EVE Search - [Proposal] War Dec Mechanic Changes

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Proposal] War Dec Mechanic Changes

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Drem Aldent	Posted - 2011.01.23 01:45:00 - [1] Okay, first of all if you are going to troll please include something to improve the thread. I admit this is a very controversial topic, but I personally think the mechanics of this needs to change. so without further ado... 1. I propose that wardecs are changed so that the corp that started the war pays slightly more isk every week, this will make it so that griefer corps will not be able to continue wars forever and ruin the game experience. Pros: will stop griefing wars Cons: will create a new isk sink (this could possibly be under both depending on the way you think about it) will make legit wars cost far more. OR 2. Wars can only last a certain amount of time then they need a cooldown period Pros: again will prevent wars just for the sake of griefing Cons: will make legit wars end at a certain point OR. 3. Just increase the war dec cost themselves Pros and cons: same as the first option.
Goose99	Posted - 2011.01.23 01:54:00 - [2] I'd say 3. Wardec cost 2 mil atm, with a starting point like that, slightly more every week hardly makes a dent. Limiting time artificially wouldn't do much for griefer decs, which usually don't last long anyway, but will interfere with the handful of real wars between large alliances atm.
Drem Aldent	Posted - 2011.01.23 02:01:00 - [3] Originally by: Goose99 I'd say 3. Wardec cost 2 mil atm, with a starting point like that, slightly more every week hardly makes a dent. Limiting time artificially wouldn't do much for griefer decs, which usually don't last long anyway, but will interfere with the handful of real wars between large alliances atm. The problem with it being 2 million is that I could mine that in a covetor in about an hour, which is nothing. it needs to be more around 10 million for a war-dec
Goose99	Posted - 2011.01.23 03:31:00 - [4] Originally by: Drem Aldent Originally by: Goose99 I'd say 3. Wardec cost 2 mil atm, with a starting point like that, slightly more every week hardly makes a dent. Limiting time artificially wouldn't do much for griefer decs, which usually don't last long anyway, but will interfere with the handful of real wars between large alliances atm. The problem with it being 2 million is that I could mine that in a covetor in about an hour, which is nothing. it needs to be more around 10 million for a war-dec Mine? For an hour? 2 mil is shooting 2 rats. 10 mil is shooting 10 rats. Have to be more than that to even make people pause and blink before dec.
Pirokobo Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.01.23 03:47:00 - [5] Make wars cost more... make them start immediately.
Brutus B	Posted - 2011.01.23 04:46:00 - [6] I admit that 2mil isn't much. But, it does go up by double every single week. My experience is that most wars don't last longer than 2 or 3 weeks before the agressor breaks up, or the victims find allies or disband. And those that start and stop over longer periods of time, do so with infrequency. And it costs much-much more to goto war against alliances, and they get wardecs frequently for all kinds of reasons. So, changing the ammount of isk won't change the fact that wars will be declared... the whole point of EVE is thrashing folks who don't realize they are in your space. Also the 2mil for corp vs corp warfare is to allow a low cost of entry for newb-corps wanting to declare war on other newb corps. Honestly, I don't see what we'd get out of changing the mechanic in anyway. Less war decs? More war decs? A better user experience for those who want to goto war? A worse experience for those who want to go to war? Or a better or worse experience for those who are getting war declared on them? As it stands, those who are gearing up for war endure a 3 day process (calling the vote, concluding the vote, starting the war process and waiting) the last day of which the enemy is notified given 24 hours to prepare. After which they aren't gauranteed any conflict because 90 times out of 100 the people getting dec'd do everything in their power to avoid a fight including not logging in, moving to other corps, and staying inside stations (and they can't even walk in stations yet!) If they get a fight at all it probably will stay inside a station's docking perimeter and that's kinda lame. If you're lucky you might catch someone passing through a gate. What's really missing is a mechanic to conlude a war without the agressor retracting it willfully (often because the victim corp surrenders informally, or just out of boredom) which is often concluded as an invalidation when they no longer pay the Concord war bill. What should be added to wardecs is a system of binding contract that offers a terms of surrender, in which the victor can claim isk or assets the other corp has in exchange for the rapid dismissal of the war, and a long prohibition that keeps the agressing corp from declaring war on the surrendered corp again for whatever agreed to time. A better warbill cost than the current system would be based on how many more members the attacking corp has over the victim corp. (So that even matches would cost less than insanely uneven ones.) But there would need to be a minimum cost as a baseline. But, it's not about the cost really, and since there isn't much worth taking/getting under the current system--players mostly declare wars for the lols, and the cost is really irrelevant. As far as griefing wars go, if a corp has earned another corps hatred to the point of griefing... they are playing for your corps extermination, and upping the cost of wars isn't going to change their goal at all. Paying someone else to help you bloddy their noses might, but even that's not a gaurantee. TLDR; Overall, I go with option 4; create a mechanic for a peace contract that will quickly end a war, declare a winner, and enforce a gauranteed period of time in which the winning corp gains something for the victory, and is prevented from going to war with the victim corp for as long a period as agreed to in the contract.
