These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Woot, woot. Now even easier to get out of a war dec.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#241 - 2013-05-15 00:47:04 UTC
OfBalance wrote:
I have to concur. Of all the things to get a hernia over: highsec pvp isnt' what I'd pick. Non-consentual pvp in empire has never required a wardec and that's the cold harsh wonder of EVE. The day you legitimately need a wardec to grief anyone in empire space is the day EVE dies.


"well wardecs are literally irrelevant now but hey you can still suicide gank so what's the problem?????"

christ

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Montevius Williams
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#242 - 2013-05-15 00:47:43 UTC
OfBalance wrote:
I have to concur. Of all the things to get a hernia over: highsec pvp isnt' what I'd pick. Non-consentual pvp in empire has never required a wardec and that's the cold harsh wonder of EVE. The day you legitimately need a wardec to grief anyone in empire space is the day EVE dies.


Pretty much this.

"The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#243 - 2013-05-15 00:49:03 UTC
I mean now that there is literally no difference between being in a player corp and an NPC corp, perhaps the NPC corp tax should be raised and applied throughout highsec and extended to extraction?

Safety should have a cost

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Montevius Williams
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#244 - 2013-05-15 00:49:04 UTC
Andski wrote:
OfBalance wrote:
I have to concur. Of all the things to get a hernia over: highsec pvp isnt' what I'd pick. Non-consentual pvp in empire has never required a wardec and that's the cold harsh wonder of EVE. The day you legitimately need a wardec to grief anyone in empire space is the day EVE dies.


"well wardecs are literally irrelevant now but hey you can still suicide gank so what's the problem?????"

christ


Dude, seriously, just take your Beatles hair cut and get out.

"The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB
OfBalance
Caldari State
#245 - 2013-05-15 00:50:03 UTC
Andski wrote:
OfBalance wrote:
I have to concur. Of all the things to get a hernia over: highsec pvp isnt' what I'd pick. Non-consentual pvp in empire has never required a wardec and that's the cold harsh wonder of EVE. The day you legitimately need a wardec to grief anyone in empire space is the day EVE dies.


"well wardecs are literally irrelevant now but hey you can still suicide gank so what's the problem?????"

christ


Not "what's the problem," but rather "there are other problems of more import," and I save my rage for when it's fully justified.

I think empire being so damned profitable is more of an issue than the miniscule impact of this wardec change, which amounts to nothing much.
Montevius Williams
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#246 - 2013-05-15 00:51:43 UTC
Andski wrote:
I mean now that there is literally no difference between being in a player corp and an NPC corp, perhaps the NPC corp tax should be raised and applied throughout highsec and extended to extraction?

Safety should have a cost


I do agree that NPC corps need to be nerfed and nerfed hard.

"The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#247 - 2013-05-15 00:52:43 UTC
OfBalance wrote:
I think empire being so damned profitable is more of an issue than the miniscule impact of this wardec change, which amounts to nothing much.


Do you honestly think CCP will ever do anything to fix that massive imbalance? Of course not, they've stopped caring about "balance" in hisec since they've decided to essentially make it an almost entirely separate game, a bloated themepark enclave within the "sandbox" while ignoring the fact that they've essentially made the rest of EVE a bloody desert.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#248 - 2013-05-15 00:55:32 UTC
OfBalance wrote:
Andski wrote:
OfBalance wrote:
I have to concur. Of all the things to get a hernia over: highsec pvp isnt' what I'd pick. Non-consentual pvp in empire has never required a wardec and that's the cold harsh wonder of EVE. The day you legitimately need a wardec to grief anyone in empire space is the day EVE dies.


"well wardecs are literally irrelevant now but hey you can still suicide gank so what's the problem?????"

christ


Not "what's the problem," but rather "there are other problems of more import," and I save my rage for when it's fully justified.

I think empire being so damned profitable is more of an issue than the miniscule impact of this wardec change, which amounts to nothing much.


The problem is that this change means its now all but impossible to attack a player in high sec without concord getting involved. Granted the odds wern't great before but at least it was better than 0 chance.
OfBalance
Caldari State
#249 - 2013-05-15 00:57:27 UTC
Andski wrote:
OfBalance wrote:
I think empire being so damned profitable is more of an issue than the miniscule impact of this wardec change, which amounts to nothing much.


Do you honestly think CCP will ever do anything to fix that massive imbalance? Of course not, they've stopped caring about "balance" in hisec since they've decided to essentially make it an almost entirely separate game, a bloated themepark enclave within the "sandbox" while ignoring the fact that they've essentially made the rest of EVE a bloody desert.


