EVE Search - New War Dec system - massively article - Very good points covered.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

New War Dec system - massively article - Very good points covered.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Micheal Dietrich Standards and Practices 283	Posted - 2012.04.17 02:02:00 - [91] - Quote Cipher Jones wrote: the article wrote: Nobody will fly a mining ship, hauler, freighter, or expensive mission-running ship while a war is in progress, Even though they already do, frequently. Just sayin. Yep, you'd be surprised how often this happens. The last war that we just came out of we racked up a few mining barges and scored ourselves a free mission Harbinger that the pilot simply bailed out of. I don't think the other corp even bothered to put us on the ever so useful watch list which makes a wonderful first warning that trouble is coming.
Richard Hammond II Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 182	Posted - 2012.04.17 02:18:00 - [92] - Quote Bane Necran wrote: After reading more of this thread i've become convinced all the griefers need is better propaganda to convince the public that the killing of the innocent and defenseless is justified. Maybe start making baseless claims that small hisec industry corps are connected to corps that are actual threats? highsec industry corps support al queda Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you.
Herping yourDerp Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 508	Posted - 2012.04.17 02:36:00 - [93] - Quote Bane Necran wrote: Herping yourDerp wrote: engage in armed conflict for resources<- doesn't happen in highse land<- nope not in highse intolerance other races religions or creeds <- probably against TOS if about RL stuff, in game most corps have multiple races and ideologies pretty sure there has never been a war, in the entirety of human history that involved "lets go to war for no benefit" Removal of a POS was an example you gave before. That's a resource you're either just denying someone else to weaken them or you plan to put your own POS there. There is no land in this game obviously, but places to put a POS are in high demand for some hisec systems Intolerance and pettiness has fueled many, many, wars in real life. Lots have even been sparked over smacktalk, much like they are in this game. The idea all wars are justified and fair is propaganda. You routinely see extremely powerful militaries invading weaker and unprepared countries with little or no justification given. And there's always benefits to war for the victor, and the people supplying armaments. It's bizarre to find myself on this side of the 'greifers' here for once , but i'm only doing so because much of real war actually is greifing. Go check out liveleak for awhile if you don't believe me. If you want to make an argument that war in EVE should be more fair than real wars i'd have no problem with that, but lets not have any illusions about the fairness of real war, please. except, they never take the moons when poses are killed.. its very rare if it happens some wars probably are started by smack talk, but most are definitely looking in belts for miners or searching for a large alliance declaring they live in highsec and mine alot or something to that effect. the sole purpose of probably 98% of wardecs is just to get kills or get rage mail, which is not how it should be despite what people think. like someone said before, the ideal thing is a war in which both parties can actually win by doing something, win conditions ect.. CCP seems to be doing the only thing they can think of short of removing wardecs which is make them more expensive.
Bane Necran 308	Posted - 2012.04.17 02:41:00 - [94] - Quote Jorma Amatin wrote: Darn trolls, stay under bridges. Also, I love derailed threads, I think it's pretty on point. But i'll try to be more direct because i seem to have confused you. Wars are by their very nature unfair. The idea they are is an illusion. Military strategy is all about having an unfair advantage over whoever you're attacking, meaning the strong are always attacking the weak. EVE is realistic in this way. If people want all wars in EVE to be fair, then they no longer want wars, they want the arena system from WoW, or something.
Richard Hammond II Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 182	Posted - 2012.04.17 02:49:00 - [95] - Quote Gogela wrote: quoted quote Bane Necran wrote: quoted quote Gogela wrote: quoted quote Bane Necran wrote: quoted quote you all argue like Tippia Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you.
MeestaPenni Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent 209	Posted - 2012.04.17 02:58:00 - [96] - Quote Richard Hammond II wrote: you all argue like Tippia That's harsh mang...... Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? I am not Prencleeve Grothsmore.
Kestrix UV Heavy Industries 12	Posted - 2012.04.17 03:45:00 - [97] - Quote Quote: 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 What happens if all the members of the defending corp decide to bail out of their corp leaving an inactive CEO as the only member? Can the attackers destroy their own war structure and collect thier isk back or do they just sit at their POS/Planet glumly looking at thier defunct war structure? The problem with adding victory conditions to wars is that this assums both sides want to fight.
Tyberius Franklin Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 110	Posted - 2012.04.17 03:57:00 - [98] - Quote Kestrix wrote: Quote: 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 What happens if all the members of the defending corp decide to bail out of their corp leaving an inactive CEO as the only member? Can the attackers destroy their own war structure and collect thier isk back or do they just sit at their POS/Planet glumly looking at thier defunct war structure? The problem with adding victory conditions to wars is that this assums both sides want to fight. Part of the idea is to give defenders a reason to fight. If fighting had a tangible benefit, such as ending the war sooner, or forcing it to end if the attackers aren't committed to fighting. In my opinion a tangible war goal would be a good thing, but what it would have to be i don't know. And as many have pointed out the static structure idea has it's glaring flaws.
