Nullsec Alliance Cowardice Ladder

[Dracvlad]

@Wadiest_Yong

I was involved in the war dec discord in the run up to CCP’s decision to add war HQ’s.

My suggestion was that each entity could do three wars at any one time without the need for any structure, but if they wanted to do more than three concurrent wars then they needed a war HQ with an office in it that enabled this. I suggested that as I was mindful of small war deccers like Destiny.

I was the only non-war deccer in that discord and I was trying to give the view of the other side to the war dec players, I must say it was hard work. I am aware of how good wars can be if done properly. the problem is that most wars are not done properly. The majority of wars ended up as merely interdiction of unsuspecting prey along trade routes or when exiting trade hubs, it was farming, and worse still it was pretty pointless to fight back for most players as there was nothing to force a fight.

I found people who FC’d nullsec fleets would go into utter contempt mode when you suggested that they go after war decs, the issue was that there was nothing to force a fight, war deccers would dock up and log. And you had to see their point of view because in nullsec what forced a fight was sov structures and stations, anyway…

The object of the war HQ was also to give a vulnerability to war deccers, and with this system while some war deccers have had impunity at times due to their strength, there have been a lot of war HQ’s taken down so it is not a complete failure as many think, but it could have been so much better. I must say that I was very disappointed with nullsec alliances who saw no need to set up a strategic anti-war dec groups in hisec for PvP fun, it was the same attitude as before, people getting caught in hisec are dumb, use out of alliance alts, but of course that was great for gankers.

If only CCP had done what I suggested, and I should add that making neutral RR a criminal act is the worst thing of all. It made people allying in against war decs impossible, you had to be in the same entity that was war decced, being an ally does not enable you to act like an ally, the mechanics treat you as neutral in terms of support, this another reason why it pushed war dec groups to get bigger. If they had left it as it was, then I am sure that more people would have joined in on wars and created structured fleets with RR, but as it is now, nope.

To be honest this whole bag of turds is one of the reasons I gave up on Eve. CCP did it completely wrong in that they managed to annoy both sides and to be blunt I think the current situation is worse than it was before war HQ’s. Especially with the addition of cores and making medium structures a walk in the park, all, they just priced small entities out of structures, silly really.

EDIT: Edited to be clearer.

[Arya_Yeshe]

@Wadiest_Yong

When a player (or group) does have a structure it makes wardecs possible. None of us know for certain what ccp’s reasoning was

It was becaused new players learning the game would create player corps and get dunked by people who were already playing for years. It is a “structure gate” you have to cross this gate

@Wadiest_Yong

What would be the benefit ?

She wants freedom for small groups taking the fight against big groups in highsec, without having to worry about defending her own HQ, which is fine and I flirt with such idea. What the small group will do with this newfound freedom is up to them, they could simply gate camp, ramsom, bash pocos, aid attackers, demand protection money, be hired to attack certain groups, etc

@Aiko_Danuja

The wardec changes were intended to protect small groups, but they have merely ensured that small groups have no chance against a larger group.

This is the voice of reason!

There should be more casus belli in EVE, for example:

• attackers having only 1/10th the size of the defenders (1 member corp wardecs 10 member corp)
• any corp/alliance with 100 members is wardeccable
• defender has 5 bil in assets on space (poco spam, etc)
• both corps have an orca on space in the same system
• wars could have new goals when you don’t have a structure: attackers ISK loss is equivalent to the total ISK value of the defender’s headquarters or whatever assets.
• regional war

In scenarios like these, attackers should have the option to initiate a war without the need for structures. Personally, I’ve had a long-standing aversion to timers. The last time I dealt with timers, it was five timerss, past midnight on a Thursday, that was the day I told myself I was done with it

[Zaera_Keena]

@Wesley_Baird

what is the big deal with losing warHQs

As a newbie is 1 billion a big deal for their 1 man army. How many bears do they have to kill before the blob of internet router humping f1 monkeys arrive, with the combined inteligence and heroism of a squirrel ?

[Wesley_Baird]

@Zaera_Keena

As a newbie is 1 billion a big deal for their 1 man army. How many bears do they have to kill before the blob of internet router humping f1 monkeys arrive, with the combined inteligence and heroism of a squirrel ?

1 newbie probably is an edge-case we can safely ignore.

[Wadiest_Yong]

@Dracvlad

I was involved in the war dec discord in the run up to CCP’s decision to add war HQ’s.

That is a really interesting post you added, with a unique perspective of the discussion at the time.

