Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Miss Power
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 09:50:00 -
[1]
With the change to wars we've seen Privateers go from a major 'pvp alliance' to the small alliance they are now. Yet they still continue their grieving in empire.
Now my main is in one of the three '?unlucky?' alliances that they war dec each week. Not that it really matters to me, as I hardly ever go to empire, but still.
Note on how I write this, they war dec us each week instead of letting the war continue they let it invalidate and then re-war dec us.
Now thats whats interesting, I always wondered (after being war dec'd a couple of times now) why they did that.
And then someone explained why, the initial war dec of 3 alliances costs Privateers 50 + 100 + 150 = 300m isk. However the upkeep for those same wars is 150 + 150 + 150 = 450m isk, or 50% more.
As such they let the war get invalidated for a day and war dec the same alliances at a lower cost. Essentially saving 150m isk, but not only that they circumvent game mechanics for their own goal (which is essentially what exploit means).
This seems like a flaw in the war dec procedure and I doubt its what CCP had in mind. A solution to this would be the following, the starting cost of a war should be changed. The first war should still cost 50m, the second however 150m and the third should cost 250m. Then after a week all three should cost 150m to maintain.
That way theres no longer an exploit for 'cheaper' wars and no annoying "the war has been invalidated" eve-mails as the upkeep of the war is the same cost as to start it.
|
Comac
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 09:53:00 -
[2]
I have seen this tactic also but from other another corp. They have a wardec, let it end and the next day or 2 they wardec again.
Not sure why, but annoying to me
|
barvo
7th Space Cavalry YouWhat
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 10:09:00 -
[3]
Alternatively, it could be that *gasp* the person who should be renewing the war dec isn't online every hour of every day and sometimes things don't get done on time.
Once the war is invalidated, you are forced to wait out the 24h period, then create a new war dec.
I'm not suggesting that they didn't then discover it costs less, but sometimes you need to look beyond the tinfoil.
|
WhitePhantom
Gallente Edenists
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 10:13:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Miss Power With the change to wars we've seen Privateers go from a major 'pvp alliance' to the small alliance they are now. Yet they still continue their grieving in empire.
Now my main is in one of the three '?unlucky?' alliances that they war dec each week. Not that it really matters to me, as I hardly ever go to empire, but still.
Note on how I write this, they war dec us each week instead of letting the war continue they let it invalidate and then re-war dec us.
Now thats whats interesting, I always wondered (after being war dec'd a couple of times now) why they did that.
And then someone explained why, the initial war dec of 3 alliances costs Privateers 50 + 100 + 150 = 300m isk. However the upkeep for those same wars is 150 + 150 + 150 = 450m isk, or 50% more.
As such they let the war get invalidated for a day and war dec the same alliances at a lower cost. Essentially saving 150m isk, but not only that they circumvent game mechanics for their own goal (which is essentially what exploit means).
This seems like a flaw in the war dec procedure and I doubt its what CCP had in mind. A solution to this would be the following, the starting cost of a war should be changed. The first war should still cost 50m, the second however 150m and the third should cost 250m. Then after a week all three should cost 150m to maintain.
That way theres no longer an exploit for 'cheaper' wars and no annoying "the war has been invalidated" eve-mails as the upkeep of the war is the same cost as to start it.
I don't see this as an exploit I see this using how the system works to their advantage, every thing else in the game your allowed to use this, as long as they pay for it then well its fair. The difference and why it as changed before was you were never suppose to have 50 war declarations at one time.
I also don't see how it will change anything for your situation, sounds like they have something against you or somebody is paying them to go to war with you. You also should post with your main and not an alt.
|
Kappas.
Galaxy Punks O X I D E
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 10:16:00 -
[5]
I remember petitioning something like this a long time ago, and the response was "It's not an exploit", so unless their position has changed it's still not an exploit.
|
Frug
Zenithal Harvest
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 10:26:00 -
[6]
You petition something like this?
It's the upkeep that is too high, it should be the initial 50+100+150, not the other way around.
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles |
Ladyah Liandri
A GmbH
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 10:41:00 -
[7]
Originally by: WhitePhantom I don't see this as an exploit I see this using how the system works to their advantage, every thing else in the game your allowed to use this, as long as they pay for it then well its fair. The difference and why it as changed before was you were never suppose to have 50 war declarations at one time.
