These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

The not-quite-a-carebear objection to the wardec system.

Author
Cassiel Valdis
#1 - 2012-05-10 09:05:37 UTC
TLDR crowd: you only need to read to the divider to get the gist of this post.

Before I even step up on my little soapbox, and before you even start typing your snarky little reply about how Eve is supposed to be dangerous and whatnot, let me make one thing absolutely super-duper double-plus clear.

I like PVP. I like that everything except sitting in dock is at least a little bit dangerous. I like that I can kill people who have offended me, and vice versa. I love that preying on carebears is a valid career path.


That said, I cannot fathom what the developers were going for with the corporate war system. For those of you who have the attention span of a squirrel on speed and assume everyone wants to know about it; I'll sum it up in three quick points so you don't have to give yourself repetitive stress injuries from typing tldr all day.
1. From an in-universe standpoint, it makes no sense.
2. From a player standpoint, it seems to do absolutely nothing but encourage griefing.
3. The fact that you personally enjoy ganking people is fine, but does NOT mean Eve is "All about PVP, all the time, everywhere."

TLDRers, you can stop reading now.


Now, for those of you who have a longer attention span, I'll continue on. This is part rant, part question: I'm happy to admit that I'm new enough that I may just be completely missing some things; and if so, I'd love to stand corrected.

I started playing quite recently, and up until today, I was loving the game - and the fact I'm posting this instead of just walking away hints that I may love it yet. I loved that danger and reward went hand-in-hand, that the best way to profit fast meant taking risks and making allies. I HATE working with other people, and I still love that it's encouraged. It's realistic, it's sensible, etc, etc, sing its praises to the heavens, etc.

However - I loved the OPPOSITE, as well. I loved that the security system meant that the entire galaxy was not like a Mad Max film 100% of the time. I liked the fact that although there were places where I had to be constantly looking over my shoulder, there were also places where I could let my guard down a bit, secure in the knowledge that only someone with a serious grudge would be willing to make the sacrifices required to kill me.

Then, my first war declaration notice arrived in my inbox (from some random 2-member corp with members I had never even met, let alone had a chance to **** off.) I did some research. I assumed the site I was reading had to have been wrong. I did more research which agreed with the first site. I sat in shock for a minute. "For a palty two mill, which is pocket lint even to my newb ass, a person can (and had) simply declared herself above the law, re:me? Seriously?" I mean, come on - this is the equivalent of, in real life, being able to pay about five bucks to the government and then being allowed to mug someone in the middle of a shopping mall, follow them to their car and slash the tires, go to their home and break all their windows and steal all their possessions, and then **** on the corpse afterwards for the lulz. Oh, and the mugger gets to be armed (the players declaring war on us have been playing and presumably training up their skills for years) while the victim does not (two new players who aren't even past the end of the first subscription period.)

We have nothing they can realistically want aside from our sweet angst, and we have no realistic chance of defending ourselves unless they are the absolute most brain-dead veteran players in the galaxy.

I've probably lost a dozen ships already before this wardec - I honestly enjoy taking risks! - and none of those have bothered me in the slightest. I accept that when I wander my newb butt into .2 security systems or sit around with a hull full of valuables, I'm making myself a target, and I'm fine with that. I have NOT lost any ships to the corp that has declared war on me; but nonetheless, THIS is the thing that is causing me to hate the game right now. Just the IDEA that this is possible offends me. If two corps want to agree to have a little scrap in high-sec and go "Hey, CONCORD, we both think you should leave us to our business," that's awesome, and I support it 100%. But allowing someone to say "Hey, CONCORD, I think I shouldn't be subject to your laws now, kthxbye," is absurd, both in- and out-of-universe.

Now, I know I have the option of sitting in an NPC corp, and I don't mind paying the taxes that go with it; but I miss having some of the basic organization abilities that come with a corporation (such as being able to use the corporate wallet for convenient loot dividing after rolling around the galaxy with my buds) and I cannot see the benefit of forcing me to stay there just because I don't want to get ganked anywhere and anytime some random bored long term player feels like it. Why in the name of all the gods would you want to force newer players to choose to either 1. Sit in an NPC corp; or 2. Get griefed?

