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

[Arthur_Aihaken]

@stefnia_Freir

data are only as interesting as you want to make propaganda out of them.

The interesting part would be to see the ship/structure kills pre/post wardec changes. I have a feeling it’s still being abused in the same manner - just to a lesser extent. And by “abused”, I mean keeping that one crab from crawling out of the barrel of crabs…

[Gloria_Exercitus]

@Syzygium

Except the game isn’t a Savannah Simulator.

Oh come off it.

@Syzygium

picking targets that will most likely not be able to muster a defense

You mean like how lions pick on the weakest ?

The only difference between Eve and the savannah is that in Eve you can choose whether to be a lion or a wildebeest.

[Arthur_Aihaken]

@Gloria_Exercitus

The only difference between Eve and the savannah is that in Eve you can choose whether to be a lion or a wildebeest.

Honey badger feels left out… (although honey badger doesn’t give two F*s anyway…)

[stefnia_Freir]

@Gloria_Exercitus

The only difference between Eve and the savannah is

That one is real, and the other one is the result of your imagination as it suits your propaganda.

The Challenges of Lion Cubs: Surviving the Wild to Adulthood

[Arthur_Aihaken]

Sorry, couldn’t resist…

[Gloria_Exercitus]

@Arthur_Aihaken

I bet there’s some really interesting data there.

One of the reasons Wrecking Machine stopped the wrecking for a while ( I wonder if anyone noticed ) was to allow the natural regeneration of player owned stations. I’ve seen data that shows there clearly were fewer stations to bash.

However, that raises the issue of whether the sort of 3 or 4 man corps that got easily bashed were even capable of defence in the first place and whether it is just too easy for people to set up shop and own a station. Is it actually reasonable for a person to expect their 3 man corp to be able to set up a 2bn ISK station somewhere and be able to avoid attack ?

[MB_ThePhotographer]

@Kezrai_Charzai

If you didn’t read them, how do you know that none of the suggestions are any good?

Because none of them get repeated and vetted on the forums or Reddit?

@Kezrai_Charzai

The problem wasn’t poorly designed PvP mechanics. The problem is there’s always a small group of so-called PvPers who will target every easy kill they can find, regardless of the damage it does to new players or the overall game.

Let’s take a case study from EVE itself. I checked the wardec list last week, it had 161 active wars. The top 5 wardeccers (4 alliances, 1 corp) had 121 of those wars (3/4). The top alliance, Blackflag., had 61, over a third of all active wars.

Looking at Blackflag alone, those 61 wars, costing them 6.1B ISK for the week, over 90% of them had no kills on either side. The 4 wars that resulted in any kills, showed 23 ships and 1 citadel killed by Blackflag., roughly 20B ISK worth. Enough of that was in drops (not hulls) that the loot probably covered the wardec costs for the week. None of the defenders killed anything.

Blackflag’s wars were against 33 corps and 28 alliances. The corps held a little over 500 members, the alliances over 25,000. Blackflag has 293 members.

So one wardec corp with 293 members (assuming no alts, deadwood or placeholder members) can threaten over 25,000 players, turn a profit from it, lose nothing… and that’s just one week! That works out to one small alliance with 293 members holding a gank-threat against hundreds of thousands of players per year.

Some people will say ‘hey that’s what makes EVE great’. Here’s what CCP had to say about it (I bolded some parts for emphasis):

“In the EVE Leadership meeting the CSM was presented with numbers resulting from research
into the state of war declarations in EVE and those numbers quite starkly showed how
asymmetric the situation is, and how war declarations allow a small number of players to
negatively affect a huge number of people, with low risk. These numbers may be discussed
further by CCP at a later date.”

“CCP Fozzie goes on to clarify that the metrics for the current system clearly show that it’s in a state that CCP is not happy with. The current system is extremely skewed in the favor of aggressors. There is also the fact that people involved in wars will simply not play whilst the war is ongoing.”

“CCP Larrikin pulls up activity data for players of corporations that have wars declared against them and it shows considerable activity drops in all activities during the war. They also show that the low activity continues after the war ends. Brisc Rubal noted that the numbers here were so stark, it would justify immediately removing war decs as a mechanic and promising a fix after the fact. The CSM in general were surprised at how stark the numbers were and noted it was clear this mechanic was having a significant impact on player recruitment and retention.”

“They (CCP) also want to see a scenario where the defenders who may not normally be interested in wars would engage in them as they see a clear scenario where they can get a victory condition and end it.”

---

Summary: It’s clear that just like every other MMORPG trying to mix PvE with open PvP, the very small percentage of players who target easy, safe kills regardless of the damage done, create a drastically negative impact for the game as a whole. As in, a few hundred wardeccers driving thousands or even tens of thousands of players per year away from the game.

