I feel like weâve already had this. NPC corps vs player corps. And did we find people prepared to risk wardecs in order to benefit from being in a player corp?
Yes we did. But they still whined. And it still resulted in a âproblemâ with retention.
All weâre doing is moving the goal posts. Make structures as attractive as player corps were, and people will want them but without the risk of wardecs. Then they will cry all over again.
What would you say to a noob who puts up a structure in his first week of playing the game, gets decced and cries on the forums? Probably the same thing weâve been telling noobs that start their own corp on the first week.
Or you could tell me why itâs going to be different this time.
We donât need them tied to structures for that. Heck you didnât even need to be in a corp for that.
Colour me skeptical.
The same people who join a corp and complain about being decced will be the same people who put down a structure and complain about being decced.
Meanwhile wardec corps are getting bigger and fewer and more blue to eachother. Just the way noob corps like it right?
I swear i read it all, itâs nice to see interest in wars, indipendently if i agree or not.
Just a question to start: are our beloved new players safe yet?
Wasnt that all about?
I see such a need for war objectives, please spare us. Whatever mechanic you chose as target for attackers and defenders will surely be boring and probably easy to evade/exploit for both sides.
How about the original idea i proposed of a financial tax/ mining/ industry/ trading reward for who flag himself and face the risk?
There you go your objective, in a simple rule, that is very sandbox friendly and doesnt bring boredom. Restauration of risk vs reward is what the war system lacks, mechanics come after.
The defender has an incentive to take the risk, the attacker a probably better opponent that has something to defend, his ability to make isk.
Dont want to tale a risk? Stay in noob or social corps which are not elegible, but accept that you will have less reward. This can be easily tuned to make so that new players arent affected in their ability to make isk ( tax progressing with char age, limitations to mining ship classes that wont affect ventures anyway, and so on⌠unless you want to inject to riches, in which case you already have enough iskd probably).
Then later tune the mechanics. Locator for structures? Ok, letâs give it a try.
Letâs discuss mechanics, but after fixing risk/reward. It might be that this alone would fix wars, or at least their perception. No one go to forums to complain about being blowed in low sec or null: they knew rewards were worth the risk. Two tier of income in high sec , linked to war elegibility, would balance most issues, especially perceived ones.
P.s. If the only solution a corp leader can provide to his mates is to log off a week in case of wardec, then thid leader would be better going learn the rooes. Evaiding deks itâs easy imho. Dont forget modt dekking ppl has carebearing alts, so trudt me if i say that :))
These changes has made it common for the defenders to just start taking down their structures right after they get war decâd. Iâve had a few wars now Iâm in a race against time because they would strip the structures and start the timer to take them down. Iâve seen billions of dollars of tech2 rigs just destroyed rather then defended. This is the strangest war tactic yet.
What changes are you referring to? It has always been possible to strip a structure prior to the war. The unanchoring timer is a week, however, and is unlikely to complete before you can reinforce it.
If the defender has reason to believe they will lose the structure, then it is prudent, though unsatisfying, for them to make the structure as unattractive target as possible. Better to lose the rigs than the whole structure, or better to have a cheaper kill on your killboard if you will lose the whole structure.
Either way, though, youâve inflicted billions of isk in damage to your target, and you donât even have to do anything. Once the war goes live, shooting the structure once will freeze the fit if you can score any damage. Reinforcing it will cancel any unanchoring timer and see to it the fit sticks until the structure repairs itself, or it is unanchored by weapons fire.
Just becuase youâre easy to kick around doesnât mean you should be left to mine and manufacturing 24/7.
Carebears choose to farm pve because itâs easy and risk free rather than learn to defend themselves. Choosing easy targets is the nature of predators. Donât get salty about, become tougher prey or reduce your exposure.
I agree, Iâm tired to say I donât care about AFK miners being ganked. I just say the truth be spoken. There are corps that live by farming new or dumb players, and a few of them actually engage in a real challenge
Or you know, itâs a natural process because CCP has designed highsec in such a way that larger co-operation is actually punished by a number of game mechanics, and there arenât any significant rewards to it. There could be a totally different design for industrials that would almost be more EVE than the current one which would encourage co-operation a lot more.
