@Kezrai_Charzai / @Dirk_Kajhone
I’ve read the multiple attempts to find a “failsafe” system but I have to remind everyone to keep it simple.
Any concept that you can’t explain to a total newb in less then a minute - and he could then rephrase it in his own words - is too complex.
I know that some people like to invent concepts because the have fun doing braingames and trying to adress all possible issues, but that quickly leads to overengineering. Please keep in mind that EVE is already overcomplex and in many areasy totally unnessessary so. That too is a reason many people won’t even try it. If the game looks like you need a Master degree in economics, physics and law to understand it, that makes it not very appealing to a large player base that just want to come in, enjoy their time (and pay for the servers and future development while doing so).
The two most urgent problems that needs to be adressed are:
-
Wars are currently a pure, mostly riskless, math-issue, giving a wardeccing entity a 100% guaranteed profit for each of them because the loot of a single core already pays for the whole cost of the wardec. And every other loot comes on top of that.
– In combination with –
-
Wardeccers can mass-declare and simultaenously threaten thousands or even tenthousands of players, they don’t have to make any kind of evaluation or “wise decision” who they target. They don’t need reasons other than wanting to grind money from basically anyone daring to anchor a station.
You can adress both points with rather simple fixes and thus remove probably 95%+ of the current problems:
1. make wardecs more expensive than cores by quite a margin. (OR remove cores as a requirement for basic functionality as a corporation home, just require them for industrial purposes)
Example: Initially the act of declaring war costs 500M + another 500M for each week you want to keep it up. If the attackers can’t score a kill within a week, the war is automatically invalidated and you can’t target the same corp for at least 3 months.
This would make the first week cost 1B, thus being a net-loss for the attacker if the target has only 1 M-citadel and is active enough to evacuate it. This alone would reduce the number of wardecs against small corps by a huge amount because core-grinding isn’t profitable any more. But people still could go to war if they have a political, strategical or personal issue with the target corporation.
2. limit the number of wars a corporation/alliance can issue to force them to make decisions that have consequences. This enables them to target groups that they deem to be valuable targets for their “PvP” interests, like large Nullsec alliances or WH corporations that do logisitics in HS. But they can’t throw out a 100(s) wardecs each week any more to target or keep at war basically anyone at once without even having any relation or issue with the target.
Example:
This means, the big wardeccing groups either focus on large lucrative mega-targets or if they want to keep mass-targeting smaller groups, they would have to essentially split-up a lot. With each squad being on their own corp, needing their own War HQ, paying their own wardec fees and so on. Making it all way too costly to mass-harass smaller groups for extremely low profit chances.
(Adressing constant member-hoppings to shift around numbers as nessessary would be pretty simple by implementing long delay timers before you can switch membership between wardeccing corporations.)
And then lets just see what happens. If players really find loopholes and keep curbstomping the weakest targets possible even without a financial interest, just to get their easy beatdowns, this could be adressed further if nessessary. There are always some thumbscrews available to punish undesired behavior.