Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

[Mr_Epeen]

Anyone else find it odd when he replies to himself like he’s a completely different person?

Dissociative identity disorder? It would explain a lot.

Mr Epeen

[Ogun_Ferraille]

I have seen other people on the forum with this disorder. eg dysonpaddington

[MB_ThePhotographer]

I finally F’ing found it!

The Struts - Primadonna Like Me

I have so many music vids that I can’t classify them into subcategories since so many apply to so many other things.

[Mr_Epeen]

@MB_ThePhotographer

I finally F’ing found it!

I bet one of your other personalities new exactly where it was. You should have waited until it was his turn at the wheel.

Mr Epeen

[MB_ThePhotographer]

@Mr_Epeen

knew exactly where it was

Fixed it for you.

[Komi_Valentine]

Blackflag doing the old reinforcing their own WarHQ trick to get a 4 day timer instead of the 24h one.

[Arthur_Aihaken]

@Komi_Valentine

Blackflag doing the old reinforcing their own WarHQ trick to get a 4 day timer instead of the 24h one.

Their Astrahus is painted the wrong color.

[Arthur_Aihaken]

I’m going to (attempt to) keep tracking of proposed solutions, as this thread is getting a tad ‘long in the tooth’… Apologies in-advance if I mis-credit anyone. I’m just including the most recent ones - but if you want to post the sub-link within this thread I’ll revise below (thanks).
. . . . .

???
Maybe you can summarize for me?
@Kezrai_Charzai
. . . . .

Starbase Charters to operate structures (HS/LS)
@Max_Deveron
Starbase charters are once again required as fuel to operate structures (HS/LS).
. . . . .

Empire Standings to anchor/maintain structures (HS/LS)
@Max_Deveron @Arthur_Aihaken
Corporations need a certain Empire standing in order to both deploy and maintain structures (10x the security status, ie: 0.9 = 9.0 standing). If the corporate Empire standing should fall below the level required for any structure(s), structures in those specific regions immediately drop into “Low Power” state.
. . . . .

Increase the Cost of wardecs
@Arthur_Aihaken
Increase the cost of wardecs from the current 100m to between 500m and 1b ISK.
. . . . .

[Babooshkie]

Having watched the Twitch Developer’s Stream, I now understand the game’s current state. If those guys are making the decisions we’re in for a bumpy ride.

[Kezrai_Charzai]

Good idea, but I think it might be help to (briefly) identify what problem the “solution” is actually solving. (Using W-E to mean "War Eligible here.) For instance:

Hatch Nasty: address war cost between groups of different sizes, to reduce the “big vs small” effect:

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

Or just make them never drop and thus remove the 600m+ guaranteed payout. In order to fix wardecs, I think CCP has to first remove or minimize perverse incentives. For starters, wars shouldn’t generally be profitable affairs. It should be a costly venture that a group enters into only because it’s necessary to achieve their goals. I also think war-immunity-by-default was a mistake. It was blunt instrument to correct a complex problem. My thought is that every non-NPC corp should be war eligib…

---

Arthur Aihaken: reduce limitations, increase incentives to be W-E and penalties to be immune

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

Let me throw a different idea out for high-sec: • No structure requirements or requirements at all - other than the wardec’ing corporation needs to be in high-sec. • All high-sec corporations have the option to opt-in or opt-out of wars (with the caveat that if you’re in a current way, you need to wait 24-48 hours to exit). • Opting “in” gains that corporation a 50% loyalty point and 50% mining yield bonus (regardless of whether or not it’s at currently at war with anyone). If the attacked co…

---

Max Deveron: limit structures to corps that do lots of PvE locally, require Charters and Standings

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

Instead of trying to go forward, or backwards… How about we think of maybe taking a step sideways… An idea i can think of is … 1.) Add Starbase charters as fuel to every player structure in HS. 2.) Create a Rig for Citadel Class Upwells(Astrahus and Fortizar only) This limits an entity to 3 wardecs per Citadel Class Upwell Structure. 3.) Remove Quantum Cores as a req for HS Upwell structures. What Im proposing here, is if an Upwell(any type) runs out of Starbase Charters or Fuel Blocks it …

---

Gloria Exercitus and others: increase station defenses

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

1 ) Allow more than one person to run station defences 2) Beef up those station defences. I don’t think stations need more shield/armour…just more DPS capability. 3) Perhaps introduce a new station module that could, for 30 seconds or so at a time, disable all repping devices within 100km ( this would also disable defending logi too…so a two edged sword ). The thing that makes most station bashing fleets so strong is logi. In fact I think (3) alone would totally re-balance things.

---

Stefnia Freir: allow non-W-E corps the option of a single limited structure to provide for growth:

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

They could had smaller structures that would not be war eligible nor core dependant, while not disputing a local resource like a moon. The issue is that would allow corporations at war to use such a structure with an alt corporation, to have staging in a space occupied by at-war corporation. This may be solved by having those structure not have a modifiable ACL, therefore only corp members could dock/rep/be tethered/etc. . Actually I think raitarus and astrahus should be those ones : don’t r…

---

Kezrai Charzai: address the full range of issues identified by CCP in CSM 13. As well as those identified by players over past decade. Corp size differential, incentives to be W-E, disincentives to be immune, war farming, defender participation, all covered. Complex to understand the ‘behind the scene’ details, much more simple in actual practice.

