These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

What happened with war decs?

Author
ImYourMom
Retribution Holdings Corp
Retribution.
#1 - 2016-03-13 21:51:06 UTC
So in the past we had problems because it was too easy and cheap to war dec. That got changed to be more expensive dependent on size of people you were deccing in some cases 500mill a pop. This led to alliances like Privateers, Orphanage etc closing.
But now i see even more war dec alliances sprouting out with an incredible amount of war decs

Marmite - 136 wars
Pirat - 171 wars
Archtype - 77 wars
Vendetta Merc - 181 wars
Complaints Dept - 129 wars
Caldari State Police - 116 wars

and thats just a few, i dont think most of these are offering assistance but actually the ones deccing. How can this be happening as its clearly not solved the problem its seems it just got worse. I am not convinced either this is all merc work either, as this costs billions per week as well.

Can someone explain if im missing something here?
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#2 - 2016-03-13 21:56:20 UTC
watchlist went away.

we told ye this would happen
ImYourMom
Retribution Holdings Corp
Retribution.
#3 - 2016-03-13 22:01:04 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
watchlist went away.

we told ye this would happen


what the watchlist got to do with this?
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#4 - 2016-03-13 22:11:02 UTC
Ibutho Inkosi
Doomheim
#5 - 2016-03-13 22:50:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Ibutho Inkosi
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
everything.
Over-simplification is one thing, but reducing all this to THIS? Please. I'm no Einstein here, but do give me a BREAK.

The rise in war decs has to do with deccing, then blackmailing small, starting out corps who are attempting a shot at the meta game, but being cut down and sent to the showers by bored, juvenile players who just can't be bothered to play the deeper game offered by EVE's design. Face it. Hanging around in high, reading rosters of corps for that magic set of numbers [three members founded four days ago] isn't exactly what I'd call EMERGENT GAME PLAY - and if you call it CONTENT CREATION, I hope your career with Mickey D's works out. (The content of that cheeseburger is as easy
to apply.)

The powers that be, for good or ill, have decided to sanction one so-called style of gameplay, and offer lip service to all the others. If you want to pretend this hasn't happened ('cause you happen to be one of those getting their yuks out of this) then go ahead, and be sure to lie about it all in this forum. But, when you do, at least put some effort into inventing one that's relatively BELIEVABLE, and somewhat PLAUSIBLE.

Our collective intelligence has been insulted enough of late.

As long as the tale of the hunt is told by the hunter, and not the lion, it will favor the hunter.

Wanda Fayne
#6 - 2016-03-13 23:13:47 UTC
They told you this would happen

"your comments just confirms this whole idea is totally pathetic" -Lan Wang-

  • - "hub humping station gamey neutral logi warspam wankery" -Ralph King-Griffin-
Neuntausend
Rens Nursing Home
#7 - 2016-03-13 23:14:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausend
Balancing something around the price has always been a silly idea. If you make something more expensive, you will just take everyone except the ones that are really into it out of the equation, leaving more room for those that are.

Edit: Also - yes, we said that removing the watchlist would hurt war decs in Highsec for all except the tradehub camping types like Marmite and PIRAT. They are thriving, unsurprisingly.
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#8 - 2016-03-13 23:26:27 UTC
Ibutho Inkosi wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
everything.
Over-simplification is one thing, but reducing all this to THIS? Please.

its literally the only relevant thing that has changed so yeah it is that simple,
we called this about a month ago and here it is.
Cara Forelli
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry
Templis CALSF
#9 - 2016-03-14 01:21:25 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Ibutho Inkosi wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
everything.
Over-simplification is one thing, but reducing all this to THIS? Please.

its literally the only relevant thing that has changed so yeah it is that simple,
we called this about a month ago and here it is.

Confirming I went AFK in Dodixie for an hour and got wardecced. As a wormhole person I'm an utterly worthless target so they clearly just go through local and dec everyone there, knowing a portion of them will stay/come back within a week. It's the only way to reliably find targets without watchlist (even if 90% of them never come back).

Want to talk? Join my channel in game: House Forelli

Titan's Lament

Omar Alharazaad
An Interesting Corp
Spectrum Alliance
#10 - 2016-03-14 02:19:21 UTC
Pretty much what Ralph said.
Unless they change locator agents to once again make them relevant I can only suggest that you learn to love your new trade hub camping overlords.

Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.

