Player Features and Ideas Discussion

@ Nestara:
You clearly didnt get the gist of the idea. The SNA is transmitting the information that there is a war going on over the whole univerese and you would be able to fight your WTs all over the universe without concord intervention. As I said before the "bubble" around the SNA serves a different purpuse than the SNA itself. The bubble is used for creating possibilities for third parties to take a step into the war and has nothing to do with the overall wardec itself.

@Reppyk:
I think your argument is worth to be considered when implementing a mechanic like that. I scrached on that, when said its all about tweaking the numners right. In detail i think it is intended that the structure itself is set up fairly easy and fast, but takes some effort to take down. So it is very unlikely that an atacker will not be able to set the SNA up.
Having that concern out of the way, whats left is, that you dont want to have pvp in eve centered to that one object alone. I agree on that and I think the solution is right in kelduums proposal. As an atacker you have the possibility to harden the shields, wich in case the SNA gets atacked just buys you time. But even after that, the structure goes into reinforce mode, so you got time X (24h were proposed) to repair the shield and get it running again. What does that to the pvp in EvE? Well it does allow the atacker to set the SNA up and then do hide again for at least 24h and do their war-strategy as they like it to be (i.e. Station ganking, small gang-hunting or homesystem siege). What the mechanic really prevents you from doing is hid totally from the war that you initiated and by al means I think thats a good thing. So after your SNA got into reinforce you have to face your enemy at least or otherwise the defender succeds in ending the war. Does this favor large corps? Well not too much I think, becaus the only thing you have to do is sneak in to your SNA, find a good opportunity and refuels and get the shields up again.
Even large corps like the E-Uni would have a hard time to set up a 24h force to guard the reinforced SNA. But if they succeed and take the effort on doing so, why blame them? If you wardecc a 2000 player corp with 4 guys, what can you realistically expect more than just a few ganks? If (as it is now) the atacker advantage is that imbalanced, that it is suitible for a 4man-corp to figt a 2000man corp thats a serious lack of realism in my opinion. They should nevertheless be able to start a war, and they still can win the war by ISK after 24 or 48 ours, whatever it takes the defender to take the SNA down, but the defender must be able to end such a war in my opinion.

By the way it offeres also a lot of nice tactical opportunities for the atacker. You can set up traps around the SNA and force the defender into fights on your ground. It is just meant to prevent the atacker as well as the defender from just dock and cover until the war expires wich is no good pvp at all, but just anoying.

Well, that's bit raw and messy but I'll try to answer you !

Which argument ? I said that's a bad concept (defending a structure when you're the agressor), a boring gameplay (bashing a structure how funny) and a bad design (2-sides forcefield, no no no).

I don't think you actually read the proposition. If the attacker doesnt "set up" the SNA, there is no wardec. I guess everybody could do that !

Ahaha no. What can I do with a 24h wardec ? Absolutely nothing to an ennemy POS. That's it, they are invulnerable (unless the guy in charge of the stront is an idiot).
Also, don't forget that for a corporation (like me), I need not only the iskies, but 50h of vote. Do you really think that people will bother with wardecs anymore ? No. No it's just too much of an assle, and it's expensive too.
They are already far too few wardecs at the moment, I will not support a bad system that will only reduce them.

Structures in EVE don't work that way. You can't "sneak" to hit and refuel it/stront it. Why ? Because your lovely SNA (or a POS) would become invulnerable too (that's easy : the second it's out of rf'ed, warp to it, fuel/stront it, see you in 24h -and you can type trololololol ♫ in local-).
Structures that are coming out of rf'd are damaged, damaged enough that you cannot stront them again. First, you need to lose a few hours repairing it (yes ! reverse EHP bash ! I like EVE !).
Can you really imagine that a small corp will be able to repair a boring SNA while getting blobbed by the defenders ? Ahahaha.
It won't work.

(let's say EVEuni is the defender, I guess ?)
Why would EVEuni "guard" the SNA ?
I will tell you what would happen :
BLSHL votes a wardec against EVEuni. Wait 24h please, you're not an alliance.
BLSHL anchor a SNA.
BLSHL declares war on EVEuni.
BLSHL's SNA is blobbed. It will get in rf'd within 5mn -I'm not even speaking of the famous ~third parties~, it will just make a bigger blob).
BLSHL has 24h to "hunt EVEuni miners". Woot woot, 24h, I'm glad I paid all these iskies and took time to set up this for 24h of hunting.
BLSHL's SNA is out of rf, option 1) BLSHL repairs it while not getting attacked in only 3,5h (because I paid for that, yes) to refuel it or 2) the SNA is blobbed again and destroyed in 5mn. What a good fight ! The wardec is over.

EVEuni doesnt have to guard it. EVEuni must only gather a fleet for a) when they got a wardec message (they can even form up the next day, don't worry) and b) when it's out of rf'd.


If you wardecc a 2000 player corp with 4 guys, what can you realistically expect more than just a few ganks?
(I can only quote 5 times :cpp: srsly: so it's in bold)
I did at least once, with the same scale (and I'm far for being a good pvper). They lost a bit of ~e-honor~, one corporation, 2 POSes, and about 30 killmails.

the atacker advantage is that imbalanced, that it is suitible for a 4man-corp to figt a 2000man corp thats a serious lack of realism in my opinion.
]No. The "lack of realism" would be the 2000-man alliance that is afraid of getting wardec'd by 4 pilots. They won't kill everything ; they can be trapped ; and losing stuff in EVE is normal. But I'm not in the alliance that, instead of doing something with the current sandbox, is just saying "stop playing guys, they'll get bored ahaha".

By the way it offeres also a lot of nice tactical opportunities for the atacker. You can set up traps around the SNA and force the defender into fights on your ground.
You can already make traps in EVE. You don't need a 2-side forcefield with a EHP grind.

It is just meant to prevent the atacker as well as the defender from just dock and cover until the war expires wich is no good pvp at all, but just anoying.
Honestly ? I never saw any "good pvp" in highsec (and I did "some" wardecs). Wardecs isn't about "good pvp" or even "pewpew" ; it's sending a message to a whole alliance "EH YOU I DON'T LIKE YOU AND I MAY PUNCH YOU IN THE FACE". Nothing else.

Also, I will raise (another) issue : about these "third parties" that could be involve without any wardec or whatever, at the SNA.
I think that one of the good thing about highsec wardecs is that you know the number of the opponents. It will not make a "fair fight" but at least it's not that blob thing (or that cyno bridge that allows you to "surprise" the opponents by bringing a lot more pilots that they thought). Am, it's a bit ****** since you can join or leave a corporation almost instantly (and there is the rr neutral problem too) but there still this idea of "sizeable fights".
With this FFA arena, it would be a "blob time".

1) So? Being wardecced does nothing to stop you from doing PvE activities. Your corp may have some SOP forbidding it, but that's in no way a game mechanic. Pick a quiet system, watch local, scout before you jump, and you'll be fine.

2) How is being able to harass those opponents that you are unable to slug it out with a bad thing? Ali v Foreman, Ali was considered completely outmatched, but by letting Foreman tire himself out while harassing him, Ali was able to score a knockout victory. And that's in Boxing with a ton of rules. In EvE, if someone wants to harass someone else through game mechanics or using their opponents own SOP against them, that's fantastic. With all the talk about unfair fights, you seem to forget that harassing a larger opponent until they're beatable is a time honored tactic to turn an unwinnable situation into a winnable one.




What the hell is a faildec? If your wardec achieves the aims you want; be they access to easy targets, reduction in the target's forces, destruction of a POS, general harassment, or it just gave you the warm and fuzzies; then it was a successful wardec. If it didn't succeed in those objectives, and you still had fun, that's successful too. Only if your wardec failed on all of the above counts (*ahem* E-Uni v RvB => Y U Surprise with attack POS?) could you call it a failure. And never a "faildec," that just sounds silly.

