Player Features and Ideas Discussion

So all the highsec corps that make money off of wardecking null alliances and blasting their freighters at the jita undock go out of business because the massive null alliance can call a "Highsec CTA" to blow up this SNA thing?

1) I doubt it's actually the minority opinion.
2) The Devs and 9 years of EvE History also hold this opinion, so if we are the minority, we'll still win.

Aww, dangit. I misread what Rattlesnake said.

Yeah, I got confused,

This is the lynch pin of Kelduum's little proposal ... and ensures that the Uni does not have to engage in any wars it does not want to engage in. There are zero highsec corporations that can muster the numbers that the Uni can muster, and thus no appreciable defense of this so-called "SNA" will be parlayed. The war will end before it can start.

This is an EVE University proposal, not a proposal with the interests of EVE Online in mind.

Let's try to get another perspective on the whole wardec-discussion:

What's the issue an educational focussed corporation has with the current implementation of wardecs?

To understand that, you have to understand the structure of the University in the first place. It has several departements, wich are dedicated to EVERY aspect of the game. Because of that the raw numbers of corp-members don't say anything about the ability of that corporation to take a stand in any pvp situation. If it was true, that no High-sec corp would be able to set up a SNA against the Uni, than it would be also true, that there is no high-sec corp that would be able to take a stand against the Uni in a wardec like it is implemented today and it would be just suicidal to wardec the Uni at all. In reality the Uni has only a quite small percentage of its members that pvp at all. And most of them are in a phase of their Eve-live, where they just want to try out different things, even if they dont have the adequate skill setup, can not fly proper pvp-fitted ships and for that the Uni just not has the ability to endorse any kind of fleet-doctrine at all. If u dont know about the efectiveness of a fleet-doctrin (and well ballenced fleet-setups with e-war and logistic support) against a kichen-sink type of fleet I would doubt u know anything at all about pvp in Eve (and to be honest I dont consider myself as "knowing"). Just to give the most recent example: We were not able to get a single kill in a confrontation with our actual wartargets, even though we outnumbered them by 2-1. Fighting a fleet of 20 (wich a lot of high-sec-corps can set up at any time) that has Logi-support is almost impossble for a Uni-fleet with no logi, unexpierienced e-war and low-SP-DDs.
So even if we could get up huge blobs at any time, they stil would be considered fairly easy targets. In reality, again, the pvp-fleet numbers are almost never reaching 100, and if so it would take the Uni a lot of time and preparation and education to set that thing up and get it rolling. The Uni does this and it is a good thing and a good learning opportunity, but anyway it is pvp and u have a large part of the Uni wich would just not be interested in pvp. Thats where the often criticised WSOP comes into play:
Its intention is/was (caus it got altered and is much more offensive in our days) to make wars unpleasent for the atacker.
Why is this neccessary? Becaus the current implementation of wardecs is just way too pleasent for the atacker! You pay the bill, u got the war (period). So the whole corp hast to react on it, even those who dont want to participate. Educational mining fleets can't go out without pvp-support (and thats not an easy thing to set up for a University at all), carebearing is very dangerous, missioning and just exploring the New Eden (kind of crucial for any new player to get hooked onto the game) can become frustrating or impossible very easy. So people have to leave the corp just to play the game the way they like it and the corp has to take on a huge effort to make it posssible and desireble for those who left to rejoin after war.
We all want to get rid of the infamous "decshield"-mechanic and we want to get rid of, what we can call the "fail-dec"-mechanic, wich makes it possible for a 1-man-corp to disturb the life of 2000 players without even having the intention to have a good pvp-fight.
So Kelduum stepped up to find a solution on this very difficult terrain and took a bold and broad-scoped approach to fix most if not all the issues I described and he has my full respect for that. So instead of criticising the intention Kelduum took and accusing him on beeing "just" an Uni-advocat, you maybe want to step up yourself an come with a solution for this broken mechanic. And please UNDERSTAND the mechanic Kelduum proposed before you comment on it.

By the way, you probably should take into account, that having an institution like Eve-University, and having its possibilities in educating athe whole scope of gameplay, that the game offers, is of great benefit for the whole Universe. Without anything like the Uni (and there are other corps taking similar approaches too) all you Mercenairies, griefers, carebears, low-sec, null-sec an W-space corps would have a very, very hard time of recruiting players for your interests in the future. All the pvp-corps should take into account, that they would have a hard time getting their ships replaced without carebears, and those people that do the job and like to carebear, build stuff, etc. Those people want to and have a right to have FUN in what they are doing. So you are doing yourself no good in advocating against every attempt to save their space from what is only your egoistic interest.
I see no intention in those opposing voices to Kelduums to take any kind of action to attract new players to the game and make them happy by teaching them what the game is about, showing them the many possibillities and making them able to decide wich way the wanna go. In my opinion: If it is good for the University, it is good for the vividness of all New Eden in the long term. If it is good for New Eden (all aspects of it) it is good for the game. If it is good for the game it is good for you.
Think about it....

Fly safe and BaddaBoom!

Poetic i am kind of fed up with your hypocritic comments that lack of any substance in general, but I will do you a favor and answering the question you asked.
As you should know the University is holding classes. teachers in those classes I had were FCs from PL, Noir, RvB, Test, some were from W-Space corps and some were from the University itself, but had their time in other corps and places for years, before they decided to come back. So I know how the Universe works and u should better tell me what I can not learn from others in the University. But anyway it doesn't matter at all as long as you dont have ANY arguments and dont take on concrete arguments, but instead are only trying to discredit people and their opinion. Even if I would have started playing the game yesterday my arguments would count more than your not-arguments.
As you have been a member of the Uni yourself, you should know that the Uni is very interested in getting teachers from OUTSIDE the Uni, but your intention here is obviously not to take part in the substantial discussion on the topic. Your intention is to discredit a honerable corporation just because you got kicked out of it becaus of your profile neurosis, that you are proofing again and again in every post i read from you so far.

