These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Obvious Avoiding war decs exploit is still an obvious exploit.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Hesser Mech
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#41 - 2012-02-26 15:50:10 UTC
ShipToaster wrote:
C0SMIC GIRL wrote:
How is war dec avoiding not an exploit ?


Money. It is all to do with new player retention. CCP believe that veterans will never unsub.


Or they realize that at some point veterans are going to unsub thus needing new players to fill the gaps. If there is a new pilot and he cant join a corp without 50mil sp toons shooting at him does he keep playing? Probably not.

If it's not just easy kills and griefing you are looking for and actually just the small gang pvp like the OP says he is looking for. Why not make the argument that war decs be a accept/decline situation. If they decline you dont get charged the price of the dec. Thus making dec shields entirely useless, corps that can not defend themselves have a out, and you know the ones that accept are going to make a effort to fight back. Now you have all the small gang pvp you want and better more competitive pvp without the lost isk from corps using dec shields on you.

I don't think many making the exploit argument are going to like this idea though since its not competitive pvp they are actually looking for in high sec war decs.
Plus 1
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#42 - 2012-02-26 17:29:09 UTC
Hesser Mech wrote:
ShipToaster wrote:
C0SMIC GIRL wrote:
How is war dec avoiding not an exploit ?


Money. It is all to do with new player retention. CCP believe that veterans will never unsub.


Or they realize that at some point veterans are going to unsub thus needing new players to fill the gaps. If there is a new pilot and he cant join a corp without 50mil sp toons shooting at him does he keep playing? Probably not.

If it's not just easy kills and griefing you are looking for and actually just the small gang pvp like the OP says he is looking for. Why not make the argument that war decs be a accept/decline situation. If they decline you dont get charged the price of the dec. Thus making dec shields entirely useless, corps that can not defend themselves have a out, and you know the ones that accept are going to make a effort to fight back. Now you have all the small gang pvp you want and better more competitive pvp without the lost isk from corps using dec shields on you.

I don't think many making the exploit argument are going to like this idea though since its not competitive pvp they are actually looking for in high sec war decs.

Have players left EVE because of High Sec war decs they couldn't handle? Sure, but EVE maintained a population growth without allowing players to avoid decs like this. High Sec is safe enough as it is. No one is entitled to a player corp just by having a sub. You have to work to keep things intact. If you can't handle it, there's always the NPC corp.
Hesser Mech
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2012-02-26 18:01:54 UTC
Plus 1 wrote:
Hesser Mech wrote:
ShipToaster wrote:
C0SMIC GIRL wrote:
How is war dec avoiding not an exploit ?


Money. It is all to do with new player retention. CCP believe that veterans will never unsub.


Or they realize that at some point veterans are going to unsub thus needing new players to fill the gaps. If there is a new pilot and he cant join a corp without 50mil sp toons shooting at him does he keep playing? Probably not.

If it's not just easy kills and griefing you are looking for and actually just the small gang pvp like the OP says he is looking for. Why not make the argument that war decs be a accept/decline situation. If they decline you dont get charged the price of the dec. Thus making dec shields entirely useless, corps that can not defend themselves have a out, and you know the ones that accept are going to make a effort to fight back. Now you have all the small gang pvp you want and better more competitive pvp without the lost isk from corps using dec shields on you.

I don't think many making the exploit argument are going to like this idea though since its not competitive pvp they are actually looking for in high sec war decs.

Have players left EVE because of High Sec war decs they couldn't handle? Sure, but EVE maintained a population growth without allowing players to avoid decs like this. High Sec is safe enough as it is. No one is entitled to a player corp just by having a sub. You have to work to keep things intact. If you can't handle it, there's always the NPC corp.


By the same logic having a sub does not entitle you to provide someone with a bad gaming experience or force them to play the way you want them to. There a a ton of ways you can play EVE and they don't all involve pvp.

I know I cant say this about all corps but the large majority of high sec war dec corps dont really want pvp they just want to one shot someone so they can say "U mad bro" or something else you might expect from a 2 yo that cant form complete words yet. It really is just sad that so many out there get their rocks off by providing a unpleasant gaming experience to others.
Plus 1
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#44 - 2012-02-26 18:33:17 UTC
Hesser Mech wrote:
Plus 1 wrote:
Hesser Mech wrote:
ShipToaster wrote:
C0SMIC GIRL wrote:
How is war dec avoiding not an exploit ?


