EVE Search - War decs : not achieving objectives

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

War decs : not achieving objectives

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Indahmawar Fazmarai 5625	Posted - 2017.02.26 23:24:51 - [31] - Quote Ptraci wrote: If you have trouble with war decs or the war dec mechanics just leave high sec. The rest of EVE is constantly at war with everyone unless they're blue (and even then sometimes). Seriously. The ONLY use for war decs is in high sec. Nah don't give me crap about low sec, no one in low sec is worried about gate guns or sec status. No one. You tank it, or you bring logi, or both. It's high sec carebears who cry about war decs. High sec structures can be targeted. And carebears who forget their renter corp/nullsec alliance is under war dec and get popped on the way to or from Jita because they're too dumb or forgot to use a neutral hauling alt. Seriously, this affects so few people it's laughable. And to those few who complain about it - what, you think "high sec" means absolutely risk and consequence free? No, your stuff can be popped in high sec too. At least you get 24 hours' notice. Don't like it, take everything out of your POS/Citadel and put it in someone else's or an NPC station. Too lazy to do that? THEN YOU GET WHAT YOU DESERVE. Or you could always, I dunno - defend your stuff. Briliant analysis, you just discovered, without assistance, that the reason of wardec is to circunvent CONCORD in highsec, thus they are a highsec mechanic. Now ask yourself, why the ability to destroy player assets without the aggressor being destroyed by CONCORD is so important that CCP devoted time and effort to create wardecs as an exception to the already existing -and quite complex- crimewatch mechanic? And who is favored by this wardec mechanic? Carebears? PvPrs? Who's being pampered by CCP...?
Hir Miriel Elves In Space 334	Posted - 2017.02.26 23:37:22 - [32] - Quote Wardecs allow bigger groups to prey on smaller groups. This encourages smaller groups to disband, and their members to join bigger groups. Ultimately the design of wardecs is to encourage forced group play in huge groups. At its core, CCP wants everyone to be zerglings. I don't want to be part of a zombie horde, I get enough of that mindless life on this planet. But I can see why CCP wants everyone to be a space zombie; zombie movies are very popular. We could make a HBO series! "The Flying Dead" ~ ~~ Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox. ~~ ~
Ptraci 3 R Corporation The Irukandji. 2011	Posted - 2017.02.27 00:29:23 - [33] - Quote Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Briliant analysis, you just discovered, without assistance, that the reason of wardec is to circunvent CONCORD in highsec, thus they are a highsec mechanic. Now ask yourself, why the ability to destroy player assets without the aggressor being destroyed by CONCORD is so important that CCP devoted time and effort to create wardecs as an exception to the already existing -and quite complex- crimewatch mechanic? And who is favored by this wardec mechanic? Carebears? PvPrs? Who's being pampered by CCP...? You have a 24 hour notice. Why do you think you're so special that your assets must last absolutely forever with no risk in this game? If you're not prepared to defend your assets, take them down. You can take a POS down in a few hours. A citadel is a little more complicated but hey, if you're in a position to afford a citadel then you're good enough and popular enough to defend it, right? RIGHT? Wait, does this come back to "don't fly what you can't afford to lose?" Boohoo I bought a citadel with PLEX and now I can't afford/don't know how to/don't have friends to defend it.... well whose fault is that? Maybe you shouldn't have plonked cash on a citadel thinking you can "pay to win". As to "the ability to destroy player assets without the aggressor being destroyed by CONCORD", you realize that you can do it to them too, right? This is not a one-sided situation. Unless you absolutely cannot fight, in which case maybe you have misunderstood the nature of the EVE universe.
