Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
DURRRHHH
|
Posted - 2010.11.01 04:06:00 -
[1]
Dear piloteers,
I know this is an old discussion, but I personally believe that the wardec mechanic for high sec needs many revisions. Nevertheless, as 90% of eve makes it's money by either scamming, ganking, or destroying then old game mechanics need to be "updated" to the current market of today.
Therefore, I propose that the wardec prices be shifted to a more "reasonable" price.
100 million for wardecing a corporation. 200 million for wardecing an alliance (or an alliance wardecing another corp).
The other costs can be doubled or what not. Maybe another 25 mil for each corp another corp is at war with on corporations, and 50 for alliances.
The reasons why:
A.) 2 million is cheaper than cow dung. Any eve pilot can make 2 million in twenty minutes. B.) It was 2 million X many years ago. Back then 2 million isk MEANT something. Now, its more expensive to buy a caracal/thorax/wtfever cruiser and fit it cheaply than to ask concord to ignore destruction of other corps. C.) Instead of wardecing being majorly a nice tactical tool to overtake another corp... it has become a grief engine fueled by the tears of carebears and idiots alike (and this is true).
Everything else can remain the same. |
klyeme
Soft War
|
Posted - 2010.11.01 04:16:00 -
[2]
Add one more thing, if 20 or more people from another corp aggress the corp that started the wardec they should be able to wardec the people who aggressed the corp with the 20 RRers instantly (no 24 hour waiting period). This would make it harder for RR to unlevel the battlefield.
|
Aceehrrs
|
Posted - 2010.11.01 04:18:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Aceehrrs on 01/11/2010 04:19:36 It does strike me as a bit odd that CONCORD sanctioned combat is cheaper than a competently T2-fit rifter...
|
Mishkaii
|
Posted - 2010.11.01 05:13:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Mishkaii on 01/11/2010 05:14:37 Supported, very needed.
|
Xorv
|
Posted - 2010.11.01 08:03:00 -
[5]
Not Supported.
If anything Wardecs should be made cheaper. The fees should just be a token administrative fee not a barrier to declaring War. So long as High Sec remains a major ISK faucet it should become less safe not more so.
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.11.01 10:30:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik on 01/11/2010 10:32:46 Not supported. This is PvP game and PvP should be cheap.
|
BloodySpade
Amarr ANZAC ALLIANCE IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.11.01 10:30:00 -
[7]
Can't really support it. For any serious corp/alliance the suggested (raised) fee is still nothing but pocket change. Heck, a couple thousand players could probably pay those fees out of their own private pockets for a good while. Thus too pointless to make such a marginal adjustment.
|
DURRRHHH
|
Posted - 2010.11.01 22:32:00 -
[8]
To those who do not support the idea.
Towards pvp- yes Eve is a pvp place, but for the majority of people in small corps who live in high sec pvp is not profitable towards the more industrious corps. Nevertheless, the wardec mechanicis useful to heavy producers for ships that many high sec lovers use. Destruction does mean sales, but 2 million per week is nothing and it leads to the point of less tactful wardecs to *let's wardec as many idiots as possible*. Hence, grief engine.
Price - 200 a week is is still cheap. That is less than 30 mil a day.
Everything else, ssdd.
|
Slimy Worm
Lonetrek Salvage and Scrap
|
Posted - 2010.11.01 22:55:00 -
[9]
gb2wowkthxbai
---------------
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar Green-Core The Obsidian Legion
|
Posted - 2010.11.01 23:35:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Antihrist Pripravnik Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik on 01/11/2010 10:32:46 Not supported. This is PvP game and PvP should be cheap.
PvP is cheap. In fact it's completely free is vast swaths of the game universe.
That said, just making war decs more expensive will not fix what's wrong with them. At your proposed prices (30 million a day, etc), I can pay for a weeks worth of war dec in an hour or so of playing the game. --Vel
|
|
Arkanor
Ixion Defence Systems
|
Posted - 2010.11.02 02:58:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Antihrist Pripravnik Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik on 01/11/2010 10:32:46 Not supported. This is PvP game and PvP should be cheap.
Agreed, let's start handing out ships and fits for free from now on.
Times have changed and mechanics should keep pace with it. "Grief engine" seems to be an acceptable term for the current system.
|
Super Gump
|
Posted - 2010.11.02 15:46:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Super Gump on 02/11/2010 15:48:04 I support this. I am tired of free wardecs.
|
DURRRHHH
|
Posted - 2010.11.02 15:50:00 -
[13]
Edited by: DURRRHHH on 02/11/2010 15:55:39
Originally by: Antihrist Pripravnik Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik on 01/11/2010 10:32:46 Not supported. This is PvP game and PvP should be cheap.
