These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Decrease war Dec price

Author
Lugh Crow-Slave
#21 - 2016-05-31 04:41:39 UTC
true but i feel at best it would work and introduce an extremely limited item with much more potential or at worst never be used and we all continue hub humping
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#22 - 2016-05-31 07:32:56 UTC
My problem with structure based wars is malicanisis law,

It favours larger groups able to mount a static defense with a large standing fleet ,
Smaller groupes and people looking to get into the scene will get rolled over by the big established corps who already blanket the hubs , or the big null boyos who have this kind of warfare already
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#23 - 2016-05-31 08:25:20 UTC
Just cap the number of war decs plus assists at 10. Problem solved.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#24 - 2016-05-31 08:44:35 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
My problem with structure based wars is malicanisis law,

It favours larger groups able to mount a static defense with a large standing fleet ,
Smaller groupes and people looking to get into the scene will get rolled over by the big established corps who already blanket the hubs , or the big null boyos who have this kind of warfare already



corps not being able to dec corps outside their weight class is not the best solution but its better than the current state.


but even if we fix the issues with being the defender in a war dec there are still plenty with being the aggressor biggest one being your target can just drop corp
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#25 - 2016-05-31 13:44:19 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
My problem with structure based wars is malicanisis law,

It favours larger groups able to mount a static defense with a large standing fleet ,
Smaller groupes and people looking to get into the scene will get rolled over by the big established corps who already blanket the hubs , or the big null boyos who have this kind of warfare already

No matter what mechanics CCP uses large will ALWAYS have an advantage over small, the only way to eliminate this part of the problem is to change it so you can only war dec a corp / alliance that has more members than you and then lock both aggressor and defender corps / alliances so no one can join for the duration of the war.

Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
but even if we fix the issues with being the defender in a war dec there are still plenty with being the aggressor biggest one being your target can just drop corp

Limit the number of wars an aggressor corp can have active, limit them to only deccing a group with the same or more members, put a reasonable maximum limit on the length of a dec (1 week maybe 10 days) and add a timer (at least 1 month) before you can re-dec that same group and then we may have some reasonable grounds on which to discuss preventing players from leaving a defending corp. In the current system where the aggressors have total control of the entire process CCP has very little choice, to protect cash flow (subscribers) they have to allow players to drop corp or reform.

But you do make a valid point Lugh Crow-Slave, any restrictions put on the aggressors side needs to be balanced with restrictions on the defenders side. Players will always have ways to dodge war decs, not logging in, playing the game using an alt character or simply quit so in the end there is really nothing that CCP can or even should do about this side of the problem. Besides that is one of the risk versus benefits portions of the war dec mechanic, you pay your money and take your chances maybe you get targets maybe you don't.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#26 - 2016-05-31 14:09:56 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
So to avoid war decs I just have to make enough isk that I can keep my self perma deced by several other alt corps?

This used to be a thing that people did, specifically Ivy League did it. Then it was declared an exploit and they grudgingly stopped then immediately started doing it again when it was declared not an exploit during that period of time when CCP decided that all of the various war dodging exploits were no longer exploits, which then led to the entire dec-shield business.

Basically all forms of cost scaling an exponentially increasing costs are exploitable in some, or multiple ways. Moreover they limit the ability of individuals or small groups without much isk to engage in conflict and push aggression into being the domain of the wealthy.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#27 - 2016-05-31 14:10:56 UTC
Yeah i understand that larger organised entities have an inherint advantage, my problem with structur based wars is that it panders even further to the same large entities who basicaly just camp key systems and the pipes leading to them ,
all they have to do is move their sebod t3's,neutral logi and vindys to your/their structure and sit on the damn thing



Im also not seeingwhy locking agressors into a war for even longer than they currently are will help matters, shurly more fredom to drop a war would be prefferable
Think about it, you only have to avoid the hubs for as long as their patince holds rather than a full week (or longer in your praposal)
Lugh Crow-Slave
#28 - 2016-05-31 14:35:56 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:


Limit the number of wars an aggressor corp can have active, limit them to only deccing a group with the same or more members


so to dec a smaller corp i just break up into smaller ones and dec them with each
Quote:

put a reasonable maximum limit on the length of a dec (1 week maybe 10 days) and add a timer (at least 1 month) before you can re-dec that same group

i just repeat the same steps as above


this is what i mean when i say there are just no easy fixes to the issues :/
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#29 - 2016-05-31 15:48:29 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
what is needed is the attacking group needs to have some assets at risk so they don't have full controll of when and how engagements happen.


