Ofcourse.
One Wardec HQ is stupid. We want Wardec HQ in each region. 
1 Like
Like Olmeca says, all the smaller alliances are dying off…
But ye sure, thats good for the game.
1 Like
PIRAT is the only big wardec group left because smaller alliances are dying off?
I don’t get the connection.
Pirat is the only big alliance left cos is the way the changes are driving to.
Being merc job, and overall the hig sec pvp, fading into oblivion a good or bad thing is an opinion.
With your permission I would like to do some corrections:
Here first time is free. Next time if you want to say something maybe you should use your own name on it, not changing quotes. Or is it too much to expect from you Mr ?
Actually I can agree this, for each region you must have a War HQ and if it is destroyed the war at that region stops with the defending side victory. And also WarHQs should be at least Large structures so they can mean something! Are you up for it ?
He wrote it. Why woudln’t he be up for it?
OK.
Very constructive, and rich of objections, reply tough, Sir.
Because people sometimes writes things without meaning, but when the time comes to do /apply what they write, they tend to bail out. I am not saying that he is one of those people, but I am saying why I need answer
How do you think this is going to be applied? None of us have any say in that. If CCP don’t introduce it, then asking him for confimation of what is already written is pointless and if CCP did implement, then there is no choice but to adapt, so again it’s pointless.
He is the one offering to have War HQ in each region, and I am being pointless because I agreed? Seems logical, thanks o7
No, it’s pointless asking him if he agrees with his own idea. He’s already posted it, but aside from that, you have no power to implement this, so asking him if he still agress after you agreed with him is impotent.
Please no…You are 100% with the region point but don’t add a barrier to entry by adding a size limit to the stations.
2 Likes
The objective is to end all aggression, so it fits the desired outcome perfectly.
Commander Kane is alright, he is pretty straight up and he likes to brawl, so good guy in my book. What you said about PIRAT above is on the nose, but they will take advantage of the mechanics, because why not. But it does need to be adjuted in some way. I would give a week off for the War HQ dying within six days of the end of the war dec.
1 Like
You are assuming but of course you are mistaken again. My point was not to end all aggresion, I like PvP and never want to see it die out. So maybe instead of assuming you can provide some constructive feedback next time. My point is that clearly loosing Astrahus HQ is nothing a real risk when you can abuse the mechanic to evade 2 weeks peacetime period and spam War HQ Astrahus all over the space and keep harrasing emerging corps and new players, so at least have a structure that will cost more so balancing their risk.
That is a strawman, they just want to project on you their deepest fears. You are obviously like me, you want there to be something worth fighting for and you feel just like me that CCP needs to adjust the mechanics to cover this sort of exploit, instead of leaving it half finished.
You don’t need to defend yourself from such a dig, I have come across very few players that actually want what they project on us. You are and I are certainly not wanting to end all aggression.
I think having it linked to structures which is stepping up to the plate is OK, I do regret that there is no limited way to go after corps or alliances without structures, but the abuse went on for far to long and had very negative affects, they had it so good and so easy for so long, but the pay check has arrived. And good people like Commander Kane will deal with it easily.
That some of the war deckers are crying about it, like the OP because he has not got it within himself to put a structure at risk says more about them then anything else. Don’t look at what they say that they do, look at what they actually do.
2 Likes
Hes not the only one is assuming it, and for some strong reasons.
For example:
-Question: Why someone who is mainly operating in a big null would take care of small
insurgent hi-sec corps?
-Answer: Because, with the new changes, the hig sec decs hits big nulls way way more
harder than the small ones, wich with the BEHAVIOUR of using alt shell corps
are pretty much safer than before.
Your posts demonstrate otherwise.
If.you like PVP, then your proposals would be the other way.
Nothing you have posted will increase PVP, only decrease the potential for it. That’s not a great demonstration of liking PVP.
1 Like
You had it really easy for so long, but now you have it different, I have total confidence that you will adjust to it and you have.
I recognised for a long time that most of your kills were on nullsec players in any case, so the changes only reduced slightly your real target pool and gives people in hisec time to develop and something to stand up for if they want it. Far as I am concerned it is better than it was.
Edit: A quick question, what do you think of the OP’s shameful lack of bottle in that he cannot even put a structure at risk, damn carebears do that when they do indy, but he can’t, WTF!