These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#341 - 2014-09-10 19:21:15 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Beast part of this is that Veers is bitching in another thread about how he cannot engage other incursion groups because they avoid wardecs.


Not true. I think wardeccs work fine. They are effective at hitting medium-large corps which don't want to disband. They are ineffective against 1 man corps (like incursion runners use). I think this is 100% WAD. Wardeccs are a tool to engage organizations that are willing to fight, not a tool to force individuals who don't want to fight into PvP without CONCORD protection.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#342 - 2014-09-10 19:26:12 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Beast part of this is that Veers is bitching in another thread about how he cannot engage other incursion groups because they avoid wardecs.


He wouldn't engage them even if he could, he is squarely in the "I don't want to do anything but win, CCP please play the game for me" camp that many forum posters inhabit. He hadn't lifted a single finger to organize opposition to the MOM popping fleets before running to CCP to ask for help (in the F&I forums).
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#343 - 2014-09-10 19:34:11 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Beast part of this is that Veers is bitching in another thread about how he cannot engage other incursion groups because they avoid wardecs.


He wouldn't engage them even if he could, he is squarely in the "I don't want to do anything but win, CCP please play the game for me" camp that many forum posters inhabit. He hadn't lifted a single finger to organize opposition to the MOM popping fleets before running to CCP to ask for help (in the F&I forums).


Guilty as charged. I like to play this game with other people, in a cooperative PvE fashion. I don't go blow someone up everytime they annoy me. I try to work out a diplomatic solution, and if that fails, than I suggest appropriate game mechanics changes to solve the problem. Not every solution comes through the barrel of a gun.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#344 - 2014-09-10 19:39:12 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Beast part of this is that Veers is bitching in another thread about how he cannot engage other incursion groups because they avoid wardecs.


He wouldn't engage them even if he could, he is squarely in the "I don't want to do anything but win, CCP please play the game for me" camp that many forum posters inhabit. He hadn't lifted a single finger to organize opposition to the MOM popping fleets before running to CCP to ask for help (in the F&I forums).


Guilty as charged. I like to play this game with other people, in a cooperative PvE fashion. I don't go blow someone up everytime they annoy me. I try to work out a diplomatic solution, and if that fails, than I suggest appropriate game mechanics changes to solve the problem. Not every solution comes through the barrel of a gun.


So you are a spineless bear who refuses to think for themselves or expend any effort.

This game isn't for you.
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#345 - 2014-09-10 19:42:55 UTC
The trash talking and personal attacks on these forums is embarrassing. It's starting to get to the WoW or ESO level of immaturity. People can have differing opinions on a subject and actually discuss it without acting like children.

A lot of players don't think you should escape a wardec. OK...valid points. A lot of players don't feel they should have to participate in blanket wardecs for obvious reason. Both sides have valid points. Besides, no matter how many personal insults you fling or how many times you state the same thing, none of us have any say in the matter. CCP does. Most gaming companies completely ignore threads like this because the players make themselves look like asses. Maybe if some of the people in this thread act a little more civil to their fellow players there will be a better chance of CCP giving a damn about their opinions.

A little food for thought.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#346 - 2014-09-10 19:44:49 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Beast part of this is that Veers is bitching in another thread about how he cannot engage other incursion groups because they avoid wardecs.


He wouldn't engage them even if he could, he is squarely in the "I don't want to do anything but win, CCP please play the game for me" camp that many forum posters inhabit. He hadn't lifted a single finger to organize opposition to the MOM popping fleets before running to CCP to ask for help (in the F&I forums).


Guilty as charged. I like to play this game with other people, in a cooperative PvE fashion. I don't go blow someone up everytime they annoy me. I try to work out a diplomatic solution, and if that fails, than I suggest appropriate game mechanics changes to solve the problem. Not every solution comes through the barrel of a gun.


You are aware that we are playing a video game right? It's alright to shoot people to settle things in EVE you know.

That part i bolded is just...wow. If you can't work something out with another player you suggest GAME CHANGES that affect the holders of more than 400,000 EVE accounts. I beleived you were extremely selfish, but this confirms it.

You'd rather CCP change their video game than you taking some responsibility for your enjoyment and use your own resources and skills to secure your goals. We already knew this as it's par for the course when it comes to many forum posters. But it's still mighty irritating.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#347 - 2014-09-10 19:49:33 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Beast part of this is that Veers is bitching in another thread about how he cannot engage other incursion groups because they avoid wardecs.


He wouldn't engage them even if he could, he is squarely in the "I don't want to do anything but win, CCP please play the game for me" camp that many forum posters inhabit. He hadn't lifted a single finger to organize opposition to the MOM popping fleets before running to CCP to ask for help (in the F&I forums).


Guilty as charged. I like to play this game with other people, in a cooperative PvE fashion. I don't go blow someone up everytime they annoy me. I try to work out a diplomatic solution, and if that fails, than I suggest appropriate game mechanics changes to solve the problem. Not every solution comes through the barrel of a gun.


You are aware that we are playing a video game right? It's alright to shoot people to settle things in EVE you know.

That part i bolded is just...wow. If you can't work something out with another player you suggest GAME CHANGES that affect the holders of more than 400,000 EVE accounts. I beleived you were extremely selfish, but this confirms it.

You'd rather CCP change their video game than you taking some responsibility for your enjoyment and use your own resources and skills to secure your goals. We already knew this as it's par for the course when it comes to many forum posters. But it's still mighty irritating.




Certainly. And the good part is that Eve is big enough for different people who focus on different things. Some people just love PvP, so we have lowsec/nullsec for them. Others (like myself) prefer to focus on PvE, so that's why we have highsec, where CONCORD will intervene and punish those who engage in PvP. And I think a lot of people are constantly suggesting changes to the game mechanics to make Eve a better game for everyone. Personally I think that wardeccs are working exactly as intended, and don't need a change.
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#348 - 2014-09-10 19:55:28 UTC
Only issue I see is nullbears who say they want to pvp not pvping each other. Instead they be looking at the ones who don't want to pvp.

If you went to null for pvp then why is everyone sitting around the campfire holding hands singing kumbaya atm.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#349 - 2014-09-10 19:55:46 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:


Certainly. And the good part is that Eve is big enough for different people who focus on different things. Some people just love PvP, so we have lowsec/nullsec for them.


There it is. Finally the truth.

Quote:

Others (like myself) prefer to focus on PvE, so that's why we have highsec, where CONCORD will intervene and punish those who engage in PvP. And I think a lot of people are constantly suggesting changes to the game mechanics to make Eve a better game for everyone. Personally I think that wardeccs are working exactly as intended, and don't need a change.


This about quoted crap is why I post as I do. As an EVE PVE player I want people here to know that not all of us are as bad as the above quoted embarrassment is. I want my fellow real EVE players to know that there are some of us who shoot rats or mine rocks for fun who are not crazy, lazy and totally self centered to the point where we'd see the game changed to mask our shortcomings and video game playing incompetence.
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#350 - 2014-09-10 20:33:41 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Lol. You're an idiot. Clearly wardeccers have it so hard in your mind, those poor little souls. If only those pesky 1 man corps couldn't evade them it would be all better.



Ahh, there's that name-calling we've all been waiting on. This, Grashoppa, is how you know your opponent is getting desperate, but fear not, for his personal attacks are no match to your Forum-Fu!

\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#351 - 2014-09-10 20:51:58 UTC
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Lol. You're an idiot. Clearly wardeccers have it so hard in your mind, those poor little souls. If only those pesky 1 man corps couldn't evade them it would be all better.



Ahh, there's that name-calling we've all been waiting on. This, Grashoppa, is how you know your opponent is getting desperate, but fear not, for his personal attacks are no match to your Forum-Fu!




I know, Internet victory is mine!!!!!
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#352 - 2014-09-10 21:39:03 UTC
ITT: some people are playing in the sandbox in a way which ruins someone else's way of playing in a sandbox and this has to be changed because sandbox should work in a way I want and not in a way it actually does at the moment.

This thread has been better entertainment than the incursion whining threads, kudos to OP.
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#353 - 2014-09-10 22:05:32 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:

Guilty as charged. I like to play this game with other people, in a cooperative PvE fashion. I don't go blow someone up everytime they annoy me. I try to work out a diplomatic solution, and if that fails, than I suggest appropriate game mechanics changes to solve the problem. Not every solution comes through the barrel of a gun.


Wow I LOL'd so hard..

I would like to run an idea by you Veers... I think it would be a great "game mechanics change"

After jumping through a stargate you're immune from targeting or any form of attack for 60 seconds. This would make things so much safer in highsec and would be a great fix to me getting blown up when I jump into lowsec.
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#354 - 2014-09-10 22:08:12 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Beast part of this is that Veers is bitching in another thread about how he cannot engage other incursion groups because they avoid wardecs.


Not true. I think wardeccs work fine. They are effective at hitting medium-large corps which don't want to disband. They are ineffective against 1 man corps (like incursion runners use). I think this is 100% WAD. Wardeccs are a tool to engage organizations that are willing to fight, not a tool to force individuals who don't want to fight into PvP without CONCORD protection.


Wrong. They are also used as a tool for extortion. You'll find that many "evil wardec corps" are just deccing "poor mylittlepwny corp" to get them to pay some cash out. It sometimes has nothing to do with looking for fights.


\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Kaely Tanniss
The Conference Council
The Conference
#355 - 2014-09-10 22:08:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaely Tanniss
Adrie Atticus wrote:
ITT: some people are playing in the sandbox in a way which ruins someone else's way of playing in a sandbox and this has to be changed because sandbox should work in a way I want and not in a way it actually does at the moment.

This thread has been better entertainment than the incursion whining threads, kudos to OP.


LOL..I figured it would bring out the whiners..even so, that wasn't the point of it. I suggest some of the people posting on this thread consider further education in reading comprehension. If name calling is all you have left to resort to, it only shows how truly desperate you have become...some would even say butthurt. Putting that aside, try reading the post...it is a suggestion/idea post..but I guess some people will never get that. To each his own I suppose. Roll

If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#356 - 2014-09-10 22:11:13 UTC
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Beast part of this is that Veers is bitching in another thread about how he cannot engage other incursion groups because they avoid wardecs.


Not true. I think wardeccs work fine. They are effective at hitting medium-large corps which don't want to disband. They are ineffective against 1 man corps (like incursion runners use). I think this is 100% WAD. Wardeccs are a tool to engage organizations that are willing to fight, not a tool to force individuals who don't want to fight into PvP without CONCORD protection.


Wrong. They are also used as a tool for extortion. You'll find that many "evil wardec corps" are just deccing "poor mylittlepwny corp" to get them to pay some cash out. It sometimes has nothing to do with looking for fights.




Great! That's fine with me. If you found someone who refuses to disband the corp, and is willing to pay extortion money instead of fighting, then by all means take advantage of it. As I said before, I think the current wardecc mechanics accomplish their purpose.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#357 - 2014-09-10 22:12:14 UTC
Adrie Atticus wrote:
ITT: some people are playing in the sandbox in a way which ruins someone else's way of playing in a sandbox and this has to be changed because sandbox should work in a way I want and not in a way it actually does at the moment.

This thread has been better entertainment than the incursion whining threads, kudos to OP.


ITT; people like you, with an agenda to push, deliberately misinterpret what is actually going on, to try and derail the thread.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Kaely Tanniss
The Conference Council
The Conference
#358 - 2014-09-10 22:13:47 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Beast part of this is that Veers is bitching in another thread about how he cannot engage other incursion groups because they avoid wardecs.


Not true. I think wardeccs work fine. They are effective at hitting medium-large corps which don't want to disband. They are ineffective against 1 man corps (like incursion runners use). I think this is 100% WAD. Wardeccs are a tool to engage organizations that are willing to fight, not a tool to force individuals who don't want to fight into PvP without CONCORD protection.


Wrong. They are also used as a tool for extortion. You'll find that many "evil wardec corps" are just deccing "poor mylittlepwny corp" to get them to pay some cash out. It sometimes has nothing to do with looking for fights.




Great! That's fine with me. If you found someone who refuses to disband the corp, and is willing to pay extortion money instead of fighting, then by all means take advantage of it. As I said before, I think the current wardecc mechanics accomplish their purpose.



So what you're saying Veers is even though something is not right (used as a generization, nothing in particular), as long as it serves your purpose, you are okay with it? Correct me if I'm wrong..please.

If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#359 - 2014-09-10 22:18:43 UTC
I'm still waiting for an answer to my question from a few pages ago, by the way.

If you are the camp claiming that wardecs are fine right now and this isn't an exploit, then I want you to tell me why you think CCP designed and intended for wardecs to have the effect of costing the defender a few million isk and a few minutes time.

Because I don't think that is their intent, to have wardecs be completely trivial. Since you do, I want you to defend that position.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Veers Belvar
Swordmasters of New Eden
#360 - 2014-09-10 22:24:07 UTC
Kaely Tanniss wrote:




So what you're saying Veers is even though something is not right (used as a generization, nothing in particular), as long as it serves your purpose, you are okay with it? Correct me if I'm wrong..please.



Not at all - What I'm saying is that the wardecc mechanics are working as designed. They allow you to engage medium-large corps which don't want to disband, and force them to fight, pay extortion money, or disband. That is the price they pay for wanting to maintain a corporate presence. The mechanics don't allow you to bother people in NPC corps or 1-man corps, who are happy to disband and re-form. Basically the mechanics are not allowing you to target a particular individual you don't like, which anyway raises concerns about griefing. That's why I think that the current setup is great - it lets you hit big organizations, while preventing you from going after individual players.