Many wardecs have a small aggressor against a big corp. The defending corps already form fleets. Already try to face off against the initial fight. But aggressors dock up and wait.
The defenders are left on ‘high alert’ for a week against a foe that will not fight directly but can still potentially strike at any time. It’s frustrating, demoralising and exhausting.
It is easier to just go do something else or drop corp, but what people want to do is get rid of the dec or force a fight.
CCP doesn’t care about 3 man alt corps. They can’t make CCP enough money to justify the existence of the servers, and they cannot produce word of mouth external recruiting.
wardecs are a necessary thing, and plainly any feature that alters the balance of wardecs towards defenders is absolutely going to bias towards larger organisations. Malcanis law never goes away, but the other truism of eve is joining up with other people works.
IMO it will be working correctly, as desired for the health of eve if it promotes a few large organisations, and causes the abandonment of a larger amount of micro organisations, by the positive route of wanting to leave the micro organisation to access a better feature (a combat based defense against wardecs).
I originally pvp’d to retain access to content I rented from your lords, since well they protected the ihub they rented me, but could not prevent russians from geminate and others coming to take the content itself. As an individual, such targets were feasible, because they, like me were ultimately intending on exploiting pve and mostly they were solo.
This is an extra optional pvp feature. It does not change the gameplay of people that actively decide to leave defensive side of the wardec open by not using it.
there is literally nothing in this proposal that prevents you doing this. There is nothing stopping the defensive side of the dec leaving it open. there is nothing stopping the defensive side of the dec ambushing the offensive side. We are discussing a timer that lets the defensive side of the dec, optionally end a war by winning a fight ?
As far as I’m aware they do not publish the figures, but I’d be quite happy if you shot me an official publication.
You don’t think that the very existance of panfam is not a political result ?
its pretty much 17,000 pilots that they stopped brave, test and goons recruiting or bluing, and have aligned to themselves. and its a currently a fairly durable entity - ie hasn’t folded in the face of what should be overwhelming goon pressure. yes I’m aware tidi, servers burning and citadel mechanics.
Which is a bloc that is named after them and acts in their best interests, and for which they utilize to continue to operate their selective processes, which offers to the pilot joining them, a clear career trajectory (even if many will never make it, and even if you don’t like it).
It’s not a political result of theirs. It’s the result of a few guys taking advantage of rubes like you to play the marketing game and siphon people away from Brave by poaching a couple of recruiters and a few corp officers. Can’t really claim it’s PL having political influence when PH was built on newbies and claiming not to have a political agenda.
Do you really think 9-4 represented any serious pressure? It was 9 days of not-even-half-assed work, culminating in one fight both sides hurfed into immobility. If there’d been pressure, they wouldn’t have gotten the ihub in the system back, for example.
And now they’re withdrawing the Geminate to hide behind their new status as ‘B-Team’ members of the DRF. Oh yeah. Such political influence.
The bloc is named after them because ‘PanFam’ is pithy and catchy, and ‘NCdot’s Pets’ just didn’t have the same ring to it. The bloc mostly revolves around NCdot, and no, PL doesn’t recruit from PH. There is no clear career trajectory.
I have actually. There is a massive body of my text in this thread, all of which are reasonable points, and I’ve given you my counter opinion to your points. You want to dismiss them instead of debate then fine, just be honest about it. I don’t get angry with people that dismiss a point.
None of which this will prevent you using those features.
Yes, and some PVE corps will fail miserably at the task, and they will be mocked mercilessly on local by the deccers and all of the other rubbish that goes along with playing against ‘elite pvpers’. ie there will be a distinction between a corp that can field an effective efficient pvp fleet in highsec, and those that can’t. There will be an advantage for being able to do so (war dec averted), and there will be a disadvantage for being ■■■■ or not forming (a week with the sharks).
However this is fundamentally a battle that the average person can relate to, where as being creepily camped for a week, is not. Likewise a good FC can come to a highsec organisation and help win that battle for them, where as such cannot save their idiots from themselves for a week.
I’m going to define the act of luring 11,000 pilots from karma or brave as an overtly political act, and one that positioned nc and pl outside of needing either as an ally for at least 2 years, and I don’t think too many people will disagree with me. Particularly when they defend the sov.
I don’t believe that goons move and position their whole super/titan fleet carelessly, no, and I also do not believe that PL took it as anything less than extremely seriously, nor do I believe the steam roller would have stopped at the ramparts if the server had allowed it to move.
I’m pretty sure I could find a pilot in PL that went PH->NC->PL, PL doesn’t have to recruit directly from PH for it to be a career path.
To be clear, this is an idea I have been kicking around. Not one which has come out of CCP
So what you’re saying is that you/csm have suggested a solution that you dont even have a vague idea how to implement?
If you tie the ability to dec someone with a structure and its weak and puny as you would like to it would need to be one per war right, and with a short takedown time and attack able at any time. So let me paint you a picture.
CCP implements you thing. PIRAT just renewed their wars for the next week and used 15b in wardec fee’s + war structure cost. Pirat places their war structures on the amarr undock (like 200 of them), Along comes a big ass fleet from 0.0 (more people than PIRAT even has) and wipes out all their war structures/wars when they all have gone to bed. great gameplay!
Because if your idea was that war structure is one structure to gain wardec capability it has to cost more and be defendable. And that would mean a citadel, resulting in the small guys you want to help never has a chance in the first place. And 0.0 fleet would get bored eventually.
