These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What happened with war decs?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
tiberiusric
Comply Or Die
Pandemic Horde
#141 - 2016-03-15 06:11:44 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Sibyyl wrote:

The only broken mechanic in connection to wardecs was NPC Corp immunity to them.

I think watchlists should be nonconsensual as long as you're in space.




Where it up to me™ NPC corps would wardec each other on random occasions as part of lore and immersion (etc. etc.). That would really stir the pot a bit. I would even give player corps options to assist as a means of gaining corp-corp standings for faction building.

It's not up to me, so I can just scratch my ass instead.


thats called faction warfare lol

All my views are my own - never be afraid to post with your main, unless you're going to post some dumb shit
Pookoko
Sigma Sagittarii Inc.
#142 - 2016-03-15 06:57:22 UTC
hm just from lore perspective, I don't think war decs should be ever described as a means to 'bribe Concord to look the other way'.

War dec is a perfectly legal exercise where the deccer notifies Concord that his corp will engage in a war with another corp, and Corcord automatically sanctions the legal commencement of such a war within 24 hours after receiving the application, and the war dec fee is just an administrative fee.

ALL wars will be sanctioned by Concord, provided that the deccer has notified Concord according to proper procedures and paid the fees.

Game play wise non of this may make a difference, but describing it as a 'bribe' gives very wrong impression on how this works. During war time, all aggression between the entities at war are legal. CONCORD has actively sanctioned it. They are not 'looking the other way'. They know what's going on but they are not doing anything about it because they have no reason to interfere as no law is being broken.

I know most people who've commented here know this, but I just felt this need to be stressed because even after all these years we are getting people complaining "how can CONCORD allow this in high sec!" for various in game activities.
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#143 - 2016-03-15 07:36:47 UTC
Nat Silverguard wrote:
Neadayan Drakhon wrote:
My thoughts on the wardec system and how it could be improved:

Raise the per-member cost of a wardec by about 10% - making it a little more expensive per person. Then include the member count of the wardeccing corp in the count - to discourage further conglomerating of wardeccers. Additionally, remove the hardcap on wardec fees, and lock recruiting on the agressing corp once the wardec fee is paid to prevent abuse (or include a fee for each added member equal to what they'd cost if they'd been there at the start to bring them into the wardec).

And/Or:

Allow defending corps/alliances to counter-bribe CONCORD in a non-trivial way to cancel the wardec before the 24 hour waiting period is up. The counter-bribe would need to scale to the size of the corp/alliance being wardecced (and only them, not the attacker), but could cost 3-5x per person the normal wardec per-member rate. (maybe 5x under a certain size, and shrinking to a minimum of 3x above a certain size? debatable I'll admit). Could also have a minimum baseline (like 5x the minimum baseline wardec fee). No, this mechanic would not provide any sort of immunity from being re-wardec'd by the same (or any other) group, the agressor would have to decide if its worth paying another fee to try to get it to stick a 2nd time though.

And/Or:

Increase wardec fees by a percentage for each concurrent outgoing wardec (including minimums). No hard caps on the humber of wardecs, just make people think about being a bit more selective.



No. more wardec means fun, if anything, fees should be lowered.

... and the fee table reversed. Deccing small corps should be very expensive, where wardeccing a big alliance should be dirt cheap.

I'm my own NPC alt.
Valkin Mordirc
#144 - 2016-03-15 08:02:18 UTC
Zappity wrote:
People disband because there is no real way to take the fight to wardec corps. Putting something out in space that can be attacked ticks the goal of getting the defender to take action involving spaceships exploding rather than avoiding interaction.



I know I didn't actually say it before,


But It's easier to roll a corp when you get decced then it is to fight.


That's also what I meant when I said things needed to balanced out.


This idea would simply make Wardecs completely useless on all fronts. Larger corps could just blob and small corps would just roll.

#DeleteTheWeak
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#145 - 2016-03-15 08:09:23 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:

And 1 year later, when 2 insetad of 6 corp/alliance are elft because they banded together to absorb the dec cost increase, we crank it to 1bill/war?

Another year later, 2bill/war for the last mega alliance doing it?