Bertok Francis Raiju 27	Posted - 2017.02.27 00:59:14 - [34] - Quote Ptraci wrote: Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Briliant analysis, you just discovered, without assistance, that the reason of wardec is to circunvent CONCORD in highsec, thus they are a highsec mechanic. Now ask yourself, why the ability to destroy player assets without the aggressor being destroyed by CONCORD is so important that CCP devoted time and effort to create wardecs as an exception to the already existing -and quite complex- crimewatch mechanic? And who is favored by this wardec mechanic? Carebears? PvPrs? Who's being pampered by CCP...? You have a 24 hour notice. Why do you think you're so special that your assets must last absolutely forever with no risk in this game? If you're not prepared to defend your assets, take them down. You can take a POS down in a few hours. A citadel is a little more complicated but hey, if you're in a position to afford a citadel then you're good enough and popular enough to defend it, right? RIGHT? Wait, does this come back to "don't fly what you can't afford to lose?" Boohoo I bought a citadel with PLEX and now I can't afford/don't know how to/don't have friends to defend it.... well whose fault is that? Maybe you shouldn't have plonked cash on a citadel thinking you can "pay to win". As to "the ability to destroy player assets without the aggressor being destroyed by CONCORD", you realize that you can do it to them too, right? This is not a one-sided situation. Unless you absolutely cannot fight, in which case maybe you have misunderstood the nature of the EVE universe. I think you may be missing the point of his post, I am not sure whether he is anti-PvP in hisec or just anti-pointless wardeccs where the defenders only victory conditions are to not fight (which btw is laughably easy) but to me it looks like he means that wardecs are a mechanic designed to get people out of hisec and they fail miserably at it in their current form. People in hisec are most likely either. 1) smart enough to avoid wardeccers. 2) unwilling to bother living in an area with less security or just afraid of low/null sec after reading articles about it. (Eg. afraid they will have super carriers dropped on their venture 2 jumps into lowsec) 3) station traders who don't care about wardecs anyways. 4) people who are very new or very stupid who fly into trade hubs/uedama in slow aligning ships while wardecced. 5) people who make isk killing the people in category 4. Also, I have not checked but how many wardec corps actually have structures in space?
Shiloh Templeton Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 604	Posted - 2017.02.27 01:05:59 - [35] - Quote CCP "needs" destruction in the game to make a profit. It also makes the game more interesting to many players. The problem is new players and beginner corporations have no chance against established players & corps that have knowledge, experience & SP on their side. Thus leading to a failed NPE that causes players to quit. So the challenge is how to allow destruction while not losing new players. What if defending corps were allowed to hire NPC assistance during the war. Use the new NPC mining fleet AI to provide backup that shows the new corps how an organized group of ships - tackle, DPS, logistics - fights. This gives them a chance to experience the thrill of combat and forces the attacking corp to risk some destruction as well.
Ptraci 3 R Corporation The Irukandji. 2011	Posted - 2017.02.27 01:13:41 - [36] - Quote Bertok Francis wrote: I think you may be missing the point of his post, I am not sure whether he is anti-PvP in hisec or just anti-pointless wardeccs where the defenders only victory conditions are to not fight (which btw is laughably easy) but to me it looks like he means that wardecs are a mechanic designed to get people out of hisec and they fail miserably at it in their current form. People in hisec are most likely either. War decs were never meant to "get people out of hi sec". They were meant to prevent people from being untouchable in high sec. Being war decced is an opportunity. Sure, they can kill you. But you can kill them too. If they outnumber you, well perhaps THAT is your problem. EVE is a multiplayer game. Don't expect to be able to play solo 100% of the time.
