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


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.06.17 13:27:00 - [31]
 

War Weariness, eh? Perhaps balance it so that increase is mitigated by success in battle ..
Originally by: Danika Princip
But for some people, it IS a way of life. Stop trying to ruin the sandbox for people who don't play like you.

Sandbox goes both ways so kind of a silly thing to say. Besides, the people who live the dream of constant wardecs rarely if ever have protracted wars against single targets so will be largely unaffected.

Dutarro
Matari Munitions
The Fendahlian Collective
Posted - 2011.06.17 15:33:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
... the people who live the dream of constant wardecs rarely if ever have protracted wars against single targets so will be largely unaffected.


You're right that an individual war dec rarely lasts a long time. What's more likely is that a defending corp is targeted by a stream of war decs, so that it is in a state of war more or less indefinitely. This proposal is meant to give such corps a break once in a while.

As for the effect on aggressive corps who like to declare wars, on further thought I don't think that needs changing. If someone wants to declare wars all the time, so be it, as long as there is some mechanism to prevent one target from always being in the crosshairs. The original proposal has been edited accordingly.

Amy Garzan
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.18 15:22:00 - [33]
 

Not signed.

Go make some friends, join an alliance, or disband. Thats what a War dec is designed to do. Or just dont play.

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.18 19:30:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Baaldor
Originally by: Dutarro
Originally by: Shandir
Not supported, this is a bandaid to the wardec system - it need to be redesigned from the ground up as it does not currently provide interesting gameplay for both parties. ...


Call me cynical, but the war dec system is not designed to provide interesting gameplay to both parties. It is designed for the attacking party to deprive the defending party of interesting gameplay. IMO, depriving other players of game enjoyment should not be a design goal, but that ship has sailed long ago.

The present proposal is intended to limit said reduction in game enjoyment to a finite time period, for any particular target corp.



You would think, that before signing up for a game, someone would understand the game play before the made a decision...right?









Read the EULA and Terms of Service. The game isn't presented in the way it works; quite the opposite really. How about we Google: how EVE works? Nope, all I get is a lot of stuff on EVA. Aside from Extra Vehicular Activities in space, NASA, and the like, none of it is even closely related to EVE.

We'll try something simpler, and more direct: EVE Gameplay.

We have:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gameplay_of_Eve_Online

http://massively.joystiq.com/2011/05/29/eve-evolved-casual-gameplay-and-public-groups/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVCdD-dhVnk

Right, I think those should cover it..

Herping yourDerp
Posted - 2011.06.18 22:31:00 - [35]
 

I think there should be war decced zones.
nullsec war ( basically free)
lowsec war ( only fighting allowed is low-null sec)
a medium sec which is wars in .5-.7 sec or lower,
and high sec, .8~ 1.0
and have each one cost more then the other.
this makes sense because if i want to wardec a lowsec alliance it would be cheaper then people who stay in the highest security of highsec.
this means
+griefing highsec will be more costly
+ bigger isk sink
+ wardecs in lowsec might happen more
+ people might openly declare war in nullsec more
+ now when wardecced u might be able to undock depending on the type or war

-+ highsec "pvpers" ( read bad players) will cry that they have to pay more

proposed cost corp/alliance
null 2mil/20mil
low 20mil/40mil
med 50mil/100mil
high 100mil/150mil

currently, a wardec is 2mil for a corp ( free) and 50mil for an alliance ( cheap considering someone can run 4 missions and make over 50mil

Danika Princip
Minmatar
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.06.19 02:51:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Herping yourDerp
I think there should be war decced zones.
nullsec war ( basically free)
lowsec war ( only fighting allowed is low-null sec)
a medium sec which is wars in .5-.7 sec or lower,
and high sec, .8~ 1.0
and have each one cost more then the other.
this makes sense because if i want to wardec a lowsec alliance it would be cheaper then people who stay in the highest security of highsec.
this means
+griefing highsec will be more costly
+ bigger isk sink
+ wardecs in lowsec might happen more
+ people might openly declare war in nullsec more
+ now when wardecced u might be able to undock depending on the type or war

-+ highsec "pvpers" ( read bad players) will cry that they have to pay more

proposed cost corp/alliance
null 2mil/20mil
low 20mil/40mil
med 50mil/100mil
high 100mil/150mil

currently, a wardec is 2mil for a corp ( free) and 50mil for an alliance ( cheap considering someone can run 4 missions and make over 50mil


I know you're an alt and all, but what?

