open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Wardec, more like Faildec
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Author Topic

Shadowsword
The Rough Riders
Ares Protectiva
Posted - 2008.12.27 18:25:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Flaming Lemming
I have to disagree somewhat about this last line. If someone is fightint an actual war with you, haulers/etc. are vital targets...anyhting that can mess up logistics is important in war.


Alt corps.

A wardec has an insignifiant effect on the logistics of a 0.0 alliance.

Concorduck
Gallente
Posted - 2008.12.27 18:48:00 - [32]
 

a possible fix

mutual wars reduces the cost of each wardec to a quarter, but BOTH corps/alliance must pay that sum.

so, instead of having 1610379812 mutual decs on an alliance as a wardec bouncer, we'll have 2-3, and most "rich" alliances can play out that.

easy fix, mutual 1-on-1 war now costs 250'000 isk to both warring corps.

EASY AS HELL!

Janu Hull
Caldari
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2008.12.27 19:53:00 - [33]
 

By the way, flaming me is pretty useless. I live in 0.0, so I don't need a stinking wardec to go shoot people.

I just find it pathetic that so-called hardcore PvPers feel the need to stalk carebears behind wonky mechanics rather than man up and take it with the big boys.

Concorduck
Gallente
Posted - 2008.12.27 20:01:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Janu Hull
By the way, flaming me is pretty useless. I live in 0.0, so I don't know **** about what happens in empire and i got nothing better to do than ****posting on forums

Nephilius
Caldari
Pillage and Plunder Salvage Co.
Posted - 2008.12.27 20:10:00 - [35]
 

So how does the system determine whether or not it is a mutual WarDec, and not a non-consensual commencement of hostilities from one corp to another?

WarDeccing does serve a purpose, just not the purpose that most use it for. For those who use it to muscle the LEGITIMATE competition, it's survival of the fittest corp. Grievances, true grievances, are one of the purposes. Even having a mutual want/need between two corps to engage in PvP in HiSec could seriously be considered a legitimate purpose. (Although seriously, how come they don't just fleet up and duke it out that way?) Being called an idiot does not qualify under that, and I have heard of Decs being meted out for that. Now that should tell you something right there.

To WarDec someone because someone deigned to call you an idiot, moron, etc. shows the true, trivial purposes of the flawed system. "Dude called me pond scum, I'll the spend 2 mil, which I can make back pretty quick, to grief and torment him." The trivial cost of WarDecs make it inherently trivial in nature. 2 mil would be acceptable for two individuals to duke it out, but not two corps. A corp should have a crapload more money at its disposal, and therefore, sound reasoning dictates that there should be no problem in raising the cost of a WarDec. 20 mil would be fair, I think. I believe it would eliminate a great many trivial Decs and streamline the system to more of what it was originally envisioned as: A mechanism that allowed competing corps a way to force their competition out of their region so that they may claim it for their own purposes.

As it stands now, the WarDec system is nothing more than a hunting license for the somniferous and inane to go pewpewpew with those who have no desire to do so.

Guilliman Roboute
Posted - 2008.12.27 20:49:00 - [36]
 

Just make it cost 500mil-1B per wardec, stops the useless decs' and makes way for the real 'wars' to be fought between corps/alliances.

A wardec should not be fundable by 1 person so freely..

Dirk Magnum
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2008.12.27 20:52:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Guilliman Roboute
Just make it cost 500mil-1B per wardec, stops the useless decs' and makes way for the real 'wars' to be fought between corps/alliances.

A wardec should not be fundable by 1 person so freely..


And this puts the mechanic beyond the financial means of small corps trying to run other small corps out of the local asteroid belts or whatever small corps do.

Having some kind of sliding cost scale would probably be better and I think CCP have brought this possibility up for discussion (though didn't say it was going to be implemented) before.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.12.27 20:57:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Nephilius
So how does the system determine whether or not it is a mutual WarDec, and not a non-consensual commencement of hostilities from one corp to another?

WarDeccing does serve a purpose, just not the purpose that most use it for. For those who use it to muscle the LEGITIMATE competition, it's survival of the fittest corp. Grievances, true grievances, are one of the purposes. Even having a mutual want/need between two corps to engage in PvP in HiSec could seriously be considered a legitimate purpose. (Although seriously, how come they don't just fleet up and duke it out that way?) Being called an idiot does not qualify under that, and I have heard of Decs being meted out for that. Now that should tell you something right there.

To WarDec someone because someone deigned to call you an idiot, moron, etc. shows the true, trivial purposes of the flawed system. "Dude called me pond scum, I'll the spend 2 mil, which I can make back pretty quick, to grief and torment him." The trivial cost of WarDecs make it inherently trivial in nature. 2 mil would be acceptable for two individuals to duke it out, but not two corps. A corp should have a crapload more money at its disposal, and therefore, sound reasoning dictates that there should be no problem in raising the cost of a WarDec. 20 mil would be fair, I think. I believe it would eliminate a great many trivial Decs and streamline the system to more of what it was originally envisioned as: A mechanism that allowed competing corps a way to force their competition out of their region so that they may claim it for their own purposes.

As it stands now, the WarDec system is nothing more than a hunting license for the somniferous and inane to go pewpewpew with those who have no desire to do so.



Let's talk about what "non consensual" means.

Nephilius
Caldari
Pillage and Plunder Salvage Co.
Posted - 2008.12.27 21:04:00 - [39]
 

Edited by: Nephilius on 27/12/2008 21:06:29
Side B didn't agree to recieve the high explosive suppositories that were administered by Side A.

Does that clear it up? Twisted Evil

500 mil IS a bit hard to swallow. Like I said, 20 mil would be reasonable. I just want to see WarDeccing fixed, not demolished! 500 mil would be reasonable for a large Alliance perhaps, and I use the word 'perhaps' cautiously.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.12.27 21:12:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Nephilius
Edited by: Nephilius on 27/12/2008 21:06:29
Side B didn't agree to recieve the high explosive suppositories that were administered by Side A.

Does that clear it up? Twisted Evil

500 mil IS a bit hard to swallow. Like I said, 20 mil would be reasonable. I just want to see WarDeccing fixed, not demolished! 500 mil would be reasonable for a large Alliance perhaps, and I use the word 'perhaps' cautiously.


If you're going to increase the price, you'd better increase the value.

Qordel
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
Posted - 2008.12.27 21:28:00 - [41]
 

Looks like masternerdguy has can-flipped your thread. What a ****.

masternerdguy
Gallente
Meerkat Maner
Posted - 2008.12.27 21:29:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Qordel
Looks like masternerdguy has can-flipped your thread. What a ****.


i have ideas different from this guy, thus new thread.

Qordel
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
Posted - 2008.12.27 21:34:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: masternerdguy
Originally by: Qordel
Looks like masternerdguy has can-flipped your thread. What a ****.


i have ideas different from this guy, thus new thread.


You don't understand how a discussion works. One person gives their thoughts. Then you give yours. You don't need an entirely new thread to address each and every individual's viewpoint.

With the type of threads you've been creating recently, you'd probably be best served to primarily commenting within existing threads, anyway. A shame, because from what I gather (and from reading EVE-Search results) you used to be an apparently respected poster.

masternerdguy
Gallente
Meerkat Maner
Posted - 2008.12.27 21:36:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Qordel
Originally by: masternerdguy
Originally by: Qordel
Looks like masternerdguy has can-flipped your thread. What a ****.


i have ideas different from this guy, thus new thread.


You don't understand how a discussion works. One person gives their thoughts. Then you give yours. You don't need an entirely new thread to address each and every individual's viewpoint.

With the type of threads you've been creating recently, you'd probably be best served to primarily commenting within existing threads, anyway. A shame, because from what I gather (and from reading EVE-Search results) you used to be an apparently respected poster.


nope that was never true, and i am gonna keep posting till somone agrees wit me.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.12.27 21:47:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: masternerdguy
Originally by: Qordel
Originally by: masternerdguy
Originally by: Qordel
Looks like masternerdguy has can-flipped your thread. What a ****.


i have ideas different from this guy, thus new thread.


You don't understand how a discussion works. One person gives their thoughts. Then you give yours. You don't need an entirely new thread to address each and every individual's viewpoint.

With the type of threads you've been creating recently, you'd probably be best served to primarily commenting within existing threads, anyway. A shame, because from what I gather (and from reading EVE-Search results) you used to be an apparently respected poster.


nope that was never true, and i am gonna keep posting till somone agrees wit me.


Yet the sun only has enough hydrogen for another 4-5 billion years....

Droog 1
Posted - 2008.12.27 23:43:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: masternerdguy

and i am gonna keep posting till somone agrees wit me.

Then you should make a thread titled:

Should I stop posting.

Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
Posted - 2008.12.28 00:26:00 - [47]
 

English? More like failish.

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2008.12.28 00:56:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: Qordel
A shame, because from what I gather (and from reading EVE-Search results) you used to be an apparently respected poster.


Are you on drugs? Masternerdguy a respected poster? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA.

Anyways back on topic, war decs are needed to resolve conflicts that arise between two corporations/alliances. Wars were never meant to be able to shoot random people for no reason. The problem is that when you declare war on a high sec corporation, they have no inspace assets and no real reason for people to engage. Most "real" corps/alliances have POS and key systems that they use for logistics and ratting that you can challenge, but high sec corps have nothing to shoot except for the players.

I've been toying around with the idea of making corporation offices and headquaters into shootable services when a war is declared. If you knock out the service for the better part of a week, you get the one month rental fee. Not sure on rewards/penalties for finishing the war and stuff, but I thought it'd be much more interesting than our current system.

Qordel
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
Posted - 2008.12.28 01:00:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: Vaal Erit
Originally by: Qordel
A shame, because from what I gather (and from reading EVE-Search results) you used to be an apparently respected poster.


Are you on drugs? Masternerdguy a respected poster? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA.


You're right, I was just making an empty effort to be somewhat nice in my criticism. I don't even know why, since he doesn't deserve it. :)

Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
Spreadsheets Online
Posted - 2008.12.28 02:09:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Concorduck

Wardec is broken.
Evidence: Alliances having 15 mutual wars with 1-man corps

15 or 150 mutual wars with 1man corps make no difference.

Mutual wars have no effect on wardecs.

The reason it's so expensive is because they already have 4 wardecs active with no mutual. Meaning all those people are paying good isk to keep that wardec active.

Sorry Concorduck but you are simply an ignorant troll.

Stab Wounds
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2008.12.28 02:38:00 - [51]
 

It's pay to grief system. Only similarly skillpoint corps should be able to have war dec.

Dirk Magnum
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2008.12.28 02:45:00 - [52]
 

Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 28/12/2008 02:47:58
Originally by: Stab Wounds
It's pay to grief system. Only similarly skillpoint corps should be able to have war dec.


But what other game mechanic either now or at any point in Eve's history has followed the line of reasoning that only people of similar skill should be able to interact with each other in a particular way?

Also, what would happen to FW if such a plan were implemented? Even further degradation of an already underdeveloped game feature, which FW totally is if you were expecting it to be anything more than a free permanent war dec.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2008.12.28 04:41:00 - [53]
 

A couple of fixes to wardecs: first if a skill can't be trained on a trial account, don't let people flying ships requiring that skill undock unless they're in a player corp. Second, start with a corp-hopping cooldown set to 1 day and double the cooldown every time they hop corps. After a cooldown has expired, reset the cooldown to 1 day.

This way you can easily declare war on people who are competing with you in mining, hauling, whatever. The purpose of the economic suppression wardec will be achieved regardless of whether they disband their corporation or simply stay docked.

In the meantime when a corporation is subject to a wardec the individuals can't just indefinitely corp-hop to evade war.

Davina Braben
Posted - 2008.12.28 04:50:00 - [54]
 


Dirk Magnum
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2008.12.28 04:53:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Davina Braben
http://www.plasticbamboo.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/hello-kitty-cat.jpg


Lolcats spotted.
War thread has escalated.

Infinity Ziona
Minmatar
Cloakers
Posted - 2008.12.28 05:00:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Janu Hull
By the way, flaming me is pretty useless. I live in 0.0, so I don't need a stinking wardec to go shoot people.

I just find it pathetic that so-called hardcore PvPers feel the need to stalk carebears behind wonky mechanics rather than man up and take it with the big boys.

Not everyone wants consensual PvP. When you undock in 0.0 in your combat ship your agreeing to fight. When I come down there and appear in your system I agree by my being there to fight you. Your form of PvP is consentual.

I find it much more fun and satisfying to track down and kill people that don't agree to fight. Its harder and it is more satisfying for me and it is what I choose to do when I pay for a subscription.

You seem to think that what satisfies you should also satisfy me. Not true.

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2008.12.28 05:03:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn
A couple of fixes to wardecs: first if a skill can't be trained on a trial account, don't let people flying ships requiring that skill undock unless they're in a player corp. Second, start with a corp-hopping cooldown set to 1 day and double the cooldown every time they hop corps. After a cooldown has expired, reset the cooldown to 1 day.


This is sexy stuff, I wish CCP devs had the balls to put this in. I say you have no balls CCP, I said it!

Oh and my cat is ready to do battle! (let's see if linking from lolcats works...)

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Concorduck
Gallente
Posted - 2009.01.03 15:16:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Jason Edwards
Originally by: Concorduck

Wardec is broken.
Evidence: Alliances having 15 mutual wars with 1-man corps

15 or 150 mutual wars with 1man corps make no difference.

Mutual wars have no effect on wardecs.

The reason it's so expensive is because they already have 4 wardecs active with no mutual. Meaning all those people are paying good isk to keep that wardec active.

Sorry Concorduck but you are simply an ignorant troll.


I hate trolls that can't troll. but i hate the smart people that don't know **** of what they're talking about.

Set up Alliance.
Set up Corp.
Dec the Corp. Declare Mutual.
Join Alliance.
Corp Drops Alliance, Repeat.

Now you have 136712032694615 mutual wars with Corp, that effect the alliance count of unmutual wars, since they're not considered mutual with the alliance.

Do you spot the problem now, mister Know-It-All-With-Screenies?

Esmenet
Gallente
Posted - 2009.01.03 15:27:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: Flaming Lemming

I have to disagree somewhat about this last line. If someone is fightint an actual war with you, haulers/etc. are vital targets...anyhting that can mess up logistics is important in war.


Sadly its extremely easy for an alliance to keep its logistics safe from any such action. For instance keeping logistics ships in a npc corp makes them immune to such actions. One of the many aspects of EVE warfare that is completely broken.

Kweel Nakashyn
shadow and cloaking
Yggdrasill.
Posted - 2009.01.03 15:38:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Shadowsword
While I agree with non-consensual pvp, high-sec not being entirely safe, and so on, I must say that the current wardec system IS broken.

You declare a frigging WAR, for God's sake! If you do it, you should go all out against whoever your opponent is.

I have seen dozens of wardecs come and go, and only once did I see a group of 10+ war targets together. I have yet to see one such group actively seek a fight, instead of camping a gate.

The current wardec mechanics are just an excuse for legal piracy.

There's need for two changes, imho:

- It should give both sides more possibility for a fight. For exemple, by adding a one minute docking timer, aggro or not aggro.

- It should be much more expensive, enough to stop frivolous wardecs.

What I would do is localizing target and hunter.
The wardeccing corp reveal their member's positions while in Empire to the wardecced guys. The wardecced guys reveal their positions while in Empire to the wardeccer guys.

This way :
- no wardec just for fun.
- costly because ships will be broke
- not a source of intel for low-sec/0.0 movements

The timer change is one of many solutions among others but it won't change many things imo.
"xxx wardec your corp" : then your corp should defend themselves, hunt the hunters and so on. The hunter could avoid bigs gangs and hunt only solo ships/small gangs.

CCP could make the scan button cost 1m per blip if they want moar isk sinks.

Currently our alliance is wardecced one on two weeks. Without success at everytime... Make us willing to go duckhunt !! :) Let's bring BoB vs Goons in the Empire !


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

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