I have fair fights in Counter-Strike Global Offensive thank you very much
In all games, not just EVE, the gank is just a hunt
In World of Warcraft I was ganking people with my Orc rogue
I think anyone should be allowed to declare war on anyoneâŚindividual, corp, alliance, whatever. But there should beâŚ
- A fee for declaring war. To discourage people declaring war on noobs. minimum would be 50m ISK.
- A additional level of destruction defined upfrontâŚ50m ISK, 500m ISKâŚwhatever, which you pay upfront and only get back that amount which you destroy, and nothing over the pre-defined limit. That means if you set the limit at 50m and you destroy 500m worthâŚyou effectively lose 450m ISK. If you set the limit at 500m and you destroy or loot 700m, you only make 500m. This would encourage people to aim highâŚbut with greater risk if they do. Itâs going to cost you at least 100m to declare war, even just on an individual.
- A fixed time periodâŚand inability to declare war on same persons or group for X amount of time afterwards.
- A fee for exemptions from war declarations for a specified period. Noobs under 30 days would automatically be exempt.
Let the carnage begin !
Btw, the war fee was already 200mil in 2019 no matter who you decced. It was usually still much more expensive than ganking as they either stopped playing for a week or they left corp to get around it, then week later they rejoined corp. And all those botting orcas and ice fleets were already npc corp at that time.
1 Like
Why would anyone pay anything above the minimum allowed value in that case? Why would someone choose to pay 500 million for the opportunity to get back 500 million (leaving them with net 0 million), when they can pay 50 million for the opportunity to get back 50 million, which also leaves them with net 0 million? Thereâs no incentive to pay anything above the minimum value in this case since itâs just additional risk without additional reward?
In the old days it cost more to dec an alliance
A solution to that is to either not let them leave after a dec or stop them rejoining till the end of time.
Or, they are still tagged as eligible target because they were in the corp the moment the dec was declared. And will remain an eligible target until the dec ends. Regardless of what NPC / and or player corps they try to escape to.
CCP however, in their wisdom, decided that shooting structures is more fun
Down with all structures in high sec.
2 Likes
They just wanted the âhigh-sec griefersâ to absorb the ISK/resource/PLEX sinks by taxing them very heavily for engaging in piracy/PvP.
The effect that it actually had though was that pretty much every single person who used to do this, aside from about 50-100 total holdouts, stopped playing the game.
1 Like
Why does everything have to be about ISK reward ? Surely the reward is the fight itselfâŚand any kills. Its the same reason I object to CCP going on about âvalidâ targets as if some level of ISK reward made them âvalidâ. Whatâs wrong with shooting stuff up just for the fun of it ?
Okay, but what is the point of the mechanic then? If the most you can âwinâ when you bet the money is some or all of your money back, but not more than that, then why would anyone bet more than the minimum required amount? Thatâs the part I donât get.
1 Like
Let kill them all
People would be paying for the opportunity to have fights they would not otherwise have. I donât get why you donât get that. Itâs for those who value kills more than ISK. It would be high risk, with the only reward being kills. Iâm sure plenty would take up the challenge.
Full stop
At least Candleass did not beg the other person to put a war HQ down like a certain someone who is a war deccer and then complained about not being able to defend it, cry more please.
I will keep reminding you that you are a war deccer who could not war dec, I was in an alliance that could be war decced and yet you made a crying cringy challenge when you could have just done a war dec, seriously⌠In the end you joined RIOT and got the war dec, but that is where you end up bringing friendsâŚ
You have not defined anything that happens when you reach the limit that stops people from fighting. Even the example given outlines a case where the attackers killed and looted more value than the imposed limit so it is not clear how paying more grants any benefit, either in tangible isk or intangible fun, but it does come with the penalty of making it harder to recoup your costs.
Either an authority has to confiscate your excess isk and loot from fighting, the war has to end, the payout has to be greater than the expense if the limit is reached, or some other actual thing has to trigger upon reaching the limit that is still not defined.
Then theyâll just log off.
This is the issue CCP had before. People would declare war on a corp, most of that corp would stop logging in, then after the war a small percentage of them would stay logged off indefinitely. Wardecs on average would reduce the size of the playerbase by a small amount, and neither the people declaring war nor the people having war declared on them were actually engaging in the content.
There is no way to force people who donât want to PvP into combat with other players. Since mass wardeccers and gankers both want to target players who donât want to fight thereâs never going to be a solution that comes from those people thatâs actually feasible, because it will all be built around the false premise that you can force people into combat.
Oh look personal attacks from a hypocrit.
If you are super rich like Zaera, it doesnât
Calm down chicken
Y125 Proposal
Only Mutual WARS on Highsec Only Structures allowed, all other locations such as Lowsec or Nulsec Structure locations will be open to fully non-consented Wardecs being allowed.