EVE General Discussion

Yes, we always need more CONCORD protection so that you can always be protected in some manner by an NPC. Because sometimes, you can't rely on anyone that doesn't make decisions based on coding.

Mining bots don't count.

Yeah high sec war griefers depend on NPCs to look the other way. So if you can buy NPC judgement/motive/activity then why not open it up some more and see what else we can buy?

I think war decs should be re-modeled based on the grand strategy game Europa Universalis 3. In EU3, you need a clearly defined "casus belli" or "cause of war" to declare war on another country. If you win the war, you can only claim spoils based on the casus belli, e.g. release a subject country if the casus belli was "liberation" or something. There are unscrupulous ways to make up a bogus casus belli but there are also ways to defend against such actions.

You do not have to abide by these rules. You can declare war on another country and annex them without any justification at all. However, your citizens will protest and your reputation among other countries will be damaged.

This should be implemented in Eve. There should be numerous casus belli and specific war aims (hey, Concord needs a credible back story to cover their corruption). I'm thinking things like trade wars, insults, rejected ultimatums, failed contracts, etc.

However if an aggressor wants to war dec a newbie corp with no adequate cause of war, they should pay not just in terms of ISK but also faction standing, security standing, standings with other corps, increased bounties, etc.

I don't want to read all the responses but you realize it's "safer" in null because war-dec'ers prefer the safety of high sec, too? Station camping gets a bit complicated when everybody in system can kill them.

Or, instead of making hellcode they [CCP] could just make it when a wardec gets made the defender can reply [with a selection of replies which remain open while the war is on such as] with nothing, so the normal process, they can proclaim oh hell yes and the wardec fee is refunded to the attacker and the war costs less or they can reply or hell no and the dec fails and they pay tax to concord for a period of time based on the number of members in the[ir] corporation. While paying tax to concord (who generously takes this tax in the form of both isk and post process minerals) you cannot be wardecced.

Though, I'm just pulling stuff out from my egress pipe. I'm pretty sure that you think hellcode is a fun thing for devs.

edit: edited to make slightly more sense.

The War Dec system has to be flawed by definition. War is never fair.
One party will allways have advantages. And since you can really loose stuff in eve, it would be wise not to engage if there is nothing to gain and only to loose.
So in most cases one party will be verry unhappy about a war dec.

I agree that it is very cheap to make a whole corp unhappy with a war dec.

So the only thing i could imagine that could prevent some grief play is this:
Since the war fee is a bribe to concord, the deced corp should be able to bribe back to raise the cost of the war. So first it is an ISK war and after that comes the real shooting if the attacker can pay enough.

It would be a nice ISK sink too.
No corp will not be completely safe but they can alter the cost-income ratio for the grief corp (thier fun will cost more) or even prevent the war at all.




Every other mechanic, you offered, could be exploited in one way or the other. And if we remove or alter the War Dec system, will EVE still be EVE?
Grief is a part of Eve as well as corp thiefs and scammers.

The wardec mechanics are fine.

Instead of ******* with them why don't you people start asking for CCP to provide CONTENT, and TOOLS, things to OWN of value in high sec.

Something that can be LOST or WON.


Nothing you do to the wardeck mechanics is going to stop people from droping or disbanding a corp when there's a war.
NOTHING YOU DO TO THE WARDEC MECHANIC WILL MAKE PEOPLE STOP DROPPING OR DISBANDING THE CORP WHEN THEY GET DECCED.


No one complains that null sec wardeccs "dont' work" or are "meeningless". You guys don't have **** to fight for in high sec. You don't have **** to call your own.

YOU HAVE NO REASON TO ALLY IN HIGH SEC. The hell do you need allies for? For what are you protecting? Nothing.
A corp name, that is all.

You guys fight for corporation names.

Wardeccing in high sec is only for the purpose of gaining legal targets to shoot. Because NO ONE has any reason to dec a high sec corporation.

There's nothing to fight over.
It works in null because there's **** to fight over. There's something to win or lose. You have NOTHING in high sec.
Give high sec corps something to fight over and the wardec problem is solved.


Having things to fight over encourages you to grow. There's no reason to have 1000 guys in a hgh sec corp.
Having things to fight over means you have something to lose. You drop corp because you lose NOTHING. You disband corp becaue you lose NOTHING.


It is entirely the lack of ability of a high sec corporations to say, "This is mine, and I will fight to keep it."

If PoS's were worth holding onto, people wouldn't ******* disband corporations that own PoS's, and they are abandoning them.


Not one suggestion in this thead is geared around making wardecs meaningful, they're all geared around reducing PvP. I see a bunch of guys suggesting things that would simply make declaring war either harder, irrelevant, or simply not possible.

Those are not EVE solutions.

EVE solutions involve TOOLS, CONTENT, PLAYER CONTROL.
Not arbitrary limiters and more concord involvement.

You are on to something. Keep it up.