|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
576
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 14:14:00 -
[1] - Quote
Yoink.
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
576
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 14:40:00 -
[2] - Quote
It really does look good gents!
There's two things I have to say at the moment - and I know you're going to tell me this might be down the road.
1. My basic point is that if you can make the objectives/goals of some of the wars to be tangible, then people have a reason to undock and fight or lose something if they don't.
i.e. "I am declaring war to close your office in the Dodixie System".
Now, this is a very rough concept to implement - but to me that is actually tangible. Should every war require that? No. But perhaps some can and will have a kind of objective system built into it. There's the challenge of how the objective is completed etc.
I'm also thinking about things such as Miners wanting to shoot other miners (As a merc, I get a surprising number of those based on anonymity). So, we go in and kick the miners out of their home system and harass them, and then they can end the war by just leaving. To most people this is an easy value judgement that they will take to end the war and leave the system. So, although that can be done through the "meta-game" so to speak without game mechanics, some ways to lay this out in a war dec might be worth looking into.
Also, some people have stated that publically showing who has surrendered will make corps that surrender blatant targets of opportunity. I think that the results of that information should be private. It will get around the merc circles anyways.
Another question : Let's say the Defender totally turns the tide on an Aggressor - can they offer to surrender to the defender to get out of the war early? This might allow an out for a merc group to get out of a war early, but they then have to pay the people that they were just trying to shoot at. Think about it.
2. On this topic :
Quote:Q: Corp at war joining an alliance A: Only aggressor corp is banned from joining an alliance (this is so alliances can't use a corp to dec an alliance and then join to get the whole alliance into the war, there are a few other edge cases). A decced corp can join an alliance and will transfer it's wars to (and from when leaving ) the alliance.
This is back to the old dec shield System. Instead, you just stay in the alliance for a week and then the price goes up ridiculously high and then you drop out again. I think this needs a bit closer examination on how not to **** the mercs who want the war.
Now, I don't think that someones war dec should stop you from joining an alliance. And in my opinion alliances in high sec are just going to get mega huge to make war expenses ridonculously high. This might stop the average 1 man corp, but we might even see mega huge privateer alliances rise again that can afford the costs of these.
(Get a 700 man privateer group, each person gives 1m isk a week and you can war dec a huge alliance easily.)
But, how do you plan on stopping alliance hopping then? I think the most notable deterrent to this would be that if a corp joins an alliance the war is extended 7 days from the moment the corp joins an alliance. Meaning that the mercs keep getting a free extension on their war dec if corps try and move around and alliances have to really consider if they want to take a merc war on just for this corp and wait it out a week.
My biggest prediction from inferno is the rise of mega alliances.
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
576
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 14:49:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:this is just a mockup made by a UI designer. it's not a final version of how everything will look (we're still iterating on it and we've actually changed it a bit already since this is a version we used at Fanfest) and I'll try my best to make the data correct when I implement it
UI looks great so far.
But the mini-map should really be a 3d version!
That'd be sexy.
I am curious about the actual War Tab in the Corporations section, how is that going to change?
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
576
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 14:50:00 -
[4] - Quote
Catching up on posts for this response.
No XYZ yet
Hehe. Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
576
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 15:02:00 -
[5] - Quote
There have been discussions about having some kind of upper cap on the cost of war decs.
I think a diminishing return needs to be looked into rather than a cap. Basically, it starts at a relatively high point, and then starts to teeter off. So to start a war might be 500k for up to 5 people, then it starts to drop incrementally down to 1000+ people. By the time you get to 1000 people, the cost might be as low as 250k per person.
The price should definitely go up by member count, but enough that it doesn't become absurd at some point.
A cap will create an artificial limit to the size of alliances. At some point they'll just say "Hey, let's make 2 alliances so those people war deccing us have to pay extra extra more money to get us all! muahahahhaha 3vil Carebears in Space.".
Anyways. I know we like to keep things simple around EVE now adays with the charts and the graphs and stuff. But it needs to gradiate down slowly as numbers go up rather than cap out or stay at a high rate all the way.
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
576
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 15:05:00 -
[6] - Quote
Karim alRashid wrote:"Once youGÇÖre an ally, youGÇÖre committed to the war until it ends."
I don't think this is a good design. In fact you're not an allies, sharing a common goal, you are a contractor, a hired mercenary.
Such contracts should have a term. At the end of the term, both parties choose to continue or not the contract.
I agree with this. Mercs/Allies should be allowed to continue or discontinue support on a weekly basis when the war dec fee is paid.
Also, I agree with the person above saying this system is too easy for large privateer groups to war dec small groups. I think high sec alliances will start to form up anyways to protect themselves, but there needs to be something protecting the little guy from the big guy to some degree. Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
576
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 15:57:00 -
[7] - Quote
Marshiro wrote:I like Dierdra Vaal's line of incentive thinking, but I would make the incentives this way:
1. There are multiple levels of wardec, corresponding to intended scale of conflict and isk cap for ending the war in #2 2. If the Defender inflicts enough damage to the attacker (regardless of efficiency), the defenders then are given the right to end the war if wanted. They could end the war immediately after this is done, without waiting until the end of the week or whatever counts as wardec cycles.
This way, defenders have some incentives in undocking and quickly ending the war, while attackers have to attack carefully to keep the wardec alive.
These ideas are great but it doesn't stop the war deccer from just reinitiating the war right away again.
Ending it immediately is a no though. At the end of the week, if the defenders have a better efficiency by a noticeable margin (not 1% efficiency), then they can get a cesssation of fire for 1 week or something if they so choose.
I don't like that allies can join in as a freebie. There should be some cost for pulling an ally into the war on the game mechanics side. In my time as a merc, it's actually pretty common for deccers to hire counter-mercs out of sheer ego trip. So, the implied cost of mercs shouldn't be assumed since anyone can just join as an ally. Unless you're limiting this by forcing Mercs to pay a registration fee to be on the merc list in the first place or something.
The 2 effects of the system are going to be a mega privateer alliance deccing all the little corps, and then mega alliances protecting themselves from privateer alliances. So, maybe this will be inferno. ;p Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
579
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 17:12:00 -
[8] - Quote
I was going to say something about : What stops 1 privateer alliance from war deccing 1000 small entities?
But... I realized that then you can bring 1000 allies into the fight that can fight and kill them all. The question is if that's what will happen?
I'm curious to see this now.
Don't change a thing.
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
579
|
Posted - 2012.03.29 17:33:00 -
[9] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:Besbin wrote:Cosmetic suggestion:
Change the term "Killmail" to "Kill Report" to reflect the new setup.
It will no longer be just a mail and it will then be analogous to the "War Report". I like this idea <3 I wish I came up with it myself
This is true to some degree.
I still have new guys go looking int heir mail "Where's my killmail"??
And i have to say... Go into your Character Sheet.
Go to your Kill Logs
Go look up Kills.
lol. It's a misnomer based on the good old days (sigh). But it would be nice to not have to turn to these people and be like. "Urm, it's not really a kill /mail/ anymore"
Mimidae Risk Solutions Recruiting |
|
|
|