. Because if the answer is no, you will get no fights. If it is yes, you will get fights.

Choose better targets.


"Do these people play EVE Online and fly space ships" If yes, DEC if you want to, if no, don't.


Fixed that for you.



Sure, but don't cry when they don't fight you either.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#186 - 2014-09-10 13:42:35 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Making wars impossible to avoid...
That's not what this is about. Wars are avoidable without dropping corp. Dropping corp is just the :easymode: for avoiding them.
Yes, with other awesome methods such as staying docked and not playing EVE.


That's really all you can come up with?

Dude... you just lost EVE. It's okay though, I've done that a few times myself. Learn from your mistakes, and become better for it, that's what I always say.
Lol, I even preemptively dealt with this exact response, which you just failed to quote. Selective quoting is fun though, eh?


Almost as fun as contradicting yourself in the same post, but yes, nonetheless, incredibly fun. My entire intent is fun, and I'm going to have as much fun with you as I can squeeze out of you, because you made your own hostile intent quite plain the moment you started posting without reading the forums and addressing the points and ideas that have been made, you've just made blanket dismissals and been argumentative for it's own sake.

Now, what's say we all calm down, have a bacon and cheese toasted sandwich (I only have Colby in the fridge but the bacon I assure you is properly cured and quite grease-free), and talk about Scrabble. Because you lost this thread the moment you ignored it, and ignorance is easy to beat at Scrabble.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Absolutely Not Analt
Carebears on Fire
#187 - 2014-09-10 13:43:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Absolutely Not Analt
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

In particular, I want highsec corps to actually justify their existence instead of being a glorified chat channel.


So what about corps like Red Frog? They trivialize the wardec mechanic all over the place, yet I don't think anyone can say they don't justify their existence. The sheer amount of freight they move around seem ample justification to me.

And let's not forget, wardec or no wardec, you can always attack anyone in space in highsec, while they cannot preemptively defend themselves (unlike l,owsec or null).

I realize that there are, in Eve, a certain segment of the population that just want to watch the world burn, and will wardec anything and everything in sight to move that goal along. But there is an equally valid part of the population that really could give two fucks if the world burns or blossoms into giant fuzzy rainbows of joy and goodwill. They just want to have fun with their friends doing whatever it is they do. Why should they have to justify themselves to anyone?

As I said before - you can always inflict PvP on people. You cannot force them to actively participate in their own demise.

Edit: Why is **** censored but fucks isn't? Seriously CCP - is your language filter that literal?

Eve is a multi player game. And you are the content. - Ralph King-Griffin Being meh at two things is not better than being great at one. - Lugh Crow-Slave

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#188 - 2014-09-10 13:43:25 UTC
Drago Shouna wrote:

Send me your Rattlesnake fit, mines crap :-)


I just logged out of the game. The fit I use is on the EVE subreddit somewhere, I believe.

The trick to missioning during a wardec is to have a flight of ECM drones, and a Micro Jump Drive. Just micro jump as soon as you hit the mission pocket, so that even if you get probed down they have to close 100km worth of distance. Which is sufficient time for even a battleship to warp off to safety if they have to. The ECM drones are to break a tackle if you get caught on a gate by someone with a scram. Then you just cycle the jump drive and warp off again, anytime you get a fight you don't like. (which, with 1380 dps with the heat on, is not often)

That's how you're supposed to avoid PvP. Not by pushing a button and spending a few million isk.

"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.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#189 - 2014-09-10 13:45:00 UTC
Roushar Prhizer wrote:
There is a price. Its just very low for small corps with no space assets. Choose better. Nothing prevents a 300 man corps from disbanding, unless the leaders don't want to take towers down, abandon POCOs, or they are afraid that no one will re-apply.
Your target selection should be:
"Does this group have a reason to fight me if I war dec them. If they decide to fight are we ready?"

The end. Because if the answer is no, you will get no fights. If it is yes, you will get fights.

Choose better targets.
This. If a corp is small enough to be able to disband on a whim, why would you wardec it? Wardeccers need to make choices about their targets, not just blanket wardec highsec.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Milan Nantucket
Doomheim
#190 - 2014-09-10 13:47:41 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Making wars impossible to avoid...
That's not what this is about. Wars are avoidable without dropping corp. Dropping corp is just the :easymode: for avoiding them.
Yes, with other awesome methods such as staying docked and not playing EVE. I'd rather people could drop and reform corps than have it so the several thousand targets of the mass wardec groups have to simply not play EVE to avoid being ganked.

