These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

State of Eve: War Dec
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#281 - 2016-07-07 09:28:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Dracvlad wrote:
And yet in your reply to me you talked about reducing risk, but it was a perfectly valid point.

Nope. I talked about balanced suggestions.

Reduce risk all you want. But reduce reward too.

Almost 100% of suggestions made when it comes to wardecs, propose placing more limits/requirements on wardec groups; with no associated penalty the other way.

For example, where's the suggestions like:

- 'reduce the cost of a dec to 0 if a structure is up'?
- 'make it so defenders can't drop Corp to an NPC Corp if there is a structure they can shoot instead'? (I don't agree with this)
- 'remove the ability to hire allies to go do your shooting for you'?

etc.

Where are the balancing mechanics that give something back to the wardeccers for the additional restrictions/costs they have to absorb?

Where are the suggestions to reduce rewards because overall risk in highsec will be reduced?

It's always just about grrr risk for pve-ers. grrr nasty wardeccers. They shouldn't be allowed to have their fun because they make it harder for others to have fun. Well, that's what competition is about. That's where even something like a game can create a sense of achievement, because instead of losing a war, you find a way to continue to get what you want despite a war. etc.

Every player in the game can make a choice to make it hard for the wardeccers, or go penalise them for declaring war. Instead, the suggestions always cry for CCP to step in and put mechanics in the way instead of players taking responsibility for themselves.

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..."
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#282 - 2016-07-07 10:00:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Dracvlad wrote:
But I have to ask why if you do not care about war decs are you posting in a thread about war decs. This is not a gotcha, just honest bemusement, though I saw you wanted to remove rewards in hisec to balance off against reduced risk

I'm not a chef, but I still care about the food I eat.

That is, I don't use the wardec mechanics myself, but I'm still subject to wars and the risk they bring, so I have as much interest in the mechanics as wardeccers do. The risk is a good thing.

I've never ganked either, but the mechanics should be there and be usable for people that want to use them. (but that's off topic for this thread).

I've only ever conducted 1 war, which was a solo war against FCON at the end of 2014. One of their members was paying a merc group to declare war against a Corp in highsec and they didn't know how to deal with it. I couldn't be on 24/7 to help teach them after their CEO went awol for the war, so I did the next best thing and took the war against the guy who was financing the rolling wardec.

I killed everything of FCONs I could. MTUs, mining barges, industrials coming through gates, industrials at POCOs; and the few times I was killed, I came straight back again and cloaky camped them when I was at work or asleep.

For a group as large as FCON, it was nothing more than an annoyance, but players getting at other players is at the core of this game. I made sure I told them all in local why I was there and who was paying the mercs.

After 2 months of a rolling wardec, the week after I went to null, the wardec wasn't renewed.

We don't need mechanics getting in the way. Let the players sort things 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..."
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#283 - 2016-07-07 10:18:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
And yet in your reply to me you talked about reducing risk, but it was a perfectly valid point.

Nope. I talked about balanced suggestions.

Reduce risk all you want. But reduce reward too.

Almost 100% of suggestions made when it comes to wardecs, propose placing more limits/requirements on wardec groups; with no associated penalty the other way.

For example, where's the suggestions like:

- 'reduce the cost of a dec to 0 if a structure is up'?
- 'make it so defenders can't drop Corp to an NPC Corp if there is a structure they can shoot instead'? (I don't agree with this)
- 'remove the ability to hire allies to go do your shooting for you'?

etc.

Where are the balancing mechanics that give something back to the wardeccers for the additional restrictions/costs they have to absorb?

Where are the suggestions to reduce rewards because overall risk in highsec will be reduced?

It's always just about grrr risk. grrr nasty wardeccers. They shouldn't be allowed to have their fun because they make it harder for others to have fun. Well, that's what competition is about. That's where even something like a game can create a sense of achievement, because instead of losing a war, you find a way to continue to get what you want despite a war. etc.

Every player in the game can make a choice to make it hard for the wardeccers, or go penalise them for declaring war. Instead, the suggestions always cry for CCP to step in and put mechanics in the way instead of players taking responsibility for themselves.


I said that your point was a perfectly valid one, you had a game balance as a concept. I want war decs to be a part of hisec so removing war decs is not an option I would support.

