EVE Information Portal

This meta gaming is only effective for the corps that want to try to reduce wardecs, and to do so, require massive expenses, and it doesn't stop anyone from wardeccing them anyway (since cost shouldn't be balancing, the price of a wardec is no more effective than the cost of adding alts to a corp). Yes it should be discouraged, but to compare it to a super cap that, even in small numbers, were extremely effective against everything is absurd.

At the cost now they are immune and dont need a 'dec shield', they can continue blobbing lowsec unimpeded.

Good change. It prevents one of the possible exploits.

I'm not sure that the '7-day' lock out for corp member changes is completely good. It's probably too draconian when 3-day limits would have sufficed just as well.

But it doesn't solve the problem of:
- declare war
- scout out a target in a neutral alt
- join wardec, blow up target
- repeat with another neutral alt

And if you wardec the target from multiple shell corps, your neutral alts can:
- hop into corp #1, blow up target, leave corp #1
- find another target, hop into corp #2, blow up target, leavel corp #2
- repeat until your 7-day waiting period is up, rejoin corp #1

In fact, smart attackers will merely setup half a dozen different shell corps. Each shell corp will wardec a different target. All of the fighters stay in NPC corps until they have found a vulnerable enemy. They then insta-join the correct shell corporation which allows them to attack said enemy, then leave right away.

There needs to be a delay on joining an aggressor corporation - such as not being able to join the aggressor corporation until downtime. Which nips the "scout out target, insta-join, pop target" exploit in the bud.

There may not be that many alts like that now, but with this change, the number would explode. You can get a literally infinite amount of alts into inactive accounts for free trough the buddy invite system.
If it goes trough unchanged, people will simply send buddy invites to themselves and choose PLEX as the reward if the "buddy" activates his account, then send the "buddy" account the isk needed for a plex to activate that account with. Create 3 alts on the account and put them in corp, then use the plex you got as a reward to do it again until you reach the desired member count and then sell the last reward plex again.

End result: However many alts you want for 0 cost.

This can be done even if you exclude inactive accounts by simply repeating once every 51 days (when the 21 day trial+30 days from a plex expire), but at least that's better then only having to do it once.

well that makes me feel better. I must say, though, that I rather like the idea of including the ratio somehow, so that small corps can easily declare war against large alliances for comedy and targets, but the opposite is not true - perhaps something like

k*max(1,log10(m*A/D)^p)*log10(q*A)*W^r

where A is Aggressor size,
D is defender size
W is number of extant wars the Aggressor holds
k,m,p,q,r are tuning constants

I don't know for sure - I'm at work, so I'm just writing functions that should multiply roughly in the right shapes with the right properties, but I hope you get the idea.

This does seem an issue. A fix would be 2 cpu rigs: One that hits shields, and one that hits cap recharge rate. You pick the one that works best for you.

Jamming (and other EW) rigs reduce shields, which some, but not all, EW ships care about (Rook cares, Lachesis doesn't).
Drone rigs reduce CPU, which some, but not all, drone ships care about (Vexor cares, Arbitrator doesn't).
Astronautic rigs reduce armor, which some, but not all, fast ships care about (Malediction cares, Stiletto doesn't).

I fail to see how the CPU rig is out of line.

Three cheers for Team Super Friends! \☻/

whooyes

Dumb alt mechanics, forum alt posting, sec status avoiding, all gone... Mmmmm...

You are not allowed to make me daydream. Stop it.