[dev blog] backwards then forwards

[Mr Marram]

http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3433


“The future influences the present just as much as the past.”-Friedrich Nietzsche
Hello again everyone. It’s time to to look back at the last few months and then take a quick peak into the near future for the pilots of EVE Online. Last November’s release of Crucible was a key moment for us. Not only did it herald a shift in focus in what types of releases we were going to deliver to you, it also coincided with significant changes in how we, CCP, go about making the game we all love. There is plenty of detail about all of this in this dev Blog from CCP Zulu and in the December CSM minutes. In short, we are focusing the majority of our efforts on the “core” game of EVE whilst taking some time to give some TLC to our own internal structure, processes and tools.
The good thing is that the first big mountain of work on our reorganization has been completed, although there will be more change for us ahead. After the initial disruption that an effort like this always creates, all our developers are back in the serious business of making EVE better and better. You have already seen some of the results of this with January’s 1.1 point release for Crucible which brought balancing changes for Assault Frigates, Neocom improvements, Factional Warfare increments and a host of other changes all designed around making it a better experience to play EVE. Time Dilation has brought a level playing field in super-populated server situations and Team Gridlock have now turned their attention to performance improvements for the client, having recently released some of their work in Crucible 1.2 (http://community.eveonline.com/updates/patchnotes.asp?newpatchlogID=3410).
http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/3131/3433/QVH0m_550.jpg (http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/3131/3433/QVH0m.jpg)
A picture from a recent Time Dilated fleet fight courtesy of Deathcrow (http://www.reddit.com/r/evedreddit/comments/pknsr/yesterday_was_the_biggest_fight_i_have_seen) (click to enlarge)
You will also have noticed an increase in the pace of small targeted patches and hotfixes, many in response to the reports we are getting in from new back-end systems we put in place to help us react to issues faster.
In addition to the many small fixes and improvements we’ve deployed, we have also released a completely revamped eveonline.com website, designed to lead new pilots into the wonders that await them in the game. Poke around with it if you haven’t yet. It’s complemented by a simultaneous release of an ever improving community website for those who have been in the game for a while longer.
That’s actually quite a bit when you consider it has only been two and a half months since Crucible launched. However, it is time to look to the future and see what it brings.
EVE’s developers are really getting into their stride for our upcoming releases. I recently emerged from many demos where the teams have been showing off their progress from their second sprint (short development cycle). I have to say that even at this early stage I think we have some great features, content and improvements for you coming up over the next 4-5 months. We are hoping to have a number of small releases as we go through February, March and April culminating in our major, war-themed release coming just before the summer, EVE Online: Inferno
http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/3131/3433/Inferno_LogoArt_550px.jpg
The next few months will be spent reinvigorating Concord-sanctioned warfare, giving tools and a framework to groups who wish to take advantage of these conflicts both directly and indirectly. We are also looking to introduce many new things which will mix up all forms of combat in a way not seen for a long time. Factional Warfare will also be seeing changes to make it much more relevant and fun by giving real reasons to fight for your faction.
As we continue development there will also be smaller changes, improvements and usability fixes, and we will not forsake our game performance focus. We will be making some changes and additions to our avatar technology and many other parts of the game. The websites will continue their metamorphoses and there may even be sight of more developer events on TQ.
Finally, we will revealing more concrete steps in the link between EVE and DUST 514, bringing an unprecedented level of collaboration, conflict and purpose to both games living in the same EVE Universe.
Am I playing my cards close to my chest? Of course. I’m keeping details light right now as it is still early on in the development process. I’d also much rather let the people putting all the hard work into making these features a reality have the chance to unveil things. Expect dev blogs, forum posts, interviews and video blogs packed full of information in the coming weeks and months.
Of course, if you want to witness the next big reveal of plans for EVE Online: Inferno, then you can hear it in person by coming to Fanfest in March. There you will be able to get quite cozy with your favorite devs and find out the real lowdown on EVE. This year Fanfest will be at a bigger, better venue right in the social epicenter of downtown Reykjavik, allowing us to bring MOAR EVE to Fanfest than ever before as well as some sneak previews of DUST 514, including the first-ever hands-on demo.. I can’t wait for the event and I hope to talk spaceships with a lot of you in person.
Time to sum up what has become a giant tease of a blog. A lot of work was put into YourEVE by everyone at CCP over the last few months and we all hope to continue momentum into what is shaping up to be the best year ever for EVE Online. The changes we painfully undertook appear to already be paying dividends via the Crucible releases.. More importantly though, I hope each one of you is experiencing benefits from our recent releases and that our plan going forward will bring even more of the same. I thank you for being here with us as we co-develop EVE with you, the greatest gaming community ever assembled. I trust that, come EVE Online: Inferno, you will be having the grandest time blowing each other up and/or profiting from it.
CCP Unifex
Jonathan Lander
Senior Producer of EVE Online

Tl;dr
Wardec, FW changes and Dust514 linkage slated for the next expansion called 'Inferno'.

[Alistair]

Inferno, eh. Nerdcontentwarning, reminds me of a Marvel Comics X-men crossover from way back in the day.

Sounds good (as usual), but "show us", as usual.

[Cue1*]

Apparently first? Looks like a good step, but would like to see POSs worked on.


Edit:damn, not first.

[Rudolf Miller]

Considering their "show us" has been delivering pretty good of late, I for one am moderately excited. I can't wait to see what they come up with.

[kyrieee]

The screenshot is pretty good

[Varcaus]

Iwanttobelive.

[Takon Orlani]

I like it. May drive me back to my Griefing ways.

...posted from a potato.

[Alistair]

...posted from a potato.

with Tapatalk?

[Doomed Predator]

I'm gonna go with cautiously optimistic. How could they possibly make wardecs worse(any CCP employees reading this thread,that was not a dare!)?

[Lady Spank]

In before Roemywhine

[Shin_getter]

How could they possibly make wardecs worse(any CCP employees reading this thread,that was not a dare!)?
oh you just lack imagination

murphy's law on unintended consequences is funny

[RoemySchneider]

In before Roemywhine

just get your fanfest ticket already and devour all the fairy tales


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=7AzyCJ1hND8#t=95s

[notbitterenough]

Looking forward to wardec and aggression mechanics that make sense.

[rojomojo915]

Who said they were gonna make sense?

[Takon Orlani]

...posted from a potato.

with Tapatalk?
Yes.

[Varcaus]

Who said they were gonna make sense?

This

[notbitterenough]

Who said they were gonna make sense?

This

I'm hopeful they will. Try to be less bitter ok?

[Poem]

This does look really good. As CCP seem to be showing a full design shift as opposed to a one off customer pleasing expansion the new thing to transfer bitterfear to seems to be this IPO rumble. Looking forward to more FW work, there is a lot of potential in there.

[Boltorano]

wwww.eveonline.com

Edit: ha, it's been fixed already

[indeterminacy]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

[Rivqua]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?


I think that non-hardcorepvpers feel they should never be wardecced, and would love 1bil/week, while highsec-pvpers feel they should be able to prevent people from corp jumping (and more importantly, getting their pos out of wardec).

[Boltorano]

Since corp jumping is now allowed (and practically encouraged) I don't expect to see much change there.

[Verite Rendition]

Since corp jumping is now allowed (and practically encouraged) I don't expect to see much change there.Corp jumping has always been difficult to prove, and while CCP is no longer trying to stop it I've never gotten the impression that they want corp jumping. It's entirely possible CCP has some new mechanics in mind that would negate it, which would allow it to be verboten again without requiring expensive GM time to investigate it.

[indeterminacy]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?


I think that non-hardcorepvpers feel they should never be wardecced, and would love 1bil/week, while highsec-pvpers feel they should be able to prevent people from corp jumping (and more importantly, getting their pos out of wardec).

So what you're saying is: once the changes are completed, an equal number of people will be unhappy with the new system but for new reasons. CCP might leave it alone and devote assets elsewhere.

[notbitterenough]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

Neutral RR.

[Rivqua]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

Neutral RR.

Neutral RR has never been a issue for anyone (now, RR in general IS, but thats different). The fact its neutral has never been a problem as such.

[depili]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?


I think that non-hardcorepvpers feel they should never be wardecced, and would love 1bil/week, while highsec-pvpers feel they should be able to prevent people from corp jumping (and more importantly, getting their pos out of wardec).

