These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Bitter Vet - High Sec War Decs are Broken. Lets Talk :)

First post
Author
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
R I O T
#261 - 2015-04-21 23:57:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
alexclone1 wrote:
Controversial in null sec. And i didnt use my null sec character to create a high sec corp.
Its difficult to keep a 'low profile' in an industry corp when 30+ peeps are online at once.
Please educate me about these 'good relations' between industrial corps and merc alliances.

Does 'good relations' mean having to pay a ransom constantly?

"Hey, would you guys be interested in a long-term ally relationship if we provide a modest retainer and give you other benefits, such as discounts on various things we produce, and intel on our industrial competitors in the area?"

Obviously you search for someone reliable before trying this instead of just choosing a random person in local, but that's literally all it takes.

alexclone1 wrote:
exactly. War decs are good. Industrial corps should be war dec'd. But the current mechanic allowing just about everyone, at once, to wardec a corp that already has 5 war decs against it makes no sense. And if your corp is active, and dudes die (which happens in wardecs) then they constantly become renewed.

Esentially your only option is to log out for a week and pray they dont renew. 30 vs 300 just isnt viable. Especially when the costs of said war dec are minimal.

Edit: This is high sec. Not null sec. In null sec you wave all right to things being fair because there are no npc faction/mechanics protecting you. Its pure politics. In high sec, you have a pay a fee to the npc faction (not shoot on site) and that is the particular mechanic that is broken imo.

The costs need to be higher. If you wanted to war dec someone, it should be because they REALLY pissed you off. Not because you want to shoot at miners.

The wars in which your group of 30 is being attacked by a group of 300 amount to nothing more than the inability to access the main trade hubs without alts. These are blanket declarations, and the people putting them out aren't targeting you individually. It's small groups like mine (less than five active players) that you have to worry about actually hunting you. But hey, it's just five of us, and thirty of you. You should have no problem putting us in our place, right? Hypothetically speaking.

alexclone1 wrote:
Lets step through this. So lets say you have an active 100 man high sec corp with 40 people online at once. You get wardec'd (it isnt 'very rare' as you claim) and hundreds of pilots from experienced war decers show up to your hq system. They know where you rat (agent finder) they know where you mine (neutral cloaky alts), ect.

So what happens? They put a cloaky alt in your system, watch your corpies undock to do a mission, wait 1j over and blap em. You decide to put your own cloaky alts to watch their cloaky alts. You warp to the gate (opposite gate is clear), you jump and then wt's log in, and blap you. You try to mine, war targets log in and blap you.

The point is, no matter how careful you are; experienced pvpers have been doing this for YEARS. Im not against these mechanics. Im simply against the cost amount of what it takes to war dec a corp/alliance

Once again, this never happens. No one is going to bring in hundreds of players (there's only a few hundred high-sec warriors to begin this - it's a very small community) to solely focus on the forty guys in your corporation. Unless, of course, you choose to live in a hub, or very close to one. Maybe Dodixie isn't a great place to set up your base of operations?

The point is, hundreds of mean griefers showing up isn't an issue, never has been, and never will be. Now, one or two might show up, sure; but if you can't deal with one or two players showing up for some Retriever kill lulz while outnumbering them 20:1, then you don't deserve to run your own hundred-man industrial corporation. Once again, you should be more worried about the smaller groups of dedicated hunters, like myself. But even then, you still outnumber us ten to one. Do the math.

alexclone1 wrote:
- lets talk about 'the bigger you are'. Your logic SHOULD play out. So lets say you get a war dec, and your corp fights well. That war decing corp calls in buddies, who call in buddies because "holy cow an industrial corp that will fight".

Due to the low costs, you now have 5 war decs and hundreds of pilots looking for blood. Tell me, how does one recruit to get bigger when your corp cant even undock from station?

That's not how it works at all. If a high-sec warrior finds the golden goose of industrial war targets, he's not going to want to share it with anyone. The only way you can force yourself into getting swarmed is by running your mouth in local telling your enemies about how MLG PRO you are.

alexclone1 wrote:
You are assuming that dec limits or number limits is my solution.

I have posted multiple times that COST OF THE WARDEC is the solution. If 5 corps war dec me, at least have the satisfaction of knowing that they are paying out the nose to do it.

Please make an attempt not to be so hostile without reading previous posts. Clearly im talking to a pilot of whom i have been having a conversation the last few pages.

