EVE Search - [Proposal] LOOPHOLE: Alliance Wardec Dodging

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Proposal] LOOPHOLE: Alliance Wardec Dodging

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mistress Suffering Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.21 20:30:00 - [1] ITEM: Corporation level wardecs can be freely shed in Empire by joining/leaving an Alliance. SOLUTION: When a Corporation departs an alliance, any wardec against the Alliance is carried onto the Corporation and lasts for its natural duration. These 'leftover' wardecs do not count towards wardec costs for other wardecs. THOUGHTS: Using an Alliance to shed wardecs was previously classified as an exploit by CCP, but I think they didn't want to take the time to enforce it and thus reclassified it as not being one later. This now means that any corporation can shed empire wardecs within 48 hours simply by joining/leaving an alliance, and getting the added bonus of increased wardec cost (both against the original target and against the alliance) for the attacker. This is even more dodgy when used to protect empire POS. Example - Let's say you wardec my corporation to attack a highsec POS I own. Ok, you reinforce the POS so it will come out of reinforced 1.5 days from now. I now go ahead and have my corp leave the alliance. 24 hrs later it is untargetable, and you were not able to declare a new wardec against me because you still had the leftover one from before that was expiring. When you finally can re-wardec my corp, my POS will have already come out of reinforced and been fully repped, ready for me to simply rejoin my alliance and repeat the process. The attacker's only real workaround here is to use secondary corps with pre-voted wardec proposals ready to be dropped on the defending corp the moment it hits the 'leave' button on its alliance. Now this corp can join the attacking alliance (you were an alliance weren't you, sorry if you're a corp you have no recourse at all) and share its wardec with that alliance. That's a huge amount of extra work, cost, and rules juggling to accomplish what should have been simple in the first place. You wanted to wardec a corp and kill it for a week, which is exactly what a wardec is supposed to pay for. Make it do exactly that.
Mr Vrix Vrix Nation	Posted - 2009.08.21 20:38:00 - [2] fully support this1 . ______________________________________________ Better to Die many times Then to Never Lived atall
Tortugan F9X	Posted - 2009.08.21 20:50:00 - [3] Edited by: Tortugan on 21/08/2009 20:51:21 Supported. When you pay to declare war on an alliance for a week, you are paying to declare war on ALL the corporations in an alliance for a week- if they leave the alliance after war has been declared, they should be subject to the same week of war. The current mechanic makes no sense- anyone who knows what they're doing can make their high-sec POS invulnerable by continuously joining/leaving alliances. If you want to defend your high-sec POS during a wardec, either deathstar it (which is already OP enough in high-sec), or take it down for the duration of the wardec. This is a very big issue for anyone PVPing in empire, and I hope that the CSM gives it high priority.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.08.21 20:56:00 - [4] Last I heard this was a petition-able offense if abused. I suggest you explore that route. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Hickock Caldari Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.21 20:59:00 - [5] Originally by: Drake Draconis Last I heard this was a petition-able offense if abused. I suggest you explore that route. Nope, we already petitioned and they said it was legal, even though they have a dev blog about it being illegal -------------- Visit http://extremepredators.com/ for more information.
Tortugan F9X	Posted - 2009.08.21 21:07:00 - [6] Originally by: Drake Draconis Last I heard this was a petition-able offense if abused. I suggest you explore that route. I'll quote a petition of mine when I get home- but no, this is no longer considered an exploit.
De'Veldrin Minmatar Special Projects Executive	Posted - 2009.08.21 21:09:00 - [7] Originally by: Hickock Originally by: Drake Draconis Last I heard this was a petition-able offense if abused. I suggest you explore that route. Nope, we already petitioned and they said it was legal, even though they have a dev blog about it being illegal That's consistency. We've had similar discussions about this before (corp-hopping etc to avoid war decs) - I'd frankly like to see the entire War Dec mechanic overhauled to be more functional. I think it should be possible to withdraw from a war (surrending or what have you) but it should involve some kind of sacrifice aside from just making a new corp or leaving the one you're in. Here's an idea - Alliance A war decs Alliance B. Corp C leaves Alliance B to dodge War Dec. War dec follows C, and they gain a new (free) War Dec from B for being deserters. Now everyone from A and B can shoot them. Meh, it may be my meds talking. I'm really not feeling well today. --Vel You're killing me Smalls!
