A loose idea to revamp highsec wars and gameplay

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
,
1

Greetings.

This is a very short post providing a rough outline of an idea regarding the current wardec system. It certainly deserves more detail and attention, but I wanted to keep it short to explore the ideas and thoughts of others on the subject to see what might emerge.

The problem, as I see it
Wardec mechanics in the past prior to the inclusion of war hq’s (I’m unsure about which expansion exactly) were far too excessive, and oppressive. The current wardec mechanics alleviate this issue by making war declarations potentially more costly when risking the loss of an hq structure, if not impossible when a target is unwardeccable. The good thing about the old system, obviously and despite its flaws, was content – there was a market for even small mercenary corps to assist in the wardec, gatecamp, and docking game shennanigans that were too frequently the norm. The downside is much of this content is no longer viable as actual war-related content tends to be limited to groups that have the ability to engage at a level that requires hq-destroying capabilities. In effect, wars, while still common, seem to involve far less organizations within highsec. Further, the current system limits the ability of smaller corps to wage legitimate wars, effectively tying their hands unless they can afford to risk the considerably larger losses, compared to the older system, or to outright hire a more capable wardeccing corp to wage their war for them.

Firstly, let me clarify that I appreciate the current system. I think the massive changes were much needed. But I think it can be improved upon.

My proposed solution
I think the current system needs to be retained, but built ontop of with a negotiation phase which allows for attackers and defenders to opt, by agreement, for an isk deposit as the predetermined bounty for the victor, giving participants the option to lower the risk of warfare if it is mutually agreed upon. Further, during this negotiation phase, I would like to see an option to recruit external corps as mercenaries. In the case that this happens it would modify the rules of warfare entirely, but temporarily. Once a mercenary group is hired by a participant, the participant is legally removed from the conflict until the outcome of a proxy war is met, at which point, the war resumes as normal, except that only the structures of the loser are open to attack. A proxy war would not allow for any structures to be vulnerable and can only be won by something like a point system, through ship losses on each side.

The negotiation phase with an isk deposit would allow corps to 1) lower the risk of substantial losses through mutual consent and 2) encourage the frequency of wardecs while maintaining the protections corps now have from the oppressive wardecs of the past. The proxy war mechanic I’ve proposed would both 1) obviously improve upon content opportunities available to external corps, and 2) allow for corps to engage in warfare with the possibility of avoiding direct conflict entirely. Lastly, since the current mechanics would largely remain in place, wars could still continue as they are now waged in highsec, should negotiations or other factors fail to affect the war.

In effect, something close to this wardec system should allow wars to be waged on a smaller scale, for cheaper and in such a way that incentivizes particpants to include outsiders, to increase the frequency of wars and while creating opportunity for more war-related content for more players. Meanwhile corps could continue to enjoy protection from the oppressive wardec mechanics of the past.

I’m interested to hear other’s thoughts or suggestions.

Thanks.

2

My personal feeling is that high-sec wardecs are a lost cause at this point. I’d tried expanding on this in a few other drafts, but at the end of the day that’s what it essentially boils down to.

I think it’s a combination of apathy, stagnation and the fact that those of us in high-sec are basically left out of the development cycle at every turn and don’t really have anything to look forward to except the next nerf as a result of an exploit elsewhere.

1 Like
3

I wouldn’t disagree with you, although, it is at least clear that CCP has intended to shake things up and encourage war at least in null with the equinox expansion. At best this might fall in line with CCP’s current objectives. If equinox fails to do the job to the intended effect, perhaps we ought to have good reason to increase wars somewhere, at least.

4

Did anything really change as a result of Equinox though? Other than 10k fewer players logging in?

5

I don’t agree with bringing in a mercenary corp suddenly making the wardeccd corp basically untouchable, if i understand the concept correctly. I can think of half a dozen ways to exploit such a mechanic (use that time to clear out/unanchor structures).
The proposed negotiation phase strikes me as giving a huge advantage to the aggressor via an in game, enforceable “blackmail” style system.
There are several ways around current wardec mechanics that can help protect individual pilots. Use a holding alliance for all structures. Have corp members in another, non alliance corp with no structures.
It also means you have very limited ability to defend your structures when the holding alliance is wardeccd. But your individual pilots are “safe” from concord sanctioned aggression.
I confess, the last time I was involved with hisec wars was during the glory days of RvB.

6

High-sec structures are borderline defenseless. Only the engineering and mining structures have some (limited) benefit, but even still I can’t imagine that most corporations go to great lengths to defend them.

7

No structure can defend itself against a capable siege fleet.
If a corp isn’t prepared to fleet up and defend their structures, then they don’t deserve to have them.

1 Like
8

Only one war hq

Every player corp is eligible

HS wars drastically improve.

Bonus points if moons are reverted and we have something to fight over in hs again.

9

What did they change with moons?

10

Scarcity and ore distribution removed all non-goo ores from moons. Making HS moons very similar.

Before the change you had some moons that were well over 200% the average value and we actually saw hs corps and alliances fighting over them.

