Wardec Nerf incoming

[Domunos]

Common Misconceptions about Exploits

This passage contains common tactics and other player conduct that is often mistakenly reported as exploits but are in fact not.

Constant War Declarations

War Declarations are a risk that every player corporation has to face and they are under no circumstances considered harassment. Wars in general can be completely avoided by remaining in an NPC corporation.

Directly taken from https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/204873262-Known-Declared-Exploits.
I wonder when and what CCP will change in this article; it was updated 5 days ago.

[Ima_Wreckyou]

@JUSTIFIED_ARROGANCE

Im all for a discussion of what YOU want to see in the early part of next year when we get there and more importantly WHY you think your proposals will be a clear solution to the problem but I will not sit by at let you claim even once that the current ‘fix’ doesnt improve the situation for a significant number of players in highsec that want pve based corporations and alliances.

Yeah ok. I claim it anyway because that is exactly how it will play out. It may make a small minority of players immune that don’t care about structures, but the rest will just scream for secure structures. And the cycle continues…

[Lugburz]

the problem with fozziesov, and nullsec in general is the ease of which it is to maintain systems (and sovereignty of) in far to reach areas, this is what creates the ‘renting’ empires. Now we do have wormholes that smaller groups can operate within remaining mostly hidden but the rewards and ease of living in such places would be much harder than say daytripping into nullsec, basically there isnt really much scope for smaller corps to live in null without being noticed and therefore ‘plundered’ by larger groups; larger groups can and will always have the upper hand just through shear force of numbers, even in wormholes.
In essence i think if all these figures for wardecks and player retention are correct and the issue is fixed i believe there will have to be some sort of additions or changes made that allow small, careful groups some sort of way to maintain themselves invisibly in far to reach systems - i would personally add communications relays to the sov mechanics, something relating to adms and not having delayed ‘intel’ local channels - or like wormhole local chat, maybe even a mixture of both.
At least that way the core or ‘home’ systems of nullblocs would operate as standard with full local but the further and less used (and less upgraded) systems begin to deteriorate.
This could go on to help smaller groups, even roaming groups and help to create and maintain not just conflict but the feeling of being in danger in the ‘outer fringes’ of ‘known space’.

Course thats just my opinion and probably would require a fair amount of effort to properly design and implement.

In regards to wardecks the only thing i really want to see is some sort of buffer to specific demographics, those being newer players and the infirm simply because we cant rely on the ethics of fair play from most players - not even me.

If your able and have over 5 million sp for sure by now you should be capable of avoiding wardeckers or at least know the mechanics of eve well enough to know wardecks are indeed a thing.
Having said that some people do wardeck specifically to harrass certain individuals…

[Predvodnica_LSG]

@Lugburz

At least that way the core or ‘home’ systems of nullblocs would operate as standard with full local but the further and less used (and less upgraded) systems begin to deteriorate.

I like this “cost of ownership” and I thik it is good way to make much better null-sector

[Lugburz]

I think in an ideal new eden these standards

@Domunos

War Declarations are a risk that every player corporation has to face and they are under no circumstances considered harassment.

Would be great to maintain and, certainly when i started in 07, werent a real issue, however; that was ten years ago, a full decade and some gaming attitudes have changed (theres a specific generational thing here i wont go into)
And to be fair not nearly as much neutral logisitics and high sp players were running wardecks - there was also much more cause and effect and yes, it was far easier to actually find people that you had decked.
Many of these items have played their role in defining how wars work today and its small adjustments that should be made to each defining factor that should be addressed.

I think id agree that relating decks strictly to citadels is really not the best fix but that perhaps we should sit back and see what they do come up with… if they do…

[techzer0]

@Ima_Wreckyou

Once wardecs and ganking are removed

Self fulfilling prophecy.

Content A is getting removed at no fault of my own even though that is all i do every day making it a problem in the first place.