@Dracvlad

The object of the war HQ was also to give a vulnerability to war deccers

Unfortunately it was implemented in such a way that it requires the same level of firepower as it does in nullsec - but now under the cover of hisec rules, concord, no caps, etc, making the whole effort very one-sided to reach the endpoint, from logistics to fleet compositions (and inevitably very high tidi when in hisec), and the fact that you have the armor and the hull timer.

The hisec aggressor, on the other hand, does not intend to take down a warHQ, he’s happy with ganking for as long as he can stretch the war.

Imagine a wardec’er having to plant a warHQ in at least the same security zone as his target’s announced HQ, perhaps nullsec FC’s would be less alien to the idea - although taking down structures, regardless of sec zone, is never fun, the only real fun coming from any defending fleet and some keen tactics on grid.

For what it’s worth (pretty insignificant), I’d be okay with a hard limit on wardecs by tiny groups who do not have a warHQ, as long as there would be a defined endpoint for any war. Even a 1 person wardec, with the prowess and talent of a DC, can be a complete and perpetual nuisance. Enjoying a license to kill at a relatively low fee, without any possibility for the defender to “win” the war, that is not balanced design without some endpoint.

By all means, anything but Upwell warHQ’s would already be an improvement to the current mess and de facto limitation of gankers’ rights and needs to develop their gameplay in hisec.

I hope this gets picked up by the new CSM. Perhaps @Mike_Azariah when (not if ) he gets elected ?

[Destiny_Corrupted]

@Altara_Zemara

@Destiny_Corrupted

It was working just fine for nearly 17 years.

But surely there’s a sense in which you gain the kills that you do precisely because the wardec only lasts 48 hours and you cannot be perma wardeced by all and sundry. Under the old system, I could come to Amarr and disrupt your efforts. Anyone could declare war on you and do so…without they themselves needing a war HQ. Under the new system, I myself have to have a war HQ to get involved at all. Nobody can disrupt your efforts without Concord getting involved. So its just you vs Blob Corp…nobody can interfere…and yet this is somehow unfair ?

You’re still talking about something that you don’t understand. Please go read and internalize the mechanics regarding wars. The ally system has existed for a very long time, and you could equally get involved against my hostilities back then and today. How is that in any shape or form nobody being able to interfere?

Also, it’s funny seeing the high-sec wardec monopolists post about how war HQs are a great mechanic, because they “lose them too!” Well, here are some stats for you: SRS lost a grand total of 3 war HQs in about 2 years, while BLACKFLAG lost a total of 11 war HQs in around 5 years. So they lose like what…1-2 per year on average?

Meanwhile, if a small group tries to do this, their space hut will be dunked instantly, either by one of their null-sec blob targets, or by the wardec cartel itself that instantly stomps out all competition against their industrial-scale PvP farming operation. Of course they think it’s a good mechanic; it benefits them a lot, while making it effectively impossible for their enemies to operate. Just another prime example of…

…by the big groups who want to protect the benefits bestowed by the artificial handicaps that CCP developed in their favor.

[Arya_Yeshe]

@Wadiest_Yong

without any possibility for the defender to “win” the war,

Like I said:

@Arya_Yeshe

wars could have new goals when you don’t have a structure

New goals, new war scopes… losing ships… losing ISK… or being podded… etc

Finding simpler goals is not hard.

[Destiny_Corrupted]

They need easy-mode goals to “win” wars because they’re too incompetent to bait and/or win fights against players like me, and are too stingy to pay someone else to do it for them. Much easier to just pull a gang of 100 together and yeet into high-sec to bash a 15-minute timer with a bunch of Kikimoras. Those filaments and/or jump clones make it so easy for them to do it, too; just another example of CCP giving some cummies to their favorite sugar babies.

CCP gives everything to these ravenous gluttons, like they’re collectively their first-born children or something. Rorquals getting jumped by roaming pirates? Don’t worry, we’ll make them invincible for you. “AFK” cloakers making you feel uncomfortable while your Gila bots are grinding belt rats? Here’s a thing you can anchor that will get rid of them. We’re going to make various minerals exclusive to various areas of space, but you know what? We’ll give you guys all the types in your ore anyway, because you deserve it. Sorry high-sec and low-sec residents, but this isn’t for you. You aren’t the chosen ones after all.

[Ax_l_Thorne]

Destiny, it isn’t about lowering the bar. It’s about equality of outcome.

Wars should be handled like this:

CEO of party A faces CEO of party B.

