These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Grog Aftermath
Doomheim
#761 - 2014-09-15 14:23:50 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Grog Aftermath wrote:


Why don't you war-dec a corp. that actually wants to fight back, I'm sure you would have more fun if PvP is truly what it's about.



I've been saying for pages and pages and pages (AND pages) that it's not always about the PVP. It's about inconveniencing and denying content. As Veers or whatever his name is said, it's an embargo of sorts. You'll find that many of not most wardecs from merc corps have 0 kills, but in that week they kept the WT shut-in, and thats the goal.




You will never defeat the "if you want pvp find someone else who wants pvp" dodge. it's one of those things that people (mostly high sec people) say to make themselves feel better about holding what amounts to an untenable opinion.

I've been in the same boat many times. No matter how much I tell people that I'm a pve player who isn't some ship v ship pvp fanatic, they insist that the ONLY reason I could possibly hold any opinion contrary to theirs is some selfish desire to make their ship explode thus padding my killboard and puffing up my ego. No matter how many time I tell them "unless you are a Guristas that has become self aware, you are generally safe from me lol", they cling to that incorrect belief.

They HAVE to, what they believe doesn't work without greedy, evil people trying to do them harm. It's no different from them saying "you are trying to push me out of high sec into low so you can kill me" despite the fact that almost no one cares about if they leave high sec or not..

It's also because the realization that no on gives a damn about what they do would hurt Cool


If you're answering my part that was quoted, you missed the point completely.

If it was about PvP people would find someone that's going to PvP with them, otherwise it's not about PvP.

As for giving a damn, I couldn't care less if you give a damn or not, I personally don't give a damn.
Hiply Rustic
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#762 - 2014-09-15 14:42:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Hiply Rustic
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Grog Aftermath wrote:


Why don't you war-dec a corp. that actually wants to fight back, I'm sure you would have more fun if PvP is truly what it's about.



I've been saying for pages and pages and pages (AND pages) that it's not always about the PVP. It's about inconveniencing and denying content. As Veers or whatever his name is said, it's an embargo of sorts. You'll find that many of not most wardecs from merc corps have 0 kills, but in that week they kept the WT shut-in, and thats the goal.





And since the target of a wardec is by definition a corporation and not an individual, there should certainly be no prohibition on an individual leaving a corporation...which is its own entity separate and distinct from its members...at any time and for any reason.

Ralph King-Griffin wrote: "Eve deliberately excludes the stupid and the weak willied." EvE: Only the strong-willied need apply.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#763 - 2014-09-15 14:59:33 UTC
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Surrender mechanic is intended for large corps where dropping is not practical/desired. The stupid people who decc 1 man corps deserve their 30-1 loss - surrender mechanic is not intended for that scenario, unless for some reason the 1 man corp doesn't want to disband.


And I'll ask again, you base this statement on what?




The fact that CCP changed its position on corp rolling from "potential exploit" to "fully allowed" while at the same time introducing surrender mechanics means that the two were meant to coexist. The obvious way for that to happen is corp rolling for small corps and surrender for larger ones. If CCP agreed with your view, that individual pilots should not be able to drop corp during a war - it had a very simple solution - just allow players to individually dec pilots who are in a non-NPC corp. That would completely solve the "problem" of corp dropping. Obviously CCP does not see that as a problem!
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#764 - 2014-09-15 15:02:05 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Obviously


Still not getting why that word doesn't apply, are we Beers.

Allow me to reiterate: if someone is disagreeing with you, then it's not obvious. It really is that simple.

“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
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#765 - 2014-09-15 15:09:56 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Obviously


Still not getting why that word doesn't apply, are we Beers.

Allow me to reiterate: if someone is disagreeing with you, then it's not obvious. It really is that simple.


Ha! You could find someone to disagree with you on anything in the Eve forums. I can assure you that the mere fact that one, or even many, person(s) disagree with you on something does nothing to lessen its obviousness. CCP added a surrender mechanic while retaining corp rolling, having already stated that it is fully allowed. Without any clear indication from CCP, it's absurd to think that they meant to now terminate corp rolling. Further, the lack of any individual wardecc mechanic shows with absolute clarity that they never intended for wars to reach the capsuleer level, they were always solely against the corporation and its current members.
Chu Ke
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#766 - 2014-09-15 15:17:44 UTC
i dont understand why the op wants to wardec individual one man corps

go pick on somebody your own size
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#767 - 2014-09-15 15:18:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Veers Belvar wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Obviously


Still not getting why that word doesn't apply, are we Beers.

