Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Hello,

So I was reading an old article on joystick.com about the war system (http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/04/15/eve-evolved-fixing-the-wardec-system/). I must say they are right to say that it is currently as good as broken.

- Mostly industrial, mining, etc. corps get war-decced
- These corps mainly have no way to end the war by "Winning" and no way of defence
- ISK is not a problem for a corporation that declares a war.
- People stay docked in the station for the week.
- There are many other problems all in the article linked above, it's sure worth a read.

In the article there is proposed a very good solution to most of the problems, I will quote it bellow:



Ofcourse this would need some work, but I must admit I personally hate the current system, so I hope something will change.

I hope people share my opinion,

Gijs

Having a way for defenders to end things early is the concept im leaning to. The exact mechanic on the other hand im undecided on.

Structure Bashes? which many believe are boring
Control Timers? which means spawning of sites per wardec and that could be messy

also i dont know if there will be another territorial control mechanic for sov in the new sov system. It may be possible to steal it for war decs, whatever it may be.

The war system works well when both sides are willing to fight. I would argue it is carebearism that is the real culprit here. Second place on the blame list goes to the mentality of starting a corp at all when you aren't willing to defend it.

More and better incentives would be nice but the culture within corps is what needs to change. Corps should be able to defend themselves and be willing to do so. I have a hard time believing some random group of 10 AFK miners is going to feel any incentive, ever, to switch into combat ships and fight PVP experienced players.

All that said the new rules against AWOX might help to create bigger "superindy" corps, where the broken pride and hurt feelings of fourty carebears in a TeamSpeak channel could actually motivate them to shoot spaceships.

There is a distinction between carebearing and good common sense.


Things the aggressers have in their favour:

>Know it is coming so can pre logistic supply (if it is even needed as they will have a plethora of out of corp alts)
>Enemy already pre scouted
>neutral OGBs
>Actually combat pilots

There are more, of course, but unless the defenders are decent combat pilots with decent skills/OGB/experienced logi they are going to get stomped.

Fighting in a high sec war as an industrialist is about as smart as jumping your freighter into low. Hiring mercs is about the only option and it's not like they couldnt be in league with the aggressors just to get the isk.


The smartest thing to do is to avoid it. To call it carebearing is thoroughly disingenuous, unless you knowling YOLO into camped gates solo and hope for the best in an industrial.

And it should be doable to make 'glorified chat rooms' by having corps that have no assets. Just a common chat channel, mailing list, NPC tax, etc etc.

logi should not get a criminal timer. a suspect timer is better, an aggression timer to the opposing corp for the duration of the war would be perfect.

That's only really true in the current context, hopefully the new corp system will provide proper tools for corps to actually work together, perhaps even different types of corporations depending on their activities. At that point the one size fits all highsec corp that falls apart at the first wardec might be a thing of the past.

It's pretty much impossible to find a starting point for a wardec fix until we know what types of entities will be fighting them.

Which is a shame, cause they're boring as all shite atm.

This is all well and good in your average themepark MMO where one thing doesn't really impact on another. But if people want to participate in a competitive, active economy they just can't have a little haven of happy. Sorry.

You can't really suggest such people will hide in purgatory forever either - some do, granted but plenty of others freak out at the thought of paying 11% tax and if corp-related buffs (ESS, structures, whatever) become part of Corps 2.0 those numbers will only grow.

A wardec system and the associated tears are inevitable but with a bit of joined-up thinking there's no reason why it should wallow it the pit of pointless grief we're all in now.


Subbing gives you the right to log on and accumulate SP, nothing more. To suggest otherwise in a 'sandbox' (TM) is absurd. If you want the benefits a corp brings you have to accept you're in a competitive environment and everything that entails.

+1000

Paying the subscription fee gives people the right to do whatever the games allows as long as it has interest for them and that includes forming a corp and then refusing to un-dock to "defend it".


I am not missing the point. In fact I stated this in my last post but you are choosing to ignore it so here it is again.

"The only real reason HS WD exist is to give those PvP players who do not want to go to low or nul a legitimate way to blow things up without experiencing the wrath of Concord." Sorry for this style of quoting my own post I seem to have exceeded some quote limit and I believe the others are more important and the traditional style of quote.


I disagree the single largest problem with HS WD in a general sense are these idiotic beliefs that people should be willing to fight simply because you or someone else chooses to WD them, or that they should be willing to fight simply because they want to from a social club in game. And like it or not forming a player owned corp is a fundamental requirement for the role playing gamers in our midst and yes they have as much right to participate in EVE as you or I do.



They pay the monthly subscription and they have the right to form a corp even if all they want it for is social club in EVE.

I am not going to quote the text on how you think these NPC super corps should be set up, those interested can find and read it above, here is my response to it.
Since this would make an even larger percentage of the player base immune to the threat of or an actual WD I find myself wondering what the advantage there is in this is for the HS WD players/corps. And I wonder how many of them outside of this discussion would support it.

If your idea was introduced into the game how does this change things for those who set up a player corp as we know them today? What additional risks would they face? What penalties would they face if they chose not to fight in a WD. To compensate for any or all of the additional risks what additional benefits would they get?

As I have stated here and in numerous other topics on HS WD you are still ignoring the final and the most important deciding factor, each players right to chose not to fight. To be blunt if a player decides they will not fight there is nothing you or CCP can do to change that and anything that is done to try and force them to fight may cause them to leave the game. I will not debate here if that would be good or bad I will leave that to each person that reads this to decide. My opinion is that the loss of any subscriber who is going about their time in game and enjoying themselves is valuable and CCP should do everything within reason to keep them in game. However CCP should not and cannot cater to these players in a way that adversely impacts others in the game.


And this is something that we can agree on.
Even though I am not a HS WD player I have always believed the current allies rules for WD are idiotic in the extreme and they need to be addressed so they better balance this aspect of WD.
As you state there needs to be a way where the defenders can clearly WIN thus ending the WD early and I see this as the single biggest change that could be made to improve the current WD system. I would even take this one step further, currently there is no clear WINNER in any WD unless you count a destroyed POS/POCO or numbers on a kill board. So I would amend this suggestion and say there needs to be clear win/lose goals established for both sides and as soon as those goals are achieved by either side the war ends immediately.

Despite what some may think I always have and always will support some form of WD activity in HS, it is a viable and valuable play style that needs to be maintained in the game. What I am against is the current system that stacks all of the advantages on the aggressors side and all of the disadvantages onto the defenders.

Without being draconian to either side how do we change this situation so that is offers more or a better balance for both sides? And yes restricting the game play options of a group of high sec players simply because they do not want to participate in what they consider a useless waste of time and ISK is a draconian measure.

theres nothing wrong with not fighting. and my proposal does not force anything on anyone.

it in fact allows you to form a social club without having to worry about decs.

but if you want the benefits of a POS and/or other corp assets, you can be decced.

chose which one is for you. one has less benefits, less risk and NPC tax. The other has extra benefits but with it extra risks.

if you still want to form a full asset corp and you still want to dock up everytime your wardecced then fine, you can still do that. but dont you dare **** up the forums with your whining when you do eventually get decced.




that is my idea in a nut shell.