Kinda contradictory. Before and after Privateers did just what the warring system had and has to offer. So either using exploits both times or not at all I'd say.
And you just assume that before "you were never suppose to have 50 wars". Says who? Ļou still can run 50 wars if you have an ISK printing machine in the backyard.
Originally by: WhitePhantom I also don't see how it will change anything for your situation, sounds like they have something against you or somebody is paying them to go to war with you.
The OP made it quite clear that he has no problem with the war itself. He just aked a general question.
Originally by: WhitePhantom You also should post with your main and not an alt.
And you should start reading posts maybe a little more careful before replying.
Here:
Originally by: Miss Power Now my main is in one of the three '?unlucky?' alliances that they war dec each week.
|
Miss Power
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 10:44:00 -
[8]
Originally by: WhitePhantom I don't see this as an exploit I see this using how the system works to their advantage, every thing else in the game your allowed to use this, as long as they pay for it then well its fair. The difference and why it as changed before was you were never suppose to have 50 war declarations at one time.
I also don't see how it will change anything for your situation, sounds like they have something against you or somebody is paying them to go to war with you. You also should post with your main and not an alt.
I have no doubt that they might have been hired to war dec our alliance neither do I care (plenty of empire alts to get my stuff to a carrier jump point that arent in the corp I'm posting with).
Fact is that CCP changed the way upkeep works for wars because it was too cheap to have multiple wars running for extended periods. Thats the very reason it was changed.
Now due to working around game mechanics put in place for that (e.g. higher upkeep), they are still able to at least have cheaper war dec's.
Using flaws in game mechanics for profit or gain is exactly what an exploit is, and seeing this is exactly that I dont see how it cant be an exploit. The question however is more if CCP sees this the same way.
|
Ki An
Gallente KDM Corp Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 10:47:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Ladyah Liandri
Originally by: WhitePhantom I don't see this as an exploit I see this using how the system works to their advantage, every thing else in the game your allowed to use this, as long as they pay for it then well its fair. The difference and why it as changed before was you were never suppose to have 50 war declarations at one time.
Kinda contradictory. Before and after Privateers did just what the warring system had and has to offer. So either using exploits both times or not at all I'd say.
They didn't exploit the wardec system before the change, so I guess that means they don't exploit it now. CCP changed the mechanic because they didn't feel it was right. That doesn't mean the Privateers where exploiting it before. If they where exploiting it, they would have been warned/banned by CCP, and the mechanics wouldn't have changed.
/Ki
Remember kids: Beware: I'm a "viscous pirate"! |
Miss Power
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 10:48:00 -
[10]
Originally by: WhitePhantom You also should post with your main and not an alt.
Posting with my main has no benefit to this post as its not about the war between my alliance and privateers, neither do I want to see it turn into a post like that.
Its more a question if the behavior of privateers (e.g. re war dec'ing instead of keeping it going to save costs) could be considered an exploit.
|
|
Miss Power
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 10:52:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Ki An They didn't exploit the wardec system before the change, so I guess that means they don't exploit it now. CCP changed the mechanic because they didn't feel it was right. That doesn't mean the Privateers where exploiting it before. If they where exploiting it, they would have been warned/banned by CCP, and the mechanics wouldn't have changed.
/Ki
I never found it an exploit that they had wars with tons of alliances, heck I had some nice fights with them (and some ganks by them). If they want to have wars with 3 or 10 or 100 alliances, I couldnt care less.
I am just wondering if the difference between the startup cost and the upkeep cost of a war, and (ab)using of that difference can be considered an exploit.
|
Ladyah Liandri
A GmbH
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 10:58:00 -
[12]
If Privateers exploited the warring system in the past I guess CCP would have limited the number of concurrent wars by now. Instead it just became more expensive.
But I have to admit that the current systems seems to have a logic flaw. I'd expect that all in all recurring war declarations would result at least in equal or better higer costs than a war that continuously lasted the same amount of time.
|
Randomish Hauler
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 11:17:00 -
[13]
There is more than one flaw in it, that isnt positive to privateers if you think about it, but as for that, im keeping it to myself
|
Banana Torres
The Green Banana Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 11:22:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Miss Power Its more a question if the behavior of privateers (e.g. re war dec'ing instead of keeping it going to save costs) could be considered an exploit.
It would be an exploit if the Privateers were getting something for nothing. But they are not. By allowing the wardecs to run out there is a period of at least 24 hours where they cannot fight.
