These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Breaking war-dec's. Questions and a small rant :)

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Aquilan Aideron
Wardecs go here
#181 - 2015-09-24 12:31:53 UTC
Syn Shi wrote:
The term wardec needs to change to something like kicking puppies.

... or clubbing seals.
Tora Bushido
Commonwealth Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#182 - 2015-09-24 12:57:24 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
The same tools, yes, but not the same objectives. Like if we both had a small knife and I had to cut carrots while you had to chop down an oak tree. You're happy because the tools are unbalanced in your favour and you don't want change because you are risk averse and want to protect your easy gameplay.
So are you saying my way of playing should be removed because it doesnt fit your game style ? If thats ok for you, can I do the same and suggest all industrial parts of Eve should be removed ? How would you like it if I kept saying that ? You probably would think I was nuts...... guess what many here are thinking now about your suggestions. Blink

You do understand, I hope, that's it's you who wants easy game play ? Remove wars, they are to hard for me. I want easy, as it fits my game style. How selfish.

DELETE THE WEAK, ADAPT OR DIE !

Meta Gaming Level VII, Psycho Warfare Level X, Smack Talk Level VII.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#183 - 2015-09-24 13:15:04 UTC
Tora Bushido wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
The same tools, yes, but not the same objectives. Like if we both had a small knife and I had to cut carrots while you had to chop down an oak tree. You're happy because the tools are unbalanced in your favour and you don't want change because you are risk averse and want to protect your easy gameplay.
So are you saying my way of playing should be removed because it doesnt fit your game style ? If thats ok for you, can I do the same and suggest all industrial parts of Eve should be removed ? How would you like it if I kept saying that ? You probably would think I was nuts...... guess what many here are thinking now about your suggestions. Blink

You do understand, I hope, that's it's you who wants easy game play ? Remove wars, they are to hard for me. I want easy, as it fits my game style. How selfish.
Ideally it shouldn't be, it should be rebalanced like every other mechanic, which involves big changes and you having to adapt as well as your opposition, much like how sov is being nuked and we are having to adapt to new norms.

But you won't even have a reasonable discussion about it, you just want to say "grr carebears" while you march on with your easy unbalanced gameplay, so **** you and **** your playstyle. If you can't be reasonable you should get no say in the matter.

Just FYI, types like you do say that parts of my playstyle should be removed, so don't give me any of that "how would you like it if" bull. There are a vast number of times when part of the game I use have been whined about, not least of which with the recent jump and sov changes.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Syeed Ameer Ali
Dirtbag Space Warriors Coming for yor Loots
#184 - 2015-09-24 13:15:28 UTC
Roney Strongarm wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
Roney Strongarm wrote:
If you people don't start agreeing on this, it's not me that's going to hurt from it. It's EVE itself. You can have your scams, your exploits, your general d0uchebaggery, this game is going to die a horrible death. Is that really what you want?

I'm telling you this is going to happen. IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. This game is not friendly to new players. TOO MANY have quit over the bullox stuff that goes on here. It's time for a change. Maybe CCP should change their motto. Stop focusing so much on PVP. Make high sec actually safe for once. Give the non-pvp'ers a chance.
The sky is not falling.

Highsec has been made safer than ever before in the game. Ganking, awoxing, wardeccing, can flipping/baiting have never been harder. Why only now, 12+ years after the game debuted is the Eve going to "die a horrible death"?

If you no longer enjoy Eve, then perhaps it is just you that is past your expiry date and not the game. I suggest you take a break and do something you enjoy more with your spare time rather than whining impotently on these forums. You can always come back later and see if your fondness for our PvP sandbox game has been rekindled while you were apart.


Oh it's not? Ok. Just wait till something else like star citizen comes out.

I'm raising the arguments here because of what I have seen. Not because of what the statistics say. Sure there are many new players who join the game. Many of them are alts of people who have anywhere between 1 - 8 accounts.

I say there's a decline in numbers, because I HAVE SEEN IT. Just recetly, 8 more newbro's to the game, gone. Why? War dec mechanics. Could I have done more as a CEO? I'm not sureI could have. You can only push people so much to do what you want. "Use this overview. Use that warp gate. Fit your ship this way. Listen to the FC". But new players are just that. NEW. And yes, many of them I trained went on to PVP and join nullsec alliances. Even out of the coveted "join null" argument, they STILL quit the game.


It's actually pretty normal and expected that a majority of people who try the game will quit. Hell, everyone quits eventually. But as for new players, every MMO sees a large number of players who try it out, play for anywhere between 1 hour to a couple of months, then leave and don't come back. I myself have tried out numerous games and decided that they weren't worth my time and quit early. Most of those games were more successful than EVE, so you can't really say that they were at fault in any way.

