These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Fanfest: War Declarations

First post
Author
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#221 - 2012-03-25 22:19:06 UTC
CCP Punkturis wrote:
some people thought nobody from the team was reading this thread


Create an Item Exchange sell contract. Rightclick item inside the contract > Find in Contracts or Market Details
!! you cant! (but you can with WTB contracts)

There was a time you could rightclick on the blue Info icon for the menu but that was removed! This sucks when you're trying to compare the contract price to other contracts/market

Reason i bug you about this is i saw you talking about fixing all the rightclick menus and you missed this one!

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP

gfldex
#222 - 2012-03-25 22:32:57 UTC
CCP Punkturis wrote:
I've nothing specific to say though because I'm "just" a programmer, just wanted to post here because I noticed some people thought nobody from the team was reading this thread Cool


Thank you for noticing.

If you take all the sand out of the box, only the cat poo will remain.

Kira Vanachura
Green Visstick High
#223 - 2012-03-25 22:56:09 UTC
Allendra Sormana wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
...
What you don't get instead, is that this IS an unconsensual PvP game therefore you just cannot opt out of PvP here.
Indeed if you want to play EvE you have to factor in losses.
...
While that may be a design intent it is just not true. Yes, you can always be shot at when in space, but nobody forces you to undock in the first place. There are plenty of people who play this game without ever undocking, their playstyle is just radically different, more like a multiplayer-economy-simulation. If you do undock you are of course at some degree of risk of being shot at, but it is rather small if you have a rough idea of what you're doing and don't want to be shot at...
Also you can just refuse to do pvp by not undocking if you have an active wardec, also plenty of people who play that way.

I think you have an important point here. It's unconsensual and people try to find all ways to avoid PvP. Plugging a few loopholes isn't going to make people PvP. If they don't find other ways to avoid it, they can always just stay in station. Or log off and play WoW. I guess that is not what CCP is after. No, I hope that is not what CCP is after.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#224 - 2012-03-25 22:56:41 UTC
Amateratsu wrote:

One of the biggest issues with the current war dec system is that an agressor can basicly keep a war going indefinitely.

What is needed is a system where either side can defeat the other and force the war to end, goals or targets need to be set and when 1 side achieves those goals /targets he is declared the victor and the war ends.


Why is that an issue, let alone the "biggest issue"? You can disband your corp, then you've been defeated and the war ends. CCP seems to be coming up with an idea of surrender terms, so that one side can negotiate with the other to end the war and I would assume if the terms are accepted there can't be a resumption of hostilities for a period of time. So essentially there is already and will be more ways for a war to end.


Ting von Amarr wrote:
There is something i don't understand ...

When i read this thread, there is lot of people saying such things as "Kill all these carebears", "You have fun just running your POS, burn in hell etc ...".

So seem, the game is missing some PVP action, that people want to annoy other player who are NOT interested at all by PVP.

So :

1 - Do people not interested at all by PVP, and just taking fun with little industrial things with 1 or 2 friends have to stop the game ?


People not interested in PvP at all shouldn't be playing EVE, so yes they should stop playing or learn to embrace and enjoy PvP. The entire game revolves around warfare and player conflict, even if your not shooting people you're making ISK to buy machines of war, minerals to build them, you're making them, or you're selling them.

It's a Sandbox everything is linked and interconnected, or if it isn't it ought to be. It's also a Sandbox entirely based on conflict and warfare. Why would you play this game if you are "NOT interested at all by PVP"? Seriously that's just stupid.




Victoria Sefica
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#225 - 2012-03-25 23:16:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Victoria Sefica
Xorv wrote:
Amateratsu wrote:

People not interested in PvP at all shouldn't be playing EVE, so yes they should stop playing or learn to embrace and enjoy PvP.

Sure, I'm gonna suicide my hulk to a gatekamp in Tama and jump into a Merlin PvP-ing like a pro, throwing months and years of training into waste. Hm, wait I became a miner/industrialist in the first place because PvP didn't appeal to me, and I managed to play the game successfully so far, hence your argument is invalid - PvP should not be forced on everyone in high security space. You want good pvp - go to Surajento and say hi to Snuff, or go to OMS and visit Desmans. Surely that's more fun that forcing miners into Merlins... Huh. bot those guys tend to shoot back, don't they?

Quote:
The entire game revolves around warfare and player conflict, even if your not shooting people you're making ISK to buy machines of war, minerals to build them, you're making them, or you're selling them.

A lot of stuff in real life revolves around warfare, still you don't see all that many scientists from DARPA going to Iraq, do you?

