open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked Corp hopping to avoid a War Dec. Exploit , lame or fine?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic

Doonoo Boonoo
Posted - 2008.05.11 10:29:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Doonoo Boonoo on 11/05/2008 10:29:39
Opinions,possible fixes,reasons why this is happening please ladies and gents.

Thanks


Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2008.05.11 11:18:00 - [2]
 

Not everyone likes pvp, or plays this game for pvp. People shouldn't be forced to pay for having to sit in a station, so if they wish to leave a corp that is war dec'd, I see no problem with that.

In fact, I feel current empire war dec mechanics are nothing more than a licence to kill for the aggressor, with no real victory or loss conditions, and I feel this should be changed to make empire wars more meaningful for the players involved.

Sir Substance
Minmatar
Suddenly Ninjas
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
Posted - 2008.05.11 11:27:00 - [3]
 

indeed. i feel that while the prices for wars between standalone corps is so low, at the very least players should be allowed to leave corps to dodge a wardec.

lets face it, for 2 mil a week, i personally could keep 50 corps dec'd around the clock, 24/7/365.

if a corp to corp war cost 50mil a week, maybe people wouldn't use them to squash starting corps, something i feel is one of the lowest tactics in eve.

corp warfare should be used to solve territorial disputes (be it moons or constellations) and to solve grudges, not for randomly harassing people.

Leandro Salazar
Quam Singulari
Posted - 2008.05.11 11:36:00 - [4]
 

Corp hopping to avoid them is no lamer than most of the wardecs themselves.

Ethaet
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.05.11 11:40:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Sir Substance

if a corp to corp war cost 50mil a week, maybe people wouldn't use them to squash starting corps, something i feel is one of the lowest tactics in eve.

corp warfare should be used to solve territorial disputes (be it moons or constellations) and to solve grudges, not for randomly harassing people.

This ^^

viod hawk
Amarr
B4D W0LF
Systematic-Chaos
Posted - 2008.05.11 11:50:00 - [6]
 

50 mil a week wont stop anything...100 mil a week wont either nor should it. there are LOTS of good reasons for a war dec...

like the guy who stole from me and my corp and started his own corp with the ill gotten gains.

sometimes folks....its just personal. as for those who are 100% carebear , join a noob corp and never worry about it again.

Doonoo Boonoo
Posted - 2008.05.11 12:07:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
Not everyone likes pvp, or plays this game for pvp. People shouldn't be forced to pay for having to sit in a station, so if they wish to leave a corp that is war dec'd, I see no problem with that.



Maybe I need to be more specific.I'm talking about people making multiple corps and moving all their members in and out of a sucession of corps created for the sole purpose of avoiding war.

Originally by: Dierdra Vaal

In fact, I feel current empire war dec mechanics are nothing more than a licence to kill for the aggressor, with no real victory or loss conditions, and I feel this should be changed to make empire wars more meaningful for the players involved.


I agree that victory or loss conditions could be added but I don't think this will stop Corp hopping.

Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
Posted - 2008.05.11 13:05:00 - [8]
 

Something should be done about wardeccing corps that love to stomp smaller corps for the heck of it. As said by Dierdra Vaal, it's a licence to kill for the aggressor. And a pretty cheap licence too.

However, declaring war is also used as means to deliver payback to corps that engage in griefing and hi-sec crime. And if there's some new mechanic which allows corps to avoid wardecs even more easily than corp-hopping, you can bet that these criminals will use it.

Hmm, something which discourages unprovoked wardecs, and encourages provoked ones...

Doonoo Boonoo
Posted - 2008.05.11 13:11:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Doonoo Boonoo on 11/05/2008 13:14:42
^^ Ank understands that this effects more than just new players/starter corps.

/waves a white flag in Anks direction

Originally by: Leandro Salazar
Corp hopping to avoid them is no lamer than most of the wardecs themselves.


The reason for the dec, the agressor and the target are irrelevant. If you think this method is legit then it's open for everyone to use. Even legitimate targets.

Example: Corp A recruits only low sp/new players who love to mine.They move into a system used by corp B to mine in and start to strip all the belts.Corp B hires mercs to dec corp A. Corp A does not want to PvP so they jump all their members into another corp and continue to strip the belts.

Dawnstar
Gallente
Kiroshi Group
Exiliar Syndicate
Posted - 2008.05.11 13:21:00 - [10]
 

Corp wars are a delicate topic. They fill a useful purpose but also can be subject to what many consider abuses.

The system also contains holes that you can fly a titan through.

The low price for war declarations is one problem. They're used a bit more casually than I think is good for the game.

On the flip side, being able to bail out of a corporation at war makes it easy to run from a war if the attacked party so desires.

How to address this? I think that the pricing structure for wars needs to be addressed. How specifically? I think that the frequency which a corp uses war declarations needs to be a factor in the pricing. Sort of a multiplier that increases the cost factor the more time a corp spends in a non-mutual war they declare. This would decrease over time when the corp was at peace.

Now, obviously war declarers could pull the same kind of scheme... making and cycling through corporations to avoid the cost factor. So it would be best to attach this sort of counter to the characters and the corporation they are in would use a multiplier based on the characters who are members (and adding some sort of an extra fee for members joining after a war dec to account).

If such a system were in place, the second problem of characters bailing from a war needs to be addressed as well. I'd require characters to pay a fee to leave a corp that was at war. I'd further put a similar system in place to track characters who are running from war declarations as well. Characters who have left corporations that are at war repeatedly would have to pay higher and higher fees to get away, with this multiplier diminishing over time as they don't resort to these sorts of tactics.

Essentially I want wars to be used (generally) as a system to allow players to deal with occasional problems in their own manner while also discouraging the (repeated) use of the war system to harass newer players, which discourages the growth of the player base.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.11 21:04:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
Something should be done about wardeccing corps that love to stomp smaller corps for the heck of it


Yea, they should buck up and fight. Or hire some mercs.

Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
Posted - 2008.05.11 21:29:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
Something should be done about wardeccing corps that love to stomp smaller corps for the heck of it


Yea, they should buck up and fight. Or hire some mercs.


Yeah that's really going to help your 5-10 man real-life friend corp that just got wardecced by some 100 man grief corp. As if they have the funds to hire enough mercs in the first place.

Arcani Victus
Posted - 2008.05.12 00:40:00 - [13]
 

Don't make it appear as if all wardecs are performed by griefers. There are legitimate reasons for a lot of wars, and when the enemy hops corps, it's very frustrating. I think that if you want to leave a corp at war, you should still be a valid wartarget (or at least flashing red) for 72 hours.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.12 01:20:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
Something should be done about wardeccing corps that love to stomp smaller corps for the heck of it


Yea, they should buck up and fight. Or hire some mercs.


Yeah that's really going to help your 5-10 man real-life friend corp that just got wardecced by some 100 man grief corp. As if they have the funds to hire enough mercs in the first place.


Too bad, buck up and learn how to fight or don't give them any.

ed: It occurred to me that i never answered the original question.

If you don't allow people to leave a corp when its wardeced then you will open up a new and terrible exploit that cannot be discovered wherein a corporation wardecs another for the purpose of keeping its members in that corp/corp in that alliance.

Very similar to the "constantly grant roles" abuse except there would be no way to determine if it was legitimate or not.

Ben Derindar
Dirty Deeds Corp.
Posted - 2008.05.12 02:13:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Ben Derindar on 12/05/2008 02:16:24
Originally by: Sir Substance
corp warfare should be used to solve territorial disputes (be it moons or constellations) and to solve grudges, not for randomly harassing people.

And how would you propose that CCP differentiate, without the introduction of some clumsy, artificial game mechanic?

Much of the fighting that goes on in 0.0 and low-sec is random anyway, particularly at the smaller end of the scale with gatecamps, etc. Empire wars are just an extension of that, and serve as just another reminder (like suicide ganking) that, in Eve, nowhere in space are you 100% safe.

So corp-hopping to avoid Empire wars does smell a bit lame to me as it effectively consentualises PvP. But on the other hand, simply not allowing people to leave wardecced corps is easily exploitable as Goumindong has pointed out.

One thing I do agree with though is that the cost of declaring war is too low, as are other related costs such as setting up a corp and even setting up an alliance. Isk is just so easy to make these days.

EDIT: spelling

/Ben

zoolkhan
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2008.05.12 04:54:00 - [16]
 

lame but not an exploit

Vio Geraci
Amarr
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2008.05.12 06:21:00 - [17]
 

You could spend hundreds of man-hours rewriting the war dec system so that you are still in a state of war when you leave the corp upon which war was declared, no matter which corps you join.

Hanell Steel
Posted - 2008.05.12 09:22:00 - [18]
 

However there are many corps that use the wardec system to turn highsec into low sec for them. Point and case, a corp with 5 4+ year pirate member simultaniously wardecced 3 completely unrelated corps for no reason other than to allow some newbie killing fun in high sec (as all three were decently populated new player dedicated industrial corps) I think that something should be done about this. Can something be done? I dont know, and as such I think the mechanic should be left as is for now.

ellie mayer
Posted - 2008.05.12 10:32:00 - [19]
 

Perhaps the war deccing corp should provide a reason for the war to concord as it's a concord santionable action ( Yulai agreement or something like that.)

Have to provide realistic terms for peace in the Dec, You could tie this in with the 24hr wait for hostilities to begin.

This wouldn't stop the random war dec's but may stop the war before the week is up if the dec'd corp submits to the terms, would probably give the few days of fighting you get now, just not the boring station camp for the last 4 days or so.

Would give both sides a war, may stop small corps from breaking up from a week of grief, and a taste of action the same time, as i would think the corp hoping starts from being totally out gunned and helpless then it turns into an easy way out.


Would take a lot of working out as i only just thought of it and ovious abuse's ironed out, but if a corps going to grief it's going to grief i guess.



The stupidest thing though is the way the deccing corp screams that the bunch of new players or industrial corp should " grow a pair " and fight, THEY made war on a undefendable corp and can never see the irony in their statment !!! Rolling Eyes

Doonoo Boonoo
Posted - 2008.05.12 10:43:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Hanell Steel
However there are many corps that use the wardec system to turn highsec into low sec for them. Point and case, a corp with 5 4+ year pirate member simultaniously wardecced 3 completely unrelated corps for no reason other than to allow some newbie killing fun in high sec (as all three were decently populated new player dedicated industrial corps) I think that something should be done about this. Can something be done? I dont know, and as such I think the mechanic should be left as is for now.


So if those 3 large industrial corps had hired Mercs to dec the 5 players who were out for some 'newbie killing fun' and the 5 players hopped to another corp and re dec the 3 corps that would be fine too yes ?

annab
Amarr
Dromedaworks inc
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2008.05.12 10:45:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: annab on 12/05/2008 10:46:24
I hate it when a corp just moves into another to me its the same as disbanding the corp exploit.

I think a war movement fee is needed. If you leave you pay concord for the right to do so. It should high enough to hurt the wallet but not hurt too much.

The waring corp should get a cut after all they have lost a target. Very Happy

Hanell Steel
Posted - 2008.05.12 10:48:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: ellie mayer
Perhaps the war deccing corp should provide a reason for the war to concord as it's a concord santionable action ( Yulai agreement or something like that.)

Have to provide realistic terms for peace in the Dec, You could tie this in with the 24hr wait for hostilities to begin.

This wouldn't stop the random war dec's but may stop the war before the week is up if the dec'd corp submits to the terms, would probably give the few days of fighting you get now, just not the boring station camp for the last 4 days or so.

Would give both sides a war, may stop small corps from breaking up from a week of grief, and a taste of action the same time, as i would think the corp hoping starts from being totally out gunned and helpless then it turns into an easy way out.


Would take a lot of working out as i only just thought of it and ovious abuse's ironed out, but if a corps going to grief it's going to grief i guess.



The stupidest thing though is the way the deccing corp screams that the bunch of new players or industrial corp should " grow a pair " and fight, THEY made war on a undefendable corp and can never see the irony in their statment !!! Rolling Eyes


I Totally agree with your thoughts in the matter, problem will be what is a deccable offence, that will be hard to sort out. To tie in with your last statement I love the well youve got 2 v 1 odds on us... yeah 2v1 in numbers but theve got 20X the sps.... and they never fight unless they have 3+ v 1 odds, even against the youngest toon. And before we get any posts about you should have joined a more well established/defended corp WHY? its more fun to be with your freinds and build up your own and why should eve turn into massive corps only? why shouldnt smaller corps/newer corps be able to play as well without getting greifed hmmm.... Truth is these corps dont want honest even fights, just easy kills.

Doonoo Boonoo
Posted - 2008.05.12 10:49:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: ellie mayer

The stupidest thing though is the way the deccing corp screams that the bunch of new players or industrial corp should " grow a pair " and fight, THEY made war on a undefendable corp and can never see the irony in their statment !!! Rolling Eyes


The stupidest thing is the way the industrial corp has failed to provide security for its members and recruited only miners and industrialists.

The recruitment policies of the CEOs of these corps make them unable to defend themselves so the only option they have is to hire mercs.THEY made a weak corp.


Hanell Steel
Posted - 2008.05.12 10:52:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Doonoo Boonoo


So if those 3 large industrial corps had hired Mercs to dec the 5 players who were out for some 'newbie killing fun' and the 5 players hopped to another corp and re dec the 3 corps that would be fine too yes ?



Sure, but that would only go to show that they are out to greif new player/industrial corps, further proving the point that something needs to be done to tweek the war system. And btw its ok for a week, maybe two, but when you hit four, five, six, whats the corp to do then?

Hanell Steel
Posted - 2008.05.12 10:55:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Doonoo Boonoo
Originally by: ellie mayer

The stupidest thing though is the way the deccing corp screams that the bunch of new players or industrial corp should " grow a pair " and fight, THEY made war on a undefendable corp and can never see the irony in their statment !!! Rolling Eyes


The stupidest thing is the way the industrial corp has failed to provide security for its members and recruited only miners and industrialists.

The recruitment policies of the CEOs of these corps make them unable to defend themselves so the only option they have is to hire mercs.THEY made a weak corp.




And whats wrong with recruiting a specific vein? Why must we all join large well defended corps? point is that there is no reason for the war and it makes no sense for concord to allow it... and whats your definition of properly defended? You do realize that the corps doing these deccs have extreemely old combat toons, outnumber them, and out sp the industrials. like I said a couple weeks is fine but when you start going beyond that it gets excessive

Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2008.05.12 11:11:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Doonoo Boonoo
Example: Corp A recruits only low sp/new players who love to mine.They move into a system used by corp B to mine in and start to strip all the belts.Corp B hires mercs to dec corp A. Corp A does not want to PvP so they jump all their members into another corp and continue to strip the belts.



This is perfectly fine. What many people seem to forget that this is a GAME that people play for FUN. Not only that, but people pay real life money for it too. Why should someone be forced to pay real money to do something they do not enjoy?

I believe the following mechanic should be implemented in empire warfare (CONCORD sanctioned wars): (*)

The aggressor declares war on the aggressed. In their war dec they have to specify their Victory Condition. The Victory Condition is a measure of success. For the sake of this argument (**), lets take the ISK value of destroyed enemy ships. The value is determined by the median price in sell orders of said ship in Jita 4-4 at the time of its destruction. The aggressor decides their Victory Condition is 1,000,000,000 isk in destroyed ships. The aggressed is informed of the Victory Condition in the CONCORD mail announcing the war dec.

Once the war is active, the aggressor officially Wins the war if they can meet (or surpass) their Victory Condition, while preventing their opponent to meet that same Victory Condition. This means the aggressor has to inflict 1,000,000,000 isk worth of losses on the aggressed, while sustaining less than 1,000,000,000 isk in losses themselves. If they win, they have the option to extend the war with another week, and have to set a Victory Condition again (this can be the same condition, or a different one). Obviously a CONCORD fee still has to be paid.

However, if the aggressor fails to meet their Victory Condition, they lose the war (and the aggressed wins the war). If the aggressed meets or surpasses the Victory Condition, the aggressor loses the war (and the aggressed wins the war). When the aggressor loses the war, the war is ended, and they cannot issue a new war dec on the same target for the duration of the past war. So if a war had been going on for 5 weeks and they lose, they cannot reissue a war dec on that same target for 5 weeks.

Any wins or losses in empire wars should be made public. Possible the existing corp wars page in the Corporation window can be used for this.

Explanation of the idea:
This still allows people to declare war when they want/need to, but will force the aggressor to perform well. Instead of it being a simple licence to kill it encourages goal oriented gameplay. This mechanic also gives the aggressed a means to win, and end the war. Current mechanics give the aggressed no control whatsoever over the war that is waged on them.

The implementation of the Victory Condition, and its application to BOTH sides will encourage aggressors to try and establish a fair Victory Condition. Afterall, if they set it very low (example: 1mil isk worth of destroyed ships), it will be easy for the aggressed to meet it as well, and would cause the aggressor to lose the war. If they set it very high, they make it difficult for themselves to win the war.

(*) NOTE: This is just an idea and is still open for debate/change.
(**) NOTE: this is only an example. This can be changed. It could also be expanded to allow for different types of victory conditions.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.05.12 11:38:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Hanell Steel
However there are many corps that use the wardec system to turn highsec into low sec for them. Point and case, a corp with 5 4+ year pirate member simultaniously wardecced 3 completely unrelated corps for no reason other than to allow some newbie killing fun in high sec (as all three were decently populated new player dedicated industrial corps) I think that something should be done about this. Can something be done? I dont know, and as such I think the mechanic should be left as is for now.


The first time that REPO industries wardeced Merch Industrial[when we were still operating in low-sec domain and were very small and very young] we camped them into their main high-sec staging station until they offered to pay us to go away.

Granted, the second time we were not as successful. But it just goes to show that all it takes is a little bit of gusto and organization to turn the tides. 5 4 year old players should be no match for three decently populated new player dedicated industrial corps.

Esmenet
Gallente
Posted - 2008.05.12 13:54:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Dierdra Vaal

This is perfectly fine. What many people seem to forget that this is a GAME that people play for FUN. Not only that, but people pay real life money for it too. Why should someone be forced to pay real money to do something they do not enjoy?



This is a silly argument that is often repeated but it has no meaning. EVE is based on pvp, and you risk getting blown up the second you log on. If you hate that why are you playing EVE? There are many games that are based around pve where you dont have to fight if you dont want to. But EVE is different.

To use your own words: Many people find this pvp mechanic to be FUN. Why should anyone force us that enjoy this (we pay money too) to stop?

The suggestion about victory conditions sounds ok to me though.

Originally by: Hanell Steel
And whats wrong with recruiting a specific vein? Why must we all join large well defended corps? point is that there is no reason for the war and it makes no sense for concord to allow it... and whats your definition of properly defended? You do realize that the corps doing these deccs have extreemely old combat toons, outnumber them, and out sp the industrials. like I said a couple weeks is fine but when you start going beyond that it gets excessive


You can recruit however you want, but if you dont realise the consequences you are simply a bad CEO. If you only want miners in your corp, fine but try to be on friendly terms with corps with combat pilots and you can get them to help you incase of a war. Maybe even form an alliance. Because the game revolves around pvp, and if i want your hulks out of the belts i can wardec you and blow you up. You cant ignore this aspect of the game. EVE is a battle for resources and might makes right.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.05.12 14:22:00 - [29]
 


I think the issue can be addressed best by re-working the war-dec mechanics to have some automatic resolution outcomes in the case of mismatched slaughter and radical drops in membership of wardecced corps. What I basically mean is that rather than a war-dec being a fully-open-ended and potentially eternal conflict mechanic (as long as you pay war fees) it becomes a tool of short term conflict objective where the purpose is to inflict damage on the target and the system itself will assess the "winner" after a couple of weeks of fighting when it becomes clear who is getting the better of the exchange. I'd support a system where the war continues as long as neither party gets higher than (say) 75% victory rates (and the fee is paid) but when the exchange gets to that point and stays there for a week the system itself will award a "win" for the winners and force a "surrender" from the loses and automatically end the war with various victory boons for the successful side.

Now this is quite a rough idea at the moment, but I can see it tying into enhancements for the merc profession (they can be invited to the war by contract agreements and average their results with the defending/attacking client). I also think there could be a "membership collapse" condition when a majority of the membership flees the at war corp and triggers auto surrender as well.

(obviously for corps that simply want an endless war they'd just click mutual and not have to worry about results)

As for opinion about why this happens (war dec evasion) - answer is pretty simple - some players don't like wars and don't wish to worry about being attacked in empire. Thats why they jump ship on war dec and ultimately its their choice and freedom to do so. But I would like the system to recognize the consequence of this choice by registering surrenders and defeats to the entities that are losing wars in this way. A pure industrial outfit wouldn't really care to the reputation impact of these results - (profit is their bottom line not pvp boasting rights) but a corp/alliance of prideful pvp flyboys would definitely care, and be more likely to stand and fight to keep their reputation solid in the pvp environment.

With the right polishing to this kind of war-dec objective system you'd see a lot more dynamic potential to the whole business and war-decs would become much more interesting than the largely consequence-free and meaningless things they currently are.

Dierdra Vaal
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2008.05.12 17:47:00 - [30]
 

Edited by: Dierdra Vaal on 12/05/2008 18:15:26
Edited by: Dierdra Vaal on 12/05/2008 17:48:09
Originally by: Esmenet
This is a silly argument that is often repeated but it has no meaning. EVE is based on pvp, and you risk getting blown up the second you log on. If you hate that why are you playing EVE?

...

To use your own words: Many people find this pvp mechanic to be FUN. Why should anyone force us that enjoy this (we pay money too) to stop?



PvP is a major driving force behind the games economy (among other things) but saying that eve is all about pvp and that someone who wishes to mine in peace should play a different game is just being shortsighted. There are many people who do not look for conflict and who do not wish to 'test their mettle' time after time, they just want to mine some veldspar. I believe that NOBODY should be forcing anything on anyone. Carebearing shouldnt be forced on anyone (so no 100% safe zones) and pvp shouldnt be forced on anyone. I believe everyone has a right to play this game, this sandbox game, the way they enjoy it. I also believe people do NOT have the right to ruin anyones gameplay consistently (meaning, one gank is ok, repeatedly targetting the same person to drive him or her out of the game is not). If someone claims their idea of enjoyment is to ruin other peoples fun (thus creating a problem with my two statements), I would suggest them to seek professional counceling.

Then, saying that pvpers would be forced to stop pvping is nonsense, and you clearly cannot turn my words around. There is PvP everywhere. 0.0, low sec, and high sec. If pvpers war dec a corporation, and all members of that corporation leave to an NPC corp, that doesnt stop the pvpers from getting pvp. All they need to do is go to low sec, 0.0 or war dec another corporation. And - if the pvpers have any real balls or desire for actual pvp - they'll war dec an actual pvp corp, instead of industrials.


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