These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Inferno 1.1 Changes To the War Dec System

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#441 - 2012-06-20 15:55:45 UTC
Anyway, on the subject of mercs, bouncing the mechanics between being skewed in favour of aggressors or defenders doesn't stimulate merc gameplay. If you skew it in favour of defenders they don't need mercs, if you skew it in favour of aggressors then the majority of poor/small defending corps will do what they always have: dock up, use out of corp alts and wait it out.

Mercs shine when it comes to specific tasks like defending a tower thats coming out of reinforced, knocking over an enemies tower, etc. Certain 'goals' or mechanics that mercs specifically would excell at (more than just being extra bodies, or camping hubs) should be the focus. I don't think limiting or otherwise messing with "normal" allies will successfully steer people towards using mercs.
Nikon Nip
Doomheim
#442 - 2012-06-20 17:15:52 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Nikon Nip wrote:

Which is exactly what has happened, only the Goons thought we would just bend over and take the abuse. Oh how wrong they were.

you are, and will continue to do so

meanwhile our unwardeccable npc alt freighters will continue to supply us and bring our tech to jita

have fun!



So, if I understand this correctly, you ARE afraid of wardecs and do care about them, otherwise you wouldn't need to hide in the npc corps. Interesting, another admission of fear direct from a goon.
Nikon Nip
Doomheim
#443 - 2012-06-20 17:20:38 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:

You know the hilarious thing in all of this is the ONLY entities that *can* fight a war (if they chose to do so) with unlimited and free allies IS ******* Goonswarm/TEST.
.



So your saying that the game HAS been rigged to give the advantage to Test/Goons?
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#444 - 2012-06-20 18:09:13 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan
Nikon Nip wrote:

So, if I understand this correctly, you ARE afraid of wardecs and do care about them, otherwise you wouldn't need to hide in the npc corps. Interesting, another admission of fear direct from a goon.

this is one of those things that's so stupid it's actually difficult to respond to because to focus on just one of the stupid things lets the other ones slip through

you cannot threaten us with wardecs, because like anyone with brains larger than a snail, we do our shipping in npc corps. a freighter is not a combat ship: it cannot do damage and so its only recourse is to avoid combat, so naturally we do so. given the choice of screening a freighter with a fleet or simply dropping it into an npc corp naturally we'll take the easy road because who wants to put in effort moving a space truck

we have nothing to actually fear from a collection of highseccers -----Edit----- because we know how to play this game and therefore know that the method they're trying to threaten us with simply doesn't work

so we laugh about the idea that we're actually threatened by having everyone in empire wardecced with goonswarm to the extent we'd batphone devs is so laughable that its almost suprising even jade believes it

edit: you also shouldn't use racist character names

Post edited.
No personal attacks, please.

ISD Tyrozan
Ensign
Community Communications Liaison
Interstellar Services Department

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#445 - 2012-06-20 19:43:22 UTC
Nikon Nip wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:

You know the hilarious thing in all of this is the ONLY entities that *can* fight a war (if they chose to do so) with unlimited and free allies IS ******* Goonswarm/TEST.
.



So your saying that the game HAS been rigged to give the advantage to Test/Goons?

Wow this is special.

So it's rigged if the current system favours them and it's rigged if the change favours them, and you just decide to flip a coin as to which that is? Surely the vector of change is the important thing, no? (whether it is moving to support them or hinder)

That's the worst logic I've seen in a thread in a long time, and that is really saying something.

"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,

Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#446 - 2012-06-20 19:46:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Khanh'rhh
Jade Constantine wrote:
If on the other hand Team Superfriends had delivered a stakes system for war (here's something I made up on the back of a beermat last night for example):

Wardec declared ... (Alliance X 5000) people (aliiance Y 1000 people.)
Alliance X pays 200m per week
(alliance Y to X would be 500m)

Default stake (defeat penality) = cost to wardec X vs Y + cost to wardec Y vs X x 10 = 7billion isk.