Ok so EVE is already dead by that measure then, and this change doesn't do much but add a tiny insult to injury.

Assuming they didn't implement this at all, I'd still be arguing for nerfing empire income streams and buffing what used to be superior risk/rewards in null. If that battle can't be won, then the game is going in the wrong direction (again), but that's the battle and I don't think the change is symboilc of a turning point either way.
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#250 - 2013-05-15 01:00:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
OfBalance wrote:
Ok so EVE is already dead by that measure then, and this change doesn't do much but add a tiny insult to injury.

Assuming they didn't implement this at all, I'd still be arguing for nerfing empire income streams and buffing what used to be superior risk/rewards in null. If that battle can't be won, then the game is going in the wrong direction (again), but that's the battle and I don't think the change is symboilc of a turning point either way.




I'd say that the effective removal of the primary avenue of PvP in hisec does more than "add insult to injury"

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Kangaax
Money in da bank
#251 - 2013-05-15 01:11:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Kangaax
Andski wrote:
OfBalance wrote:
Ok so EVE is already dead by that measure then, and this change doesn't do much but add a tiny insult to injury.

Assuming they didn't implement this at all, I'd still be arguing for nerfing empire income streams and buffing what used to be superior risk/rewards in null. If that battle can't be won, then the game is going in the wrong direction (again), but that's the battle and I don't think the change is symboilc of a turning point either way.




I'd say that the effective removal of the primary avenue of PvP in hisec does more than "add insult to injury"


I have a tiny bit of a question for you. When you say "removal of the primary avenue of PvP in highsec" when most people in that discussion agree that the targets that would have fought before would still fight, and people who would have logged off now switch corp, what do you mean exactly?
Because it's not like there is a lot of pew to be lost in that change Straight

Oh, and besides, there's just an idea, but... what about restricting corp hopping exclusively for war-decced corps? That'd solve the "issue" while still removing the hassle of roles dropping
Iudicium Vastus
Doomheim
#252 - 2013-05-15 01:12:00 UTC
This isn't even a wardec change or function. It's really just a corp management change, yet so much whine. <3

[u]Nerf stabs/cloaks in FW?[/u] No, just.. -Fit more points -Fit faction points -Bring a friend or two with points (an alt is fine too)
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#253 - 2013-05-15 01:26:40 UTC
Kangaax wrote:
I have a tiny bit of a question for you. When you say "removal of the primary avenue of PvP in highsec" when most people in that discussion agree that the targets that would have fought before would still fight, and people who would have logged off now switch corp, what do you mean exactly?
Because it's not like there is a lot of pew to be lost in that change Straight

Oh, and besides, there's just an idea, but... what about restricting corp hopping exclusively for war-decced corps? That'd solve the "issue" while still removing the hassle of roles dropping


Wouldn't do anything because the only wardec that will continue to exist is the RvB wardec. Wardecs against nullsec alliances will no longer matter since anyone worth killing will drop corp before entering hisec, wardecs against hisec corps will no longer matter because they'll just reform and wardecs against hisec PvP corps will no longer matter because they'll just reform when defeat is on the horizon.

I guess CCP's vision of hisec PvP is T1 frigate no-pod duels and the occasional suicide gank once in a blue moon (if even that)

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#254 - 2013-05-15 01:44:00 UTC
Karsa Egivand wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
According to latest dev blog, the need to wait 24 hours between dropping roles and quitting a player corp, is being removed.

War dec? Insta-drop corp to NPC corp.

SWEET!


Come on, this feature has so many upsides, that THAT particular downside doesn't spoil it. Members without roles did that already.


What is this reason and logic stuff doing on the EVE forums!
Kangaax
Money in da bank
#255 - 2013-05-15 01:47:33 UTC
Andski wrote:
Kangaax wrote:
I have a tiny bit of a question for you. When you say "removal of the primary avenue of PvP in highsec" when most people in that discussion agree that the targets that would have fought before would still fight, and people who would have logged off now switch corp, what do you mean exactly?
Because it's not like there is a lot of pew to be lost in that change Straight

Oh, and besides, there's just an idea, but... what about restricting corp hopping exclusively for war-decced corps? That'd solve the "issue" while still removing the hassle of roles dropping


Wouldn't do anything because the only wardec that will continue to exist is the RvB wardec. Wardecs against nullsec alliances will no longer matter since anyone worth killing will drop corp before entering hisec, wardecs against hisec corps will no longer matter because they'll just reform and wardecs against hisec PvP corps will no longer matter because they'll just reform when defeat is on the horizon.