Kitty Bear Harbingers of Chaos Inc Triumvirate. 1594	Posted - 2017.02.27 01:34:57 - [37] - Quote wardecs fail because people can just drop from a corp with no consequence they'd be less broken if dropping from corp made no difference
Bertok Francis Raiju 27	Posted - 2017.02.27 01:41:47 - [38] - Quote Ptraci wrote: Bertok Francis wrote: I think you may be missing the point of his post, I am not sure whether he is anti-PvP in hisec or just anti-pointless wardeccs where the defenders only victory conditions are to not fight (which btw is laughably easy) but to me it looks like he means that wardecs are a mechanic designed to get people out of hisec and they fail miserably at it in their current form. People in hisec are most likely either. War decs were never meant to "get people out of hi sec". They were meant to prevent people from being untouchable in high sec. Being war decced is an opportunity. Sure, they can kill you. But you can kill them too. If they outnumber you, well perhaps THAT is your problem. EVE is a multiplayer game. Don't expect to be able to play solo 100% of the time. Yes, you can kill them (or not if they have 8 out of corp basilisks covering them) but that is the worst way to get them to go away. Unless they are in it for the isk only (unlikely) fighting battles are the best way to make it so you have to live with the annoyance of a war for another week. Atm the best way to deal with a wardec is to just not go to a trade hub with a wardecced character. An alpha clone can be a neutral hauler alt with almost no training and even better can create a 1 man corp for low tax. Yes that account can be wardecced but corp management is a cheap skillbook. If there was an actual point in fighting I would but there simply is not.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 5809	Posted - 2017.02.27 02:13:58 - [39] - Quote Kitty Bear wrote: wardecs fail because people can just drop from a corp with no consequence they'd be less broken if dropping from corp made no difference Do you really want players logging off for weeks at a time? I'm not sure how this improves EVE. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Neuntausend GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1623	Posted - 2017.02.27 02:18:04 - [40] - Quote As much as I don't want to, I have to agree. Forcing players to take part in a war is not a good idea, and not even possible. If they can't avoid the war while playing, they will just avoid playing instead.
Commander Spurty 1670	Posted - 2017.02.27 05:09:49 - [41] - Quote How does a mechanic you can avoid successfully portray "Acts of war"? I don't see any such success here. You can log out for a week to avoid it. Not really possible in real life. You really have to fight or jump ship to a neighboring location. Additionally, wars are "location based". If "War decs" are to succeed they need to mutate. What we have right now is exactly this: "concord, here's a very trivial amount of money. Please look the other way". It progresses by promoting the opposing side logging out. That's suicidal from a business pov. Basically, the cost of war needs to increase as so must the result of successful operations. The victor should be rollling in money of the loser. This promotes the desire to actually "progress by aggression". This promotes better chances for "meaningful content". You're not going to stay out of the war if you're going to start losing money to the victor You're going to fight :-) note the smiley face as unless you're a "science is an alternative truth" sort, you're going to be having a "oh I see now" moment about now. What we have can remain, but it should not be called a war dec. it should be called what it is. A "7 day, Selective, forced alternative mechanic event" sponsored by the person handing you it. Good to see the white knights for the status quo are well. We may actually need you soon for something that you actually won't want. There are good ships, And wood ships, And ships that sail the sea But the best ships are Spaceships Built by CCP
Nana Skalski Taisaanat Kotei 28320	Posted - 2017.02.27 05:12:41 - [42] - Quote War could be a tool to destroy the corps, to make them have less players. Some players will still want to play, and not have wardec, like those refugees from places where war is going on. Every part of a game helps to tell a story =ƒôò Where is Angry CONCORD guy when you need him Osprey =ƒÜÇ GëíGïüGëí GÖÑ
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 5812	Posted - 2017.02.27 05:26:20 - [43] - Quote Commander Spurty, perhaps you should relocate to low-sec, null-sec or wormhole space. Areas in EVE where players are always itching for a fight. This continual effort to try and force a square peg into a round hole by pigeonholing high-sec players into a perpetual state of war is not only unwelcome - but unwarranted. Whether you realize it or not, EVE depends on high-sec as much as any other area of space. Maybe you should stop trying to destroy Eden... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Black Pedro Yammerschooner 3182	Posted - 2017.02.27 06:28:16 - [44] - Quote Neuntausend wrote: As much as I don't want to, I have to agree. Forcing players to take part in a war is not a good idea, and not even possible. If they can't avoid the war while playing, they will just avoid playing instead. The thing is the game is already designed this way. The NPC corp is the intended place for players to go who do not want or like taking part in wars. You can drop corp at anytime and the war goes away. You are not forced to continue to participate. That may mean there is need for a social corp or corp lite or society or some other social group that exists separate from taking on a vulnerability to wars. In fact, many highsec residents have built one of these already using chat channels or hopping corp and play the game with little worry of wars. Maybe that needs to be formalized, but real corps with real advantages like in-space structures always will be vulnerable to wars. We can't have invulnerable structures in this game and never will. The 8 Golden Rules of Eve Why Do They Gank?
