These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Wars and structures
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Flickstick Rick
Air
The Initiative.
#61 - 2016-10-29 09:00:44 UTC
Hmm.

Yes I like a large amount of the OP ideas.
Certainly a constructive base to work from and not unfair for anyone besides those doing 1 man wars versus alliances.
Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#62 - 2016-10-29 11:13:25 UTC
A few years ago someone captured the essence of the Eve community with this cartoon: http://i.imgur.com/F2NHW.jpg
I enjoy the industrial side of the game - mostly the strategic planning, supply chain management and market analysis required to succeed in business. In game, as in real life, I accept that the environment isn't going to adapt to me - I must adapt to the environment. I really don't care what the rules are as long as they apply to everyone - a level playing field. In that environment, I don't need to be good to succeed, I just need to be a little bit better than my competition. I've experienced my share of war in Eve - it's built into my business plan and I make allowances for losses. My strategy is simple - I win by not losing, by denying any aggressor their victory conditions. That doesn't mean taking time off from the game - I have characters in both highsec and nullsec and NPC haulers. My small POS can be taken down and stored in a station in less than an hour. I carry on as usual, playing my normal game completely insulated from the war.

If change comes, that's OK - I'll adapt and figure out how to prosper in the new environment. That's the kind of challenge I enjoy.
Flickstick Rick
Air
The Initiative.
#63 - 2016-10-29 15:05:26 UTC
Yep. Yep yep yep looks about right.
And I for one totally agree the risk averse gankbears (basically a carebear who ganks safely for profit in empire) need a bashing!
Count Szadek
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2016-10-31 09:17:25 UTC
I was going to make my own topic, but as this post is here i'll just reply. To "fix" wars, I think it needs to be a multi-part approach.

A) Limiting Wars
B) Objectifying Wars
C) Give Incentive to War Participation
D) Give Corps a Way of Reprieve From Future Decs (Limited Time)

A) Limiting Wars:
- This mostly goes for the Attackers but could have benefits to Defenders (Just haven't thought of a good one yet)
My suggestion would be a Corp Management Skill. Without it, Corps and Alliances can only declare 2 wars.
- Warfare Management: + 1 War Per Skill
- Advanced Warfare Management: +2 Wars Per Skill
- War Mongering: +5 Wars Per Skill
- This would max out at 42 Offensive Wars

B) Objectifying Wars:
- I like the structure idea. I would say a "Small Citadel" would work great here. Make it only deployable in Hi Sec
Structure Info:
- Attacking Force Must Maintain This Structure
- This Structure Has 1 Reinforcement Timer
- If Structure is Destroyed, Wars End
- Structure is Vulnerable 2 Hours Per Day Per Offensive War (Attacker can choose but can get to 24 hours if enough wars)
- All War Targets May Attack During ALL Vuln Times
- Structure Can Have Ships Dock, Repair, Fit, and Provide War Intelligence (LVL 4 / 5 Locate AI with VERY Short Cooldown)
Winning the War:
- Attackers Win By Defenders Surrender or War Structure Destruction* (Defenders are not required to own, however if they have one, it can be destroyed to win the war)
- Defenders Win By Attack Surrender or War Structure Destruction
- Defenders Also Are Allied With All Other Wartargets of Attackers
- No Allies Into War Directly - These Groups Can Declare War on the Attacking Force
- You Can Not Declare War on an Entity That is an Ally From Existing War(s). If a Corp Would Join an Alliance That Would Circumvent This, It would be blocked or delayed until after the war.