So you want to be able to run your mouth off to people, negatively affect them in various ways (such as interfering with them in space or on the market), hoard moons and other critical resources, and then also make them pay absurd amounts of money when they try to do something about it?

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
R I O T
#262 - 2015-04-22 00:15:10 UTC
alexclone1 wrote:
My 'flawed' arguement was a game mechanic for a decade. Since then industrial corp numbers are down in high sec due to the vast number of war decs that any corp can obtain simply by being active.

In fact, i would welcome a ccp representative to comment about industrial corp numbers compared from this year to 2012 and before.

Source?

Because as someone who does the whole war thing on a constant basis, it feels to me like there's more targets, not less.

alexclone1 wrote:
I do know that activity on the client is much lower now than pre war dec changes. I know of dozen of people i used to play with quit after the months of continuous war decs knowing that war decs were dirt cheap and would never stop. Everyone knows that the vast majority of eve online players were high sec industrials. Not sure what demographic is the most popular now...

Point being is that an entire way to play was removed so that griefers could war dec at will. Call me a carebear, but ive alarmclocked 4am for 2 months straight to shoot at russians in paragon soul. Ive spent much more time pvping than i have mining. And I felt that in regards to low/null sec - that is pretty fair. High sec is catered to the griefers since 2013, and the game is not better for it.

If you look at Chribba's EVE population chart, you'll see that the game was growing at a stable, high rate back when wars only cost two million ISK to launch from a corporation, and dec-dodging was considered an exploit of game mechanics.

What way to play was removed? You'll need to elaborate on that.

alexclone1 wrote:
Obviously the inferno war changes are the problem. War decs used to DOUBLE after every war dec. The first 2 were pretty cheap (50m, then 100m isk). This would allow the small guys to war dec, and at the same time ensure that too many corps couldnt pile in on an industrial corp at once.

And back then, the entire system could be gotten around by prepaying for a set of wars for two weeks, and then letting them all lapse for a day before starting them up again.

alexclone1 wrote:
You are the ceo of a corp. It grows to 50 pilots and you take them out to low sec on the weekends to kill pirates and you do well. You get war dec'd, and your corp does well. The next day another war dec... no big deal. The next another war dec, you decide that now you are outnumbered and so you will only take engagements that you can win/ do quick drive bys. The next day another alliance war decs you... word is getting around that you will actually fight! The next day another war dec, you are now camped in station.

Whats your next play?

Once again, this doesn't happen. Multiple wars are usually incidental, and while many of them can happen at the same time, it's a relatively rare event. We high-sec hardmen are greedy, and don't want to share profitable prey with anyone else. You'd know this, if you actually had experience with our play style, as opposed to merely claiming that you do.

alexclone1 wrote:
You forgot that you are the ceo of an industrial corp. Most your memebers are around 10m sp with at half being in mining skills. Logis and Vexor Navy issues are not an option except from your more experienced players, which arent many.

How did you get your fleet out of the station?

Sounds like you should have balanced your corporate roster by recruiting some pvp-oriented players as well, instead of going full derp with pure miners. Critical failure has already occurred during the initial planning stages, way before you have to undock.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
R I O T
#263 - 2015-04-22 00:40:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
alexclone1 wrote:
Currently it is war dec hot and heavy will little financial consequence

There's also little financial consequence to re-rolling a corporation. Only two million ISK in fact. You're willing to create a system in which it costs someone hundreds of millions to start a war with you, which you can nullify within fifteen minutes by starting a new corporation and moving all of your members to it (without any delay due to recent changes, might I add)?

Are you willing to address this imbalance as well, or do you only want war prices to be raised?

alexclone1 wrote:
buff war decs to the price to flip a corp. This is an example of someone who doesnt have the ability to view life from another's perspective. There are others that want to play the game in their own way. Not your way.

There is a whole universe of pvp opportunities. Why would you want to further buff high sec war mechanics?

Does that "own way" involve being left alone to do your thing, which is mainly impacting others in an economic fashion, without yourself being impacted by others? Why should this be the case in EVE? "Me want" isn't a good answer to give here; you'll need to be specific and logical, and tell us exactly why we should remove conflict from a game about conflict.

Oh, and, "because it's a fun part of the game that exists for a reason." Good enough for you?

ISD Ezwal wrote:
Options, possibilities, choices....rules. You know what? Given the direction this thread is going, I opt to do the following as last resort:

This thread has been moved to Crime & Punishment.