I guess CCP's vision of hisec PvP is T1 frigate no-pod duels and the occasional suicide gank once in a blue moon (if even that)

Erm, i don't think anyone in a nullsec alliance will drop corp while entering highsec because it would bloat everyone of emails, not to mention the recruiters that would spend half their day accepting people back from highsec. And keep track of every member that's on a "highsec break". No, seriously.
Wardecs against highsec corps already didn't matter because they would log off, and if wardecs against highsec pvp corps were to make them disband, that's like... totally the point? I wouldn't give any credit to a "PVP" corp that would disband any day, and that wouldn't make sense in the first place.
So... hum, what's left?
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#256 - 2013-05-15 01:50:03 UTC
Probably bears repeating that folks with no corp roles could always drop corp immediately -- so this is an insignificant change.
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#257 - 2013-05-15 01:50:15 UTC
Kangaax wrote:
Erm, i don't think anyone in a nullsec alliance will drop corp while entering highsec because it would bloat everyone of emails, not to mention the recruiters that would spend half their day accepting people back from highsec. And keep track of every member that's on a "highsec break". No, seriously.
Wardecs against highsec corps already didn't matter because they would log off, and if wardecs against highsec pvp corps were to make them disband, that's like... totally the point? I wouldn't give any credit to a "PVP" corp that would disband any day, and that wouldn't make sense in the first place.
So... hum, what's left?


So you don't actually have the slightest clue about how nullsec alliances operate?

Let me help you: if I need to do a hisec run on a character, I don't need to bug a "recruiter" to accept it - I do it myself. And it's not only through being a GoonWaffe director, but because of the fact that I could keep that character in an in-alliance alt corp under my control.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#258 - 2013-05-15 01:54:56 UTC
GreenSeed wrote:
if a corp got wardecced they just call it a day and drop corp, in the event they decided not to fight. now they can just drop corp and be done with it.

how is that different from before? they still have assets they need to evacuate, and they still have 24 hrs of warning to do so.

how is having to spin ships for 24 hrs, then going back to whatever they were doing is different from not spinning ships for 24 hrs?


is your argument really going to be " well if they don't want to fight, they they must take a 24hr time out", because if it is so, then its really stupid. sorry, i want to be on your side, because i agree that corp hopping sucks, but if they fight is has to be because they want to. not because some overly contrived set of rules forced them to.

Because it used to be that paying for a week of war got us 1 day of war, and now it will get us 0 days of war.

If CCP is going to make leaving corporations instant, then wars should be free. It's only fair.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Kangaax
Money in da bank
#259 - 2013-05-15 01:58:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Kangaax
Andski wrote:
Kangaax wrote:
Erm, i don't think anyone in a nullsec alliance will drop corp while entering highsec because it would bloat everyone of emails, not to mention the recruiters that would spend half their day accepting people back from highsec. And keep track of every member that's on a "highsec break". No, seriously.
Wardecs against highsec corps already didn't matter because they would log off, and if wardecs against highsec pvp corps were to make them disband, that's like... totally the point? I wouldn't give any credit to a "PVP" corp that would disband any day, and that wouldn't make sense in the first place.
So... hum, what's left?


So you don't actually have the slightest clue about how nullsec alliances operate?

Let me help you: if I need to do a hisec run on a character, I don't need to bug a "recruiter" to accept it - I do it myself. And it's not only through being a GoonWaffe director, but because of the fact that I could keep that character in an in-alliance alt corp under my control.

Indeed i don't, since i never was part of one. That being said, your argument is a bit... erm, stupid.
You can do it, because you're a director in goons, alright. That means 90% of your corp can't, so we got that sorted out.
The alt-corp thing, what would prevent people from deccing it as well? I assume there isn't 2000 corps in goons, so it's plainly obvious it is exactly the same as the first corp dropping argument... there has to be someone in the alt-corp to accept you back, and everybody isn't a director.

What about the random goon member, that has no alt and is no biggie?


Oh, and let's go to the neutral alt topic. What's the difference with this change, when EVERYONE uses neutral hauling alts? I have some doubts about nullsec alliances members getting shot in highsec by war targets, except if they're like, very, very dumb.
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#260 - 2013-05-15 01:58:39 UTC
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
Probably bears repeating that folks with no corp roles could always drop corp immediately -- so this is an insignificant change.


It is an insignificant change, but that doesn't mean the end result of the wardec system being worthless is acceptable.