These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CCP MASIVE FAIL

First post
Author
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Villore Accords
#61 - 2012-10-25 23:53:47 UTC
Tekitha wrote:
The solution to this problem is simple tbh and it's a shame ccp lack the brain power to fix it.

When a corp / alliance makes a war mutual, there is no longer an "agressing" party, both sides are effectively agressing. At this point both parties should be afforded the mechanics of a defending party


Or, if the dec is mutual allow for either corp to join an alliance and let the alliance they join take on the dec as well.

If the corp leaves the alliance, let the war dec follow them, or better yet, let the war dec follow the leaving corp and leave the alliance.

It's stupid that this can prevent a corp joining an alliance.
Andre Vauban
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2012-10-26 00:42:48 UTC
Tekitha wrote:
The solution to this problem is simple tbh and it's a shame ccp lack the brain power to fix it.

When a corp / alliance makes a war mutual, there is no longer an "agressing" party, both sides are effectively agressing. At this point both parties should be afforded the mechanics of a defending party


I actually prefer a checkbox labeled "mutual". Both sides need to check it to make a war mutual. If one side unchecks it, the war returns to normal. But yeah you could also make both sides a defender in a mutual war.

Anyway, it's not hard to fix. The problem was ccp wasn't going to have mutual wars anymore, but just threw it back in without thinking about it when they realized RvB would break.

.

Rail Gun
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#63 - 2012-10-26 00:54:00 UTC
I like what I see here... it amazes me how people are so eager to use word "exploit" about every game mechanic that they dont approve. I can only imagine all the tears new aggro mechanics will cause when people start to "exploit" them and first people lazy enough to read patch notes start to die.

OP have a good change to learn something important here: in Eve you should learn to play with the rules game mechanics give and not to run cry on forums and try to make CCP change rules so you can do what you want... otherwise you might attract more people who feed on others tears and misery...
OsirisShi
ROMANIA Renegades.
#64 - 2012-10-26 01:05:04 UTC
DDbreaker wrote:
well this guys are taking advantage of this from 2009, and CCP just acting like nothing is happening. I just found a post about something similar like this, where they are listed with their alts:
" FW trouble
From: Ankhesentapemkah
Sent: 2009.12.04 02:05
To: Jade Constantine,

Hello Jade, how's it going?

As you may know, the PERVS and Cadre corps are exploiting FW bugs heavily and currently capturing all Minmatar space. If nothing is done they'll have it within the month.

I've already informed CCP but CCP didnt care when they used exploits to capture all gallente space either, stupid slackers.

Anyway, Z0D, my puppet on the CSM, is hiring all mercs he can find to grief them out of the game if CCp doesnt ban them, and Electus matari and a lot of gallente FW corps are going after them as well, starting this weekend. I'll finally get into PVP with my alt, as this is something worth fighting for!

Are you in as well?

Thanks, Eva

Info about the targets:

Main Targets:
Damar Rocarion
Bad Messenger
Unfamed II
Kuolematon
Yuri Intaki (likely Damar's alt or shared account)

Target Corps:
Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United
The Cadre
Whatever corp they use for their alts, suspected corp is Emperor Throne Guards as they used this in the past.

Target Corp Members:
Blaze Doran, SoKore, Minh Aldara, Lt Merc (Cadre)
Cletanainen, Lancress, Lina Lucent, Prismaa, Vampy Vampress, Tupsu, Tosi, Talerco and Sidaro (pervs)

Alts used for FW:
Michiru Murakami, Huppu Hemmo, Eva Jubse, Suurimaaami Mehmed, Maik Zierra, Sentern Embric, Pahani Julmu, Mestari Jaakko, Zan Fee, Rage coordinator, viidentahden vakooja, Per Capano, Pim Panero, Xian Bling

Time Zone:
Damar and Bad Messenger are confirmed Finnish, Unfamed II is suspected USA, Kuolematon is suspected British. A lot of them are unemployed and can be found online at any time. PERVS is a finnish-exclusive corp, while Cadre is their non-finnish wing.
.............................."


So as i said emperor throne guard is an alts corp that is using this to block corps to enter any alliance.
God job CCP for not thinking of this exploit.
We HAOS demand a fix to this matter in next patch.And i think we are not the only once that in the same situation.
As a solutions to this u have here some that u can use :
Make that any part of the mutual war can offer ransom or
Any of corp involved can join an alliance.
U can also use that check box for both corps for mutual war
Rail Gun
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#65 - 2012-10-26 01:29:50 UTC
OsirisShi wrote:
DDbreaker wrote:
well this guys are taking advantage of this from 2009, and CCP just acting like nothing is happening. I just found a post about something similar like this, where they are listed with their alts:
" FW trouble
From: Ankhesentapemkah
Sent: 2009.12.04 02:05
To: Jade Constantine,

Hello Jade, how's it going?

As you may know, the PERVS and Cadre corps are exploiting FW bugs heavily and currently capturing all Minmatar space. If nothing is done they'll have it within the month.

I've already informed CCP but CCP didnt care when they used exploits to capture all gallente space either, stupid slackers.

Anyway, Z0D, my puppet on the CSM, is hiring all mercs he can find to grief them out of the game if CCp doesnt ban them, and Electus matari and a lot of gallente FW corps are going after them as well, starting this weekend. I'll finally get into PVP with my alt, as this is something worth fighting for!

Are you in as well?

Thanks, Eva

Info about the targets:

Main Targets:
Damar Rocarion
Bad Messenger
Unfamed II
Kuolematon
Yuri Intaki (likely Damar's alt or shared account)

Target Corps:
Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United
The Cadre
Whatever corp they use for their alts, suspected corp is Emperor Throne Guards as they used this in the past.

Target Corp Members:
Blaze Doran, SoKore, Minh Aldara, Lt Merc (Cadre)
Cletanainen, Lancress, Lina Lucent, Prismaa, Vampy Vampress, Tupsu, Tosi, Talerco and Sidaro (pervs)

Alts used for FW:
Michiru Murakami, Huppu Hemmo, Eva Jubse, Suurimaaami Mehmed, Maik Zierra, Sentern Embric, Pahani Julmu, Mestari Jaakko, Zan Fee, Rage coordinator, viidentahden vakooja, Per Capano, Pim Panero, Xian Bling

Time Zone:
Damar and Bad Messenger are confirmed Finnish, Unfamed II is suspected USA, Kuolematon is suspected British. A lot of them are unemployed and can be found online at any time. PERVS is a finnish-exclusive corp, while Cadre is their non-finnish wing.
.............................."


So as i said emperor throne guard is an alts corp that is using this to block corps to enter any alliance.
God job CCP for not thinking of this exploit.
We HAOS demand a fix to this matter in next patch.And i think we are not the only once that in the same situation.
As a solutions to this u have here some that u can use :
Make that any part of the mutual war can offer ransom or
Any of corp involved can join an alliance.
U can also use that check box for both corps for mutual war

So you want that aggressor must have right to retract from war if they want (doesent have to agree on mutual war), but defender must stay in war as long as aggressor wants? Your alliance wardecked 10 man corp but your plan backfired and now you DEMAND CCP to save you?

It seems to me that you guys are not in a position to make any demands... Maby you should just remake your corp and not make any stupid mistakes in future?
Tekitha
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#66 - 2012-10-26 01:43:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Tekitha
Rail Gun wrote:
So you want that aggressor must have right to retract from war if they want (doesent have to agree on mutual war), but defender must stay in war as long as aggressor wants? Your alliance wardecked 10 man corp but your plan backfired and now you DEMAND CCP to save you?

It seems to me that you guys are not in a position to make any demands... Maby you should just remake your corp and not make any stupid mistakes in future?


I believe you're heavily missing the point. No the agressing corp shouldnt be able to back out of a mutual war, the same as a defending corp cannot back out of a war. However when the defending corp sets the war mutual, both parties should hvae equal rights with regards to joining / leaving an alliance or hiring allies etc. The current system is clearly floored and open to abuse on the part of a defending corp being able to literally trap a corp in a wardec that could continue forever.

As someone suggested earlier, currently the only way to guarentee your corp never gets stuck in this kind of dilemma is if you NEVER declare war on anyone, and hope that your alliance does not either ... how does this promote a healthy wardec system?
Andre Vauban
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#67 - 2012-10-26 01:55:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Andre Vauban
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=156437

^^^ This is the thread to bind them all. I just read it all and it appears the Dec Shield guys figured this one out a month ago. Its a huge problem. Goonswarm Federation is about to be trapped. COVEN is already trapped. Hopefully the Dec Shield guys can burn the system to the ground and CCP will fix it.

In the meantime, all my fellow FW corps/alliances(except Happy Endings who are already trapped) DO NOT DECLARE WAR ON ANYBODY unless you want to trash your corp or alliance. That especially applies to you Tek, even if they use the magic Torpedo word and really deserve a war dec.

.

Rail Gun
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#68 - 2012-10-26 02:10:40 UTC
Tekitha wrote:
Rail Gun wrote:
So you want that aggressor must have right to retract from war if they want (doesent have to agree on mutual war), but defender must stay in war as long as aggressor wants? Your alliance wardecked 10 man corp but your plan backfired and now you DEMAND CCP to save you?

It seems to me that you guys are not in a position to make any demands... Maby you should just remake your corp and not make any stupid mistakes in future?


I believe you're heavily missing the point. No the agressing corp shouldnt be able to back out of a mutual war, the same as a defending corp cannot back out of a war. However when the defending corp sets the war mutual, both parties should hvae equal rights with regards to joining / leaving an alliance or hiring allies etc. The current system is clearly floored and open to abuse on the part of a defending corp being able to literally trap a corp in a wardec that could continue forever.

As someone suggested earlier, currently the only way to guarentee your corp never gets stuck in this kind of dilemma is if you NEVER declare war on anyone, and hope that your alliance does not either ... how does this promote a healthy wardec system?

Nah, I'm pretty sure I didn't miss anything... It really is good idea not to go to war or join alliances if you are afraid of consequences. But there is no hurry to fix this "game breaking mechanic" because OP has an option to remake his corp with same name if he wants to get out of this embarrassing situation. Mark of shame in corp history is only price and quite fitting one.

It's just stupid to blame victim of the war about "exploiting" when they use mutual war which is current game mechanics. Do defender have to retract from war every time aggressor feels sad becouse current mechanics arent fair? Well war usually is not fair.
Tekitha
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#69 - 2012-10-26 02:24:40 UTC
Rail Gun wrote:
Tekitha wrote:
Rail Gun wrote:
So you want that aggressor must have right to retract from war if they want (doesent have to agree on mutual war), but defender must stay in war as long as aggressor wants? Your alliance wardecked 10 man corp but your plan backfired and now you DEMAND CCP to save you?

It seems to me that you guys are not in a position to make any demands... Maby you should just remake your corp and not make any stupid mistakes in future?


I believe you're heavily missing the point. No the agressing corp shouldnt be able to back out of a mutual war, the same as a defending corp cannot back out of a war. However when the defending corp sets the war mutual, both parties should hvae equal rights with regards to joining / leaving an alliance or hiring allies etc. The current system is clearly floored and open to abuse on the part of a defending corp being able to literally trap a corp in a wardec that could continue forever.

As someone suggested earlier, currently the only way to guarentee your corp never gets stuck in this kind of dilemma is if you NEVER declare war on anyone, and hope that your alliance does not either ... how does this promote a healthy wardec system?

Nah, I'm pretty sure I didn't miss anything... It really is good idea not to go to war or join alliances if you are afraid of consequences. But there is no hurry to fix this "game breaking mechanic" because OP has an option to remake his corp with same name if he wants to get out of this embarrassing situation. Mark of shame in corp history is only price and quite fitting one.

It's just stupid to blame victim of the war about "exploiting" when they use mutual war which is current game mechanics. Do defender have to retract from war every time aggressor feels sad becouse current mechanics arent fair? Well war usually is not fair.