And the “good” scenario where defenders actually engage in wars… simply doesn’t happen. Not to any significant degree. Wardecs are just a low-risk ego stroking and farming operation that profit very few and costs the game very many.

I have to conclude that the situation for wardecs is and always has been terrible - and I’ve got links going back to 2012 (when wardecs were still fairly new) stating the same thing.

A full and drastic re-write would be needed to fix this, not just some tweaks and patches. I’ll post a sample re-write next week, after I go through some of the notes I made over the years on this.

Sources:

GDC 2018: Ultima Online post-mortem with Richard Garriott, Starr Long, Raph Koster, and Rich Vogel | Massively Overpowered ‘Magic through serendipity’: Raph Koster on the glorious mess that was Ultima Online | Massively Overpowered The Evolution of New World’s PvP - News | Official New World: Aeternum Website https://assets.ctfassets.net/7lhcm73ukv5p/4tSKkWWjRe0yagAAYgOUYC/99b4c9be6477bafab52de5b85b786ff5/CSM_13_Winter_Summit_Minutes.pdf

Thank you for making my point for me. The WD sys is borked.

@MB_ThePhotographer

no one has a good solution to this problem.

What part dd I get wrong?

[Gloria_Exercitus]

@Kezrai_Charzai

So one wardec corp with 293 members (assuming no alts, deadwood or placeholder members) can threaten over 25,000 players

Seriously ?? 25,000 players can’t muster a defence against a force 1/100th of their size and they feel ‘threatened’ ??

[Arthur_Aihaken]

@Gloria_Exercitus

Seriously ?? 25,000 players can’t muster a defence against a force 1/100th of their size and they feel ‘threatened’ ??

Most of the corporations in high-sec are small (<25 player) operations, so no - I don’t think most can mount an effective defense against an attacker 20-25x their size. The wardec stats that were posted don’t lie - you’ve essentially got a half dozen or so groups conducting the vast majority of wardecs in high-sec.

[Syzygium]

@Gloria_Exercitus

The only difference between Eve and the savannah is that in Eve you can choose whether to be a lion or a wildebeest.

And I thought the main difference would be that EVE is a game that should return profit to the company and create fun for those playing it. My bad.

If you like that lion/prey/hunt scheme so much, venture out into the wilds where no CONCORD magic force protects you from threats. A true lion doesn’t hide in artificial shelters. He is out in the open, not afraid of anything trying to jump on him. No sir, a “lion” is the last thing I associate with someone living in the regulated theme park that HighSec is.

[Gloria_Exercitus]

That’s not how Kezrai mis-represents it. She’s talking about 293 people ‘threatening’ 25,000. I mean, that is just laughable, even by Eve standards. Add to that the fact that I’ve been on operations alongside Blackflag and I’ve never seen them field 293 man fleets…they are often not even half that size. Even Wrecking Machine fleets I’ve been on have ( unless they are in support of some huge Absolute Order fleet ) often been less than 30 players.

[Arthur_Aihaken]

@Gloria_Exercitus

That’s not how Kezrai mis-represents it. She’s talking about 293 people ‘threatening’ 25,000.

Well, I’m not taking about 293 players threatening 25k players. I’m talking about a half dozen corporations conducting in excess of 75% of the current wardecs in high-sec. If you’re attacking a 10-20 player corporation, chances are only a small percentage (<25%) is going to show up to fight. So even showing up with 10-20 attackers is probably enough to ensure victory.

I have fond memories of my teeny tiny corporation being continuously wardec’d under the old system - and the attackers were always showing up in force. Maybe this isn’t so much the case now, but knowing how infrequently players login these days - it doesn’t surprise me in the least that many of these wars just go uncontested.

Wardecs are currently just another form of legalized ganking.

[Gloria_Exercitus]

@Arthur_Aihaken

Well, I’m not taking about 293 players threatening 25k players. I’m talking about a half dozen corporations conducting in excess of 75% of the current wardecs in high-sec.

Sure its around half a dozen. There simply isn’t room for more. In fact I can recall Wrecking Machine attacking one of the other station bashing groups precisely because they were wiping out too many stations, so even among those half a dozen groups there is rivalry too. There is also the matter of ‘protection’…where some groups will protect ( for a fee, of course ) corps from other groups. It’s dog eat dog…precisely how Eve is supposed to be. What is the problem ?

[Arthur_Aihaken]

@Gloria_Exercitus

What is the problem ?

Hey - it doesn’t affect me in the slightest. But the law of diminishing returns (players, activity) would seem to point to a continued decline in available targets - to the point where this content may dry up completely.

