Mavrix Able
Cadre Assault Force
Initiative Mercenaries
0
   |
Posted - 2012.03.29 17:29:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hey, I must admit I havent read all the replies, but a good chunk of them and here is my take:
Problems:
- Big fish can dec and sustain wars against smaller fish easily due to the general wealth of a big fish and the cheap dec cost of the small fish.
- Small guys can't harass the big guys due to massive costs (this is what I used to do back in the days, being in a small corp, wrecking the 0.0 alliances hi-sec logistics.)
- Boring the enemy into undeccing is often the only solution for small fish.
Alright, crazy idea time:
- All war-decs must come with a "Terms of Surrender". If you want to start a war you list the ISK you demand for it to stop. If the demand is met the war stops with a 1 hour grace period.
"But what stops a corp from demanding a gazillion ISK that the defender can never pay?"
- When declaring and renewing a war dec, the agressor must pay an amount of ISK proportional to the amount of ISK demanded in the "terms of surrender."
Thats the basics of it, there are of course options to be toyed with:
- There could be a period after surrender where the defender cant be decced by the same corp again, although that brings it own lot of corp hopping problems.
- The war cost and upkeep could involve an escrow system, where the dec price and cost are kept standard, but the "Terms of Surrender" demand fee and ukeep is taken into escrow during the war and returned after.
The concept here is that by effectively freezing the agressors ISK during a war, rather than simply taking them, you can make all sorts of expontial systems to make the dec cost of long wars (read harassment wars you cant get out of) outlandishly high as long as the war is on without it being unfair as the ISK are returned when the war ends.
- When trying to neutral remote rep a war-agressed player you get a message saying "This player is currently agressed in acts of war, if you wish to assist you must pay [x amount of ISK proportional to the dec/upkeep cost.] for a temporary participation license."
This system has a series of effects I consider good (digging the lists here):
- Red vs Blue; Red can dec Blue with a demand of 1 ISK, that will set them back a tiny amount of ISK each week and its business as usual.
- An agressor can opt for a realistic amount for a realistic amount of ISK on the "terms of surrender". This might net them a relatively cheap war dec that can go on for a while or they might actually get the money. (Win or win)
- An agressor can opt for a high amount of ISK on the "Terms of Surrender" which will make it very likely that they control the duration of the war but also very expensive (Or insanely lucrative if the defender actually pays.)
- This means the system prices the wardec according to how hard you want to lock the defender down.
- A rich corp being harassed by a poor could simply pay the cost of getting out.
- A poor corp being harassed by a rich (which sets a high surrender demand) will damage the rich corp financially as the dec runs.
The idea is that if you want to lock that small corp down hard so they cant get out of the wardec and are free for you to harass, you have to pay to the price. And if you are being cheap the defender can simply pay and be immune for atleast a while.
Its not waterproof, but hopefuly it pushes the ball a bit around.
Regards - Mav |