Crime & Punishment

As I already noted, hiring counter mercs is a waste of ISK due to the way hisec wardeccers operate, and an industry corp by definition is going to have ties with fewer effective pvp pilots than their opposition. As for working out a deal, I suppose if you pay them enough they might stop shooting...I'd just ask for more money. We all know how well ransom payments usually work out for the victim.

I don't run a corp. I was in a newbie corp that got decked some months ago, personal experience aside this is all pretty obvious to someone who pays attention, and reads the various griefer/ganker blogs for entertainment.

There's a chat channel for exactly that purpose?

Nope...you aren't understanding. I think that the only nonconsensual PvP allowed in highsec should be ganking, with concord allied with the victims. There should be strict consequences for repeat offenders who do nothing to redeem themselves in the eyes of concord in between ganks. Those who are looking for a more lax environment should move to nullsec.

One of the problems with hiring mercs is that most of the merc you hire are also the guys that roll out wardecs. Paying for a merc to protect you from a wardec pretty much announces to the merc that you are willing to pay to lose (edit: by "lose" here I mean "get rid of" by the way) the wardec, thus making you a good choice for a target later down the line.

If you're small enough to just fold and remake your corp, that's exactly what you should do. It's cheap, it's efficient, it accomplishes the task, it shows you are willing to do it and best of all it produces an untold volume of tears from players who think it's unfair.

At the end of the day, if wardeccers are going to suck so much at target selection that they pick corps with no intention of fighting back that are small enough to disband and reform, then the fault is entirely on them.

You should be able to avoid PvP in this game. The problem is if you can avoid PvP and yet still earn as much ISK as someone who is actually risking something.

This is why wardecs are necessary. It is poor sandbox game design to allow an industrial/PvE corp to earn as much in NPC-enforced safety as corporations that actually are risking something as the natural consequence is that an increasing number of players will choose to make ISK in perfect safety and the game will stagnate.

Each player should be able to set the risk level that they are comfortable with, but for that to work, the reward has to scale with increasing risk or why would anybody ever leave the safest part of the game?

Many players seem to have a problem with this. The risk vs. reward thing applies when there is reward to be had. The industrial corp is making rewards and influencing the economy of the sandbox, so the risk is on them to defend their operation. The wardeccer is not creating resources in the sandbox - if anything they are destroying them by losing/destroying ships and paying a wardec fee to NPCs. The industrial corp is making all the reward and gets to keep it if successful, and thus has to accept the risk that someone might try to stop them. The wardeccers stand to gain nothing directly, and certainly aren't putting more resources into the economy by declaring war and thus do necessarily have to be under any additional risk than that normally present in ship-to-ship combat from a game design point of view.

Now the reality is more complex as wardeccers do accept a lot of risk under the current system. Read the last wardec devblog and see how the system is suppose to work. You have the ability to invite any other corp for free after the war has been declared and the attackers are locked in for a week. You are suppose to invite your PvP allies, or hire mercenaries, to defend your operation. The wardeccers have no control over this giving the decced corp much power to fight back.

Add to that the trivial ability to shed the war by the once-an-exploit-but-no-longer-an-exploit fold and reform corp mechanic, the wardeccers do have much risk that things won't go their way. I think wardecs can be improved, but they are definitely an important part of the risk vs. reward design of the game.

Most benefits of owning a corporation aren't to do with direct isk generation, so punishing players for being in NPC corps by reducing their comparative income is pointless.

You say that, yet thousands upon thousands of players are in player run corps. So there obviously is a reason for them to leave the NPC corps. Your problem appears to be that not everyone leaves NPC corps. That's their choice, and it's perfectly valid.

Just because they aren't creating value in the sandbox doesn't mean they aren't receiving a reward though. Major wardeccers run very few risks for a pretty substantial reward. More risk and less reward than gankers get, granted, but you can't claim that they are unrewarded because their reward is transferred from a player.

Against a "normal" corp wardeccing, that system works. Against a group specifically designed to operate with hundreds of wars, that system doesn't work. Adding free allies to the war is just giving them more targets to play with. The only allies you could get that would actually be useful would cost you far more than the wardeccer paid to run the wardec, and they would likely be evaded by the wardeccers anyway. Those allies would also likely be wardeccers so you would be paying one group of wardeccers to try to fight another group of wardeccers. That's hardly a way to "fight back" against wardeccers.

Corp reforming can only be done by players with a small enough corp to make destroying and recreating it viable. If a wardeccer is picking a target like that, they suck at target selection, it's that simple. Most corps worth attacking won't have that as an option.

Not to counter them, but to protect you while you are on Mining ops and Hauling ops. Its not a waste of money if you pay people to protect you and rep you while you are on a mining op. Its not like you guys have mining ops every hour of every day, you will still be able to schedule, and do them.

Thats what smart CEOs of industrials do. They schedule mining ops. Tells their corpmates not to fly around during the wardecs, except for the times where they can be sufficiently protected by whoever they hired. Then, during that week of wardeccing, they have 2-3 mining ops, make a ton of isk.



You dont need ties, only Isk.

Do you seriously think that every person that hires a merc company to do a job, has "Ties" with that merc corp? Or did they simply just see the merc corp ad on C&P and contacted them in-game for the first time?

You keep repeating this, as if you cant hire a merc company unless you know the CEO of that corp personally in real life, and have spent 10 years living next to him. Let me repeat it here. ANY merc company is up for hire for the right price. You DONT NEED TIES TO HIRE A MERC CORP!



Not a ransom, but a surrender. You offer the isk along with a surrender, and if they accept, as per your agreement, they cannot wardec you for 2 weeks. The only way they can get that isk, is if they accept the surrender offer, which means the war is effectively over.

You seem like you dont know how Wardecs and surrenders work.

I never said you did run a corp.

But my statement stands. It looks like the CEO of your newbie corp, shouldnt have started the corp in the first place.

If you lack experience/isk/skills to run a corp, you shouldnt be recruiting Newbies. You should be recruiting Skilled players who know how to act and manage themselves. A newbie CEO recruiting Newbie players, is only going to lead to a sh*t corp that fails more often than it succeeds. The fault is not with the gankers/greifers/wardeccers, but your CEO. He shouldve been more aware, he shouldve been more experienced.

Eh, Awoxing hasn't been dying, it's just been evolving past "let's kill 10 mining ships, if that, and watch the lelz"

Yes....but it carries criminal consequences. It is tantamount to real life crime, and provides victims with police protection. That should be how nonconsensual pvp works...not forcing folks into often warfare without concord help.