CCP killed highsec PvP


(Whitehound) #1133

Yes, trying is the right word, but you’re not actually doing it. I already told you that you only have intentions. You fail to examine the consequences of your proposal. All you have done is to imagine it would have the desired outcome like someone faking their research.

I’m then pointing to your wardec limit as one of the worst ideas. And you still haven’t accepted that unlimited wardecs is a blessing. Your proposal is that of a control freak, unwilling to let go of control and to give it to the players. Instead you’re obsessed with controlling it. Start letting go of it, then rethink your approach.


(Salvos Rhoska) #1134

Canned Spam is ok, but its pretty boring.
Just cured pork shoulder and very salty. Every can of it is the same.

Generally its something people stash and forget about for a needful day, except for a few cultures that consume it frequently.


(Whitehound) #1135

Ever had fresh, grilled meat after you’ve hunted it and taken the guts out? Nothing tastes like it when you get it fresh from mother nature. No package at all, but only what nature put around it and made you chase after it. Sure you must know it.


(Salvos Rhoska) #1136

Thats what I would like in EVE.

Instead we have canned SPAM, everyday.

“Would you like some SPAM with your SPAM, sir?”


(Whitehound) #1137

If by spam you mean wardec spam then that’s just a phase. Alliances such as Marmite and PIRAT have been growing and they need to give their members targets. If you want to fix this then don’t destroy the culture, but give them the tools for a better hunt. Give them intel tools, allow them to see the location of war targets on the map, etc… Anything that helps them to get what they want will also help to reduce wardec spam. But ultimately, if they keep spamming then it’s simply due to their growing size.

When you then don’t want this then you don’t want EVE. These are just things which happen naturally and even when it looks monstrous then that’s just what it is. What makes some panic is the greatest fun for others.


(Salvos Rhoska) #1138

Much of that is included in my package proposal.

Again, whether wilfully or ignorantly, you are misrepresenting me.


(Whitehound) #1139

You are limiting them. There is not much more to say to it other than perhaps that you’re holding onto your idea like a whale mum to it’s dead baby.


(Salvos Rhoska) #1140

I specifically just said those aspects are included in my package proposal, yet you still insist they arent there as if I hadnt said it.

To paraphrase, Im selling you a forest, but you are focused only on the first tree that you run into.


(Whitehound) #1141

So say, how am I ignoring it when I call your proposal a limitation? You are limiting them based on how big the targeted corporations are.

On what is this limit based on if not just the concept of fairness? You only find it unfair when a large corporation declares war on a smaller one. It’s a complaint as old as EVE itself that something has to be fair.


(Salvos Rhoska) #1142

Wrong.
The wardec cap is based on how big the Omega population of the declaring Corp is.

Has no relation to the size (Omega or Alpha) of the target.


(Whitehound) #1143

No, not wrong. That’s just another limitation of yours.

I’ve quoted you and unless I’ve quoted you wrong is your proposal a limitation.

It’s the nutbush city limits.


(Salvos Rhoska) #1144

It is factually wrong and a misrepresentation of that element of my package proposal, and I explicitly stated so above.

I proposed wardec cap would be based on number of Omegas in the declaring Corp.

This has nothing to do with the population, Omega or Alpha, of the target(s), as you falsely claimed of it in quote below:


(Whitehound) #1145

Is it possible you don’t know what the word “limitation” means?

You state here that the cost for a wardec is dependent on the size.

So when in one case you pay more and in another less, and you lack the ISKs for the higher price, then it limits you.

Is this not correct?


(Salvos Rhoska) #1146

Wardec cost is separate from wardec cap.

You falsely conflated the two.

In my proposal wardec cost is determined by an inverse scale to size of declarer/target based on Omega count, such that it is cheaper for smaller Corps to engage larger ones, more expensive proportionally for larger Corps to declare on smaller ones, and equal sized Corps balance out.

This rationalises cost of wardec, so smaller Corps can afford punching up, and larger Corps, with more manpower/revenue can punch down, but pay a premium, compared to declaring on a Corp their own size.

This can be mitigated by forming smaller Corps, as a temporary task force, to engage specifuc smaller Corps with a sufficuient roster moved there to do so.


(Whitehound) #1147

No, I’m quoting you on your proposal and I’ve asked you a question. Still waiting on an answer.


(Salvos Rhoska) #1148

You conflated cost with cap.
They are separate.
Answer is above.


(Whitehound) #1149

Answer my question please.


(Salvos Rhoska) #1150

Answered above.


(Whitehound) #1151

Yes or no, Salvos?


(Salvos Rhoska) #1152

Answer is no.

Cost is inversly proportional to size of target, compared to yours, in Omega members. Such that the smaller you are, the less it costs to punch up, and the larger you are, the more it costs to punch down.