# New player scamming - mass invite spammers **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Created:** [May 20, 2020, 9:28am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703 "2020-05-20T09:28:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Daichi\_Yamato](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/daichi_yamato/32/252995_2.png) [@Daichi\_Yamato](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Daichi_Yamato)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 5:37pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/26 "2020-05-20T17:37:18Z")
> [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > You mean like all nullsec groups? Perhaps a specific example may help… Do they do stuff in noob systems? Rookie chat? > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > “Noobs” aren’t the ones dropping fat loot and paying out thicc ransoms. Get out of here with that carebear chop logic. No one’s paying war fees to attack day-olds in Velators. More than that. The reason awox was removed was so that vets weren’t afraid to hire noobs that might be awoxers. But that wouldn’t suit his narrative. ---
**Author:** ![Daichi\_Yamato](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/daichi_yamato/32/252995_2.png) [@Daichi\_Yamato](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Daichi_Yamato)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 5:59pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/29 "2020-05-20T17:59:20Z")
> [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > Sure. And they exploit new players all the time. They gotta get their fill of F1 monkeys. You were supposed to say what they do to exploit them. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > Any competent vet didn’t hire awoxers anyway or simply had systems in place to make sure it wouldn’t matter much. The awox changes were made to lower the barrier for entry in general because data showed that joining a corp increased retention, not just for vets too afraid to recruit players. They missed the point why corps lead to better retention though. It wasn’t because recruiters were spamming invites to anyone and everyone. Or providing zero guidance and support to the players they recruited. It was exactly because care was taken during recruitment. Because time was spent developing every new member. And corps that were detrimental to the npe didn’t get very far. I’d be interested to see what player retention in corps was like in 2010 compared to today. And like with wardecs, they were warned this would happen. ---
**Author:** ![Ramona\_McCandless](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ramona_mccandless/32/468438_2.png) [@Ramona\_McCandless](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ramona_McCandless)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 6:01pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/30 "2020-05-20T18:01:03Z")
Lol “people who awox shouldnt get hired” Yeah dont marry an adulterer, either ---
**Author:** ![Destiny\_Corrupted](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/destiny_corrupted/32/411527_2.png) [@Destiny\_Corrupted](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Destiny_Corrupted)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 6:09pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/32 "2020-05-20T18:09:46Z")
Oh man. This is actually going to be easy. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > Kill boards track ISK efficiency, and that is the primary metric that **most** PvPers use to judge competency. > > Firstly, that’s not true, plenty look at the number of kills. Secondly, killing a bunch of easy to kill ships still give good isk efficiency. Increasing the risk of suffering a loss for a bigger win is less appealing than a small sure win. You have no idea what you’re talking about, and what you’re saying is pure conjecture, because you have no actual first-hand experience leading, or being part of, any sort of piracy-oriented organization. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > Their changes **are** what led to mass wardecs to begin with. There’s like three groups responsible for 95% of all wars today. > > That didn’t lead to mass wardecs. Mass wardecs were a thing before the changes. What the changes did was give players who wanted to be social but not engage in wars the ability to do so, by having a cop with no structures. Of course the mass wardec groups didn’t change their behaviour because they aren’t;t bright enough to realise that their behaviour was the problem. Now it just affects less corps. I was one of the first members of the Privateers. At our _peak_ we weren’t even responsible for just 5% of all wars in the game. And we had thousands of members. Today, Hell Dawn, WeR4, and P I R A T are responsible for over 85% of all outgoing wars. I actually kept track of the war board in-game for a while recently, and it was really easy to see. So, once again, you have no idea what you’re talking about, and what you’re saying is pure conjecture, because you have no actual first-hand experience leading, or being part of, any sort of piracy-oriented organization. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > The concept of fighting “half-decent PvP corps” is completely nonsensical because these groups **are** the PvP corps. > > They aren’t really though, are they? They are a bunch of poor PvPer farming newbies for stats then chest-beating about how brilliant they are. You have no idea what you’re talking about, and what you’re saying is pure conjecture, because you have no actual first-hand experience leading, or being part of, any sort of piracy-oriented organization. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > What exactly would the standard be measured against? > > It would be measured against PvPers that actually fight players that can and will fight back. Being willing to PvP (in any of its combat forms) is the definition of a “PvPer.” So, once again, you have no idea what you’re talking about, and what you’re saying is pure conjecture, because you have no actual first-hand experience leading, or being part of, any sort of piracy-oriented organization. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > I’ve been a part of almost **every** major high-sec war group over the years. I’d **know**. > > But you’d also lie because you’re looking to protect your easy gameplay. I have nothing to protect. That gameplay doesn’t exist anymore. Blanket wars aren’t my thing, and targeted wars for extortion and mercenary work are no longer practical, so I’m finding other things to do. Also, I have no need to lie. Lying is a coward’s folly. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > Of course they were blue; you basically told them to fight themselves. > > No I didn’t. I pointed to groups like TTT, EVE-Mogul, E-Uni, etc. They were banging on about how it’s not their fault that noone defends their structures so I gave them a list of groups that own structures and were likely to care if they were knocked down. Pretty much any major trade hub is going to cause a stir. And all of them are blue because you’d get wiped out if you went against them. Starting wars to bash structures (that don’t even drop player loot) is fundamentally un-fun. And the purpose of piracy isn’t just to “get fights” (although this is fine, _sometimes_), but to make some kind of living. A gameplay style revolving around fights in which you are sometimes victorious and don’t get much for the effort, and are sometimes defeated and lose quite a lot, is self-defeating and downright nonsensical. So, once again, you have no idea what you’re talking about, and what you’re saying is pure conjecture, because you have no actual first-hand experience leading, or being part of, any sort of piracy-oriented organization. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > A person who has done every form of PvP in the game for 15 years. > > Including mining? Actually, yes, including mining. One of the first things I did when I started playing was join a friend’s low-sec alliance, and later a 0.0 alliance in the southern regions (Omist, I think?), and mining was one of our primary income streams. Except we actually actively defended our ops, and chomped at the bit to engage any aggressors, instead of crying on the forums about “griefers” not letting us suck our rocks in peace. Welp, that was pretty easy. Didn’t even work up a sweat. 🕶 ---
**Author:** ![Wanda\_Fayne](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/wanda_fayne/32/377654_2.png) [@Wanda\_Fayne](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Wanda_Fayne)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 6:19pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/33 "2020-05-20T18:19:24Z")
> [@Forum\_Posting\_Alt](#): > > I see there are some rather determined individuals mass spamming newbies with corp invites - the senders are sent to doomheim almost immediately, and the corps they advertise also disappear quickly - I assume after ripping off some newbies through corp taxation… > > Can CCP do something about this? I can’t imagine it’s going to be a positive experience for new players Can you provide evidence, as in names of any of these Doomheimed characters and/or any of the invites? I’m not refuting your claims. Rather I would like to see confirmation. ---
**Author:** ![Daichi\_Yamato](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/daichi_yamato/32/252995_2.png) [@Daichi\_Yamato](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Daichi_Yamato)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 6:27pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/34 "2020-05-20T18:27:42Z")
> [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > When you sucessfully enslave me, you can tell me what I’m supposed to do. I feel like it was just yesterday you were saying that if you make a claim you should back it up with evidence, or you’ve got nothing. I’m just inviting you to be more specific about how null blocs exploit new players. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > Did they though? Yes definitely. Just as described. It wasn’t just corps that increased player retention. It was how corps were run and how recruitment policies were selective. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > It’s not like their changes created recruit spammers. What their changes did do is open up recruitment for people who were put off recruiting newbies because of the risk, which means the recruitment spammers dominate less of the market. I didn’t say they created them. But i will say they made it worse. More players may be in corps quicker now. But a much greater proportion of those corps are of terrible quality. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > Warened what will happen? That leadership will spam recruitment without giving a damn about the players they are recruiting. Skim corp tax from them and misinform them about the game. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > Wardecs for example they were like “oh but wars will get worse and there will be mass wardecs waah waah waah”, You were bad before but you’re being more disingenuous than usual. When people said wars will get worse, what do you mean? Who said wars would get worse and how? ---
**Author:** ![Daichi\_Yamato](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/daichi_yamato/32/252995_2.png) [@Daichi\_Yamato](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Daichi_Yamato)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 6:45pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/37 "2020-05-20T18:45:33Z")
> [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > No thanks, I’m good. I’m sure whatever is said you’ll deny to protect the poor innocent little null blobs. I don’t not believe you. And I’m no friend of null blobs either. But i haven’t seen the behaviour you describe. And i don’t know how far you’d stretch the definition of ‘exploit new bros’. You say they do stuff in rookie chat…but what? > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > But they can still run that way and still recruit selectively if they want. If you ran a good corp that selectively recruited players, how are you prevented from doing so after the changes? Exposure. A needle is easier to find if there isn’t a hay-stack. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > Prove it. SICO and ICANP hoovered up a disproportionate number of new players recently. Both were shown to have terrible management. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > I’m not, it’s just the same nonsense from you lot. any change that negatively impacts you you scream to high heaven about and says “oh it’ll definitely backfre” then when the changes comes in you shift the goalposts about until you can find a way to claim it backfired somehow. HTFU. Uh huh… Where did we change the goal posts? ---