It is "supposed" to be a healthy even mixture of PvE and PvP. I prefer this scenario. I also like it to be fair, not easier towards one side of the spectrum. Right now with the prices, they are easier towards the agressor.
Originally by: De'Veldrin That said, just making war decs more expensive will not fix what's wrong with them. At your proposed prices (30 million a day, etc), I can pay for a weeks worth of war dec in an hour or so of playing the game.
Well thankfully, not everyone can afford to throw away 200 million+ a week PER WARDEC towards a war. I didn't say the mechanic fix was a perfect system, but at least with this fix it'll be somewhat more balanced towards both parties. This will also help to prevent AFK trader-gank wardecs (I.E. where the agressor is in a 2 person corp and only comes online to see ya come into jita/dodixie/amarr to gank ya).
Like I said, 200 million is still NOTHING, but it amounts to SOMETHING after a while.
|
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.11.02 16:08:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Alara IonStorm on 02/11/2010 16:10:39
Agreed I can War Dec 190 Corperations
A Corperation war should cost you a bit more then it does, so a Corp has to pay for it and not a person.
Edit: forgot the Thumbs Up Thingy!
-- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen!
For Great Justice!
|
Nithi Haya'Ji
|
Posted - 2010.11.02 19:04:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Nithi Haya''Ji on 02/11/2010 19:09:20 Not supported. Highsec already is "safe enough". There is already a 48 hour delay till a war can start.. this is also to be considered a cost - which is pretty high in my opinion.
If you want to increase the wardec fee, make it optional.. but for the agressor to pay for that option the war should start lots faster... I'd pay you 100m ISK if I can dec a corp instantly (after 15 minutes or so) for that.. so how about that, huh?
edit: btw.: A corp can only dec 3 targets at a time.. one could argue that after the many years eve is out there might be a change needed to that, too?! As there are so many corps around.. the limit should be raised.. so one could dec maybe 10 targets.. which I'd like as well... hehe.. but well.. as you can only dec 3 targets the other targets you cannot dec at the same time are "opportunity cost".. so add these on your 2m dec-fee again plus the 48 hours delay (24h vote, 24h warmup) and you get a sense of the costs of a war for an agressor.
So again: Nt supported. Defend your corp and its assets yourself and dont ask for a game-mechanics change to do that for you!
|
Arkanor
Gallente Ixion Defence Systems
|
Posted - 2010.11.02 22:20:00 -
[16]
The point of view of people supporting this is not "PVP needs to stop nerf pvp nao!". It's the fact that Eve is based on making decisions, and it's not really any kind of decision to make when it costs you 2 million to start a war.
War is srs bsns, it should be something that has to be weighed as an OPTION, and right now there is no gravity in that decision. The wait-time before going active does not count as a cost, and is irrelevant in making the decision to go to war.
Better yet, I think it would be more fitting to have a "bid" system, whereas the aggressor corp pays for the initial war, and the target can pay the same amount to cancel it. All funds go straight to CONCORD (ISK sink right there).
PVP takes many forms, not all of them are ship combat.
|
DURRRHHH
|
Posted - 2010.11.02 23:21:00 -
[17]
Edited by: DURRRHHH on 02/11/2010 23:26:10 To Nithi Haya'Ji The 24 hour period is a requirement (24s if your CEO says "Let's do it".) to give the other corp a heads up to get ready. That part is the only benefit the dec'd corp is given. If you didn't have that, then people would wait in jita and start wardecing freighter pilots as they fly through. Thus making the concept of high sec a 'semi-safe' place POINTLESS. Ya might as well turn high sec to null sec, and what a giant cluster-frack that would be.
If you want to increase the amount of corps a corp can wardec, then by all means. This time around, I would suggest that Concord would be allowed to display all corporations other corporations are at war with by using a bribe (2 mil + depending on the price) just to make things fair on both fronts. I don't see how you can't bribe concord to display that information, it must be cheaper than cow dung if you can ask concord to wardec another corporation for pennies in a jar.
Bid wars are also nice, but they can get wayyyy out hand. I rather just make a minor change in the code than to add a new module altogether.
To the 'highsec is safe enough' thought... well I never said that high sec was safe, I will admit I do like the system of checks and balances placed by Concord. The ability to blow something up before concord blows you up is a realistic flaw in any criminal system out there (although concord is sanctioned by the EULA that you must DIEEEEEEEE if you do agress a non WT in highsec) and I am okay with that.
All I am trying to say is that wardecs are too cheap. Even 50 mil would be better than 2 mil. Just fix the cheap rates.
|
Running missions
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 00:59:00 -
[18]
yes but why stop there. maybe incorporate sec status into the dec cost. higher sec status more it is to be war decced
war decing shouldnt be free or any cheaper ( this is at the yarrtard and morons saying this is a pvp game) just fact this is a sandbox, highsec? a faucet? i would like to see some number on income, but scaled to population i'm sure highsec makes more, but then again 80% of players are strictly highsec I hope they increase the price, because again, they need new isk sinks and wardeccing is a prime way to do this. 200mil is nothing to a lot of players, let alone an alliance
Originally by: CCP Adida
Originally by: WMunny Is it cheating for a new player to buy ISK using PLEX?
It's against the EULA and can be actioned by GMs.[/ |
Lykouleon
Trust Doesn't Rust
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 04:51:00 -
[19]
The mechanic isn't perfect, agreed.
But i'd much rather see people running around in rifters with their underwear on their head, drooling like puppies after a tasty treat, wardecing each other left and right than people not decing like crazy due to cost constraints.
Quote: Lord Makk > Our pilots are masochist buttjockey
|
Xorv
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 07:21:00 -
[20]
I see comments here about EVE needing to be a balance between PvP and PvE. However, in my view the game is heavily skewed towards PvE already, and getting worse not better. Even Null Sec is mostly PvP optional to PvEers due to Local mechanics etc. Unless you count "market PvP" and scams, PvE is the major or only real source of ISK for most players. I suppose Ninja Salvaging/looting could be considered a PvP source of ISK, but then most people wanting to make Wardecs harder also want to nerf the salvagers/looters as well.
At a minimum I think the P Alliance Wardec Nerf should be reversed.
But ideally I would like to see PvP and game Lore put before PvE for once in EVE. Have players and Player Corps tied to the in game Empires and Factions and then have War automatically between players of rival Empires/factions.
|
|
ugh zug
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 07:34:00 -
[21]
supported... for less frivolous wardecks by small corps, and a very much needed isk sink for the game with an unhealthy infinite isk inflation. |
Grozdan Boyadijev
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 07:40:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Grozdan Boyadijev on 03/11/2010 07:41:46
Originally by: Xorv I see comments here about EVE needing to be a balance between PvP and PvE. However, in my view the game is heavily skewed towards PvE already, and getting worse not better. Even Null Sec is mostly PvP optional to PvEers due to Local mechanics etc. Unless you count "market PvP" and scams, PvE is the major or only real source of ISK for most players. I suppose Ninja Salvaging/looting could be considered a PvP source of ISK, but then most people wanting to make Wardecs harder also want to nerf the salvagers/looters as well.
At a minimum I think the P Alliance Wardec Nerf should be reversed.
But ideally I would like to see PvP and game Lore put before PvE for once in EVE. Have players and Player Corps tied to the in game Empires and Factions and then have War automatically between players of rival Empires/factions.
From a lore standpoint, capsuleers are the lucky few who have paid the price for what essentially equates to immortality, and are considered neutral agents. As for having players and corps tied in with Empire factions and warring, we already have that, it's called Faction Warfare. Perhaps you should check it out.
If I wanted to have a strong identity based upon my race, I'd go play WoW. A large chunk of EVE's appeal is the sandbox nature of interaction between players. If you want to yell about how Amarr are horrible racist slavers, go join your militia and get on with it, but there's a segment of the playerbase who couldn't care less what happens in Empire aside from if it means a different system is a primary trade hub, but probably hate a group of other players that they may live next door to.
To me, EVE is balanced between PvP and PvE. I go shoot rats to make ISK to pay for spaceships I can afford to lose while shooting at the guys next door (who are real players and probably hate me just as much). While I'd love to have billions of ISK to throw around, it wouldn't really mean much other than that I have to spend less time doing PvE things. PvP in EVE is a lot like real combat happens, from my understanding of real combat/war. Sixty minutes of waiting for sixty seconds (or less) of action. And before that sixty minutes of waiting for an enemy to shoot at, there was the five hours I spent ratting up the money to buy those modules/ships/skillbooks involved in the eventual shooting.
I'm supporting this on the fact that it's a decent ISK sink to increase wardec prices. It's doubtful that serious wardec corps/alliances will feel any real pain from it. The best solution would be to scale prices based on the size of the corp/alliance declaring war and the corp/alliance that is getting dec'd. Your two man corp wants to attack a 5000 man alliance? You're going to have to pay for it.
|
Xorv
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 07:41:00 -
[23]
Originally by: ugh zug [...] and a very much needed isk sink for the game with an unhealthy infinite isk inflation.