When you CEO a corp that welcomes new players it is guaranteed that a majority of them will become inactive pretty quickly. This is nothing to panic over, it's not evidence that the game is dying, it's just normal turnover as people who are casually trying the game decide they have better things to do. Look at BNI - they just purged 9000 inactive players from their corp.

For you as a CEO to say that a majority of your recruits unsub and that wardecs are the reason is a pretty big assumption. Realistically most of them left for reasons which had nothing to do with game mechanics- all newbie corps need a constant influx of new blood to keep up with this. The other likely cause of the turnover may be that you failed as a CEO to keep generating fun content. CCP has concluded that wardecs do not adversely affect player retention, so I'd suggest you look a little closer to home if you are looking for reasons.

everevolutionaryfront.blogspot.com
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#185 - 2015-09-24 13:28:12 UTC
Nihlus Valke wrote:
However, CONCORD clearly exists in hisec for the purpose of curbing acts of violence between players. If you want to gank that miner or blob an industrial on a gate, so be it. But you lose all ships involved*.

*Although that isn't the case anymore as CCP, unable to police bumpers, folds and tries to play it off as legal to save face. It clearly isn't legal seeing as the bumpers can't be considered gankers seeing as they aren't arousing a CONCORD response. Ergo, they aren't technically part of the gank and therefore are just griefers.
I'll ignore most of your little rant and just point out that bumping was legal long before hisec gankers began using it; it's not that CCP can't police it, it's that they currently see no need to.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Tora Bushido
Commonwealth Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#186 - 2015-09-24 13:39:16 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Ideally it shouldn't be, it should be rebalanced like every other mechanic, which involves big changes and you having to adapt as well as your opposition, much like how sov is being nuked and we are having to adapt to new norms.

But you won't even have a reasonable discussion about it, you just want to say "grr carebears" while you march on with your easy unbalanced gameplay, so **** you and **** your playstyle. If you can't be reasonable you should get no say in the matter.

Just FYI, types like you do say that parts of my playstyle should be removed, so don't give me any of that "how would you like it if" bull. There are a vast number of times when part of the game I use have been whined about, not least of which with the recent jump and sov changes.
That's probably because you are the one who keeps saying it should be removed from game. That has nothing to do with rebalancing. Thats a 100% one sided nerf. If you really wanted to have that reasonable discussion, you would also listen to people like me. If you go black in your replies, expect people to go white to counter it. You might want to settle down on your replies a bit, see what it does for the replies you get. I'm just a mirror for you. It will show yourself. I still feel much anger here.

DELETE THE WEAK, ADAPT OR DIE !

Meta Gaming Level VII, Psycho Warfare Level X, Smack Talk Level VII.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#187 - 2015-09-24 13:43:35 UTC
Aquilan Aideron wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:
The term wardec needs to change to something like kicking puppies.

... or clubbing seals.
For the player wardecs are completely consensual. You are never forced to defend a corporation.

Puppies and baby seals can play safely in the NPC corp if they want, protected from those who are actually competing for dominance in this PvP game.

I fail to see the problem here. If some player lacks the ability or the interest to defend a player corporation, no one is forcing them to.

Complaining about wardecs is like complaining about getting shot when going into a wormhole. You are choosing to accept increased risk that someone will shoot you in exchange for the increased rewards in that wormhole. If you don't want to be shot at by a wardeccer (or a cloaky Proteus), just stay in an NPC corp (and out of that wormhole). If you aren't deploying structures, there is no real advantage for you to be in one anyway. Use a dedicated chat channel to socialize with your mission running/mining friends.

Or better yet, join a corp in low/null/WH space, or even a competent highsec corp that knows how to defend itself. There you can learn how protect yourself from the minimal threat wardeccers actually pose by those that do it everyday.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#188 - 2015-09-24 13:55:53 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Ideally it shouldn't be, it should be rebalanced like every other mechanic, which involves big changes and you having to adapt as well as your opposition, much like how sov is being nuked and we are having to adapt to new norms.
It has been rebalanced, and it was a big change.

So how is it imbalanced this time?
Commander Spurty
#189 - 2015-09-24 14:02:16 UTC
Renegade Heart wrote:
Commander Spurty wrote:
you know, if it really is a sandbox, some people would be 'building castles'. No one builds castles if its all PVP.

When was the last time you jumped onto a PVP ONLY game like Counter Strike server to 'build the map'?

Doesn't happen and the guy is correct, this is a SANDBOX. It's not exclusively PVP.

To think otherwise is very telling of your Philosophy (an ability to understand the World around you).


Of course you are not obliged to seek out encounters with others to fight. However, it is hard to separate yourself from the rest of the universe completely, and others will often seek out encounters with you to explode your ship. There are other forms of PvP too.

To disregard the inherent PvP nature of the universe is to misunderstand the world around you.


All STATION TRADER ACCOUNTS reading that nonsense are rolling about in the station pointing at you and laughing pretty hard.

Just no.

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#190 - 2015-09-24 14:07:47 UTC
Commander Spurty wrote:
All STATION TRADER ACCOUNTS reading that nonsense are rolling about in the station pointing at you and laughing pretty hard.

Just no.


Market PvP isn't PvP?

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#191 - 2015-09-24 14:09:11 UTC
Commander Spurty wrote:
All STATION TRADER ACCOUNTS reading that nonsense are rolling about in the station pointing at you and laughing pretty hard.

Just no.
Station traders risk far more than a simple ship explosion in the PvP they're engaged in.
Aquilan Aideron
Wardecs go here
#192 - 2015-09-24 14:28:10 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Aquilan Aideron wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:
The term wardec needs to change to something like kicking puppies.

... or clubbing seals.
For the player wardecs are completely consensual. You are never forced to defend a corporation.

Puppies and baby seals can play safely in the NPC corp if they want, protected from those who are actually competing for dominance in this PvP game.

I fail to see the problem here. If some player lacks the ability or the interest to defend a player corporation, no one is forcing them to.

Complaining about wardecs is like complaining about getting shot when going into a wormhole. You are choosing to accept increased risk that someone will shoot you in exchange for the increased rewards in that wormhole. If you don't want to be shot at by a wardeccer (or a cloaky Proteus), just stay in an NPC corp (and out of that wormhole). If you aren't deploying structures, there is no real advantage for you to be in one anyway. Use a dedicated chat channel to socialize with your mission running/mining friends.

Or better yet, join a corp in low/null/WH space, or even a competent highsec corp that knows how to defend itself. There you can learn how protect yourself from the minimal threat wardeccers actually pose by those that do it everyday.

Sound like you mistake yourself for a game dev whos job it is to design my game experience.

To be frank, I want the actual game devs get those bored bittervets off of the newbros backs, so that we can enjoy their supposedly sandboxy game rather than being contained and stumped at every turn. This game got to suffer from some serious lack of content if longtime players really need to mess up the new players. Might as well close down Null, I suppose.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#193 - 2015-09-24 14:34:32 UTC
Aquilan Aideron wrote:
To be frank, I want the actual game devs get those bored bittervets off of the newbros backs, so that we can enjoy their supposedly sandboxy game rather than being contained and stumped at every turn.

There is very little in the game that contains or stumps new players in such a way as to hold them back from enjoying the sandbox. It's mostly players who keep giving them bad advice, such as telling them to wait for skills or not testing anything out before committing to it. 'm not sure it's really the average bittervet doing this though — it's more the mark of an evern00b that wants other new players to join his ranks by never really understanding the game.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#194 - 2015-09-24 14:39:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Aquilan Aideron wrote:
To be frank, I want the actual game devs get those bored bittervets off of the newbros backs, so that we can enjoy their supposedly sandboxy game rather than being contained and stumped at every turn.
Sandbox means that you can try and play any way that you want to, it does not mean that you will succeed.

Sandbox also means that other players can try and play any way that they want to, that includes trying to make it hard for you to play as you want to, it does not mean that they will succeed.

Above all Eve is a game that revolves around conflict, the clash between what you want and what others want is intended.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Skeln Thargensen
Doomheim
#195 - 2015-09-24 14:49:05 UTC
do the new structures not make wars kind of irrelevant?

i mean assuming the pupose of wars is to fight over anchored structures which it seesm like ti should be.

forums.  serious business.
Aquilan Aideron
Wardecs go here
#196 - 2015-09-24 14:59:43 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Aquilan Aideron wrote:
To be frank, I want the actual game devs get those bored bittervets off of the newbros backs, so that we can enjoy their supposedly sandboxy game rather than being contained and stumped at every turn.
Sandbox means that you can try and play any way that you want to, it does not mean that you will succeed.

Sandbox also means that other players can try and play any way that they want to, and that includes trying to make it hard for you to play as you want to. It does not mean that they will succeed.

Above all Eve is a game that revolves around conflict, the clash between what you want and what others want is intended.

I guess so. And with EvE sandbox means the devs having made the deliberate choice of implementing means of targeting new players/corps rather than excluding them. Thats got nothing to do with sandbox, thats a decision CCP made. Just as they made CONCORD a part of the game, because of - or inspite of - it being a sandbox.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#197 - 2015-09-24 15:14:07 UTC
Aquilan Aideron wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Aquilan Aideron wrote:
To be frank, I want the actual game devs get those bored bittervets off of the newbros backs, so that we can enjoy their supposedly sandboxy game rather than being contained and stumped at every turn.
Sandbox means that you can try and play any way that you want to, it does not mean that you will succeed.

Sandbox also means that other players can try and play any way that they want to, and that includes trying to make it hard for you to play as you want to. It does not mean that they will succeed.

Above all Eve is a game that revolves around conflict, the clash between what you want and what others want is intended.

I guess so. And with EvE sandbox means the devs having made the deliberate choice of implementing means of targeting new players/corps rather than excluding them. Thats got nothing to do with sandbox, thats a decision CCP made. Just as they made CONCORD a part of the game, because of - or inspite of - it being a sandbox.
No, it's pretty much the definition of a sandbox. How can you have a class of players "playing" in the sandbox if they are isolated from all the other players?

Eve is a PvP sandbox - that means we all play together. Eve is not your own private sandbox where you can do whatever you like. That is indeed an intentional design decision by CCP and one of the core concepts of the game.

CONCORD is a just a crude game mechanic to impose a cost on attacking other players in the safest spaces in the game. It is not intended to make players immune from each other. If CCP wanted to do that, they could easily disable offensive weapons in highsec with a few lines of code, but that would kind of throw out the core concept of their game now wouldn't it?

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#198 - 2015-09-24 15:19:24 UTC
Skeln Thargensen wrote:
do the new structures not make wars kind of irrelevant?

i mean assuming the pupose of wars is to fight over anchored structures which it seesm like ti should be.

Nope, the only way to remove them in highsec will be via wardec as I think they're going to have concord protection.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#199 - 2015-09-24 15:34:02 UTC
Aquilan Aideron wrote:
I guess so. And with EvE sandbox means the devs having made the deliberate choice of implementing means of targeting new players/corps rather than excluding them.
If you're excluded then you're not playing in the sandbox Roll.

There is no paddling pool here, everybody gets chucked into the same pool, which just happens to be full of voracious predators. I suggest that you read this post from CCP Falcon which succinctly describes the kind of game that you have chosen to play.

Quote:
Thats got nothing to do with sandbox, thats a decision CCP made. Just as they made CONCORD a part of the game, because of - or inspite of - it being a sandbox.
Concord is a way to distinguish hisec from the other areas of space and inflict a cost on unsanctioned aggression in highsec, nothing more, nothing less.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#200 - 2015-09-24 15:35:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Tora Bushido wrote:
That's probably because you are the one who keeps saying it should be removed from game. That has nothing to do with rebalancing. Thats a 100% one sided nerf. If you really wanted to have that reasonable discussion, you would also listen to people like me. If you go black in your replies, expect people to go white to counter it. You might want to settle down on your replies a bit, see what it does for the replies you get. I'm just a mirror for you. It will show yourself. I still feel much anger here.
Reasonable discussion have been attempted, and every time yourself and players like you have jumped in screaming about "the carebears". I no longer have any interest in continuing to hear you whine about people you don't think are being risk enough while you hide behind concord ganking noobs. You want to give good examples on how war decs can be balanced without simply feeding you more kills, go right ahead. I know already though that anything you even consider as valid would be beneficial to you more than it is to others or at best a token gesture to "balance" a buff.

Here's a less extreme suggestion: CCP should exponentially increase wardec cost after 5 active aggressive wardecs (making more than 8-10 or so ludicrously expensive, with no limits on active defensive decs or mutual decs).

Tippia wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Ideally it shouldn't be, it should be rebalanced like every other mechanic, which involves big changes and you having to adapt as well as your opposition, much like how sov is being nuked and we are having to adapt to new norms.
It has been rebalanced, and it was a big change.

So how is it imbalanced this time?
Lol, it wasn't balanced. They just made it a bit more expensive at the low end and took off the limiting factors. Those changes made it even more unbalanced. No way did you see groups deccing 200 corps full of noobs. Back then you had to make choices over who to wardec, rather than just blanket wardeccing. Now it's so broken there's no point in making a highsec corp that isn't just for wardecs, tax shields or solo pos holders. I'd love to see the day when people can actually make workable corps of all varieties in highsec without the certainty of being wardecced and farmed into non-existence.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.