These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

GMs - "We can't figure it out on our own. You do it"

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sasha Azala
Doomheim
#61 - 2012-03-02 15:44:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Sasha Azala
Butzewutze wrote:
Sasha Azala wrote:
Reppyk wrote:
GM Homonoia wrote:
Besides, you can still suicide gank your target if you truly want that target dead. It is not like they are truly safe.
Tell me how to suicide gank an highsec POS, please.




The target that was being talked about was a player not a structure. But of course you know that already.

Why not just war-dec the corp the structure belongs to.


i lol'd. Do you even know what this thread is about?

The problem is that some corps flood the markets with ISK so they might change the economy and affecting every players experience risk-free. They often have a huge impact on the market but they are also "safe" at the same time. Their POS's can't be killed and their barges can only be killed by suiciding yourself. There should be Risk / Reward in eve but atm this game favours reward over risk.

And btw. imho "Industrial-Only" Corps that cant defend themselfs shouldnt exist in a "PVP" game at all. Look for another game or learn to defend yourself. Dont make the game easier for this guys.






Oh you mean 'Why not just war-dec the corp the structure belongs to'.

Well it was a bit tongue-in-cheek when I said that.


War-dec mechanics are a bit crap at the moment, but the op should not blame GMs for that.
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#62 - 2012-03-02 15:56:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Ptraci
Orator de Umbras wrote:

The problem with that argument is that a corporation will not declare war on another corporation that can defend itself.


Exactly right. The war dec mechanics as they now stand favor people picking and choosing their targets, and only attacking /deccing targets when they know there is no risk to themselves.

How often have I been war-decced only to have the supposed aggressor corp sit in a station all day the minute I show any signs of putting up a real fight? EVE is supposed to be all about PvP, but all I see is cowardice. There really are no "good fites" left anymore. You have all turned into care-bears, and kill-mail whoring has become the death of EVE.

I recommend a visit to null where you will quickly be stripped of those fancy ships, modules and implants, and you will stop caring again. Then maybe the good fights will come back.
Archare
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#63 - 2012-03-02 17:20:46 UTC
As far as "unwritten rules" go, There are many other instances in eve where stuff are simply passed word of mouth or assumed exploits, EULA violations, ect. For example I have heard 20 different angles on jet can decloaking and whether or not it is or is not an exploit. Unless you're scouring every gm post and/or are a professional eve-lawyer, keeping track of these unwriiten rules are frustrating. This contributes to the "learning cliff" and while those eve-lawyers that do their homework and research these details (Jet can decloak not an exploit) can use them to their advantage, this contributes to both unnecessary petitions claiming someone exploited, and subsequent customer dissatisfaction when they are told "i'm sorry but that mechanic is valid" or "you have been warned for using a mechanic that is deemed exploit but is documented in a 2 year old post on the forums".

While I know tweaking the mechanics are a whole different matter and require manhours from the dev team, is there a possibility of a consolidated site of GM policies on common issues?
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#64 - 2012-03-02 17:35:49 UTC
It's like everybody is just repeating themselves over and over again in "wardecs are broken" threads.

Wardecs are so broken they aren't even viable as a game mechanic. I wardec'd some bigger corps and they just jumped to another corp or swapped alliances. I would say take a break from wardecs until it is fixed. A new wardec mechanic was speculated about for years now but it looks like this summer it's finally going to get done so I would just say take a break and wait for it to get fixed.

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Feligast
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#65 - 2012-03-02 20:23:32 UTC
Jada Maroo wrote:
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:


I think there should just be a system whereby we can decide when we want to participate in PVP, some kind of 'PVP pennant' or 'PVP banner' I don't know I'm sure you can work out a name.


I actually agree with this - for high sec. If people don't want to pew, they shouldn't have to stay docked because someone else decided they want to pew them in high sec. But fix fleet wars and have some sort of new opt-in aggressive high sec play mechanic that gives you a "hazard pay" bonus to high sec activities if you participate.

Something like: before going into a mission, dead space, or mission mining site you can decide to disable Concord protection. If you do, Concord doesn't charge you for their normal services and you get paid like a 50% bonus or something. Same with courier missions - would give a whole new use for cov ops haulers.

Other than that, suicide gank or live in WHs, low sec, or null if you want to pew.


hahahahah no.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#66 - 2012-03-02 21:27:51 UTC
Feligast wrote:
Jada Maroo wrote:
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:


I think there should just be a system whereby we can decide when we want to participate in PVP, some kind of 'PVP pennant' or 'PVP banner' I don't know I'm sure you can work out a name.


I actually agree with this - for high sec. If people don't want to pew, they shouldn't have to stay docked because someone else decided they want to pew them in high sec. But fix fleet wars and have some sort of new opt-in aggressive high sec play mechanic that gives you a "hazard pay" bonus to high sec activities if you participate.

Something like: before going into a mission, dead space, or mission mining site you can decide to disable Concord protection. If you do, Concord doesn't charge you for their normal services and you get paid like a 50% bonus or something. Same with courier missions - would give a whole new use for cov ops haulers.

Other than that, suicide gank or live in WHs, low sec, or null if you want to pew.


hahahahah no.


No really, war declarations should be handled just like in the real world... where the nations involved sit down and all decide it's in everyone's best interest to go to war.

Oh wait.... Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#67 - 2012-03-02 21:32:09 UTC
Sasha Azala wrote:
Why not just war-dec the corp the structure belongs to.
Because that doesn't let you blow up the structure due to how the timers work.
Sasha Azala wrote:
War-dec mechanics are a bit crap at the moment, but the op should not blame GMs for that.
Actually, you can, because it's the GMs (or, well… whoever set the GM policy on decshedding and decshields) that ensure that structures are pretty much invulnerable as a result of this policy change.
Jada Maroo
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#68 - 2012-03-02 21:37:01 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Sasha Azala wrote:
Why not just war-dec the corp the structure belongs to.
Because that doesn't let you blow up the structure due to how the timers work.
Sasha Azala wrote:
War-dec mechanics are a bit crap at the moment, but the op should not blame GMs for that.
Actually, you can, because it's the GMs (or, well… whoever set the GM policy on decshedding and decshields) that ensure that structures are pretty much invulnerable as a result of this policy change.



People should be thankful they're having to shoot fewer structures. Big smile
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#69 - 2012-03-02 21:47:42 UTC
Considering how dirt easy it is to declare a war as the aggressor I find it no problem that it is equally dirt easy for the target to end the war.

I hope CCPs rework will make you put much more on the line when you declare a war and make it equally more difficult to avoid it, thereby keeping the balance.

Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook 

Cyniac
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#70 - 2012-03-02 22:33:57 UTC
Jowen Datloran wrote:
Considering how dirt easy it is to declare a war as the aggressor I find it no problem that it is equally dirt easy for the target to end the war.


The main problem with it is not that it's easy to declare and evade wars - the main problem is that the system makes certain targets completely invulnerable (see POS issues above).


Having said that here are a few concepts on wardecs:


Wardec mechanics should be changed so that they will result in more, not less fights (as a general principle - conflict is good)

Wardec mechanics should be balanced between the options available to the aggressor and those available to the defender

Here is a little thought that might help.

Currently the system considers all wars to be bilateral. One corp or alliance vs another corp or alliance. This is based on the very flawed assumption that the only "friends" which a corp or alliance has are in their own corp/alliance.

In fact the system penalizes mercenary corps which try to join existing conflicts. On the contrary conflicts should be allowed to escalate much more easily. This would have two interesting effects:

1) Highsec wars would have the potential to escalate rapidly with friends and allies of corps joining into the conflicts which would generate a lot more targets for everyone to worry about - this benefits both the combat corps (more pew pew!) and the non-combat corps (more friends with guns to protect or distract from the bad guys)

2) People would pause and think just a wee bit more before entering a war because they will not know exactly what they would be getting into, and how far things would escalate out of control.