Ima Wreckyou | Character

Maybe if you and your fellow James followers didn’t do it so often it wouldn’t even be up for discussion.

Now that you can acknowledge that it is a problem why don’t you people do something about it instead of whining that its going to be removed.

CCP alters things drastically when there is a reason behind it. Don’t want ganking hindered? Stop doing it so often.

[Lugburz]

I dont want to see an end of ganking high value targets as i fully believe its one of the only real piracy that happens in the game; there are however some very real issues with how it all works, i think tethering on citadels is the main one at this point; hyperdunking before that.

Personally I hate hauling so i almost always set my hauler on ap to a jump or two before prominent spots (uedama/niarja etc) then manually pass through before setting ap again; its a bit of a ballache but hey if your effectively stupid enough to ap into and through low and nullsec… or places like sivala/uedama then thats not really a game issue; thats a you issue.

I am however dead set against the constant aggression against miners, this does indeed seem somewhat psychopathic and CODE should effectively be turned into an actual ‘pirate’ faction like eom or sanshas. Most of them are neg 10 anyway but might be amusing to have them added to npe and maybe some other missions (especially mining ones, maybe some high level courier ones too)
In regards to the miner ganking im not sure it can really be resolved without effecting the other, perhaps if belts were more like asteroid belts? (huge rings around a planet rather than seperate belt 1, 2 etc) it might be harder to simply warp in and blap but tbvh many code operatives use a cov ops alt spotter anyway.

CCP state that the game is basically made or driven by players, would be nice to see some of these items, corps and alliance actually entangled with the lore, and not as some crappy little novelty item we get given at xmas…
Holoreels for example could easily have a link to a gif or video…
Some guys boots could easily have been made to actually be boots a toon can wear…
And device could uhm… actually be a thing and do stuff…

As a game its programmable im sure, even down to the fact that you could have a 3 strike system; three suicide ganks on a miner could automatically put that toon in code or something…

But yeh, does require some work i imagine.

[Black_Pedro]

@Lugburz

I am however dead set against the constant aggression against miners, this does indeed seem somewhat psychopathic and CODE should effectively be turned into an actual ‘pirate’ faction like eom or sanshas.

They are an actual ‘pirate’ faction but one made and run by players exactly how this game is suppose to work.

Forgive me for pontificating, but I find it strange that so many players say they are here for an sandbox-y virtual universe experience, but when some players go out there and decide to be the bad guys, they get cold feet and start declaring this “greifing” or that “harassment” or this “unfair”. What do they think a full-time, PVP Battle Royale experience is going to be?

This is a video game though we all play for fun, so there should be a way to play it safer (and less rewarding) way as a group for many reasons, but this game is all about aggression, either directly by shooting spaceships, or gathering and building things to facilitate that aggression. The fact that even newer and casual players are open to criminals is fine, especially given how many tools there are to stay safe in highsec. If anything, there should be more ways for newer and casual players to play the role of criminals and content-generators in the sandbox.

I also this this latest wardec nerf is kludgy but fine - there really is no additional safety that couldn’t be access by using/exploiting the NPC corp. I think the whole system needs a more careful balance path with clear trade-offs and advantages for being open to wars and being protected from them, but CCP has their best people working on it. I am optimistic they will do their best to come up a system that supports the core game of Eve Online while keeping some of the softest and most casual players in the game by giving them access to a war-immune social group.

I mean, who can really disagree with their goals? They could make a mess of it, but the worst messes usually enter the game when CCP is forced to add rapid band-aids upon band-aids. If they have the time and resources to do this right, people, including carebears, will be exploding more than ever in highsec.

Unlike the last Fanfest, I came away from the Eve Vegas presentations much more optimistic that CCP is still trying to develop the game that Eve is. They genuinely still want the original vision of a full-time PvP sandbox, and while there is still some tendency to pander to the farmers and safebears of the world as some play to a wider audience, they seem to be getting better focused on pandering to new players like they should have been all along. The game is still too safe, especially for the most established players (who, coincidently are usually the loudest at screaming “think of the children!” and abusing this safety), but giving safety to new and casual player groups will only fill the universe with life. And raise a new crop of content to be enjoyed when they set-out on their own to carve a place for themselves somewhere in New Eden.