Actually I had started to look at those aspects and had written a post, but canned it because I was hoping others would talk about that. My view was that the current mechanics are in themselves pretty good, but the environment suck as do reasons to actually fight, which is why I came at it from the angle I did. I wanted to go kill some Goons operating near me, and I saw 500m to dec them and went, no way..., that I do have a beef with.

In terms of your suggestions, reduce war dec cost to 0 if a structure is up, 50m is OK.
I don't believe it is a good idea to lock people into anything if their option is just to not log in
I was debating allowing the aggressor to have allies if the war became unbalanced, but it is a risk to the attacker.

Look at it as they are getting watch list type abilities back but it is not free intel.

Hisec has low rewards apart from Incursions and most people in hisec don't run them.

It is not Grrr hisec war deccers at least on my part, I want to have better wars and change the mentality of just going to ground.

You might notice that I am looking at having something in space that matters as being key to meaningful war dec content for both sides.

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
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#284 - 2016-07-07 10:47:07 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
But I have to ask why if you do not care about war decs are you posting in a thread about war decs. This is not a gotcha, just honest bemusement, though I saw you wanted to remove rewards in hisec to balance off against reduced risk

I'm not a chef, but I still care about the food I eat.

That is, I don't use the wardec mechanics myself, but I'm still subject to wars and the risk they bring, so I have as much interest in the mechanics as wardeccers do. The risk is a good thing.

I've never ganked either, but the mechanics should be there and be usable for people that want to use them. (but that's off topic for this thread).

I've only ever conducted 1 war, which was a solo war against FCON at the end of 2014. One of their members was paying a merc group to declare war against a Corp in highsec and they didn't know how to deal with it. I couldn't be on 24/7 to help teach them after their CEO went awol for the war, so I did the next best thing and took the war against the guy who was financing the rolling wardec.

I killed everything of FCONs I could. MTUs, mining barges, industrials coming through gates, industrials at POCOs; and the few times I was killed, I came straight back again and cloaky camped them when I was at work or asleep.

For a group as large as FCON, it was nothing more than an annoyance, but players getting at other players is at the core of this game. I made sure I told them all in local why I was there and who was paying the mercs.

After 2 months of a rolling wardec, the week after I went to null, the wardec wasn't renewed.

We don't need mechanics getting in the way. Let the players sort things out.


I liked that story, I have done similar things. I have also ganked...

I think the war dec mechanics are not that bad to be honest, I think the issue is the environment and player attitude, I am looking for something that gives value to both sides and is a conflict driver by being vulnerable to attack.

For example your reply on the 1-10 guys made me think about having them set the period it was working and link that to it being vulnerable, in other words when they were active and able to defend it and use it. I think that is rather neat and I like it.

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
Aaron
Eternal Frontier
#285 - 2016-07-07 12:52:15 UTC
Drac, have you been looking at right wing BNP websites again, its 2016 BTW we live in a multicultural society.

Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#286 - 2016-07-07 13:16:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Aaron wrote:
Drac, have you been looking at right wing BNP websites again, its 2016 BTW we live in a multicultural society.


Aaron,

I have to report you for that, I was your friend, if I was what you have just accused me of, I would have never been your friend. Sad

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
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#287 - 2016-07-07 13:34:12 UTC
Hm. Something just dawned to me (sorry if I go off on a tangent here lads - just throwing it out there)

The complaint I hear is that wardeccers don't put any assets on the line. Right? Whereas in fact they do, in the form of expensive ships, implants, boosters, you name it.

On the other hand, the one thing keeping the defender from mounting a counterstrike, is the fact these assets simply dock up whenever a real fight would go down.

Perhaps we can slightly modify some mechanics and come to a point where both parties are somewhat more at risk, so that fighting indeed occurs? Thinking along the lines of:

- copy/paste citadel tethering mechanics to stations, meaning: if you aggress you lose tether; after that, you can't dock until you shake all tackle.
- get rid of neutral interference by making a boosting ship gain the same flags as logistics: when boosting suspects or out-of-corp, it should go suspect as well. (to prevent this, keep safety green).
- locator agents should provide more meaningful data on the whereabouts/numbers of other parties involved in the war. Even number online and constellation would be a start.