Kengutsi Akira Ministry of War Amarr Empire 416	Posted - 2012.04.17 04:02:00 - [99] - Quote Tyberius Franklin wrote: Kestrix wrote: Quote: 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 What happens if all the members of the defending corp decide to bail out of their corp leaving an inactive CEO as the only member? Can the attackers destroy their own war structure and collect thier isk back or do they just sit at their POS/Planet glumly looking at thier defunct war structure? The problem with adding victory conditions to wars is that this assums both sides want to fight. Part of the idea is to give defenders a reason to fight. If fighting had a tangible benefit, such as ending the war sooner, or forcing it to end if the attackers aren't committed to fighting. In my opinion a tangible war goal would be a good thing, but what it would have to be i don't know. And as many have pointed out the static structure idea has it's glaring flaws. Give the defenders a way to win https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1109909#post1109909 My stance on WiS (updated)
Bane Necran 308	Posted - 2012.04.17 04:04:00 - [100] - Quote Richard Hammond II wrote: you all argue like Tippia I'll admit when i'm wrong, and have done so in the past. In all these years Tippia has never been wrong once, or so he'd have us believe.
Kestrix UV Heavy Industries 12	Posted - 2012.04.17 04:15:00 - [101] - Quote Kengutsi Akira wrote: Tyberius Franklin wrote: Kestrix wrote: Quote: 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 What happens if all the members of the defending corp decide to bail out of their corp leaving an inactive CEO as the only member? Can the attackers destroy their own war structure and collect thier isk back or do they just sit at their POS/Planet glumly looking at thier defunct war structure? The problem with adding victory conditions to wars is that this assums both sides want to fight. Part of the idea is to give defenders a reason to fight. If fighting had a tangible benefit, such as ending the war sooner, or forcing it to end if the attackers aren't committed to fighting. In my opinion a tangible war goal would be a good thing, but what it would have to be i don't know. And as many have pointed out the static structure idea has it's glaring flaws. Give the defenders a way to win They already have one, it's called fighting. How ever there will always be a % of players who will consider every other option before doing this. Now you can try to take these options away or restrict them but thiers one you have no control over and thats logging off and going to play another game until the war is over, or as I advise people get an alt.
Caliph Muhammed Short Bus Friends 109	Posted - 2012.04.17 04:23:00 - [102] - Quote Cipher Jones wrote: the article wrote: Nobody will fly a mining ship, hauler, freighter, or expensive mission-running ship while a war is in progress, Even though they already do, frequently. Just sayin. http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=13088831 Afk in Jita at the Perimeter gate in the middle of a war with quite a few targets on. =)
Sri Nova Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 57	Posted - 2012.04.17 04:23:00 - [103] - Quote Expanding on the ideas in that article: First when a war is declared there is no timer it happens right then right now. Then both corps attacking and defending loose all npc station access . thats right when you are in a war you are no longer allowed access to the npc stations (this has a purpose) Both attacking and defender will be forced to anchor a player command station (if one or the other dose not, one will be placed at a random location. ) The player command station is where the players will be able to doc to change out ships, clone up, repair, refit, and store items, it is also the only way they will be able to participate in the market and via contracts. (this ensures players can still acquire ships and services to fuel their war efforts) Waging war should incur risks on both sides, war should also invoke the need of maintaining and upkeep of the logistics to maintain the war. the way eve works now logistics is thrown out the window and everybody just makes use of the npc stations to provide the necessary up keep and protection . (the npc stations should remain neutral and deny all access to waring parties) As stated in the article there needs to be a goal with war rather than just griefing people which is all the war dec system is . the player command stations give the warring parties clear goals to attack and to defend when the last command structure falls the war is over and much loot is to be had for winner. the player command stations is what drives the war they are the points that need to be defended or destroyed they give the players clear goals in the war . they make both parties vulnerable since they both rely on the command stations to provide them with the necessary logistics to attack and or defend. the stations prevents people from docking up in a invulnerable npc station it also encourages small gang warfare as there will be a need to find the opposing command station. if both parties are actively seeking out the other station many skirmishes will most likely ensue . im sure their are many scenarios where this could be exploited to grief or deny players but the key is banning warring parties from the npc stations. this ensures that both parties are exposed and that there is a clear goal to winning the war .
Kestrix UV Heavy Industries 12	Posted - 2012.04.17 04:38:00 - [104] - Quote Quote: First when a war is declared there is no timer it happens right then right now. So when a freighter pilot is nearing Jita a corp can declaire war against thier corp and attack straight away? Are you a Goon alt?
