Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Please do, because we all appear to be confused (Vimsy included) as I'm fairly certain wars can be retracted at any time without it being made mutual.
I would think that making it mutual would mean they couldn't retract, but if they can when mutual and can't when not mutual....
That's pretty broken.
But, regardless of the mutual aspect, I'm fairly certain that wars can be retracted without is being mutual.
I've had wars get retracted before the fighting period ever started, leaving only a very small window in which fighting is allowed. I'm also pretty certain those situations weren't made mutual.

Ok, so if you are comparing the amount from wardecs to the amount that of pvp as a whole if those wardecs didn't exist, can you link those figures?

How much pvp more would have happened if the wardecs didn't exist?

Aggressors pvping without the mechanic in highsec wouldn't have happened in many of the cases. If people just want to gank, then they gank.

But if they want to pvp without CONCORD intervention, then they use the wardec mechanic.

There is no, amount of pvp resulting if the aggressors still pvp'd without the mechanic. The mechanic permits them to pvp in highsec.

But, since you are suggesting that they would have gone to low/null and pvp'd instead, then can you link the figures you've used to compare the difference in the amount of pvp.

I know that really sounds stupid. Because it is.

It's pure conjecture, designed just to fit a particular narrative.

You can't compare anything because it's impossible for the data to exist.

It's not a comparison Joe. It's just a story.


Yeah my bad on the pvp thing. I adjusted my wording after to be clearer on what I really meant.

However, that's not what you said at all.

You said this:

The KNOWN FACT that players drop corp during decs combined with the CCP'S FACT that lack of player interaction is detrimental to retention shows that wardecs reduce retention.

There isn't anything to support that. Dropping to an NPC Corp for someone already having rich experiences in the game isn't going to cut them off from those rich experiences, nor does it prevent them from having others.

It seems illogical to suggest that someone who is having rich experiences and is engaged with the game is suddenly going to quit to game because of a wardec.

That doesn't pass the common sense test.

I think there are arguments to make that wardecs deter people from joining player Corps in the first place and perhaps miss out on rich experiences because of that.

There's possibly an argument to make that players in a player Corp, who aren't really experiencing anything rich could leave the game after dropping to an NPC Corp; but in that case, the issue there seems to be more with the Corp/player expeirence internally and not because someone else wanted to bring pvp to them. But there's no data, so just also conjecture on my part with that last sentence.

I did watch it, I've watched it several times, and I'm currently staring at the infographic for it.

In the first five minutes of that video(specifically between 2:30 and 3:50) he declares that they separated players between illegally killed and legally killed, then checked retention for each of them. Legally killed basically always means wars or duels, by the way.

How about you actually bother watching it, instead of trying to lecture someone who actually has a clue?

Oh, and it's between 4:00 and 4:20 that he says that wars are almost as much of a driver of positive retention as ganking is, which is the highest.

Now how about you shut the ever loving **** up already, you worthless liar.

Fair enough..
It was a story..
The story part of it was assuming that wardeccers would actually pvp without the dec mechanic.

The premise was that if all deccers used forms of PVP other than the wardec mechanic, it would result in more KMs and isk loss than the same amount of time spent in a wardec.

Though this is a story, is it wrong?
If you took every wardeccer and sent them out of HS to pvp for the exact same amount of time that 100% of wardecs have lasted (excluding RvB and other mutual war focused groups.. we're focusing on war in which one or both entities do not revolve around war) would it not be safe to assume that it would result in more loss?

If I spent 1 year in HS(not undocking during wars) and one year out of HS, is it not safe to assume that I have a much higher chance of losing and/or causing loss than I do in HS?

Would it also then not be safe to assume that if all deccers spent as much time pvp'ing outside of HS as they do in wardecs), that it would result in more overall isk lost?

Sure, it's pure conjecture to make this assumption, but I feel it's a safe assumption to make.
Take your KB in comparison to Kaarous' KB.
You are younger than him and your kills/losses are predominantly outside of HS, while he's old and his kills are predominantly within HS.
Despite you being younger, your kills and losses total over 108 billion isk more than that of Kaarous.

It is therefore safe to assume that if he spent his time pvp'ing out of HS as opposed to within, his kills and losses would be significantly higher than they are now, thus the total isk lost by a player (himself included) would be significantly higher.

Yes, it may be a story and it may be assumption, but I think we can agree that is a fair assumption.

Though, I am NOT proposing the removal of wardecs, only a change to wardecs that makes killing and dieing more likely to happen.