I could afford to drop and maintain a structure - but what would be the incentive for placing a legal bullseye on my ship? For the small amount I manufacture I’m still way ISK ahead using an NPC station. Not to mention that it’s safer and asset safety doesn’t come into play.

So my playstyle (like I suspect many others) will just be to continue to “blue-ball” everyone looking for easy kills in high-sec (via wardecs, ganking, etc.) I guess that’s the only form of “PvP” that I can respond in kind with when arrayed against overwhelming numbers: denial.

[Arthur_Aihaken]

I’ve been stating this for over a decade: if regions don’t start managing their resources (in this case, players and available targets) - that content is going to completely dry up and become extinct. Gank and wardec all you want - when the active player numbers turn really negative it will be too late to reverse course.

[Gloria_Exercitus]

@Arthur_Aihaken

would seem to point to a continued decline in available targets

Sure…I’ve seen data that supports that, and its also one of the reasons Wrecking Machine has been less active. But then most stations are really little more than poorly armed ships plonked in space and immovable during a wardec. Nobody would expect to park their 3bn ISK Golem in Uedama and go AFK and find it still there the next day…so why would it be any different with a station ?

I do think that stations should be given far larger defence capabilities…possibly even allowing more than one person to operate defence. To me the real issue is that stations themselves are so weak…way more so than any defence force that might defend them. That’s the issue that needs fixing.

[Arthur_Aihaken]

@Gloria_Exercitus

I do think that stations should be given far larger defence capabilities…possibly even allowing more than one person to operate defence. To me the real issue is that stations themselves are so weak…way more so than any defence force that might defend them. That’s the issue that needs fixing.

I agree with this entirely. And I think it’s probably the root cause for a lot of related issues (wardecs, etc.) As I’ve indicated previously (and elsewhere), it’s not just a question of changing wardec mechanics - there are a myriad of other related issues as well.

Rather than the “savannah” analogy - I think this is more akin to “Lord of the Flies”; your choices are to go along with the masses (null-sec), try to eke out an existence elsewhere (wormhole, low-sec) or just try to stay hidden long enough not to get hunted (high-sec).

[Gloria_Exercitus]

It always surprised me when I first found out that only one person could operate station defence…having to switch between neuting logi and firing at DPS ships before logi re-organises, or other such tactics. Even just allowing two people to operate station defence would make a huge difference. One person could concentrate solely on logi while the other concentrates on the DPS ships. Simply being able to disrupt logi for any extended period would in many cases make all the difference…as the thing that makes station bashing fleets ( even small ones ) so formidable is precisely that logi.

[Glenduil]

@stefnia_Freir

I think this is irrelevant to the discussion so far.

I think my comment about increasing the defensive power of a structure was very relevant. Otherwise, it’s worth it to just log off, let the bully team destroy it, and move on.

What’s more, take out that core before logging off (if you’re able to once you know war is coming).

As it stands, structures arent worth protecting in high sec. They can easily be rebuilt. They have garbage defensive capabilities and cost less to build than most of my ships. If removing all war decs from high sec isn’t an option and neither is increasing their defensive capabilities, then the best option is just to move out all your stuff to a station and log off. Let it get destroyed and then build another one elsewhere.

In high sec, there are stations everywhere that can hold all the valuable possessions. There’s absolutely no need to burn all your ISK defending these weak structures when they’re so easily replaced.

How’s that for relavence?

[stefnia_Freir]

@Gloria_Exercitus

To me the real issue is that stations themselves are so weak…way more so than any defence force that might defend them. That’s the issue that needs fixing.

That would not change a thing.
Being able to wardec for the sake of it is the issue.

There is nothing to do about Eve being all about numbers most of the time.
And with alts, if you need more numbers and can afford them, it’s a cost that is recouped (can even sell SPs)

You could increase the cost of wardecs, with flat value (like 200M per wardec per week) or additive invest (so more cores to field in structure for each wardec), but in the end the one with the most numbers can most safely make it unbearable for the others.

@Glenduil

I think my comment about increasing the defensive power of a structure was very relevant. Otherwise, it’s worth it to just log off, let the bully team destroy it, and move on

The issue is that you talk about structures specifically, but other people want to get back to the wardec-anything system.

The main issue is how wardecs in themselves are an issue, and what would “free buffet wardec” actually bring to the game (spoiler : nothing).

Your issue is how wardecs can still make sense when they allow people to club defenseless players, who just dropped a structure with ignorance of the actual risks and costs of it, as they were trying to build something with friend in the “high security” area of a submarines-in-space simulator, mostly without any experience of PVP.

Remember that most people in the game don’t care about the PvP. Fun fact, Eve is not a PVP game : it’s an open-pvp MMORPG with “safe area” which is not safe.