These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

How to Exploit the Wardec system to remove aggressors ability to dec.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Carlton Foster
Doomheim
#21 - 2012-09-26 23:36:43 UTC
duplicate.
Dennis Gregs
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2012-09-27 01:13:02 UTC
There's no issue here, if you really want the war and you're a large corp even paying 2 billion is no problem. Get off high sec and your high horse.
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2012-09-27 01:18:41 UTC
not an exploit

YOU engaged in a war
they joined dec shield because why not
then decshield made the war mutual

since you wanted to fight people, you get what you want, a perma and free wardec against dec shield.
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#24 - 2012-09-27 09:58:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Mars Theran
What is this even about anyway? It's like some nonsensical post about how things are not meant to be done. I'm not even sure the OP has a clear idea of how it all works, or even that the majority of posters replying in this thread do.

edit: if actually true, then I'm still not convinced it is an issue or an exploit.

Please present it in a more clear and concise fashion, and outline what areas you think are exploitative, and what areas you feel should be adjusted to remove the ability to exploit this system.

Does anybody even care? ..aside from the OP?

I suppose I could be less apathetic about a system that has no effect on me, and one I wouldn't bother gaming, because I don't really care about being wardec'd. Maybe if I had a reason, but it's a war, it's a war. Fight or don't fight. Do, or do not. whatever.

Trying to care..


nope, not mustering much of this caring thing. I was originally a proponent of the new wardec system if that makes any difference. The fact that people find long, boring ways to over complicate things is beyond my scope of reasoning. It seems to me, that you are actually griefing yourself in this endeavor.

Has it occurred to you that it costs a Billion ISK and plenty of wasted time skill training just to create an alliance, so~as you say~you can fill it with a bunch of 1 man corps, which would require in excess of 10 dedicated alt accounts, just to leave it?
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#25 - 2012-09-27 10:18:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
the solution is to remove wardecs and CONCORD while increasing the effectiveness (not the mechanics, however) of faction police

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Hiro Ceffoe
State War Academy
Caldari State
#26 - 2012-09-27 10:27:07 UTC
This may sound a little crazy but...

Just because an Exploit/Bug/Whatever exists does NOT mean you have to abuse it, seriously do people really have 0 self control in these instances?

Got into a war? fight your ******* war, stop being cowards.

Players of EVE? Fans of CCP? You sure do try hard to screw up there work.

Also doesn't discussing the exploitation of mechanics violate forum rules?
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#27 - 2012-09-27 10:48:16 UTC
and you are going through all this trouble to avoid 11% npc tax

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#28 - 2012-09-27 10:50:10 UTC
Andski wrote:
the solution is to remove wardecs and CONCORD while increasing the effectiveness (not the mechanics, however) of faction police

CONCORD is broken...

ever flown through a hisec CONCORD sov system with low sec status?

the navy is CONCORD

they break your ship as they break the game

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#29 - 2012-09-27 12:14:06 UTC
Andski wrote:
the solution is to remove wardecs and CONCORD while increasing the effectiveness (not the mechanics, however) of faction police


What?

That seems random; besides which, you'd pretty much be removing Highsec from the game.

I don't disagree that Concord is perhaps a little too overpowered, and I tend to think of Faction Navy as non-entities, never having dealt with them. They really are just little white crosses on my screen, and ships flying about near gates. Sort of like inactive color.

Wardecs are actually interesting though. If all Highsec had was gank squads and Faction Navy fighting them, how interesting would it really be?


zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#30 - 2012-09-27 12:31:37 UTC
Hiro Ceffoe wrote:


Also doesn't discussing the exploitation of mechanics violate forum rules?


Not as far as I know; not from this perspective anyway. This is more of an awareness issue with a quasi-exploit that may or may not really be an exploit. I haven't really determined that yet. Not that it's up to me to determine that. Otherwise, it would be considered a known issue.

afaik, the forum guidelines indicate that advertising an available unknown exploit you've found, and how to game it for profit is not allowed. Proper procedure is to report it and wait for it to become a known issue with a deployable hotfix before discussing it, if at all.

This isn't profitable, it's just stupid. It's also been known since E-Uni set a bunch of alt corps to war with themselves and declared it mutual to stop the continuous griefing that was occurring and keeping their members docked in stations due to their draconian policies.

Let me be clear: E-Uni was keeping their members docked in stations through the use of draconian policies. As most of their members are essentially newbs, it was griefing, because E-Uni doesn't trust anyone with more than 1-6 months of subscription time, that is not a Directors alt, or long-standing member.

Anyone else, they discriminate against, refuse to trust, and generally flog out of the Corp with extended periods of intolerant silence. That was my experience anyway, and it stopped me from donating a billion or two in ISK to help them with ship replacement or whatever activities they were helping to support.

Oddly, that wouldn't have even been of much assistance, as they appear to have unlimited capital from other sources, and I think generate income off their members through their fitting guidelines and restrictions using available nearby markets, through the sale of Tech 2 items.

Back on topic..

The simplest thing to do, would be to modify Wardec conditions. Didn't the original Wardec cost associate with number of members? I thought it did, and that would certainly make 40 1 man Corps kind of pointless, despite still having an impact on it.

Here's another thought: I saw a thread around here, that indicated it cost 500 Million ISK to WarDec Goonswarm, and that has me wondering where this 2 Billion ISK Wardec cost is coming from.