Allow me to reiterate: if someone is disagreeing with you, then it's not obvious. It really is that simple.


You could find someone to disagree with you on anything in the Eve forums.


Which is why I never use the word "obviously". Because it would require would I'm saying to be as obvious to everyone as it is to me.

Instead, I prefer, "it seems to me that....". Because, that's honesty.

“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
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#768 - 2014-09-15 15:38:33 UTC
Hiply Rustic wrote:
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Grog Aftermath wrote:


Why don't you war-dec a corp. that actually wants to fight back, I'm sure you would have more fun if PvP is truly what it's about.



I've been saying for pages and pages and pages (AND pages) that it's not always about the PVP. It's about inconveniencing and denying content. As Veers or whatever his name is said, it's an embargo of sorts. You'll find that many of not most wardecs from merc corps have 0 kills, but in that week they kept the WT shut-in, and thats the goal.





And since the target of a wardec is by definition a corporation and not an individual, there should certainly be no prohibition on an individual leaving a corporation...which is its own entity separate and distinct from its members...at any time and for any reason.


So how do you shoot a corp? How do you extract money from a corp? You don't. There should be some sort of disincentive to just packing up and dropping corp any time a war is declared, otherwise you trivialize war deccing in general, and cut out several options of emergent gameplay. Basically what I'm getting from you guys is that you don't want any non-consentual PVP in hisec at all. Why dont you just tell us all to go join RvB?

To at the very least throw aggressors a bone, how about a corp that disbands under a wardec can never have it's name or ticker used again, and the aggressor get's their concord fee refunded?


\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#769 - 2014-09-15 15:40:30 UTC
Or how about youbwardec people worth wardeccing and not whine to CCP to fix problems for you?
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#770 - 2014-09-15 15:48:17 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Surrender mechanic is intended for large corps where dropping is not practical/desired. The stupid people who decc 1 man corps deserve their 30-1 loss - surrender mechanic is not intended for that scenario, unless for some reason the 1 man corp doesn't want to disband.


And I'll ask again, you base this statement on what?




The fact that CCP changed its position on corp rolling from "potential exploit" to "fully allowed" while at the same time introducing surrender mechanics means that the two were meant to coexist.


I haven't seen the change in policy, can you link it for me? (not being a smartass, Im serious)

Also, even if their stance HAS changed, it doesn't make them "right" or consistent or even "fair."

Here's a hypothetical for you guys: Player A is mad at Player X. Player A wardecs Player X's corp mainly just so he cant target Player X. Player X drops corp because he wants no part in a war. Player A then decs Player X's new corp. And on and on it goes, every time Player X moves around, Player A decs the new corp. To add a little variety, Player A might start contacting the CEO's of whatever corp Player X is in at the moment, and tell him he's going to get Decced if he doesn't kick Player X out of his corp. Would you guys consider that harassment?


\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#771 - 2014-09-15 15:50:20 UTC
Trixie Lawless wrote:
Or how about youbwardec people worth wardeccing and not whine to CCP to fix problems for you?


So if you and I disagree on what constitutes "worth wardeccing" (which seems to be the case here) I'm automatically wrong and you're automatically right, amirite? Roll


\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#772 - 2014-09-15 16:03:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Trixie Lawless
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Trixie Lawless wrote:
Or how about youbwardec people worth wardeccing and not whine to CCP to fix problems for you?


So if you and I disagree on what constitutes "worth wardeccing" (which seems to be the case here) I'm automatically wrong and you're automatically right, amirite? Roll




It has nothing to do with that. The current mechanics allow for dodging, CCP has said it is NOT an exploit. They aren't idiots, they know what's going on. If you are wardeccing people and they are dodging, and then you are whining about it and wanting CCP to change mechanics for you, then it must have not been a worthwhile target for you. It's not rocket surgery. You are arguing trivial little details about peoples wording because you don't have a leg to stand on.

