CCP killed highsec PvP

Communications Center General Discussion
61

Just read Dom’s doc.

Hilarious how he basically ripped off each of his changes from my suggestions on wardec/intel.

-Inversely scaling wardec cost based on corp size.
-Wardec maximum based on Omegas.
-Limited Watchlist.
-Locator Agent improvement.

Been there. Done those.

I suppose I should be flattered.

In the discussions where I posted them he spent his time trying to piss on my leg.
Seems Ive managed to profoundly influence him, nonetheless.

The misnamed “Corp Cooldown” for players to join another corp has been universally rejected. It artificially encourages going to NPC corp, or just not logging in.

1 Like
62

Sounds like you have something positive to add to the discussion. Are you interested in coming back to the discord server? I recommend you leave your sexism and hate at the door though, last time was a bit vile.

63

Yes, Id take that offer.

64

Everybody knows you love clubbing newbies in high sec. The fact that you constantly try to dress it up with sugar and spice reeks of failure as a real PvP’er.

I’ll HTFU when you GTFO.

4 Likes
66

did I?

isn’t that what you’re doing atm, pissing on my leg?

and please, do quote me on all of these

:smiley:

1 Like
67

Agreed. There is plenty of fighting to be had outside of hi-sec. But the people who go on and on about wanting to fight in hi-sec and “you agree to pvp the moment you undock!!!” are not really interested in fun pvp. They are interested in making easy kills. Fighting one-sided fights against people who don’t want to fight and are not equipped (skill-wise and ship-wise) to do so. In other words, they want to disrupt the gameplay of others simply because they can. Thus the unending boasting obsession with “kill boards.”

7 Likes
68

Tell me then
Why are highsec wars there?

CCP implemented them for a reason. Same reason that ganking is also still a thing

Safe spaces aren’t a thing, but the closest you’ll get are npc corps. If tou want a player corp you accept the fact you’ll be prey to someone :smiley:

2 Likes
69

So, is it
“wardecs are killing highsec”
OR
“highsec pvp is dead”

deskflip
deskflip.jpg1920×1200 124 KB

10 Likes
70

The whole there are no safe spaces thing is just hilarious in this game. Of course there are safe spaces in this game. Deep in sov controlled highsec, personal wormholes where elite PvP pilots are to scared to tread, and inside a citadel building mighty space ships. None of these are completely safe but they are certainly safe places to be.

High Sec wars are a rule set, just because they don’t let you do exactly what you want does not make your opinion of the rule set more valid then the carebears who also have to interact with it.

Above table flip is about right with this whole thing.

4 Likes
71

The point of this thread other than " cartoon cutout pretending to be a PvP’r" (amazing description @Ralph_King-Griffin ) whining, Is to at the core, generate discussion about fixing highsec to facilitate more and interesting PVP. Any opinion of “fighting should be done outside of highsec” imediately leads me to believe your moon mining/hauling alt is in highsec and you’re tired of being ganked/killed by war targets, to which my response is stop whinging like the OP. Highsec should not be a safe space.

72

This.

1 Like
73

I’d normally skip past this but I just can’t. You managed to pick a fight with 2 of the most passive and understanding people in the entire channel last time not to mention 2 more to boot. All that in less than 24 hours. I wasn’t even annoyed I was down right impressed

74

Lot of conflating of suicide ganking with wardeccing starting to happen here.

They affect each other indirectly, and overall rate of PvP in HS, but are two very different animals.

One is illegal aggression in HS, the other is legal aggression in HS.

I think it would be helpful if people specify which, illegal or legal, form of aggression they think is killing HS, and as causing either lack of PvP in HS, or too much of it.

1 Like
75

My view:

-Illegal aggression: Ie: Suicide ganking. I dont entirely agree with bump mechanics (which, while legal, are a central aspect of much suicide ganking), but the instances of suicide ganking in HS is so small, and the requirement of so many to take down one target, that its hard to argue its harming HS, or PvP in HS. When/if we are talking about 10-20% attrition via illegal aggression, Ill reconsider that.