They gently hand a virtual ball back and forth in absolute silence, while corp members look on, with tears in their eye. After 5 minutes of ball passing, the war ends and both parties are given a virtual trophy to proudly display in their corp window, declaring them both winners!

[Mike_Azariah]

There has already been a loophole for the fix, before the fix even is in place . . . hisec islands make for a good place to put structures if they were needed for a hisec wardec.

m

[Destiny_Corrupted]

@Mike_Azariah

hisec islands make for a good place to put structures if they were needed for a hisec wardec.

This is not at all a deterrent for anyone who wishes to destroy a war HQ.

[Thosa]

You have a lot of imagination and prejudice.
You should write a novel. But don’t call it Eve Online stories.
Call it something like “The lies inside my head” or “Blind you can’t see”.

[Altara_Zemara]

@Destiny_Corrupted

How is that in any shape or form nobody being able to interfere?

You missed the ‘without themselves having to have a war HQ’ bit…huh.

@Destiny_Corrupted

Meanwhile, if a small group tries to do this, their space hut will be dunked instantly

Why wouldn’t it ? You declare war on Mega-Blob Corp and expect them to send half a dozen corvettes to negotiate their surrender after you’ve just advertised that you have a nice juicy quantum core for the grabbing ?

[Destiny_Corrupted]

@Altara_Zemara

You missed the ‘without themselves having to have a war HQ’ bit…huh.

You don’t need a war HQ to interfere in someone else’s aggressive wars. You don’t even need a structure for longer than a few minutes.

Please learn the game mechanics before commenting on them, for your own good. It makes you look silly otherwise.

@Altara_Zemara

Why wouldn’t it ? You declare war on Mega-Blob Corp and expect them to send half a dozen corvettes to negotiate their surrender after you’ve just advertised that you have a nice juicy quantum core for the grabbing ?

The point of this thread isn’t to discuss high-sec war declaration mechanics; it is to make fun of and mock null-sec alliance for being cowardly.

Case in point, null-sec alliances being willing to bring overwhelming firepower to stomp out the war HQ of a little group declaring war on them, but not being willing to do the same against the larger war cartel that is farming their members, instead opting to allow the cartel to continue farming their members while turning a blind eye to the threat, is pretty damning evidence that null-sec alliances are indeed very cowardly organizations.

Also, lol at the new throwaway forum alt coming in to talk some shit to me. I like how most of the people who’ve done so in this thread aren’t even doing it on their mains.

[Altara_Zemara]

@Destiny_Corrupted

You don’t need a war HQ to interfere in someone else’s aggressive wars. Y

Darn, it looks like you missed the ‘without Concord involvement’ bit too. Did you forget to put your glasses on today ?

[Destiny_Corrupted]

Without CONCORD involvement.

[Altara_Zemara]

@Destiny_Corrupted

The point of this thread isn’t to discuss high-sec war declaration mechanics; it is to make fun of and mock null-sec alliance for being cowardly.

So who are you losing these structures under ? I see lots of kills by your corp but I don’t see a single citadel or other structure lost.

[Destiny_Corrupted]

We did lose a few war HQs when we tried to do aggressive wars. Pretty much instantly. But we remove the holding corporation from the alliance when that happens.

For ally wars, which we are doing now since the primary form of high-sec war content is closed off to us, structures aren’t needed except for a short time to be able to apply as an ally. You can apply, and then shed the structures to become war-ineligible. However, we keep hidden structures up as a matter of principle in order for other groups to be able to declare wars on us, if they so wish. Although like I mentioned previously, we would also accept mutual wars, for which owning structures isn’t a requirement by either party. These courtesies extend to pretty much anyone who isn’t BF/SRS or their close affiliates.

[Altara_Zemara]

Mutual wars sound good fun…though the only char I could do that with ( without involving AO in a war they wont want ) is my new Omega, who has her own corp…but alas only 8m SP at present.

[Aiko_Danuja]

It’s fine to say that wardeccers should have ‘skin in the game’, or be prevented from declaring war on every poor little newbro who wants 0% taxes, but why should a wardec HQ be the litmus test? Doesn’t a wardec HQ simply give an overwhelming advantage to whichever side has N+1? If you want to limit wardecs, couldn’t you achieve a satisfactory outcome by merely increasing the wardec cost, rather than forcing the one player corporation to provide an easy win to the 10,000 player alliance?

I truly fail to see why solo players should not be allowed to wardec megaalliances for FREE. Why should there be any cost or requirement? Nullsec players already have nullsec, why should HIghsec also be a safe space for them?