Crime & Punishment

No, it's no less valid because no one is obligated to offer up their ships to create loss.

Loss happens upon failure to mitigate another players attempts to take something you have. It's not a natural automatic function that happens without realized intent. And that intent should have a variety of responses.

Mechanics are set up for those who want to avoid loss to do so should they be willing to take some action towards it, and in this case the response is appropriate to the method of aggression.

No, no player is obligated to it, which is why observational and defensive mechanism exist. You are allowed to keep you assets to the extent of your ability to keep them from harm. The nature of eve in no way defies this. It's only a failure to understand the limits of PvP that encourages thinking otherwise.

Until you realize both active and passive defense are PvP can you see that the ability to interfere with the intent of others doesn't inherently create loss.

Hello, i am posting with an alt.

Intro: Ive done it all: Build caps; Military Director for a Large Sov holding allaince; FC for small gang leet pvp low sec; FC for high skilled high sec mercs; mining; manufacturing.

So after my Military Director stint for over a year, i took a break from the game. Back in 2010 i was the CEO of a high sec corp. That was most fun ive ever had. We had 160 peeps in 3 months and membership was exploding.

Ive been playing eve since 2006 and back pre 2013 (i think) one had to pay a fixed fee to wardec someone which doubled every time a new entity wardec'd. This means that rarely would a corp get more than 3 war decs at once. The average war dec time was 1 week out of the month.

So i come back to do that high sec corp all over again. The problem is once my corp got to 50 guys in 2 weeks, the war decs came hot and heavy. And they werent like the old days of small corps. Now it was huge multiple war decing alliances. We didnt have a prayer. The corp was wardeced EVERY WEEK afterwards. Thus stomping us out of existance.

Who is there to hire when all the pvpers are in the war decing alliances? Where is there to go? What is there to do?

Sadly i had spent too much $$ for a corp website that never saw the light of day because once i relized the war dec mechanics, it was no longer worth it to be a successful large (50+) high sec corp.

I have no issues fighting, but a 50 man corp spread in euro/american tz simply cant do jack about the HUNDREDS of experienced pvpers camping your stations with nothing better to do.

I would love to have a conversation in the comments from both sides. Perhaps there is some middle ground?

And, so long as you're actually doing it with intended game mechanics, I have no issue with it either.

But you cannot sit there and tell me that CCP intended wars to be trivially removed by screwing around with loopholes in the corp creation mechanics. It's right there in the dev blog, the intended method to dissolve wars is the surrender function.






If that mitigation involves actually playing the game, yes. I have no problem with people who avoid me, I spent damn near three hours a while ago hunting one guy who I just could not catch.

But flipping corps and trivializing the existence of the mechanic in the first place is not "mitigation". It's an exploit used to abrogate the need for any other forms of mitigation at all.




Purely social constructs are chat channels. Nothing further need be done about that.



Those all involve actually doing something in the game itself. Those involve making decisions and weighing choices. Dec dodging does not, it just gives you free safety, no fuss, no muss, fire and forget.

Personally I think a wardec should be as trivial to exit as it is to enter. If 50mill (+ costs for members) to concord starts one it should end one just as easily. Since we don't have that the next best thing is dec dodging, which is better since it lacks the harassment potential for dec'ing repeatedly for isk attrition.

There are ways out of wardecs that don't involve dec dodging. Whether that is to surrender, fight or hire someone to fight for you Corps do have options. Adding more options to the mechanic that doesn't just provide a near free way to avoid conflict is also something I hope CCP eventually add.

On the other hand, not every wardec fits into the 'frivilous' category that is often complained about and we have no figures to know what percentage of wars are for a genuine greivance, to gain a competitive advantage, etc. v declaring because the mechanic exists.

In situations where someone is genuinely trying to 'avenge' a greivance, or if they are trying to get rid of the competition, gain some market advantage, etc.; the dec dodging mechanism robs them of that opportunity to genuinely bring conflict against someone they have a reason to.

In that respect, the mechanic is totally to the advantage of the dec dodger and to the disadvantage of the other person/Corp. Mercs make a living off settling someone's greivance for them and the dec dodging mechanism also affects them.

So looking at it from the perspective that the war has a genuine reason to exist, the dec dodging approach is a bit too easy.