And before you go off on a tirade, yes, I'm aware there are further ways to avoid people while actively at war, but for the majority of players they involved you having to do things which have a steep learning curve and are generally of no interest to the type of people a change like this would target. You can;t force people to play a certain way just because you think it's the way they should do it.

The only reason that happens is the whining that goes on. Stop whining and accept the consequences or find another game if it's too much for you. Maybe instead of avoiding the inevitable accept the other persons play style and defend yourself.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#191 - 2014-09-10 13:48:04 UTC
Absolutely Not Analt wrote:

So what about corps like Red Frog?


I'm glad you asked that. I spent about six months failing to infiltrate Red Frog, and along the way I learned something interesting.

Their entire corp are market alts. None of them are haulers, the haulers are all out of corp.

They are an excellent example of people doing it right, and justifying their own existence.

Random Highsec Mining Tax Evasion Corp # 417165 is not.



Quote:

As I said before - you can always inflict PvP on people. You cannot force them to actively participate in their own demise.


They participated in their own demise when they subscribed to a PvP sandbox game. They agreed to fight, and they agreed to die if they don't fight.

"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.

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#192 - 2014-09-10 13:49:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Lucas Kell wrote:
Good luck with CCP surviving the next run of layoffs following that one.


You know a guy is worried that his argument doesn't work when all he has left is scare mongering.

CCP didn't die when the game was harsher, and it won't die is CCP makes their game design more internally consistent.

Whenever will people learn that 'protectionism' (in the game sense) doesn't work in sandbox games. you (and apparently some at CCP) think they are doing people a favor when they seek to protect them from bad things when in reality all you really do is make people MORE susceptible to bad things.

It's like helicopter parenting. They think they are keeping their kids safe when all they are really doing is denying their kids the opportunity to develop internal coping mechanisms. So instead of the kid growing up to be a good person, they grow up to be a neurotic basket case that can't recognize or deal with everyday dangers and conflicts.

People who would quit over a sane war dec scheme are the same people who would quit under almost any circumstance, where as the same sane wardec scheme would be a retention device for people actually suited to EVE Online (because real EVe player don't quit till they get their revenge).

Worrying about losing subs is a great way to create a game that loses subs. Go ask Star Wars Galaxies...if you could.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#193 - 2014-09-10 13:50:24 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Almost as fun as contradicting yourself in the same post, but yes, nonetheless, incredibly fun. My entire intent is fun, and I'm going to have as much fun with you as I can squeeze out of you, because you made your own hostile intent quite plain the moment you started posting without reading the forums and addressing the points and ideas that have been made, you've just made blanket dismissals and been argumentative for it's own sake.

Now, what's say we all calm down, have a bacon and cheese toasted sandwich (I only have Colby in the fridge but the bacon I assure you is properly cured and quite grease-free), and talk about Scrabble. Because you lost this thread the moment you ignored it, and ignorance is easy to beat at Scrabble.
I didn't ignore the thread. I read it and responded accordingly. You didn't like my response, and that's fair enough, but my opinion will not change because you don't like it. Are changes needed to wardecs? Of course, but from BOTH sides, not just the defenders.

By the way, you can't "lose" a thread. To be perfectly honest, while I respect you and your outlook on many things, your personal opinion of me and how I conduct myself is completely irrelevant to me.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#194 - 2014-09-10 13:51:10 UTC
Roushar Prhizer wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Roushar Prhizer wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

In particular, I want highsec corps to actually justify their existence instead of being a glorified chat channel.



This is the main issue. People are targeting corps that are essentially a chat channel with (I hope) lower tax rates. Stop doing that, and the outcomes will be better.


You mistake the correct course of action.

The only way to fix that is for that kind of corp to stop existing. If they aren't doing anything with the game anyway, they should be chased away from a player corp. And when they run, their 7 day cooldown should start up. That would actually make it have some meaning to have decced them.

In addition, player corps should be the sole optimal course of action for pretty much every activity. This would make being able to keep a player corp up and running a valuable and profitable thing, something people are willing to work for, and defend.



Your mistake in truth. You are attempting to decide how people should play the game. You are attempting to limit other players activity so that you do not have to adapt yours. How people play the game is not under your control. Only your actions are controllable by you. Complaining that people do not react the way you think they should, is not the correct course of action.


