WTF are you talking about?
1 Like
Per CCP Fozzie, and A lot of this is paraphrasing from what he said,
To start a war, or be wardecced, there must be a structure both ways, and a Buy In will be available⌠ANYWHERE IN SPACE⌠doesnât matter where the structure is. ALL structures.
If you ninja build structure during the 24 hour invalidation, it does not continue the war, it will still end, but you can restart afterwards.
If a corp in an alliance drops a structure, the alliance will be eligible for wardec system.
another option, will be a spy can drop a structure just anywhere in the middle of nowhere and put the alliance in a chance for war, but will also give the spy a burn notice.
if you have a poco in WH, you will be eligible for Wardec
a corp will have an option, set by director/ceo if they can receive a structure, that way if someone tries to transfer a structure to a corp, by default all the corps will be set to no. Similar to the friendly fire button in the corp window.
Total Volume of Decâs will go down, since most decs are pointed towards smaller groups, often experienced players, but still small groups.
decs will shift towards larger groups with structures. If the structures are transferred to alt groups, then youâll have to wardec the holders of the structures to still destroy the structure. within a few months from dec, other changes should be ready to roll out. âparaphrasing from fozzieâ
Players should have a choice, they encourage larger groups to have people, and live where they should want to live. War Dec change will allow smaller groups to grow and thrive without being suppressed by large bitter vets. Possibly see NPC corps empty out allowing pilots to create an identity in their own corps and not be held down by groups like PIRAT, and good possibility to see corps instead of individuals moving into alliances. âagain paraphrasingâ
2 Likes
No, at all. If you want to harass a small corp, you can throw dozens of cheap catalysts at their mining and hauling ships. No need of wardec for that.
1 Like
like i said i was paraphrasing what fozzie said⌠this will help stop smaller corps from being blanket wardecced, and instead of individuals joining TEST, or PL, they want to encourage corps to move to an alliance.
2 Likes
yet people who want to harass newbro do it withwardec, which means you are wrong.
ATM if you want to harass people you wardec them.
Later you will need to use throwaway cataganks, which requires more resource, both in terms of logistics, of playtime, though of course you still have very small to risk (since those catalysts are lot anyway).
1 Like
CCP have already stated that it never was newbros (total newbies or few month old characters), that was victims of the wardecs and people who left the game because of them.
So can we stop this âThink of the childrenâ thing.
That being said, I do like the idea of the rebalance, where they are trying to make structures objectives to fight over. If executed properly, this hopefully would create reason for forming bigger corporations in highsec, as well as cull the structure spam as it is now.
CCP Fozzie did reveal a little extra information on the rebalance in the 25/11-2018 Talking in stations podcast. They start talking about the wardec rebalance around 1:04:00.
1 Like
in the post I was replying to, people talked about harassing mining people with catalysts.
This is only possible for newbros, as more advanced players have access to eg procurers which increases the cost of harassment by a lot in non-.5 systems, to the point the harassers have to pay more than the worth of the harassed.
Maybe read again what youâve written yourself.
Suicide ganking a newbie mining in a venture is also not a positive gank. Sure, sometimes people will do it for the lulz, but it doesnât happen as often as some of you make it to be. Ganking newbies in rookie systems is also not allowed.
1 Like
maybe read again what Iâvre wrotten myself.
I talked about the COST of harassment, not the benefit. I said the COST is ramping up when people start to acquire the skills, not the BENEFIT.
Thatâs exactly my point : itâs easier to wardec people than to suicide gank them.
And ??? dude read what you wrote yourself and ask if it does fit into the discussion. Spoiler : it does not.
Thatâs where my paraphrased post came from.
Whatever you are trying to say makes no sense if you read through the responses starting from Mevatlaâs.
Just because you canât understand what I wrote, does not mean it makes no sense.
However it means you should not try to argue over it. Because you fail.
So now keep your useless sentences for yourself.
You seem upset. Calm down there buddy
If you actually read through your posts, then maybe you would see you not only make no sense. You also contradict yourself.
You start out by saying, people harass newbros by wardecs and that Mevatla is wrong for saying that no need to wardec a small corps when you can just suicide gank. Then in your next posts, you write the costs of ganking older players is higher cause of procurers. So suicide ganking with catalysts is only possible on newbros.
It is clear from your posts, that you are not completely proficient in English. You can accept that and try to clarify the point you where trying to make in your posts above, or you can flail your arms around and throw a tantrum.
1 Like
No I am not saying that. I said the only people you can harass their mining ships with catalysts suicide ganks without an awful isk cost is those that contain newbros, who are not able to go into procurers.
I did not talk about the occurrence of said newbro harassment. You completely missed my point, by going all sperg into âTHERE IS NO NEWBRO WARDECâ.
1 Like
Ok great. Now youâve made your point clear.
Then I suppose you understand my confusion, when the post I responded to contained the following statement.
no, I donât understand how you allow yourself to make me say things I did not exactly said.
You just cherry pick words out of my sentence and make it say a totally different thing.
Not quite sure how the point in this post:
Is equivalent to the point in this:
Anyway, your point in either form doesnât bring much to the discussion. So it makes no point in further debate. Not that there was much discussion to begin with, since this thread got necroâed with a nonsense post.
2 Likes
It was not equivalent. It was the start of my argument, so * of course* itâs not the same thing -.-
Again you make me say things I did not say.
Which means, you still fail to get my point -.-
If I want to harass newbros Iâll just gank em
No wars required 
You should think about not posting if youâre going to say bs
1 Like
There is a whole difference between ganking people and harassing them.