It occured to me recently that CCP may have almost stumbled upon this.

-Remove watch lists and locator agents and incorporate them into observatories.


Good idea!



why wouldn't i just put these up with a neutral alt in a neutral corp? that has no connection with me


The targets of locates and watchlist could be told who the owners of the observatory watching them are.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Poranius Fisc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#30 - 2016-05-31 20:48:03 UTC
Null sec alliance gets war dec'd by hub camper's.

Solution: Use out of corp alts to go to hubs and ship through non-allaince sources (black / red frog or PUSHX or whoever.. I know theres a third one there.)

The real bender here is, yeah.. its a pretty big niussance for newer player players, but.. most of high sec war decs that arent hub camps usually involve blowing up a POS.. and are dropped after said pos goes pop.

Multiple war decs a year againsta group of people is pretty much targeting a group of people to harrass them in game... even if they aerent in high sec to get affected. Because there is "a chance" someone didnt pay attanetion to the ingame notification or forgot and might get blown up. Or you keep an alt in one of the starter corp's to do high sec stuff...
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#31 - 2016-06-01 14:47:01 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Yeah i understand that larger organised entities have an inherint advantage, my problem with structur based wars is that it panders even further to the same large entities who basicaly just camp key systems and the pipes leading to them , all they have to do is move their sebod t3's,neutral logi and vindys to your/their structure and sit on the damn thing

Missed the important part. If the aggressor can only dec corps that are larger then they are always at a disadvantage size wise and as such your concern as quoted above becomes a non-issue.
As far as moving the camping from gates / stations to the structures that is intended. It forces the aggressors AND the defenders to make a choice, you can protect your structure or you can go try to destroy the other sides or you can try to do both all of which offers more game play options and the opportunity for more real combat in space than the simple gate / station camps we have now.


Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Im also not seeingwhy locking agressors into a war for even longer than they currently are will help matters, shurly more fredom to drop a war would be prefferable
Think about it, you only have to avoid the hubs for as long as their patince holds rather than a full week (or longer in your praposal)

I never stated that we should lock players into a war for the duration. I simply stated that there needs to be a MAXIMUM duration a war can run. Currently the aggressors can keep a corp perma decced if they want and that is what needs to change.
Likewise the current broken mechanic that locks the aggressors into a war for the entire week, or they have to opt to surrender to end it is equally idiotic and needs to change an aggressor should be able to simply drop a dec whenever they want.

Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
so to dec a smaller corp i just break up into smaller ones and dec them with each
Quote:




put a reasonable maximum limit on the length of a dec (1 week maybe 10 days) and add a timer (at least 1 month) before you can re-dec that same group

i just repeat the same steps as above


this is what i mean when i say there are just no easy fixes to the issues :/

So we go this route, once a corp has had a war started against them no other corp can start a war until the current on ends. But as you have pointed out in the past this allows you permanent war dec immunity because alt corps and that is not a good thing either. So I will turn this back around, you can point out the flaw do you have an idea to solve it?

I can think of one but it may not be feasible. CCP knows which real person owns which characters and which corps those characters are in. They could create an automated data search that looks at the rosters of both the corp filing the dec and the corp being decced, if there are characters in both corps own by the same person then the war would be rejected.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#32 - 2016-06-01 14:57:02 UTC
lol no i don't i have stated as much before i can not think of or have seen any ideas that fix the current issues.

as for your idea of ccp using actual owners to affect how people can do anything in game is just opening a can of worms
Previous page12