Just zipping through quickly, noticed this point. I remember past discussion about citadels being so weak, and the only thing people could conclude is that CCP wanted them to be weak in order to increase destruction, which was apparently their primary focus for a while.
I think to us as players it makes no sense that citadels should be so weak when POS’s were able to be quite strong. And I agree they should be stronger although I doubt they’d ever be made strong enough to do much against the current structure-bashing fleets.
But if CCP for whatever reason wants them to blow up, or other players do I guess, then that’s a different issue. I never really ‘got’ why people hated ‘structure spam’ so much. Who cares how many strucs are in a system?
Also I think that having citadels in a game, making them part of the feature set, making them part of the indy/research/manufacturing thing, and then also saying thaqt hey, unless you’re a 200 man corp ready to PvP, you can’t have this… that seems silly to me? Like I can see limiteing it but just making it open season on them also seems wrong.
Well, more reading to do, maybe there’s more ideas on this!
In fact, killboard shows that it was actually your corp ( The-Citadel ) that was primarily doing the ‘bullying’…with one of your members destroying 3 defenceless Mackinaws in the space of 2 minutes. The last record for your corp is on the day that happened.
I mean…I can just hear it now…" We’ve destroyed 3 defenceless Mackinaws in nullsec…we’re being bullied to death ! "
Well that’s odd…and convenient…as zkill records every single win and loss of the corp you destroyed the Mackinaws from…even over a year before your corp ever existed. So there’s a full record going back as far as January 2008…yet somehow only your losses from early 2009 have mysteriously ‘disappeared’. Hmm.
Also, I found that half a dozen of the members of your ‘bullied to death’ corp were actually still playing EVE several years later and some still are to this day.
Basically it seems to me that a bunch of complete noobs went into nullsec "with our crappy destroyers and cruisers " and expected to survive against a corp that today has almost half a million kills. Which begs the question, as that corp only has 29 members and they only started a year before you, howcome they could survive to this day and do so well with only marginally more members than yours. Why weren’t they ‘bullied to death’ ?
1 ) Allow more than one person to run station defences
2) Beef up those station defences. I don’t think stations need more shield/armour…just more DPS capability.
3) Perhaps introduce a new station module that could, for 30 seconds or so at a time, disable all repping devices within 100km ( this would also disable defending logi too…so a two edged sword ). The thing that makes most station bashing fleets so strong is logi.
In fact I think (3) alone would totally re-balance things.
CCP made the structures to replace outposts, not starbases.
That’s why they gave them asset safety : to be sure players kept the level of safety they had with outposts.
They don’t care either. They just spin dishonest arguments to make the situation look more in their favor. That’s propaganda, and it knows no morals. It does not care about making a constructive argument.
You should really learn how to read killboards dude. This member was GunnerySergeant Blair, who, after we asked around for help desperately joined us for a few days to drive off the attackers. He was not part of our group of newbs and only stayed a few days to help us but it was already to late, the damage done and most of our people had left or no interest any more. He was already an experienced player at this time, while all of our other pilots could barely fly destroyers or a T1 cruiser, and he departed a few days later after the war had ended and we decided to abandon the project.
None of our other pilots even left Highsec in these days, we wouldn’t even know how to get into Nullsec, not even talking about trying to “fight” there, we never left HighSec (well one jumped into Ls with his barge appeareantly not knowing what he was doing).
Thats not odd, you realize that the current zKillboards aren’t the first killboards for EVE? There was a big migration from the old killboards to the new ones around this time, I remember that because I still know the old ones. And I had to manually add my API later for the new killboards because many killmails were missing for months. Those who quit simply didn’t do that and the corp never had a corp-api registered because at this time it was already closed.
G.S.Blair for example killed one of the attackers Drakes that we couldn’t beat in Penirgman or Akhragan, using a Megathron and that kill also doesn’t exist any at zKill. But I know it has happened, because I was on Grid. Lots of mails from this time went missing, especially if people didn’t renew their API keys for the zKill website.
Wow, OK, thank you for the comprehensive breakdown on the impact of this sort of thing on games. ‘Doubling the player base’ (or cutting it in half, I guess, dpending on the view angle) seems like something that even CCP would pay attention to.
I saw these CSM minutes referred to in the past but was always loking for more info on the “CCP may discuss these numbers further in the future” comment. I guess now we have some idea what kind of numbers those might be. I wonder what percent of players reduce/stop/quit playing during wardecs though?
You’ve mentioned the ‘better way to do it’ thing before, are we going to see that here or not? So far most suggestions seem like they will either have little effect or will completely change the game ('remove Concord, remove fleets, for example).
