These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
malcovas Henderson
THoF
#781 - 2014-09-15 17:20:20 UTC
Trixie Lawless wrote:
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:
[quote]

It's like ordering a pizza and when it comes it has the wrong topics on it and then some joker comes along and says "omg d00d! why didn't you order it with toppings you like??"


Except you are getting the exact toppings you have ordered? Just because you want to agress a group of players doesn't mean they have to participate. Once again....TARGET SELECTION.

You all keep trying to shove all the responsibility to the defender. They are not the one initiating the action. Have you maybe thought CCP doesn't want you to be able to extort super small corps with just a click of a button and a show of force...in hi sec of all places. Have you ever thought maybe CCP doesn't want you to have the ability to deny content so easily to others in hi sec?

Arguing until you are blue in the face about it doesn't matter. Coming up with hypotheticals doesn't matter. CCP has stated they don't feel its an exploit. Plain and simple.

39 pages worth of "ITS NOT FAIR CUZ I DONT GET MY WAY" is excessive.



I have posted a perfectly valid target selection scenario. Please note the word VALID. Just so you cannot forget, i'll repeat myself. Please note the word VALID. Yet even though it is a "Valid" WD, in your eyes. It is still rendered useless by this mechanic.

Again this is not about Forced PVP. It is not about locking players to a corp. There is more than just PVP as a reason to WD's happening.

On the subject of PvP. "go to null / lo / WH" is also not the answer. All 3 have different styles of "PvP" partaking within them. If I prefer 1 style of something, Why should I settle for another.

Just because CCP do not agree atm, does not mean they cannot see sense later on. That argument is totally flat. Just look at all the changes that have been made. changes = CCP changed minds.
Prince Kobol
#782 - 2014-09-15 17:37:23 UTC
To all the people who are complaining asking why people people war dec one man corps or its the fault of the war deccers for not selecting a valid target, As soon as you log into Eve you a valid target for aggression.

Whether it be by suicide ganking, war decing, baiting, duelling etc you are a valid target and as for the reason why sojmebody should go after another person or corp, it is completely irrelevant.
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#783 - 2014-09-15 18:03:38 UTC
Trixie Lawless wrote:
Sabot I think you are looking at this topic from a 1 corp vs 1 corp war, and not seeing this in the average carebears eyes. Do I agree with you that staying out of area is the proper way to show you are not a good target? Yup. Sure do, especially when you are at war with 1 other corp....but this topic isn't really aimed at the 1v1 type of wars. The problems spring more from mass war decs and people wanting to deny content to others in hi sec.

Think about this from a business perspective (CCP will never confirm this...and they shouldn't, because that's not how a company should present itself)...

You have three players that really really really love to be super boring and watch rocks disappear in space and then sell goods on the market. They all pay their 15/month and are in a corp together. They all have around 5 mill sp and because of the tutorials they really didn't know or think to skill into combat...yet.

One day they get wardecced and (according to you, extorted for what? 300 million) pay the other corp 300 mill just to go away. Then it happens again by another corp, then again, and again, until they are broke. So they decide just to dock and refuse to play. Now the corps extorting them get pissed because they can't anymore....so they keep on deccing just to deny them content. Those three aren't having fun so unsub.

3 customers gone. The way it is now...CCP probably loses zero customers because the carebears have a way to show you they don't want to play your game...and you just move along to the next group. Or... You can just gank them and CCP is okay with that too.

Its not real mind boggling to see that CCP , although giving you the option to go to war, wants to have an area that somewhat caters to the carebear gamer. They have two other areas in the game to attract people who want lots of war.

Why high sec war deccers stay in high sec when they can go to null or low sec and find the playstyle they want is beyond me, but to each his/her own. But CCP should not bend or change these mechanics. If they do you can wave goodbye to a lot of carebears, therefore a lot of players, and a lot of money, just to appeal to war deccers.


First, please let me apologize for saying your earlier post showed a lack of perspective and maturity. I feel bad about that, and am embarrassed I let myself stoop low like that. Please forgive me Oops

Sooo, the stupid forum ate my long-ass reply Evil

Anyway, I do see what you're saying, and it does put things in a clearer perspective for me. We certainly dont want to chase off all the carebears, as they really do play an important role in the economy. The big thing I and likely many others love so much about this game is the whole sandbox thing. To me, a wardec should be used as a tool, not an excuse to pop carebears to pad the kill board. I really dig the idea of wardecs as a means of extortion. Your points are valid too, however.

