EVE Search - The old 8 million ISK to avoid war decs, still going on, still no word

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

Crime and Punishment

The old 8 million ISK to avoid war decs, still going on, still no word

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 :: one page

Author	Topic
Dynast	Posted - 2008.02.23 05:23:00 - [181] Originally by: Dianeces Originally by: Dynast They've consented to PvP when they joined a player corp. If they find PvP repugnant, they have the perfectly legitimate choice to stay in NPC corporations. THe downside is that they do not get the various advantages of having their own player corp. Cycling through alt corps bypasses the CPP intended mechanic: player corporations being able to war each other for a price. For all intents and purposes, it is the players and their characters that truely compose the corporation. Switching between Hahanowar4u1, Hahanowar4u2, Hahanowar4u3, and Hahanowar4u4 is lame, and should either be blocked by the mechanics, or by GM action. You missed the point. Those people were all afk. I also did not have a war dec against them when they died. Quoted the wrong person :(
Dianeces Minmatar Repo Industries	Posted - 2008.02.23 05:50:00 - [182] Indeed.
Nexa Necis The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2008.02.24 00:03:00 - [183] See my update, GM states it's fully legal. I encourage the people who thought of IMune to now try and get a new war avoidance operation in place. Create trial account alts with maxed corp skills, create like 20 corps, then have people jump from corp to corp to corp. The GM's have stated corp jumping is 100% legal in any situation. I have no clue why it's not the same for the alliances, but go figure.
Praxis1452 The Bastards	Posted - 2008.02.24 00:42:00 - [184] Wow... that's kinda lame. Good thing I do low-sec anyway. -------------------------------------------- ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it"
Quelque Chose Gallente	Posted - 2008.02.24 01:32:00 - [185] Edited by: Quelque Chose on 24/02/2008 01:33:48 Originally by: Nexa Necis See my update, GM states it's fully legal. I encourage the people who thought of IMune to now try and get a new war avoidance operation in place. Create trial account alts with maxed corp skills, create like 20 corps, then have people jump from corp to corp to corp. The GM's have stated corp jumping is 100% legal in any situation. I have no clue why it's not the same for the alliances, but go figure. /pats self on back for guessing right //not sure how happy to be about it, time will tell So, what's TRAPs going to do now? Any news from the actual war/ nonwar?
Ga'len Your Assets Relocated and Redistributed	Posted - 2008.02.24 04:01:00 - [186] Originally by: Nexa Necis See my update, GM states it's fully legal. I encourage the people who thought of IMune to now try and get a new war avoidance operation in place. Create trial account alts with maxed corp skills, create like 20 corps, then have people jump from corp to corp to corp. The GM's have stated corp jumping is 100% legal in any situation. I have no clue why it's not the same for the alliances, but go figure. You know, back in the iMune discussions, there were a lot of fixes proposed. The follow was one and I think that it should be put in place. "When a corp is war decc'ed, no corp member may leave the corp without paying a surrender fee. New members can join either corp that is under the dec and alliance membership should be allowed to change." I don't remember who posted this thought, but it seems to me that with this blatant exploit being utilized that it's a darn good thought and should be taken into consideration. The actions of this corporation and it's alt corporations simply violate the developers intentions. Now before you say no, remember this simple concept, Risk vs. reward. Everything in EVE is based on that. You risk going into lower security space to gain the reward of better loot and npc rat bounties. You risk a war dec to seek the reward of a surrender fee, loot, political change, etc.. The risk in creating a corporation is the possibility of loosing everything, the reward is to grow in wealth an power. So, these people have violated that basic principle of the game. They have no risk in the creation of these many corporations other than the initial isk used in creating them. It's not the same thing as the iMune exploit, but it has the safe effect, corporation existence without risk. That's just not EVE people. It's an abuse of a game mechanic and that ladies and gentleman, is an exploit plain and simple.
WeightedCompanionCube Aperture Science Enrichment Center	Posted - 2008.02.24 10:57:00 - [187] Originally by: Nexa Necis See my update, GM states it's fully legal. I encourage the people who thought of IMune to now try and get a new war avoidance operation in place. Create trial account alts with maxed corp skills, create like 20 corps, then have people jump from corp to corp to corp. The GM's have stated corp jumping is 100% legal in any situation. I have no clue why it's not the same for the alliances, but go figure. Or you just make a bunch of your own wardec corps to follow them as was suggested earlier instead of calling on all players to create more load on the server. And don't begin about costs symmetry. Your wardecs on much smaller corps show that asymmetric war what your corp is all about.