For two million, I can now be killed in highsec without repercussions. If you think I should be fine with that, consider the reverse - suppose I could pay two million for a "peacedec" or some lame thing like that and suddenly have CONCORD follow me around like my own personal security force in lowsec. The current wardec system is exactly as stupid as that.

I once killed a six-pack, just to watch it die.

Doctor Ungabungas
Doomheim
#2 - 2012-05-10 09:25:01 UTC
I agree, it is stupid - however the idea is that rather than everyone sitting in their own one man corporations, they'll start to talk to other players and maybe band together - if for no other reason than to make it more expensive to war dec you,
Vilnius Zar
SDC Multi Ten
#3 - 2012-05-10 09:26:52 UTC
Doctor Ungabungas wrote:
I agree, it is stupid - however the idea is that rather than everyone sitting in their own one man corporations, they'll start to talk to other players and maybe band together - if for no other reason than to make it more expensive to war dec you,


So you mean they'll form zombie corps with 15 people online who never talk or use teamwork?

That's new.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#4 - 2012-05-10 09:29:32 UTC
Yes. This is the price you pay for the benefits of having a player corp.

The new wardec system can be solved with a single line: abs( ln( attacker / defender ) / ln( multiplier factor) ) × multiplier cost + base cost.
Cassiel Valdis
#5 - 2012-05-10 09:40:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
This is the price you pay for the benefits of having a player corp.


Yes, obviously I understand this: the entire point of my post is that I understand this is true, but do not understand WHY. Why encourage people to live in an NPC corp like 30-somethings living in their parents' basements? Why would you NOT want me trying to get all my non-Eve friends to come join my Super-Radical No-Girls-Allowed Eve-Club(!!1!11!)?

My recruitment speeches loose a little something when they go like this: "Hey, you ought to give Eve a try! We can play together! I mean, you can't join my "guild" unless you want to get murdered by random people, and we'll have to spend a half hour at the end of the night manually dividing up the proceeds from our loot sales, and you'll want to stay in an NPC corp and be laughed at for it for like a year, but I... Actually, screw it. Let's go to the bar."

I once killed a six-pack, just to watch it die.

Tor Gungnir
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2012-05-10 09:40:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Tor Gungnir
Maybe put an upkeep cost on the wardec over the weekly cost. To make the choice to wardec not as easily made. The benefits far outweigh the price at the moment.

Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you.

Cassiel Valdis
#7 - 2012-05-10 10:04:06 UTC
Tor Gungnir wrote:
The benefits far outweigh the price at the moment.

Precisely. I don't want high-sec to be a gank-free zone, but it should require some sort of risk/penalty for the ganker.

I'm not sure raising the cost is a solution, though. I mean, the people most likely to abuse the system are bored players who have been around forever and have long since passed the point where they have nothing really left to spend cash on. If we price it for them, we price it out of reach of mid-tier people who aren't using it solely to grief strangers; making it an even worse system than before.

I once killed a six-pack, just to watch it die.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#8 - 2012-05-10 10:10:43 UTC
Cassiel Valdis wrote:
Yes, obviously I understand this: the entire point of my post is that I understand this is true, but do not understand WHY. Why encourage people to live in an NPC corp like 30-somethings living in their parents' basements?
Nothing of the kind is happening. That's just player choice and the game offering options. Each choice has its pros and cons — you have to choose which one is the better for you.

The only “encouragement” comes from players who perpetuate the myth that it's dangerous to have a corp.
Cassiel Valdis
#9 - 2012-05-10 10:30:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Cassiel Valdis
Tippia wrote:
Nothing of the kind is happening. That's just player choice and the game offering options. Each choice has its pros and cons — you have to choose which one is the better for you.

