open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] War Dec Mechanic Changes
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic

Imigo Montoya
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.05.10 03:23:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Danika Princip
Originally by: Taredi Taredi
EVE Online was about taking big risks to gain great rewards. What's the point if you're always at risk of non consensual pvp in high sec? What exactly is the gain on either party in high sec?

A one man corp War Decing a bunch of hulks just to pad his stats on battleclinic?

This was the intended result?


Wait wait wait. let me see if I understand your post.

You start by saying 'EVE Online was about taking big risks to gain great rewards.', then you immediately contradict yourself by asking for the removal of risk? What?


I think what he was referring to was that Empire still has the big risks (arbitrary wardecs by anybody) but doesn't have the great rewards (mining veldspar isn't exactly great ISK/hr)

Originally by: Baaldor
Actually it would be much more effective to hire a MERC to address the situation rather than rely on some contrived game mechanic. You know support home grown player driven activities that solve player social conflicts with out the use of the CCP hand holding.


LOL. Players with 50m skillpoint toons wardeccing a startup empire mining corp with 10m skillpoints between them to feel big (and for lols) is hardly a "player social conflict". Aside from the likes of Privatears and 0phanage who predominantly wardec nullsec alliances, there are so many wardecs by long term players on new players for no better reason than wanting some easy cannon fodder to shoot.

I'm all for players being able to resolve conflicts without contrived game mechanics getting in the way, but as mentioned before wardecs are contrived game mechanics themselves.

If you want PvP, go to low/nullsec or join FW or RvB. If you have some beef with some Empire based corp then perhaps a wardec is an appropriate outlet but currently no reason is required to declare war, all you need is to get your corp shareholders to agree to it.

Having said that, I don't think ISK amounts will change anything, so not supporting this topic. Requiring the addition of terms of surrender might (ISK, items, leaving a system etc)

ITTigerClawIK
Amarr
Galactic Rangers
Galactic-Rangers
Posted - 2011.05.10 16:36:00 - [62]
 

can i just throw int he idea that players can not leave a corp for the first week of a war so that the people we actually want to kill dont just leave before the 24 hour notification time is up. so if a war ends after a week, then so be it, they are still there but i think more corp CEO's get ****ed of the fact that as soon as that dec mail comes throuhg 75% of there corp leaves just couse there could be a bit of pew pew,if you join a corp, be expected to help out when times are rough.

Swynet
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.05.10 17:29:00 - [63]
 

Originally by: Drem Aldent
Okay, first of all if you are going to troll please include something to improve the thread. I admit this is a very controversial topic, but I personally think the mechanics of this needs to change.


/agree

Originally by: Drem Aldent
1. I propose that wardecs are changed so that the corp that started the war pays slightly more isk every week, this will make it so that griefer corps will not be able to continue wars forever and ruin the game experience.


What about the merc grieffers corp using isk given by the contractual corp?

20M first week then increase by 100% 2nd week, 200% 3rd week and next ones 500%.
Small grieffers couldn't stand the rithm while real big alliances wars yes.

By the way what's the point of wardecc a 2 men corp for ever? -unless grieffers are just stupid, and unfortunately there are too many in this game...

Destroying ships is the purpose of the game every one and his mother are aware of that, but sustain vicious acts with simple game mechanics is bad for every one. Has neutral repp.


Baaldor
Black Sail Anarchists
Yarr Collective
Posted - 2011.05.10 20:15:00 - [64]
 

Originally by: Swynet
Originally by: Drem Aldent
Okay, first of all if you are going to troll please include something to improve the thread. I admit this is a very controversial topic, but I personally think the mechanics of this needs to change.


/agree

Originally by: Drem Aldent
1. I propose that wardecs are changed so that the corp that started the war pays slightly more isk every week, this will make it so that griefer corps will not be able to continue wars forever and ruin the game experience.


What about the merc grieffers corp using isk given by the contractual corp?

20M first week then increase by 100% 2nd week, 200% 3rd week and next ones 500%.
Small grieffers couldn't stand the rithm while real big alliances wars yes.

By the way what's the point of wardecc a 2 men corp for ever? -unless grieffers are just stupid, and unfortunately there are too many in this game...

Destroying ships is the purpose of the game every one and his mother are aware of that, but sustain vicious acts with simple game mechanics is bad for every one. Has neutral repp.




Can you please, explain to me the definition of a "Greifer" within the context of this game.