Marcus Binchiette Federal Vanguard 85	Posted - 2017.02.27 06:47:14 - [45] - Quote The problem with a lot of the meaningful suggestions here (of which there have been few) is that it is all about punishing the aggressor. Making it more expensive to fight. Or increasing the risks for the aggressor. The way I see it, the reason why defensive corps are non-participants is because they have no incentive to fight. Beyond perhaps protecting their assets in space they never needed nor wanted the fight - and are probably unprepared, ill-equipped, under-skilled, and out manned. If the wardec mechanic is to be successful you actually need to give the defender some motivation to fight. My suggestion would be as follows: 1. Instead of governing the cost of wardec by number of players in enemy corp. It should be governed by: a. The ratio of cumulative skill points of all members in each of the respective corps. b. Percentage of the cost of any assets secured in space. c. The average security status of all players in the defending corp. 2. Defenders who make kills shall receive Concord LP for every war target kill they make. 3. The cost of brining allies into the war should be increased. The idea here is that mismatched wardecs will be discouraged. Evenly matched wars will be much easier to initiate - and players who keep a high security status will be harder to wardec (as they are in Concords 'good books'). As well as this. There is an LP incentive for defenders to actively participate and engage in gurella attacks.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 47135	Posted - 2017.02.27 07:22:18 - [46] - Quote Marcus Binchiette wrote: Beyond perhaps protecting their assets in space they never needed nor wanted the fight ... This is why, no matter what system is put in place, there will always be complaints about wardecs. They have to be in the game, but some people just don't want to fight, yet want the benefits of a player owned Corp. As a result, whinging will always occur.
Jeremiah Saken The Fall of Leviathan 667	Posted - 2017.02.27 07:55:38 - [47] - Quote Marcus Binchiette wrote: a. The ratio of cumulative skill points of all members in each of the respective corps. Miner oriented characters vs pvp oriented ones. Same SP lvl. Solves nothing. "I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville If you need a scout mail me.
Indahmawar Fazmarai 5625	Posted - 2017.02.27 08:04:23 - [48] - Quote Shiloh Templeton wrote: CCP "needs" destruction in the game to make a profit. It also makes the game more interesting to many players. The problem is new players and beginner corporations have no chance against established players & corps that have knowledge, experience & SP on their side. Thus leading to a failed NPE that causes players to quit. So the challenge is how to allow destruction while not losing new players. What if defending corps were allowed to hire NPC assistance during the war. Use the new NPC mining fleet AI to provide backup that shows the new corps how an organized group of ships - tackle, DPS, logistics - fights. This gives them a chance to experience the thrill of combat and forces the attacking corp to risk some destruction as well. As a matter of fact, the single most destrucitve force in the EVE economy it's lapsed accounts. FAI, according to the January MER, PvP destroyed 1.3 trillion ISK, whereas lapsed accounts removed 60 trillion isk from the game economy. So what keeps the economy healthy and more or less balanced it's not destruction of assets. It's players going away and removing their assets from the economy. In EVE economy as in real life, what is not seen can be pretty telling of what's going on. The economy stays healthy because most ships are never flown, most ISK is never spent and that vast majority of assets is just removed from the economy when their owners no longer play the game. Care to think what would happen if people tried to inject 60 trillion worth of assets into the market, each month? With actual monthly production being a bit under 3 trillion ISK? EVE's economy is a game about hoarding stuff and then let it rot in some hangar.
