These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Drago Shouna
Doomheim
#541 - 2014-09-11 18:51:04 UTC
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:

Oh god here we go again...

If you're so convinced it's an exploit..

Have you petitioned it?

If not why not?

If yes, what was the answer?

A certain poster in here seems unable to even acknowledge that this question has even been asked. But never mind, maybe you can answer it?


I haven't petitioned it because it's an obvious and"out in the open" enough tactic that Im sure CCP is well aware of it already. Hopefully conversations such as this will bring it more to the forefront of their balancing.




Ok..

Your answer was the one I expecting actually, and which someone else has been dodging.

It's the same as watching someone getting beat to a pulp and PRESUMING someone else has reported it.

Or seeing a house fire and presuming that it's so obvious someone has OBVIOUSLY rang the fire brigade.

Tell you what..I will, and if I ever get an answer i'll get back to you.

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.
Absolutely Not Analt
Carebears on Fire
#542 - 2014-09-11 18:53:22 UTC
Drago Shouna wrote:


Good post...apart from the last sentence.

What do you envisage happening if the corp can't afford the surrender fee?

Do they stay as vassals until the debt is paid off?

Or is the surrender fee just going to be a cash cow for the deccers?


That really is the problem - the has to be a way for people to end a wardec on their own terms. At the present time, the Dec Dodge is the only way to do that because the surrender isn't enforceable. Even if it was made enforceable, there has to be a mechanic in place to keep it from being abused, which is going to lead to the one thing CCP is never very good at - trying to anticipate what the players are going to do with a given mechanic (and listening to us when we tell them how their idea will be abused to hell and back).

Dec Dodging may not be the ideal solution, but at present, it may be the best one available. Sometimes you don't get a good solution - sometimes you have to live with the one that's least bad. This may be one of those cases.

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
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#543 - 2014-09-11 18:56:04 UTC
Drago Shouna wrote:

Ok..

Your answer was the one I expecting actually, and which someone else has been dodging.

It's the same as watching someone getting beat to a pulp and PRESUMING someone else has reported it.

Or seeing a house fire and presuming that it's so obvious someone has OBVIOUSLY rang the fire brigade.

Tell you what..I will, and if I ever get an answer i'll get back to you.


Your analogy stings a little bit, but u may be right.

And ty Smile

\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Steppa Musana
Doomheim
#544 - 2014-09-11 19:03:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Steppa Musana
Absolutely Not Analt wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:


Good post...apart from the last sentence.

What do you envisage happening if the corp can't afford the surrender fee?

Do they stay as vassals until the debt is paid off?

Or is the surrender fee just going to be a cash cow for the deccers?


That really is the problem - the has to be a way for people to end a wardec on their own terms. At the present time, the Dec Dodge is the only way to do that because the surrender isn't enforceable. Even if it was made enforceable, there has to be a mechanic in place to keep it from being abused, which is going to lead to the one thing CCP is never very good at - trying to anticipate what the players are going to do with a given mechanic (and listening to us when we tell them how their idea will be abused to hell and back).

Dec Dodging may not be the ideal solution, but at present, it may be the best one available. Sometimes you don't get a good solution - sometimes you have to live with the one that's least bad. This may be one of those cases.

There is a solution though to allow for permawardecs. I've presented it many times but it seems to fall on deaf ears.

Remove the dec dodging exploit.
Nerf NPC corps so members are at a more severe disadvantage.
Allow players to create corps that function very similarly to NPC corps, with the exception that they have a player CEO who can adjust membership.

Now you have the ability to create a player corp that cannot be wardecced, at the cost of loss of income, no POS, no POCO, etc.
Real corps can be permadecced with the benefit of increased rewards and abilities as a corp. Much like how WH/null corps take such similar risks (they are at permawardec with everyone :P)

Risk/reward baby, woo!

Hey guys.
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#545 - 2014-09-11 19:09:56 UTC
Except bears dont need a POS no more, so not a good idea ATM.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
BoBoZoBo
MGroup9
#546 - 2014-09-11 19:17:59 UTC
Wardecrs like who - Marmite?

It is easy to avoid them, the only bother camping two stations.

Primary Test Subject • SmackTalker Elite
Carl Pator
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#547 - 2014-09-11 19:22:27 UTC
Steppa Musana wrote:
Absolutely Not Analt wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:


Good post...apart from the last sentence.

