EVE General Discussion

war dec fees should be based on size of attacking corp only with attacking corp not allowed any allies, and defending corps limited to a max of 2 allied corps. Wars should automatically end after 90 days, no renewals, no early terminations, no surrenders/etc. Gain should be limited to the loot from wrecked ships plus any direct payments made between corps. After war, minimum 3 months before defending corp can be wardec'd again. Attacking corps can only initiate one war/month, and fees double for 2nd or 3rd active war.

One Time War Fee:
Attacking corp <= 5 members: $250M
Attacking corp <= 25 members: $1B
Attacking corp >= 25 members: $4B

Initiating a war should also result in a -1 standing drop with whichever faction has the highest relations with the defending corp. -1 to security rating too.

The above would allow serious real wars to occur in highsec, and would reduce the incentive for defending corps to grow big, and makes the initiating corp pay something closer to the real cost of reduced profits/operations/etc that they are forcing the defending corps to incur.

As long as the corp-hopping is resolved for all war-participants, this sounds rather positive.

Let me give a concrete example, story time!
I was in a corp with my main that had taken on quite a few new players, but since we were still about 100 people all in all we got a wardec from a corp with just 4 players. As about 80% of our players were less than or around a month old, we told them to stay docked for now and taught them the basics (including aggression mechanics) with some practice-fights against those with a bit more time (and pvp-fights) under their belt (at times when no WTs were online). All in all we thought it might make for a nice experience and a bit of fun, we could just put them in frigs or cruisers and have a bit of pewpew, even if we would still likely lose: we might just get a kill or 2 with pure numbers
Clearly the WTs were not interested in such a fight. We tracked down one of them (who got away) and decided to just wait for him to come back out of the dock. After quite a while he did finally come out, and he brought about 10 more people who had just (re-)joined the corp. We of course just got out of there (we were also only 10 people or so all-in-all) as a couple of frigs and cruisers won't kill command ships, T3 and the like in even numbers.
We even knew this was a possibility (having done a bit of homework on the WTs before and seeing corp histories on current and ex-members), but we hoped they'd commit at least to a fight against a couple of noobs (even with those numbers their chances of winning were still just fine).

My point about all that is this: CCP has stated they want people who wardec to COMMIT to the whole thing. What is the point of a war if the aggressing corp is basically just a shell where people join if they feel like fighting and leave if they want to go shopping to jita or whatever? At the very least the aggressing corp needs to incur join/leave timers of 1-3 days or something, possibly the defenders as well though to even things out.
Also there currently isn't any mechanic that can be used to see these things coming (even if the possibility has come to mind). I can't "Show Info" on the corp every few seconds to see if the member count has changed, that just isn't practical. To my knowledge there is no way to manually refresh a "Show Info" window's information, and it would still be rather impractical if there was.

I'm also unclear as to what they wanted to accomplish, but I doubt they managed to make the war fee of a measly 2 mil back in loot. I also doubt they had much fun in that 1-2 minute fight. But whatever the motives I really hope this mechanic should clearly be improved. I hope to considered cases like this when designing the new system (or you do now)!

v. nice.

Correct me if I've missed it, but there is no protection for the aggressor if everyone just leaves target corp except ceo. You're now stuck with a war that you can't end early and you're out of pocket.

I am particularly referring to farmer/botter corps with a handful of members. It's impossible to lock them into a war today, and with no mechanism in place to stop this or at least compensate, these exploiting cunts are even safer then before.

If plans are that ransom demands are just withdrawn from their account as a fine, then I'm ok with it.

Basing fees on the size of the attacker is too prone to abuse.

1. Kick everyone out of the corp except a skeleton crew.
2. Wardec target, pay fee for the week (which will be dirt cheap since you have hardly any members).
3. Re-invite everyone back in before the war goes live.

And if you're an alliance.

1. All corps except the executor corp drop the alliance.
2. Executor corp wardecs target, pays fee.
3. Corps rejoin alliance and now get to participate in the war.

Why is it so easy to abuse? Because the attacker is in control of when the wardec occurs, therefore they can game the system to their advantage.

Can the defending corp play games with their membership count? Yes, but since they don't know when the attack is coming, they have to keep it bulked up at all times. And if the costs do not increase linearly with size, there's a limit of how much they can raise the costs for the attacker (such as calculating using the CubeRoot() of the size).

Some combination of the following factors would probably serve well:

- A higher base fee, because even 50M is a joke these days.
- A scaling cost based on total # of people involved.
- A scaling cost based on the size differential between the two corps.

For the "size" calculations, take some constant fee and multiply by the CubeRoot(N), where N is either the corp size (only counting characters on active/paid accounts) or the difference between the corp size.

Even better IMO.

Watching today's wardec bit and i'm impressed. From yesterday's reports it sounded like they were making DecShield official, now it sounds very much the opposite (which i like ^_^)

I liked the idea of not counting unsubscribed accounts towards the wardec cost, whoever asked that, i hope they bugged the devs all day about that =D

Also counting logistics into killmails is important. A lot of assholes refuse to fly logi simply because they dont get on killmails (FIT ECM DRONES NOOBS)

Unlimited allies. And you can be an ally in an unlimited number of wars.

Just stop and think about that for a bit. What's gonna happen?

That would lead to an unbelievable amount of abuse. You could wardec the University continually and ensure that they could never recruit new members ever again. Whereas some of us might find that hilarious, it's not beneficial to the game overall.

Yes I suppose that's true. Although, if you put a 7 day wait timer to join a corp that had declared a wardec that would eliminate that problem.

Another way would be to have Wardecs of different sizes at the point of declaration with a set max number of players you can have in the wardecing corp/alliance. Exceed it and the deced corp/alliance can drop the war against them if they wish.

For example Corp A wishes to wardec Corp B. Corp A has 45 members and takes out a Wardec against Corp B which allows 50 max players. During the course of the war that week Corp A takes on 8 new members giving them a total of 53 which exceeds the limit of 50 players the Wardec they paid for, and now Corp B can end the War immediately if they choose at no cost to themselves and Corp A will have to wait to renew the war with a new Wardec that allows for more than 53 members.

The larger the max number of player a corp can have during the wardec the higher the cost obviously, with an added set fee for wardecing an Alliance.

A Corp/Alliance can choose whatever max number they wish to pay for, if a one man corp wants to pay for a Wardec that allows for 200 characters they may do so.