Sitting Bull Lakota SBL Co 252	Posted - 2017.02.27 08:30:48 - [49] - Quote Commander Spurty wrote: https://zkillboard.com/wars/ I'll offer you this data for the bassis of the following statement: War decs are failing to achieve objectives of a war. Strictly looking at kills per war, yes. But Devil's Rejects, Marmite, Pirat, etc. might not agree. Quote: If you could tweak war dec mechanics (be bold, all options are on the table), what would you tweak? Two changes to corp structure: minimum number of players required to form or continue a corp, and make NPC corps vulnerable to wardecs. Way too many people (me too) use them to shield alts, neutral eyes, haulers, neutral logi, etc. That guaranteed protection of the logistics of your corp/alliance/coalition in the market hubs doesn't encourage player or community development. The current hubs will remain until this changes. After the change? Who knows, but I predict a more fluid and engaging, emergent system of ebbing and flowing markets. The stuff of econ-nerd dreams. Many have also noticed that the NPC and especially Starter NPC corps have become a toxic haven for mining fleets, missioners, and the other flavors of bear that poison the minds of our newer players with their bitter chats and risk-averse attitudes. Also not good for player and community development. In EvE, mechanics guaranteed safety from all but suicide ganking shouldn't be an option as long as you remain online in space. Quote: P.S. if you are unaware of the point of a war, I still want to hear what you think. It might offer insight as to why the malaise continues. The current point of war is to bash structures. That is basically it. Corps without anchored structures are functionally invulnerable to war decs with a few quick clicks and a couple million isk. Wardec? Drop corp: roll a new one. In my fantasy version of EvE, wardecs make sure that everyone is always checking local.
Wolfgang Jannesen The Evesploratory Society 77	Posted - 2017.02.27 13:12:12 - [50] - Quote Bjorn Tyrson wrote: Wolfgang Jannesen wrote: Bjorn Tyrson wrote: How I would like to see the wardec system get revamped. Isk based "war goal" the agressor sets the amount if isk worth in assets that they want to see destroyed. They must pay that amount of isk and it gets placed into an escrow account. When the agressor destroys a defenders ship it counts against the war goal. When the defender destroys an attackers ship half of fhe value gets deducted from the escrow and is payed out as a bounty. War continues until either the war goal is met. The escrow is depleted, or the attacker cancels the war. Or, the defender can pay off an amount equal to the cost of the war. When the war ends. The attacker gets back the remaining escrow -10% (administration fees) and if the defender has payed off the war, they will also get 50% of the buyout. Buying out a wardec will prevent a new one from being issued for say 2 weeks. Numbers may need some tweeking since this is off the top of my head. But the way I see it it does several things 1) it gives a good reason for the defender to fight, since it can help to end the war faster and they get payed. 2) it raises the cost of the war with the goals. 3) because the war will last until goals are met, it de-incentivizes "just don't log in for the week" 4) it gives an out for industrial corps willing to pay through the nose for it. While still giving a benefit to the attacker. Set goal of 400million Show up and destroy their Raitaru Didn't have to pay 1bil to target it, defenders lost far more than 400mil Not a perfect system and could use some tweeking. Maybe a minimum 1 bil to start a war or something. (Or maybe adjust the on the books value of a Raitaru to be more in line with market prices) But even if it doesn't, in your example. Defenders pay 400 mil, wardec gets canceled attackers get 200 mil, +360 back from fees. Raitaru is saved and protected from that corp for 2 weeks. Alternatively, defending corp shows up, puts up a fight, destroys 2 or 3 battleships, wardec ends 24 hours later (so even if reinforced cannot he destroyed) defenders gain 200 mil. Attackers loose full 400 and would need to Dec again to try and get the next timer putting another x amount of isk on the line. That's even worse, now the attacker is losing money for winning.