So it seems to me that the Privateers are just using their brains to minimize costs. But then again using their brains was always a Privateer strong point.
|
Callthetruth
Caldari Drunken Ratbags Inc New Eve Order
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 12:07:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Miss Power With the change to wars we've seen Privateers go from a major 'pvp alliance' to the small alliance they are now. Yet they still continue their grieving in empire.
Now my main is in one of the three '?unlucky?' alliances that they war dec each week. Not that it really matters to me, as I hardly ever go to empire, but still.
Note on how I write this, they war dec us each week instead of letting the war continue they let it invalidate and then re-war dec us.
Now thats whats interesting, I always wondered (after being war dec'd a couple of times now) why they did that.
And then someone explained why, the initial war dec of 3 alliances costs Privateers 50 + 100 + 150 = 300m isk. However the upkeep for those same wars is 150 + 150 + 150 = 450m isk, or 50% more.
As such they let the war get invalidated for a day and war dec the same alliances at a lower cost. Essentially saving 150m isk, but not only that they circumvent game mechanics for their own goal (which is essentially what exploit means).
This seems like a flaw in the war dec procedure and I doubt its what CCP had in mind. A solution to this would be the following, the starting cost of a war should be changed. The first war should still cost 50m, the second however 150m and the third should cost 250m. Then after a week all three should cost 150m to maintain.
That way theres no longer an exploit for 'cheaper' wars and no annoying "the war has been invalidated" eve-mails as the upkeep of the war is the same cost as to start it.
u dont like em touching u leave youre alliance or fight back
perhaps a solution to the privateer threat ( lol) is if u have war decd someone and let it lapse instead of cancelling it in the last month it costs and additional 100% to dec again, would also make corp on corp empire grief ( as carebears call em) wars less attractive
|
Ethaet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 12:09:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Callthetruth
Originally by: Miss Power With the change to wars we've seen Privateers go from a major 'pvp alliance' to the small alliance they are now. Yet they still continue their grieving in empire.
Now my main is in one of the three '?unlucky?' alliances that they war dec each week. Not that it really matters to me, as I hardly ever go to empire, but still.
Note on how I write this, they war dec us each week instead of letting the war continue they let it invalidate and then re-war dec us.
Now thats whats interesting, I always wondered (after being war dec'd a couple of times now) why they did that.
And then someone explained why, the initial war dec of 3 alliances costs Privateers 50 + 100 + 150 = 300m isk. However the upkeep for those same wars is 150 + 150 + 150 = 450m isk, or 50% more.
As such they let the war get invalidated for a day and war dec the same alliances at a lower cost. Essentially saving 150m isk, but not only that they circumvent game mechanics for their own goal (which is essentially what exploit means).
This seems like a flaw in the war dec procedure and I doubt its what CCP had in mind. A solution to this would be the following, the starting cost of a war should be changed. The first war should still cost 50m, the second however 150m and the third should cost 250m. Then after a week all three should cost 150m to maintain.
That way theres no longer an exploit for 'cheaper' wars and no annoying "the war has been invalidated" eve-mails as the upkeep of the war is the same cost as to start it.
u dont like em touching u leave youre alliance or fight back
perhaps a solution to the privateer threat ( lol) is if u have war decd someone and let it lapse instead of cancelling it in the last month it costs and additional 100% to dec again, would also make corp on corp empire grief ( as carebears call em) wars less attractive
Good idea. ----- CONCORD Notice: Don't drink and fly. Drunken jumping can result in loss of ship through "navigational error".
Seems familiar? |
Ladyah Liandri
A GmbH
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 12:16:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Banana Torres
Originally by: Miss Power Its more a question if the behavior of privateers (e.g. re war dec'ing instead of keeping it going to save costs) could be considered an exploit.
It would be an exploit if the Privateers were getting something for nothing. But they are not. By allowing the wardecs to run out there is a period of at least 24 hours where they cannot fight.
So it seems to me that the Privateers are just using their brains to minimize costs. But then again using their brains was always a Privateer strong point.