C) Give Incentive to War Participation (More so for the Defenders):
- I suggest a new "WarPoint" system (similar to LP but is much smaller quantity of points) store for wardecs.
- This WP Store Can be accessed from Journal Tab or a new Warfare Window
Rewards Include Ship SKINS, War-Themed Clothing, Notoriety Medals (Shown in Decorations), etc. (All Cosmetic)
- Notoriety Medals would be something along the lines of "HAC Pilots: [X] Kills with HACs" and the X changes over time.
Winnings:
- Win the War: 10 WP to All Members of Attackers
- War is a Draw: 5 WP to ALL Attackers and Defenders
- Lose the War: You Surrendered or Lost a Structure

D) Give Corps a Way of Reprieve From Future Decs (Limited Time):
- Wars Can No Longer Be Chained.
- Declaring War Last 1 Week, Win Lose or Draw
Attackers:
- If you Win, You may Redeclare After 2 Weeks
- If you Draw, You may Redeclare After 4 Weeks
- If You Lose, You may Redeclare After 5 Weeks
Defenders:
- If You Win, You are not declarable for 5 weeks by ANY Attacker
- If you Draw, You are not declarable for 4 weeks by ANY Attacker
- If you Lose, You are not declarable for 2 weeks by ANY attacker
Declaring war voids the above defender invuln per Concord Policy
- If you have multiple wars - the remaining wars will still remain, however you will not be able to obtain more
- "Defender Invuln" has a 5 week COOLDOWN to prevent alt corp war trickery
Ivy Axisur
State War Academy
Caldari State
#65 - 2016-11-07 23:34:57 UTC
I think everyone is over-complicating this.

Just allow player corps to opt-out of the war dec system. I’d suggest putting a 6-month or annual timer on before the corp can elect to change status again. Inactive corporations would lose their status when the timer runs out.

We all know the war dec system is used primarily for harassment and that players who don’t want to fight just drop to NPC corps while placing and alt in their corp.

The whole thing is stupid.

EVE's player base has been cut in half over the last 5 years. Its time to be more inviting to a wider player base; EVE is big enough for everyone, including those who don't like involuntary pvp and gang r**e.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#66 - 2016-11-07 23:41:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Ivy Axisur wrote:
Just allow player corps to opt-out of the war dec system. I’d suggest putting a 6-month or annual timer on before the corp can elect to change status again. Inactive corporations would lose their status when the timer runs out.

That would be fine as long as you are also happy that they have an 11% empire tax on top of their own, can't own any structures or use Corp offices or hangars and can't join an Alliance.

As for the wardec system being used primarily for harassment, in all the wars that have been declared against our Alliance, not once have we ever been harassed by the wardeccers. Where is your evidence that they are harassing people as their primary aim?

Certainly the whole thing is stupid, at least in the forum when people compare playing a video game with gang ****. Thats not just stupid, it's pathetically stupid.
Count Szadek
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#67 - 2016-11-07 23:42:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Count Szadek
Ivy Axisur wrote:
I think everyone is over-complicating this.

Just allow player corps to opt-out of the war dec system. I’d suggest putting a 6-month or annual timer on before the corp can elect to change status again. Inactive corporations would lose their status when the timer runs out.

We all know the war dec system is used primarily for harassment and that players who don’t want to fight just drop to NPC corps while placing and alt in their corp.

The whole thing is stupid.

EVE's player base has been cut in half over the last 5 years. Its time to be more inviting to a wider player base; EVE is big enough for everyone, including those who don't like involuntary pvp and gang r**e.


I would be okay with this ONLY if they cannot use corp assets (ie: corp hangers, poses, citadels, etc.) also they should have a minimum tax (say 7% lower then the npc but not 0%) risk vs reward
Ivy Axisur
State War Academy
Caldari State
#68 - 2016-11-08 00:12:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Ivy Axisur
Poor choice of words on my part Scipio, I’ll give you that.

My point is, that a large portion of the EVE player base always has and always will avoid involuntary PVP.
And another large portion insists on harassing them or limiting their access to the game's content to the point where it just isn't fun.

It was that way in 2006 when I started and still is today.
Just accept it; and move on. "carebear" or "hardcore" they all pay the same money - to each their own I say.
PopeUrban
El Expedicion
Flames of Exile
#69 - 2016-11-08 01:32:28 UTC  |  Edited by: PopeUrban
Ivy Axisur wrote:
I think everyone is over-complicating this.

