You did not give any love to indy players, you just make their lives harder.

I appreciate the effort involved in changing a long standing feature of the game but I do not understand why the war dec mechanic even exists.

If I enjoy mining and industry, why should I be forced to train up combat skills to defend myself, or sit in a station afraid to undock, or even spend my hard earned isk on hiring mercenaries or enlist people into my corp to 'protect' me while I play the game my way?

Are you going to implement a game mechanic that forces people in 0.0 to mine and manufacture and train the relevant skills?

Nobody in this thread has given (in fact I doubt nobody can give) a valid reason as to why the war dec system sxists, except to grief people.

The problem with this is that a 10 man corp can be decced by an 8,000 member alliance for 25m, but if the 10 man corp wanted to dec the alliance it would cost over 4b isk. There is no symmetry in this -- you really need to factor in the aggressor size into the formula.

"If you are engaged in a war that you declared, you cannot join an alliance until that war is finished."

This is a good thing, because it will eliminate one of the possible loopholes. However, I also suggest that if the alliance itself has a declared (outbound) war that it is not allowed to take on new corporations until the war is over.

"Once youGÇÖre an ally, youGÇÖre committed to the war until it ends."

This is problematic. It means that a mercenary corporation could find itself drawn into a very long-term contract with now way to force the ally who hired them to continue paying each week.

Words of wisdom never heard before...

They are not going to do that because it would mean privateers would come back. Those fellow highsec pirates had simply to much fun blowing folk up in Jita. (And they where not really fighting for anythign but the lolz.)

2) Put a strict limit on the number of allies a defender can bring into the war. I'm thinking three (3) is a pretty fair number.

What about people choosing how do they want to play the game, for a change? What about CCP smartasses listening to players each now and then?

Yay, I had some anonymous dudes wardec my one-man corp, presumedly to get a cheap shot on my mission runner ships (as if i was to endanger a ship worth 3 months of my income...). I just resigned as CEO, transfered the corp to this alt and went NPC for a week. Then the war ended as it was non-mutual and I went back to business with only a small 10% dent in my weekly income.

And now some CCP smartass thinks everyone who ever did like me just spoiled the fun to poor lil' griefin' modafakers and it's about time to make things more "fair" to PvP carebears... great.

War decs were implemented for a reason. That reason no longer exists.

The war won't stop authomatically if non-mutual, only will stop if the agressor stops paying for it. Which opens a door for cheaply kicking people out of game for "NOT PLAYING MY WAY".

That's outrageously stupid and unnecesary. If a player chooses to stay out of PvP, he must not be forced to do so, and certainly not in a way that can effectively make playing impossible to him for a ludicrous low price.

There is something that I have that you seem not to posess and that is the ability to see other peoples point of view.

And finally risk-free griefing. Let's say I have a second account with a suitably skilled character in a one-man corp. I can dec another corp, say the small corp of friends up there, a 10 man industrial, for 25 million per week. I just need to stay docked and type a few lines in the local every now and then to force the other corp to stay docked. I effectively make it impossible for them to play without it affecting my main's ability to function. I'm sure the 10 people appreciate paying sub for staying docked. Now eventually they will start doing whatever they usually do when I take no action and I can go get their juicy stuffs with a small investment of 50 million or so.

Awfully sorry to have to ask but could you please bold the insult?

But the question remains, why are you war deccing that corp (player)?

Having a mechanic in game that allows people to destroy the enjoyment of others, on a whim, and that is all war decs are, should be removed.

My understanding is that this mechanisms is targeted at the mercenary profession. In my opinion (actual mercenaries may confirm or deny), the mercenary corps are agnostic about the goals of the corporation that hires them - they are after the money and the PvP - and that's it. Hence, I assume it wouldn't be acceptable for them to be dragged in a long, boring war that would potentially prevent them from taking other, possibly more profitable and/or interesting contracts. The lack of commitment is the natural modus operandi of the mercenaries. Hence, they should have the option to exit a continuing war.

a) a single payment of XXX million ISK at the end of contract
b) XXX ISK at the beginning of contract, YYY at end of contract
c) XXX ISK upon inflicting YYY billion ISK damage

So the side that makes more money wins. As many of these industrials have stated, they don't make that much money. Me, I just sell Plex on the market. Who do you think will last longer?

The big corps and alliances, with vast resources, can wardec my corp for basically free

Yet, while they have manpower and resources far beyond mine, they are effectively perma-shielded against wardec by me

* Multiple agressors can't get on the same war-sheet

hey

The problem is, CCP is discovering the same thing UO did... the pure PvP sandbox is not sustainable. There simply are not the number of players interested necessary to keep such a complex world running. The dev's started EvE with this null sec image from the failure of UO, but EvE succeeded because it blended multiple playstyles in one universe, allowing the PvE population to balance (and fund) the much smaller PvP/null one. If they rip out high sec, the player base will shrink, and all these shiney graphical updates that people drool over (not to mention server costs) become unviable... not to mention the inflation you would get as all that cheap industry goes away.

And CCP is pushing this people out of the game by effectively harrassing them with growing free griefing. If the young ones don't join and you fukk the old grumps until they quit, your fate as a business is null.

You know that the biggest single faucet in the game are rewards/bounties, do you? Just nobody makes a "mission runner/ratter hall of fame" accounting for NPC destroyed, rewards collected and so.

Nullsec and Lowsec account for 23% of all accounts in EvE. So says what passes for QEN these days. So if every nullsec and lowsec character had an alt dedicated to highsec, you'd get 43% of all players.

Also, dude with 22 accounts wasn't a bot. A bot means not at keyboard having a program do it for him. He was very much at keyboard. Might have had the god of all keyboard macros to make it work, but he was there and playing.

I wasn't around for this time, so I guess I'd have to request a bit of perspective. How long had the game been out at that time? How far were the older players from the new ones? What were people flying; is all the bittervet talk about mining in frigs for ages to afford cruisers true? What tech 2 mods and ships existed at that time?

Not to say that wardecs are the thing that keeps eve from growing, but it seems the difference between new players and older ones then and now is a world apart. Drawing parallels would be difficult at best.

Given the time and age of the game it stands to reason that new players fighting back in 2004 would have it much better than those same players trying it today against what we now consider veterans. Which in my mind begs the question: Would those players who were dec'd have had the same attitude and fared as well if their opponents were using T2 and pirate ships on high skilled characters?

... (quite some whining) ...

You're just a coward.

[quote=Manssell]So we can try to make the incentives balanced, but we are never going to ensure wars are fair, it just goes completely against the nature of sandbox.