I'll elaborate, because this has several implications. For one, it'd put an end to out-of-corp boosting for miners as well, providing an incentive to be IN a corp. Drop from corp, lose boosts. At the same time it'd put some more assets at risk. As for reusing the tethering for stations as well, it'd promote commitment-- whether from the attacking or defending side: when you aggress, you dish it out till it's over.

As for 'upgrading' the locator agents, the goal here is simply to promote engagements. You don't have to get it handed on a silver platter, but just knowing when/where to focus your efforts goes a long way.
Lord Razpataz
Devils Rejects 666
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#288 - 2016-07-07 13:38:48 UTC
Lord Razpataz wrote:
Aaron wrote:

Ahh, ya got me.

I can't be sure that the watchlist has always been used as a war tool, I'll research it and get back to you, I can't even remember right now.

But didn't you say something about what you guys did before watchlist, I would really like to hear that.
Or dont you remember?

FYI.. I've tried to figure out when watchlist was implemented.. and the best answer was videos from back then.
If anyone can verify when it was implemented it would be great.

I did some more research.

Seems like the first time the old watchlist functionality is mentioned in a patch note was in 2005
And ironically contacts was called "buddy list"...

Quote:
Chat Channels

* Players will no longer get a confirmation dialogue box when receiving an invitation from a member of their buddy list.
...
* When a buddy or blocked contact logs off, you get a logged off notification and the windows change their online status accordingly.
* When a buddy or blocked contact of yours logs on, you get a logged on notification and user entry windows change their online status accordingly.
* When a new buddy or blocked contact is added, you immediately get their online status.


Not sure if the mechanic was already in place in some form and this was changes?
Atleast we had the functionality waaaay before 2011/12 as you claimed Aaron.
Aaron
Eternal Frontier
#289 - 2016-07-07 13:44:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Aaron
Dracvlad wrote:
Aaron wrote:
Drac, have you been looking at right wing BNP websites again, its 2016 BTW we live in a multicultural society.


Aaron,

I have to report you for that, I was your friend, if I was what you have accused me of I would have never been your friend. Sad


You talk the way you do and we end up here, now you want to snitch? That ain't gangsta. Maybe your skin is too thin? I know you're not that you banana, I just knew saying that would get to you. I'm pulling your leg.

Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
ll Kuray ll
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#290 - 2016-07-07 14:19:21 UTC
well this took me by surprise it was intended to discuss the war dec mechanic in the whole but it looks like we are focusing on watchlist.

Can we do better? I want to talk about what a war dec mechanic would really look like and not just the detail about blanket deccing, neut logi, and watchlist.

As it stands I do not see a clear position for war decs and that's not saying they shouldn't be in the game. I'd just like to see a bit more structure to it so it's actually something both sides enjoy and one which doesn't stop people from signing into the game for a week.
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#291 - 2016-07-07 15:14:16 UTC
ll Kuray ll wrote:
well this took me by surprise it was intended to discuss the war dec mechanic in the whole but it looks like we are focusing on watchlist.

Can we do better? I want to talk about what a war dec mechanic would really look like and not just the detail about blanket deccing, neut logi, and watchlist.

As it stands I do not see a clear position for war decs and that's not saying they shouldn't be in the game. I'd just like to see a bit more structure to it so it's actually something both sides enjoy and one which doesn't stop people from signing into the game for a week.

You are never going to get a "balanced" war-dec mechanic that "both sides" are happy with. Ever. The closest thing is Faction Warfare - and that isn't a war-dec, just a permanent state of war. Also RvB and some groups like that - who are able to use the existing mechanic just fine.

The actual war-dec mechanic itself is fine. If anything they should reduce the price again to open it up to small poorer groups so there would be less incentive for people to cluster together and let 1 rich guy pay for it....But lets face it the damage is already done and EVE will never go back even if they reduce wardec prices again. it would only open the field to new groups, not change the old ones.

There is no reason both sides need to want or enjoy war. That is what makes it "war" and not a friendly contest....

I wouldn't be opposed to some sort of built in reward for winning a war...but I don't really think it is needed - and all it would do is encourage even more blanket war declarations to farm it.

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
ll Kuray ll
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#292 - 2016-07-07 15:19:56 UTC
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
ll Kuray ll wrote:
well this took me by surprise it was intended to discuss the war dec mechanic in the whole but it looks like we are focusing on watchlist.

