Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mister Xerox
|
Posted - 2008.09.08 21:36:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Mister Xerox on 08/09/2008 21:44:44 Wars should flag all pilots for the duration of the war period, regardless if they jump corp (they're still flagged until the end of that billing cycle).
Make wars last 30 days.
Allow victory conditions using an Escrow interface such as we currently use:
The Yulai Terms of War
The Terms of Surrender: Using an interface identical to the current Item Exchange escrow window a corporation declares war on its target. The target has 24 hours to prepare for the war, or: They can satisfy the terms of the Warfare Contract by supplying the ISK and/or items detailed in the Contract. If these items are currently available in any of the corporation's hangars the CEO need not pull & compile them in any single location, they can simply click the 'Accept Terms of Surrender' button and the items & ISK are withdrawn immediately. Items go to the declaring corporation's deliveries hangar and will need to be picked up while the ISK goes directly to the corporation in the wallet selected during War setup.
Limitations: The declaring corp can select a region in which the items must be located to satisfy the terms of surrender, but cannot choose a specific system or station. The target corporation, if they choose to deliver the goods to a location determined through diplomacy, need not open an office. The party fulfilling the contract need only select 'use local hangar' and the items will be drawn from that hangar and go to the declaring corporation's delivery hangar.
Once the Terms of Surrender have been met the war ends in 30 minutes. If the escrow expires unfulfilled the war will terminate in 24 hours unless one of the parties re-initiates a War Contract within that 24 hours.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.09.08 22:39:00 -
[2]
I like the idea of explicit terms of surrender, as long as they can be changed mid-war. I'm not so much a fan of the 30 day part, though - that can be punishingly long for both sides, and sometimes it's good to have the ability to have an automatic ceasefire. Perhaps a price per week, with the ability to buy for a given number of weeks up front.
But yeah, quibbles aside this is good stuff. ------------------ Fix the forums! |
Tesseract d'Urberville
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
|
Posted - 2008.09.08 22:46:00 -
[3]
I'm a fan too. I especially like that corp-jumpers remain (individually) flagged after jumping corps, but I don't think that they should remain flagged forever. Maybe just for a week.
There should also be a "default" surrender option that is always available to the defending corporation, maybe one-half the value of the defending corporation (we'd need some way of calculating that, though), to set an upper limit on how much the declaring corporation can extort the defending corporation. Other surrender options could be offered (and altered) throughout the war as well, through the contract format you suggest.
Overall, great idea.
--------------------------------- Thomas Hardy is going to eat your brains. |
Mister Xerox
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 00:54:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Tesseract d'Urberville I'm a fan too. I especially like that corp-jumpers remain (individually) flagged after jumping corps, but I don't think that they should remain flagged forever. Maybe just for a week.
Corp jumpers only remain flagged for the duration of that initial war declaration period (currently 7 days). After that, since they're part of another corp, they are safe... for a while.
Originally by: Tesseract d'Urberville There should also be a "default" surrender option that always available to the defending corporation, maybe one-half the value of the defending corporation (we'd need some way of calculating that, though), to set an upper limit on how much the declaring corporation can extort the defending corporation. Other surrender options could be offered (and altered) throughout the as well, through the contract format you suggest.
The 'default' surrender value should be 2x the declaration cost (4m for a corp, 100m for an alliance). That's a pittance for most corps/alliances so the declaring party would be well wise to set some greater level in the declaration terms.
Originally by: Tesseract d'Urberville Overall, great idea.
Thanks, I certainly hope it's something that CCP looks at since the underpinnings are already in place and work amazingly well compared to what we used to have.
|
Synapse Archae
Amarr Demonic Retribution Un-Natural Selection
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 05:35:00 -
[5]
It's a step in the right direction, but how do you plan to keep pirate corps from simply asking for untenably large sums of isk, in order to get an open ended war that the defenders couldn't pay. Even if they did pay, what stops teh same war from being re-declared the next month? or the next week?
Originally by: CCP Garthagk While these forums may not give you everything that you want, they will usually let you post.
|
Doonoo Boonoo
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 16:31:00 -
[6]
You have only come up with a way to surrender. What about victory or loss conditions?
|
Red Raider
Airbourne Demons
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 17:12:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Red Raider on 09/09/2008 17:15:08 Setting a ransom will just be abused but if the surrender terms was twice as much as what the declaring corp put into it then they run the risk of losing something instead of just constantly war decing folks just to get a pay day.
I would like to give the option to vassal your corp to an alliance or corp that dec's you as another option to surrendering. It would be preferable for a lot of people because they may not want to fight and might not be able to afford the surrender cost. It would not allow them to kill you without Concord interference but it might allow for people to more or less get into PVP in a manner that is much less a leap of faith since you know there is a corp of PVP'ers backing you up and in fact giving you orders.
How long you would be vassaled is determined by the amount of money the war dec'er initially set as a surrender term. Once that time is up the vassal corp can choose to leave, remain a vassal, or form an alliance with their overseer. The overseer could tax the vassal but only as much as they tax themselves. In the case of an alliance the tax would be the lowest tax rate of any member of the alliance.
Seem reasonable?
A happy gamer isnt on the forums, they are playing the game unless they have an idea that they honestly think is helping out. |
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 17:55:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Danton Marcellus on 09/09/2008 17:57:50
As for victory conditions it could be a cash sum, the aggressor deposit a sum at the start of the war for the defender to match if they want to surrender.
If it reaches an armistice the deposit is given back, if the aggressor somehow gets overwhelmed and surrender that's the reparations they'll pay, put down in the pot already.
The Aggressor committing cash to the campaign will help make sure there are less random declarations as there would be little to gain, having spread out the own funds there would be just so many wars of oppertunity if you want to secure profitable conditions.
Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav!
Also Known As |
Tesseract d'Urberville
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 18:18:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Doonoo Boonoo You have only come up with a way to surrender. What about victory or loss conditions?
I assume that surrender means the defending corporation loses and the declaring corporation wins. As to the other way around, the defending corporation has to make the war so unbearable to the declaring corporation that the declaring corporation voluntarily terminates the war contract, which they can at any time. If the declaring corporation voluntarily terminates the contract, the defending corporation wins.
More defined victory or loss conditions would have to be mandatory to be used at all, and if they were mandatory, I think wars wouldn't be used as a game mechanism - organizations would seek ways around them to wage wars illegally. "Police Actions," if you will.
--------------------------------- Thomas Hardy is going to eat your brains. |
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 18:57:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Synapse Archae It's a step in the right direction, but how do you plan to keep pirate corps from simply asking for untenably large sums of isk, in order to get an open ended war that the defenders couldn't pay. Even if they did pay, what stops teh same war from being re-declared the next month? or the next week?
The same thing that prevents open-ended wardec extortion from happening now. Nothing. |
|
Synapse Archae
Amarr Demonic Retribution Un-Natural Selection
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 19:35:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Originally by: Synapse Archae It's a step in the right direction, but how do you plan to keep pirate corps from simply asking for untenably large sums of isk, in order to get an open ended war that the defenders couldn't pay. Even if they did pay, what stops teh same war from being re-declared the next month? or the next week?
The same thing that prevents open-ended wardec extortion from happening now. Nothing.
No one really uses the surrender mechanism right now... I don't see why anyone would use this either...
Originally by: CCP Garthagk While these forums may not give you everything that you want, they will usually let you post.
|
Drake Draconis
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 19:49:00 -
[12]
Extortion is a very big problem in war dec'ing.
Specially if the corp is small time and there SP's are very low.
Things should be factor'ed into that before we start proposing changes.
|
Dizeezer Velar
Caldari League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 19:49:00 -
[13]
absolutely not signed.
I hate this idea. This is a sandbox game. It is up to the diplomats of both corps to find a solution to a war, if there even is one.
You have a bigger corp beating up your small corp? you have still have many options at your disposal. No need to make silly victory/surrender conditions. War is NOT a freaking Word Of Warcraft quest.
|
Drake Draconis
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 19:55:00 -
[14]
Well then it should be changed to Racketeering (sp?).
: O P
|
Dizeezer Velar
Caldari League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 20:01:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Drake Draconis Well then it should be changed to Racketeering (sp?).
: O P
if a corp is too weak to handle the pressure from its competition, it should fold. Just like a corporation in real life.
If eve changes the game mechanics to give weak corps a survivability factor outside of open ended war, then it's unrealistic and watered down gameplay.
|
s33ker
Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 20:04:00 -
[16]
/fail
|
sukio
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 21:08:00 -
[17]
Make wars last 30 days. Allow victory conditions using an Escrow interface such as we currently use: The Yulai Terms of War The Terms of Surrender: Using an interface identical to the current Item Exchange escrow window a corporation declares war on its target. The target has 24 hours to prepare for the war, or: They can satisfy the terms of the Warfare Contract by supplying the ISK and/or items detailed in the Contract. If these items are currently available in any of the corporation's hangars the CEO need not pull & compile them in any single location, they can simply click the 'Accept Terms of Surrender' button and the items & ISK are withdrawn immediately. Items go to the declaring corporation's deliveries hangar and will need to be picked up while the ISK goes directly to the corporation in the wallet selected during War setup.
and exactly how you expect non-pvp corps to deal with this? pay your extortion money every week? no thanks! EVE PVP is out of control and is hurting EVE and CCP |
Dizeezer Velar
Caldari League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 21:23:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Dizeezer Velar on 09/09/2008 21:24:37
Originally by: sukio
and exactly how you expect non-pvp corps to deal with this? pay your extortion money every week? no thanks!
Your options are to; Hire mercs Fold corp Pay extortion money Join a real corp/alliance that can hold its own.
I repeat, no special treatment should be given to any weak corp. If you can't hack the heat, get out of the kitchen. Does your mommy make your bed, pack your lunch and iron your clothes? no? Then why should CCP cater to the equivalent of that in game.
|
Drake Draconis
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 21:24:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Dizeezer Velar
Originally by: Drake Draconis Well then it should be changed to Racketeering (sp?).
: O P
if a corp is too weak to handle the pressure from its competition, it should fold. Just like a corporation in real life.
If eve changes the game mechanics to give weak corps a survivability factor outside of open ended war, then it's unrealistic and watered down gameplay.
Ah so you identify with the bigger bullies... I get it.
I'm with the group that prefers to pick on people our own size : O P More challenging that way.
No biggie anyway as I can see this isn't getting anyone anywhere.
|
Dizeezer Velar
Caldari League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 21:27:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Drake Draconis
Originally by: Dizeezer Velar
Originally by: Drake Draconis Well then it should be changed to Racketeering (sp?).
: O P
if a corp is too weak to handle the pressure from its competition, it should fold. Just like a corporation in real life.
If eve changes the game mechanics to give weak corps a survivability factor outside of open ended war, then it's unrealistic and watered down gameplay.
Ah so you identify with the bigger bullies... I get it.
I'm with the group that prefers to pick on people our own size : O P More challenging that way.
No biggie anyway as I can see this isn't getting anyone anywhere.
I am part of a 23 man corp that decs 1500+ member alliances as well as small industrial corps. We dec whatever we feel will make us ISK. Do not paint me with a bully brush. War is business and business is war. Adapt or die. Change the mechanics and you do not have a sandbox game anymore.
|
|
TimMc
Gallente SolaR KillerS
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 21:51:00 -
[21]
I support this idea.
Although may I propose that the that the cost of declaring war becomes X base amount, plus 1/5 of the value being demanded as surrender terms. This should pay for a week. In less than 5 weeks, unless the looting is good, the war will seem pointless.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 00:15:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Dizeezer Velar
Originally by: sukio
and exactly how you expect non-pvp corps to deal with this? pay your extortion money every week? no thanks!
Your options are to; Hire mercs Fold corp Pay extortion money Join a real corp/alliance that can hold its own.
I repeat, no special treatment should be given to any weak corp. If you can't hack the heat, get out of the kitchen. Does your mommy make your bed, pack your lunch and iron your clothes? no? Then why should CCP cater to the equivalent of that in game.
You forgot two options - fighting back and evading the enemy. Both of these are effective in many cases. You can tie up three or four guys for hours by sitting docked up in a station and cruising YouTube, while maybe smacking in local once in a while to keep them interested. And most corps who actually have money(i.e., are worth extorting) are missioners, which implies large amounts of combat SP. If you can't fight at least a decent guerilla war, you're not trying. ------------------ Fix the forums! |
soldieroffortune 258
Trinity Council
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 03:09:00 -
[23]
nice, good idea, i agree
but as already objected, the 30 day thing can be a BIT much
Originally by: soldieroffortune 258
"Eve is about making yourself richer while making the other guy poorer"
|
Mister Xerox
|
Posted - 2008.09.11 12:14:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Mister Xerox on 11/09/2008 12:14:43 Agreed, then, the 30 day timer may be a little steep.
I also like the idea that the declaring corp has to pony up a chunk that rides in escrow as reparations should they terminate the war. Unfortunately this does not allow an amicable termination of the war.
I have been a part of wars where both sides were so impressed with each other, or through what ever other reasons, that the declaring party withdrew the war and let them alone with no ransom paid. Under the reparation contract the declaring party would never be moved to recind a war.
At the end of the war period, if no surrender terms have been agreed upon, the contract would then... what? Expire, no reparations, with the only costs incurred being the declaration costs? And under the Yulai Terms how would mutual wars be declared... that one I had not thought of.
The declared party may, perhaps, be able to put up a counter-contract within the opening 24 hours, with no outlay of ISK, demanding their own war-termination requirements. If the counter-contract is fulfilled the war ends in 30 minutes (not instantly, to prevent CONCORD hostility traps).
These are just perhapses, maybe a CSM will poke their head in here to do something other than p*ss on another CSM's tree and actually respond/accomplish something.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.09.11 16:37:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Mister Xerox Agreed, then, the 30 day timer may be a little steep.
I also like the idea that the declaring corp has to pony up a chunk that rides in escrow as reparations should they terminate the war. Unfortunately this does not allow an amicable termination of the war.
I have been a part of wars where both sides were so impressed with each other, or through what ever other reasons, that the declaring party withdrew the war and let them alone with no ransom paid. Under the reparation contract the declaring party would never be moved to recind a war.
At the end of the war period, if no surrender terms have been agreed upon, the contract would then... what? Expire, no reparations, with the only costs incurred being the declaration costs? And under the Yulai Terms how would mutual wars be declared... that one I had not thought of.
The declared party may, perhaps, be able to put up a counter-contract within the opening 24 hours, with no outlay of ISK, demanding their own war-termination requirements. If the counter-contract is fulfilled the war ends in 30 minutes (not instantly, to prevent CONCORD hostility traps).
These are just perhapses, maybe a CSM will poke their head in here to do something other than p*ss on another CSM's tree and actually respond/accomplish something.
Sure you can have an amicable finish. You just need mutual approval to do it - make the contract end with a null payment via contract. It's only if you want to end without mutual consent that you need to pay the escrow. I think this is a bad idea for other reasons, but the difficulties of an amicable truce are not among them. ------------------ Fix the forums! |
Artemis Rose
Varion Galactic Accord Corporate Enterprise Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.09.12 09:01:00 -
[26]
How stupid is it to break cooperative teamplay elements in a MMO?
I think your proposed changes are ill-thought out and they heavily focus on the aggressor having completely unfair advantage. You do need a chance or a way to opt out of violence, because you shouldn't be able to force people to play the game your way. Why would you even form a corporation ever if all it takes is a fee to be shot on sight for 30 days?
This would completely destroy any sort of corporation based in high sec (unless they were gankers themselves) to appease the empire PvPers. No freaking way.
*** Currently Playing: Trolls from Outer Space Current Equipment: VISAcard chain mail, +2 Amulet of Epic Whine, Self Banstick +2 WTB: +666 E-peen killboard stats |
Ankhesentapemkah
|
Posted - 2008.09.12 09:39:00 -
[27]
Not supported, your 'surrender' option will only encourage mafia-style extortion on a galactic scale and would make it almost impossible to have a small corporation. ---
Thanks for all that supported me. Let me know if there's anything I can do for you.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.09.12 13:30:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Not supported, your 'surrender' option will only encourage mafia-style extortion on a galactic scale and would make it almost impossible to have a small corporation.
Have you ever been involved in small-corp wardecs? Extortion exists as-is. The thing is, virtually nobody pays - gamers as a group have a wholly irrational reaction to threats, and are generally willing to pay five times as much to a merc as they are to an extortionist. Or they'll hole up and deny a fight until you get bored. But they don't pay, no matter how easy the game mechanic for surrender is. ------------------ Fix the forums! |
Ankhesentapemkah
|
Posted - 2008.09.12 15:39:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Not supported, your 'surrender' option will only encourage mafia-style extortion on a galactic scale and would make it almost impossible to have a small corporation.
Have you ever been involved in small-corp wardecs? Extortion exists as-is. The thing is, virtually nobody pays - gamers as a group have a wholly irrational reaction to threats, and are generally willing to pay five times as much to a merc as they are to an extortionist. Or they'll hole up and deny a fight until you get bored. But they don't pay, no matter how easy the game mechanic for surrender is.
Not me personally as I don't want to be in a corp, but I've had plenty of people that come to me that whine about wardecs. But now that CCP thinks that wardecs equates to pay-to-grief, I think we can better wait to see what their plans to overhaul the current mechanics are.
The reason noone pays up now is of course because if they do, they got no guarantees, plus, the next corp can just come along to dec them again. ---
Thanks for all that supported me. Let me know if there's anything I can do for you.
|
Drake Draconis
|
Posted - 2008.09.12 17:27:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Not supported, your 'surrender' option will only encourage mafia-style extortion on a galactic scale and would make it almost impossible to have a small corporation.
Have you ever been involved in small-corp wardecs? Extortion exists as-is. The thing is, virtually nobody pays - gamers as a group have a wholly irrational reaction to threats, and are generally willing to pay five times as much to a merc as they are to an extortionist. Or they'll hole up and deny a fight until you get bored. But they don't pay, no matter how easy the game mechanic for surrender is.
Not me personally as I don't want to be in a corp, but I've had plenty of people that come to me that whine about wardecs. But now that CCP thinks that wardecs equates to pay-to-grief, I think we can better wait to see what their plans to overhaul the current mechanics are.
The reason noone pays up now is of course because if they do, they got no guarantees, plus, the next corp can just come along to dec them again.
Remind me to vote for you next election.
/me thumbs up @ CSM
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |