These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#221 - 2014-11-21 16:47:25 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
and lobby for advantages and changes.

Lobbying for advantages and changes, Exhibit A:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

Looks like you're the one who needs nerfed, just like I said.

Exhibit B:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Except that with wardecs being toothless thanks to the dec dodge exploit, people can bear in peace with ease.

And that's why this needs fixed.

Roll


An exploit does not get to remain in the game merely because some would benefit from it's removal.

See the POS bowling change for an example.

But meanwhile, I notice that you still give full credence to the people who stand to gain from the current existence of this exploit. They're arguing bitterly to keep their unfair advantage, but you seem to be just fine with that.

"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
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#222 - 2014-11-21 16:48:35 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
and lobby for advantages and changes.

Lobbying for advantages and changes, Exhibit A:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

Looks like you're the one who needs nerfed, just like I said.

Exhibit B:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Except that with wardecs being toothless thanks to the dec dodge exploit, people can bear in peace with ease.

And that's why this needs fixed.

Roll


You mistake what he's saying by taking it out of context (and the worse part is that you probably know this, which simply makes you a liar). I should no longer be surprised, as you do that to me all day long when I try to help you understand the (many) flaws in your way of thinking.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#223 - 2014-11-21 16:50:49 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

An exploit does not get to remain in the game merely because some would benefit from it's removal.

See the POS bowling change for an example.

But meanwhile, I notice that you still give full credence to the people who stand to gain from the current existence of this exploit. They're arguing bitterly to keep their unfair advantage, but you seem to be just fine with that.

Dodging a war dec by leaving or dismantling a corp has never been considered an exploit by CCP.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#224 - 2014-11-21 16:53:41 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

An exploit does not get to remain in the game merely because some would benefit from it's removal.

See the POS bowling change for an example.

But meanwhile, I notice that you still give full credence to the people who stand to gain from the current existence of this exploit. They're arguing bitterly to keep their unfair advantage, but you seem to be just fine with that.

Dodging a war dec by leaving or dismantling a corp has never been considered an exploit by CCP.


And for the longest time, POS bowling and/or some other form of it was allowed as well.

Until it wasn't.

That's what I'm arguing for. The intended method to dissolve a wardec is the surrender mechanic. The dec dodge exploit bypasses that basically for free and instantly. That's a textbook exploit.

"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.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#225 - 2014-11-21 16:55:32 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
They're arguing bitterly to keep their unfair advantage, but you seem to be just fine with that.

Yes, grief deccers keep arguing to keep their invulnerability exploit intact.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#226 - 2014-11-21 16:56:24 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
They're arguing bitterly to keep their unfair advantage, but you seem to be just fine with that.

Yes, grief deccers keep arguing to keep their invulnerability exploit intact.


Wardecs are not griefing. You've been shown definitive proof of that already, so cease your lies.

"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.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#227 - 2014-11-21 16:56:45 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
That's what I'm arguing for. The intended method to dissolve a wardec is the surrender mechanic. The dec dodge exploit bypasses that basically for free and instantly. That's a textbook exploit.

Let's make grief decs war decs first, shall we? Then we can consider dodging them an exploit, dodging a grief dec is the only rational thing to do at the moment.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Anslo
Scope Works
#228 - 2014-11-21 16:57:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Anslo
If you're insanely rich and have good skills and get decc'd and wanna give fighting back a shot, do this.

Arty Ballermachs
Nestors
Warp to enemies at like..70+
F1 primary
lol hard in local

Some people don't dig pvp and hey, that's perfectly OK. BUT if you're rich, bored, and have a lot of members....try the above. It will produce lolarious results.

Like, volleying Ishtars off field level of lolarious.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#229 - 2014-11-21 16:57:48 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
That's what I'm arguing for. The intended method to dissolve a wardec is the surrender mechanic. The dec dodge exploit bypasses that basically for free and instantly. That's a textbook exploit.

Let's make grief decs war decs first, shall we? Then we can consider dodging them an exploit, dodging a grief dec is the only rational thing to do at the moment.


See my post above.

Wardecs are not griefing, they never were, and never are. Cease your lies.