Money. It is all to do with new player retention. CCP believe that veterans will never unsub.


Or they realize that at some point veterans are going to unsub thus needing new players to fill the gaps. If there is a new pilot and he cant join a corp without 50mil sp toons shooting at him does he keep playing? Probably not.

If it's not just easy kills and griefing you are looking for and actually just the small gang pvp like the OP says he is looking for. Why not make the argument that war decs be a accept/decline situation. If they decline you dont get charged the price of the dec. Thus making dec shields entirely useless, corps that can not defend themselves have a out, and you know the ones that accept are going to make a effort to fight back. Now you have all the small gang pvp you want and better more competitive pvp without the lost isk from corps using dec shields on you.

I don't think many making the exploit argument are going to like this idea though since its not competitive pvp they are actually looking for in high sec war decs.

Have players left EVE because of High Sec war decs they couldn't handle? Sure, but EVE maintained a population growth without allowing players to avoid decs like this. High Sec is safe enough as it is. No one is entitled to a player corp just by having a sub. You have to work to keep things intact. If you can't handle it, there's always the NPC corp.


By the same logic having a sub does not entitle you to provide someone with a bad gaming experience or force them to play the way you want them to. There a a ton of ways you can play EVE and they don't all involve pvp.

I know I cant say this about all corps but the large majority of high sec war dec corps dont really want pvp they just want to one shot someone so they can say "U mad bro" or something else you might expect from a 2 yo that cant form complete words yet. It really is just sad that so many out there get their rocks off by providing a unpleasant gaming experience to others.

War decs don't force people to play the way the deccer wants. There are different ways of dealing with them or avoiding them in the first place. How the deccee deals with it is still their choice.

You missed the most important part of my post: EVE has made it where it is by being the opposite of the way you seem to want it to be.
Buruk Utama
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#45 - 2012-02-26 19:11:46 UTC
Plus 1 wrote:

War decs don't force people to play the way the deccer wants. There are different ways of dealing with them or avoiding them in the first place. How the deccee deals with it is still their choice.

You missed the most important part of my post: EVE has made it where it is by being the opposite of the way you seem to want it to be.


So how the deccee deals with it is their choice and if they chose to use an alliance to nullify the war it is their choice yet this thread and its supporters are crying for the exact opposite to be true. You claim you aren't trying to make the targets play eve your way yet you are trying your damndest to ensure the only paths avaiable to the war target is paying you to go away or go to an npc corp. You cannot stand that there is a valid and useful way past your harassment which allows the war target to continue on enjoying eve the way they want to enjoy it.

Also by "you" I mean the OP and his supporters.
Hesser Mech
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#46 - 2012-02-26 20:46:53 UTC
Plus 1 wrote:
War decs don't force people to play the way the deccer wants. There are different ways of dealing with them or avoiding them in the first place. How the deccee deals with it is still their choice.

You missed the most important part of my post: EVE has made it where it is by being the opposite of the way you seem to want it to be.


Well the entire origin of the thread is to take away one of the options the decced corp has for dodging a war. So really everything you are using to defend your stance seems to contradict what you are actually defending. By saying " How the deccee deals with it is still their choice" but being in support of limiting those choices really doesn't go with any point you are in support of. Unless by choice you mean a limited number of choices all of which I decide is acceptable for someone else to make.

Everyone always talks about they like EVE because the get to be pirates and its not policed liked other MMO's but then as soon as the defenseless come up with a way to use the system to defend themselves then its a exploit and how dare baby seals find a way not to get clubbed.
Plus 1
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#47 - 2012-02-26 21:04:26 UTC
Buruk Utama wrote:
Plus 1 wrote:

War decs don't force people to play the way the deccer wants. There are different ways of dealing with them or avoiding them in the first place. How the deccee deals with it is still their choice.

You missed the most important part of my post: EVE has made it where it is by being the opposite of the way you seem to want it to be.


So how the deccee deals with it is their choice and if they chose to use an alliance to nullify the war it is their choice yet this thread and its supporters are crying for the exact opposite to be true. You claim you aren't trying to make the targets play eve your way yet you are trying your damndest to ensure the only paths avaiable to the war target is paying you to go away or go to an npc corp. You cannot stand that there is a valid and useful way past your harassment which allows the war target to continue on enjoying eve the way they want to enjoy it.

Also by "you" I mean the OP and his supporters.

This has been an exploit until, apparently, now.
Plus 1
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#48 - 2012-02-26 21:06:50 UTC
Hesser Mech wrote:
Plus 1 wrote:
War decs don't force people to play the way the deccer wants. There are different ways of dealing with them or avoiding them in the first place. How the deccee deals with it is still their choice.

You missed the most important part of my post: EVE has made it where it is by being the opposite of the way you seem to want it to be.


Well the entire origin of the thread is to take away one of the options the decced corp has for dodging a war. So really everything you are using to defend your stance seems to contradict what you are actually defending. By saying " How the deccee deals with it is still their choice" but being in support of limiting those choices really doesn't go with any point you are in support of. Unless by choice you mean a limited number of choices all of which I decide is acceptable for someone else to make.

Everyone always talks about they like EVE because the get to be pirates and its not policed liked other MMO's but then as soon as the defenseless come up with a way to use the system to defend themselves then its a exploit and how dare baby seals find a way not to get clubbed.

That's exactly what you want taken away. With "dec shielding," it is policed almost as much as other MMOs because it makes it so easy to be so much safer.
Jake Warbird
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2012-02-27 07:48:09 UTC
What part of 'sandbox' didn't you understand?

Sugar Von MurdererTits : Jake Warbird gets my vote for most intriguing and attractive male character in Eve.
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#50 - 2012-02-27 09:45:08 UTC
yep. Wardec is an intended mechanic, and Dec Shield is abusing other mechanics to completely disable wardecs.

Its also not fair, since alliances are unable to realistically do this.

Its a horribly abused 'feature' and its shocking that CCP approves of it

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#51 - 2012-02-27 11:00:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Cannibal Kane
Instead of everybody complaining about it, why don't we wait and see what they have planned for Inferno?

Ideas will be realised way before then, something as simple as a 48 hour probation timer for leaving an Alliance will make all the difference.

Or am I making to much sense here?

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#52 - 2012-02-27 13:23:30 UTC
Terminal Insanity wrote:
yep. Wardec is an intended mechanic, and Dec Shield is abusing other mechanics to completely disable wardecs.

Its also not fair, since alliances are unable to realistically do this.

Its a horribly abused 'feature' and its shocking that CCP approves of it


Don't you get it yet? The whole war deccing system is flawed. It's not just this lone exploit messing it up. There are other exploits such as people joining a corp in system to spring a trap, neutral reposed, etc.

Ccp has taken the stance that until they give us a new system in a future release (probably then next expansion or the one after), it is far cheaper and less of a hassle on ccp's part to not police this system. So our only choices ate to HTFU and deal with this or move to another game.
Dutarro
Ghezer Aramih
#53 - 2012-02-27 14:08:33 UTC
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Instead of everybody complaining about it, why don't we wait and see what they have planned for Inferno?

Ideas will be realised way before then, something as simple as a 48 hour probation timer for leaving an Alliance will make all the difference.

Or am I making to much sense here?


Indeed, the next expansion will probably include a total overhaul of the war dec system. We'll see what that means as time goes on, but judging by CCP's past philosophy it will attempt to include something for everyone. For those who like hisec wars, more ways to fight in hisec (expanded faction war maybe?). For those who currently avoid wars, more incentives to get involved and fight. The "war dec" mechanic as we know it may not even exist, replaced by some other game system for CONCORD-sanctioned conflict.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#54 - 2012-02-27 15:48:35 UTC
biggest problem with wardec avoidance is that its niegh impossible to take down an undefended hisec tower. Before you could force a corp to either lose the tower or remove it voluntarily during the 24 hour period. Now you can jump around alliances and alternate stront timers for days, each time forcing the aggressors to pay higher and higher wardec fees.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Dutarro
Ghezer Aramih
#55 - 2012-02-27 16:05:10 UTC
Batelle wrote:
biggest problem with wardec avoidance is that its niegh impossible to take down an undefended hisec tower. Before you could force a corp to either lose the tower or remove it voluntarily during the 24 hour period. Now you can jump around alliances and alternate stront timers for days, each time forcing the aggressors to pay higher and higher wardec fees.