Let's take another example.
What's the issue an mining focussed corporation has with the current implementation of wardecs ? The same thing as you. They want to play with the sandbox, but only the part they like.
The difference between this mining corp and EVEuni ? No, it has nothing to with the goal of "teaching noobs". EVEuni is getting a lot more attention because :
- EVEuni is one of the biggest (or maybe the biggest ? I don't know) highsec entity. It will attract wardecs.
- EVEuni has done some unpopular things, like this dec shield, which will attract other people willing to disturb them.
- Poetric is an attention wh*re and ahaha good luck with him ahaha.

Not many highsec corps/alliances can actually field a such fleet.

A number that only the purple fleet can match.

This has nothing to do with the current subject, but almost none of the pilots I flied with went in an "educational corporation". EVEuni is bringing something good to EVE (if you're forgetting the wardec subject) but do not think it's that much important to EVE, because it's not.

I'm still the only one who mades a comment on it. Even Kelduum doesn't understand why a double-side forcefield is a bad idea.

Some clarifications:

1. I know that eve is all and only pvp, just wanted to point out that pve in eve is actually supporting pvp, and that ther would not be a pvp like it is today without the pve.

2. I have nothing against unequal fights when it comes to numbers or strength, at all! The problem with the current mechanic is NOT that it allows a small corp to fight a big corp and vice versa. The problem is, that it allows corps to annoy other corps by starting a war without being willing or able to fight and pvp at all. Thats the issue! Nobody wants to take away "anfair" fight, caus there is no refferie in EvE and thats a GOOD thing!!

3. High-sec corps cant put a 20-man fleet with logis on the field? I strongly doubt that in the first place, caus every incursion-corp would easily be able to do so I guess.

4. A 100 Purple vs. 100 E-Uniis still unfair by any means, because on the SP-side of things its then still 10-1 and don't get me wrong thats nothing I am whining on. Thats good, educational and I want it like that! Any kind of SP-compensation would be terrible for the pvp in Eve.

5. Reppyk you are absolutley right that the "faildec"-mechanic is actually affecting every Highsec-corp be it incursion, mining, trading or missioning-focussed. And right E-Uni is affected "more" by it due to its size alone. So Kelduum is not only proposing this for E-uni benefit only, but for all High-sec corps that are not pvp-centric (as far as it is posssible in Eve:)

6. I see some problems on the implementation of the SNA-"bubble" myself, especially the target-breaking of the border seems to be exploitible to me. But whats the intention of the "bubble" at all? I think the intention is (and I hope I got it right) that the defender or the attacker is able to bring in third and forth parties to the war (i.E. mercs) So you can make the war even more unfair or unequal after it started, or u can hire somebody to even it out. I think that intention (no matter how implemented) would make wardeccs more interesting and in the longterm also a "political" issue, wich adds interesting gameplay and meta-game to it. I have heard that Merc-corps in general are very unhappy with the current wardecc-mechanic and I dont think that being a merc should consist in corp-hopping to fulfill your duity.
To make it clear: The intention of the bubble is NOT to let the whole war taken place inside of it... thats nonsense.
The SNA is there to initiate the war and make it possible to end a war for the defender, if he is capable of doing so. In principle thats what a war is about: You should be able to WIN it, no matter if you are atacker or defender. In the current implementation Atackers can win by ISK or by forcing the defender to surrender on their terms or by just anoying the enemy to death (corp-change). Defenders can win by ISK, but can not END the war on their terms at all (except by dieing = corp-change)
That need to be fixed. For High-sec carebears, high/low-sec wardeccers and for Mercs benefit.

7. I understand that "structure-bashing" is no fun to people that live in w-space, null or even sov-null and have to deal with big structures on a daily bases. But actually it is something a "high-seccer" is very rare to expirience at all. In my opinion its more on the number-tweaking side of the idea itself to make it not annoying, not too easy and not impossible to build and destroy the SNA.

8. on the RP-side of things: I dont't think thats not explainable. Let it be a Radio-amplifier that makes clear to concord "THIS IS A WAR. DO NOT INTERFERE" And concord hears it and say ... good job. Fight.

you know what the response is to this? aww, call a whambulance, sucks when you have to live up to the same conditions you expect your targets to live up to doesn't it?


if you still want the wardecer's advantage, expand a bit on my earlier recommendation of the null/wormhole pocket and have each side be notified of an acceleration gate in a different system, and the declaring organization can set the ship type and mas limits per hr entering the space. this allows the aggressive force the advantage of knowing whats possible on the field.

This is even worst than Kelduum's proposition.
You're suggesting a "closed arena" which is a step further in this "pvp instantiation" madness.

Let's say I'm the agressor.
I'm a lone guy willing to fight a big alliance ? Cool, minimum mass, fregate size, and I'll fly the worst nano fregate ever. Btw, good luck bashing the SNA inside the deadspace with your own fregate. See you next month.

I'm a big bully in my big blobby alliance and I want to wardec a small indy corp ? Cool, battleship size and just enough mass for my 25 men. I'll take 15 vindicators, 9 bhaals and 1 widow. Gl gl gl hf.


And it seems that I'm the only one complaining about this non-sense of defending a structure. I mean, c'mon, I paid for this, I chose you for my wardec slot, and I must sit near some ****** structure instead of doing the goal I had in mind when I decided to dec you ? This is not how you're supposed to create conflicts in EVE.