So, Ive had a crazy idea jump into my head. There's a lot of talk from people about forcing people into player corps by nerfing NPC corps, making the taxes higher, etc. I'm wondering, what if we do the opposite? What if we significantly lower the taxes in NPC corps? Come up with some other buffs, too... idk what, this just came to me lol, but make it relatively attractive to stay in an NPC corp, and make joining a player corp a real decision, one that has both pros and cons either way.

This, I think would foster a better "growing up" of the noobs and carebears. Due to the low taxes and other incentives (I cant think of any atm but you know :D) they hopefully would look at joining (graduating to) a player corp as a big step that one should take only when one feels "rdy."

This might make it a little more "fair" when it comes tocorps getting decced, idk. Like I said, just an incomplete thought I had. Would like to hear opinions on it tho.

\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Carl Pator
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#784 - 2014-09-15 18:15:09 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
To all the people who are complaining asking why people people war dec one man corps or its the fault of the war deccers for not selecting a valid target, As soon as you log into Eve you a valid target for aggression.

Whether it be by suicide ganking, war decing, baiting, duelling etc you are a valid target and as for the reason why sojmebody should go after another person or corp, it is completely irrelevant.


Fair but then you can't blame the target for using a perfectly viable mechanic to avoid being a target (at least in 1 way). You wouldn't blame someone for declining a duel would you?

People are saying go nuts and dec all the "mission bill's blatant tax dodge" corps you want but don't cry on the forums when he folds his corp.
Trixie Lawless
State War Academy
Caldari State
#785 - 2014-09-15 18:19:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Trixie Lawless
Your idea of making NPC corps more attractive for noons and carebears is def something I can get on board with. Cheap taxes and non deccable is good, but make the player corp incentives be for people who have been in the game longer, or are ready to say...hey, I'm ready or willing to defend myself and my corp.

I think one of the big reasons there are so many super small corps, is the trust issue that EVE players have themselves placed into the game. Awoxers, thievery, and whatnot scare the hell out of newbs, so they form small corps with trusted people only, that's why you see hundreds of small Indy corps all over the place.

People want to see players corps mean more, wardeccers want to not have dinky corps roll up, and carebears just want to carebear. This could be a start to good ideas.

Props Ssabat
thatonepersone
Black Jack 0-1
#786 - 2014-09-15 19:08:38 UTC  |  Edited by: thatonepersone
If you jump corp and reform to often ccp will get on you for it.
Prince Kobol
#787 - 2014-09-15 19:20:03 UTC
Carl Pator wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
To all the people who are complaining asking why people people war dec one man corps or its the fault of the war deccers for not selecting a valid target, As soon as you log into Eve you a valid target for aggression.

Whether it be by suicide ganking, war decing, baiting, duelling etc you are a valid target and as for the reason why sojmebody should go after another person or corp, it is completely irrelevant.


Fair but then you can't blame the target for using a perfectly viable mechanic to avoid being a target (at least in 1 way). You wouldn't blame someone for declining a duel would you?

People are saying go nuts and dec all the "mission bill's blatant tax dodge" corps you want but don't cry on the forums when he folds his corp.



Here is the thing, Folding your corp should be the very last thing you would want to do but at the moment it is the first thing many people do, why, because the gap between NPC corps and HS Corps are so small and the penalty for folding your corp is non existent that it damn well makes no difference.

The game mechanics is teaching players that it is better to stay in a NPC Corp then a player corp and that is just wrong.
Lady Spank
Get Out Nasty Face
#788 - 2014-09-15 19:21:50 UTC
Hi-sec problems.

(ಠ_ృ) ~ It Takes a Million Years to Become Diamonds So Lets Just Burn Like Coal Until the Sky's Black ~ (ಠ_ృ)
Carl Pator
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#789 - 2014-09-15 19:41:33 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Carl Pator wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
To all the people who are complaining asking why people people war dec one man corps or its the fault of the war deccers for not selecting a valid target, As soon as you log into Eve you a valid target for aggression.

Whether it be by suicide ganking, war decing, baiting, duelling etc you are a valid target and as for the reason why sojmebody should go after another person or corp, it is completely irrelevant.


Fair but then you can't blame the target for using a perfectly viable mechanic to avoid being a target (at least in 1 way). You wouldn't blame someone for declining a duel would you?

People are saying go nuts and dec all the "mission bill's blatant tax dodge" corps you want but don't cry on the forums when he folds his corp.



Here is the thing, Folding your corp should be the very last thing you would want to do but at the moment it is the first thing many people do, why, because the gap between NPC corps and HS Corps are so small and the penalty for folding your corp is non existent that it damn well makes no difference.