This stake would be paid out if one alliance gets a 75% isk killed efficiency on the other alliance while scoring at least 7b isk damage done (taken directly from the executor corp wallet or fixed as an automaticly collected "debt" if wallet insufficient. (entities in debt would no longer be able to declare war).

I'll say the same thing I said to Mara, this is a perfectly good gameplay mechanic, and I will not argue against it.

It is not, however, a gameplay mechanic that you try to force into a game designed to be a sandbox and CERTAINLY not one you do so with some inane notion of "fairness."

Contrary to what you might think everyone starts the game with the same skills and ISK. To say your situation is "unfair" is basically saying you have maneuvered yourself into a position in which you have a disadvantage.

In your case, it was mouthing off constantly without the military backing to do anything about it.

That's your fault, a sandbox game shouldn't be re-balanced around you.

(your other gameplay ideas seem centred around letting very small groups cause disparaging harm against larger groups in nullsec, so your MO of "every change should make it easier for me to harm Goons" is long established.)

"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,

Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#447 - 2012-06-20 19:49:35 UTC
We're also on post #447 and still talking about how this is about Goonswarm, when it's really all about small entities in highsec being able to declare war and not getting run over after the defender pressed one button.

"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,

Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#448 - 2012-06-20 19:54:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Khanh'rhh
Weaselior wrote:
so we laugh about the idea that we're actually threatened by having everyone in empire wardecced with goonswarm to the extent we'd batphone devs is so laughable that its almost suprising even jade believes it

Jade doesn't believe it, he's using tabloid style assuagions and strawmanning to try to make his argument have some weight, and hopes the mass of NPC corp alts who will rage about anything with the word "Goons" in it will make it seem like he has support. He also makes proposals hoping people will swallow the assumptions within, and argue on his terms, and not look beyond them.

I at least give him credit for playing a clever game, even if it has bounced straight off his targets (CSM and CCP).

"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,

CCP Punkturis
C C P
C C P Alliance
#449 - 2012-06-20 20:19:34 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
We're also on post #447 and still talking


really? I hadn't noticed..... Pirate

♥ EVE Brogrammer ♥ Team Five 0 ♥ @CCP_Punkturis ♥
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#450 - 2012-06-20 21:13:28 UTC
CCP Punkturis wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:
We're also on post #447 and still talking


really? I hadn't noticed..... Pirate




Anyone would think that eve players didn't like the 1.1 patch nerf to wardec mayhem! Cool

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#451 - 2012-06-20 21:20:03 UTC
Jade Constantine wrote:
Anyone would think that eve players didn't like the 1.1 patch nerf to wardec mayhem! Cool

If it wasn't for the fact that this thread has only been kept alive by a handful of characters, yes.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#452 - 2012-06-20 21:55:59 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
So, if I want to wardec Jade and his band of buddies for making up endless conspiracy theories about me, I'm not allowed to?


Where did my proposal prohibit that kind of wardec? You can still wardec for griefing: just sign up for a "inflict damage" wardec with very modest goals and put a tiny kitty on the table (tiny, like 0).

Khanh'rhh wrote:
Your proposal is very silly, because trying to artificially give conditions for war in a sandbox is the complete antithesis of what fighting in a sandbox actually is.


You can already grief people using suicide ganking and other mechanisms. The design goal in my system is to provide some incentive for the wardecced party to fight. Do you want more fights, or are you only interested in driving people from the game?

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#453 - 2012-06-20 22:04:47 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
Contrary to what you might think everyone starts the game with the same skills and ISK. To say your situation is "unfair" is basically saying you have maneuvered yourself into a position in which you have a disadvantage.


i.e.: "You must play EVE my way, or you are wrong".

Some people don't care to be a mindless henchman. Some people don't want to dedicate their game time to someone else's objectives. Why should all play style be "join a huge alliance, move to null sec, shoot structures for hours"? That's what you're saying, by implying that people who resent a wardec system that favours larger aggressors are manoeuvring themselves into a position of disadvantage.

