open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Concept - War dec cost changes
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Broken Lemming
Posted - 2010.10.07 12:13:00 - [31]
 

Edited by: Broken Lemming on 07/10/2010 12:16:11
Originally by: Whitehound
Edited by: Whitehound on 07/10/2010 11:35:38
Originally by: Broken Lemming
Interesting idea. Though what reason would there then be to accept the war dec?

You know little about wars ... Cool The reason for a surrender would be a financial reason of course!

Corps and alliances, which make a lot of ISKs in high-sec could choose to surrender if the cost of a war and a possible defeat exceeded the payout.

Small corps will not make a lot of ISKs and have little to lose, which is why a war against them is often nothing more then griefing.

Does this now make sense to you?


You didn't read what I wrote in that post past the first line did you...

I do know little about war dec'ing dispite being around since 2007. Mainly because of large null sec alliances abusing it to grief small high sec corps.

My thoughts from what you wrote:-

if you don't accept the war dec and sit there you get paid for doing nothing, but you're likely lose more due to being stuck in a station for months than you make from it.

accept and you pay to fight them plus pay for lost equipment with no reward at the end unless you earn more from loot than it costs you in ships (in most cases - unlikely for a high sec corp),

surrender and you get nothing but the big guy loses the payment? Same as currently and really rather boring as the small corps ain't gonna undock if an alliance war decs them.

So that was basically an attempt to continue the status quo... which supports the griefers and makes it less fun for people who have no interest in PvP atall.

Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2010.10.07 12:51:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Broken Lemming
So that was basically an attempt to continue the status quo... which supports the griefers and makes it less fun for people who have no interest in PvP atall.

I did read it. I think that you are selfish in your proposal and I do not really want to argue with you as your position is hardly different from that of a griefer. They, too, do things for selfish and emotional reasons. They want to grief you - you now want to ungrief them in return.

Neither you or are I are the topic here, so let us get back to the topic. The current mechanic does not support griefers. They have to pay for their griefing. It is the fact that one can actually declare war, which allows for it. You need to consider that griefers are willing to lose ships and to pay a game mechanic in order to cause you grief.

You however try to fight griefing with reason. I can assure you that it will never work unless you force the griefers to give some direct compensation to their targets. And even then will it not eliminate griefing, but only reduce it for the most unfair cases.

Broken Lemming
Posted - 2010.10.07 13:14:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Broken Lemming
So that was basically an attempt to continue the status quo... which supports the griefers and makes it less fun for people who have no interest in PvP atall.

I did read it. I think that you are selfish in your proposal and I do not really want to argue with you as your position is hardly different from that of a griefer. They, too, do things for selfish and emotional reasons. They want to grief you - you now want to ungrief them in return.

If only it were so easy to read me as that... I see things broken I try to find a solution... Selfishness is something I see alot on nearly all the forums i've ever visited... Personal attacks are also something I see (calling someone you don't even know selfish for example). Of course everyone is entitled to an opinion Rolling Eyes.

Originally by: Whitehound
Neither you or are I are the topic here, so let us get back to the topic. The current mechanic does not support griefers. They have to pay for their griefing. It is the fact that one can actually declare war, which allows for it. You need to consider that griefers are willing to lose ships and to pay a game mechanic in order to cause you grief.

Yes, they pay a pathetic amount to war dec a corp in high sec that is pretty much always less than half their size. Their loses are practically nil when they're griefing because the people they grief haven't got a fair chance of being able to fight back (2000+ member nullsec PvP ALLIANCE vs industrial corp of less than 100). They can easily afford the price to dec a corp at present and sustain that for years if they wish to (alliance dec'ing costs more apparently). So how does that NOT support the griefing ALLIANCE? And instead support the industrial corp?

Originally by: Whitehound
You however try to fight griefing with reason. I can assure you that it will never work unless you force the griefers to give some direct compensation to their targets. And even then will it not eliminate griefing, but only reduce it for the most unfair cases.

It's not meant to eliminate it. Reduction is a step in the right direction. And with the rewards system adaptation I suggested it would give reason to accept a war dec or surrender straight away rather than hide in a station for months as is the current way of dealing with it.

Broken Lemming
Posted - 2010.10.07 13:28:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Emylissan
Edited by: Emylissan on 07/10/2010 11:22:28
Perhaps take the clones of all members together, each clonegrade adds a multiplier to increase a base wardec prize?

