EVE General Discussion

Prediction:
OP won't like where CCP goes with Wardec changes.


(Since I don't see CCP deleting them altogether)

happy xmas!

Just... no. PvP, combat and the open system for control and power is what sets EVE appart from virtually every other MMO out there.

Removing that difference would just be dumber than belief. If CCP remove the ability to kill people in hi-sec they remove one of their USPs. EVE cannot survive in the mass MMO market by just being more like other games.

This is what makes EVE awesome: When you die your ship gets blown to tiny, burning pieces. There is no "respawn", no "corpse run", no "jetbike back to the arena". You're dead. That's it. You just lost everything you were flying and perhaps even your body too. Worse still you might have just lost the space you controlled or the resources you were gathering.

Take that away and EVE is no longer EVE.

This is an old and terrible argument. Let me give you a non-trolling-carebears example: Null sec Alliances war-deccing each other to restrict their hi-sec trading and logistics capability.

By playing EVE you are choosing to take part in a game that revolves around power and control. You may not want to be involved in combat, fair enought, but you should not be able to simply avoid the control or power than combat can evoke.

I will point also to a more recent non-combat PvP operation by the Goons to manipulate ice prices. Yeah, I know they ganked hulks to achieve it but the root cause was actually market-based. You see that EVE is full of these "mechanics" and none of them should be optional.



I am talking objectively.

Edit: I have been in hi-sec war dec corps before now but it was not the intention to "screw up another player's life". It was mostly for profit from POS modules or honoured ransoms or loot. All part of the business, I am afraid.



A war dec is not 100% certain and it never was. The targets may: move away; not undock; fight back; counter-dec; hire mercs.

Please do not associate trolling with "shutting down a non-combat operation". The two are not the same thing. Shutting down a non-combat operation might mean your own operation profits more.

You seem a little obsessed over the combat vs non-combat side of the game. If someone were to "shut down" a non-combat operation via non-combat means would you feel the same?

One could say that about you.

This game was developed on the principle of non-consensual conflict. If there are people playing this game that cannot abide by that principle, then they should go play another scifi game, such as Star Trek Online or SWTOR. They'll enjoy themselves more.

And you can still attempt wardecs. Who is stopping you? I'm not sure what's so bad about you having to choose your targets carefully and actually think before you toss around a wardec. Careless trolling is really the only thing being prevented here.

Avoiding wardecs at no cost is subverting the entire premise of EVE Online. It's not a case of picking a target to wardec, any wardecced target can avoid being decced with minimal effort. Simply alliance hop. That's just an outright subversion of everything EVE was built upon. Conflict is a guiding principle in this game, consensual conflict (which is what the broken wardec system has become) has no place in EVE Online. Period.

First of all, it's an overstatement to argue that wardec'ing is "the entire premise of EVE Online." It may well be what you or others like to do in the game, but it is by no means the game's "entire premise."

Secondly, as I said before, if you don't like people alliance hopping, turn it into a reputation issue. Small-fry who aren't worth the dec in the first place won't be harmed by it because they have no reputations to uphold, or care very little about it. Worthy targets may well see their reputations drop if they start getting called out for alliance hopping, and I could see them caring enough about that to at least consider the ramifications of ducking a wardec instead of letting it run its course. If that's not the case, then maybe that's a problem with EVE society, that we want to rely on game mechanics, rather than a sustained and reinforced sense of dignity, honor, and one's reputation, to force people into PvP.

Either way, the mechanics are what they are, and they aren't going to change. So you either have to adapt or find something else to do.

The thing is, you can still wardec. You just need to choose a better target if you find that your target is constantly alliance hopping. I'll say it again: call them chicken**** when they do it. If it has an effect, they're a worthy target. If it doesn't, they weren't worth targeting to begin with. The solution is to hold peoples' reps accountable, not whine because the carebears now have 1 trick up their sleeves to combat trolling wardecs.

I find it really interesting how trollish PvPers are allowed to manipulate all sorts of game mechanics to coax people into PvP, and everyone says "Oh, that's fair play!" And yet, when it's revealed that carebears have one game mechanic they can use to avoid some of that BS, there are endless tears over it. Let's face it, wardec'ing used to be a super inexpensive way to ruin somebody's week, or even longer, since it could be perma-maintained endlessly at very little cost. If they're not going to allow alliance hopping, then they need to seriously increase the cost of wardec'ing across the board.

In fact, when war finally costs something to wage, I'll step back on my alliance hopping position. Because as it stands, there needs to be some disincentive toward wardec'ing noobs for laughs. That would separate wars of legitimate strategy (i.e. shutting down ISK-making operations for a legitimate combat opponent) from wars of trolling (i.e. choosing a tiny hi-sec corp out of thin air just to make their lives a living hell).

The problem I have is that, whenever this issue comes up, everyone wants to get all disingenuous and pretend that the latter isn't prevalent, or that it doesn't constitute a form of abuse sanctioned by overly permissive wardec rules and costs. A lot of people seem to have a big problem with the fact that they can't just run around wardec'ing anybody they like, but if alliance hopping were still banned, they wouldn't have a single problem with just how easy and cheap the game makes it to wardec. They'd love that, how the game just lets you be a little internet warrior, declaring wars left and right as if it means nothing. How realistic is that?

I'm all for the creative uses of game mechanics, across the board, to achieve novel benefits or effects. I see no reason not to be in this case, either. Let corp/alliance reputations stand or fall based on whether they use this particular strategy to avoid combat. The remedy for this "problem" should just be farmed out to EVE's social sphere.

First, no I didn't come here from WoW. Second, are you trying to argue that reputation is so meaningless in EVE that the idea of using it as a means of getting other players to act within certain boundaries of dignity and integrity suitable to their relative positions is pointless? If so, that's a bigger indictment of EVE than it is of some game mechanic you happen not to like.

What corp worth entering combat with is going to want a "Dec Shield" badge of shame plastered in its alliance history?