New Wardec mechanics - can't wait!

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
902

No. It’s a question. I’m asking you how you can ask me such a question and you have no answer to it.

To quote Sun Tzu, “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

You have no answer to what it means to win, which means you don’t know what victory means to yourself. Your entire fight becomes an absurdity, where you fight without a goal and without a reason, and now your suggestion is not just to fight the corp, but the players leaving the corp and beyond.

In short, even if they implemented it the way you want it, and even if they completely removed the ability to drop from a corp, would you never win, because you don’t know when you’ve won.

903

It is not possible for me to answer a subjective view question any more than it is to ask me a subjective view question and telling me that I can’t answer it. You have done it before and not long ago. Here is your previous subjective view question repeated because you seem to have forgotten it.

You return to the loaded question scenario where if an answer is given then the opposite answer is touted as a reason why the person knows nothing. This will shift your argument to a situation where yet again a loaded question is asked.

That… is arguing the status quo. Even if we did add anything at all the answer to “did you win the war” is entirely subjective. There is still no defined answer for winning a war in the game any more than if any change was made.

904

Either tell me when you have won or say that you don’t know.

905

If you continue to argue with logical fallacies as your basis then the battle continues and the victor has yet to be decided.

906

You’ve lost.

907
908

No.

It’s only your perspective, but not mine. I have handed you the chance to snatch victory when I’ve asked you when you’ve won. And you didn’t take it, because you don’t know when you’ve won. So I’ve taken the win and the winner gets to declare the loser. It isn’t the loser who gets to say who has won.

909

Sorry it was dragged out this long, but I did warn you about this.

If you do want to continue discussing wardecs and brainstorming ideas, let me know.

910
911

Do you need me to give you the victory?

912

This isn’t the problem, at least not for me. MinerArt here doesn’t seem to know when he has won and also not when he has lost. So for him to take part in the discussion does he need to realize what matters to him and that he cannot expect the defeated player to declare him the winner, like a Dad who pretends to have lost only to let his son win. Because of this is he struggling to come to terms with what a meaningful end condition for a war is. To chase players from corporations and to keep fighting them isn’t a good idea, because it lacks a deciding factor. The deciding factor should be the moment when players are leaving the corp.

913

You’re starting to bore me with the lack of a valid challenge. We’re back to repetition as a challenge. That was declared many posts ago.

If we’re going to go back to post 491 you’re going to end up with the same issue.

914

So, to get our minds out of the corp hopping subject (to which I can only say that the problem was that you both had good points but you both couldn’t reconcile them).

Here is something I was thinking about:

Diplomatic Resort
Structure

  • Can only be anchored within 200 to 500 km of a Station.
  • Can be anchored within 175 km of another Upwell Structure.
  • A limited number of those are allowed per station depending on sec status.
  • Only allows docking to members of the owning corp.
  • The Structure allows setting up Meetings with Agents from CONCORD, the Empire owning the system, and the Corporation owning the station the structure is anchored to.
  • The results of Meetings depend on the number corp members in the structure (up to a maximum of X) when the Meeting is held.
  • Meetings would give unique buffs (and debuffs) to the characters participating (resulting from your intense partying or diplo activities).
  • Meetings would be the way to gain perks for your corp.
  • Lore-wise, Diplomatic Resort are Pleasure Hubs where you try to convince representatives of the different powers in EVE to support and push the cause of your corp by making them live the good life in a finely crafted environment.
  • Material Rewards TBD.
  • No High-slots. Only 1 reinforcement timer.

The obvious goal here is to give a proper incentive (aka one that is not about increase war decs costs for attackers) for corps to grow bigger.
They also create more points of Contention in High-sec.
More importantly, they open up an avenue for Corporate/Diplomatic warfare. In that this is the way you can gain affiliations with the powers of Empire space, and thus ways for others to make you lose said affiliations could be created (missions for enemies to kidnap one of those agents, Rogue structures allowing you to contest/disrupt a Diplomatic Resort?), and ways to cash in (being able to summon a fleet from the Caldari Navy to attack a structure?).

Plus, another goal is to liven up Stations. Diplomatic Resorts could be customizable, having very different forms and functions. One could be a giant space bar, another would be a gigantic casino, the other a place of visibly devious occupations. The anchoring spatial limitations ensure that Stations will have multiple resorts within eye’s view around.