Quote:
It's a Sandbox everything is linked and interconnected, or if it isn't it ought to be. It's also a Sandbox entirely based on conflict and warfare. Why would you play this game if you are "NOT interested at all by PVP"?

Because the Sandbox provides so much more than just PvP. It's the most complex game, closest to rl economy that I've ever seen and that's why I love and play it.

[quote]People not interested in PvP at all shouldn't be playing EVE, so yes they should stop playing or learn to embrace and enjoy PvP.

Seriously THAT's just stupid.
Ting von Amarr
Doomheim
#226 - 2012-03-25 23:27:00 UTC
Xorv wrote:
It's a Sandbox everything is linked and interconnected, or if it isn't it ought to be. It's also a Sandbox entirely based on conflict and warfare. Why would you play this game if you are "NOT interested at all by PVP"? Seriously that's just stupid.


Maybe because PVP is a part of the game, not THE game. Maybe because players can just love trading, crafting, researching ? Maybe CCp Diagoras can tell us the % of accounts who don't get 1 killmail ? Just for fun ?

Even the guy from CCP said at fanfest he knows the new system is completely unbalanced, but no problem for him, it is unbalanced, so it's just a "****" he wants to commit in prod instead of taking more time to think to a better system, as seem urgent ... It's in inferno patch ... No time to rethink and recode alll this.

Do someone know if CSM is behind that ?
Liam Mirren
#227 - 2012-03-25 23:47:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Liam Mirren
There's a difference between disliking PVP while focussing on PVE/production and outright refusing to admit/realise that this game is built around PVP, trying to wish it away.

If you mine you can get ganked, would you fit more tank the chance of being ganked is lower but you lose yield. That's a choice, you can choose to tank more and be safer OR you can choose to max yield and run more risk, either way it's one's own choice, don't make the lazy choice and then whine when something goes wrong.

If you're in a pve/production corp you can choose to put in a tiny bit of time&effort to actually get some teamwork going and learn/talk/prepare for a possible attack or wardec, you can also choose to have a bunch of folks in your corp that are more PVP minded. That way you have a more alround corp which will probably have more interaction going while at the same time being better prepared for any problems, but this ofcourse takes effort, thought and preparation. If you CHOOSE to be a one sided corp full of people who refuse to admit that there's bad guys out there and thus cba to prepare for it, you choose to become victims.

You can choose to ignore all that, do your own little thing in your own little universe while not doing something about it and just put your fingers in your ears going "lalalala" when someone states that this game has pvp, and then whine when it knocks on your door. If you CHOOSE to be unprepared, to not pay attention and to stay uninformed then you CHOOSE to get in trouble a lot.

If you want peace, prepare for war.

Excellence is not a skill, it's an attitude.

Masral Kabo
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#228 - 2012-03-25 23:52:55 UTC
So clearly you, Vahrokha, are upset you wont be able to keep your zero risk Jita POSs without interacting with other eve players.

Are you of the opinion that alliance jumping to avoid wardecs is a reasonable tactic?

All the little complaints you have about the new system can be tweaked after launch if they are genuinely a problem. Stop being so melodramatic.

The only real problem i see atm is the pricing of wardecs. If the cost was proportional to the difference in active player numbers between corps then:

- large corps would be less inclined to harass small corps
- small/1 man corps would be less likely to grief medium/large industry/noob corps in a similar way to afk cloakers in 0.0.

It should not be cheap for a one man corp to affect the gameplay of numerous noobs/industrialists. When i started the game i joined multiple noob corps which were harassed and subsequently disbanded because of 1 man corp wardecs. I cant remember ever being wardecced by a similar sized pvp corp. Probably because we weren't worth their time.
Victoria Sefica
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#229 - 2012-03-26 00:16:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Victoria Sefica
You are absolutely right. The main problem with the proposed changes is that it will make griefers turn to even easier targets (small indi corps) and boast with their tears on forums and (eventually) on Fanfest (puke icon). However that is hardly the only problem.

Now if they make corp size differences (deccer vs the decced) matter in war costs, fix corp hopping (whatever that ccp guy said, risks for deccers are un-existent as long as they can go back to npc corps during wartime) and stick folks who neut-RR an individual war flag for the duration of the conflict... well then it could be called a major improvement.

However, atm this is crap in it's purest form.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#230 - 2012-03-26 00:35:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Xorv
Victoria Sefica wrote:

Quote:
The entire game revolves around warfare and player conflict, even if your not shooting people you're making ISK to buy machines of war, minerals to build them, you're making them, or you're selling them.

A lot of stuff in real life revolves around warfare, still you don't see all that many scientists from DARPA going to Iraq, do you?


If we must talk 'real life' Iranian scientists have been assassinated in recent years, civilian transport drivers were killed in Iraq, ultimately when war reaches your home country anyone and everyone can become target and a victim, but most certainly scientists and manufacturers. Maybe you should spend more time understanding what has and is happening in the real world before using it as an example for the virtual world of EVE.

Whether you like it or not, in EVE you are a military entity, your not a civilian scientist. I don't know what it is with people like you but your always making analogies with EVE characters to things like real life scientists, pizza delivery boys, and burger flippers to justify your failed arguments. It's nonsense

Victoria Sefica wrote:

Quote:
It's a Sandbox everything is linked and interconnected, or if it isn't it ought to be. It's also a Sandbox entirely based on conflict and warfare. Why would you play this game if you are "NOT interested at all by PVP"?

Because the Sandbox provides so much more than just PvP. It's the most complex game, closest to rl economy that I've ever seen and that's why I love and play it.


Right a sandbox economy that is entirely driven by conflict and warfare. Point me to the part of EVE's economy that has nothing to do with warfare and blowing stuff up?
Victoria Sefica
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#231 - 2012-03-26 00:45:39 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Spitfire
*snip* Please post constructively. Spitfire
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#232 - 2012-03-26 01:08:03 UTC
CCP Punkturis wrote:
you guys write many words Shocked

I've nothing specific to say though because I'm "just" a programmer, just wanted to post here because I noticed some people thought nobody from the team was reading this thread Cool
Awesome. Then perhaps they can fix this idea before it goes live.

The whole thing of unlimited allies for the defender destroys the war dec system. I'm sure you envisioned an idea of well-paid merc contracts and a bustling war-related economy. But that's not the way EvE works. Players will do this for free. I will do this for free! I get free wars. Sure there might be Awesome Mercs(tm) who still require payment, which is great for them. And if a defender opts for that route it's no problem. Because I (and everybody like me) can still be added into the war at our low low free cost. Cuz it's... Unlimited Allies! If you start a war you are completely screwed. You are gonna get blobbed to death. Which will quickly mean, no hi-sec wars. Honestly how can you not see that this will happen? Are you that out of touch with EvE-player mentality?

Not to mention there is still zero reason for nullsec or lowsec entities to pay for a war. Really what would they gain from it?

We had faith in you. You were supposed to fix this shiite, not destroy it.
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#233 - 2012-03-26 01:15:13 UTC
Xorv wrote:
Point me to the part of EVE's economy that has nothing to do with warfare and blowing stuff up?
P.I. resources > Fuel Blocks > Research POS > Fuel Block BPCs... regardless of whether or not there is PvP that cycle could continue indefinitely.

But yeah 99% of EvE economy is based on warfare and stuff getting blown up.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#234 - 2012-03-26 01:19:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Masral Kabo wrote:
So clearly you, Vahrokha, are upset you wont be able to keep your zero risk Jita POSs without interacting with other eve players.

Are you of the opinion that alliance jumping to avoid wardecs is a reasonable tactic?

All the little complaints you have about the new system can be tweaked after launch if they are genuinely a problem. Stop being so melodramatic.

The only real problem i see atm is the pricing of wardecs. If the cost was proportional to the difference in active player numbers between corps then:


Let me put down a little drawing for you.

In a perfect universe (which I enjoyed when I was a new player and I could play 3-4 hours a day in a PvP corp) you are a though guy with team work friendly corpies.

You get decced? COOL we had up to 7 decs at the same time, that meant more targets!
You get a POS reinforced? Cool we assembled a dozen of carriers and much more and pew pew (I was way too new so I had to camp a gate in a puny BC with other guys).
You get a mining op? Cool, 10 Hulks in 0.3 sec constantly guarded for the full duration by corpies.


Then one day it ends.
You suddenly have a life and are down to 1h gameplay every other day.
Yet you still love EvE.

So you end up alone in hi sec or in some crappy corp, like probably 50%+ of the whole playerbase.
Nobody wants a 1h every other day player, certainly not give him corp POS access (tried joining such corp on my industry characters, 2 times out of 2 a guy ended up stealing stuff, because POS access rights management is a sad joke).
At this point you setup a POS by yourself. You grind standings, buy the required stuff and so on. No mercs want to defend it, used to find "retainer" deals but then it fell out of general acceptance.
Some unknown corp with a skull in their logo wardecs you. You know they will just wait for you to be offline to reinforce the POS. They want 500M to clear the wardec.