My play style has huge advantages for me: I pick what I want to do when I play the game I subscribed to. If I want to spend an evening mining, I don't have to put up with someone else telling me, "you can't do that, we're supposed to be invading that system over there". If I want to spend an evening in my astrometrics frigate, I don't have to cop abuse from my corp mates for doing care bear activities when everyone else is busy chasing down reds.

The new wardec system makes it much more expensive for a small pirate corp to inflict damage on large industrial corps. It's cheaper to suicide gank them than to wardec them. My argument isn't about "fairness," it's about encouraging warring parties to actually fight. With defined objectives for a war and a potential reward for winning, the care bear corp will have some incentive to prevent the aggressor achieving their goal.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Nikon Nip
Doomheim
#454 - 2012-06-20 22:19:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Caldari Citizen 189728976979
Khanh'rhh wrote:

Wow this is special.

So it's rigged if the current system favours them and it's rigged if the change favours them, and you just decide to flip a coin as to which that is? Surely the vector of change is the important thing, no? (Whether it is moving to support them or hinder)

That's the worst logic I've seen in a thread in a long time, and that is really saying something.


It's not a coin flip I'm using, it's common sense. I'm going to spell it out for you rrrreeeeeeeaaaallll sssssslllloooooowwwww for you; you are a goon after all...

Pre-inferno - the system favoured large alliances/the aggressor
Inferno - (pay real close attention to this part) the system favours the defender because of unlimited allies, we AGREE that this needs to go as it's unbalanced
Inferno 1.1 - system moves ALL the power back to the large alliance/aggressor <--this is the part we do NOT AGREE on.

You see, where all you goons keep twisting things around is, we agree that the current system needs some changes, we DO NOT think that those changes should be those announced for 1.1. Hell, we have all even said that jades may not even be the right/best solution, but we do know that the 1.1 changes are only going to make wardecs a grief only mechanic instead of the awesome pvp tool it should be.

Weaselior wrote:

this is one of those things that's so stupid it's actually difficult to respond to because to focus on just one of the stupid things lets the other ones slip through

you cannot threaten us with wardecs, because like anyone with brains larger than a snail, we do our shipping in npc corps. a freighter is not a combat ship: it cannot do damage and so its only recourse is to avoid combat, so naturally we do so. given the choice of screening a freighter with a fleet or simply dropping it into an npc corp naturally we'll take the easy road because who wants to put in effort moving a space truck

we have nothing to actually fear from a collection of highseccers -----Edit----- because we know how to play this game and therefore know that the method they're trying to threaten us with simply doesn't work

so we laugh about the idea that we're actually threatened by having everyone in empire wardecced with goonswarm to the extent we'd batphone devs is so laughable that its almost suprising even jade believes it


ROFL ROFL ROFL, you’re so enraged that you had to start using names? Look everyone a goon who's been trolled. Run back to your npc alt already, and hide behind ccps skirt while they dig you out of the situation you've gotten yourselves into. If you guys had any BALLS you wouldn't be exploiting the system by using npc corps, hell, I'm a huge carebear and even I don't use the npc corps to hide from wardecs in. Run little boys run from the big bad carebears, because we'll eat your face and quench our thirst with your delicious salty tears.

Unfortunately, I must say that I know you do not have a devphone or control what ccp does and does not do..............I DO however; think that ccp caters to a few alliances/play styles at the expense of others.
Seriously CCP....carebears are paying customers too and we demand some love. (The upcoming barge changes are a good start, but we NEED more)

Weaselior wrote:

you also shouldn't use racist character names


OMFG, really? Look everyone, I found a way to offend a goon, and I wasn't even trying. After all the things that goons/mittens have said/done, where was your conscience/line in the sand when mittens called for the suicide of *** ***? Or when mittens threw his temper tantrum and called for the harassment of certain people in game?

Khanh'rhh wrote:

I'll say the same thing I said to Mara, this is a perfectly good gameplay mechanic, and I will not argue against it.

It is not, however, a gameplay mechanic that you try to force into a game designed to be a sandbox and CERTAINLY not one you do so with some inane notion of "fairness."

