EVE Information Portal

Would it be possible to make anyone remote repairing a war target a legal target in the war themselves? Say for a week. Could this work kind of like kill rights?

It's rather lame that people can sit around with alts that are perfectly safe, but have the ability to swing battles in their favor, and then be scott free again in 15 minutes.

Well, provided how the CSM and CCP agree that the current proposal is A-OK to go, it doeesn't makes much difference wether we are miners or mercs. Despite all the Fanfest buddy talk, "CCP does" still means a lot more than "CCP says".

And what they do is to supply a free wardec shield to the uberalliances and turn smallholders and non-PvP into free rides.

I reepat, that's OK with CSM and CCP.

Have you seen any CSM here? No. I had to go to the friggin Jita Park to get some feedback. And they like the proposal in "OUR" name.

Of course CSM is okay with it - they are mostly goons and this protects goons from empire privateers.

The fact is that I've been on all sides of this: i've decced and i've been decced. I've ganked and been ganked. And I've definitely been in large 0.0 alliances having to deal with privateers hitting our logistics.

Those privateers add flavor and character to the game. Forget the fact that any intelligent player can avoid them entirely by dropping corp (something CCP should address as well), the large alliances hardly need protection against them.

I think it is completely reasonable to expect a mega alliance to have to protect their logistics against smaller privateer corps in empire space. It's in fact - one of the best little quirks to the game - it is the sandbox in action.

Now CCP wants to kill that? And if they use CSM as a gauge, well they are being foolish. The CSM is many things but it is far from representative of the game overall.

Large organizations do not need the double protection of being large and being expensive to declare ware against. If anything the smaller corps should be more expensive (but not outrageously so) to declare war against just to provide a slightly decreased incentive to griefing.

As large organizations become un-deccable (for lack of a better word), smaller corps will likely receive more war declarations.

Add to that the fact that the mechanic provides a free, easily abused dec shield when they stated at fanfest they wanted to stop dec shielding - it clearly is in need of modification.

The fact is, CCP was off guard. But now, as they have done previously - they entertain us with silence, thus fueling baseless rumors that CSM and CCP are somehow involved in a conspiracy. One that I do not believe exists but like all conspiracy legends is fueled by silence. That does not mean CCP can use the CSM to judge the quality of a change all of the time. In this particular instance in fact the csm is poorly suited to serve as a benchmark.

I've writen SoniClover in game and asked for a response.

We'll see if we get one.

Thanks!

Argus

Thanks SC. Sometimes it just helps to know things are not set in stone and we are being heard.

Not to mention the eerie fact that I apparently summoned you forth with post number 666.

Argus

Well thank you, its good to know that the feedback is at least being listened to.

I personally have spent some time trying to figure out what would work. I have to admit that it's quite a challenge. You are right that not everyone is going to be happy here. I have come up with something though, its stands parts of the wardec system on its head, and these types of radical proposals usually fall by the wayside quickly. Anyway I don't know if I expect this to be adopted but it may provide some good grist for the mill. I will just leave here for food for thought:

---

One of the stated goals of this exercise was to make WarDec's less of a pay to grief system, and I have to say that does not seem to have succeeded.

Maybe its time to rethink this a bit:

Lets look at a few goals (mostly culled from prior discussions):

* We want to preserve unconsensual PvP as part of EVE. Merc corps, pirates, extortionists. But not overwhelm carebears and new players.

* Wars should be "serious business" not lightly entered into and not risk free for the aggressor. Declaring a war needs to be a commitment.

* Nuisance wars by small corps against large ones are to be avoided, at least not happening all the time.

* In EVE, at least in high-sec, you should be able to ruin someone's day and perhaps week, but for player retention reasons it should be very difficult ruin their EVE "life" to harass them out of the game. (I know many would dispute this goal, but I think CCP needs to accept this for the long term health of EVE).

A couple of observations I would make:

* A week is a long time if you are under a griefing wardec.

* One of the serious abuses of the system is to declare war, and then not login unless your alts/neutral allies have located a war target you can get overwhelming odds on.

