You sir, have absolutely won this thread.
Applause.
Of course you are, because you don’t have any further arguments and you’re now only telling stories on how you believe the world works. You say CCP is a business, they need to make money, money comes from players, and therefore do they need to do what you want them to. Do you believe you’re the first person who tried to argue this way?
I’m telling you the game isn’t dying. You can stop worrying about how it’s losing players.
And if it was dying would turning it into a PvE game only be the death scream of it.
1 Like
Well you are focussed on the structure grind as boring, but failing to see that it is a conflict driver, I also saw some stonking fun fights sub cap fights around entosis too. Real hit and run stuff, not the massed claw rubbish of course. So for war decs there is no such conflict driver for the defender to go after and no way to end the war dec. That is the issue.
The gain for the defender is to end the war dec, that has real value.
Yeah, an IF CCP actually ads that requirement for the attacker, and IF destroying it will actually end the war. Even if those two things happen somewhen next year that still doesn’t mean that people will go after the attacked structure.
The same big wardec entities that will do what they do today will have prepared a 100x better for the occasion their structure gets attacked compared to any opposition from random corps who have no experience in wardecs.
The effect carebears hope for will be extremely minimal. The bug wardec entities CCP claims are the target of all this will not even feel it, nothing will change for them as they keep spaming wardecs. The only people that this affects is small solo wardecers that aren’t organized to a degree those big alliances are. And was there really an issue with them?
As I said, this is not about disagreement that the wardecs needs change, pretty much everyone thinks that. But all the ideas CCP and CSM talked about until now are not really encouraging in that they will change anything in the current boring and stale wardecs meta. And it will certanly NOT solve the problem they say they want to solve with this.
If they want to change something they will have to add more stuff for both sides. The idea I put forward would work as a conflict driver on all scales and not just around structure grinds. And maybe this ideas are ■■■■, but it is one of the only attempts to change the situation by adding tools and new game play that is true to the sandbox I have see so far. The ideas from CCP, CSM and other entities have mostly been around limiting removing existing game mechanic or adding artificial goals that look more like a mini game than something you would find in a sandbox game.
Some will and some won’t, the objective is to give a strategic objective that matters to those that will.
I hear this a lot, but this is still a strategic objective that they will have to defend, smart people will wait for the moment when they are occupied elsewhere and give it a go.
The small solo or small gang war deckers will be more TZ focussed, but they still have to defend it, target selection is key to this. The issue is war decs as a whole, I just think that for the defender having no way to end it is the key issue and that is all that I would really change about from tinkering with certain other areas, like enabling allies and even people war decked by the same aggressor to rep each other without going suspect. The objective in this is to give a real benefit to getting out in space and blowing stuff up, and ending the war dec is what the defenders want. Not this rubbish end the war dec when I feal like it as we have now, which is why people stop playing.
I am looking at it on the basis of getting the defenders to try to fight, it has to be made doable, it can then be adjusted as hisec becomes more healthy.
Many ideas force objectives on the defender and aggressor and that does not sit with me, the war should be open, so I have focussed on a way to end the war dec pure and simple as the only real conflict driver that should matter. Everything else I have seen including ISK penalties on the defender is starry eyed dreamy fluff that ignores the reality of hisec wars.
I have come across enough people that want to fight, the question is whether the ability to end the war will be enough? Anyway CCP have a difficult job to do as the situation is pretty dire, with two sides of the game having little common ground, one wants open season, the other wants to be left alone, which is hard to reconcile as a games designer.
1 Like
They did not have that until now ??? 
What did they do up there? Played DOTA and drink beer whole day log ??? 
Please, don’t credit the idea of ‘Give us a structure we can shoot’ to a general group. There is a very tiny number of people pushing this idea that as you’ve said is not going to help the defenders in a war because they will be at massive disadvantage attacking a structure, if they can’t even defend their own structure they have no chance attacking basically.
