These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Breaking war-dec's. Questions and a small rant :)

First post
Author
Mag's
Azn Empire
#321 - 2015-09-27 17:20:05 UTC
Syn Shi wrote:
If I don't like something I don't do it. You on the other hand have this belief that it is your right to impose what you like on others.

And no amount of discussion will matter because the only thing you will accept is your perceived right to impose what you like on other, no matter how they feel about it.
Welcome to the Eve sandbox.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Salvos Rhoska
#322 - 2015-09-27 18:03:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Rules of the sandbox hve been changed countless times before.

We do not own it. We merely play within it.

Do not confuse how you want to play, as you want, as a natural entitlement to do so.

This applies to everybody.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#323 - 2015-09-27 18:40:10 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Rules of the sandbox hve been changed countless times before.

We do not own it. We merely play within it.

Do not confuse how you want to play, as you want, as a natural entitlement to do so.

This applies to everybody.
Yes rules change often, but the core of the sandbox has remained the same since day one. This means that you can try to do whatever you want, within the walls of Eve's sandbox. But I can also try to do whatever I want, to stop and interfere with your goals.

I'm not the one here feeling entitled, that's how this sandbox works and has always worked. Indeed this does apply to everyone.
Welcome to Eve.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#324 - 2015-09-27 19:26:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Reese
Mag's wrote:

]Yes rules change often, but the core of the sandbox has remained the same since day one. This means that you can try to do whatever you want, within the walls of Eve's sandbox. But I can also try to do whatever I want, to stop and interfere with your goals.

I'm not the one here feeling entitled, that's how this sandbox works and has always worked. Indeed this does apply to everyone.
Welcome to Eve.


Which comes back to the topic for the war decs. Most notable change in regards to highsec is concord and concord evasion. The triggers really haven't change, but the rules around it have.

Should that not be the same for wardecs? Keep wardecs but bring some logic to them. Big fights cost big money, little fights cost little money. This way small new guys can do small wars, big corps can do big wars. If somebody wants to start a gank war, it would cost a huge pile of isk to war a huge area. Bring relevance and make it something more than just a grief tool.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#325 - 2015-09-27 19:38:40 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:
Mag's wrote:

]Yes rules change often, but the core of the sandbox has remained the same since day one. This means that you can try to do whatever you want, within the walls of Eve's sandbox. But I can also try to do whatever I want, to stop and interfere with your goals.

I'm not the one here feeling entitled, that's how this sandbox works and has always worked. Indeed this does apply to everyone.
Welcome to Eve.


Which comes back to the topic for the war decs. Most notable change in regards to highsec is concord and concord evasion. The triggers really haven't change, but the rules around it have.

Should that not be the same for wardecs? Keep wardecs but bring some logic to them. Big fights cost big money, little fights cost little money. This way small new guys can do small wars, big corps can do big wars. If somebody wants to start a gank war, it would cost a huge pile of isk to war a huge area. Bring relevance and make it something more than just a grief tool.


If you raise prices, it will do what the last price hike did. Force people to conglomerate into larger groups to offset the cost. Which of course will make it so that the average bear corp stands even less chance than they do right now, which you freaking people will claim is evidence that wars need nerfed even more.

How about no? How about you people just **** off already?

"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.

Mag's
Azn Empire
#326 - 2015-09-27 19:42:39 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Yes rules change often, but the core of the sandbox has remained the same since day one. This means that you can try to do whatever you want, within the walls of Eve's sandbox. But I can also try to do whatever I want, to stop and interfere with your goals.

I'm not the one here feeling entitled, that's how this sandbox works and has always worked. Indeed this does apply to everyone.
Welcome to Eve.


Which comes back to the topic for the war decs. Most notable change in regards to highsec is concord and concord evasion. The triggers really haven't change, but the rules around it have.

Should that not be the same for wardecs? Keep wardecs but bring some logic to them. Big fights cost big money, little fights cost little money. This way small new guys can do small wars, big corps can do big wars. If somebody wants to start a gank war, it would cost a huge pile of isk to war a huge area. Bring relevance and make it something more than just a grief tool.
The only thing that really changed about Concord, is their omnipotence. When they became unkillable, evasion of them became bannable. This happened many years ago. But it didn't change the core of the game. We could interfere before and after that change. It's been like this since day one, some players still don't get it.

Now I'm all for updating and improving the war dec system. I'm sure most are. But it must include all aspects.
So yes let's have a new better system, but without the current (corp drop) or any easy avoidance method.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#327 - 2015-09-27 20:17:39 UTC
Mag's wrote:
[quote=Markus Reese]
Now I'm all for updating and improving the war dec system. I'm sure most are. But it must include all aspects.
So yes let's have a new better system, but without the current (corp drop) or any easy avoidance method.


If players have more versatility to avoiding wars (such as relocating to a different region) then abso-freaking-lutely remove corp drop dynamics. Auto timer delay to leave corps and such. Right now the only option is drop corp to get out of a war.

The other option, go to low/nullsec, well many players do not have the experience to gain such things. A more wide reaching use of war dec would make these skills and experiences more developed. War declaration really should be just a part of play from new corps to the mega alliances. Just one of those things. Want that mission hub? War dec, want that belt, war dec. But now on a functional scale since can very affordably limit it to those areas.

The mission hub one is interesting. I wonder if CCP could make it possible so agent missions are as a list instead of always given out when asked for? Give mission runners a reason to fight, to keep the best location agents?

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Salvos Rhoska
#328 - 2015-09-27 21:14:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Mag's wrote:
I'm not the one here feeling entitled, that's how this sandbox works and has always worked. Indeed this does apply to everyone.
Welcome to Eve.


I understand the rest of your post.

I did perhaps not arcitulate my own specifically enough.

My point was that nobody is entitled in the sandbox, one way or the other; as the rules are invariably mutable.

One can validly argue that "I can play this way, because the sandbox rules are currently this way".

One cannot argue, however, that "The sandox rules should be this way, because I play this way" with any more validity just on that, than anyone else . At that point its not for us to decide, though ofc we will express reasons for why our opinion of how rules should be is better than someone elses, and them doing the same in return, over which CCP arbitrates and decides.

Things are allowed, until they are not.
Things are the way they are in sandbox, until they are not.

That they are the way they are atm, is in and of itself no natural argument for them being so in perpetuity.
Nor is it a way to invalidate how someone else would like them to be, simply because they are now the way you like..

Im all for more player conflict and competition across the board, especially as more integrated into PvE.
Youd be surprised how vociferous and irrational resistance to that is from both camps.

Creative and innovative solutions are no doubt possible.
Unfortunately, very few seem interested in brainstorming and exploring them.
ISD Buldath
#329 - 2015-09-28 02:33:05 UTC
This thread has served it's purpose, as well as continuously getting out of hand and causing issues.

I will go ahead and lock this, and will link it in the future if necessary.

~ISD Buldath

Instructor King of the Forums! Knight of the General Discussion

Support, Training and Resources Division

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE-Mails regarding forum moderation.