These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The 4.7%: Wardecs with a Purpose

Author
Lan Wang
Princess Aiko Hold My Hand
Safety. Net
#61 - 2014-11-20 12:58:27 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Jarod Garamonde wrote:

Then they just cry to CCP to nerf ALL combat ships. Ugh.....


Of course they do.

In their minds, the ability to shoot other people in ANY WAY is the problem. Everything they ask for is just one further step to accomplishing their goal.

Trammel.


isnt this the same for wardeccers who cry to nerf npc corps?

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Nat Silverguard
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#62 - 2014-11-20 13:00:38 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
If wardeccs/awoxxing/theft weren't a threat, I would surely join up with some kind of incursion/L4 corp for social interaction.

EVE is a very social game. You started to troll the wrong people from day one not realizing what long term effect this would have for your character. Maybe you can do that sort of thing in WOW or any other game without consequences for internet tough guys like you if you plan to do only PvE. Your char Veers Belvar will probably never be able to join a normal corp in Highsec. It will most certainly get deced right away and forced to kick you, fold or dock up.

You brought this on yourself. I am not surprised that you now try to ask CCP to change the system in your favour. But this is not a problem for new players at all, the majority of them have no problem joining a corp, it's only a problem for people like you who don't know when to shut up.

tough life, lulz


i don't usually agree how the Code. roleplays and i might get in trouble if my CEO finds out about this post, nonetheless, i will make an exemption on this one.

+1 to Ima Wreckyou

Just Add Water

Good Posting Reloaded
My Real Mind
#63 - 2014-11-20 13:20:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Good Posting Reloaded
Veers can join my corp and do what he pleases whenever he wants and with 0 taxes, and of couse jump in and out. I wouldn't require api because i don't give a rat ass. Besides, what the point of joining a high sec orp? Unless you are a stinky high sec roleplayer, that is.

And lol at "this is a very social game" haha, yeah tell that to the "replicant" fleets. This game is more like Age of Empires in space, controlling dozens of villagers but with the help of an external program and the more you pay, the more dps you have.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#64 - 2014-11-20 13:50:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Kagura Nikon
Basil Pupkin wrote:
HUGE amount of ignorance...


Sir.. you instead of thinking on something that would arise in better gameplay is jsut spoting nonsense crap basaed on your limited narrow view that the game should be made jsut for you.


Your ideas are so stupid and ignorant that they do not deserve a direct response.

For once, understand. There is no GRIEFER in this game!! Its WAR, its combat, the main thing this game is built around. If you call the core of the game griefing, then GTFO of the game.


Stop with the sad excuses! Among the highest killer in our ranks have characters barely 1 year old. So stop with the SP bullshit excuse that could just come out from a loser mindset.

Your problem is nto wars, it is your loser mindset that cannot cope with EVE.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#65 - 2014-11-20 13:54:59 UTC
Good Posting Reloaded wrote:
Veers can join my corp and do what he pleases whenever he wants and with 0 taxes, and of couse jump in and out. I wouldn't require api because i don't give a rat ass. Besides, what the point of joining a high sec orp? Unless you are a stinky high sec roleplayer, that is.

And lol at "this is a very social game" haha, yeah tell that to the "replicant" fleets. This game is more like Age of Empires in space, controlling dozens of villagers but with the help of an external program and the more you pay, the more dps you have.



Can I join my alt? because if yes I will wait you undock in something expensive and kill you without concord intervention.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Dave Stark
#66 - 2014-11-20 14:00:32 UTC
Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:
The time has come for you to do the same for highsec war declarations - make them a tool that's actually worth using for something besides lolz and farming kills.



the issue isn't that wardecs are bad.

the issue is that player owned corps aren't worth fighting for.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#67 - 2014-11-20 14:14:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Discussions about war decs are irritating to me, because it's like talking about the Flu yet acting as if the kleenex you use to blow your nose is the problem.

