These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What happened with war decs?

Author
PAPULA
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#41 - 2016-03-14 12:04:33 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:

So what's your problem? Bring a bigger fleet.

Then i would do space spinning and station watching all day and do nothing.

Jonah Gravenstein wrote:

Carebears and PvE players are not the same thing.

Then i don't understand what carebear means.
Tora Bushido
The Marmite Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#42 - 2016-03-14 12:05:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Tora Bushido
It's simple. We changed our ways about 6 months ago, from trade hub huggers with many wars, to more dedicated hunters, with half the wars, who use watch lists to focus on targets. CCP ****** up the WL, introduced it without talking to the players who know. Not talking about the two CSM members here, who have been crying for this change for years now or the nulsec CSM members, who are clueless how highsec works.

So no watch list = no more targeted wars = back to mass war deccing. Sad, but true. Evil

DELETE THE WEAK, ADAPT OR DIE !

Meta Gaming Level VII, Psycho Warfare Level X, Smack Talk Level VII.

Tora Bushido
The Marmite Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#43 - 2016-03-14 12:10:45 UTC
ImYourMom wrote:
and thats fine but how are they even affording to have so many wardecs? it cant be sustainable surely. the pricing structure wqs supposed to stop all that and making it just far too expensive to war dec so many
We have many clients, I run 16 posses (not highsec) on my alts and I have alts who are nasty little ******* and who will steal everything from you (Fedo's first!).

DELETE THE WEAK, ADAPT OR DIE !

Meta Gaming Level VII, Psycho Warfare Level X, Smack Talk Level VII.

Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#44 - 2016-03-14 12:11:41 UTC
Wouldn't a simple fix to be to have the dec cost scale with number of wars? The first war could cost a standard amount and every additional war costs X% more than the last putting an upper limit on the amount of active wars a corp can afford to have. There's no legitimate gameplay reason to have 200 active wars.

For example if the scaling factor was 5% (can be fine tuned) then the cost of new wars would go as below:
First war, standard cost
Second war, 1.05x standard cost
10th war, 1.63x standard
50th war, 18.42x standard
200 wars, 339.3x standard

This way "elite dec corps" would have to actually choose their targets if they want to hunt in the target rich highsec. Wardecs were not intended by CCP as a way to turn highsec into a more populated lowsec, in their current form they just allow these wardec corps to negate concord.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#45 - 2016-03-14 12:14:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
PAPULA wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:

Carebears and PvE players are not the same thing.

Then i don't understand what carebear means.
That's pretty obvious, I'll make it simple for you

If you expect CCP to provide you with safety and that the game change to suit your playstyle? You're a carebear.

If you provide your own safety and change your playstyle to suit the game? You're not a carebear.

There's plenty of PvE players, who solely do PvE, that provide for their own safety. There's also plenty of PvP players that also indulge in the PvE playstyle to provide them with standings for locator agents, isk to buy that next shiny Loki explosion etc. Neither group are carebears.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2016-03-14 12:18:14 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
[quote=Zappity]All you people trying to get wardecs changed to "force the agressors to fight" ***** and moan about how they dock up when they might lose. Well, don't you do the same thing? Everybody in this game does. You get a way to force the agressors to fight as soon as the agressors get a way to force the defenders to fight.
The difference is, that the aggressor choose to fight and the defender doesn't. If the defender needs to use Hauler alts, disband/reform the corp or stop the normal mining activities that's putting all the pressure on the defender while the agressor can dock up although HE choose to fight. If you can't swallow the bite you have to pay for it.