The buffs and debuffs would create variance in the “power level” of a corp.
There could be that week where X corp got a nasty STD and have their tracking reduced by 25%, which would be the moment ideal to go after them in smaller ships. Or they could get a big buff increasing their firing speed by 10% or a 10% bonus damage to structures, encouraging them to get things done.

Tying it to wardecs and ganking, you could interact with CONCORD through them. Asking for wars with better attributes (a special kind of war where dropping corp would still have you at war?? for example), or an extra second or two before CONCORD blows you up??..

Finally, we were talking about corps starting at a “bare minimum” state and slowly getting perks by opening themselves up to risk (you have a corp hangar now but you can be wardecced).
A way to do that could be through Diplomatic Resorts.
This would have the clear benefits of cockblocking corps that could not contest a spot for a Resort, helping curb the amount of small/noob corps.

I will create a thread that will essentially be a Design Workshop for this, as there are still some things I haven’t figured as in how to make them not be an isk faucet, the type of material rewards they could afford, the proper stats, ways to make people undock during the process, etc…

Tell me what you think, especially @Whitehound :100:

915

Is this meant to replace the current mechanic of declaring war? Does one first have to set up the structure before one can go to war? And would the destruction of the structure therefore mean one can no longer declare war until a new structure has been set up?

916

Nope.

I’m internally debating on if one could house a potential War Room module in a service slot, but we still have to figure out what said War Room would be all about, and it would definitely not be specific to that structure.

917

We do have fleet boosts. So it shouldn’t compete with fleet boosts, because these already are the existing method for giving a group of players a bonus. One also needs to be careful with the type of boosts/buffs one wants to give to a group, because if it gives i.e. a boost to DPS then CONCORD would not only have to punish the pilot doing it, but also the thing which is giving the extra damage. Hence do we not have DPS fleet boosts, or they’d have to get CONCORDed, too (and the buff to tank a fleet booster can give isn’t an issue for CONCORD, because the aggressor will get punished regardless of any tank).

But I like the idea of getting players more frequently together and to reward them for it, even if it’s just for a meeting. That’s a nice idea and promotes team work.

1 Like
918

Seems like a worthwhile goal indeed.

I’m just trying to add in a reason to now undock together that could be tied in.

Outside of that, I think we do have to clarify the situation of the War Structure and/or War Room, we have being going around the minutiae enough that I think we can come up with… a joint statement?

1 Like
919

This is a complicated system you’re proposing.

Far too complicated for a new player.

New players are already overwhelmed with choice, when they start. This proposal just adds another layer.

New players have a difficult time understanding how to engage with the game. Many new players know no one who plays EVE. There is no CCP manual or rule book. This game is, or was for me and others, a combination of trial by error and a mentoring process.

One of the loudly proclaimed reasons people advocate for a rework of the war dec mechanic is new players, and how difficult the current application of the war dec mechanic, in highsec, is on new players.

Your proposal just worsens this situation in my opinion. Taking a mechanic, which as it stands now, is literally player group versus player group, and making it into a combination of player v. environment and player v. player, adds layers of complication.

Right now, if a new player enters the game and is either smack talked or in some manner insulted, or aggrieved, they can create a corp and war dec their aggressor, and at least try to participate in the game, in what the game considers a “legal” manner (no suicide ganking). It’s pretty straightforward. Open corp, then war dec, then try to exact revenge/justice (depending upon view point).

My point is a new player can engage with the game and their surroundings (other players) in a reasonable amount of time.

Your suggestion eliminates that ease of access entirely.

I urge you to “stream line” your idea, keeping in mind those new players that would like to participate in war decs.

Don’t make it so complicated a new player has no choice but to join an already established corp to even try to play the game.

That’s my two cents on what you outlined.

o7

p.s. If your point with this proposal is to change the game’s war dec mechanics in such a manner that a small group or solo player can no longer participate in war deccing, I mean literally than you must belong to a reasonably large corporation to participate, then please disregard my wall of text. I misunderstood your proposal entirely.

920

Try to remember that a new player is also barely understanding the basics of travel, shooting, drones, and reloading before you ever consider something is too complicated for anyone.

This isn’t for the brand new 1 day old character who has never played eve online before. A 1 day old character (without a crudload of injectors) can’t even build a structure in the first place. Most will not even have heard of invention and how to get datacores. Planetary interaction is most likely an impossibility to them.

In effect your argument is a circular logic statement of “People who don’t know anything will not know anything.”

1 Like
921

:slight_smile: you are like the 10 little shits hanging up on a kid in school yard that is all. No balls.