I don’t think the war dec system should go mutual as to many people will hide behind that safety but having the ability to war dec a structure could be a good thing if done correctly
What makes you think that the proposal is about me? I haven’t played EVE for a couple of years, but I dropped this proposal and it was welcome so I’ve elaborated it a bit more.
Wardecs as they are are a piece of rubbish. My proposal would sort some of the drawbacks and potentilally drive to a increase in highsec PvP.
I have some news for you: players are not fighting non consensual wars.
They drop corp, they stop playing, or they leave if their corp is serially wardecced and can’t learn to play the game.
The intent is to keep things simple: if you want to war, you war, if you want to blow a structure, you can do it, if you want to defend a structure, you can do it too.
that is true for the smaller corps I’m not arguing that at all
but having bigger corps able to say no to war decs means mercenary corps are pointless and (I have no issue with what they do) CODE will be the only people shooting miners/anyone in HS
Wardecs exist as part of a system to limit PvP of almost any kind in a certain area of space. They are not specifically about structures. The wardec mechanic gives a defender 24 hours to prepare, warning of who is attacking, and the ability to make their foe fair game for an ally of their choosing for free, or a few more for a fee.
The system is meant to bias towards the defender in any PvP engagement. It is not meant to assure safety to non-structure owners, industrialists, or any other individual or group.
I think the stifled conflict is because the wardecs themselves are not binding enough (corp dropping) and it is debatable whether the advantages of a corporation outweigh the near immunity to PvP provided by CONCORD protection. Industry should integrate with the Eve ecology rather than disassociate with it on grounds that the makers of war-machines are somehow more pure and innocent than the people who pilot them.
Provide a PvP shield of any kind that people can willfully take up, and they will. Every time they do so, Eve moves closer to being some other game we can already play if we don’t like this one.
People want to do things the easy way. It’s sensible and efficient, but satisfaction comes from getting something done when the hard way was the only way. How far to skew the balance makes for a good debate, but to be able to force a confrontation with anyone else is the heart of Eve. War must not become something capsuleers can opt out of more easily than they already can.
Ok, so you don’t play the game but you think people should listen to your proposals about a game your don’t even play and that wrecks whole play-stiles of people who actually do play the game?
Wardecs are fine. The support tools surrounding them are rubbish. Wardecs are the reason I staid with the game as it was the first interesting thing actually happening.
Oh sure, for some reason removing aggression mechanics always results in more PvP in the carebear mind. It is just a lie in an attempt to not make your proposal look like it would remove PvP but enhance it.
Frankly I think that bigger corps refusing to mutual would be a minority case, and by being big, they also would offer a lot of potential targets aka structures.
Also, let’s say you have a really big corp that would avoid wars if it could… what does it do now? Avoid them nonetheless? Maybe use alt corps?
The thing is, forcing people into war doesn’t makes them fight it. Anyone that would fight under the current system, would also fight in the new system. The difference is for those who under no circumstance would fight -as with the new system they’d ne free to keep playing if they sacrifice their structures, and if they want to save their structures, they can fight back without losing their abbility to PvE. And this change would lead to more PvP, not less.
What a waste of pixels. Wrong section. It’s not being read, or picked up on.
I completely agree that shooting structures should be easier but having wars mutual will not increase pvp it will just increase suicide ganking
I think if a station is low power it should just flag a suspect timer to shoot it and war decing a station that full power should be able to be done
Go troll some another thread, will you?
While I played I was wardecced 4 times and fought exactly 0 wars. I kept my CEO in a station and my active characters just dropped corp and came back as wardecs came and go. Awesome content, huh?
Under my proposal I would be free from dropping corp, which is a minor annoyance… and that’s it. On the other hand, if I could join a fleet and go find PvP around a wardecced structure, that’s something I might consider a thousand years sooner than accepting a war. It’s in the “unlikely but not impossible” side of things compared to “I’d rather quit than be forced into a unescapable war”…
The increase of PvP would come from the roaming “firefighter” fleets.
It would replace non-consensual wardecs which create little to no PvP and cost lost players, with something that could feed a variety of hunters and preys.
Let’s say Marmite is attacking an Astrahus somewhere. You can’t afford to wardec Marmite, but you can bring 50 friends and kill a few of them, or even crash their party -or conversely, maybe Marmite just comes and crashes your party while you’re trying to kill a Raitaru on behalf of a customer.