And the clonegrade mulitplier depends on the sk value of the clone

The baseprise would be something equal for everybody so that only the summ of the multipliers would make the difference in prize




That might be workable. Generally clone grade doesn't alter that often. Though if an industrial trained character took on a PvP trained one the indy might have a higher SP clone grade but be less skilled up for combat.

Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2010.10.07 14:29:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Broken Lemming
Yes, they pay a pathetic amount to war dec a corp in high sec that is pretty much always less than half their size. Their loses are practically nil when they're griefing because the people they grief haven't got a fair chance of being able to fight back (2000+ member nullsec PvP ALLIANCE vs industrial corp of less than 100). They can easily afford the price to dec a corp at present and sustain that for years if they wish to (alliance dec'ing costs more apparently). So how does that NOT support the griefing ALLIANCE? And instead support the industrial corp?

Again, size in EVE matters. If this seems unfair to you then you can go back into an NPC corporation where you are save from war until you have made enough friends to start your own corporation. A war then allows both sides to shoot at each other. The smaller corp gets the same chance and gets to shoot at a much bigger target.

Trying to bring SPs into the equation will not change this either. You may think that a corp with 98m SPs versus one with 107m SPs is about fair, but if the one with 107m SPs is purely miners and the one with 98m SPs is PvPers then you have not gained anything with the change, because it is nothing but a superficial change.

War declarations are nonsense by nature. They only make sense in high-sec, but also no sense as one is supposed to be protected by CONCORD, and the very reason for the area being called "high-sec". Instead, the war-dec mechanic means you are bribing CONCORD to look away.

Trying to change it in order for it to make more sense is like trying to teach a monkey humanity by sending it to law school and to turn the monkey into a lawyer.

So now am I questioning your motive. If you want to reduce the total amount of griefing then you need to reduce the total number of war declarations by increasing the costs, because war-declaring is a griefer mechanic. If you want to drive large groups in particular out of high-sec, then you need to increase the war costs for them so they give up fighting wars in high-sec. Which is it?

Broken Lemming
Posted - 2010.10.07 15:27:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Whitehound
Again, size in EVE matters. If this seems unfair to you then you can go back into an NPC corporation where you are save from war until you have made enough friends to start your own corporation. A war then allows both sides to shoot at each other. The smaller corp gets the same chance and gets to shoot at a much bigger target.

Trying to bring SPs into the equation will not change this either. You may think that a corp with 98m SPs versus one with 107m SPs is about fair, but if the one with 107m SPs is purely miners and the one with 98m SPs is PvPers then you have not gained anything with the change, because it is nothing but a superficial change.

War declarations are nonsense by nature. They only make sense in high-sec, but also no sense as one is supposed to be protected by CONCORD, and the very reason for the area being called "high-sec". Instead, the war-dec mechanic means you are bribing CONCORD to look away.

Trying to change it in order for it to make more sense is like trying to teach a monkey humanity by sending it to law school and to turn the monkey into a lawyer.

So now am I questioning your motive. If you want to reduce the total amount of griefing then you need to reduce the total number of war declarations by increasing the costs, because war-declaring is a griefer mechanic. If you want to drive large groups in particular out of high-sec, then you need to increase the war costs for them so they give up fighting wars in high-sec. Which is it?

You keep trying to make it personal. Rolling Eyes I have no need to make my own corp, I have friends that already have corps which I help when they need me to.

This concept was formed through discussion between several people. It's not only my idea...

The core idea is to ALTER costs relative to the sizes of BOTH parties and may need altering as someone suggested a moment ago to include an adjustment according to the number of active war decs. As you say size means everything, more people can make more isk so it's only fair they have to pay more to pick on smaller corps that can't make as much isk. If the size difference is large enough then war would become non viable due to cost. The current mechanics make it cheaper to hit a corp than an alliance. This concept would turn that on it's head by making it cheaper to pick on someone your own size rather than someone considerably smaller. It's designed to introduce a level of fairness, not drive anyone anywhere.

Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2010.10.07 17:40:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Broken Lemming
You keep trying to make it personal.

No, and do not start complaining now. I have stated merely facts. The option for you to go back into a NPC corporation exists independent of your proposal.

Quote:
The core idea is to ALTER costs relative to the sizes of BOTH parties ...