The problem isn't war decs, it's core (and now ancient) game design that designates a large swath of space "high sec" and spawns magical/indestructable space police to do a job that at best should only be done by players. The existence of high sec creates the paradox of "hey, this is a safe place to play (keeps playing)" along side "hey, this is a safeplace to play, man is this boring (uninstalls)". High Sec draws in players of a mindset that is generally incompatible with what the rest of EVE is, and when players (gankers, awoxxers and the like) demonstrate this to them these incompatible players react as if some great injustice just occurred.

In the same way the old clone grade system discouraged pvp in a pvp based game, high sec as currenlty constituted dampens and punishes player interaction in a game that NEEDS such interaction.

It's EVE's security status bands and mechanics that need rethinking, not "pve needs to be better" or 'war decs need changing" or "npc corps need balancing" etc etc. It's simply "high sec needs a rethink", period.

Hopefully this will happen since CCP has grown the space balls (ironically, with a woman in charge) to re-examine the 'sacred cows'. Despite high-secist propaganda to the contrary, the biggest sacred cow in the game isn't moon goo or null sec, it's high security space.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#68 - 2014-11-20 14:24:19 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

The problem isn't war decs, it's core (and now ancient) game design that designates a large swath of space "high sec" and spawns magical/indestructable space police to do a job that at best should only be done by players.


I think you confuse HS with 0.0.
0.0 is where players are da police.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#69 - 2014-11-20 14:26:56 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

The problem isn't war decs, it's core (and now ancient) game design that designates a large swath of space "high sec" and spawns magical/indestructable space police to do a job that at best should only be done by players.


I think you confuse HS with 0.0.
0.0 is where players are da police.


I confuse nothing. High sec players LOVE to tell us how "null sec is safer than high sec".

so, by High-secian logic, High sec players should welcome the demise of CONCORD so that players can then make high sec as safe as deep null.

Right? Twisted
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#70 - 2014-11-20 14:33:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Robert Caldera
Jenn aSide wrote:

so, by High-secian logic, High sec players should welcome the demise of CONCORD so that players can then make high sec as safe as deep null.

Right? Twisted


not really, players arent neutral with all bad consequences resulting from it.
I wouldnt like a game where I had no place to retreat into, without having someones d*ck down throat just to be allowed to be somewhre.
Unsure how your vision works.
Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#71 - 2014-11-20 14:36:06 UTC
Yourmoney Mywallet wrote:
Am I the only one who want to see the killmail with the OP's main on it?


Oh. I'll happily admit that my alt (this is my current main) dies in a fire just about every time I engage in PVP - I'm terrible solo, and only reasonably decent in a good group. I don't PvP to win fights. I PvP for the excitement of potentially ruining someone else's day. Sometimes I even win. \o/

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.

Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#72 - 2014-11-20 14:39:27 UTC
Angeal MacNova wrote:
You incorrectly assume that just because nothing was destroyed, no purpose was served. This is the common mistake about wars. Too many people think that the purpose of them is to destroy stuff when really, destroying stuff is just a means to an end. If miner corp A hires mercs to wardec miner corp B causing miner corp B to pack up and move elsewhere, then the war served it's purpose. No need for anything to blow up.


That's true, but it's impossible to measure that objectively - I think that may be one of the reasons people get so hung up on killboard stats, especially new highsec merc corps. It's really the only objective measure they can point to and say "See, we did this."

Maybe adding in some kind of objective mechanic might give everyone a better overall picture of the way wardecs are working and help dispell some of that "kills only" mythology.

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.

Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#73 - 2014-11-20 14:41:01 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:

Good stuff, but let's not eulogize the war deccers as "crushing toxic corps", "fighting the evil tax farms", and preventing the "poisoning of new players." Cool



Why not? That's what I've always used it for. Awoxing too, to crush these vile people who try to get new players to mine for two months before they train any useful skills. The people who tell new players nothing except "you can't." The less of these people around to corrupt newbies, the better.


I don't often agree with your point of view Kaarous, but in this instance I find it hard not to.

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.

Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#74 - 2014-11-20 14:42:24 UTC
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:
This is a call to CCP to make wardecs actually useful for something besides being an enormous ISK sink for people with too much time and money on their hands.


The real question is: Why would you want to remove an ISK sink that affects people with too much time and money Lol


I don't want to remove the ISK sink. If anything I'd like to increase the amount of ISK wardecs remove from the economy in some fashion - but aside from raising rates, or adding in a dec-doge fee, I'm not entirely sure how that would be accomplished.

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.

Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#75 - 2014-11-20 14:45:12 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Jvpiter wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
The mechanic is fundamentally broken because there is no way for the defender to force a resolution to the conflict.



How would you suggest the defender do that?



One idea would be to create some type of sov structure in the aggressors home system, and if the defender manages to occupy that for say, 3 days, make the attacker pay a SIGNIFICANT financial penalty to the defender...or something along those lines.


This sounds suspiciouly like faction war, and all that would really happen is the war deccers would camp their "flag" and wait fomr someone to try and occupy it. The rest of the scenario plays out exactly the same.

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.

Lan Wang
Princess Aiko Hold My Hand
Safety. Net
#76 - 2014-11-20 14:46:55 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Robert Caldera wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

The problem isn't war decs, it's core (and now ancient) game design that designates a large swath of space "high sec" and spawns magical/indestructable space police to do a job that at best should only be done by players.


I think you confuse HS with 0.0.
0.0 is where players are da police.


I confuse nothing. High sec players LOVE to tell us how "null sec is safer than high sec".

so, by High-secian logic, High sec players should welcome the demise of CONCORD so that players can then make high sec as safe as deep null.

Right? Twisted


no, remove concord and it will only affect everyone everywhere

id rather remove weapon activation from highsec and force all pvp to low and nullsec where there is no security and populate null a bit better bringing more content

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#77 - 2014-11-20 14:50:12 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Jean Luc Lemmont wrote:
The time has come for you to do the same for highsec war declarations - make them a tool that's actually worth using for something besides lolz and farming kills.



the issue isn't that wardecs are bad.

the issue is that player owned corps aren't worth fighting for.


Honestly, I think that's always been the crux of the problem. And I've never seen a good idea that would fix it.

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.

Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#78 - 2014-11-20 15:16:41 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:
id rather remove weapon activation from highsec

This could almost be a good idea. At the very least we wouldn't have permabears injecting massive amounts of ISK into the economy since ratting and missioning would be impossible in nigh perfect safety. Also incursions. Unfortunately you'd also have to remove towers and POCOs from high-sec because no one could contest them (or tear down NPC POCOs). That would probably also mess with a lot of other mechanics too...

Anyway, what Jenn said: high-sec is the problem, not wars.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.

Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#79 - 2014-11-20 15:24:09 UTC
I just took a quick look at my corp stats (which, thankfully, zkillboard hasn't lost) and confirmed that only ~15% of my wardecs didn't generate a kill.

From my standpoint (small corp vs small corp, or small corp vs abandoned structure) wardecs work just fine.

Having said that, I do feel that wardec mechanics and possibly fees need an overhaul, I just don't have enough experience with larger wars to know what would improve things.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#80 - 2014-11-20 15:31:15 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

so, by High-secian logic, High sec players should welcome the demise of CONCORD so that players can then make high sec as safe as deep null.

Right? Twisted


not really, players arent neutral with all bad consequences resulting from it.
I wouldnt like a game where I had no place to retreat into, without having someones d*ck down throat just to be allowed to be somewhre.
Unsure how your vision works.


It's not my 'vision', it's the logical conclusion to the high sec lie of "null is safer than high sec".

IF you want high sec to be 'safe'

AND

You think null is safer than high sec

The obvious path forward is to ask what is different between null and high (it's CONCORD) and eliminate the thing causing the difference. This of course is blasphmey is the 'rugged individualists" aka asocial loners of high sec so it will never happen. But because high sec (not war decs) is the actual problem, the problem being discussed in this thread can never be 'fixed'.