These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Bel Amar
Rules of Acquisition
#461 - 2012-06-21 09:53:17 UTC
Jade Constantine wrote:
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.


Khanh'rhh, this whole time I never knew you had Mittens ear! Can you introduce me?
Vladimir Vladimirovitch Putain
Remanaquie Federation
#462 - 2012-06-21 11:37:17 UTC
As I said before on a post in this thread that can only have been deleted by mistake, as it was entirely constructive, unline a truckload od posts from Punkturis or whatever the name is regarding popcorn...

Just make it a free for all. Allow all sides both sides of the war dec to get unlimited allies for no cost at all, or for whatever cost is agreed amongst themselves and take your cute little isk sink somewhere else. Put it on clones' cost cause a whole lot more will be podded then. I really hope the purpose of the Inferno expansion was to be a war themed one and not just yet another jab at Diablo3. Saddly however, after much promise CCP has been behaving like the freaking UN.

On a side note, I now have this post saved on a .txt just so I can keep on posting it every time one of you mods deletes it just because.
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#463 - 2012-06-21 12:20:33 UTC
Bel Amar wrote:
Khanh'rhh, this whole time I never knew you had Mittens ear! Can you introduce me?

Mittens is my alt.

There's more evidence for that statement than most of those made in this thread about the reasoning for the changes. Sad, no?

If you're going to make (seemingly) ad hominem attacks such as "you would say that, as you're a Goon alt!" then at least look at the logic behind that, since I have spent the majority of this thread repeatedly saying "this isn't about Goonswarm."

Mara Rinn wrote:
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.

As quite the opposite of the norm, not every change needs to affect the majority of my gameplay for me to express an opinion on it. Having said that, I both dabble in wardecs with BUGRY and on alts (who do it for ransoms). Indeed, BUGRY was the first corporation to sign an ally under 1.0 and we were using the system until a week ago; we know about as much about it as anyone. Not that direct experience is actually needed to infer logical reason from changes. Most of my objection is demonstrably level critism at the heart of the changes, I haven't talked about me and mine at all. If you want to look at a self interested party, as it happens, check out some Mara and Jade posts!

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

No, not at all. Do whatever you want. Do you see me in a large 0.0 alliance? No. You live with your own choices in EvE, however, so if I decided to mount a 1 man verbal crusade against large alliances I quite expect the consequences would be rather bad. I won't, however, decide to make up reasons why a game needs to change to make this more viable for myself.
Quote:
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.

You're still talking about setting objectives (in sense a framework construct) in a sandbox which is meant to be anything BUT that.
We once went to war with the objective of taking down a POS and it turned into a 3-month long sprawling and quite random campaign, which got other entities involved across highsec, lowsec and WH space and formed new friends and enemies ... the sandbox lets this emergent conflict happen. Your system, stops it in the bud because waaaaaaaaaaaa it's just not right if there's no direction.
Quote:
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?

I find it ironic and counter-intuitive that you would see open conflict as bad but targeted anger and rage (the kind that leads to repeat ganking) as OK. Which would be more likely to remove someone from the game?
Your change is self invested, since you know people won't throw more than a handful of tornadoes at achieving grief when they're losing more than they're gaining. It's silly to support suicide ganking as a means of settling disputes, utterly.

"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,

Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#464 - 2012-06-21 12:25:39 UTC
Vladimir Vladimirovitch Putain wrote:
As I said before on a post in this thread that can only have been deleted by mistake, as it was entirely constructive, unline a truckload od posts from Punkturis or whatever the name is regarding popcorn...

Just make it a free for all. Allow all sides both sides of the war dec to get unlimited allies for no cost at all, or for whatever cost is agreed amongst themselves and take your cute little isk sink somewhere else. Put it on clones' cost cause a whole lot more will be podded then. I really hope the purpose of the Inferno expansion was to be a war themed one and not just yet another jab at Diablo3. Saddly however, after much promise CCP has been behaving like the freaking UN.