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

This Wardec proposal addresses specific concerns stated by CCP in the CSM 13 minutes (as noted in this post ), those being: Risk Reward: wardecs “extremely skewed in favor of aggressors”, “with low risk” Game Activity: “people involved in wars will simply not play whilst the war is ongoing” Defender Engagement: “want to see a scenario where the defenders who may not normally be interested in wars would engage in them” Player Retention: “war declarations allow a small number of players to nega…

---

Syzygium: limit war farming by large war cost increases. Limit number of wars possible:

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

@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 overc…

---

Arthur Aihaken: expanding on the structure bonuses and empire standings concept:

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

In the simplest terms, the corporation would need to be able to maintain a certain standing with each Empire to be able to wardec and maintain a wardec in that region - just having a structure and the defender having a structure isn’t enough. This is just in high-sec only. If your corporation’s Empire standing in that region drops below a certain level - any active wars immediately end. Something like 5.0 to deploy a structure and 7.0 or higher to issue a wardec. In addition, deploying a stru…

---

Gloria Exercitus: sliding scale of factors to determine W-E. 15-minute suspect flag for deccers.

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

I have the solution… Scrap the binary ‘war eligibility’ ( on of off ) flag entirely. Introduce a sliding scale of factors that make a corp more, or less, eligible for both being able to attack and for being able to do the attacking. Two separate scales. Defender Scale :- To be eligible for attack a corp must be over a certain size Members who swap to another corp if condition (1) is met are still eligible up to a week after the swap. This prevents corps simply temporarily reducing member co…

---

Gloria Exercitus: Grace period free from W-E for small corps when place structure:

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

The Finanar war is an example of the size of corp you are talking about. Parabellum had well over 150 structures. The fleets involved in destroying them were probably the largest in recent highsec history…with there being over 2000 in the system at one time. Both Wrecking Machine and Blackflag’s HQs were destroyed. The battles ( there were several major ones ) were epic…and the entire ending turned upon Parabellum making a mistake that prevented some allies corp swapping, if I recall correct…

---

Arthur Aihaken: Grace period plus war costs increase, discounted per multiple structures:

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

A grace period is a good start. I’d make it 3 months (90 days). I’m on the fence about whether it should be a one-time thing or repeatable after you lose all your structures (as it would give you time to rebuild). I think we need to increase the price for wardecs to at least 500 million ISK - and I think this should be scalable - but in reverse, ie: if you’re wardec’ing a corporation with a lot of structures (and in theory, a larger corporation as a whole) - the price comes down by 100 million …

---

Syzygium: Standings and charters again, and also member shuffling/alt corp/access lists:

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

I wholeheartedly agree. Structures should require Empire Standing for the corp anchoring them. Maybe not 7.0, but some. In times of Epic Arcs (selectable Standing boost, easily sharable) and by using the anchient “Data Center” tag trades, it is pretty easy to push a member that you really want to have in the corp over the limit needed) Citadels and POCOs also should require Starbase Charters, explained often enough why (POCO empires in the hand of Altcorps protected by blob alliances). Member…

---

For completeness, I’ll include an early poster that seemed a bit ranty to me. Perhaps it will make more sense to you.

Distaine: you’ll have to figure out what issues it addresses by yourself:

Are Wardecs always going to be broken? Is a fix even possible?

CCPlease… THIS IS FOR YOU… and others to fix mistakes or comment. There should be NO structure requirements. No CCP anti-pvp, blob always win rules. The larger the corp, the cheaper it should be to war dec them because they actually do have the ability to defend themselves. Structure fights are trash compared to ship vs ship combat, No one in their right mind likes bashing structures as a requirement. War cost should be a War Bond. A one-time fee. War can only end when both CEOs meet togeth…

---

That’s all the meaningful proposals I could find. If proposing something new/different, it helps if you identify what problem with wardecs you’re trying to solve, some support for why it is a problem, and then what your solution does to address it.

Despite some of the animosity and sniping, it’s been a good discussion so far. My thanks to the OP for keeping up with it and everyone who’s contributing to the debate!

[Arthur_Aihaken]

^ That’s a better summary than mine - thanks!

[MB_ThePhotographer]

“Is a fix even possible?”

It’s been 10 yrs now that question has been asked…

No workable ideas have been proposed in that time, so I think CCP is happy with the status quo at this point.

[Bakster_Kane]

It seems like wardecs are working as intended its just that most people dont seem to like it

[MB_ThePhotographer]

From what perspective are you looking at it from? Your own where it makes you profit? Or number of players?

I started when small corps were viable, lot of numbers back then.

[Bakster_Kane]

They must be working as intended otherwise they would have been changed by now

[MB_ThePhotographer]

The whales pay for the game so wd’s will always be limited since that’s what makes CCP $.

[Chad_Frostpacker]

I disagree as there is no cooling off period for corporations to rebuild.

There is an option for Mutual Wars

Though the system is not always working towards the correct approach.

[Bakster_Kane]

Its funny how in the other thread someone also sais “its bad on purpose because CCP makes more money this way”

[MB_ThePhotographer]

Apparently, it does? 60k numbers vs now? Someone has to be covering the cost of those lost numbers.

[Chad_Frostpacker]

Years ago there was less chance of a Capsuleeer trusting the online payment system.

Years ago it would be a rare event to open the wallet for some plex to try and catch up.

Not now as it isour time and what our time is worth to us!

/Siri can not understand me