Doonoo Boonoo Amarr	Posted - 2008.02.24 11:39:00 - [188] So,if a corp were decced by mercs and they hired their own protection the mercs who decced them just skip to another corp and avoid the hired help?
Aslovi Caldari Repo Industries R.E.P.O.	Posted - 2008.02.24 13:32:00 - [189] Well I've kept off this topic even though I'm good ingames friends with TRAPS, I've always felt that this was an area that could and would be expolited but REPO have never really had a major problem with it until recently. Our situation is a little different to TRAPS, and although I disagree with those that say "well you shouldn't pick on nubs that don't want to fight" I see there point. However this is my situation- There is a corp who decided that with 255 members they are big enough to start dec'ing other smaller empire corps. so off they go and start killing people and tbh they must be loving there new found pvp. But the corp they dec'd hires REPO since there out numbered and out gunned. Within a day this corp turns itself into an Allaince, no big deal just means the client has to pay bigger weekly war fee's. Now this corp and remember they started the conflict can't handle losing over 400 ships, so they create a new corp not in the allaince with the same name (give or take a digit) and move a large chunk of there members to it. So REPO dec them too, the campgain is starting to get expensive but hey the client is happy to pay. Within an hour of that dec going in they create not 1 new corp but 3 more corps all the same description and all the same name just changing one digit. I petetion no reply yet but hey we all know the answer. It gets worse I log on before down time and find yet more alt corps that they are jumping members too, again all the same name with one digit difference. How can this not be an expolit? These guys basicly start a war then when the going gets tough want to run and hide. Since the Privateers war slot nerf last year, the cost of having multi war dec's is stupid and the system never accounted for this happening. Surely the solution should be when you dec a corp or allaince EVERY member has a week long flag and any corp they join during that week should get then war flag themselves. At the end of that week the aggressing corp should have the option to continue the war at the original price per corp, or let it drop. CCP needs to understand that empire wars are part of the game they created and allowing people to avoid it (particualry when they start it) has simply got to be an exploit. Aslovi IMAGE REMOVED!!!! :(
Niccolo Duku Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.02.24 18:09:00 - [190] I've been waiting pretty anxiously for the results. I'm sorely disappointed in CCP's outlook on this, to say the least. It's not only surprises me, it disgusts me that Eve is turning into "just another MMO". They cave to the whiners, plain and simple. But, all is not lost. Now that this.... "tactic".... is public, it will more than likely grow to epidemic levels in hi-sec space, and may eventually be fixed if we raise enough hell about it. Let us hope so, because if not it means the end of hi-sec war, which was pretty much my last idea for having fun in Eve. 0.0 ratting got boring, lowsec is dead, and I was just moving all my gear to hi-sec to start a little war corp with a few friends. Guess I won't waste my time with this utter bullcrap in effect. Hope they fix it soon. Anyhow, enough babbling. I'm truly sorry for those of you who already have an active investment in this noble venture. It really sucks, and I do feel bad for you guys. REPO and TRAPS especially, you've always played a pretty fair game, and now the carebears get one more place to run and hide. I hope they fix it soon, because if not, Eve just changed for the worse in a big way.

Krows Caldari Resource Reallocators Incorporated	Posted - 2008.02.24 19:19:00 - [191] Originally by: Niccolo Duku I've been waiting pretty anxiously for the results. I'm sorely disappointed in CCP's outlook on this, to say the least. It's not only surprises me, it disgusts me that Eve is turning into "just another MMO". They cave to the whiners, plain and simple. But, all is not lost. Now that this.... "tactic".... is public, it will more than likely grow to epidemic levels in hi-sec space, and may eventually be fixed if we raise enough hell about it. Let us hope so, because if not it means the end of hi-sec war, which was pretty much my last idea for having fun in Eve. 0.0 ratting got boring, lowsec is dead, and I was just moving all my gear to hi-sec to start a little war corp with a few friends. Guess I won't waste my time with this utter bullcrap in effect. Hope they fix it soon. Anyhow, enough babbling. I'm truly sorry for those of you who already have an active investment in this noble venture. It really sucks, and I do feel bad for you guys. REPO and TRAPS especially, you've always played a pretty fair game, and now the carebears get one more place to run and hide. I hope they fix it soon, because if not, Eve just changed for the worse in a big way. I wouldn't sweat it too much, I personally hate this decision as well but in all the time I've spent in empire wars, this has never happened to me. So far my corp and I have been through about twelve wars and no one has pulled this trick on us. I don't like to admit it, but if you really want to ensure this doesn't happen, you have to fight corps that feel they have a reputation to live up to, regardless if it actually exists or not. If you want good targets, cycle through the moons near your home system and find any good POS targets. Those corporations won't be quick to pull this tactic, not if they feel they have anything to lose by either sacrificing the POS or by pulling it up. I really, REALLY hate to sound this way, but the best way to avoid seeing this happen is to go after corps larger than you that have some PvP capability. They get*****y and they think their numbers will give them a big enough advantage to keep with the war.
Cypher Run	Posted - 2008.02.24 19:42:00 - [192] It's a sad day indeed when we cant punish the carebears like we used to
Nexa Necis The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2008.02.24 20:15:00 - [193] Krows, People say that to us all the time, "Go fight people who want to pvp". There is one major problem with that, is once they lose, they don't want to fight anymore. Just like Aslovi pointed out. REPO dec'd a large pvp corp, they got their asses handed to them and decide to jump ship using the same corp hopping tactic that CCP has decided is legal. Where's that leave REPO and their client? Dec'ing placeholder corps with people jumping ship left and right. I'd say abusing mechanics, but again, CCP says it 100% legit. I guess what irks me is there is now a "zero accountability" option in Eve that is fairly inexpensive to carry out. Basically you can kill, steal, smack talk, and do anything you like and still maintain being in a corp via "war washing" techniques like this. I always thought the cool part of Eve was that people were accountable. Everything had consequences. All the changes in game were about balance. I guess CCP will say the consequences of mass corp jumping to avoid wars will create a blemish of sorts on one's employment history. I don't get it really. Don't get me wrong, corp jumping for normal reasons is fine. In the cases that I mentioned and Aslovi mentioned it's obvious that the corp jumping is to patently avoid the war, while still being able to have the benefits of a corp. In my book it's a weak move, and quite cowardly. I mean my corp has been attacked many times by much larger opponents with better pvp'ers and endless wallets. We never once considered jumping ship. I am aware that Nexa is a pvp character, but I have plenty of other characters who are non pvp-oriented who are in corps that have been pummeled by wars, and never once would I quit corp under duress. That's just me. My guess is more and more people will start doing this. Sure it never happened much in the past perhaps, but then again, look at Privateers. No other corps had undertaken such a step. For some reason CCP stepped in to stave of their bleeding of people through infinite war decs, yet the entire time Privateers were completely within the rules at that time. Now perhaps all these corps practicing this technique will cite a precedence. Perhaps CCP will change things up a bit. I would say keeping characters flagged for war for at least a week is a fair trade off. I mean, why on Earth would anyone need to jump corp 12 times in 7 days? That is not normal play to me. However I don't make the rules, I just play by them.
Quelque Chose Gallente	Posted - 2008.02.24 20:49:00 - [194] Hmmm... is REPO's target still able to keep up the war on their client at this point? If not, isn't that Mission Accomplished(tm)?
coffeecigarettebeer	Posted - 2008.02.24 21:11:00 - [195] Edited by: coffeecigarettebeer on 24/02/2008 21:12:21 Originally by: Niccolo Duku I've been waiting pretty anxiously for the results. I'm sorely disappointed in CCP's outlook on this, to say the least. It's not only surprises me, it disgusts me that Eve is turning into "just another MMO". They cave to the whiners, plain and simple. No. The whiners didnt win this time. CCP ruled this tactic legal. The whiners lost. Remember who started this thread and who petitioned CCP.
Drakolus Amarr Dopehead Industries FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.02.24 21:30:00 - [196] Warning: I have not read the full thread and this may or may not be a really BAD idea... While it may sound cheap and cheesy and ultimately annoy the crap out of you and your members...but if you cannot beat them, join them. Reach the dec limit of your initial corp, create a new corp and keep on hunting them down and deccing them. Creating a corp to keep hitting their new corps costs money and it's annoying but it will allow you to keep chasing them until they finally capitulate and surrender or you disperse them so much that they cease to "be" as a corp entity.
Grindewald Aliastra	Posted - 2008.02.24 21:56:00 - [197] Edited by: Grindewald on 24/02/2008 21:58:03 Originally by: coffeecigarettebeer No. The whiners didnt win this time. CCP ruled this tactic legal. The whiners lost. Remember who started this thread and who petitioned CCP. And still, with all theese comments of yours, you come out as the whiner of this entire thread.. As for on topic, it's a shame. Easy way to get out of wars. But I really hope Nexa finds a good solution to this, and looking forwards for a nice story on Eve-P :)
Ernesto Hoost	Posted - 2008.02.24 21:58:00 - [198] Nice one CCP.just another move toward the "pvp flag on/off" Glad the Blizzard consulting went well for you guys. This ruling kind of contradicts the essence of EVE, but what do you care, so long as the subscription money comes in amirite?
Lugs Brannigan	Posted - 2008.02.24 22:07:00 - [199] I say set up a fund to donate money to TRAPS to wardec all the alt-holder corps of the wardodgers.
Slave 775 Ministry of Punishment Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.24 22:20:00 - [200] Its a shame !! CCP really made a bad decision again. From now on, everytime i suicide a isk farmer, i will now check for corphoppers nearby and blow them up instead of the farmer.

Ernesto Hoost	Posted - 2008.02.24 22:28:00 - [201] The question remains...why is what the Immune Alliance offered as a service to avoid wars, any different from this? How can you rule one as an exploit, and the other as fine. CCP have grown so fat, they have got a little soft around the belly. Some would say gutless
Krows Caldari Resource Reallocators Incorporated	Posted - 2008.02.24 22:53:00 - [202] Nexa, just how high did this petition go? I'm aware you said a GM stated it to be legal, but I would still like a GM to actually reply in this thread telling all of us scumdogs that we are bad people and completely undeserving of CCP's sympathy. Then again, if the problem becomes widespread enough, CCP is bound to take action one way or the other, I hope.
Aeo IV Amarr	Posted - 2008.02.24 22:55:00 - [203] Originally by: Ernesto Hoost The question remains...why is what the Immune Alliance offered as a service to avoid wars, any different from this? How can you rule one as an exploit, and the other as fine. CCP have grown so fat, they have got a little soft around the belly. Some would say gutless Think about the logistics for a second; if it is an exploit, CCP would have to examine every movement of every player that leaves during a war, as well as have proof that this player knew that whatever corp they're joining was owned by an alt of the Ceo of the first corp. or one of his buddies. or one of that player's other accounts. or one of those accounts' alts. There is no rule against A) having alts. B) having multiple accounts, and C) having members of your corp leave for another corp. CCP has, logically, ruled that in order to enforce such a ban, they'd have to waste far, FAR too much of their time. So stop whining. The exploit was petitioned and ruled not be an exploit, so it's not. If you didn't want a 'no' answer, you should have never had asked in the first place.
Ernesto Hoost	Posted - 2008.02.24 23:01:00 - [204] Originally by: Aeo IV There is no rule against A) having alts. B) having multiple accounts, and C) having members of your corp leave for another corp. CCP has, logically, ruled that in order to enforce such a ban, they'd have to waste far, FAR too much of their time. So stop whining. The exploit was petitioned and ruled not be an exploit, so it's not. If you didn't want a 'no' answer, you should have never had asked in the first place. It's pretty easy to spot placeholder alts and corp hopping. I guess you are one of those guys that thinks High sec means immune to pvp. If you didn't want to face pvp, then you should have never installed EVE in the first place
Nexa Necis The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2008.02.24 23:15:00 - [205] Krows, Basically I sent a petition asking if thats legal. I submitted all of the information such as the alts were created within hours, they made a corp immediately jumping to it the second every war dec email went out. They responded with "we will look into it" then a bit later closed the petition saying I never responded to them. Huh? So I repetitioned, they said they would look into it and get back to me. A week later they respond saying "its legal to create a corp and jump from it at will regardless of war decs". So I responded back saying, "Well CCP ruled the alliance hopping with IMune was an exploit, how is this any different?" I also pointed out with the alliance jumping at least it cost the alliance every time someone jumped into the alliance. In this instance, all costs stop after the initial 8 million is spent. Later that day they responded with, "We can't discuss previous issues, this tactic is legal." So that's it basically. With all things being equal, say 1 corp vs 1 corp. Corp A can spend 8 million to avoid all wars with corp B. Unless corp B has alts who then spend 2 mil per alt to create a corp and 2-18 mil a week to dec the fake corps for corp A. So the bad guys have to spend more money to get at their enemy. Same with the Privateers thing, they put in outrageous fees to prevent mass war declaring. They are ok with mass corp jumping though. I understand CCP can't police people's reasons for leaving a corp. That's why I had no problem with corp jumpers in the past. They were jumping to actual corps, alliances or NPC corps. In this case it's corps specifically made to avoid war. Is switching corps between the same 4 corps 20 times in 1 week normal gameplay? Highly unlikely. You would be hard pressed to find characters with that type of employment history with the exception of some of those pharmer players whos corps get dec'd constantly. I have no clue what a fair solution would be. I have no real idea what could bring equity to the situation. Maybe it doesn't need it. Maybe it's completely fair and I am biased. It would be interesting to get a CCP dev response that gets a bit more in depth than a 2 sentence response. I think really, this is an easier, and much cheaper scenario to pull off than the IMune one was. How can that one be considering exploiting game mechanics but this one isn't? If the same 5 people can jump through the same 4 corps 30 times in 2 weeks, why cant the same corp of 5 people jump in and out of the same alliance 30 times in 2 weeks? Maybe I am missing something along the way. In both instances it's extremely peculiar gameplay at best, at worst it's avoiding war through in-game mechanics. Again, it doesn't really bother me, nor does it overly affect me good or bad. There are plenty of targets out there to shoot at and harass.
Ernesto Hoost	Posted - 2008.02.24 23:19:00 - [206] Originally by: Nexa Necis It would be interesting to get a CCP dev response that gets a bit more in depth than a 2 sentence response. Good luck with that. CCP are only interested in subscription fees and mission runners So much for the hardcore pvp game we once loved
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.24 23:55:00 - [207] Originally by: Slave 775 Its a shame !! CCP really made a bad decision again. From now on, everytime i suicide a isk farmer, i will now check for corphoppers nearby and blow them up instead of the farmer. That's the spirit. Show CCP that for every time they allow players to escape your griefing you'll just retaliate by griefing someone else. It's the only mature thing to do really. Who do they think they are anyway, the owners of this game? P.S. I love your sig... Keep killing the noobs... They're just ruining your game anyway. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Ernesto Hoost	Posted - 2008.02.24 23:59:00 - [208] Edited by: Ernesto Hoost on 25/02/2008 00:03:25 Originally by: Exlegion Show CCP that for every time they allow players to escape your griefing you'll just retaliate by griefing someone else. Define griefing, and please quit Hydra (Of course you can stay if they now endorse fur clad risk avoiders) Can you even imagine what this game would be without combat. You fluffy builders would not be able to sell a ship or any mods, as nobody would lose anything. All it would be, is a bunch of pretend stock brokers, watching their virtual wallets. EVE trade online, wow, thats a cool game to play.
Carebear Trader	Posted - 2008.02.25 00:12:00 - [209] "As for defining grief. A corp that insists in continuing to war dec another corp even after they continue to bail out is pretty much grief and unhealty obsession." Well, someone that spends more time writing stories trying to slur other players than actually playing the game most likely has an unhealty obsession imho. Loooosers.......
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.25 00:16:00 - [210] Edited by: Exlegion on 25/02/2008 00:21:53 Originally by: Carebear Trader "As for defining grief. A corp that insists in continuing to war dec another corp even after they continue to bail out is pretty much grief and unhealty obsession." Well, someone that spends more time writing stories trying to slur other players than actually playing the game most likely has an unhealty obsession imho. Loooosers....... Original, "loser", hehe :). I have to admit, you got me to ***** a smile with that comment. I'm being honest :). Edit: I have to add that the hate you seem to feel for those you call "carebears" is just resounding. But, whatever floats your boat, I guess. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.