-Legal aggression: Ie: Wardecs. Two forms: Mass wardecs and specific wardecs. Mechanic changes like loss of Watchlist threw this dichotomy far in favor of mass wardecs. They are difficult to define from each other, as mass wardec can be construed as simply “issuing multiple specific wardecs”. Technically there is nothing preventing specific wardecs, and mass wardec arguably leads to more PvP. BUT: Due to a number of changes in combination, specific wardecs (especially those employed by mercenary corps) have become impractical. The challenge thus would be to improve the mechanics involved with specific wardecs in such a way that it does not further encourage mass wardecs.

76

In order to accomplish that, I have suggested the following (which has since been copied by Dom in his proposal but my specifics are different):

-Inversely scaling wardec cost based on corp size.
-Wardec maximum based on Omegas.
-Limited Watchlist.
-Locator Agent improvement.

Wardec Cost: Based on size, inversely, so as to enable corps large and small to declare war on an equal footing, relative to their size and the targets.

Wardec Maximum: Based on Omegas, so as to moderately incentivize specific wars. The Omega limit is to prevent inflating this limit with Alpha spamming, and is more representative of the “real” accounts associated with the corp. The specific margins can be discussed.

Limited Watchlist: I propose as being bought individually by specific players in a wardec engaged corp, on a target corp. Ie: The Corp does not get Watchlist. Each player has to buy it themselves, individually. I propose it be bought for 1-7 days, with cost scaling to 7. I propose it be bought through the Wardec interface. The reason to make this only individually buyable by players, is so that though the information can be shared with others, smaller corps, and even solo wardeccers, can get it too at the same cost. (For guys like Kannibal Kane for example)

Locator Agents: I propose Locator Agents are eliminated, and instead Location Services are naturalized into an aspect of the Bounty interface. Result: Location services are bought from the Bounty interface at a flat rate (no standing issues), anywhere in space, based on the level of Location service you want. Targets in J-space are excluded, as before. Locator service will not reveal if target is online, as before. You can use the Watchlist service instead., if at war with them.

Second, optional, I propose the cost of the Location service is reduced in a scalar fashion depending on the current Bounty on that target. Ie: A target with a high bounty, will cost less to locate. This, additionally, returns some significance to Bounty. IE: Bountied targets are cheaper to locate.

2 Likes
77

That is not true. They came at me picking fights, and immediately started misrepresenting/attacking my comments with belligerent intent. This became clear in that though I explained myself, and their attacks on my positions as false, they refused to own that. It takes two to fight. You may see them as “passive and understanding”, my experience was anything but.

I admit, I lost my cool. I should have seen it for what it was, and just continued to respond rationally for the benefit of the rest of the channel. Ill be better prepared next time.

1 Like
78

Like I said above, quote yourself saying any of it

Nothing says anywhere that you thought of anything first, nor that anyone else can’t have had the same idea.

You have no right whatsoever to claim anything that I wrote as purely yours, because it simply isn’t.

Lmao

We came at you because you refused to see any other way to do anything. It was either your option A or B, bot C nor D because you didn’t think of them ahd were cleaely better.

We came at you because you decided to be as obtuse and closed off there as you are on here.

Stop trying to act like a victim when you’re not…

Anyone wanting the screenshots of all that, lmk I’ll mail it to ya

P.s. I know you’ll simply ignore anything that I say, but that already proves the part where you’re obtuse and closed off :smiley:

79

You started off at me because you asked a question in which you wanted one of two straightforward answers. I answered you in a way where I was trying to show you that there are other and more effective options for change.

Then it spiraled into sexism and other ugly bits. You’re still in timeout. Alternatively I, like CONCORD am willing to look the other way for a fee of 500m. I will def slip you an invite then.

2 Likes
80

@Faylee_Freir
I’m not going to argue this here. Its off-topic. Contact me ingame.
I don’t know anything about a timeout duration.
I don’t “need” access to the Discord. I can argue/discuss here.
I’m not going to pay you anything for an invite.

PS: Ive been contacted by several members of the discord channel that are on to your game.

1 Like
81

What game is that?