These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

My revised take on Wardecs.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#21 - 2016-05-13 09:34:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Geronimo McVain wrote:
You disrupt the gameplay of others without giving them something do do against you.

This is such a fallacy.

People disrupt themselves through their own fear.

They don't think about the positive things they can do to keep playing as normal and give the power up to the wardeccers intead of getting on the front foot by managing the war.

This is a result of all the hopeless CEOs who just reinforce to new players how hopeless the situation is, so the idea perpetuates. The next group of CEOs carry the 'hopeless' expectation into their own Corps, because that is what they were taught by the previous generation of fail CEOs.

In reality, it's not the situation that is hopeless, just the incompetent CEOs.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2016-05-13 09:41:35 UTC
Today we got birth of true Eve player Cool

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#23 - 2016-05-13 10:02:46 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
This is such a fallacy.

People disrupt themselves through their own fear.
You realise though that this in itself is a fallacy though right? It only really works if their fear is unfounded, which it's not since in most cases the defending corp is outclassed by the aggressor. Say for example you were sitting on a couch watching TV, and i come in and set the couch on fire. You suddenly have to stop what you're doing. I could then argue that I wasn't being disruptive, your own fear of being horrifically burned was disruptive. That is effectively the argument you are using.

There are wardec corps that have done their best to refine their craft and select soft targets to the point that most groups who are wardecced would stand zero chance of actually fighting back. So the targets have every reason to be fearful.

Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
They don't think about the positive things they can do to keep playing as normal and give the power up to the wardeccers intead of getting on the front foot by managing the war.
The most positive thing they can do is just stop being in a player corp. For most highsec players, unless you plan on being a wardeccer you should just stay in an NPC corp or be in your own 1 man disposable corp. I know people say "ooh, you could learn to fight back", but the simple fact that that player isn't a wardeccer in the first place indicates they have no interest in playing the game that way, so why would they engage in gameplay they have no interest in just to satisfy a group of bored veterans?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#24 - 2016-05-13 10:22:38 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
You realise though that this in itself is a fallacy though right? It only really works if their fear is unfounded, which it's not since in most cases the defending corp is outclassed by the aggressor.

Rubbish.

Expected from someone from SMA, but still rubbish.

Outclassed by being out thought. Wardeccers are easy to beat. You just have to decide to think and if you do that, then you con't be outclassed, because you can always change what you are doing and stay at least one step ahead, but since many wardeccers are deccing multiple Corps, it's easy to go unaffected through a war.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#25 - 2016-05-13 10:39:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
You realise though that this in itself is a fallacy though right? It only really works if their fear is unfounded, which it's not since in most cases the defending corp is outclassed by the aggressor.

Rubbish.

Expected from someone from SMA, but still rubbish.

Outclassed by being out thought. Wardeccers are easy to beat. You just have to decide to think and if you do that, then you con't be outclassed, because you can always change what you are doing and stay at least one step ahead, but since many wardeccers are deccing multiple Corps, it's easy to go unaffected through a war.



Please show me where you have beaten one of the major so called merc but blanket war dec corps/alliances as a solo or small corp.

War deccers can disrupt my game play, and do I really want to disrupt GTFO pipe campers, gets boring watching Svipuls warping away all the time... Coming up to my third week of war dec by Vendetta, can't go to Jita, can't run missions in my preferred system, so while no kills on me and no sight of them actually being at war with me, except when I was intel gathering I cannot say that I am unaffected.

Nothing to do with failed CEO's and all that pap you said earlier and why do you have to be insulting all the time with little digs, are you copying Jenn a'Snide? Next you will be telling me you are the God of PVE in every post.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Evasive Shadow Assassin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2016-05-13 10:40:56 UTC
There are no "merec" corps left in eve, they all call themselves mercs but they arnt

PvP corps simply grief, thats iut

period

200+ Videos On Eve Online, Missions, Anomalys, PvP, Guides
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#27 - 2016-05-13 11:06:20 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Rubbish.

Expected from someone from SMA, but still rubbish.

Outclassed by being out thought. Wardeccers are easy to beat. You just have to decide to think and if you do that, then you con't be outclassed, because you can always change what you are doing and stay at least one step ahead, but since many wardeccers are deccing multiple Corps, it's easy to go unaffected through a war.
"Grr SMA". Doesn't really say much about your point of view if your biggest supporting argument is your bias against my alliance. If you had a good point it would stand well on it's own.

