Evil Incarn8
Fates Unwritten Consortium
Guardians of Serenity
9
   |
Posted - 2012.03.29 19:43:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP you have totally missed the point.
The problem with wars is not the shedding/shielding, that is the workaround to the problem.
The problem is that the wardec system as it is now is a "pay to grief button"
It is true that the system needs changes, but the solutions you have presented show that devs do not understand the PvE player at all.
Yes wars should be possible, yes any and every player corp should be targetable, but you have to allow a way for the defender (95% of the time a non pvp corp of younger players than the aggressor) to win.
As it is now when an indy corp is decced you have very few options;
1) Fight back, not really viable, the aggressor chose you because they think they can win, hence they are older, better equipped, more knowledgable, have intel on you, have an army of remote rep and scouting alts and possibly spies in your corp. By fighting back you give the aggressor exactly what they want, entertainment, fights and kills. Nobody wins a war by giving the enemy what they want.
2) Stay docked up, why exactly do you pay a subscription to sit staring at a docked spaceship? but this is often the most effective solution to a war, deny the enemy what he wants, do not engage, do not entertain them, bore them into going away.
3) Pay a ransom, lol, seriously? if you pay a ransom you deserve the redec you get each and every one of them.
The new system as proposed has a few decent features, the ally system looks good I like that, as is making war a committment, however you have only made it a committment for the defender, the aggressor is still free to do as they want.
Increasing the cost of war is good, the way it has been done will encourage roster stuffing and discourages decs against the major power blocs which is bad.
I like a few of the player suggestions in this thread, the pot of cash for meeting a predetermined victory condition, one that is viable for the defender (non pvp corp remember) to achieve.
For ex, war is won if the aggressor can destroy 1 bil isk worth of shipping, or if the defender can make 10 kills of any kind against the aggressor. (dont let the aggressor chose the victory conditions for the love of God)
If the war turns in the favour of the defender+ allies then control of the war should automatically swap to them, control should be determined by being closer to the victory conditions than your opponent.
Either way wars need fixing, your current solution although showing potential is woefully aggressor biased and in need of changes.
Thanks
Evil Incarn8.
|