Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 69 post(s) |
Twg Memitim
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:28:00 -
[61] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:Di Jiensai wrote:Kelduum Revaan wrote:Just to quickly cover the changes coming to the Ally system, if the costs are kept fairly low, it shouldnt be much of a problem, even when they scale exponentially. Indeed. Then you probably wont mind giving me 1 grain of rice for the first square on the chessboard and double that for each field. After all, the cost is only one grain of rice and that should not be a problem, even when it scales exponentialy. Yeah, shouldn't be that bad should it. After all in Star Fraction's defensive war against Goonswarm we currently have 33 allies. Lets assume that CCP kindly allow the exponential cost to begin scaling at 1m isk for one ally. We'll pay. 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 8192 16384 etc Well it'll probably cost us more ISK than exists in the Eve universe by the time we get half way through our allies list. Fair to say it'll be considerably more expensive than the 50m per week that Goonswarm have to pay though.
hurr lets throw around random number to try and make myself look right. Alternativley, how about this for an exponential scale:
5mil 5.87mil 7.01mil 8.51mil 10.55mil 13.35mil etc..
that's not so bad is it? |
Jarnis McPieksu
398
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:33:00 -
[62] - Quote
I don't think you understand what the word "exponential" means.
Don't be sad. Most people don't.
|
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
359
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:34:00 -
[63] - Quote
Ministry of Love is going to be so sad. They were very pleased with Jade's initiative - it gave them tons of targets. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3280
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:35:00 -
[64] - Quote
aww man now we won't be at war with every highsec shitlord in eve |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
86
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:35:00 -
[65] - Quote
This reminds me of my days of stomping all over little kids on the playground |
Dramaticus
Goonswarm Federation
86
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:36:00 -
[66] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:aww man now we won't be at war with every highsec shitlord in eve
WE ARE ALWAYS AT WAR WITH HIGHSEC |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
359
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:37:00 -
[67] - Quote
You know Jade, you like to throw around the "9000 man alliance" thing here a lot but lets be real how many goons are actually in highsec spoiling for fights? It isn't many, you should probably drop the strawman.
While you're at it, accept that you brought it on yourself. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3280
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:37:00 -
[68] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:CCP Goliath wrote:Guys, before this goes on any further, kindly take off the hats and get real - we do not develop with one corp or alliance in mind... Seriously Goliath. This does look exactly like a change to suit one particular alliance. The changes you have proposed make it impossible for a smaller organization to add significant allied numbers against an incoming wardec from a 9000 person alliance (goonswarm) without paying massively more isk than Goonswarm have to pay to make the wardec in the first place! Your devblog patchnotes could have been drafted by Mittani. In addition the mutual wardec change means that its literally impossible to bring any kind of pressure to bare on a much larger attacker that would make them want to actually surrender at some point in the future. Because you can't bring in allies on mutual then you can't bring pressure to the table. And if you don't go mutual then the attacker can simply stop paying the moment they want out. You have utterly defanged the Inferno Wardec system and turned it into a joke just because one particular large alliance is currently wardecced against 70 or so allies across a couple of outgoing "griefing" decs and I have to tell you it looks damned fishy. you could, of course, declare your own war
but our wardec won't ever drop so don't worry toots |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
359
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:43:00 -
[69] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:Mara Tessidar wrote:Now, imagine that I am not part of the most powerful group in Eve Online, and that I am not controlling your game. Instead, I am some 20-man "merc" corp that wants to make a reputation. So, my corporation declares war against a mid-sized alliance. The next day, there are 20 "Ally has joined a war" notifications. None of them are friendly.
Goonswarm doesn't really care about getting wardecced by every mom and pop operation out there. If we want to kill people, we will kill them. Wardecs have never stopped us from causing tears of unfathomable sadness. What this change does is keep things from getting out of hand for other, smaller groups that declare war. The way the system works now, you could theoretically have every other corporation in Eve ally against the aggressor at virtually no extra cost. And if there's anything the last 9 years should have taught everybody, it's that if there's a mechanic that can be abused, it will be abused. So. 1. Concord fee for allies only kicks in if the Defender + allies headcount is greater than the aggressor headcount. 2. For every defender ally that joins when their headcount is larger than aggressor headcount, the aggressors can add an ally too. 3. Ally contracts come up for renewal each 2 weeks, can be set to autorenewal and these don't cost concord fee unless defender outnumbers aggressor. 4. Mutual system contains as is and does not exclude allies. Do you have a problem with that?