So if you choose to wardec you should better do the intel if you can stand the heat. At the moment you can keep up a wardec as long as you just pay each week without any way for the defender to end the wardec except for surrender. With something to defend an industry corp can pay some mercs to do the dirty work for them. So you will think about it if a 10 member corp really wants to tackle the multi-trillion industry corp. If you are in for the fight: go for it even if they can dish out a multi billion contract to flaten you. If you are not: think again.
Tora Bushido
The Marmite Mercenaries
BLACKFLAG.
#47 - 2016-03-14 12:22:24 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Wouldn't a simple fix to be ....
You lost me after simple fix. If one thing has been proven the last years, is that there isnt a simple fix for this. Main reason we setup the war dec Google doc with carebears, mercs and dedicated players.

DELETE THE WEAK, ADAPT OR DIE !

Meta Gaming Level VII, Psycho Warfare Level X, Smack Talk Level VII.

Skarner Kondur
Order of The Forge
#48 - 2016-03-14 12:27:10 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Wardecs used to cost 2 million isk, a subset of players demanded that the prices were increased to the current level in order to curtail the activities of merc corps; CCP obliged and it backfired on the people who demanded it.

The result was that the smaller merc corps banded together in order to be able to afford the cost of wars and carried on killing the greedy, the lazy and the feckless. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth and rending of stuff when the changes didn't give rise to a curtailment in the activities of merc corps, instead making them stronger and more organised.

Incidentally, the same thing happened with gankers, as mechanics have changed and made their chosen profession more difficult to maintain, they have become stronger and more organised.

TL;DR your approach has already been tried, and it has been found wanting. The easily predictable result of CCP implementing such change would be the rise of merc super corps against whom there would be no defence.

Be careful what you wish for.


The issue clearly was that CCP didn't hit them hard enough with the correct solution. Again as I've said above, 2 million or 50 million, the point is that it's a joke of a cost. One player can easily sustain that, barely playing at all. Not to mention running missions and profiting from war which easily pays for itself.

Nothing you said really counters the fact that increasing the cost of war declaration is a viable solution. Going by the logic of "they'll band together to mitigate costs" is faulty; until what point can they merge? When the entire player base is one corp?
Noragen Neirfallas
Emotional Net Loss
#49 - 2016-03-14 12:30:15 UTC
ImYourMom wrote:
So in the past we had problems because it was too easy and cheap to war dec. That got changed to be more expensive dependent on size of people you were deccing in some cases 500mill a pop. This led to alliances like Privateers, Orphanage etc closing.
But now i see even more war dec alliances sprouting out with an incredible amount of war decs

Marmite - 136 wars
Pirat - 171 wars
Archtype - 77 wars
Vendetta Merc - 181 wars
Complaints Dept - 129 wars
Caldari State Police - 116 wars

and thats just a few, i dont think most of these are offering assistance but actually the ones deccing. How can this be happening as its clearly not solved the problem its seems it just got worse. I am not convinced either this is all merc work either, as this costs billions per week as well.

Can someone explain if im missing something here?

Well wars got too expensive for small entities so large ones formed to bear the costs which meant more people came to them for the volume of decs which meant they could afford more decs which caused more decs which brought more people etc etc etc

Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment

Noragens basically the Chribba of C&P - Zimmy Zeta

Confirming that we all play in Noragen's eve. - BeBopAReBop

ISD Buldath favorite ISD

'"****station games" - Sun Tzu' - Ralph King Griffin

Black Pedro
Mine.
#50 - 2016-03-14 12:32:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Wardecs were not intended by CCP as a way to turn highsec into a more populated lowsec, in their current form they just allow these wardec corps to negate concord.
Yes they were, negating CONCORD is the purpose of wardecs:

CCP wrote:
The first question we asked ourselves is why touch the war dec system at all? Isn’t it functioning fine? The answer to that is yes, and no. The system is not broken, it’s not useless (though underutilized) and it does what it’s supposed to do (allow people to fight legally in hi sec).


I highlighted the relevant bit from the last wardec devblog. Wars are just the mechanism to allow real fighting in highsec; that's all. They limit the number of opponents and give you some warning, but highsec is not, and never was intended to be free of PvP or made perfectly safe by CONCORD. You are expected to defend your stuff.

