Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Dammit you just made me hungry

On the More SP= Better argument that's utter rubbish, I have ~35 mil SP no and a 12mil combat focused pilot would most likely kill me in BC or BS combat, in frigate or destroyer combat we'd be evenly matched as we would both have all tech II fit ships, or I could equally match them in two of the tech III destroyers. And there is the point, we would be evenly matched because we both have maxed out skills for those hulls even though I have roughly 3x more SP. If you take a fleet of maxed out frigate pilots into the shattered WH's you can only meet other pilots in the same class frigate with probably the same maxed out skills no matter what the SP disparity of the pilots overall.

As for wardecs I agree they need changing but entirely disagree with the OP's proposals to do so. The changes need to be tied to the new structures and worked around those.

You're high right now, aren't you? It's okay to admit it, admitting that you have a problem is the first step to getting help.




I opposed things like this long before I was in CODE, and if that alliance folds tomorrow I will continue to oppose it. Because they are bad for the game, and are only proposed out of pure, disgusting selfishness.

ahuahauah a omg lol whuwhuwhuwhw that is so funny that is borderline mind damaging.

You probably just managed to get a infinite war manteinance set to your corp now.

I think that CCP themselves has conclusively shown that killing new players is one of the best things you can do to drive positive player retention.

And I also think that anyone who quits this game because they are allowed to lose is no big loss.




Killing other players is not "griefing", period. The rules permit it, and it's intended gameplay. Deal with it.

It is no where like null. Were were paid and had to pay money to e able to war dec you. We have to find you, and local is warning 100% of time when we get into system. Your members on other hand are completely unable to notice flashy red signs in local and warp of. Even worse they are compeltely unable to talk within corp to realize that a fight is goign on and they warp pve ships into the same place.


Your corp shown an huge amount of incompetence. Face it... What drive people away from the game is being lead by a horrible CEO and corp members that cannot even car to warn their mates that they should not do certain things.

Really griefer alliance? I'm in a corporation full of less than a month old pilots who've never experienced EVE... hell, a lot of them haven't even looked at it before.
We're currently dealing with 12 war declarations right now and the new players seem to be handling the situation and enjoying the game just fine.

Quite simply, everyone is picking holes because the restrictions you propose would completely ruin the war system and make it possible and stupidly easy for too many corporations/alliances to become immune to real declarations.

I do agree war decs need to change but, capping number of decs is like saying lets cap number of sov systems alliance can hold or amount of POS they can use for moon mining, etc etc...

Wars are easy to avoid, you leave corporation / create new one, move members (sure you lose ability to place POS for a week). Dec cost is 50 mill (up to 500 mill), creating new corporation is 1.7 mill, it is between 2941.18%-29411.76% more expensive to declare war then to avoid it, sure it's annoying to move people especially for larger corporations but I did see up to 100 people or so swap corporation in a day.

On other hand creating alliance is 1 bill (on top of 40 days of useless skills), where you don't get any benefits except that you are pulled in war together and delayed alliance chat (usually you can't see how many people are online). You don't have alliance bookmarks, access to alliance POS (except hiding in shields), or alliance hangar, but you do get 2 mill tax per month per corporation in alliance. Still cost of creating one is 62507.81% higher then creating new corporation, where Dec cost is still between 50 and 500 mill.

1st.
To fix some parts of it would be to bump cost of creating new corporation to lets say 250 mill (new people will mostly join existing corporation, where they can learn about eve, instead of creating their own). On top of that I would add tax that is paid by corporation for each member that joins (one time) lets say 5-10 mill so that people are more inclined to protect it, hide in wh space, fight, hire mercs or even pay surrender.

2nd.
With changes to cost of creating corporation and joining, wars could be more expensive, but still less then cost of creating new corporation, lets say decs would be between 125-500 mill (50% cost of new corporation + additional cost for every subscribed member over 51 etc..) .

3rd.
There should be more of a benefit of owning alliance in high sec, for example alliance office hangar (with better way of limiting who can take what and logs of who put what in and took what out etc.), shared POS access for whole alliance, maybe even things like alliance insurance that is slightly cheaper, etc.

