These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Inferno 1.1 Sisi features

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
#61 - 2012-06-11 15:43:48 UTC  |  Edited by: corestwo
Jade Constantine wrote:
Mara Tessidar wrote:
Now, imagine that I am not part of the most powerful group in Eve Online, and that I am not controlling your game. Instead, I am some 20-man "merc" corp that wants to make a reputation. So, my corporation declares war against a mid-sized alliance. The next day, there are 20 "Ally has joined a war" notifications. None of them are friendly.

Goonswarm doesn't really care about getting wardecced by every mom and pop operation out there. If we want to kill people, we will kill them. Wardecs have never stopped us from causing tears of unfathomable sadness. What this change does is keep things from getting out of hand for other, smaller groups that declare war. The way the system works now, you could theoretically have every other corporation in Eve ally against the aggressor at virtually no extra cost. And if there's anything the last 9 years should have taught everybody, it's that if there's a mechanic that can be abused, it will be abused.


So.

1. Concord fee for allies only kicks in if the Defender + allies headcount is greater than the aggressor headcount.
2. For every defender ally that joins when their headcount is larger than aggressor headcount, the aggressors can add an ally too.
3. Ally contracts come up for renewal each 2 weeks, can be set to autorenewal and these don't cost concord fee unless defender outnumbers aggressor.
4. Mutual system contains as is and does not exclude allies.

Do you have a problem with that?


As much as it pains me to admit it, you have a good idea there. We like it. Although the question is whether we like it more than your endless gnashing of teeth over this change. That is a tough call.

Jade Constantine wrote:
corestwo wrote:
You know Jade, you like to throw around the "9000 man alliance" thing here a lot but lets be real how many goons are actually in highsec spoiling for fights? It isn't many, you should probably drop the strawman.

While you're at it, accept that you brought it on yourself.



Well given that most corporation/alliances are active only at a tiny fraction of their on the books numbers its a nonsense thing to argue about. Alliance membership is what it is. If I bring a 100 man ally corp into a war I expect to see 10% of them on the field really - thats eve. As for accepting I brought this on myself - lol, of course I did you silly goose, that was rather the point. I wanted to trap you guys into a genuine foreverwar that had enough people decced against you it would mess up your next burn jita event. Somebody needed to be the lightning rod for mittani's ego so he clicked the button.

You'll see significantly fewer than the 10% (or whatever) that is active, because you live in empire, and goons do not. In most cases if goons had even 1% of our memberbase actively hunting for a fight in highsec, it would be considered an awe inspiring display of power.

So, like I said - drop the strawman.

This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

fofofo
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#62 - 2012-06-11 15:47:34 UTC
Thread purged of offtopic/irrelevant replies. There are appropriate places for that and this is not one of the places. Let's keep focused on the features on Sisi.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#63 - 2012-06-11 15:48:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Weaselior
CCP Goliath wrote:

• Adding some new items to FW LP stores
• Removing EWAR from all FW NPCs

Isn't speedtanking FW complexes a huge issue? Shouldn't you be adding webs or something else to fix that inbalance (this is, apparently, completely breaking the caldari/gallente war)?

Also what kind of items - brand new items, or ones from other LP stores?

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#64 - 2012-06-11 15:50:33 UTC
corestwo wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:
Mara Tessidar wrote:
Now, imagine that I am not part of the most powerful group in Eve Online, and that I am not controlling your game. Instead, I am some 20-man "merc" corp that wants to make a reputation. So, my corporation declares war against a mid-sized alliance. The next day, there are 20 "Ally has joined a war" notifications. None of them are friendly.

Goonswarm doesn't really care about getting wardecced by every mom and pop operation out there. If we want to kill people, we will kill them. Wardecs have never stopped us from causing tears of unfathomable sadness. What this change does is keep things from getting out of hand for other, smaller groups that declare war. The way the system works now, you could theoretically have every other corporation in Eve ally against the aggressor at virtually no extra cost. And if there's anything the last 9 years should have taught everybody, it's that if there's a mechanic that can be abused, it will be abused.


So.

1. Concord fee for allies only kicks in if the Defender + allies headcount is greater than the aggressor headcount.
2. For every defender ally that joins when their headcount is larger than aggressor headcount, the aggressors can add an ally too.
3. Ally contracts come up for renewal each 2 weeks, can be set to autorenewal and these don't cost concord fee unless defender outnumbers aggressor.
4. Mutual system contains as is and does not exclude allies.

Do you have a problem with that?


As much as it pains me to admit it, you have a good idea there. We like it. Although the question is whether we like it more than your endless gnashing of teeth over this change. That is a tough call.

Jade Constantine wrote:
corestwo wrote:
You know Jade, you like to throw around the "9000 man alliance" thing here a lot but lets be real how many goons are actually in highsec spoiling for fights? It isn't many, you should probably drop the strawman.