On a side note, I now have this post saved on a .txt just so I can keep on posting it every time one of you mods deletes it just because.




Well its a good point you raise really as to "what is the actual problem?" with Inferno wardecs escalating in size of participants and leading to more mayhem in empire exactly? One of the problems Eve has faced recently is in the slowing of conflict and loss in 0.0 (not enough people dying and too few wars) leading to people getting super fat and bloated and driving up prices everywhere. Whilst I can't see wardecs actually making up for the terrible balance and poor game design in 0.0 currently - it might help a bit to have actual expansion of war participation (rather than the contraction and imposed barrier to entry in 1.1)

And yep, for a War-themed expansion to end up stifling war and choking off participation is pretty sad.

For what its worth I'm not sure we've seen the worst of the nerfs yet.

What 1.1 will achieve will be the crippling of defender participation in wars. It won't do anything for paid mercs and the only actual winners (aside from 0.0 alliances who will be safer) will be the largest trade hub raider entity who will get invited into ALL wars as the free ally. This means Orphange will have a renaissance of popularity and as long as they can manage not to be inflitrated and disbanded they'll have a field day - and frankly good on them!

Of course the "mercenary profession" will keep complaining and whining that they haven't got an income stream from Inferno and the next nerf we'll see to the war system will be restricting any organization from allying in more than one war.

And so on really.

This is the problem with Team Superfriends (in my opinion) not really understanding the problem with Eve Online wardecs and trying to legislate with the stick rather than the carrot and being badly advised by various "merc professionals" on the CSM.

One thing is sure though, no mercs are getting rich on these changes and for that alone we can draw some small crumb of satisfaction.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom

CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#465 - 2012-06-21 12:30:27 UTC
Vladimir Vladimirovitch Putain wrote:
As I said before on a post in this thread that can only have been deleted by mistake, as it was entirely constructive, unline a truckload od posts from Punkturis or whatever the name is regarding popcorn...

Just make it a free for all. Allow all sides both sides of the war dec to get unlimited allies for no cost at all, or for whatever cost is agreed amongst themselves and take your cute little isk sink somewhere else. Put it on clones' cost cause a whole lot more will be podded then. I really hope the purpose of the Inferno expansion was to be a war themed one and not just yet another jab at Diablo3. Saddly however, after much promise CCP has been behaving like the freaking UN.

On a side note, I now have this post saved on a .txt just so I can keep on posting it every time one of you mods deletes it just because.


It got deleted because you quoted a post that got deleted. Also I'm not sure that "tinfoil asshattery" is an entirely constructive statement Blink

We've explained pretty well why it can't be a free for all with unlimited allies - that option has proved to not be workable for where we want to go, nor is it healthy for the game.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#466 - 2012-06-21 12:47:15 UTC
goliath please allow me to wardec jade on the forums tia

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#467 - 2012-06-21 12:51:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Jade Constantine
CCP Goliath wrote:
We've explained pretty well why it can't be a free for all with unlimited allies - that option has proved to not be workable for where we want to go, nor is it healthy for the game.


You guys haven't really explained why:

a) the 2 week ally contract now comes with a mandatory 24/48 hour cooldown even if the defender + ally wants to continue with the relationship (rather than programming an auto renewal for same terms if defender + ally click "auto renew")

b) the "unlimited allies" issue cannot be dealt with by having the cost escalator begin when the defender + defending allies outnumber the attacking entity. (soundwave's "eve isn't fair" post has been pretty thoroughly I debunked across the blogosphere.

c) why allies should be barred from mutual wars (given that mutual wars are THE ONLY way its possible to bind an attack to consequence in the inferno wardec system.

d) how exactly barring free allies from a defender in a wardec (beyond the first) is going to lead to anything other than most defenders picking the largest trade hub raider alliance for free and then just ignoring the wardec thereafter.