Ok, there may be nothing to back up my claim.
I'm merely putting 2 and 2 together.

it's logical, but unsupported..
I say logical because most 'target' corps consists of carebears. The only player interaction carebears typically have are with players within their corp, typically performing 'carebear' activities such as mining and missioning.
If they drop corp as a result of a wardec, it's safe to assume they will continue carebearing within their NPC corp, only now they are not doing so with other players in which they're interacting.


I can understand why would won't consider this to have merit.

I will say, from what I understand CCP DOES have results regarding wardecs in relation to retention and other factors.
HOWEVER, the only part of that information they have released is the 70-80% part.


So, my 'assumptions' (i'll freely admit that) are that they're sitting on this information either because they don't want to make a change and if the players saw it we would force it, OR (still an assumption) they plan to release the information after/in conjunction with a prepared change proposal in order to denounce any nay-sayers that would suggest the change isn't needed.

HOWEVER, I don't know why they're sitting on the rest of this information. If is supported wardecs as they are, they would have released it already and Rise would likely have made sure of that, just as they openly released the information regarding ganking and griefing. With this in mind, I feel safe in my assumption that the results are not good news for the wardec mechanic. Again, that's an assumption, but I feel all but certain that we'd have the results by now if they supported the current mechanic.

Why on earth would you do that? This character's killboard is atrocious, as befits a freaking logi main. Until they make logi show up on killmails, 95%+ of every engagement he's ever been in doesn't count for squat.

I have more sitting time in a Guardian than I do anything else by far.

If you're watching the same video as I am, it pertains specifically due to newbros, and their retention.
It also only checked for deaths within the first 15 days, which is not my premise.

It is also split up into killed legally, illegally killed, and not killed at all.

He goes on to say that 'newbros' that were 'ganked' were more likely to stay.
'Newbros' that were legally killed were slightly more likely to quit.
Those that didn't get killed at all were most likely to leave.

Again, this is all based off the first 15 days and doesn't specify how many of the 'not killed' 'newbros' were in a player corp, as well as not mentioning whether they were or weren't in a wardec at the time.

It then states that only 1% of cancelled subs cite ship loss or harassment.
it again mentions NOTHING about those that were in a wardec and didn't lose anything.




I cut out the part where you attack me, as you love to do, so that this comment doesn't have to get cut out if ISD show up.

Now that I've explained that CCP Rise's comments refer accounts younger that 15 days, does not factor how many non-killed players quit as a result of wardecs, does not factor how many hadn't joined a corp, doesn't factor how many dropped to NPC corp and then quit... Basically, the only factors is had regarding wardecs were the retention rate of players 'legally' killed, but DOES NOT state what percentage was retention and that legal kills also factor kills outside of HS, as he states they specifically looked for the aggressors being killed by CONCORD. Therefore, even the retention results of legally killed players IS NOT a representation of just wardecs, thus the results are irrelevant to the conversation on wardecs ALONE.
For all we know, all of the lost retention in legal kills could have been the result of lost ships during a wardec. That is not an assumption, nor am I saying that is true. I'm merely pointing out that we still don't know the effects of wardecs alone on retention regarding 'newbros' and especially any characters older than 15 days.

Now, if you're done making false accusations and bashing me; Maybe you can go back and watch the video again.
This time, maybe you should listen to what's actually being said as opposed to picking out the individual parts you feel can support your agenda.

I'll even link it for you...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A92Ge2S8M1Y&index=37&list=PLQvKSs1k6DLOiGGb44McruXcndTtzUUlu

Scipio, feel free to back me up on this... Not my claims on wardecs effecting retention, but Kaarous' incorrect understanding of what Rise says in that video... you know need to watch the first 6 minutes or so, as the rest is all about the NPE.

for anyone that liked his comments regarding this video, feel free to watch the video and retract your like on those comments.


Edit...


Addressed in the above comment.
Watch video for confirmation.

Are you guys seriously so bored you are arguing this argument in like the 10th consecutive thread.....
Any changes to the actual mechanics of wars need to wait till Citadels have been widely adopted and we actually see what the current system is like with the new structures.

See, I can tolerate waiting until Citadels are presented.

My personal opinion is that they'll only make things worse, but I'm willing to wait until we have relevant stats.

I'll eat my words if I'm wrong.

Though, it will suck to have to wait another year at least, plus however much time it takes CCP to admit wardecs are f'd, plus however much time it takes them to propose and idea, plus however much time it takes until the idea is implemented.

Sheesh... we're talking 3 years before anything gets done....

Lets hope so!

don't forget to watch the video that Kaarous loves to use as an argument that holds no merit!!