Ptraci 3 R Corporation The Irukandji. 2016	Posted - 2017.02.27 14:06:19 - [51] - Quote Commander Spurty wrote: How does a mechanic you can avoid successfully portray "Acts of war"? I don't see any such success here. You can log out for a week to avoid it. Or just change regions. Or better yet, hang out in low/null sec for a week. Because hi sec war deccing corps NEVER go to low/null. Or you could play an alt that's in another corp. You get 3 toons per account. There are lots and lots and lots of ways to keep playing EVE that week and avoid ALL consequences of the war dec.
Agondray Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces 401	Posted - 2017.02.27 14:22:03 - [52] - Quote war decs are only valid in empire/low sec. all most all wars are between station camps/ main route gate camps. you have to hope people ignore the little warning because they want to mission "Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
Malcorath Sacerdos Rogue Meddlers 52	Posted - 2017.02.27 15:08:58 - [53] - Quote Bjorn Tyrson wrote: How I would like to see the wardec system get revamped. Isk based "war goal" the agressor sets the amount if isk worth in assets that they want to see destroyed. They must pay that amount of isk and it gets placed into an escrow account. When the agressor destroys a defenders ship it counts against the war goal. When the defender destroys an attackers ship half of fhe value gets deducted from the escrow and is payed out as a bounty. War continues until either the war goal is met. The escrow is depleted, or the attacker cancels the war. Or, the defender can pay off an amount equal to the cost of the war. When the war ends. The attacker gets back the remaining escrow -10% (administration fees) and if the defender has payed off the war, they will also get 50% of the buyout. Buying out a wardec will prevent a new one from being issued for say 2 weeks. Numbers may need some tweeking since this is off the top of my head. But the way I see it it does several things 1) it gives a good reason for the defender to fight, since it can help to end the war faster and they get payed. 2) it raises the cost of the war with the goals. 3) because the war will last until goals are met, it de-incentivizes "just don't log in for the week" 4) it gives an out for industrial corps willing to pay through the nose for it. While still giving a benefit to the attacker. add to it a daylie deduction from the war chest of 1/7 of the input. now the war ends if the defender uses guile and smarts and evades the agressor. if this tactic proves to end the war without incuring any losses the defender gets a nice bonus of 50% of the original war cost and is deemed winner of the war.
MadMuppet A Better Corp Name 1233	Posted - 2017.02.27 17:58:57 - [54] - Quote Wardecs objectives are to permit one corp to freely engage in PVP with another corp regardless of location. That is it. No more, no less. All this other fluff is whining, both ways, to change something to someone else's favor. -Force players to stay in corp. Some just wont' fly, others will quit. -Force a payment against losing corp for a week based on their income. Is that corp income? "CEO, set corp tax to 0% for a week." Oh that is player income, drop corp for the week. -Last corp to win a war gets the prize? Make two corps, declare war on each other forever. -No last winning corp get the prize, so another corp still as war doesn't count. Fine, you guys won, now we'll surrender the perm war reclaim the bounty and start up another one when you come back. -Base wardec cost on SP of players in corp, inseam of pant leg, color of hair, etc... ridiculous and overly complicated (as well as possibly an intel tool) -Allow wardecs on NPC corps? Seriously? "Hello pilot, I am AURA, this is your first..." BOOM (logoff) This message brought to you by Experience(tm). When common sense fails you, experience will come to the rescue. Experience(tm) from the makers of CONCORD.
Chihuahuaraffe University of Caille Gallente Federation 28	Posted - 2017.02.27 17:59:26 - [55] - Quote A war dec confers an advantage to the aggressor because they choose who they're going to war against, and being a strategy game people tend to only initiate conflicts they already think they can win. Other games have mechanics to balance the advantage of "going first" and perhaps some benefit could be given to the target of a war dec to help balance the field a bit. So for example if the decee got a 20% bonus to damage done against the decer. There are of course an unlimited number of things you could do to try to pick something that would improve balance. The goal would not necessarily be to make things "balanced" but maybe you could give the small corp the feeling like they're not totally defenseless and maybe it's worth undocking and taking a chance or even seeking out conflict. I think new players especially are not happy with the idea of switching to an Alt for the duration of a war and are more likely to just log out. They're laboriously climbing the skills ladder with their first character and the idea of "starting from scratch" will not be appealing. What if Omega accounts got to have a second character on the account doing simultaneous training for free, but at the half-speed rate that free accounts get? This would encourage the creation of alts which might eventually result in second paid accounts or paid simultaneous training to get the full training speed.
Joey Bags School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 48	Posted - 2017.02.27 19:10:41 - [56] - Quote I would suggest the cost of a wardec should be proportional to the SP of both corps. A 5 player bitter vet corp can wreck a newbie 5 man corp. Put 25 guys in the newbie corp, they stand a chance and you have a more balanced mechanic. If the SP is really lopsided in favor of the attacking corp, big ISKies to initiate the wardec. Make it in favor of the defender, small ISK. This would encourage large, newbie corps to train at least a little on PvP skills instead of total blitzing on industy and would promote both content and reduce griefing for griefings sake. You can pick your friends and you can pick your nose but you can't pick your friends nose. Unless you podded them...and collected their corpse.
Amojin Entropic Synergies Research 18	Posted - 2017.02.27 21:10:38 - [57] - Quote Commander Spurty wrote: https://zkillboard.com/wars/ I'll offer you this data for the bassis of the following statement: War decs are failing to achieve objectives of a war. If you could tweak war dec mechanics (be bold, all options are on the table), what would you tweak? P.S. if you are unaware of the point of a war, I still want to hear what you think. It might offer insight as to why the malaise continues. My offering: winner of the war receives 1% war loot from the tax of all activities the entity beaten takes after the war ends. If this entity is war dec by another entity, the 1% money goes to the last war dec to win. It really doesn't matter. I know what war decs cost. I know what they can cost me, for every ship I fly. I evaluate a war dec in fhe foillowing manner: 1) What is my ship worth? 2) They paid, and they want me. They know, if they have half a brain, where I am likely to be. This is not good, for me. 3) They will minimize their losses, meaning T1 crap with T2 mods and ammo, to waste me. 4) This is a disruption, since I am usually mining, or exploring, or running missions. More expensive than they are. 5) Therefor, I will let them burn themselves out in stupdity and go play world of warcraft for a week. My old restoration druid is in much need of attention, at all times, nerf after nerf, after nerf.
March rabbit Mosquito Squadron The-Culture 2077	Posted - 2017.02.27 21:30:00 - [58] - Quote Sitting Bull Lakota wrote: In my fantasy version of EvE, wardecs make sure that everyone is always checking local. How would you do this in Jita for example? I personally cannot even scroll it from top to bottom without getting huge lags and client freezes. The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Amojin Entropic Synergies Research 19	Posted - 2017.02.27 21:32:58 - [59] - Quote March rabbit wrote: Sitting Bull Lakota wrote: In my fantasy version of EvE, wardecs make sure that everyone is always checking local. How would you do this in Jita for example? I personally cannot even scroll it from top to bottom without getting huge lags and client freezes. I can't, either. The lag in those systems is nothing to the time dilation mechanic, though. A wardec is basically some pussy paying money because he thinks you have to be there.
Mephiztopheleze Laphroaig Inc. 1234	Posted - 2017.02.27 21:35:34 - [60] - Quote The main change I'd like to see is exponentially increasing war dec costs the more wars you have active. From 1-5 HS Wars: Current prices. 6-20: x2 Cost 20-40: x4 Cost 40-80: x8 Cost and so on. This will have the effect of allowing war decs for the purpose of removing opposing entities high sec structures, but corps that simply wardec all and sundry will have to find a way to pay for it. When simply opening the War History tab of some corp's Info boxes causes your EVE client to crash, you know there's a problem. Occasional Resident Newbie Correspondent for TMC: http://themittani.com/search/site/mephiztopheleze This is my Forum Main. My Combat Alt is sambo Inkura

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: 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.