Groovy. No need to worry about undocking to certain death then. And certainly not smart bombs.
Carry on we shall.
The best part is that @Your_Ex-Girlfriend was so busy thumping her⌠whatever? that she forgot completely that certain death is a thing that can exist in eve online for undocking and demanded you either fight and die or unsubscribe.
In the meantime:
I am fully aware that current mechanics mean nothing while having no consequences for either attackers or defenders in war. This would make it a non-personal problem. Current mechanics are broken but working as intended.
trolls, trolls everywhere
Yep, everywhere. 
most bots donât care about being in a corp, if its a mission group 11% tax seems ok for being immune, if its miner bots, they donât even care for the tax as it doesnât apply
To add to this, BOTs donât care about the occasional loss by players. Also you cannot mechanically do anything to BOTs other then slow them down while the creators learn the new system. Players effectively can do little else besides help CCP detect BOTs but in the end it is up to CCP to keep up the attack on BOTs.
Darwin never talked about strength⌠according to Darwin unfit fail to survive - fitness doesnât mean strength. If it did we would have gone extinct long time ago.
It gets even better⌠even if you get wardecced you usually get decced by hub campers - unless you live in jita you are unlikely to get affected by them in any way. And if they happen to be near your system you can always start doing your activity few jumps away for a week or 2. Neutral haul alts can do the moving of goods to your main base of operations.
Personally the only issue I have with wardecs is that you canât wardec npc corps.
Itâs a cute thing.
Wardecs are nothing. Donât even need to switch to neutral hauling alts if you mine. Just drop corp and they canât do anything to you. If there is no change then there will never be wars with any form of meaning. You can even just throw a super noob into the CEO chair and have everybody switch out while maintaining a corpâs existence.
There is no risk to avoid war in this manner. There is also no risk to declare the war in the first place as you can dodge the war being bad in the same manner and move your attack crew over to another corp while leaving a dummy corp manager in the CEO chair.
Massive flaws anyone?
Yep. IMO the solution is to remove NPC corps for experienced players, leaving them as the newbie starter corps. Keep the tax rate low initially, to allow newbies to operate, but after your first X days the tax rate gradually increases to 100% and applies to all transfers of value (including things like the amount of ore produced by your mining lasers, any items traded/contracted to the character, etc), not just NPC reward payouts. Then, to fix the war issue, leaving a corp during a war flags your character with that war. If you join another player corp while the war is still active the war now applies to your new corp for free.
The result: dropping corp to dodge a war is no longer effective. If you move to a new player corp you just drag more people into the war, if you move to an NPC corp your character is crippled and you effectively canât play the game.
1 Like
yes, because removing options always screams sandbox
Sandbox =/= every possible option is viable. I would love to have a âkill Mike Voidstarâ button that I could press at any time and destroy whatever ship/pod youâre in. Iâd press it constantly until you finally GTFO and go back to WoW. But I donât think anyone is going to claim that EVE not a sandbox game because I donât have that button.
1 Like
You do have that button, you just have to come to me to use it.
Good Luck
Why are you removing my options? Isnât this a sandbox? I want a button I can press and kill you remotely. In fact, why are you removing my option to press this button without even having to log into EVE? The sandbox should have a button next to every one of your forum posts that I can press and kill you every time I have to suffer the pain of reading your delusional ramblings.
1 Like
The thing is. Your proposal is 100% stick. And just results in people logging off for a week.
It is better for the game to have people Corp drop or hop but keep playing for the week than it is for them to simply vanish for a week.
1 Like
No it isnât. Itâs better for CCPâs subscription money (though letâs be honest, most of these players are probably alphas anyway), it isnât better for the game. Failure should be punished, not encouraged. If you canât deal with a war dec then you should be forced to stop playing. Alternatively, without the option to corp hop and negate the war, you might actually have to learn how to fight back and win.
Well. We are just going to have to agree to disagree if you honestly believe that forcing people to stop playing the game is better.
They arenât forced to stop playing the game. They are free to continue by fighting back, moving their operations elsewhere to avoid the aggressor, etc. They just canât opt out of the war mechanic by changing the name of the corp every time a new war hits. The only players who are forced to stop playing are ones who donât belong in EVE in the first place, WoW carebears who saw the pretty spaceships and didnât understand that EVE is a PvP game.
I donât think there is any way the âproblemâ can get fixed.