While you're at it, accept that you brought it on yourself.



Well given that most corporation/alliances are active only at a tiny fraction of their on the books numbers its a nonsense thing to argue about. Alliance membership is what it is. If I bring a 100 man ally corp into a war I expect to see 10% of them on the field really - thats eve. As for accepting I brought this on myself - lol, of course I did you silly goose, that was rather the point. I wanted to trap you guys into a genuine foreverwar that had enough people decced against you it would mess up your next burn jita event. Somebody needed to be the lightning rod for mittani's ego so he clicked the button.

You'll see significantly fewer than the 10% (or whatever) that is active, because you live in empire, and goons do not. In most cases if goons had even 1% of our memberbase actively hunting for a fight in highsec, it would be considered an awe inspiring display of power.

So, like I said - drop the strawman.




Point is though its not a strawman - its a solid balancing metric for the wardec system and I honestly can't see how it can be otherwise. The cost of wardeccing Goons is based on the number of heads you have in that alliance. Hence, its reasonable to consider the number of heads you have in that alliance as a balancing factor in how many allies can be called against you.

Now we can argue all day about how your effective size should only be 90 because only 90 of you routinely pvp in hisec but there is absolutely no way to tie that argument / assumption / claim into a system of game mechanics so lets just stick with what it says on the alliance ranking table.


The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
#65 - 2012-06-11 15:58:50 UTC  |  Edited by: corestwo
Jade Constantine wrote:
Point is though its not a strawman - its a solid balancing metric for the wardec system and I honestly can't see how it can be otherwise. The cost of wardeccing Goons is based on the number of heads you have in that alliance. Hence, its reasonable to consider the number of heads you have in that alliance as a balancing factor in how many allies can be called against you.

Now we can argue all day about how your effective size should only be 90 because only 90 of you routinely pvp in hisec but there is absolutely no way to tie that argument / assumption / claim into a system of game mechanics so lets just stick with what it says on the alliance ranking table.


If you decced us, we'd turn the tables, make it mutual, and invite anyone who wanted to shoot you to do so for free...and I imagine there are many who'd take the opportunity. That would seem to make the cost to dec us irrelevant - after all, if you've such an issue with 9000 vs 100, why would you invite the chance for it to be 10000 vs 100, or 15000, or 20000?

This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

fofofo
Isabella300
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#66 - 2012-06-11 15:59:31 UTC
Would be nice if some positive changes to making Titans usefull again was being looked at and implemented!
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#67 - 2012-06-11 16:04:10 UTC
When you say "re-designed caldari drake" do you mean the model, or you're going to be tweaking ship stats?

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#68 - 2012-06-11 16:06:42 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
When you say "re-designed caldari drake" do you mean the model, or you're going to be tweaking ship stats?

lol the old missle launchers are gone. Come join us on Sisi and see for your selfTwisted

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#69 - 2012-06-11 16:11:07 UTC
Salpun wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
When you say "re-designed caldari drake" do you mean the model, or you're going to be tweaking ship stats?

lol the old missle launchers are gone. Come join us on Sisi and see for your selfTwisted

that's sort of hard to do at work

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#70 - 2012-06-11 16:14:55 UTC
corestwo wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:
Point is though its not a strawman - its a solid balancing metric for the wardec system and I honestly can't see how it can be otherwise. The cost of wardeccing Goons is based on the number of heads you have in that alliance. Hence, its reasonable to consider the number of heads you have in that alliance as a balancing factor in how many allies can be called against you.

Now we can argue all day about how your effective size should only be 90 because only 90 of you routinely pvp in hisec but there is absolutely no way to tie that argument / assumption / claim into a system of game mechanics so lets just stick with what it says on the alliance ranking table.


If you decced us, we'd turn the tables, make it mutual, and invite anyone who wanted to shoot you to do so for free...and I imagine there are many who'd take the opportunity. That would seem to make the cost to dec us irrelevant - after all, if you've such an issue with 9000 vs 100, why would you invite the chance for it to be 10000 vs 100, or 15000, or 20000?



Well these changes would put a stop to all that.

Of course would your leadership make a commitment to accept mutuals from incoming wardecs to add up to 9000 total membership of corps - somehow I doubt that.

My issue btw about the 100 vs 9000 is not really a complaint about (oh noes we're being griefed 1111! etc) its because I don't see the point of a war unless one side can somehow lose. I did have a strategy for fighting the goon wardec and as you saw that strategy involved inviting as many allies as we could find and trying to fill hisec with people ganking goon ships. Unlikely that it might have seemed I could see a future where the number of wardec allies you were fighting would be so large as to seriously impact the planning and implementation of a burn Jita style event and your leadership might actually have been forced to offer a surrender.

Burn Jita was only successful because you shed your outgoing wardecs and the cost in wardeccing you during that weekend became immediately prohibitive because of cost escalation on multiple decs. But a couple of hundred active wardec fighters duriung Burn Jita would have seriously messed up your plans.

Of course, now with these 1.1 patchnotes you'll never have to worry about that in the future because there will never be significant numbers of people wardecced against you in mutually-locked-in wardecs and you can always :forget: to pay the outgoing bills in advance of such events.

This is why I'm disappointed with these changes - it seems the reverse of encouraging emergent gameplay and simply a thoughtless nerf of the Inferno wardec system.

Sure the system needed tweaks and balances and this thread has examples of how those could be achieved.

But the patch notes as written are not tweaks and balances - they are nothing short of a frontal lobotomy on the wardec system and they will have the impact of returning hisec war mechanics to pre-inferno irrelevance.








The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#71 - 2012-06-11 16:17:00 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Salpun wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
When you say "re-designed caldari drake" do you mean the model, or you're going to be tweaking ship stats?

lol the old missle launchers are gone. Come join us on Sisi and see for your selfTwisted

that's sort of hard to do at work

Just the model, the launchers under the launchers are gone
http://i.imgur.com/e2OwY.jpg

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
#72 - 2012-06-11 16:22:48 UTC
Jade Constantine wrote:

Of course would your leadership make a commitment to accept mutuals from incoming wardecs to add up to 9000 total membership of corps - somehow I doubt that.

Unless chaining allies was the point of this exercise in the first place. Perhaps you just got played.

Jade Constantine wrote:
Unlikely that it might have seemed I could see a future where the number of wardec allies you were fighting would be so large as to seriously impact the planning and implementation of a burn Jita style event and your leadership might actually have been forced to offer a surrender.

Nice to see that you remain delusional enough to think we'd pay you 5b isk per ally to end a war though.

Jade Constantine wrote:
Burn Jita was only successful because you shed your outgoing wardecs and the cost in wardeccing you during that weekend became immediately prohibitive because of cost escalation on multiple decs. But a couple of hundred active wardec fighters duriung Burn Jita would have seriously messed up your plans.

Maybe. It wasn't "a couple hundred" but people certainly tried to dec us and interfere. It didn't work then, either.

Jade Constantine wrote:
This is why I'm disappointed with these changes - it seems the reverse of encouraging emergent gameplay and simply a thoughtless nerf of the Inferno wardec system.

Sure the system needed tweaks and balances and this thread has examples of how those could be achieved.

Ironically I agree, but then again, a goon would be a fan of emergent gameplay, wouldn't he?

This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

fofofo
Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#73 - 2012-06-11 16:23:41 UTC
The Mittani wrote:
CCP! Jade Constantine meta gamed us. Meta gamed the Goons!! *sniff* I want this fixed right now!!!!!!!!! *sniff*

By the way any word on when you will process my job application?


In all seriousness CCP, you just made the war dec system 100% in favor of large alliances picking on small ones and leaving no options for the small ones. I truly hope you fix this. I find it pretty much impossible that you did not see the large alliance vs very small alliance scenario happening.

I mean ****, why don't you just add this in your patch notes:

- Gave Goonswarm Federation a Sabre BPO so they would get over it already
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#74 - 2012-06-11 16:24:16 UTC
Jade Constantine wrote:
My issue btw about the 100 vs 9000 is not really a complaint about (oh noes we're being griefed 1111! etc) its because I don't see the point of a war unless one side can somehow lose. I did have a strategy for fighting the goon wardec and as you saw that strategy involved inviting as many allies as we could find and trying to fill hisec with people ganking goon ships. Unlikely that it might have seemed I could see a future where the number of wardec allies you were fighting would be so large as to seriously impact the planning and implementation of a burn Jita style event and your leadership might actually have been forced to offer a surrender.

I know you've probably never pushed the "declare war" button and so don't know how it works, but the aggressor can pull out at any point, for any reason, by pushing one button. There's no need to "surrender" or have any harm caused to you at all.
Or, you just don't pay the wardec fee after a 7day period and it disappears.
Quote:
Burn Jita was only successful because you shed your outgoing wardecs and the cost in wardeccing you during that weekend became immediately prohibitive because of cost escalation on multiple decs. But a couple of hundred active wardec fighters duriung Burn Jita would have seriously messed up your plans.

You've willfully just made that up. They had more wardecs on them that weekend than ever before, there were as many "save jita" campaigners in Jita as the server would allow. Also, an alliance can't "shed" wardecs so I have literally no idea what you're talking about.