Antihrist Pripravnik 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.01.23 09:48:00 - [7] Originally by: Drem Aldent 1. I propose that wardecs are changed so that the corp that started the war pays slightly more isk every week This only shows how much you actually know about the game mechanics. Please, learn to play the game and the rules and then propose something.
Greniard	Posted - 2011.01.23 11:09:00 - [8] Making wardeccing more expensive won't change anything, same as with every other mechanic. People have a ton of isk, corporations have two tons and alliances have s**ttons so it's not like they'll run out any time soon. Forcing wars to end won't help much either. Just need to make a secondary corp where members can jump to when the first corp is running out of war time. And how are these "griefing wars" not legit? Or maybe to word that better which wars are not griefing wars? I bet the answer will be something along the lines of "pvp corps deccing pve corps is griefing" to which I might reply "lol"
Memcoll	Posted - 2011.01.23 11:22:00 - [9] Not supported. If someone wants to declare war on you they will pay the price whatever that may be. A high war dec fee might prevent new players from starting a war which would discourage pvp. not a good thing.
nugget906	Posted - 2011.01.23 15:08:00 - [10] Originally by: Memcoll Not supported. If someone wants to declare war on you they will pay the price whatever that may be. A high war dec fee might prevent new players from starting a war which would discourage pvp. not a good thing. There's low and null if you want pvp. Griefing miners and haulers does not constituted pvp. With the current 2 mil fee, anyone can just go shoot 2 rats and fund a war.

Quillian Ulant	Posted - 2011.02.21 19:20:00 - [11] Edited by: Quillian Ulant on 21/02/2011 19:20:09 i agree with this, something HAS to be done about this. Like various posts before me have said, its easy to fund a war as it is now from popping 2 rats. IMHO this makes wardecs horribly underpriced. IMO what a wardec essentially is, is a way to bribe concord who will then allow your corporation to not only destroy ships without consequences, but also pod pilots. This sort of mechanic, while i believe that it is needed to balance the economy, needs to be changed. If this game wants to be as realistic as possible, then a 2mil bribe to concord would be laughed at. imo, a wardec should be a BIG deal...highsec wars should be very few and far between, and have purpose...which right now only includes griefing and preventing other corps from starting up. Right now, the risk associated with declaring a war in High Sec are vastly underscored by the gain/fun of declaring one. Where the potential loss of the decced corp vastly outweigh the cost to the agressor. Increase the amount per week required to declare war, and require a certain standing with either concord or the faction who's soverignty the corp is based in. PRO: Less Highsec Wars for griefing, a wardec becomes a big deal (even newsworthy). Players who "rage quit" the game would not leave if they were not harassed every time they tried to make something of themselves. Eve player base grows as such. Also the current corporation skillsets allow corporations of thousands of players, but the largest corporations are only 100 (and very well established ones of 200), this would also increase the probability of bigger corporations. CON: new isk sink, as stated in prior posts...but is that really a bad thing? Less PVP, (not correct...this has nothing to do with lowsec pvp, and is an addition to pvp)
Mimiru Minahiro	Posted - 2011.02.21 20:51:00 - [12] Outside of personal preference there is no reason to nerf war decs. You think the ability to wardec for long periods is "griefing"...others think of it as a lucrative business model. Many people are ambivalent to current mechanics. Seems pretty balanced and fair for all players to me! That being said the best way, imo, to improve the OP's idea is to erase it.
Quillian Ulant	Posted - 2011.02.22 00:12:00 - [13] Originally by: Brutus B I admit that 2mil isn't much. But, it does go up by double every single week. My experience is that most wars don't last longer than 2 or 3 weeks before the agressor breaks up, or the victims find allies or disband. And those that start and stop over longer periods of time, do so with infrequency. And it costs much-much more to goto war against alliances, and they get wardecs frequently for all kinds of reasons. So, changing the ammount of isk won't change the fact that wars will be declared... the whole point of EVE is thrashing folks who don't realize they are in your space. Also the 2mil for corp vs corp warfare is to allow a low cost of entry for newb-corps wanting to declare war on other newb corps. Honestly, I don't see what we'd get out of changing the mechanic in anyway. Less war decs? More war decs? A better user experience for those who want to goto war? A worse experience for those who want to go to war? Or a better or worse experience for those who are getting war declared on them? As it stands, those who are gearing up for war endure a 3 day process (calling the vote, concluding the vote, starting the war process and waiting) the last day of which the enemy is notified given 24 hours to prepare. After which they aren't gauranteed any conflict because 90 times out of 100 the people getting dec'd do everything in their power to avoid a fight including not logging in, moving to other corps, and staying inside stations (and they can't even walk in stations yet!) If they get a fight at all it probably will stay inside a station's docking perimeter and that's kinda lame. If you're lucky you might catch someone passing through a gate. What's really missing is a mechanic to conlude a war without the agressor retracting it willfully (often because the victim corp surrenders informally, or just out of boredom) which is often concluded as an invalidation when they no longer pay the Concord war bill. What should be added to wardecs is a system of binding contract that offers a terms of surrender, in which the victor can claim isk or assets the other corp has in exchange for the rapid dismissal of the war, and a long prohibition that keeps the agressing corp from declaring war on the surrendered corp again for whatever agreed to time. A better warbill cost than the current system would be based on how many more members the attacking corp has over the victim corp. (So that even matches would cost less than insanely uneven ones.) But there would need to be a minimum cost as a baseline. But, it's not about the cost really, and since there isn't much worth taking/getting under the current system--players mostly declare wars for the lols, and the cost is really irrelevant. As far as griefing wars go, if a corp has earned another corps hatred to the point of griefing... they are playing for your corps extermination, and upping the cost of wars isn't going to change their goal at all. Paying someone else to help you bloddy their noses might, but even that's not a gaurantee. TLDR; Overall, I go with option 4; create a mechanic for a peace contract that will quickly end a war, declare a winner, and enforce a gauranteed period of time in which the winning corp gains something for the victory, and is prevented from going to war with the victim corp for as long a period as agreed to in the contract. I like your ideas, especially the ingame interface you mentioned about negotiating an end to a declared war, and the prohibition period that would follow also, however i wouldn't agree about the griefing corporations comment. I was a member of a corporation that had reached around 20 members, and was wardecced for no reason. we had not offended anyone, interacted with any alliances or corporations, we weren't even recruiting in recruitment, we were just wardecced and forced to disband for no reason other than lolz. and i think that is what people want to stop from happening when they talk about grief
Obstreperous1	Posted - 2011.03.28 08:48:00 - [14] OR... Index war dec cost to the corp standing, make standings actually mean something
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Shadow Confederation	Posted - 2011.03.28 18:10:00 - [15] Edited by: Drake Draconis on 28/03/2011 18:11:00 I've always said it was too cheap to war-dec. But then the other side of the coin can get quite alot of ISK to do a war-dec anyway. Cost change won't be enough I figure. ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Jerika Bodet	Posted - 2011.03.28 23:39:00 - [16] This thread just sounds like another, "CareBears Unite" whine thread. This has always and will always be a PvP game. Problem solving any issue that may arrise, in corp, opposing corp or griefer corp, is the very charm of this game... I understand people just want to be in their own little Eve universe, but alas, you're in a great big sand box and things can and will happen beyond your control. I do admit that a proper "Surrender" terms should always be an option. As stated above, terms of surrender should be provided from the war dec initiator in contract form of ISK or items paid that would enforce "peace" for a certain (set in terms by the initiator) length of time. Of course, CEOs should be able to have a negotiation table to further adjust/accept/decline terms. Cooldown could then be set to "immediate" or a standard 24 hours. Peace time could be 1 month min to a year or indefinite. This feature would enhance gameplay from the "helpless" feeling of a "griefed" corp and also assure the surrendering corp that the aggressor won't pull a fast one and continue killing anyways. Plus, the aggressing corp can validly claim victory for their purpose. This would also help reduce the need for corp jumping. Of course, there can't always be an agreement on terms, but at least there should be a legitimate option.