Dutarro
Matari Munitions
The Fendahlian Collective
Posted - 2011.06.19 16:53:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Herping yourDerp
I think there should be war decced zones.
nullsec war ( basically free)
lowsec war ( only fighting allowed is low-null sec)
a medium sec which is wars in .5-.7 sec or lower,
and high sec, .8~ 1.0
and have each one cost more then the other [...]


This idea makes some sense. It could be even simpler ... 0.8 to 1.0 is a safe zone, period, i.e. CONCORD does not respect war decs in those systems. Or perhaps the defending corp in a war can ask for safe haven in one particular empire, so only 0.8 to 1.0 of Gallente space would be safe, for example.

This would serve the same purpose as my proposal, which is that player-made corps with mostly inexperienced members would have some relief from constant war decs. Your idea is to provide that relief by location, rather than time, which actually is appealing. If that is done, high level agents should be moved to 0.7 and lower systems, so that players under war dec face a risk/reward choice when deciding if they want to move up to better missions.

Dutarro
Matari Munitions
The Fendahlian Collective
Posted - 2011.06.20 03:36:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Amy Garzan
...
Go make some friends, join an alliance, or disband. Thats what a War dec is designed to do. Or just dont play.


What a great marketing slogan for EVE. Why don't they just put that on the box? "Play our way or GTFO"

Danika Princip
Minmatar
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.06.20 13:36:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Dutarro
Originally by: Amy Garzan
...
Go make some friends, join an alliance, or disband. Thats what a War dec is designed to do. Or just dont play.


What a great marketing slogan for EVE. Why don't they just put that on the box? "Play our way or GTFO"


I think their slogan is actually 'Welcome to EVE online. Here's a Rubix cube. Go **** yourself.'

Baaldor
Black Sail Anarchists
Yarr Collective
Posted - 2011.06.20 16:45:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Dutarro
Originally by: Amy Garzan
...
Go make some friends, join an alliance, or disband. Thats what a War dec is designed to do. Or just dont play.


What a great marketing slogan for EVE. Why don't they just put that on the box? "Play our way or GTFO"


So, what do you think the response would be if you went into a game like WoW and suggest implementing the ability to war dec another guild on any server.

Dutarro
Matari Munitions
The Fendahlian Collective
Posted - 2011.06.20 19:42:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Baaldor
...
So, what do you think the response would be if you went into a game like WoW and suggest implementing the ability to war dec another guild on any server.


WoW also has its contingent of elite players who despise anyone they view as having inferior skills; they would think it's a great idea. The other 90+% of players would hate it though.

Baaldor
Black Sail Anarchists
Yarr Collective
Posted - 2011.06.20 19:59:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Dutarro
Originally by: Baaldor
...
So, what do you think the response would be if you went into a game like WoW and suggest implementing the ability to war dec another guild on any server.


WoW also has its contingent of elite players who despise anyone they view as having inferior skills; they would think it's a great idea. The other 90+% of players would hate it though.



Inferiority complex much? Christ all I was pointing out is the community in those games would probably have an issue with peeps trying to change the game play.







Sephiroth CloneVII
Posted - 2011.06.20 22:32:00 - [43]
 

Something that would make wardecs a bit more sensible is a 1 week cool-down. For new war decs against same corp after one ends (no constant war-decks, ytali convention provision or whatever).

Also have the war dec cost scale like the author suggested, police officers looking other way demand more to cover the flack they getting as gang war and ganking goes on longer.

Dutarro
Matari Munitions
The Fendahlian Collective
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:49:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Baaldor
...the community in those games would probably have an issue with peeps trying to change the game play.


Game play changes all the time, in EVE and every other MMO. Like the recent change to give BPC's a different icon than BPO's .. nobody was against that. Community reaction depends on how each player is affected.