Just allow player corps to opt-out of the war dec system. I’d suggest putting a 6-month or annual timer on before the corp can elect to change status again. Inactive corporations would lose their status when the timer runs out.

We all know the war dec system is used primarily for harassment and that players who don’t want to fight just drop to NPC corps while placing and alt in their corp.

The whole thing is stupid.

EVE's player base has been cut in half over the last 5 years. Its time to be more inviting to a wider player base; EVE is big enough for everyone, including those who don't like involuntary pvp and gang r**e.


This is a bad idea.

Chiefly because players can already do this by not having a corp in the first place, only in your system I'm assuming they get to keep the full benefits of owning a corp, including anchoring structures, corp hangars, setting their own taxes, and med cloning even in stations without cloning facilities. If this happens, there will never be another hisec war. I know if I could opt out of getting decced and still keep all those benefits I'd do it immediately because hey, who would be around for me to dec that didn't also do the same thing? All my hisec assets would be invincible and I could still happily go shoot people in lower sec space without having to deal with the occasional wardec.

I'd just have to remember to go shoot up every POCO in site before I did it and have endless tax revenue that could never be taken away.

If not, then you're basically just closing your corp in the first place and having everyone join an NPC corp.

In which case... just do that and create a chat channel and don't wast the time of CCPs engineers so you can have some letters next to your name and a fun icon in your bio.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#70 - 2016-11-08 03:06:38 UTC
Corps can already opt out of decs. All they need is a chat channel and name it Corp chat.

The gameplay surrounding actual corps is that you get some perks but you can be attacked by players. Building castles and defending them against those trying to knock them over. Thats not limiting content, that IS the content the game was built around.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Ivy Axisur
State War Academy
Caldari State
#71 - 2016-11-08 03:12:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Ivy Axisur
If you assume that no one will fight if the option exists to opt out, then the game is already doomed.
That means that no one enjoys it. But – that’s not true, plenty of people do.

The insistence on everyone participating in PVP or being restricted is ridiculous and greatly limits the player base.

I have 2 main characters, when I log into one I have time and intention to fight with you.
When I log into the other I don’t and just want to be left alone. I appreciate all aspects.
And yes I'm still going to keep them both in player corps mainly just so I can have accessible shared assets for all my alts and a few friends.

Some people do just one or the other and that’s fine too.

I’m not in competition with you, I don’t have the time for it and I don’t care. It’s a game, a game I’ve played on and off for 10 years.
I play for my enjoyment – not yours.

The sooner CCP realizes that, the better off we’ll all be.

That is assuming they reinvest the money in EVE and not some other venture...
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#72 - 2016-11-08 03:54:35 UTC
But you are in competition with me, and everyone else everytime you touch the market.

By playing this game you are signing up for pvp in its many forms. The game was actually doing much better when wardecs were less restricted. You said yourself, wardecs have been hard on some players since 2006, when the playerbase was growing every year.

The safer we make players, the faster this game dies.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#73 - 2016-11-08 07:32:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Ivy Axisur wrote:
My point is, that a large portion of the EVE player base always has and always will avoid involuntary PVP.

This is a perfectly fine choice if that's how any player wants to play the game. We are all free to make our own choices.

The game even provides ways to completely avoid wardecs - simply by being in an NPC Corp.

Alternatively, during any wardec Corps can go wormhole diving, into lowsec, NPC nullsec, especially now they can just move away from trade hubs and routes and play quite safely in highsec. They can use alts and soon just roll an alpha account and play on that.

Nothing about wardecs restricts the choices people can make in the game. It just potentially brings consequences because other players, with exactly the same rights to choose how they play, prefer pvp in highsec.

There's no right and wrong. All the play styles that are within the rules are equally valid.

