These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The 4.7%: Wardecs with a Purpose
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Black Pedro
Mine.
#101 - 2014-11-20 17:23:45 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:

Great idea Roll

Drive all the people looking for a relaxed PvE experience right out of the game, but do nothing to stop the obvious response by wealthier/more experienced players like me which would be to create lots of alts capable of running L4s, stick them all in different 1 man corps, and just use whichever one isn't wardecced. Also, your ideas would lead to the same cartel control that plagues nullsec. Fail idea is fail.

Nah. You can still PvE to you hearts content. No change in mechanics for staying in a NPC corp. Just your income will be a little lower.

You can stay in a one-man corp too. No problem there. However, the increased income from the deployables would require significant effort, too much for only one or a few people, so that you wouldn't improve your corp structures much and not get much additional benefit. That is an incentive to move to bigger corps.

And no, there would be no "cartel" as anyone can make a corp, and there is no lock-out from any highsec space or resources. As long as new corps can "catch up" in a reasonable time, and the income bonus for being in these corps not too great, there would be no significant reason not to start your own corp if you feel the need.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
The Conference
#102 - 2014-11-20 17:23:46 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ummm....ya........this is a strange post. I constantly have people asking to join my 1 man corp so I can teach them about missions/incursions. I'm forced to decline because of awoxxing concerns. I could easily make the corp with me having all the roles, and no assets, and just roll corp when wardecced. Awoxxing is a bigger problem than wardeccing, though both make highsec corps kinda useless right now.

If I wanted to join a highsec corp, which I don't of course as the ones that publicly recruit are terrible and I can achieve all of my gameplay goals in a 1 man corp, I would just one of my alts that CODE is unfamiliar with. CCP is the one that has noticed that awoxxing is leading to poor player retention, and the same is true for wardeccs.

As for "trolling" CODE, I must tell you that is my great honor to "troll" you folks by opposing real life harassment, targeting of new players, forcing new players to stay in NPC corps, and "harvesting" rage and tears. If the consequence of that is that I can't join some useless publicly recruiting highsec PvE corp on this character, so be it....that's not exactly a major repercussion. Obviously much more important is advocating gameplay changes that work towards preventing new players from getting curbstomped by the usual wardeccers.

Since your "trolling" has zero impact on anything other than your own ability to do stuff with Veers you are of course welcome to continue. And by all means start another toon and start over with a more EVE compatible attitude.

Evil RatKid
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#103 - 2014-11-20 17:44:02 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ummm....ya........this is a strange post. I constantly have people asking to join my 1 man corp so I can teach them about missions/incursions. I'm forced to decline because of awoxxing concerns. I could easily make the corp with me having all the roles, and no assets, and just roll corp when wardecced. Awoxxing is a bigger problem than wardeccing, though both make highsec corps kinda useless right now.

If I wanted to join a highsec corp, which I don't of course as the ones that publicly recruit are terrible and I can achieve all of my gameplay goals in a 1 man corp, I would just one of my alts that CODE is unfamiliar with. CCP is the one that has noticed that awoxxing is leading to poor player retention, and the same is true for wardeccs.

As for "trolling" CODE, I must tell you that is my great honor to "troll" you folks by opposing real life harassment, targeting of new players, forcing new players to stay in NPC corps, and "harvesting" rage and tears. If the consequence of that is that I can't join some useless publicly recruiting highsec PvE corp on this character, so be it....that's not exactly a major repercussion. Obviously much more important is advocating gameplay changes that work towards preventing new players from getting curbstomped by the usual wardeccers.

Since your "trolling" has zero impact on anything other than your own ability to do stuff with Veers you are of course welcome to continue. And by all means start another toon and start over with a more EVE compatible attitude.


Well, my "trolling" definitely seems to cause you to obsess over me...while I could care less about you....maybe it's time for you to grow up and move on? Didn't you declare a few weeks ago that you had blocked me on the forums?
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#104 - 2014-11-20 17:59:25 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:

Great idea Roll

Drive all the people looking for a relaxed PvE experience right out of the game, but do nothing to stop the obvious response by wealthier/more experienced players like me which would be to create lots of alts capable of running L4s, stick them all in different 1 man corps, and just use whichever one isn't wardecced. Also, your ideas would lead to the same cartel control that plagues nullsec. Fail idea is fail.

