Warfare & Tactics

For the moment, let's pretend I've got a hisec mining corp I want to keep from mining and hauling their ore. Or maybe I want to crush the morale of a weak hisec carebear alliance in an effort to force the alliance to disband or ruin its chances of recruiting members.

Lets pretend for a moment you go through with this lame idea for what ever reasons or objectives you wish to accomplish. The alliance or corp simpley does a bit of homework, and puts your sorry ass on their contacts list. Who cares if your offline for 6 months. Instant notification of when you log in or off. Hmmm. lame idea is lame. Good luck.

You haven't actually thought it through. A second alt could be added to the corp. That person will never ever post to a thread or forum, send evemails, or do anything that would generate a killmail. There will be no way for anyone to know who the second person is. Just tuck him away in some godforsaken system with Director roles. When the time is right log him on to accept apps from the kill team.

You're not thinking outside the box enough. There are lots of interesting uses for this tactic or variations on it. Here is but one example of a nullsec alliance who didn't think things through.

Seems like you just want easy kills and risk free PVP to me.

Of course its lame, but not from him, he is just trying to use game mechanics and try to make the best out of it for him.

But the game mechanic is pretty lame, which allows this. This needs to be fixed.

The whole point of the war dec system is to forewarn the players of the corporation being decced that there danger coming. Once at war it's a pretty simple task to use the tools in game to ensure there are no immediate threats in the area of space where you are operating.

If a war dec from an inactive corporation actually manages to stop a highsec mining corp from mining or a carebear alliance to disband then they do actually deserve to be disrupted with such lame antics.

I like the kids who whine that you should grow some balls.

Wardecs by the very definition and mechanic is created to harrass and grief, with focus on industrial corps. Early on we used it to disrupt nullsec alliance logistics. It's not a mechanic to get even fights. Not to mention it's even more ironic that you suggest FW, RvB or nullsec to get 'fights'. Usually you are more likely to get a decent fight out of a highsec wardec than you are from the spy-cluttered blobs you find on those groups you mention..

Grow some balls, go wardec.

I think you are missing my point.
I don't really care if its tasteful or not. You can try and attack or kill whom ever you want. Its eve, not kinder-garden.

What that corp did, was very much not similar regarding game mechanic.
They followed the bot-or-not-bot corp, they decided when to strike, and war-dec them for that purpose.
You want something completely different.

My point is, that permanent war-dec, can cause a whole lot of troubles, and is a good place for an exploit.
It allows for example a person to per-war-dec his won corp (and increase its cost for others), it allows a corp for people to join, shoot at someone in high sec, and leave, and other options as well, where some of those are marked as exploit (like joining a corp to kill someone and leave).

You want a permanent war-dec. And its not really possible.
Its based on how many people war-dec someone, it has a week time for a reason to not cause over-excessive grieving, and its meant to allow someone to stop the war-dec.

CCP want to make a war an active one, not a passive one for high-sec. And they want to remind both parties that there is a war.


If you actually want to keep the war-dec, you will have to log on your alt and continue the war-declaration every week.
There is no "declare and forget" option for a good reason.

If you war dec a corp and don't undock or fight, they can petition it and ccp will remove it. It's considered griefing.

I know exactly what a strawman is, and my suggestion of actually fighting a war if you were going to threaten such action had absolutely nothing to do with the tactics by which you fight it. You argued against WW1 straight line tactics which had nothing to do with my argument, there is a whole history of combat tactics available many of which focus on a smaller unit inflicting great damage to a larger one. My point was to actually do something with the dec in an active manner not just have it as some sort of away-from-game middle finger.

I will however concede you are right on the latter point, I focus on the element of a war dec being something to do with war not empty threats, and you have raised a fair point that some corps near enough lock themselves down at the sight of a war dec regardless of no active presence of WT's so there may be some people who may react in the way you are looking for. Though I wouldn't expect them to maintain their kneejerk wardec policies in favour of something more practical for very long if the dec was ongoing.

"The rest of us are not constrained by your self-imposed limitations." Not my limitations, I was referring to the rules of this game as I understood them from reading these forums and sources within game. I clearly remember reading on the old forums that it was not allowed to use decs in such a way (ie for such a sustained period without actually appearing, also about deccing your own corp to raise costs*). That given I see you say you have asked a GM and if true it is suprising indeed that you can use the wardec mechanic in such a manner though obviously the GM's need to talk to each other about their multiple interpretations.

*Linky post 26 (cant find the other right now, i'll look later)