These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Ally wardec system allready showing its flaws ?

Author
Isokuro
tr0pa de elite
#1 - 2012-05-25 08:20:47 UTC
This whole Ally system seems borked allready.

CCP should have never made it so that a defender allaince can ask multiple corps/ allainces
for help and why ?

instead of boosting the Merc market you just destroyed it completely because there are allready
a **** ton of corps and allaince that just ally up with everyone for having more targets.
Making it harder to actually ask a price for being someones ally for a merc.

Same goes with the wars for big allainces in nullsec.

for a quick example: Against All Authorities wardecced Pandemic Legion.
Now because of the higher wardec costs all the high sec pvp allainces and corporations are all
offering to be an ally for PL like Flies on a big fat pile of **** just so they can have these free wars.

So within a week now all the big null sec allainces have discoverd that its actually not a great idea to
officially wardec a other null sec allainces because of this chaining of allies.
leaving your fantastic features made to get a better overall look at the warstats left in the totall dark once again
and you all did it yourself by instead of leaving that number 1 ally and make limitles.
Offcourse this is my personal view but didn't CCP see this comming ?

How do others think about the new wardec system ? ( would be nice if some guys from Merc allainces could give there opinion )
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#2 - 2012-05-25 08:28:54 UTC
We told them this would happen (Alekseyev Karrde made a big write-up on it in another forum section that summarized these concerns), and they didn't listen.

My take on it is that it was simply another concession to carebears, since these changes act as a painfully-obvious nerf to high-sec war aggression.

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

MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2012-05-25 08:31:51 UTC
Sandbox

it'll work itself out

If the system wasn't open to this sort of abuse it would be too closed to promote sandbox gameplay. If the playerbase in eve want to ruin the ally system for a while, it'll happen.

CCP already knew this would be a great way to let people get free wars, and get their allies into war with them for free.

If anything if you're tagging your self as someone who needs defenders it should only be if you're looking to pay someone. There should be an easy way to bring in free allies without littering the merc marketplace with people who don't want someone to give them an offer.

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#4 - 2012-05-25 08:38:34 UTC
MotherMoon wrote:
Sandbox

How is it "sandbox?" I fail to see how it can be "sandbox," unless your definition of sandbox is having all the adults on the playground beat the living **** out of the kid who knocked down another kid's sandcastle.

Look, I'm all for the "if you wardec someone, you better be prepared to fight" ideology. But this is simply absurd. It removes all incentive for declaring war against someone, because no matter how much you like pvp, and no matter how fearless you are, having the enemy get infinite allies is just stupid. No amount of ridicule and chicken-calling is going to get me to engage three hundred people out of principle.

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

Tobiaz
Spacerats
#5 - 2012-05-25 08:47:52 UTC
Nobody is forcing Pandemic Legion to seek allies.
Nobody is forcing Pandemic Legion to accept ally requests.

Working as intended.

Only part that needs a real fix right now is not locking allies for the entire duration of a war.

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!

Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2012-05-25 08:49:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Zagdul
Isokuro wrote:
This whole Ally system seems borked allready.

CCP should have never made it so that a defender allaince can ask multiple corps/ allainces
for help and why ?

instead of boosting the Merc market you just destroyed it completely because there are allready
a **** ton of corps and allaince that just ally up with everyone for having more targets.
Making it harder to actually ask a price for being someones ally for a merc.

Same goes with the wars for big allainces in nullsec.

for a quick example: Against All Authorities wardecced Pandemic Legion.
Now because of the higher wardec costs all the high sec pvp allainces and corporations are all
offering to be an ally for PL like Flies on a big fat pile of **** just so they can have these free wars.

So within a week now all the big null sec allainces have discoverd that its actually not a great idea to
officially wardec a other null sec allainces because of this chaining of allies.
leaving your fantastic features made to get a better overall look at the warstats left in the totall dark once again
and you all did it yourself by instead of leaving that number 1 ally and make limitles.
Offcourse this is my personal view but didn't CCP see this comming ?

How do others think about the new wardec system ? ( would be nice if some guys from Merc allainces could give there opinion )


We didn't 'buddy up' to PL for a 'free war'

We did because it meant more opportunity to kill -A-.

FYI, PL are still red and we still shoot each other. Buf if a decision has to be made of who are better targets, it's -A- every time.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement

Shoot2kilI
The Milkmen
Sedition.
#7 - 2012-05-25 08:52:18 UTC
"Mercs" complaining about the 50m war declaration increase. "Mercs" then complain about getting free wars on other terrible primordial highsec dwellers who think that their army of hulks and level four mission-running ravens can blot out the sun. Complaining about more targets is literally the most ******** thing I've seen since Darius III's CSM thread(s). How more barely-combat-capable targets is a bad thing, I do not know. My alt is having a hilarious time blowing up "allied" orca's and mining barges/exhumers.
Ziranda Hakuli
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2012-05-25 08:54:35 UTC
SHHHHH! your ruining it. the isk sink has a hole in it...................
Ten Bulls
Sons of Olsagard
#9 - 2012-05-25 09:02:07 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
We told them this would happen ... and they didn't listen.


