These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dodging Wardecs

First post
Author
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#241 - 2014-09-10 15:27:39 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
[I don't think any game mechanic is going to be able to force PvE players into wars that they have no interest in fighting.


I didn't realize Eve had a PVE server...
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#242 - 2014-09-10 15:30:47 UTC
IIshira wrote:
malcovas Henderson wrote:
IIshira wrote:
Just make it where they war follows that pilot till the wardec is up for renewal. Yes you could still "dodge" the wardec but you would be waiting 7 days to do so..

Simple fix


No. That would certainly be game breaking, and fall directly into the WD'ers lap. That's not including that the war is against a Corp, not an individual. Even if the Individual caused the war.


"game breaking"... Really??... Being a bit dramatic are we???

If anything is broken it's the ability for corp members being able to jump from one shell corp to another 5 minutes after being dec'd. This is coming from myself who absolutely hates wardecs and would use any means to avoid them.

No it's not wardecing the player.. You chose to be part of the corporation and you're paying the price for dealing with a war... If you don't want wars be in a NPC corporation. You shouldn't be able to have the benefits of a player corp with the protection of an NPC corp.


Exactly.

That you can do this moots the point of having small player corps. Mine exists out of pride and pride alone, the 11% tax in an npc corp wouldn't kill use as most of our income if from LP. But why play a player driven game if you're just going to hide behind the developer's skirts in an npc corp?
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#243 - 2014-09-10 15:33:23 UTC
It's so easy

Chuck wardecs

Chuck NPC corps

Chuck CONCORD

Allow Sov in Highsec.

Done.

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Absolutely Not Analt
Carebears on Fire
#244 - 2014-09-10 15:33:53 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Absolutely Not Analt wrote:
Let me try taking a different tack here.

Assume that disanding corps under wardec is removed from the game. It's a done deal. If your corp is wardecd it cannot be disbanded, which means the CEO character cannot leave the corp.

Scenario: The Marmite Collective wardecs Random Corporation Number 1234567890 [RC#.] who has four members (who are all probably alts of the same player).

Question: What will change in RC#.'s response to the wardec given the new assumption?


Nothing. An alt is installed as CEO and everyone drops to NPC as usual

This already happens


And that's my point.

You can't MAKE people fight a war they have no chance of winning when they have no reason to fight it in the first place. Changing the wardec mechanics won't change that - it's basic human nature. If they (being the target corp) have no interest in ship to ship combat and no real assets that have to be defended, why would they fight against overwhelming odds for what amounts to, basically, a String entry in a database on a video game server?

You can make all the mechanics changes you want, but you're very unlikely to change the behavior.

Eve is a multi player game. And you are the content. - Ralph King-Griffin Being meh at two things is not better than being great at one. - Lugh Crow-Slave

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#245 - 2014-09-10 15:34:02 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
A station trader exposes himself to loss. Again, exactly who said that pew pew is the only form of conflict? Am I not typing in English?
Then why is using perfectly valid methods to avoid a wardec suddenly so bad? They do not want to fight, so they can avoid doing so.

Jenn aSide wrote:
And that's the problem. People doing a war dec don't need to 'want a fight', they need to want to do a war dec for whatever reason they choose. That's no one's business than there own. You don't need a permission slip to interact with other people in a video game, in this game it's the whole purpose of the game.
Absolutely, and if the other side wants to run away from that wardec, it's perfectly reasonable to do so.

Jenn aSide wrote:
In a game like this, if someone makes war on you you should have to either respond (via fighting, moving, spending money to hire proxies/mercenaries or even just manual evading in space which is what I do) or surrender (ie pay a fee, imo to CONCORD not the war deccers). But they whole "drop corp, reform" thing is stupid.
And most people can't just "drop corp, reform". Most people have something to protect. If your targets keep dropping corp, then stop targeting the people with absolutely nothing to protect (which is a small minority).

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#246 - 2014-09-10 15:34:30 UTC
IIshira wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
[I don't think any game mechanic is going to be able to force PvE players into wars that they have no interest in fighting.


I didn't realize Eve had a PVE server...


It has players like me who prefer to focus on PvE, and have no interest in PvP in highsec without CONCORD intervention. To the extent that I could no longer avoid wars in my 1 man corp I would just drop to NPC corps and consider the 11% tax rate the cost of doing business. In no conceivable world would I decide to do something like fight a war against Marmite.
Seneca Auran
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#247 - 2014-09-10 15:35:56 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Seneca Auran wrote:

Why do you think War Decs are the one area of the entire game where CCP is adamantly opposed to people using any means to get around them?


I don't, and I have never said that.

It's telling as to just how weak your position is, that you have to resort to making up lies.

Now, answer the question.


War Decs are designed to allow you to attack another corporation in high security space without CONCORD intervention. They do exactly that.

