These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Limit the amount of active War Decs for Alliances and Corps

Author
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#21 - 2016-12-08 01:14:49 UTC
Kara Hawke wrote:
Apparently im not getting my point across. It is a problem because this game has a higher turnover rate than McDonalds. CCP may not consider indefinite and unlimited war decs griefing but expecting people who can barely understand the games mechanics to properly organize or fight back against vets who have been playing for years with superior ships is just ignorant. The alpha surge is already dying down. Unless CCP does something to address broken highsec and encourage people to stick around without buying plex to compensate for constant losses it's going to drop to pre expansion numbers and you people will have even less people to dec.


Why can't they organise? Why can't they defend themselves? Why can't they operate in anyway under a wardec? Where is their leadership?

Starting a corp is consenting to the wardec mechanic. New players who get together and start a corp do so at their own peril. Nothing stopped them joining more experienced organisations who can show them that they don't have to dock up during a dec.

Let's not further destroy a playstyle because of players who don't know what they're doing. As someone mentioned, your issue is with corps and clueless players leading noobs to failure.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Black Pedro
Mine.
#22 - 2016-12-08 06:08:49 UTC
Kara Hawke wrote:
Apparently im not getting my point across. It is a problem because this game has a higher turnover rate than McDonalds. CCP may not consider indefinite and unlimited war decs griefing but expecting people who can barely understand the games mechanics to properly organize or fight back against vets who have been playing for years with superior ships is just ignorant. The alpha surge is already dying down. Unless CCP does something to address broken highsec and encourage people to stick around without buying plex to compensate for constant losses it's going to drop to pre expansion numbers and you people will have even less people to dec.
Why are you so sure of this? Data presented by CCP Quant and Rise suggest the opposite - that isolating people from the players from the sandbox decreases retention rates and the average time players spend in the game. Making it so new players can get trapped in clueless highsec new player corps that never interact with anyone else seems more likely to put players on a path to quitting then to stay with the game long term.

I am sure that people have quit the game after being wardecced and told to stay logged out. Either reflects the fact that they don't really want to be playing a PvP game, which is therefore a good thing as the wouldn't be likely to stick around that long anyway and can do something else with their time, or that their corp has terrible leadership and we lost a potential long-term Eve player which is a shame. The solution isn't however is to let these terrible corps operate with impunity by nerfing wardecs into irrelevance.

There are probably changes to the mechanic to promote more balance on each side as well as give some space for a purely social corp to exist. That is where you should focus your energies if you truly want to make the game better. Don't propose to remove large parts of the competitive aspect of the game because you don't want to, or are unable to, compete. Competition is the heart of this game.

-1 to your proposal then.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2016-12-08 06:29:31 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:


Let's not further destroy a playstyle because of players who don't know what they're doing. As someone mentioned, your issue is with corps and clueless players leading noobs to failure.




This right here is why War dec's won't ever be fixed.


Everyone is too busy worrying about the balance of the status quo, poor noobs getting decced in high sec, poor deccers who can't use watchlist anymore.


This game is going on 14 years old. Play styles come and go and must change as the game itself changes. How bout them ishtars, eh? Or even something we take as a concrete fixture these days, Concord?


Because of this, it's impossible to discuss the actual problems, because as soon as one tries, everyone and their brother does exactly what's going on here.


http://puu.sh/sI9qL/8d3a1ceba8.jpg

This is not good 'gameplay' for anybody, no matter how you try to spin it. But go ahead, let's keep going on about how the status quo is just fine, I'm sure that will get it fixed.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#24 - 2016-12-08 14:09:17 UTC
Ken, all that is is some numbers. On its own the amount of wars a corp has is not an indicator of anyone having fun or not. It is entirely possible that every one of those wars to have plenty of activity and even fights where the defenders have fun. Thats why, along some other reasons, im against just putting a limit to the amount of decs a corp/alliance can make.

The reason we expect those decs to be crappy blanket decs has a lot to do with different features to dec limit. And a lot of the people arguing against the op here are actually not happy with the status quo either. I'm not. Ralph especially isn't fond of blanket deccing.

Kara Hawke is someone who thinks nerfing wardecs into the ground will make the game a fun and safe place to play and subs will go up. She thinks players will enter into pvp later if they are allowed to grow. Problem with that is, it's not meant to be a safe place to play and players rarely enter pvp later. Instead the opposite of what she thinks happens, they just 'level up their raven and quit'. Where as those who get shot at, stay with the game. When wardecs were cheaper, more frequent, less biased towards the defender and hunters could see the moment you logged on, the game subscriptions grew every year. It WAS new players that were deccing other corps and learning to hunt and pvp. And more of these players stuck around.