But let's be real, whatever way you swing it, to survive a wardec players need to take specific steps to either evade or attack their aggressors, meaning that unless the defending corp was a wardec corp to begin with they have to be affected by the wardec. It will always seem strange to me that there's a mechanic that fulfils no other purpose than to allow groups to force a playstyle on their opponents. I'm with Geronimo that there should be something being fought over rather than just an off switch for concord to allow veterans to harvest non-PvPers for easy kills and kb ratio. I know, I know, I'm such a horrible person to want to see more balanced, even fights instead of farming.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Gurista Nerfed
Doomheim
#28 - 2016-05-13 11:09:14 UTC
The one thing that makes people quit this game, above all else, is wardec griefing. The whole mechanic is so dumb and catered towards griefers. You should only be allowed to wardec a corp if it has more than 20 members. Don't like it? Well go find a bigger corp to harass then.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#29 - 2016-05-13 11:26:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Dracvlad wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
You realise though that this in itself is a fallacy though right? It only really works if their fear is unfounded, which it's not since in most cases the defending corp is outclassed by the aggressor.

Rubbish.

Expected from someone from SMA, but still rubbish.

Outclassed by being out thought. Wardeccers are easy to beat. You just have to decide to think and if you do that, then you con't be outclassed, because you can always change what you are doing and stay at least one step ahead, but since many wardeccers are deccing multiple Corps, it's easy to go unaffected through a war.



Please show me where you have beaten one of the major so called merc but blanket war dec corps/alliances as a solo or small corp.

What do you want me to show you? A war report where we lost O ships?

What will that prove? 60-70% of wars go with no loss.

It could just as easily be that we were totally beaten down by those nasty wardeccers and so didn't login for a week. Or, it could be that we played smart and continued as normal without too much fuss because we know what we are doing.

So what proof is suitable Drac? Fighting them?

If that's the case, I can't show that since fighting them is what they want. Playing our game is what we want and what we consistently achieve. What proof is suitable to demonstrate that?

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#30 - 2016-05-13 11:28:31 UTC
Gurista Nerfed wrote:
The one thing that makes people quit this game, above all else, is wardec griefing. The whole mechanic is so dumb and catered towards griefers. You should only be allowed to wardec a corp if it has more than 20 members. Don't like it? Well go find a bigger corp to harass then.
Not sure about that as it would mean people could put up a POS/citadel in a small corp and be untouchable, but certainly there should be a way for people to choose to group up without painting a massive target on their face. As it stand highsec corps are only really useful for PvPers or fronts like red-frog to group contracts while NPC alts are the ones undocking. I like the idea of people being able to set up structures to increase their productivity and only groups with structures to be able to be involved in a war, so both sides have something to protect and people who opt out of wars are still able to form corps and group up under a banner but don't gain the benefits of the people willing to take the risks.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Rawmeat Mary
Empire Assault Corp
Dead Terrorists
#31 - 2016-05-13 11:29:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Rawmeat Mary
Dracvlad wrote:
Coming up to my third week of war dec by Vendetta, can't go to Jita, can't run missions in my preferred system, so while no kills on me and no sight of them actually being at war with me, except when I was intel gathering I cannot say that I am unaffected.

Didn't you stop your main's training for a couple days to fly a t1 Industrial for Jita shopping?

Don't you have a deep end, out of the way mission system where you can do your missions? Use a t1 Raven or Domi. Sure it's not Osmon and SoE missions, and income is smaller, big deal.

Disruption is relatively minor, when I'm bored I run L4 and mine with alts in a damn Marauder and pvp fit Proc even under Wardec, just use a scout when you jump another system.

The death of Watchlist almost completely killed hunting. You've never been safer, just stay out of hubs, trade pipes and obvious mission/mining systems.

'If they take the ship, they'll rape us to death, eat our flesh, and sew our skins onto their clothing. And if we're very, very lucky, they'll do it in that order.'

Yeah, we're like that.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#32 - 2016-05-13 11:29:40 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Rubbish.

Expected from someone from SMA, but still rubbish.

Outclassed by being out thought. Wardeccers are easy to beat. You just have to decide to think and if you do that, then you con't be outclassed, because you can always change what you are doing and stay at least one step ahead, but since many wardeccers are deccing multiple Corps, it's easy to go unaffected through a war.
"Grr SMA". Doesn't really say much about your point of view if your biggest supporting argument is your bias against my alliance. If you had a good point it would stand well on it's own.