How that corp responds to the war dec is irrelevant. If they're small enough with few enough assets, or feel that rounding up all their stuff and putting it back together again after disbanding is a better option, oh well.

The War Dec gives you the opportunity to attack, it doesn't guarantee that the target's only options are to fight or sit in a station until you get bored.

Milan Nantucket wrote:

Umm it would be the wrong game. The sandbox environment you are referring to is PvP.

If ALL you want to do is mine then Minecraft is -> that way.
PVE only <- is where WoW is.

Want Pvp then your in the right place.


CCP should probably get around to fixing that now 11 year old bug of non-combat related skills, ships, and activities constantly appearing on the server then.

Every day I logon thinking, "Surely after the last downtime asteroids belts, ice, moons, planets, agents, plexes, industrial ships and industry and production skills will be gone now." but no, CCP just can't seem to fix anything.

A sandbox is a sandbox. For game who's vision is "All pew pew, All the time.", there is a bizarre amount of things to do that don't actually you require to fire a single shot at another player. That's not to say that there should be any place that is truely 'safe', but looking at the scope of the game and saying, "Obviously CCP's vision was for every player to spend every moment in absolute terror of death." is laughable.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

Which is just fine, presuming that you have to actually do something to obtain safety. D-scan, mining/missioning while aligned, and so forth.

But snapping your fingers, paying a few mil, and waiting two and a half minutes for complete safety? You really think it should be that easy, that risk free?

I don't. Not in a PvP game.


I know right? It's almost as silly as snapping your fingers, paying a few mil, and being given free reign to bypass the normal consequences of PVP in high sec.

Milan Nantucket wrote:

Actually lucas it will increase subs. Once the mindless crap is eradicated subscriptions will sky rocket.


Yes, if there's one thing CCP should take away from the fact that something like 90% of the player population hangs out in the relatively small 'High Sec' area of the game, it's that the only thing stopping a major subscription boom is the lack of available free for all PVP space.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#248 - 2014-09-10 15:39:05 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
IIshira wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
[I don't think any game mechanic is going to be able to force PvE players into wars that they have no interest in fighting.


I didn't realize Eve had a PVE server...


It has players like me who prefer to focus on PvE, and have no interest in PvP in highsec without CONCORD intervention. To the extent that I could no longer avoid wars in my 1 man corp I would just drop to NPC corps and consider the 11% tax rate the cost of doing business. In no conceivable world would I decide to do something like fight a war against Marmite.


Avoiding marmite does not require one to roll a corp. They are more predictable than the result of a human body hitting the ground after a free fall from 10 thousand meters.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#249 - 2014-09-10 15:40:55 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Just quoting this part to demonstrate when a guy knows he's wrong when he distorts the position of his opposition. I've said repreatedly that no one is saying all conflct has to be pew pew, hell, I don't even pvp much and have never been a ganker (nothing wrong with it, not my cuyp of tea).

Don't you see what you do, by trying to cling to the idea that I (and avowed and serious PVE gamer) have some kind of selfish agenda, you let yourself lie to yourself about your own argument. Those are signs of some not so good personality traits if you ask me.

Look, we get it, you can't deal with a harsh video game (and are afraid that this game will die if others have to, contrary to the 11 year history of EVE online). No big deal, but some of us actually like challenge in our hobbies and are willing to pay for that.
At no point did I say you had an agenda, but you are supporting an idea to remove a method of running away from a fight you can't win. Running away is a perfectly valid tactic, and if you are in a position where you have nothing to protect, that's tough luck for the wardeccer for picking a soft target.

And yes, it's so harsh this game. You can pay pocket change and gank thousands of noobs and steal all of their stuff without even having to rub 2 braincells together to choose which targets to attack. Sounds mega harsh. There has be be a challenge on BOTH SIDES. I really can;t say it simpler than that and yet you'll still parade back here ignoring most of what I've written.

Here it goes one final time:
I do not disagree with the changes suggested here, I only disagree that they should be made alone. BOTH SIDES need to be changed in a balanced way to make BOTH SIDES more challenging.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#250 - 2014-09-10 15:44:34 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Avoiding marmite does not require one to roll a corp. They are more predictable than the result of a human body hitting the ground after a free fall from 10 thousand meters.
Which doesn't always end the way you imagine, people have lived. Terminal velocity for a human means that there's no difference in impact between about 450 meters and 10000.

But yeah, Marmite are pretty predictable.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
#251 - 2014-09-10 15:49:05 UTC
This issues is such a dead horse. CCP simply cannot force people to play when they dont want to. War decs as they currently stand are ganking tools, meaning that there is nothing in it for the victim of a dec. All you have to do to see the problem is picture yourself as a war dec victim and ask what is in it for you? Why should you stick around and give these aggressors fights on their terms? Without a doubt alot of people say there is nothing in this war dec for them and therefore look to dodge the dec. Now if CCP was to try and force folk to pvp when they did not want to pvp, all that would do is make them dock up and wait out the dec. Maybe they will log off and play another toon, or worse (from CCPs perspective), maybe they log off and dont play eve at all. You force people to log off enough times and they will stop playing entirely.