And the biggest problem is how the Inferno wardec system in the light of these 1.1 changes is supposed to incentize, revamp or in any ways improve the wardec feature in Eve online. All it really does is raise the barrier to entry for small entities while protecting larger entities and allow some trade hub raiders to join wars for free. It does nothing to make wars genuine contests that people should care about - does nothing to bring significance or consequence to either attacker or defender, and simply looks (at the end of the day) as nothing more than an ingame killmail system attached to a set of changes designed to protect the large at the cost of the small's interest level.

I mean, I'm not going to accuse you guys of ignoring this thread Goliath because you clearly haven't, you've tried at times to have a conversation, Punkaris has tried to entertain people etc etc, but I think we're a long way from getting some actual answers or debate on the perceived flaws of the 1.1 wardec changes.

Sure you can say that I've made a lot of the running on crticism so far (and I have) but I'm not the only one who sees a problem with this system hence the many posts here from interested neutrals, the many blogs on the subject out there in the community, the wide discussion on podcasts and radio and the general interest for this issue in the universe of eve online.

I said earlier in this thread that I got the impression these changes were set in stone and the developers were justifying a decision already made rather than engaged in a collaborative dialogue and I guess thats the underlying tension here.

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom

Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#468 - 2012-06-21 12:52:54 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
goliath please allow me to wardec jade on the forums tia


You know perfectly well that would lead to one of your alts losing a thread full of moon minerals on the first day and once I got 50 allies you'd have to whine to Goliath to turn off the forum ally system again Big smile

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom

Makari Aeron
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#469 - 2012-06-21 13:02:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Makari Aeron
Jade Constantine wrote:

You guys haven't really explained why:

a) the 2 week ally contract now comes with a mandatory 24/48 hour cooldown even if the defender + ally wants to continue with the relationship (rather than programming an auto renewal for same terms if defender + ally click "auto renew")

b) the "unlimited allies" issue cannot be dealt with by having the cost escalator begin when the defender + defending allies outnumber the attacking entity. (soundwave's eve isn't fair post has been pretty thoroughly debunked)

c) why allies should be barred from mutual wars (given that mutual wars are THE ONLY way its possible to bind an attack to consequence in the inferno wardec system.

d) how exactly barring free allies from a defender in a wardec is going to lead to anything other than picking the largest trade hub raider alliance for free and then just ignoring it.


a) I agree with you here

b) actually, allowing for unlimited free defenders makes it more of a "fair fight" for the defender

c) that would make the wardec system fair.

d) see my answer to c.

To be brutally honest, I don't believe the wardec system should exist at all. Here's my reasoning:
1) less BMCs (b**ches, moans, and complaints) everywhere. Let's be honest with ourselves here, it's pretty stupid at this point. (note: I'm trying to be as nice as possible here)
2) it would bring more of a meaning back to lo-sec as alliances and corporations could duke it out there for *free* (excluding sec-status drops)
3) it would eliminate this problem of "war decs not being fair" and "unlimited allies" because let's face it, you go to lo-sec or 0.0 and your wardec doesn't mean crap. You're fair game for everybody.

To me, wardecs take the risk out of the conflicts in EVE because it allows the warring corps/alliances to be in relative safety* in hi-sec fighting one another instead of being forced to watch their own backs for some third party to come and wipe both of them out.

PS: in lo-sec and 0.0, you can have your unlimited allies for free; just think on that.

* I use the term relative safety because pilots can still suicide gank you

EDIT:
The elimination of the wardec system woulld also force people to go against CONCORD sanctions (ie: suicide ganking) and thus allow EVE to lose more tonnage to CONCORD as well as the angered factions. The elimination of wardecs wouldn't force people to migrate to lo-sec or 0.0 for wars either; as stated above you can just go and suicide gank one another.

CCP RedDawn: Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty.

CCP Goliath: I often believe that the best way to get something done is to shout at the person trying to help you. http://goo.gl/PKGDP

Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#470 - 2012-06-21 13:09:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Khanh'rhh
Jade Constantine wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
goliath please allow me to wardec jade on the forums tia


You know perfectly well that would lead to one of your alts losing a thread full of moon minerals on the first day and once I got 50 allies you'd have to whine to Goliath to turn off the forum ally system again Big smile


[citation needed]

You're STILL making assuagions that this is the result of GSF whining about it.

Really.

Wow.

Quote:
b) the "unlimited allies" issue cannot be dealt with by having the cost escalator begin when the defender + defending allies outnumber the attacking entity. (soundwave's eve isn't fair post has been pretty thoroughly I debunked.

I literally couldn't count the number of times this has been explained to be a bad idea. You still maintain that no one has said anything against it despite there have being countless posts on exactly that. Quoting sources which are obviously biased (Jester openly so, Mabrick is ALSO currently wardecced by GSF) is just bad form. Hilariously, I quoted Mabrick about 10 threads ago saying the 1.0 system was broken.

C'mon, this discussion is better than flat out lying to try to affect a change, no? Can you honestly not do better?

"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,

Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#471 - 2012-06-21 13:12:59 UTC
Khanh'rhh wrote:
Jade Constantine wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
goliath please allow me to wardec jade on the forums tia


You know perfectly well that would lead to one of your alts losing a thread full of moon minerals on the first day and once I got 50 allies you'd have to whine to Goliath to turn off the forum ally system again Big smile


[citation needed]


get one of these

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.
#472 - 2012-06-21 13:14:08 UTC
It's a bit early to be joking about being a rabid conspirator, when you're still posting such.

"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.
#473 - 2012-06-21 13:18:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Khanh'rhh
I'll quote the guy who you said is debunking Soundwave saying it "shouldn't be fair" because this is really funny....
Mabrick wrote:
Now, before you get yourself all worked up because CCP is favoring Goonswarm again, think it through. They NEED to make these changes. That little mutual war-dec dog-pile loop-hole isn't just usable to exact revenge on Goonswarm (or Test.) It can be used against every mercenary corporation that ever wanted to make a living from being mercenaries. And though you may find it odd for a carebear to say, they deserve the right to earn a living too. Frankly, mercenaries are some of the hardest working people I know. Dog-piling them because you don't like their chosen profession is no better than The Mittani sending out Death Squads because he doesn't like bad press from a high-sec carebear.

So CCP has to draw a line and the system has to be the same for everyone. There cannot be two separate war declaration systems - one for Goon size "aggressors" and one for everyone else. As much as I'd like to see Goons and anyone else with visions of a PvP Utopia driven out of high-sec, I can't condone ruining legitimate game-play for someone else. That would be selfish of me and it would be of you too.

.... as exactly what he said in the post that "thoroughly debunks" the fairness argument is that "it isn't fair or should change."

"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,

Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#474 - 2012-06-21 13:28:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Jade Constantine
Frying Doom
#475 - 2012-06-21 13:29:35 UTC
Well I think the new changes, make the New war dec mechanics more broken than the old ones.

As to whether or not this has anything to do with a large alliance. Frankly it doesn't matter.

Members of Goonswarm are always going on about how Hi-sec war decs don't affect them anyway.
To prove their point, they should just be classed as Terrorists as made shoot on site by everyone including concord.
They sponsor and commit terrorist actions in front of Concord. Follow the example of the United states and declare war on Terror.

But seriously. The allies system will be broken beyond the point of why bother in Inferno 1.1 and besides members of Goonswarm and some CSM's it seems to have little favor in the forums or on the majority of Blogs.

Just shoot it in the head and put it out of its misery.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Makari Aeron
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#476 - 2012-06-21 13:33:12 UTC
Using internet (fallacy) logic, since no one argued my point, I must be correct.

Seriously though, I'd like to hear someone counter my points by saying how important/good the wardec system is for hi-sec because I simply don't see the benefits.

CCP RedDawn: Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty.