It's okay, we're familiar with this clever little tactic as well. Wouldn't want all those potential customers reading about the mean griefer sociopaths in GD, would we now?

alexclone1 wrote:
I JUST TOLD YOU MY MAIN. READ UP. FFS

Seriously, what is your malfunction?

Post from it and say that "alexclone1" is your alt. Problem would be solved.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
To summarize:

Only player corps can access L4 missions or receive LP from incursions.
NPC corp taxes are raised +10% for players over 90 days old.
Killrights generated against dec dodging.
Corps that dissolve during an active war have their names and ticker lost, given to the attacker as a trophy.
Corp creation price increase.
Corp creation cooldown after leaving a player corp.
Highsec ESS as a starbase module, one per constellation. Boosts LP given from mission rewards to corp members.

And then, player corps are worth fighting for. The defender has a stake in the game, the rewards that come with being in a player corp. The typical highsec corps also have a reason to fight one another, for control of the constellation.

Let's be realistic, none of that will ever happen, aside maybe from the very last thing. In fact, CCP's probably going to do the exact opposite of what you proposed.

My personal estimate of awox removal in 2015 was almost right on the nose. I've said in the past that I expect them to neuter wars by late 2015 or early/middle 2016, and I'm sticking with that.

I'm expecting a toggle.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#264 - 2015-04-22 00:46:00 UTC
Crime and punishment isn't even the appropriate subforum for this thread. Warfare and Tactics would have made more sense.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#265 - 2015-04-22 00:47:21 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

Let's be realistic, none of that will ever happen, aside maybe from the very last thing. In fact, CCP's probably going to do the exact opposite of what you proposed.

My personal estimate of awox removal in 2015 was almost right on the nose. I've said in the past that I expect them to neuter wars by late 2015 or early/middle 2016, and I'm sticking with that.

I'm expecting a toggle.


If they want to kill their own game, that's fine with me. They've got the data themselves, conflict is what makes people stay in EVE Online. If they want to ignore the mandate granted by that data and turn this game into Trammel, they can be my guest, and I'll happily watch them die.

"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.

Noragen Neirfallas
Emotional Net Loss
#266 - 2015-04-22 00:49:01 UTC
Welcome to Crime and Punishment. And on behalf of everybody here let me say Post with your main or GTFO. Alt posts are not accepted here

Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragens basically the Chribba of C&P - Zimmy Zeta

Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop

ISD Buldath favorite ISD

'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King Griffin

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
R I O T
#267 - 2015-04-22 01:06:53 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

Let's be realistic, none of that will ever happen, aside maybe from the very last thing. In fact, CCP's probably going to do the exact opposite of what you proposed.

My personal estimate of awox removal in 2015 was almost right on the nose. I've said in the past that I expect them to neuter wars by late 2015 or early/middle 2016, and I'm sticking with that.

I'm expecting a toggle.


If they want to kill their own game, that's fine with me. They've got the data themselves, conflict is what makes people stay in EVE Online. If they want to ignore the mandate granted by that data and turn this game into Trammel, they can be my guest, and I'll happily watch them die.

Corporations tend to bury their heads in the sand while chasing the little short-term profit bunnies. Would we have had the changes we've had over the past few years if CCP wasn't trying to turn this game into something at least slightly different from what was originally envisioned?

The banner ad for Tiamat was "Take control of friendly fire!" How big of a clue do we need before we come to terms with the reality of the situation?

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#268 - 2015-04-22 01:14:34 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

Let's be realistic, none of that will ever happen, aside maybe from the very last thing. In fact, CCP's probably going to do the exact opposite of what you proposed.

My personal estimate of awox removal in 2015 was almost right on the nose. I've said in the past that I expect them to neuter wars by late 2015 or early/middle 2016, and I'm sticking with that.

I'm expecting a toggle.


If they want to kill their own game, that's fine with me. They've got the data themselves, conflict is what makes people stay in EVE Online. If they want to ignore the mandate granted by that data and turn this game into Trammel, they can be my guest, and I'll happily watch them die.

Corporations tend to bury their heads in the sand while chasing the little short-term profit bunnies. Would we have had the changes we've had over the past few years if CCP wasn't trying to turn this game into something at least slightly different from what was originally envisioned?

The banner ad for Tiamat was "Take control of friendly fire!" How big of a clue do we need before we come to terms with the reality of the situation?

It's funny because the reasoning was actually the opposite of short term profit motivations. The goal was and is to grow long term profits by turning new players into long term players by making recruiting more palatable. We've already seen the evidence of players getting into corps sticking around longer so I'm not sure how this move translates to the reasoning you describe.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#269 - 2015-04-22 01:18:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

It's funny because the reasoning was actually the opposite of short term profit motivations. The goal was and is to grow long term profits by turning new players into long term players by making recruiting more palatable.