So you alter the costs, but it does not make it fairer. Fairness is not measurable just like equality is not measurable. Your proposal will continue to make war fair for some and unfair for others. Only who is affected by it changes. Was it previously possible for a large group of miners to be more or less save from war-decs will they now become cheap targets for small griefer corps who specialize in PvP.

You can alter the cost formula, make it depend on numbers of players, SPs, numbers of clones, ISKs in wallets, number of accounts, years of EVE, etc.. It will not change the nature of the game itself and it will also not make it easier.

Lady Spank
Amarr
In Praise Of Shadows
Posted - 2010.10.07 17:50:00 - [38]
 

Life isn't fair.

Danks
Caldari
Fat Angry Toe Tappin Inbreds
Posted - 2010.10.07 18:22:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Broken Lemming


Why would a one man corp war dec an alliance with considerably more members? That'd be almost suicide, unless they're in a BS and the alliance are under 60 members and in nub ships.



This statement alone proves you don't know what you are talking about and that no one should listen to you.


Broken Lemming
Posted - 2010.10.07 18:44:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Danks
Originally by: Broken Lemming


Why would a one man corp war dec an alliance with considerably more members? That'd be almost suicide, unless they're in a BS and the alliance are under 60 members and in nub ships.



This statement alone proves you don't know what you are talking about and that no one should listen to you.




Actually that comment came from experience rather than ignorance. I was part of a fleet of about 60 noob ships that did nearly kill a Dominix. Therefore it is based on factual events.

Danks
Caldari
Fat Angry Toe Tappin Inbreds
Posted - 2010.10.07 19:21:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Broken Lemming
Originally by: Danks
Originally by: Broken Lemming


Why would a one man corp war dec an alliance with considerably more members? That'd be almost suicide, unless they're in a BS and the alliance are under 60 members and in nub ships.



This statement alone proves you don't know what you are talking about and that no one should listen to you.




Actually that comment came from experience rather than ignorance. I was part of a fleet of about 60 noob ships that did nearly kill a Dominix. Therefore it is based on factual events.


You're doing it wrong. The original statement I quoted is still a valid reason to not listen to anything you say.

Broken Lemming
Posted - 2010.10.07 19:51:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Danks
Originally by: Broken Lemming
Originally by: Danks
Originally by: Broken Lemming


Why would a one man corp war dec an alliance with considerably more members? That'd be almost suicide, unless they're in a BS and the alliance are under 60 members and in nub ships.



This statement alone proves you don't know what you are talking about and that no one should listen to you.




Actually that comment came from experience rather than ignorance. I was part of a fleet of about 60 noob ships that did nearly kill a Dominix. Therefore it is based on factual events.


You're doing it wrong. The original statement I quoted is still a valid reason to not listen to anything you say.



If you want to troll more and keep the thread on the first page where more people can see it be my guest. Rolling EyesHopefully someone will be cleaning the thread up shortly.

Danks
Caldari
Fat Angry Toe Tappin Inbreds
Posted - 2010.10.07 20:02:00 - [43]
 

I'm not trolling. Your statement that "a one man corp attacking an alliance is suicide" is completely wrong. It happens in Eve. I've done it myself.

Is one man going to bring an alliance to its knees? Of course not. Just as it isn't suicide for a one man corp to attack an alliance.

I'm not trolling, I am calling you out on your ignorance.


Broken Lemming
Posted - 2010.10.07 20:33:00 - [44]
 

Edited by: Broken Lemming on 07/10/2010 20:37:45
This was just brought to my attention. Seems people have felt something wasn't right for a long time and have suggested changes.

Courtesy of a cross corp friend from in game.

2008 posted by a CSM deligate

Reading it the intention is similar to when altered this proposal to include a victory condition set. To give it a real meaning with rewards.

Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2010.10.07 21:12:00 - [45]
 

Edited by: Whitehound on 07/10/2010 21:13:15
Originally by: Lady Spank
Life isn't fair.

Wrong. Death isn't fair. You got it mixed up.

Valandril
Caldari
Ex-Mortis
Posted - 2010.10.07 21:55:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Danks
Originally by: Broken Lemming


Why would a one man corp war dec an alliance with considerably more members? That'd be almost suicide, unless they're in a BS and the alliance are under 60 members and in nub ships.



This statement alone proves you don't know what you are talking about and that no one should listen to you.


/thread


Pages: 1 [2]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only