I assume it's just inflammatory language and limp posturing.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#75 - 2012-06-11 16:24:36 UTC
Jade Constantine wrote:

My issue btw about the 100 vs 9000 is not really a complaint about (oh noes we're being griefed 1111! etc) its because I don't see the point of a war unless one side can somehow lose. I did have a strategy for fighting the goon wardec and as you saw that strategy involved inviting as many allies as we could find and trying to fill hisec with people ganking goon ships. Unlikely that it might have seemed I could see a future where the number of wardec allies you were fighting would be so large as to seriously impact the planning and implementation of a burn Jita style event and your leadership might actually have been forced to offer a surrender.

have you ever used a neutral alt, it's pretty cool

Quote:
Burn Jita was only successful because you shed your outgoing wardecs and the cost in wardeccing you during that weekend became immediately prohibitive because of cost escalation on multiple decs. But a couple of hundred active wardec fighters duriung Burn Jita would have seriously messed up your plans.

I hear wardecs make it hard to shoot a ship once with a full rack of 1400s

Quote:
Of course, now with these 1.1 patchnotes you'll never have to worry about that in the future because there will never be significant numbers of people wardecced against you in mutually-locked-in wardecs and you can always :forget: to pay the outgoing bills in advance of such events.

This is why I'm disappointed with these changes - it seems the reverse of encouraging emergent gameplay and simply a thoughtless nerf of the Inferno wardec system.

Sure the system needed tweaks and balances and this thread has examples of how those could be achieved.

But the patch notes as written are not tweaks and balances - they are nothing short of a frontal lobotomy on the wardec system and they will have the impact of returning hisec war mechanics to pre-inferno irrelevance.


wardecs have never affected my game experience because I can suckle enough space money out of the game to plex a second account for the very limited amount of time I do have to spend in empire

tech munnay
Dabigredboat
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
#76 - 2012-06-11 16:27:05 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
The Mittani wrote:
CCP! Jade Constantine meta gamed us. Meta gamed the Goons!! *sniff* I want this fixed right now!!!!!!!!! *sniff*

By the way any word on when you will process my job application?


In all seriousness CCP, you just made the war dec system 100% in favor of large alliances picking on small ones and leaving no options for the small ones. I truly hope you fix this. I find it pretty much impossible that you did not see the large alliance vs very small alliance scenario happening.

I mean ****, why don't you just add this in your patch notes:

- Gave Goonswarm Federation a Sabre BPO so they would get over it already



What do you mean no options. If I want to invite razor or test into a wardec I have with someone its free, I could literally invite all of 0.0 to kill 1 small alliance FOR FREE.

500million isk is nothing but a drop in the bucket if literally all of eve can join in for free. What ccp is trying to do here is to prevent alliances WHO WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE HAD TO PAY FOR A WARDEC just getting a free ride whenever they feel like.

Normally I avoid highsec like the plague, because of people like jade constantine crying and whining whenever a dev works on fixing the problems instead of keeping the system broken for himself. Today I login and see 80 alliances who either have died in 0.0 or now live only in highsec on a war with goons that they are not paying for. This change is better for everyone, and it is not like you cannot afford an extra few mil a week.
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2012-06-11 16:33:03 UTC
can't you make an allies formula that only gets expensive when there are more allies than attackers?
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#78 - 2012-06-11 16:35:41 UTC
As a highsec coward who wants to hire as many useless corporations as i can find to swell my ranks and is completely unaware the ally system is intended to promote skilled mercs who you hire rather than just being used to evade the wardec cost at no cost to anyone, i disapprove of these changes

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#79 - 2012-06-11 16:36:00 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
I hear wardecs make it hard to shoot a ship once with a full rack of 1400s


They make it an awful lot easier to pod the ex tornado pilots with fast lock rifters post gank though - especially when said pods are not going properly gcc due to bizzaro inexplicable bugs.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
Elijah Craig
Trask Industries
#80 - 2012-06-11 16:39:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Elijah Craig
Jade Constantine wrote:
This is why I'm disappointed with these changes - it seems the reverse of encouraging emergent gameplay and simply a thoughtless nerf of the Inferno wardec system.


I appreciate your frustration at feeling like your gameplan has been nerfed, I really do, but at the same time your plan was to just have ~everyone~ in high sec join certain wardecs? Do you think all those folks would ~actively~ fight the aggressor on your behalf? In reality, they won't.

In fact, the emergent gameplay here is that you now need to choose and prioritise your Allies and work with those that are most effective.

Rather than going "Hey! Everyone pile on for free wardecs!", you are now going to have to consider who are the best partners to have in the war and, every two weeks, you can look at their effectiveness and reward those that are actually helping you and extend the deal, whilst weeding out the time wasters.

Imagine being a tight, well skilled Merc corp and seeing your entire business model be flooded by jokers looking to pile in on wardecs? How can you make a living when everyone is giving it away for free?

I figure that a single professional motivated Merc corp would do more harm to a large alliance than a huge bunch of dudes who don't do anything and dock up when it comes time to fight (see: Noir during Burn Jita). And one motivated corp defending his home, or being paid to do so, is more powerful than a 100 empty wardecs.