These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Ally wardec system allready showing its flaws ?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#21 - 2012-05-25 12:17:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
non judgement wrote:
I would have thought that you'd have to wait a while before you can see which corps are good in the ally system. Of course it's going to get a bit weird in the first few weeks. When it settles down the good merc corps will have good records. The dodgy corps you'll be able to see their bad record of helping and you wont pay their fee.

We already have a developed mercenary market, with many corporations and alliances that have good (and not so good) records.

The problem is that because of this change, all of the blanket-war groups (the ones that declare war on as many large entities as they can to have as many war targets as possible, as opposed to mercenary groups or war corporations that target more specific targets but in less numbers) are going to be accepting the ally requests for free.

Don't get me wrong, I think blanket war groups are great, and I have nothing against them. I loved pre-nerf privateers, even though at that point in time I was a null-sec dweller, and the alliances I was in were frequently targeted by them. It's just that now these guys will inadvertently ruin the mercenary market, as well as small-scale wars in general. Before the change, the war fees prevented them from doing so, but now they're free to offer assistance to any and all entities that request it, without charging a dime. The defenders would be stupid to not take up these offers, while the aggressors will be so inhibited that few will continue their activities.

CCP said this expansion was all about war; the only thing it will do in the long run is significantly decrease the amount of wars we have.

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
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2012-05-25 12:22:36 UTC
If it doesn't - Force a blue +10 standings on allies when accepted by a wardec'd corp.

+10 = Awoxer. Can't trust your allies = hire mercs.

Just give it a couple months to sort itself out with exploits of this nature. A small blip on the isk income for mercs until it sorts out is all.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#23 - 2012-05-25 12:26:38 UTC
Mocam wrote:
If it doesn't - Force a blue +10 standings on allies when accepted by a wardec'd corp.

+10 = Awoxer. Can't trust your allies = hire mercs.

What?

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
Plentath
Sparkle Motion.
#24 - 2012-05-25 12:33:06 UTC
It works fine.

If you want random scrubs helping you (and everyone else) at the same time, accept the free offers.

If you want a powerful ally that will actually hunt and destroy the target effectively, pay for it like you would before.

The good thing~ about these changes is that it lowers the barriers to entry for mercs and allows small upstarts to get their name known without needing to post to C&P with no killboard history and getting trolled by Jita 4-4 campers.

+1 on the change, work with it not against it.
Fuji 9000
Sleeping Dogs Awake
#25 - 2012-05-25 13:00:32 UTC
Plentath wrote:
It works fine.
If you want a powerful ally that will actually hunt and destroy the target effectively, pay for it like you would before.

you're missing the point, why hire a 'powerful ally' and pay them what they are worth, when you can hire unlimited scrubs for free?
most corps/alliances will go the free option
Fabulousli Obvious
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#26 - 2012-05-25 13:08:24 UTC
Isokuro wrote:
So within a week now all the big null sec allainces have discoverd that its actually not a great idea to
officially wardec a other null sec allainces because of this chaining of allies.



Yes, we all saw this coming.
Yes we complained.
Yes, it's as un-thought out as the UI Windows...and all development and implementation advice offered was ignored.

All I can say is....like me, get out of this mess while you can.

Good Luck.

I am NOT YOUNG ENOUGH to know EVERYTHING.  ~~ Oscar Wilde, writer, d. November 30, 1900
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#27 - 2012-05-25 13:32:22 UTC
Plentath wrote:
It works fine.

If you want random scrubs helping you (and everyone else) at the same time, accept the free offers.

If you want a powerful ally that will actually hunt and destroy the target effectively, pay for it like you would before.

Except the people who are putting out 0.00isk assistance offers are the exact same people who are listed in the merc contracts channel. So no, not really.
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2012-05-25 13:44:36 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Mocam wrote:
If it doesn't - Force a blue +10 standings on allies when accepted by a wardec'd corp.

+10 = Awoxer. Can't trust your allies = hire mercs.

What?


You're joking, right? If not ...

If the system sets all accepted allies to blue at +10 standings, then they aren't seen as hostiles.

Awoxer is someone who joins a group to then provide warp-ins to hostiles. A short-term spy gig used to mess up those that see them as friendly. It happens a bit in nullsec -- get "blue" to an alliance by joining it or a pet/friendly. The way many setup their overviews there, they turn off blues in local. As such, you warp to someone who's doing PvE stuff and have hostiles warp in to kill them.

It can tend to mess up trust.

With respect to this - simply have an alt group offer to help against your mains corporation, use that blue standing to get in close on their stuff and have your buddies come in and blow them up.

A couple such stunts and trust in accepting help takes a big dive.

It's not difficult to see this being done *IF* it is possible for griefer types to pull it off and once it starts, trust in strangers offering help won't last -- merc contracts go back in vogue vs accepting help "for free".

This is EVE and trusting someone to help that you don't know... I seriously doubt I'm the first to look at this notion and see the potential griefer side but, then again, I do hold a huge paranoia gig about others in this game so tend to look for what dangers may be lurking in any such game changes that come around.

If that standings for accepting help isn't in there, then request it and let the nature of the player base push things back to "normal" distrust.
engjin
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#29 - 2012-05-25 14:01:37 UTC
Isokuro wrote:

instead of boosting the Merc market you just destroyed it completely because there are allready
a **** ton of corps and allaince that just ally up with everyone for having more targets.
Making it harder to actually ask a price for being someones ally for a merc.

Same goes with the wars for big allainces in nullsec.

for a quick example: Against All Authorities wardecced Pandemic Legion.
Now because of the higher wardec costs all the high sec pvp allainces and corporations are all
offering to be an ally for PL like Flies on a big fat pile of **** just so they can have these free wars.


Working as intended. People want more PVP and they're getting it, win win. Will 'real' merc corps/ alliances still get good contracts? Yes.

The Corp's and Alliance's getting freebies have no skin in the game. They don't have to engage or get any results at all. You get what you pay for. Of course scammers, bad merc corps or those that are up and coming will post cheaper rates than more popular ones but in the end if I want an outcome or a specific objective achieved I'm going to pay to have it done and will go to Noir, etc. to get it.
Kiandoshia
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2012-05-25 14:10:25 UTC
Isokuro wrote:

but didn't CCP see this comming ?
)


:D
ShipToaster
#31 - 2012-05-25 14:10:28 UTC  |  Edited by: ShipToaster
Add a standard weekly fee for allies just like the declaring war fee?

Add a minimum weekly payment to allies so it does not have a zero cost?

Allow attackers to bring allies if the defenders do?

Set allies to be able to shoot any who are involved in that conflict?

I feel sorry for the small groups who get abused in game somehow and want revenge only to find out that they now cannot wardec someone without getting ally smashed.

.
Fabulousli Obvious
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#32 - 2012-05-25 14:15:56 UTC
Plentath wrote:
It works fine.



You have proven over and over agin the worthlessness of your opinions and brain.

I am NOT YOUNG ENOUGH to know EVERYTHING.  ~~ Oscar Wilde, writer, d. November 30, 1900
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#33 - 2012-05-25 14:16:30 UTC
Mocam wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Mocam wrote:
If it doesn't - Force a blue +10 standings on allies when accepted by a wardec'd corp.

+10 = Awoxer. Can't trust your allies = hire mercs.

What?


You're joking, right? If not ...

If the system sets all accepted allies to blue at +10 standings, then they aren't seen as hostiles.

Awoxer is someone who joins a group to then provide warp-ins to hostiles. A short-term spy gig used to mess up those that see them as friendly. It happens a bit in nullsec -- get "blue" to an alliance by joining it or a pet/friendly. The way many setup their overviews there, they turn off blues in local. As such, you warp to someone who's doing PvE stuff and have hostiles warp in to kill them.

It can tend to mess up trust.

With respect to this - simply have an alt group offer to help against your mains corporation, use that blue standing to get in close on their stuff and have your buddies come in and blow them up.

A couple such stunts and trust in accepting help takes a big dive.

It's not difficult to see this being done *IF* it is possible for griefer types to pull it off and once it starts, trust in strangers offering help won't last -- merc contracts go back in vogue vs accepting help "for free".

This is EVE and trusting someone to help that you don't know... I seriously doubt I'm the first to look at this notion and see the potential griefer side but, then again, I do hold a huge paranoia gig about others in this game so tend to look for what dangers may be lurking in any such game changes that come around.

If that standings for accepting help isn't in there, then request it and let the nature of the player base push things back to "normal" distrust.

I know what awoxing is, I just didn't get your post.

Anyway, this is absolutely not an issue. Just because some corporation/alliance brings allies into a war, doesn't mean that they're obligated to operate in the same area, share intelligence, or fight against the aggressor in the same fleets.

Also, doing this has been entirely possible with game mechanics pre-patch. The only real change this new system made is that it removed the need for people to pay for mercenary work, (previously, "allies" still had to pay the war fee). War aggressors rarely used awoxing in this manner because it was too inefficient, and in that respect, nothing has changed. It's much more effective to find your targets with a neutral, cloaked alt, or a character inside the enemy corporation/alliance.

