|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Minnaroth
Powered by Yoda
0
   |
Posted - 2012.07.26 07:36:00 -
[1] - Quote
I am in a small war dec corp that i just set up and I plan to war dec small corps with High Sec POS in order to clear them and make isk from the POS modules and contents there-of.
My view is that the 50mill war dec fee is far too high because it is unreasonable to expect a small high sec indy corp to pay that kind of isk in surrender, let alone any profit for the declaring corp.
An alternative solution that does not reduce fee would be to have a "refund war dec fee" tick box in the surrender offer - this doesn't cost the defender anything but allows them to maker a more reasonable offer.
Potentially this tick box could only be available in the first 24 hours of the war dec in order to encourage fast surrender when the odds are against you and prevent people war deccing themselves with alt corps. Even allowing a partial refund (2 mill per hour before war starts maybe)
What do you think?
I also think something needs to be done about people taking down POSes or removing contents in that 24 hour window before the war starts is a problem, but I can't think of a good solution right now. Maybe disallow anchoring / un-anchoring during that time unless the defender clicks a "start war now" button? Doesn't prevent people removing all their stuff though. Maybe POSes could be instantly vulnerable and the 24 hours only applies to ships?
-Minna- |
Minnaroth
Powered by Yoda
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 07:43:00 -
[2] - Quote
Tao Shaile wrote:
* The cost of war should be 10 times higher per week.
I like this idea - but reduce the cost of week 1 significantly and 10 times is maybe a little steep. Double each week would be reasonable.
|
Minnaroth
Powered by Yoda
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 08:58:00 -
[3] - Quote
Here's another idea.
Why not link the cost of surrender to the cost of maintaining a war and allow the attacker to choose the rate from a range of options. In the event of surrender, the defender pays the same price for a week of peace that the attacker paid for a week of war. The attacker is refunded their fee for that week and receives the payment from the defender. In the event that surrenders happens in week 1, the attacker then doubles their money, if week 2 they break even and from week 3 onward it starts to be a loss.
The advantages of this are that it takes into account size of corp in terms of available isk rather than number of players.
If for example the attacker's aim is to get a ransom, they must set the rate high enough to get the most they can but not too high or the defender will hire help, hide or fight rather than surrender and the isk will be lost. The greater the reward aimed for, the greater the risk because a higher war dec fee will be charged.
If the attacker's aim is war, they must set the rate high enough to discourage surrender, but must in turn pay the price in higher war dec fees for those higher surrender terms.
War rates could range from as low as a few million to as high as a billion or more for really large organisations.
This also has the advantage of making surrender terms transparent from the off.
What do you think?
-Minna- |
|
|
| |
|