Scaling war costs would just limit the viability of the profession of mercenary (while easily being circumvented with alternate corps if need be) which would seem counter-productive to CCP's goal of increasing the number of wars and making mercenaries a real profession as stated in the last devblog.

I have no problem increasing social options (like corp lite) to allow players to group up and play the game free of wardecs, but real corporations, especially those with in-space assets like POCOs and Citadels need to be at risk to the other players.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#51 - 2016-03-14 12:55:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Skarner Kondur wrote:
The issue clearly was that CCP didn't hit them hard enough with the correct solution.
Go ahead, post in the features and ideas forum with your proposal and ask CCP to implement it. If it ever comes to pass, I, and many others, have tear collection arrays standing by to harvest the resulting saline explosion when it all goes hilariously wrong.

Quote:
Again as I've said above, 2 million or 50 million, the point is that it's a joke of a cost. One player can easily sustain that, barely playing at all. Not to mention running missions and profiting from war which easily pays for itself.
You do realise that merc groups are forced by game mechanics to wardec multiple targets at once in order to get a fight? For every 10 corps they wardec (a minimum of a 500 million isk investment) they are likely to get maybe 1 or 2 that don't roll corp, log off for the duration or otherwise evade the war.

Any proposals that involve increasing the cost of wardecs must also increase the chances of the merc corps actually getting a fight for their isk by curtailing the ability to evade a war at little or zero cost.

Quote:
Nothing you said really counters the fact that increasing the cost of war declaration is a viable solution.
You've yet to explain the how and why of it being viable beyond stating that "wardecs are too cheap"

Merc corps are willing to admit that wardecs need attention, the problem is that nobody knows how to actually fix them; 100% of the "solutions" that have been implemented and the suggestions that have been made over the years have failed to do so, what makes yours better?

Quote:
Going by the logic of "they'll band together to mitigate costs" is faulty; until what point can they merge? When the entire player base is one corp?
Imagine a future where a majority of the hisec merc corps are gathered under 1 or 2 banners; where CODE.s numbers have increased exponentially due to the remaining mercs joining them because they can't afford to wardec people or don't get on with the merc supercorps.

It's not only the numbers you have to worry about, it's the collective years of experience and knowledge, the pre-existing intel networks, the tactics and all the other things that come together when you force a gathering of specialists.

To use a crap analogy; the current merc corps are colleges of destruction, when all of them gather in 1 or 2 places they become universities of devastation.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Skarner Kondur
Order of The Forge
#52 - 2016-03-14 12:57:25 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Wardecs were not intended by CCP as a way to turn highsec into a more populated lowsec, in their current form they just allow these wardec corps to negate concord.
Yes they were, negating CONCORD is the purpose of wardecs:

CCP wrote:
The first question we asked ourselves is why touch the war dec system at all? Isn’t it functioning fine? The answer to that is yes, and no. The system is not broken, it’s not useless (though underutilized) and it does what it’s supposed to do (allow people to fight legally in hi sec).


I highlighted the relevant bit from the last wardec devblog. Wars are just the mechanism to allow real fighting in highsec; that's all. They limit the number of opponents and give you some warning, but highsec is not, and never was intended to be free of PvP or made perfectly safe by CONCORD. You are expected to defend your stuff.

Scaling war costs would just limit the viability of the profession of mercenary (while easily being circumvented with alternate corps if need be) which would seem counter-productive to CCPs goal to increase the number of wars and make mercenaries a real profession stated in the last devblog.

I have no problem increasing social options (like corp lite) to allow players to group up and play the game free of wardecs, but real corporations, especially those with in-space assets like POCOs and Citadels need to be at risk to the other players.


If this was the case then I would fully support wardecs as they are. However, that isn't the case. The low difficulty of declaring war and profiting is abused for a ton of purposes other than mercenary work, such as killboards and legal hisec ganking.