CCP have made concerted efforts so they look like they listen to the players, they even made the CSM with 14 players, 2 of which represent and care about the majority of players.

They post on these forums regularly telling us how it will be, and criticise or ignore objectors, and generally keeping us informed of who the boss is.

How is that now players can see through their mask...
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#10 - 2012-05-25 09:04:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Tobiaz wrote:
Nobody is forcing Pandemic Legion to seek allies.
Nobody is forcing Pandemic Legion to accept ally requests.

Working as intended.

I suppose that if CCP would add a big red button to the UI that allowed you to instantly destroy the ship of the player you're targeting, if you were the defending party in a war with that player's corporation, you wouldn't be forced to use it. But how many people wouldn't?

Shoot2kilI wrote:
"Mercs" complaining about the 50m war declaration increase. "Mercs" then complain about getting free wars on other terrible primordial highsec dwellers who think that their army of hulks and level four mission-running ravens can blot out the sun. Complaining about more targets is literally the most ******** thing I've seen since Darius III's CSM thread(s). How more barely-combat-capable targets is a bad thing, I do not know. My alt is having a hilarious time blowing up "allied" orca's and mining barges/exhumers.

Before the changes, there was an actual mercenary market where people could hire mercenaries by reputation, and mercenaries actually got paid for their work. What we have now is a bunch of privateer-style groups doing the same for free. So point 1 is that there is no more mercenary work, because mercenaries get paid. Point 2 is that this will result in many less outgoing wars. Sure, the more skilled players will be able to evade the allies while achieving their goals, but the average corporation declaring upon another will get absolutely stomped because the defenders will bring in at least a few hundred people by clicking a single button.

Ten Bulls wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
We told them this would happen ... and they didn't listen.

CCP have made concerted efforts so they look like they listen to the players, they even made the CSM with 14 players, 2 of which represent and care about the majority of players.

They post on these forums regularly telling us how it will be, and criticise or ignore objectors, and generally keeping us informed of who the boss is.

How is that now players can see through their mask...

In my many years here, I can say that this has been one of their worst gameplay decisions ever made.

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

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#11 - 2012-05-25 09:10:18 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Tobiaz wrote:
Nobody is forcing Pandemic Legion to seek allies.
Nobody is forcing Pandemic Legion to accept ally requests.

Working as intended.

I suppose that if CCP would add a big red button to the UI that allowed you to instantly destroy the ship of the player you're targeting, if you were the defending party in a war with that player's corporation, you wouldn't be forced to use it. But how many people wouldn't?

Shoot2kilI wrote:
"Mercs" complaining about the 50m war declaration increase. "Mercs" then complain about getting free wars on other terrible primordial highsec dwellers who think that their army of hulks and level four mission-running ravens can blot out the sun. Complaining about more targets is literally the most ******** thing I've seen since Darius III's CSM thread(s). How more barely-combat-capable targets is a bad thing, I do not know. My alt is having a hilarious time blowing up "allied" orca's and mining barges/exhumers.

Before the changes, there was an actual mercenary market where people could hire mercenaries by reputation, and mercenaries actually got paid for their work. What we have now is a bunch of privateer-style groups doing the same for free. So point 1 is that there is no more mercenary work, because mercenaries get paid. Point 2 is that this will result in many less outgoing wars. Sure, the more skilled players will be able to evade the allies while achieving their goals, but the average corporation declaring upon another will get absolutely stomped because the defenders will bring in at least a few hundred people by clicking a single button.

Ten Bulls wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
We told them this would happen ... and they didn't listen.

CCP have made concerted efforts so they look like they listen to the players, they even made the CSM with 14 players, 2 of which represent and care about the majority of players.

They post on these forums regularly telling us how it will be, and criticise or ignore objectors, and generally keeping us informed of who the boss is.

How is that now players can see through their mask...

In my many years here, I can say that this has been one of their worst gameplay decisions ever made.


It could be worse. They could have unified the whole wardec system in the smart Unified Interface To Rule Them All.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2012-05-25 09:16:07 UTC
Agreed. If one corp war decs you, you should only be able to hire one ally.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#13 - 2012-05-25 10:41:11 UTC
Tobiaz wrote:
Nobody is forcing Pandemic Legion to seek allies.
Nobody is forcing Pandemic Legion to accept ally requests.

Working as intended.

Only part that needs a real fix right now is not locking allies for the entire duration of a war.


At most, there should probably be a small ISK fee (5-20M ISK) paid by the defender for each ally accepted. Putting a hard limit on how many allies you can accept would be too limiting given the open nature of EVE game play. Especially since you can't un-invite an ally to the war, so if you're limited to N allies and your first N allies are bogus choices, you'd be stuck without the ability to hire competent ally N+1 who shows up a day late with an offer.