Yea, and next year CCP makes wardec even more expensive....
this way only 3 years are needed: when war is too expensive for one left alliance then the problem is solved Lol

(not saying that i support this way of solving)

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#146 - 2016-03-15 09:56:05 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
Zappity wrote:
People disband because there is no real way to take the fight to wardec corps. Putting something out in space that can be attacked ticks the goal of getting the defender to take action involving spaceships exploding rather than avoiding interaction.



I know I didn't actually say it before,


But It's easier to roll a corp when you get decced then it is to fight.


That's also what I meant when I said things needed to balanced out.


This idea would simply make Wardecs completely useless on all fronts. Larger corps could just blob and small corps would just roll.

Yeah, thats right .... so what? If you want to pick a fight with a big corp you can either stand the heat or you don't pick the fight. If you are in for the fight: Where is the problem with picking big corps? And where is the disadvantage for smaller corps compared to the actual system? Even a small corp, if they are vet players can easily pay mercs to do the job if they miss the manpower. Or a industry/PVE corp can hire mercs to do the job and you get the fight that you are longing for. Either way is better then the actual system or at worst for small corp with young players there's no difference. The biggest difference is, that now there's something at stake for the attacker.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#147 - 2016-03-15 10:53:24 UTC
The only change to wardec fees should be to change it to the size of the corp or alliance doing the dec affecting the price.
And accepting new members while you have an offensive war also costs relative to what the wardec cost would have cost with them already in corp.

This creates a counter pressure to blobbing for those corps that use wardecs, you want to be small for cheap fees, but larger for better coverage.

Otherwise leave costs alone, leave function alone, if people want to use a wardec to trade hub camp, let them. It's not cheating, it's not game breaking.
Xara
Sewercidal Tendencies
#148 - 2016-03-15 10:55:33 UTC
Okay here goes, daft idea no.1

Make everyone in an aggressor corps crim flagged for shooting a wardec target, you're paying for Concord to look the other way, but not other corps/players.

or daft idea no.2

Make it so that if you wardec someone you are automatically at war with every other current aggressor corp.

Chaos ensues.
Sol epoch
HELVEGEN
#149 - 2016-03-15 11:13:01 UTC
Xara wrote:
Okay here goes, daft idea no.1

Make everyone in an aggressor corps crim flagged for shooting a wardec target, you're paying for Concord to look the other way, but not other corps/players.

or daft idea no.2

Make it so that if you wardec someone you are automatically at war with every other current aggressor corp.

Chaos ensues.


Seriously Daft post!

+1 for Daft posting
ImYourMom
Retribution Holdings Corp
Retribution.
#150 - 2016-03-15 11:37:19 UTC
really daft idea just remove wardecs because there is no one answer and no one can agree
Spurty
#151 - 2016-03-15 13:11:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Spurty
Join a null sec alliance, Skill inject s noob Corp alt to do your HS logistics

i say anyone that is involved in a wardec be allowed to anchor bubbles in highsec and drop Bombs.

No concord intervention is what you paid for.

No concord intervention is what you should get.

This "middle ground" is bad

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP
Sol epoch
HELVEGEN
#152 - 2016-03-15 13:37:09 UTC
Commander Spurty wrote:
Join a null sec alliance, Skill inject s noob Corp alt to do your HS logistics

i say anyone that is involved in a wardec be allowed to anchor bubbles in highsec and drop Bombs.

No concord intervention is what you paid for.

No concord intervention is what you should get.

This "middle ground" is bad


We don't need bubbles or bombs like nullbears , We use skill to catch our targets not toys.
Ima Wreckyou
The Conference Elite
The Conference
#153 - 2016-03-15 13:50:11 UTC
This just reminded me of some miners who watchlisted me and docked everytime I entered the game no matter where I was last time I wardeced them. Looks like it's the right time to visit them again.

Evil RatKid
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#154 - 2016-03-15 14:30:56 UTC
Commander Spurty wrote:
Join a null sec alliance, Skill inject s noob Corp alt to do your HS logistics

i say anyone that is involved in a wardec be allowed to anchor bubbles in highsec and drop Bombs.

No concord intervention is what you paid for.

No concord intervention is what you should get.

This "middle ground" is bad


This would totally not be a nightmare to code right?
Iria Ahrens
Space Perverts and Forum Pirates
#155 - 2016-03-15 15:11:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Iria Ahrens
Commander Spurty wrote:
Join a null sec alliance, Skill inject s noob Corp alt to do your HS logistics

i say anyone that is involved in a wardec be allowed to anchor bubbles in highsec and drop Bombs.

