Warfare & Tactics

Or, if the dec is mutual allow for either corp to join an alliance and let the alliance they join take on the dec as well.

If the corp leaves the alliance, let the war dec follow them, or better yet, let the war dec follow the leaving corp and leave the alliance.

It's stupid that this can prevent a corp joining an alliance.

I like what I see here... it amazes me how people are so eager to use word "exploit" about every game mechanic that they dont approve. I can only imagine all the tears new aggro mechanics will cause when people start to "exploit" them and first people lazy enough to read patch notes start to die.

OP have a good change to learn something important here: in Eve you should learn to play with the rules game mechanics give and not to run cry on forums and try to make CCP change rules so you can do what you want... otherwise you might attract more people who feed on others tears and misery...

So you want that aggressor must have right to retract from war if they want (doesent have to agree on mutual war), but defender must stay in war as long as aggressor wants? Your alliance wardecked 10 man corp but your plan backfired and now you DEMAND CCP to save you?

It seems to me that you guys are not in a position to make any demands... Maby you should just remake your corp and not make any stupid mistakes in future?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=156437

^^^ This is the thread to bind them all. I just read it all and it appears the Dec Shield guys figured this one out a month ago. Its a huge problem. Goonswarm Federation is about to be trapped. COVEN is already trapped. Hopefully the Dec Shield guys can burn the system to the ground and CCP will fix it.

In the meantime, all my fellow FW corps/alliances(except Happy Endings who are already trapped) DO NOT DECLARE WAR ON ANYBODY unless you want to trash your corp or alliance. That especially applies to you Tek, even if they use the magic Torpedo word and really deserve a war dec.

I intentionally steered clear of the word exploit since from the CCP responses I have seen on the subject from various people, it seems its working as they want it to, hence it's not technically an "exploit"

It is however a clearly broken / flawed mechanic, to claim otherwise is pretty narrow minded. When your corp (the defending corp) presses the "make mutual" button, you are agreeing to continue the war in exactly the same way the agressing corp did when it hit "declare war". Why then, at that stage should the (originally) defending corp be afforded defensive rights yet the (originally) attacking corp not? it makes zero sense.

If you're arguing the carebear point of view, well a carebear corp would never make a war mutual because they want rid of the agressors as soon as possible, they can still join an alliance or hire allies in an attempt to drive off the attackers. However, the only reason I see for making a war mutual under the curent system (aside from situations like RvB) is to then trap the attacking corp into a foreverwar, thus breaking the whole wardec system to the point nobody will be declaring war on anybody (I know I won't be until this is fixed)

from your posts it seems you are saying "if you declare war on ANYBODY, EVER you should expect the consequences" (consequences in this case being the likelyhood you'll have to disband your corp should you ever wish to join an alliance) ... Is this honestly your opinion?

Don't forget, if you are an Alliance that gets trapped, no new corporations can join your alliance ever again either. Also, any corps leaving your alliance will also be trapped and can never join a new alliance. If an Alliance declares war it effectively says that you will have to trash the alliance and all the corps in it and start over as soon as the war is over.

An exceptionally well delivered argument, very conducive to a discussion about a clearly flawed game mechanic.

I give up

:golfclap:

yes, because CCP and their all knowing wisdom have never (by their own admission) gotten something wrong ...

you clearly havn't been here very long.

if you truly believe that ccp's objective is to force people to never wardec anyone for fear of having to disband their "10yr old" (older than both of us combined and infact, almost as old as eve itself) corporation, then you good sir, are beyond reasoning with.

good day.

I wonder if you felt you should smack and celebrate like this for the sake of trolling, or if you are honestly as ignorant of the problem presented as you seem.

Let me make the OP's problem clear;

Romanian Renegades, a corp that has been around as long as EVE has, joined an alliance. That alliance decced a 10-man corp and RR left the alliance shortly thereafter for their own reasons. AFTER they left the 10-man corp made the war mutual and now, due to mechanics, RR can't join any other alliance due to being at war as an 'agressor'.

RR don't care that they are at war. They don't care for any losses or whatever, they do care about the fact, that they can't, EVER AGAIN, join any other alliance so long as this war is mutual.

The 10-man corp is either inactive or intentionally trolling them by making the war mutual then purposefully ignoring anything their 'enemies' do; they don't respond to mails, or convos or anything, they are not online to fight, and they don't accept the surrender proposed by RR.

What this means is the RR is crippled for as long as this goes on; potentially, for all time. They can't kill their targets, the surrender is not being accepted and re-forming their corp is out of the question.



And, should they as 'aggressors' wish to leave the war, they can surrender.

Oh wait, they can't. Because the defending 'corp' is an empty shell, made specifically to trap alliances and corporations where they are, and not allow them the options of quitting ever again.

When they can't surrender, they can never leave their alliance (pointless because the war goes on regardless) they can never join another alliance, the alliance that declared war can never get new corporations to join them.

How is this fair, in any way? How is it 'working as intended' that all the 10-man shell-corp has to do is ignore them and never accept the surrender and the corporation that decced them is screwed forever unless they disband?

The answer is, that it's NOT fair. If the defender makes a war mutual, they are effectively not DEFENDING anymore - they are declaring that they want to directly attack their attackers, and by that right, should lose their defending status and have the same rights as an attacker has.

What's more, every time a corp is declared war on the aggressors SHOULD HAVE TO set up an surrender option with terms. "Pay us X number of isk and the war ends". Now, the defenders have a few choices. Pay, if they deem the price acceptable. Fight back until the aggressor quits. Call in an ally. Join an alliance if they are a corp - now it's the alliance's war. Set the war mutual at any time with THEIR OWN AUTOMATED TERMS - "we have made the war mutual and intend to fight you. We will not accept your terms, you want out, you accept ours. Hand us X million isk and you can go."

Now, if either party wants to end the war, they can at any time by providing the needed sum in the corporation's wallet and selecting 'pay surrender terms' or something like that. Obviously, the number of isk asked for should be something logical deduced from, say, the number of players in corp. This way, you can't NOT accept a surrender request and trap a corp forever.

Because despite what you seem to think, this BS is not fair, and it does in fact break wardecs as a system. completely. I find it very hard to believe this was CCP's intention all along.