Lets not pretend that game design doesnât have a massive impact on how people group up or donât group up.
Or on how well a group can defend themselves.
Carebear is someone who tries to avoid any form of risk as much as possible.
And letâs face it. In most cases itâs the wardeccing corp which avoids the risk more than the socalled indy corp they decced.
And also most of those small wardec corps donât go for any structures, they only do a load of decs for the remote chance of an easy gank every so many decs.
They will try to gain any advantage in a fight, and thatâs exactly what the defenders should do as well. Doing so doesnât make you a carebear. Itâs just smart.
A carebear to me, is someone who thinks they should be exempt from pvp. Who thinks they should get all the benefits of industry and pve without exposure to pvp.
But I know in advance that any reasoning from my side will be smurked at, ridiculed etc I am not even going to try to look at it all from each point objectivly.
Getting upset about unfair fights shows a fundamental lack of understanding of how the pvp sandbox works. See eves golden rules.
Whomever gets wardecced, does so because they put themselves in a position to be decced. They told the game they were willing to take the risk. And itâs only getting harder to put yourself in a position to be decced, so if people are still complaining about how they end up decced against big war groups or that big war groups only dec small corps, theyâve only got the defenders to blame.
Yet itâs in many cases in High Sec where it is actually the one doing the wardec is the most risk averse player.
As soon as i mentioned to add a locator agent for a corporation that gets decced to locate the nearest structure of the agressor, so incase itâs one of the gazillion pvp wannabe carebears. the socalled pvp community almost got a fit.
The arguments like âThis wonât make any indy / missionrunner corp actually fightâ or âthis would be an unfair advantageâ were intermixed with LOL fests and Nubcake bravadoâs.
Yet i find it odd that when I want to locate a specific pilot there isnât really that much difficulty to get his location anywhere in Empire, unless they are docked up in an Upwell.
But in this heavily regulated Empire space, where Concord keeps also track of everything itâs impossible to get the systemname of where a corporation has itâs nearest giant structure in space?
And why would this Indy corp undock if they can hire people who want to fight for them? Or that mission runner corp has friends who would like to step in, just that this hopeless searching most of the time for these socalled pvp elitists is pointless, because CCP in their infinite wisdom handed this gankstyle of play a lot of extra tools so they can continue their style in every which way they want.
On the other side you have the indy and mission runner people who have to adapt completely towards the game style of the wannabe pvp elitists whoâs main feat is to have several alpha alts here and there to gank small ships to pass time untill they see at some point one of players from one of the 10 corps they decced in a juicy target.
This isnât a sandbox, itâs just shooting fish in a barrel over which the shootist has all say and lays down all the rules and the fish arenât given any real tools like these firearms experts to defend themselves or hire someone who wouldnât mind some pew pew.
I donât think anyone can honestly say that at least some highsec wardeccers are hyper risk-averse. You donât get 100-to-1 killboards without minimizing risks and stacking the PvP deck in your favour. But that isnât the pejorative that many Eve players like to use it as. It may be âcowardlyâ or âdishonourableâ but it is in general smart play, just like all the industrialist and PvE players who go to great lengths and efforts to minimize the risks to themselves.
I do think there should be a major buff to locator agents giving them the ability to both the location of structures, and some information on player/corp activity to compensate for the large impact the watch list had on hunting game play. I will say I donât expect that would make many targets actually fight back, but it is pretty silly to build a PvP game and not include viable methods to find when your opponents are online or where their stuff is.
This game is absolutely a sandbox. There is nothing preventing you from using the same tactics as the other side. You have maximal freedom to join up with friends, hire muscle, or flee the war entirely. I get that you may just want to farm stuff without risk, but guaranteeing that isnât what âsandboxâ means. You are part of a living, competitive world where the other players might move in on your corner of the sandbox or even smash your sandcastles.
These stop-gap changes are not the final form. Letâs hope CCP comes up with a fun and engaging war system that keeps those that donât want to compete out of harms way while allowing interesting conflict to go on in highsec. But whatever that final form is, it isnât going to allow corporations access to structures or all the other perks of being in a competitive corporation - if you want that, you better figure out a way to defend that.