Yet a flaw considering the costs for 24 hours of war.
|
Wacoede
Amarr Allied Combat Team Endless Horizon
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 12:19:00 -
[18]
an easy way to solve this is to have the system charge the extra upon a new wardec IE
instead of it being
50 +100 +150 = 300
It would be
50 + 150 (the 100 for the second wardec plus the extra 50 for the first) + 250 ( 150 for this war dec plus and extra 50 per other wardec) = 450
simple math and it then costs the same to start the wardec as it does to maintain it
An Idea about Bounties Version 2 |
Miss Power
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 12:21:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Callthetruth u dont like em touching u leave youre alliance or fight back
This is why I dont post with my main, but just so we're clear I'll repeat it once again:
I couldnt care less that they war dec my alliance, I will fight them if I see them however, in the last month I've spend a grand total of 1 hour in empire. And not once did I see privateers.
The issue at hand here isnt our war against them, they can war dec who they like when they like. However its pretty clear that they are letting war dec's end (instead of renewing them) to save money, the question I'm asking is if this is allowed or not.
The fact that 3 wars cost less to initiate then to keep going means there's a flaw in the current war dec logic. They are (ab)using this flaw for their gain / profit. Normally doing something like that classifies as exploiting.
I cant blame them for doing so, nor will I do that, I am however questioning the legality of this act. I would have done it through a petition but I'm at work and a bit bored (and we all know forums have more effect then petitions anyhow)
|
Miss Power
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 12:23:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Miss Power on 09/08/2007 12:24:14
Originally by: Ladyah Liandri Yet a flaw considering the costs for 24 hours of war.
Considering these wars are for profit (ganking empire nubs) and not for 'political purposes', the 24 hour downtime has no effect on them other then having less enemies for 1 day (remember they have 3 wars going, this just means they have 2 alliances for those 24 hours instead of 3).
Originally by: Wacoede ...
If you re-read my post, thats exactly the solution I suggested.
|
|
Wacoede
Amarr Allied Combat Team Endless Horizon
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 12:25:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Wacoede on 09/08/2007 12:26:02
Originally by: Miss Power
Originally by: Wacoede ...
If you re-read my post, thats exactly the solution I suggested.
wall of text hurts eyes use big spaces to make it easier
An Idea about Bounties Version 2 |
Banana Torres
The Green Banana Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 12:35:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Miss Power I would have done it through a petition but I'm at work and a bit bored
If you can access this website you can raise a petition.
The problem is the arse about face way that CCP implemented the wardecs. Usually you get a discount if you continue to do something but if you stop and restart it will cost more.
But wardecs are the other way around. So that it is more sensible to stop and restart the wardecs. Its not an exploit, in the same way as the original Privateers use of the wardec system was not an exploit.
It is just smart people using the game mechanics to give them an edge.......oh wait, yeah, this needs a nerf. We can't have smart people prospering.
|
Jennai
The Silent Rage R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 13:02:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Miss Power I couldnt care less that they war dec my alliance, I will fight them if I see them however, in the last month I've spend a grand total of 1 hour in empire. And not once did I see privateers.
I saw a grand total of FOUR privateers reported in intel channels during the entire war. even with the cheap wars, I don't see how they're making enough to cover the costs.
|
Major Stallion
Four Rings D-L
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 13:48:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Miss Power
Now my main is in one of the three '?unlucky?' alliances that they war dec each week. Not that it really matters to me
if none of this matters to you, then post with your main or STFU.
Originally by: Miss Power , as I hardly ever go to empire, but still.
Note on how I write this, they war dec us each week instead of letting the war continue they let it invalidate and then re-war dec us.
Now thats whats interesting, I always wondered (after being war dec'd a couple of times now) why they did that.
And then someone explained why, the initial war dec of 3 alliances costs Privateers 50 + 100 + 150 = 300m isk. However the upkeep for those same wars is 150 + 150 + 150 = 450m isk, or 50% more.
As such they let the war get invalidated for a day and war dec the same alliances at a lower cost. Essentially saving 150m isk, but not only that they circumvent game mechanics for their own goal (which is essentially what exploit means).
This seems like a flaw in the war dec procedure and I doubt its what CCP had in mind. A solution to this would be the following, the starting cost of a war should be changed. The first war should still cost 50m, the second however 150m and the third should cost 250m. Then after a week all three should cost 150m to maintain.
That way theres no longer an exploit for 'cheaper' wars and no annoying "the war has been invalidated" eve-mails as the upkeep of the war is the same cost as to start it.
and as for the rest of this post....WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA CCP WE'VE BEEN WAR DEC'D TELL THEMEAN MR PRIVATEERS TO STOP IT
Dude, they already nerfed wars once, get over it. War is meant to be underhanded, and dirty. So if PA is saving 150mil a week to war dec you, and you dont really care (or at least you claim not to, after all if you hadnt cared, youd not have posted)then stfu about it.
________________________________ High Sec PvP |
Major Stallion
Four Rings D-L
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 13:52:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Miss Power
Originally by: Callthetruth u dont like em touching u leave youre alliance or fight back
This is why I dont post with my main, but just so we're clear I'll repeat it once again:
I couldnt care less that they war dec my alliance, I will fight them if I see them however, in the last month I've spend a grand total of 1 hour in empire. And not once did I see privateers.
The issue at hand here isnt our war against them, they can war dec who they like when they like. However its pretty clear that they are letting war dec's end (instead of renewing them) to save money, the question I'm asking is if this is allowed or not.
The fact that 3 wars cost less to initiate then to keep going means there's a flaw in the current war dec logic. They are (ab)using this flaw for their gain / profit. Normally doing something like that classifies as exploiting.
I cant blame them for doing so, nor will I do that, I am however questioning the legality of this act. I would have done it through a petition but I'm at work and a bit bored (and we all know forums have more effect then petitions anyhow)
maybe its me but i dont get your points in ay of your posts. You dont care that theyve war dec'd you. So you post about how theyve dec'd you.
Secondly, you tell us how u never spend any time in empire, but then you come to the forums and cry that theyve dec'd you.
Thirdly, you refuse to post with your main because you know you look like a dumbass. Or maybe its because you dont want your corpies/alliance mates to see who the dumbass is in their ranks.
________________________________ High Sec PvP |
Miss Power
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 13:54:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Major Stallion and as for the rest of this post....WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA CCP WE'VE BEEN WAR DEC'D TELL THEMEAN MR PRIVATEERS TO STOP IT
Dude, they already nerfed wars once, get over it. War is meant to be underhanded, and dirty. So if PA is saving 150mil a week to war dec you, and you dont really care (or at least you claim not to, after all if you hadnt cared, youd not have posted)then stfu about it.
Do I smell a privateer alt? Or are you hiring them to shoot (one of) the 3 alliances and are you afraid that this might up the bill 150m a month?
I want them to pay, and pay good for the privilege to war dec me, I'm not a cheap $5 ....., I'm a premium $10 one !
|
MrTripps
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 13:57:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Miss Power I'm asking is if this is allowed or not.
Obviously it is.
"They must find it difficult... those who have taken authority as the truth, rather then truth as the authority." - Gerald Massey |
Major Stallion
Four Rings D-L
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 13:59:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Miss Power
Originally by: Major Stallion and as for the rest of this post....WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA CCP WE'VE BEEN WAR DEC'D TELL THEMEAN MR PRIVATEERS TO STOP IT
Dude, they already nerfed wars once, get over it. War is meant to be underhanded, and dirty. So if PA is saving 150mil a week to war dec you, and you dont really care (or at least you claim not to, after all if you hadnt cared, youd not have posted)then stfu about it.
Do I smell a privateer alt? Or are you hiring them to shoot (one of) the 3 alliances and are you afraid that this might up the bill 150m a month?
I want them to pay, and pay good for the privilege to war dec me, I'm not a cheap $5 ....., I'm a premium $10 one !
privater alt? hahah look t my corp and alliance, numbnuts.
I only post with my main, unlike some people in this post...errr just you.
Why so scared to post with your main, seriously? You must really be that afraid that you look like an idiot.
________________________________ High Sec PvP |
Miss Power
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 14:05:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Major Stallion privater alt? hahah look t my corp and alliance, numbnuts.
I only post with my main, unlike some people in this post...errr just you.
Why so scared to post with your main, seriously? You must really be that afraid that you look like an idiot.
Shivering in fear as I type this.
|
Major Stallion
Four Rings D-L
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 14:12:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Miss Power
Originally by: Major Stallion privater alt? hahah look t my corp and alliance, numbnuts.
I only post with my main, unlike some people in this post...errr just you.
Why so scared to post with your main, seriously? You must really be that afraid that you look like an idiot.
Shivering in fear as I type this.
the absolute fearlessness of little kids posting from their alts never ceases to amaze me.
________________________________ High Sec PvP |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |