These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New War Dec system - massively article - Very good points covered.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#41 - 2012-04-16 21:04:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Kattshiro
Quote:
The ideal war system would be one that forces the attackers to commit and has clear victory conditions. It should make small corps engaging large entities riskier and encourage people to fight a war rather than dock up for a week. To start a war, the attacker should have to place the war fee into a war command structure that would be in space, orbiting a planet, or at a starbase. If the defending corp destroys this structure, it would collect the war fee as a prize, and the war would end. This way a larger corp that costs a lot more to wardec would have more incentive to fight, and small alt corps wouldn't be able to reasonably pursue a war against large alliances.


Actually a semi good idea. Dunno bout the structure part, but says hey defender corp.. want to win? Want this dec to end earlier? Now you can.

Incentives the defenders to fight beyond denial. Also makes attackers look bad if the war ends in day. Furthermore make the objective in a random spot. This way neutrals cant as easily camp home stations or what the above author was talking about.
And also makes logistics harder as you can't just have your 5 man group in one location.

Furthermore there needs to be a way to pay to hide from locator agents for X amount of time depending on how much you pay.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2012-04-16 21:08:13 UTC
Micheal Dietrich wrote:

Dec-shields under the proposed changes are going away. Assuming this article is a response to that, the omission is entirely relevant.
Nothing is stopping a player from corp hopping into an alt corp. There is more than one form of dec-shield out there.


Micheal Dietrich wrote:

Calling him factually wrong would be like stating it never happens. If no one had alts then perhaps this could be considered valid, but the idea that no one has ever thought of having their means to continue business as usual in a different corp from the one they are using to declare war for whatever reason is laughable.
No it is not like saying it never happens. I know there shell corps out there, you know that there are shell corps out there. But he is stating that we are all alt corps and we only pick on weak players and industrials. That is factually wrong. We are the big bad boogy to many carebear corps and they commonly tell campfire stories about us to each other. How would a corp know what the other corp does once their own war has ended.

Most <> All. I'm not even arguing that "most" is an entirely accurate word in this case. But dismissing the argument and saying it's factually wrong is like stating it isn't reasonably prevalent or worth considering.
Micheal Dietrich wrote:

This again goes back to target selection. Knowing your opponents numbers and activity provides an invaluable potential resource for an attacker who also has the initiative. It allows you to ensure you have all reasonable advantages. Why would someone who is trying to accomplish anything other than getting blown up want to undock to that?
I've said it twice and I'll say it again, a corp is only as weak as they allow themselves to be. You don't want to do your homework on the people who are attacking you, fine. You don't want to seek help in removing the problem, fine. You don't want to learn how to fight, fine. You have the tools, if you choose not to use them then don't look to blame anyone but yourself.

Knowing you are up against a superior force doesn't suddenly put you on equal terms. Shelling out isk for defense doesn't guarantee success, and it certainly doesn't mean you can go around acting as normal with no issues. Fighting back doesn't guarantee a favorable outcome. There is no such thing as winning simply by disallowing weakness.
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#43 - 2012-04-16 21:12:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobiaz
Adunh Slavy wrote:
The article does make a good central point. War decs lack meaning. Having something to fight over would be a good thing. War just for the sake of war is lame.


You're sadly mistaken if you think empire wars are fought over nothing. I'll agree that killmail farming is rather pathetic, but the chance to get to the soft underbelly of careless carebear corps that don't bother to defend themselves? That IS something to start a war over.

We talk about war, but what happens in EVE in empire is more like small-scale raiding and is better compared to the way the trading companies operated in the 17th century. For REAL wars you'd have to look at null-sec.

But that doesn't mean the fighting in empire is less important. On the contrary: they weed out the fail-corporations that lure in newbies, teaching them nothing about how to play this game, often burning them out in months. I think these corporations are one of the main reasons why the newbie-retention of EVE is so low.

The empire wardeccers are the predators killing off both the sickly and the obese, before they infect to many newborns.

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!
Micheal Dietrich
Kings Gambit Black
#44 - 2012-04-16 21:13:31 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:


I get a wardec. I look up my opponent. I see characters significantly older than mine who are very PvP active. My chances of doing serious damage with my character/players skills and numbers available are slim.




Character age is another misconception among players. He can never have more than 5 points in any one skill just like you. Having said that, if a ship set up requires 12 million points to fly then it requires 12 million points. Having points in lasers will not help your blaster boat. Having points in negotiation will not help your armor one bit. A character having more points does not make him automatically better.

Out of Pod is getting In the Pod - Join in game channel **IG OOPE **
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
#45 - 2012-04-16 21:14:08 UTC
Herping yourDerp wrote:
engage in armed conflict for
resources<- doesn't happen in highse
land<- nope not in highse
intolerance other races religions or creeds <- probably against TOS if about RL stuff, in game most corps have multiple races and ideologies

pretty sure there has never been a war, in the entirety of human history that involved "lets go to war for no benefit"


Removal of a POS was an example you gave before. That's a resource you're either just denying someone else to weaken them or you plan to put your own POS there. There is no land in this game obviously, but places to put a POS are in high demand for some hisec systems

Intolerance and pettiness has fueled many, many, wars in real life. Lots have even been sparked over smacktalk, much like they are in this game. The idea all wars are justified and fair is propaganda. You routinely see extremely powerful militaries invading weaker and unprepared countries with little or no justification given. And there's always benefits to war for the victor, and the people supplying armaments.

It's bizarre to find myself on this side of the 'greifers' here for once What?, but i'm only doing so because much of real war actually is greifing. Go check out liveleak for awhile if you don't believe me. If you want to make an argument that war in EVE should be more fair than real wars i'd have no problem with that, but lets not have any illusions about the fairness of real war, please.

"In the void is virtue, and no evil. Wisdom has existence, principle has existence, the Way has existence, spirit is nothingness." ~Miyamoto Musashi
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#46 - 2012-04-16 21:15:11 UTC
Quote:
a handful of alts can disrupt a corporation or even a major alliance like EVE University.


Only if Eve Uni is disorganized and fails to respond to the threat of "a handful of alts". If Eve Uni can't defend itself from a couple of guys with battleships, they shouldn't be pretending they know what they're doing well enough to teach others.

Quote:
The new fee calculation makes it more expensive to target larger organisations like EVE Uni


Which is a terrible, terrible concept. See here for why.

Quote:
To start a war, the attacker should have to place the war fee into a war command structure that would be in space, orbiting a planet, or at a starbase.


Psychotic Monk and I proposed the idea of "corporate offices" that could be made war objectives. I prefer that to a special war structure which would make for more tedious administration as you had to deploy one every time you went to war. Every corp would get ONE office, anchored at a moon somewhere, and should an aggressor lose theirs, they would lose the war. This way a small shell corp's wardec on Eve Uni could be put to an end in a day by a single op to smash their corp office. It also makes defense a two-way street: both sides have something to defend. If the defenders stay docked and don't defend their office, their corp will lose assets.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#47 - 2012-04-16 21:17:47 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Dec-shields under the proposed changes are going away. Assuming this article is a response to that, the omission is entirely relevant.
Just one problem: dec shields are not going away. Under the proposed system, it becomes the default mechanic. Most larger alliances will automatically be decshielded through their sheer numbers — the thing that should already give them a whole lot of protection. They don't need the mechanics to inherently provide a dec shield on top of that numerical protection.
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#48 - 2012-04-16 21:22:51 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Dec-shields under the proposed changes are going away. Assuming this article is a response to that, the omission is entirely relevant.
Just one problem: dec shields are not going away. Under the proposed system, it becomes the default mechanic. Most larger alliances will automatically be decshielded through their sheer numbers — the thing that should already give them a whole lot of protection. They don't need the mechanics to inherently provide a dec shield on top of that numerical protection.