Quote:
And another large portion insists on harassing them or limiting their access to the game's content to the point where it just isn't fun.

There were stats published some time ago showing that 70-80% of all wars end up with no loss at all. That hardly seems like harassment when the aggressors don't even come in contact with the defenders at all during a week of play.

In all the wars declared against us, we've never even been contacted at all by the aggressor. I can't imagine that we are somehow special in that regard.

So where's the proof of harassment?

From my perspective, calling for nerfs to other players style comes from a belief that you have more of right than others to your playstyle and they have less right to theirs. Thankfully the game doesn't actually work that way and hopefully never will.

Quote:
Just allow player corps to opt-out of the war dec system. I’d suggest putting a 6-month or annual timer on before the corp can elect to change status again. Inactive corporations would lose their status when the timer runs out.

I pulled the data, just to look at the use of wardecs to kill structures owned by player Corps:

https://puu.sh/saskf/9528977ebb.png

That's a summary of all structure kills in highsec so far this year. All player Corp owned and as it is extremely difficult to gank structures, almost completely using the wardec mechanics.

The totals for the year so far (as at the end of last week):

POCOS: 2571
POS: 1332
Citadel: 131

Total structures killed: 4034
Average structure kills per week: 91

Corps can't expect to be able to own structures and be immune from competition from other Corps/Alliances that want those assets, or who want to remove assets and as the above shows, there's a lot of structures being destroyed in highsec.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#74 - 2016-11-08 15:51:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Donnachadh
Scipio Artelius wrote:
The totals for the year so far (as at the end of last week):

POCOS: 2571
POS: 1332
Citadel: 131

Total structures killed: 4034
Average structure kills per week: 91

Corps can't expect to be able to own structures and be immune from competition from other Corps/Alliances that want those assets, or who want to remove assets and as the above shows, there's a lot of structures being destroyed in highsec.

Your information is incomplete and lacks anything that gives it relevance.
Just before I posted this I did a quick count on a randomly selected portion of the war dec list and the extrapolated the result for the entire list and that yields more than 1,100 corps in high sec under war dec this week alone. Because non -scientific and only this week not the entire 11 months so we put in a huge error factor and say somewhere between 600 and 800 corps are under war dec during any given week. So you have 91 structures killed in a week where 600 to 800 corps were under war dec. No matter how you add that up and no matter how you try to spin it the numbers say that structures are a minor factor in the overall war dec picture.

No one here has ever disputed that structures die as a result of war, but then structures dying is not the important thing here. Were those structures the only reason why war was declared? were the structures themselves even a major factor in the decision to declare war? Those are also important facts that we need to consider and your stats simply cannot give us that information.
Ivy Axisur
State War Academy
Caldari State
#75 - 2016-11-08 16:46:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Ivy Axisur
To your point Daichi and yours Scipio about this being a PVP game and anyone who doesn’t like that is asking for special treatment I completely disagree.

I mean your right – that is how EVE works, I’m saying it shouldn’t work that way and would attract / retain a lot more people if it was altered.

Countless options exist for unregulated PVP, just one highly limited option for those who want to just be left alone.

It’s a sandbox, and to use the kid analogy a lot of people simply don’t want to play in a sandbox with their friends only to have their sandcastle smashed by a gang of bullies that they don't like and don't want to play with.

And yes, you can always avoid the war by dropping to an NPC corp, and losing (or pulling) their assets in space, but that’s just harassment, its griefing. Anyone who avoids war obviously doesn’t want to play; you’re forcing it on them. The proof is in your stats: 70-80% have no losses, these are the people who have neither the inclination and/or the numbers to defend themselves.

You say “well just stay in an NPC corp”.
Oh look at this cool new feature, you can have a Citadel now – oh, but not you; you can’t have it.
A POS, nope. Just want to organize or share your stuff? – nope, you can’t have that either. Not unless you let me bully you.

