Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Before I begin, let me start by saying that I am not a carebear. I enjoy a good fight, and I have no problem losing ships, pods, implants, and whatever else goes along with it. I enjoy high sec wars, low sec fights, nullsec roams...the works.

That being said, I think there needs to be some changes on how war declarations get handled vis a vis the ridiculous 2 and 3 man corporations running around and bulk war deccing a half a dozen corporations at a time. The end result is one or two players doing little more than being a nuisance. I mean, I know we're all on the Internet here, but is it really necessary to enable people to go out of their way to prove John Gabriel's "Greater Internet @$#!-wad Theory" correct on a regular basis? I think not...

I propose that a minimum ACTIVE member count requirement (e.g. must have logged in within the past X days) be imposed on any corporation wishing to declare war on another. Set it to some reasonable number, like 10+, or even base it on some reasonable fraction (or whole) of the target corporation. Do something to make wars meaningful again, basically.

Again, I should reiterate that I am not suggesting we abandon war declarations entirely. I would just rather see them taken more seriously than they currently are. Every time I've gone hunting for war targets in these ridiculous 2 man griefer corporations, 9 times out of 10, they tuck tail and run as fast as they can as soon as someone willing to take them up on their war shows up. The last good engagement I had involved me losing a Hyperion of an expensive sort, but the six man corporation we were fighting was an honorable group, and it was...FUN.

You should definitely undock and go kick their asses. Stop letting them ruin your biznazz.

Problem is: if there were fights, then it would ruin the statistics about wardecs. Can't have that right now.

So whats your post for then?

If you are not losing ships or they are not putting you out of business then why worry about it?

This 100%. Play smart and you'll never lose a thing. Especially to these small one or two man corp wardecs. They're easy...make a watchlist. Takes a total of right-clicking and selecting "Add Contact." Not too time consuming. Plus you get a 24 hour warning, so you could do it while afk running missions in your faction fit BS right before the dec goes through and not waste any time.

I don't buy into the "minimum member count" idea, but given that there ARE people who use wardecs for griefing purposes and NOT for what the wardec mechanism was meant for, I'd alter your suggestion a bit with something like an x-number of decs per # of members kind of thing. If you're a 1-3 man corp, you can only ACTIVELY start one wardec. 5-10, two wardecs, and so on. Yes, I know this can easily be exploited with the whole wardec invite thing, but maybe it's worth discussing. Apply the same rule to accepting an invite to an existing war, maybe... dunno. I've always thought wardecs should be about accomplishing something, and not just to grief small high-sec indy players.

http://www.imgjoe.com/x/out001.png

So you're saying that this individual who has war dec'd your much larger corporation and succeeded in killing one of your members should not be allowed to do that, then?

GOOD NEWS EVERYONE

Your scrubby corporation has qualified for a free wardec from Kris' Karebear Killing Korp.

See you soon! o7

Wait, you want me to war dec you with my one man corporations of death?

You're quite right. How dare I suggest wardecs actually ACCOMPLISH something.

Yeah, I suck. I forgot this was GD Light.

Redacted quote of deleted post. -- ISD LackOfFaith

Actually, I spend the bulk of my time doing high-sec industry (fairly plainly obvious given that the vast majority of my posts are in S&I).

Not that it's of any particular consequence.

What I spend my time doing has no material relationship to whether or not your idea has merit.

The people declaring war on the OP are quite obviously accomplishing something, by definition. This is an absolute, irrefutable fact. They've blown up his ships and hindered his operations, and made his life more difficult than it would be in the absence of the war dec.

To say that this isn't "accomplishing anything" is the claim of an intellectually dishonest dullard. It is clearly accomplishing something. Whether or or not that accomplishment is worth the price of maintaining the war is a wholly subjective determination that is rightfully left to the person paying the bill.