Main War declaration thread


(Keno Skir) #702

This is an unbelievably terrible idea. So is the structure thing but you literally started off with the worst sentence ever.

No they don’t. Not allegedly or otherwise. Wardecs exist to encourage destruction in all areas. Player ships amount to way more than structures in terms of ISK destroyed in war.


(Yiole Gionglao) #703

Huh… my proposal would encourage more destruction. Obviosuly as I said CCP should numbercrunch their data to figure out, but my hunch is that there is a market for the kind of low cost, emergent, casual PvP I am suggesting, and since it is incompatible with corporation wardecs, it should replace the non mutual wardecs.


(Dom Arkaral) #704

no

EVE is based around non-consensual pvp.


(Yiole Gionglao) #705

All your points assume that you can make the horse drink the water. It’s wrong. You can’t force people to PvP any more than you can force a 200 kg rope to stand 500 kg.


(Yiole Gionglao) #706

You can’t non-consensual PvP someone who’s not playing the game. At least I come with suggestions to have more PvP and more people around by removing a FUBAR mechanic which has been causing less players for no gain since forever.


(Dom Arkaral) #707

so you’re telling me that you would consent 100% to pvp with that change (since you want it so much)?

I think not,
Nice try Mrs Safebear


(z0rberg) #708

okay miss, we all appreciate ya input, but ya really have to consider that someone who ain’t even doin’ PvP likely’s not goin’ to be in the best position to suggest anythin’ for those who do. Like, imagine i’d brought up ideas for missions. Ya’d be all over me, 'cause you’d just hate it, 'cause i ain’t got no ■■■■■■■ clue about ‘em and why people are doin’ em.

Like, ya can be assured that all of those who play “war” don’t wanna shoot structures, ‘cause it’s absolutely shite. I can tell, i shot structures. It’s shite. Now, when ya make a suggestion that’d bein’ rejected by exactly those who’re supposed to be playin’ that stuff, what’d ya think’s goin’ to happen once it goes live?

Just do a 180 here. Imagine I made the same thing for stuff yaself like to do and I’d just wanted it forced onto ya no matter if ya actually like it or not. That’s just ■■■■■■ up.


(Yiole Gionglao) #709

I am still wondering what kind of somersault your argument tried to perform, but it has broken its neck and back and I would suggest you to put it out of its misery. :thinking:


(Yiole Gionglao) #710

If you play war against targets who agree to war, nothing would change for you. If you play war on targets that avoid it, you wouldn’t lose anything (and would save some money). If you play war on targets who fail to avoid it and feed your killboard, then well, you might be expendable… or you might find that using a structure as a beacon to draw the attention of targets is funnier than actually killing it.


(z0rberg) #711

Ya sure, but ya’rr suckin’ all the fun and randomness out of it. And no one who respects himself is goin’ to show up for a fight at a beacon. That’s not how these people work, but ya ain’t knowin’ that so I’m tellin’ ya!


(Salt Foambreaker) #712

Not just NO!

F no!


(Keno Skir) #713

You proposed removing non-consensual wardecs, which would eliminate a large amount of destruction. Way more than the structure thing would create in the long run.


(Marcus Luttrell Khan) #714

I can’t make the horse drink the water, but the horse might drown in the water, too. Just because he doesn’t want to doesn’t mean he won’t. THAT is what EVE is.

To address what you said, you clearly didn’t read the post. Go read the part about different types of corporations before you assume that everything is about forcing PvP.

You can do this. Using the rope you can create tension that can hold 500kg. Simple physics.


(Qia Kare) #715

I do not want to punish new players or, indeed, any players for joining a corporation. What I want to do is make joining a corporation a decision that is deserving of careful consideration.

A Tangent on Wardec Philosophy

I played a game that bundled an experience point curve in two ways. The first was to initially give players normal experience, then apply a fatigue penalty to people over time. The second was to lower overall xp gain at start, but to apply a rest bonus that made up for that deficit.

These two systems are functionally identical, but the latter was well received and the former harshly criticized.

I bring this up because I feel Wardecs suffer from the same type of cognitive bias. Because of their name we are wont to assume they are a benefit to the aggressor. CONCORD is an iron shackle placed on PvP. It can still lurch about here and there, but its freedom is severely curtailed. To loosen the shackle for a limited time one must follow procedure, and pay a fee.

New players are oppressed by older players even without war. There is little the new player can do to an established industrial mogul living under CONCORD’s umbrella. Lurking in those shadows free of retribution you’ll find a different kind of war being waged.

Pirates who walk in the light and wage war to take what they want are among the least of my concerns. There are options available to me that make it possible to hold them accountable for what they do. I am likewise held to account for what I do. Those under the skirt of CONCORD should be more accountable for what they do. Disrespect too many noobs, and they should be able to form a corp and curb stomp your sorry (in game) butt.

I don’t want to punish new players for joining a corporation. I want it to be a meaningful choice or tool they use to shape their own destiny in the sandbox that is Eve. One that becomes less useful as people can opt out of fighting at all.


(Dom Arkaral) #716

that pretty much confirms my assumption that you wouldn’t

I’m so surprised!! /s


(Marcus Gideon) #717

And right here… I lost interest in anything you had to say.

Maybe I should go over to random forums of games I don’t even play, and make dumb assed suggestions about things I know nothing about too.


(Ima Wreckyou) #718

Not everyone who would mutually enter a war runs away or quits playing the game. Most people act like actual gamers who can handle a minimal challenge and are perfectly capable to work around the wardec by actually playing smart or god forbid fighting back.

Not all wardecers are super huge elite corporations. For example I wardec other corps as an individual. Now I do know how to fight against multiple people, but that does not mean I don’t get the teeth kicked in from time to time by people who actually make an effort to fight back.

You would completely destroy that gameplay because you are unwilling to have some minor inconvenience and feel entitled to get almost complete safety without any minimal effort.


(Lukett MyDabb) #719

@Yiole_Gionglao does make sense of this proposal even if they don’t play the game. I just want to be clear we are talking about non-consensual wardecs on any structure, right?

you seem to also believe merc corps would die, but in all honesty are they not going to get contracts for taking down structures? could they also go after structure kills because of course gudfites and mails? They won’t die, they’d only evolve.


(Qia Kare) #720

Under the current system, All Player Corporations and Structures are vulnerable to a 'dec. Under the new system, only Structures are vulnerable to a 'dec. Players with no structures are immune.

I grant that without a structure on the field dodging a wardec is pretty easy, but I think it’s the ease of opting out of fights that is a problem.

Structure cruft isn’t because nobody can engage them. It’s because nobody wants to engage them.


(Yiole Gionglao) #721

Houm…

This is the period for which I played EVE Online, a bit more than 7 years and 7 months. You bet I learned a few things and talk from familiarity with the game… which accidentally had the same online population when I joined EVE and when I won it -and that was more than now.