The only “encouragement” comes from players who perpetuate the myth that it's dangerous to have a corp.


Few things here. First, you are seriously missing the point to my main post, to whit: war decs in general add nothing but grief, subtract from realism. I don't care how much you like/don't like PC/NPC corps or the decision making process surrounding them - the war dec system is absurd from any angle.

Second, what do you think pros and cons are, if not things which encourage people to make specific choices? Adding massive cons to something is absolutely an encouragement to do the opposite. If you're going to try playing semantics games with me, at least do a good job of it.

Third, your "myth" is currently my reality, so don't even bother trying to convince me of that piece of garbage.

I once killed a six-pack, just to watch it die.

Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#10 - 2012-05-10 10:30:34 UTC
My experience is that 90% of the War Decs are a joke.

The 'perpetrators' hardly ever undock, much less engage.

One has to be on one's toes though during all other normal activities, as one never knows.

I say if the War Dec initiators have not engaged one in any way within the first 7 days, the dec should be automatically cancelled.

The people who War Dec for a month and then never log in at all should recieve a 30 Day Harrassment Ban.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882

Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#11 - 2012-05-10 10:34:30 UTC
Cassiel Valdis wrote:


Third, your "myth" is currently my reality, so don't even bother trying to convince me of that piece of garbage.


"I Heartily Endorse This Statement."

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882

Ilnaurk Sithdogron
Blackwater International
#12 - 2012-05-10 10:59:22 UTC
My alliance has been wardecced once or twice, at least for the time that I've been in it. No one ever seems to actually do too much - the enemy once tried to gank a few of our miners, but that went nowhere.

I've never had an enemy show up when I was running missions during a wardec.

Overall, I'd have to agree with Krixtal Icefluxor's statement that 90% of wardecs are a joke.

http://eve-sojourn.blogspot.com/

Keno Skir
#13 - 2012-05-10 11:15:13 UTC
I kinda agree, everything is (kinda) fine except the cost. Make wars MUCH more expensive and i think it would add depth.
Singoth
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2012-05-10 11:23:34 UTC
I agree with the sentiment.


how about some solutions?

Solution 1: possibly a sort of bribe for Concord:
Pay some money to Concord > concord no longer allows wardecs against your corporation and concord also no longer allows you to wardec an other corporation.

The cost to bribe concord is based on your membership numbers, so the more members of your corp, the higher the cost.

limitations to prevent abuse:
- if you already have a wardec declared on you, those will remain active and can also be extended.
Any future wardecs will be blocked.
- you can not do this if you have wardecced an other corporation.

This way, those who want to PvP can do so, they can get wardecs against them, and they can wardec others. It's almost, but not quite, consensual.
Those who don't want to PvP in a "legit" wardec, can do so, but will lose lots of money with bribing Concord all the time without even knowing if others will wardec them.

And of course, this doesn't make you immune to suicide ganks, lowsec/nullsec roams and other such stuff. It merely makes you immune to wardecs.



Solution 2: Make the cost of the declaring corporation based on the total skillpoint differences between the declaring corp and the target corp. (result is based on simply subtracting the SP of the target corp from the SP of the declaring corp)
If the difference is positive (the declaring corporation has more SP than their target) then the cost of war will be increased. If the difference is negative (the declaring corp has less SP than their target), nothing happens and the base cost must be paid.
Base cost still remains 2 million ISK.

Maximum cost is based on the amount of active wardecs by the declaring corp, the amount of wardecs already declared against the target corp, and the SP difference between the declaring corp and the target corp.

This doesn't prevent the "old vets" from declaring war on newbie corporations, but will make it very expensive as obviously, the veteran corp has much more total skillpoints than the newbie corporation. It also doesn't prevent 1000 man corps from wardeccing a 1-man corp, but again, will make the cost unattractive versus the rewards.

A system like this makes it more oriented on declaring war on targets that are about the same level as your corporation, or stronger than your level. But targetting pilots weaker than yourself with wardecs will have a cost attached to it.

