These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Question about war mechanics.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Disposable Hashur
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2015-06-09 08:11:00 UTC
o/ guys,

Just got a question. I did some search about this and i didnt exactly get a clear answer so i decided to ask here.

Assuming a corp leaves a currently wardec'ed alliance, the moment its out of the ally it will be automatically dec'ed.

The question is assuming aggressor does not extend duration of war regarding that specific corp, will this war end when:

a) a week has got by since alliance was dec'ed?

b) a week has gone by since corp left alliance?

c) will be dec'ed as long as alliance is dec'ed (even if aggressor extends war for that alliance)?

cause I've read various posts and tbh i cant find a clear answer. Maybe CCP should put a msg saying when war will end (like the "started in dd/mm/yy").

Thnx
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#2 - 2015-06-09 08:15:28 UTC
B) a week since the the Corp left the alliance

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Disposable Hashur
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2015-06-09 08:16:35 UTC
ty for reply.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#4 - 2015-06-09 08:21:54 UTC
Disposable Hashur wrote:
ty for reply.

No worries mate.



Now let the trolling commence!

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#5 - 2015-06-09 08:30:03 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Now let the trolling commence!

Shouldn't be any trolling. Simple question well answered.

During a recent'ish wardec we were subject to, after 4 weeks one of the Corps wanted to drop from Alliance so they could carry on with some plans they had in highsec. They dropped a couple of days into the 5th week and then the wardec wasn't renewed against the Alliance.

As a result, they ended up being the only Corp subject to the war for a few days and we all had a good laugh about it.
Disposable Hashur
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2015-06-09 08:33:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Disposable Hashur
there is still time till thread is locked i guess.

Well we were gonna leave alliance anyway. So it wasnt really due to the war.

So what you guys think about war mechanics? Having spent about a year in null sec i realise that war is currently only affecting hi sec imho. Null, low and wh space arent really affected as ppl can shoot you anyway.

Wars only act as a strategic move cutting off access to hi sec for ppl living in those spaces. But what if you would have to be in war to use entosis etc etc. That would perhaps give a whole other meaning to null warfare. Cause currently war or no war, shooting ppl or not is dictated by alliance standings and politics.

Imho i believe wars as they are currently are a bit outdated. Maybe its time we see a change? What you think?
Pops Tickle
Tickle Industries
#7 - 2015-06-09 08:45:01 UTC
Disposable Hashur wrote:
there is still time till thread is locked i guess.

Well we were gonna leave alliance anyway. So it wasnt really due to the war.

So what you guys think about war mechanics? Having spent about a year in null sec i realise that war is currently only affecting hi sec imho. Null, low and wh space arent really affected as ppl can shoot you anyway.

Wars only act as a strategic move cutting off access to hi sec for ppl living in those spaces. But what if you would have to be in war to use entosis etc etc. That would perhaps give a whole other meaning to null warfare. Cause currently war or no war, shooting ppl or not is dictated by alliance standings and politics.

Imho i believe wars as they are currently are a bit outdated. Maybe its time we see a change? What you think?

I think that you are not being honest with us.

CCP Rise wrote:

"We have tried and tried to validate the myth that griefing has a pronounced affect on new players - we have failed."

Source
Yarda Black
The Black Redemption
#8 - 2015-06-09 09:15:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Yarda Black
We nullseccers don't do high-sec mechanics. You want a mechanic telling you what to do, stay in high-sec. You want to fight a war without all the fuzz and emocrap about neutral reppers you cant shoot; come back to null.


Alright. The moment I posted this, I remembered sieging on a SOV structure yesterday. To create a reinforcement timer. I'm therefor changing my statement:

We have enough mechanics out here to worry about. Keep that high-sec stuff out. Thanx

I'm also based out of low-sec atm. Bloody gateguns. This aint going well for me... Still.... Go away with your "rules"
Disposable Hashur
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2015-06-09 09:24:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Disposable Hashur
Yarda Black wrote:
We nullseccers don't do high-sec mechanics. You want a mechanic telling you what to do, stay in high-sec. You want to fight a war without all the fuzz and emocrap about neutral reppers you cant shoot; come back to null.




No no dont get me wrong. I dont really care about wars since i always found other stuff to do, Whs, null sec etc. And come on lets be honest. 9/10 times war means that you just can't undock from trade hubs, and jump stargates freely in some systems.

As i said wars have no effect in null apart from cutting off free access to hi sec, mostly for logistic reasons. But what if it actually mattered? And i'm not saying this about what you can shoot or not (as in neut reppers as you mentioned). But for things that are of importance. what if you had to be in war to flip a station? You can shoot them anyway :p reps or no reps

It wouldnt really change much, but it would have meaning i guess. After all we are just discussing here. I'm not looking to prove a point or something

Yarda Black wrote:


Alright. The moment I posted this, I remembered sieging on a SOV structure yesterday. To create a reinforcement timer. I'm therefor changing my statement:

We have enough mechanics out here to worry about. Keep that high-sec stuff out. Thanx

I'm also based out of low-sec atm. Bloody gateguns. This aint going well for me... Still.... Go away with your "rules"


Man I know well of the mechanics that take place in null. I dont disagree with you. I'm not saying ADD more stupid timers or requirements. Just reform all these ****** timers into something that will have meaning.
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2015-06-09 09:33:35 UTC

Why would null alliances have to gain from wardecs?


