Assembly Hall

Sooner or later EVE will start catering to a slightly larger audience. Not by softening the game too much, but rather by reducing the confusion of one's decisions.

With that said I heard they are eventually going to be introducing more player friendly services like name changes (with name logs of course). If you don't believe me, then why on earth are skill injectors a thing.

I totally Agree with everything you said Jack. I also Disagree with what the OP has said. It isn't Suicide ganking that is the problem nor does CCP support Suicide ganking. Suicide ganking is a clever loop hole or Exploit that players have found and CCP is yet to discover possible solution too that wouldn't disrupt the game play of their player base or stop the mentality behind a sand box game that "anything" can happen.

I remember when I first started playing a friend told me that when you undock from station you consent to PVP. Also I remember them telling me that only fly what you can afford to loose. Two major rules that all players that have been playing eve usually live by.

Mind you when I first started playing when I logged in the game had something like 100,000 or more players online, some times during peak times I would get put into a queue and have to wait 5 to 30 seconds to actually get into the game. Now when I log in the most I see is maybe 24,000 or 26,000. Never really seen over 30,000 players online. I don't know if this is due to banning of bots or other things. However I would like to point out this video, back in 2012 before the war dec changes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u0H3WA_UYA

I bring this up because back in 2009, 2010 prices for tritanium where around 1 to 2 isk per unit. after 2012 or more around 2013 once those new war dec changes got put into place tritanium went up to 3 to 4 isk per unit. Now it is sitting at 5 to 6 isk average. What could make a change like that in something as simple as tritanium. Especially with all the changes made to mining barges to prevent suicide ganking?

I say it is the war dec system not suicide ganking. It is now easier, and not as expensive for a corporation or an alliance to declare war on another corporation or alliance. This is clear when you see some of the heavy PVP groups declairing war on 99 different groups some times on the same day. Which is good for PVP corps bad for indy corps. Players can still do indy with out having to worry about war decs in NPC corps. However I've been hearing a large push now from PVP corps for CCP to allow war deccing of NPC corps, but don't think that will ever happen. Though there could be a Faction war rebalance, which could be interesting.

I point that video out above because CCP knew what would happen and they still did it. What the didn't count on was the fact that players would stop playing the game. Granted based on the current number of players that play this game on a regular basis they are still making enough money to easily keep the game going and make improvements on that game.

I understand this game is a war game, PVP is fun, however there are players that play this game that want nothing to do with the PVP side. I'm not saying that CCP should soften the game, I'm saying that CCP needs to fix certain problems with the way things work. If they are so worried about inflation and the crazy amounts of liquidated isk available in the game. Make it more expensive for a war to be declared. Also allow a corporation that has been decced to pay concord to cancel that dec at double the cost of the dec. So the surrender system would have merrit, it would save a corporation money.

Example: Corp A decs Corp B. It costs Corp A 50mil to dec Corp B. Corp B could pay concord 100mil to cancel dec before dec starts, and corp A could re declare dec after a one week period. Or if CEO or other leadership role member doesn't log in until after war starts or waits for war to start. Corp B could pay 200mil to concord to cancel dec and force corp A to wait 2 weeks to re declare war. Or Corp A could send a surrender request to Corp B for 150mil thus making 100mil, and saving Corp B 50mil in the process. You could go further and allow Corp A to pay additional weeks worth of Dec time forcing Corp B to pay more to end war and increasing the value of surrendering. However if Corp B accept Surrender its the Dec time paid for +2 weeks. So if Corp A pays for 4 weeks of dec time that costs 200mil. Then offers surrender to corp be at a cost of 300mil Then Corp B won't have war declared on them for 6 weeks by Corp A and they would save 100mil for canceling the war.

And to some extent changes in refining of mission loot. Why mine minerals when you could run missions, get the loot, get ISK, and get loyalty points and improve your standings? Then refine the loot for the minerals if you also do industrial stuff.

You are correct, drone Alloys used to be the major contributor to minerals prior to their removal in what 2012 2013. Which is what initially drove the prices of minerals up. Just as the need for materials in the construction of citadels is driving the need for PI and minerals. Which is why I talked about the 3 to 4isk per unit and the next jump which was 5 to 6isk per unit.

As for wars decs being more prevalent now then they were in the past. I disagree, in the past we had more players online then we do now, also Corps were restricted to a maximum of 3 war decs. Now that has changed we have corps with 99 and alliances 99. I wouldn't say it was turning hi sec into low or null being that they would have to dec just about everyone for that statement to be true I would however say that war is and has become easier for people to get into. Which I might add is both good and bad.