**Author:** ![Bernie\_Nator](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/bernie_nator/32/390552_2.png) [@Bernie\_Nator](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Bernie_Nator)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 6:49pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/38 "2020-05-20T18:49:45Z")
> [@Daichi\_Yamato](#): > > SICO and ICANP hoovered up a disproportionate number of new players recently. Both were shown to have terrible management. Just a daily reminder that the CEO of Sico is running for CSM and added a bunch of corps to his alliance explicitly for the purpose of voting. ---
**Author:** ![Destiny\_Corrupted](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/destiny_corrupted/32/411527_2.png) [@Destiny\_Corrupted](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Destiny_Corrupted)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 6:57pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/39 "2020-05-20T18:57:22Z")
> [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > Prove it. Prove it? I’m not going to conduct a massive survey for a forum post argument. My proof is my first-hand involvement with this sphere of gameplay. I deal with a whole lot of similar players, and I know _exactly_ how we judge each other; you, on the other hand, don’t. ISK efficiency trumps everything. In fact, when we spot someone padding their board with mass frigate kills, we mock them mercilessly. You would know all of this, _if_ you were involved. Maybe you _should_ involve yourself, even if only for academic purposes. You would quickly come to understand why what you’re saying right now is drivel. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > So you were part of a terrible group of wardeccers and that proves… what? It proves firsthand experience with the system, which is more than you have. My knowledge comes from seeing and doing, and your knowledge comes from inferring according to your own sense of morality. The two can’t be compared. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > So? When was the last time you pulled the actual war stats, and how many wars were created? Has that number gone down? How many corps with no structures were wardecced? I’m not sure if there’s anywhere I can pull _actual_ war stats from. This was possible a long time ago, but no longer. Right now, all we have access to is the list of “recent wars” in-game. I followed that list for a few weeks recently, to get up to speed with the current situation and war mechanics. What I saw was that those three groups I mentioned were responsible for upwards of 90% of all wars. Has that number gone down…from what, exactly? From the amount of wars that were conducted in the past? That’s a resounding “yes,” as the rate of **all** new wars being declared is lower than **just** what Marmite was responsible for **by iitself** as recently as five years ago. And you can’t declare war on anyone who doesn’t have structures in space, so that’s a ridiculous question to ask. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > Again, prove it. I like how your evidence is that you were once in a crappy war group and you look at the in-game war lists for a handful or corps and said “whoa that’s many”. Still better than anything you’re able to offer. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > 🤣 🤣 So you’re crying about the loss of blanket wars even though you don’t like them and yo think extortion no longer works because the corp you wardec have structure in space to protect? Seems a bit backwards. I imagine if you threatened to nuke a major trade hub they’d pay you to not do that. Threatening to nuke a major trade hub would be all risk and no reward. It’s not like I would get any of the items inside. Even if I successfully do it, they can just put another one up, and the effort I would have to expend to take it down would exceed the difficulty of replacement considerably. Things just don’t work the way you imagine them to. Once again, if you had firsthand experience, you’d know this. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > Don’t do it then. Target groups that defend their structures and use the structure to bring them to the field and fight them. Stop whining that corps who don’t want wars arent; forced to feed you content. I already explained this to you and don’t want to do it again. ---
**Author:** ![Daichi\_Yamato](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/daichi_yamato/32/252995_2.png) [@Daichi\_Yamato](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Daichi_Yamato)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 7:09pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/40 "2020-05-20T19:09:21Z")
> [@Bernie\_Nator](#): > > Just a daily reminder that the CEO of Sico is running for CSM and added a bunch of corps to his alliance explicitly for the purpose of voting. Wouldn’t be surprised if it’s Naari\_Naarian ---
**Author:** ![Destiny\_Corrupted](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/destiny_corrupted/32/411527_2.png) [@Destiny\_Corrupted](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Destiny_Corrupted)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 7:46pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/42 "2020-05-20T19:46:36Z")
> [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > It’s only your assumption that I have no experience, it’s also your assumption that all groups operated like yours. then there’s the question of objectivity. Then feel free to publicly state that you: - have experience with the high-sec war system - have initiated and engaged in wars - have dealt with multiple other players who did the same as allies and enemies - and have generally engaged in non-consensual PvP as an aggressor in a quantity sufficient to attain at least a moderate degree of experience - name at least one such group you were a part of Also, while I can’t speak for _every_ group, as I said before, I was a member of a whole lot of them. Pretty much every _major_ one until about 2017, at least. Yes, there will always be outliers - I never argued against that. That’s why I say "most\*. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > I’m not sure if there’s anywhere I can pull _actual_ war stats from. > > From the ESI. It’s pretty straightforward. My apologies, then. I have only recently come back from a break, and don’t know the functionality of that new system. I’ll explore it later, but won’t be able to do it in time for this thread. As far as I know, though, the in-game war board reports _all_ new wars, so having followed that for a few weeks, I’d imagine that the sample is fairly reliable. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > So then CCP achieved their goal of reducing mass wardecs. It seems that they have reduced the number of wardecs _in general_, which is the expected outcome of implementing a change like the structure requirement for wars. However, the percentage of blanket wars out of all wars declared seems to have gone up considerably. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > And you can’t declare war on anyone who doesn’t have structures in space, so that’s a ridiculous question to ask. > > But you used to be able to but can’t now, so that’s reduced. But the outcome appears to be more negative this way. In the past, wars were more personal, and on a smaller scale, which meant that defenders often _did_ fight back. Today, all I see happening is the blanket war groups camping pipes and major hub stations. I’m no longer seeing fights, just ganks. The system has definitely become less dynamic and fun. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > That’s because I’m not offering anything. I’m backing CCPs play which is based on their data, so it’s them you’re arguing against. Having a structure requirement for wars is fine in itself. The issue is that the system is full of holes. For example, you can use a 1-man shell corporation to administer the structure(s), and while that structure is vulnerable, all of your normal members are safe from the war. And this isn’t just something that precious carebears that we must protect and coddle at all costs can take advantage of. It’s just not a good system all around. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > Why? For every billion ISK in a buy or sell order up in a station, a minimum of 5m ISK is unrecoverable if the station is destroyed as that’s the NPC part of the brokers fee, not to mention that any major trader would be put off using it again. With that you should be able to force a trade hub owner to pay you not to bring it down or bring a fight, so you either get ISK or content. You’re still approaching PvP entirely from the “gudfite” perspective. EVE isn’t an arena, or at least it’s not an arena for _everyone_. Being a pirate entails, and necessitates, more than just getting fights for “content.” Fighting has to make financial sense, too. Most of the opportunities available with regard to attacking structures provide little financial incentive. Meanwhile, ambushing a player can _always_ result in a ransom. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > Sure they do, you’re just too fixed in the way you look at things to realise it. Feel free to explain how and why, then. ---
**Author:** ![Daichi\_Yamato](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/daichi_yamato/32/252995_2.png) [@Daichi\_Yamato](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Daichi_Yamato)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 7:48pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/43 "2020-05-20T19:48:10Z")
> [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > There’s all types. From “we’ll totally move all your stuff, honest” through “the buyback program is totally not a scam to get you farming for cheap”. Is that what they put in rookie chat and noob system local? Cause I’d consider that bad form. It’d be surprising that ccp allowed that. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > But there always was a hay stack. There were always lots of corps recruiting. What you’re really saying is now they have to compete with other decent corps too. I don’t think the hay-stack was as big then as it is now. I try to keep in touch with the new npe with new characters. And i believe that it’s harder to find a good corp today than it was when i started. So many corps are dishonest in their adverts, inactive and lead by idiots. Another interesting statistic for ccp to look at would be the turnover of corporations and how many corps players go through before they settle. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > That hasn’t been shown though. All I’ve seen is a bunch f people who don’t like them giving them a disproportionate amount of grief. I have and alt in SiCo and for the most part it seems decent enough. If you really wanna know, do some asking around or join them yourself. SICO are quite notorious now. Bring em up in local and you’ll get the odd ‘oh _those_ guys’ and ‘yeah i used to be in that corp’ And i was part of ICANP which had a fail cascade when junior leadership got fed up of propping up the corp alone and unsupported, and especially got fed up with the cult BS. ICANP was spamming recruitment despite the wardec, and provided no warning nor assistance to their new members. It was not interested in what it could do for new players. And entirely focused on using them as a lobbying group whilst taking corp tax. ---
**Author:** ![Ramona\_McCandless](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ramona_mccandless/32/468438_2.png) [@Ramona\_McCandless](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ramona_McCandless)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 7:50pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/44 "2020-05-20T19:50:39Z")
SICO also had a number of AWOXes recently that they are sweeping under the rug. ---
