Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Oh this is understood.
However, no amount of Intel on the aggressor will force them to engage me on my terms of end the war on my terms..

Serious question, as a role player; Does plexing not break a rule or something?
I mean, you're taking out of game assets for in game benefit.

As far as the war mechanic though.
I could see the severe loss idea working if they were forced to have all of their toons and assets in their war deccing entity, but they are not. There is also the plexing method you spoke of as well.
With this, then comes the fact that even with severe loss, the aggressor still dictates when the war ends.

Now, what we must also consider is that this example of severe loss on the aggressor is even fewer and more far between than almost any other outcome.
This goes back to the fact that many deccers will mitigate as much loss as possible by not fighting anything threatening, thus only attacking targets of prey, and having significant in game Intel to avoid any potential traps.

The defender, mostly knowing the aggressor will mitigate as much loss as possible in the manner specified above, will then also take actions to mitigate loss as well. the best advantage they have over the aggressor is the ability to deny kills, thus denying relative "fun" for the aggressor, in hopes that they will get bored and move on.

These two outcomes lead to wardecs having the effect of less player activity and interaction then CCP would likely consider "good" which is a negative outcome, and being the most common outcome.

Now, you made the proposal that wardecs last for two weeks as opposed to one in order to fuel interaction with the intent of making players essentially engage or suffer boredom. Now, I feel this is likely an attempt to force interaction on the defender's part as opposed to the aggressor, but if it has your premised outcome, what's the difference?
However, I strongly feel that this will likely only make things worse. More people getting less involved in player corps/'dropping corp, more players quitting Eve, and other negative outcomes of the war mechanic.
Now, I will state that this is speculation, as CCP has never done an investigation to determine the effects of wardecs on player retention, interaction, will to join player corps, nor any other potential effects as they have with griefing and ganking.
However, the experience of several players, is that it does have a negative effect. This is a shared premise by both aggressors and defenders and is expressed through out this thread on both sides.
The only difference is, one side sees this as the war mechanic being broken and needing a change in order to encourage defenders to fight back for a chance to end the war. The flip side of the coin would suggest that the mechanic be changed so that no one can drop corp during a wardec; oddly enough, many of the honest ones will say that this shouldn't happen, as it will hinder Eve and the door was left open for a reason.. Yet somehow two and two is not put together.
Now, there are those outliers than none of us agree with, which are the ones that suggest that there shouldn't be wardecs or the ones that believe there shouldn't be a high sec at all. These are essentially the ones we all ignore and are considered the extremists of each group, much like the radical left and right in politics.

Maybe it's time CCP does a study, as it seems to be the great debate of our time, just as ganking and griefing was before it.
I accept CCP Rise's premise on ganking and griefing to be true, however, I would almost rather have someone at CCP do the study on wardecs as Rise is known to be a proponent of non-consentual PVP and regardless of any fact within his statistics, many players do not trust him when it comes to defending the claims of the less risk involved players.
I personally don't think he would lie, especially considering it would require an entire team at CCP to lie, and also because of the generally known fact on both sides that war decs typically doesn't provide a ton of destruction and combat..

I suppose only time will tell.. It may be a debate to which CCP is not ready, nor willing to join due to the extremely biased nature of both sides.

No agency would be removed from anyone.

Wardec just removes the penalties for aggression in high sec. At no point would anyone be prevented from attacking anyone they choose, though without the wardec they would be subject to the penalties associated with it.

If the options to buy them off were able to be put in a contract so as to prevent them taking the money and continuing the war, that would be fine. If bringing in allies would end the war, that would be fine. If making it not worth their while involved anything but not undocking until they get bored, also fine.

But as of right this moment there is no way to force them to stop the war. They put nothing at risk that they care about losing, you just play into their game if you try to engage, assuming they don't just dock and wait for you to resume normal operation.

There is no EFFECTIVE action that you can take against them to accomplish the goal of stopping the war. That needs to change. Understand that fighting just to fight isn't something that appeals to everyone... many people like to accomplish goals.

I agree that there are bigger problems to deal with as dodging the wars are so easy. Social corps that can't be wardeced but also don't allow for things like shared hangers, corp funds or POS to be put up are a good answer too. But wardecs in their current format are counterproductive to a healthy game environment

You argue like a child in elementary school, continuing to call people liars and suggest that the defenders have oh so much power when it comes to wardecs, yet provide no evidence of your statements.

Even if you did, they're easily argued because the mechanic is broken...

You've got the twisted sociopathic mind of Kaarous Aldurald down pat.

Makes one wonder, is EVE Online a government program to keep people like him off the streets?

There you go.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6236542#post6236542

Irony isn't the same as hypocracy. Choose your words better next time!

You know me, I'm just here to help!

Well obviously as they are investors in the corps who are doing this stuff, they want a return on their investment.

And a considered review of arrangements in high-sec - and the E part of PVE - would clearly have knock on effects in low-sec and null-sec - with the logical conclusion that they might lose their stuff - and power

Let's face it, the last thing anyone wants is for corps of new players to form a structure and identity that might challenge the existing meta/memes/etc. Better to smack them down, so they either leave, or join the training program - so they can work their way up to being just another null-sec mission runner in a large alliance.

Oh and I would be interested to know if CCP has any data on how many of the high-sec war decs are made by - for want of a better phrase - genuine high sec corps?

They really need to go further than that to determine how detrimental the dec mechanic is to Eve.
How many players quit during a wardec.
How many trials don't go full sub in relation to a wardec.
How much is player activity reduced (or increased if you want to claim that) during a wardec.
How many players have become less socially involved as a result of wardecs.

This will likely be quite difficult to determine, as inactivity isn't always tied to wardecs.
I haven't logged much the past week or so cause I've been bored and the rest of my corp folded and went to null sec as a result of continuous war paid for by some French dude that made some rather nasty remarks and got kicked from corp as a result.
He then used his personal wallet to PLEX up and pay to have us basically perma decced.

It's sad that null sec is the best place to go in order to get away from aggressors.
90% of the time they won't chase you out.. They seem to be afraid to lose stuff...........lose stuff....


That said, I did not join them because I despise null sec.
Spent 2 months out there, was involved in 5 large roams which resulted in 0 fights.. Not even a gank, and a structure bash with over 100 bombers which was thwarted by 2 carriers...
.. And I came out with less Isk than I went in with... I also lost two ships trying to move everything back to HS due to persistent gate camps.. To which they were my last two to move, so I took the pod express back to HS on purpose.