4th.
Regarding surrender, if accepted it should make alliance/corporations unable to declare war against that specific alliance/corporation that did surrender for at least 1 month if not 3 months.

5th.
Issue with NPC corporations and this is a bit more complicated to fix, mostly incursion runners and some missions runners lose isk on tax (LP not included), where traders, site runners, miners, explorers aren't affected by it as they hunt for loot and not bounties. Even if NPC tax is increased only few type of players would be affected by it. So one of the possible fixes maybe a bit extreme for it would be limitation to market, trade between players and contracts to lets say only rookie systems. That way people would be forced to be in corporation, they would have reason to fight for it, to hire mercs, to negotiate deals, hide in wh, join null alliance, etc... I'm sure there still would be a way to work around all this but at least it would be much more annoying then it is.

This kind of change would probably alienate some people from game, but at same time it would be more of a sandbox game as NPC corporations would be only there for standings, missions and to protect newbys.

Obviously this idea needs more work but it's much better then stuff like "Lets start capping stuff I don't like that aren't even related to what I do, because I can't find where to PVP in null." and maybe stop blue balling everyone around you. If anything bunch of high sec people did move to null because of high sec wars as they feel safer in null...

Just be carefull not to drop the soap.

Rest assured that if i wasn't in Brussels with work, u'd have lost ur silly sansha ship in seconds, there was no qualified fc online, u got lucky, end of story

Get a clue griefer

Member of a hardcore carebear alliance checking in with a simple question: what was the last time any of the dec corps stood and fought against a 20-30 man fleet, as opposed to docking up in order to maintain KB efficiency stats?

Regarding the topic: let's face it, 50m is nothing more than random pocket change on a corporation level, and a competent individual could finance a dozen wars per week without working too hard at it. Paying 50m to effectively shut down a corp full of newbies who are just learning the game is *not* good for EVE's longevity, and yet happens all the time.

Scenario A) Wardec corp attacks casual hisec corp who are bad at eve, they loose stuff and are encouraged to not play for a week and may eventually quit the game before they learn it well enough to stick with it. This is not good for new player retention, which we as a community desperately need. As it stands, wardec mechanics are working against this goal and should be revised (though not eliminated).

Scenario B) Wardec corp engages a similar sized entity who do stuff in hisec and do weekend pvp roams in low. The defender gets their ships over to hisec and engages the wardeccers who stand and fight even if victory isn't certain. Good fun is had by everyone; this is the Unicorn Scenario.

Scenario C) Wardec corp engages a large pvp-capable entity which dispatches small fleets to patrol active areas. Wardec corp docks up in order to preserve their KB statistics, no pvp occurs, and for a very modest isk cost and no actual fighting you've forced a much larger group to stop ordinary operations in lieu of suffering losses they're smart enough to avoid, costing them many times the wardec fee. This sort of asymmetrical risk v. reward is poor game design and keeping control over the war entirely in the aggressor's hands doesn't help either. I shouldn't have a "pay isk to prevent [300 man hisec corp] from doing normal hisec stuff" button.

Looking at the killboards of several major wardec corps, it's quite clear that the risk incurred through the act of a declaration against most targets is miniscule relative to how much they kill. I for one am a fan of a slightly more balanced equation.

What I'd like to see; when a corporation declares war, a greatly increased wardec fee is put into escrow and their HQ system (which must be in hisec) spawns command nodes which can be fought over in a manner similar to nullsec ones. If the defenders succeed in node capture events, the dec ends immediately and they get a period of immunity in addition to the entire dec fee for their troubles.

Should the war end by the attackers not renewing it, they get 90% of the isk put into escrow back. Against defenders unable or unwilling to fight, this would function exactly like the current system. It would however provide an incentive not to declare war against entities which you are completely unable to contest in an open fight, and possibly create additional conflict spots at the command nodes. Punishing attackers who have neither the ability nor intention to actually fight against organized resistance would eliminate much of the poor game design currently present, and might even lead to interesting scenarios where a bunch of brave newbies band together against the 'evil' corps stopping them from mining and missioning, learning some pvp in the process and increasing how attached they are to EVE.

I feel that such a system would eliminate the feeling of helplessness and lack of control many hisec corps cite as reasons for disliking wardec mechanics.