As much as it pains me to admit it, you have a good idea there. We like it. Although the question is whether we like it more than your endless gnashing of teeth over this change. That is a tough call. |
|
CCP Goliath
C C P C C P Alliance
526
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:47:00 -
[70] - Quote
Thread purged of offtopic/irrelevant replies. There are appropriate places for that and this is not one of the places. Let's keep focused on the features on Sisi. CCP Goliath | QA Director | @CCP_Goliath |
|
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3280
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:48:00 -
[71] - Quote
CCP Goliath wrote: GÇó Adding some new items to FW LP stores GÇó Removing EWAR from all FW NPCs
Isn't speedtanking FW complexes a huge issue? Shouldn't you be adding webs or something else to fix that inbalance (this is, apparently, completely breaking the caldari/gallente war)?
Also what kind of items - brand new items, or ones from other LP stores? |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2008
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:50:00 -
[72] - Quote
corestwo wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:Mara Tessidar wrote:Now, imagine that I am not part of the most powerful group in Eve Online, and that I am not controlling your game. Instead, I am some 20-man "merc" corp that wants to make a reputation. So, my corporation declares war against a mid-sized alliance. The next day, there are 20 "Ally has joined a war" notifications. None of them are friendly.
Goonswarm doesn't really care about getting wardecced by every mom and pop operation out there. If we want to kill people, we will kill them. Wardecs have never stopped us from causing tears of unfathomable sadness. What this change does is keep things from getting out of hand for other, smaller groups that declare war. The way the system works now, you could theoretically have every other corporation in Eve ally against the aggressor at virtually no extra cost. And if there's anything the last 9 years should have taught everybody, it's that if there's a mechanic that can be abused, it will be abused. So. 1. Concord fee for allies only kicks in if the Defender + allies headcount is greater than the aggressor headcount. 2. For every defender ally that joins when their headcount is larger than aggressor headcount, the aggressors can add an ally too. 3. Ally contracts come up for renewal each 2 weeks, can be set to autorenewal and these don't cost concord fee unless defender outnumbers aggressor. 4. Mutual system contains as is and does not exclude allies. Do you have a problem with that? As much as it pains me to admit it, you have a good idea there. We like it. Although the question is whether we like it more than your endless gnashing of teeth over this change. That is a tough call. Jade Constantine wrote:corestwo wrote:You know Jade, you like to throw around the "9000 man alliance" thing here a lot but lets be real how many goons are actually in highsec spoiling for fights? It isn't many, you should probably drop the strawman.
While you're at it, accept that you brought it on yourself. Well given that most corporation/alliances are active only at a tiny fraction of their on the books numbers its a nonsense thing to argue about. Alliance membership is what it is. If I bring a 100 man ally corp into a war I expect to see 10% of them on the field really - thats eve. As for accepting I brought this on myself - lol, of course I did you silly goose, that was rather the point. I wanted to trap you guys into a genuine foreverwar that had enough people decced against you it would mess up your next burn jita event. Somebody needed to be the lightning rod for mittani's ego so he clicked the button. You'll see significantly fewer than the 10% (or whatever) that is active, because you live in empire, and goons do not. In most cases if goons had even 1% of our memberbase actively hunting for a fight in highsec, it would be considered an awe inspiring display of power. So, like I said - drop the strawman.
Point is though its not a strawman - its a solid balancing metric for the wardec system and I honestly can't see how it can be otherwise. The cost of wardeccing Goons is based on the number of heads you have in that alliance. Hence, its reasonable to consider the number of heads you have in that alliance as a balancing factor in how many allies can be called against you.
Now we can argue all day about how your effective size should only be 90 because only 90 of you routinely pvp in hisec but there is absolutely no way to tie that argument / assumption / claim into a system of game mechanics so lets just stick with what it says on the alliance ranking table.
