That’s actually the core of the issue, fighting about Upwell structures is no fun, neither for the defender nor the aggressor. Making them artificial focus points doesn’t solve that.
Rough idea, reduce timers, have a deposit by the owner or a bounty assigned which gets paid to the fleet with highest damage (like NPC fights). Then make them a strong force multiplier for defenders, like 10 people get the power of 100 (a curve 100 get 110), if in fleet with the structure.
Please, stop repeating this nonsense already. That’s NOT going to happen. It has already been said in this very thread that this is NOT going to happen.
It amazes me that some would believe this when it’s already possible to rep the victim without going suspect and the only thing that the blog says will change in that regard is that the suspect timer will be changed to a criminal timer.
As to why that’s the case, suicide ganking doesn’t create a limited engagement (unless the victim retaliates, that is), so the circumstances under which a suspect or criminal timer might be granted simply don’t apply to remote repping someone that’s being suicide ganked.
Let me spell this out for you guys.
First of all lets look at how this change affects wardeccing, since that’s what CCP is claiming to target with this change.
Lets look at Marmite and P I R A T
Not a single kill or loss on their boards in 2019 (or likely ever) would’ve been affected in the slightest from this change. They’re not targetting PvPers, at least not specifically enough for it to materialize into any sort of real engagement. They’re camping trade hubs or shooting Citadels because that is where the money is.
If they for whatever reason decided to get in a real engagement with each other (even though there is literally no incentive to do so) the topic of neutral logi would be a completely moot point as it doesn’t change the fact that there’s no reason, other than boredom or bragging rights, for the two entities to fight in the first place.
There is LITERALLY ZERO conflict driver in place for high-sec pvp organizations to engage each other. This change does nothing to change that, doesn’t even affect the non-consensual pvp that most of you guys are talking about (if someone is dumb enough to get caught by a wartarget they’re not going to magically be smart enough to not get caught by a war target and his now flagged logi alt) AND removes large swaths of content for other much smaller entities (mine included).
Now lets look at the affects this change has on suspects. So currently if you’re suspect everyone and their mom can shoot you, and the suspect can only engage those that have engaged him. If he has a fleet the only way they can interact with the engagement is with remote support. This being said the deck is already HEAVILY stacked against someone who is suspect.
An example for those of you who do not have a PHD in highsec mechanics: Someone steals something and is suspect, alliance they stole from warps in fleet to kill suspect, currently suspect can receive remote support from his fleet but that is the only way the suspects friends can interact with the engagement. Now you want to make it where the suspects fleet cannot interact at all? Where’s the conflict driver there?
This all but removes all forms of High-Sec PvP outside of wardecs and suicide ganking. This change would literally be the final nail in the coffin for any sort of dynamic PvP content in high-sec, you might as well just remove it all-together at this point.
It’s been awhile since I have posted on these forums. But this the wardec changes are very disappointing and I must speak up.
I am a 14+ year veteran, and the vast majority of that time, I have spent in corporations or alliances that are at war. Ushra’Khan vs CVA, Pravateers vs everyone, Cry havoc vs everyone who owned a moon, and a host of other recent wardec corps. I have spent almost 15 years playing Eve (on and off) because I enjoyed highsec wars.
First, the artificial “goal” being instituted making structures the focus of wars is disappointing. Wars in eve have always had goals: isk income; eviction; bounty collection, RP, such as freeing slaves; sometimes just because someone talked smack in local and I want to teach them a lesson. Why now is structure bashing the only “goal” being recognized? Many of us stay in highsec for the very reason that we do not have to shoot structures, nullsec is where you go to do that playstyle.
Keep the sandbox alive and let us pursue our own goals with wars rather then limiting what has always been a fine mechanic.
I gave the structure focused war mechanic a chance over the past few months and I don’t like it. I do acknowledge that it helps new corps grow, but one very strict war goal does not conform to the sandbox that is Eve Online. At the very least, introduce other goals besides structure bashing.