Maybe once the defender has more control over ally contracts with expiration dates (CCP says this is coming soon), renewals and (most important) the ability to terminate ally contracts; then we can discuss putting limits on how many allies you can bring into the war.

The rest will be sorted out by the market. Including the going rate for good mercenary allies. But I expect that the first few weeks will see merc corps going in as allies on as many wardecs as possible as a way to build their history and try and fluff their numbers for future business.
BTL Thumps Up
#14 - 2012-05-25 10:43:51 UTC
more pvp? sounds grand also stop smeaningless wars wars should be SERIOUS BUSINESS
I liked the part where wars were meaningful

THUMPS UP IF BTL

Christine Peeveepeeski
Low Sec Concepts
#15 - 2012-05-25 11:03:06 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
MotherMoon wrote:
Sandbox

How is it "sandbox?" I fail to see how it can be "sandbox," unless your definition of sandbox is having all the adults on the playground beat the living **** out of the kid who knocked down another kid's sandcastle.

Look, I'm all for the "if you wardec someone, you better be prepared to fight" ideology. But this is simply absurd. It removes all incentive for declaring war against someone, because no matter how much you like pvp, and no matter how fearless you are, having the enemy get infinite allies is just stupid. No amount of ridicule and chicken-calling is going to get me to engage three hundred people out of principle.


Not trying to troll or pick a fight here but you've raised an interesting point in the bolded part.

I would ask what was the incentive to start with? I hazard a guess that for most high sec wardeccers its just easy kills. Not all of course, but most.
Those with balls will still dec a target if the reason to attack that target goes beyond easy fights because there is a reason to. If they know allies will engage in return then best they have friends of their own to counter dec the target corp.



Tobiaz
Spacerats
#16 - 2012-05-25 11:10:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobiaz
People should stop making up problems where there are none.

"Defending corporations shouldn't be able to add endless amounts of 'free' allies."
Is this happening now? NOT AT ALL
Besides, actually useful allies are almost never of the 'free' variety.

And if you are getting a ton of ally requests from tiny corporations wanting to jump on the free wardec-bandwagon, just convo them and charge them a fee for acceptng the rather useless 'ally' request. Complaining about ally-request spam is rather silly tbh.

Christine Peeveepeeski wrote:

Not trying to troll or pick a fight here but you've raised an interesting point in the bolded part.

I would ask what was the incentive to start with? I hazard a guess that for most high sec wardeccers its just easy kills. Not all of course, but most.
Those with balls will still dec a target if the reason to attack that target goes beyond easy fights because there is a reason to. If they know allies will engage in return then best they have friends of their own to counter dec the target corp.


If the incentive is trying to make a living from killing/ransoming others, then easy kills = best kills.

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!

Fuji 9000
Sleeping Dogs Awake
#17 - 2012-05-25 11:36:35 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

In my many years here, I can say that this has been one of their worst gameplay decisions ever made.


completely agree.. it would have been much better if they didn't change anything and just fixed decshielding

I would like to hear from people that have deced smaller ~100 man corps, I assume they are spamming allies as well?


non judgement
Without Fear
Flying Burning Ships Alliance
#18 - 2012-05-25 12:06:19 UTC
A bit early to tell isn't it?

I would have thought that you'd have to wait a while before you can see which corps are good in the ally system. Of course it's going to get a bit weird in the first few weeks. When it settles down the good merc corps will have good records. The dodgy corps you'll be able to see their bad record of helping and you wont pay their fee.

How would anyone expect to be able to tell if it's good in such a short time?

It'd be better to wait a month or so and then see if sort of stuff is still happening. Making a judgement about how the system will work just after a few days is a waste of time. Eg. when CCP does something that causes a change in the market prices. After awhile you can see how it really changed the market. But saying something about the market right at the time of speculation and manipulation when CCP changes it, is silly.
Jessica Sweetwater
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#19 - 2012-05-25 12:08:24 UTC
RAGE HARDER
Mindfarer
Ruatha Holding
#20 - 2012-05-25 12:17:13 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:

Before the changes, there was an actual mercenary market where people could hire mercenaries by reputation, and mercenaries actually got paid for their work. What we have now is a bunch of privateer-style groups doing the same for free. So point 1 is that there is no more mercenary work, because mercenaries get paid. Point 2 is that this will result in many less outgoing wars. Sure, the more skilled players will be able to evade the allies while achieving their goals, but the average corporation declaring upon another will get absolutely stomped because the defenders will bring in at least a few hundred people by clicking a single button.


That's free market. High supply (of trigger-happy people, this game surely doesn't lack of them) vs low demand (from warring corps) oviously drives prices down. This is as it should be.

if people want specialized services they will still go to professional mercs, and professional mercs can still try to convince a wardecced party that paying for specialized services alongside an unorganized mob is better than having just an unorganized mob for free.

I don't dispute that the system needs some tweaks, but the free market aspect of it should stay here.
123Next pageLast page