I intentionally steered clear of the word exploit since from the CCP responses I have seen on the subject from various people, it seems its working as they want it to, hence it's not technically an "exploit"

It is however a clearly broken / flawed mechanic, to claim otherwise is pretty narrow minded. When your corp (the defending corp) presses the "make mutual" button, you are agreeing to continue the war in exactly the same way the agressing corp did when it hit "declare war". Why then, at that stage should the (originally) defending corp be afforded defensive rights yet the (originally) attacking corp not? it makes zero sense.

If you're arguing the carebear point of view, well a carebear corp would never make a war mutual because they want rid of the agressors as soon as possible, they can still join an alliance or hire allies in an attempt to drive off the attackers. However, the only reason I see for making a war mutual under the curent system (aside from situations like RvB) is to then trap the attacking corp into a foreverwar, thus breaking the whole wardec system to the point nobody will be declaring war on anybody (I know I won't be until this is fixed)

from your posts it seems you are saying "if you declare war on ANYBODY, EVER you should expect the consequences" (consequences in this case being the likelyhood you'll have to disband your corp should you ever wish to join an alliance) ... Is this honestly your opinion?
Juan Rayo
Justified Chaos
#70 - 2012-10-26 02:30:06 UTC
It´s a ****** mechanic and ROMANIA Renegades shouldn´t have to disband their corp. Hope CCP comes through for you guys, even if you´ll be shotting us soon.
Andre Vauban
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2012-10-26 02:33:39 UTC
Tekitha wrote:

from your posts it seems you are saying "if you declare war on ANYBODY, EVER you should expect the consequences" (consequences in this case being the likelyhood you'll have to disband your corp should you ever wish to join an alliance) ... Is this honestly your opinion?


Don't forget, if you are an Alliance that gets trapped, no new corporations can join your alliance ever again either. Also, any corps leaving your alliance will also be trapped and can never join a new alliance. If an Alliance declares war it effectively says that you will have to trash the alliance and all the corps in it and start over as soon as the war is over.

.

Rail Gun
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#72 - 2012-10-26 02:40:10 UTC
Tekitha wrote:
I intentionally steered clear of the word exploit since from the CCP responses I have seen on the subject from various people, it seems its working as they want it to, hence it's not technically an "exploit"

It is however a clearly broken / flawed mechanic, to claim otherwise is pretty narrow minded. When your corp (the defending corp) presses the "make mutual" button, you are agreeing to continue the war in exactly the same way the agressing corp did when it hit "declare war". Why then, at that stage should the (originally) defending corp be afforded defensive rights yet the (originally) attacking corp not? it makes zero sense.

If you're arguing the carebear point of view, well a carebear corp would never make a war mutual because they want rid of the agressors as soon as possible, they can still join an alliance or hire allies in an attempt to drive off the attackers. However, the only reason I see for making a war mutual under the curent system (aside from situations like RvB) is to then trap the attacking corp into a foreverwar, thus breaking the whole wardec system to the point nobody will be declaring war on anybody (I know I won't be until this is fixed)

from your posts it seems you are saying "if you declare war on ANYBODY, EVER you should expect the consequences" (consequences in this case being the likelyhood you'll have to disband your corp should you ever wish to join an alliance) ... Is this honestly your opinion?

It's not my opinion, it's how this game works now. And I must say again that I like what I see in this thread.
Tekitha
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#73 - 2012-10-26 02:50:02 UTC
Rail Gun wrote:

It's not my opinion, it's how this game works now. And I must say again that I like what I see in this thread.


An exceptionally well delivered argument, very conducive to a discussion about a clearly flawed game mechanic.

I give up

:golfclap:
Rail Gun
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#74 - 2012-10-26 03:04:31 UTC
Tekitha wrote:
Rail Gun wrote:

It's not my opinion, it's how this game works now. And I must say again that I like what I see in this thread.


An exceptionally well delivered argument, very conducive to a discussion about a clearly flawed game mechanic.

I give up

:golfclap:

Nah, it's just that you see problem where there is none. We have pointed out way to deal this situation for OP. He deals with it or stays stuck with a war his alliance started.

CCP cant change rules and mechanics every time someone is stubborn enough not to play by rules and starts whining in forums.
Tekitha
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#75 - 2012-10-26 03:18:46 UTC
Rail Gun wrote:
Tekitha wrote:
Rail Gun wrote:

It's not my opinion, it's how this game works now. And I must say again that I like what I see in this thread.


An exceptionally well delivered argument, very conducive to a discussion about a clearly flawed game mechanic.

I give up

:golfclap:

Nah, it's just that you see problem where there is none. We have pointed out way to deal this situation for OP. He deals with it or stays stuck with a war his alliance started.

CCP cant change rules and mechanics every time someone is stubborn enough not to play by rules and starts whining in forums.


yes, because CCP and their all knowing wisdom have never (by their own admission) gotten something wrong ...

you clearly havn't been here very long.
Rail Gun
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#76 - 2012-10-26 03:57:33 UTC
Tekitha wrote:
yes, because CCP and their all knowing wisdom have never (by their own admission) gotten something wrong ...

you clearly havn't been here very long.

If that is your main, I have been here littlebit longer than you. I'm not the oldest ones, but old enough that I have seen many great expansion and patches. And I have also seen the waves of tears those expansion have raised. I have seen Jita burn and statues fall under the rage of the lesser minded fools. But still CCP has managed to focus in their own vision and keeps delivering us the content that keeps us hooked for this unforgiving world.

I know change can be scary, but if you are willing to learn new mechanics and rules you will prevail. New Eden can be harsh and cold world for those who cant adapt when enviroment evolves, but that is the way of the game.
Tekitha
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#77 - 2012-10-26 04:43:44 UTC
Rail Gun wrote:
Tekitha wrote:
yes, because CCP and their all knowing wisdom have never (by their own admission) gotten something wrong ...

you clearly havn't been here very long.

If that is your main, I have been here littlebit longer than you. I'm not the oldest ones, but old enough that I have seen many great expansion and patches. And I have also seen the waves of tears those expansion have raised. I have seen Jita burn and statues fall under the rage of the lesser minded fools. But still CCP has managed to focus in their own vision and keeps delivering us the content that keeps us hooked for this unforgiving world.

I know change can be scary, but if you are willing to learn new mechanics and rules you will prevail. New Eden can be harsh and cold world for those who cant adapt when enviroment evolves, but that is the way of the game.


if you truly believe that ccp's objective is to force people to never wardec anyone for fear of having to disband their "10yr old" (older than both of us combined and infact, almost as old as eve itself) corporation, then you good sir, are beyond reasoning with.

good day.
Rail Gun
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#78 - 2012-10-26 05:22:52 UTC
Tekitha wrote:
if you truly believe that ccp's objective is to force people to never wardec anyone for fear of having to disband their "10yr old" (older than both of us combined and infact, almost as old as eve itself) corporation, then you good sir, are beyond reasoning with.

good day.

No one is forcing anyone to do anything. They are free to do whatever they want. They already choose to join an alliance, no one forced them. They decided to leave alliance after wardeck, no one forced them. They are now free to be stuck with war or remake their corp or form a new one... or wardeck more people. No one is forcing them to any of those options, they are free to choose...

They are just unwilling to choose any of options they have and are trying to force CCP to save them and it seems that is not happening. So it seems it's not me that is beyond reasoning here.

And most pleasant day for you too.
Antares 04
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#79 - 2012-10-26 06:07:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Antares 04
Gogela wrote:
This puts a big smile on my face. I'm glad that wars mean something again and dec-shielding has gotten so much harder. I agree w/ the GM... you should disband your corp in shame and start another one, endeavoring to make better alliance and war choices in the future. +9001 to CCP for the new WarDecs!

/feature working as intended. Lol


I wonder if you felt you should smack and celebrate like this for the sake of trolling, or if you are honestly as ignorant of the problem presented as you seem.