Given all that, I tend to wonder how relevant the information in the OP really is, as I think--with limitations--the per member cost was left largely intact, and I'm not sure how exactly mutual Wardecs impact the fee structure of additional Wardecs.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#31 - 2012-09-27 13:18:17 UTC
Mars Theran wrote:
If all Highsec had was gank squads and Faction Navy fighting them, how interesting would it really be?


Ideally, the navies would not bother with you until your sec status is low enough.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#32 - 2012-09-27 13:23:07 UTC
Andski wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
If all Highsec had was gank squads and Faction Navy fighting them, how interesting would it really be?


Ideally, the navies would not bother with you until your sec status is low enough.

Totally would not be exploited to hell and back right? Roll
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#33 - 2012-09-27 13:43:32 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Totally would not be exploited to hell and back right? Roll


Just like CONCORD mechanics aren't currently exploited?

Oh wait, they're exploited to "protect yourself" so that's fine right

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#34 - 2012-09-27 14:57:51 UTC
Andski wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Totally would not be exploited to hell and back right? Roll


Just like CONCORD mechanics aren't currently exploited?

Oh wait, they're exploited to "protect yourself" so that's fine right

I'll take the lesser of the two evils.
Betrinna Cantis
#35 - 2012-09-27 16:51:00 UTC
Soryn Kael wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
If I'm not mistaken mutual war dec's have no cost associated with them, and either side can end the war at any time by surrendering.



Only if the other side accepts the surrender, so essentially you're trapped and the mutual effect is to prevent you from being able to leave the mechanic to spread the more expensive wardecs.

I recently used ant alt corp to wardec someone. They surrendered after about 3.5 hours of the mail. I did not get any options to reject or accept it. I just ended and I was out 50 mil. What's up with that?QuestionQuestionQuestion

Alts have been changed to protect the Innocent. You may have mistaken me for someone who cares.....
Soryn Kael
Chaos From Order
#36 - 2012-09-27 20:20:57 UTC
The surrender with no option to accept or decline means they folded their corp.



Every additional war you have increases the base cost by 50m isk..


50m for one, 100m for two etc. So it's an EASY way to prevent long term decs by alliances or corps that want to use alt alliances or even groups who simply wish to prevent a group such as a mercenary alliance from being able to dec any new targets for less than whatever amount of isk they decide.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#37 - 2012-09-27 20:26:50 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
I'll take the lesser of the two evils.


after all the safety of hisec will be of greater concern to you soon

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Zorastar
Legends Project
#38 - 2012-09-29 01:26:37 UTC
Soryn Kael wrote:
Option 3 would be to remove the mutual wardec ability from the system until such time as a more permanent fix is put in place.

Option 3 for me please, I realize that would be too easy though.
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#39 - 2012-09-29 01:59:32 UTC
This thread is so 2008....

Roll

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#40 - 2012-09-29 03:31:10 UTC
Figured I'd cross-post this to clear some of the speculation for myself and others. I needed to look at it again anyway.

"Changes to War Mechanics" wrote:
Finally, here are a few Q & A from the Fanfest and CSM feedback that will hopefully clear some things up.

Q: A declares war on B. B enlists help of ally C. Can A now bring in D? Or is this option only limited to the defender? And if A brings in D, is D at war with B and C, or just C?
A: Only the defender can call an ally. There is no limitation to how many allies he can call. The ally counts as being at war with the aggressor corp.

Q: War dec cost, number of aggressor wars.
A: The number of wars the declaring corp has still modifies the cost.

Q: War dec cost, target corp member modifier?
A: The war dec cost formula will not take aggressor size into account and will not count trial account members in target corp. But the formula is constantly being revised, so nothing is set in stone.

Q: Mercs can't escape war?
A: That's true and the same goes for the aggressor - entering a war is now more of a commitment and not something you can hop in and out of on a whim.

Q: Can mercs be in more than one war?
A: Yes, as long as later employers are fine with hiring somebody spread thin (corp war history, which includes ongoing wars is public).

Q: Limit on number of wars?
A: No, apart from the increased cost of war deccing many.

Q: How long will wars last?
A: As long as the aggressor pays every week and no one surrenders (or no surrender offer is accepted), then a war can last forever.

Q: Wars last for max 2 weeks?
A: No. At the end of EACH week, the aggressor chooses.

Q: What about mutual wars?
A: We're still debating what to do about mutual wars, so I didn't include any info on that here.

Q: What about corp-hopping?
A: We're adding tracking in the backend to track this. How we will then display it in game is undecided, but we do have stories in the backlog (todo list) for the character war history to show if the character left a corp at war. We also want to have it cost a little to corp-hop during a war. We're also looking into not allowing you to join a corp you've left during a war while that war is still ongoing. We're also exploring some limitations to joining and leaving a corp on the fly.

Q: Corp at war joining an alliance
A: Only aggressor corp is banned from joining an alliance (this is so alliances can't use a corp to dec an alliance and then join to get the whole alliance into the war, there are a few other edge cases). A decced corp can join an alliance and will transfer it's wars to (and from when leaving ) the alliance.

Q: Neutral parties in a fight?
A: This is part of crime watch and not handled specifically by the war system. RRing someone in a legal war fight in hi sec adds a Suspect flag. This won't solve RRing as such, so maybe something more needs to be done, but this is what we're planning for Inferno.

Q: Easier to see war targets?
A: We're not making any changes to this at this time.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Previous page123Next page