These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Wardec Defender Abilities

Author
Natural CloneKiller
Commonwealth Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#61 - 2016-11-30 19:36:38 UTC
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Perhaps I am an idealist, but a lot of people like the idea of being able to resist in some way and if this means they go out in something even if its cheap to blap something like this it is creating some content


Get rid of killboards and people would do this. Killboards simply mean people refuse to fight if they don't know they can win, because for some reason in this game stats matter more than actually having fun.

You stay in the village. Bad dog.
Natural CloneKiller
Commonwealth Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#62 - 2016-11-30 19:41:34 UTC
Can I just remind everyone that citadels in high sec. You have a week, yes a week to organise your defenses. More often than not longer as you get 24 hr notice of a dec.

And so if you cannot defend it yourself you can hire others.

Currently to date only TEST and PL have stopped us killing a citadel. And even then we went back the week later to continue...and in one case the owner became a client....ooh.

PS. I prefer to defend and protect structures than kill them.
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#63 - 2016-11-30 20:13:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Doddy wrote:
Tom Gerard wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
stuff


Currently the logical solution is to corp-swap, this bloats corp history and doesn't provide gameplay for anyone.


No, the logical solution is to kill the agressors or employ somebody else to do so.

In most cases currently, that's neither the logical nor practical solution, hence this thread and the OP's suggestions, Dracvlad's suggestion, almost every other wardec thread, etc.
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#64 - 2016-11-30 20:35:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Sonya Corvinus
Estuary Algaert wrote:
I don't feel that the removal of the boards would do this. IMO, it is the repeatedly reinforced perception/reality that they cannot win. Neutral interference, sudden corp joins, and sometimes just the sheer size of the aggressing corp play into this. And ya know, a lot of times they are right. Hopefully (defiantly not holding my breath) HS war mechanics get another overhaul here in the future to bring them into something that is fun and rewarding for both sides on the good days and at least a *meh* on the worst days. Until then I'm gonna just file it away in the same section I keep my hopes in as bounty hunting.


But people wouldn't care if they can't win if there was no record of it. I've yolo-ed into fights where I was stupidly outmatched a lot of times simply because those are incredibly fun. I've also been yelled at for doing it because it negatively affects killboard stats for corps and alliances. That's a bad thing for the game. Have killboards show for the last week or two, so people who need an ego boost from being on the top of a list get it, but people still aren't terrified of losses on a permanent record, which prevents them from fighting.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2016-11-30 20:36:42 UTC
Doddy wrote:
Tom Gerard wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
stuff


Currently the logical solution is to corp-swap, this bloats corp history and doesn't provide gameplay for anyone.


No, the logical solution is to kill the agressors or employ somebody else to do so.


No, that solution is anything but logical. Losses and/or the cost of hiring mercs on top of having your normal activities interrupted are not logically sound alternatives to resuming activities unimpeded.
Estuary Algaert
Petulant Luddite GmbH
#66 - 2016-11-30 20:56:26 UTC
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Estuary Algaert wrote:
I don't feel that the removal of the boards would do this. IMO, it is the repeatedly reinforced perception/reality that they cannot win. Neutral interference, sudden corp joins, and sometimes just the sheer size of the aggressing corp play into this. And ya know, a lot of times they are right. Hopefully (defiantly not holding my breath) HS war mechanics get another overhaul here in the future to bring them into something that is fun and rewarding for both sides on the good days and at least a *meh* on the worst days. Until then I'm gonna just file it away in the same section I keep my hopes in as bounty hunting.


But people wouldn't care if they can't win if there was no record of it. I've yolo-ed into fights where I was stupidly outmatched a lot of times simply because those are incredibly fun. I've also been yelled at for doing it because it negatively affects killboard stats for corps and alliances. That's a bad thing for the game. Have killboards show for the last week or two, so people who need an ego boost from being on the top of a list get it, but people still aren't terrified of losses on a permanent record, which prevents them from fighting.


I agree that the killboards do not help the situation as there are indeed a lot of folk that are overly focused on them. And yes, loss of a public permanent record would likely cause more fights to happen. But, the players in question here probably don't ascribe to a form of play where that is the limiting factor.
Neuntausend
Rens Nursing Home
#67 - 2016-11-30 21:11:21 UTC
The fact alone that there are many players who are very focused on killboards does imply that killboards are quite important to many players. So, why would you just willy-nilly want to remove something that is important to many players? Eve is still a very competitive game, and killboards provide some sort of ranking/comparison tool. I don't care about killboards too much myself, but fighting a battle, knowing that I will never know how it actually turned out in the end would kinda take a bit of excitement from it.

I can see how killboards negatively affect some aspects of the game, but I don't see how they could just be removed.
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#68 - 2016-11-30 21:23:55 UTC
Neuntausend wrote:
The fact alone that there are many players who are very focused on killboards does imply that killboards are quite important to many players. So, why would you just willy-nilly want to remove something that is important to many players? Eve is still a very competitive game, and killboards provide some sort of ranking/comparison tool. I don't care about killboards too much myself, but fighting a battle, knowing that I will never know how it actually turned out in the end would kinda take a bit of excitement from it.

I can see how killboards negatively affect some aspects of the game, but I don't see how they could just be removed.


Knowing how the battle you were personally in turned out and knowing how a battle you weren't involved with turned out are very different things.

I just philosophically hate the mentality that people don't undock to fight unless they think they can win. It keeps fights from happening.
Neuntausend
Rens Nursing Home
#69 - 2016-11-30 21:35:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausend
If players know the stats of a battle they fought in, everyone will ultimately know, because somebody in the winning team will pin them up somewhere for bragging rights. That's basically how killboards work - it's not necessarily the game that tells everyone how a battle they weren't even involved in went. It's the players that have that information making it public, because they want everyone to see how well they did.

These days, this happens automatically through API requests, which makes it a bit easier, but there's not much of a difference compared to way back when killmails were actually still private mails. The winner would post that mail to a killboard anyway in 9/10 cases, and many e-honourable corps expected their members to post their losses as well, in case the winner had not posted them already. Yes, some people posted mails only to a private corp- or alliance-only board, some posted them on eve-kill, some on battleclinic, so there were a few gaps here and there, but most of the kills still got posted.

So, in practice, either nobody can get any combat statistics, not even for kills they were personally involved in, or everyone will get them one way or another.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#70 - 2016-11-30 22:19:41 UTC
Not to mention that CCP specifically added war reports and war histories specifically to record and display the outcome of wars in terms of kills and losses.
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#71 - 2016-11-30 23:06:17 UTC
Neuntausend wrote:
If players know the stats of a battle they fought in, everyone will ultimately know, because somebody in the winning team will pin them up somewhere for bragging rights. That's basically how killboards work - it's not necessarily the game that tells everyone how a battle they weren't even involved in went. It's the players that have that information making it public, because they want everyone to see how well they did.

These days, this happens automatically through API requests, which makes it a bit easier, but there's not much of a difference compared to way back when killmails were actually still private mails. The winner would post that mail to a killboard anyway in 9/10 cases, and many e-honourable corps expected their members to post their losses as well, in case the winner had not posted them already. Yes, some people posted mails only to a private corp- or alliance-only board, some posted them on eve-kill, some on battleclinic, so there were a few gaps here and there, but most of the kills still got posted.

So, in practice, either nobody can get any combat statistics, not even for kills they were personally involved in, or everyone will get them one way or another.


I disagree. Getting rid of killboards (while some people would post kills manually) would still lead to more fights. Let's say you're right though. Absolutely no killboards would lead to even more decent fights.

So the question is what do people want? Less fights and the ability to stroke your ego with KBs, or more fights and actually having more fun playing the game?
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#72 - 2016-11-30 23:21:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
I disagree. Getting rid of killboards (while some people would post kills manually) would still lead to more fights. Let's say you're right though. Absolutely no killboards would lead to even more decent fights.

So the question is what do people want? Less fights and the ability to stroke your ego with KBs, or more fights and actually having more fun playing the game?

I must admit, I may be a little naive here, but I can't quite see how the presence of killboards drives risk aversion in a war.

People still seem to undock mining barges, orcas, bling mission running ships and haulers knowing they could end up with a big red entry on their killboard, yet they apparently don't undock combat ships because of the possibilty of red on their killboard?

That logic doesn't make sense to me.

It seems far more common, but only from annecdotal evidence, that the lack of attempts to fight against wardecs is related to (1) lack of pvp skills, (2) lack of confidence that there is any chance of winning an engagement, and (3) an expectation that if a fleet is taken to engage a wardeccer, their scouts will see it coming and they'll dock up unless they can win, so why bother?

Killboards seem to be way down the list of things that prevent people from engaging in pvp, but like above, that could just be total naivety on my part.
Neuntausend
Rens Nursing Home
#73 - 2016-11-30 23:23:02 UTC
Probably stroke their ego, but I can't speak for "the people". I can only make guesses.

I do not think it would lead to more fights overall, though. Yes, some people might be easier to coerce into actually trying to defend themselves against an aggressor in highsec, but at the same time "just for fun" fleet roams, public fleets and the like would probably become rare, because where's the fun in such a fleet if you can't tell afterwards if you actually "won" or inflicted any damage beyond the ships you actually saw explode with your own eyes in the heat of the battle? In a strategic battle you can tell, because there's an objective. In a roam you do just for fun, you may just want to blow stuff up, and you may want to see afterwards what your fleet managed to blow up.
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#74 - 2016-11-30 23:28:13 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
I must admit, I may be a little naive here, but I can't quite see how the presence of killboards drives risk aversion in a war.

People still seem to undock mining barges, orcas, bling mission running ships and haulers knowing they could end up with a big red entry on their killboard, yet they apparently don't undock combat ships because of the possibilty of red on their killboard?

That logic doesn't make sense to me.