Good point. For that matter, why should a war dec be required at all to attack a hisec POS? It's already protected from capitals by the ban on cyno in 0.5+. It's not like hisec POS owners are defenseless newbs -- anyone with the ISK and experience to anchor a tower should be prepared to defend it in case of attack, regardless of location.
Lady Ayeipsia
BlueWaffe
#56 - 2012-02-27 16:28:15 UTC
Dutarro wrote:
Batelle wrote:
biggest problem with wardec avoidance is that its niegh impossible to take down an undefended hisec tower. Before you could force a corp to either lose the tower or remove it voluntarily during the 24 hour period. Now you can jump around alliances and alternate stront timers for days, each time forcing the aggressors to pay higher and higher wardec fees.


Good point. For that matter, why should a war dec be required at all to attack a hisec POS? It's already protected from capitals by the ban on cyno in 0.5+. It's not like hisec POS owners are defenseless newbs -- anyone with the ISK and experience to anchor a tower should be prepared to defend it in case of attack, regardless of location.



Not everyone can log in once every 24 hours. Why abound every pos be am open Target just to satisfy your desires? Also, wouldn't this pretty much eliminate the need for small or medium poses? Everyone would have to death star up just to avoid roaming griefer gangs. Further more, are you prepared for the price increase in all t2 mods becayse people feel they can't ruak a pos? Maybe if ccp increased the number of copying, invention, and manufacturing slots in hi sec, this would work, but for now, this is just a horrible idea from some one who's probably never spent a day being an indy toon nor realizes that a player run economy needs poses to produce materials.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#57 - 2012-02-27 18:57:50 UTC
I like the idea that when wardecced, you have 24 hours to remove your tower, prepare to defend it, or pray that its never found.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
StonerPhReaK
Herb Men
#58 - 2012-02-27 19:39:17 UTC
Some war decs are legit.Some are to grief.

Allot of people will say they should join a bigger corp/htfu etc.But this is not the case with some wars.And since there is no "rule" as to how these wars should take place or what actions should designate a right to dec,people will use any "mechanic" or "feature" to win.This goes both ways.There needs to be a reason for conflict.Or some type of aggression needed to be had between both corps for a dec to be possible.

This is a touchy subject either way you handle it.Would like to see people play the way they want (both sides).Whether it be pvp'rs or pve'rs.but as it stands there is no middle ground.

You cannot play in a sandbox without risking sand to the eye.No matter who you are.

Signatures wer cooler when we couldn't remove them completely.
Dutarro
Ghezer Aramih
#59 - 2012-02-27 20:09:35 UTC
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:

Not everyone can log in once every 24 hours. Why abound every pos be am open Target just to satisfy your desires? Also, wouldn't this pretty much eliminate the need for small or medium poses? Everyone would have to death star up just to avoid roaming griefer gangs.


I've run medium and small POSs in low sec before and never had one put into reinforced mode. Killing a POS is boring as hell, and hardly worth the trouble for a small tower on a crap moon that has only a couple of modules to loot. It's the last thing a gang of bored PvPer's would want to do, unless maybe they were hoping for a good fight when it runs out of strontium. Not likely, since by then most indy corps/alliances will be waiting with a huge blob of their high sec friends to defend it.

Quote:
Further more, are you prepared for the price increase in all t2 mods becayse people feel they can't ruak a pos? Maybe if ccp increased the number of copying, invention, and manufacturing slots in hi sec, this would work, but for now, this is just a horrible idea from some one who's probably never spent a day being an indy toon nor realizes that a player run economy needs poses to produce materials.


On the contrary. I've been an industrial character for years and have run POSs of all sizes in high sec, low sec and null. The comment was not motivated by a desire to blow up other people's POSs, but rather to see risk/reward in high sec properly balanced. The current war dec system puts everyone who joins a player corporation at equal risk, regardless of their character's age, yet a high SP character can earn far greater rewards. It would be more fair if combat risk were attached to the most lucrative activities in high sec, like T2 production, L4 missions and incursions.

As for T2 prices, let them rise. That's more ISK for those of us who make T2 and are willing to take some risks in the process.
Hesser Mech
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#60 - 2012-02-27 22:58:10 UTC
Dutarro wrote:
It would be more fair if combat risk were attached to the most lucrative activities in high sec, like T2 production, L4 missions and incursions.


At what point in time did you decide putting more risk and high security in the same sentence did not contradict yourself? There are low sec versions of all of these things that take place where people are rewarded for their risk in doing them. Why not worry about them if adding risk to lucrative activities is what you are looking for? Or why not just make the argument we should move all of these activities to low sec since you have decided they are too lucrative for high sec?