If you’re going to stay in high-sec, structures don’t lead to any of the higher paying career options (burners, abyssals) - and with one or two exceptions, there’s really no advantage in having one.
Without going into specifics, I think it’s been established that structures are “paper tigers” - so without the accompanying defensive player component - they’re glorified piñatas (in the form of core drops).
So the answer of why you’d have a structure in the first place is somewhat self-explanatory: you wouldn’t. Ergo, there’s not anything to fix - unless you start mucking around with the benefits that structures provide - which pretty much makes the whole suggestion a non-starter (since I don’t think CCP has any immediate or even future plans to touch structures).
Yep. He’s for PvP in high sec without Concord. They get really upset when anyone suggests doing anything to take that away. You should watch them come out of the woodwork the instant anyone mentiones doing something about Bumping. I mean- we have warp scrams, but the trolls will come out of the woodwork if you suggest that they employ them instead of bumping.
Anyway, I’m talking to my Corp and we’re discussing what we’re going to do when we get war deced. I’m going to get our new players to set up jump clones across the galaxy. Set up ships there too all fit. When war comes, we’ll just jump into pre-arranged clones and keep playing like nothing happened. Screw the stupid war dec system and screw those that think it’s a good idea. Until Structures become as strong as a Dreadnought/ Carrier, I see no reason to ever defend one. I’d even pay extra for that strength. War Decs in High Sec are for bullies and cowards. I won’t play along
There’s a dishonest sense in which most of the things proposed have little or nothing to do with the actual ‘issues’. 90% of the issues on the forums consist of people manipulating ‘data’ to support some pre-conceived bugbear, with a ‘think of the poor noobs’ slant thrown in for good measure. Noobs are always handy when people want some change to the game for their own benefit.
In fact it would not surprise me in the slightest if more noobs are ‘abused’ by people claiming to speak on their behalf on the forums than are ever abused in the game itself.
The only real pioneers that truly embody this game are wormholers. No local, no asset safety - no support. And constantly besieged by players intent on destroying everything they’ve built.
Low-sec is the proverbial red-headed stepchild; not really sure what it is they want to do but generally not taking advantage of the opportunities provided.
High-sec has always been looked upon as a “feeder” for every other area of space - when the reality is that it’s pretty much the end destination for many casual players, traders and industrialists.
I’m workin’ on it, geez, give me a break. Rome wasn’t burned in a day, you know.
It’s a sticky problem. It’s not going to have a ‘great’ solution. The nature of wardecs means the aggressor will always choose where, when and who to fight. This means they will always be able to cherry-pick the weakest available targets.
And we’ve already established there’s a small percent of players who get off on relentlessly attacking the weakest targets. Even when there’s zero risk or challenge involved. Sometimes even when there’s zero reward.
It’s very hard to limit that sort of behavior.
So far I’m working on ways to reduce (not eliminate) that sort of behavior, and somewhat increase the chance that a defender corp will remain active and even venture out into space during a wardec. But EVE is a complex system and many other adjustments need to be made at the same time to create an effective approach.
Here’s the design goals so far:
Reduce the ability of abuser corps to endlessly wardec weak targets with near zero risk
Increase the agency and options available to defenders to address the war
Create a viable reward system so both sides of the war feel they have opportunities for gain
Reduce (or eliminate) the need for structures as War HQs, or make them more interesting
Increase opportunities and options for small corps (both aggressor and defender)
Increase incentives for players to join corps, and for corps to help their recruits grow
Create opportunities for wars to grow, snowball, or deliver other surprises (less predictable)
That’s a pretty hefty list of design goals. It’s also slower because I’m already doing the “if I can think of a way to break this, then it’s back to the drawing board” step. Even with all that, I should have a new wardec system some time next week. Stay tuned. Same bat-time, same bat-channel!
The real reason that no one goes (or desires to go) to war is that it’s always a losing proposition. Even if you win - what do you win? Bragging rights and maybe some nice kills. It still doesn’t change the fact you may have to replace any losses and you’ll still have to PLEX your account at the end of the month.
And that’s if you win! If you end up on the losing side, your losses are going to be more substantial - to the point where you’ll have to hunker down for months just to rebuild what you’ve lost. Assuming you want to rebuild, that is. And assuming your corporation doesn’t disband and everyone goes their separate ways. And you still have to PLEX your account at the end of the month.
What do you otherwise win anyway ? What is the point of playing any game unless there’s some element or potential of being ‘better’ than the average player ? People decry ‘bragging rights’, but take that away and there really is nothing left.