No concord intervention is what you paid for.

No concord intervention is what you should get.

This "middle ground" is bad


No concord intervention vs the specific corps decked. AOE weapons that might hit bystanders is still off limits.

And Concord doesn't "look the other way" Concord is not some knight in shining armor. Concord is the Mob. They use war for profit and entertainment. They are sitting in their ships nearby watching, and munching on popcorn, and listening to their wallet making ding sounds.

My choice of pronouns is based on your avatar. Even if I know what is behind the avatar.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#156 - 2016-03-15 15:26:42 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Practice what you preach. The wardec mechanic needs to force some risk or commitment on part of the aggressor.

So long as it also forces commitment on the defender as well.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#157 - 2016-03-15 15:29:34 UTC
Commander Spurty wrote:
i say anyone that is involved in a wardec be allowed to anchor bubbles in highsec and drop Bombs.

No concord intervention is what you paid for.

No concord intervention is what you should get.

This "middle ground" is bad


If you're up for getting concorded every time your bomb does collateral damage, I say bring it on.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Daerrol
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#158 - 2016-03-15 15:33:15 UTC
Ibutho Inkosi wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
everything.
Over-simplification is one thing, but reducing all this to THIS? Please. I'm no Einstein here, but do give me a BREAK.

The rise in war decs has to do with deccing, then blackmailing small, starting out corps who are attempting a shot at the meta game, but being cut down and sent to the showers by bored, juvenile players who just can't be bothered to play the deeper game offered by EVE's design. Face it. Hanging around in high, reading rosters of corps for that magic set of numbers [three members founded four days ago] isn't exactly what I'd call EMERGENT GAME PLAY - and if you call it CONTENT CREATION, I hope your career with Mickey D's works out. (The content of that cheeseburger is as easy
to apply.)

The powers that be, for good or ill, have decided to sanction one so-called style of gameplay, and offer lip service to all the others. If you want to pretend this hasn't happened ('cause you happen to be one of those getting their yuks out of this) then go ahead, and be sure to lie about it all in this forum. But, when you do, at least put some effort into inventing one that's relatively BELIEVABLE, and somewhat PLAUSIBLE.

Our collective intelligence has been insulted enough of late.

Drank some bitter tea recently, bro? If small groups are trying the metagame and can't handle a week or two of wardecs, they certainly won't handle a hellcamp or even a regular deployment against them. Wardecs are easy to avoid, doubly so with Watchlist Removal. But seriously just to mission in Khanid for a week.
Pandora Carrollon
Provi Rapid Response
#159 - 2016-03-15 16:24:15 UTC
As a member of a small corporation in HiSec, I understand the repercussions of the War Dec frenzy.

Regardless of the change in mechanics, I feel that we as players have a responsibility to the game that extends beyond our play style. I'm not saying the following to be self serving, because war decs don't necessarily bother me, there are plenty of ways to get around them. The only reason it's profitable is people targeted by them don't know how to deal with them. If they did, people would stop spending ISK on them as there'd be little profit in it.

I'm not picking on anyone's play style here, but I am asking everyone to evaluate what their style is doing to the game and it's players. Just because I don't understand the attraction to HiSec Carebear hunting doesn't mean I have a right to bash it. To me it's not really PvP, but whatever floats your boat. Realize that the play style we use has consequences and the War Dec frenzy is one of them, regardless of how it came about.

If you analyze this, I think you'll find that the newer players in small, less experienced, corporations pay the highest price. Is this okay with you as a player?

I feel it would be smart of us as players to have a more intelligent approach to the mechanic change rather than this sledge hammer approach.

8 Golden Rules of EVE • EVE is entirely PvP
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#160 - 2016-03-15 16:25:06 UTC
FloppieTheBanjoClown wrote:
Commander Spurty wrote:
i say anyone that is involved in a wardec be allowed to anchor bubbles in highsec and drop Bombs.

No concord intervention is what you paid for.

No concord intervention is what you should get.

This "middle ground" is bad


If you're up for getting concorded every time your bomb does collateral damage, I say bring it on.


I'd use noobship to forcefully warp in the bubbles all the time.