EVE General Discussion

We agree on something here; the existing payment system for wars is totally broken. It is too cheap to dec a corp that has no other wars and there is no counter-payment that can be made to prevent the war from happening.

I would like to see a method for escalating the cost of wars such that it must be financially viable to have the war and that the other party can end the war with a similar payment (or a 'bidding' type system to ensue).

Either way, it is a broken mechanic at the moment and two clear facts stand...

1. War dec's need fixing
2. The solution should no be to remove them.

That's still possible, there is just a sliding scale of penalties depending on where that conflict takes place.

I'm not sure the situation you seem to want is actually stable enough to subsist long term, without large numbers of rules that don't really have any real world equivalent. That's certainly been the case in real world history.

Similarly, the strongest nullsec alliances tend to have significant measures in place that stop the non-consensual conflict that they don't like.

Wardecs *were* a method of (kind of) forcing PvP on a corporation for a week. Meaning POSes were vulnerable, and operations might be disrupted for that week. Currently Wardecs are a method of forcing PvP on a corporation for 24h. Meaning POSes are not vulnerable and operations will not be disrupted for longer than a day.

Add to that the fact that an alliance hopping corp is immune from wardecs going live for the 24hr period following the vulnerability, and wardecs are now useless for affecting any corporation who is not in an alliance. (This doesn't affect Sov holding alliances because alliance hopping has some slightly negative effects re: Sov mechanics)

So wardecs for anything other than consensual war between hisec corps, beating up on people who are too new to know how to alliance hop, and trying to kill Sov holder JF pilots has disappeared. Wardecs for POS bashing profit are gone, wardecs to disrupt rival industrial elements are gone.

All that's left among nonconsensual hisec wardecs are the wardecs that people have been complaining about, the so called "griefing" wardecs of newbies.

This is a tired and fallacious argument. Dickheads hide under the umbrella of Empire Space, and when confronted throw out the "go pick on people in low/nullsec" whine.

This all assumes, of course, that the corp in question actually alliance hops when you dec them. A tiny carebear mining corp probably stands a 100% chance of doing this (assuming they're even aware it's possible). But I'm not sure I'd say the same for every single hi-sec corp in existence. A great portion of them, yes. But it's not impossible to have a wardec commence successfully.

And that falls under "Consensual PvP" and consensual PvP is fine and all, but not the issue.

Welcome to a Multiplayer Sandbox. If someone wants to spend their time or make their isk running missions, they can. If someone wants to spend their time or make their isk by wardeccing those who do the former, They Can Too. The restriction on alliance hopping was a band aid on an arterial bleed of hisec PvP (which is a valid form of gameplay because: Sandbox), ripping it off did not make things better.

An incentive would be a negative cost. If your carebear corp keeps missioning/mining/ giving away kills, you are the one providing the incentive for continued wardecs of your and other similar corps. Increasing the cost would simply take wardecs away from new players, since one decent gank of a mission runner will pay for any reasonable wardec, and ones done for the lulz won't be affected by a reasonable increase.

The current prices are fine. Even if they weren't, cost is not a good way to balance things in Eve.

Raising wardec costs to 500m ISK? Wardec costs being scaled depending on members?

What extra am I getting for a 1000% increase in wardec costs? Can this 1000% price increase be justified beyond the generic wardecs are too cheap whines? Have player incomes increased 1000% since wardecs were introduced? (would this not be a massive problem in itself?) Are we moving to a wardecs for the rich only philosophy in EVE? Will increasing costs too much be a de facto removal of wardecs?

All the carebears want wardec costs increased because they are rich and think everyone else is rich as well but, and this important, many people in EVE do not have ISK accumulation for no real purpose as their goal in EVE and do not have carebear levels of wealth so why penalise these poorer players for avoiding hours of tedious and futile ISK grinding?

One point already made in other threads is that the Orphanage have paid over 18 billion a week to fund a mere 20 wars, your change would increase this to 180 billion a week. Can this in any way be considered a fair and rational increase in war costs? Any upward change in war costs must be accompanied by a removal of the Alliance P nerf that increases costs of multiple wardecs in such a poorly thought out manner.

The idea of scaling wardec costs is often proposed but, and this is a key point, people are not deccing one hundred or one thousand members but one single corp or alliance. If you want to charge me money for deccing people instead of groups then I want to be able to choose those people as I am paying the money to dec people instead of a group.

Will scaled wardec costs do nothing except force smaller groups to merge to make wardec costs manageable? If people are whining so much about facing smaller groups then imagine their whine level when faced with groups of a thousand plus who are deccing them.

Add this as a point for your discussions on scaled wardec costs. Why should I have to pay to dec alts who dont log on, people who never leave the station, or anyone who does not fight? Why should I not just create a lot of trial accounts and pack my deccing alliance with alts so that my alliance size is 6k and in any number of attackers versus number of defenders calculation I pay the minimum? Policing this, as it will no doubt be ruled an exploit, will take a lot of CCP resources.

A second point, again critical in understanding wardecs, is that there is no such thing as a PvP corp, a carebear corp, an industrial corp or whatever name you call them, in EVE mechanics there are only corps and alliances with no distinctions. You make or join a corp and you are agreeing to become involved in the game called EVE.

I mentioned cost increases being a de facto removal of wardecs and EVE University is an example of this in action. They are using the dec shield method to avoid wars by making it cost a billion a week to dec them. I think they have been decced by two parties in four months compared to almost constant wardecs prior to this. I took a straw poll of thirty groups in game and no one said they would pay a billion a week for a wardec.

What about honour or reputation? Dropping corp to avoid wardecs?

**** that, I would rather be the honourless winner than be honourable and constantly get face raped. Dropping corp needs an in game ISK cost paid to the wardeccers to balance it as in current mechanics it is too easy to avoid war without any penalties.

The decshield might be a way to avoid wardecs right now but it has also identified corps who are ripe and juicy war targets for the future.

There are claimed to be two ways to break a dec shield but as far as anyone knows they have been ruled as exploits which is ironic. One person in this thread also claims to know a way but is not telling so I dont know if this is the same as the other methods.

Consensual PvP?

The premise of EVE is one of non-consensual PvP. This game was never, at least before this thread started, a place where you could choose to avoid group conflict and this is the change in the ethos of EVE that people dont like. Not having the option to **** with someone who irritates you, offends you, or for any other reason you have, or even for no reason at all, cheapens the entire EVE experience for me. I am no longer playing nasty EVE but am now playing pretty lame EVE and I dont like it.

Mechanics stuck now? ("Either way, the mechanics are what they are, and they aren't going to change. So you either have to adapt or find something else to do")

Some people just cannot read. Actually, if you had read this entire thread you would see that the current mechanics will be getting changed and CCP even asked for ideas about it. Admittedly no one knows if CCP are going to stay in their previous HTFU mode or move to Hello Kitty mode.

Personally, I think CCP are going to move toward a Hello Kitty version of EVE as recent changes, from space barbie on, show all the signs of a move to a Hello Kitty version of EVE. High sec becomes safe sec. EVE loses its appeal for a lot of long time players; they wont rage, they wont post, they will just lose interest in EVE and leave as without the harshness EVE will have become just another mmo in a packed field with nothing special about it.

karidor made a bad post, and they need to revamp the crimewatch system and wardecs altogether.