Warfare & Tactics

Forum Index

EVE Forums » EVE Gameplay Center » Warfare & Tactics » Permanent Wardec?

Topic is locked indefinitely.

Permanent Wardec?
Author

Previous Topic Next Topic

Apollo-Moor

Republic Military School

Minmatar Republic

Likes received: 147

#41 - 2011-09-15 08:17:49 UTC

Misanth wrote:

I like the kids who whine that you should grow some balls.

Wardecs by the very definition and mechanic is created to harrass and grief, with focus on industrial corps. Early on we used it to disrupt nullsec alliance logistics. It's not a mechanic to get even fights. Not to mention it's even more ironic that you suggest FW, RvB or nullsec to get 'fights'. Usually you are more likely to get a decent fight out of a highsec wardec than you are from the spy-cluttered blobs you find on those groups you mention..

Grow some balls, go wardec.

Yea you definitely fail.. Griefing tactics are permitted perhaps they should be called "guerilla" tactics when you compare them to the actual act of "griefing"..

One is war, eye for eye, by any means necessary approach..

The latter is purely used to make a game unenjoyable or completely unplayable for another..

OP is trying to do the latter, make it unenjoyable for the person playing the game.. Not just their toons or corps but the persons behind the computer..

Also in Null-sec 9 times out of 10 you know who's on your side and who's not.. to have some random nuet not involved in a Wardec come rep your Target while avoiding actual danger by hiding behind Concord game mechanics is a grief in itself..

You need to take those balls back to whatever HUB you got them from and trade those in for a Monnicle..

Misanth

RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE

Likes received: 970

#42 - 2011-09-15 11:59:28 UTC

Mehashi 'Kho wrote:

To kid-liker misanth, just saw your post on preview. I can see you have a particular view of war from the griefers perspective and that's fair enough but that doesnt make it all it is about, or have anything to do with "definition". I find it suprising you think war decs have the best pvp if you are using them on non-combatants but each to their own. As for your last line yeah why not, he could grow some balls, go wardec BUT actually turn up and fight - but that's a world away from what the OP is suggesting.

Actually, I think it's tragic that the state of low- and nullsec PvP is so horrible, that highsec wardecs actually brings "better fights". The definition of "better fights" in this case is the ones argued by the whine kids early in the thread, i.e. trying to get more equal fights with someone who want to fight back. Industrialists and small corporations often can't fight back, but eventually they do. In null people even pull back and don't fight, if they believe that's the best strategy to protect their territory, and in most cases they also blob. Even roaming PvP these days see blobs that are so big that defenders just wait them out in station. Lowsec is cluttered with equal blobs, FW crawling with spies and blobs, RvB is blobs and spies, we could go on. Highsec also got the spies and blobs but it's less likely to happen.

I'd prefer to use todays mechanics, but the attitude of 2007 or earlier for nullsec PvP. Lowsec.. well we might have to look to 2006 or earlier to make that decent. In an ideal world I'd PvP in null, or possibly low, but as it is, the best fighting is actually going on in highsec. (I'm disregarding WH completely as it can have good PvP but you could also waste days of weeks trying to find targets who leave their POS to begin with, else it's WH > high > low > null, currently).

Apollo-Moor wrote:

Misanth wrote:

If you look up the definition of grief it'll give you synonyms "annoyance", "frustration", "suffering". If you re-read what I posted, I said that the mechanics were created to harrass industrial corps and to destroy logistic chains. Now, if that is not the very definition of grief, I'm wondering if we speak the same language.

The 'grief' you are talking about is the people (ab)using game mechanics to fight at unfair advantages. If we go down that road, we should mention all the industrialists/carebears who just hop corps during wars, and/or stay in the nub corp forever and ever. TL;DR in this game noone is innocent.

At the end of the day, as I said before, I'd prefer to have the roaming and widespread nullsec PvP back. But as it is, nullsec is the worst platform for PvP in this game, lowsec slightly better but a copy of nullsec territorial warfare, while highsec actually has a potential (even tho small, still) to actually give decent combat. That's the key. Null- and lowsec doesn't even have the potential to give decent fights, and havn't had that for years.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.

Apollo-Moor

Republic Military School

Minmatar Republic

Likes received: 147

#43 - 2011-09-15 16:58:22 UTC | Edited by: Apollo-Moor

How is combat remotely fair in hi-sec when you have pilots who have not declared wardec on your corp can interfere with two wardecing corps.. They are/were abusing a game mechanic knowlingly..

Now if that is not the SADDEST excuse for PvP.. Hiding behind unbreakable game mechanic such as Concord..

Red vs Blue (no not RvB Rep or Fed) Grey from nowhere, unknown to your corp since they aren't actually at war with you.. so out of a meta-game why would this random neut start repping your RED.. Because he knows if BLUE were to egress him he would be Concorded..

This was a widely known and "accepted" tactic for Hi-sec.. A "grief" tactic purely based on the fact the neut can't be engaged without a garunteed loss of ya ship.. LAME..

How can you seriously think that is any form of actual PvP.. its half-assed.. lame, weak, and rather cowardly.. Your most "fair" chance at PvP is going to be hard anywhere.. But Is rather have a blob I know I can shoot at without worries of some pussies to whimpy to actually declare themselves targets..

Hi-sec wardeccing PvP and the formally abused tactics of it.. Put it at the lowest form of PVP in the game.. its so bad you guys think you should have Arenas in hi-sec for "risk" free fights.. You mean fights where random nuets won't be repping your targets with Concord watching over their shoulders.. Very Very VERY.. Lame..

Hi-sec has flawed your since of fleet pvp

"Did you pick up that Monnicle yet?."

Puss in Boots

Naked Moon Industries

Likes received: 20

#44 - 2011-09-15 17:05:27 UTC | Edited by: Puss in Boots

Anuthahoodedguy wrote:

Puss in Boots wrote:

If you war dec a corp and don't undock or fight, they can petition it and ccp will remove it. It's considered griefing.

Yet another ******* idiot who can't or won't read the whole ******* thread. Seriously, do you have eyes or the ability to comprehend english ************?

Minutes ago I received SENIOR GM confirmation that both perma deccing and using alt corps to dec your own corp are permitted.

This is my last post on the topic. It was started mainly to get confirmation that these tactics were permitted. They are. Its confirmed. Repeatedly. Would you like me to test it with you? Send me the first week's wardec fee and I will dec YOUR corporation and you can petition it all you like. It will do you NO good.

I couldn't be bothered to read thru your entire weak sauce drivel. Perma war decking is allowed but you have to actually undock and fight. Not undocking or fighting is griefing and petitionable. But since it's your own corp your emperor of fail is war decing, who's going to complain? You're idea is stupid by the way and so is the fact that you've wasted my valuable bandwidth reading this swill.

Basically, you've wasted everyone's time, with a really stupid question that you answered yourself. NIce job. Don't forget to "like" me. :)

Previous page123