Contrary to what you might think everyone starts the game with the same skills and ISK. To say your situation is "unfair" is basically saying you have maneuvered yourself into a position in which you have a disadvantage.

In your case, it was mouthing off constantly without the military backing to do anything about it.

That's your fault, a sandbox game shouldn't be re-balanced around you.

(your other gameplay ideas seem centred around letting very small groups cause disparaging harm against larger groups in nullsec, so your MO of "every change should make it easier for me to harm Goons" is long established.)



So its ok if the game is balanced around goons and their game play, but no one else’s. That's basically what you’re saying, and that is a load of horseshit. Again, we're not advocating making wars fair, we want them balanced, and there is a difference. All you want is the ability to grief with immunity, and what we want is the ability to fight back and not be griefed into quitting (which is all that wardecs are good for at this point).
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#455 - 2012-06-20 22:54:53 UTC
Nikon Nip wrote:
It's not a coin flip I'm using, it's common sense. I'm going to spell it out for you rrrreeeeeeeaaaallll sssssslllloooooowwwww for you; you are a goon after all...


Sadly, as much as he worships the ground that they walk on, Khanh'rhh is not a Goon. He's part of Sudden Buggery which appears to be a low sec roaming corp. Why he's so opinionated about hisec wardecs, I don't know. He has claimed in the past to have pursued single-man wardecs against larger corporations and perhaps believes that this means he understands the design goals of wardecs and what wardecs mean to hisec corps.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Nikon Nip
Doomheim
#456 - 2012-06-20 22:57:37 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Nikon Nip wrote:
It's not a coin flip I'm using, it's common sense. I'm going to spell it out for you rrrreeeeeeeaaaallll sssssslllloooooowwwww for you; you are a goon after all...


Sadly, as much as he worships the ground that they walk on, Khanh'rhh is not a Goon. He's part of Sudden Buggery which appears to be a low sec roaming corp. Why he's so opinionated about hisec wardecs, I don't know. He has claimed in the past to have pursued single-man wardecs against larger corporations and perhaps believes that this means he understands the design goals of wardecs and what wardecs mean to hisec corps.



If he's not a goons alt then I'm mittens.
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#457 - 2012-06-21 00:27:29 UTC
I don't think he's a goon, he's a member of a wormhole roaming corp of some kind. He is pretty close to Mittani on twitter though so who knows.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom
MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#458 - 2012-06-21 02:36:59 UTC
CCP Punkturis wrote:
Jade hasn't posted in this thread for a few hours, I hope he's okay Ugh


I think you just became my favorite poster <3 amazing forum post, I lol'd I cried

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#459 - 2012-06-21 04:49:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Antisocial Malkavian
j Haginen wrote:
Well im gona say this short ; ccp good job!!!!!!! with your war decking system,youjust fd up pvp again go on f*** it up more , the only thing whats happening is your gona lose more eve players. the only ones gona stays in this game are your goonpets


It does appear that while its not supposed to be fair, as Soundwave said, its only supposed to be unfair for the defenders. If it becomes unfair for the attacker, the rules will be changed.
Also; wouldnt it be BETTER for the mercs for people to be able to afford to hire them? Exponential ally increase doesnt exactly work with that in mind does it?

Nikon Nip wrote:
Maybe all the highsec carebears need to arrange a little uprising like we did for the whole incarna thing. How do you think ccp would respond if several thousand carebear accounts suddenly just stopped subscribing. Maybe then we would get some carebear love


You do that, Goons unsub, yer back at square one.

Gl with that O.o

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#460 - 2012-06-21 08:25:35 UTC
Nikon Nip wrote:
Khanh'rhh wrote:

Wow this is special.

So it's rigged if the current system favours them and it's rigged if the change favours them, and you just decide to flip a coin as to which that is? Surely the vector of change is the important thing, no? (Whether it is moving to support them or hinder)

That's the worst logic I've seen in a thread in a long time, and that is really saying something.