Forcing a standings change for allies would be a terrible fix for the problems created by this change because it's very unintuitive, and contrary to the open-ended nature of this game. Also, it wouldn't work anyway due to the way the overview functions. You can set filtering priorities to make positive standings have a lower priority than other types. For example, if you have a corp member who is an outlaw, you can prioritize the outlaw indicator and prevent the corporation indicator from being shown at all.

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
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#34 - 2012-05-25 14:22:28 UTC
ShipToaster wrote:
...

Add a standard weekly fee for allies just like the declaring war fee?

YES! This would fix most of the problems with this change.

Add a minimum weekly payment to allies so it does not have a zero cost?

Pointless, since money transferred between players can always be given back.

Allow attackers to bring allies if the defenders do?

Yes, but allow the first ally as a freebie, and then allow for a 1:1 ratio.

Set allies to be able to shoot any who are involved in that conflict?

Not sure on this one.

I feel sorry for the small groups who get abused in game somehow and want revenge only to find out that they now cannot wardec someone without getting ally smashed.

Not only that, but now it will not be viable for them to hire small mercenary groups, since the same thing is likely to happen. At the very least, it will be must more expensive due to the increased risk, leading to less jobs either way.

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
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#35 - 2012-05-25 14:29:35 UTC
The new war-dec system is a huge boost to mercenaries as almost all offensive wars will be contracted out to them - in contrast the casual pvp corps will stick to acting as allies/defenders as they fear the possibility of a war-dec going completely out of control (dec a 10man corp and suddenly have a 2,000 people with rights to shoot you) too much to act as aggressors.

.
Jonathan Malcom
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2012-05-25 14:48:55 UTC
DestinyCorrupted wrote:

Before the changes, there was an actual mercenary market where people could hire mercenaries by reputation, and mercenaries actually got paid for their work. What we have now is a bunch of privateer-style groups doing the same for free. So point 1 is that there is no more mercenary work, because mercenaries get paid.


So, you're trying to charge for a service that others are willing to provide for free. That kind of makes you an idiot.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#37 - 2012-05-25 14:59:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Jonathan Malcom wrote:
DestinyCorrupted wrote:

Before the changes, there was an actual mercenary market where people could hire mercenaries by reputation, and mercenaries actually got paid for their work. What we have now is a bunch of privateer-style groups doing the same for free. So point 1 is that there is no more mercenary work, because mercenaries get paid.


So, you're trying to charge for a service that others are willing to provide for free. That kind of makes you an idiot.

They didn't provide it for free when there was a war fee attached. In most cases, that fee was so significant (due to their existing amount of outgoing wars), that clients would balk at hiring them, even if they didn't charge for anything but the war fee. For example, The Orphanage does "free" work, as long as the client covers the war fee. How many small groups would be willing to shell out upper-hundreds of millions, sometimes even billions, for a week of war? Most balk at paying even 200-300 million, fee included, to a small mercenary group that will actually devote a significant amount of time to going after the targets. Now, they can get a few thousand people without having to pay a single cent, and let numbers do all the work.On top of that, Inferno made it significantly more expensive to declare war.

2/10 for getting me to reply I guess.

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
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2012-05-25 15:23:10 UTC  |  Edited by: March rabbit
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
MotherMoon wrote:
Sandbox

How is it "sandbox?" I fail to see how it can be "sandbox," unless your definition of sandbox is having all the adults on the playground beat the living **** out of the kid who knocked down another kid's sandcastle.

carebear-miner just wants to mine safe and freely. He gets killed by "cool PVPer/ganker". He asks wth? And people say: THIS IS SANDBOX!

And what do we see now? Cool PVPer wants to freely and safe wardec other people and asks "WTH?" when he gets kicked by other PVPers? Shocked

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
JitaPriceChecker2
Doomheim
#39 - 2012-05-25 15:37:14 UTC  |  Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2
I look of it as opportunities.

Add possibility to join on the attacker side as well, this should escalate wars quite nicely !!!!
EvEa Deva
Doomheim
#40 - 2012-05-25 15:46:48 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
MotherMoon wrote:
Sandbox

How is it "sandbox?" I fail to see how it can be "sandbox," unless your definition of sandbox is having all the adults on the playground beat the living **** out of the kid who knocked down another kid's sandcastle.

Look, I'm all for the "if you wardec someone, you better be prepared to fight" ideology. But this is simply absurd. It removes all incentive for declaring war against someone, because no matter how much you like pvp, and no matter how fearless you are, having the enemy get infinite allies is just stupid. No amount of ridicule and chicken-calling is going to get me to engage three hundred people out of principle.


HTFU you can always dock up for a week