You pay them. Few days later another unknown corp with another skull magically re-wardecs you. Is it alts? Is it just news that a dumb guy actually pays ransoms? Does not matter. They also want 500M.
Just a few hits like this and you invested 20B in BPOs, researched them for 1 year of pure cost zero income and are still losing 500M a ransom. GREAT deal!
The "OH YOU HAVE CONSEQUENCES IN EVE" for the wardeccers? 20M? AH AH AH! That's though on them, eh?

Or

You tell them to GTFO and tear your POS down. You just lost 200M in POS fuel and 20 days in research on every BPO (it gets completely cancelled when you rip labs off), which means about further 80M damage per slot (there can be dozens of slots in a POS).

Let's see the CONSEQUENCES for the wardeccers? 20M, once again they really had to sweat blood, I mean, they had to risk their neck with the downsides of their wardec, uh?

Or

For some miracle you find mercs to fight for you. They ask 1B and do NOT guarantee the POS will not be destroyed, just that they will fight vs the wardeccers.

Let's see the CONSEQUENCES for the wardeccers? 20M and they get the pew pew they were after. Once again, this looks clearly balanced.



It's is clearly surprising how people just love to be butt drilled without vaseline like this. I mean, it's totally a 50% vs 50% CONSEQUEEEEENCES deal between deccers and their target, something both have to sit down and precisely calculate the pro vs cons. Or not.

But hey, if you love EvE but can't hard core it any more, you should indeed GTFO and GBWoW. That's player retention 101.
Allendra Sormana
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#235 - 2012-03-26 01:29:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Allendra Sormana
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
Not to mention there is still zero reason for nullsec or lowsec entities to pay for a war. Really what would they gain from it?

Both obviously get the obvious, which is that they can also shoot their enemies in high-sec. Admittedly that matters less for 0.0 as nobody would go shopping with their main. For lowsec this shopping in high might also not be an option in the first place if the sec status is too low to do so in the first place. Lowsec gets the added bonus of shooting enemies (or lets just call them tagets) without getting a sec hit every time. Also a thing that might matter to some more than others.
All in all this isn't a huge thing to get for a (potentially) big wardec price, but wars are mechanics intended for empire space, not 0.0. And mainly for highsec, not lowsec, to get around concord. Nobody forces you to use the system, and why would you if you don't ever go to highsec? It's a (needed) way to be able to shoot pos, either to get phat l00t or put up your own in that spot. It can allow you to hunt your enemies if they flee to highsec but you feel you've been wronged so badly you have to hunt them.

Just to make this clear again, even though I think the changes can be improved upon (how can be found in my posts, obviously) I'm generally in favor of them. Preferably price should be defined by the member difference of the corps and somewhat scaled by the size of both, but those are things that I would consider "tuning the system".
What is an absolute requirement for this to have any meaningful effect at all is to stop corp hopping together with the changes. There is no alternative! Otherwise any changes to the war system become meaningless, just like the peace treaties that we will be able to negotiate, like everything else around the war system in general.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#236 - 2012-03-26 01:44:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Tippia wrote:
The whole idea the devs presented was that you paid for gaining access to targets. More targets = easier to find = moar ISKies!! Few targets = harder to find = less ISK… the problem is, of course, that that's just nonsense. It's not difficult in the slightest to find a small group, and that this pricing structure just means large alliances get an extra layer of security for free that their sheer numbers alone should provide. Making it a relative-size or ratio scheme, it would rather (admittedly only ever so slightly, and with the aforementioned caveats) incentivise something that could — at a distance — be considered approaching a “fair” fight. The caveats also open up for some fun player-run cottage industries, and that's always a bonus in my view.

I can't stress enough how much I agree with this paragraph. It's a massive gap in logic to claim that any and all war declarations are just "by the pound" shopping sprees for war targets. Some are, sure. But it's ridiculous to claim that all are. There are plenty of reasons to wage war that don't include being bored and simply needing something to shoot.

There's absolutely no rational explanation for why a small corporation declaring upon a bigger one should be penalized for taking on increased risk. How can anyone justify a 20-man corporation paying less to declare war on a 5-man corporation than a 150-man corporation, considering that the latter has significant numerical superiority?

Dutarro wrote:
That's exactly my opinion. Member count will be gamed just as war dec count is already (a.k.a. "dec shielding"). An inverse member count scale is interesting, but can also be gamed. For example, 100-member corp breaks into five 20-member corps and opens a chat channel ... now you need five decs that are five times as costly to attack them all. Tying war cost to corp income potential imposes a risk/reward tradeoff that is much harder to game.

It's true that this will make those newly-made smaller corporations more expensive to declare upon. However, the original aggressor now has the ability to cherry-pick which specific offshoots it wants to go after. On top of that, implementing floors and ceilings for war fees would help mitigate this strategy.

Dutarro wrote:
Also, I disagree with the premise that a war dec from a small aggressor is less damaging than a large aggressor. When a 2-man PvP corp decs a 100-man indy corp, all 100 defenders have to adjust their game play but the aggressor does not. It's sort of the high sec equivalent of the afk cloaker. At least when a larger corp decs you, there's an enemy online and possibly in space for you to go fight with. I'm not saying that the 2-man dec vs. 100 should be forbidden, but it shouldn't be cheap either.

This is a logical fallacy. The 100-man corporation has a significant numerical advantage when being at war with a 2-man corporation; a benefit it doesn't have when being at war with a corporation of similar size. It's absurd to claim that 2 people are more dangerous than 100, absolutely absurd. If you guys can't defeat someone with 50:1 odds, then frankly, you should be ashamed of yourselves.

Victoria Sefica wrote:
A lot of stuff in real life revolves around warfare, still you don't see all that many scientists from DARPA going to Iraq, do you?

These scientists belong to an organization (nation) which maintains significant military assets to protect its industrial base. On the other hand, the bears pleading for absolute safety in high-sec demand that they be allowed the option of conducting industrial activities without having to worry about defending themselves at all. No one is stopping industrial corporations from recruiting pvp pilots, and then compensating them for their services with the profits from the increased industrial capacity their protection affords them.

Liam Mirren wrote:
There's a difference between disliking PVP while focussing on PVE/production and outright refusing to admit/realise that this game is built around PVP, trying to wish it away.

Agree with everything you said, but especially that.

Also, lol at the guy who thinks that everyone should be entitled to have a POS within 3 jumps of Jita, and be able to have limitless opportunities for the most profitable ventures without being exposed to any kind of risk. Laughable.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Jas Dor
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#237 - 2012-03-26 03:36:00 UTC
Hum haven't gone through all this mess. The issues though seem to be:

1. Defender corp can bring in allies but not aggressor corp. Solution: let the defender corp bring in one ally. After that if the defender brings in an ally the aggressor also gets to bring one in. If implemented this way a chance exists for things to spiral out of control with attacker and defender eventually bringing half of high sec into the fight. I have trouble seeing how this is a bad thing.

2. This might lead to more deccing of small corps. There are actually two problems here.

a. Atomizing of the one man research corps that are the backbone of the T2 economy and;
b. At present POS mechanics are so defective that without a human gunner present any size high sec POS with any level of hardening, ECM and Guns can be killed by 10 toons if they know how to do it. If POSes suddenly have a problem inflation is going to go through the roof.
Muestereate
Minions LLC
#238 - 2012-03-26 04:21:41 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Ting von Amarr wrote:
"I'm a sheep, come to shave me !"

(English is not my native langage, sorry).

We know. :)

But it's cool. EVE is multi-national. And you speak English far far better than I can speak your native tongue.


Poetic, your nice side is showing . get with the program and HTFU
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#239 - 2012-03-26 04:30:28 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
Xorv wrote:


Whether you like it or not, in EVE you are a military entity, your not a civilian scientist. I don't know what it is with people like you but your always making analogies with EVE characters to things like real life scientists, pizza delivery boys, and burger flippers to justify your failed arguments. It's nonsense



See, I thought the whole point of an MMORPG is that someone who is not normally a bad ass can role play as a bad ass. So, if someone is role playing as a pizza delivery boy, what does that make them in real life? A little girl with a lemonade stand?

Not to mention the fact that all the scientists and pizza delivery boys and lemonade stand girls in the real world are protected by men and women with guns. Why should Eve - a cold, harsh, dark, universe - be any kinder and gentler?

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Masral Kabo
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#240 - 2012-03-26 04:33:52 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

Let me put down a little drawing for you.


I dont see a problem with this picture. People like yourself would drop out of POS related activities resulting in a drop in supply (of whatever you're producing) increasing profits for people who are willing to put in the extra effort.

I want a ratting Titan but i cant be arsed joining/creating an alliance and putting in the required work for it so... i dont get a Titan. Likewise, if you aren't willing to do whats required to run a successful POS operation after the new mechanics are implemented then you cant have it. There are plenty of other things you can do.