And it still wrecks their playstyle/time. If they intended to spend friday night mining then spending friday night shooting a structure is unlikely to be fun even if they win. (Especially since they’ll need to do it at least twice)
For the defenders to win, the win mechanic actually needs to be based on what they already do, and managing to do that while under a wardec. This gets them out in space mining or missioning or whatever, and lets them do their thing, while the attacker has to interdict it to stop the war ending early. Base it off an average of the previous months activity or something, so yes, if they did PvP in the last month PvP vs the attacker would be part of their win conditions.
This meaning declaring on someone because you saw them trading in Jita is a bad idea, you need to actually know where the corp is and what they do. As otherwise you throw your money away, they spend a day or two mining, war ends early and they get a cut from the money you spent declaring the war.
N.B. If you went with asymmetric war conditions, since the attacker should always need to shoot them to win as to outmine them there is no need to declare a war, the war dec is only if you want the ability to shoot, you could go with much larger war costs, but if the attacker ‘wins’ by achieving kills based on the defenders activity & numbers, then they get a portion of those costs back. So it becomes almost like a wager, with only a small portion of it being lost for sure.
Run a game server, log the data from every activity in a useful form, and crunch the data on it, then come back and tell us about how you are super amazing at data analysis. It’s far more complex than it sounds to store all the events that happen, and to present them to the analyst in a meaningful way that they can actually extract information from.
1 Like
Worked on stuff like that for several customers.
FYI, Big Data is very old feature and Hadoop is standard bussines tool for years now.
All that is nothing new just standard business practice today.
Then you should know how hard it is and not be surprised that they didn’t happen to collect just the right data to allow them to look at a single aspect out of tens of thousands of factors which affect things. The fact that in hindsight the aspect is important doesn’t make it any trickier to have predicted beforehand.
Basically, if your claim is true & you really think it’s super easy to collect data and use it when you don’t have one or two clearcut items to track, then either you are arrogant as… or no good at your job and only actually doing very simply analysis.
Not doing that today is lame, and every serious business doing Big Data for years.
Only complete loosers today do not do complex analysis of all the information available to them …
Ok, so super arrogant then, gotcha.
Since you have apparently no idea how many factors come into play when it comes into interactions between people.
Bah, this thread is going nowhere just the same as every other before it.
There is this mystical belief that EVE will pull players magically from other games in enough numbers to increase the population. This isn’t going to happen. Whether people can accept it or not, EVE is a niche game. It’s gameplay and philosophy only appeal to a limited audience, even if you made hisec a safe haven for all players, this wouldn’t change. This isn’t WoW where the gameplay is designed to be simple and forgiving so that it can sustain millions of subscribers.
Without the cutthroat element, EVE is just another MMO designed 15 years ago that has a stupid number of bugs, loopholes and exploits, despite being released 15 years ago. No other playerbase would stand for it frankly and as I said earlier, no other MMO has survived this long. CCP/PA need to remember why EVE has the playerbase it has rather than what artificial way they can bolster numbers.
1 Like
All your replies on this subject are based on your feelings. Mine was based on speaking to players whose annoyance was that there was no way to end the war and who would fight if they saw a benefit to them, many people say that these players do not exist. Well they do.
You want to make some sort of super complicated victory condition algorithm based on their activity to create an abstract victory condition.
So my reply is why not do both your idea and my idea, this gives more options.
CCP can do both your idea and my idea at the same time
1 Like
You understand that if this is true then this is a death sentence for Eve???
You know annoyance is a feeling right? You’ve basically said your entire argument is based on feelings here.
As for my view being based on feelings, no, it’s based on logic.
A structure that the attacker must have to declare war means that you can not conduct asymmetric warfare against a larger entity to bleed them unless the larger entity permits it.
It’s also a fairly reliable statement that if you can’t defend your structures against an attacker when in your chosen timezone & day, you are not going to be taking down their structures in their chosen timezone & day. Since you have tactical advantages when defending a structure that you don’t have when attacking a structure.
