Posted - 2004.12.03 09:37:00 - [121]

 

Edited by: Valentine Keen on 03/12/2004 09:40:45

Originally by: Seleene

---

I put my .02 ISK in earlier...

What amazes me is that this thread has yet to earn a little yellow bar on the left of it. Seems like the Devs would at least tell us, "We're watching this one."

---

A clarification of the costs at least would be great.

Right now all I know is that:

1. The listed formula for Corp vs Corp war doesn't agree to the quoted example of corp war costs.

2. The listed formula for Corp vs Corp war doesn't work for the first war if you read 'existing wars' as the number you had before that (ie when 0 the cost comes out as 0).

3. The listed formula for Alliance vs Alliance war doesn't work either for the same issues.

4. The cost of Alliance vs Corp warfare listed in Hakera's example doesn't agree to any possible calculation of the cost if you use the given formula.

5. The cost of Corp vs Alliance war is still not clear from the original information or the dev blog. Saying it's the same as for Alliances is fine, but when that formula is dependant upon the factor "Number of Corps in Alliance declaring the war", this must either come out as 0 or 1, depending on how you interpret it. Which doesn't at all agree with the written comment of how the fee is supposed to reduce the motive of corps to declare on alliances.

Posted - 2004.12.03 10:20:00 - [123]

 

My gut instinct is that this new war system favours alliances but we're clearly going to have to wear it and see what happens.

If it pans out that it is causing a serious imbalance between Alliances and empire corps then it will have to be modified at some point.

Personally, I think there's an element of waiting for the other shoe to drop here.

The devs take the line that 0.0 is equally dangerous for everyone, that's fairly clear. I believe they think they're addressing the fact that 0.1+ is, in their minds, more dangerous for Alliances than empire corps under the old war system.

Fine. They will soon see that all they've succeeded in doing is swinging the pendulum back the other way. Empire is going to be safe as houses for Alliances. Trade corps will be attacked with relative impunity and have little recourse other than mounting expeditions with merc support into 0.0 (possibility: CCP may be trying to engineer this...).

Moreover, why would Alliances declare war on one another at all? They can do their fighting in 0.0.

That is unless...

To my mind formal Sovereign Alliances implies the possibility of their space increasing in security status either on application or by diktat of CONCORD.

In that situation, Alliance vs Alliance formal wars make sense. They make little sense in any other - why bother spending the money to wage war in empire?

Iac

Posted - 2004.12.03 11:15:00 - [125]

 

If everyone is so scared about alliances abusing the charging system by making alt-corps.. how about making the fee dependent on the number of members (i.e. pilots) in the alliance.

Of course, you'd still have lots of alts in there, but if the scale is set right (e.g. 1 mil per 50-100 members or something like that rather than 1 mil per corp), it would be much less exploitable.

Posted - 2004.12.03 18:57:00 - [127]

 

Edited by: Wraeththu on 03/12/2004 19:01:07

Originally by: Seleene

---

I put my .02 ISK in earlier...

What amazes me is that this thread has yet to earn a little yellow bar on the left of it. Seems like the Devs would at least tell us, "We're watching this one."

---

I've come to the conclusion it works like this:

CCP Forum Facists: Hey, I know you've been coding this for a while, but.. nobody's going to use the alliance system. They've figured out its a scam to try to bring down their rampant min-maxing and complete flipping of the "risk vs reward" flag we tried to set up but failed misserably at. There's honestly no bonus to it.

CPP Leaders: Hmm.. Shiva's going to be a bust if nobody uses the system, which means nobody fights over POS, which means everyone gets bored and leaves as they have been. Database dude, run me a report on alliance counts.

Database Dude: Hey, it turns out that about 18,000 of the 30,000 players are in alliances. As a side note, I ran another report too though, it turns out there's only about 1500 billing addresses to those 18,000 accounts.

CCP Leaders: Man, that's a lot of cash. Well, we're a company, and customer focus is our middle name! What do the alliances want? Recognition in 0.0, and a complete baby security blanket anywhere else. Change the war system so that it's basically impossible to wardec an alliance for a normal corp. Put it in so that it's possible, but so prohibitive that nobody will do it. Excellent..

Originally by: Arud

---

OMGWTFCCPHATESME!!!

thats sums about half of the posts in this thread, thoughts which have no basis behind them

---

Actually, you're the one using illiterate and infantile language and trolls. Maybe you should reevaluate why you're spending so much money on a game.

Originally by: Arud

---

it also costs more for alliances to keep their alliances running per alt corp they have

people always forget that

---

Take the combined total wealth (both in liquid forms and in capitol) of all the characters in your alliance. Now divide it by the total # of characters in your alliance. Now do the same thing for any of the corps that would be declaring on you.

Who can afford another Mil a week?

In fact, if you put a .0001% tax on refining in your alliance, you could pay for an additional week of an alt corp.

Stop trying to hide your capacity from people. I know I don't believe you, and I'm pretty sure the rest of Eve knows you're lying too.