EVE General Discussion

I predict a full revamp of wardecs ...
... or complete removal for something much better.

Good times ahead !

Your attitude towards the matter only makes it worse.
You people yourself only make it worse, tbh.

Try being reasonable at some point.

The new structures leave them no other way than to revamp wardecs.
The drifters also show that it will be happening,
because there's a huge change coming.

Of course I can be wrong, but so far everything points into that direction.

The best explanation I can give you about the lack of talks ...
... is that it's still to come.

In any way is your approach to this situation not helpfull at all.
The attitude even more so.

So then we have a 500man alliance. You only dig your own graves
by only caring about your side, FORCING ccp to do something.

It has been like this with ganking as well. It's not the complaints on the forums,
it's people constantly pushing it tk a level that leaves CCP no choice
and then exactly these people cry the most.

Let's hope the leaders of this alliance have a bit more thoughtfullness.

Sorry but that post makes not much sense.
It sounds contradictionary.

Please elaborate.
Why did you benefit and what competition would you expect to see anyway?
I have a followup question to this... but one after the other.

They will destroyable by entosis modules - no EHP involved. If anything, this makes it easier to destroy a structure as if unopposed, you can do it in a T1 frigate (or perhaps a little more to avoid the automated defenses). That's way better the hours of boredom for a dozen players required to take down a large POS in highsec now even if the other side is logged off.

The only question is whether this can be done without a wardec, or if a war is declared, does the defending corporation have the option to take down the space assets and decline the fight. Those answers will determine whether these structures will actually drive conflict or just be another toy for players in highsec.

From what I read of (the subject to change) dev post was that one account trolling attacks of citadels wouldn't be possible, so it it will require multi boxing at least.

There was also some mention of wanting players to have a spot they feel safe in.

If citadels don't provide that, then why would players change their behaviour when they can just stay safe in NPC buildings?

A few things in your post need to be corrected.
No, it's not a matter of opinion.


> And I know EVE is meant to have a learning cliff, but if you want new players you need to let them learn.
> That's one of the purposes of high security zones.
> People can wade into the shallow waters of EVE first, before heading into the darker waters where some of us live.

That's not how reality works. One does not learn how to be safe by being safe. One needs to be un-safe
to learn how to be safe. HighSec is the absolutely worst place for new players to learn the game,
because there they only learn that they are being protected and have it easy.

All the spoonfed babies who couldn't deal with life if there wasn't some force
actually governing and protecting them will, of course, disagree.

That's the kind of self entitled people who run a big mouth until you slap them.
Virtually or in reality. Doesn't matter, they start crying and yelling for CCP, mommy or the police.


> Having a variety of arenas lets players choose what they want to do.
New Eden does not have "arenas". The idea that people should move to specific "zones"
for doing specific things has no connection to the game at all.

Yes, some space allows for things the other doesn't,
but that doesn't turn them into specific zones for specific "playstyles".



> I'd prefer them to be easily defensible, because I like having more content, more things to do.
> Last thing I want to do is stress about a game I pay money for,
> and have to log in at odd hours to make sure I haven't lost my stuff.
That, of course, is perfectly fine. I see that you aren't the type who whines about
things he does not actually deserve. Nowadays every idiot believes he deserves anything.

By that I mean ... as said above ... if you can't defend it, you can't have it.

Let's see, if we'll have NPC stations left, when the Drifters are done with us.

*sigh*

We are very different.

You think there is such a thing as hard realities, whereas I think everything is a matter of opinion.

You think "self entitled" is a phrase to demean people, whereas I think it is a phrase taught to sheep to make them keep other sheep in line.

I'd say you were a fan of tough love, which I think is a rework of the self entitled school of thought. A way of saying other people are worse than oneself because oneself is so tough.

Given what I think is the distance between our disparate views of the world, it's doubtful we can find any understanding, however, let me try.

The real world is entirely uncaring of us. How we see the world makes it so. Depending on our point of view the Universe can be infinitely bountiful, or a cold uncaring oblivion.

I prefer to see the world as a fairly fun place and I'm quite happy doing boring stuff which I find fun. And I don't really see the need to argue that EVE should be as hard a world as can possibly be.

Like.... 'your defence are awesome but the ai doesn't use them at all so we have taken your defended pos and capped on it so any guy in a frig can wardec you and unless you spend ages at just the right time watching your pos it dies'. That kind of entosis link loophole?
As for complaining anti cap defence are unfair vs subcaps. These little things called tracking and sign radius on guns say otherwise.

Essentially if CCP go ahead with their plans as is. Kiss any idea of building your own places goodbye.

I thought they removed standings requirements for POS?