* No amount of ISK really balances out the equation in wars, it'll always be unfair in some way; the only true unit of currency in EVE is time.

A Possible Solution (in addition to or modifying the existing proposals):

* Wars are assessed on a day by day (or perhaps thats a little tight, 48 hours?) basis (keep the current cost and say divide by ten? Cost will increase fast due to point 2).

* Unless made mutual cost of the war goes up every time its evaluated, by something very significant. I suggest geometric, doubling every period. Mutual wars become free to maintain.

* Aggressing corp can get credit by spending time prosecuting the war by being active: defined as a percentage of its pilots being logged in, in empire space, uncloaked. This percentage is multiplied against the cost increase for this period.

* Defending corp can take control of the war by exceeding the active percentage. At that time the defending corp can shut down the war or extend it (by paying the day one cost of declaring war on the previous aggressor).

* After a war ends, no new wardecs will be accepted against either corp for the period of a week. (Might make an exception for the aggressor corp if they win the war, it makes some sense to let them declare a new war almost immediately.) If a second war ends during this time it or the 24 hour period after it does not extend the week or create new week of respite (preventing a new decshield exploit in this proposal).

---

So there's a stab at a more balanced WarDec system that does not institutionalize unlimited harassment. Probably more than one way to skin that cat, but I think something like this would be better for the game in the long run.

So griefers will have an easier time griefing, good idea......

especially with all those new players coming in.

first I'd like to say that is ridiculous that is considered greifing 4 a smaller corp declare war on a larger corp. in high sec expecially when it comes to pos's there are only so many places available for them to be anchored . anything that prevents a smaller corp from being able to attack a larger corp that is not maintaining a pos is outrageous .a high cost due to the number of members is inappropriate inexcusable . the larger a corporation is the more capable it should be to defend itself and its assets . therefore the cost for a smaller entity attacking a larger should be less . the inverse should also be true as the larger entity should also have the resources to attack a smaller 1 at a higher cost . with a base price for corporations that are of similar sizes

regardless of the reason hi sec war allows combat actions to control limited resources . the nature of a corporation allowed access to these limited resources and should make you subject 2 combat for them. failure to allow this or setup a situation that savers a larger corporation will results in stagnation. the form of which will be very large alliances and less destruction of assets in high security systems

the mechanic 4 avoiding high security war declarations is to be in a npc corporation . the issue of neutral rr logistics is being resolved by crime watch . as long as there is an implementation that slows or limits the ability tocorp hop with out adversely prevent people from leaving and then later rejoining in a reasonable time frame . then the issues and problems would mostly be resolved

the final point to be addressed is a satisfactory mechanic to allow defending corporation to end war declaration that provides incentives for them to fight and defeat the aggressors in combat . the mechanic 4 continuing the war is already in place in the form of a war declaration .


I apologize for the errors as I dictated this on my phone I'm sure I may have missed some issues and have not offered any solutions I do hope I have summarized a fair and equitable

Thank you for confirming that you intend to keep cost scaling so that large highsec entities can keep their decshields.

Way to plow ahead with implementing mechanics that the majority of the people in this thread think are completely contrary to the spirit of the game and that completely counteract the removal of cost increases for multiple wars against the same entity. It's good to know that you're completely ignoring the people who will actually be affected by the proposed gameplay changes.

I will just repost what i said earlier, as it is likely to go under after a while in a huge thread. I always see the smaller vs bigger corp discussion and how people do not see why it is bad to make that easy. The thing is: small corps with alts can grief a bigger corp and if they try to hunt them, the smaller agressor just hides or playes docking games. Thats what i try to prevent with my idea: starting a war with the thought in mind that you could just hide if it goes the wrong way. Preferably i would throw people out of a station if it gets sieged by the defender, with their ship to give the defender something to blow up. This is obviously not going to happen as it would make people voulnerable that are afk because of rl. You cant have people coming back to the pc and see that they were thrown out of a station to die. But you can prevent them from hiding once they have started playing (once they have undocked). Just read up the old post, ill quote it here to make it easy to find.

+1

and a casus belli a real one as its coming through game mechanics.