Tortugan F9X	Posted - 2009.08.21 21:15:00 - [8] Originally by: De'Veldrin Originally by: Hickock Originally by: Drake Draconis Last I heard this was a petition-able offense if abused. I suggest you explore that route. Nope, we already petitioned and they said it was legal, even though they have a dev blog about it being illegal That's consistency. We've had similar discussions about this before (corp-hopping etc to avoid war decs) - I'd frankly like to see the entire War Dec mechanic overhauled to be more functional. I think it should be possible to withdraw from a war (surrending or what have you) but it should involve some kind of sacrifice aside from just making a new corp or leaving the one you're in. Here's an idea - Alliance A war decs Alliance B. Corp C leaves Alliance B to dodge War Dec. War dec follows C, and they gain a new (free) War Dec from B for being deserters. Now everyone from A and B can shoot them. Meh, it may be my meds talking. I'm really not feeling well today. That could be fun :) Though it reminds me a bit to much of the Lofty scam- I have the feeling someone would find a way to abuse it.
Baaldor Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.08.21 21:16:00 - [9] Originally by: Drake Draconis Last I heard this was a petition-able offense if abused. I suggest you explore that route. U mad?
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.08.21 21:17:00 - [10] Originally by: Baaldor Originally by: Drake Draconis Last I heard this was a petition-able offense if abused. I suggest you explore that route. U mad? I was fine until you posted. :) ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Brock Dillinger Gallente University of Caille	Posted - 2009.08.21 21:19:00 - [11] There's already a solution to this: wardec the corp that left the alliance. If you want to blow up ships so badly, what's a few million more? Don't support it.
JZIM Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.21 21:19:00 - [12]
Dibsi Dei Salamyhkaisten kilta	Posted - 2009.08.21 21:19:00 - [13] Edited by: Dibsi Dei on 21/08/2009 21:19:19 Have had experience of this. Since tower reinforce can last two days corporations may easily save their towers with the current 24 hour wardecs.
Hai Gaise	Posted - 2009.08.21 21:22:00 - [14] Originally by: Brock Dillinger There's already a solution to this: wardec the corp that left the alliance. If you want to blow up ships so badly, what's a few million more? Don't support it. From the OP: Originally by: Mistress Suffering This is even more dodgy when used to protect empire POS. Example - Let's say you wardec my corporation to attack a highsec POS I own. Ok, you reinforce the POS so it will come out of reinforced 1.5 days from now. I now go ahead and have my corp leave the alliance. 24 hrs later it is untargetable, and you were not able to declare a new wardec against me because you still had the leftover one from before that was expiring. When you finally can re-wardec my corp, my POS will have already come out of reinforced and been fully repped, ready for me to simply rejoin my alliance and repeat the process. Please read the arguments put forward before dismissing them.
Tortugan F9X	Posted - 2009.08.21 21:22:00 - [15] Originally by: Brock Dillinger There's already a solution to this: wardec the corp that left the alliance. If you want to blow up ships so badly, what's a few million more? Don't support it. And in the time it takes you to wardec them, they've joined and left another alliance, thus invalidating your wardec and making their POS invulnerable. They can do this as often as the please, costing the wardeccing corp significant amounts of ISK, and precious time. Don't get me wrong- if this mechanic wasn't being utterly abused in its current state, I'd have no problem with it, but for now, high sec POSes are invincible to those who know how to bend the rules.
Xing Fey	Posted - 2009.08.21 22:27:00 - [16] Fully supported!
Bob Mc Shade. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.21 23:20:00 - [17] Supported.
Lucas Avidius Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.22 00:44:00 - [18] Needs fixing, or at e absolute very least enforcement/clarification by the GMs.th
Herschel Yamamoto Agent-Orange	Posted - 2009.08.22 01:22:00 - [19] Something needs to be done about this, yes.
Ev0rz	Posted - 2009.08.22 01:35:00 - [20] frustrating loophole to say the least.
Jazzadanub Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.22 01:53:00 - [21] /signed
Don Pellegrino	Posted - 2009.08.22 01:58:00 - [22] Originally by: Brock Dillinger There's already a solution to this: wardec the corp that left the alliance. If you want to blow up ships so badly, what's a few million more? Don't support it. There is indeed a solution. But does it mean the current system is perfect? No. It can be improved and that's why we're here.
Raith Dresden Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.22 03:10:00 - [23] Edited by: Raith Dresden on 22/08/2009 03:10:28 Supported. The War Dec should stay with the original entity and not be shed like a snake skin when you join / leave an alliance 24hrs later.
Mevadem Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.22 03:52:00 - [24] /signed... and fully support a review and overhaul of these flawed "game mechanics". As stated by OP... previously identified and commented on by CCP as a "loophole" that "Repeated offenses of this nature may also result in a ban"... CCP Post From CCP (linked above): alliance hopping to avoid wars is not allowed reported by CCP Wrangler \| 2008.01.10 16:32:33 "Presently, there is a loophole that some corporations are using to avoid wars that have been declared on them. As soon as a war has been declared on the corporation, they join an alliance and, once admitted, they immediately leave the alliance again. The result is that they are only involved in an active war for 24 hours and not a week as should be the case according to normal war game-play mechanics. Bogus alliances have even been created for the sole purpose of giving corps a way out of wars. This is an unintended game mechanic and it will be fixed as soon as possible. Until then we are putting a stop to this situation and anyone found abusing this loophole will receive a warning for their trouble. Repeated offenses of this nature may also result in a ban. " CCP now states the following (from a recent petition): "Hi, senior GM Spiral here. Please accept our apologies for the delay in responding back to your petition. The issue that you were reporting here to us within this petition is not considered an exploit given it is how the game mechanics currently function within the game. This may be somewhat against the spirit of EVE and we assure that we will have this brought up with our game design team to see if they wish to take this mechanic under review. We apologize for the time it has taken to respond to this and hope that the final decision presented to you here will be to your satisfaction. If you have any further questions or concerns then please do not hesitate to ask. Best regards, Senior GM Spiral EVE Online Customer Support Team " And followed up with by this.... "Thank you for your update. The news update from January 2008 is no longer applicable as it was sent out in response to another issue which was declared an exploit at the time. That was later resolved. The current issue is simply a factor of the current game mechanics and will only be altered with changes made to those mechanics. Best way to voice your concerns with those mechanics is to make yourself heard through the EVE Online forums. As stated, we have informed the game developers of the concerns expressed to us through the petition system and that is unfortunately all that we can do at this time. Best regards, Senior GM Spiral EVE Online Customer Support Team " /signed again!
Didier Oriol Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.22 05:09:00 - [25] Mistress says if I don't support this thread she'll cut me off from the veld roids... NOT my precious veld roids! P.S. I do actually support this
Micia Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.08.22 05:40:00 - [26] Signed.
Mr Bright Shade. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.22 10:14:00 - [27] Supporting.
Venkul Mul	Posted - 2009.08.22 10:25:00 - [28] Edited by: Venkul Mul on 22/08/2009 10:27:30 Originally by: Mevadem /signed... and fully support a review and overhaul of these flawed "game mechanics". GM replies Beside the: "don't post GM replies" rule can you post the QUESTION you made? From the sound of those replies I have a doubt your petition was unclear about the exploit used. From what I know leaving a wardecced corporation in allowed, joining a Alliance when wardecced and then leaving, giving the wardec to the alliance and shedding it from the corporation was declared an exploit and never "un-declared" as such. If really that was changed and it is not an effect of miscommunication, yes the ruling must me changed.
Suitonia Genos Occidere	Posted - 2009.08.22 11:03:00 - [29] support --- Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Jazzadanub Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.22 11:05:00 - [30] Originally by: Venkul Mul Beside the: "don't post GM replies" rule can you post the QUESTION you made? From the sound of those replies I have a doubt your petition was unclear about the exploit used. From what I know leaving a wardecced corporation in allowed, joining a Alliance when wardecced and then leaving, giving the wardec to the alliance and shedding it from the corporation was declared an exploit and never "un-declared" as such. If really that was changed and it is not an effect of miscommunication, yes the ruling must me changed. The original petition, which I submitted was, Quote: Our alliance declared war against Corp. XXXXXXXXXX on 2009.06.17 02:28 to enable us to kill their high sec POSes. They then joined Alliance XXXXXXXX on 2009.06.18 04:53 which bought our current wardec to the alliance. We have just reinforced two of the XXXXXXXXXXX POSes in Muvolailen (both come out of reinforced in over 30 hours) and straight after they have left the alliance at 2009.06.19 07:31 so that the current wardec we have against them runs out (24 hours) before the two POSes come out of reinforced. This is clearly an attempt for them to use the wardec mechanics to avoid Cry Havoc being able to finish their POSes off. I am aware that CCP deems this conduct as an exploit. Can you tell me how we are going to be able to continue to have a current wardec against Corp XXXXXXXXXXXXXX to enable us the opportunity to finish the POSes off. Given I also linked the post CCP said doing such actions were an exploit, I found it quite humorous that they now choose it to be normal game play mechanics

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.