These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Anonymous Wardecs - intended behavior for new war system, or bug?

First post
Author
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#1 - 2012-05-29 22:07:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Petrus Blackshell
The new war system eliminated the whole "voting" process to declare war, which was a good thing. It puts more power in the hands of corp leadership, and allows them to respond to situations better. However, the "voting" process allowed a time for discussion and for everyone to be aware of what is going on. When the war was finally declared, no character name was attached to it, as it was presumably a "whole corp" decision.

New to Inferno, with the elimination of the voting system, any director can anonymously force his corp into at least 7 days of war. When war is declared, there is no info published about who in leadership decided to initiate it.

This is a big upset in the balance of power in corps, and allows trigger happy directors to go over the heads of the entire corp and any other diplomacy. I know, "if you don't trust him, he shouldn't be a director" and all, and this is not a problem that my corp is having, but...

Is this an intended mechanic and feature, or is it an unintended side effect (and exploit) of the revamped war system?

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Morganta
The Greater Goon
Clockwork Pineapple
#2 - 2012-05-29 22:32:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Morganta
A job != a democracy

Boss > you

now corporations

...read that as...
CORPORATIONS

work a little more as such

that said, executive board approval would make it much better (an executive roles only vote), but a dictatorship also works since the CEO can always stack the deck anyhow
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#3 - 2012-05-29 22:38:39 UTC
Morganta wrote:
A job != a democracy

Boss > you

now corporations

...read that as...
CORPORATIONS

work a little more as such

that said, executive board approval would make it much better (an executive roles only vote), but a dictatorship also works since the CEO can always stack the deck anyhow

Re-emphasizing: I am perfectly fine with the power to wardec lying in the hands of individuals.

The issue I am raising is the fact that when this particular power is exercised, the person who does so is not identified. For example, if I were to suddenly make Rifterlings wardec your alliance, my members would have no idea which director it was that did it. The problem grows in magnitude the more directors there are.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Morganta
The Greater Goon
Clockwork Pineapple
#4 - 2012-05-29 22:41:59 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Morganta wrote:
A job != a democracy

Boss > you

now corporations

...read that as...
CORPORATIONS

work a little more as such

that said, executive board approval would make it much better (an executive roles only vote), but a dictatorship also works since the CEO can always stack the deck anyhow

Re-emphasizing: I am perfectly fine with the power to wardec lying in the hands of individuals.

The issue I am raising is the fact that when this particular power is exercised, the person who does so is not identified. For example, if I were to suddenly make Rifterlings wardec your alliance, my members would have no idea which director it was that did it. The problem grows in magnitude the more directors there are.


could be a bug or oversight
or it could be to help force leadership to communicate better with each other and the underlings

think of it as an extra mystery mini-game, it's content!
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#5 - 2012-05-29 22:46:56 UTC
Morganta wrote:
think of it as an extra mystery mini-game, it's content!

I'd say short-circuiting diplomacy involves ruining content, but whatever.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2012-05-29 22:57:23 UTC
Don't let people you don't trust into important positions?
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#7 - 2012-05-29 23:02:18 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Don't let people you don't trust into important positions?

Obviously, and with this mechanic this is more important than before, but the question was "should people know who activated the war, rather than have it be anonymous"?

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Garnoo
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2012-05-29 23:02:52 UTC
mayby you should talk sometimes to your ceo?

People are going to try to ruin your day. Get together with others, ruin their day back -  EvE

Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#9 - 2012-05-29 23:04:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Petrus Blackshell
Garnoo wrote:
mayby you should talk sometimes to your ceo?

I am my corp's CEO, and my corp is not experiencing this problem. This is not a whine "I got screwed over due to trusting someone I shouldn't Sad" thread. It is just a question about the new Inferno mechanics.

Did you even read the OP?

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Serene Repose
#10 - 2012-05-30 00:33:53 UTC
Morganta wrote:
A job != a democracy

Boss > you

now corporations

...read that as...
CORPORATIONS

work a little more as such

that said, executive board approval would make it much better (an executive roles only vote), but a dictatorship also works since the CEO can always stack the deck anyhow

I love it when you pretend to understand real life.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#11 - 2012-05-30 19:16:27 UTC
Petrus brings up a really good point. We just went through this ourselves, with a war dec that flew faster than everyone could be consulted and it caused some diplomatic tangles.

I think it just makes sense that those initiating a war dec should be held responsible by being identified, I'll look into this and see if I can find you guys an answer on whether this is a bug or a "working as intended" type situation.

Thanks for the heads up to this thread!

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

ErrorRon
Turbo-Encabulator LLC
#12 - 2012-05-30 19:21:22 UTC
Perhaps CEOs will choose their directors more wisely. I'd say its a good mechanic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtItWL6GfSM CCP Gargant -  Dev of my heart.

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#13 - 2012-05-30 19:27:23 UTC
ErrorRon wrote:
Perhaps CEOs will choose their directors more wisely. I'd say its a good mechanic.


I don't think this is a completely fair way to approach the problem as even reliable, trustworthy directors can make errors in judgement, or act based on limited information but with best intentions.

Saying "get better directors" doesnt fix the problem of a CEO needing to be able to know why he's at war and who brought his corp to that point, for whatever reason. Holding everyone responsible for their actions isn't an unreasonable thing to ask for.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#14 - 2012-05-30 19:34:48 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
any director can anonymously force his corp into at least 7 days of war. When war is declared, there is no info published about who in leadership decided to initiate it.



Easily fixed by leaving the corp if you don't like it.
Juess
The Order of Cerberus
#15 - 2012-05-30 19:35:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Juess
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
ErrorRon wrote:
Perhaps CEOs will choose their directors more wisely. I'd say its a good mechanic.


I don't think this is a completely fair way to approach the problem as even reliable, trustworthy directors can make errors in judgement, or act based on limited information but with best intentions.

Saying "get better directors" doesnt fix the problem of a CEO needing to be able to know why he's at war and who brought his corp to that point, for whatever reason. Holding everyone responsible for their actions isn't an unreasonable thing to ask for.

That may be true, Hans, but we never knew who "called for war" before, either. What I mean is that, under the system of voting, a CEO still had no idea who in his corp actually approved of the war.

I really don't see this as being a problem at all.
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#16 - 2012-05-30 19:36:21 UTC
Alliances always had the ability to declare war without the voting process. Why should corps be any different?

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration

Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#17 - 2012-05-30 19:42:03 UTC
As a counterpoint, any director can clear out the corporation hangars *everywhere* *remotely* with no trace left behind.

Whether or not intended, I would chalk this one under "only give director to people you 100% trust". And that includes trusting them to speak up when you ask "alright which one of you noobs just wardecced Goonswarm?"
Malice Redeemer
The Black Crow Bandits
Pandemic Horde
#18 - 2012-05-30 19:43:28 UTC
Richard Desturned wrote:
Alliances always had the ability to declare war without the voting process. Why should corps be any different?


The forum communities ability to completely miss the point of the OP by trying to read to much in to it is astounding.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#19 - 2012-05-30 20:52:15 UTC
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
As a counterpoint, any director can clear out the corporation hangars *everywhere* *remotely* with no trace left behind.

Whether or not intended, I would chalk this one under "only give director to people you 100% trust". And that includes trusting them to speak up when you ask "alright which one of you noobs just wardecced Goonswarm?"

In a game that is supposedly all about having consequences for your choices, being able to do stuff anonymously with no consequences just seems against the spirit of the game. That includes offgrid boosting, neutral logi, swiping everything from corp, and now declaring war. I'm fine with these all existing, but they need to have real consequences and risks.
Malice Redeemer wrote:
Richard Desturned wrote:
Alliances always had the ability to declare war without the voting process. Why should corps be any different?

The forum communities ability to completely miss the point of the OP by trying to read to much in to it is astounding.

It really is, isn't it? They're so used to the same ol' whine threads it's sad.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Morganta
The Greater Goon
Clockwork Pineapple
#20 - 2012-05-30 20:57:54 UTC
so you cant chat with your execs and see who did it?

this is the issue, if you cant be arsed to talk to a couple of people who you trust to make decisions like that why should CCP do something about it?
12Next page