EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

War decs : not achieving objectives

Author
#141 - 2017-03-03 21:49:14 UTC
Hm, how about a compromise.

1. No wars in hisec unless it's a mutual thing
2. Make hi sec ***GASP*** smaller
3. .......
4. Profit
Goonswarm Federation
#142 - 2017-03-03 21:56:50 UTC
000Hunter000 wrote:
Hm, how about a compromise.

1. No wars in hisec unless it's a mutual thing
2. Make hi sec ***GASP*** smaller
3. .......
4. Profit


If mutually declared were something people want, you would see wardeccers under permanent wardec by other wardeccers. Is this the case? If no, then your idea would obviously be useless.
Vendetta Mercenary Group
#143 - 2017-03-04 09:46:09 UTC
As a high sec merc I follow and read all these 'nerf war dec' threads, I find them amusing as there is a new one every week either on here or reddit about how they're broken then see it followed up by tons of people who don't even live in high sec.

People need to join the other side of the fence before trying to give feedback and input, I used to fly in null a lot but haven't for many many years yet I don't feel the need to start up a thread complaining about aspects of your game play. Most of our war decs we like to call 'Content fillers', as you complained and removed our watch lists finding targets has never been harder resulting in the increased war decs.

I see a lot of comments about us preying on the weak, I find this very interesting considering most of my friends in null inform me if you fly anything bigger then a cruiser you get dropped on by supers just for giggles.

War decs wont change, there is no viable system that will cover every issue without nearly breaking the game.
#144 - 2017-03-06 17:56:37 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
One possibility is that all this safety and lack of risk is boring players out of the game. I am going to refer to this as the 'Tippia effect' from now on: the problem that excess safety prevents meaningful content and challenging opposition from taking place devaluing the satisfaction in accumulating wealth, leading to boredom and people quitting the game.


People have been claiming this for years, and its never held up to the actual experience of many of the players who leave.

It's not really that complex, Eve just has (and has had for as long as I've been playing) a big gap in the NPE covering the step from learning how to play, and then stepping up into a corp. For the less pvp oriented players (and once upon a time I was one of these), the draw of Eve was in its industry not its combat. The idea of a game where you can set up complex mining and manufacturing organizations with countless different ways to build that depending mainly on your own inventiveness is something really attractive to a lot of people. Eve limits what you can do around the corp mechanic however, so its natural that groups of fairly new industrial minded players (and pvp minded ones for that matter) want to join together and carve out their own niche.

Someone mentioned earlier about 'why don't they just join a big corp/alliance', well a better question would be why do you want them to? Is Eve supposed to just be WoW, where you have a couple of big sides and you're either one or the other? Eve was always a lot more than that, which is most of its charm.

So what usually happens is that a corp of fairly new players get together to mine or manufacture or whatever, and then along comes the inevitable wardec. It's never from another equivilent corp, it's pretty much always from a group of seasoned vet pvpers looking for cheap ganks/tears. If the new guys try and fight back, they get obliterated, because the only 'combat' experience they have is shooting rats, and then after days of not being able to undock without feeling like someone is going to pop them, half of them walk away. Sure, often they'll drop back to an NPC corp first but then they still can't progress without corp mechanics and it just gets stale really quickly.

As for moving to 0.0, what options do they have exactly? Rent damn expensive space from a blob, and go sit in nullsec unable to do anything but shoot asteroids? If indeed they can even get there without getting popped on the way, and if the alliance are actually renting and not just running a scam.

It's never going to change because CCP have always made very clear (just not to new players) what they want the game to be, but its a crying shame because high sec could be a much more interesting and innovative place if the industrialists were allowed some breathing room. Because much as high-sec gankers hate the simple fact, if you've come into Eve because you liked the idea of being a miner and you've spent week mining to buy that shiny hulk, and then someone just flies in and blows it up and shouts 'Lolz, stupid carebear!' in local, there really isn't much incentive to continue playing.

The really sad part is that the vast majority of industry people wouldn't stay in hi-sec forever anyway. It's fairly dull, the returns on time invested are low and there's always the knowledge that you could make a lot more money once you start venturing out into the danger lands. So why this constant obsession with making hi-sec dangerous? Who cares? Let the carebears learn the game and they'll soon grow some teeth at their own pace.
Amojin
#145 - 2017-03-06 18:04:57 UTC
Kentonio wrote:
Who cares? Let the carebears learn the game and they'll soon grow some teeth at their own pace.


Well, let's just think about that. I'm one of those 'care-bears,' at least, part time. Yesterday, a group of ice-miners were getting ganked, and I and one other player, fought back. He cloaked, which was smart, I would have, too, if I hadn't had PvE mods fitted to my Proteus. Long story short, I lost a Proteus, in a field full of Skiffs, all of which, as you well know, are bonused for drone damage.

Would I have lost, had those I was fighting for, even bothered to launch their drones? Probably not. I really doubt that the Rattlesnake, flown by a veteran of EVE, could handled the combined firepower of a dozen, that's what, 60 T2 drones on, plus a Proteus.

You would think, this is what would happen. This is what I thought. Well, I was wrong. I got no help, and lost yet another ship. I was wardecced a few minutes ago, and did the obvious, since this is not like the last wardec, where I won't be on, anyway, having a 6 day stretch of long workdays. This one hits me during my 6 days off, so I'll use the mechanic and leave.

Now, I'm fairly sure that, sucking even as I do at PvP, and being fitted with PvE mods when this went down, I WOULD have survived with the help of 60 more drones...

Learn? At their own pace? Look, I'm risk averse, too, and I know I'm gonna lose a lot, but sometimes you fight and lose, because it's the right thing to do. A field of people you're trying to help as you get wrecked? Not the right thing to do, but it is what they do.
#146 - 2017-03-06 18:07:28 UTC
gnshadowninja wrote:
As a high sec merc I follow and read all these 'nerf war dec' threads, I find them amusing as there is a new one every week either on here or reddit about how they're broken then see it followed up by tons of people who don't even live in high sec.

People need to join the other side of the fence before trying to give feedback and input, I used to fly in null a lot but haven't for many many years yet I don't feel the need to start up a thread complaining about aspects of your game play. Most of our war decs we like to call 'Content fillers', as you complained and removed our watch lists finding targets has never been harder resulting in the increased war decs.

I see a lot of comments about us preying on the weak, I find this very interesting considering most of my friends in null inform me if you fly anything bigger then a cruiser you get dropped on by supers just for giggles.

War decs wont change, there is no viable system that will cover every issue without nearly breaking the game.

As a wardeccer, how would you feel if your targets were tougher? Would you still do that as a primary activity? What's the typical character age of your targets? Do you intentionally go after rookies and the less experienced? Do you immediately drop it when any target presents an actual challenge?

My experience in dealing with wardec aggressors is that they aren't usually actually very good at the game. But then neither are most defenders. But if they do encounter a defender who actually defends, aggressors typically seem to get all butthurt. So, as an aggressor, what would YOU change to make wars more fun?

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.

#147 - 2017-03-06 18:14:22 UTC
Amojin wrote:
Kentonio wrote:
Who cares? Let the carebears learn the game and they'll soon grow some teeth at their own pace.


Well, let's just think about that. I'm one of those 'care-bears,' at least, part time. Yesterday, a group of ice-miners were getting ganked, and I and one other player, fought back. He cloaked, which was smart, I would have, too, if I hadn't had PvE mods fitted to my Proteus. Long story short, I lost a Proteus, in a field full of Skiffs, all of which, as you well know, are bonused for drone damage.

Would I have lost, had those I was fighting for, even bothered to launch their drones? Probably not. I really doubt that the Rattlesnake, flown by a veteran of EVE, could handled the combined firepower of a dozen, that's what, 60 T2 drones on, plus a Proteus.

You would think, this is what would happen. This is what I thought. Well, I was wrong. I got no help, and lost yet another ship. I was wardecced a few minutes ago, and did the obvious, since this is not like the last wardec, where I won't be on, anyway, having a 6 day stretch of long workdays. This one hits me during my 6 days off, so I'll use the mechanic and leave.

Now, I'm fairly sure that, sucking even as I do at PvP, and being fitted with PvE mods when this went down, I WOULD have survived with the help of 60 more drones...

Learn? At their own pace? Look, I'm risk averse, too, and I know I'm gonna lose a lot, but sometimes you fight and lose, because it's the right thing to do. A field of people you're trying to help as you get wrecked? Not the right thing to do, but it is what they do.


Rattlesnake and field full of skiffs? This was a hi-sec gank? Because if they were flying a field full of skiffs during a war-dec then I really don't have much sympathy. I can sympathize with the war-dec mechanics being terrible, but knowing they're terrible and ignoring them is just stupid.
Amojin
#148 - 2017-03-06 18:16:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Amojin
Kentonio wrote:
Rattlesnake and field full of skiffs? This was a hi-sec gank? Because if they were flying a field full of skiffs during a war-dec then I really don't have much sympathy. I can sympathize with the war-dec mechanics being terrible, but knowing they're terrible and ignoring them is just stupid.


No, I'm addressing two things at once, sorry. 1) They'll learn at their own pace. I started the **** for them, and all they had to do is target, launch, and hit 'F.'

I would have survived, but nobody sent any aid, at all.

The wardec is me, alone, against my tax evasion corp. The last one was meaningless, since I had to work 6 12 hour days, anyway. This one hits me during my six days off, so I'll just leave the corp until it's over.

Sorry for the confusion.
Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
#149 - 2017-03-06 18:17:30 UTC
I would add "personal war decs" bound to the character and not the corp. Let's make some enemies.

Signatures should be used responsibly...

Brave Collective
#150 - 2017-03-06 18:22:40 UTC
Kentonio wrote:
[ high sec could be a much more interesting and innovative place if the industrialists were allowed some breathing room. Because much as high-sec gankers hate the simple fact, if you've come into Eve because you liked the idea of being a miner and you've spent week mining to buy that shiny hulk, and then someone just flies in and blows it up and shouts 'Lolz, stupid carebear!' in local, there really isn't much incentive to continue playing.



One more nerf!!!
#151 - 2017-03-06 18:29:23 UTC
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:
One more nerf!!!


I'd nerf lots of things, just to shake up the fat, lazy bitter vets personally, but that's just me. Big smile
#152 - 2017-03-06 18:41:13 UTC
balance pass on insta-locking tornado's need to be fixed..

balance pass on ganking ships needs to be looked at.. make it more expensive .. risk vs reward is off

war dec system needs entire balance pass its broken

citadel transfer ownership needs a fix.. otherwise more exploits that go unreported will occur.

ChaosTheory.
#153 - 2017-03-06 18:45:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Kentonio wrote:
high sec could be a much more interesting and innovative place if the industrialists were allowed some breathing room.



I know you want to believe that, but you being here proves it's wrong, and that happens a lot here (ie people who survived their early EVE experience believing the dangers need to be watered down for others). It's misguided.

For many of us, what kept us playing EVE when we abandoned other more 'modern' games was the fact that EVE (like old school non mmo video games that came before it) treated us like Adults. It gave us a space ship and let us figure out the rest. The people who didn't like that quit during the trial and probably went to play some other more 'guided' mmo.

And When EVE Online did that (treated people like they were adults who could both deal with other people AND learn the ins and outs of a game with little documentation), EVE flourished. But apparently not fast enough for some, and then came the disastrous days of "easy to learn hard to master" and with that thinking came the buffs to safety and the anchor rigs and the safeties and the "don't you dare do anything interesting" safety pop us etc etc.

Luckily I started playing in 2007 and don't live in high sec so for the most part I've not been affected by that nonsense, but you can tell by the 'new recruit' industrialist and PVE types you sometimes get to come out to null, their high sec experiences HURT their ability to adapt to player run space with no npc cops.

You want to help people, teach them how to survive, remind them that they are playing a game that is about challenge not "comfort" and "breathing room" and explain to them that the value in industry and PVE comes from succeeding despite opposition. If that's not what they want from a game there are hundreds of themepark MMOs to choose from.
Amojin
#154 - 2017-03-06 18:56:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Amojin
Jenn aSide wrote:

I know you want to believe that, but you being here proves it's wrong, and that happens a lot here (ie people who survived their early EVE experience believing the dangers need to be watered down for others). It's misguided.

For many of us, what kept us playing EVE when we abandoned other more 'modern' games was the fact that EVE (like old school non mmo video games that came before it) treated us like Adults. It gave us a space ship and let us figure out the rest. The people who didn't like that quit during the trial and probably went to play some other more 'guided' mmo.


EVE has it's pluses, but let's not put them up for sainthood, just yet, ok? The reason it's a sandbox is because content creation is the most difficult and expensive part of the game. Back in the day, I ran a major empire on a MUSH, which is a text based role-play game, that has some coded systems, but is mostly rp. Yes, we had rp arcs.

Sometimes I would @pcreate a new toon, and play it in tinyfugue, along with doing my real job. Now, the players had no idea that this infiltrator was anything but a new character. They messed with him, raised and lowered his rank with their coded tools, and just played their game. In the meantime, I had a job to do, a lot of times espionage. We had a rule, no meta-gaming, so I had to actually tease out from these people, in character, information, or it could not be acted on, in game.

To provide a coherent, honest, experience, even though all of us with access to the databases and code, we didn't read their mails or their stuff, UNLESS we were granted access, on a real alt, of their own free wills. Then, and only then, could we push things.

Adults? Most were adults, but an adult has the option to play in a sandbox, or say 'You know, I'd like to experience the fun other people have designed, hear their story.'

There is a place for both of these things, but neither is superior to the other. Sometimes I'm in the mood for one, and sometimes another. Having to build, poorly, what someone else with natural talent can build for you to enjoy? Sometimes that's a good excercise, but sometimes it's just too much self-esteem, on your part, telling you, no, I can't enjoy this! Someone else made it?
Ivy League
#155 - 2017-03-06 19:05:03 UTC
Commander Spurty wrote:
https://zkillboard.com/wars/ I'll offer you this data for the bassis of the following statement:

War decs are failing to achieve objectives of a war.

If you could tweak war dec mechanics (be bold, all options are on the table), what would you tweak?

P.S. if you are unaware of the *point of a war,* I still want to hear what you think. It might offer insight as to why the malaise continues.

My offering: winner of the war receives 1% war loot from the tax of all activities the entity beaten takes after the war ends. If this entity is war dec by another entity, the 1% money goes to the last war dec to win.



if the objective of the war dec is to actually engage in war, it would make sense for both parties to actually agree to engage in combat with one another without CONCORD interference.

Or perhaps it should only be possible to create a war dec if a certain level of aggression has been made from one corp to another over some period of time... or something, idk.

As it stands, wardecs are just a way for people to gank in hisec with zero consequences. If that's the design intent-- it's working flawlessly.
#156 - 2017-03-06 19:56:14 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Kentonio wrote:
high sec could be a much more interesting and innovative place if the industrialists were allowed some breathing room.



I know you want to believe that, but you being here proves it's wrong, and that happens a lot here (ie people who survived their early EVE experience believing the dangers need to be watered down for others). It's misguided.

For many of us, what kept us playing EVE when we abandoned other more 'modern' games was the fact that EVE (like old school non mmo video games that came before it) treated us like Adults. It gave us a space ship and let us figure out the rest. The people who didn't like that quit during the trial and probably went to play some other more 'guided' mmo.

And When EVE Online did that (treated people like they were adults who could both deal with other people AND learn the ins and outs of a game with little documentation), EVE flourished. But apparently not fast enough for some, and then came the disastrous days of "easy to learn hard to master" and with that thinking came the buffs to safety and the anchor rigs and the safeties and the "don't you dare do anything interesting" safety pop us etc etc.

Luckily I started playing in 2007 and don't live in high sec so for the most part I've not been affected by that nonsense, but you can tell by the 'new recruit' industrialist and PVE types you sometimes get to come out to null, their high sec experiences HURT their ability to adapt to player run space with no npc cops.

You want to help people, teach them how to survive, remind them that they are playing a game that is about challenge not "comfort" and "breathing room" and explain to them that the value in industry and PVE comes from succeeding despite opposition. If that's not what they want from a game there are hundreds of themepark MMOs to choose from.


Nah, you see if it was indeed true that it was just 'a challenge' then that would be all good, and for some players it is. For many others though, they don't get a challenge they just get repeatedly kicked in the face and told that playing the game using the mechanics provided makes them a stupid carebear who should go play WoW if they don't think its ok that a 10 year vet can come gank them repeatedly a week into their Eve experience.

The famous old EVE learning difficulty curve picture was funny because it was true, but it was also silly that it was true. You don't need to put newbies up against a ferocious sink or swim test in order to make a deep game that vets can enjoy.

What's frustrating is that people seem to think that if new people had more chance to settle in without being jumped on that they'd somehow just stay like that forever mining veldspar and ruin the game for everyone. It's nonsense.
Amojin
#157 - 2017-03-06 20:02:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Amojin
Kentonio wrote:
Nah, you see if it was indeed true that it was just 'a challenge' then that would be all good, and for some players it is. For many others though, they don't get a challenge they just get repeatedly kicked in the face and told that playing the game using the mechanics provided makes them a stupid carebear who should go play WoW if they don't think its ok that a 10 year vet can come gank them repeatedly a week into their Eve experience.

The famous old EVE learning difficulty curve picture was funny because it was true, but it was also silly that it was true. You don't need to put newbies up against a ferocious sink or swim test in order to make a deep game that vets can enjoy.

What's frustrating is that people seem to think that if new people had more chance to settle in without being jumped on that they'd somehow just stay like that forever mining veldspar and ruin the game for everyone. It's nonsense.