"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.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#230 - 2014-11-21 16:59:48 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
They're arguing bitterly to keep their unfair advantage, but you seem to be just fine with that.

Yes, grief deccers keep arguing to keep their invulnerability exploit intact.


Wardecs are not griefing. You've been shown definitive proof of that already, so cease your lies.

grief decs are not textbook griefing, it's a name picked for them to differentiate them from war decs.
grief decs are used with griefing intentions and are catered by rules which are unbalanced for no good reason towards risk-less gameplay of all the benefit you are willing to claim. It's lack of meaningful options aside from rationally dodging that situation instead of taking some meaningful steps (possibly involving guns) that differentiate a grief dec from war dec.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#231 - 2014-11-21 17:00:34 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
Jenn aSide wrote:

You mistake what he's saying by taking it out of context (and the worse part is that you probably know this, which simply makes you a liar). I should no longer be surprised, as you do that to me all day long when I try to help you understand the (many) flaws in your way of thinking.

You want to talk about my way of thinking? Fine, let's talk about my way of thinking.

I'm going on 5 years of eve now, I have 3 accounts with 7 well trained characters. A war dec will never affect me because I can simply swap to an unaffiliated character in an unaffiliated corp and go about my business, if I have any in hisec in the first place. This is the representative case of most veteran players. No changes to war dec mechanics will ever change this simple truth.

A war dec, then, is simply a tool that affects noobies. Which brings us to the next point:
afkalt wrote:

What they want, is to blow up inexperienced, amateurs and the fact they are not even honest about it is pretty pathetic. You want to do that, fill your boots but at least be honest about it.

One wonders why I have no sympathy for the poor deccers.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#232 - 2014-11-21 17:01:04 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:

grief decs are not textbook griefing, it's a name picked for them to differentiate them from war decs.
grief decs are used with griefing intentions and are catered by rules which are unbalanced for no good reason towards risk-less gameplay of all the benefit you are willing to claim. It's lack of meaningful options aside from rationally dodging that situation instead of taking some meaningful steps (possibly involving guns) that differentiate a grief dec from war dec.


CCP wrote:

A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making others’ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account.

This should not be confused with standard conflict that might arise between two (or more) players, such as corporation wars. The EVE universe is a harsh universe largely driven by such conflict and notice must be taken of the fact that nonconsensual combat alone is not considered to be grief play per the above definition.


Wardecs are never griefing.

"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.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#233 - 2014-11-21 17:01:16 UTC
Why dont we stop calling it grief decs and start with the accurate term - tear-decs.

Again, nothing wrong with decs for lols - but pretending like that isn't what is being talked about/referred to is fairly disingenuous and detrimental to the discussion.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#234 - 2014-11-21 17:03:18 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

An exploit does not get to remain in the game merely because some would benefit from it's removal.

See the POS bowling change for an example.

But meanwhile, I notice that you still give full credence to the people who stand to gain from the current existence of this exploit. They're arguing bitterly to keep their unfair advantage, but you seem to be just fine with that.

Dodging a war dec by leaving or dismantling a corp has never been considered an exploit by CCP.

[...]
The dec dodge exploit bypasses that basically for free and instantly. That's a textbook exploit.

So do high sp alts. What's your point?
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#235 - 2014-11-21 17:04:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Basil Pupkin
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Basil Pupkin wrote:

grief decs are not textbook griefing, it's a name picked for them to differentiate them from war decs.
grief decs are used with griefing intentions and are catered by rules which are unbalanced for no good reason towards risk-less gameplay of all the benefit you are willing to claim. It's lack of meaningful options aside from rationally dodging that situation instead of taking some meaningful steps (possibly involving guns) that differentiate a grief dec from war dec.


CCP wrote:

A grief player, or "griefer," is a player who devotes much of his time to making others’ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account.

This should not be confused with standard conflict that might arise between two (or more) players, such as corporation wars. The EVE universe is a harsh universe largely driven by such conflict and notice must be taken of the fact that nonconsensual combat alone is not considered to be grief play per the above definition.


Wardecs are never griefing.


grief decs are not textbook griefing, it's a name picked for them to differentiate them from war decs.
grief decs are used with griefing intentions and are catered by rules which are unbalanced for no good reason towards risk-less gameplay of all the benefit you are willing to claim. It's lack of meaningful options aside from rationally dodging that situation instead of taking some meaningful steps (possibly involving guns) that differentiate a grief dec from war dec.

It's really hard to read, isn't it?

Nonconsensual combat is fine, I never said otherwise. However, we have a situation where the issue is NOT non-consensual combat, but lack of meaningful options on defender's side, and invulnerability exploit on the grief deccers side. Deal with those, and it will clear all issues so we may forget the term "grief dec" we used to name those issues.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#236 - 2014-11-21 17:08:04 UTC
There is no such thing as a "grief dec".

Get it yet? There is no circumstance in which declaring war is griefing. It is always a legitimate game mechanic.

Take your made up terms elsewhere, we're talking about wardecs in this thread.

Quote:

However, we have a situation where the issue is NOT non-consensual combat, but lack of meaningful options on defender's side, and invulnerability exploit on the grief deccers side.


Except that both of those are outright lies.

There are plenty of things a defender can do, and the aggressor is not magically invincible in any way.

"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.
Basil Pupkin
Republic Military School
#237 - 2014-11-21 17:11:03 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
There is no such thing as a "grief dec".

Get it yet? There is no circumstance in which declaring war is griefing. It is always a legitimate game mechanic.

Take your made up terms elsewhere, we're talking about wardecs in this thread.

Quote:

However, we have a situation where the issue is NOT non-consensual combat, but lack of meaningful options on defender's side, and invulnerability exploit on the grief deccers side.


Except that both of those are outright lies.

There are plenty of things a defender can do, and the aggressor is not magically invincible in any way.


There are plenty of things a defender can do, and only one of them is rational, despite being negative to both grief deccer and defender - dodge the grief dec.
The rest of the options are irrational, inefficient, and the best they can do is give risk-averse grief bunnies some good scare, but no losses, due to invulnerability exploit of sitting on Jita undock.
Stop calling obvious things lies, they won't be less true no matter how many clueless people like you call them wrong.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#238 - 2014-11-21 17:11:19 UTC
As long as wardeccs can be beaten by docking up and playing on alts...what purpose do they have? And how would you propose to stop that elite pvp tactic?
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#239 - 2014-11-21 17:11:57 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:

You want to talk about my way of thinking? Fine, let's talk about my way of thinking.


Lets.

Quote:

I'm going on 5 years of eve now, I have 3 accounts with 7 well trained characters. A war dec will never affect me because I can simply swap to an unaffiliated character in an unaffiliated corp and go about my business, if I have any in hisec in the first place. This is the representative case of most veteran players. No changes to war dec mechanics will ever change this simple truth.

A war dec, then, is simply a tool that affect noobies. Which brings us to the next point:


Even if that's the case (it's not), what's the problem with that? EVE tends to follow 'reality' when it comes to conflict (unlike themepark games which mechanically shield players for the realities of conflict). The reality here is that the strong pick on the weak, their is no 'honor', and the best thing you can do is learn the rules of gunfighting.

My favorite EVE quote comes from Malcanis: "EVE Online: A game where you start out as a child in park full of pedophiles. If you're smart and ruthless, eventually you become one of the pedophiles".

It's ok that some people don't like that kind of game, but they are then playing the wrong kind of game. "think of the children" people like you would see CCP water down the game to be 'more fair' to these types and that's not what EVE is or needs.


Quote:

One wonders why I have no sympathy for the poor deccers.


That's another part of your problem, you think in terms of like or dislike. I don't give a damn about the deccers (or gankers or scammers0 one way or another. i care about the integrity of the game, and it's original (harsh, dystopian and thus ENJOYABLE) vision. a vision being eroded slowly by bleeding heart type people who defend the kinds of weakness displayed by too many high sec forum posters.
Anslo
Scope Works
#240 - 2014-11-21 17:13:17 UTC
If not Ballermachs, NaPocs. Lots of NaPocs.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]