There is lots of room to re-imagine a better wardec system. I’ll wait to see what CCP comes up with before I declare this a success, but I am convinced whatever system they build, it will still allow people and their things to get regularly exploded in highsec and the same game of Eve go on as it has for so long now.

[Faylee_Freir]

@Nevyn_Auscent

Again, exploit never intended and never possible till bowhead.

Was never ruled as an exploit. Just unintended use of game mechanics. Also it’s been possible since Orcas have had a Ship Maintenance Bay. The bowhead wasn’t what made this possible.

[Nevyn_Auscent]

@Faylee_Freir

Was never ruled as an exploit.

Pretty sure CCP said so when they closed it off that any other mechanic to achieve hyper-dunking by was an exploit. It just wasn’t a bannable exploit when it first came to light. That doesn’t make it any less an exploit though.
Orca’s couldn’t hold enough ships to do it unless I’m badly remembering the size of the Orca’s SMA.

[Faylee_Freir]

Bring more orcas?

[Black_Pedro]

@Nevyn_Auscent

Pretty sure CCP said so when they closed it off that any other mechanic to achieve hyper-dunking by was an exploit. It just wasn’t a bannable exploit when it first came to light. That doesn’t make it any less an exploit though.

Well, maybe they have since changed their tune, but Falcon explicitly said it wasn’t an exploit:

Since the introduction of the Bowhead freighter, we’ve become aware of a tactic that has been introduced which has become known as “Hyperdunking”. This involves leaving a grid where a criminal action occurs to draw away CONCORD and reshipping to continue shooting at a target. There’s been much discussion among members of the community regarding this tactic, and whether or not it is considered legitimate gameplay.

After meeting with members of the game design and customer support teams and discussing this in depth, we have come to the consensus that due to the fact no rules are being broken and any ship that is involved in a criminal act is being destroyed by CONCORD as intended, that this tactic is simply an unintended but legitimate use of new game mechanics, and is not in breach of the rules. Tactics similar to this have been used with previous hulls before the Bowhead was introduced, and have been considered perfectly legitimate in the past.

With this in mind, at this time we do not consider this tactic to be in breach of the game rules, and as such our customer support team will not be offering reimbursements for hulls lost in this manner.

Players are also reminded that if someone is criminally flagged, they are fair game to be attacked in self-defense. Feel free to use this to your advantage.

People ‘hyperdunked’ for years things like abandoned POS arrays using Orcas. Probably not freighters as an Orca can only hold… 7 destroyers at a time? but such strategies had been used for years in less attention-grabbing ways.

I wouldn’t be surprised though if you found a new way to do so now it would be declared an exploit in short order given CCP’s clear intention for it not to exist, but it was a “legimate use of game mechanics” at the time.

[Nevyn_Auscent]

Fair enough, I was meaning freighter hyper dunking really with my statement, so yeah I guess you could have done it to smaller stuff at the time.
Which only goes to make my point stronger. Take things too far and they become exploits and get the rules changed to bring it back into balance.

[Faylee_Freir]

Well I infact did find a new way to do it. I was banned for 15 days for “manipulating concord”. Which makes no sense because the way I manipulated concord is no different that how other gankers manipulate concord.

[techzer0]

@Black_Pedro

but I find it strange that so many players say they are here for an sandbox-y virtual universe experience, but when some players go out there and decide to be the bad guys,

I know right. Like super bowling for free supers. Wonder why they removed that…oh yeah…the sandbox sometimes destroys gameplay on such a level it has to be nerfed.

[Lugburz]

@Black_Pedro

cold feet and start declaring this “greifing” or that “harassment” or this “unfair”.

in a game where this is achievable by losing nothing whilst countering it does cost something… there is imbalance.

@Black_Pedro

The game is still too safe, especially for the most established players (who, coincidently are usually the loudest at screaming “think of the children!” and abusing this safety), but giving safety to new and casual player groups will only fill the universe with life. And raise a new crop of content to be enjoyed when they set-out on their own to carve a place for themselves somewhere in New Eden.

Thats the aim i think we should all be looking for yes, and some players have always needed a bit of extra time to get used to the game… some never do… like the ones exploring nullsec and screaming about quiting when they get caught in a bubble… all space is dangerous but highsec is and should remain less dangerous, but not just for high sp experienced players that are really just abusing mechanics to remain super safe from practically everyone.

@Black_Pedro

There is lots of room to re-imagine a better wardec system. I’ll wait to see what CCP comes up with before I declare this a success, but I am convinced whatever system they build, it will still allow people and their things to get regularly exploded in highsec

hopefully they actually come up with something with an actual plan that they monitor and adjust accordingly; im hoping this will be the case rather than the current trend of… here you go, see you in 5 years…

[Tora_Bushido]

Will have an interview with PC Gamer about highsec war decs soon.

[Lugburz]

be sure to tell them its largely not fun for decker or deckee

[Black_Pedro]

@Lugburz

in a game where this is achievable by losing nothing whilst countering it does cost something… there is imbalance.

No, that is how the game is suppose to work. You are competing with other players. If they choose to roll over and die and give you their stuff, that is fine. Equally, they are intended to have to spend effort to defend themselves. That is what makes this game interesting - the constant push-pull between investing in defence or gathering resources, risking what you have for something more, and putting pressure on your opponent so that you get ahead and are relatively stronger than them.

Highsec is so safe and enforces costs on you to even attempt to aggress, that flying aware and cheap makes you invulnerable economically. Your opponent has to spend more effort and/or ISK exploding you than you do to evade them. That is a fine and balanced baseline to set the game. Then, from there, highsec resident can cut corners on effort or take additional risks for more yield or profit, some of these put you at additional risk.

It’s a fine game design that works well. I believe there maybe be some room to make the fights that result from crime more interesting than the DPS race the suicide ganking mechanic produces, but I see no evidence it is “imbalanced” or the like. The destruction caused by suicide ganking is barely noticeable on the MER and almost everything moving around highsec makes it safely to its destination station.

@Lugburz

Thats the aim i think we should all be looking for yes, and some players have always needed a bit of extra time to get used to the game… some never do… like the ones exploring nullsec and screaming about quiting when they get caught in a bubble… all space is dangerous but highsec is and should remain less dangerous, but not just for high sp experienced players that are really just abusing mechanics to remain super safe from practically everyone.

Yeah. There are a whole bunch of reasons someone may want to play Eve in a less competitive way. Maybe they don’t have much time, or dislike other people, or have strange schedules, or by nature very risk-averse, or maybe are just bad at the game. There is no reason they shouldn’t be able to play in a safer way, and in social groups, that comes with sufficient limits on their income potential or ability to influence others economically. I think a safer group space is even more important in modern Eve where the power gap between new players and established players is so large.

A corollary to this is that there needs to be good and clear reasons and benefits to put yourself at risk - the ‘player agency’ spoken of in the slide I posted, so you know why someone attacked you. It feels much better to know that you were attacked because you deployed a mining structure in an ice system someone else claims as theirs, than to catch a seemingly random wardec just because you exist. If you know why and who attacked you, you can possibly do something, especially if your opponents have a real presence in the game world, other than docking up and playing PUBG for a week.

[zluq_zabaa]

@Ima_Wreckyou

It’s not boring enough yet. Once wardecs and ganking are removed they will join in the millions. They are just waiting outside because every gamer out there dreams of a spaceship shooting game where you can’t shoot spaceships.

Now we laugh about it and in 5 years people will complain that NPCs are shooting back.