And then they discovered that the boring, banality incarnate PvE "content" doesn't actually make people stick around and keep paying for their sub. Turns out, it just bores them to death, while people who are engaged in conflict are far more likely to stick around.

Whoops.


Quote:

We've already seen the evidence of players getting into corps sticking around longer so I'm not sure how this move translates to the reasoning you describe.


Citation needed, nevermind I'd love some proof that, if true, it's not a really bad thing. The typical highsec corp is poison, and anything that enables them to ruin more newbies is a bad thing.

"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.

Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#270 - 2015-04-22 01:20:33 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
I'm going to give you a really big clue, OP. And I won't post it on an alt, either. Are you ready?

As someone who has ran/currently is running multiple high-sec piracy/mercenary corporations, I haven't had any problem with incoming war declarations, even in the very, very rare instances in which we actually received them.

Why do you think this is?

Perhaps this is a little old case of not being able to defend what you have, and asking for artificial defense in the form of restrictions implemented by the developers, instead of either scaling down your operations to become less of a target, or becoming proactive and aggressive enough so as not to appear as one to others in the first place, hm?

Edit:

Quote:
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

Yeah uh, I'm not buying it.


You don't see the logical conclusion of this argument. You want PvP focused bittervets with a half dozen alts apiece to be able to kick the **** out of everyone else, anywhere in the game. And you don't see why this is bad.

No, what I want is you people to understand that I've earned my right to mine and run missions in peace. It wasn't given to me for free.


You've earned nothing. The simple fact that you've invested an inordinate amount of time and money into this computer game does not entitle you to risk free content. You might aswell ask for a 1 trillion ISK instant kill button, because it's the same logic.

If you remove the ability to evade wardecs, you will render highsec meaningless because the bittervets with huge piles of ISK will wardec everyone.

I don't get it, I just don't understand what you want short of making highsec into lowsec for those with the ISK stacks to wardec spam.


Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#271 - 2015-04-22 01:24:09 UTC
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:

You've earned nothing. The simple fact that you've invested an inordinate amount of time and money into this computer game does not entitle you to risk free content. You might aswell ask for a 1 trillion ISK instant kill button, because it's the same logic.


Whoosh.

You missed the point of their statement entirely. They earn being safe, by actually doing things, by watching local, by being aligned, by actually evading other players.

Not by abusing loopholes in the corp creation system.


Quote:

If you remove the ability to evade wardecs, you will render highsec meaningless because the bittervets with huge piles of ISK will wardec everyone.


Gosh, I hope so. There is nothing worse for the game than the stagnation and stifling on conflict that highsec creates.


Quote:

I don't get it, I just don't understand what you want short of making highsec into lowsec for those with the ISK stacks to wardec spam.


Maybe not boring people to death? Maybe incentivize some form of gameplay besides the very worst PvE "content" in the entire MMO industry?

"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.

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
R I O T
#272 - 2015-04-22 01:32:59 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Corporations tend to bury their heads in the sand while chasing the little short-term profit bunnies. Would we have had the changes we've had over the past few years if CCP wasn't trying to turn this game into something at least slightly different from what was originally envisioned?

The banner ad for Tiamat was "Take control of friendly fire!" How big of a clue do we need before we come to terms with the reality of the situation?

It's funny because the reasoning was actually the opposite of short term profit motivations. The goal was and is to grow long term profits by turning new players into long term players by making recruiting more palatable. We've already seen the evidence of players getting into corps sticking around longer so I'm not sure how this move translates to the reasoning you describe.

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

Juxtapose that chart with a dated list of changes CCP began implementing when they decided to start doing their safety dance right around 2010.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Noragen Neirfallas
Emotional Net Loss
#273 - 2015-04-22 01:33:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Noragen Neirfallas
To add to this if you have 6 active wardecs against you at once your lads are either pissing ppl off or consistently losing shiny stuff.

Adapt to it or die. Delete the weak - Tora Bushido

Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragens basically the Chribba of C&P - Zimmy Zeta

Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop

ISD Buldath favorite ISD

'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King Griffin

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#274 - 2015-04-22 01:45:42 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
And then they discovered that the boring, banality incarnate PvE "content" doesn't actually make people stick around and keep paying for their sub. Turns out, it just bores them to death, while people who are engaged in conflict are far more likely to stick around.

Whoops.
Good thing we weren't talking about PvE content in that statement. We were talking about recruitment which doesn't predispose someone to access to any form of content. there isn't any connection between this and the prior conversation so I'll just leave it alone.

Quote:
Citation needed, nevermind I'd love some proof that, if true, it's not a really bad thing. The typical highsec corp is poison, and anything that enables them to ruin more newbies is a bad thing.
I'll look for quotes but I'm pretty sure it's come up on a few occasions alongside the general themes of social interactions. This isn't intended to say all corps are beneficial corps, but I'd be willing to be the ones that stay in NPC corps tend to leave sooner on average than those that don't.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#275 - 2015-04-22 01:52:10 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Good thing we weren't talking about PvE content in that statement.


No, just a poorly rationalized change that enables it entirely too much.

"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.

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#276 - 2015-04-22 01:52:17 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Corporations tend to bury their heads in the sand while chasing the little short-term profit bunnies. Would we have had the changes we've had over the past few years if CCP wasn't trying to turn this game into something at least slightly different from what was originally envisioned?

The banner ad for Tiamat was "Take control of friendly fire!" How big of a clue do we need before we come to terms with the reality of the situation?

It's funny because the reasoning was actually the opposite of short term profit motivations. The goal was and is to grow long term profits by turning new players into long term players by making recruiting more palatable. We've already seen the evidence of players getting into corps sticking around longer so I'm not sure how this move translates to the reasoning you describe.

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

Juxtapose that chart with a dated list of changes CCP began implementing when they decided to start doing their safety dance right around 2010.

That doesn't seem a fair evaluation since changes of that nature were almost never made in isolation. Unless you have reason to believe those events are the strongest motivators/demotivators of play we're looking at a set of data that's likely more noise than signal for your point.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#277 - 2015-04-22 01:55:42 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Good thing we weren't talking about PvE content in that statement.


No, just a poorly rationalized change that enables it entirely too much.

It was already enabled for the most part by going unnoticed and not recruiting.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#278 - 2015-04-22 02:02:04 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

It was already enabled for the most part by going unnoticed and not recruiting.


Except that people were recruiting. That was the big lie. If they weren't recruiting, then how could I awox ten corps in a row before deleting an alt? How were people whining about it at all, if people weren't recruiting?

All this change did was make the big, fat bears bigger and fatter and safer. And considering those are the very people killing the game in the first place, I feel confident in saying that it was a net negative change.

If they want more people in player corps, they need to nerf NPC corps, not make highsec more bloated with safety.

"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.

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
R I O T
#279 - 2015-04-22 02:07:36 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

Juxtapose that chart with a dated list of changes CCP began implementing when they decided to start doing their safety dance right around 2010.

That doesn't seem a fair evaluation since changes of that nature were almost never made in isolation. Unless you have reason to believe those events are the strongest motivators/demotivators of play we're looking at a set of data that's likely more noise than signal for your point.

I do. Not much changed in EVE throughout those years, save for regular minor addition of content (this was post-wormholes), balancing of ships and modules, and a constant stream of safety-oriented changes toward EVE's core gameplay. Only now do we have non-safety-related changes that are also shaking things up, mostly in the form of the jump drive and sovereignty stuff. EVE was becoming safer, and stopped growing. I firmly believe that there's a direct relationship of causation between the two.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#280 - 2015-04-22 02:11:52 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

It was already enabled for the most part by going unnoticed and not recruiting.


Except that people were recruiting. That was the big lie. If they weren't recruiting, then how could I awox ten corps in a row before deleting an alt? How were people whining about it at all, if people weren't recruiting?

All this change did was make the big, fat bears bigger and fatter and safer. And considering those are the very people killing the game in the first place, I feel confident in saying that it was a net negative change.

If they want more people in player corps, they need to nerf NPC corps, not make highsec more bloated with safety.

Some were yes, not everyone was, not everyone is. Lets step away from the idea of everyone moving in unison for a moment since we should know that to be demonstrably false. Personally I've seen awox complaints less often than gank complaints and yet ganks are at last comment on the matter actually near a low point. Does that mean people don't die daily to ganks? No. Does that mean the anecdotal accounts of an awoxer paint the post accurate picture? Again, likely no.

The point is anyone who wanted security could get it and a number did and do by removing recruitment from a corp equation and/or removing themselves from the corp equation. Nerfing NPC corps doesn't rectify this either. 1 man corps are a thing.