The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom Epic Inferno Wardec Test, Sign up and shoot Goons for free! |
Khanh'rhh
Sudden Buggery
1306
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:56:00 -
[73] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:NeoTheo wrote:CCP Goliath wrote:Hi everyone, GÇó Ally contracts have fixed length of two weeks GÇó Allies can not be part of mutual wars GÇô defender cannot hire allies into mutual wars and existing ally contracts are cancelled (with a 24 hour grace period) GÇó Cap on War Dec cost GÇô it will never have a base price of more than 500 mill regardless of corp/alliance membership (still affected by the number of wars you have declared) GÇó New UI control for War options in war lists GÇó Added cost for hiring multiple allies for a war GÇô hiring more than one ally now incur a cost that goes to CONCORD. The cost rises exponentially the more allies are hired into the same war. GÇó Added new skill GÇô Armor Resistance Phasing, which reduces the cycle time of Reactive Armor Hardeners
Hello mittens is that you :-( /sob shame ... This is pretty sad actually. With these changes CCP is caving into Goonswarm whines and allowing them to wardec smaller entities without practical response. [...] Whats happened here is that Mittani and goonswarm have whined and pleaded for these changes on the back of the Honda Accord and (now) Star Fraction precedent and CCP have kneejerked into making Inferno wardec system something of a joke. I guess you're going to post where all this QQ and whine was said, then? Or is it just more "waaaaaaaaaa goons!!" as per your usual recourse?
Admittedly my sample isn't statistically significant, but the people I know in TEST/GSF are having a lot of fun shooting the kind of terrible idiot who camps 4-4 for haulers. - "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930's |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
359
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:58:00 -
[74] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:Point is though its not a strawman - its a solid balancing metric for the wardec system and I honestly can't see how it can be otherwise. The cost of wardeccing Goons is based on the number of heads you have in that alliance. Hence, its reasonable to consider the number of heads you have in that alliance as a balancing factor in how many allies can be called against you.
Now we can argue all day about how your effective size should only be 90 because only 90 of you routinely pvp in hisec but there is absolutely no way to tie that argument / assumption / claim into a system of game mechanics so lets just stick with what it says on the alliance ranking table.
If you decced us, we'd turn the tables, make it mutual, and invite anyone who wanted to shoot you to do so for free...and I imagine there are many who'd take the opportunity. That would seem to make the cost to dec us irrelevant - after all, if you've such an issue with 9000 vs 100, why would you invite the chance for it to be 10000 vs 100, or 15000, or 20000? |
Isabella300
FinFleet Raiden.
16
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 15:59:00 -
[75] - Quote
Would be nice if some positive changes to making Titans usefull again was being looked at and implemented! |
Marlona Sky
Massive PVPness Psychotic Tendencies.
1111
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:01:00 -
[76] - Quote
CCP Goliath, who is your goon main?
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Krios Ahzek
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
889
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:02:00 -
[77] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:CCP Goliath, who is your goon main?
It's me I'm the goon main.
Seriously guys now, this is a lot of whining for a permadec emanating from effectively 20 highsec goons.
-áThough All Men Do Despise Us |
Lord Zim
783
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:03:00 -
[78] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:CCP Goliath, who is your goon main? I'm Spartacus. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3280
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:04:00 -
[79] - Quote
When you say "re-designed caldari drake" do you mean the model, or you're going to be tweaking ship stats? |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce Masters of Flying Objects
301
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:06:00 -
[80] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:When you say "re-designed caldari drake" do you mean the model, or you're going to be tweaking ship stats? lol the old missle launchers are gone. Come join us on Sisi and see for your self |
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3280
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:11:00 -
[81] - Quote
Salpun wrote:Weaselior wrote:When you say "re-designed caldari drake" do you mean the model, or you're going to be tweaking ship stats? lol the old missle launchers are gone. Come join us on Sisi and see for your self that's sort of hard to do at work |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2008
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:14:00 -
[82] - Quote
corestwo wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:Point is though its not a strawman - its a solid balancing metric for the wardec system and I honestly can't see how it can be otherwise. The cost of wardeccing Goons is based on the number of heads you have in that alliance. Hence, its reasonable to consider the number of heads you have in that alliance as a balancing factor in how many allies can be called against you.