I have to admit, I'm not sure. I'm a relative noob. But I do try, and as far as I'm concerned, that's enough. I'll get better, in time. If I can find a good leader than can lead from the front, instead of using me as fodder, it will be faster, but it will happen, regardless.

So, yes, I can advance, alone. But it would be better, if I had a real leader, instead of a polished desk jockey CEO who uses what scant assets I have to enrich himself. Hence my hatred of most corps in this game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPDs0dq0LOo

I basically do this for miners, because it's right, and it gets me some experience, and hell, it IS just a game. But I'm a little saddened that 60+ drones sat in their bays and watched me defend them and die, and then I have a wardec made against me because people are mad about what I said on these forums, not even in game.

Doing right, here, costs. We have an alliance, do we not?

The miners, apparently, say no. We don't.
#158 - 2017-03-06 20:09:54 UTC
Kentonio wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
One possibility is that all this safety and lack of risk is boring players out of the game. I am going to refer to this as the 'Tippia effect' from now on: the problem that excess safety prevents meaningful content and challenging opposition from taking place devaluing the satisfaction in accumulating wealth, leading to boredom and people quitting the game.


People have been claiming this for years, and its never held up to the actual experience of many of the players who leave.
Doesn't it? Unlike you, I won't claim to know what every Eve player's experience was but it is clear that there is plenty of evidence that players are still regularly bored out of the game. Just today, CCP Quant released a report that shows that players owning 35.6T ISK in assets quit the game last month. Further, talks from CCP Rise in 2014 and from CCP Quant in 2015 show really how bad a game Eve is at retaining players who don't get engaged with the sandbox and just do their thing in peace (AFK highsec mining, "levelling their Raven" or whatever) for a short while before stopping to log in altogether.

I have no doubt some people quit Eve after their first unexpected loss to another player either because they didn't like such an experience, or weren't expecting it. Losing to other players is not acceptable to many modern gamers. But I am equally sure many more have tried the game, mined alone in a Venture for a few weeks, and then quietly moved on to some other game that is more engaging, which is a shame as many of those would have really enjoyed playing in our sandbox if they had only found a way in and to connect with the real interesting bits of the game - interactions with other players both cooperative and competitive.
ChaosTheory.
#159 - 2017-03-06 20:13:48 UTC
Kentonio wrote:


Nah, you see if it was indeed true that it was just 'a challenge' then that would be all good, and for some players it is. For many others though, they don't get a challenge they just get repeatedly kicked in the face and told that playing the game using the mechanics provided makes them a stupid carebear who should go play WoW if they don't think its ok that a 10 year vet can come gank them repeatedly a week into their Eve experience.


It is ok, as long as it's not in a rookie system. The ones who will keep playing EVE will be the ones who brush it off and plot revenge.

Quote:

The famous old EVE learning difficulty curve picture was funny because it was true, but it was also silly that it was true. You don't need to put newbies up against a ferocious sink or swim test in order to make a deep game that vets can enjoy.


Yes you do. Without it I would not have stayed, because surviving in the game would not have been an accomplishment.

Quote:

What's frustrating is that people seem to think that if new people had more chance to settle in without being jumped on that they'd somehow just stay like that forever mining veldspar and ruin the game for everyone. It's nonsense.


Show me where anyone ever said any such thing. but we do know (from CCP) that people who just do that or run missions are the ones who tend to quit. EVE is really a game about dealing with people, trying to make it into something else (like a game that entertains people based on it's own merits) doesn't work for something like this.

I always say this and it's true: i know people like you mean well, but what you want to happen is actually the counter productive thing that has hurt EVE in the long run. It's evidence that the old saying is true, the path to hell is paved with good intentions.

If you want to help "new players" teach them that they can survive and thrive even against veterans if they keep to a few simple rules.
ChaosTheory.
#160 - 2017-03-06 20:19:03 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Doesn't it? Unlike you, I won't claim to know what every Eve player's experience was but it is clear that there is plenty of evidence that players are still regularly bored out of the game. Just today, CCP Quant released a report that shows that players owning 35.6T ISK in assets quit the game last month. Further, talks from CCP Rise in 2014 and from CCP Quant in 2015 show really how bad a game Eve is at retaining players who don't get engaged with the sandbox and just do their thing in peace (AFK highsec mining, "levelling their Raven" or whatever) for a short while before stopping to log in altogether.


Get out of here with your inconvenient facts! Don't you know this is emotion time Twisted

Forum Jump