Q: Price of war?
A: The current formula is 20 mill (for corp, 50 for alliance) base price plus 500.000 per member in target corp. We're looking into some sorts of diminishing returns/cap, but nothing has been decided yet. We will not modify cost based on aggressor size as it is too easily gamed.

Q: Price of war
A: The current formula is 20 mill (for corp, 50 for alliance) base price plus 500.000 per member in target corp. We're looking into some sorts of diminishing returns/cap, but nothing has been decided yet. We will not modify cost based on aggressor size as it is too easily gamed

To declare war on the largest and most bloated alliances would cost:

1. Goonswarm Federation - 4.23 Bil
2. Test Alliance Please Ignore - 3.24 Bil
3. Against All Authorities - 1.68 Bil
4. Intrepid Crossing - 1.49 Bil
5. Solar Citizens - 1.36 Bil
6. AAA Citizens - 1.27 Bil
7. Legion of xXDEATHXx - 1.21 Bil
8. Razor Alliance - 1.2 Bil
9. Fatal Ascension - 1.08 Bil
10. En Guarde - 1.04 Bil
.
.
.
23. Pandemic Legion - 787 Mil
.
.
.
100. Echoes of Nowhere - 272.5 Mil

per week!

This change to cost formula serves only to protect the alliances that need protection least.

There is zero reason for CCP to interfere and seek to protect large bulky alliances, it doesn't make any sense that wars should be changed in this way.

It should be the other way around.
If you attack people who cant defend itself it would need to cost you a lot of ISK.
And if you attack people who can destroy you 1000 times it need to be free for you to do it.

Why the hell wuss attacks on weaker then you is rewarded?
Why the hell is murder only in EVE rewarded?
Why is attacking people without weapons encouraged?
Why is griefing encouraged and true wars killed in the roots?
When you have the balls to war dec someone who can fight back you are forbidden to do that?

Real wars are forbidden in EVE and griefing is what EVE DEVs only want.

Something is rotten in the state of EVE.

As someone suggested, cost should be inversely proportional to both relative size AND killboard. Big corps or big killers declaring small corps or small killers should be penalyzed with a higher cost. Small corps or small killers wardeccing the big guys should be greeted for their galls and have a low wardec cost.

And of course anyone wardecced against his will should be able to drop the war for free after a week.

Ill try to go step by step:

First:
Make killboard of corps as a combined killboard of their members so that players kill record goes with him when he change the corp.

Second:
Make difference between killboards of attacker and defender as a base for calculating war fee.
Something like this:
- Add up isk worth of all destroyed things by all members of the corp
- Add up isk worth of all losses of all members of the corp
- Subtract this two values
- Divide value that you got after last step with number of corp members.

Third:
- Do above thing (from second step) for attacker and defender corp
- Subtract values of attacker and defender corp
- That value you have now use for calculating the price for war dec (multiply it with some number of isk and you get war dec fee)


This way you have system that will make cheap for PVPers to war dec PVPers regardless of number of players in corps.
And will make attacking indy/noob corp by the PVP corp expensive

If you have balls to attack someone who can fight back you will pay little, and if you are a wuss and attack someone who cant defend itself you will pay much.

I hope you understand better now.

p.s.
This was only an example so there can be changes.



Q: And how are you going to stop people from grabbing a character and putting a few thousand losses on it to have its presence in the corporation act as a decshield?

A: I think that if you calculating with ISK destroyed and calculate middle worth of it for entire corp you wont have that problem because it would be expensive way to do it. (you must destroy many many many of your own isk)




edit:
If you are worried that there may be some exploits (even if they are much much harder then with original CCPs proposal) then you can just erase (*) step (- Divide value that you got after last step with number of corp members.) and then there is no way to exploit it.
Its based on difference of ISK damage between attacker and defender but its more steep gradation.

To declare war on the largest and most bloated alliances would cost:

1. Goonswarm Federation - 4.23 Bil
2. Test Alliance Please Ignore - 3.24 Bil
3. Against All Authorities - 1.68 Bil
4. Intrepid Crossing - 1.49 Bil
5. Solar Citizens - 1.36 Bil
6. AAA Citizens - 1.27 Bil
7. Legion of xXDEATHXx - 1.21 Bil
8. Razor Alliance - 1.2 Bil
9. Fatal Ascension - 1.08 Bil
10. En Guarde - 1.04 Bil
.
.
.
23. Pandemic Legion - 787 Mil
.
.
.
100. Echoes of Nowhere - 272.5 Mil

per week!

This change to cost formula serves only to protect the alliances that need protection least.

There is zero reason for CCP to interfere and seek to protect large bulky alliances, it doesn't make any sense that wars should be changed in this way.

This "AND killboard"
You think something like this: ???

(stuff)

To declare war on the largest and most bloated alliances would cost:

1. Goonswarm Federation - 4.23 Bil
2. Test Alliance Please Ignore - 3.24 Bil
3. Against All Authorities - 1.68 Bil
4. Intrepid Crossing - 1.49 Bil
5. Solar Citizens - 1.36 Bil
6. AAA Citizens - 1.27 Bil
7. Legion of xXDEATHXx - 1.21 Bil
8. Razor Alliance - 1.2 Bil
9. Fatal Ascension - 1.08 Bil
10. En Guarde - 1.04 Bil
.
.
.
23. Pandemic Legion - 787 Mil
.
.
.
100. Echoes of Nowhere - 272.5 Mil

per week!

This change to cost formula serves only to protect the alliances that need protection least.

There is zero reason for CCP to interfere and seek to protect large bulky alliances, it doesn't make any sense that wars should be changed in this way.

he main issue I see with this is that you're now effectively locking corps and alliances into a war, even if they do not enjoy playing like this, without giving them an effective way to get out of it. "Oh but you can fight back, even get your friends to help out!" you might say, but this is not always effective. Sure you can fight back, but there is no guarantee that that will end the war (even with help from your friends). Especially when plenty of high sec wardeccing corps are made of up alts, who can easily 'escape' to their mains to play elsewhere, or consist of players who specifically seek out pvp. As defender, you're essentially resigned to waiting (hoping) for the aggressor to get bored of the war.

Now I do admit the ease of getting out of wars currently is a big issue, one only justified by the broken system we currently have. But forcing players into a war they didn't chose should come with an ability for the defender to take control of the wardec, and giving them the direct ability to end the war and enforce a temporary peace

To declare war on the largest and most bloated alliances would cost:

1. Goonswarm Federation - 4.23 Bil
2. Test Alliance Please Ignore - 3.24 Bil
3. Against All Authorities - 1.68 Bil
4. Intrepid Crossing - 1.49 Bil
5. Solar Citizens - 1.36 Bil
6. AAA Citizens - 1.27 Bil
7. Legion of xXDEATHXx - 1.21 Bil
8. Razor Alliance - 1.2 Bil
9. Fatal Ascension - 1.08 Bil
10. En Guarde - 1.04 Bil
.
.
.
23. Pandemic Legion - 787 Mil
.
.
.
100. Echoes of Nowhere - 272.5 Mil

per week!

This change to cost formula serves only to protect the alliances that need protection least.

There is zero reason for CCP to interfere and seek to protect large bulky alliances, it doesn't make any sense that wars should be changed in this way.

The idea of using the attacker's killboard to determine war costs:

Attacker kicks all members with a good KB.
Attacker declares war.
Attacker accepts applications from all kicked members.

As CCP has said: basing costs on the status of the attacker, be it member count or KB, allows for gaming the cost.

The idea of using the attacker's killboard to determine war costs:

Attacker kicks all members with a good KB.
Attacker declares war.
Attacker accepts applications from all kicked members.

As CCP has said: basing costs on the status of the attacker, be it member count or KB, allows for gaming the cost.

The idea of using the attacker's killboard to determine war costs:

Attacker kicks all members with a good KB.
Attacker declares war.
Attacker accepts applications from all kicked members.

As CCP has said: basing costs on the status of the attacker, be it member count or KB, allows for gaming the cost.

This "AND killboard"
You think something like this: ???



And when i look at this edit,
Without dividing with number of corp members you have incalculated number of corp members in this method too.
So I think it would be what you suggested.

And yea... that was my idea when o was writing that.
And that way there is no possible exploits.

But the message I'm trying to put across is that War is a horribly complex thing, and the current mechanics are too simple to make it work properly.

"War is merely the continuation of policy by other means." Carl Von Causewitz.

What that policy happens to be isn't a defining point of war, only that the use or threat of force is used to achieve it.

All the proposals that suggest tournaments, arenas, dueling systems, or try to narrowly define what they believe is justified policy to be pursued by war are not valid suggestions for this thread, they are not "War Declaration" proposals.

Just to clarify it to you.. your point is, you just want to engage whoever you want anywhere you want on your terms.

Ok then lets go ahead and allow to pod people while docked in stations and logged off.

Don't give me this generic war quotation. Doesn't reinforce your point in any way nor clarify it. Just to clarify it to you.. your point is, you just want to engage whoever you want anywhere you want on your terms. You paid for it, you got it. Hisec is not longer safe for anyone in a player corp regardless of whether they want it or not. We are going to allow anybody to pay so that they have rights to attack anybody else in hisec. The difference is now that sometimes hisec is safe (you are not in a war), sometimes it's not. You get an 24hr advance warning that you will be allowed to be attacked by a force of an unknown size (since the aggressor can currently grow from a 1-man corp to a 1000-man corp overnight). Alright that's kind of strange but I guess that's not entirely weird. BUT you are also allowed to quit your player corp and avoid the war completely. So... my point is the mechanic is largely nonsensical. Either force people 100% in all situations to be attacked, even in NPC corps ( equals massive carebear rage, 100k unsubs in two months, EVE folds), or don't inconvenience people in player corps JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE IN A PLAYER CORP.