I think this was designed as a "throttle" mechanic. CCP is probably going to adjust the cost/member based on how much the mechanic is used. If nobody is at war I bet it gets pretty cheap. That would be my guess anyway. Personally, as one who intends to start wars for profit, what it's worth to dec a corp in terms of isk/member depends entirely on who they are and what they do. My targets will be worth it (unless they totally kick my *** which is a real probability). If it's some nub training corp it wouldn't be worth it to attack from a profit standpoint... so maybe that is all as is intended.

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Micheal Dietrich
Kings Gambit Black
#49 - 2012-04-16 21:23:57 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

Most <> All. I'm not even arguing that "most" is an entirely accurate word in this case. But dismissing the argument and saying it's factually wrong is like stating it isn't reasonably prevalent or worth considering.


I don't think you and I are on the same page here. I'll will show you 2 quotes and what I am talking about.
massively wrote:

The main issue is that it's hilariously biased in favour of the aggressor, who can prepare for the war and will always pick weak or industrial targets.


That line is factually wrong. We do not always pick weak or industrial targets. He should have placed a word like 'generally' in there.

Massively wrote:
As most empire wardecs are initiated by small shell corps full of PvP alts, the attacking players won't mind logging out for a few days if the war backfires.


Unless he can provide proof, this again is factually wrong. Always back up your claims.

Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Knowing you are up against a superior force doesn't suddenly put you on equal terms. Shelling out isk for defense doesn't guarantee success, and it certainly doesn't mean you can go around acting as normal with no issues. Fighting back doesn't guarantee a favorable outcome. There is no such thing as winning simply by disallowing weakness.


Lesson number 2 - Life is not always guaranteed. Many of my fights don't end up the way I plan them, I certainly wouldn't expect it any other way.

Out of Pod is getting In the Pod - Join in game channel **IG OOPE **
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#50 - 2012-04-16 21:28:46 UTC
Here is an example of how the Current Wardeck system was broken & I see no fixes in the next one..
Dailty Corp hopping:
Psychotic Monk
Security Status -1.9
The Skunkworks [SKNK.]
Member for 0 days

BIO Employment History Latest Forum Posts


CURRENT CORPORATION
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.04.16 00:11 to this day
PREVIOUS CORPORATION(S)
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.04.16 00:03 to 2012.04.16 00:11.
Glory In Death [GIND-] from 2012.04.15 20:57 to 2012.04.16 00:03.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.04.15 01:32 to 2012.04.15 20:57.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.04.14 07:14 to 2012.04.15 01:32.
In Accordance with the Prophecy [-AWP-] from 2012.04.13 06:46 to 2012.04.14 07:14.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.04.13 05:53 to 2012.04.13 06:46.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.04.12 02:49 to 2012.04.13 05:53.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.04.12 01:37 to 2012.04.12 02:49.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.04.10 23:22 to 2012.04.12 01:37.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.04.10 16:33 to 2012.04.10 23:22.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.04.09 21:19 to 2012.04.10 16:33.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.04.09 19:21 to 2012.04.09 21:19.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.04.08 23:34 to 2012.04.09 19:21.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.04.07 21:21 to 2012.04.08 23:34.
Eagle Enterprises (Closed) from 2012.04.07 19:50 to 2012.04.07 21:21.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.04.07 08:32 to 2012.04.07 19:50.
EVE Portal INC [EVE-P] from 2012.04.07 06:01 to 2012.04.07 08:32.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.04.04 23:41 to 2012.04.07 06:01.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.04.04 10:21 to 2012.04.04 23:41.
Compu-Global-Hyper-Mega-Tech [CGHMT] from 2012.04.03 06:16 to 2012.04.04 10:21.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.04.01 00:06 to 2012.04.03 06:16.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.03.31 22:34 to 2012.04.01 00:06.
Sherrein Industries [SRNID] from 2012.03.31 16:37 to 2012.03.31 22:34.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.03.05 00:38 to 2012.03.31 16:37.
The Hebrew In Me [J3WS] from 2012.02.16 04:19 to 2012.03.05 00:38.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.02.15 06:12 to 2012.02.16 04:19.
The Hebrew In Me [J3WS] from 2012.02.14 03:10 to 2012.02.15 06:12.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.02.12 05:18 to 2012.02.14 03:10.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.02.10 22:40 to 2012.02.12 05:18.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.02.08 01:00 to 2012.02.10 22:40.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.02.07 04:58 to 2012.02.08 01:00.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.02.06 06:26 to 2012.02.07 04:58.
Estel Arador Corp Services [EACS] from 2012.02.06 06:09 to 2012.02.06 06:26.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.02.05 06:58 to 2012.02.06 06:09.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.02.05 00:47 to 2012.02.05 06:58.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.02.04 05:55 to 2012.02.05 00:47.
Red Tsunami [IBPH] from 2012.02.04 05:11 to 2012.02.04 05:55.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.02.04 04:29 to 2012.02.04 05:11.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.02.04 01:59 to 2012.02.04 04:29.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.02.03 05:44 to 2012.02.04 01:59.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.02.01 09:24 to 2012.02.03 05:44.
Athesarian [ATHES] from 2012.02.01 08:10 to 2012.02.01 09:24.
Cresent Hawk's Order of The Angels [CHO.] from 2012.02.01 05:57 to 2012.02.01 08:10.
The Hebrew In Me [J3WS] from 2012.01.31 03:34 to 2012.02.01 05:57.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.30 07:22 to 2012.01.31 03:34.
Datadyne Dark Division [-DDD-] from 2012.01.30 07:13 to 2012.01.30 07:22.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.30 04:39 to 2012.01.30 07:13.
Gallente Trade Union [GLTU] from 2012.01.30 02:55 to 2012.01.30 04:39.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.30 00:19 to 2012.01.30 02:55.
Reverse Safari Venture Industries [RSVI.] from 2012.01.29 01:58 to 2012.01.30 00:19.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.29 01:22 to 2012.01.29 01:58.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.01.26 04:56 to 2012.01.29 01:22.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.26 00:49 to 2012.01.26 04:56.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.01.24 01:52 to 2012.01.26 00:49.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.23 05:07 to 2012.01.24 01:52.
ELUSIVE JOKERS [-EJ-] from 2012.01.23 04:41 to 2012.01.23 05:07.
New Guardian Protection Inc. [NGPI] from 2012.01.22 04:35 to 2012.01.23 04:41.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.01.21 21:53 to 2012.01.22 04:35.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.20 18:41 to 2012.01.21 21:53.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.01.20 03:56 to 2012.01.20 18:41.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.20 02:54 to 2012.01.20 03:56.
Zervas Aeronautics [ZERVA] from 2012.01.19 18:45 to 2012.01.20 02:54.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.18 23:34 to 2012.01.19 18:45.
Zervas Aeronautics [ZERVA] from 2012.01.18 20:04 to 2012.01.18 23:34.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.01.18 19:22 to 2012.01.18 20:04.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.17 22:45 to 2012.01.18 19:22.
Zervas Aeronautics [ZERVA] from 2012.01.17 01:43 to 2012.01.17 22:45.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.01.14 22:43 to 2012.01.17 01:43.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.14 18:56 to 2012.01.14 22:43.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.01.07 02:47 to 2012.01.14 18:56.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.07 01:53 to 2012.01.07 02:47.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.01.06 05:27 to 2012.01.07 01:53.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.05 23:51 to 2012.01.06 05:27.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.01.03 01:52 to 2012.01.05 23:51.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#51 - 2012-04-16 21:29:10 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:

And very specially, in the real world, most people who lose a war once can't wage war never again. War it's game over if you lose, and this is the bloody reason of all the above.


Clearly written by someone with little to no knowledge of history.
Burseg Sardaukar
Free State Project
#52 - 2012-04-16 21:29:37 UTC
I kind of like the sentiment in the article regarding "goal-less" wars.

I can't say I'm hugely attached to the structure-grind idea; as someone mentioned here, it promotes blobs. And what's to stop some attackers from placing the structure at a planet in W-space or null where most hisec corps won't even venture after anyway?