**Author:** ![Bernie\_Nator](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/bernie_nator/32/390552_2.png) [@Bernie\_Nator](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Bernie_Nator)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 7:55pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/45 "2020-05-20T19:55:32Z")
Are we also counting the 5 orcas they managed to lose in a single day because not a single one of them mentioned their orca was going down, neither in discord or in any eve related chat channel? ---
**Author:** ![Ramona\_McCandless](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ramona_mccandless/32/468438_2.png) [@Ramona\_McCandless](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ramona_McCandless)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 7:56pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/46 "2020-05-20T19:56:13Z")
There’s a lot that “doesnt happen” when it definately has going on. ---
**Author:** ![Solonius\_Rex](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solonius_rex/32/388172_2.png) [@Solonius\_Rex](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solonius_Rex)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 8:01pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/47 "2020-05-20T20:01:12Z")
> [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > How does this solve the issue? All this does is once again open up awoxing. Exactly. So shitty corps will be inundated with Awoxers and they will either have to learn their lesson and actually vet and choose who to accept, which will decrease the spams, or they will lose ships. ---
**Author:** ![Solonius\_Rex](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solonius_rex/32/388172_2.png) [@Solonius\_Rex](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solonius_Rex)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 8:25pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/49 "2020-05-20T20:25:57Z")
> [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > But scam corps that are being discussed here do not care. What will actually happen is that semi-decent corps will find it difficult to recruit without arbitrary limits on history and we’ll be back to a situation where genuine new players are ignored by decent corps because they look too much like awoxers. a). If they are actual scam corps, then, yeah, they do care. Imagine having someone who constantly joins and kills other corp members while discussing in length how bad the corp is and how they should move to another corp. The point of scam corps that recruit new players is so that they can milk them, and human beings at large tend not to care about things that dont happen to them or affect them directly, i.e. starving children in africa versus yourself starving because you cant afford food. Just joining a corp and spamming that this place sucks isnt going to leave a large impact. Going around killing those players and explaining why this corp sucks and this is a good reason why, does. b). Semi decent corps will already be able to deal with this. Theres a reason why groups like Brave Newbies and, previously, EVE uni were doing just fine even before the friendly fire off button. They had no problems recruiting and holding players, no problems dealing with Awoxers. c) remember, I said beyond a certain size. Small corps wont be affected. Its only corps that go beyond a certain limit, that get bloated by mass recruiting and blind accepting of players, that will suffer. Im also okay with forgoing this friendly fire off system for larger corps if they set their taxes to 0%. But if you are a large corp, with 1+% taxes, then yeah, friendly fire on. ---
**Author:** ![Destiny\_Corrupted](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/destiny_corrupted/32/411527_2.png) [@Destiny\_Corrupted](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Destiny_Corrupted)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 9:08pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/51 "2020-05-20T21:08:55Z")
> [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > I can do the rest but I’m not burning alts. Then do it. Also, I didn’t ask you to name your character(s), just a single group you were a part of. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > I have only recently come back from a break, and don’t know the functionality of that new system. > > ESI is not that new. If you’re so out of touch, how can you sit there lecturing me about how experienced you are and how you believe I’m not? Because I’m playing the game, not managing web code. As far as I can tell, being an ESI expert isn’t necessary for me to draw conclusions about the game itself, especially when I have in-game data. Regardless, I’m not falling into this debate trap of being called out into performing many hours of professional data analysis to bolster an argument which you’ll then say you didn’t even bother to read anyway. Saying that “the sky is blue” doesn’t necessitate citing multiple scientific papers. When I look at the in-game war board, and see that out of the roughly 30-40 new wars declared each day, three groups are responsible for close to nine-tenths of them, that should be good enough, because it is easily verifiable. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > It seems that they have reduced the number of wardecs _in general_ , which is the expected outcome of implementing a change like the structure requirement for wars. However, the percentage of blanket wars out of all wars declared seems to have gone up considerably. > > There goal was to reduce mass wardecs, which were already most wardecs before the change, so that’s obviously going to reduce all wardecs. When I read the blogs with regard to these new gameplay mechanics, they stated that their goals were to create meaningful engagements in wars, and not to affect the number of wars. CCP isn’t stupid enough to say that they want to reduce player conflict in a blog, which an explicit desire of decreasing war numbers would convey. Also, while it’s true that most of the wars before the changes were of the blanket type, the proportion to the total was still less. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > How can you say it’s gone up when you haven’t stated what it was before and are yet to look at the data that would say what it is now? You’re looked at an in-game system and said “by golly that’s a lot” and that’s now hard data for you. Sorry, but I’ll need to see the actual figures. Why do I need to state it when it’s so easily verifiable in game? There are _about_ 40 new wars declared every day (at least there were when I kept track a few months ago), and you can easily see how many of them the three primary groups are responsible for. In the past, that board scrolled so fast, that it changed entirely every two hours. Which is in line with your argument (which I agree with) that overall, the amount of wars has gone down. The difference is that in the past, there were more than three big groups doing it. I can’t quantify this for you without doing tens of hours of work going through every known high-sec war group’s war history. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > How were they? The whole reason for this change was that the stats showed that the vast majority of wars were from a small number of groups, that most had no defender kills and that activity dropped off a cliff and never recovered after the war. Other than your feelings, what actual data do you have that shows that wasn’t the case and that the changes made it worse? Wars, by their nature, and with a very small number of exceptions, aren’t something that a defending party desires. The losing party to a war (and in EVE, that usually happens to be the defender) will end up being negatively affected. The concept of the “defender kill” becomes a red herring, in this case. Just because there are more defender kills today (enabled by the additional combat utility that structures provide), doesn’t mean that the defenders aren’t as negatively impacted as they were before. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > The issue is that the system is full of holes > > I don’t disagree with this. Unfortunately the war system was in such a dire state that it was suggested that removing it entirely would have been better than leaving it as it was, so the changes just got jammed in. If war groups had policed themselves in the first place the changes wouldn’t have been needed at all. They did police themselves. It’s just that for carebears, _any_ amount of nonconsensual PvP is _too much_, so the amount of crying done was always the same. And yes, it would probably have been better to scrap the system entirely. Of course, they’d have to compensate for the lack of destruction elsewhere, such as by nerfing high-sec income. Otherwise, the market would start to inflate. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > You’re still approaching PvP entirely from the “gudfite” perspective. > > By suggestuign a way for your to extort a payment from a target? Your suggestion is “big” PvP. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with that, in order to be able to accomplish something like this, I would need a _large_ group of people. I’m not going to be able to do this by grabbing a friend and rolling up in two Leshaks. And that’s my issue with the new system: it eviscerates small, personal engagements. Decreasing the amount of wars in general is not the same as decreasing the amount of large-scale blanket wars. You’re probably happy with _any_ change that decreases wars in any shape or form, though, which is why I wanted some example of your wardec credentials. I find it hard to believe that _any_ person who did high-sec wars would want wars to be removed. > [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > > [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > > > Fighting has to make financial sense, too. > > So you blanket wardec noobs cos that’s where all the money is while massive trade hubs are too poor to pay a ransom? By definition, “blanket” wars don’t discriminate against the type of player on the receiving end. ---
**Author:** ![Shipwreck\_Jones](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/shipwreck_jones/32/274382_2.png) [@Shipwreck\_Jones](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Shipwreck_Jones)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 9:23pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/52 "2020-05-20T21:23:29Z")
Holy shitballs. You sure know how to hijack a thread. You guys have fun. ---
**Author:** ![Merin\_Ryskin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/merin_ryskin/32/259354_2.png) [@Merin\_Ryskin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Merin_Ryskin)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2020, 9:51pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703/54 "2020-05-20T21:51:44Z")
> [@Lucas\_Kell](#): > > For the most part it’s done by giving them things to fight over. Encourage those evading wars to want a thing and encourage those that want to declare wars to want to take that thing away from the others. But your claim is that these people are “neckbeards” and “incels” and grief newbies because they enjoy hurting people. How exactly is giving them an in-game objective going to change their behavior? Or are you going to take back all of the things you have said about them and take the position that they are legitimate players playing the game in a normal and rational way, and therefore subject to normal incentives within the game? And, aside from the “griefers”, if the goal people have is killboard stats and CCP has no control over killboards how is giving an alternative objective going to change anything? They’re already ignoring alternative targets right now because they only care about the killboard stats, what exactly is giving them even more alternatives going to do? [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703.md?page=1) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/new-player-scamming-mass-invite-spammers/242703.md?page=3)