Lord Tarrn	Posted - 2011.04.04 23:32:00 - [17] Edited by: Lord Tarrn on 04/04/2011 23:34:34 War Decs are too cheap. Up the ISK required \|\| Add a Cooldown period. It ruins game play experience.
BattleSister Oryx	Posted - 2011.04.05 07:12:00 - [18] this whole thread is based around the idea that wardecs ARENT meant to be for greifing.
Goose99	Posted - 2011.04.05 17:01:00 - [19] Originally by: BattleSister Oryx this whole thread is based around the idea that wardecs ARENT meant to be for greifing. Well, CCP did state in the past that wardecs weren't designed for griefing, so yeah, that's the right idea.
Tarrn	Posted - 2011.04.07 02:21:00 - [20] War Decs need a refresh.

Andski GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2011.04.07 12:22:00 - [21] Edited by: Andski on 07/04/2011 12:23:00 Originally by: Pirokobo Make wars cost more... make them start immediately. I'm not quite sure how it works for alliances, but corporate war declarations have to be initiated via vote. The minimum voting period is 24 hours, which means that the war declaration wouldn't be issued until 24 hours after the vote (even if one person has 100% of the shares) and another 24 hours after that. I think it's just "push butan" with alliances, which would be horrible. "Oh hey Bob, lookie here, a freighter carryin' officer mods! War dec the corp!"
Lord Tarrn	Posted - 2011.04.19 18:01:00 - [22] This issue almost went away when the new forums launched. It should remain in light. War Decs need a revamp. Thanks,
J Kunjeh Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.19 20:43:00 - [23] Originally by: Jerika Bodet This thread just sounds like another, "CareBears Unite" whine thread. This has always and will always be a PvP game. Problem solving any issue that may arrise, in corp, opposing corp or griefer corp, is the very charm of this game... I understand people just want to be in their own little Eve universe, but alas, you're in a great big sand box and things can and will happen beyond your control. It's not about carebears (such a useless argument...that's a totally valid way to play this game). It's about balance. And yeah, it's too easy to use wardecs to grief without much sweat off the griefer's back. That needs looking into. ~Gnosis~
Izo Alabaster Amarr	Posted - 2011.04.20 01:41:00 - [24] Originally by: Drem Aldent 1. I propose that wardecs are changed so that the corp that started the war pays slightly more isk every week, this will make it so that griefer corps will not be able to continue wars forever and ruin the game experience. You seem to not understand the whole purpose of wars is to force players to gasp interact with each other, and not to allow them to simply hide under the skirt of CONCORD like a bunch of scared children. So-called griefer corps should rightfully be able to continue wars indefinitely. This forces the aggrieved corp to gasp come up with counters. Potential counters include hiring mercenaries, paying off the griefing corp, or double gasp manning up and fighting them, or simply pulling up stakes and moving on to a different corp. All are ways to deal with a wardec. Quote: 2. Wars can only last a certain amount of time then they need a cooldown period Pros: again will prevent wars just for the sake of griefing Cons: will make legit wars end at a certain point Or maybe we could just limit war time to certain zones and times, and require a +/- PVP flag before initiating PVP and change the name of EVE from EVE Online to Carebear-WoW-Loving-Sissies Online. What a terribad idea. The people initiating the wardec are real people. Talk to them, reason with them, and if all that fails, then hire reputable mercenaries against them or man up and fight them yourselves. Quote: 3. Just increase the war dec cost themselves Yes, let's allow only the elite who can afford to pay exorbitant amounts of isk to actually PVP in EVE. The wardec costs shouldn't be a barrier to wardecs, the targets should. Learn to quit being such a soft target and you won't get so many wardecs. Learn to actually fight back and they'll quit messing with you altogether. In short, learn to play. -I can't get the Desu sigs to work. :( http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sig.php
Merouk Baas Gallente	Posted - 2011.04.20 02:08:00 - [25] I think the only thing they need to do is help newbie corporations out by giving A LOT more information at the FIRST war declaration that a corp suffers, including: - links to tutorials or the wikipedia about wars and what their options are - a list of vulnerable assets (POSes for example) and suggestions about what to do to protect them - instructions on how to find out info about the wardec corp and its members, including setting them red and locator agents - reminders to insure ships and/or stockpile some war supplies within the 24 hrs they have - perhaps extending the 24 hrs to 48 hrs, but only for the first war declaration suffered, so newbies have more time to prepare - a cost analysis of what ships they could afford to fight in and for how long, perhaps based on the ISK amounts in the corp wallet
Alias 6322A	Posted - 2011.04.20 05:08:00 - [26] Quote: There's low and null if you want pvp. Griefing miners and haulers does not constituted pvp. With the current 2 mil fee, anyone can just go shoot 2 rats and fund a war. I myself am a miner, and yes, that is PvP. EVE is what it is because nowhere is truly safe. As with all wardecs, if you can't win, MOVE. Griefing is not 'killing non-combat ships' (considering a covetor can actually kill something). It might be griefing if the warring corp chases you through three different regions over the course of 3 months for no apparent reason. But then again...you'd have to petition on that one. I'd be ok with more expensive wardecs. I personally think wars ought to cost 10 million isk per week. Much larger deters smaller corps from ever taking on larger, and potentially ill-organized corps that make lots of isk, but not skilled pilots. Wars serve a purpose in EVE - they actually are best used against miners and haulers. This is how you PvP in hisec (and avoid sec loss in low). +1 for higher price, but keep it reasonable for small-corp gangs to cause some havoc.
Opertone Caldari World - of - Empire Cassiopeia.	Posted - 2011.04.20 11:14:00 - [27] Originally by: Memcoll Not supported. If someone wants to declare war on you they will pay the price whatever that may be. A high war dec fee might prevent new players from starting a war which would discourage pvp. not a good thing. this is bull... high cost war decs will protect new players from war being initiated against them aka griefing the newbies
ezthumper	Posted - 2011.04.20 17:49:00 - [28] Originally by: Opertone Originally by: Memcoll Not supported. If someone wants to declare war on you they will pay the price whatever that may be. A high war dec fee might prevent new players from starting a war which would discourage pvp. not a good thing. this is bull... high cost war decs will protect new players from war being initiated against them aka griefing the newbies I see a lot of words like "Griefing" in this thread being thrown about. So are these "Griefer" type corps / individuals getting the ban hammer? I mean you guys are reporting these "Griefer" corps....right? If they are truly "griefing" you should be able to correct the action as per terms of agreement upon logging into the game...right?
Lord Tarrn	Posted - 2011.04.21 05:37:00 - [29] Originally by: ezthumper Originally by: Opertone Originally by: Memcoll Not supported. If someone wants to declare war on you they will pay the price whatever that may be. A high war dec fee might prevent new players from starting a war which would discourage pvp. not a good thing. this is bull... high cost war decs will protect new players from war being initiated against them aka griefing the newbies I see a lot of words like "Griefing" in this thread being thrown about. So are these "Griefer" type corps / individuals getting the ban hammer? I mean you guys are reporting these "Griefer" corps....right? If they are truly "griefing" you should be able to correct the action as per terms of agreement upon logging into the game...right? What??? Do you have any idea how many corporations are affected by Grief Wars? Think of the amount of petitions for that category alone. War Declarations Need to be Reformed Otherwise the game should have the tag line - EVE ONLINE - Everybody's an ******* Join Now
Guilliman R Gallente Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E	Posted - 2011.04.21 09:59:00 - [30] Edited by: Guilliman R on 21/04/2011 09:59:34 Make em cost 1m per member in both the target and your own corp. Same for alliance. Say a corp with 300 people decks a corp with 20 people, the total cost to start the war is 320.000.000 ! Alliance A with 3250 members decks alliance B with 2521 members makes the total cost to start a war by 5.771.000.000 Promotes actual corp growth too. ------ http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4441/evesigr.jpg



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.