The game mechanics is teaching players that it is better to stay in a NPC Corp then a player corp and that is just wrong.


You're not wrong, folding a corp should be a last resort. However, is that an issue with a lack of penalties related to closing a corp or an issue with wardecs? If players aren't having fun under a war dec to the point they would want to close their corp should they really be forced to partake in it for over a week?

Personally I feel we should be looking for ways to encourage players to participate in war decs. Instead of looking for ways to punish them for not wanting any part of it.
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#790 - 2014-09-15 19:54:48 UTC
Carl Pator wrote:


Personally I feel we should be looking for ways to encourage players to participate in war decs. Instead of looking for ways to punish them for not wanting any part of it.



I agree, however I would have it go along with making NPC corps more attractive as well, as I discussed a few posts ago. Let them stay in the NPC corp and reap good benefits until theyve "grown up" and are rdy to join a player corp. Joining a player corp should be a big step up for noobs and carebears. Make it count. And then, yes, encourage them to fight the wars somehow. We need more ideas on this then we can take it to F&I

\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#791 - 2014-09-15 20:02:21 UTC
If someone leaves a corp under wardec, the wardec should follow them, just like a corp leaving an alliance under wardec.

The current mechanic of dropping corp to avoid wardecs is an exploit. If a wardec mechanic is going to exist at all, it should be a meaningful mechanic, not 'meh...just drop corp to shed it. Done'.

The fact this existing loophole and exploit has not been closed already, makes it clear to me that CCP is ultimately about nerfing hisec, while talking a good HTFU game out of the other side of their mouth.

One just has to took at the long list of progressive nerfs on the road to nerfdom, to see CCP is all about carebear lovin pansification these days.

::sadpanda::

F

Would you like to know more?
Seneca Auran
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#792 - 2014-09-15 20:36:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Seneca Auran
Ssabat Thraxx wrote:

So how do you shoot a corp? How do you extract money from a corp? You don't. There should be some sort of disincentive to just packing up and dropping corp any time a war is declared, otherwise you trivialize war deccing in general, and cut out several options of emergent gameplay. Basically what I'm getting from you guys is that you don't want any non-consentual PVP in hisec at all. Why dont you just tell us all to go join RvB?


There all ready is. If said corp has assets to defend or other reasons that dropping corp is the less desirable option. Sitting in a station and war deccing every corporation you see with 'mining', 'missioning' or 'pve' in it's description is trivializing war decs.

Quote:
To at the very least throw aggressors a bone, how about a corp that disbands under a wardec can never have it's name or ticker used again, and the aggressor get's their concord fee refunded?


Yes, aggressors all ready have absolute control over declaring war, keeping the war going in perpetuity, and controlling surrender offers. Why can't CCP throw them a bone by taking away the single mechanic defenders have for directly affecting the war dec that isn't entirely dependent on the aggressors mood that day.

Quote:
Lets go over this slowly. I "ordered" a war against ACME Corp. Because I "want to agress them." They all drop corp and dodge the war..

#1. I did NOT, in fact, get "exactly what I ordered a war.)"


You got exactly what you wanted, a war against ACME Corp. ACME Corp. no longer exists. Congratulations on your victory.

Quote:
#2. Im still wondering how you can keep saying "TARGET SELECTION" when I have already asked how you expect a would-be attacker to know ahead of time if their target is or is not going to actually go to war?


Recon? Intel? Follow people around. Locate POS's and POCOS and find out who owns them? If you're just going to spam war decs at every likely looking 'carebear' you see without doing any kind of groundwork, you should expect it to be a crap shoot.

Prince Kobol wrote:
To all the people who are complaining asking why people people war dec one man corps or its the fault of the war deccers for not selecting a valid target, As soon as you log into Eve you a valid target for aggression.

Whether it be by suicide ganking, war decing, baiting, duelling etc you are a valid target and as for the reason why sojmebody should go after another person or corp, it is completely irrelevant.


Yup. And if it turns out you war decced somebody who has nothing to lose or defend, you shouldn't be demanding that CCP force them to fight you anyway, or punish them for not doing so. Particularly when as you just helpfully pointed out, there's nothing stopping you from attacking them anyway, except that CONCORD is a bit tougher than your average Venture.
Carl Pator
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#793 - 2014-09-15 20:37:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Carl Pator
Delete
Iudicium Vastus
Doomheim
#794 - 2014-09-15 20:49:54 UTC
Way too many entitled types whenever the wardec subject comes up. Pick better targets that don't have a history of dropping corp or reforming. Or ones that you have located confirmed assets in space like POCOs or towers that they'll likely defend.