As for making it harder to dec people; this mechanic would make it impossible for a small corp who's been wronged to react in a meaningful manner to the depredations offered to them by a larger corp. That's bad, mmmkay. Also structure bashing sucks. Maybe the first time you do it, for the first ~5min it's kind of cool, but after that it just blows.


And that pretty much covers the interesting bits of your post.

Remove the Decshield, make it harder to leave a corp involved in a wardec (I like the institution of RvB and the casual PvP learning experience it provides, so it saddens me that this would hurt those who need to do their own logistics, but can't thing of a good way around it).

If you meant you want help improving your idea then;
1) Scrap it or,
2) The same as the above poster, to wit, it's not our job to polish a turd if it isn't our own (eww, disease).

"Once online, a member of the owning corporation with the relevant roles"
There is no corp role for that, and that's why corporations without an alliance must vote them (and no "being a ceo/director" isn't).
You didn't mention in your proposition to redo that (and mind you, some entities I know aren't rule by only one person and they vote for a lot of things).
But if you want to spin it a bit, let's say "the agressors agreed a few days ago and the wardec is planned".

I'll just quote you :
"(The SNA) With its location not disclosed to the public and it not showing on the overview when not on-grid, it is unlikely it would attract direct attention."
It really really really sounds like an instance for me.
The agressors know where it is. The defenders have the name of the system (and a bookmark I guess, like the one for an escalation or something, you didn't precise). Maybe every side could give this "bookmark" to that "third parties surprise blob". Everyone else ? Ah, no sorry, it's a private party (but not an instance, I swear !).
The only way to interfere would be via combat probes, which is obviously the best way to get attention (I, too, fly in high sec probing every ship in every system and having a neutral fleet ready to fight in a SNA).

Did you lookt at my Pro-paint-skillz artwork ?
A bigger bubble will not change the exploit I pictured.
A "warp scram" in the forcefield will not change it.
A "5mn ffa" will still not change it !

I could. I fought in many more wardecs than you, actually -as an agressor, a defender or a "third party merc"-. I have my own idea of fixing this mess.
But I won't help you with your non-sense. You didn't answer most of my questions. And when you answered one, you didn't even understand what I was telling to you (I won't say my English is that good, but well, you got a picture !).

Crossposts. Expect a double post. CCP is welcomed to fix this damn quote limitation.

No, it's by far too exploitable. For a lot of reasons that have been already discussed multiple times on this forum (if you insist, I could tell you why, but that's not the subject of this thread).

No. I'll give you 3 reasons :
1- Seriously, shooting something for one hour ? It's supposed to be a game. Also, with this "warm up" period, you can attack the SNA when you want, for example... Not in your opponent tz ? Which means that no side will get some real pewpew.
2- 1h to kill it ? So, I must guard my SNA at least 23h/24. Sounds fun. Oh, wait, it's not. Only the biggest entities in EVE can cover all the timezones (and they are all in 00).
3- 1h, but how ? DPS in EVE is (mostly) linear. So, 1h with your fleet, it means that I could get a much bigger fleet, let's say x5, and kill it under 12mn. Yes, yes, I can form up in 12mn, after all we are all ready since we have been guarding this SNA for the last 16h, right guys ?

This is incorrect. Only a very very few people can do this. You can't have roles, titles, your employment history is messed, your kills will not ended on your kb and you can be awoxed by the corp you're joining. Corp hoping as a merc is possible, but I dare you to find 10 merc pilots that do it.

I said it's impossible to kill a POS in 24h, since it will be stronted for more than one day. When it's out of rf, your wardec is already ended by a few hours (or even a day).
And for the last line, well you can check my own KB. Half of my pos kills aren't on it, but it will be enough to convince you.


There are already risks when you wardec someone. They could use the decshield exploit, so you lost your money for nothing. Or they could make the wardec "mutual" (I did it a few times, I got paid to drop it lol). Or they could join a much bigger alliance (and the wardec is transfered). Etc, that's only a few examples of what you can do.