If this is the case, there's a simple fix for the system. A war declaration costs substantially more than it does currently, and scales on the number of players in the target. However, it can be subsidized. This can be done by some form of contract system where the client creates a contract with a specific pay and all war fees implicitly subsidized. The mercenary can browse and accept these contracts.
Payne Dakara
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#53 - 2016-03-14 13:22:29 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

Right, and that's where an alliance like ours would come in.

We would find you in your little hidy holes , grab one of your lads and hold him till you came to rescue him and then brutalise the rescue force, we would follow you into holes and low and it's us this is effecting.

We do want fights we will jump down other mercs throats in a heartbeat we are known for it and its our tools that got removed,
now many groups like us (hell even the bloodhounds in marmite and the like)are faced with two options ,

an inordinate amount of scouting ,intel gathering and infiltration just to find online targets

Or

Sit in a hub and deck everything with a pulse

Most don't have the time or patients for the former and now you are seeing the results

We told ye this would happen if we didn't get something to balance out the watch list removal.



Allow me to disagree that you want fights maybe you wanted to say you want easy kills that look nice on the kill board.

If you wanted fights you will go low or null and will not even care to open war against high sec care bear corp since war only matters in high sec.




Giaus Felix
Doomheim
#54 - 2016-03-14 13:23:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Giaus Felix
Skarner Kondur wrote:
If this was the case then I would fully support wardecs as they are. However, that isn't the case. The low difficulty of declaring war and profiting is abused for a ton of purposes other than mercenary work, such as killboards and legal hisec ganking.
That's the whole point of them, wardecs were designed to do exactly that; legalise hisec ganking, the fee is a bribe for Concord to look the other way.

Killboard padding is just a bonus.

Payne Dakara wrote:
If you wanted fights you will go low or null and will not even care to open war against high sec care bear corp since war only matters in high sec.
lol this old chestnut; hisec is just as much a PvP area as lowsec, nullsec and whspace. In fact it's probably even more so because it's A: where 70% of the targets are, B: where the majority of the money is made and C: where 90% of the nullsec supply lines begin.

I came for the spaceships, I stayed for the tears.

Black Pedro
Mine.
#55 - 2016-03-14 13:27:36 UTC
Skarner Kondur wrote:
If this was the case then I would fully support wardecs as they are. However, that isn't the case. The low difficulty of declaring war and profiting is abused for a ton of purposes other than mercenary work, such as killboards and legal hisec ganking.

If this is the case, there's a simple fix for the system. A war declaration costs substantially more than it does currently, and scales on the number of players in the target. However, it can be subsidized. This can be done by some form of contract system where the client creates a contract with a specific pay and all war fees implicitly subsidized. The mercenary can browse and accept these contracts.
It only cost 2M ISK to declare war on a corporation before the last revamp where CCP said they thought wardecs were underutilized, and they raised it 25-fold. Why should they raise it again if they are trying to get players to actually use the mechanic?

Wardecs are just there to turn off CONCORD - that's all. They cannot really be "abused" because that is their primary purpose. Eve is a game about shooting spaceships, and this includes shooting them for reasons you seem to look down upon like gaining killboard numbers or ganking industrial ships.

Can wars be made more fun/fair/interesting? I have no doubt. But cranking up the cost so that only large organizations can afford to use them is not the path to that I am sure. If CCP has gone to the effort to code in the war declaration mechanic, players should be able to use it. All players. Not just rich veterans or members of large groups. If CCP decides that wars are too disruptive or unbalanced, there are much better ways to tweak the mechanic than just making it prohibitively expensive to most groups.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#56 - 2016-03-14 13:37:45 UTC
Giaus Felix wrote:

Payne Dakara wrote:
If you wanted fights you will go low or null and will not even care to open war against high sec care bear corp since war only matters in high sec.
lol this old chestnut; hisec is just as much a PvP area as lowsec, nullsec and whspace. In fact it's probably even more so because it's A: where 70% of the targets are, B: where the majority of the money is made and C: where 90% of the nullsec supply lines begin.