Example numbers, can be tweaked:
For every SP in difference, 2 ISK is added to the cost of war.
For every war already in effect against or by the declaring corp, the cost is multiplied by 2
For every war already in effect against or by the target corp, the cost is multiplied by 5

Corporation A, with a total of 5 million SP, with 0 wars active, declares war on Corporation B, with a total of 1 million SP, which also has 0 wars active.
The cost will be: (5 million - 1 million) = 4 million. 4 million * 2 = 8 million.

Corporation A, with a total of 1 million SP, with 0 wars active, declares war on Corporation B, with a total of 5 million SP, which also has 0 wars active.
The cost will be: 2 million ISK, as the difference is negative.

Corporation A, with a total of 5 million SP, with 0 wars active, declares war on Corporation B, with a total of 1 million SP, which has 1 war active.
The cost will be: (5 million - 1 million) = 4 million. 4 million * 2 = 8 million. 8 million * 5 = 40 million.

Corporation A, with a total of 1 million SP, with 1 wars active, declares war on Corporation B, with a total of 5 million SP, which has 0 wars active.
The cost will be: 2 million * 2 = 4 million ISK

Corporation A, with a total of 5 million SP, with 1 war active, declares war on Corporation B, with a total of 1 million SP, which has 1 war active.
The cost will be: (5 million - 1 million) = 4 million. 4 million * 2 = 8 million. 8 million * 2 * 5 = 80 million.

Corporation A, with a total of 1 million SP, with 1 wars active, declares war on Corporation B, with a total of 5 million SP, which has 1 war active.
The cost will be: 2 million * 2 * 5 = 20 million ISK.

of course, real game scenarios might end up in weird numbers like 20,132,056 credits for war dec.

Less yappin', more zappin'!

Maxpie
MUSE LLP
#15 - 2012-05-10 11:25:12 UTC
OP, I agree, but I'm not sure what would be a better system which would keep this game unique and pvp-centric.

What you could do, since you don't seem so risk averse, is move to low-sec or nrds null sec during the war dec. I notice high-sec griefer corps like the one you describe are afraid to venture into low-sec. They will only go to the bordering high-sec system like a little kid afraid to go into the deep part of a pool.

No good deed goes unpunished

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#16 - 2012-05-10 11:33:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Cassiel Valdis wrote:
First, you are seriously missing the point to my main post, to whit: war decs in general add nothing but grief, subtract from realism.
Realism isn't much of a factor — what they add is the ability to get a bulk discount on ship kills in highsec, as opposed to going for the more expensive suicide route. The reason they're use for nuisance decs is that they're too easy to avoid so there's very little reason to apply them against a strategic target. It's not particularly absurd — it's just too full of holes to be entirely useful for any kind of meaningful conflict.

Quote:
Second, what do you think pros and cons are, if not things which encourage people to make specific choices?

PC Corp — Pros: increased options for S&I work, availability of corp services, protection in numbers, asset management, people you actually want to play with, improved group options; Cons: wardecs.
NPC Corp — Pros: no wardecs; Cons: destructive taxes, restricted to public NPC services, no corp protection, simplistic asset management.

The pros of being in a PC corp vastly outweighs the cons, unless you are deathly afraid of those wardecs for some reason.

Quote:
Third, your "myth" is currently my reality.
…and how dangerous is it? SLOPS has had four wardecs over its two years of existence, with exactly zero danger attached to them. Before that, wardecs were the least of IT's and IRC's worries, and before that RDEX pretty much actively sought out wardecs.
∑ Danger = 0.
Cassiel Valdis
#17 - 2012-05-10 11:43:19 UTC
Ilnaurk Sithdogron wrote:
Overall, I'd have to agree with Krixtal Icefluxor's statement that 90% of wardecs are a joke.


That's good to know, but it doesn't address the core problem, which is that the mechanic itself is flawed and unrealistic.

Singoth wrote:
Solution 2: Make the cost of the declaring corporation based on the total skillpoint differences between the declaring corp and the target corp. (result is based on simply subtracting the SP of the target corp from the SP of the declaring corp)
If the difference is positive (the declaring corporation has more SP than their target) then the cost of war will be increased. If the difference is negative (the declaring corp has less SP than their target), nothing happens and the base cost must be paid.


This is definitely a step in the right direction. I was bouncing around a similar thought earlier, but for some reason I only considered "average" SP numbers and derailed myself by thinking about sticking tons of low SP alts in the corps. Sleep deprivation probably to blame, heh.

Maxpie wrote:
OP, I agree, but I'm not sure what would be a better system which would keep this game unique and pvp-centric.

The thing about this is that I do not consider Eve to be PVP-centric, honestly. Eve is realism-centric, which isn't quite the same. If I wanted straight PVP, I'd fire up Halo or something; Eve is so much more. PVP is a big part of PART of the game, but all us PVP assholes would be bored to tears if we had to mine/refine/manufacture all our own gear. We might not enjoy hanging around high-sec all day, but I think we all have to admit that those high-sec guys are an important part of our game. I may not want to work in a fast food joint myself, but I sure do appreciate that someone's there, serving my my french fries.

Maxpie wrote:
What you could do, since you don't seem so risk averse, is move to low-sec or nrds null sec during the war dec. I notice high-sec griefer corps like the one you describe are afraid to venture into low-sec. They will only go to the bordering high-sec system like a little kid afraid to go into the deep part of a pool.


Excellent advice, from my standpoint (though validating a lot of what Krixtal Icefluxor and Ilnaurk Sithdogron mentioned, in my personal case, the war dec has so far been toothless.) However, like I said above, I also accept that there ARE plenty of risk-averse gamers around, and they shouldn't be forced to suffer griefing over it - they're already paying for it through the basic economic sanctions that come from staying in high-sec, and that seems like a fair trade to me.

I once killed a six-pack, just to watch it die.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#18 - 2012-05-10 11:57:54 UTC
Cassiel Valdis wrote:
The thing about this is that I do not consider Eve to be PVP-centric, honestly. Eve is realism-centric
You've got that part quite the wrong way around. EVE is PvP-centric — everything in the game is PvP in one for or another. None of it is realistic, since it all feeds a war economy where the broken-window fallacy is not a fallacy, but rather the key driving force of the entire game.

Now, even if EVE were meant to be realistic, what about wardecs make them “unrealistic” and flawed?
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#19 - 2012-05-10 12:01:35 UTC
Singoth wrote:
I agree with the sentiment.


how about some solutions?

Solution 1: possibly a sort of bribe for Concord:

SNIP



All irrelevant. You do not see how Goons see.

2 Trillion ISK fee is not a deterrent to them.

Solution must come from elsewhere (i.e CCP).

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882

Cassiel Valdis
#20 - 2012-05-10 12:04:28 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Cassiel Valdis wrote:
The thing about this is that I do not consider Eve to be PVP-centric, honestly. Eve is realism-centric
You've got that part quite the wrong way around. EVE is PvP-centric — everything in the game is PvP in one for or another. None of it is realistic, since it all feeds a war economy where the broken-window fallacy is not a fallacy, but rather the key driving force of the entire game.

Now, even if EVE were meant to be realistic, what about wardecs make them “unrealistic” and flawed?

I think you're insane to say everything in Eve is PVP in one form or another, frankly. The guy who got me started playing, for example, has been around for a decade or so, and he still avoids PVP like the plague. He enjoys the economic and PVE aspects, and like it or not, that's a completely valid game experience. Your Eve is PVP, and that's fine - but his is not. Just because someone else is buying his **** to PVP with does not me that he personally is playing a PVP game.

As for wardocs being unrealistic and flawed, try reading the OP. I see no reason to keep repeating myself.

I once killed a six-pack, just to watch it die.

123Next pageLast page