Varrik Kayne
Caldari
Posted - 2011.05.10 22:33:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Izo Alabaster
Originally by: Drem Aldent

1. I propose that wardecs are changed so that the corp that started the war pays slightly more isk every week, this will make it so that griefer corps will not be able to continue wars forever and ruin the game experience.



You seem to not understand the whole purpose of wars is to force players to *gasp* interact with each other, and not to allow them to simply hide under the skirt of CONCORD like a bunch of scared children. So-called griefer corps should rightfully be able to continue wars indefinitely. This forces the aggrieved corp to *gasp* come up with counters. Potential counters include hiring mercenaries, paying off the griefing corp, or *double gasp* manning up and fighting them, or simply pulling up stakes and moving on to a different corp. All are ways to deal with a wardec.

Quote:

2. Wars can only last a certain amount of time then they need a cooldown period

Pros: again will prevent wars just for the sake of griefing

Cons: will make legit wars end at a certain point




Or maybe we could just limit war time to certain zones and times, and require a +/- PVP flag before initiating PVP and change the name of EVE from EVE Online to Carebear-WoW-Loving-Sissies Online. What a terribad idea. ugh

The people initiating the wardec are real people. Talk to them, reason with them, and if all that fails, then hire reputable mercenaries against them or man up and fight them yourselves.

Quote:

3. Just increase the war dec cost themselves



Yes, let's allow only the elite who can afford to pay exorbitant amounts of isk to actually PVP in EVE.

The wardec costs shouldn't be a barrier to wardecs, the targets should. Learn to quit being such a soft target and you won't get so many wardecs. Learn to actually fight back and they'll quit messing with you altogether. In short, learn to play.


Quoted for TRUTH.

All types of player Interaction is CCP's goal, thus war dec's won't change, albeit a Surrender terms option like what Jerika posted would be a good idea. Btw, it's also cheap because it's too damn easy to just leave a corp... And decced corps disband laughing w/o any ill affects on them, saying "u just wasted (whatever wannabe price hike wardec). The low cost allows for less war evassion to a new corp. To be fair, any corp in a War should be locked... Nobody in or out. The 24hrs after notification is for your preperation only. You want out? Time to negotiate a surrender... Again loke Jerika posted (page 1).

I would add though, to apease you balance claimers... The initiator pays a war dec cost, per how much Isk damage they would be satisfied to inflict. I.e. A 2 mil wardec allows you to inflict 500 mil isk damage per avg market value. A 10 mil wardec allows 2.5 bil etc etc. Not saying that's a solution, just a thought, yet better contrived than the drivel "balance" that the 40yr old virgin carebears singing "I want an Oscar Meyer Weiner" have come up with thus far, in a sad attempt to escape PvP altogether.

True story: Corp A has an internal dispute. Some members split to form Corp B. Corp B viciously decs Corp A, but Corp A knows a good Merc corp. Merc corp decs Corp B and deals them heavy casualties. Corp B retracts war on Corp A. Corp B having ruined their ties with Corp A and continue to get hit by Merc Corp, disband. Corp A, very happy with Mercs and establish commerce with them. Mercs happy to get good deals, get paid and had some fun.

In Carebear dreamland, this kind of exciting social interaction wouldn't happen.

Swynet
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.05.11 14:15:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Baaldor
Can you please, explain to me the definition of a "Greifer" within the context of this game.


There are not several definitions of griefer, just scum that fit it or not.

Frank Lonehorn
Gallente
Rocco's New Legacy
New Eden's Industrial Alliance
Posted - 2011.05.12 01:48:00 - [67]
 

I agree, Random war decs to stop.

Vaju Katru
Posted - 2011.05.12 12:05:00 - [68]
 

Their is only one problem with wardecs, carebears can leave corporations to avoid it.

Eperor
Posted - 2011.05.12 12:20:00 - [69]
 

I agree random war decks need to stop.

And ader ting now member can leave the corp when ever they wanth, if war start that to need to be changed , and my proposal is that they pay leaving fee for leaving corp at all if only they not kicked from corp. aderways payers have free movem ode oll the time, ansd meny CEO wasting his time on them, than they need to pay for that CEO time wath its waisted.

Baaldor
Black Sail Anarchists
Yarr Collective
Posted - 2011.05.12 12:48:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: Swynet
Originally by: Baaldor
Can you please, explain to me the definition of a "Greifer" within the context of this game.


There are not several definitions of griefer, just scum that fit it or not.