What I don't get is why aren't you all deccing other war deccers all the time. You'd keep getting fights after fights since you keep saying you do it to get fights. I'm entirely willing to accept the notion you currently dec left, right and center in the hope of getting a fight at some point through sheer number of potential targets but why don't you also go with arguably safe bets?
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#57 - 2016-03-14 13:39:40 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Giaus Felix wrote:

Payne Dakara wrote:
If you wanted fights you will go low or null and will not even care to open war against high sec care bear corp since war only matters in high sec.
lol this old chestnut; hisec is just as much a PvP area as lowsec, nullsec and whspace. In fact it's probably even more so because it's A: where 70% of the targets are, B: where the majority of the money is made and C: where 90% of the nullsec supply lines begin.


What I don't get is why aren't you all deccing other war deccers all the time. You'd keep getting fights after fights since you keep saying you do it to get fights. I'm entirely willing to accept the notion you currently dec left, right and center in the hope of getting a fight at some point through sheer number of potential targets but why don't you also go with arguably safe bets?
Saline content Twisted

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#58 - 2016-03-14 13:40:53 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Memphis Baas wrote:
Zappity wrote:
The reason a deployable structure which can be attacked to end the war dec would be a good idea is because there is currently no practical way to force a fight with highsec wardec corps.

This would give a small indy corp a way (likely via mercs which would be healthy) to attack the dec itself.


Well, the entity that declares the war spends some money to create the war dec. Would only be fair for the other party to be able to pay the wardec fee (to the NPCs) to abort the war dec, don't you think?

Would also be just about the biggest ISK sink... pay for safety.

To avoid the "it's on, no it's not, it's on, no it's not" spam, CCP should change it so the entity that declares war has the option to pay the base fee + whatever extra amount they want, with the defenders having to match the total to cancel the wardec.

Even bigger ISK sink.


This is great

Except the decced corp that just bought off the dec will be immediately decced again by a third corp (who just happens to be filled with alts of the original deccer). You stillget the "it's on, no it's not, it's on, no it's not" cycle, just with new decs.
What? Give the decced corp a week of immunity once they buy off a war? Then two indy corps will get together, one will dec the other for the minimum fee, the other will buy it off, and get immunity.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Memphis Baas
#59 - 2016-03-14 13:51:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Memphis Baas
Zappity wrote:
I'd much prefer a solution that involves people being out in space shooting each other.
Paying an NPC doesn't create content, paying a merc (or trying themselves) does.


Does it? All I'm seeing is people docking up or disbanding their corps during the wardec. Where exactly is the content?

Paying taxes to get out of it (you only have the brief 24 hr warning period to do it, once the fighting starts it can't be canceled) simply delays the inevitable; it's not like the target 2-3 man corps will have the ISK to compete with Marmite's bank. And it creates an ISK sink that takes advantage of this spamming of wardecs.

Ralph: Locator agents not working on a target means they're in a wormhole. This is (one reason) why I prefer that the locator gives the last known address for offline people. But anyway, we've argued both sides before, so I guess we'll see if CCP does anything, and what.

EDIT: Vincent, no, they only have the initial 24hr period BEFORE the fighting starts to out-wallet each other. Once the 24hr passes, and fighting starts, then the war can't be canceled. Actually, personally I'd give them 24hrs for wallet wars, then 24hrs for the "prepare yourselves" period, then the war is on.

Also, the wardeccers don't have to form alt corps; all they have to do is pay a bigger fee, something that the defenders can't afford to match.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#60 - 2016-03-14 13:59:47 UTC
Ibutho Inkosi wrote:
bored, juvenile players who just can't be bothered to play the deeper game offered by EVE's design. .

Show us on the doll where the bad man touched you.

You're clearly so biased against this particular choice of Eve gameplay that your impression of it is irrelevant.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.