Currently there is no way to force any fight with wardecs, if you attack a tower any sane corp will do the alliance-hopping and guarantee the towers safety and all real bears will just hop into another corp, so wardecs are pretty much reduced to camping jita for the morons.

[Tarminic]

I'd like war declaration mechanics to involve a lot more than just "We declare war, we shoot you in 24 hours". Currently there are a lot of questionable mechanics used to dodge war declarations that I'd like to see removed and replaced by something more formal and interesting.

DISCLAIMER: IDEA PULLED DIRECTLY OUT OF ASS

1. War Objectives
War declarations come with objectives that can be completed. These objectives allow attackers to actually win or lose wars by having met or failed the objectives. Examples include: number of podkills, number of kills, number of [SHIP] kills, financial lost inflicted.

If a war is won, that victory along with the completed objectives becomes part of that corporation's public War Record. Any war that they initiate and subsequently lose, however, is also publicly visible. Records of wars declared against them (won or lost) are not automatically public until someone with the right role chooses to make them public.

In addition, each war declaration comes with a surrender price. Pay the surrender price and the war ends immediately.

2. Evading Wars, Officially
If someone doesn't want to fight a war, they have the option of semi-officially bribing CONCORD to keep it stuck in red tape. At least some of this fee goes directly to the declaring corporation. The cost of this, in addition to the ISK going directly to the attacking corp, increases over time.

There should be an official mechanic for extorting another corporation. Something like "Corporation A must pay Corporation B X amount of [ISK/ITEM] per week. Failure to pay will result in a declaration of war with conditions C, D, and E".

3. Making it Harder to Evade Wars Unofficially
War declarations now become "sticky", so that if a corporation has a war declaration, leaving the corporation will not immediately make you an invalid war target. The duration of the "sticky" war dec is subject to balancing but the player cannot join another player corporation in the mean time. This also applies if the corporation is disbanded.

These mechanics also apply to wars between Alliances as well.

[Takon Orlani]

Hopefully there will be some sort of built in end the war pay the ransom option. Also a punishment system for hopping around, perhaps a 3 day cooldown timer when leaving under war.

...posted from a potato.

[notbitterenough]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

Neutral RR.

Neutral RR has never been a issue for anyone (now, RR in general IS, but thats different). The fact its neutral has never been a problem as such.

Yeah I'm going to have to call bullshit on what you just said. Remember before the Falcon nerf and everyone was rolling with a Falcon alt in low sec? Yeah, that's the same thing in high sec, but its now neutral RR. It is so bad that there is some high sec corps that have more neutral alts to assist their main in the corp that actually is at war.

Every aspect of high sec wars revolve around neutral alts. The largest eye sore is Orphanage. They have tons of alts remote sensor boosting, remote tracking enhancing, remote repair and so on.

[Bacchanalian]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

Neutral RR.

Neutral RR has never been a issue for anyone (now, RR in general IS, but thats different). The fact its neutral has never been a problem as such.

Yeah I'm going to have to call bullshit on what you just said. Remember before the Falcon nerf and everyone was rolling with a Falcon alt in low sec? Yeah, that's the same thing in high sec, but its now neutral RR. It is so bad that there is some high sec corps that have more neutral alts to assist their main in the corp that actually is at war.

Every aspect of high sec wars revolve around neutral alts. The largest eye sore is Orphanage. They have tons of alts remote sensor boosting, remote tracking enhancing, remote repair and so on.

You mean people stopped rolling everywhere with Falcon alts? I think half of EVE missed the memo. Now it's a Falcon alt and cloaky t3 ganglink alt for "solo".

[Lana Torrin]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

The biggest issue is that you can now just completely ignore them. CCP ruled quite recently that it is all working as intended so every possible exploit to get out of being shot at is fair game. Mass corp jumping, alliance jumping, the lot.

Now I'm all for corps being able to get out of wars but it should have to be a negotiated thing with the person that declared war on them not some game mechanic bug.

[Donte]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

Neutral RR.

Neutral RR has never been a issue for anyone (now, RR in general IS, but thats different). The fact its neutral has never been a problem as such.

Yeah I'm going to have to call bullshit on what you just said. Remember before the Falcon nerf and everyone was rolling with a Falcon alt in low sec? Yeah, that's the same thing in high sec, but its now neutral RR. It is so bad that there is some high sec corps that have more neutral alts to assist their main in the corp that actually is at war.

Every aspect of high sec wars revolve around neutral alts. The largest eye sore is Orphanage. They have tons of alts remote sensor boosting, remote tracking enhancing, remote repair and so on.

You mean people stopped rolling everywhere with Falcon alts? I think half of EVE missed the memo. Now it's a Falcon alt and cloaky t3 ganglink alt for "solo".

yeah but with highsec wars a neutral falcon is concorded as soon as it activates is first jamming mod on another person who they're not at war with, hence neutral. if a falcon rolls up to station in the wardec corp you can try to kill em just like the other guy. Neut RR's are just about impossible to deal with, the only way to win is to bring more neut RR. stuff like that tends to get fixed as it de-sandboxes the sandbox.

[dzajic]

Once again respected gentleman, you push what you "believe EVE should be" above what "can possibly be done".

Say corp jumping and all other forms of wardec evasion are nerfed. Goons and friends proceed with great joy do destroy every highsec POS they can find.

Enjoy brave new EVE where everything that is not meta 0 T1 costs many times more than it costs now. Now I'm sure people with tens and hundreds of billions of ISK in their wallets wouldn't care much...

Edit.

Highsec POSes might have been originally unwanted consequence of CCP's lazy coding. But they are crucial part of economy now. 00 leaders and tycoons would profit greatly from their removal (and removing corp hop option to evade wardecs would have same effect); but everyone else would suffer the consequences.

[Joshua Foiritain]

Pretty pictures. Also; Pirate factions for faction warfare please.

[Sponk]

Say corp jumping and all other forms of wardec evasion are nerfed. Goons and friends proceed with great joy do destroy every highsec POS they can find.
You say that like it wouldn't be compelling game content.

[Tyrus Tenebros]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

Neutral RR.

Neutral RR has never been a issue for anyone (now, RR in general IS, but thats different). The fact its neutral has never been a problem as such.

Yeah I'm going to have to call bullshit on what you just said. Remember before the Falcon nerf and everyone was rolling with a Falcon alt in low sec? Yeah, that's the same thing in high sec, but its now neutral RR. It is so bad that there is some high sec corps that have more neutral alts to assist their main in the corp that actually is at war.

Every aspect of high sec wars revolve around neutral alts. The largest eye sore is Orphanage. They have tons of alts remote sensor boosting, remote tracking enhancing, remote repair and so on.

You mean people stopped rolling everywhere with Falcon alts? I think half of EVE missed the memo. Now it's a Falcon alt and cloaky t3 ganglink alt for "solo".

yeah but with highsec wars a neutral falcon is concorded as soon as it activates is first jamming mod on another person who they're not at war with, hence neutral. if a falcon rolls up to station in the wardec corp you can try to kill em just like the other guy. Neut RR's are just about impossible to deal with, the only way to win is to bring more neut RR. stuff like that tends to get fixed as it de-sandboxes the sandbox.Well the neutral RR DOES properly aggress to you when it reps a wartarget. The problem is that there's no way to pre-emptively and definitively identify the neutral reps or nullify them without exposing yourself to your actual target's aggression first.

The other big problem, really, is that they aren't aggressed and they're so prolific that you have to assume you're fighting a fleet including 5-8 logistics (In amarr at least) on top of whatever you're actually fighting. Combine that with on-undock login traps and you either

A) get blobbed and die because you brought 9 to fight what you assumed would be 4-5 + 5 logi alts and it turned out to be 16 (lol logging in) + 7 logi alts (true story)

or

B) you bring 20 and they call you blobbing faggots in local because "we only have 3 guys" and just stay docked and their RR stays on station as non-aggressed eyes on station.

[Tarminic]

Once again respected gentleman, you push what you "believe EVE should be" above what "can possibly be done".

Say corp jumping and all other forms of wardec evasion are nerfed. Goons and friends proceed with great joy do destroy every highsec POS they can find.

Enjoy brave new EVE where everything that is not meta 0 T1 costs many times more than it costs now. Now I'm sure people with tens and hundreds of billions of ISK in their wallets wouldn't care much...

Edit.