It's not just high sec war either, it's the griefing in general that the game embraces .


IMO, That’s BS; they pay the same money you and I do and are equally important to the future success of EVE.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#76 - 2016-11-08 17:09:28 UTC
Ivy Axisur wrote:
but that’s just harassment, its griefing

no it isnt.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Dark Lord Trump
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#77 - 2016-11-08 17:27:16 UTC
Ivy Axisur wrote:
To your point Daichi and yours Scipio about this being a PVP game and anyone who doesn’t like that is asking for special treatment I completely disagree.

I mean your right – that is how EVE works, I’m saying it shouldn’t work that way and would attract / retain a lot more people if it was altered.

Countless options exist for unregulated PVP, just one highly limited option for those who want to just be left alone.

It’s a sandbox, and to use the kid analogy a lot of people simply don’t want to play in a sandbox with their friends only to have their sandcastle smashed by a gang of bullies that they don't like and don't want to play with.

And yes, you can always avoid the war by dropping to an NPC corp, and losing (or pulling) their assets in space, but that’s just harassment, its griefing. Anyone who avoids war obviously doesn’t want to play; you’re forcing it on them. The proof is in your stats: 70-80% have no losses, these are the people who have neither the inclination and/or the numbers to defend themselves.

You say “well just stay in an NPC corp”.
Oh look at this cool new feature, you can have a Citadel now – oh, but not you; you can’t have it.
A POS, nope. Just want to organize or share your stuff? – nope, you can’t have that either. Not unless you let me bully you.

It's not just high sec war either, it's the griefing in general that the game embraces .


IMO, That’s BS; they pay the same money you and I do and are equally important to the future success of EVE.

So why do people get toys that they can use to compete with me, but I'm not allowed to fight them for it? A POS and EC are cheaper than building in a station, and Citadels can offer lower refining tax/brokers fees than mine. If they want to compete with me, why is there no counter? Since you clearly seem to support unwardeccable citadels and POS, as you complain you can't use them in an NPC corp. If you want the reward of free use of citadel services and the power to charge others for it, you must accept the risk of wardecs.

I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
Ivy Axisur
State War Academy
Caldari State
#78 - 2016-11-08 18:03:38 UTC
I do fully support unrestricted access to all features of high sec with the additional protection of opting out of the war dec system.
That is exactly what I propose.

If you want action, great, so do I sometimes, that’s when I clone jump to low sec or warp to a WH. -the vast majority of the game still accommodates that.

BTW: your name and signature are hilarious.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#79 - 2016-11-08 18:14:37 UTC
They pay money to play the game as it is. If they don't like the way it is, don't pay and don't play. Your idea wont save the game. It will kill it faster. The types of player you are trying to attract are the ones who get bored and quit. The players youre shitting on are the ones who play this game for life.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Ivy Axisur
State War Academy
Caldari State
#80 - 2016-11-08 18:54:21 UTC
I’m not trying to **** on anyone man, that’s my whole point. I’ve been playing this game on and off for 10 years and I’m exactly the kind of player YOU want to **** on. Your right about one thing though, "that type" is subjected to constant greifing and harassment and restrictions which does result in them quitting faster in general.

What I’d like to see, and what I truly believe would help EVE grow beyond its current entrenched player base, is the concept of voluntary association in high sec. You would be free of unwanted aggression (except for the suicide gank, which I would nerf but not eliminate).

Perhaps, once in place, a system can be implemented to entice – not force or restrict – but entice people to voluntarily participate in high sec war – which can be quite fun.

Example: A war dec would require the sign off of both parties involved.

You can entice them with restrictions such as number of combatants of each side, maximum fleet value, or prize money held in escrow, a bet of sorts. A beginning and end with established parameters of win and loss.

The only other change that may need to happen if war decs were voluntary is planetary customs offices. Since its just one per planet– having them immune to war dec may be a problem, but I’m not sure exactly how that all works, I’ve never run one.