All of the above does not mean that war decs cannot be fixed. To fix war decs, there must be something in it for the defender as well as the attacker. In other words, defense must be incentivized - the defender in a dec must have something they can potentially lose or gain from the dec. POCOS were a good start to this, but they are simply not enough. IMO little pieces of sov should be brought to HS -- allowing HS corps to fight over resources (such as individual asteroid belts) in HS would go a long way to fixing war decs. Of course, I wouldnt make all of HS "sov" like - but there are certainly enough systems in the .8 to .5 categories for corps to be able to stake small sov like claims.

Also requiring the attacker to have a deployable war headquarters somewhere in space which if destroyed would end the war would be another step in the right direction. I would have the war dec fees be deposited in the war headquarters and if the headquarters are destroyed, the defender gets the fees.

In short, if war decs are to work, the dec must be about more then just pvp for pvp's sake.

I don't play, I just fourm warrior.

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#252 - 2014-09-10 15:49:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Lucas Kell wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Avoiding marmite does not require one to roll a corp. They are more predictable than the result of a human body hitting the ground after a free fall from 10 thousand meters.
Which doesn't always end the way you imagine, people have lived. Terminal velocity for a human means that there's no difference in impact between about 450 meters and 10000.

But yeah, Marmite are pretty predictable.


I'm aware of how often people survive freefalls, that was my point P

I would also like to clarify my own position.

I want to see joining/creating corps in high sec in particular become more of a commitment that one makes. In order to achieve this, corporation development needs more meaning and incentive.

On the other hand, I agree that declaring war is incredibly risk-free, especially when declaring war against a corporation that is not likely to put up much resistance. That being said, I imagine corporations developed around more meaning and community could create the increase in risk that would make the difference. By producing their own communities, corporations could even learn to work with other corporations that have been blanket-decced by mercenaries like Marmite, and take them down all blob like and **** by working together, as communities do.

In short, I believe the problem lies within the meaningless of corporations in high sec at the present time. A factor of that is also, undeniably, the ease with which one can maintain a presence in NPC corporations, even if that presence is just an alt.

I intend to continue to troll this thread now until it is locked, or new relevant and mature discussion points are raised.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#253 - 2014-09-10 15:50:01 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
IIshira wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
[I don't think any game mechanic is going to be able to force PvE players into wars that they have no interest in fighting.


I didn't realize Eve had a PVE server...


It has players like me who prefer to focus on PvE, and have no interest in PvP in highsec without CONCORD intervention..


Exactly and you complain about CODE being able to gank in highsec. If it up to you highsec would be this safe place where you could AFK and do whatever. Eve isn't meant to be that.

Trust me I absolutely agree that being dec'd by coronations like Mermite sucks. I've been dec'd by them and you don't have any other option but to hide or go to lowsec. I have a mission runner pilot right now that's under wardec... Do you think I'm undocking my Golem?? No...

I'm not saying make it where people are perma dec'd... I didn't say the war would follow the pilot till it ended... Just till renewal that way the dec corp actually gets a war with their ISK.

Now you can just switch from some shell corporation you make to another in another in 5 minutes whats the point of a wardec? I'll make "IIshira corporation 57674".. Want to dec me?... Okay now "IIshira corporation 527544"... wasted another 50 mil on a dec?... "IIshira corporation 987641"... I can make 20 shell corporations so we can play the dec dodger game all day.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#254 - 2014-09-10 15:51:13 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
All you have to do to see the problem is picture yourself as a war dec victim and ask what is in it for you? Why should you stick around and give these aggressors fights on their terms?


So... be a boring lazy ass and drop corp?

Be a moron and fight them 1 on 213?

Or

Make them look like idiots by always being in sight but never in reach. Give them a bad time for their 50m.

Why do anything on their terms?

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

malcovas Henderson
THoF
#255 - 2014-09-10 15:51:15 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:


Here it goes one final time:
I do not disagree with the changes suggested here, I only disagree that they should be made alone. BOTH SIDES need to be changed in a balanced way to make BOTH SIDES more challenging.


No one here is saying "You got to stay put and fight".

IMO the Aggressor side of as WD is where it should be, but leaving dropping Corp should carry a better consequential penalty.

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#256 - 2014-09-10 15:55:54 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
All you have to do to see the problem is picture yourself as a war dec victim and ask what is in it for you? Why should you stick around and give these aggressors fights on their terms?