But let's be real, whatever way you swing it, to survive a wardec players need to take specific steps to either evade or attack their aggressors, meaning that unless the defending corp was a wardec corp to begin with they have to be affected by the wardec. It will always seem strange to me that there's a mechanic that fulfils no other purpose than to allow groups to force a playstyle on their opponents. I'm with Geronimo that there should be something being fought over rather than just an off switch for concord to allow veterans to harvest non-PvPers for easy kills and kb ratio. I know, I know, I'm such a horrible person to want to see more balanced, even fights instead of farming.

So you'd rather force a playstyle on someone else by having CCP do it for you.

That's the cowards way out.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#33 - 2016-05-13 11:30:24 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
What do you want me to show you? A war report where we lost O ships?

What will that prove? 60-70% of wars go with no loss.

It could just as easily be that we were totally beaten down by those nasty wardeccers and so didn't login for a week. Or, it could be that we played smart and continued as normal without too much fuss because we know what we are doing.

So what proof is suitable Drac? Fighting them?

If that's the case, I can't show that since fighting them is what they want. Playing our game is what we want and what we consistently achieve. What proof is suitable to demonstrate that?
Well for you it's pretty easy to not be affected since you're in an NPC corp and so not susceptible to wars.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#34 - 2016-05-13 11:36:06 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
So you'd rather force a playstyle on someone else by having CCP do it for you.

That's the cowards way out.
No, I'd rather playstyles weren't forced on anyone. People shouldn't be punished by not being able to hang out in a corp with their mates just because they don't want to fight or evade veteran players. There should be something that opts players in to that combat but it shouldn't be a bar as low as corp membership itself, and wardeccers should also have something tangible at risk when they declare war. As it currently stands wardecs are backwards, as the most rewarding wardecs are the ones against the softest targets, so lower risk general equals higher reward. It's no surprise that many veteran players love that when they are on the winning side of it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Rawmeat Mary
Empire Assault Corp
Dead Terrorists
#35 - 2016-05-13 11:36:06 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
What do you want me to show you? A war report where we lost O ships?

What will that prove? 60-70% of wars go with no loss.

It could just as easily be that we were totally beaten down by those nasty wardeccers and so didn't login for a week. Or, it could be that we played smart and continued as normal without too much fuss because we know what we are doing.

So what proof is suitable Drac? Fighting them?

If that's the case, I can't show that since fighting them is what they want. Playing our game is what we want and what we consistently achieve. What proof is suitable to demonstrate that?
Well for you it's pretty easy to not be affected since you're in an NPC corp and so not susceptible to wars.

You're being deliberately obtuse there, this is an obvious NPC alt, isn't it?

'If they take the ship, they'll rape us to death, eat our flesh, and sew our skins onto their clothing. And if we're very, very lucky, they'll do it in that order.'

Yeah, we're like that.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#36 - 2016-05-13 11:37:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Lucas Kell wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
What do you want me to show you? A war report where we lost O ships?

What will that prove? 60-70% of wars go with no loss.

It could just as easily be that we were totally beaten down by those nasty wardeccers and so didn't login for a week. Or, it could be that we played smart and continued as normal without too much fuss because we know what we are doing.

So what proof is suitable Drac? Fighting them?

If that's the case, I can't show that since fighting them is what they want. Playing our game is what we want and what we consistently achieve. What proof is suitable to demonstrate that?
Well for you it's pretty easy to not be affected since you're in an NPC corp and so not susceptible to wars.

Yeah because it's totally not allowed to have more than 1 character in this game.

Oh no. You got me.

This game is all about how the way one person plays can affect someone else. That can be positive or challenging. There was even a trailer that covered the butterfly effect (whether it goes that far it not is debatable, but the ability to affect others is real).

It's part of the game and it's part of the game to adapt to situations, like having cyno alts in NPC corps, neutral scouts, etc.

It's how anyone can respond.

Wardecs aren't a problem and can be easily managed, whether or not that fits your personal view. Your view is no more valid than mine, not less valid. Just different.

My experience though says wardecs are easily handled and adapted to. Nothing you say can show that experience to be wrong.

But too many people give up their ability to adapt and lose by default. They carry that attitude into other corps and pass it on. They are the ones that are the problem, not the wardeccers.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#37 - 2016-05-13 11:40:01 UTC
Rawmeat Mary wrote:
You're being deliberately obtuse there, this is an obvious NPC alt, isn't it?
Perhaps, but that's all we have to go on on here. If someone is posting as an NPC alt then for all intents and purposes that's an NPC player until there's evidence proving otherwise. Anyone could sit around on an NPC alt going "oh yeah we're totally not affected by wars", doesn't mean a thing.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#38 - 2016-05-13 11:48:03 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Yeah because it's totally not allowed to have more than 1 character in this game.
Nope, apparently we're not, which is why you judge everything I say on my membership of SMA even though only 2 of my 51 characters are in SMA.

Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
This game is all about how the way one person plays can affect someone else. That can be positive or challenging. There was even a trailer that covered the butterfly effect (whether it goes that far it not is debatable, but the ability to affect others is real).
Sure it is, but a key part of that is balance. As it stands there are veteran players who have been playing and refining their PvP skill for years who can pick and choose soft targets to declare war on so they can retain their 95%+ kb ratios, while their targets can only respond by stopping what they are doing (either by evading the aggressors or attempting to fight back). Beyond the token amount of isk paid for the wardec the aggressor don't really have to put anything at risk and can attack anyone that has chosen to attempt to be social in the MMO by joining a corp.

All I'm saying is the bar should be raised so joining a corp shouldn't open people to wardecs, but adding benefits such as assets in space should, and for aggressors to attack they should also have fixed assets in place so they have something of their own to defend.

Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Wardecs aren't a problem and can be easily managed, whether or not that fits your personal view. Your view is no more valid than mine, not less valid. Just different.
Sure, they can be easily managed, in most cases by not playing the game the way you want to, thus allowing aggressing corps to force a playstyle. there was a thing a while back about peacedecs, and how PvPer would respond if people were able to pay 50m a week to force them to only be able to take part in PvE if they stay in corp. People would be up in arms if that were put in, yet it's no different from what wardecs currently do to PvE players.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#39 - 2016-05-13 11:51:37 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
You realise though that this in itself is a fallacy though right? It only really works if their fear is unfounded, which it's not since in most cases the defending corp is outclassed by the aggressor.

Rubbish.

Expected from someone from SMA, but still rubbish.

Outclassed by being out thought. Wardeccers are easy to beat. You just have to decide to think and if you do that, then you con't be outclassed, because you can always change what you are doing and stay at least one step ahead, but since many wardeccers are deccing multiple Corps, it's easy to go unaffected through a war.



Please show me where you have beaten one of the major so called merc but blanket war dec corps/alliances as a solo or small corp.

What do you want me to show you? A war report where we lost O ships?

What will that prove? 60-70% of wars go with no loss.

It could just as easily be that we were totally beaten down by those nasty wardeccers and so didn't login for a week. Or, it could be that we played smart and continued as normal without too much fuss because we know what we are doing.

So what proof is suitable Drac? Fighting them?

If that's the case, I can't show that since fighting them is what they want. Playing our game is what we want and what we consistently achieve. What proof is suitable to demonstrate that?


Words are cheap, nope its where you have got a kill on them and they have no kills on you, simple yardstick that. If people do blanket war decs they are going to get plenty with 0 kills on it.

But now you say don't fight them when people like me are suggesting actual fights and meaningful content to be created.


When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#40 - 2016-05-13 11:53:33 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
You realise though that this in itself is a fallacy though right? It only really works if their fear is unfounded, which it's not since in most cases the defending corp is outclassed by the aggressor.

Rubbish.

Expected from someone from SMA, but still rubbish.

Outclassed by being out thought. Wardeccers are easy to beat. You just have to decide to think and if you do that, then you con't be outclassed, because you can always change what you are doing and stay at least one step ahead, but since many wardeccers are deccing multiple Corps, it's easy to go unaffected through a war.



Please show me where you have beaten one of the major so called merc but blanket war dec corps/alliances as a solo or small corp.

What do you want me to show you? A war report where we lost O ships?

What will that prove? 60-70% of wars go with no loss.

It could just as easily be that we were totally beaten down by those nasty wardeccers and so didn't login for a week. Or, it could be that we played smart and continued as normal without too much fuss because we know what we are doing.

So what proof is suitable Drac? Fighting them?

If that's the case, I can't show that since fighting them is what they want. Playing our game is what we want and what we consistently achieve. What proof is suitable to demonstrate that?


Words are cheap, nope its where you have got a kill on them and they have no kills on you, simple yardstick that. If people do blanket war decs they are going to get plenty with 0 kills on it.

But now you say don't fight them when people like me are suggesting actual fights and meaningful content to be created.



Bullshit.

We're we play our game and don't provide what they want is just as much a win.

A silly one dimensional view that's it's all about pew pew is naive.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."