Change to war dec mechanics

There is a very simple reason why I said it doesn’t need to be a citadel but it does need to stop being flat isk.

Yep. That is the alternative. You are clearly too weak to run a player corp successfully, so the alternative is either an NPC corp or joining a more powerful player corp. You are not entitled to a corp of your own, CCP does not owe you changes to the mechanics just because the current ones are too difficult for you.

1 Like

Shut up “Teckos Pech”, you are not fooling anyone with your alt “Merin Ryskin”

Ah yes, the paranoid delusions of the spineless carebear. Truly when anyone disagrees with their obsessive need to farm and treat EVE as WoW with spaceships it must all be alts of the same person. It is all a conspiracy to ruin their farming.


Confirmed. Merin Ryskin is Teckos Pech.



You can’t even come up with actual proof
But luckily for you I do :wink:

not as big as every bumb joe being able to be a ceo and bring in newbros for a ■■■■ experience.

go look at the war history of “guardians of the morrigan” nearly 3 years of constant war decs and we still managed to go about our days with little to no trouble dispute this being back when large groups actively hunted targets, its idiots who cant lead leading newbs who don’t know better and that causes a problem with retention far outside HS wars


Thank you for verifying and showing how new players are running from high sec as fast as possible and getting killed on the way to null, thus the high numbers off losses in null for new players who learn fast, high sec is boring in NPC corp, join small corp get trapped in station, no fun, try something else and go straight into null corps and alliances.

I wonder what percentage of new players get war decked and just don’t undock and get board and move on to another game?

I also wonder what percentage of new players are incentivized to go to null. (Because that’s where everyone tells them to go) and they are stuck doing data/relic sites salvaging or suicide tackle for a looooong time because of low SP and are turned off by it and leave?

I’m more curious if the data shows how many of these people who moved to nul still exist.

Me too.

Data like that is frequently only collected for a short time and presented in little snipets.
But falls short in scope and longevity, leaving out important statistics or only collected long enough to benefit one theory, guideline or point of reference.
But not tell the whole story.

You are saying that a company that makes dozens of millions per month, is incapable of looking at their own data and also incapable of making proper conclusions from their data. You are also saying that this company apparently has no idea how to actually find relevant and correct information inside all of their data.

Plus, you are ignoring that, if wardecs truly were a problem, they would just have nerfed them again. Just like the last times. Not fixing, no. Nerfs. Because ■■■■ highsec anyway, just as usual.

And here you are, having zero data at all, declaring that you know better.

Does that really make sense to you?

Why are we assuming that maximizing new player retention is the primary goal? EVE is never going to be a game that everyone likes, and people will always leave after realizing it isn’t the game for them. We should be happy that EVE is losing new players because it means that EVE hasn’t compromised its identity in favor of temporary subscription increases, a plan that is a disaster in the long run.

So yes, I’m sure some newbies encounter a war and ragequit. Good. Those people don’t belong here. Posting data that confirms that this is happening is not a compelling argument for change.

1 Like

You are saying that a company that makes dozens of millions per month, is incapable of looking at their own data and also incapable of making proper conclusions from their data.

That’s the case with most organizations, yes. Which is why they hire consultants to tell them what they already know.

This is not complicated, though, and EVE history supports the conclusion perfectly. Recruiting newer players by shooting them had a long tradition in this game. The scenario usually went something like this:

They mined into a jetcan.
They got can-flipped.
They attacked the flipper.
They lost.

“Wow, I did not know you could do that! Amazing!”
“What just happened?”
“How dare you! One day I will exact revenge on you!”

This was the norm before times changed and CCP gave in to the whining mainstreamers, before they have decided to unknowingly ruin the game’s continuous growth. As I know that there is no point in talking about this anyway, because the griefers will only deny any- and everything when it does not fit into their rather inhume worldview, I will now just opt out of this.

This thread will achieve just as much as all the others anyway. : - )

It is and always will be the status quo due to lack of wanting to look at it.

The lack of whom? CCP?

You have no idea what you’re talking about :rofl:

Only the non-hackers we don’t really want. That would be like buying Call of Duty and not leaving the initial spawn point because you’ve heard there are brown people out there who want you dead. We can do without the people who want EvE to be something it’s not, in favour of the people who support what EvE already is. A harsh sandbox where you must fight for everything you have.

Everybody. Those who want it to remain the same shout it down rather than discuss it. People get tired of being shouted at rather than hold discussion and leave. CCP ignores the issue because nobody talks about it without yelling.

How many people posting in these threads want it to remain the same though?

Pretty much everyone, from what most of these threads show, would like changes to wardecs, not for them to remain the same.

The differences don’t seem to be whether change is needed, but what the change should be and I can’t see one side shouting anymore than another.

The problem?

As it is people already say we don’t need change. Do Little also listed the current methods of avoiding war. Not good ideas, nor bad ideas, but merely status quo ideas. Change can make wars better, or worse, or not important at all. People still spout status quo as a defense rather than discuss things. So we’re left with status quo. We’re left with war being not important at all.

With everything that is making war so easily unimportant what’s the point in making any change of any format to make war actually a situation where people engage in combat? A reason for the defenders to fight back? A point for attackers to gain? They don’t exist. You have no reason to fight as a defender because you can never end a war that way without the attacker’s consent. Attackers don’t have to do anything at all to go to war. There is no risk.