Yes I did derail the thread, but it wasn’t done with a beer pic, and it was done for a reason. If you look at the posts preceding it you might understand why.
This is a nonsense myth.
You want this thread wrecked, cos you dont want HS PvP changes.
I manage to survive just fine under current PvP mechanics, ergo I see little reason to change them in order to accommodate people who want to play insert generic MMO of choice in space.
Nuff said. Didnt read the rest.
Guess what.
You’re wrong, again. If you had bothered to read the rest you may have gained some insight.
Case in point.
Thats that.
That’s the only thing you’re not wrong about.
Score 1 for Salvos. Please insert coin to continue.
A myth debunked quicker than you can make toasts
GG
I agree. Its easily debunked, because its blatantly false.
Now that you two have blown your cover and shown yourselves, back to topic:
Implement proportional inverse scaling on wardec cost based on number of Omegas in wardeccing Corp vs target Corp.
Implement wardec cap based on number of Omegas in declaring Corp.
Implement duration limited Watchlist as a paid NPC service through the Bounty interface, specific to targeted character.
Geometrically align all NPC Corps to be at war in perpetuity with their diametric opposite.
Implement max bumping duration mechanic.
That doesn’t belong here
Bumping is used universally
Whatever floats your boat lmao
The topic is HS.
Bumping duration can be capped in HS alone, though I think its a stupid “perma stun” that should be restricted everywhere. Either bring your fleet intime, within the limit, or too bad, you didnt deploy near/fast enough.
Bumping will still work just fine, just not indefinitely to prevent warp.
If you want that, scram the target with a module.
Unless this is just an opinion of yours, do please explain why you want this by giving reasons and list the expected consequences.
It is an opinion of mine (I issued it), thus I dont have to answer the rest, per your conditions/query.
Then please don’t expect this to be a discussion that will go in your favour. And stop insisting this would be a good thread when all you do in the end is to spout an opinion. You got to give a little to get a little.
Wat.
Everything issued here is opinion, including your contrived/self-defeating query.
That slap aside, I will answer what I think you meant:
That should be obvious from context, as we are discussing how CCP killed HS PvP (or not) and how to remedy that.
That’s not actually a consequence of what you suggest. It is what you wish to be the consequence.
Take 10 corporations with 10 players and each declaring one war.
Then taken one corporation with 100 players and declaring 10 wars.
In sum is it the same amount of wars and the same amount of players who want war. So when you limit the number then you force the most successful war-faring corporations to fall apart. And that’s all it will do.
The complaints however don’t come from the war deccers, but they come from the defenders. And the defenders will always complain. Only now do they use the argument of “wardec spamming” when really they complain about one large corporation declaring wars against them. They will continue to complain and make up new reasons after you’ve limit the numbers of wardecs. Alliances such as PIRAT and Marmite will pass war requests off to contractors and we will still have plenty of wars to go around.
EVE is then a PvP game and war is at its core. To have unlimited wardecs is a gift, a blessing, for a game like EVE. You however want to declare a great feature to be a curse and solve a nonissue in a control freak way, to disallow it, to limit it, to deny it, to remove it, to take it away.
Your approach to solving issues consists of negativity. Not one of your suggestions is positive, constructive and supportive of PvP, but only detrimental to it, aimed to punish the successful players. You’re not a dumb person, but your grasp of EVE is flawed.
Ok.
So tell me, what is the consequence of what I suggested above?
Did you miss it?
I saw an opinion, but no facts.
When I say…
Take 10 corporations with 10 players and each declaring one war.
Then taken one corporation with 100 players and declaring 10 wars.
In sum is it the same amount of wars and the same amount of players who want war.
…then you don’t see this as a fact?
Go back and re-read my proposal.
I numbered it for a reason, so that rebuttal/discussion on itemised points is easier for you.