Good in the since that it creates more conflict which destroys more things and creates a need to rebuild what was destroyed.

Bad in the since that most of the wars that I'm seeing are from bored PVPers looking for a war targets. Their CEOs trying to appease that and deccing anyone they see or find that could potentially give them a target to shoot at.

The good does cause prices to go up being that the need to build what has been destroyed will always drive demand, and the bad usually comes from PVP corps deccing industrial carebears that want nothing to do with fighting and would gladly pay to keep from being shot at. The fact that you would offer "mining permits" only proves my point.

CCP seems to completely okay with. Although Mass Dec's do have meta problems, they have one benefit of being a giant ISK sink.



PROOOOJECTION.

I love it when people revert to this sorta opinionated insult. Generally it means you have no idea what's going, evident conveniently by the next paragraph...




If you are war with another entity, Gate Guns in Lowsec will not engage you. So no not just Highsec is a wardec useful. Ask PL they just decced Goonswarm who are currently residing in Sarren. Wonder why?



War's need to be tweak yeah, they haven't been touched in a long while. Just like Sov CCP will need to change the game at some point to keep it interesting.

Your idea only benefits the strong and well established. Which they can do already by paying the current mercenaries a protection fee. It worked for two years for Ped-Dictorate. No merc could dec them with out the other 7 drop in to defend Before the CEO's lack of social skills got the better of him anyways.

You want to keep newbies from be farmed, your idea is not going to work. Brave, Goons, PL, Ivy, Dead Terrorist any of the big alliance are going to still be a stupid high amount to dec, and the newbies are going to be penniless.

That's a nice suggestion Malcanis but how many of the new players can afford a multi billion isk war bond to kind of protect themselves?

The current war dec system is rubbish. It allows PvPers to impose their play style on others. That can't go well.
What would they do if because of some game mechanics the only thing they suddenly can do is mining? They would leave too.

Yes Eve isn't a birthday party for children, it's evil. It is and has to be dangerous everywhere but that within well defined borders. If someone wants a total war, there is plenty of space in low and null sec for it.

What has to be changed?
- No war declarations without avoidable reasons. A reason can be a suspect timer on a corp member.
- The costs for a defender to end a war has to be lower than for the agressor to declare it. Otherwise its a simple mechanic to financially ruin the defender.
- Declaring war on a 5 man corp has to be more expensive/less rewarding than for a 500 man corp which very likely has more resources to defend themself.
- Unequal fights in high sec, where the aggressor has much more dps/hp as the victim shouldn't be rewarded with loot.

Malcanis,

I enjoy the whole concept of a war bond. It would be similar to setting the price for someone to send you a message only now its a defenders bet that says you won't be able to win a war against me. I would like to see some more detail into this concept like for example. What would be the conditions for winning said war against a defender? Are those conditions set by a general game mechanic or by the defender? Is there a way for the Attacker to end the war with out losses and the Defender to retain their bond? How does surrendering work in this case? How does allies coming in to help the defender work?

Just a few questions if you have more to add to your idea please feel free to do so. I like that idea as much as I like mine with the whole bribing the cops so to speak as a few have suggested it as.

One thing though in regards to Aelavaine, I agree with most of what is needed to be changed except for the fact about the costs for a defender to end war has to be lower. The whole point of war is to "ruin" the other corp you are attacking. It could be equal I suppose for the attacker and defender, meaning that the cost to end the war from the defenders side " The Bribe" could be 50mil just like the initial cost of a war dec was 50mil. With the option to pay more to prevent a dec for a week.

That's true.

I'm sorry, but what game are we playing EVE or CCC (Cute Cuddly Critters)?

The very premise of the game is that you can impose your play style on others. If you choose to be helpless and ineffectual...that is your choice.

I would refer you to this post.

I think the real problem is a fundamental difference in the philosophy. While we can point out, as Malcanis does, that HS war deccing is to farm easy kills and one could argue is rather...low class or something along those lines. The other side, those getting decced, have a philosophy when it comes to the game that is 180 degrees at odds with the philosophy of the game.



That is always going to be a problem. For these players any measure short of making HS perfectly safe is just not good enough. It is why we have the "just one more nerf" phenomena. CCP nerfs and nerfs and nerfs, and yet we hear the same complaints. Over in the AFK cloaking thread despite a nerf to cynos via a nerf to jump range and fatigue people are still....still...whining about cynos.

And we won't get into the issue that in many cases these are people who make bad decisions in game. Repeatedly.