As for having a structure to be a wartarget would also just exaggerate the issues with holding corps and sacrificing their structure instead of fighting back. There wouldn’t be anyone in their right mind that puts up a structure in-house.
It seems to me that the CSM is hoping for a magic pill/jesus feature that will fix wardeccing and it wont. The issues with wardecs are small and only a few iterations would help balance it out.
CCP did a rework/rewamp of the wardec system back in 2012, and what changed? They did not invent a new way to do wars, it was basicly just iterated on and added allies. The other stuff that affected wars since then is other mechanics. like crimewatch, watchlist etc.
To exhume one of the ideas I posted a year back in the old forum about a replacement of wars…
Make everybody be able to freely shoot a corp structure (like you can today with personal structures). However this results in a for example one week* war timer for your corp with the defending corp (individual “beef” if NPC corp), where free engagement can happen. To limit awoxing, this can be tight to roles. If you don’t have the right role, the war timer would be individual.
Now the twist, based on invitation (public or limited to an ACL), everybody can join the defending side. If you are eligible, you can commit by shooting an aggressor or assist a defender (similar to activating a killright). Same rules here, if you have the role, you commit for your corp, else individual only. The limit is for defender side only, to avoid everybody just whoring on the structure.
This is only the basic mechanic, it can be accompanied by a structure war wager where the defender sets a price for opening fire on the structure, which has to be paid by both parties (with a min/max value defined by mechanics). If the structure survives the full amount goes to the defender, else to the attacker. Others can add bounties to the pool.
What do you think?
EDIT: * Better is a war timer lasting until the structure is saved or destroyed instead of a fixed length.
Oh, I have ideas. But I’m explicitly not a game designer. That’s not the CSM’s role, and anyone who says it is is sadly mistaken.
So lets hear them?
There is the alternative of making observatory arrays an important tool for running a dec when they come out.
If all or nearly all hunting is done with OA’s rather than npc agents, you can become very difficulty to track by taking out enemy OA’s.
Is there any data showing how SP trading affected capitals accessibility? Are there more, less, the same number of them?
seconded.
you are the highsec csm member and right now jin has been far far more forthcoming and opaque on the topic.
Third.
Releasing them minutes with such vague details about completely revamping our game style has put our whole community on edge, mainly because what suggested was terrible.
Hell, I’ll go four on this one.
@Steve_Ronuken: you’ve got ideas, let’s hear them. People can poke at them and kick them around, game out what would and wouldn’t work, get more voices and brains focusing on implications and consequences, and CCP can see that process unfold, right in front of them. Maybe something will emerge from it. Maybe someone at CCP has the same idea, and one of the things said in the thread will be a problem that wouldn’t get thought of within a small dev group.
You’ve got ideas. Don’t be a tease, man.
It has most definitely increased accessibility of capitals. I’ve seen several characters that their first PVP kill was in a supercarrier. Most likely skill injected alts.
Then perhaps not outright removal, but I firmly believe Industry should be gated behind a basic understanding of ship fitting and ship flight. That should include the knowledge and acceptance of loss.
Education provides options and opportunities. Where is the benefit of knowing which ores to mine, if without a tank the ship does not return to the station? Sure you can know how to haul manufactured goods to market, but did you know about reviewing the map of New Eden and avoiding systems where trouble is occurring. These are elemental tools which every player should be familiar.
Whether you want to PvP or not, it will happen. The knowledge that it can happen makes all the difference. Ignorance is not bliss around here, it is a kill-mail playing on borrowed time.
Its perfectly fine if wardeccing a 37000 pilot entity brings a 1000 pilot fleet down on your head.
I imagined that if the structures had to be in highsec that p i r a t would locate a structure for a war on the north in zaveral which is deep in aridia, and a war on goons in ossa which is near tribute or somewhere convenient to force attacking fleets to have to deal logistically with hostile lowsec and they’d maybe horse-trade some wars to punish which ever nullsec entity attempted to break a war and notify locals about the opportunity to interdict a subcap fleet in lowsec when they come for the timer.
ie I thought that nullsec politics would conspire to frequently shaft nullsec attempts to get out of wars, and that pilots from multiple wardec orgs would probably offer each other a certain level of assistance with interdiction.
Futhermore, the spam scale of p i r a t is a unique problem to 1 organisation, and just like i don’t care that this feature probably won’t work for 3 man corps, I don’t care if its difficult for 1 organisation on the other side either.
lastly this is a discussion forum - its not evil to have an imperfectly figured out idea thrashed out in a discussion.
Unless Steve put it forward in a specification sheet with an order to build exactly this, then what he has done is perfectly fine. He is a player, not a game designer. I don’t get all the people trying to railroad conversations this way.
Or, you know, we’d just use a wormhole.
I’m completely fine if you have to use most of the mechanics of the game. That sort of thing is the hallmark of an apex organisation. I’m also fine if you have invested in holding a highsec static j system, and are willing to rage roll it, and I’m also fine if random holes get rolled by wardeccers to limit options for orgs that don’t have absolutely every tool in the toolbox.
Lastly, I’d be fine with a general rejigging of war prices to reflect defending the wardec itself, and I’d rather have more of the wardec maintained by effort, rather than by upfront fee, that after all could “theoretically” be collected in omist with a nyx.