It's not a coin flip I'm using, it's common sense. I'm going to spell it out for you rrrreeeeeeeaaaallll sssssslllloooooowwwww for you; you are a goon after all...

Pre-inferno - the system favoured large alliances/the aggressor
Inferno - (pay real close attention to this part) the system favours the defender because of unlimited allies, we AGREE that this needs to go as it's unbalanced
Inferno 1.1 - system moves ALL the power back to the large alliance/aggressor <--this is the part we do NOT AGREE on.

You see, where all you goons keep twisting things around is, we agree that the current system needs some changes, we DO NOT think that those changes should be those announced for 1.1. Hell, we have all even said that jades may not even be the right/best solution, but we do know that the 1.1 changes are only going to make wardecs a grief only mechanic instead of the awesome pvp tool it should be.

Weaselior wrote:

this is one of those things that's so stupid it's actually difficult to respond to because to focus on just one of the stupid things lets the other ones slip through

you cannot threaten us with wardecs, because like anyone with brains larger than a snail, we do our shipping in npc corps. a freighter is not a combat ship: it cannot do damage and so its only recourse is to avoid combat, so naturally we do so. given the choice of screening a freighter with a fleet or simply dropping it into an npc corp naturally we'll take the easy road because who wants to put in effort moving a space truck

we have nothing to actually fear from a collection of highseccers -----Edit----- because we know how to play this game and therefore know that the method they're trying to threaten us with simply doesn't work

so we laugh about the idea that we're actually threatened by having everyone in empire wardecced with goonswarm to the extent we'd batphone devs is so laughable that its almost suprising even jade believes it


ROFL ROFL ROFL, you’re so enraged that you had to start using names? Look everyone a goon who's been trolled. Run back to your npc alt already, and hide behind ccps skirt while they dig you out of the situation you've gotten yourselves into. If you guys had any BALLS you wouldn't be exploiting the system by using npc corps, hell, I'm a huge carebear and even I don't use the npc corps to hide from wardecs in. Run little boys run from the big bad carebears, because we'll eat your face and quench our thirst with your delicious salty tears.

Unfortunately, I must say that I know you do not have a devphone or control what ccp does and does not do..............I DO however; think that ccp caters to a few alliances/play styles at the expense of others.
Seriously CCP....carebears are paying customers too and we demand some love. (The upcoming barge changes are a good start, but we NEED more)

Weaselior wrote:

you also shouldn't use racist character names


OMFG, really? Look everyone, I found a way to offend a goon, and I wasn't even trying. After all the things that goons/mittens have said/done, where was your conscience/line in the sand when mittens called for the suicide of *** ***? Or when mittens threw his temper tantrum and called for the harassment of certain people in game?

Khanh'rhh wrote:

I'll say the same thing I said to Mara, this is a perfectly good gameplay mechanic, and I will not argue against it.

It is not, however, a gameplay mechanic that you try to force into a game designed to be a sandbox and CERTAINLY not one you do so with some inane notion of "fairness."

Contrary to what you might think everyone starts the game with the same skills and ISK. To say your situation is "unfair" is basically saying you have maneuvered yourself into a position in which you have a disadvantage.

In your case, it was mouthing off constantly without the military backing to do anything about it.

That's your fault, a sandbox game shouldn't be re-balanced around you.

(your other gameplay ideas seem centred around letting very small groups cause disparaging harm against larger groups in nullsec, so your MO of "every change should make it easier for me to harm Goons" is long established.)



So its ok if the game is balanced around goons and their game play, but no one else’s. That's basically what you’re saying, and that is a load of horseshit. Again, we're not advocating making wars fair, we want them balanced, and there is a difference. All you want is the ability to grief with immunity, and what we want is the ability to fight back and not be griefed into quitting (which is all that wardecs are good for at this point).


That seems to be the general sentiments - wars should be unfair... so long as the unfairness is in favour of big nullsec alliances. If it's unfair AGAINST them then that's unfair and we need to make the unfairness unfair to be unfair for other people because thats only fair.