Let me make the OP's problem clear;

Romanian Renegades, a corp that has been around as long as EVE has, joined an alliance. That alliance decced a 10-man corp and RR left the alliance shortly thereafter for their own reasons. AFTER they left the 10-man corp made the war mutual and now, due to mechanics, RR can't join any other alliance due to being at war as an 'agressor'.

RR don't care that they are at war. They don't care for any losses or whatever, they do care about the fact, that they can't, EVER AGAIN, join any other alliance so long as this war is mutual.

The 10-man corp is either inactive or intentionally trolling them by making the war mutual then purposefully ignoring anything their 'enemies' do; they don't respond to mails, or convos or anything, they are not online to fight, and they don't accept the surrender proposed by RR.

What this means is the RR is crippled for as long as this goes on; potentially, for all time. They can't kill their targets, the surrender is not being accepted and re-forming their corp is out of the question.

Rail Gun wrote:
Tekitha wrote:
if you truly believe that ccp's objective is to force people to never wardec anyone for fear of having to disband their "10yr old" (older than both of us combined and infact, almost as old as eve itself) corporation, then you good sir, are beyond reasoning with.

good day.

No one is forcing anyone to do anything. They are free to do whatever they want. They already choose to join an alliance, no one forced them. They decided to leave alliance after wardeck, no one forced them. They are now free to be stuck with war or remake their corp or form a new one... or wardeck more people. No one is forcing them to any of those options, they are free to choose...

They are just unwilling to choose any of options they have and are trying to force CCP to save them and it seems that is not happening. So it seems it's not me that is beyond reasoning here.

And most pleasant day for you too.


And, should they as 'aggressors' wish to leave the war, they can surrender.

Oh wait, they can't. Because the defending 'corp' is an empty shell, made specifically to trap alliances and corporations where they are, and not allow them the options of quitting ever again.

When they can't surrender, they can never leave their alliance (pointless because the war goes on regardless) they can never join another alliance, the alliance that declared war can never get new corporations to join them.

How is this fair, in any way? How is it 'working as intended' that all the 10-man shell-corp has to do is ignore them and never accept the surrender and the corporation that decced them is screwed forever unless they disband?

The answer is, that it's NOT fair. If the defender makes a war mutual, they are effectively not DEFENDING anymore - they are declaring that they want to directly attack their attackers, and by that right, should lose their defending status and have the same rights as an attacker has.

What's more, every time a corp is declared war on the aggressors SHOULD HAVE TO set up an surrender option with terms. "Pay us X number of isk and the war ends". Now, the defenders have a few choices. Pay, if they deem the price acceptable. Fight back until the aggressor quits. Call in an ally. Join an alliance if they are a corp - now it's the alliance's war. Set the war mutual at any time with THEIR OWN AUTOMATED TERMS - "we have made the war mutual and intend to fight you. We will not accept your terms, you want out, you accept ours. Hand us X million isk and you can go."

Now, if either party wants to end the war, they can at any time by providing the needed sum in the corporation's wallet and selecting 'pay surrender terms' or something like that. Obviously, the number of isk asked for should be something logical deduced from, say, the number of players in corp. This way, you can't NOT accept a surrender request and trap a corp forever.

Because despite what you seem to think, this BS is not fair, and it does in fact break wardecs as a system. completely. I find it very hard to believe this was CCP's intention all along.
Yuri Intaki
Nasranite Watch
Ghostbirds
#80 - 2012-10-26 06:57:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Yuri Intaki
Antares 04 wrote:
Romanian Renegades, a corp that has been around as long as EVE has, joined an alliance. That alliance decced a 10-man corp and RR left the alliance shortly thereafter for their own reasons. AFTER they left the 10-man corp made the war mutual and now, due to mechanics, RR can't join any other alliance due to being at war as an 'agressor'.


Emperor Throne Guards is hardly inactive and a corp with proud pvp history. I disapprove labeling them as "empty shells". Why, i'm online most days and could pass information to people needed to talk about this wardec.

Also, that internal memo brings back lots of memories. Legendary corporations, legendary pilots, legendary times Lol