I've seen hypocritical double standards before but ths takes the cake. You JUST posted telling people what corps they should and should not war dec.
Valkin Mordirc
#195 - 2014-09-10 13:51:41 UTC
Quote:
There is a price. Its just very low for small corps with no space assets. Choose better. Nothing prevents a 300 man corps from disbanding, unless the leaders don't want to take towers down, abandon POCOs, or they are afraid that no one will re-apply.
Your target selection should be:
"Does this group have a reason to fight me if I war dec them. If they decide to fight are we ready?"

The end. Because if the answer is no, you will get no fights. If it is yes, you will get fights.

Choose better targets.



You seem to be stuck on this, choose a better target.


I have shown you that corp closing is broken.

Yet you fixate on target selection. It that hard to learn that target selection is not a issue but that mechanic itself?


A corp creation fee is so small that a one day toon could pay for it. I'm sorry but that is not a fee, that is tax.


If you don't have anything else to say but to repeat this, target selection which multiple people have told you are wrong. Then please leave and come back when you have more to add to the subject.


As of right now, Lucas has been more useful in this thread then you have. Which is saying something because at this point he's in full Troll mode.
#DeleteTheWeak
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#196 - 2014-09-10 13:52:25 UTC
Roushar Prhizer wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Roushar Prhizer wrote:

Your target selection should be:
"Does this group have a reason to fight me if I war dec them. If they decide to fight are we ready?"

The end. Because if the answer is no, you will get no fights. If it is yes, you will get fights.

Choose better targets.


"Do these people play EVE Online and fly space ships" If yes, DEC if you want to, if no, don't.


Fixed that for you.



Sure, but don't cry when they don't fight you either.


I don't war dec people. Still, people should not be so easily able to avoid conflict in a video game about conflict.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#197 - 2014-09-10 13:52:27 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Almost as fun as contradicting yourself in the same post, but yes, nonetheless, incredibly fun. My entire intent is fun, and I'm going to have as much fun with you as I can squeeze out of you, because you made your own hostile intent quite plain the moment you started posting without reading the forums and addressing the points and ideas that have been made, you've just made blanket dismissals and been argumentative for it's own sake.

Now, what's say we all calm down, have a bacon and cheese toasted sandwich (I only have Colby in the fridge but the bacon I assure you is properly cured and quite grease-free), and talk about Scrabble. Because you lost this thread the moment you ignored it, and ignorance is easy to beat at Scrabble.
I didn't ignore the thread. I read it and responded accordingly. You didn't like my response, and that's fair enough, but my opinion will not change because you don't like it. Are changes needed to wardecs? Of course, but from BOTH sides, not just the defenders.

By the way, you can't "lose" a thread. To be perfectly honest, while I respect you and your outlook on many things, your personal opinion of me and how I conduct myself is completely irrelevant to me.


No, that's incorrect. I loved your responses. They made me giggle like an astrophysicist giggles when someone claims the world is flat.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#198 - 2014-09-10 13:53:15 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
I'm glad you asked that. I spent about six months failing to infiltrate Red Frog, and along the way I learned something interesting.

Their entire corp are market alts. None of them are haulers, the haulers are all out of corp.

They are an excellent example of people doing it right, and justifying their own existence.

Random Highsec Mining Tax Evasion Corp # 417165 is not.
So wait. Keeping all of your active, in-space characters exclusively in NPC corps and only using player corps for alts that never undock, you think that's the right way for highsec corps to work?

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
As I said before - you can always inflict PvP on people. You cannot force them to actively participate in their own demise.
They participated in their own demise when they subscribed to a PvP sandbox game. They agreed to fight, and they agreed to die if they don't fight.
PvP is not all shooting. You can subscribe to this PvP game and never fire a gun.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#199 - 2014-09-10 13:55:48 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

I've seen hypocritical double standards before but ths takes the cake. You JUST posted telling people what corps they should and should not war dec.


That's why I call you a PvE player, and not a carebear, Jenn.

Because you're not a hypocrite, and you can't be a carebear without being a hypocrite too.

"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.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#200 - 2014-09-10 13:58:10 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
So wait. Keeping all of your active, in-space characters exclusively in NPC corps and only using player corps for alts that never undock, you think that's the right way for highsec corps to work?


Don't be obtuse.

Having a genuine business model, interacting with other players on a large scale, and setting and achieving goals is doing it right.

Quote:
PvP is not all shooting. You can subscribe to this PvP game and never fire a gun.


And? CCP has said it themselves, in no uncertain terms. Here, I'll paraphrase it for you.

The intent behind this game is that if you don't bother to defend yourself, you should get used to being food.

"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.