It's not an exploit per our supreme overlords at CCP. Are you deccing people and not getting the outcome you want? Quit crying about it and adjust your target selection. Its on you, not CCP.

No matter what bs argument you come up with or no matter what reasons you wardec for, proper target selection to achieve the outcome you want is your responsibly and no one else's.

What is it the kids say these days? Oh....yeah...

/thread.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#773 - 2014-09-15 16:15:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Trixie Lawless wrote:


No matter what bs argument you come up with or no matter what reasons you wardec for, proper target selection to achieve the outcome you want is your responsibly and no one else's.


So a merc corp goes to war with me, and they involve a corp with neutral logi.

I dec them too so I can shoot the neutral logi, so it's now no longer neutral. That is, after all, proper target selection.

They drop corp. I made the proper target selection though, and now they can rep the mercs from an NPC corp.

And yes, I know they go suspect when they start repping. The point is to pre-empt them, not wait until they're already in position and beating me.

You still want to argue that this is my fault?

Under these circumstances, I fail to see how 'proper target selection' has anything to do with the viability of the current mechanics as they stand.

EDIT: Let's up the stakes here - the merc corp doesn't dec me at all, they dec a PVE-focused Indi corp with a pos, who can't roll corp without losing the pos. The pos is vital infrastructure to their operations.

“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
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#774 - 2014-09-15 16:19:15 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Trixie Lawless wrote:


No matter what bs argument you come up with or no matter what reasons you wardec for, proper target selection to achieve the outcome you want is your responsibly and no one else's.


So a merc corp goes to war with me, and they involve a corp with neutral logi.

I dec them too so I can shoot the neutral logi, so it's now no longer neutral. That is, after all, proper target selection.

They drop corp. I made the proper target selection though, and now they can rep the mercs from an NPC corp.

And yes, I know they go suspect when they start repping. The point is to pre-empt them, not wait until they're already in position and beating me.

You still want to argue that this is my fault?

Under these circumstances, I fail to see how 'proper target selection' has anything to do with the viability of the current mechanics as they stand.


Fixing the neutral logi issue shouldn't be fixed through wardec mechanics. It needs to be fixed through logi mechanics. Different topic. Although I do agree with you that if they participate in the fight you should be able to blow them up, the wardec issue encompasses more than that. Petition for logi changes.
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#775 - 2014-09-15 16:27:16 UTC
Quote:


So if you and I disagree on what constitutes "worth wardeccing" (which seems to be the case here) I'm automatically wrong and you're automatically right, amirite? Roll


Quote:

It has nothing to do with that.


It has nothing to do with what you just said? Then why did you say it? How are we supposed to have an intelligent conversation here?

Quote:

The current mechanics allow for dodging, CCP has said it is NOT an exploit.


Didnt they also say that corp-cycling "too much" (which is grossly arbitrary and undefined) would "not be a good idea?"

[quote]They aren't idiots, they know what's going on. If you are wardeccing people and they are dodging, and then you are whining about it and wanting CCP to change mechanics for you, then it must have not been a worthwhile target for you. It's not rocket surgery. You are arguing trivial little details about peoples wording because you don't have a leg to stand on.


So directly quoting you is arguing over trivial little details? Is everything you say a trivial little detail? Lol
Furthermore, I don't believe that I "don't have a leg to stand on" any more than I believe the folks who "whine" (as you say) about afk cloakers, or missions not paying enough or people getting suicide ganked, etc, "don't have a leg to stand on." In every one of those instances, CCP has either said or implied thru inaction that they are OK with said mechanics.

Basically, your argument means that anyone who disagrees with any given mechanic in the game "doesn't have a leg to stand on."

I think that's a little silly, tbh. Sad

(out of quotes so bolding)
No matter what bs argument you come up with or no matter what reasons you wardec for, proper target selection to achieve the outcome you want is your responsibly and no one else's.

I'm seeing that argument tossed about in this thread every once in a while. I'm wondering how you people expect anyone to know ahead of time if their targets are going to corp-cycle?

It's like ordering a pizza and when it comes it has the wrong topics on it and then some joker comes along and says "omg d00d! why didn't you order it with toppings you like??"

