Warfare & Tactics

http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Griefing

Specifically the part where non-consensual PVP is an intended feature in EVE.

You don't want to get wardecced? Go join an NPC corp and crawl back into your hugbox.

This

Griefer war decs "Griefer war decs" refers to the practice of declaring a war, typically in high-security, against a party who is not your competitor in politics, regional control, industry, or anything else, and does not want the war. Such wars are often, but not always, declared with the intent to extort money from the victim for termination of the war. While they are sometimes used for actual griefing (ie, declared only for the malicious enjoyment of seeing the victim suffer), they can also be seen as a valid playstyle, and are used by many for simple isk-making and/or combat training.

War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature.




Welcome to the Suck

There are pros and cons with the new war dec system, it is never going to be perfect nor is it going to get phased out. It is quite amusing how many people are taking the time to have a whinge about the matter.

The Pros :
User Experiance
It gives pvp to people that dont want/dont know . With the new dec system it is going to allow new friendships and alliances to develop which wouldnt normally have occured.
The Mechanics ( Pro For Defender )
With the new system, an aggressor cannot withdrawn the dec. So this means with finding friends or mercs you can bring down some unholy rage if you wish. Alternatively you can pay off the aggressor in the safe knowledge that the dec will end. With the costs involved now for setting up a wardec, it isnt worth spending the money to dec a 2 or 3 man corp just to 'grief'
ISK Sinks
Allows for isk sinks - more destruction = more production = more money moving on the market
Less ways to get out of wardecs
I see this as a positive seen as I personally see decshield as an exploit
Player Numbers
With the decs going on corp size it makes more sense for corps to expand again building on the user experiance

The Cons
New Players
When people join a corp they need to be made more aware of what war decs cover. With the cost going on person count as well it is more than likely more new players are going to be brought into the corp to act as expensive decs / meatshields
Alt Characters
Some griefers will jump to alt characters to avoid decs. It happens there is nothing you can do.
Cost ( For Aggressors ) / Player numbers
Picking on high number corps that boost their numbers with players and alt accounts will have to pay more.

I think i have covered most of the main points, im not going to go into people hiding in stations because that is their own choice and not part of the mechanic - end of the day see my previous statement

Corps that can't handle a war dec tend to dissapear.

I started in 2003 when eve first came out and have been playing on and off since then. I have done everything from carebearing, pirating, being a director in 0.0 alliances, and being a highsec merc. There are serious flaws to the way high sec wars are done and I see some positive things to what ccp is trying to do, but a few other serious flaws.

First, there should be no way to leave corp or alliance once a war has been declared and this is a positive step in the war dec system. There should be some pride in a corp/alliance, and if you dont have it then you will get smashed and no more of that corp/alliance.

Second, Its a great idea to not allow agressors bring in new members during a dec, but allowing the defender to bring in mercs or allies. This will add some serious consideration to who you try and dec. Also gives the defender a nice way to royally screw the attackers. I think there should be some limit to how many allies you can bring in so its not a "invite every free merc in game" type situation. That would render war decs useless.

Third, War should be very costly both sides. There should be penalties for losing a war dec. When I was in AD0PT pitboss had a good idea that if the defender loses the war, the agressor gets the option to continue the war at no cost. Simply put, the amount of isk lost during the war would dictate who won or lost. But there should also be a very big penalty on the agressor for losing the war. Maybe paying the defender 10x-100x the fee of the war. This would make it vital to win.

Fourth, The cost of the war dec is looking backwards. It shouldn't cost so much to dec an alliance/ corp bigger than you, it should cost less. It should therefore cost more to dec an alliance/corp smaller than you. Start with a base price and add cost for a dec to a smaller alliance, and subtract for the larger ones.

Fifth, There should be a limit to how many wars you can help out in. (yes I know this would hurt what I do in highsec, but it would add an interesting twist). Start with a skill that the ceo has to train allowing you to add up to 6 wars you can help in. This way you wouldnt have as many "free mercs" just looking for more and more targets. It would make it so the mercs actively choose contracts to fulfill based on prices and number of targets.

My sixth point is going to surprise some of you, I think the changing of the rules on neutral RR is going to add alot of fun to the mix. No longer will you see the mass of logi on the back of 4-4 waiting to rep whoever. It will make fighting with in corp logi or risk the random pilots all over eve attacking your neutral logi. I think for the most part the neutral logi situation will not change much except on stations.


Have fun and kill something shiny today.

-VIT0

The worst change CCP made.
So again you want to screw little ppl and make love with big guys?
Again you want to make ppl that don't want to PVP make the best/only war target???
Thnx a lot... NOT!

make little guy pay 5B and large alliance 40 mill?
Yea, thats the best.
Screw the little guy and make him leave the game.

I think its funny that someone who's objecting the change towards better ganking in hisec is told to leave eve, because "he chose the wrong game", when obviously all he wants is the game to stay as it is and, to the contrary, the self proclaimed PVP crowd doesn''t like the game as is and wants CCP to fix the rules towards better ganking.

Locking characters into a corp is a bad idea. What if a war drags on for months, and yes I have seen this happen. Now all the characters in that corp are stuck there, even if they want to change corps for reasons totally unrelated to the war. Also, a CEO could dec his own corp with an alt as a "stop loss" measure.



If you're eager for PvP, why would you want to limit the number of people you're at war with?



In another thread, someone proposed that every corp must own an anchorable structure in space. You win the war by destroying that structure.



The dec cost could increase with the number of characters in the attacking corp, as well as the number in the defending corp.

Also, I disagree that it should be cheap for a small corp to dec a big one. The attacker is getting lots of targets, and is disrupting the game play of lots of people. That should cost ISK.

Which would mean you would be stuck with spies in your corp. Locking people into corps will generate rage quits by people who get frustrated with never being able to get out of a corp that is a magnet for wardecs.



Blocking recruitment during war means that merc corps can never recruit if they do their jobs well.



The cost should be based on difference in size. Small corps declaring on alliances are looking for cheap shot kills rather than actual war, and that should cost them.

You're making the assumption that deccers need an incentive beyond the lolz factor. I can assure you, they do not. Hisec wars will always be the same regardless of what CCP does. It's a place where the strong pick on and bully the weak and risk averse. I'm not saying I like it. I'm just saying that's the reality.