Second. Limiting the suspect/criminal flags even more is a massive change to gameplay that keeps many of us in the game. I agree wholeheartedly with Bladewise, above, that the proposed changes will lead to more suicide ganking, and thus more players feeling that they are losing their ships unfairly.
As has been said before, the current mechanics are already unfavorable to suspects, turning what is now a suspect flag (remote rep) to a criminal flag, is an extreme measure. Is highsec really that overrun with suspect logistics ships that we need to nerf the playstyle to non-existence.
Through all the wardec changes, including the P alliance nerf, I have remained silent because I always felt that I, and other with my playstyle could adapt. Now though, feel that I must strongly protest the proposed changes. The changes are against the spirit of Eve. The sandbox is turning into an amusement park.
In conclusions: Structure bashing wargoal is bad. War is good. Save neutral logi.
Thank you,
The Mute
Yes it really is. People have entire neutral logi wings. And just like super cap umbrellas they stifle combat a lot.
Though it is still better than entosis warfare.
Well now I’m just down right dissapointed. At first I was ok with these changes to neutral logi as it only applied to the wardec system , which is what all your current propagana has been toting. and that these changes kept my way of playing eve (ransoming expensive mission runners) still viable. But now you back track and place a blanket ban on all neutral logi in highsec? So much for the sandbox play style. You have in one move, pushed us all to suiside ganking, being null bears, or grinding endlessly on boring structures instead of honourable ransoming. Now I guess I go back to null and beat my head against a brick wall with ratting and serving stupid block alliances in thier endless donut of blueballs… Sigh.
Very few peole use neutral logi. Very few people in highsec use logi at all. The best fight I have had in the past year had neutral logi on both sides and it was a blast. the types of fights that happen in highsec when some people are suspect, others are not, and 3rd and 4th parties start to enter the fray are really some of the most memorable times in eve. There is no other game that offers the dynamic pvp that can be found in eve at the moment. Little by little we are losing what has made Eve stand apart.
Save Wardecs or burn New Eden
Except, you know, that it will:
No, suicide ganking doesn’t create a limited engagement timer. It won’t have to. trap-freighters will simply accept a duel from one of the ‘gankers’ when the reps start landing.
So safety green, or boom.
The bit you are missing is that if this was an issue, there would already be loads of anti ganker reps getting killed in this fashion, because simply having them go suspect would be enough for ‘bystanders’ to then kill them.
Therefore, because it’s not currently happening on any scale we can reasonably predict it’s not going to happen on any significant scale after the patch either.
If anything gankers like to get the kills themselves rather than Concord as that gets them green KB’s.
This is a non issue Arrendis.
P.S. Even yellow safety would save them.
Yeah… I’m going to just take that as a sign that you are disconnected from most of the PvP happening in high sec. Today in what would have been a 50 man engagement (both sides) there were at least 5 dedicated logi as well as about 15 Remote rep battleships of various sorts, which have similar rep power to logi boats. So that’s 20 logi ships out of 50. With nothing really special about any of the groups.
All the wardec corps use logi. And a lot of them have used neutral logi to trap defending groups and make sure they take zero losses in an attack. Which then creates an environment where people don’t bother defending because they don’t know if they have enough guns to break the unknown number of neutral logi present.
You seem to be instead talking about duel type environments where someone is baiting, and selling this as a great shining example of EVE… when again, it shuts down people taking duels because they expect 5 neutral logi to bail the other person out if things go badly for them.
That’s nonsense. You talk about it as if the change would have any effect on the ability to use remote reps to save a freighter that’s in a duel, or as if more anti-gankers would die as a result of doing that after the change.
It makes no sense to try to save a freighter that’s in a duel with remote reps under the current mechanics already. The only difference is that anyone willing to do that would die to CONCORD after the change whereas he would go suspect and die to other capsuleers under the current mechanics. The freighter would die in both cases regardless.
So what? That’s the case under current mechanics for freighters in a duel already. And the change has no effect for freighters that are suicide ganked instead…
Either a purchased character or a mission runner who hasn’t PvP’d for 2 years.
Propaganda ■■■■■■■■ from someone vying for their playstyle to be easier. Not actually citing any real events in game.
I’m actually looking at the data, straight from zkill and everything you posted is ■■■■■■■■. War dec corps are not engaging each other. All this change is going to do is remove EVEN MORE player vs player content from the game.
You guys are already bubble-wrapped to infinity. Please leave what little content I have left alone, thank you.
Actually an old live events character who now occasionally runs missions, however is still my main forum character because it’s a bother to jump on and off characters. Doesn’t make today’s experience from a random war dec I have a character in the receiving corp a lie though.
Also who said anything about war dec corps engaging each other. Stop putting up strawmen just for you to then argue against when it’s not what anyone has said.
Okay I’ll bite. This change would not make you win any engagement where neutral logi was a thing. It would make all the neutral logi be in their alliance and make you not even take the engagement. Meaning less content in an already content barren game.
Also could you link me a kill from the engagement you speak of?
Said engagement was a blue ball engagement because we put enough defenders on the field. So no KM’s. But we did get fleet counts.
& sure, they would be in the attacking corp. Which would mean that people could make an accurate call. (or at least a believed to be accurate call, log in traps, sudden corp switches etc still exist)
Sometimes it still wouldn’t result in a fight because attackers would still have too many yes. But it means the targets of those wardec corps actually will know what they face. Which means in some cases fights will be taken where they wouldn’t have before due to fear of neutral logi.
Neutral logi is a problem. It’s a problem that’s being addressed, but as things stand, it’s a problem.
If I declare war on you, you can hit me back whenever you like. If you find me in space, you can shoot me. We’re at war, after all. When I come into system, you can tell I’m there. You can see how many of my corp members are there. You can make the same educated decision about engagement strength as I can make about you.
Except… neutral logi change that math. You don’t know if I’ve got twice as many friends set up with reps to make anything you try to do useless and frustrating. What’s more, even if you could identify who those characters are… you can’t do anything to them until they rep me.
That means you can’t do anything to them until they engage on their terms. They can only be shot at when they’re in a situation where they feel they can adequately respond to the threat you bring. If they don’t, they’re going to let my T1 battleship die, and keep their more expensive T2 logistics cruiser unassailable.
Usually that means the only time you’ll get to shoot at them is when we’re already formed up, and they know they have enough logi there to keep one another alive. The rest of the time? You can’t touch them. They’re active participants in a war, but you can’t touch them. They can go missioning and mining right in front of you, and you can’t do a thing about it. They can move around however they like, alone and without backup, and you… can’t do a thing about it.
If you do, CONCORD blows you up.
Active participants in a war, that you can’t engage except on their terms. That’s not a problem? Because if that isn’t a problem, then people being unwilling to engage except under the cover of their own supercapital umbrella isn’t a problem. People dropping multiple BFG-titans on an interceptor roam isn’t a problem. After all, we’re just engaging on our terms.
RIIIGHT so you’re actually supporting what I’m saying. Smart players aren’t going to take engagements they’re not going to win. Giving even more perfect intel is going to result in nothing but even less conflict.
Also your stance is becoming less and less informed the more you explain your point of view. You are the type of person that is killing this game. Crying for changes that you know absolutely nothing about because you think they’ll have a positive affect in your little bubble, even though they won’t.
I, and the other people agreeing with me on the other hand, do/have done high-sec, low-sec, and nullsec PvP. We’ve done wardecs, we’ve done suicide ganking, we’ve done WH, blops. Literally everything.
pat pat
I know it’s hard but go back and read, and actually think rather than name call and assume.
Actually I’ll just consider the argument won since you no longer have any rebuttal.
When has this happened to you? And again assuming ANY of this EVER happens why not make it only apply to warring parties as stated initially instead of removing massive amounts of content from the game?