\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#776 - 2014-09-15 16:28:32 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Trixie Lawless wrote:


No matter what bs argument you come up with or no matter what reasons you wardec for, proper target selection to achieve the outcome you want is your responsibly and no one else's.


So a merc corp goes to war with me, and they involve a corp with neutral logi.

I dec them too so I can shoot the neutral logi, so it's now no longer neutral. That is, after all, proper target selection.

They drop corp. I made the proper target selection though, and now they can rep the mercs from an NPC corp.

And yes, I know they go suspect when they start repping. The point is to pre-empt them, not wait until they're already in position and beating me.

You still want to argue that this is my fault?

Under these circumstances, I fail to see how 'proper target selection' has anything to do with the viability of the current mechanics as they stand.

EDIT: Let's up the stakes here - the merc corp doesn't dec me at all, they dec a PVE-focused Indi corp with a pos, who can't roll corp without losing the pos. The pos is vital infrastructure to their operations.


Yes...actually I will argue its your fault. You know the current mechanics and you know CCPs stance. They have posted its not an exploit. You already have a good idea what's going to happen. Why waste the isk? Still sounds like poor target selection to me.

And so what about the pos? It was an Indy corp...and once again...if you use the wardec feature you should know the mechanics. Pick a corp you don't think will roll up. CCP has made their position clear, so there's really nothing to argue about. Find a way to outsmart the system, not reasons to cry about it.
Hiply Rustic
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#777 - 2014-09-15 16:40:32 UTC
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Hiply Rustic wrote:
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Grog Aftermath wrote:


Why don't you war-dec a corp. that actually wants to fight back, I'm sure you would have more fun if PvP is truly what it's about.



I've been saying for pages and pages and pages (AND pages) that it's not always about the PVP. It's about inconveniencing and denying content. As Veers or whatever his name is said, it's an embargo of sorts. You'll find that many of not most wardecs from merc corps have 0 kills, but in that week they kept the WT shut-in, and thats the goal.





And since the target of a wardec is by definition a corporation and not an individual, there should certainly be no prohibition on an individual leaving a corporation...which is its own entity separate and distinct from its members...at any time and for any reason.


So how do you shoot a corp? How do you extract money from a corp? You don't. There should be some sort of disincentive to just packing up and dropping corp any time a war is declared, otherwise you trivialize war deccing in general, and cut out several options of emergent gameplay. Basically what I'm getting from you guys is that you don't want any non-consentual PVP in hisec at all. Why dont you just tell us all to go join RvB?

To at the very least throw aggressors a bone, how about a corp that disbands under a wardec can never have it's name or ticker used again, and the aggressor get's their concord fee refunded?




Hey, I have no problem with non-consensual PvP...don't get me wrong. You just don't get to lock people into a corporation when they want to leave it. I'm fine with finding some disincentive...at the corp level...for disbanding to quash a wardec.

I'm not fine with telling one of the grunts in a corp "You can't leave until the current wardec is over, someone else's freedom to enjoy their version of emergent gameplay has trumped yours and until they feel like letting you play the game again, you can't". That just leads to endlessly locking people in by serially deccing a corp. The dec'd get to play too, whether you think you should be able to endlessly deny them content or not. I'm not talking here about fighting back...I'm responding specifically to your statement that your goal is the denial of content.

Ralph King-Griffin wrote: "Eve deliberately excludes the stupid and the weak willied." EvE: Only the strong-willied need apply.
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#778 - 2014-09-15 16:40:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Trixie Lawless
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
[quote]

It's like ordering a pizza and when it comes it has the wrong topics on it and then some joker comes along and says "omg d00d! why didn't you order it with toppings you like??"


Except you are getting the exact toppings you have ordered? Just because you want to agress a group of players doesn't mean they have to participate. Once again....TARGET SELECTION.

You all keep trying to shove all the responsibility to the defender. They are not the one initiating the action. Have you maybe thought CCP doesn't want you to be able to extort super small corps with just a click of a button and a show of force...in hi sec of all places. Have you ever thought maybe CCP doesn't want you to have the ability to deny content so easily to others in hi sec?