I'm sorry, but the only wardec 'victims' are those that choose to be victims. You have the same access to ships and weapons that those deccing you do, and in choosing not to use them and just lie down and die instead, you choose to be a victim.

I have literally watched no less than three indi corps in this game get up and choose not to be victims, whereby they took the fight to their aggressors so hardcore that on two of those occasions, it was the deccers who were losing members due to corp drops.

The attitude is there, it's just not pervasive enough. This is one point that I can agree with Tora on - delete the weak.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#257 - 2014-09-10 15:57:42 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
delete the weak.


Motto of the day

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#258 - 2014-09-10 16:03:35 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
At no point did I say you had an agenda, but you are supporting an idea to remove a method of running away from a fight you can't win. Running away is a perfectly valid tactic, and if you are in a position where you have nothing to protect, that's tough luck for the wardeccer for picking a soft target.


Dropping corp and reforming isn't running away. When I fit my mach with MJD+cloak+MWD+stabs to move to a new part of space during a wardec, thats running away. The bad guys still have a chance at me, but i'm good, they ain't never gonna get me.

Dropping and reforming is imo abusing game mechanics for an advantage, it's cheezy game play and i'm going to call it such (though I appreciate that some will use it because it's there, as long as they acknowledged that it's broken and they don't cry if CCP fixes it, I'm cool with what they do).

Quote:

And yes, it's so harsh this game. You can pay pocket change and gank thousands of noobs and steal all of their stuff without even having to rub 2 braincells together to choose which targets to attack. Sounds mega harsh. There has be be a challenge on BOTH SIDES. I really can;t say it simpler than that and yet you'll still parade back here ignoring most of what I've written.


There's that prejudice again. You see, im too busy playing my game to worry about how much a ganker spends on a catalyst. My focus is internal (my actions) not external (the actions of those evil nasty gankers). Yours seems very external.

Quote:

Here it goes one final time:
I do not disagree with the changes suggested here, I only disagree that they should be made alone. BOTH SIDES need to be changed in a balanced way to make BOTH SIDES more challenging.


Both sides are not the same. Gankers don't need more challenge, they already lose their ship and some sec status and they simply can't often catch people who know what they are doing. War Deccers don't need more challenge either, they' paid CONCORD for their shot at people like me.

I don't find it necessary to try to 'meta-game' my opposition out if existence (while calling it 'balance') like you seem to. It's enough that I've beat them at this game for 7 years.
Seneca Auran
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#259 - 2014-09-10 16:04:04 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
All you have to do to see the problem is picture yourself as a war dec victim and ask what is in it for you? Why should you stick around and give these aggressors fights on their terms?


I'm sorry, but the only wardec 'victims' are those that choose to be victims. You have the same access to ships and weapons that those deccing you do, and in choosing not to use them and just lie down and die instead, you choose to be a victim.


No, actually they often don't.

Which is another curious question. If CCP definitely never intended PVE to be a relevant choice for players, why are there entire libraries of skills devoted to mining/industry/production? Especially when by virtue of the way they set up the skill training system, if you're working on those skills you can't be training weapons/combat ships/pvp relevant skills?

Surely since the only purpose of the game is to get into PVP as quickly as possible and stay there, every new player should start with perfect mining, refining and production skills, and access to all industrial ships. Of course, that would completely destroy the player-run economy, so why does that exist? Since ship-to-ship PVP is the only thing they want anyone doing on any kind of regular basis, surely it would be much simpler to have a fixed NPC market.

If PVE isn't mean to be anything but at best a minor hobby, CCP has made a lot of truly baffling design choices since day 1.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#260 - 2014-09-10 16:05:22 UTC
Seneca Auran wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:
All you have to do to see the problem is picture yourself as a war dec victim and ask what is in it for you? Why should you stick around and give these aggressors fights on their terms?


I'm sorry, but the only wardec 'victims' are those that choose to be victims. You have the same access to ships and weapons that those deccing you do, and in choosing not to use them and just lie down and die instead, you choose to be a victim.


No, actually they often don't.

Which is another curious question. If CCP definitely never intended PVE to be a relevant choice for players, why are there entire libraries of skills devoted to mining/industry/production? Especially when by virtue of the way they set up the skill training system, if you're working on those skills you can't be training weapons/combat ships/pvp relevant skills?

Surely since the only purpose of the game is to get into PVP as quickly as possible and stay there, every new player should start with perfect mining, refining and production skills, and access to all industrial ships. Of course, that would completely destroy the player-run economy, so why does that exist? Since ship-to-ship PVP is the only thing they want anyone doing on any kind of regular basis, surely it would be much simpler to have a fixed NPC market.

If PVE isn't mean to be anything but at best a minor hobby, CCP has made a lot of truly baffling design choices since day 1.


Where does this nonsense come from?

Hello, PVE jock here, no one is promoting any pvp here.