Right, you do not know what is considering greifing with in the context of this game.

foksieloy
Minmatar
Rockets ponies and rainbows
Posted - 2011.05.13 09:03:00 - [71]
 

So the only upper limit to price is the price of creating a new corp to wardec with?
That will *sooooo* fix things.

To avoid cooldown, just wardec with new corp before the war created with old corp expires.

Bill from Accounting
Posted - 2011.05.16 12:48:00 - [72]
 

Personally I say make the War Dec's cost more. I'll agree with some of you that War Dec's do get out of handwith people randomly Declaring War on one another, War is alos important as to some extents it keeps the economy rolling and as some of you hvae said, nowhere is safe in EVE, don't fly anything you're not willing to lose right?

I only say make it cost more, because in reality, these Wars would be insanely expensive, declaration of War shouldn't run you 100mil, maybe 10mil is a good starting place. If you up the price, you also make the wars just a bit more meaingful.

While its true no matter how expensive they are, people are still going to declare war, if it costs them a bit more or they have to work a bit more to declare war, well that just shows that the corp or alliance came together and said, "Yeah... these sob's need to go."

Only other thing I can thin of, is if after 2 weeks of war and no shots have been fired between the agressor and the dec'ed corp, why not null the dec or atleast make them pay a much larger fee to continue. I mean if you're gonna war dec, you might as well get out there and fight and die.

Those are just my ideas and opinions, anyone elses thoughts?

Matrix Blackstar
Posted - 2011.05.16 16:04:00 - [73]
 

Edited by: Matrix Blackstar on 16/05/2011 16:06:39
A Corp War Dec should cost no less than 250 million Isk. An Alliance War Dec should cost no less than 500 million Isk. Fighting wars are expensive and thanks to Eve, anyone with an ******* and a couple of Isk can file a War Dec on a Corp, then not fire a shot. There should be very stiff penalties for the aggressing Corp that does not want to fight, but War Decs everyone. Example; Let Us Sleep corp. I fyou are the aggressing corp and you haven't fire a shot at enemy corp during the first week, War Dec fees double. If no shots are fired after the second week, War Decs fees are again doubled, plus war dec is voided. If your not going to fight, then you should not be allowed to continually file war decs. That is the biggest problem in this game.

Mithrial Maska
Posted - 2011.05.16 21:27:00 - [74]
 

Ok so what is concords deal then? For 2mil they turn a blind eye to a wardec. I call bull****. The concord I know and have been killed by, wouldn't give a damn if you paid them or not they would still smoke you and laugh. I had a wardec last over 50days in high sec. It was the most pointless 50days ever. . . ever. The wardec'ing corp would kill noobs during the day, and hide for 6-8 hours in station from the older players logging in. That having been said eve needs its wardecs and its dark, gloomy, god forsaken theme.

Now stay with me on this, concord for a small fee will allow aggression in and around a system, and for extra you can include other other systems, constilations, and regions. Higher sec systems cost more to wardec in, lower sec systems would then cost less. This allows concord to 'monitor' and 'contain' conflict. But at the same time for aggressing corps that really have a reason to fight can pay the premium and have no containment issues. This gives the option for corps and alliances to fight over systems in highsec for any social conflict you can think of. It gives carebears the option of spreading out to make a wardec cost more, but at the risk of going solo.

Now you can still fight outside of the designated fighting zone, but you risk sec status taking regualar sec hits like you would in lowsec, still without concord intervention for either party involved with the wardec. That can be used for the protection of the defending corp, as well as for ambushes for the agressing corp.

Building the mechanic for ending the wardec via contract of some kind is a great idea.

By charging more for a larger area to fight in without penalty would help keep pointless wardecs minimized.

Taredi Taredi
Posted - 2011.05.21 03:55:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: Matrix Blackstar
Edited by: Matrix Blackstar on 16/05/2011 16:06:39
A Corp War Dec should cost no less than 250 million Isk. An Alliance War Dec should cost no less than 500 million Isk. Fighting wars are expensive and thanks to Eve, anyone with an ******* and a couple of Isk can file a War Dec on a Corp, then not fire a shot. There should be very stiff penalties for the aggressing Corp that does not want to fight, but War Decs everyone. Example; Let Us Sleep corp. I fyou are the aggressing corp and you haven't fire a shot at enemy corp during the first week, War Dec fees double. If no shots are fired after the second week, War Decs fees are again doubled, plus war dec is voided. If your not going to fight, then you should not be allowed to continually file war decs. That is the biggest problem in this game.


Supported.


Pages: 1 2 [3]

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