These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Purpose of highsec wars?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Another Posting Alt
Zerious Fricken Biziness
#21 - 2016-10-09 10:39:41 UTC
OP should maybe try SISI, where nobody will shoot him in hisec unless he wants them to.
Mark Marconi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2016-10-09 10:43:43 UTC
The biggest problem with hi-sec wardecs is that they are not risk vs reward.

They cost more the larger the corp you are war decing. So it is the opposite of risk vs reward.

A large corp deccing a smaller corp and taking less risk pays less.

The fees should be based on the size of your corp vs what you are war decing.

Have a base and then a multiplier effect so if you have 50 in your corp and want to wardec a 10 character corp you pay 5 times as much but if you are in a 10 character corp and want to wardec a 5000 character alliance, its almost free, as you are going to die a lot.

The CSM gets in the way of CCP communicating properly with the players of this game.

After all we are not just players, we are customers.

Time for the CSM to be disbanded.
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#23 - 2016-10-09 10:58:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Mark Marconi wrote:
The biggest problem with hi-sec wardecs is that they are not risk vs reward.

They cost more the larger the corp you are war decing. So it is the opposite of risk vs reward.

A large corp deccing a smaller corp and taking less risk pays less.

The fees should be based on the size of your corp vs what you are war decing.

Have a base and then a multiplier effect so if you have 50 in your corp and want to wardec a 10 character corp you pay 5 times as much but if you are in a 10 character corp and want to wardec a 5000 character alliance, its almost free, as you are going to die a lot.

All defenders to a wardec are able to acquire an infinite number of free allies to balance any issue between numbers and competitiveness.

So if a 50 character Corp declares war on a 10 character Corp, by the time aggression starts, they could be facing many times their own size if the defenders are good.

This more than balances the issue of cost.
Mark Marconi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2016-10-09 11:46:42 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Mark Marconi wrote:
The biggest problem with hi-sec wardecs is that they are not risk vs reward.

They cost more the larger the corp you are war decing. So it is the opposite of risk vs reward.

A large corp deccing a smaller corp and taking less risk pays less.

The fees should be based on the size of your corp vs what you are war decing.

Have a base and then a multiplier effect so if you have 50 in your corp and want to wardec a 10 character corp you pay 5 times as much but if you are in a 10 character corp and want to wardec a 5000 character alliance, its almost free, as you are going to die a lot.

All defenders to a wardec are able to acquire an infinite number of free allies to balance any issue between numbers and competitiveness.

So if a 50 character Corp declares war on a 10 character Corp, by the time aggression starts, they could be facing many times their own size if the defenders are good.

This more than balances the issue of cost.

Except in reality that very rarely happens. So the attacker has a very small risk with the small possibility of a greater risk, while the defender has a greater risk.

That is not risk vs reward. That is picking on the little guy, to steal their lunch money.

The CSM gets in the way of CCP communicating properly with the players of this game.

After all we are not just players, we are customers.

Time for the CSM to be disbanded.
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#25 - 2016-10-09 11:58:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Mark Marconi wrote:
Except in reality that very rarely happens.

That's not an issue of mechanics though, so it doesn't really need a change in mechanics to manage.

The mechanics clearly provide a very easy to use way to balance the difference in size/competence, which makes it a totally player controlled and player solvable issue.
Linus Gorp
Ministry of Propaganda and Morale
#26 - 2016-10-09 12:10:09 UTC
Jedi Xenogen wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

People who PvP in a game built around PvP are bad people... I guess you also think guns should be banned from all call of duty games too.

The only bad people here are the ones who demand the playstyles and content of others (and themselves) removed from a game for no good reason.


Hmm, I think your right, maybe I'm just trying to push my point of view.
But, I stand by my opinion that the game could be a bit more newbie friendly.

https://dementiagaming.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/learning_curve_of_eve.jpg

EVE was never designed to be new-player friendly. It's designed to be a harsh, cold and unforgiving universe that punishes your every mistake.