Sri Nova Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 57	Posted - 2012.04.17 04:41:00 - [105] - Quote Kestrix wrote: Quote: First when a war is declared there is no timer it happens right then right now. So when a freighter pilot is nearing Jita a corp can declaire war against thier corp and attack straight away? Are you a Goon alt? yeah that sucks but then those attackers are left with no place to dock up less their ceo is on the ball and places that station a.s.a.p
Psychotic Monk The Skunkworks 218	Posted - 2012.04.17 04:54:00 - [106] - Quote bornaa wrote: Burseg Sardaukar wrote: DarthNefarius wrote: 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 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. Yea, alts care about "stains" I'll have you know this is defiantly my main. And I welcome stains. Also, I'm flattered that I'm apparently the gold standard of this kind of behavior. (And I still get Safaris.)
Ch3244 Azule Dragoons Sspectre 77	Posted - 2012.04.17 05:05:00 - [107] - Quote I think CCP should let us wardeck NPC corps. who's with me?
Avila Cracko 340	Posted - 2012.04.17 05:48:00 - [108] - Quote Articles like that are written when some person go and play some other, actually fun and entertaining MMO. And then compare it to EVE. truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
roboto212 Hull Breach Inc. Double Tap. 20	Posted - 2012.04.17 05:53:00 - [109] - Quote the article was utter trash. obviously who ever wrote it is pushing the eve uni agenda or has no concept of how eve works. much better options have been posted other then this repeated trash.
Xorv Questionable Acquisitions 249	Posted - 2012.04.17 06:05:00 - [110] - Quote Not to sound too Poetic, but I'm beginning to wonder if Kelduum is behind this whole thing, the article and the OPer linking it. The rest of the CSM has probably made CCP see some reason on War Decs, and this is part of his last ditch effort to change their minds by trying to sway public opinion. Ch3244 wrote: I think CCP should let us wardeck NPC corps. who's with me? This would not be a bad idea so long as you couldn't dock at the stations owned by the same NPCs and the associated Navy also treat you as if - 5 standings.
Brooks Puuntai Nomadic Asylum KUGUTSUMEN. 472	Posted - 2012.04.17 06:10:00 - [111] - Quote It would be interesting to do the structure idea for the aggressor. If you want to declare war then you have to also defend this structure. It would also allow another way for the group who got decced to end it, instead of the current bore them into dropping the dec, or corp hopping to avoid dec. It would also open up the use of mercenaries since it would actually give an objective. Either way it would limit the number of griefer decs and give smaller yet more organized corps a chance of surviving a dec. It would suck however for those who do multiple decs, but that's the risk you take.
D Program Yamamoto Industries 18	Posted - 2012.04.17 06:50:00 - [112] - Quote I find this idea very short minded. It would be such a basic and boring capture the base system. This system would be okay for some FPS game like Unreal Tournament or whatever. EVE is a strategy game where every aspect plays a role. It needs a more complex and dynamic system than just a simple capture the base. The writer of that article seems to be a newish player who has not experienced all aspects of the game yet. I don't have a solution for a better system, but I trust CCP that they will make a good system. What is this sorcery? http://www.eve-cost.eu
Brooks Puuntai Nomadic Asylum KUGUTSUMEN. 472	Posted - 2012.04.17 07:12:00 - [113] - Quote D Program wrote: I don't have a solution for a better system, but I trust CCP that they will make a good system. Bad idea to trust CCP to fix anything really.