Highsec POSes might have been originally unwanted consequence of CCP's lazy coding. But they are crucial part of economy now. 00 leaders and tycoons would profit greatly from their removal (and removing corp hop option to evade wardecs would have same effect); but everyone else would suffer the consequences.
I don't think anyone here had advocated removing all forms of wardec evasion, but update the mechanics so it provides a better and more balanced experience. Preferably one that doesn't involve shitty, unfun metagaming.

[Cue1*]

Say corp jumping and all other forms of wardec evasion are nerfed. Goons and friends proceed with great joy do destroy every highsec POS they can find.
You say that like it wouldn't be compelling game content.

Seconding this. Sounds like an excellent way to force industry to move to 0.0, which would make it all the better I think. Nerf the ability to move across EVE in half an hour and we'll have tiny empires popping up, defense forces to just defend the indy POSs and decent fights all around.

[Sudden]

Pretty pictures. Also; Pirate factions for faction warfare please.

[dzajic]

Say corp jumping and all other forms of wardec evasion are nerfed. Goons and friends proceed with great joy do destroy every highsec POS they can find.
You say that like it wouldn't be compelling game content.

Seconding this. Sounds like an excellent way to force industry to move to 0.0, which would make it all the better I think. Nerf the ability to move across EVE in half an hour and we'll have tiny empires popping up, defense forces to just defend the indy POSs and decent fights all around.


Do you really long that much for good old days of 400mil command ships and 50mil T2 guns?

[Tyrus Tenebros]

Say corp jumping and all other forms of wardec evasion are nerfed. Goons and friends proceed with great joy do destroy every highsec POS they can find.
You say that like it wouldn't be compelling game content.

Seconding this. Sounds like an excellent way to force industry to move to 0.0, which would make it all the better I think. Nerf the ability to move across EVE in half an hour and we'll have tiny empires popping up, defense forces to just defend the indy POSs and decent fights all around.


Do you really long that much for good old days of 400mil command ships and 50mil T2 guns?
Stealth noob buff?

[dzajic]

Nah. Uberrich bittervett buff. The edge that full T2 fit provides will remain same as its now; so people willing to stay competitive (who don't have dozens and hundreds of billions in wallets and so can't not care about prices of stuff) end forced to grind more to afford same ships they fly today.

Though I'm happy that at least people aren't claiming removal of industry from high-sec wouldn't affect prices.

[Qwert]

There are two problems with wardecs ATM. One is that corporation hopping makes you un-deckable. The other is that when fighting does occur, (ignoring rvb) the deck is 100% a pay-to-greif system since economic retaliation by the defenders is made impossible by alts.

[Lana Torrin]

the deck is 100% a pay-to-greif system since economic retaliation by the defenders is made impossible by alts.

This as well.. If wardecs are going to be harder to get out of (and I want them to be pretty much iron clad, see my idea about a wardec staying on individual members of the corp even if they leave corp for the full duration of the dec) then they need to be harder to get in to as well. "I saw you mining in something shiny and I think you would drop something nice" isnt really a good enough reason..

Just a random thought... Corp A wants to wardec Corp B, but to allow this Corp B must have done something 'bad' to Corp A.. Lets say someone in Corp B can flipped someone in Corp A.. Not enough to get concorded but perhaps this should be enough to allow the dec.. Something that gets you concorded (say suicide ganking their miners) should also allow them to declare war on you..

I can see a glorious future when corp infiltrations and backstabbing is needed to provoke a war! (Rather than just ooo, shiny)

[Shin_getter]

The other big problem, really, is that they aren't aggressed and they're so prolific that you have to assume you're fighting a fleet including 5-8 logistics (In amarr at least) on top of whatever you're actually fighting. Combine that with on-undock login traps and you either

A) get blobbed and die because you brought 9 to fight what you assumed would be 4-5 + 5 logi alts and it turned out to be 16 (lol logging in) + 7 logi alts (true story)

or

B) you bring 20 and they call you blobbing faggots in local because "we only have 3 guys" and just stay docked and their RR stays on station as non-aggressed eyes on station.
Sounds like Eve everywhere else? Sandbox as intended lol


Seconding this. Sounds like an excellent way to force industry to move to 0.0, which would make it all the better I think. Nerf the ability to move across EVE in half an hour and we'll have tiny empires popping up, defense forces to just defend the indy POSs and decent fights all around.
Does not follow. Sounds like the guys that can build jb networks and put a titan everywhere is going to reap the rewards. Its probably best to station the new jewvetion POS beside CSAA, reaction and tech towers and run a unified defense fleet.

If you really think some tiny group in the middle of deep null can do invention effectively when it takes hours of gate hopping importing materials and datacores and taking the same amount of time to get it to market, you must be nuts.

[Varcaus]

Pretty pictures. Also; Pirate factions for faction warfare please.

This would make we join FW.

[RoemySchneider]

http://www.eve-search.com/thread/907075-0/page/1

[Cue1*]

If you really think some tiny group in the middle of deep null can do invention effectively when it takes hours of gate hopping importing materials and datacores and taking the same amount of time to get it to market, you must be nuts.

Tiny wasn't what I was going for. I'd rather see the current size of alliances stay the same, just alliances don't have to be in huge powerblocks to stay where they are. Add to that the ability for those alliances to make bank from invention, and we can finally fix moon mining. Honestly, most indy should be in 0.0 IMO.

[Shin_getter]

If you really think some tiny group in the middle of deep null can do invention effectively when it takes hours of gate hopping importing materials and datacores and taking the same amount of time to get it to market, you must be nuts.

Tiny wasn't what I was going for. I'd rather see the current size of alliances stay the same, just alliances don't have to be in huge powerblocks to stay where they are. Add to that the ability for those alliances to make bank from invention, and we can finally fix moon mining. Honestly, most indy should be in 0.0 IMO.

What you want <> what is going to happen here.

If you are a jewbear (if not RMT-ing on the side), is there any reason you don't want to be in the biggest most bluelisting power block there is? The more indy types you move out there, the more pressure there is to bluelist since indy types don't do good fights much and just want to jew in peace.

And we knew exactly what happened when folks tried to move indy out to null by giving better rewards there. *hint: it has something to do with drones*

[Lana Torrin]

If you really think some tiny group in the middle of deep null can do invention effectively when it takes hours of gate hopping importing materials and datacores and taking the same amount of time to get it to market, you must be nuts.

Tiny wasn't what I was going for. I'd rather see the current size of alliances stay the same, just alliances don't have to be in huge powerblocks to stay where they are. Add to that the ability for those alliances to make bank from invention, and we can finally fix moon mining. Honestly, most profitable indy should be in 0.0 IMO.

FYP

[Cue1*]

If you really think some tiny group in the middle of deep null can do invention effectively when it takes hours of gate hopping importing materials and datacores and taking the same amount of time to get it to market, you must be nuts.

Tiny wasn't what I was going for. I'd rather see the current size of alliances stay the same, just alliances don't have to be in huge powerblocks to stay where they are. Add to that the ability for those alliances to make bank from invention, and we can finally fix moon mining. Honestly, most indy should be in 0.0 IMO.

What you want <> what is going to happen here.

If you are a jewbear (if not RMT-ing on the side), is there any reason you don't want to be in the biggest most bluelisting power block there is? The more indy types you move out there, the more pressure there is to bluelist since indy types don't do good fights much.

And we knew exactly what happened when folks tried to move indy out to null by giving better rewards there. *hint: it has something to do with drones*

Nerf travel ability, makes it a lot harder to keep large blue lists. But whatever, you're stuck in your own little world, unwilling to see EVE change.

[Shin_getter]

If you really think some tiny group in the middle of deep null can do invention effectively when it takes hours of gate hopping importing materials and datacores and taking the same amount of time to get it to market, you must be nuts.

Tiny wasn't what I was going for. I'd rather see the current size of alliances stay the same, just alliances don't have to be in huge powerblocks to stay where they are. Add to that the ability for those alliances to make bank from invention, and we can finally fix moon mining. Honestly, most indy should be in 0.0 IMO.

What you want <> what is going to happen here.

If you are a jewbear (if not RMT-ing on the side), is there any reason you don't want to be in the biggest most bluelisting power block there is? The more indy types you move out there, the more pressure there is to bluelist since indy types don't do good fights much.

And we knew exactly what happened when folks tried to move indy out to null by giving better rewards there. *hint: it has something to do with drones*

Nerf travel ability, makes it a lot harder to keep large blue lists. But whatever, you're stuck in your own little world, unwilling to see EVE change.
Its not a question of willingness, but the question of "whether it is possible given proposed changes". (changes being mostly wardec: nothing about nullsec is even on the table at the moment) If you nerf "jump everything", i suspect the powerblocks is just going to camp all the systems near highsec and do their money making there and there'd be vast stretches of emptiness in deep null unlike anything in recent eve, and much crying by the player base about them. If you really want to balkenize everything its likely going to take traumatic changes on a grand scale (which likely won't happen given incremental iterative change controlled by nullblock CSM).

------
Wanting CCP micromanage large scale player dynamics is not unlike wanting governments to do social engineering, and governments actually contain folks well educated on the problem while the inverse is completely not true.

[Vilgan]

Getting from deep null to empire is usually massively faster/easier with wormholes than jump nonsense anyway.

[Shin_getter]

Getting from deep null to empire is usually massively faster/easier with wormholes than jump nonsense anyway.
If all you are doing is inventions and can't do highsec, probably best to throw them up in a C1 together with a PI and reaction setup and call it a day. Sov null is just bad for it. Powerblocks can also just keep their tower anywhere they want to begin with, its the small 3 man alt corps and likes that have problems.

[Gix Tyrionn]

I'd like war declaration mechanics to involve a lot more than just "We declare war, we shoot you in 24 hours". Currently there are a lot of questionable mechanics used to dodge war declarations that I'd like to see removed and replaced by something more formal and interesting.

DISCLAIMER: IDEA PULLED DIRECTLY OUT OF ASS

1. War Objectives
War declarations come with objectives that can be completed. These objectives allow attackers to actually win or lose wars by having met or failed the objectives. Examples include: number of podkills, number of kills, number of [SHIP] kills, financial lost inflicted.

If a war is won, that victory along with the completed objectives becomes part of that corporation's public War Record. Any war that they initiate and subsequently lose, however, is also publicly visible. Records of wars declared against them (won or lost) are not automatically public until someone with the right role chooses to make them public.

In addition, each war declaration comes with a surrender price. Pay the surrender price and the war ends immediately.

2. Evading Wars, Officially
If someone doesn't want to fight a war, they have the option of semi-officially bribing CONCORD to keep it stuck in red tape. At least some of this fee goes directly to the declaring corporation. The cost of this, in addition to the ISK going directly to the attacking corp, increases over time.

There should be an official mechanic for extorting another corporation. Something like "Corporation A must pay Corporation B X amount of [ISK/ITEM] per week. Failure to pay will result in a declaration of war with conditions C, D, and E".

3. Making it Harder to Evade Wars Unofficially
War declarations now become "sticky", so that if a corporation has a war declaration, leaving the corporation will not immediately make you an invalid war target. The duration of the "sticky" war dec is subject to balancing but the player cannot join another player corporation in the mean time. This also applies if the corporation is disbanded.

These mechanics also apply to wars between Alliances as well.

Both 1 and 2 are already available via meta game means. Killboard for 1, having a trading system for 2.

Oh and 3 is already there for corps (1 day). For players "dropping roles" keeps them from instantly becoming an invalid target (1 day).

I'd shutter to think of a mechanic forced option to number 2 as the bulk of the fun with it is setting it up. I'm not sure why you wouldn't want to negotiate personally with the corp instead of pressing butan and letting them pay a tax that would have to be lower than the 15% npc corp rate.

Same fear with number 1, an official win/lose mechanic would be terrible. Carebears would purposely fail objectives to end the war and grief the wardeckers while bragging about how they've make enough isk running level 4's over the last 5 years to fail a thousand wars and not be bothered.

[JForce]

All Eve problems can be solved by fixing 2 things:
1) Too much ISK
2) Too easy to move around

Everything else stems from those. Change those, and everything changes. Not all for the better, but the fundamentals would.

[Sofia Roseburn]

Shin_getter shut the fuck up or make decent posts before I'm forced to resolve this situation in a friendly manner.

[Shin_getter]

Post reasoned responses (on content or style), not ad hominem. If there is some serious problem, there needs to be explicit rules and reasoning instead of "hey, I don't like you and stop being a shit."

Or I've misunderstood and this forum is designed to be a echo chamber where all posters knew exactly how they are suppose to conform to unspoken moderator expectations.

[Xiang Jiao]

I've got a wild and terrible idea so feel free to shit all over it.

Instead of using the current week long CONCORD bribes, scrap them and make a much more extensive faction system that applies to all players except the very new. If you and another player are separated by a certain threshold of faction points and belong to warring sects (based on LOLRP), you can attack each other in empire space without CONCORD getting involved. Additional factors based on system security and system sovereignty would apply to adjust this mechanic. CONCORD isn't interested in mediating blood feuds, so they look the other way when you decide to pound your enemies into dust on the playground.

A couple of problems I forsee with this new faction warfare system:

1) Faction standings are currently decided by PVE content. Not everyone likes to grind this content because it's largely dull. A dynamic faction system begs for more player reaction and interaction. If you go around shooting Caldari miners in your spare time, you would gain affinity with their enemies. Eventually, you become so hated that you can throw down in .5 Caldari systems.

2) How do you get players involved in faction warfare in the first place? If they have to gain faction by killing their enemies, where do they start and how? In essence, what will faction warfare be about? I would expect it to involve GM run events and objectives that bring players to low sec. If it's not fun and doesn't have a significant impact on the game, players might as well opt out of it.

3) How do you join corporations and alliances? A heavy handed faction system throws a wrench into the whole red/blue/neutral standings dynamic that typical player entities follow. I don't think it should replace the political dynamics of null sec space. I wouldn't want to see corp hopping a viable means to game the system, however. To join a corporation you should have to fly with them first, or strike their enemies, thereby gaining a faction affinity with them to become a member.

At any rate, it's an unusual approach. One of the inherent challenges is the disconnect that exists between the faction system and real game politics. To make faction warfare mean something significant, it has to tie in with the thread of the game first. Right now, it has little to no effect on players who do not participate in it, and it would be great for the game if we could have more reasons to shoot each other in all parts of space.

[Sofia Roseburn]

You've misunderstood. Get with the fixing please.

[Rivqua]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

Neutral RR.

Neutral RR has never been a issue for anyone (now, RR in general IS, but thats different). The fact its neutral has never been a problem as such.

Yeah I'm going to have to call bullshit on what you just said. Remember before the Falcon nerf and everyone was rolling with a Falcon alt in low sec? Yeah, that's the same thing in high sec, but its now neutral RR. It is so bad that there is some high sec corps that have more neutral alts to assist their main in the corp that actually is at war.

Every aspect of high sec wars revolve around neutral alts. The largest eye sore is Orphanage. They have tons of alts remote sensor boosting, remote tracking enhancing, remote repair and so on.

Also you would be wrong. Yeah, 0rphanage uses them for every other thing, but they also don't really fight wars, they are (were, didn't they break up?) more like fixtures in space to avoid. And the whole neutral thing, I was a "highsec combatant" for many years, and we did it well, very well, and I can tell you, the RR being neutral is never a issue, they are easy to indentify along the course of a campaign, and are very easy to handle. Now, I am not saying the number of RR isnt wrong, it is. THere are some corps that have a rule of 2-4 RR per pilot, to allow them to join corp, and I think that's too much. But it makes very little difference if they are neutral or not.

I really don't know how it should be changed. I think tracking wardecced members for the duration of the dec is probably the best way, but I guess it needs to be a complete system, maybe involving mechanics to involve mercs and such as well. also, neutral RR should probably give you kill rights for a month similiar to ganks in lowsec, thereby you being able to "exact revenge" at a later date. That may curb some of it without actually changing the fighting mechanic, which I welcome, as unknown factors can be fairly fun, all in all.

[Durzel]

I want them to be pretty much iron clad, see my idea about a wardec staying on individual members of the corp even if they leave corp for the full duration of the decCCP didn't want those subscribers anyway.

What you're proposing would make people quit - pure and simple. If a dec follows you around everywhere and you don't want to fight why would you even bother logging in?

Whatever changes they make have to accommodate in some form or another peoples unwillingness to fight in "safe" space. Whether that be extortion payments that automatically end the dec (and prevent it being redone soon afterwards) or some other mechanic it has to be better than "you're attackable anywhere you undock until such time as the griefers decide they're bored". "Forcing" fights on people will eat into their majority subscriber base.

