Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Hang on, people are saying in this very thread they're making loads of isk, having dramatic effects on the economy...which is it? I'm not an indy so I don't know.



Iiiish. If they do pre-emptively make shells up front and tower up that is an up front cost, those are assets gathering dust "just in case" whilst burning fuel (it is assumed that the main corp can facilitate all members otherwise what is the point), those corps are also vulnerable to wardecs, potentially before the "primary" is attacked thus ruining the protection. It can be burned through by simply rolling the dec further up the tree.

I feel like people putting in isk, time and effort to create a one time ablative layer should reap those rewards, however even as I type this I know in myself no-one will ever do it, not unless there are huge (and I mean HUGE) changes to industry and POS mechanics. And this would be for a one time only option. Risk mitigation to be sure, but not invulnerability. Mind you, so would be a freighter runner paying a few guardian pilots to follow him about, ain't no-one gonna be able to gank in any realistic scenario that so equally "risk free". Plus the attacker can just roll the dec along, certainly costs a bit more but then if people have set up this level of (frankly pointless) paranoia then more power to them.

Today it's a case of pay some isk, shut down ops for at least a week - pretty decent bargain (I'd not be adverse to people getting a pro-rata refund if a decced corp folds in the first week, that seems entirely fair.). Sure, stuff doesn't blow up but as we all know that is not the be all and end all of PvP. Folk moan about it, but I don't think it's broken nearly as badly as a lot of other things out there needing fixed. I suspect if more people (not aimed at yourself) could embrace that explosions are not the final word in PvP it would be more apparent.

And this is the crux of it.

Some people want, against both the design and intent of the game, to be immune.

They quite simply should not be.

@McChicken Combo HalfMayo. Too much to quote.

It's a well reasoned discussion however in my book because these are one time burns (the towers go down and the corp folds) it is not without penalty - they just pay it up front (towers aren't free).

If people are perpared to spend hundreds upon hundreds of millions putting up exposed and vestigial towers (72m a pop for a naked small in jita) "just in case", should that level of preparation not pay dividends?



>>>>Players shouldn't have to spend half a billion ISK and pull out their hair in the process to finally impede your operations .

>>>>I don't mind ISK, logistics and effort making it harder to be attacked but it has to be reasonable

The counterpoint is: Why should an exceptional well organised, pre-orchestrated, layered defence be rendered worthless with a mere 50 million isk?

I would wholeheartedly agree if war was the only way to bring PvP, however it is not and as such I feel that should people be going to supreme effort to insulate themselves from a SINGLE PvP vector deserve reward for their efforts (or perhaps the attackers deserve to fail for not doing their research/picking a poor attack vector either way the result is the same). After all, all that prep and isk counts for exactly nothing against a suicide gank.

You see it comes down to the "point" of the war - if you want to disrupt an industrial corp for economic reasons for example a competitor, then a series of war decs is chump change. However, if you're looking to farm easy kills, maybe it's not the best tool for that job. There can be no doubt this "free immunity" involves significant upheaval, asset relocation, time and lost isk potential hauling and onlining new mods on each tower, delays or flat out cancelled projects...these things are non trivial, they very much prove a disruption - and that is before a single shot is fired.

I get that some people just want to shoot ducks and that's fine, knock yourself out - but let's not pretend it is under the guise of "there's nothing else I can of to harm an indy corp", because there are other avenues. If people chose not to pursue these avenues then such is their choice.

Because that is not a "defense", that's still just playing with the corp creation mechanics.

Which, as has already been established, is what needs to be gotten rid of in the first place.




Those people belong in an NPC corp, taking NPC corp penalties.

Player corps, and the rewards of them, are for those willing to deal with wars. Not for cringing cowards. Any mechanic that lets people completely avoid wars while still being in a player corp should be removed outright or highly punished.

Yes, we've been over that. Do you actually have anything to say, or are you just here to bite ankles?




No, there is no moral equivalency here. One side wants the mechanic to not be trivial, and one wants it to be as worthless as possible so they can profit from it.

Nope. The ones currently abusing the mechanic are you and your side.

You want the status quo to continue out of nothing but selfishness. And, as we have recently discovered, at the expense of the health of the game as well.

One could ask you the same thing. Many of us have been telling you from the very beginning that you cannot force people into a war they do not want, or into fights they do not want to be a part of yet you refuse to accept this as fact.

Logging off for the duration is, was and always will be the ultimate path taken to avoid a war. Make wars any more unpalatable for those who want no part of them and that is exactly what you will find happening and then what are you going to do?

After pages of reading all the crap about how wars are about denying access to this, or restricting someones ability to do that and at the end we still come down to the same end. A vast majority of the WD in high sec are filed simply as a license to kill and nothing more. As I have stated many times before I have no problem with this fact as long as those who file these WD stop hiding behind all these lame excuses that high sec wars are about denying people the right to do this, or the access to that. Because in the end you cannot deny anyone access to anything in high sec and that includes a POS. You might be able to WD and restrict access to POS owned by that corp but dedicated players simply do what we did in an indy corp of times past on another of my characters. You simply move everything to another corp on another set of characters and as the old saying goes "keep on truckin" laughing in the face of those who WD you all the while.

oh yes the health of the game is dependent on the minority of the player base. What were those numbers? 50% pvp, but only 20% pve/miners/mission runners?

Those numbers are ambiguous and don't account for the learning curve, or the ease of access to the content they wanted to do. Activities like mining, which they probably felt was all they could do given their skills, didn't give them the fun they were looking for and quit. I am willing to bet quite a number of people quit because of the combat pvp in one form or another. So neither side isn't poison to the game.

how? by avoiding activities we don't want a part of? or just refusing to roll over and let people shoot us? you keep using player retention as a shield, but aren't subscriptions up for CCP? this is odd discrepancy.


the status quo changes update to update, you know that.




see, it happens regardless of how small.




Whelp, we have come full circle. Neither side is going to yield, the tie breaking vote is none other than CCP. Let's let THEM decide what to do with the game that they own.

They choose to be vulnerable to wars by joining a player corp. Just like you choose to be vulnerable to ganking by undocking.

Don't want wardecs, get out of player corps. Back threads for 'social corps'

The very point of war decs is to allow any player Corp shoot another player Corp for a week for a fee. Ccp say themselves they dont have to have a reason or rhyme and grief decs are not rampant.

Complaining that wardecs are just excuses to shoot people is like complaining about how light is just used to illuminate things...