Vaerah Vahrokha Vahrokh Consulting 587	Posted - 2012.04.17 07:38:00 - [114] - Quote foxnod wrote: Frankly, the small-med carebear corps that infest hisec need to be weeded out since they're the ones that burn out new players. I've seen quite a few of these "indi" corps where the older players abandoned their newer members like rotting carcases to the vultures, instead of teaching and leading them against the wardecers. The small-med carebear corps that infest hi sec are just like the small-med shops and factories that infest our cities. They hire office boys, pizza deliverers, typewriters, clerks, workmen. They hire, they are not bound to marry their sisters to them. When problems arise, those employees are kicked, exactly like it happens in RL. They have NO REASON to teach pizza deliverers how to handle an AK 47 because it's expensive, time consuming and the pizza deliverer is attached to them exactly like they are attached to him (that is, very little) anyway. If you are after a MMO where people are all fluffy and grow all brothers and sisters for years and go kill the epic monsters go play WoW. Pizza deliverers who find out they prefer a military career leave the town and go join a proper low sec / 0.0 PvP corp not the contrary. "Teaching and leading against wardecs", it's not like everybody in life is Rambo and goes to bed with a grenade under the pillow. That's why having effective mercs would be important, because belive it or not, the vastly huge majority in this game does not give a f*ck about the minimal minority who can't do anything but stay in hi sec and pretend to PvP aka wardecs. They'd just be happy to get mercs and have them handle their belly ache. Auditing \| Collateral holding and insurance \| Consulting \| PLEX for Good Charity Twitter channel
Vaerah Vahrokha Vahrokh Consulting 587	Posted - 2012.04.17 09:21:00 - [115] - Quote Gogela wrote: Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: blah blah blah I'm super rich but i can't afford a merc, i'm the baddest pvp toolbag evar but my corp can't defend itself... blah blah Your numbers fail to impress. You seem weak. I can't be weak, as I am not touched the slightest by the changes, I don't need a corp to trade. My corp exists only because I like to have several different wallets to split different customers investments into and keep everything orderly. Unlike you, I try figuring out how the mechanic should be changed to make EvE fun and actually entice people to PvP. Your kind is why PvP averse people exist, you are just out to crush somebody else with no chance to fight back and then cry on the forums why "carebears" avoid PvP. They avoid it because they are not idiots ready to jump in your frying pan. Gogela wrote: Can't dec-shield like that with the new mechanic. Not as easily anyway. Read... something. If they all jumped ship though, that kind of contradicts your argument about mercenaries being worthless... just like your "durka 3 digit billions" (the judges would have also accepted "hundreds of billions") contradicts what you said about not being able to afford a merc corp. sounds like you are super rich and super bada** at PvP you should dec NC. Illusional much? The new mechanic is as stupid as the old one, it FAILS to make fighting back useful therefore it also FAILS to fix the underlying simple fact that you CANNOT force somebody to PvP back if they see it's useless. As for being able to hire a merc corp... when my old corp teamed up with GIS (famous German mercs) we would do 1 non trivial task at a time. I have no reason to believe this changed 3 years later. With the new mechanism, "brand" mercs will be always busy so people will have to resort to unknown mercs. Unknown mercs don't have a "face", they are unreliable and may as well wardec you with an alt corp just to keep sgnatching money off you. Gogela wrote: No. I'm going to share my laughter. At you. Nonsense about alts Duh. Auditing \| Collateral holding and insurance \| Consulting \| PLEX for Good Charity Twitter channel
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 3358	Posted - 2012.04.17 10:10:00 - [116] - Quote Wars will never be "fair", because wars aren't declared for fair fights, they're declared because the aggressor thinks they can win or have something to gain. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players. Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Nomad I University of Caille Gallente Federation 59	Posted - 2012.04.17 10:11:00 - [117] - Quote The war dec system will cause huge emire alliances to avoid wars, because of the costs for the new war decs. In my opinion, todays war dec system is nice.
Simi Kusoni HelloKittyFanclub 620	Posted - 2012.04.17 10:15:00 - [118] - Quote Quote: It's also pretty bizarre that no matter how militarily powerful a corporation or alliance is, it can't physically win a war declared against it This is why people that don't play Eve shouldn't write articles about it, just because there aren't some in game objectives he assumes there is no way to win Declaring a war mutual, then camping the aggressor into station or hounding them into leaving corp or baiting them and destroying as many of their shiny high sec "pee vee pee" ships is winning. And under the new system, from what I've gathered you could then force terms of surrender that involve monetary compensation from the aggressor. --Will Support Your Terrible Forum Thread For ISK--
Simetraz State War Academy Caldari State 211	Posted - 2012.04.17 11:08:00 - [119] - Quote Well the writer of the article has a valid point. There is very little to no point of a high-sec war. There is just nothing in High-sec worth fighting over. IF wars are ever going to be fixed, CCP and the players are actually going to have to figure out a reason to have a war. Till you do that any mechanic you create will be wasted.
Joran Dravius Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 9	Posted - 2012.04.17 11:14:00 - [120] - Quote gfldex wrote: Lets have a look at just one paragraph of that article. Quote: Very few players would argue that wardecs are fine as they are now, but until now, CCP has always been reluctant to change the system. 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. That is plainly wrong. With legal decshields any corp can shake off any war at any given time. It's currently simply not possible to take down a POS in highsec that is filled up with stront. Quote: The defender gets just 24 hours' notice to get a plan together and warn its members of the threat and typically won't be in a position to fight back. Any CEO has to have a plan what happens at war time before he presses the button to create the corp. If he starts to prepare for war when CONCORD sends a mail it's to late and that CEO should be driven out of business. Quote: The new mercenary system will help even the odds, but it won't be that useful if the attacking corp can weasel its way out of the war by not paying the bill. There is no reason why one can't declare a counter war when the wardec mail hits the inbox. That's even possible right now. That's just one paragraph in that article. Pretty much anything he writes is either plain wrong or an assumption. In can only hope that the author has never played EVE Online. Thanks for saving me the trouble of reading a bad article by a dude who clearly doesn't know what he's talking about.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,05s, ref 20250916/1349
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.