CCP Goliath: I often believe that the best way to get something done is to shout at the person trying to help you. http://goo.gl/PKGDP

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#477 - 2012-06-21 13:49:45 UTC
Jade Constantine wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
goliath please allow me to wardec jade on the forums tia


You know perfectly well that would lead to one of your alts losing a thread full of moon minerals on the first day and once I got 50 allies you'd have to whine to Goliath to turn off the forum ally system again Big smile


come now that guy wasn't even in my corp, you think i can be bothered to react 65 moons worth of tech?

for the record that would require a minimum of 195 towers

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
#478 - 2012-06-21 13:51:27 UTC
Makari Aeron wrote:
Using internet (fallacy) logic, since no one argued my point, I must be correct.

Seriously though, I'd like to hear someone counter my points by saying how important/good the wardec system is for hi-sec because I simply don't see the benefits.



The sad thing is that in its current state (the wardec system) you actually have a point. And I hate that you have a point. I mean, I used to love the wardec system. I really enjoyed the notion of corporate warfare, alliance showdowns - roleplaying wars, wars for resource and area denial and all that jazz. I've probably a longer wardec history in this game than anybody outside privateers/orphanage and I've been using the system since the servers turned on.

But little by little wardecs did become increasingly irrelevant.

NPC corps are partially to blame, its an obscenity that large alliances can use NPC corp alts to move their wealth to market in perfect safety while using the wardec system to dec smaller targets for vanity griefing purposes with no consequence. Given my way I'd force ALL characters over a month old to leave the NPC corp for a wardeccable corp.

Faction Warefare is partially to blame (for my playstyle, all roleplay alliances basically got eaten up by FW so it became pointless to pursue decs for roleplay ideology and pay for it when you could just join the opposite faction and have it for free).

0.0 stasis and ultimate boredom doesn't help, it used to the case that 0.0 alliances died and lost space and got busted back to the empire where they floated around in confusion and wardecs would blow them to bits. Last few years all 0.0 is napped and static and nobody really loses space any more.

Add to that the increasing risk-averse cynicism of the player base and perception of "us and them" mentality between pvp'ers and pve'ers / nullsec/hisec etc etc and you get a situaiton where rather than getting a wardec and thinking "great lets fight!" it turns into getting a wardec and groaning and making plans to move 30 jumps away, form a shell corp and go play in that till the attackers get bored.

All these things add up to wars being a bit rubbish currently, and I guess part of the disappointment with the Inferno 1.1 nerf is the dawning understanding that they will keep being a bit rubbish because CCP doesn't appear to have the knowledge and interest to design a truly good wardec system. Instead we get this half-assed stumbling thing that lurches between idiot (but enthusiastic) mayhem one week and dullsville crushing stasis the week after.

So yeah. I hate your argument Makari, but frankly I'm not sure I have much to fight it with.

The saddest thing is that I think CCP *could* genuinely have renewed and regenerated the wardec system this summer if they'd had the courage of the initial convictions expressed in the early devblogs - but a cavalcade of whinging from the big alliances and their CSM appointees have led to the neutering of creativity to short-sighted narrow-minded lobbying that doesn't even benefit half the lobbyists at the end of the day (ie big alliance protection boosted, merc profession completely thrown under the bus).

The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom

Jake McCord
Greater Metropolis Sanitation Service
#479 - 2012-06-21 13:59:36 UTC
I think I have the perfect solution to the wardec problem. We can all just close our corps and alliances and return to the NPC corps, sit there, do our mining, mission running and griefing and whatever else we do. No player corps/alliances, no problem.


Naah, that's too easy. Although, if you ask me, it's heading that way. Fast.

They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's the Chicago way! Did I mention, I used to live in Chicago?

Kale Freeman
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#480 - 2012-06-21 14:03:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Kale Freeman
Another suggestion...

What about separating mercs from allies

Allies are your "friends". They join the war because they are your friends. Friends stand by friends. They join for free. In unlimited numbers and have no way of backing out of the war. Friends to the end!

Mercenaries are not friends. They join the war for money. You buy them for 2 weeks at a time. Prices as described elsewhere in this horrible thread.

EDIT: Allies are not dropped from the war if the war goes mutual. Friends to the end!