That’s emergent content.
My proposal would provide tools to those willing to fight, and would trade it for the safety of those who would never fight anyway.
PS: “burn Jita”, post structure wardec: Goons wardec every structure around Jita and try to blow them while the rest of the game tries to kill Goons… that would some story!
But if I don’t have any structures and don’t engage in the attack of any structures out side of suicide ganking I cant be touched so you want all corps to be npc style set up?
So this game wasn’t for you. That’s fine, a lot of people don’t like to play a full PvP sandbox. I hope you did not recruit new players into your corp and infected them with your defeatist attitude.
So you want to remove a complete play-stile which is in the game for over a decade just so you don’t have to endure a minor annoyance… ok?
No you will not do that, of that I’m sure. Why should you risk your ship for someone else stuff against a force that is organized and prepared to deal with random neutrals who want to interfere? The crying would continue as it does right now.
It would be a replacement to everybody who doesn’t owns a structure avoiding wardecs by drop corp/stop playing/quit game.
Those who want to be safe from wardecs already have the tools if they don’t have any structures. And those who own structures probably would be at a greater risk under the new system. Plus the tools for emergent content.
The proposed system would be a net increase in PvP and would stop the loss of players because of griefing wardecs. It’s a net win.
If you want the hard way, you’ll go mutual. Meanwhile people who wouldn’t go mutual and would rather quit the game will keep playing it free from wardecs as long as they don’t owe a structure and enjoy its benefits, to which wardecs are a counter.
I mean, seriosuly… why should EVE punish new players just for joining a corporation?
Innovative and emergent thinking by the OP, will encourage PvP in hisec, what’s not to like?
So why change the war dec system if its able to be avoided already
Bashing a structure is super boring so I don’t think you would see much of an increase in people doing it if anyone could attack them would just be the same guys that do it now
Sorry I disagree it wont increase pvp at all
it doesn’t punish new players for joining a corp it punishes bad CEO’s for not setting things in place for war decs.
90% of people that war dec do it to corps around trade hubs I’m not going to go into how to avoid war decs but its not hard
I agree some of your idea could work in some ways but as a whole it will kill a lot of people game play imo
Corporations can have as little as 0% tax, Corporations can put up structures, Corporations can have shares/holdings, Corporations can have dozens if not hundreds of members depending on skills…
EVE is about risk vs reward. Having those unique abilities as corporations means you have to be vulnerable in some way shape or form. Your unwillingness to defend from a wardec is the reason the wardec system has issues and people complain about it. 50 newbros in 50 frigates is over 5,000 DPS. Only have 10? 10 battleships is around 10,000 DPS, if fit correctly.
Mutual wars will further discourage highsec PvP, and will indeed increase suicide ganking, as Ima noted. You fail to understand second and third orders of effect.
You are exactly what is wrong with Corporations and wardecs. 100%. The ability to avoid them with very little cost is stupid. There are two things that have been discussed among EXPERIENCED pilots, that have somewhat of a consensus:
Have different corporation types. Do you not want to be wardecced? Have a ‘social corporation.’ You and your friends can play and fly together, but you cannot put up structures, have to pay NPC taxes, have limited members, etc. If you want to put up a structure, you have to make yourself vulnerable somehow.
Punish those who drop Corporation during wardecs. They should be able to be targeted for one week or the remaining time in the initial war, whichever is sooner. Similar to how you have a period of being unable to join another corporation/alliance if you have roles, if you have been ‘initiated against,’ you should also have a timer. Running from what EVE is designed for does nothing for the game.
Wardecs are not designed for griefing, nor is that their current intention. The reason Marmite and PIRAT have hundreds of wardecs is that the mechanics for having individual, targeted, meaningful wars have been removed. There is almost no ability to hunt juicy targets, and small corporations can just simply disappear to avoid the dec (as mentioned above). There is VERY LITTLE risk for the people you call ‘victims’ at this current time. If you don’t believe this is true, perhaps you should ask the CEOs of mercenary alliances. Knowing the opinions and experience of both sides would really make your argument stronger.
Go home Drac, you’re drunk.
The one thing I have read here that I certainly agree with is that low power structures should not need to be wardecced to be reinforced/destroyed. Let’s get rid of space clutter!!!
Topic moved to Player Features And Ideas section
So you want the icing and not the cake, typical war decker who has no idea about game balance, next!!!