No need to call him a troll.
But yeah, most of the objections I see from them seems to come from assumptions they have on what we want to do.
So your idea is now suddenly not tied to structures?
Right from the start I detailed that any corp or alliance could do 4 war decs without having a CONCORD agent and a structure, in your desire to attack me you seem to have missed it.
Because I understood that it was wise to have the ability to do a number of war decs and not have to pay for this type of thing. But the structure will give advantages like better intel on the activity of the defenders so could be worth doing. And if it got destroyed and they had only 4 war decs they continue. It allows any entity to do more than 4 war decs.
AAnd they can use an Astrahus too. As part of the war dec it will be flagged, but, if people want to get into space to attack it more kills.
Sorry, but he was coming over to me as one, but perhaps he genuinely thought that this was for anyone that was war decking, though I thought I made it clear it was a step up. Anyway, lets see how he reacts to this.
Iâm not attacking you at all. As Iâve said am I here to listen and to talk. And youâre indeed still tying wardecs to structures.
Again, we can already do all this in the game and there is no need to limit the number of wardecs, as each wardec also increases the number of enemies an aggressor has to face.
Yet you keep thinking that limiting wardecs is going to make it more fun for others when in fact they are already spamming wardecs just to find targets. Your idea will not make it easier to find targets, but it only makes it harder.
We are still not on the same page, mate.
We could focus target any merc group and we would do exactly that.
Limiting wars would not work and would completely kill the system, I understand what your saying about IF you do not have a structure your limited to 4 wars but there is current issues already within the war system that would make it very hard for 4 wars to sustain any content. (Useless locates, removed watchlist, easy to leave corp) just to name a few.
Limit would have to be around 20-30 to make some form of sustainable content for a small group.
Honestly Iâd drop a Astrahus in the most remote system and it would take someone a good amount of time to find it.
2 Likes
No I am not tying war decs directly to structures. I am limiting the number of war decs that a corp or alliance can do top 4 and if they want more they ahve to have a Concord agent in a Citadel, and the benefit they get is activity reports and location from the concord agent, if they lose that structure then the lose all but the last four war decs declared.
Nope, does not exist, not sure where I can end war decs this way at this point.
I am editing this because as per normal it was taken out of context and deliberately misunderstood, by destroying the Citadel you can end the war there and then, yes you go through the timers and all, but when the citadel falls the war dec ends, at this moment no such mechanism exists, you have to wait for the war decker to decide to end the war deck no matter how much you might have kicked him into touch. So I repeat the question which you did not answer where in the current system can a defender end the war dec? It does not exist.
Many people disagree with that point including people in the war dec discord, unless they go back on what they saidâŚ
Irrelevant a bunch of indy or miners are not adding much to contentâŚ, except making them log for a week or two.
Tough, blanket war decs are seen by many players as bad, and this way people will have to fight to be able to blanket war dec if people get to dislike them In any case they will lose the citadel, the cost of the war decs that were lost and will have to wait a few days to get it back up and running.
That is the intention, never hid it, it is aimed at blanket war deckers to try to match war deckers to what is in hisec. Blanket war decs where people donât ever see anyone who went to war with them are not doing hisec any favours.
And there isno issue if PIRAT ends up a super duper big daddy able to war dec nullsec alliances and contesting citadels against them, more content.
Definitely, I am not on the same page with a lot of people. So I will just beg to differ.
Do it, it is content.
The limit of 4 could be adjusted.
When I was in the war dec discord I also suggested that people who left a corp under a war dec could not rejoin a player corp within the war dec period, if they did it worked like corps joining an alliance when under a war dec.
Once above 4 war decs the location of the Citadel will be flagged, the system that is,in of course they would still have to probe it down.
I have to go, wife calling, but it is not a set in stone setup, it can be adjusted. The war dec system as a whole is rather good, it just needs some adjustments.
How to over complicate.jpg
Also so abusable
Thanks for free wars Iâll just move my alts all over the place 
Yes, you can. You simply need to make the others suffer enough losses. When they then donât want to give up and still want to fight you then thatâs their choice. Youâll only be making more kills. And when you no longer want to fight in corporate warfare then you can go back into an NPC corporation.
Your idea then doesnât end wars. When others want to fight you will they simply use one of the 4 available wardecs to fight you. Nor does it stop them from creating new corporations and to use them to declare war on you and they can also create an alliance to fight you.
The meta game will walk over your idea and will destroy whatever meaning you think youâre adding to the game. PIRAT is a rather tragic example, which shows to what lengths players are willing to go to have their fights. Botting is wrong, but the will to fight needs to be unleashed and allowed to run wild, and not find more limitations, or EVE will no longer be EVE.
The principal of allowing as many wardecs as possible only follows nature where prey and predator balance each other out. When we then have corporations spamming wardecs then it only means we have far too much prey and too few predators. There to make warfare more complex and limited is not going to support the predator and at worst helps the prey.
Does that work with blanket war deckers? I do not think so, and here is why.
I had the recollection that Hard Knocks Citizens won a skirmish against Vendetta, I went hunting for it and found it Two Phobus a Stratios and of course two neutral RR Guardians:
Hard Knocks are the strongest wormhole groups and are very involved in nullsec at this point, I would not be wrong to define them as elite. That was quite a defeat wasnât it and was the last engagement in that war dec. However that was dec was 7bn kills to VMG and 3bn to HKC, of course the two guardians were not countered as part of it.
That loss occurred on 14th May2016, the war dec was between the period 17th March 2016 to 27th May 2016, so they kept the war dec going and after that they were still war decked by VMG a further four times. But note after this defeat, the war dec continued for thirteen more days.
Categorically proves that winning a war or applying a crushing defeat on blanket war deckers does not end wars against blanket war deckers.
So when you say that in a bland glib way with total confidence, and I go and show you that it is utter bull, can you even start to think about why?
As I said it is to place a strategic vulnerability on people who currently have none and if they lose they lose. Simple really.
A nothing statement, what meta game, expalin in detail, not a one liner with no detail. PIRAT cheated full stop their success using bling ships was based on the advantage of botting. Smart people but cheaters none the less, even CCP Falcon was annoyed at them, which was a surprise I can tell you.
I donât know how you could get to that, I have to doubt your sanity, sorry that is insane. I think that statement just about kills my attempt to take you even remotely seriously, what a jokeâŚ
Thatâs a very good point right there.
Well, if thatâs the case I have to disagree with you, mate.
Personally I absolutely want to tie wardecs to structures, and I absolutely want it to be 1 WarRoom needed per system you want that war to be legal. In exchange, they can declare war to any number of people they want, but always through 1 structure per X targets, for 1 system.
This will give the missing territoriality that is lacking in High-sec. And it will open the attacker more as they get bigger.
All other areas of space in EVE have natural barriers, Null-sec have them enforced by force, J-space have their holes, FacWar has system ownership.
Only High-sec lacks it, and this is in my opinion one of the big aspect of why wars lack meaning there.
As the Empire gets bigger, their borders expand but they have more territories to defend and have to expose themselves to more ennemies. This is been played out multiple times in Mankindâs history and it is as natural as it gets.
And by having alliances and mercs having to plant that flag in a system in order to be able to attack people in it, this will create this mechanic.
For those too dense to see it, the structure doesnât have to be a 1bil citadel and have millions of reinforcement cycles. We can have a smaller structures that take minutes to anchor and is not aids to reinforce, thatâs half of your worries gone.
Are you saying wars need to end in after one fight?
I proved your statement utterly wrong.
Except that was a contractâŚ
So there goes another of your arguments lol
Rip
Kinda hard to get the whole picture when you only see what you want to see eh? 
Answer my question, noob. Do you believe wars have to end after one fight?
1 Like
Salty, you canât answer the crushing example I gave you can you and are floundering including the insult, thank you.
1 kill and 10 losses and you call me a noob, lolâŚ
I am OK with your suggestion, I just think mine is more simple.
This was uncalled for. You are not making your points any more valid by calling people that.
@Whitehound have you noticed how he avoids the facts like it was the Black Death?
Itâs amusing to see the defeated think theyâve won 
1 Like
Not salty. Who the hell in EVE calls themselves a PvPer and then believes wars are won in a single battle?!
That is ridiculous. Wars take as many battles as is necessary to win. When the defeated donât end the war then you havenât won.
You call yourself a PvP? Youâre a noob!
@Dantelion_Shinoni I can call him a noob, because thatâs what he is. And not even a noob in his first day of EVE would think a war is won in a single battle.
1 Like