Wars themselves would do a much better job of that than fees used to prevent small or poor corps from declaring war.
|
Xorv
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 07:57:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Grozdan Boyadijev
From a lore standpoint, capsuleers are the lucky few who have paid the price for what essentially equates to immortality, and are considered neutral agents. As for having players and corps tied in with Empire factions and warring, we already have that, it's called Faction Warfare. Perhaps you should check it out.
If capsuleers were considered neutral agents we wouldn't have any Standings to Empires and Factions in EVE. We do have standings therefore Capsuleers are not neutral, they pick their sides based upon their actions. What's missing from EVE is real consequences for those actions and resulting standings.
Yes I'm familiar with Faction War is EVE, and to me it's rather lame, despite being a gamer that played in a number of Sandbox MMOs as an RP/PvP type player... exactly the sort of gamer FW was meant to attract, I have zero interest in participating in it's current form.
Quote: To me, EVE is balanced between PvP and PvE. I go shoot rats to make ISK to pay for spaceships I can afford to lose while shooting at the guys next door (who are real players and probably hate me just as much).
PvE free from PvP, to then go PvP with the gains made in PvE. That's pretty much the exact formula for Thempark MMOs dynamics between PvP and PvE. This is what you want, and your talking to me about Sandbox MMORPGs?
Everyone's entitled to an opinion, but the justification for those opinions here for a Wardec nerf are quite frankly pretty weak or nonsensical. It would be much stronger if you were just straight up and say you want a game where you PvE free from PvP and leave it at that. |
DURRRHHH
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 20:02:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Xorv
Wars themselves would do a much better job of that than fees used to prevent small or poor corps from declaring war.
Four people can run level IVs in drakes for a few hours and EASILY get 100 million (probably faster if they use CNRs/Golems/Nightmares correctly fitted). If a corp can't afford a 100 million towards a wardec, I doubt they need to be in a war(otherwise the miner corps will just stomp all over them in bigger ships...unless they are idiots).
Most corporations I have been at war with fly tech 2 EXPENDABLE ships. I mean, if PVP high sec wardecs are a way to help create isk sinks/keep markets going.... an increase in wardec costs is not going to be that much of a dent in their wallet. They are probably just going to spend WISER on who they wardec, not just wardec people because a corp has a stupid name or they were looking at them funny.
I really do believe that the amount of deaths in high sec are not going to change due to the increase in cost, but I do believe pointless wardecs will be avoided.
Like I said before, wardec prices are not relative to their cost from then to now. There needs to be a 'market adjustment' fix.
|
The PitBoss
Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 21:29:00 -
[26]
Not Supported ...
Mechanic isn't perfect but is far from broken
We spend 2.75 billion a week every week we run 10 wars ...
Being in a corp/alliance is a privilege .. NOT a given .. if you don't like wars .. stay in NPC corps -or- get better wing-mates
Thank-You,
The Pitboss
Signatures by: Kalen Vox |
Baaldor
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 21:37:00 -
[27]
Read the thread and this is basically the TLDR:
Penalize a corp / alliance that PvP's in a PvP game because the defending corp is not motivated enough to defend nor aware they are playing a PeeVeePee game.
I think this pretty much sums what they are asking for.
|
Aiwha
101st Space Marine Force Nulli Secunda
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 21:38:00 -
[28]
Supported for the destruction of those god damned RR domi's.
I like me. |
DURRRHHH
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 22:57:00 -
[29]
Edited by: DURRRHHH on 03/11/2010 23:05:43 Edited by: DURRRHHH on 03/11/2010 23:02:16 Edited by: DURRRHHH on 03/11/2010 22:59:16
Originally by: The PitBoss Not Supported ...
Mechanic isn't perfect but is far from broken
We spend 2.75 billion a week every week we run 10 wars ...
Being in a corp/alliance is a privilege .. NOT a given .. if you don't like wars .. stay in NPC corps -or- get better wing-mates
That can be easily twisted to "Don't be in so many wars at once" and "you have the option of wardecing or not" and "raise your taxes".
|
Lykouleon
Trust Doesn't Rust
|
Posted - 2010.11.03 23:06:00 -
[30]
Originally by: The PitBoss Being in a corp/alliance is a privilege .. NOT a given .. if you don't like wars .. stay in NPC corps -or- get better wing-mates
^^ this
Quote: Lord Makk > Our pilots are masochist buttjockey
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |