Player Features and Ideas Discussion

That sort of just pushes the problem onto bigger corps, you'd effectively push corps like EVE Uni out of high-sec because every merc and their mum would be deccing them.

I think the best change to wardecs, is to rapidly increase the wardec fee beyond week 1. Perhaps double it each week so by the second week it's more convenient to dec a new corp, by week 3 it is prohibitively expensive to maintain a war. Give it a month cooldown or so. Now, mercs still have their carebear targets to pop at gatecamps, but it is beneficial for them to cycle through corps instead of just harassing one.

why? HS is not designed that way, people who dont want pew pew can evade wardecs, thats fine.
Why should you be able to enforce your playstyle on other people?

because I have a long list of NPC corp people I want to murder and in this sandbox I might want to rub sand in their eyes.

but your question begs the follow up question of "why let griefers force their play style on poor highsec miners?"

if opting out of pew pew is easily allowed why not just get rid of war all together?

its not like its used to settle disputes, promote religion, or to steal oil.

still sounds just like forcing someone to play the game a certain way.


(I am arguing purely for the sake of arguing... me troll much?)

My over arching point is players that don't want any PVP should look into Hello Kitty Online. EVE is PVP centric.

I'll stop adding stupid things to this thread now.

Sorry

As someone who uses wardecs to clear out offline towers owned by long-dormant corps who haven't logged on in months, I strenuously oppose this change, or any other change that limits the ability of small corps to dec other small corps. I understand the concerns regarding players being drawn towards staying in NPC corps, but that is no justification for stymieing other perfectly valid forms of gameplay that don't discourage players to join player corps.

Don't break valid gameplay to fix an un-related issue.

Regarding wardec fees, I feel that CCP has the right idea. Wardec fees are essentially bribes to CONCORD to look the other way, and the larger the entity, the larger the bribe necessary. I can see some room for tweaking of the fees and mechanics in general, but it should not be more expensive to wardec a smaller corp than to wardec a larger corp/alliance.

EDIT: I don't support wardec fee refunds. Yes, it'd be nice, but there's the whole risk/reward thing. If you could get a refund of your fees...where's the risk?

Wardecs are a tool to get easy kills, not to destroy corps or force players into NPC corps. Highsec players that are ignorant of tools that low, null and WH players have used for years should ask themselves first how to utilize existing game mechanics to protect themselves rather than asking for CCP to change the game to cater to their wants.

I argue that making highsec safer discourages social interaction, because there's nothing to force people to work together to accomplish a goal. If your little ten man corp can operate with total autonomy and in complete safety, why would you ever interact with anyone else in highsec, except to participate in the economy? Anyone looking for pvp can just take a quick trip to low, null or wormholes, and doesn't have a care in the world when operating in high.

You want to be safer with existing game mechanics? You should start by learning them first and then educating other players. Use locator agents, watchlists, form an intel channel. Don't have enough players to fight back or form an op to move corp or personal assets? Well then talk to your neighbors and form an alliance. Use scouts, cloaky alts, or corp spies. Marmite disseminates wardec and important information via mailing list- maybe you should try to get this information. Fight back. Many wardec corps are notoriously risk averse, and faced with something they can't deal with, will dock up and log off.

None of these things involve changing the game, but most of them require you to make friends and talk to people. If you want the social option then take it and stop spreading your self serving lies about what problems that highsec faces are.

This is a terrible idea for a simple reason: You will no longer have any CONCORD-compliant means to harrass null-sec supply lines. I mean, not even our *terrible* players will be at risk. Marmite will anchor their structure, and the CFC will roll over it. Done. No more high-sec war decs for us null bears. We can once again travel high-sec on our mains under the umbrella of CONCORD.

Then it appears that you are playing the wrong game, for CCP has made it abundantly clear that highsec is NOT safe, only "safer" than low/null/wh space.

Eve is a game that's built around player interaction, but even more so, conflict.

And where did I ever mention that I wanted unavoidable wardecs?
Please don't put any words in my mouth.

I'm perfectly fine with players not wanting to be wardecced, they can already do this by staying in an NPC corporation, and I am perfectly fine with that (though perhaps the downsides to being in an NPC corp could be made just a tad harsher).

Well, wardecs were already changed once, and they increased the price of starting a war 25-fold at the very minimum.
So you see, things have already gotten quite a bit better for people that don't wish to be involved in wars.

That said, I can understand Tora's reasoning, since whacking on smaller corporations, especially for a large alliance such as Marmites doesn't really offer a good return on investment, so to speak.