Nah. You can still PvE to you hearts content. No change in mechanics for staying in a NPC corp. Just your income will be a little lower.

You can stay in a one-man corp too. No problem there. However, the increased income from the deployables would require significant effort, too much for only one or a few people, so that you wouldn't improve your corp structures much and not get much additional benefit. That is an incentive to move to bigger corps.

And no, there would be no "cartel" as anyone can make a corp, and there is no lock-out from any highsec space or resources. As long as new corps can "catch up" in a reasonable time, and the income bonus for being in these corps not too great, there would be no significant reason not to start your own corp if you feel the need.



The inability to run L4 missions is a major, major nerf to NPC corps. That's what a lot of people in them play the game for. Also, you massively nerf NPC corps but do nothing to prevent people from seeding alts in 1 man corps to run L4s/incursions. What exactly are you accomplishing? Perpetuating even more social isolation in 1 man corps?

Rewarding bigger corps would 100% encourage cartelization like in nullsec. The big boys would wardecc the littler boys into oblivion, and everyone would want to be part of the mega-block, CFC or N3 style. That is bad for highsec, and bad for the game. Not to mention a radical departure from the design of the game, built around missions, mining, trading, incursions, etc...not trying to set up POS's in highsec.
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
The Conference
#105 - 2014-11-20 18:01:55 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Since your "trolling" has zero impact on anything other than your own ability to do stuff with Veers you are of course welcome to continue. And by all means start another toon and start over with a more EVE compatible attitude.


Well, my "trolling" definitely seems to cause you to obsess over me...while I could care less about you....maybe it's time for you to grow up and move on? Didn't you declare a few weeks ago that you had blocked me on the forums?

Oh yeah I did, I just click the posts from time to time to see what the nerf drivel of the day is. The forums are still overflowing with your tears about us, tell me more about how you don't care?

Evil RatKid
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#106 - 2014-11-20 18:03:09 UTC
Jvpiter wrote:


Having to hit a big red "end wardec" button on an aggressor's POS is a real immersion killer. For that reason alone I would oppose the change.





Well the agressor should be able to defend the POS.. after all if they could not fight.. why would they do the war? That woudl reduce the nubmer of random wars, and would make more of the wars become real fight.

IF you want an immersion factor. Make a module of the POS be the concord war license itself. When you lose it, you lose concord license for the wars associated with it.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#107 - 2014-11-20 18:06:05 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
High sec need more strategical assets that can relinquish good income so that players stay more on corps and that they need to fight back.


I for once would change a lot of things. I would make that NPC corps have a 50% tax (yes 50%) after you are 2 months old. A new player corp has a base tax to concord of 20% with -1% per 2 players up to -10%. The last -10% you get rid of by having a POS or some other sort of fixed structure that you move your headquarter to. That is a target that most corps would have to defend..

Also. .leaving a corp in war create kill rights that will expire in 7 days. Since these are possible to be made open to all, leaving a corp in war would be MORE dangerous than staying.



Now.. on the OTHER side. Would make that When someone declares a war it MUST also associate that war with a POS of his own corp. Allow as many wars to be linked to a POS as the owner woudl want. If the POS is taken down, ALL wars associated with that POS go DOWN, and ALL the money paid for the wars associated with that POS is passed to the corp that made the killing blow on the POS .. Also those same wars cannot be remade for 2 weeks. That way war dec groups could not HIDE and fight only when they want. Groups could gather and go kill their POS and enforce a War end.


I think something Like that would create a scenario where no side can COMPLAIN. Because the defenders can enforce an end if they have balls or hire mercenaries. Woudl create more real fights and less ganking on pipes. Also people would gather more in player corps due to a real benefit in doing so. Also leavign corp during war would have a real impact.


