also, a real sandbox would be all about removing CONCORD
anything else is a compromise

1.Goons wouldn't last a second in a real sandbox.

2.You are being a ****** by trying to reason with Goons. They know they are lying vermin. They never stop lying. Treating them like they want honest discourse is ********.

balance

Where exactly are you getting this figure of "a trillion isk".
It costs 10M + 10M*n^2 per ally.
Which means you could bring on the 9000 pilot "Anti-Goonswarm Alliance" as an ally for 20M isk a week, or whatever.

So what 'possibilities' are being restricted?

Lots, so they should merge up if they're serious about their anti-Goon goal and not just indiscriminately looking for cost-effective workarounds to wardecs.

That is exactly what he means.

Since we're discussing the wardec thing, I thought the "butthurt" was from the goons, not carebears?

oh no jita decbears are preventing us from doing things

*logs in neutral alt*

I'm actually not sure.

On second thought, were you talking about Jade Constantine's whining over the infinite allies for free forever nerf?

3. I believe that (fiscally speaking) this is probably the most extreme nerf of anything in the history of Eve Online.

Has anyone pointed out that if all 46 corps combined into one, you could have them all for free? They might not even have to combine into one corps, I'm fairly sure an alliance would work. Need to SiSi it...

I pointed it out and everyone got extremely upset and mad
Pointing out that Jade could also save money by trying to actually defend himself instead of getting highsec wardec corps looking to skirt around paying a wardec fee to fight his battles for him was met with incredulity.

You can still do all that tho? There's just wssociated with wardecs, hardly something new, and encourages defenders to be more selective in their contracts. Which I would think would be better for mercenaries - you're not trying to sell something that scrubs are giving away for free

Funnily enough this system is a bit of a lose for FW people as well, since with Inferno 1.0 attempted selective wardeccing of particular militia corp/alliances to split up their collective efforts could be resolved via the ally system (ie the whole militia joins into the war and fights the aggressor together.) That is now completely off the table and once more its possible to disruptor militia operations by targetting specific corps and alliances amongst their number.

There is freedom. Plenty of it. We just own more freedom than you.

This is a change that only really affects Empire. Why is the Goons so concerned?

In a real sandbox there wouldn't be concord, but then players would have control over the jump gates. Since there are more carebears than PvP'ers, this would ensure that most of space would retain hisec staus, even if once in a while systems were lost to piracy.

The Mittiani owns you now, little goon.

I am implying that you are Jade Constantine, btw.

Well, it was either that or make fun of your one-man vanity corp, but even that seems a little low for me.

If you were in game before CONCORD existed, well, I don't think you would see any merit in it whatsoever.

How, exactly, is it 'broken'? You could argue that it's a bit unfair, or places too much support in favor of the aggressor, or that the cost of allies is too high, or the cost of wardecs too low, or that it should take into account the difference in members... but none of those things make it broken in the same way that dec scraping or dec shielding did.

Let's compromise--you can have as many defensive wardecs as you want as long as I don't have to read about each one in eve-mail.

You can't say it's a fact that these changes actually help the mercenary market, because it's too early to tell - the changes haven't been implemented yet.

Well inferno was supposed to help the mercenary market, and ... well we saw how that turned out.

Well, all the amazing whining over the changes are great and all, but it was fun to be able to find highsec as a target-rich environment of people that can't leave the war without disbanding their corp/alliance.

Can we go back to that? It would be really nice...

It is now when some people have 35+, 45+ allies.

It's not boring for the defender because whilst one character is indeed docked in a station their other character is out mining or running missions or what ever it is that they like to do. You fail to understand that other players have different play styles and what one person calls fun makes another person feel like logging off.

Any real merc would go find fights in low sec or null where they dont have to pay for a dec

A real sandbox wouldn't have a designated "safe" area

check and mate

Looking through some of your later posts, I don't think we're on opposite sides here. I'm all in favour of the mercenary profession being a viable career, but I just don't think a healthy career option is going to come about via this kind of protectionism. If it does, I think people are not going to value mercenaries. They'll be seen as the group who had so little to offer clients that they couldn't compete with random strangers. I don't see clients wanting to pay mercs much if that's how they'd be viewed.

Well, I think selling rights to camp the jita undock and kill wartargets' haulers and such should bring in more than -1 isk (you pay for "help").

You can then use this (1isk cost) "service" to prevent them from undocking in various market hubs, as long as they don't remember to use NPC corp alts or altcorps etc etc.

Professional Market Hub Undock Camper: Elite


Hm, paying CONCORD money to end a war... and if you have more allies you can end it cheaper? So someone adds five random undock camping allies and in two weeks they can end the war for free? Nice...

I agree. I think you may have misunderstood me earlier when I said something along the lines of "mercs need to offer more than the average uncoordinated random stranger", by which I meant people who pile in as allies in a wardec in order to get targets. These people probably won't take on difficult or necessary jobs like taking out a POS in enemy territory or disrupting supply lines in null. You may not even be able to trust them to come to your help when jumped on. The advantage of having them (in the Jade vs Goons example) is that it makes it harder for the enemy to come into Empire space to harass defenders without losses - but they are not really competition for good mercenaries, who would be able to offer a lot more than that.

Eve War Concept:
Rule #1: Non consentual war requires a payment from the party who has the choice (Aggressor)
Rule #2: Non consentual war has no cost for the party who does not have a choice (Defender)
Rule #3: Consentual war has no cost for the aggressor or the defender.

If we add the new rule to it:

Rule #4: Third side are allowed to join a war without cost.

this effectivly disables rule #1 since the third side, having a choice and all, still does not have to pay for the war.
Instead of declaring war, you look what wars your opponent has and simply join it (and pay the Defender to make it mutual for a fraction of the cost of starting your own)

Yea, it is that easy. You are supposed to pay for wars you choose to fight and the ally system was circumventing that fact.
Third side joining should be still covered by Rule #1, you have to pay, perhaps with a 20% discount because otherwise you do not need the system at all.

Sure there is. 20sp put into mining skills that's what.

They don't, they either made it using their alts or bought it from the market.

There seems to be enough prey to sustain the predators thus far. If you're not willing to fight back, you can either pay someone else to do it or roll over and take it.

In truth, some people just need to admit that they're masochists and get on with it.

What does this


have to do with this topic?

We're long past discussing the OP.

Someone should make a chart that on the Y axis has all your options for fighting back against nullsec wardecs, and on the X axis the options of "Works if you want to fight back against a nullsec alliance" and "Works if you want a free/low-cost war against a nullsec alliance"

Can you please phrase your answer in the form of a question? That makes absolutely no sense...

Speaking of the costs as "drama", I find it hilarious that the costs were much lower before this expansion and you couldn't bring in allies. Is it now a problem because you can't scrape the war-dec?

Space-holding alliances should be unprotected by concord, and thus "kill on sight" whenever they enter Empire space.

Cue the null-bear tears

So, what does that have to do with this


Besides, costs for the attackers is determined by the number of people in the target corp/alliance, while costs for the defenders is determined by the number of corps/alliances that are brought in as defenders. It's in your best interest to ally with a big corp or two since you get allies much cheaper than attackers get targets.

You're not good at graphing. You do not need a 4-dimensional structure to visualize this.