No, I would know that if they give the numbers so we can actually see for ourselves. So far we only have the reaction of the CSM who I’m not certain they had even an interest to look closely at but took everything that looked remotely like a good excuse to get rid of wardecs. They have an interest to get rid of them to make their highsec logistics easier. If you think this is because of the love for carebears you are a bit naive lol.
1 Like
So your mad CCP wont feed the trolls by giving you a number of the damage that was done.
I just got done reading PIRATs and MARMITEs position on Eve news24 on the situation. Its mostly telling they admit wars are hurting player retention. It is also amusing in an age of Rorquals that they think this will have serious consequences to the market.
I also don’t think CCP loves anyone more than another, but I do believe they have a vested interest to get the player to 6 months old, because that is probably the longest guaranteed extent they are a paying player.
http://evenews24.com/2018/10/26/war-declarations-the-pink-elephant-in-the-room/
Why do you people always come with the new players when it was clearly stated that they are not the target of wardecs? Old habits?
1 Like
Not the target but always the victim.
The victim of older players holding them up as a shield to push their own agenda yes.
2 Likes
Without any older players in a corp it would just be the blind leading the blind.
After downloading it and stepping into it, literally the first thought I had was this is the ugliest game I have ever seen.
When I asked others about how horrible the color scheme was they told me to be imaginative since its fantasy.
Uninstall.
1 Like
It is a fallacy to base arguments against a person bringing a point of debate and my reason for choosing an forum alt isnt to hide anything but rather to keep people from falling into that common debate fallacy.
By the way, You just fell into that particular fallacy despite my attempt to steer you clear of it.
p.s. In case the realization has not yet dawned on you, this means that you just lost yet another debate to me, not that this wasn’t a predictable outcome but I thought I’d point it out anyways.
This discourse has lost its interest for me. As I’ve said before, even ‘constantly winning’ debates eventually becomes tiresome to me. Should you bring up some on-topic point I feel inclined to debate I might be enticed to respond, otherwise, our discussion has come to an end.
CIAO !
-
I had a 1-man corporation out in some of the most remote and least populated systems between Amarr and Rens and was wardec’d even though at the time my corporation only had three members in it and all of them were my own alts, so your statement that i can, ‘reasonable assume’ that i will be left unwardec’d if i avoid trade hubs is proven false, they wardec’d me because they were members of CODE and i was a miner at the time.
-
As to counter-attacking warbears, the tactic i come across is that they come out, kill a single freighter pilot, then either dock up in an NPC station or log off and log back in with their, ‘hunt for easy-mode wardec target’ scouting alts, which makes counter-attacking the actual warbear corporation or alliance effectively impossible in any real practical sense.
-
Trade hubs ARE the lifeblood of highsec gaming and avoiding them is not an option. You can bootstrap around this using an alt but bootstrapping isnt interesting or engaging game play for the highsec players and it isnt even interesting for the warbear crowd either.
-
On the one hand you admit that corps will, “…continue to mine and run missions in their corp without structures…” but then you imply that all such corporations will have alt corporations with structures. This is not my argument and attributing something to me that i never said, nor implied, is both personally insulting and more importantly an argumentative fallacy.
-
Bootstrapping around the wardec system is something we all understand how to do and the myriad ways of doing it, so you explaining how it can be done using NPC corp-hopping is a waste of time. I stated that i felt, and apparently CCP agrees, that bootstrapping isnt an acceptable solution to the wardec issue, so you can continue to kick the dead horse of bootstrapping all you want but it shall remain dead, both in my eyes as well as CCPs.
-
The wardec system has been in effect long enough that we understand what emergent game play came from it and CCP, as well as those of us seeking change, understand that the emergent game play that has arisen from the current wardec system is not a good development for EVE and IS going to be changed.
1 Like
I have been wardecced by someone from forums once because I wrote its shamefull to kill your own alts for killmarks (he done that many times), also one time because someone was angry that I bumped him out of hacking range to steal the hack. So people dont even care if its one man corporation anyway.
Just my 0.2 ISK.
First one is just sad. Second one, legit. Wars are a sanctioned pathway for vengeance, no matter how small or personal the gripe.
in second case it wasnt about PvP, just trying to make me not undock or I dont know what, because it was a one man alt wardeccing, some kind of ISK sink more than anything. In the first case it was someone really wanting to prove that he can PvP. In both cases there was only some ISK lost by wardeccer and nothing else, because I dont play much anyway. And not for combat PvP at all, I dont like combat PvP in EVE… 
Cause you totally said so, like, for reals.
2 Likes
The weak must be cleansed. That has a ring to it. Wonder where else that can be applied?
People that argue the way you do, announcing loudly that they have claimed victory, when it is not their place to do so… Have always struck me as particularly contemptible, and pitiable.
I know this is going to sound alien to your ears, but you don’t actually decide whether or not you have won an argument. Your audience decides that. I know that waiting for your audience to announce you as the victor would be rather pointless on these forums, but the only thing more pointless is for you to just abruptly announced that you have scored points on your opponent, just because you say you have.
Quite pathetic, really.
4 Likes
People using alt corps for stations is by far a bigger Null problem then it will ever be a hisec problem.
But hey, lets go there, lets talk about the current story on Reddit where a faction titan was destroyed in build, but who cares because the corp building it was just letting a alt corp build it in their sov space.
It seems people from Null don’t like alt corps having structures, that is, until it serves them to build things and never take the loss if it is destroyed. Its downright shameful you can basically circumvent the whole killboard system by spamming alt corp structures in Null.
But that’s ok right? Because false killboards haven’t made anyone quit right? O wait they have, maybe we should just look at that problem a little closer next. I mean it does keep getting brought up, obviously there must be an issue there.
That is fine. I accept your surrender. Thanks for the tears though
6 Likes
Actually, sound debate tactics determine the winner of a debate. Winning debates has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic or how people feel about the topic, including you and the others that posted like-minded responses.
The poster that i was speaking to used a fallacy as the basis of their point of debate and so automatically loses, there is no opinion that matters in this case, not mine and certainly not yours.
I mentioned that I won so as to frustrate the floundering attempts by the other poster to keep up with me in the arena of debate. Your being caught up in this was simply and unfortunate choice on your part and I see you as nothing more than collateral damage in a discussion you obviously dont understand.
Love always,
JUSTIFIED ARROGANCE.
When you sound this stuff out in your head, does it sound intimidating/intriguing/intelligent?
1 Like