My whole bottom line point is that the whole corporation mechanism and pretty much everything that is related to it such as wars, taxes, corp permissions, hangars and benefits for being in a corporation are just broken and outdated.
Trying to apply small changes here and there such as a NPC tax will only complicate things and force good corporations to add more procedures on their list such as corporation hopping or cycling war eligibility status on and off to dodge wars and the NPC tax. While the good and active corporations will find their ways around these small changes the smaller and not so active corps which you could call ābad corpsā will just allow their members to suck the changes and become even worse corporations. Bottomline issue still remains where people canāt separate the good from the bad.
So adjusting old systems with small changes will add a lot of dev workload but provide pretty much nothing to the game. The way they fixed POCO gantry permission roles regarding the war bug clearly shows that even a tiny change to the corporation system requires weird workarounds so the code spaghetti behind this system must be insanely horrible.
So trying to apply bandages and tackle issues one by one with changes like this is just waste. We do not need to fix the issue we need to fix the cause of the issue which in this case is the outdated corporation system. Only reasonable change that would rly help here on the long run would be to rewrite how corporations work OR introduce a new level of corporations which would be written on a new code while leaving the old corporation mechanism on the background creating sort of ranked corporations.
But why would they? Whatās the purpose of exposing yourself to war for a very brief window of time, when you can not do it at all? Maybe Iām just not seeing it. Please explain.
Right, but groups with structures outside of high-sec arenāt really the prime targets for wars, since they operate in areas where they can be openly attacked anyway.
Youāre right, Iām probably not getting this entirely.
But also if someone is hopping corporations every day to avoid wars, that becomes very visible in their employment history, and hurts their reputation. Few respectable organizations would want to recruit someone like that, which was actually the case for players who had a bunch of ādec shieldā entries in their histories.
Anyway, like I said before, all of these near-exploit (or actual exploit) loopholes need to be patched out anyway. If a war is a 7-day fee commitment, then other player actions, such as those that make players war-eligible, should have a similar commitment.
I agree.
Itās really just a band-aid solution thatās predicated on the lack of willingness to implement more drastic and extensive changes. Not having any deterrents toward war ineligibility right now is the worst possible outcome, however, and Iād rather have a band-aid solution than nothing at all.
1.) Keep the war status mechanic but, create a moduleā¦make it cost up to a billion ISK, call it a Command Center, limit it to 5 wars, and allow multiples to be placed on a single structure.
2.) Remove the ally up part of the system, you want an ally or someone wants to come to your aidā¦well drop a structure and declare a war.
and yes i know the costs of adding more ISK on top of the mercs would be seen as overly harsh, but really they are the only ones declaring wars every day.
Btw this is not a proposal just a thought processā¦
Makes (keeps) those with structures war eligible.
Only those with (command pts) can declare wars
Gets rid of the ally system, forcing more attentive strategic playā¦maybe.
The only other thing i can say about this ongoing topicā¦is the friends and allies i play alongside with, have seen a serious uptick of returning players or ex-nullsecrs that want to avoid nullsec politics, dont want to do combat pvp anymore, and there fore do not want to be part of wars. and neither do a lot of newer players i have personally coming into the game and had the chance to talk with.
I am old school and believe in the ādont want to defend your stuff you dont deserve it mantra.ā but its getting more and more difficult to swing players to that attitude, believe me I have had arguments/debates in our own organization with such new players and the best solution i can come up withā¦is reward those that come onto voice comms and want to do things better than those that simply want to be a wage slaveā¦which I am not happy with, but will reluctantly and gladly harbor such and tell them to go mine and mission run so i dont have to and pay them for their efforts.
It was already discussed why this particular aspect of the system is bad. Itās bad for the carebears, and itās bad for the PvPers. All it does is push the PvPers to ball up into wardec mega-cartels, because any small outfit that drops a structure quickly loses it to one of these big groups, since thereās no practical way to defend it. You canāt use skirmish/harassment tactics for station defense since itās a static battlefield, and all the enemy has to do is ball up with a logistics chain. Before the structure requirement for wars, smaller groups could fight back against larger groups by being a PITA.
no destiny you do not get to quote out of context the entire part of my post the one part one came fromā¦
now would you like to try againā¦and say something with intelligence and thought behind it after attempting to go down the rabbit hole(i say attempting cause i refused to take the tumble) or would you like to concede the fact i was not trying to start and argument/debate and just leave it at that?
Might be my explanation. what i meant is the other way around. So a corporation stays most of the time eligible for wars to avoid taxes but if they are decced at any point they drop the war eligible status. This will instantly put the war on the ending status so it will only last 24 hours insead of a week. After the war ending has been triggered they drop the structure again to avoid npc taxes. This will cost the atacking aide 100mil a day if they want to keep redeccing the corp. Which in my oppinnion would be a more reasonable cost for wars to begin with. But that is a whole another story.
Well, this is how things are, and not how they should be. Once again, all such loopholes should be closed.
But as is, currently, this is impossible to do anyway if your structure is a high-sec citadel, since you wonāt be able to take it down within a day. And corporations with low/null-sec structures donāt particularly care about their war eligibility for the most part. If weāre talking about POCOs, well, I guess they could theoretically do this, but the hassle involved is so great, that I think most groups that want to remain war ineligible will simply choose not to have POCOs instead.
You seem to be awfully upset that I chose to address the section of your post that I felt like addressing, instead of treating the entire thing like some kind of doctorate thesis and responding with a grand essay of my own. Too bad. Iāve said what I wanted to say, and itās no less valid despite how much you thrash against it. Quite the carebear forum tactic actually, if I may observe.
We do it the same way it was always done. Wardecs are a great litmus test for corps and any wardeccable corp that lasts must have something going for it.
This is still the case now. Any corp that keeps itās structures in-house and remains active after a decent amount of time must be doing something right. They are recognisable because of that.
The mistake was obscuring some of the good corps with bad corps just because they donāt have a structure (and letting bad corps have their cake and eat it too).
How is that any different to now?
At least there is cost, trade-offs and effort to avoiding the dec. Instead of being permanently immune to wars with absolutely no cost, trade-offs and effort.
If you close those loopholes instead it becomes possible to lock people into a corp via wardecs.
Which is even worse for the game than the current structure.
And CCP have been very clear that wardecs are aimed at corps & alliances, not at the members of those corps & alliances, in the past.
I believe that players should always be able to leave a corporation. Joining, however, can be restricted in certain ways. For example, dropping into an NPC corporation should have a circumstantial cooldown on rejoining a player corporation. Maybe you get one free drop every month, but any further drops would restrict you from joining a player corporation for a few days, and lock you into a taxed NPC corporation.
That sounds fair and like a effective way to patch this loophole.
Give newbies unrestricted corporation switching the first month, and after that players get a cooldown period after every second corp drop of the month, locking you in the NPC corp for some time.
To achieve a restriction to daily corp hopping as a method to circumvent wars while enjoying the benefits of corporations.
Sure, youāre allowed to drop corp to avoid a war. But if you then join another corp, you wonāt be able to repeat that trick immediately nor regularly.
Wouldnāt it be more fair to keep the payouts like they are now, but only for the characters that take additional risk by flying in a war-eligible corporation?
Do you really think what anyone with active war will fly multi-billion incursion ships? I doubt it. So this players will have to stop playing until war end, exactly opposite to what CCP want.
