They will get it locked, they do it all the time.
Yep, itâs their preferred strategy.
Just ignore the people who are not constructive and stick to the topic.
These are perfectly reasonable questions and points to raise. If someone is claiming knowledge and experience of a subject, itâs more than fair to challenge those credentials.
2 Likes
They often give you an opportunity to expose more, take this guy who thinks I have no experience from a rather infantile view of Dracvladâs killboard. That allowed me to define what a successful defense looks like in the current state of war decs.
What benefit is there to a defender in fighting back as a hisec corp or alliance chilling in hisec, just another war dec as you are good content, you can be farmed and they can have fun at your expense and the people in your corp and alliance. And the people who do fight will soon leave anyway for nullsec probably.
I tried to explain in the war dec discord that there was no benefit to fighting back, just down sides, because what happens is that others will see it and go ah content and in comes the war dec and fail cascade incoming. So I suggested a war dec holiday for fighting back, based on lossmails of combat ships. But the war deckers went nah, only if they win the war, which is possible but not that easy to do. How many players in T1 ships do I have to get together to kill a bling fitted Proteus backed up by five neutral RR Nestors for example. Aka PIRAT.
And yes that is an extreme example and I know that people like the Devils run around without neutral RR and take risks, which is why I liked and respected them. However, this is a perception, it is all based on perception and the simple fact is that there is no value for anyone in hisec to fight back and there is no value in nullsec WH corps or lowsec groups to come to get pay back, because there is nothing to force a fight.
So my objective was to create something meaningful to force a fight, and give back something to enable hunting. Which my idea will do, I hopeâŚ
But you know what will happen, someone, perhaps the same person who said there was no demand for the bumping timer, will say there is no demand to link wardecks to structures, I can see it comingâŚ
Except you didnât, all you showed is how poor you are at gathering data and making sense of it.
And look at the personal attack followups, arenât they just so predictable and sad. I laugh at them, as they are always the same, desperate attempts to gain an emotive response, when all I feel is hearty contempt and acute amusement. I have three of them at me all posting emo type stuff in desperation, isnât that grand and fascinating.
Itâs not a strategy, but itâs where he is taking the thread. He has been told several times that we can already declare war on others and attack their structures. Yet he claims that his ideas would create this. He cannot or doesnât want to accept that it is already in the game.
How do you suggest we get him to understand this? He seem to be playing a completely different game than we do.
1 Like
Youâre nothing more than an embarrassment draccie
Claiming you did highsec wars, then saying you arenât a war deccer.
Then wanting to make the strong stronger while obviously handicapping more the weak.
People wonât change their attitude about wars, because thatâs how people work.
Nullsec people still wonât give a care about them, neither will lowsec guys, and highsec people will still cower in fear.
I donât understand how youâre going to put in the effort to go after mercs then if youâre not putting any effort ingame to go after them at this time (so typical of forum warriors really)
Reminds me of the bumping threads, where you cry so hard to get it removed, but you arenât trying to counter it ingame either 
3 Likes
What you have described there is EVE in a nutshell. Having fun at others expense is pretty much how PVP happens in EVE. There are no âfairâ or âhonourableâ fights. If a fight is close, then you didnât bring enough friends.
All you have defined is what you consider to be a successful defence. There are no objectives in wars in EVE. Thatâs the whole point of it. The party declaring war has their own objectives that they decide when they push the button. Or maybe they donât have any at all. Maybe itâs because you flew too close to a wreck from one of their kills, or maybe itâs because they didnât like the name of your ship. Maybe their objective is to scare you into dropping to an NPC corp.
Putting a set objective into war decs forces confines on what a group wants to get out of declaring war on another alliance. I know that merc corps were employed during WWB to provide trade route denial to CFC and to try to dry up their supplies. With your suggestion, that removes the player set objectives and forces them to play a different way. Yes currently wars are weighted in the favour of the attacker, but only because of the reaction (or lack thereof) of the defenders. I, and many others judging from the responses youâve had, donât see that having a structure to shoot (one of the most boring aspects of the game) will change that.
Your responses are petulant and childish and by resorting to insults you devalue your argument, regardless of what I think of your experience. Youâve consistently refused to listen to reasons why your ideas are flawed.
3 Likes
Did I say otherwise, is that your belief? Because it is most certainly not mine, who are you trying to convince, yourself?
There is no set objective, the only thing that has changed is that there is now a strategic objective on which a fight can be forced if people want to, nothing else has changed.
I know that too, however the Goons could not really afford to send fleets to hisec when embroiled in a full on sov war. They could interdict that attempt by blowing up the war dec citadel, but would probably have it low down on the list.
Except that it will, because it has meaningful value.
I can understand why that scares you, hence the personal attacks and stuff, but it is shown to work in other areas of the game. The CONCORD agent linked to the war decs ability in a structure is a content driver, do you understand that?
So itâs boring, you donât want to do it, oh dear, we have had stonking fights around citadels and even around entosis, minus Fozzieclaws of courseâŚ
You donât like it because the big nasty scary nullsec alliance will come in and kick over your sandcastle because now they will be able to do that. One of the war deckers in the Discord channel said that to me and it is a natural reaction.
So you can call me petulant and childish as much as you want, I donât care, you can try and fail to attack my experience I donât care. You can try and fail to mock and suggest that I said things or believe things that I did not and do not , I donât care. That is your opinion, I donât agree with it and you donât agree with mine.
So when you came after me to say you have no experience, you made your arguments weak, donât forget that. And your arguments are weak, it is boring , we donât want to do that. Come on⌠can you do better than that, it appears not!
And the dumb emo posts cascade in again, ROFL are you two just one trick ponies, or do you have any other things you can add Dom and White.
Oh look removing part of a sentence to change the meaning and then not understanding the difference between a set objective and a strategic objective, you are desperate mate. 
smacks of acute desperation⌠So you now deleted Strategic in your reply, ROFL. This is comedy gold⌠LMAO, explode, haha, I am laughing too much, you are terrible at this. And now set has done a runner too, ROFL
PS I will leave you three to your I donât want to do that whine fest, oh dear, so sadâŚ
Itâs not just us here in this thread. Many players hate structure bashes. Itâs in the game and people just donât enjoy it.
Dracvlad believes he is giving us structure bashes and that itâs going to be awesome.
Itâs as if he is living in a different reality.
1 Like
Who did?
Then why are you still talking about it?
He obviously touched you deep inside, otherwise you wouldnât talk about it every other post 
1 Like
What a nonsense sentence! 
âThere is no objective ⌠there is objective âŚâ
Heâs lost it. Cannot be long before he explodes. Tick-tock ⌠tick-tock âŚ
1 Like
I guess this is the perfect thread to start shooting that idea in the head once and for all.
Yes, EVE is not about âfairâ fights, anyone who has played the game enough knows that, but there is a difference between âfairâ and âenjoyableâ.
A fight doesnât have to be fair to be enjoyable, but the problem is both the game and the community engineered an atmosphere where not only you do not get fair fights but you do not even get enjoyable fights.
This âif a fight is fair you screwed up somewhereâ is cancer to the game and will do it in. And no I am not asking for fair fights, Iâm asking for the end of the lack of commitment that allow people to run away from anything that is not a 100% crushing victory.
Fleeing from a fight you are sure to lose is wise. Fleeing from a fight you could win is cowardly.
More and more EVE becomes more risk-averse because people can just keep retreating and fleeing, jumping away again and again, because they have nothing planted they have to defend. Lack. Of. Commitment. So of course in that case the only thing to do is keep doing so until you have that famous 100% crushing victory, and thus refusing to either undock or even play the game if they donât.
What I want is people being balls to the wall and having to go 5vs20 because they have that flag planted there and if they are commited to it. This is where great stories can happen. Null-Sec, Worhmoles, even Faction Warfare at a time, can all generate those kind of stories and this is why they attract people to the game.
Your rotting High-sec can barely generate those kind of advertising because all it is is a space full of ruffians with licenses to kill each other for no meaningful reasons.
Sure, EVE is not about fair fight, the weak should lose more and they do, they get rightfully crushed under overwhelming odds.
However, this is a bit of a meme now that it has been repeated all over the internet, when two mices play with each other at fighting, if the bigger mouse does not let the smaller mouse win from time to time, the smaller mouse will just refuse to play.
Even at the animal level they understand that you have to give a chance to fight back and win to the smaller side.
Nobody here will voluntarily do it, because the cost of defeat in EVE is real, thus the game has to do it for us. And that that means by making fights fairer, not fair but fairer. Either through diminishing returns from numbers (irl itâs harder to control a bigger force) or through mechanics.
With the structures, what we want first is a clear way for the defender to come and play with you if you refuse to give them the opportunity. I think this is fair, and EVE needs fairness as much as you all want to say that EVE is not about it.
Else people will just refuse to play.
1 Like
That is so spot on, great paragraph and then this:
Blows it away and this is the dagger to the heart:
Great post really great. You impressed the absolute hell out of me.
But sadly we are exchanging with one guy here who does not understand the difference between a set objective and a strategic objective. Another who does personal insults only TM, and another who is not able to check the corp or alliance history for war decsâŚ
Look at this corker:
Does he really believe this Others can impose their will or restrictions on your play by being a threat and forcing you to play in a specific way, but then again his posting approach is very similar to a troll player who was proud to steal billions from Bombers Bar in an emo outburst because they did not give him the respect he felt he deservedâŚ
Does it not occur to you that what is enjoyable to one person may not be enjoyable to another?
If this is about you begging to be animated to play the game, which you donât enjoy, while forcing others to play âa game on railsâ and just so you can have fun, then youâre far worse than Iâd imagined.
You can do whatever you want in EVE and youâre not forced to play it in a specific way. If you cannot understand this, but want it changed, because youâre not enjoying it then leave.
Youâre the guy who cannot get his ass up and into the fight and asks if he can have a wheel chair ramp into a boxing ring.
Is this seriously what you want?
1 Like
I would argue that itâs the game rather than the community. We have a game where there are consequences to losing ships. Because of those consequences most pilots will avoid losing ships if they donât have to. Thatâs what drives players to the point of only taking a fight theyâre guaranteed to win.
And as much as people will claim otherwise, this happens throughout the entirety of EVE. Yet seemingly hisec is attacked most over this. Most EVE players are naturally ârisk-averseâ. Those that arenât either fly small and cheap, or have billions of isk behind them. The old adage of âdonât undock what you canât afford to loseâ is testament to this. The only way youâre going to change this is by removing the consequences of death - if any of you want that you need to rethink the game you play.
There is no fairness to EVE of any kind. Itâs not fair that my buzzard gets killed by Marmite at a gate when I wasnât paying attention, nor is it fair that the entirety of EVE ganged up on CFC in WWB. This is not a game that is designed to be fair, or that needs to be made fairer. Itâs a game where you either adapt and learn, or band together to form numbers where you can attempt to get revenge. EVE is not for people who will quit a game over losing, pure and simple.
Hisec has never been the shining beacon that people seem to believe it has. There was no âgolden ageâ of hisec. Hisec isnât âstagnantâ, itâs the same as itâs always been. Thatâs an excuse used by those who donât live in hisec to change the mechanics there.
I donât understand this yearning for âgreat storiesâ either. Most of these kinds of fights donât occur willingly and never will. They happen by accident and canât be forced. The battle of B-R5RB wasnât planned. Ask either side if they would relive that and I bet theyâd politely decline.
Yeah youâre right
Now,
Who was it @Dracvlad
Your lack of answer makes me think it was only yourself imagining that ever being said⌠lol
You should seriously ignore that guy. At least, until he stops being so⌠poisonous.
1 Like
Or better, until he stops putting words into other peopleâs mouths.
1 Like
Actually EVE is very fair at the start. Everyone gets the same chances. What matters are the choices one makes throughout oneâs career. When one gets ganked by a player with 10 alts is this something anyone can do, too. It may only take a while to get there or require a little bit of money, but even with the existing real-world differences can one still come to riches in EVE and have many accounts.
Make the wrong decisions and one will always get stepped on. Make the right ones and you can have a great time playing EVE.
1 Like
Please, Iâm here to talk and to listen. Iâm not poisonous at all.
Iâm still waiting for Dracvlad to recognize that we can already bash structures in EVE. You need to ask him why he doesnât see it or why he doesnât want to acknowledge it. Heâs a grown man and should be able to act like one.
I could interpret his comment as is him saying âAll icecream shops shall only sell banana icecream, because he enjoys banana icecream the mostâ. I just donât believe heâs such an immature person to make arguments like a little child. I really donât. I do believe heâs a grown-up.
1 Like