Nerf to HS ganking increases dest. by 11% SRS, and HS WARS are next

Turning gankers into targets for high sec player policing is doing its job. I propose us going even further, when people engage in non consensual war there should be some from of standing reduction from every kill. Furthermore these wars are usually declared to destroy structures against peoples will, so structure destruction should have a significant affect on standing if the structure is not abandoned. This should restrict people from killing all of a corporations structures and they have to be selective about what they destroy or be considered targets in high sec and unable to dock.

This would further increase destruction and allow people engaging in non-consensual war to be targets. Most people use holding corps with minimal amounts of characters in them so corporations like SRS are getting a free ride. There is no real war happening. People use holding corps because they don’t want people in their corps being destroyed. Most of the time these are new players.

CCP you went and put SRS in the year end video. You must know by now they are exploiting the war system and getting a free ride with ZERO risk.

It’s time for RISK to be added to their game. If you turn corps like SRS into targets then people from the main corp can be selective how they engage. It levels the playing field, restores risk, and increases legitimate high sec targets. Fun is restored and SRS can’t complain because they will get content instead of a boring structure bash with no risk.

Finally declaring war on any high sec corporation should open your structures up for destruction by anyone in high sec. This system of offering assistance is meaningless.

1 Like

Lol, the demand for nerfs will never end. Once Highsec is 100% secure they will come for Lowsec and then for Null

13 Likes

Once high sec is 100% save, CCP will have to reduce its size drastically and all the people who called for more security will lose hard in the end.

7 Likes

I would suggest rather that you and others who feel like you do, go find another game to play, please? And quit trying to ruin Eve’s uniqueness…

6 Likes

But why should they do throught this and complicate matters, when they could just remove PvP from the game ?! Then they could focus on more apparel, cat ears, WIS, hypernet expansion, more project discovery, etc.

2 Likes

How are they exploiting the war system? People can defend or call in defenders.

It is zero risk because people are to lazy to defend their assets.

SRS gameplay focuses on getting people to surrender hence the stat for payment or structure transfer to make it go abandoned. Hardly an issue if it is 37 a year, their focus is structures. Which is why the stats of CCP is so bogus. There is only 1 Warlord in Hisec when it comes to wars and that is Blackflag.

5 Likes

High sec will never be 100% safe, but even if it were CCP wouldn’t have to do anything.

1 Like

Anchoring a stucture can be seen as undocking a ship that is already paid for upfront so the owner will not worry if it gets destoyed.

It would be interesting if they decide to force Faction War signup for everyone seeing how we nolonger need to leave our Corps.

/last comment was in reference to;

There is only 1 Warlord in Hisec when it comes to wars

I didn’t really pay attention or just missed this, did they finally implement that you no longer have to leave corp to participate in fw but only the character who joins fw will be affected not the entire corp?

RISK RISK RISK…

That’s what it is all about. War Dec’s on holding corps is ZERO RISK! Believe me, it matters to CCP now that they know destruction of low sec players in high sec makes them money.

next they will ask nope demand that lvl 5 missions are to be in high sec… to be restored.

A ‘holding corp’ is a perfect way to signal your structures are owned and controlled by people who’re afraid of war.

If a small corporation wants their structures to last longer:

  1. Don’t be a holding corp.
  2. Be an asset to people living in your locality. In other words, share the benefits of your structure.

No small group’s structure will be unassailable, but you’re more likely to keep it if people like you and you don’t make it obvious you’re trying to have the benefits of a structure without taking on any personal risk.

I was able to hold on to 4 or 5 structures in highsec with a corporation of only about 5 people pretty much indefinitely, and when I would have trouble people would ask how they could help me.

‘Holding Corps’ with selfish aspirations have two easy to deduce weaknesses. First, they don’t want to help themselves, and second, nobody else wants to help them either.

Still an unknown and would have to be updated at a later date with that answer for you @Friend

This next update, coming in Q1

As mentioned in the [Factional Warfare Dev Blog that was released in December, the next big part of the FW equation is already underway. This next update, coming in Q1, will introduce a feature we’re calling Direct Enlistment, which will allow players to join FW without leaving their corp and alliance mates.

2 Likes

We’ll see if CCP delivers, might sacrifice some frigates on my main if they implement it. :blush: Although I have a specific FW alt my main is better trained as it has the full expanded alpha skillset. Though in the end my major limiting factor is available time to be honest. Anyway thanks for the quote as I didn’t see that.

Now that CCP has fixed ganking, I think it’s a very good thing that people are finally realizing how bad the griefdecs are for the game, and how they make so many honest and hard-working players also leave the game. CCP should do something about griefdecs as soon as possible, because they’re getting completely out of control! Griefdecs are risk-free PvP just like ganking, and I see no reason why griefdeccers shouldn’t have the same penalties that gankers do. The fact that they can still dock in high-sec is absolutely ridiculous. It’s like CCP doesn’t even understand that it’s hurting their game. If all of these little psycho groups want to do wars, they should be forced to go to null-sec to do wars with the REAL PvPers, instead of molesting players who want to play peacefully in the game’s starter zone (high-sec).

@CCP please fix this stupid mechanic like you fixed ganking ASAP!

3 Likes

There’s no such thing as non-consensual war. If you are war eligible and you have at least one POS, you have consented by default.

And of course stuff is destroyed ‘against people’s will’. That’s the whole idea of it ! I don’t warp up to people’s ships or structures and say ’ Excuse me, good Sir, but would you mind terribly if your stuff was demolished ? '. People putting the structure up in the first place are committing the aggression…laying claim to this or that moon or piece of space. Of course people are going to challenge any flag being planted in the ground.

And if they can’t raise a fleet sufficient enough to defend that structure, and/or provide it with sufficient defences, then they should not put up the structure in the first place. You don’t get a free pass in Eve, to just build whatever you like and have it be safe. The whole idea of Eve is that nothing is safe anywhere…and long may that continue.

3 Likes

Which faction will you be fighting for?

Obviously the Master Race: Gallente. :wink:

Though maybe in true Gallente fashion I will perform my militia duties in a pleasure hub. :face_with_hand_over_mouth: :blush:

2 Likes

Amarr

//

Which faction has the best ships Eve Online?

Amarr: Pros

Amarr ships are some of the most technologically advanced of the four factions.

I don’t want to be signing up for them I will be fighting for Minmatar though I am not fully armor tanked skilled.

In saying such, there has to be a winner and a loser and hey I am fine playing the loser in this RP FW

1 Like

Starting my carebear bingo card now … ‘go to null-sec to do real PVP’ … check!