The proposed change here is that war dec's against the same target corp get more and more expensive as time goes on. If you're a 'high sec piracy' corp, all it means is you find a different target, one that has not been at war as long. If you're a 'high sec industrial' corp, it means you get a break from war every once in a while. Why oppose that?

Rytha Main
Amarr
PIE Inc.
Posted - 2011.06.21 17:31:00 - [45]
 


This proposal DOES remove certain aspects of the sandbox elements to this game.

To the original poster, I'd recommend you re-visit your original proposal. After all, this would ultimately negatively affect a certain portion of players in EVE, namely Roleplayers.

Take PIE Inc. for example, one of the oldest pod pilot Corporations in EVE still existence today. They are hardline armarrians by nature, and are obviously at odds with the Republic and The Federation. They also are in perpetual service to the Empire, and prior to their establishing of CVA they constantly had on-going war-decs against pirate organizations within Empire space (whether they RP'ed or not).

How can an RP organization (and many others, like 1pg, KoTMC, DIA, Core, CLRGY, GNS, U'K, EM, EG, KG... the list goes on) legitimately operate wars which are in character for them against hostile entities who may not necessarily entertain a mutual declaration?

Until this is taken into consider, I would recommend leaving things are they are in the sandbox, unless you can think of a creative way to accomodate Corporate freedom in war declarations.

Dutarro
Matari Munitions
The Fendahlian Collective
Posted - 2011.06.21 19:08:00 - [46]
 

Edited by: Dutarro on 21/06/2011 20:30:56
Originally by: Rytha Main

This proposal DOES remove certain aspects of the sandbox elements to this game.

To the original poster, I'd recommend you re-visit your original proposal. After all, this would ultimately negatively affect a certain portion of players in EVE, namely Roleplayers.

Take PIE Inc. for example, one of the oldest pod pilot Corporations in EVE still existence today. They are hardline armarrians by nature, and are obviously at odds with the Republic and The Federation. They also are in perpetual service to the Empire, and prior to their establishing of CVA they constantly had on-going war-decs against pirate organizations within Empire space (whether they RP'ed or not).

How can an RP organization (and many others, like 1pg, KoTMC, DIA, Core, CLRGY, GNS, U'K, EM, EG, KG... the list goes on) legitimately operate wars which are in character for them against hostile entities who may not necessarily entertain a mutual declaration?

Until this is taken into consider, I would recommend leaving things are they are in the sandbox, unless you can think of a creative way to accomodate Corporate freedom in war declarations.


This is a genuine reason to rethink my proposal, that I had not previously considered. I don't have a good answer at the moment but will certainly give it some thought.

EDIT: On further thought, the unwilling targets of RP wars are really no different than any other unwilling target. It may be in character for a corp such as PIE to desire endless war against their RP enemies, but that doesn't mean CONCORD would necessarily sanction it.


Arimius
Posted - 2011.08.18 16:46:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Dutarro
Edited by: Dutarro on 21/06/2011 20:30:56
Originally by: Rytha Main

This proposal DOES remove certain aspects of the sandbox elements to this game.

To the original poster, I'd recommend you re-visit your original proposal. After all, this would ultimately negatively affect a certain portion of players in EVE, namely Roleplayers.

Take PIE Inc. for example, one of the oldest pod pilot Corporations in EVE still existence today. They are hardline armarrians by nature, and are obviously at odds with the Republic and The Federation. They also are in perpetual service to the Empire, and prior to their establishing of CVA they constantly had on-going war-decs against pirate organizations within Empire space (whether they RP'ed or not).

How can an RP organization (and many others, like 1pg, KoTMC, DIA, Core, CLRGY, GNS, U'K, EM, EG, KG... the list goes on) legitimately operate wars which are in character for them against hostile entities who may not necessarily entertain a mutual declaration?

Until this is taken into consider, I would recommend leaving things are they are in the sandbox, unless you can think of a creative way to accomodate Corporate freedom in war declarations.


This is a genuine reason to rethink my proposal, that I had not previously considered. I don't have a good answer at the moment but will certainly give it some thought.

EDIT: On further thought, the unwilling targets of RP wars are really no different than any other unwilling target. It may be in character for a corp such as PIE to desire endless war against their RP enemies, but that doesn't mean CONCORD would necessarily sanction it.




The point about RP-wars is a valid explaination as to why non-mutual wars can even have a place in the game, however it does not provide an explaination as to why the costs of wars are linear.
- With suggested changes to the costs of war, it is still perfectly possible to run RP wars, and as many as you'd like. The suggested changes does not alter this.

The ingame explaination to the suggested changes to war-decs, have base in the fact that wars cost more, the longer they run. Its the same as in real life. Ask any country/government in the world currently at war, if the costs of war are not higher today than they were when war was initiated. Wars simply cost more, the longer they run.
Game mechanics could reflect this.

+1 for suggested changes from a CEO who's corp on 3rd week is under unprovoked attack from a 1-man corp. The 1-man corp supplying base for exploitatious war-behaviour of having alts/friends setup a high-sec gategamp, entering his corp to instantly get into the war with us. Hereby legally being able to kill our members without CONCORD moving a muscle. Seconds after a kill they simply leave the 1-man corp again and re-enter NPC corp, to get away from any kind of possible retalliation from us.

mxzf
Minmatar
Shovel Bros
Posted - 2011.08.19 12:58:00 - [48]
 

I'm in favor of this too. If both sides are enjoying the war, it can be mutual, there's no issue there. But if the aggressor is just looking for easy killboard padding, they should be discouraged for spending weeks on end picking on one group. And if someone angers you enough that you want revenge on them, then you'll have no issue paying increasing costs for it.

Because of the gradual ramping of the costs, it won't stop corps from being wardeced, it'll simply curtail the corps who want to get easy kills off of inexperienced players. I honestly don't see any significant downside to this for anyone except bullys who want carte blanche to pick on newbies (I will admit the RPing corps is a good example, but how difficult would it be for them to cycle through wars with different corps?)

Velicitia
Gallente
Open Designs
Posted - 2011.08.19 14:05:00 - [49]
 

Edited by: Velicitia on 19/08/2011 14:07:29
Originally by: Arimius

+1 for suggested changes from a CEO who's corp on 3rd week is under unprovoked attack from a 1-man corp. The 1-man corp supplying base for exploitatious war-behaviour of having alts/friends setup a high-sec gategamp, entering his corp to instantly get into the war with us. Hereby legally being able to kill our members without CONCORD moving a muscle. Seconds after a kill they simply leave the 1-man corp again and re-enter NPC corp, to get away from any kind of possible retalliation from us.


*that* is probably able to be petitioned... provided you have names for CCP to check out...

ed... the cooldown shouldn't be as bast as the initial ramping...

e.g. costs go up by 50% per week (*1.5), but only go down by 25-33% per week... to make it slightly easier to rebuild...

Last Stepchild
Posted - 2011.08.21 20:30:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Natalie Dorgiers
Originally by: Swynet
Those are just, and nothing else but griefers.

Why aren't they pirates? Part of pirating is figuring out how to get at the juicy innards of your ship. Some leave hisec to where more people are valid targets by default. Others declare war to turn you into a valid target. It's all right there in the rules of the game. Make them hurt for targeting you and you'll get fewer wardecs.


Real pirates dont rely on neutral reppers, real pirates pay the price for being *******s with a lowered sec status that makes them fair game for everyone.

Highsec "merc" and "pirate" corps are nothing but greifers taking advantage of that they think are easy targets. If you wan't to be a pirate go live in low/null.

Spartis Reave
Gallente
Applied Creations
Posted - 2011.08.21 20:37:00 - [51]
 

I see where your coming from Dut but I think if you just made it easier to fight back by reducing docking range, giving neutral reppers an agression timer and maybe increase station agression timers to 2 or 3 minutes.

Botleten
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.22 02:33:00 - [52]
 

If you want to be a 100% carefree miner living in a gumdrops and rainbows carebear land of utter safety, then stay in your NPC corp and organize mining ops from there free from war decs. No need to change game mechanics to accommodate OP's desire to avoid any semblance of danger.


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