Kelduum has a much different definition of "very much public" than the rest of us, apparently.

So, when I wardec someone and they stay docked for a week, I shouldn't have wardecced them because the're not going to fight?

Or if they only undock in fleets that I can't beat, I shouldn't have wardecced them because I'm not going to die in a silly manner? (I'll wait until someone get's careless, thankyewverymuch)


If only there were some kind of corporation that was immune to being wardecced but had some sort of drawback to compensate for its added safety. Some sort of beginner corp, or starter corp, or NPC Corp... waitaminute.

If you join or create a PC Corp, you are announcing to the world that you are ready to be wardecced. If you do not want to be wardecced, DO NOT join or create a PC Corp.

Hisec is the safer place to be. If you are being wardecced all the time, either stop making yourself a target, or learn to fight back.



People run 10man incursions under wardec all the time. Try Lowsec/Nullsec. In HS, just watch local. If the system's too busy for that, then decide what risk you're willing to accept. In Nullsec, no sane person rats if they can't see everyone in Local or there are neuts/reds there.

If you can't kill 2 blackbirds before you die, you might have some trouble with the much tankier Niarjas.

Being too afraid to undock and thus making a shoddy week of it is on the defender, not the attacker. The PsyWar aspect is when you as the attacker know and count on the defender to do this and use this week(s) of "downtime" to keep the defender from having fun until whatever conditions you have for stopping the war are met (I've had my fill of poops and giggles is a perfectly reasonable condition, given that this is a game). The Defender of course has many counters to this; going to Low/Null, undock and fight, undock and watch local, etc.

E-Uni has enforced a strict SOP because it makes itself a target by its very nature (moreso as its membership has shifted towards the fulltime carebear). The SOP helps make it less of an interesting target, being in an alliance makes it more expensive, and now there's the shield.

The Defense can always end the war early, just meet the conditions that the attacker sets when you ask them. As in everything in EvE, beware of scams. CCP realized that they couldn't possibly thing of all the things wars might be fought over, so they declined to code them into the mechanics. There is no bias against the defense; the fights are exactly as fair* as you can make them.

If I am fighting a war against a group that can and does field enormous fleets, why the hell wouldn't I stay safe until I can pick off stragglers and the careless? You speak of protecting the little guy and then turn around and say that the big guy should be able to stomp out a wardec by force of numbers, what's up with that?

Never said I wanted all EvE to be 0.0, but in a sandbox, you need to be able to protect your sandcastle from those who want to build theirs in the same spot or want to kick it down for poops and giggles. A PC Corp is a sandcastle. A mining corp's functions are better served by a channel and a mailing list than by a PC corp anyway.

3-4 person fleet vs 8 high DPS ships with 3 Logi. Plus the uncertainty of the Sansha switching targets? I wouldn't take that fight. That's why Lowsec incursions aren't suicidal. Suicide Blackbirds are actually more effective than WT BBs because you have to wait for CONCORD to kill the Suicides, but you can primary the WT ones and kill them much faster. If I wanted to kill an Incursion Fleet, I'd want equal or better numbers and a better logi numbers or a couple falcons. They really are relatively PvP fit (They can't win a fight [no points], but they won't lose easy [logi support, big buffer, high DPS]).

*The Only Fair fight is the one you win, the only unfair fight is the one you lose.

Where do you all get off thinking "Hi-Sec" wars should be cheap/easy to do? They should be neither, for ANY "involved" party's.

Can't afford the "costs" of WARS? That's YOUR PROBLEM, and maybe you should worry more about re-thinking your "isk-making" strategy, instead of worrying about the cost of things you can't afford!

And FFS, what part of "HIGH SECURITY SPACE" do you not understand? It is NOT, and should NOT become, a FFA warzone, any time you get a wild hair up your a$$ to war-dec someone. Take your a$$ to null sec, if that's what you want!