That’s just it: I’d be fine with being a valid target while I’m in a fleet that is attacking/defending a war target. I don’t get that option.
My options are to join a corp I have no intention of being part of because it’s not a suitable corp, or be barred from meaningful highsec PVP.
I guess CCP has made their choice: Arrendis has already shown that the no neutrals rule doesn’t affect wardec corps because they have alt-corps also at war with the target, but it DOES stop me, because I don’t particularly have an interest in having even a second character. Therefore, CCP, in trying to make MORE meaningful PVP, is reducing the number of participants available. Somehow, this is going to help things.
I like the changes, this is a good direction. But one question I have is why are we not making it easier for newer players/corps to be able to play station content? Since the upwell stations came out and even after the last war dec changes, its impossible for anyone but the largest groups to own any stations. The whole idea of owning a station and station management is exciting but we are removing that ability from the majority of players.
I seem to recall an internal problem involving some merc services organizations last year - they don’t all get along. If you have strong opinions about the way things should be done or how certain money should be spent, that can override other concerns and lead to corp and alliance splits.
Your point was nothing to do with whether we’d canned the work we’d already started, but rather that we only started it after the goons got involved with the system. this isn’t true, as shown by the minutes I linked.
Would it be possible to escalate this further, so i wouldn’t need to be -10, yet could have my corp opt out of CONCORD protection in general? So everyone can always attack me?
Actually the talks you linked occure after nullsec entities became involved in hs wars, in january of 2017 horde began their conquest to control the fort market hubs in peri, jan 03 of 2017 being the height of it, and unsurprisingly within a year ccp is talking aboit changes, all youve done s prove him right tbh
You are right I apologise. It wasn’t the Goon CSM manipulating CCP to make the neutral logi changes that favour the blob, CCP came up with that on their own. Mea culpa.
I don’t know. I think it meant something to my friends who got wardecced. They took the fight to the other corp and had almost as many friends voluntarily show up as neutral logi as they could field dps, and it would’ve been more dps, less logi but for that being a crime in highsec.
We’d have all taken a “fair game” flag to shoot, but that’s not an option.
Somehow, the best solution is incentivizing less participation, rather than more participation, though.
read my post, his CSM talks prove nothing but the opposite, Nullsec became involved in hs in jan of 17, Goons saw the writing on the wall of how profitable market hubs in peri were. and within a year they’re talking of changing, PRETTY nice coincidence imo
you don’t even do HS pvp, so any input you have is merely speculative and considering the changes don’t involve your gameplay, who are you to tell us what our gameplay should be like?
The increased penalty for neutral targeted assistance will also apply to limited engagements
Does this imply, If I engage a suspect target in highsec (receiving a limited engagement for this) I can’t receive reps from people outside my player corp?
@CCP_Falcon @CCP_Lebowski
Question:
Say I’m in high-sec, there is NO wardec involved, I am suspect and someone engages me. We now have a LE. If I then receive remote reps from a basilisk. What happens to the basilisk? Does it go suspect or does it get concorded?