What do you envisage happening if the corp can't afford the surrender fee?

Do they stay as vassals until the debt is paid off?

Or is the surrender fee just going to be a cash cow for the deccers?


That really is the problem - the has to be a way for people to end a wardec on their own terms. At the present time, the Dec Dodge is the only way to do that because the surrender isn't enforceable. Even if it was made enforceable, there has to be a mechanic in place to keep it from being abused, which is going to lead to the one thing CCP is never very good at - trying to anticipate what the players are going to do with a given mechanic (and listening to us when we tell them how their idea will be abused to hell and back).

Dec Dodging may not be the ideal solution, but at present, it may be the best one available. Sometimes you don't get a good solution - sometimes you have to live with the one that's least bad. This may be one of those cases.

There is a solution though to allow for permawardecs. I've presented it many times but it seems to fall on deaf ears.

Remove the dec dodging exploit.
Nerf NPC corps so members are at a more severe disadvantage.
Allow players to create corps that function very similarly to NPC corps, with the exception that they have a player CEO who can adjust membership.

Now you have the ability to create a player corp that cannot be wardecced, at the cost of loss of income, no POS, no POCO, etc.
Real corps can be permadecced with the benefit of increased rewards and abilities as a corp. Much like how WH/null corps take such similar risks (they are at permawardec with everyone :P)

Risk/reward baby, woo!


What if I want to leave an join a friends corp? Is my character forever locked due to a permadec?

That sounds like a really bad idea to fix a very minor issue.
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#548 - 2014-09-11 19:49:25 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Some people seem to have a need to have a reason why somebody should war dec somebody else.

The reason could be a multitude of different things ranging from wanting to kill a bling mission runner, stop a Corp from mining, having a bad day and wanting to take out there frustration at the first person they see or because they simply didn't like the name of somebody, what ever the reason, it is completely irreverent.

The cold hard fact is Eve is PvP game. The developers have created a mechanic to allow other players for what ever reason they chose, to shoot at other players legally. The reason for

I really do not understand what is hard to understand here.


Absolutely np with what you're saying, unfortunately the guys shooting? they hate others making them miss.




Your absolutely right.

As others have said, there are many ways to accomplish this, none easier then just sitting cloaked up in system and laughing at the them in local.

Unfortunately it is so easy just to drop corp and suffer very little as a result coupled with people like Lucas Kell telling them to do this, they do not consider any other option of which there are many.

The result, we have more and more people just sitting in NPC corps getting bored as they just mission or mine and end up leaving without ever experiencing the best that the game has to offer.


The game is a sandbox. PvP and PvE.


The best part the game has to offer is up to the individual player to decide. Not the one avoiding the pvp they want to go after someone who obviously has chosen the best part for them is pve.

This whole thread is nothing more then wanna be pvp'rs trying to take the risk out for them by going after pve players.
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#549 - 2014-09-11 19:51:42 UTC
Steppa Musana wrote:
Absolutely Not Analt wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:


Good post...apart from the last sentence.

What do you envisage happening if the corp can't afford the surrender fee?

Do they stay as vassals until the debt is paid off?

Or is the surrender fee just going to be a cash cow for the deccers?


That really is the problem - the has to be a way for people to end a wardec on their own terms. At the present time, the Dec Dodge is the only way to do that because the surrender isn't enforceable. Even if it was made enforceable, there has to be a mechanic in place to keep it from being abused, which is going to lead to the one thing CCP is never very good at - trying to anticipate what the players are going to do with a given mechanic (and listening to us when we tell them how their idea will be abused to hell and back).

Dec Dodging may not be the ideal solution, but at present, it may be the best one available. Sometimes you don't get a good solution - sometimes you have to live with the one that's least bad. This may be one of those cases.

There is a solution though to allow for permawardecs. I've presented it many times but it seems to fall on deaf ears.

Remove the dec dodging exploit.
Nerf NPC corps so members are at a more severe disadvantage.
Allow players to create corps that function very similarly to NPC corps, with the exception that they have a player CEO who can adjust membership.

Now you have the ability to create a player corp that cannot be wardecced, at the cost of loss of income, no POS, no POCO, etc.
Real corps can be permadecced with the benefit of increased rewards and abilities as a corp. Much like how WH/null corps take such similar risks (they are at permawardec with everyone :P)

Risk/reward baby, woo!