If we are to stick with a structure concept, it'd have to be randomly placed structure, or multiple (?) ones. I dunno. I can see where he's going, but I don't have the faintest idea how to successfully implement something like that to help a defender.

A better victory-condition would be "whoever kills more ISK in a week can chose to keep the war going." The defender could do so for free, the attacker would have to pay more to keep it going.

So, if the defenders get some buddies and kick the attacker's asses, the war switches to the defender's favor, and any Mercs they have can chose to stay or leave at this point (with backdoor deals from either participant), but no additional ones can be taken on for the defenders (now-attackers). The defenders could also chose to end the war, which would stop war between the two for at LEAST 2 weeks (same with surrendering. 1 week is a bit short).

Also, the cost formula needs a re-think. Not only should it take count/activity into the equation, perhaps it should take the total SP as well, and the formula should be a reverse bell-curve. When the numbers/SP are equal, its the cheapest. But if it strays far in either direction, the cost goes UP for the attacker. So a 50 man corp can't pay next-to-nothing to dec a 2 man corp with a grand total of 2M SP between the two dudes

Can't wait to dual box my Dust toon and EVE toon on the same machine!
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#53 - 2012-04-16 21:29:50 UTC
While many of the "facts" in the article are arguable, and he omits completely the current option of making the war mutual, I personally feel that there need to be victory and/or loss conditions for any war.

Perhaps his proposal is not the best, but a variation on this is well worth considering.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2012-04-16 21:30:56 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Dec-shields under the proposed changes are going away. Assuming this article is a response to that, the omission is entirely relevant.
Just one problem: dec shields are not going away. Under the proposed system, it becomes the default mechanic. Most larger alliances will automatically be decshielded through their sheer numbers — the thing that should already give them a whole lot of protection. They don't need the mechanics to inherently provide a dec shield on top of that numerical protection.

Correct, going away wasn't the right thing to say there, but rather they are attempting to address one of the issues currently rendering highsec POS's indestructible. That was the specific point I was getting at.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#55 - 2012-04-16 21:34:54 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
Here is an example of how the Current Wardeck system was broken & I see no fixes in the next one..
Dailty Corp hopping:
Psychotic Monk
Security Status -1.9
The Skunkworks [SKNK.]
Member for 0 days

BIO Employment History Latest Forum Posts


Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.

(continues into last year:
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.02 07:20 to 2012.01.03 01:52.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2012.01.02 06:47 to 2012.01.02 07:20.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.01.02 06:13 to 2012.01.02 06:47.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.12.31 04:04 to 2012.01.02 06:13.
Arctic Experiments [ARCEX] from 2011.12.30 02:23 to 2011.12.31 04:04.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.12.29 21:31 to 2011.12.30 02:23.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.12.27 00:23 to 2011.12.29 21:31.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.12.26 23:26 to 2011.12.27 00:23.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.12.20 01:34 to 2011.12.26 23:26.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.12.20 00:44 to 2011.12.20 01:34.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.12.18 22:01 to 2011.12.20 00:44.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.12.18 01:05 to 2011.12.18 22:01.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.12.18 00:37 to 2011.12.18 01:05.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.12.17 23:49 to 2011.12.18 00:37.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.12.17 23:43 to 2011.12.17 23:49.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.12.16 02:05 to 2011.12.17 23:43.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.12.08 22:54 to 2011.12.16 02:05.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.12.08 06:31 to 2011.12.08 22:54.
HOUSE SCORPINTHEUS [FREMN] from 2011.12.08 00:23 to 2011.12.08 06:31.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.12.01 03:10 to 2011.12.08 00:23.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.12.01 02:45 to 2011.12.01 03:10.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.11.25 03:05 to 2011.12.01 02:45.
Love Me Dead (Closed) from 2011.11.24 01:47 to 2011.11.25 03:05.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.11.17 22:26 to 2011.11.24 01:47.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.11.16 02:22 to 2011.11.17 22:26.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.11.14 05:05 to 2011.11.16 02:22.
Martin Fury [-SKNK] from 2011.11.14 04:18 to 2011.11.14 05:05.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.11.14 01:41 to 2011.11.14 04:18.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.11.11 08:31 to 2011.11.14 01:41.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.11.11 08:04 to 2011.11.11 08:31.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.11.11 03:13 to 2011.11.11 08:04.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.11.11 02:47 to 2011.11.11 03:13.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.11.11 00:43 to 2011.11.11 02:47.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.11.10 07:37 to 2011.11.11 00:43.
Worlds Without Boundaries [77TH] from 2011.11.10 06:12 to 2011.11.10 07:37.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.11.08 07:33 to 2011.11.10 06:12.
Meteor Industries [METIN] from 2011.11.08 06:52 to 2011.11.08 07:33.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.11.06 08:18 to 2011.11.08 06:52.
Putz. [PUTZ.] from 2011.11.06 07:14 to 2011.11.06 08:18.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.11.05 07:19 to 2011.11.06 07:14.
Martin Fury [-SKNK] from 2011.11.05 04:08 to 2011.11.05 07:19.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.11.03 15:48 to 2011.11.05 04:08.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.11.01 21:06 to 2011.11.03 15:48.
Go Petition Blizzard [SKNK3] from 2011.11.01 03:58 to 2011.11.01 21:06.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.10.31 03:10 to 2011.11.01 03:58.
Go Petition Blizzard [SKNK3] from 2011.10.29 22:12 to 2011.10.31 03:10.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.10.28 00:50 to 2011.10.29 22:12.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.10.24 03:08 to 2011.10.28 00:50.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.10.24 02:44 to 2011.10.24 03:08.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.10.23 00:46 to 2011.10.24 02:44.
Clearly Compensating [LITLD] from 2011.10.19 03:26 to 2011.10.23 00:46.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.10.19 03:25 to 2011.10.19 03:26.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.10.18 01:57 to 2011.10.19 03:25.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.10.18 00:01 to 2011.10.18 01:57.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.10.17 05:22 to 2011.10.18 00:01.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.10.17 04:31 to 2011.10.17 05:22.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.10.17 04:25 to 2011.10.17 04:31.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.10.17 03:09 to 2011.10.17 04:25.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.10.13 20:53 to 2011.10.17 03:09.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.10.13 20:36 to 2011.10.13 20:53.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.10.13 05:25 to 2011.10.13 20:36.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.10.13 03:50 to 2011.10.13 05:25.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.10.13 03:22 to 2011.10.13 03:50.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.10.12 23:44 to 2011.10.13 03:22.
The Skunkworks [SKNK.] from 2011.10.12 04:24 to 2011.10.12 23:44.
Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2011.10.12 03:05 to 2011.10.12 04:24.

and keeps on going...
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Burseg Sardaukar
Free State Project
#56 - 2012-04-16 21:37:12 UTC
DarthNefarius wrote:
Here is an example of how the Current Wardeck system was broken & I see no fixes in the next one..
Dailty Corp hopping:
Psychotic Monk
Security Status -1.9
The Skunkworks [SKNK.]
Member for 0 days

BIO Employment History Latest Forum Posts


Yea... this is a big problem, too.

Accepting new members if you are an aggressor should not be allowed at all.

On the other side, if you ditch from a corp in a war (or Alliance) you should have some sort of "stain" on your record.

Can't wait to dual box my Dust toon and EVE toon on the same machine!
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#57 - 2012-04-16 21:37:25 UTC
Gogela wrote:
I think this was designed as a "throttle" mechanic. CCP is probably going to adjust the cost/member based on how much the mechanic is used. If nobody is at war I bet it gets pretty cheap. That would be my guess anyway. Personally, as one who intends to start wars for profit, what it's worth to dec a corp in terms of isk/member depends entirely on who they are and what they do. My targets will be worth it (unless they totally kick my *** which is a real probability). If it's some nub training corp it wouldn't be worth it to attack from a profit standpoint... so maybe that is all as is intended.
It will be designed as a foolish mechanic… Straight

The problem isn't the cost — it's the equation. People will be using the **** out of the mechanic because it's so easy to go after a squishy target. The only way they can throttle it is to either make wars free (so even Goons can be wardecced) or to make it so hideously expensive that not even Sunshine and Lollipops can be decced. Anywhere inbetween, and there will be tons of wars, so by any such metric, it will be a success.

The problem is that the wars will not matter. Anyone who's a worth-while target will decshield themselves up the wazoo; anyone who isn't won't. Your particular brand of wars will be completely obsolete because no target will ever be worth it (unless you are thinking about taking up POS-cleaning for a low commission… and even then, it's doubtful). For the whole thing to work for you, the price will have to come down so low that wars might as well be completely free, otherwise the valuable target will just hide behind a massive decshield pay-wall.

The current suggestion also rather removes the point of having the ally/merc system: a target that's small enough not to bankrupt you from the wardec fee alone will not be in a position to pay mercs to defend it. Should you bite the bullet and go after an worth-while target, they will be able to pay enough to ensure your defeat every time. The only counter is for you to be massively larger than any target you go after, which only further reinforces the first problem.

The whole pay-per-target idea is flawed to its very core from the start, and that flaw spreads to ruin pretty much all the other changes they're thinking of by making them pointless, and the tragedy of it is that one of the key design goals of the whole thing was to remove things like decshielding and obvious griefdecs. Instead, they're reinforcing both. Straight
bornaa
GRiD.
#58 - 2012-04-16 21:38:50 UTC
Burseg Sardaukar wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
Here is an example of how the Current Wardeck system was broken & I see no fixes in the next one..
Dailty Corp hopping:
Psychotic Monk
Security Status -1.9
The Skunkworks [SKNK.]
Member for 0 days

BIO Employment History Latest Forum Posts


Yea... this is a big problem, too.

Accepting new members if you are an aggressor should not be allowed at all.

On the other side, if you ditch from a corp in a war (or Alliance) you should have some sort of "stain" on your record.


Yea, alts care about "stains" Roll
[Yes, I'm an Amateur](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRa-69uBmIw&feature=relmfu)
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2012-04-16 21:39:54 UTC
Micheal Dietrich wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:


I get a wardec. I look up my opponent. I see characters significantly older than mine who are very PvP active. My chances of doing serious damage with my character/players skills and numbers available are slim.




Character age is another misconception among players. He can never have more than 5 points in any one skill just like you. Having said that, if a ship set up requires 12 million points to fly then it requires 12 million points. Having points in lasers will not help your blaster boat. Having points in negotiation will not help your armor one bit. A character having more points does not make him automatically better.

The question is how many skills have I acquired all 5 points in, or even had reasonable time to do so compared to a significantly older character. character age itself is meaningless, but provides some reference to say, skill wise, that if this person has been training for a great deal longer than I have and flies only a few ships that I can't even board, he probably has alot more relevant 5's and can take me in this thing I am flying. Again, this is all based on various estimations and subject to alot of error and assumption, but it is still a measure IMHO worth looking at in conjunction with other aspects.
Burseg Sardaukar
Free State Project
#60 - 2012-04-16 21:41:52 UTC
bornaa wrote:
Burseg Sardaukar wrote:
DarthNefarius wrote:
Here is an example of how the Current Wardeck system was broken & I see no fixes in the next one..
Dailty Corp hopping:
Psychotic Monk
Security Status -1.9
The Skunkworks [SKNK.]
Member for 0 days

BIO Employment History Latest Forum Posts


Yea... this is a big problem, too.

Accepting new members if you are an aggressor should not be allowed at all.

On the other side, if you ditch from a corp in a war (or Alliance) you should have some sort of "stain" on your record.


Yea, alts care about "stains" Roll


haha, I agree. I was thinking more of my own experience of corps jumping ship at the first sign of war. It'd be nice to know before-hand that they were that type of corp. Same with individuals.

The post about the Psychotic Monk's employment history just made me recall it.

Can't wait to dual box my Dust toon and EVE toon on the same machine!