It's almost like they believe hisec intentionally exists as some sort of game preserve or ranch for them. Getting upset the turkeys don't turn up for the shoot. Hisec is not "La Grunta"

[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)
malcovas Henderson
THoF
#795 - 2014-09-15 20:56:32 UTC
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
If someone leaves a corp under wardec, the wardec should follow them, just like a corp leaving an alliance under wardec.

The current mechanic of dropping corp to avoid wardecs is an exploit. If a wardec mechanic is going to exist at all, it should be a meaningful mechanic, not 'meh...just drop corp to shed it. Done'.

The fact this existing loophole and exploit has not been closed already, makes it clear to me that CCP is ultimately about nerfing hisec, while talking a good HTFU game out of the other side of their mouth.

One just has to took at the long list of progressive nerfs on the road to nerfdom, to see CCP is all about carebear lovin pansification these days.

::sadpanda::

F


I cannot get behind WD's following Players. You WD the Corp not the player. There should be however, some meaningful consequence to dropping corp.

Also you call it an Exploit. I am sorry you are wrong, CCP, in an unwise error of judgement, have deemed it permissible under the current scheme of things.

Yes CCP also seem to be heading for the Trammel state. On one hand they promote eve as a harsh environment, where the bad guys sells the game, while on the other hand removing said harsh environment.

While upping the consequences for dropping corp, makes for a more balanced mechanic. It in no way "Forces" players to engage into Combat PvP. Dropping is still an option.
thatonepersone
Black Jack 0-1
#796 - 2014-09-15 22:04:15 UTC
[/quote]
Also you call it an Exploit. I am sorry you are wrong, CCP, in an unwise error of judgement, have deemed it permissible under the current scheme of things.
[/quote]

Actualy if you drop corp and reform to often CCP will get on you for it.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#797 - 2014-09-15 22:06:03 UTC
thatonepersone wrote:

Actualy if you drop corp and reform to often CCP will get on you for it.


Despite having read that myself, I have never once seen them do this, even after I petitioned a guy who did it twenty times.

Since we're on this whole "figure out where the line is yourself" thing, I can only assume that the line is at least at twenty one. Or human decency, or some other ephemeral term.

"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.
Hiply Rustic
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#798 - 2014-09-15 22:30:52 UTC
malcovas Henderson wrote:
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
If someone leaves a corp under wardec, the wardec should follow them, just like a corp leaving an alliance under wardec.




I cannot get behind WD's following Players. You WD the Corp not the player. There should be however, some meaningful consequence to dropping corp.



Let's try it like this:

Hypothetically, my CEO decides...in his infinite(?) wisdom...to annoy Feyd to the point where the Harkonnens decide Kanly is the only reasonable course of action and Feyd wardecs the little corporation. I, being of more or less sound mind, evaluate my various options and decide my CEO has been smoking way too much of the indigenous flora to be trusted making my decisions for me any longer and I terminate my employment.

Feyd would have it that until he decides to accept the surrender of my former boss (or doesn't accept and just decides to dec that corp in perpetuity) I should be a legitimate target for his corp and allies. Seriously? That's a pretty damned one-way sandbox, isn't it?

It's one thing for a Corporation's decision-makers to be disincented in one way or another from disbanding corps to dec-dodge (even though it's not an exploit and is currently WAI) but it's a whole other thing to say that individual corp members should, additionally, have that wardec dog their steps no matter what they do.


Ralph King-Griffin wrote: "Eve deliberately excludes the stupid and the weak willied." EvE: Only the strong-willied need apply.
Ssabat Thraxx
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#799 - 2014-09-15 23:37:42 UTC
How about if only the original wardec stays on the player (as he would have it anyway had he stayed in corp) but once the initial 7 days are up he is not affected by the aggressor continuing the war against his former employer.

I think that's pretty fair.

\m/ O.o \m/

"You're a freak ..." - Solecist Project
Mackenzie Nolen
Doomheim
#800 - 2014-09-15 23:55:49 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
FYI, also from the same post, a few lines down:

(Edited from: Not an exploit per se, but excessively doing so will result in a warning. Don’t want the risk of wars being declared on you? Stay in NPC corps...)

In other words, their intent is ambiguous.


No. The "edited from" is what it USED to say. Before they changed the policy to say what it says NOW. Which is completely NOT ambiguous in any way. The "edited from" is just to maintain a revision history; it is not a statement about CURRENT policy.