When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#27 - 2016-10-09 12:12:33 UTC
Mark Marconi wrote:
The biggest problem with hi-sec wardecs is that they are not risk vs reward.

They cost more the larger the corp you are war decing. So it is the opposite of risk vs reward.

A large corp deccing a smaller corp and taking less risk pays less.

The fees should be based on the size of your corp vs what you are war decing.

Have a base and then a multiplier effect so if you have 50 in your corp and want to wardec a 10 character corp you pay 5 times as much but if you are in a 10 character corp and want to wardec a 5000 character alliance, its almost free, as you are going to die a lot.

You'll be happy to know that we did a wardec round table thing yesterday and everyone there universally agreed that the current cost scale system is logically unsound, unfairly benefits large groups which don't need extra protection from CONCORD and that a system in which the size of the aggressor is what determines the cost of declaring war, no the size of the defender would be preferable.

Literally everyone agreed that this would be a more fair, more reasonable way for the system to work, even people who whose alliances would be negatively affected by it.

Nobody, be they are carebear miner or a highsec mercenary thinks that it costing more to declare war on a larger group is okay.
Memphis Baas
#28 - 2016-10-09 13:24:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Memphis Baas
First, Mr. OP, nice troll post.

Got a question, though: how exactly do you propose that they disable wars just in high-sec? I mean, if I'm blocked from declaring a war against you in high-sec, I can take a trip to the nearest lowsec system and do it.

So let's say they allow declaring war, but just prevent any kind of shooting players (in high-sec). In effect, your corp could have 50 wars going on, but all your members would be safe, unless they step into lowsec or null or wormhole space or whatever. In effect, you'd be sieged, forced to remain in high-sec, where they can't shoot you.

Of course, without being able to hunt where the target is, all the PVP'ers will be waiting at the entry gates, and they won't really need a wardec to shoot in low or wh or null, so even your neutral alts won't be safe. So, good luck trying to export goods, or import pirate ships, officer loot, and moon materials.

You can just continue mining the low end ores, do the crappy PI, and salvage the low end mats of high sec, while null and WH takes full advantage of the buff to mining ships and the full spread of rich asteroids they have, of the capability to get materials that you can't, and of the ability to lay down citadels and have high-sec-like asset safety. You can live a simple life of no combat experience and being poor, while everyone else enjoys capital ships and whatever new combat ships that CCP introduces.

And when you try to get out and enjoy some of this stuff yourself, you can't, because you're sieged in. And won't have fight experience anyway.

It's a fun gameplay, being sieged in. You can experience it right now, actually, if you ever get camped in a station with an entire fleet of enemies waiting outside. It's a lot of fun. You just sit in station and roleplay, and relax, it's so peaceful.
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#29 - 2016-10-09 13:26:03 UTC


Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Mark Marconi wrote:
The biggest problem with hi-sec wardecs is that they are not risk vs reward.

They cost more the larger the corp you are war decing. So it is the opposite of risk vs reward.

A large corp deccing a smaller corp and taking less risk pays less.

The fees should be based on the size of your corp vs what you are war decing.

Have a base and then a multiplier effect so if you have 50 in your corp and want to wardec a 10 character corp you pay 5 times as much but if you are in a 10 character corp and want to wardec a 5000 character alliance, its almost free, as you are going to die a lot.

You'll be happy to know that we did a wardec round table thing yesterday and everyone there universally agreed that the current cost scale system is logically unsound, unfairly benefits large groups which don't need extra protection from CONCORD and that a system in which the size of the aggressor is what determines the cost of declaring war, no the size of the defender would be preferable.

Literally everyone agreed that this would be a more fair, more reasonable way for the system to work, even people who whose alliances would be negatively affected by it.

Nobody, be they are carebear miner or a highsec mercenary thinks that it costing more to declare war on a larger group is okay.

Confirming , unilateral agreement across all the attendees on this topic.


Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Jedi Xenogen
Doomheim
#30 - 2016-10-09 14:05:24 UTC
Memphis Baas wrote:

So let's say they allow declaring war, but just prevent any kind of shooting players (in high-sec). In effect, your corp could have 50 wars going on, but all your members would be safe, unless they step into lowsec or null or wormhole space or whatever. In effect, you'd be sieged, forced to remain in high-sec, where they can't shoot you.


This is what I would like to have happen.

Memphis Baas wrote:

Of course, without being able to hunt where the target is, all the PVP'ers will be waiting at the entry gates, and they won't really need a wardec to shoot in low or wh or null, so even your neutral alts won't be safe. So, good luck trying to export goods, or import pirate ships, officer loot, and moon materials.


Low, null and wh space isn't very safe anyway.

Memphis Baas wrote:

You can just continue mining the low end ores, do the crappy PI, and salvage the low end mats of high sec, while null and WH takes full advantage of the buff to mining ships and the full spread of rich asteroids they have, of the capability to get materials that you can't, and of the ability to lay down citadels and have high-sec-like asset safety. You can live a simple life of no combat experience and being poor, while everyone else enjoys capital ships and whatever new combat ships that CCP introduces.


That's my choice.

Memphis Baas wrote:

And when you try to get out and enjoy some of this stuff yourself, you can't, because you're sieged in. And won't have fight experience anyway.


I guess you miss out on the combat experience of a highsec war...
Akrasjel Lanate
Lanate Industries
#31 - 2016-10-09 14:07:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Akrasjel Lanate
Quote:
Purpose of highsec wars?

In most cases easy kills for people that don't want to leaving high sec to get kills.
Mostly one sided.
Wardec mechanics are not fixable.

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
Josef Djugashvilis
#32 - 2016-10-09 14:12:59 UTC
When the idea that the larger the wardecced corp the more it would cost rather than the other way round, I posted that it must be CCPs idea of an April Fool joke.

CCP does much that is right, but, boy, when they get it wrong, they do so on an epic scale.

This is not a signature.
Anne Dieu-le-veut
Natl Assn for the Advancement of Criminal People
#33 - 2016-10-09 14:14:09 UTC
Posting in stealth "Please wardec by corp" thread.
Natural CloneKiller
Commonwealth Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#34 - 2016-10-09 14:20:27 UTC
Jedi Xenogen wrote:
I'm just thinking how much better this game would be if CCP took wars out of highsec.

If you want to pvp join faction warfare or go live in null or brave lowsec.

Highsec should be a hassle free pve area where people can roam around and enjoy the game, and not have to take a week off cause some huge merc corp want some easy ganks on low level players that haven't got the hang of pvp yet or our community of peaceful miners.

So, I call for a change, take wars out of highsec. I know this makes wars redundant, but I don't care, I think they are making people quit the game, and I don't want this game to die slowly, I want to see it grow.

Yea or nay? Anyone got anything to add?



By making high sec totally safe you would be changing the fundamentals of the game. War decs are fine. If you don't want pvp go play wow.
Memphis Baas
#35 - 2016-10-09 14:50:56 UTC
Jedi Xenogen wrote:
That's my choice.


Pretty sure CCP won't implement your idea, which is why your troll thread is staying somewhat friendly, and is not exploding to 100 pages of rage.

In any case, your choice is to play the game the way it is, or not play. This is the choice, for pretty much any game. Have you suggested major changes like this to any other MMO's? If no, why EVE? If yes, how did it go?
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#36 - 2016-10-09 14:53:57 UTC
Quote:
17. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.

As a courtesy to other forum users, please search to see if there is a thread already open on the topic you wish to discuss. If so, please place your comments there instead. Multiple threads on the same subject clutter up the forums needlessly, causing good feedback and ideas to be lost. Please keep discussions regarding a topic to a single thread.



CCP Falcon has outlined his thoughts on EVE and touched on this issue Here. I would also point out that PVP can not be avoided in eve. In Fact if you review the EVE FAQ its listed at 7.2 "CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

As this issue has been discussed in depth before, I will close this thread.

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE mails about forum moderation.
Previous page12