Now we can argue all day about how your effective size should only be 90 because only 90 of you routinely pvp in hisec but there is absolutely no way to tie that argument / assumption / claim into a system of game mechanics so lets just stick with what it says on the alliance ranking table. If you decced us, we'd turn the tables, make it mutual, and invite anyone who wanted to shoot you to do so for free...and I imagine there are many who'd take the opportunity. That would seem to make the cost to dec us irrelevant - after all, if you've such an issue with 9000 vs 100, why would you invite the chance for it to be 10000 vs 100, or 15000, or 20000?
Well these changes would put a stop to all that.
Of course would your leadership make a commitment to accept mutuals from incoming wardecs to add up to 9000 total membership of corps - somehow I doubt that.
My issue btw about the 100 vs 9000 is not really a complaint about (oh noes we're being griefed 1111! etc) its because I don't see the point of a war unless one side can somehow lose. I did have a strategy for fighting the goon wardec and as you saw that strategy involved inviting as many allies as we could find and trying to fill hisec with people ganking goon ships. Unlikely that it might have seemed I could see a future where the number of wardec allies you were fighting would be so large as to seriously impact the planning and implementation of a burn Jita style event and your leadership might actually have been forced to offer a surrender.
Burn Jita was only successful because you shed your outgoing wardecs and the cost in wardeccing you during that weekend became immediately prohibitive because of cost escalation on multiple decs. But a couple of hundred active wardec fighters duriung Burn Jita would have seriously messed up your plans.
Of course, now with these 1.1 patchnotes you'll never have to worry about that in the future because there will never be significant numbers of people wardecced against you in mutually-locked-in wardecs and you can always :forget: to pay the outgoing bills in advance of such events.
This is why I'm disappointed with these changes - it seems the reverse of encouraging emergent gameplay and simply a thoughtless nerf of the Inferno wardec system.
Sure the system needed tweaks and balances and this thread has examples of how those could be achieved.
But the patch notes as written are not tweaks and balances - they are nothing short of a frontal lobotomy on the wardec system and they will have the impact of returning hisec war mechanics to pre-inferno irrelevance.
The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom Epic Inferno Wardec Test, Sign up and shoot Goons for free! |
Khanh'rhh
Sudden Buggery
1306
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:17:00 -
[83] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Salpun wrote:Weaselior wrote:When you say "re-designed caldari drake" do you mean the model, or you're going to be tweaking ship stats? lol the old missle launchers are gone. Come join us on Sisi and see for your self that's sort of hard to do at work Just the model, the launchers under the launchers are gone http://i.imgur.com/e2OwY.jpg - "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930's |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
359
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:22:00 -
[84] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote: Of course would your leadership make a commitment to accept mutuals from incoming wardecs to add up to 9000 total membership of corps - somehow I doubt that.
Unless chaining allies was the point of this exercise in the first place. Perhaps you just got played.
Jade Constantine wrote:Unlikely that it might have seemed I could see a future where the number of wardec allies you were fighting would be so large as to seriously impact the planning and implementation of a burn Jita style event and your leadership might actually have been forced to offer a surrender. Nice to see that you remain delusional enough to think we'd pay you 5b isk per ally to end a war though.
Jade Constantine wrote:Burn Jita was only successful because you shed your outgoing wardecs and the cost in wardeccing you during that weekend became immediately prohibitive because of cost escalation on multiple decs. But a couple of hundred active wardec fighters duriung Burn Jita would have seriously messed up your plans. Maybe. It wasn't "a couple hundred" but people certainly tried to dec us and interfere. It didn't work then, either.
Jade Constantine wrote:This is why I'm disappointed with these changes - it seems the reverse of encouraging emergent gameplay and simply a thoughtless nerf of the Inferno wardec system.
Sure the system needed tweaks and balances and this thread has examples of how those could be achieved.
Ironically I agree, but then again, a goon would be a fan of emergent gameplay, wouldn't he? |
Marlona Sky
Massive PVPness Psychotic Tendencies.
1111
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:23:00 -
[85] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:CCP! Jade Constantine meta gamed us. Meta gamed the Goons!! *sniff* I want this fixed right now!!!!!!!!! *sniff*
By the way any word on when you will process my job application?
In all seriousness CCP, you just made the war dec system 100% in favor of large alliances picking on small ones and leaving no options for the small ones. I truly hope you fix this. I find it pretty much impossible that you did not see the large alliance vs very small alliance scenario happening.
I mean ****, why don't you just add this in your patch notes:
- Gave Goonswarm Federation a Sabre BPO so they would get over it already
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Khanh'rhh
Sudden Buggery
1306
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:24:00 -
[86] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:My issue btw about the 100 vs 9000 is not really a complaint about (oh noes we're being griefed 1111! etc) its because I don't see the point of a war unless one side can somehow lose. I did have a strategy for fighting the goon wardec and as you saw that strategy involved inviting as many allies as we could find and trying to fill hisec with people ganking goon ships. Unlikely that it might have seemed I could see a future where the number of wardec allies you were fighting would be so large as to seriously impact the planning and implementation of a burn Jita style event and your leadership might actually have been forced to offer a surrender. I know you've probably never pushed the "declare war" button and so don't know how it works, but the aggressor can pull out at any point, for any reason, by pushing one button. There's no need to "surrender" or have any harm caused to you at all. Or, you just don't pay the wardec fee after a 7day period and it disappears.
Quote:Burn Jita was only successful because you shed your outgoing wardecs and the cost in wardeccing you during that weekend became immediately prohibitive because of cost escalation on multiple decs. But a couple of hundred active wardec fighters duriung Burn Jita would have seriously messed up your plans. You've willfully just made that up. They had more wardecs on them that weekend than ever before, there were as many "save jita" campaigners in Jita as the server would allow. Also, an alliance can't "shed" wardecs so I have literally no idea what you're talking about.
I assume it's just inflammatory language and limp posturing. - "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930's |
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
120
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:24:00 -
[87] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote: My issue btw about the 100 vs 9000 is not really a complaint about (oh noes we're being griefed 1111! etc) its because I don't see the point of a war unless one side can somehow lose. I did have a strategy for fighting the goon wardec and as you saw that strategy involved inviting as many allies as we could find and trying to fill hisec with people ganking goon ships. Unlikely that it might have seemed I could see a future where the number of wardec allies you were fighting would be so large as to seriously impact the planning and implementation of a burn Jita style event and your leadership might actually have been forced to offer a surrender.
have you ever used a neutral alt, it's pretty cool
Quote:Burn Jita was only successful because you shed your outgoing wardecs and the cost in wardeccing you during that weekend became immediately prohibitive because of cost escalation on multiple decs. But a couple of hundred active wardec fighters duriung Burn Jita would have seriously messed up your plans. I hear wardecs make it hard to shoot a ship once with a full rack of 1400s
Quote:Of course, now with these 1.1 patchnotes you'll never have to worry about that in the future because there will never be significant numbers of people wardecced against you in mutually-locked-in wardecs and you can always :forget: to pay the outgoing bills in advance of such events.
This is why I'm disappointed with these changes - it seems the reverse of encouraging emergent gameplay and simply a thoughtless nerf of the Inferno wardec system.
Sure the system needed tweaks and balances and this thread has examples of how those could be achieved.
But the patch notes as written are not tweaks and balances - they are nothing short of a frontal lobotomy on the wardec system and they will have the impact of returning hisec war mechanics to pre-inferno irrelevance.
wardecs have never affected my game experience because I can suckle enough space money out of the game to plex a second account for the very limited amount of time I do have to spend in empire
tech munnay |
Canned Yerins
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:25:00 -
[88] - Quote
It's not Goons you should be mad at for this change, Jade, it's Dovinian. TEST has been pushing for this change for weeks with the Honda Accord dec, because, you know, we actually have someone on the CSM. Wolololololo |
Dabigredboat
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:27:00 -
[89] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:The Mittani wrote:CCP! Jade Constantine meta gamed us. Meta gamed the Goons!! *sniff* I want this fixed right now!!!!!!!!! *sniff*
By the way any word on when you will process my job application? In all seriousness CCP, you just made the war dec system 100% in favor of large alliances picking on small ones and leaving no options for the small ones. I truly hope you fix this. I find it pretty much impossible that you did not see the large alliance vs very small alliance scenario happening. I mean ****, why don't you just add this in your patch notes: - Gave Goonswarm Federation a Sabre BPO so they would get over it already
What do you mean no options. If I want to invite razor or test into a wardec I have with someone its free, I could literally invite all of 0.0 to kill 1 small alliance FOR FREE.
500million isk is nothing but a drop in the bucket if literally all of eve can join in for free. What ccp is trying to do here is to prevent alliances WHO WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE HAD TO PAY FOR A WARDEC just getting a free ride whenever they feel like.
Normally I avoid highsec like the plague, because of people like jade constantine crying and whining whenever a dev works on fixing the problems instead of keeping the system broken for himself. Today I login and see 80 alliances who either have died in 0.0 or now live only in highsec on a war with goons that they are not paying for. This change is better for everyone, and it is not like you cannot afford an extra few mil a week. |
Dabigredboat
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2012.06.11 16:30:00 -
[90] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:corestwo wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:Point is though its not a strawman - its a solid balancing metric for the wardec system and I honestly can't see how it can be otherwise. The cost of wardeccing Goons is based on the number of heads you have in that alliance. Hence, its reasonable to consider the number of heads you have in that alliance as a balancing factor in how many allies can be called against you.
Now we can argue all day about how your effective size should only be 90 because only 90 of you routinely pvp in hisec but there is absolutely no way to tie that argument / assumption / claim into a system of game mechanics so lets just stick with what it says on the alliance ranking table. If you decced us, we'd turn the tables, make it mutual, and invite anyone who wanted to shoot you to do so for free...and I imagine there are many who'd take the opportunity. That would seem to make the cost to dec us irrelevant - after all, if you've such an issue with 9000 vs 100, why would you invite the chance for it to be 10000 vs 100, or 15000, or 20000? Well these changes would put a stop to all that. Of course would your leadership make a commitment to accept mutuals from incoming wardecs to add up to 9000 total membership of corps - somehow I doubt that. My issue btw about the 100 vs 9000 is not really a complaint about (oh noes we're being griefed 1111! etc) its because I don't see the point of a war unless one side can somehow lose. I did have a strategy for fighting the goon wardec and as you saw that strategy involved inviting as many allies as we could find and trying to fill hisec with people ganking goon ships. Unlikely that it might have seemed I could see a future where the number of wardec allies you were fighting would be so large as to seriously impact the planning and implementation of a burn Jita style event and your leadership might actually have been forced to offer a surrender. Burn Jita was only successful because you shed your outgoing wardecs and the cost in wardeccing you during that weekend became immediately prohibitive because of cost escalation on multiple decs. But a couple of hundred active wardec fighters duriung Burn Jita would have seriously messed up your plans. Of course, now with these 1.1 patchnotes you'll never have to worry about that in the future because there will never be significant numbers of people wardecced against you in mutually-locked-in wardecs and you can always :forget: to pay the outgoing bills in advance of such events. This is why I'm disappointed with these changes - it seems the reverse of encouraging emergent gameplay and simply a thoughtless nerf of the Inferno wardec system. Sure the system needed tweaks and balances and this thread has examples of how those could be achieved. But the patch notes as written are not tweaks and balances - they are nothing short of a frontal lobotomy on the wardec system and they will have the impact of returning hisec war mechanics to pre-inferno irrelevance.
You have been playing eve for how long. You where there when the good fight against BOB happened. You know damn well how much ccp works for the people THAT MATTER and not some ****** highsec only corperation called star fraction. When in the last 7 years have they ever worked for someone who refuses to take a fleet outside of highsec for fear that 10 newbies in rifters might kill him.
Keep getting mad. It will only make ccps reasons for doing so make it sound all the more correct. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |