Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Their one and only purpose is to proliferate conflict by removing Concord for a fee.

Anything else is just you wanting to handcuff someone else's player freedom.




Not relevant. We're were talking dislike or annoyance. We were talking about "pain". Anyone who feels pain from losing at a videogame is mentally disturbed.

That's up to the people involved. That's what player freedom is.

Agreed and seconded. Wars are a tool, they have no inherit purpose on their own.



And that's where you veer off the track. "Pain" has many different uses in the modern vernacular. That includes "tears" and "rage". Or, if you like classic movies, "to the Pain!", where you leave someone in anguish. It's something specifically harvested on the forums; which I'm sure you've gone out of your way to announce your collection thereof at some point. It's also, quite frankly, the entire point. It's the reason killing a super is more satisfying than killing a shuttle. You've caused them a variant of pain that a shuttle kill doesn't come close to. It's also what makes this game great. People have to work for those ships. Depriving someone of that ship means something because of the pain.

If there was no pain, there'd be no point in EvE. You can call it annoyance, but stepping on a lego is an annoyance. A super is a significant investment in ISK, hours, and teamwork.

*Yes I know Supers = low/nullsec and are not really tired to wardecs per se, but just giving an example.

I must type slow, because now three people have posted to this thread while I type this up. Watching Law & Order is probably slowing me down.

By that logic, CONCORD should not be a thing. I don't know what would happen without CONCORD, but I can imagine things would get very "interesting".


"You people"? Must be awfully nice to group people together like that and not have to worry about what their individual goals or ideals are. Good for you. Not me, though, my logical and rational mind forbids me.

For the record, I was against the friendly fire changes. Even after my friend's Orca was destroyed by an AWOXer under my nose I was still against it. It added some risk. It was interesting.

Don't act like you know what I want out of EVE.

Oh, and on the topic of the awox changes.
No amount of player cries had any merit in this change.

CCP looked at the numbers and saw that players were dropping back to NPC corps.

They made the change on their own accord in order to drive player interaction and retention.
Everyone cried about force projection changes but much like the awox change, CCP saw it as a necessity for their ultimate goal.
At least they didn't outright remove awoxing, but instead left it as optional.
Since then, suicide ganks have gone up in numbers, thus swaying the system in favor of a risk vs reward as opposed to loot pinatas with no risks.

Yet more lies.

If awoxing happened at all for people to complain about, then people were recruiting. The change was made to "solve" a literal non problem. It was an obvious false flag.

It came from nothing but tears, like every carebear centric change, and just like every time that has happened it has taken away player interaction and lessened this game.

You people will never be satisfied until this game is dead, will you?

Kaarous, I am beginning to think it is you that is playing the wrong game.

See, the thing about EVE is that choices have consequences, and non-consent works in both directions. The way wardecs are applied right now, that is not true.

The 'deccer has no skin in the game. He cares nothing for the price of the 'dec, his ship, or even his Pod. His time is fun because he gets everything he wants just by having the risk free option to shoot people. The once in a blue moon someone does manage to kill him is nothing because everything he put on the field was worth nothing to him.

The 'decced have everything to lose. PvE actually do care about their ships, rightly or 'wrongly', they do tend to have structures to shoot, and care about their Pod. Their time is valuable only when they can spend it having fun, which the 'dec is preventing. It is the wardeccers that are in fact killing this part of the game. By being pointlessly malignant to as many people as you can, fun as it is to your twisted, perverted and sickly sadistic point of view, you are turning new people away and older people off of the game entirely.

If you had to put an expensive, time intensive, and vulnerable structure in space to be able to place and keep a wardec then you finally have some skin in the game. You have a real conflict driver, not just a hunting license.

But it's ok, I understand that to a compromised mind like yourself it's perfectly acceptable for the burden of risk to only fall on your opponents and that these considerations should not apply to you.

That's called having the right attitude.

Anyone who seriously "cares" for losses, or feels "pain" for them is mentally ill.

Yes, I'm having fun playing the game as I see fit. That's exactly what a sandbox is for. And as for "skin in the game", he is risking the same thing the defender is, his undocked ships. And that's equitable and fair.

But as I've said before, and you have repeatedly demonstrated, you don't want fair. You want a huge imbalance in your favor.





No, just wrongly. The rules of the game should not change just because they have bad attitudes and aren't suited to the reality of the game.

Quit already. You hate what EVE is, you want it to be twisted and broken until it's not recognizable, just to satisfy your inability to admit that you don't belong here.




Like you always do, you lie.

You carebears need a new narrative. The "PvP makes people quit!" one has been broken for a while.

literally, NO..
I don't want it to be made toothless, I just want to be able to actually use my teeth.
That's a bit hard to do, considering every time I show my teeth, the deccer docks up.





I never once said the mechanic should be thrown away, I said it should be changed.

Yes.. A loss driver... However, you refuse to accept any suggestions where the loss could potentially be your own.

I don't have to consider your good faith because you and I are both aware that you have no good faith on this thread.
You have proven time and time again that you will flow through any number of BS falsities in order to keep the system from changing in anyway that gives the defender any value. I can't see through your crap, cause that's all it is.





You know it's not a lie... You are here, specifically saying that your preferred method of game play trumps mine and that I should be forced into your preferred style and provided with no means counter that isn't already meekly provided.
You have been specifically speaking of player freedom as your wardecs over my PVE.



Yet again you and I are both aware that this isn't a lie.
CCP would not have made the change if it hindered player interaction more than the mechanic itself.



I've tried to be more civil with you, up until this point.
It is widely apparent that you have no interests in providing any mechanic that has even the slightest bit of measurable value for the defender.

I have disagreed with others on this and the other thread, but in the case of you, it's no longer a disagreement.
It has instead become similar to watching a bitter old man yell at kids for playing video games because he doesn't like them.


Go sit in the corner and let someone with more relevance and an actual argument take over for those who wish to leave the wardec system as is. You are only hurting their cause.

But wait.. I thought wardecs were a conflict driver, as per your own words?

You're speaking of conflict avoidance... How can this be?

You mean to tell me that players have been avoiding conflict within wardecs, just as I have state?

Seriously man....

This is the last time I'm even going to acknowledge you, because at this point, if you can't see through your own crap, you're hopeless.