By simply implementing this kind of concept you instantly create a lot more opportunities for fighting, as well as make some forms of play far more viable, e.g. anti-griefer crusader corps etc.
Psychotic Monk
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#71 - 2012-03-02 22:41:04 UTC
Cyniac wrote:


1) Highsec wars would have the potential to escalate rapidly with friends and allies of corps joining into the conflicts which would generate a lot more targets for everyone to worry about - this benefits both the combat corps (more pew pew!) and the non-combat corps (more friends with guns to protect or distract from the bad guys)

2) People would pause and think just a wee bit more before entering a war because they will not know exactly what they would be getting into, and how far things would escalate out of control.


I am very pro-this. Doing more of your homework should always benefit you more. And biting off more than you can chew is hilarious. Even as a dude who's done it once or twice. A bit stressful at the time, but hilarious and fun in retrospect.

Belligerent Undesirables Selling Griefer Immunity
Caldari Citizen 786478786
#72 - 2012-03-02 23:34:38 UTC
CCP designs flawed Wardec system with many loopholes. People whine about the flaws and exploit the loopholes.
CCP removes the loopholes while they redesign the system. People whine about not being able to exploit the loopholes.

/thread
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#73 - 2012-03-02 23:45:13 UTC
Caldari Citizen 786478786 wrote:
CCP removes the loopholes while they redesign the system. People whine about not being able to exploit the loopholes.
Lol no.

CCP stop policing the exploits while they redesign system. People whine about CCP giving up and just reversing their stance on said exploits. People exploiting the loopholes cheer as they now no longer have to worry about the GMs coming after them.
Karn Dulake
Doomheim
#74 - 2012-03-03 00:03:24 UTC
why dont all you leet highsec pvper stop whining and hit lowsec or take a jump into Nullsec. You can get all the fights you want there but ofc they wont be miners, missioners and industrialists.


Long live the dec shield. 
I dont normally troll, but when i do i do it on General Discussion.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#75 - 2012-03-03 00:06:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Karn Dulake wrote:
why dont all you leet highsec pvper stop whining and hit lowsec or take a jump into Nullsec.
Because highsec is a PvP arena, so why should they? If you don't want to live in one, you're free to stop whining and leave.

Why are you defending exploits?
gfldex
#76 - 2012-03-03 00:22:38 UTC
Cyprus Black wrote:
Something is terribly wrong in the GM department.


They are payed to close tickets, not to help players. In fact, if they would actually solve problems they would make themselves redundant. Welcome to capitalism.

If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain.
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#77 - 2012-03-03 00:52:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Ladie Harlot
gfldex wrote:
Cyprus Black wrote:
Something is terribly wrong in the GM department.


They are payed to close tickets, not to help players. In fact, if they would actually solve problems they would make themselves redundant. Welcome to capitalism.


You sound awfully bitter. Every time I've found it necessary to open a ticket I've found the GMs to be helpful and pleasant.

The only problem I've seen from GMs recently is when one of them mistakenly changed the MOTD in the Recruitment channel but that was just fixed.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Johan Civire
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#78 - 2012-03-03 02:03:37 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
gfldex wrote:
Cyprus Black wrote:
Something is terribly wrong in the GM department.


They are payed to close tickets, not to help players. In fact, if they would actually solve problems they would make themselves redundant. Welcome to capitalism.


You sound awfully bitter. Every time I've found it necessary to open a ticket I've found the GMs to be helpful and pleasant.

The only problem I've seen from GMs recently is when one of them mistakenly changed the MOTD in the Recruitment channel but that was just fixed.


i agree on that one never had any problems with GM or DEVS Lol
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#79 - 2012-03-03 05:21:36 UTC
Quote:
HOWEVER, it cannot be denied that the wardec system as it currently exists is a tool that is very often used for behavior that I, personally, would call griefing.


Any non douchebag would also call it that. The underlying problem is clearly that New Eden is full of douchebags.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Psychotic Monk
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#80 - 2012-03-03 05:29:13 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
Quote:
HOWEVER, it cannot be denied that the wardec system as it currently exists is a tool that is very often used for behavior that I, personally, would call griefing.


Any non douchebag would also call it that. The underlying problem is clearly that New Eden is full of douchebags.


I would add that further to this, we're not being given a long enough leash.

Belligerent Undesirables Selling Griefer Immunity