  • Disrupting each other's hisec operations, neutral haulers notwithstanding
  • Remember they added a war history to Alliances and Corps? Wars can be declared as a part of making history.
  • War report (victory/defeat) stats. This can be a matter of pride.
  • To have mercenaries disrupt another Alliance's hisec operations
  • Enable mutual aggression at lowsec gates and stations without standings hits or interference from sentries
  • Enable mutual aggression in hisec (ie: all out war)
  • Allow takedown of a nullsec Alliance/Corp's hisec assets


Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#11 - 2015-06-09 09:47:33 UTC
Adding wardec mechanics to null would just add a tax on aggression that isn't needed.

It would favour large, rich alliances and be a barrier to small groups attempting to gain a foothold in sov.

Keep those mechanics out thanks. I'm happy shooting everyone and being shot by everyone.
Disposable Hashur
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2015-06-09 09:48:09 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:

Why would null alliances have to gain from wardecs?


  • Disrupting each other's hisec operations, neutral haulers notwithstanding
  • Remember they added a war history to Alliances and Corps? Wars can be declared as a part of making history.
  • War report (victory/defeat) stats. This can be a matter of pride.
  • To have mercenaries disrupt another Alliance's hisec operations
  • Enable mutual aggression at lowsec gates and stations without standings hits or interference from sentries
  • Enable mutual aggression in hisec (ie: all out war)
  • Allow takedown of a nullsec Alliance/Corp's hisec assets





As i said, null sec ppl use wars for strategic reasons as you correctly mentioned. Don't disagree with that. But i personally disagree with a mechanic that only has meaning in hi sec (as you mentioned assets lockdown, all out war etc). Im just saying what if they connected sov mechanics to wars. That would cripple the chances for small grps/alliances to ever get ahold of their "own space" i get that and im against it. My argument is not perfect. After all we are discussing here as i said.

But every reasonable corp/ally would have NPC corp alts to pretty much "handle" with most of the stuff you mentioned.

Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#13 - 2015-06-09 09:56:11 UTC
Disposable Hashur wrote:
As i said, null sec ppl use wars for strategic reasons as you correctly mentioned. Don't disagree with that. But i personally disagree with a mechanic that only has meaning in hi sec...

This is now a stealth remove Concord thread.

No Concord, no need for wardecs.
Disposable Hashur
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2015-06-09 09:56:44 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Adding wardec mechanics to null would just add a tax on aggression that isn't needed.

It would favour large, rich alliances and be a barrier to small groups attempting to gain a foothold in sov.

Keep those mechanics out thanks. I'm happy shooting everyone and being shot by everyone.



I agree with you. What im trying to say is this:

I'm not talking about adding war mechanics in null as they are now. I'm talking about a series of changes to it so that it does indeed make it more meaningful and combined with other game mechanics such as SOV. I want the exact same thing. To make it harder than what it is today for "null sec Big Boys" to have control. Cause atm big alliances hire mercs to wardeck smaller opponents and do their dirty work, without breaking a sweat.

So image all these new SOV stuff that took effect, like the fact that empty systems are more vulnerable etc in a completely different war mechanic.

Seriously guys, i know how things work, and im not looking to make things easier for hi, low, null sec "empires". On the contrary i want to make it more meaningful. And as i said I'm only making an argument here so perhaps we could reach a suggestion.
Disposable Hashur
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2015-06-09 10:01:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Disposable Hashur
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Disposable Hashur wrote:
As i said, null sec ppl use wars for strategic reasons as you correctly mentioned. Don't disagree with that. But i personally disagree with a mechanic that only has meaning in hi sec...

This is now a stealth remove Concord thread.

No Concord, no need for wardecs.



How you gonna protect newbies from seriously stupid "SPACEwarriors wannabe"? You want neww ppl in this game right? I know i do. Also No High sec mechanics and concord, means that casual players have no luck in this game. Well sorry but this doesnt feel right.

Last time i checked EvE is a game. So unless you wanna see only ppl in this game that can be on like 23/7 concord is necesary. Thats the bitter truth. And i wouldnt like to direct this conversation to what each of us considers as PvP, or as risk.

And lets be honest. Null sec is much safer than hi sec most of the times.If ofc you are blue
Pops Tickle
Tickle Industries
#16 - 2015-06-09 12:44:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Pops Tickle
See, Ms. Black. I was right.

Disposable Hashur wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Disposable Hashur wrote:
As i said, null sec ppl use wars for strategic reasons as you correctly mentioned. Don't disagree with that. But i personally disagree with a mechanic that only has meaning in hi sec...

This is now a stealth remove Concord thread.

No Concord, no need for wardecs.



How you gonna protect newbies from seriously stupid "SPACEwarriors wannabe"? You want neww ppl in this game right? I know i do. Also No High sec mechanics and concord, means that casual players have no luck in this game. Well sorry but this doesnt feel right.

Last time i checked EvE is a game. So unless you wanna see only ppl in this game that can be on like 23/7 concord is necesary. Thats the bitter truth. And i wouldnt like to direct this conversation to what each of us considers as PvP, or as risk.

And lets be honest. Null sec is much safer than hi sec most of the times.If ofc you are blue



He is just one more soldier in this war and you all are not only it's victims, no. You all are being used as fuel to keep the fire burning.

CCP Rise wrote:

"We have tried and tried to validate the myth that griefing has a pronounced affect on new players - we have failed."

Source
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#17 - 2015-06-09 14:14:33 UTC
Quote:

Forum rules

5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

23. Post constructively.

Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.


Since the question got answered, I'm just going to close this thread.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department