Risk reward...head out to Null sec and take on the corps out there who want to go to war like yourself. Lots of risk and lots of reward.

Seems to me you have an aversion to risk like many others in this thread.
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#550 - 2014-09-11 20:39:36 UTC
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Trixie Lawless wrote:
"But the surrender system!" Is not a very thought out argument. Wardec corps will then just use blanket deccing to extort small Indy corps with no risk to themselves.


So? Sounds like standard Eve play to me.

Quote:

Over and over again on these forums people scream and holler about how EVE is a game of decisions and consequences, and that players need to deal with the mechanics (especially when people complain about ganking), well it works the other way too. Deal with the mechanics, don't be a derp when selecting targets, and don't get pissed when you lose a bunch of targets because you didn't think it out.


All exploits are a matter of utilizing a game mechanic in a manner it's not meant to be used. Don't get mad when you're mechanic is deemed the exploit it is.





It will be an exploit when CCP says it is an exploit...until then it's not.
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#551 - 2014-09-11 20:43:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Trixie Lawless
Prince Kobol wrote:
Trixie Lawless wrote:
Arguments from all sides are getting repetitive and played out. Its real simple to deal with the current mechanics if you want to wardec....spend a few seconds to pick your targets. Its easy. Why should the deccers have it easy where they can blanket 60 industrial corps without having to think about it and then punishing people for not wanting to play their way? "But the surrender system!" Is not a very thought out argument. Wardec corps will then just use blanket deccing to extort small Indy corps with no risk to themselves.


If a Corp war dec's 60 corps what is to stop those 60 corps getting together and fighting back?

I will tell you why they don't, it is because it takes far less effort just to quit to a NPC as the penalties are non existent. The difference for most people in high sec between a NPC corp and a player created corp are so slight it is not worth fighting for.

Trixie Lawless wrote:
Over and over again on these forums people scream and holler about how EVE is a game of decisions and consequences, and that players need to deal with the mechanics (especially when people complain about ganking), well it works the other way too. Deal with the mechanics, don't be a derp when selecting targets, and don't get pissed when you lose a bunch of targets because you didn't think it out.

If you dislike the mechanics, file a petition with CCP and let them know why you dislike them, then our overlords can take your opinion into account without all the flaming and side arguments generated by some random forum. And if they decide to change it...THEN you can flame at the people who who whine about it.


What are the consequences of dropping corp and joining a NPC Corp apart from losing a tiny amount of isk in the form of Tax?


Why should they have consequences? They didn't make a stupid decision and wardec a four character corp when already knowing the mechanics.


No matter how you slice it not a single persons opinion on here matters. If CCP wants to do something about it they will. Until then its a viable mechanic and not exploitation...so HTFU and put 5 minutes thought into who you choose to dec.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#552 - 2014-09-11 20:48:30 UTC
Trixie Lawless wrote:
don't get pissed when you lose a bunch of targets because you didn't think it out.


Is this in regards to a cunning plan enacted by the wartargets....

...the wartargets dropping corp.....

...or a proposed change in game mechanics that makes the Wardec system obsolete?

"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
Wyn Pharoh
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#553 - 2014-09-11 21:06:24 UTC
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:

I hate to keep bringing this up, but every page I come across someone who didnt read my last few posts. EXTORTION. Extortion is a legit use of the wardeccing feature. I dont expect anyone to"just sit there and be shot," I expect them to sit in station and chat, or try to find an out of the way system (that my locator agents will point me toward," etc.

See, how I see it, a wardec is not about pew-pewing carebears in hisec, it's about denying them content. Sure, we'll shoot them if we see them out, but what's even better than killing them is keeping them stuck in station and BORED. 7 days is a long time to be sitting in a station with nothing to do. The more content you deny them, the more likely they WOULD HAVE BEEN willing to pay a lousy few hundred million isk to end it.

BUT NOOOOOOOO!!!!! Lets totally scrap a legit use of the wardec feature, and let people weasel out of it by paying 50M, or by corp-swapping.

How very UN Eve-like.



How 'UN Eve-like' is the functional reality of 'Shell' Corporations? Seriously.

They seem to exist in Eve, much like in real life, in significant numbers with similar features. How hard, irl, is it to 'pin down' a shell corporation? Usually, its largely impossible, since there are little to no tangible assets that have to be 'moved' when a shell corporation folds. They collapse under the slightest scrutiny into vapor, only to reappear again with a new name and logo, in little to no time at all. Some are one man ops while others are fronts for vast corporate wealth and holdings. Does this sound at all familiar? How is this anything but VERY Eve-like?

Welcome to the structured sandbox that is PvP in HiSec. Is it now CCP's responsibility to differentiate 'shell' corps from 'brick and mortar' corporations? How is this NOT a problem of target selection? How is this different from trying to blap frigates with dreds? If the corp is mobile and intangible enough to slip through your wardec with no more effort than disband/reform, why exactly is this a CCP problem? If Bobcorp exists with a solo player who's only corp 'asset' is NPC corp tax evasion, then it stands to reason that Bobcorp will be a poor wartarget choice.

I know, from probably EVERY POV that wardec mechanics are horribly flawed. What I do see here though is a specific 'mechanic' that in being 'solved' would greatly serve only one particular purpose, i.e. the farming of solo incursion/mission runners. Should their HiSec lifestyle be consequence free? NO!!! Then again, it already isn't. Ganks of bling fit ships should and do happen. Why exactly though is this a wardec 'problem'? It all seems to me to be a sandbox, sorting itself out, with one group taking advantage of corporate 'liquidity' in a way the we see every day irl.

Perhaps in a major wardec overhaul, making a dec more 'sticky' wouldn't be a bad feature, but we are talking about Eve and Eve players - a collective group of players that WILL find a way to manipulate every set of rules to suit their own needs. New and even more creative Shell Corp 'solutions' WILL be found and 'abused' no matter what CCP does to cure the current 'problem' of today.
Grog Aftermath
Doomheim
#554 - 2014-09-11 21:27:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Grog Aftermath
Trixie Lawless wrote:
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:

All exploits are a matter of utilizing a game mechanic in a manner it's not meant to be used. Don't get mad when you're mechanic is deemed the exploit it is.





It will be an exploit when CCP says it is an exploit...until then it's not.



If you find what appears to be an exploit you should report it or at least verify with them that it's not an exploit. Using an exploit and not reporting it could still see you in trouble with them once they're aware of it.
Drago Shouna
Doomheim
#555 - 2014-09-11 21:30:46 UTC
Wyn Pharoh wrote:
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:

I hate to keep bringing this up, but every page I come across someone who didnt read my last few posts. EXTORTION. Extortion is a legit use of the wardeccing feature. I dont expect anyone to"just sit there and be shot," I expect them to sit in station and chat, or try to find an out of the way system (that my locator agents will point me toward," etc.

See, how I see it, a wardec is not about pew-pewing carebears in hisec, it's about denying them content. Sure, we'll shoot them if we see them out, but what's even better than killing them is keeping them stuck in station and BORED. 7 days is a long time to be sitting in a station with nothing to do. The more content you deny them, the more likely they WOULD HAVE BEEN willing to pay a lousy few hundred million isk to end it.

BUT NOOOOOOOO!!!!! Lets totally scrap a legit use of the wardec feature, and let people weasel out of it by paying 50M, or by corp-swapping.

How very UN Eve-like.



How 'UN Eve-like' is the functional reality of 'Shell' Corporations? Seriously.

They seem to exist in Eve, much like in real life, in significant numbers with similar features. How hard, irl, is it to 'pin down' a shell corporation? Usually, its largely impossible, since there are little to no tangible assets that have to be 'moved' when a shell corporation folds. They collapse under the slightest scrutiny into vapor, only to reappear again with a new name and logo, in little to no time at all. Some are one man ops while others are fronts for vast corporate wealth and holdings. Does this sound at all familiar? How is this anything but VERY Eve-like?

Welcome to the structured sandbox that is PvP in HiSec. Is it now CCP's responsibility to differentiate 'shell' corps from 'brick and mortar' corporations? How is this NOT a problem of target selection? How is this different from trying to blap frigates with dreds? If the corp is mobile and intangible enough to slip through your wardec with no more effort than disband/reform, why exactly is this a CCP problem? If Bobcorp exists with a solo player who's only corp 'asset' is NPC corp tax evasion, then it stands to reason that Bobcorp will be a poor wartarget choice.

I know, from probably EVERY POV that wardec mechanics are horribly flawed. What I do see here though is a specific 'mechanic' that in being 'solved' would greatly serve only one particular purpose, i.e. the farming of solo incursion/mission runners. Should their HiSec lifestyle be consequence free? NO!!! Then again, it already isn't. Ganks of bling fit ships should and do happen. Why exactly though is this a wardec 'problem'? It all seems to me to be a sandbox, sorting itself out, with one group taking advantage of corporate 'liquidity' in a way the we see every day irl.

Perhaps in a major wardec overhaul, making a dec more 'sticky' wouldn't be a bad feature, but we are talking about Eve and Eve players - a collective group of players that WILL find a way to manipulate every set of rules to suit their own needs. New and even more creative Shell Corp 'solutions' WILL be found and 'abused' no matter what CCP does to cure the current 'problem' of today.



Well said.

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#556 - 2014-09-11 21:31:07 UTC
Steppa Musana wrote:
Absolutely Not Analt wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:


Good post...apart from the last sentence.

What do you envisage happening if the corp can't afford the surrender fee?

Do they stay as vassals until the debt is paid off?

Or is the surrender fee just going to be a cash cow for the deccers?


That really is the problem - the has to be a way for people to end a wardec on their own terms. At the present time, the Dec Dodge is the only way to do that because the surrender isn't enforceable. Even if it was made enforceable, there has to be a mechanic in place to keep it from being abused, which is going to lead to the one thing CCP is never very good at - trying to anticipate what the players are going to do with a given mechanic (and listening to us when we tell them how their idea will be abused to hell and back).

Dec Dodging may not be the ideal solution, but at present, it may be the best one available. Sometimes you don't get a good solution - sometimes you have to live with the one that's least bad. This may be one of those cases.

There is a solution though to allow for permawardecs. I've presented it many times but it seems to fall on deaf ears.

Remove the dec dodging exploit.
Nerf NPC corps so members are at a more severe disadvantage.
Allow players to create corps that function very similarly to NPC corps, with the exception that they have a player CEO who can adjust membership.

Now you have the ability to create a player corp that cannot be wardecced, at the cost of loss of income, no POS, no POCO, etc.
Real corps can be permadecced with the benefit of increased rewards and abilities as a corp. Much like how WH/null corps take such similar risks (they are at permawardec with everyone :P)

Risk/reward baby, woo!




Its probably been ignored because it's not a good idea.
Drago Shouna
Doomheim
#557 - 2014-09-11 21:32:19 UTC
Grog Aftermath wrote:
Trixie Lawless wrote:
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:

All exploits are a matter of utilizing a game mechanic in a manner it's not meant to be used. Don't get mad when you're mechanic is deemed the exploit it is.





It will be an exploit when CCP says it is an exploit...until then it's not.



If you find what appears to be an exploit you should report it or at least verify with them that it's not an exploit. Using an exploit without reporting it could still see you in trouble with them once they're aware of it.


Just reported the alleged exploit. Well an hour ago or so anyway.

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#558 - 2014-09-11 21:33:09 UTC
Wyn Pharoh wrote:




How 'UN Eve-like' is the functional reality of 'Shell' Corporations? Seriously.

They seem to exist in Eve, much like in real life, in significant numbers with similar features. How hard, irl, is it to 'pin down' a shell corporation? Usually, its largely impossible, since there are little to no tangible assets that have to be 'moved' when a shell corporation folds. They collapse under the slightest scrutiny into vapor, only to reappear again with a new name and logo, in little to no time at all. Some are one man ops while others are fronts for vast corporate wealth and holdings. Does this sound at all familiar? How is this anything but VERY Eve-like?

Welcome to the structured sandbox that is PvP in HiSec. Is it now CCP's responsibility to differentiate 'shell' corps from 'brick and mortar' corporations? How is this NOT a problem of target selection? How is this different from trying to blap frigates with dreds? If the corp is mobile and intangible enough to slip through your wardec with no more effort than disband/reform, why exactly is this a CCP problem? If Bobcorp exists with a solo player who's only corp 'asset' is NPC corp tax evasion, then it stands to reason that Bobcorp will be a poor wartarget choice.

I know, from probably EVERY POV that wardec mechanics are horribly flawed. What I do see here though is a specific 'mechanic' that in being 'solved' would greatly serve only one particular purpose, i.e. the farming of solo incursion/mission runners. Should their HiSec lifestyle be consequence free? NO!!! Then again, it already isn't. Ganks of bling fit ships should and do happen. Why exactly though is this a wardec 'problem'? It all seems to me to be a sandbox, sorting itself out, with one group taking advantage of corporate 'liquidity' in a way the we see every day irl.

Perhaps in a major wardec overhaul, making a dec more 'sticky' wouldn't be a bad feature, but we are talking about Eve and Eve players - a collective group of players that WILL find a way to manipulate every set of rules to suit their own needs. New and even more creative Shell Corp 'solutions' WILL be found and 'abused' no matter what CCP does to cure the current 'problem' of today.


I'll repeat something I said a few pages back:. Lots of folks here still seem to be missing my premise of wardeccing for a few hundred mill in "tribute." It's not about risk, it's not about wanting easy targets to shoot at, it's about inconveniencing a small group of people to the point that it's less of a headache just to pay out 200m or300m. Some will corp-hop, but some will not. As I said earlier, you throw enough crap at the wall, and some of it will stick. This makes probably the 6th or 7th time I've explained this.

\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#559 - 2014-09-11 21:34:14 UTC
Grog Aftermath wrote:
Trixie Lawless wrote:
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:

All exploits are a matter of utilizing a game mechanic in a manner it's not meant to be used. Don't get mad when you're mechanic is deemed the exploit it is.





It will be an exploit when CCP says it is an exploit...until then it's not.



If you find what appears to be an exploit you should report it or at least verify with them that it's not an exploit. Using an exploit without reporting it could still see you in trouble with them once they're aware of it.


Then file a petition with them...and if they decide that its not a valid form of play then BOOM...there you have it. You can now wardec whoever you want with any risk to your isk.


Until then, read. <--- its literally that simple.
Drago Shouna
Doomheim
#560 - 2014-09-11 21:36:41 UTC
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
Wyn Pharoh wrote:




How 'UN Eve-like' is the functional reality of 'Shell' Corporations? Seriously.

They seem to exist in Eve, much like in real life, in significant numbers with similar features. How hard, irl, is it to 'pin down' a shell corporation? Usually, its largely impossible, since there are little to no tangible assets that have to be 'moved' when a shell corporation folds. They collapse under the slightest scrutiny into vapor, only to reappear again with a new name and logo, in little to no time at all. Some are one man ops while others are fronts for vast corporate wealth and holdings. Does this sound at all familiar? How is this anything but VERY Eve-like?

Welcome to the structured sandbox that is PvP in HiSec. Is it now CCP's responsibility to differentiate 'shell' corps from 'brick and mortar' corporations? How is this NOT a problem of target selection? How is this different from trying to blap frigates with dreds? If the corp is mobile and intangible enough to slip through your wardec with no more effort than disband/reform, why exactly is this a CCP problem? If Bobcorp exists with a solo player who's only corp 'asset' is NPC corp tax evasion, then it stands to reason that Bobcorp will be a poor wartarget choice.

I know, from probably EVERY POV that wardec mechanics are horribly flawed. What I do see here though is a specific 'mechanic' that in being 'solved' would greatly serve only one particular purpose, i.e. the farming of solo incursion/mission runners. Should their HiSec lifestyle be consequence free? NO!!! Then again, it already isn't. Ganks of bling fit ships should and do happen. Why exactly though is this a wardec 'problem'? It all seems to me to be a sandbox, sorting itself out, with one group taking advantage of corporate 'liquidity' in a way the we see every day irl.

Perhaps in a major wardec overhaul, making a dec more 'sticky' wouldn't be a bad feature, but we are talking about Eve and Eve players - a collective group of players that WILL find a way to manipulate every set of rules to suit their own needs. New and even more creative Shell Corp 'solutions' WILL be found and 'abused' no matter what CCP does to cure the current 'problem' of today.


I'll repeat something I said a few pages back:. Lots of folks here still seem to be missing my premise of wardeccing for a few hundred mill in "tribute." It's not about risk, it's not about wanting easy targets to shoot at, it's about inconveniencing a small group of people to the point that it's less of a headache just to pay out 200m or300m. Some will corp-hop, but some will not. As I said earlier, you throw enough crap at the wall, and some of it will stick. This makes probably the 6th or 7th time I've explained this.




What if they/he/she can't pay?

What's your next course of action?

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.