There is no fairness in eve and anyone who tries to be fair is soon educated that he is stupid if he tries so. Unlike other games where you are thrown against players with similar level, skills, or results, in eve this doesnât work like this, there are absolutely no mechanics that would provide fairness and even if they were there, given this is a game of alts and multiboxers (another difference between other games where it is either not allowed or severely restricted so you canât benefit from alt on your main account) it is just a matter of time it gets abused.
Players will only attack/wardec if they have either:
- better ship
- better skills
- more experiences
- more numbers
I donât see how any changes to wardec mechanics can break this. And even if you make some restriction that corp with 100 members cannot wardec corp with less than 10 it will just be abused (both ways).
Abuse the weaker, thats what eve is about. If you are the weak, find someone weaker than you and abuse him the same way you are abused.
1 Like
100% tax is a strawman. If that was given then no activity you do would be possible to get you out of an npc non-starter corp. In effect deleting character would be better than continuing putting an artificial inflation on skill injectors and extractors which would become mandatory to continue to play without losing your time investment.
Just make leaving corp a rejected option when in war while being kicked out pushes you to â- Abandonedâ status. For two weeks they suffer Abandoned taxes (50% or greater), lose all standing bonuses their corp would have given them, lose access to npc agents they donât have individual ability to talk with, get shoved into the generic every abandoned corp chat that takes all of them and keeps an active member online list unlike the npc corp chats, and to leave have to apply to either a new corp or their greatest standing corp picks them up after two weeks.
You now have to maintain your standing in the npc corp you get assigned to or they kick you back into abandoned and the process starts over. I expect every npc corp to suddenly have storyline agents that require them to supply the corp with something from their demand listâŚ
eg:
"Your work within Duvolle labs leaves us wondering if you have any interest in our activity at all. At this time we are short Electronic Parts for our projects due to a failed project test. Nobody died, the explosion was spectacular, but that actually only complicates matters as they canât go fetch replacements themselves. Weâre also forced to keep these idiots on the payroll until theyâve recovered for insurance purposes. Doesnât matter as theyâll be fired shortly after theyâre declared at full health.
That makes their loss of corp assets a bit less likely to be replaced by them. So weâre assigning this to you. We donât care where you get them or how. Do it or weâll add a negative mark to your history."
Rejecting this mission results in auto-failure and standings penalties.
Picture this as a piece of every NPC corp in the game⌠incidentally now you have the benefits/penalties of the faction you joined applying to your ability to go places and request missions⌠Go figureâŚ
In addition to create a corp I would put one month as a minimum CEO seat requirement which you canât leave, requirements to have acceptable standings with the place you are putting an office into, and the only places you can âfoundâ a corp in would be npc stations which would require LP and ISK to do. This wonât prevent an npc station corp but would make you need to work for it and even an alpha character can earn LP and put risk back into founding a corp.
Every month this office costs more LP and ISK to continue to operate as it needs more space for the ledgers and workers to keep everything in order. Corp members can then apply their LP rewards from doing missions to pay for this but you canât donate them to a corp wallet. Fail to pay the LP bill the office closes. No office for your corp? Now youâre in Abandoned status. You can avoid this by planting an office in a station in space (and keeping it fueled) to set your own cost.
If a corp loses all offices (youâre not required to place offices in structures, but itâs an option) ALL remaining stations it has go into âlow powerâ mode and remain in wars they currently are in. The fuel it has doesnât matter. The corps with offices in them close those offices. Thus putting an office for your corp in every location you can make offices is a benefit but also every station has a limited amount of (dare I say it) office space. Cascade effect possible. If an office isnât established before 2 weeks pass then the structures go into Abandoned status.
Incidentally this would mean we need a mechanic to determine how many offices a structure has⌠I would put it on as many service slots as you wish to sacrifice for an office with a default of one free. Online and fuel need should be equal and not very high for additional offices. Trusting someone else to keep your office open has a risk that they might not keep your office open. Picture it as 1 fuel block per week to keep the lights on. Side effect of making all these abandoned structures littered all over with no fuel in them needing 1 fuel per week minimum or they go abandoned status.
Abandoned structures (locations which have no fuel, or are forced into this state) then start un-anchoring after 2 weeks. POCOs will just self destruct if they canât connect to their office after 2 weeks.
What do you think of that?