So yeah, every time someone says 'war decs are mean -something something, think of the children-. Nerfing them will make the game better'. Im gonna pile on. The 'children' used to love the wardec mechanic.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Arden Elenduil
Unlimited Bear Works
#25 - 2016-12-08 16:27:15 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Ken, all that is is some numbers. On its own the amount of wars a corp has is not an indicator of anyone having fun or not. It is entirely possible that every one of those wars to have plenty of activity and even fights where the defenders have fun. Thats why, along some other reasons, im against just putting a limit to the amount of decs a corp/alliance can make.

The reason we expect those decs to be crappy blanket decs has a lot to do with different features to dec limit. And a lot of the people arguing against the op here are actually not happy with the status quo either. I'm not. Ralph especially isn't fond of blanket deccing.

Kara Hawke is someone who thinks nerfing wardecs into the ground will make the game a fun and safe place to play and subs will go up. She thinks players will enter into pvp later if they are allowed to grow. Problem with that is, it's not meant to be a safe place to play and players rarely enter pvp later. Instead the opposite of what she thinks happens, they just 'level up their raven and quit'. Where as those who get shot at, stay with the game. When wardecs were cheaper, more frequent, less biased towards the defender and hunters could see the moment you logged on, the game subscriptions grew every year. It WAS new players that were deccing other corps and learning to hunt and pvp. And more of these players stuck around.

So yeah, every time someone says 'war decs are mean -something something, think of the children-. Nerfing them will make the game better'. Im gonna pile on. The 'children' used to love the wardec mechanic.



As one of those people who "grew up" in Eve doing wardecs, I second this. If I had kept doing what I was doing and stayed in the carebear corp I was in, I would've quit the game a long time ago. There is a reason why I'm still here after 7 years, and it ain't the carebear playstyle.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2016-12-08 20:38:48 UTC
My 'Teeth cutting' into PVP was also war decs. I started in one of those corps being founded and ran by a nub, who knew nothing and lost stupid crap all over the place. We ended up being constantly at war, until we got tired of it, broke off, formed our own corp, and became the guys war deccing others.

But those war decs weren't part of a 70+ War dec everything that comes through the Perimeter gate campaign. They were small, localized affairs designed at finding an active group in an area and war deccing them. This meant sometimes we moved around a bit. Not huge moves I've become used to since joining Suddenly, but moving a region or two one way or another. This meant spending 3-4 days sometimes sitting in traffic areas watching people, checking KB's, member counts, etc, looking for someone we thought would be active and big enough to try to fight, but that we still had a reasonable chance of beating.


Yes this sometimes meant station games. Yes, we hit towers from time to time. And yes, we occasionally had targets move across new eden. And we followed.


That's what war decs should be aiming to achieve. And if the game has changed so much that they cannot do that function anymore, then they need taken apart completely and rebuilt from the ground up. Continuously clinging to a dead and gone system because it's what you've always done is as anti-eve as you can get. How's Black Legion doing these days anyway?


You're telling me that is all just some numbers?

Well no. That's one example of a blanket war dec system being in place. Occasionally there are a few peeps that roam around, but they're the exception. We've been one of those 96 active war decs for closing on a month. Why? Because someone flew an alliance JF into Jita, and someone else forgot about the war, and flew another one into Perimeter before seeing the war targets and jumping back out. There was no scouting out our local activity, looking at our pilots depth and ability, looking for any of our vulnerable industry corps, or seizing on an opportunity like an onlining citadel. It was just because someone flew an in alliance JF through Jita. It doesn't bother me, I gave into game of Alts years ago so can still do all my stuff just fine. You'd have to figure out how to war dec a couple NPC corps and war dec a few alt corps all at the same time to start bothering me with war decs. But that doesn't mean I can't look at the system and see it's very much broken and why.


But the status quo is preferable to any progress being made on fixing the system, short of CCP giving into a bunch of salt and giving high seccers more special protections/rules and letting them have agents that tell you literally the one single most important piece of information and biggest violation of privacy a game can give you in the context of the game, whether someone is online or not.

Lemme know if you wanna actually talk about the problems. Until then I'm done here.


In response to OP, I'm for limiting war decs, as part of one of many changes that need made to the war dec system to restore war decs to what they need to be. Not because high sec needs to be safer, but because war decs need more of a purpose than just sitting in Jita and war deccing everything that comes through. +1

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#27 - 2016-12-08 22:31:07 UTC
Arden Elenduil wrote:



As one of those people who "grew up" in Eve doing wardecs, I second this. If I had kept doing what I was doing and stayed in the carebear corp I was in, I would've quit the game a long time ago. There is a reason why I'm still here after 7 years, and it ain't the carebear playstyle.


Absolutely. If it wasn't for that very special, yet disturbing, corp (you know the one) picking me up as a noob, i honestly wouldn't be here.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Iain Cariaba
#28 - 2016-12-08 23:39:52 UTC
Why do we need further nerfs to resolve a situation that is the direct result of multiple nerfs in the first place?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#29 - 2016-12-09 00:11:59 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Why do we need further nerfs to resolve a situation that is the direct result of multiple nerfs in the first place?

Except, you know, it isn't. The War Dec spamming was happening and slowly growing before all these 'nerfs' people claim created the problem. Because various groups had worked out it was a low effort way for them to get their fun.
Great for them, it's legit, camping trade hubs for juicy war targets is hardly griefing newbies or station camping people for weeks so who cares that it happens, it's not really a big deal, sometimes people forget and they die, oh well.

As always the problem with 'War Decs' is utterly unrelated to war decs and entirely related to the lack of meaning for High Sec corps. With the new structures there was hope, but then CCP applied double nerfs to them in High Sec, with incredibly weak high sec defence (Since most of the defence power comes from the AOE weapons) & weaker statistics directly also. So look to corp incentives as the problem, not the war mechanics.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#30 - 2016-12-09 13:29:46 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Kara Hawke wrote:
I don't think I said anything about removing high sec war decs. In fact, I only commented on how broken the system is because it encourages greifing of newer players who don't pvp. There's very little incentives to join high sec player corporations which is why personally 3 of my 4 characters are in a npc corporations. So in fact, mercs play style is what's killing their play style.


Limiting these corps to a handful of decs limits the number of targets massively, which is going to essentially delete the merc playstyle. What's the point if you can only have half a dozen targets? You'd dec goons, test, nc., brave and PH, and that'd be your lot.

Wardecs are not griefing. PVP is not griefing. I have been under wardecs pretty much constantly for several years. I do not think this is griefing at all.

There is no way to not PVP in this game, everything is competitive by nature. People who are so afraid of losses that they never leave NPC corps are not going to be the kind of people who stick around for very long in this kind of game. Why should they be pandered to like this?

Why is your flat out refusal to adapt to a hostile environment worth the removal of said environment?



I think you are confusing mercenary and mercenary work with 'player farming'. There is a difference. Mercing was great and good for the game. Player farming sux and isn't good for the game. The continual onslaught of recommended changes (spanning awesome, good, bad to downright horrible) have a lot to do with current war dec mechanics. Currently the only smart move in HS pvp is to mass dec and farm players. That's what the current mechanics dictate and that's what current HS pvp folks do. This is not rocket science. Bad mechanics need to become good ones. The game (specifically HS pvp in this case) needs to be challenging, fun and interesting. Currently HS pvp isn't a healthy combination of these attributes. It could be and should be more.

If anyone is claiming that deccing the 6 largest player groups and 4 additional groups doesn't provide enough targets, then they are lazy and sux at eve. Carrying 100+ decs coupled with player assists in its current form HAS reduced HS pvp to player farming. It sux.


If you can't see and understand the difference between mercing and player farming, you're really not worth the time to argue with.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#31 - 2016-12-09 19:21:28 UTC
Kara Hawke wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Why do you deserve to be functionally immune to wardecs from mercenary corps, and why is your corp worth more to the game than any of said merc groups?


It ruins the game and drives many people away.


CCP's analysis says, "No." At least for new players. That is new players who are either ganked or killed legally stay longer than those who do not.

Further, it is very easy to avoid engaging in the war. Corps that wardec sit in trade hubs and roam the routes between hubs. So find an out of the way system and just wait them out. Do missions, mine, etc. Training an OOC hauler on your account is probably also a good idea. Keep that alt in an NPC corp and you can even move your stuff around and not worry about war targets.

"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
#32 - 2016-12-09 19:26:19 UTC
Kara Hawke wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Kara Hawke wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Why do you deserve to be functionally immune to wardecs from mercenary corps, and why is your corp worth more to the game than any of said merc groups?


It ruins the game and drives many people away. I've personally been a part of two corps that have dissolved from constant war decs by superior corps. People left or just stopped logging in when all the game became was sitting in station spinning your ship. So yes, if you want to still be playing the game in a few years, the smaller corps are more important to the game because eventually those players can get more involved in the game and pvp. The currrent system is completely broken, as it stands why even bother forcing corps to pay concord to keep wars active indefinitely, its penny's to large aggressive griefer corps.

Roll

Given the vast amount of stuff to do in this game, the only ones responsible for those people doing nothing but ship spinning is themselves.

Think of a wardec as an opportunity to step outside your narrow little world and experience more that the game has to offer.



I think you people fail to understand that there are some people who can contribute allot to the game that simply cannot defend themselves from some of these better geared, more experienced "merc" corps. There is no learning involved when one of them can absolutely decimate 3 newbies without breaking a sweat and then camp their stationfor days. Obviously EVE is very pvp focused, but why should that mean 9/10 people quitting the game shortly after starting it.

If you want this game to be around for another 10 years you're going to have to extend your very narrow view of the game and accept that EVE shouldn't appeal only to scammers and greifers.


This game was growing and did fine when there was alot more PvP in HS than there is now. So you are just wrong on that count.

And look, learn to PvP means you have to get out there and....lose ships. Get your corp into low cost T1 ships and go at it. Expect to lose ships and if you kill some of them, then it is a bonus. Things to help you:

Voice comms
Develop a combat doctrine, don't do kitchen sink fleets
Focus fire--i.e. the fleet commander designates a target that everyone shoots.
Read up on and understand how various timers work, for example with gates and/or docking.
Learn which stations have big docking rings and which one's don't.
Set up insta-dock and undock bookmarks so when you warp to or away from a station you can improve your chances of surviving.

If you insist on being puny, weak, and incompetent you are going to pretty much be food for everyone else.

"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
#33 - 2016-12-09 19:33:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Kenrailae wrote:
My 'Teeth cutting' into PVP was also war decs. I started in one of those corps being founded and ran by a nub, who knew nothing and lost stupid crap all over the place. We ended up being constantly at war, until we got tired of it, broke off, formed our own corp, and became the guys war deccing others.

But those war decs weren't part of a 70+ War dec everything that comes through the Perimeter gate campaign. They were small, localized affairs designed at finding an active group in an area and war deccing them. This meant sometimes we moved around a bit. Not huge moves I've become used to since joining Suddenly, but moving a region or two one way or another. This meant spending 3-4 days sometimes sitting in traffic areas watching people, checking KB's, member counts, etc, looking for someone we thought would be active and big enough to try to fight, but that we still had a reasonable chance of beating.


Yes this sometimes meant station games. Yes, we hit towers from time to time. And yes, we occasionally had targets move across new eden. And we followed.


Ahhh yes, the good old days.


Quote:
That's what war decs should be aiming to achieve. And if the game has changed so much that they cannot do that function anymore, then they need taken apart completely and rebuilt from the ground up. Continuously clinging to a dead and gone system because it's what you've always done is as anti-eve as you can get. How's Black Legion doing these days anyway?


It was predominantly the watchlist removal. Before you could watchlist people and get an idea on when they are online. When that was removed now you have no way of knowing, so the types of wardecs you described are pretty much a thing of the past.

And I don't know if we can "go back". When you have systems that exhibit emergence and spontaneous order it is not clear that you can just roll back the changes that got us here and we'll go back to where we once were. For example, as part of the changes to war decs we go larger war deccing alliances. These guys have been together for some time now and it is not clear how reversing the changes that caused that will suddenly break up those alliances. It might, but I don't see a mechanism that WILL do that. Or at the very least it will take time.

"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

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#34 - 2016-12-09 19:42:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Don't like wardecs? Drop back into an NPC corp and forget about them.

The wardec system is broken, on both sides of the equation, nobody is denying that; blanket wardecs are a symptom, they're not the disease.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#35 - 2016-12-09 21:28:49 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:

It was predominantly the watchlist removal. Before you could watchlist people and get an idea on when they are online. When that was removed now you have no way of knowing, so the types of wardecs you described are pretty much a thing of the past.

This isn't really true. The trend started in 2013 when the base cost of wars between two corporations was increased by 2500%, which places the base operating cost of a corporation using wars as their primary form of gameplay significantly out of reach for people who are new don't have a fairy substantial and reliable isk source available to them. This also removed the advantage to not being part of an alliance.

Additionally the ally system made it entirely trivial for the established mercenary groups to continuously beat new start-ups into the ground at no cost (usually at a net profit) and with little risk of retaliation. If you try and start up a new mercenary group you'll find yourself perpetually at war with at least one, usually more, large, well established mercenary groups that will make your gameplay extremely difficult. And when a small group gets in that situation they can't even get out by retracting the war (which used to be how defenders won wars).

What you get is a situation where there's a straight up cost barrier for new players, no advantage whatsoever to being in a small group and a massive advantage to being in a large group.

And the larger a group gets the more people they need to be at war with, so they declare more wars.

The watchlist is just the final nail in the coffin for small groups and local conflicts as it removed the first step of the core gameplay loop for highsec warfare (watchlist, locate, scout, engage) without providing any kind of replacement. There's no longer any plausible way to actually fight a war on a small scale.

The net result is that if you look at the list of wars almost all of them are mass war declarations by groups like VMG and PIRAT, who operate on this highly impersonal, industrialized form of warfare.

This is basically all the result of carebears getting things that they said they wanted: more tools to use against aggressors, more expensive wars, cost scaling, aggressors being unable to retract wars etc.

This is a bed that these people have made for themselves.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#36 - 2016-12-11 04:29:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

It was predominantly the watchlist removal. Before you could watchlist people and get an idea on when they are online. When that was removed now you have no way of knowing, so the types of wardecs you described are pretty much a thing of the past.

This isn't really true. The trend started in 2013 when the base cost of wars between two corporations was increased by 2500%, which places the base operating cost of a corporation using wars as their primary form of gameplay significantly out of reach for people who are new don't have a fairy substantial and reliable isk source available to them. This also removed the advantage to not being part of an alliance.

Additionally the ally system made it entirely trivial for the established mercenary groups to continuously beat new start-ups into the ground at no cost (usually at a net profit) and with little risk of retaliation. If you try and start up a new mercenary group you'll find yourself perpetually at war with at least one, usually more, large, well established mercenary groups that will make your gameplay extremely difficult. And when a small group gets in that situation they can't even get out by retracting the war (which used to be how defenders won wars).

What you get is a situation where there's a straight up cost barrier for new players, no advantage whatsoever to being in a small group and a massive advantage to being in a large group.

And the larger a group gets the more people they need to be at war with, so they declare more wars.

The watchlist is just the final nail in the coffin for small groups and local conflicts as it removed the first step of the core gameplay loop for highsec warfare (watchlist, locate, scout, engage) without providing any kind of replacement. There's no longer any plausible way to actually fight a war on a small scale.

The net result is that if you look at the list of wars almost all of them are mass war declarations by groups like VMG and PIRAT, who operate on this highly impersonal, industrialized form of warfare.

This is basically all the result of carebears getting things that they said they wanted: more tools to use against aggressors, more expensive wars, cost scaling, aggressors being unable to retract wars etc.

This is a bed that these people have made for themselves.


Sure, mass wardeccing is what the lazy did to get content. However, the removal of the watchlist basically killed off the focused wardec. So now about the only way for war dec corps and alliances to get content--i.e. things to shoot--is to camp trade hubs and the routes connecting the hubs and war dec anything and everything they see.

As a result small and large wardec corps/alliances were done when it came to focused war decs. That game play was essentially over. Supers were more safe, but HS also became more safe except for the camping of trade hubs.

Yes, the increase in wardec costs drove smaller corps into alliances so that they could spread the costs. Yet another dumb idea from CCP...probably a Grey-I'm a flaming Idiot-scale idea.

The idea it is a bed that wardec corps have made for themselves however is just complete errant nonsense.

Basically, the current state is more a result of CCP's changes to the games mechanics. Those changes engendered behavioral changes on the part of those who use wardecs to get where we are now.

Edit: Disregard the last two paragraphs....I jerked my knee too fast.

"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

Black Pedro
Mine.
#37 - 2016-12-11 06:31:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Teckos Pech wrote:
The idea it is a bed that wardec corps have made for themselves however is just complete errant nonsense.

Basically, the current state is more a result of CCP's changes to the games mechanics. Those changes engendered behavioral changes on the part of those who use wardecs to get where we are now.
If you re-read that post you will see that Vimsy was saying it was the carebears that made for themselves this situation by continually whining like they are want to do.

And she is largely right. Raising the bar to attack in a game like this does very little in the long run other than increase the disparity between the two side of a conflict. Raising the cost, or increasing the risk just forces players to band together to deal with the artificial requirement to attack by organizing and sharing risks/costs.

CCP may like that from a social point of view as they have identified being part of groups as something that keeps people in the game, but they should be concerned about the effect that has on the PvP balance of the game. It certainly makes playing the game in a small group more difficult. It was basically the same problem that FozzieSov was trying to address by replacing the requirement for massive capital fleets and DPS requirements to participate in sov (which kept smaller groups out) with an entosis system that scaled much better with the power/size of various participants. Now groups of 10 or 10 000 can fight over sov against a similarly sized group using basically the same mechanic.

Carebears (and the devs that made the mistake of listening to them) however have just made wardecs (and ganking for that matter) inaccessible to themselves and only the province of specialized groups that they really have no chance against. They have indeed made their bed, and now have to organize to a similar extent as the aggressors if they hope to be competitive. Being carebears however, they are much more likely to just whine to CCP to save them with another nerf to the aggressors (kinda like this thread) which will just make the situation worse and leave them further behind as their opponents organize even more to just keep playing the game.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#38 - 2016-12-11 06:43:35 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
The idea it is a bed that wardec corps have made for themselves however is just complete errant nonsense.

Basically, the current state is more a result of CCP's changes to the games mechanics. Those changes engendered behavioral changes on the part of those who use wardecs to get where we are now.
If you re-read that post you will see that Vimsy was saying it was the carebears that made for themselves this situation by continually whining like they are want to do.

And she is largely right. Raising the bar to attack in a game like this does very little in the long run other than increase the disparity between the two side of a conflict. Raising the cost, or increasing the risk just forces players to band together to deal with the artificial requirement to attack by organizing and sharing risks/costs.

CCP may like that from a social point of view as they have identified being part of groups as something that keeps people in the game, but they should be concerned about the effect that has on the PvP balance of the game. It certainly makes playing the game in a small group more difficult. It was basically the same problem that FozzieSov was trying to address by replace the requirement for massive capital fleets and DPS requirements to participate in sov (which kept smaller groups out) with an entosis system that scaled much better with the power/size of various participants. Now groups of 10 or 10 000 can fight over sov against a similarly sized group using basically the same mechanic.

Carebears (and the devs that made the mistake of listening to them) however have just made wardecs (and ganking for that matter) inaccessible to themselves and only the province of specialized groups that they really have no chance against. They have indeed made their bed, and now have to organize to the similar extent as the aggressors if they hope to be competitive. Being carebears however, they are much more likely to just whine to CCP to save them with another nerf to the aggressors which will just make the situation worse and leave them further behind as their opponents organize even more to just keep playing the game.


Thanks, you are correct...I edited my post.

"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

Sitting Bull Lakota
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#39 - 2016-12-11 09:25:48 UTC
xMercyx wrote:
add some skill books to prevent what i think is the abuse of the war declaring system. what i mean by that is, the corps and alliances mass war dec-ing us tiny little corps with little to no restrictions. don't just add isk requirement, that's not enough.

Your willful and directed ignorance of the myriad of ways to secure yourself and your mates from wardecs and aggression mechanics in general to the point of being functionally invulnerable in highsec to all but the most coordinated of suicide gank fleets is not a feature or an idea. It is actually the absence of an idea.

Colloquially: Git gud. Bear
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#40 - 2016-12-11 13:46:01 UTC
I agree with the OP to some extent.

To me, the problem is that a new-ish industry corp is extremely underpowered compared to combat corps both new, old, large, and small.

A combat corp will wipe the floor against players who have most of there SP in mining and spend most of their time lasering rocks.
The newer corp, already struggling to make a profit in industry PvP, is now either forced to hire mercs with ISK they haven't been able to make or spin their ships in station, all while PvPing vs their warring corp and every industry player in all of their operating regions.

Sure they could just stay in an NPC corp but then the corp/guild mechanic, a social mechanic found and expected in every game, isn't used for the social aspect of the game which is arguably the core of an industry corp.

IMO, these corps should have a little bit of assistance in this area. Combat characters are kind of a requirement for all corps, and an unnecessary one at that.

TLDR;
A newish combat corp does not require miners.
A newish mining corp should not require fighters.