3 Likes
Most already do
Besides, theyâre all standing strong because the only group that cares about it is ag ironically
Yes please
Let us abuse the hell out of this so you can cry more about how powerless people are 
Limiting or restricting any content is pretty much going against the grain.
And you want to give more tools to people for wars, not less.
1 Like
I hope this more reasonable posting continues.
Apart from Niarja there is not that much value in blapping them as the gankers can just use the NPC stations, but it would be a good content creator if this was implemented.
This is to prevent people having a war dec, closing corp and restarting with the same name and the limit to the period of the original war dec period is deliberate as I expect people to try to and be successful in using it. This will work like the corps joining alliances. And is increasing content, because it is aimed at behaviour. I cannot see why I would be crying about something I suggested knowing full well what it could result in.
You are obviously trying to provoke me into saying what you donât like me saying, try to desist being provocative because it is pretty obvious.
I am creating consequences, it is only a limit if you are not able to protect a citadel.
The CONCORD agent would give more intel to war deckers, such as location and online status, rather like the locator agent.
You are so negative.
Then prevent them joining or creating a corp for the duration of the defensive warâŚ
Doesnât need to be super complicatedâŚ
Limiting wars because you donât have a citadel or whatever is not a consequence, itâs a punishment⌠lol
Look at the mirror
Why do you only quote part of the sentence to make it appear to have no sense what so ever? It was talking about people getting a war dec dissolving their corp and restarting with the same name.
CCP want people to be able to move around, but a war dec and player corps should have consequences, this would not apply however to NPC corps obviously or the new social corps if they get implemented
Your target selection will need to improve some what, of course it is a limit and you punish yourself by poor target selection unlike now. Actions and errors should have consequences young man, you have so much to learn and no ability to adjust your thinking. It forces you to get gudâŚ
You are so so negative it is incredible. Seriously bad.
High-sec warfare has always been about corporations fighting corporations. People who say a wardec has to follow a player simply cannot make the distinction, but want war to be personal. Warfare is simply how corporations rise and fall, how they gain in number and how they lose them.
Trying to make war personal is a common mistake by corporations. Itâs when leaders turn into âCaptain Ahabâ and ignore the greater good by making it personal when instead they need to look out for the health of their entire corporation.
When wars would stay with players will players try to join a stronger corporation, who then use it to flip wars against the aggressor. This will only make warfare complicated. Not to mention the idea itself reeks of revenge and frustration.
Itâs so simple, yet you overcomplicate it:
People dropping corps during a war shouldnt be able to rejoin a corp for the duration of the war (if itâs a defensive war)
And add a 2-3 week delay to creating a new corp with a higher price so that people think instead of insta-folding their corps
As for you calling me negative, thatâs your opinion.
Iâm a realist, not a dreamer
My dear boy, there is often a personal antipathy between players which can make the wars so much more juicy and interesting. When I went to Stain I joined a guy called Aaron who through sheer ability managed to upset almost everyone around him, the content was glorious and a lot of fun. Many war deckers hate each other and there are some real humdingers of massive egos running around rubbing up against each other. It is great content and something that make this game tick.
I get where you are coming from in terms of a fight over resources and stuff, but it is more than that. That being said my suggestion is to remove this drop corp, destroy, re-create with existing name which many war deckers have complained about.
And as many as their are stupid players. No news. The rest is a matter of group dynamic. Forcing players to stay in corporations doesnât help when you want them to stay with you voluntarily.
It is not that simple, CCP have said that they want people to be able to move around freely, your suggestion is way too harsh. My one is not.
You are not a realist in any shape or form.
Quite true, but the fun part is that getting involved with stupid people hating on each other can be a lot of fun. I remember one extremely bright German player who kept coming back to Hub Zero because he loved the content created by Aaron. Was glorious.
I am not doing that, they can join a NPC corp or a social corp when they get created, as they should.
Can we get a dom vs drac deathmatch please? Hell Iâd even provide the ships to ensure itâs fair.
1 Like
Thatâs your opinion, which is irrelevant
It is. Especially on CCPâs side.
You basically want to implement player-level wars, which is beyond ridiculous to anyone being realistic about things
He is pretty insufferable now, just imagine how he would be if he won it. 
Personally, I try never to do a fair fight, that is not to say that I donât respect one if I have agreed it, which I have done a few times.
(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)
They can do whatever they want. When they leave the corp can they no longer take part in the fight and itâs one enemy less. And when theyâve changed their minds and want to come back, then they can do this, too.
YesâŚ, so what is your point?
You already forgot what you wanted? Great. This ends it for me, too.
I have covered my reasons above, you just stated the obvious which exists now and will exist in what I proposed.
Oh look
Heâs calling me dumb again
How not surprising
Do you call everyone you disagree with dumb?