These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New War Dec Prices on Test
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Pinky Feldman
Amarrian Vengeance
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#21 - 2012-05-03 11:41:13 UTC
CCP's argument is that you should have to pay more to have more targets to shoot at, but the fundamental issue with that is that it provides built in protection for larger entities that should theoretically be able to protect themselves better anyways.

Additionally, the cost scaling with having more targets and being able to fund the war with loot drops under the proposed new model doesn't really scale very well either, even in a best case scenario.

The moar you cry the less you pee
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#22 - 2012-05-03 11:47:45 UTC
Pinky Feldman wrote:
CCP's argument is that you should have to pay more to have more targets to shoot at, but the fundamental issue with that is that it provides built in protection for larger entities that should theoretically be able to protect themselves better anyways.

Additionally, the cost scaling with having more targets and being able to fund the war with loot drops under the proposed new model doesn't really scale very well either, even in a best case scenario.

Even worse, CCP is basing this model on a fallacy. The only way it works is if you completely disregard the whole concept of risk and reward. To implement this model without offsetting the fees based on the attacker/defender ratio is complete foolishness. The small corporation that takes on the challenge of attacking a large alliance is severely penalized, while the large alliance taking on the small corporation is rewarded not just with the intrinsic ability to more easily spread the war fee cost amongst its members, but with a much lower fee in general.

It's utterly ridiculous.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2012-05-03 12:53:13 UTC
War cost - remember that the changed version is NOT YET on Sisi, what is on Sisi right now is the original, old changes we implemented before Fanfest. Expect new version tomorrow.

That is the reply I got from CCP when I asked the question regarding the high cost since it was originally raised at fanfest already.

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#24 - 2012-05-03 13:57:37 UTC
Aesheera wrote:
Neutral logistics. End this. Make out of corp Logi's suspects for anyone to agress, or better yet, give them GCC.
The amount of neutral RR seen as an over(ab)used tactic has gotten way out of hand.
There's ways to deal with this ofcourse, but i personally feel that use of Logi's should be restricted to in-alliance/in-corp usage.

No, this is absurd. Just have them take 15 minutes war aggression as they do now, PLUS the 1 minute aggression timer that prevents them from docking or jumping. Then they can no longer escape and are valid targets to the people whose enemies they assisted.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Aesheera
Doomheim
#25 - 2012-05-03 14:00:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Aesheera
qu1ckkkk wrote:
Aesheera wrote:

Arrow Neutral logistics. End this. Make out of corp Logi's suspects for anyone to agress, or better yet, give them GCC.
The amount of neutral RR seen as an over(ab)used tactic has gotten way out of hand.
There's ways to deal with this ofcourse, but i personally feel that use of Logi's should be restricted to in-alliance/in-corp usage.


I suspect someone got some 'suddently logistics' recently? lol. Proposing GCC for this is lame haha. Agression like anything else is fine, but GCC... lol lol

You obviously dont know me and my fields of activity, which is fine.
But the fact that you disagree with NEUTRAL logi's needing a fix in general shows you have very little experience in Empire PvP.

Im fine with Logi's, up to the point that it becomes abusive in High Sec in the shapes of neutral rep alts.

It *needs* to be looked at, it's current state is utterly ********.
There need to be consequences for using them when theyre not part of your corp/alliance.
Make them turn suspect on the spot, aka criminal flagged, semi similar to GCC without Concord and Sentry intervention.
That way it returns to the 'what you see is what you get' type of Logi supported PvP.
I believe this was already discussed at fanfest and tbh, it would be a very welcome change.

- I think my passion is misinterpreted as anger sometimes. And I don't think people are ready for the message that I'm delivering, and delivering with a sense of violent love.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#26 - 2012-05-03 14:00:42 UTC
Also, this.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Aesheera
Doomheim
#27 - 2012-05-03 14:03:21 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Also, this.

Liking.

- I think my passion is misinterpreted as anger sometimes. And I don't think people are ready for the message that I'm delivering, and delivering with a sense of violent love.
qu1ckkkk
The Warp Core Stabilizers
#28 - 2012-05-03 14:12:43 UTC
Aesheera wrote:

But the fact that you disagree with NEUTRAL logi's needing a fix in general shows you have very little experience in Empire PvP.


Have you actually read what I said? Apart from the fact that your neut logi debate is fail, its off topic.

FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:

No, this is absurd. Just have them take 15 minutes war aggression as they do now, PLUS the 1 minute aggression timer that prevents them from docking or jumping. Then they can no longer escape and are valid targets to the people whose enemies they assisted.

What this man said is exactly what I agree to. I hope you read this thoroughly before continuing on your off topic rant.

/thread

Proud developer of SeAT! A Simple Eve API & Corporation Management Tool.

Project Page: https://github.com/eveseat/seat
NoxiousPluK
Gallactic Groove Guild
#29 - 2012-05-03 14:14:22 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Aesheera wrote:
Neutral logistics. End this. Make out of corp Logi's suspects for anyone to agress, or better yet, give them GCC.
The amount of neutral RR seen as an over(ab)used tactic has gotten way out of hand.
There's ways to deal with this ofcourse, but i personally feel that use of Logi's should be restricted to in-alliance/in-corp usage.

