Dec-shields under the proposed changes are going away. Assuming this article is a response to that, the omission is entirely relevant.

Calling him factually wrong would be like stating it never happens. If no one had alts then perhaps this could be considered valid, but the idea that no one has ever thought of having their means to continue business as usual in a different corp from the one they are using to declare war for whatever reason is laughable.

This again goes back to target selection. Knowing your opponents numbers and activity provides an invaluable potential resource for an attacker who also has the initiative. It allows you to ensure you have all reasonable advantages. Why would someone who is trying to accomplish anything other than getting blown up want to undock to that?

this is dumb because there will be
ITS A TARP
corps that look juicy, get decced, declare mutual then just play on alts for the rest of their lives.

This is how the real world works. It's generally considered unwise to inform the person you're going to attack ahead of time, because they'll prepare. See: 'surprise attack', or the politically correct term 'pre-emptive strike'. If you want to have any chance for peace in hostile political climates you have to prepare for war.

Some other good points, though.

I'd say you are missing some fundamental parts of everyone vs everyone yourself. Simple things like knowing your targets, depriving them of what they want, and getting what you want all at the same time. An example involving wardecs:

I get a wardec. I look up my opponent. I see characters significantly older than mine who are very PvP active. My chances of doing serious damage with my character/players skills and numbers available are slim.

I have alts, those alts are spread out amongst different corps or some in NPC. Even without corp hopping I have an easy means to bypass your interference to a reasonable degree.

If I fight, I lose ships and productivity, if I don't you paid for nothing and I continue close to normal operations and I've effectively won.

Sounds like the price you risk paying for having poor judgement as a CEO. Either deal with these alts that never log in, or dissolve your corp and start over having learned a valuable lesson about thinking before you act.

Sounds like the price you risk paying for having poor judgement as a CEO. Either deal with these alts that never log in, or dissolve your corp and start over having learned a valuable lesson about thinking before you act.

this is dumb because there will be
ITS A TARP
corps that look juicy, get decced, declare mutual then just play on alts for the rest of their lives.

And what about "one little problem" that attackers are in 99% alts in alt corp that don't need to play at all on that alts to play EVE and defenders don't have that privilege so they actually cant play at all???

This is doubly the case, given that war history will be available for every corp under the new system

And what about "one little problem" that attackers are in 99% alts in alt corp that don't need to play at all on that alts to play EVE and defenders don't have that privilege so they actually cant play at all???

The ideal war system would be one that forces the attackers to commit and has clear victory conditions. It should make small corps engaging large entities riskier and encourage people to fight a war rather than dock up for a week. To start a war, the attacker should have to place the war fee into a war command structure that would be in space, orbiting a planet, or at a starbase. If the defending corp destroys this structure, it would collect the war fee as a prize, and the war would end. This way a larger corp that costs a lot more to wardec would have more incentive to fight, and small alt corps wouldn't be able to reasonably pursue a war against large alliances.

Dec-shields under the proposed changes are going away. Assuming this article is a response to that, the omission is entirely relevant.

---

Nothing is stopping a player from corp hopping into an alt corp. There is more than one form of dec-shield out there.

Calling him factually wrong would be like stating it never happens. If no one had alts then perhaps this could be considered valid, but the idea that no one has ever thought of having their means to continue business as usual in a different corp from the one they are using to declare war for whatever reason is laughable.

---

No it is not like saying it never happens. I know there shell corps out there, you know that there are shell corps out there. But he is stating that we are all alt corps and we only pick on weak players and industrials. That is factually wrong. We are the big bad boogy to many carebear corps and they commonly tell campfire stories about us to each other. How would a corp know what the other corp does once their own war has ended.

This again goes back to target selection. Knowing your opponents numbers and activity provides an invaluable potential resource for an attacker who also has the initiative. It allows you to ensure you have all reasonable advantages. Why would someone who is trying to accomplish anything other than getting blown up want to undock to that?

---

I've said it twice and I'll say it again, a corp is only as weak as they allow themselves to be. You don't want to do your homework on the people who are attacking you, fine. You don't want to seek help in removing the problem, fine. You don't want to learn how to fight, fine. You have the tools, if you choose not to use them then don't look to blame anyone but yourself.

The article does make a good central point. War decs lack meaning. Having something to fight over would be a good thing. War just for the sake of war is lame.

I get a wardec. I look up my opponent. I see characters significantly older than mine who are very PvP active. My chances of doing serious damage with my character/players skills and numbers available are slim.

a handful of alts can disrupt a corporation or even a major alliance like EVE University.

The new fee calculation makes it more expensive to target larger organisations like EVE Uni

To start a war, the attacker should have to place the war fee into a war command structure that would be in space, orbiting a planet, or at a starbase.

Dec-shields under the proposed changes are going away. Assuming this article is a response to that, the omission is entirely relevant.

Just one problem: dec shields are not going away. Under the proposed system, it becomes the default mechanic. Most larger alliances will automatically be decshielded through their sheer numbers GÇö the thing that should already give them a whole lot of protection. They don't need the mechanics to inherently provide a dec shield on top of that numerical protection.

Most <> All. I'm not even arguing that "most" is an entirely accurate word in this case. But dismissing the argument and saying it's factually wrong is like stating it isn't reasonably prevalent or worth considering.

The main issue is that it's hilariously biased in favour of the aggressor, who can prepare for the war and will always pick weak or industrial targets.

As most empire wardecs are initiated by small shell corps full of PvP alts, the attacking players won't mind logging out for a few days if the war backfires.

Knowing you are up against a superior force doesn't suddenly put you on equal terms. Shelling out isk for defense doesn't guarantee success, and it certainly doesn't mean you can go around acting as normal with no issues. Fighting back doesn't guarantee a favorable outcome. There is no such thing as winning simply by disallowing weakness.

And very specially, in the real world, most people who lose a war once can't wage war never again. War it's game over if you lose, and this is the bloody reason of all the above.

Just one problem: dec shields are not going away. Under the proposed system, it becomes the default mechanic. Most larger alliances will automatically be decshielded through their sheer numbers GÇö the thing that should already give them a whole lot of protection. They don't need the mechanics to inherently provide a dec shield on top of that numerical protection.

Here is an example of how the Current Wardeck system was broken & I see no fixes in the next one..
Dailty Corp hopping:
Psychotic Monk
Security Status -1.9
The Skunkworks [SKNK.]
Member for 0 days

BIO Employment History Latest Forum Posts


Sebiestor Tribe [S] from 2012.

Here is an example of how the Current Wardeck system was broken & I see no fixes in the next one..
Dailty Corp hopping:
Psychotic Monk
Security Status -1.9
The Skunkworks [SKNK.]
Member for 0 days

BIO Employment History Latest Forum Posts

I think this was designed as a "throttle" mechanic. CCP is probably going to adjust the cost/member based on how much the mechanic is used. If nobody is at war I bet it gets pretty cheap. That would be my guess anyway. Personally, as one who intends to start wars for profit, what it's worth to dec a corp in terms of isk/member depends entirely on who they are and what they do. My targets will be worth it (unless they totally kick my *** which is a real probability). If it's some nub training corp it wouldn't be worth it to attack from a profit standpoint... so maybe that is all as is intended.

Yea... this is a big problem, too.

Accepting new members if you are an aggressor should not be allowed at all.

On the other side, if you ditch from a corp in a war (or Alliance) you should have some sort of "stain" on your record.

Character age is another misconception among players. He can never have more than 5 points in any one skill just like you. Having said that, if a ship set up requires 12 million points to fly then it requires 12 million points. Having points in lasers will not help your blaster boat. Having points in negotiation will not help your armor one bit. A character having more points does not make him automatically better.

Yea, alts care about "stains"