EVE General Discussion

We've been talking a lot about Eve as a hard game, and Eve might not be for everyone. But if we lose people to other games, hopefully it's because they don't like what Eve is, and not because our UI is stupid and unintuitive. I don't think there's any shame in losing players for the right reasons.

Close.

I'm not trying to prevent them form having ANY PVP. They are MORE than welcome to go PVP against other players that are interested in PVP. I'm simply trying to avoid giving them reason to extend the war dec against me.

War dec means I'm not earning ISK, and I enjoy earning ISK.

Fortunately, there are lots of people that are willing to PVP against other players that want to PVP.

If the only source of boom was from PVPers not killing carebears, then there wouldn't be much boom.




Mineral prices tell me there is AMPLE boom occurring.




Lots of luck.

I'm weak Hi Sec fodder and I hate this. This would ruin the concept of eve. If you are weak, get help or quit.

CCP has demonstrated that they listen to the feedback of the players and take their concerns into consideration in varying degrees. Ironically this whole discussion came along as a result of them interacting with the CSM on this very topic. Yes, the decision comes down to them ultimately deciding what if anything they want to do, but it would be unwise for any of their customer to not want to be heard while those decisions are being made.

While I haven't been playing EVE for very long (about a month or so), I do read these forums every day. From the view of an outsider looking in, the War Dec system is broken - but scrapping it or going fully mutual are both extremes, and won't solve anything. They're also not really on the table, which anyone would know if they actually read the minutes that this entire thread is about.

If people like LHA Tarawa suddenly became the majority of the playerbase, EVE would be Asteroid Farmville Super Auction Market Land - in Space. On the other hand, If frothing-at-the-mouth PvPers got their way, then EVE would be nothing more than World of Tanks - in Space. Neither sounds very appealing, at least not to me. I like EVE to be EVE, with all its little bits and pieces intact. After all, there's no "high" sec without a "low" sec to give it the name. There's no piracy without victims, and no crime without laws. All "bad" needs a "good." Simple stuff here.

Unilateral war decs are not only necessary (or indy corps will run amok), but also just plain logical. Nobody gets together in the real world and agrees to go to war. One side declares it, the other responds - whether forcefully or not.

It's been said several times in this thread already that "purely" industrial corps shoot themselves in the collective foot by overspecializing. This is true.

Even NPC indy corps have security arms attached to them, because that's how corporations are supposed work. They protect their assets. They protect their shipping lanes. They protect their workers. You don't often see a "pure" PvP corp operate without logistical support - otherwise they couldn't afford ships to lose in the first place. So why is that industrialists neglect to protect themselves by simply fleshing out their rosters with security forces?

I've been in hi sec corps that have tried to be both PVP and Industrial balanced. it simply doesn't work.

If you go a couple weeks without any combat, the PVPers get mad and leave corp. If you have a war dec every other week, the industrialists leave. Even just a low sec roam for the PVPers will bring a war dec that forces the industrialists into station.

We tried doing two separate corps, not in alliance, so one could do war decs that dont' effect the other. Then you drift apart and the group breaks up and you are back to a pure industrial corp.


As an industrialist, the ONLY way to operate is to be in as few wars as possible, and this means never giving kills when you are war dec'ed.

You never answered the question and the rest is just personal opinion written in a factual tone. My opinion is that making a game of the war dec system would incentivise some defenders to fight but i'm interested to know, specifically, why you think it wouldn't...

I agree that currently, when a stronger entity declares war on a weaker one, there is no real reason for them to fight when they have nothing to gain.

You don't want to do combat, I don't want to mine.

Because I don't want to mine, I'm subject to the impact of market PVP.

Because you don't want to fight, you're subject to being undefended in war.

The difference is, I accept the consequence of my having no interest in one part of the game.

The only thing that comes from fighting back, is more war decs. People that want, or do not mind, war decs are already fighting back.

Those that do not want to fight, and just want to have as few war dec's as possible, will continue to stay docked up.

In short, there is nothing you can do that would get those that do not want to PVP, to PVP. Attempts to make them PVP will just drive them out of the game.


Let's say you dec me, and as soon as one of us loses 200 million ISK worth of ships, the war ends. So, I undock and fight you, the war ends. Then, the next minute I get another dec by someone that wants to PVP, because now they know they can get fights. Then I spend all my time at war instead of in belts making ISK.

Unless of course, you implement some easily exploitable system where after I win (or lose) a war, I can't be dec'ed again for awhile, in which case, I just dec myself with alts to keep the dec's away.