Not sure about anyone else...but this kinds of stuff would just make me get 6 different chars to run L4s/incursions, 5 in 1 man corps, 1 in NPC corp....would play on the 5 as long as all were not wardecced, and if all 5 were, then use the NPC alt. Good for the game how exactly? Remember, you can't force people to log in, and as long as you won't punish for docking up, these wars aren't going to be a meaningful way of actually hurting defenders.



Why is that a problem? If I am forcing you to cust 5/6th of your income, I am winning in the war. And most players would pay for us to stop the war. This system would make both sides have things at stake in the war.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Lan Wang
Princess Aiko Hold My Hand
Safety. Net
#108 - 2014-11-20 18:11:13 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
I dont live in highsec...

Then why do you think you are qualified to propose a change about a part of the game that does not concern you at all?


Im not qualified neither are you but in theory anything that happens anywhere in eve affects everyone, so just because i dont live in highsec does not mean i dont use it

Yeah, then let's remove all the moons from wormsec, I don't live there, but that does not mean I don't use it. It would be so much more pleasant for me if this space wasn't littered with towers. I don't even know what your are doing in there, so what do I care if my stupid idea kills your playstyle?


Why you getting all high and mighty, dont you want pvp? Because null and lowsec is great for it, or is it the easy targets you prefer where you can pretend your some sort of mesiah trying to guide them into other things other than what they want to do in the game, it wasnt even a suggrstion it was a reply to removing concord from highsec so simmer down please and stop crying

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#109 - 2014-11-20 18:11:44 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:


Why is that a problem? If I am forcing you to cust 5/6th of your income, I am winning in the war. And most players would pay for us to stop the war. This system would make both sides have things at stake in the war.


How do you figure 5/6th of my income? I play on a single account at a time. All it means is I would play on whichever one of the 5 alts that isn't wardecced, and dock up the rest. Presumably after a few times doing this would be wardeccers would look at my war history and realize that there is no fighting to be had, and give up. So what did your grand scheme accomplish? Forcing people to make alts and stick them in 1 man corps?

Unless you are willing to punish a war defender for docking up and playing on alts, or playing a different game for a week, there is no way to make avoiding wars painful.

Got it now?
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#110 - 2014-11-20 18:42:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Desimus Maximus wrote:
There is a clear and obvious solution. War Declaration Skill I-V, pre-req of Warmonger Skill I-V. Both are corporation management skills. allowing for a total of up to 10 active wardecs as the aggressor. For alliance warfare, the CEO of executor must have the skills.

Unlimited wardecs is just another sub-killer. Declaring war must be meaningful in the game, much like strategic planning for jumping around capitals is now, thankfully.


No.

Wardec mechanics have already been nerfed. Wardec fees were increased dramatically, and unlimited allies allowed to join the defender side (at zero cost if desired).

Wars are also today 100% consensual, because someone just needs to drop corp and return to an NPC one to duck it.

Before carebear pansies continue stroking each other off further in this tread with talk of further changes to make wars even more inneffectual, a sharp dose of reality is needed to make them more meaningful.

When someone drops corp under wardec, the war should follow them as an individual for one week, or until normal war expiry time.

Once CCP has closed the existing dec-dodging loophole of dropping corp, THEN we can talk about further mechanics changes. Like adding wardec fees to a 'bucket' paid out to defenders based on ships killed, etc.

Until that time...

tldr;
HTFU you pansies, and use the mechanics already available to you.

p.s.
NPC corp taxes should be increased to 60% immediately.

That is all.

F

Would you like to know more?
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#111 - 2014-11-20 18:50:52 UTC
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Desimus Maximus wrote:
There is a clear and obvious solution. War Declaration Skill I-V, pre-req of Warmonger Skill I-V. Both are corporation management skills. allowing for a total of up to 10 active wardecs as the aggressor. For alliance warfare, the CEO of executor must have the skills.

Unlimited wardecs is just another sub-killer. Declaring war must be meaningful in the game, much like strategic planning for jumping around capitals is now, thankfully.


No.

Wardec mechanics have already been nerfed. Wardec fees were increased dramatically, and unlimited allies allowed to join the defender side (at zero cost if desired).

Wars are also today 100% consensual, because someone just needs to drop corp and return to an NPC one to duck it.

Before carebear pansies continue stroking each other off further in this tread with talk of further changes to make wars even more inneffectual, a sharp dose of reality is needed to make them more meaningful.

When someone drops corp under wardec, the war should follow them as an individual for one week, or until normal war expiry time.

Once CCP has closed the existing dec-dodging loophole of dropping corp, THEN we can talk about further mechanics changes. Like adding wardec fees to a 'bucket' paid out to defenders based on ships killed, etc.

Until that time...

tldr;
HTFU you pansies, and use the mechanics already available to you.

p.s.
NPC corp taxes should be increased to 60% immediately.

That is all.

F



You are calling pursuit of happynnes anti war carebears? Sir... you officially stamp your post with a " No F#!@#! clue" stamp.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#112 - 2014-11-20 18:52:25 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


Why is that a problem? If I am forcing you to cust 5/6th of your income, I am winning in the war. And most players would pay for us to stop the war. This system would make both sides have things at stake in the war.


How do you figure 5/6th of my income? I play on a single account at a time. All it means is I would play on whichever one of the 5 alts that isn't wardecced, and dock up the rest. Presumably after a few times doing this would be wardeccers would look at my war history and realize that there is no fighting to be had, and give up. So what did your grand scheme accomplish? Forcing people to make alts and stick them in 1 man corps?

Unless you are willing to punish a war defender for docking up and playing on alts, or playing a different game for a week, there is no way to make avoiding wars painful.

Got it now?


If you have several accounts to play only with 1 just because you need a way to avoid me, then I am nerfing you in 5 plexesper months. Got it now?


The simple fact taht you make those alts for that means I already won.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#113 - 2014-11-20 18:53:45 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:


Why you getting all high and mighty, dont you want pvp? Because null and lowsec is great for it, or is it the easy targets you prefer where you can pretend your some sort of mesiah trying to guide them into other things other than what they want to do in the game, it wasnt even a suggrstion it was a reply to removing concord from highsec so simmer down please and stop crying


Most people that prefer to wardec in high sec do so because they cannot stand capital ships ruining anything fun in the game.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Prince Kobol
#114 - 2014-11-20 18:56:37 UTC
Once again, until there is a clear distinction between High Sec Corps and NPC Corps, no matter how you change the War Dec Mechanics they will still be broken.

At the moment there is no incentive to fight for your High Sec Corp, it is worth next to nothing.

It is far easier just to disband, wait a while and reform or just stay in a NPC Corp.

To me you have two realistic options before War Decs can become meaningful, either substantially nerf NPC so they become a place were you will leave a character whilst you go afk from the game / you are looking for a new corp / selling a character or give High Sec corps a clear distinct advantage over NPC Corps.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#115 - 2014-11-20 18:57:46 UTC
Regarding high-sec, often corps will leave an alliance then re-join after the war. If it is at the end of a subscription cycle some people will just wait until the war is over then re-join EVE.

Usually, they aren't there to PVP and will do everything to avoid it then just re-form after the war dec.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#116 - 2014-11-20 19:12:06 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


Why is that a problem? If I am forcing you to cust 5/6th of your income, I am winning in the war. And most players would pay for us to stop the war. This system would make both sides have things at stake in the war.


How do you figure 5/6th of my income? I play on a single account at a time. All it means is I would play on whichever one of the 5 alts that isn't wardecced, and dock up the rest. Presumably after a few times doing this would be wardeccers would look at my war history and realize that there is no fighting to be had, and give up. So what did your grand scheme accomplish? Forcing people to make alts and stick them in 1 man corps?

Unless you are willing to punish a war defender for docking up and playing on alts, or playing a different game for a week, there is no way to make avoiding wars painful.

Got it now?


If you have several accounts to play only with 1 just because you need a way to avoid me, then I am nerfing you in 5 plexesper months. Got it now?


The simple fact taht you make those alts for that means I already won.



A PvE player could easily make 6 alts on 2 accounts intending to use one at a time. This is not a success for your wardecc ideas...this is a failure. Unless you are willing to punish people for docking up and playing on alts, I don't see how you can compel a defender to fight the war. Ideas?
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#117 - 2014-11-20 19:26:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Veers Belvar wrote:

A PvE player could easily make 6 alts on 2 accounts intending to use one at a time. This is not a success for your wardecc ideas...this is a failure. Unless you are willing to punish people for docking up and playing on alts, I don't see how you can compel a defender to fight the war. Ideas?

You are highlighting your "it's all about me" mindset on this Veers. (big surprise right?)...

Wars aren't issued at the individual level, but at the corporation or alliance level.

Also, an aggressor who declares war on another corp and causes their pansies to decide to stay docked, is still getting a positive return on his wardec fee investment. Its not just about kills, but exerting a meta force also.

Some back end changes are also needed, like making wars follow individuals who drop corp to dodge them completely (combined with increasing NPC corp taxes to 60%+) are obviously needed, but clearly not insurmountable changes to make wars more meaningful as a mechanic.

F

Would you like to know more?
Lan Wang
Princess Aiko Hold My Hand
Safety. Net
#118 - 2014-11-20 19:44:38 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:


Why you getting all high and mighty, dont you want pvp? Because null and lowsec is great for it, or is it the easy targets you prefer where you can pretend your some sort of mesiah trying to guide them into other things other than what they want to do in the game, it wasnt even a suggrstion it was a reply to removing concord from highsec so simmer down please and stop crying


Most people that prefer to wardec in high sec do so because they cannot stand capital ships ruining anything fun in the game.


that works both ways, non-combat players will simply go to npc to hide from wardeccers just like you stay in highsec to avoid capitals

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#119 - 2014-11-20 19:51:56 UTC
I love PVP, but let's look at this from the perspective of someone who loves EVE but isn't really interested in PVP.

First of all, do we want these kind of players in EVE? I'd say yes, else we'd lose a good bunch of subscribers. Also, I'm fine with, say, lots of pure industrialists competing to keep ship/module prices down, by investing hours of RL time to devise efficient harvesting/manufacturing/distribution schemes. I think it's a cool part of EVE, actually.

Second, should these dudes be 100% safe in highsec? I'd say no, because taking away the possibility to gank people would destroy a good part of our beloved sandbox.

Enter CONCORD mechanics. They're perfect, IMHO: you're free to shoot ANYONE ANYWHERE, you just have to deal with your ship being inevitably blown up in a few seconds. Tweak the parameters as much as you want (response times, barge's tanks, etc.) but the mechanic is perfect in allowing suicide ganking, but preventing it to 'get out of hand' through limitations: dps vs. tank, 15 minutes timer, loss of sec status, etc.


Now let's get to non-consensual wardecs in highsec. Those PVE-minded dudes, that already aren't 100% safe because of a solid CONCORD mechanic that allows (but limits) suicide ganks, have 2 options if they want an enjoyable EVE experience:

1) stay in NPC corps and learn how to avoid ganks
2) join a corp and learn to PVP - at least the part about running away / surviving in a 'virtual' lowsec without gate and station guns

Problem with option 2) is... they don't like PVP. It's not fun for them. So what's the super-important reason because of which they should be forced to PVP for 2 weeks by any random dude that has 50 Mil ISK to spare?

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#120 - 2014-11-20 20:00:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Frostys Virpio
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:



Wars aren't issued at the individual level, but at the corporation or alliance level.



Some back end changes are also needed, like making wars follow individuals who drop corp to dodge them completely (combined with increasing NPC corp taxes to 60%+) are obviously needed, but clearly not insurmountable changes to make wars more meaningful as a mechanic.



Wars are at corp/alliance level or personal?

Wars will never be a really meaningful mechanic as long as corps have as little meaning as they do now. Anybody who isn't interested in actively pursuing PvP, even if he does not mind being the target of PvP at all, is making a smart strategic move to ditch every single wardecs he ever get. It's about as straight forward as clone upgrades. If you won't actively hunt your new enemies, there is no point to put effort in protecting your assets from them beside just shedding the war.