No, this is absurd. Just have them take 15 minutes war aggression as they do now, PLUS the 1 minute aggression timer that prevents them from docking or jumping. Then they can no longer escape and are valid targets to the people whose enemies they assisted.

I'm up for this also.
Reppyk
The Black Shell
#30 - 2012-05-03 14:44:25 UTC
These prices are too much for my merc corp.

And a 4b+/week wardec fee is indeed madness.

1) The base cost is too much. 50m to wardec a one-man corp ? Meh.
2) A linear 500k/toon is a very bad design. LOG FUNCTION TO THE RESCUE (or root).

I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

Proud co-admin of frugu.net, a French fansite about EVE !
Jacob Staffuer
Doomheim
#31 - 2012-05-03 14:44:43 UTC
So what (collectively, people in this thread are) saying is that players will only PvP if it's free and doesn't have any consequences?

HTFU!
Psychotic Monk
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2012-05-03 14:51:51 UTC
Not incredibly expensive =/= free.

Belligerent Undesirables Selling Griefer Immunity
Jacob Staffuer
Doomheim
#33 - 2012-05-03 14:58:36 UTC
Psychotic Monk wrote:
Not incredibly expensive =/= free.


Hey if you're a sissy you can always suicide gank. A properly fit cataclyst only costsl ike 3 mil.
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#34 - 2012-05-03 15:24:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternum Praetorian
I would just like to point out that neither Incursions nor Tier III battlecruisers "went live" on tranquility in the state that they were first seen on singularity. Far from it in fact.



On that note, CCP needs as much forum flaming as possible right now to make sure that these terrible changes do not become the exception, and go live on tranq as is. Bad CCP. Baaaaddd......

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]
Psychotic Monk
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#35 - 2012-05-03 15:40:07 UTC
Jacob Staffuer wrote:
Psychotic Monk wrote:
Not incredibly expensive =/= free.


Hey if you're a sissy you can always suicide gank. A properly fit cataclyst only costsl ike 3 mil.


I prefer decs, but if suicide ganks is the only tool left to me...

Listen, man. Why do you gotta, like, dictate the way I play, man. Maybe I just wanna dec some people in peace. I pay my fifteen bucks a month too, man.

Belligerent Undesirables Selling Griefer Immunity
Ice Fist
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#36 - 2012-05-03 15:40:12 UTC
Aqriue wrote:
So don't deck goons in highsec and move in on their turf. There is realisticly, way more ******* people who may not like them and if all of EVE (if that were to happen) were to focus on goons, they would be crushed like a cat under a monster truck. And you could do it without a wardec fee at all.

Also...GTFO of highsec, problem ******* solved. Been saying that all along if you don't like highsec shenanigans


I made a post about this recently. You see this "could" work. There are certainly enough people who hate us. The problem is you'd have to form a coalition of conflicting eve personalities. Our one great advantage is that we have a singular leader who united our whole alliance and coalition.

That, and we'd be fighting a defensive war. Nothing is more fun than a defensive war. So please do this.
Goatfather
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2012-05-03 16:17:30 UTC
Aesheera wrote:

Aqriue wrote:

Also...GTFO of highsec, problem ******* solved. Been saying that all along if you don't like highsec shenanigans

Pretty bad argument.
Just because YOU might not enjoy that, empire decs for some is a massive part of their EVE entertainment.

There's guys out there that can't stand 0.0 politics and 200 man blob wars, or just don't feel like wasting their sec status just to get a few kills every week.



this
roboto212
EVE University
Ivy League
#38 - 2012-05-03 16:17:54 UTC
None of this could be true the contract manager for snatch victory told me so when I raised these same points.

I love the changes the mean my new high sec alliance will be left alone and I will have thousands of mission runners and incursion runners in my corp and alliance. They will be free from war and then some day we to can then do nothing but farm and make isk and hold hands . Does that sound all nice and crude.


Ccp please wake up and help us here.
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#39 - 2012-05-03 16:57:19 UTC
Goatfather wrote:
Goatfather wrote:
[quote=Lithalnas]The cost of wardecs is a little harsh don't you think?

50m starting plus 500k per person x1 = 50.5m
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/KhanProject/20120503021901.jpg
50M starting plus 500k per person (xxdeathxx) = 789.5m
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/KhanProject/20120503021125.jpg
50M starting plus 500k per person (Goonswarm) = 4.297 Billion
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/KhanProject/20120503020931.jpg



We should just make one massive merc/war alliance in HS. Push our differences aside if this system actually goes live.


Someone would eventually pool up enough money to wardec all of high sec in that case and all concord "protection" would be stripped for the duration.

Yes it's expensive.. it was meant to be. In this way there is an incentive for seeking out and joining more successful corps rather than starting your own one man corp.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Jacob Staffuer
Doomheim
#40 - 2012-05-03 18:57:23 UTC
Griefing should be easy, free, and safe to do.

Any changes that add risk, danger, cost, or effort to griefing are bad and should be flamed.