It seems far more common, but only from annecdotal evidence, that the lack of attempts to fight against wardecs is related to (1) lack of pvp skills, (2) lack of confidence that there is any chance of winning an engagement, and (3) an expectation that if a fleet is taken to engage a wardeccer, their scouts will see it coming and they'll dock up unless they can win, so why bother?

Killboards seem to be way down the list of things that prevent people from engaging in pvp, but like above, that could just be total naivety on my part.


I fully admit I don't know nearly as much about HS as others, given I've only lived there for 2 months in the years I've played this game. I am talking more in general, that people refuse to take fights where they don't know they will win. EVE has always been a massive game of rock/paper/scissors where the real challenge happens before you even get into the battle. That's the part I want to change. I love fights where you risk something and don't know what will happen at the end. Killboards give risk free intel that simply keep people from engaging with people, given they know what they fly, who they fly with, etc. That's the simple point I'm trying to make.

Neuntausend wrote:
Probably stroke their ego, but I can't speak for "the people". I can only make guesses.

I do not think it would lead to more fights overall, though. Yes, some people might be easier to coerce into actually trying to defend themselves against an aggressor in highsec, but at the same time "just for fun" fleet roams, public fleets and the like would probably become rare, because where's the fun in such a fleet if you can't tell afterwards if you actually "won" or inflicted any damage beyond the ships you actually saw explode with your own eyes in the heat of the battle? In a strategic battle you can tell, because there's an objective. In a roam you do just for fun, you may just want to blow stuff up, and you may want to see afterwards what your fleet managed to blow up.


I have fun in the actual fights, not in looking at a list of stats after the fact, but that's just me. This is a game, not my job.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#75 - 2016-11-30 23:30:49 UTC
As one of the strongest sources of intel available, I would love to see killboards gone, and I'm saying that as someone with a good one. There was a pilgrim that came into my lowsec pocket last night, and it was quite easy to see he was not cyno fit just by virtue of looking up the guy's pilgrim losses and finding out he always fits it the exact same way, and also seeing how easy it was to bait him. He was sitting on the Uedama gate in Kubinen, so all we did was fly a bait Procurer through the gate, from Uedama, and drop a Vigilant on him.

And now, you can use the Kubinen kb to find out who a couple of my local friends are by virtue of seeing who was involved in that. See? Easy intel on me.

Also, I'd love to see how many people get triggered by the disappearance of killboards, I have to admit a guilty pleasure in that. I might even be one of them.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#76 - 2016-11-30 23:36:20 UTC
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
I've also been yelled at for doing it because it negatively affects killboard stats for corps and alliances. That's a bad thing for the game.


No, that's a bad thing for the person doing it. There's a reason I'm red to CVA. I may or may not have awoxed an FC who yelled at me just a little too loudly.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#77 - 2016-12-01 01:50:24 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
No, that's a bad thing for the person doing it. There's a reason I'm red to CVA. I may or may not have awoxed an FC who yelled at me just a little too loudly.


I only fly with NPSI groups anymore, but I might just be a bittervet complaining about things no one else cares about.

I care about getting decent fights more than anything, so whatever changes we can make to promote those are good by me. Stats be damned.
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#78 - 2016-12-01 02:25:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
I've also been yelled at for doing it because it negatively affects killboard stats for corps and alliances. That's a bad thing for the game.


No, that's a bad thing for the person doing it. There's a reason I'm red to CVA. I may or may not have awoxed an FC who yelled at me just a little too loudly.

Isn't everyone red to CVA just about?

I'm red to them because we fought them in the Alliance Tournament. It's the only thing I can think of to be on their redpen list ( http://kos.cva-eve.org/?q=Scipio+Artelius )
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#79 - 2016-12-01 02:47:39 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
I've also been yelled at for doing it because it negatively affects killboard stats for corps and alliances. That's a bad thing for the game.


No, that's a bad thing for the person doing it. There's a reason I'm red to CVA. I may or may not have awoxed an FC who yelled at me just a little too loudly.

Isn't everyone red to CVA just about?

I'm red to them because we fought them in the Alliance Tournament. It's the only thing I can think of to be on their redpen list ( http://kos.cva-eve.org/?q=Scipio+Artelius )


They're so easily triggered though. Just look at them funny and you're red.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#80 - 2016-12-01 02:50:30 UTC
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
No, that's a bad thing for the person doing it. There's a reason I'm red to CVA. I may or may not have awoxed an FC who yelled at me just a little too loudly.


I only fly with NPSI groups anymore, but I might just be a bittervet complaining about things no one else cares about.

I care about getting decent fights more than anything, so whatever changes we can make to promote those are good by me. Stats be damned.


If people are yelling at you, you tell em to shut the **** up, or you shoot them, or something. If someone yelling at you is enough to drive you away from EVE, you weren't gonna last long in EVE anyway. If you're suggesting that people yelling at other people in the game is something that can be changed by removing killboards, or mechanics changes, think again. Being yelled at is something you deal with yourself. It is a simple HTFU problem, and nothing more.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104