I’m sure that you are right, that in all of EVE there are some people in highsec based corps who would attack structures. But given the number of wars attributes to 5 small groups, who could easily merge if they needed to for structure defence… the likelyhood of being able to beat one of those groups is basically zero. So after a failed attempt or two, we would revert to our present situation. Except that all the giant null entities would be able to drop their wars, so now those wardec alliances would actually target smaller sized highsec corps for real, not just as a side operation.
Even if we put both ideas in, all the disadvantages of the structure system come with it regardless of what other systems exist.
You feel that these people will get out in space when under a war dec to continue doing what they were doing, while my feeling is that they will get into cheep PvP ships to try a rush attack on a one shoot no timer structure to end the war dec.
You are annoyed, you start making barbs at my idea with another player and down play it, you are annoyed and it shows.
You feel that they will go out in space if that was a victory condition.
I just suggested both your idea and my idea. What is the issue, are you so sure that you are right?
That is poppycock and you should be ashamed of yourself for saying that, so you are comparing a fight where the aggressor is coming for a timer on a structure with an attack on a structure with no timers and that can be blown up in one attack. I have defined it as being necessary for the mechanic be such that even a two player corp can do it and a member of the CSM agreed with me.
They are not going to be fighting all of that group if they play it right.
Now there is a benefit to this, which is that the war deckers want lots of content to keep their interest up and if the easy farming of nullsec characters in hisec was a lot more difficult I believe that the blanket war deckers will lose members for people wanting to do more targeted war decs.
As I said the intention is to have a doable structure so that a two or three man corp has a chance of success against even PIRAT as they are now, the CSM rep understood that.
1 Like
The thing is you will not get that.
CCP will not make a structure that a non 24/7 corp can’t defend, because that means that no small corp will ever be able to declare a war and have it last more than a day or two because someone will be outside their TZ who can attack it. Someone will be a 3am alarm clock capable person. Meaning that other 50% of wars that aren’t Pirate just got shafted.
The rest of your argument falls over at this stage because you won’t get the very first precondition for your entire logic chain to work.
Now yes, my idea is based on my feelings initially, with logic built on the feeling that PvE corps are not going to want to swap over and do PvP, and even if they do it’s not going to be a “fun” thing for them, it will be a chore. So giving them PvE based victory conditions allows them to have fun, get some isk for exposing themselves to more risk, and end the war early by doing so as well.
Obviously regardless of method some people will dock up and not bother undocking while at war no matter what conditions or incentives exist.
And why not? Again that is your feeling, CCP has to create something that will enable people to end the war dec and it has to be so easy that even new bro’s corps can attempt it to get a taste of PvP. And this is recognition that hisec is new player and casual orientated as an area. And not the same as nullsec or lowsec.
The small corp has to war dec someone in their TZ otherwise goodbye war, tough on them for doing a dec outside of their TZ, not smart was it? Do we protect war deckers from their stupidity and poor target selection?
So your suggestion is that you feel that CCP would not do this because it would be too hard for war deckers…
Well I am prepared to see that one develop, some players will go for that, but it is still very much more of the same in terms of being farmed. Some will go for my solution.
Of course, but war decs in hisec are part of Eve.
How do you stop the one guy who even if they are in your TZ happens to decide he can get up at 3am. Or 4am Or midday while you are at work.
You can’t if you are a small corp.
That’s a terrible mechanic because it means you lost your war with no realistic chance to stop it.
The smaller the corp you are, the worse this is, this means the only effective wardec corps are going to be the alliances like Pirat, who would probably merge with Marmite and the like to get TZ coverage. And then you would be trying to attack them head on.
This is why CCP won’t make it. It’s not my feeling, it’s because it’s an incredibly stupid mechanic that they have shown they know not to do with every single structure they’ve ever put in the game.