Zappity
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#11 - 2016-03-14 02:58:25 UTC
We need wardecs changed so they are attackable. Steve Ronuken had a good idea about making them dependent upon an anchored whatsit that can be shot. That would be good I think.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Conrad Makbure
Trident Expedition
#12 - 2016-03-14 03:19:08 UTC
High sec WD's should go through a high supreme Court system so both sides can present their case with security and empire standings factored into it. Those numbers should be used a lot more for game systems.
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#13 - 2016-03-14 03:33:00 UTC
Conrad Makbure wrote:
High sec WD's should go through a high supreme Court system so both sides can present their case with security and empire standings factored into it. Those numbers should be used a lot more for game systems.

you would be shocked at how high most mercs faction standing actually is.

most of us have all 4 empires in positive with a sizable chunk of their composite corps at +5 if not most of the factions themselves
we have to do an inordinate amount of grinding to get a useful number of locator agents ,
which are now practically useless because they run on offline players ,

this is why the larger ones now operate by :

Push red button on everything within eye-shot

sit in the hubs and connecting pipes

receive bacon.

again

watchlist went away

we told ye this would happen.
Valkin Mordirc
#14 - 2016-03-14 03:49:00 UTC
Confirming the horrific grind I went though to get standing so I could have a good number of locators.


And also confirming the "We told you so"

Because we did.

Like literally every wardeccer.

Also If you think it's crazy now, some merc corps, like Marmite, can run up to 300 active decs in bursts. Marmite's done it before, Archetype has the possibilities as would Ven, PIRAT and CD as I would imagine.
#DeleteTheWeak
Valkin Mordirc
#15 - 2016-03-14 03:55:48 UTC
Zappity wrote:
We need wardecs changed so they are attackable. Steve Ronuken had a good idea about making them dependent upon an anchored whatsit that can be shot. That would be good I think.



Much would need to be balanced for the aggressor if that became the case.


Wardecs are favorable to the defender believe it or not.

Most Defenders just can't be arsed enough to actually do anything about it
#DeleteTheWeak
Zappity
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#16 - 2016-03-14 04:09:36 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
Wardecs are favorable to the defender believe it or not.

lol

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Valkin Mordirc
#17 - 2016-03-14 04:16:11 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
Wardecs are favorable to the defender believe it or not.

lol



Rather than post a throw-away, why don't you give me your reason why?


You've always been a pretty vocal person. Why don't you embellish that and give me reason's?
#DeleteTheWeak
ImYourMom
Retribution Holdings Corp
Retribution.
#18 - 2016-03-14 06:03:52 UTC  |  Edited by: ImYourMom
and thats fine but how are they even affording to have so many wardecs? it cant be sustainable surely. the pricing structure wqs supposed to stop all that and making it just far too expensive to war dec so many
Valkin Mordirc
#19 - 2016-03-14 06:23:33 UTC
ImYourMom wrote:
and thats fine but how are they even affording to have so many wardecs? it cant be sustainable surely. the pricing structure wqs supposed to stop all that and making it just far too expensive to war dec so many



Most of the times it's a combination of things. Passive income via a holding-POCO's-corp, Donations from members of alliance,

Active income, Trading done by the CEO, CEO has a Nullsec background and uses is overflow to fund is Highsec Alliance, Contracts fulfilled by taking down POCO/POS for clients, and so forth.

#DeleteTheWeak
Black Pedro
Mine.
#20 - 2016-03-14 06:26:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Zappity wrote:
We need wardecs changed so they are attackable. Steve Ronuken had a good idea about making them dependent upon an anchored whatsit that can be shot. That would be good I think.

No offense to Steve, but this is probably one of the worst ideas to improve wardecs that has ever been floated. Making wars useless against entities bigger than you, and making the largest groups in the game immune to them by giving them a way to opt out by blobbing a beacon will just result in wardeccers targeting new and small corps even more than they do now.

Raising the cost just took wardecs out of the hands of small corps who could use them to dabble in PvP or settle scores and forced aggressors to organize. It made aggressors group up and increased the disparity in power between an average highsec corp and the professional mercenaries. Tying the war to a structure will just do more of the same and make guerrilla-style wars impossible.

That said, I am not against changes to make the aggressor have something on the line so defenders can counter-attack. But it needs to be done carefully and in a way that doesn't allow groups, especially the largest groups, to make themselves 100% safe from smaller aggressors.

As to the OP, players are willing to pay for content. Losing ships in random PvP isn't profitable either but players do it all the time. If nothing else, a PLEX will currently buy you over 20 wars for your whole alliance although there is ISK in contract fees, loot drops and direct extortion. Players will find a way.
123Next pageLast page