They still weren’t worth more than your average r8 so most of your larger organized groups ignored them meaning it was almost exclusivity just small hs groups fighting between themselves.

1 Like
11

Sounds interesting.

12

I don’t agree with bringing in a mercenary corp suddenly making the wardeccd corp basically untouchable, if i understand the concept correctly. I can think of half a dozen ways to exploit such a mechanic (use that time to clear out/unanchor structures).

I’ll confess that I’m not an expert on upwell anchoring/unanchoring mechanics during wardecs, though I know this can already be exploited to invalidate a war, or it used to be the case. To be honest I’m not certain defenders unanchoring structures would be a terrible idea. Isn’t the point of the current system to protect corps from oppressively excessive wardecs? Then why should wardecs lock defenders into a situation where all of their structures are at risk? Whether that would become a common practice is questionable, given the loss of rigs and other complexities of unanchoring an aged and well-used structure.

The proposed negotiation phase strikes me as giving a huge advantage to the aggressor via an in game, enforceable “blackmail” style system.

We already have this, and it is one of the things I think could be improved upon in favor of evening the playing field between attackers & defenders. At present, the blackmail works when stationary upwells are threatened by a force which cannot be contested. Changing the rules during the proxy conflict could add an interesting degree of complexity to the existing process, though exactly how that proxy conflict works is left undefined by this post. There’s probably a myriad of ways the idea could be subtly altered to promote that balance.

There are several ways around current wardec mechanics that can help protect individual pilots. Use a holding alliance for all structures. Have corp members in another, non alliance corp with no structures.
It also means you have very limited ability to defend your structures when the holding alliance is wardeccd. But your individual pilots are “safe” from concord sanctioned aggression.

Protecting pilots is not the goal of my idea at least. It’s all about upwells being the primary risk I’m concerned about. Not because I want to protect upwells necessarily. It’s because a significant population of corps are incentivized to avoid warfare if they own any. I just want to encourage warfare by potentially lowering the stakes. It would be a move toward something closer to the old system, but retaining the protections of the current system, since it seems the current system went too far when fixing the old problems in discouraging warfare. Personally I think the right balance is somewhere between the old system and current wardec mechanics.

13

I’m not sure, is it?
It gives corps a method of avoiding wardecs altogether by simply not owning any structures. They still get the tax advantages of being in a player corp.
HiSec needs some method of sanctioned aggression. Otherwise, for example, whoever put down the first POCO on a planet wins that planet, forever.

Because that’s the whole point?
Structures anchored in all other parts of space are constantly under threat of being attacked at any time.
Hisec structures are only vulnerable to attack after a war has started, so there’s that 24 hour window to get all your stuff safely into an NPC station.

Either lose the rigs and save the structure and core, or lose everything when it goes boom. Your choice.

The defenders start with a huge advantage: being able to select the window for timers.
As for ‘evening the playing field’ why in the name of divinity’s edge should that be A Thing™?
You want to ‘even the playing field’, make friends who will come and help you defend your structures against the nasty wardeccers. Have your corp fleet up and actually fight. Disrupt the wardec corp while timers tick down. Start hunting THEM.
Years ago, there was a group called PIRAT that wardecced all and sundry. Their main targets were haulers coming in and out of Jita.
They dec’d my WH corp. When that war ran out, we turned around and wardec’d THEM.
We staged a Talos fleet out of a non 4/4 station in Jita with our med clones.
Neutral probers would scout them out in Jita, when we found a target, we’d all PodX to Jita, hop in our Talos and get punted on top of the target (they would often have their combat ships at a safe off the gates with neutral scouts to tell them when a target was landing).
I caught and we killed a Devoter with over 350 killmarks in that op. We popped several very blingy Proteus along with their HG Implant pods (nobody expects the smartbombing Talos).
After a week of this, we actually forced them out of Jita. We kept up the campaign for two weeks then let the wardec lapse.
It was over a year before they wardec’d us again, and they only did that because they were paid to do it.

You want to beat a bully? Fight back. Give them a bloody nose and they’ll likely leave you alone. Exactly the same as with schoolyard bullies.

14

You’re asking an awful lot from the new players I’ve seen?

1 Like
15

Step 1: Login… (“Where’s my carrot?”)
Step 2: Undock… (“Any update on that carrot?”)
Step 3: Show up for a fight… (“Wait, wtf?! Can I bring my Drake?”)

1 Like
16

:rofl: Sad times indeed…

1 Like
17

“Yes, you can bring your Drake. No, you will not get reimbursed for your blinged out Drake. No, you cannot bring your ‘combat fit’ Venture instead. How have you survived in high-sec this long?”

18

By having far better ships than the Drake to work with when I did? And living in a WH instead?

1 Like
19

“So… about the Drake…” lol

20

I started in 08 so I have an experience advantage. CC all you want but learning the nuances of the game are still hard.

Drakes a great ship early on. I just wish players aspired to more robust ships later on instead of becoming sheep.