Arguing until you are blue in the face about it doesn't matter. Coming up with hypotheticals doesn't matter. CCP has stated they don't feel its an exploit. Plain and simple.

39 pages worth of "ITS NOT FAIR CUZ I DONT GET MY WAY" is excessive.
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#779 - 2014-09-15 16:55:42 UTC
Trixie Lawless wrote:
ssabat thraxx wrote:


It's like ordering a pizza and when it comes it has the wrong topics on it and then some joker comes along and says "omg d00d! why didn't you order it with toppings you like??"


Except you are getting the exact toppings you have ordered? Just because you want to agress a group of players doesn't mean they have to participate. Once again....TARGET SELECTION.


Lets go over this slowly. I "ordered" a war against ACME Corp. Because I "want to agress them." They all drop corp and dodge the war..

#1. I did NOT, in fact, get "exactly what I ordered a war.)"

#2. Im still wondering how you can keep saying "TARGET SELECTION" when I have already asked how you expect a would-be attacker to know ahead of time if their target is or is not going to actually go to war?

Quote:

You all keep trying to shove all the responsibility to the defender. They are not the one initiating the action. Have you maybe thought CCP doesn't want you to be able to extort super small corps with just a click of a button and a show of force...in hi sec of all places. Have you ever thought maybe CCP doesn't want you to have the ability to deny content so easily to others in hi sec?


Nope, I haven't thought that, because I've been though more than a few wars, myself. Never once did I go all "chickenpoop" and drop corp.

What I DID do was stay in lowsec, where most (chickenpoop) merc corps refuse to go, and stayed the hell out of systems in, around, and in between trade hubs. The result? They usually got 0 kills on us, showing that we were not worth wardeccing again. THAT is how it should be, and THAT is the proper application of "target selection." The only way to know what youre going to get out of a war is to go through it once, FIRST.

Quote:

39 pages worth of "ITS NOT FAIR CUZ I DONT GET MY WAY" is excessive.


This is nothing compared to the gajillions of threads this size and more about "the afk cloaking menace," or "why missions should pay more," or "wah they nerfed my industry and research in crius" or "why can my enemy bump ships within a POS shield from outside the POS?" or "they just made it untenable for our corp to continue living in a wh," and a million other red-hot topics. To trivialize things as you have shows a lack of perspective and maturity, imo. These forums are here for the players to discuss the game, and the dev's read these forums for that very reason.

\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#780 - 2014-09-15 17:16:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Trixie Lawless
Sabot I think you are looking at this topic from a 1 corp vs 1 corp war, and not seeing this in the average carebears eyes. Do I agree with you that staying out of area is the proper way to show you are not a good target? Yup. Sure do, especially when you are at war with 1 other corp....but this topic isn't really aimed at the 1v1 type of wars. The problems spring more from mass war decs and people wanting to deny content to others in hi sec.

Think about this from a business perspective (CCP will never confirm this...and they shouldn't, because that's not how a company should present itself)...

You have three players that really really really love to be super boring and watch rocks disappear in space and then sell goods on the market. They all pay their 15/month and are in a corp together. They all have around 5 mill sp and because of the tutorials they really didn't know or think to skill into combat...yet.

One day they get wardecced and (according to you, extorted for what? 300 million) pay the other corp 300 mill just to go away. Then it happens again by another corp, then again, and again, until they are broke. So they decide just to dock and refuse to play. Now the corps extorting them get pissed because they can't anymore....so they keep on deccing just to deny them content. Those three aren't having fun so unsub.

3 customers gone. The way it is now...CCP probably loses zero customers because the carebears have a way to show you they don't want to play your game...and you just move along to the next group. Or... You can just gank them and CCP is okay with that too.

Its not real mind boggling to see that CCP , although giving you the option to go to war, wants to have an area that somewhat caters to the carebear gamer. They have two other areas in the game to attract people who want lots of war.

Why high sec war deccers stay in high sec when they can go to null or low sec and find the playstyle they want is beyond me, but to each his/her own. But CCP should not bend or change these mechanics. If they do you can wave goodbye to a lot of carebears, therefore a lot of players, and a lot of money, just to appeal to war deccers.