Can we do better? I want to talk about what a war dec mechanic would really look like and not just the detail about blanket deccing, neut logi, and watchlist.

As it stands I do not see a clear position for war decs and that's not saying they shouldn't be in the game. I'd just like to see a bit more structure to it so it's actually something both sides enjoy and one which doesn't stop people from signing into the game for a week.

You are never going to get a "balanced" war-dec mechanic that "both sides" are happy with. Ever. The closest thing is Faction Warfare - and that isn't a war-dec, just a permanent state of war. Also RvB and some groups like that - who are able to use the existing mechanic just fine.

The actual war-dec mechanic itself is fine. If anything they should reduce the price again to open it up to small poorer groups so there would be less incentive for people to cluster together and let 1 rich guy pay for it....But lets face it the damage is already done and EVE will never go back even if they reduce wardec prices again. it would only open the field to new groups, not change the old ones.

There is no reason both sides need to want or enjoy war. That is what makes it "war" and not a friendly contest....

I wouldn't be opposed to some sort of built in reward for winning a war...but I don't really think it is needed - and all it would do is encourage even more blanket war declarations to farm it.


When you realise this is a game you'll see why war decs need to be changed and can be enjoyable. Before you start with Eve is not that sort of game, once you untangle all of the crap people have bolted on to why Eve is so great at the heart of it, it's a game.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#293 - 2016-07-07 15:37:40 UTC
ll Kuray ll wrote:
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:

You are never going to get a "balanced" war-dec mechanic that "both sides" are happy with. Ever. The closest thing is Faction Warfare - and that isn't a war-dec, just a permanent state of war. Also RvB and some groups like that - who are able to use the existing mechanic just fine.

The actual war-dec mechanic itself is fine. If anything they should reduce the price again to open it up to small poorer groups so there would be less incentive for people to cluster together and let 1 rich guy pay for it....But lets face it the damage is already done and EVE will never go back even if they reduce wardec prices again. it would only open the field to new groups, not change the old ones.

There is no reason both sides need to want or enjoy war. That is what makes it "war" and not a friendly contest....

I wouldn't be opposed to some sort of built in reward for winning a war...but I don't really think it is needed - and all it would do is encourage even more blanket war declarations to farm it.


When you realise this is a game you'll see why war decs need to be changed and can be enjoyable. Before you start with Eve is not that sort of game, once you untangle all of the crap people have bolted on to why Eve is so great at the heart of it, it's a game.


This pie in the sky kind of thinking is what CCP has been following for years in regards to lots of things in EVE. The idea that 'everyone can be happy' isn't just a foolish goal in game design, it's the kind of thing that ends up with a lot of strife and unhappiness in real life too imo.

Some people will NEVER accept the idea that someone more powerful than them can choose to go to war with them against their will. If you take out the "against their will" part, then you don't have war. You can tinker all you like with 'objectives for war' and incentives and costs, but at the end of the day the issues still exist.

The issue isn't war. One issue (the big one) is high sec (people play in high sec for safety/to be left alone, then feel violated because others can pay to make them unsafe). Another issue is how the anti-wardec folks hate the 'inequality' of the war system, where the rich can 'bully' (I hate that word) the poor, where the established can screw with the newbs, and where entertainment can be had at the expense of others.

But all the above is what makes EVE a GAME!. when people like you say "it's a game" you are saying "it should be fun for everyone". What you describe isn't a game, it's a movie. A GAME is a competitive situation where their are at least 2 opposing sides, and one of those sides wins and the other loses.

Quote:
game
ɡām/
noun
noun: game; plural noun: games

1.
a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#294 - 2016-07-07 15:39:09 UTC
ll Kuray ll wrote:
When you realise this is a game you'll see why war decs need to be changed and can be enjoyable. Before you start with Eve is not that sort of game, once you untangle all of the crap people have bolted on to why Eve is so great at the heart of it, it's a game.

I never said EVE wasn't a game. I never said wardecs shouldn't be enjoyable.

I just said there is no possible change you can ever make that is going to make the targets enjoy wardecs.

Particularly since very nearly 100% of all fighting spirit has died in the high sec carebears. There is nothing left to rekindle. They are a lost cause.

Deal with it.

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#295 - 2016-07-07 15:59:39 UTC
Geronimo McVain wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Additionally, the vulnerability window will, as you say, lead to better target selection or as I'd put it more precise selection. After all, I wouldn't just go deccing every other corp I see lest some of them is in my vulnerability window and they get together to start taking down my structures.

And that's exactly how it should be. The structure should be vulnerable while you can defend it and while the other players have a chance to destroy it. If you choose an AUZ time window you shouldn't be able to hunt at US prime.


I know, the Devs have basically made it so people can go to bed without having to ensure their stuff is guarded literally 24/7. Towers were one of the first to have something like this. You got to pick how much stront was in the tower so you would pick when it came out of reinforced either to be advantageous to your or disadvantageous to your opponents.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#296 - 2016-07-07 16:06:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Dracvlad wrote:


I do care about war decs and think that it should exist, I want to see them becoming more engaging for both sides. But I have to ask why if you do not care about war decs are you posting in a thread about war decs. This is not a gotcha, just honest bemusement, though I saw you wanted to remove rewards in hisec to balance off against reduced risk. But the best income making comes from market trading in hisec.



Because maybe some of us find the issues of game balance interesting and care about the overall game? Hell, one reason I like the game is because of my interest in economics (a topic which would bore more people into a coma). Also, this is a game about emergent order....economics is about emergent order. So I find it interesting to understand aspects of the game I do not take part in for various reasons....just as I do not run a fortune 500 company or negotiate trade deals IRL.

And also my corp/alliance has been the subject of war decs. While it can be annoying you don't see me here on the forums saying, "Remove it," or "Give me an inherent advantage over these players."

By and large various new ideas an suggestions boil down to just that. Providing group A with an inherent advantage over not-Group A or Group B.

To put it in game theory terms, you do not want dominant strategies in the game. Dominant strategies are boring. You ALWAYS play the dominant strategies...ALWAYS. That is boring.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Lord Razpataz
Devils Rejects 666
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#297 - 2016-07-07 16:19:13 UTC
ll Kuray ll wrote:
well this took me by surprise it was intended to discuss the war dec mechanic in the whole but it looks like we are focusing on watchlist.

Can we do better? I want to talk about what a war dec mechanic would really look like and not just the detail about blanket deccing, neut logi, and watchlist.

As it stands I do not see a clear position for war decs and that's not saying they shouldn't be in the game. I'd just like to see a bit more structure to it so it's actually something both sides enjoy and one which doesn't stop people from signing into the game for a week.


Is this something like what you had in mind?

Quote:
Finally, we want to expand a lot on the information spreading of wars and their state. We want to show information about active wars, their war reports and how wars concluded in EVE Gate. This can include several kinds of leaderboards, such as ranking war loss inflicted vs. war loss received, rank the effectiveness of allies (i.e. how much loss do they inflict of the total, etc.) and similar rank lists. One thing we want to be very careful about here is what data to count and what data is presented. For instance, wars against entities that actively fight back will count more for these rank lists, to encourage people to fight those willing to fight. Getting this information on EVE Gate would give players a better understanding of the military strength of corporations and alliances, with a special focus on mercenary corps. Naturally, it can also act as a nice status symbol for those interested in this kind of activity, with entities competing for the ‘Hall of Fame’.
source


It didn't get finished tho... but is this the "structure" you would like?
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#298 - 2016-07-07 16:45:31 UTC
ll Kuray ll wrote:
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
ll Kuray ll wrote:
well this took me by surprise it was intended to discuss the war dec mechanic in the whole but it looks like we are focusing on watchlist.

Can we do better? I want to talk about what a war dec mechanic would really look like and not just the detail about blanket deccing, neut logi, and watchlist.

As it stands I do not see a clear position for war decs and that's not saying they shouldn't be in the game. I'd just like to see a bit more structure to it so it's actually something both sides enjoy and one which doesn't stop people from signing into the game for a week.

You are never going to get a "balanced" war-dec mechanic that "both sides" are happy with. Ever. The closest thing is Faction Warfare - and that isn't a war-dec, just a permanent state of war. Also RvB and some groups like that - who are able to use the existing mechanic just fine.

The actual war-dec mechanic itself is fine. If anything they should reduce the price again to open it up to small poorer groups so there would be less incentive for people to cluster together and let 1 rich guy pay for it....But lets face it the damage is already done and EVE will never go back even if they reduce wardec prices again. it would only open the field to new groups, not change the old ones.

There is no reason both sides need to want or enjoy war. That is what makes it "war" and not a friendly contest....

I wouldn't be opposed to some sort of built in reward for winning a war...but I don't really think it is needed - and all it would do is encourage even more blanket war declarations to farm it.


When you realise this is a game you'll see why war decs need to be changed and can be enjoyable. Before you start with Eve is not that sort of game, once you untangle all of the crap people have bolted on to why Eve is so great at the heart of it, it's a game.


Yes, we know it is a game. The thing is war decs are fine for those who do not mind or even enjoy PvP. Then there are those who do not enjoy PvP at all....tell us how to get this subset of players who do want any PvP at all to be happy with PvP? It strikes me as being similar to the problem of:

How do you get people who don't like chocolate to like chocolate.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#299 - 2016-07-07 16:51:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Jenn aSide wrote:

This pie in the sky kind of thinking is what CCP has been following for years in regards to lots of things in EVE. The idea that 'everyone can be happy' isn't just a foolish goal in game design, it's the kind of thing that ends up with a lot of strife and unhappiness in real life too imo.


This. Trying to make any aspect of this game something that everyone can be happy with given the diverse nature of the player base is asking alot.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#300 - 2016-07-07 20:29:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
It is not a question of making everyone happy, with cuddles and what not, it is actually all about reasons to get in a ship and have a go at something. The best content is when you have something material to fight over, such as a POS for a valuable moon or even sov, I am not blind to the fact that the majority of people in hisec will go towards the lowest risk and accept the lower return because they are not able to fight for it, however there are some that might, I have met some like that.

The whole objective behind my suggestion was to have something in space that gave real value, as all the WDE's reacted against the watch list being changed to a buddy list I thought that would be a good place to start. I have seen in hisec a resistance against ganking, they can't win, but they fight back, as compared to not fighting back at all in terms of war decs. The issue is that even those that like PvP don't fight back.

It is not about giving advantage to x or y, it is all about giving something that they need but which needs to be defended, I have proposed something for the WDE's and one for the indy hisec players.

I do believe that the current war dec mechanics are actually pretty good, though I think that the cost of war decking the Goons for example is just too high, I wanted to go after three players who were mining near me, 500m to do a war dec, seriously that is dumb. I have a feeling that the very high cost of war decking large alliances had its part to play in the move towards blanket war decking under the direction of certain rich guys, plus the race to be the strongest in hisec, along with the decline in hisec targets.

Teckos, I have an interest in economics too, but this is a game whether people like that fact or not, it is however a hard game that you have to treat with a certain attitude to be good at it. You have to guage risk and minimize risk, at times you will have to decide not to do things because of risk, or adjust your behaviour to reduce the cost of that risk, or even change the risk. I know all about risk at a professional level.

As Jenn often drones on about risk and reward, the question in terms of war decs is the risk is pretty high in the pipes and around the hubs, but what exatly is the reward, I keep on pointing it out, a crack at a Svipul or a Cynabal, or perhaps a gank on a careless merc camping a Hub, I was looking to kill an Archetype. instra locking Legion sitting at the Amarr station, I was setup for it, I had ship scanned him, I knew his fit, I had a Vindicator ready, plus a bait ship setup to web the hell out of him and a WH merc group got him first. I was taking a risk with a Vindi to kill a Legion, how many people who are hisec would go for that.

When I speak to the hisec players I find people who focus on indy stuff and have alts that get the left overs in terms of SP, they also have very poor knowledge on PvP. When CCP did these dailies I was suggesting that they spend that SP on a PvP alt, and some were doing it and then CCP stopped it.

You really do not get it, you can only get these people to fight if they feel they have a chance at something and they can have fun, that is why the OS is a key one, it gets them into space resisting. It is not a case about making people happy, it is changing the attitude of people. I am sorry but the current rewards for fighting back are not worth the risk.

So you can talk about emergent order, waffle on about how bad carebears are, talk about risk and reward etc. until you are blue in the face, but the whole objective of this is have something of value to both sides in space and I really think that this small change could have a major impact given time and attitude.

Dirty Forum Alt, you sort of realised what I was wanting to do, but I can tell you now, my perception is that it will not work without the change I have suggested. Anyway, there is always WH space... Evil

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