no, we can’t, most of answers to the problems are “we will look it in the future”. Do you remember all that megathreads that “wardecc are killing eve”, with numerous examples how it is bad for gameplay and player retention? And what most responses were? HTFU, go back to WOW etc. Nobody at CCP even think to check the number then? How insane is that? Now when owner changed and monies are needed it is not “you are not belong here anyway” medium? Respect is needed to be constructive, and it is mutual, when playerbase see that major problems are being pissed on don’t expect constructive discussions. There where numerous thread with constructive feedback about wardecc. Players are fed up.
I’ll remind you being constructive when CCP will want to decrease NS bounties.
Yeah, but openly communicate that it’s intended to be a nerf and ignore the complaints. It is necessary, so something needs to be done.
My question would be, is it a good nerf for the situation. If devs have little time, adjusting behaviour for a couple dozen spawns shouldn’t be too bad. At least, I think it shouldn’t be much of a problem.
It might not be as easy as nerfing bounties across the board, but it could help with the unsustainable situation that was highlighted until things could be sorted out and would affect the better ships disproportionally instead of banging everyone equally.
CCP just received a massive influx of cash from the sale. CCP owned a chunk of their own stock. They got something like $60 million. Right now they need money less than they did six months ago.
Let 'em. Like I said to Mingja: there’ll be complaining, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t need to be done.
Yes Gnsshadow you mainly hunted them on the gates in Nijara. You dont need any locator for that.
All the guys who are defending the current state are alts of “high sec mercs” or guys who are connected to them. The only guys who have an advantage from the current state are these high sec “mercs”.
If mass-deccers still believe they “have no negative impact on the game”, then it’s a waste of time, really. It’s clear that the current system is detrimental for the game. CCP agrees, CSM agrees, a ton of players agree.
If it’s dire enough to cause such a pretty dramatic response, it should be the top priority.
Mind you, @Mingja and @Jeremiah_Saken - on the subject of bounty reduction or wave delays or whatever… if it’s a knee-jerk change, something where CCP just arbitrarily tosses out numbers… that’s not gonna fix anything. That’s just another Band-Aid™ solution, being taken to see what happens, without a deeper examination of the potential effects, or likely responses in-game.
It may be that the better answer is to find a way to produce more asset/ISK sinks, rather than trying to limit the faucets. I don’t know.
Its well known in the merc community i’m a hunter and hate the current state of merc’s, hence the reason i’m not playing as I got bored of the status quo (Gate camping, station camping, handing your ass to you etc…)
Problem is even if CCP reintroduced the hunting style game play its too late, people have become lazy and realise if you sit in one system with a newspaper sooner or later a juicy target will jump into death.
If CCP introduce limits to war decs I’m happy with but they need to address the corp jumping issue at the same time, also the locating in citadel issue.
Yeah, I don’t think so either. Initially, I called it a quick and dirty fix.
I also think that a lack of sinks is a problem, mentioned that here: ISK sinks
If something needs to be done quickly, bandaid it and fix it later. Given the limited time CCP has, it might take a year or two to to revisit the problem. I would prefer a more sustainable system until then, even if it’s a bandaid.
I like the idea of war deccers having to anchor a structure of somekind for each war. The anchor mechanics could mirror upwell structures but with fewer rf timers (or none at all) and destroying the structure will lead to an immediate end to the war.
Defenders who want to fight back would have a focal point where they could get an actual fight. With the right placement restrictions (eg max number per system, 1AU minimum distance from stations and citadels), attackers will no longer be able to just camp gates and trade hubs but would be forced to and warp to the structures to defend them in order to keep their war(s) going and to protect their investment (presuming each structure will have a considerable cost).
It would also be possible for groups of defenders to band together to attack the respective structures that would end each others war decs and for alliances that wardec 100s of corps, defending these structures would thin out their resources and prevent them from all waiting at choke points for easy targets.
At the end of the war the structure would go inactive and have to be scooped and redeployed to be re-used for another wardec.
Yes it is knee-jerk change, or would be but remind me any latest changes that were acutally thought trought instead of “we will see later”.
I’ve always said that there is no person in CCP that can see a bigger picture, who will see that changes are connected to each other and will impact more than change in stats. Perfect example are ceptors nullification, where the very core of the problem was anchored bubbles everywhere, that change follow another like taxi ceptors and disappearing of gate camps (because why…) next was magic wand fozziesov and so on.
NS income wouldn’t be a problem if there were actual dangers to get them. For example can we disturb anoms farming and roqual mining enough to prevent gathering for opposing faction? Are fleet battles cost enough that it has impact the meta gameplay? (in other words if losses are easily covered because of ISK farming then what the point?) If hulls are easily replaceable then maybe butchering income is not a bad thing?
Just keep in mind, that for every good looking war dec change you can think off, I can probably counter it in a way you didn’t see coming. Hence our moto, Delete the weak, adapt or die!
The more changes, the more chaos. The more chaos, the more Eve content. So please change a lot of things.
Plex does not faucet any isk into the game, it just moves it around between different players. I guess you could make the argument that the existence of plex incentivize people more to make isk but that’s a very secondary effect.
Not broken, but there are many things that could be improved. My main focus would be to protect the smaller corps, so they have time to organise and grow. Same like fishing. You dont catch all the small fishes or in time you wont have any fish left. And introduce corps that cant be war decced like NPC, but can function as a normal corp. Of course with many restrictions (no structures, max number of players, etc). Also raise the war dec fees for small corps to 150 and lower the cost of huge alliances. Or make the war dec fees be connected to the average age of the players. The younger they are, the more expensive. And make the trade hub undocks invulnerable. This way people at least get a chance to get out and people have to hunt after them.
)