Yep, I can agree on this, likely this mechanic was not nice for those who faced a wardec… but they were informed… with ganking it is even worse… just shoot what is on your way.
1 Like
It was fun once. But being perma-wardec’d certainly wasn’t. It basically became legalized ganking. In this case, it’s definitely a case of “blame the player - not the game”.
1 Like
I should mention that I’m not opposed to some kind of wardec “lite” setup, where say a 20-man (5, 10, 15, etc.) corporation could wage war against any other similar (or larger) size corporation without the requirement of a structure. It could still potentially be very unbalanced - but definitely nowhere near some of the previous nightmare scenarios.
1 Like
With old mechanics, some kills per month was a good outcome as I enjoyed the process from selection of the corporation to the actual hunt. Being able to wardec only one corporation or any other limitations would be fine… also they knew when I’m online and one of the corporations tried to catch me (it was nice team-building for them) … but with current ganking - just the same amount of kills within hours (not month)… so I have a feeling that it is much more destructive.
1 Like
Maybe limit to 1 wardec at a time for smaller corporations, with maybe a forced 1-week pause between wardecs. If structures weren’t so stupidly expensive, I suspect some corporations would throw up a cheap throw-away structure just for some fights…
Is it “griefing for tears”?
Yes sir, only the finest griefing for tears - brought to you by Safety alliance!
What about bringing back ability to wardec (with discount) those who are ganking (as most of them doesn’t have any structures) without requirements to have a structute… it will bring some action and extra pvp to HS.
PS: NPC corporations will be a home to hide
and how would you define this?
Corps whose members exchanged tags in the last 30 days?
I don’t think war decs are needed to attack gankers:
many of them have low enough security status that you can engage them already,
many of them have kill rights you can use to engage them already,
all of them have criminal status while they gank which you can use to engage them already.
In other words, this is not going to increase PvP in high sec as you could legally attack gankers already even without war decs.
I always laugh at these ‘change my mind’ posts. I mean…the author never actually has any intention of their mind being changed.
Question:
Are we assuming the guys using 28 alt accounts (they usually have the same name) to gank are paying for omega?
If that is the case then they already have a very high cost of operations, which to me souds like a reasonable balance compared their earnings on ganks.
Unfortunately there is no transparency here and we cannot tell if they are alpha or not, multiboxing alphas is against ToS, right?
Should alpha accounts even be able to initiate criminal activities? I know this can sound restrictive, but if you want to do criminal activities in an alpha account, perhaps you should validate a phone number or something 
I don’t have a solution, just throwing some ideas.
As it is impossible since a while to turn safeties to red on Alpha accounts in order to gank, we know for certain that those ganking accounts are all Omega.
Does that answer your question?
4 Likes
For example you can wardec / attack some gankers anytime as they are below -5 or have structures… but most of them are not that simple target as they keep theirs SS above -5, do not own anything and kill rights is a joke, would be nice to have WarDec instead.
And a kill right or criminal timer does not allow you to attack them either?
Sure, implementing war decs against currently war-immune players is an option, but don’t you think such a massive game change could be used specifically to kill even more miners, but now through war decs so legally and without CONCORD protection?
As it was mentioned above, those are Omega.
Likely a nullsec miners with PI and a skill farm, using characters across multiple accounts for some high-sec fun.
Nope, it is not. No one activated any of kill rights against me (even when I’m hanging on the gate for an hour). And I do not care about others with kill rights, but I would like to have some fishing and wardec groups (likely they will end up like old wardec victims and disband / leave… that was the reason of removing that nice wardec mechanic?). As messing with kill rights is stupit, I want to have a subscription!
1 Like
I’m not against the idea of making gankers war-eligible, even if I question how useful it is.
The main problem of finding a solution to make gankers without structure war eligible is to add a way to distinguish between groups that gank and groups that don’t gank.
Otherwise the same rule to allow war deccing a structure-less ganking group could also be used to war dec a mining group if only a single rogue member ganks someone!
What if a new corp-level feature is added that prevents red safety status of members when ticked, which requires ‘no structures’ and is the new requirement to be war-immune?
This would still allow groups to be war immune like today but also makes structure-less gankers war-eligible.
I wouldn’t want that new setting to be too easily the new default setting for any high sec players however, so as an incentive to get more players to participate in the comprtitive part of the game I also suggest an additional NPC tax to any war-immune corp so players can get more reward for more risk.
Hopefully those changes allow players to always war dec gankers, encourage more PvP yet still allow players to be war-immune if they so wish.
1 Like
This thread may survive a year. Hmmm.. interesting..
Yes! Thank you!
1 Like