I wouldn't be averse to neutral RR getting both a combat timer for RR - which should've already happened - and becoming part of the dec for the duration of the war from the point they decide to rep someone, rather than just a tokenistic aggression timer. If you're guilty by association this should persist for the duration of hostilities - you shouldn't imo have to rely upon people having to keep track of every single alt, or friend of an alt, that their actual targets use for neutral RR.

[Laerise]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

Neutral RR.

Neutral RR has never been a issue for anyone (now, RR in general IS, but thats different). The fact its neutral has never been a problem as such.

Yeah I'm going to have to call bullshit on what you just said. Remember before the Falcon nerf and everyone was rolling with a Falcon alt in low sec? Yeah, that's the same thing in high sec, but its now neutral RR. It is so bad that there is some high sec corps that have more neutral alts to assist their main in the corp that actually is at war.

Every aspect of high sec wars revolve around neutral alts. The largest eye sore is Orphanage. They have tons of alts remote sensor boosting, remote tracking enhancing, remote repair and so on.

While RR is pretty bad already the real cancer, in my opinion, is fleet boosting alt's. Being able to boost your mates being off grid (!) to such an extent is pretty powerful and poses no risk to the benefactors.

A fix to this would be pretty simple by only allowing fleet bonuses to work if the booster is on grid.

[Malcanis]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

Neutral RR.

Neutral RR has never been a issue for anyone (now, RR in general IS, but thats different). The fact its neutral has never been a problem as such.

Yeah I'm going to have to call bullshit on what you just said. Remember before the Falcon nerf and everyone was rolling with a Falcon alt in low sec? Yeah, that's the same thing in high sec, but its now neutral RR. It is so bad that there is some high sec corps that have more neutral alts to assist their main in the corp that actually is at war.

Every aspect of high sec wars revolve around neutral alts. The largest eye sore is Orphanage. They have tons of alts remote sensor boosting, remote tracking enhancing, remote repair and so on.

While RR is pretty bad already the real cancer, in my opinion, is fleet boosting alt's. Being able to boost your mates being off grid (!) to such an extent is pretty powerful and poses no risk to the benefactors.

A fix to this would be pretty simple by only allowing fleet bonuses to work if the booster is on grid.

Yeah maybe you missed the change, but there's no such thing as "unprobeable" any more. Those "no risk" boosting T3s are getting ganked quite regularly; 1 guy dualboxing a covops and a DPSy small ship (Daredevils are good for this, I'm told) can quite safely, efficiently and easily kill off those billion ISK boosting Lokis and Tengus, leaving the opposition fleet suddenly over-extended.

[Durzel]

Whilst they may not be unprobeable now, are they still effectively unprobeable to all but max-skilled covops flying Sisters-fit HG Virtue pilots? (genuine question - not trolling)

[Laerise]

Well, the thing is that they are almost untouchable for small roaming gangs - because dragging around a skilled prober just to probe down the t3 booster is fucking ridiculous. It'd also give fleet command ships a use again (since they have bigger tanks).

[Shin_getter]

If you nerf off grid links, you nerf "solo pvp" as one would need a gang to have links. Its kind of silly how much force multipliers there exists when one scale from one player to twenty. Whether multiboxing shiny pvp should be norm is another matter.

[Laerise]

Solo with a booster alt is no longer solo in my opinion. The only reason I see people using booster alts in "solo pvp" is to boost their ego as much as their ship :P

[Nobody_Holme]

Oh noes, a nerf to "solo" play. (stealth boost to real solo players who troll around in something just as shiny. Clearly a bad idea for CCP due to less subs, thus very unlikely to happen)

[Rivqua]

Oh noes, a nerf to "solo" play. (stealth boost to real solo players who troll around in something just as shiny. Clearly a bad idea for CCP due to less subs, thus very unlikely to happen)

I actually don't see creating more subs for CCP as a problem.

[Muffinsrevenger]

@ Devblog, SHUTUP AND TAKE MY BITS

I'm going to have high hopes of this update actually changing the way we play eve on the bigger scale, just some shaking up of the more stale mechanics would be nice

[Malcanis]

Whilst they may not be unprobeable now, are they still effectively unprobeable to all but max-skilled covops flying Sisters-fit HG Virtue pilots? (genuine question - not trolling)

IIRC, you need the Virtues, but you don't need all-V skills any more with the improved sisters launchers.

[Ædward]

What's all this 'solo play' crap. It's a MMO ffs.

If you want to 'solo play' then crank up the porn and break out the lube & tissues.

[Alistair]

While RR is pretty bad already the real cancer, in my opinion, is fleet boosting alt's. Being able to boost your mates being off grid (!) to such an extent is pretty powerful and poses no risk to the benefactors.

A fix to this would be pretty simple by only allowing fleet bonuses to work if the booster is on grid.

+1

I'd be pleased to see Booster only apply if the booster is ON-Grid only, as it should be tbh. And I'm all for revision of high-sec Neut. Remote Repping mechanics too tbh, to make it less prevalent.

[ry ry]

What's all this 'solo play' crap. It's a MMO ffs.

If you want to 'solo play' then crank up the porn and break out the lube & tissues.

nope.

The point of an mmo is that you have to interact with other people, not that you're forced to hold hands and gather flowers together.

[Gix Tyrionn]

What's all this 'solo play' crap. It's a MMO ffs.

If you want to 'solo play' then crank up the porn and break out the lube & tissues.

I wonder why themepark mmo's haven't held onto the old belief that you must be grouped to get anything done. Is it because forced grouping amplifies everything wrong with communities and actually harms them?

[jonesbones]

Off grid bonuses are so stupid. There are so many frig fits that work "with max Loki". Well yeah, when you can web and scram out to 16km it drastically changes the playing field.

Any remote (rep, sebo, tracking) should transfer the aggression timer of the target to the giver. This will also stop Logistics from jumping back and forth from two sides of the gate.

FW rework should be interesting, the area of gameplay has become so stagnant it's terrible. But at least ONIs are only 50m :)

Buff ECM and Falcons, just so I can live off of the tears for all eternity.

[Ædward]

What's all this 'solo play' crap. It's a MMO ffs.

If you want to 'solo play' then crank up the porn and break out the lube & tissues.

I wonder why themepark mmo's haven't held onto the old belief that you must be grouped to get anything done. Is it because forced grouping amplifies everything wrong with communities and actually harms them?

What's a themepark MMO? Is that like that Facebook farmville thing?

[Doomed Predator]

What's all this 'solo play' crap. It's a MMO ffs.

If you want to 'solo play' then crank up the porn and break out the lube & tissues.

I wonder why themepark mmo's haven't held onto the old belief that you must be grouped to get anything done. Is it because forced grouping amplifies everything wrong with communities and actually harms them?

What's a themepark MMO? Is that like that Facebook farmville thing?

It's the opposite of the sandbox MMO(like EVE). You get to pick a class and you're stuck with whatever it can do(heal,tank,dps) unlike EVE where every character can do anything. You follow the story to advance(questing) and exploration is limited(fatigue). WoW is a prime example of a themepark MMO.

[Sponk]

What's a themepark MMO? Is that like that Facebook farmville thing?

It's the opposite of the sandbox MMO(like EVE). You get to pick a class and you're stuck with whatever it can do(heal,tank,dps) unlike EVE where every character can do anything. You follow the story to advance(questing) and exploration is limited(fatigue). WoW is a prime example of a themepark MMO.

Kinda but no.

The analogy is that a themepark mmo is like going to a themepark. There's rides and locations and all that stuff, but it's strictly there for you do passively enjoy (rollercoasters are literally on rails) rather than able to influence it. And eventually you run out of new rides and you get bored.

The other mmo analogy is a sandbox, where you have to supply your own fun.

[drealar]

Hoping wardec change introduces something about neutral RR.
Also, posted yesterday asking about next expansion! I am clearly psychic.

[Lana Torrin]

Hoping wardec change introduces something about neutral RR.
Also, posted yesterday asking about next expansion! I am clearly psychic.

There isn't a lot they can do about them.. They already get flagged to you when the rep someone you are at war with, and unless they want to completely break logi and give them an agro timer when they rep someone, there isn't much room left to move.

[Lady Spank]

How does giving them an aggro timer completely break them.

[Malcanis]

How does giving them an aggro timer completely break them.

They can't dock up or jump out to safety when someone decides to notice that they're participating in a fight.

Personally I don't quite see how committing to a fight "completely breaks" logistics, but then I don't use neutral RR in empire wardecs.

[Zpiritual]

They could make it so that repping a member of another corporation that is at war in high sec gives you the one minute aggro timer, quite specific scenario but would solve the problem without completely changing logistics.

[Lana Torrin]

How does giving them an aggro timer completely break them.

They can't dock up or jump out to safety when someone decides to notice that they're participating in a fight.

Personally I don't quite see how committing to a fight "completely breaks" logistics, but then I don't use neutral RR in empire wardecs.

Because doing that on station to fix the neutral RR problem will also translate to every fleet trying to rep fleet mates in lowsec and 0.0. Logi will have to stop repping for 1 min before they can jump.. Pretty much will mean a fleet can not disengage though a gate without losing all of their logi ships. Its even worse in lowsec where logi is likely to have repped a crim recently and will have GCC so the gate guns will fire on them, and they are pretty thin without being repped..

This is a fix for highsec logi shenanigans but will pretty much make them useless in all of the legitimate situations where they get used.

[Cortess]

How about:
Rep someone who is at war and has aggro from his wartargets -> be a legitimate target for the time of the war.

but has been suggested before ...

[Spartan Dax]

We have different rules of what can and cannot be done in high-lo-nullsec already in a fair few areas. Allowing Logis to get aggro in highsec but not in null and losec shouldn't be too hard to swallow. Personally I think there's good reasons for having uniform rules across the universe but W/E.

[Malcanis]

How does giving them an aggro timer completely break them.

They can't dock up or jump out to safety when someone decides to notice that they're participating in a fight.

Personally I don't quite see how committing to a fight "completely breaks" logistics, but then I don't use neutral RR in empire wardecs.

Because doing that on station to fix the neutral RR problem will also translate to every fleet trying to rep fleet mates in lowsec and 0.0. Logi will have to stop repping for 1 min before they can jump.. Pretty much will mean a fleet can not disengage though a gate without losing all of their logi ships. Its even worse in lowsec where logi is likely to have repped a crim recently and will have GCC so the gate guns will fire on them, and they are pretty thin without being repped..

This is a fix for highsec logi shenanigans but will pretty much make them useless in all of the legitimate situations where they get used.

Yeah well I'm actually OK with that. At the moment there is literally no downside to packing your fleet with logis.

[Zeekar]

You lose dps.

[Malcanis]

OK other than opportunity cost there is literally no other downside.

[TotallyNotDaneel]

If both sides trade dps for logi they could end up tanking each other (either immediately or if they each kill a few dps). For some this isn't actually worse than bringing enough dps on both sides as no one dies, which is easier to repeat again rather than re-earn ships. There needs to be the incentive to risk favouring dps beyond good fights. Perhaps those ideas about loot drop relating to numbers on killmail.

[Zeekar]

OK other than opportunity cost there is literally no other downside.

Fleet size goes up.

[Gix Tyrionn]

OK other than opportunity cost there is literally no other downside.

Fleet size goes up.

This has never been a problem before.

[Malcanis]

Yeah It's not 2007 anymore and characters with FC4/5 and Mindlink + CS skills are not rare.

[Zeekar]

It is for some alliances.

[Malcanis]

We're not balancing the game around drone regions renter corps.

[kyrieee]

What about a docking aggro timer but not a jump one?

[Zeekar]

We're not balancing the game around drone regions renter corps.

Init isnt known by its 250 man fleets m8.

[ry ry]

What about a docking aggro timer but not a jump one?

Or aggression being tied to how long the ship repped has.

Eg. If rep target has longer aggro than you, your timer is adjusted to match theirs. Otherwise it keeps counting down.

[Tsubutai]

What about a docking aggro timer but not a jump one?

Or aggression being tied to how long the ship repped has.

Eg. If rep target has longer aggro than you, your timer is adjusted to match theirs. Otherwise it keeps counting down.
This is pretty much the optimal solution, IMO - rep a guy who has 60s aggro and inability to dock/jump, receive 60s aggro and inability to dock/jump. If your target only has 10s left, you also only get 10s.

[Lady Spank]

Station docking is definitely the bigger of the two 'problems'. I half think if you are going to deaggro and run then you should suffer consequenses/losses but to be honest it probably really does just lead to even more risk aversion and definitely punishes smaller gangs more than larger fleets,

If you can have a mechanic where logi's can rep the 'aggro' ships and only take on attacking ships aggro timers (no actual aggro from the REP but from the 'assisting currently aggroed ships'; so everyone can deagg and jump at the same time (once all dps applied is removed and those aggro timers are up) then cool.

Uh... I think what was said in the posts above make more sense than my tired rambling.

[Malcanis]

We're not balancing the game around drone regions renter corps.

Init isnt known by its 250 man fleets m8.

We always roll with fleet boosters.

[Zeekar]

I wasnt talking about fleet boosters i was talking about logistics and the dps loss that comes with the fact you have 10-20% of your ships in non dps ships.

[Tyrus Tenebros]

Specifying an aggression timer for war decs would make some sense as a high / low sec differentiator. "generally" killing somebody in highsec without a formal declaration of war is "illegal" by CONCORD. It makes "in game" sense then to consider targets that participate in these wars by other means (logistics, remote sensor boosting, etc.) as combatants.

Why not just extend the war dec to include individuals who directly aid (activate a module on) a player in a wardeccing corp for the duration of the war dec? If you want to participate, you have to go in for the duration.

[TotallyNotDaneel]

What if they RR, then join an alt corp at war with their friends, then drop that corp? I guess you'd just have to record that RR event to ensure they carry the war target assistance status over independant of being and then clearing their wartarget status against the people they assisted. Same goes for if the alt corp decs the original hostiles? Those at war against the original person receiving RR would not notice a status change for the RRer due to corp status, only individual actions in that case?

What if the war never ends? RR someone once in RvB and be forever a war-target?

Also consider one mistake in RRing someone with a war during a public incursion fleet. You would need to be able to see individual war status, couldn't just check a player's corp's status before accepting in fleet/RRing during PvE.
I guess that's assuming RRing the individual who's now at war also transfers the war. If it didn't you'd end up with 1 layer of RRers that aren't in the dec'd corp but join the war, and another RR set that still aren't made valid targets even if they help those who help those who are at war.

[Tyrus Tenebros]

Well perhaps a time limited but longer-than-15-minutes aggression timer. The person in question would have to be aggressed towards another WT at the time for the flag to take hold.

It would follow you as an individual for, say, 24-48 hours, rather than 15 minutes.

[Durzel]

Don't allow any friendly effects from anyone outside of the corp/alliance in highsec space for the duration of the war? Neutral RR solved - noone has any of it.

Doesn't solve neutral eyes though (can this even be solved?) and would screw over Incursion runners who are at war.

(might be a terrible idea - just thinking aloud)

[TotallyNotDaneel]

Incursion runners who are at war...don't get to run incursions. Seriously, which decent fleet would risk even current aggro spread to their shiny fits for the sake of one member's war? Where I'm at we have plenty to swap dps or logi out with, and plenty of isk that would be risked.

[Malcanis]

I wasnt talking about fleet boosters i was talking about logistics and the dps loss that comes with the fact you have 10-20% of your ships in non dps ships.

So how does that contradict anything I said?

"Your assertion that logistics ships have no drawbacks is contradicted by your alliance's heavy use of logistics ships!"?

[notbitterenough]

They already get flagged to you when the rep someone you are at war with

I think this might have already been stated but...

They will NOT show up flagged to you UNTIL you aggress the war target they are RRing (assisting). This is only specifically flagged to the person that aggresses the war target, not everyone. So as you can see; until you commit to the fight or have prior intel on whos alt is whos. There is no way to know until it is too late. :(

[KathDougans]

Eh, weren't CCP going to introduce a new mechanic at some point, regarding "smuggling" of "contraband", in that persons would be flagged, and other players would do the enforcement, rather than Customs NPCS ?

Because, there would be an opportunity here to introduce a similar player enforcement method.

Neutral remote reps, and other assists, could flag a person as a "Petty Criminal", which could allow all sorts of previously non-involved persons to then become involved. CONCORD wouldn't get involved, they'd still only care about "violent" crimes, and the "petty criminal" flag might only be specific to the star system where the offence occurred.

E.g. Pilot A and Pilot B have undocked and are pewing at each other. Neutral C intervenes on behalf of A.
This flags them to B. However, it could also flag them, and only them, to pilot D and anyone else in system not involved in the war between A and B.
And since pilot D is a "fine upstanding individual who believes in the rule of spaceshipslaw" or alternatively "hates stationcamping neutral remote rep faggots", pilot D will unleash their alpha on C.
C then either has to leave system, or dock up, but in any case, is obliged to stop interfering with A and B.

Reward of out-of-corp assists, vs risk of vigilantes pewing your remote assists. Maybe. "players don't do game design", vOv

[Rivqua]

They already get flagged to you when the rep someone you are at war with

I think this might have already been stated but...

They will NOT show up flagged to you UNTIL you aggress the war target they are RRing (assisting). This is only specifically flagged to the person that aggresses the war target, not everyone. So as you can see; until you commit to the fight or have prior intel on whos alt is whos. There is no way to know until it is too late. :(

Although, what's wrong with some subterfuge and intel work? When I was doing highsec fights, usually, even before the war started, we had all enemy neutral RR pegged orange, so it never made a difference to us if they were neutral or not. It's just another dimenision of fighting "real wars" (not real as in RL, but real as in, wars where things develop dynamically, and you are not spoonfed a list of targets / what will happen / no script to follow), and should definately not be destroyed, lest we risk removing sand from the sandbox.

[Rivqua]

Eh, weren't CCP going to introduce a new mechanic at some point, regarding "smuggling" of "contraband", in that persons would be flagged, and other players would do the enforcement, rather than Customs NPCS ?

Because, there would be an opportunity here to introduce a similar player enforcement method.

Neutral remote reps, and other assists, could flag a person as a "Petty Criminal", which could allow all sorts of previously non-involved persons to then become involved. CONCORD wouldn't get involved, they'd still only care about "violent" crimes, and the "petty criminal" flag might only be specific to the star system where the offence occurred.

E.g. Pilot A and Pilot B have undocked and are pewing at each other. Neutral C intervenes on behalf of A.
This flags them to B. However, it could also flag them, and only them, to pilot D and anyone else in system not involved in the war between A and B.
And since pilot D is a "fine upstanding individual who believes in the rule of spaceshipslaw" or alternatively "hates stationcamping neutral remote rep faggots", pilot D will unleash their alpha on C.
C then either has to leave system, or dock up, but in any case, is obliged to stop interfering with A and B.

Reward of out-of-corp assists, vs risk of vigilantes pewing your remote assists. Maybe. "players don't do game design", vOv

You may be on to something here. Although you misunderstood the smuggling mechanic. No one got flagged for "smuggling". Players would have to ship scan them, and THEN, flag them for everyone else to be able to shoot at them. Ie, there wouldnt be any automatic flagging.

But, here is a idea for converting it to wars, it's quite easy and obvious, really.

War dude A fights War Dude B. Neutral Dude C reps A, he starts blinking to B for 15 mins (per usual).

During the 15 mins, B has the right to put a bounty on him. If he does, anyone with a bounty hunter license is allowed to hunt & destroy, pod dude C, until he is dead. When he dies, he gets the bounty.

When creating the bounty, dude B can leave it at the default "everyone" list, or create a specific list of who is allowed to hunt for this bounty (as to preclude known helpers).

That way, it costs something, but you are fairly sure that neutral RR alt will be hunted for a long while. If its a neutral RR dude that does this alot, he will permanently be having a big posse after him.

[Zeekar]

I wasnt talking about fleet boosters i was talking about logistics and the dps loss that comes with the fact you have 10-20% of your ships in non dps ships.

So how does that contradict anything I said?

"Your assertion that logistics ships have no drawbacks is contradicted by your alliance's heavy use of logistics ships!"?

It contradicts it that way that you are simply ignoring what im saying and going lalala im right.

[noobcake]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

Neutral RR.

Neutral RR has never been a issue for anyone (now, RR in general IS, but thats different). The fact its neutral has never been a problem as such.

Neutral RR is a problem. Anyone telling you it isn't is the one who benefits the most from it.

To start, neutral RR need not worry about being shot, save for the fifteen minute countdown, and during the fight.

Neutral RR can go about their own business for the duration of a war with no repercussions.

For you to sit there, with a straight fucking face, and say neutral RR isn't a problem makes me wonder what game you're playing

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

[Mfume]

Yeah well I'm actually OK with that. At the moment there is literally no downside to packing your fleet with logis.

Past a certain point, adding more logis is useless because the DPS ships are going to pop before reps land.

also: It's not as if there aren't already anti-logistic/triage fleet comps running around. Complaining that a fleet full of 350 missile DPS Drakes can't kill anything they can't volley is a bit silly when there are other alternatives in a similar SP/player skill range.

[Durzel]

The principal problem with neutral RR, beyond those already mentioned, is that it adds an element to a war which is both unnecessary and undesireable. It should be possible to wardec an entity and have a pretty accurate picture of their strengh going in. Neutral RR makes the number of people in a given decced corp completely irrelevant as you can never be sure how many or how few RR they have. Keeping tabs of that stuff is imo an excessive and tiresome burden, and that's even before you've got into the practicalities of actually having a fight when neutral RR is around.

Anyone that thinks neutral RR is fine because "there's nothing stopping you bringing your own too" is dumb, it's the same retarded argument put forth before Falcon ranges got nerfed.

[Lana Torrin]

How does giving them an aggro timer completely break them.

They can't dock up or jump out to safety when someone decides to notice that they're participating in a fight.

Personally I don't quite see how committing to a fight "completely breaks" logistics, but then I don't use neutral RR in empire wardecs.

Because doing that on station to fix the neutral RR problem will also translate to every fleet trying to rep fleet mates in lowsec and 0.0. Logi will have to stop repping for 1 min before they can jump.. Pretty much will mean a fleet can not disengage though a gate without losing all of their logi ships. Its even worse in lowsec where logi is likely to have repped a crim recently and will have GCC so the gate guns will fire on them, and they are pretty thin without being repped..

This is a fix for highsec logi shenanigans but will pretty much make them useless in all of the legitimate situations where they get used.

Yeah well I'm actually OK with that. At the moment there is literally no downside to packing your fleet with logis.

Logi being over powered aside, you realise you are asking to make a whole class of ships useless in a game that we have been fighting for years to make all ships usefull right? The logi 'problem' in pvp is not the same as the neut logi problem in highsec. I wouldnt even say its a problem as they are doing exactly what logi are supposed to be doing (its the healer class of eve).

[Tyrus Tenebros]

They already get flagged to you when the rep someone you are at war with

I think this might have already been stated but...

They will NOT show up flagged to you UNTIL you aggress the war target they are RRing (assisting). This is only specifically flagged to the person that aggresses the war target, not everyone. So as you can see; until you commit to the fight or have prior intel on whos alt is whos. There is no way to know until it is too late. :(
Wrong. Neutral RR assisting a wartarget is flagged to all parties in the war for 15 minutes after activating an assist module. I can confirm this as various Remote SeBoing alts have been flagged to me when I jumped in to a system without seeing a WT until i warped to the outgate.

Also once the RR Is flagged you can have a new pilot warp on to grid and start jamming the RR regardless of who they aggressed.

That said, it's still obnoxious.

[Rivqua]

They already get flagged to you when the rep someone you are at war with

I think this might have already been stated but...

They will NOT show up flagged to you UNTIL you aggress the war target they are RRing (assisting). This is only specifically flagged to the person that aggresses the war target, not everyone. So as you can see; until you commit to the fight or have prior intel on whos alt is whos. There is no way to know until it is too late. :(
Wrong. Neutral RR assisting a wartarget is flagged to all parties in the war for 15 minutes after activating an assist module. I can confirm this as various Remote SeBoing alts have been flagged to me when I jumped in to a system without seeing a WT until i warped to the outgate.

Also once the RR Is flagged you can have a new pilot warp on to grid and start jamming the RR regardless of who they aggressed.

That said, it's still obnoxious.

I don't see what is wrong with having to do some intel work beforehand, isn't that part of the fun? It definately was for me when we were going up against full-neut-RR crews.

[Rivqua]

Having not worried about wardec machanics in a cpl years I'm just curious, what are the major complaints about it?

Neutral RR.

Neutral RR has never been a issue for anyone (now, RR in general IS, but thats different). The fact its neutral has never been a problem as such.

Neutral RR is a problem. Anyone telling you it isn't is the one who benefits the most from it.

To start, neutral RR need not worry about being shot, save for the fifteen minute countdown, and during the fight.

Neutral RR can go about their own business for the duration of a war with no repercussions.

For you to sit there, with a straight fucking face, and say neutral RR isn't a problem makes me wonder what game you're playing

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

I will sit here, with a straight face, and tell you that, neutral RR is *not* a problem. For nearly 2 years, I fought against neutral RR at every corner. and trust me, when I tell you, no time, did the fact the RR was neutral change the flow of the fight. Because, neutral RR only has a single advantage, and in a 3 month struggle or whatever against someone else, that single, one time "oh shit, that guy is their ALT", changes nothing. When he flags himself he gets (damped, neuted, ecmd, or alphad) and things keep moving.

We've lost against groups that use RR, those we did, we lost because they could undock 3-4 RR to every combat ship we brought. If we brought 5 guys, we faced, 12 neutral RR, yes, CLEARLY, RR prevented us from having a successful fight, but the fact 4 of those RR were neutral, didn't change things.

I would hate for eve to become a game where people can't jump in to a fight to save someone, or ruin someone elses day. I am all for having them pay their dues afterwards (by being hunted for days, weeks, bounty), but preventing people from shitting on others, or having their day ruined, is a very essential thing to the health of this game.

[notbitterenough]

*opinion*

Ok.

[noobcake]

ITT rivqua desperately argues to keep his army of high sec neutral RR from getting the Nerf bat

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

[Lana Torrin]

I don't see what is wrong with having to do some intel work beforehand, isn't that part of the fun? It definately was for me when we were going up against full-neut-RR crews.

Unfortunatly.. I agree with Rivqua on this.. Highsec wars shouldnt be easy..

I do think though if you are assisting a war target you should be flagged as a valid war target for the remainder of the war.. Also if you leave corp you are still tagged as a valid war target.. Would be hilarious to accidently dec some massive alliance because they acepted someone thats currently at war with you then had all their logi pilots rep them...

I honestly think this is the mechanic that is needed to fix wardecs.. The individuals are flagged, not the corp..

[noobcake]

I don't see what is wrong with having to do some intel work beforehand, isn't that part of the fun? It definately was for me when we were going up against full-neut-RR crews.

Unfortunatly.. I agree with Rivqua on this.. Highsec wars shouldnt be easy..

I do think though if you are assisting a war target you should be flagged as a valid war target for the remainder of the war.. Also if you leave corp you are still tagged as a valid war target.. Would be hilarious to accidently dec some massive alliance because they acepted someone thats currently at war with you then had all their logi pilots rep them...

I honestly think this is the mechanic that is needed to fix wardecs.. The individuals are flagged, not the corp..

The problem with his argument is that none of us said we were against doing Intel work...



Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

[Rivqua]

I don't see what is wrong with having to do some intel work beforehand, isn't that part of the fun? It definately was for me when we were going up against full-neut-RR crews.

Unfortunatly.. I agree with Rivqua on this.. Highsec wars shouldnt be easy..

I do think though if you are assisting a war target you should be flagged as a valid war target for the remainder of the war.. Also if you leave corp you are still tagged as a valid war target.. Would be hilarious to accidently dec some massive alliance because they acepted someone thats currently at war with you then had all their logi pilots rep them...

I honestly think this is the mechanic that is needed to fix wardecs.. The individuals are flagged, not the corp..

The problem with his argument is that none of us said we were against doing Intel work...



Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

Of course you did when you (others) said that problem with neutrals is that you won't know they are there, that you can't be ready for the RR, because they aren't blinking in local. Also lol @ my army of neutral RR :) First, I haven't fought in proper highsec for a long time, secondly, a very long time ago, I decided to fly a active tanked ship that won't benefit alot from RR (neutral or otherwise) when in highsec to make sure I am clear of accusations of any RR unbalancing fights ;)

What I do care about is that if I ever decide to come back to highsec warfare, it's engaging, difficult, and fun, and not just a undock > shoot, like, erm, 0.0 seems to be most of the time.

[Malcanis]

"Intel work" is not a sufficient justification for alt-repping faggotry. It's a minor mitigation at best.

[noobcake]

"Intel work" is not a sufficient justification for alt-repping faggotry. It's a minor mitigation at best.

This...

Also, rivqua, not much you can do when the neutral RR you scouted out logon as the fight starts. So yes, in that sense you don't know they're there.

But using the "do your due diligence" argument is a mother fucking abomination

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

[Rivqua]

"Intel work" is not a sufficient justification for alt-repping faggotry. It's a minor mitigation at best.

This...

Also, rivqua, not much you can do when the neutral RR you scouted out logon as the fight starts. So yes, in that sense you don't know they're there.

But using the "do your due diligence" argument is a mother fucking abomination

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

My argument is, you can't do anything even if it's a in-corp RR that logged off at the same place. He will log on, start repping, and just like the neutral, dock up and/or jump if you shoot him.

Main RR = RR Faggotry, but ok?
ALT in corp RR = RR faggotry, but ok?
Neutral Alt RR = RR faggotry, suddenly a problem?

I am just saying, you are focusing at the wrong thing :)

[noobcake]

"Intel work" is not a sufficient justification for alt-repping faggotry. It's a minor mitigation at best.

This...

Also, rivqua, not much you can do when the neutral RR you scouted out logon as the fight starts. So yes, in that sense you don't know they're there.

But using the "do your due diligence" argument is a mother fucking abomination

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

My argument is, you can't do anything even if it's a in-corp RR that logged off at the same place. He will log on, start repping, and just like the neutral, dock up and/or jump if you shoot him.

Main RR = RR Faggotry, but ok?
ALT in corp RR = RR faggotry, but ok?
Neutral Alt RR = RR faggotry, suddenly a problem?

I am just saying, you are focusing at the wrong thing :)

The fact that you can't see that the neutral repairer faces no repercussions absolutely boggles the mind....

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

[Glyken Touchon]

my thoughts about neutral RR boil down to:

prevention=bad:cry:
consequences=good:twisted:

[whispous]

Bring back "in fleet while at war = wartarget too" mechanic, screw the dumbass duped carebears!

[Lady Spank]

Gank them all.

[Rivqua]

"Intel work" is not a sufficient justification for alt-repping faggotry. It's a minor mitigation at best.

This...

Also, rivqua, not much you can do when the neutral RR you scouted out logon as the fight starts. So yes, in that sense you don't know they're there.

But using the "do your due diligence" argument is a mother fucking abomination

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

My argument is, you can't do anything even if it's a in-corp RR that logged off at the same place. He will log on, start repping, and just like the neutral, dock up and/or jump if you shoot him.

Main RR = RR Faggotry, but ok?
ALT in corp RR = RR faggotry, but ok?
Neutral Alt RR = RR faggotry, suddenly a problem?

I am just saying, you are focusing at the wrong thing :)

The fact that you can't see that the neutral repairer faces no repercussions absolutely boggles the mind....

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

No, I know what you are trying to say. All I am saying, that they lose their ships. Just because you are unable to destroy them (if you have even tried) does not mean, they are impossible. And what repercussions does anyone face beside losing their ship ?

[Rivqua]

my thoughts about neutral RR boil down to:

prevention=bad:cry:
consequences=good:twisted:


Agreed.

[Zeekar]

I really like the idea of getting the aggro timer of the guy you're repping.

[noobcake]

"Intel work" is not a sufficient justification for alt-repping faggotry. It's a minor mitigation at best.

This...

Also, rivqua, not much you can do when the neutral RR you scouted out logon as the fight starts. So yes, in that sense you don't know they're there.

But using the "do your due diligence" argument is a mother fucking abomination

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

My argument is, you can't do anything even if it's a in-corp RR that logged off at the same place. He will log on, start repping, and just like the neutral, dock up and/or jump if you shoot him.

Main RR = RR Faggotry, but ok?
ALT in corp RR = RR faggotry, but ok?
Neutral Alt RR = RR faggotry, suddenly a problem?

I am just saying, you are focusing at the wrong thing :)

The fact that you can't see that the neutral repairer faces no repercussions absolutely boggles the mind....

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)

No, I know what you are trying to say. All I am saying, that they lose their ships. Just because you are unable to destroy them (if you have even tried) does not mean, they are impossible. And what repercussions does anyone face beside losing their ship ?

I'm sure if CCP ran the numbers, you'd be surprised that the number of people not involved in a war that wind up repairing have a higher ship retention rate than war targets who use logistics while in corp.

Sent from my HTC EVO using Tapatalk (pissing FHC off since 2011)