Suggestion: War Declaration rework

[Amanari_Talar]

Hello Pilots and developers,

The following mechanics are intended to help newer players, and those less driven by pvp to do better in high security space, and help make game play more difficult by those who are constantly grieving it (hopefully encouraging them to populate lower security space for piracy)

Part 1: New Surrender mechanics

• War Declarations surrender not longer require approval from the aggressor.
  *“Surrender” Will now have two modes, Unmediated surrender, and Mediated surrender.
• Mediated surrender is mediated by concord and will provide a cost per member and their skill point value. The characters will share a bracket distribution like that of skill injectors. Each one will provide a value that is added to the total surrender amount for a mediated member. This means, that a corporation with high skill point pilots in it will pay more then one with lower skill points, and that a larger corp will pay more then a smaller.
• Mediated surrenders have a 150,000,000 isk base cost, added on upon corp member count and their assigned skill point brackets.
• Mediated war declarations do not require approval of the aggressor. This means that a corporation can now pay a larger amount of isk to instantly end the war declaration.
• Unmediated wars will continue as intended.
• Unmediated wars now have an option to allow the consolidation of the losing party into the victor.
• Wars will now be required to entosis nullsec space.

Part 2.

Weekly War declaration rates will now increase the longer you are at war. This rate will increase a rate every billing cycle. This means every week the weekly price for war declarations will increase by a factor of 0.25 (25%). this should increase up to 200% of the war target count cost, and should take an equal amount of weeks to drop off dropping at the same rate.

This mechanic is to help the high sec grief driven alliances to find something else to do for periods of time and to make their income a little harder.

Part 3 Mass Mechanics

Freighters can no longer be bump (and stopped) by ships of lower masses.

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Amanari_Talar

Make highsec safer plz.

No.

This is more characters to hit your stupid limit CCP.

[Amanari_Talar]

First off, I have flagged your reply for the immature response.

Second,
Abusive systems like this have been an issue for the longest time in eve. The abuse of inexperienced players who do not want to pvp needs to go. This will encourage them to play longer increasing the population of eve (some of which who probably done mind some null pvp and will provide you win content).

It’s time that ccp addressed the abuse of high sec players.

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Amanari_Talar

First off, I have flagged your reply for the immature response.

That’s nice. It’s exactly the sort of response your terrible idea deserves.

The abuse of inexperienced players who do not want to pvp needs to go.

There is no such thing as “no PvP” in EVE. Every player in every part of EVE is subject to PvP. If you don’t understand that this is a core part of EVE’s identity then EVE is not the game for you.

You’re also ignoring the fact that experienced players benefit just as much, if not more, from making highsec safer. Freighter alts supporting nullsec PvP groups, level 4 mission farmers in billion-ISK ships, etc, all benefit if highsec is safer. Newbies, on the other hand, gain only minimal benefits. They are not really appealing targets because they have no loot or killmails to offer, and can easily avoid a war by going back to NPC corps without ever losing anything.

It’s time that ccp addressed the abuse of high sec players.

Correction, it’s time that CCP addressed the abuse of highsec by players. Move all level 4 missions to lowsec, along with their mining equivalent. Highsec should be a newbie starter zone, there should be little or no long-term appeal for players who have made it out of the tutorial days and into endgame content.

[Amanari_Talar]

@Merin_Ryskin

You’re also ignoring the fact that experienced players benefit just as much, if not more, from making highsec safer.

You know the biggest problem i have with players like you? You dont read the suggestion fully with full attention. You skim through it and make a 10 second choice on if you like or hate something with out thinking things through. For example, Like how you have to pay more if you have higher sp for a surrender. So no, i did not forget about the high sec - null oriented alts, and to be honest they only use alts in the first place because of pilots like you who’s whole purpose to the game is to abuse the crap out of other peoples game play.

@Merin_Ryskin

Newbies, on the other hand, gain only minimal benefits.

That is a lie. Being able to play the game from the get-go is the biggest benefit anyone can have when it comes to this game. I tis not a minimal benefit at all. Being camped in the station or killed to quit is extremely abusive. Can you imagine if someone did this in wow or other similar types of games ran by other companies that are not ccp? The crap would be hotfixed over night! That is the difference between a real development company and someone who got lucky with a industry void (like eve).

@Merin_Ryskin

Highsec should be a newbie starter zone, there should be little or no long-term appeal for players who have made it out of the tutorial days and into endgame content.

Why the hell are you and other pirat members there then? If that is in fact the case.

High sec is not a newbie zone, the starter systems are. They have special restrictions from being abused in them. High sec is the focal point of eve. Can you imagine it not being valid for end game players? Then where would they buy everything? This is an unrealistic change.

You want to change the entire scope of the game, when the effect of it will take place for the most part by pushing those powers into places like low sec. Making it harder to get a fight in high sec does exactly what we both want, make it better for newer players.

But whats really interesting is that you say we should not make high sec safer, when you on the other hand turn around and say it should be a newbie zone, So are you advocating that we should make newbie starter area’s hard?

What kind of madness is this. Lets stick to your job you have, because you obviously cannot handle the industry we professions work in.

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Amanari_Talar

For example, Like how you have to pay more if you have higher sp for a surrender.

No, I saw that. It doesn’t make your idea much better, because you’re still paying to end the war at will. And an amount of ISK per SP that allows newbies to escape a war will be meaningless to experienced PvE farmers, allowing near-immunity to wars. It would take a coordinated effort from many aggressor corps to get the cost of surrender up to a point where the average farmer would even notice, at which point they disband the corp and start a new one for a tiny fraction of the surrender cost.

and to be honest they only use alts in the first place because of pilots like you who’s whole purpose to the game is to abuse the crap out of other peoples game play.

No, they use alts because they have enemies in nullsec (you know, the people they are fighting on their mains) and want to have near-100% safety for their logistics chain. Why fly a freighter with billions of ISK in value on your main, where your PvP enemies can identify and destroy it, when you can put that freighter on an anonymous alt and have no risk to your support?

Being able to play the game from the get-go is the biggest benefit anyone can have when it comes to this game.

Newbies start the game in NPC corps which can not be the target of a war. Try again.

That is the difference between a real development company and someone who got lucky with a industry void (like eve).

You seem to be ignoring the fact that the “industry void” EVE filled is for exactly the sort of PvP-focused game that you seem to hate. If EVE was WoW in space, a PvE-friendly game with lots of safety for anyone who doesn’t want to do PvP, it would never have lasted this long.

Why the hell are you and other pirat members there then? If that is in fact the case.

Why the hell do you think I’m in highsec?

High sec is the focal point of eve.

It really isn’t. The focal point of EVE is nullsec and the player-driven conflicts that happen there. Highsec is the starter area, and the token attempt to milk the cash cow of PvE farmers for subscription money before they realize that EVE is not the game they want.

Then where would they buy everything?

They could still buy stuff in highsec, they just wouldn’t have much incentive to stay longer than the time required to get to make their Jita shopping trip.

Making it harder to get a fight in high sec does exactly what we both want, make it better for newer players.

The problem is that making it harder to fight in highsec makes it safer for people who shouldn’t have safety. To make it a newbie area you have to also remove the income so that only newbies have any desire to be there. If you’re going to make highsec a newbie zone then improve safety while also removing everything above level 3 missions in income.

[Akrasjel_Lanate]

War Declaration need a rework/change, they do have place in EVE but is a one sided mechanics that favors the aggressor.

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Akrasjel_Lanate

War Declaration need a rework/change, they do have place in EVE but is a one sided mechanics that favors the aggressor.

Only because most defenders seem to be incompetent and favor whining on the forums about how unfair PvP is over organizing a PvP response and slaughtering the aggressors. There’s nothing in the war mechanics that prevents the target of a war from responding effectively and winning, and even making the war mutual so they can continue to slaughter the aggressor long past the point where the aggressor wishes it would just end.

[Do_Little]

This conversation is as old as the game

CCP isn’t going to make highsec more dangerous - 75% of the player population live there and presumably account for a comparable percentage of CCP revenue.

Nor are they going to make highsec safer. Avoiding wars is easy:

• drop to an NPC corp for the week.
• create a new player corp and move there for a week.
• create an ALT and play that character for a week.

those who declare war in highsec are rarely looking for “good fights”. They are either paid mercenaries - the corporation you belong to is interfering with someone elses business - or they are looking for cheap kills. In either case, the worst thing you can do is give them cheap kills - it simply encourages them to declare war on you again!

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Do_Little

CCP isn’t going to make highsec more dangerous - 75% of the player population live there and presumably account for a comparable percentage of CCP revenue.

This has been mentioned over the years, but it isn’t necessarily a good assumption. That 75% includes things like market alts, industry alts, etc, that are owned by players whose main activity is outside highsec and who would likely leave if that main activity didn’t exist (or wasn’t enjoyable). For example, if you looked at my accounts you’d find that ~66% of my characters are highsec residents, despite the fact that my mains are all primarily nullsec/lowsec residents. 2/3 characters per account are various highsec-only alts, and depending how you count it you might decide that even some of the mains are “highsec” characters. Does the pirate character who often spends downtime docked in highsec (especially when I jump clone to a set of skill implants when I’m away from the game for a few days) count as a “highsec character”? Does the covert cyno alt who also flies a blockade runner for lowsec/nullsec resupply count just because IIRC last time I had that account active she was docked in Jita and on call for a shopping run? Depending on how you count it you could conclude that 100% of my characters are “highsec” characters!

The end result is that the percentage of legitimate highsec-only and highsec-focused players is lower than 75%, and quite likely significantly lower.

[Akrasjel_Lanate]

You mean the situations when the defender makes a fleet because they have the “mass” and the aggressor simply docks up because they would lose and ruin there killboards stats.

Majority of corps is small thay arent interested in PvP and don’t have the skills and there are the bigger corps that have the mass/players to respond but they can’t force the agressor to engage in any way if they form a fleet(whatever level of experience they have) and the agressor can simply harash them later. The highsec corp/defender goal is not PvP but the end of the war and if he has some capabilities in that he could if there was something in the war dec mechanics that allowed it. For example “final battle” option if the defender forms and wins against aggressor the war ends, of the aggressors doesn’t forms the war also ends and if the agressor forms and wins he can extend war for another week.

This is only an idea whatever bad or not it don’t matter.
The conversation also dosn’t matter if CCP dosnt care about the war dec mechanics other wise they would made bigger changes years ago.

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Akrasjel_Lanate

You mean the situations when the defender makes a fleet because they have the “mass” and the aggressor simply docks up because they would lose and ruin there killboards stats.

Ok, so you forced the aggressor to retreat and get out of your way. Congratulations, you won the engagement. Or do you consider the only acceptable outcome to be the defending side getting killboard stats?

Majority of corps is small thay arent interested in PvP

Then they can get out of EVE. EVE is a PvP game, if they aren’t interested in PvP then there are plenty of PvE games where they can mindlessly farm PvE content with 100% safety.

For example “final battle” option if the defender forms and wins against aggressor

Define “wins”. And do it in a way that the game can automatically choose a winner that everyone will agree is the correct choice, without CCP having to manually review the results of the engagement and decide who won. You’ll find that this is an impossible task.

[Black_Pedro]

@Amanari_Talar

War Declarations surrender not longer require approval from the aggressor.

How will Upwell structures that will take 7-14 days to destroy be contested if wars can be ended unilaterally?

@Amanari_Talar

This mechanic is to help the high sec grief driven alliances to find something else to do for periods of time and to make their income a little harder.

What would prevent aggressors from using an alternate corporation to avoid this progressive cost?

@Amanari_Talar

Freighters can no longer be bump (and stopped) by ships of lower masses.

What does this have to do with wars?

And how does that make sense? Force = Mass x Velocity so if a much faster, but lower mass ship hits a larger ship, it should move. Exactly as the physics engine of Eve Online works.

[Do_Little]

CCP Quant has published some interesting statistics over the years. 65% of Eve players have 1 account. 84% have 2 or less - there aren’t as many ALTS as those of us who have ALTS seem to think.

Eve is definitely a PVP game in the sense that player interactions and inter dependencies make the game work, but not all the interaction takes place on the battlefield. The next chart shows that only 13.8% of players logged in do PVP:

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Do_Little

CCP Quant has published some interesting statistics over the years. 65% of Eve players have 1 account. 84% have 2 or less - there aren’t as many ALTS as those of us who have ALTS seem to think.

Even with only a single account a hardcore nullsec PvP player could have 66% of their characters count as “highsec characters” if they have a market/industry/whatever alt sitting in station in highsec, and a random third character still sitting in the starter system station where it was created and promptly abandoned. The 75% highsec claim is still massively skewed by alts even if only ~35% of the players have more than a single account.

Eve is definitely a PVP game in the sense that player interactions and inter dependencies make the game work, but not all the interaction takes place on the battlefield. The next chart shows that only 13.8% of players logged in do PVP:

That’s an incredibly misleading graph because it only captures PvP in the sense of “pressed F1 on a player target” and doesn’t count the warping/waiting in station/etc that PvP players do. So ignore the warping and docking and market use that are universal across all types of players and we find that:

40% of players join fleets, an activity that is almost entirely PvP-focused (incursions are only 1.5% of the total, a rounding error).

30% of players are in space in nullsec, an area of space that is PvP-focused (or at least open to PvP at all times). Another 25% of players are in space in lowsec, space that is arguably more PvP-focused than nullsec.

22% mine, a PvE actvity.

20% do missions, a PvE activity.

15% do industry, a PvE activity but often one that is done by alts of players who are doing something else.

14% engage in F1-the-enemy PvP.

So, even assuming that each character is a unique player and alts do not exist the number of PvP characters is at absolute minimum on par with the number of mission characters and mining characters, and likely equal to the two groups combined. If we drop the extremely PvE-friendly assumption of uniqueness it’s almost certain that a majority of EVE players are engaging in PvP. 40% are in PvP fleets even if their F1 was not captured during the time the snapshot was taken, and if even a small percentage of the mission and mining characters are alts of PvP players then >50% of the activity is by PvP players.

[Akrasjel_Lanate]

@Merin_Ryskin

Then they can get out of EVE. EVE is a PvP game, if they aren’t interested in PvP then there are plenty of PvE games where they can mindlessly farm PvE content with 100% safety.

First i have nothing against PvP i did it in the past i will do it in the future.
Second EVE is and open world world sandbox game with many forms of PvP - Player(s) vs Player(s), you like many sems to limit it to pure combat ignoring other elements of interaction between players.

@Merin_Ryskin

Ok, so you forced the aggressor to retreat and get out of your way. Congratulations, you won the engagement. Or do you consider the only acceptable outcome to be the defending side getting killboard stats?

Aggressor retreating/docking doesnt means winning in any way.
Killboard stats are irrelevant for me.

@Merin_Ryskin

Define “wins”. And do it in a way that the game can automatically choose a winner that everyone will agree is the correct choice, without CCP having to manually review the results of the engagement and decide who won. You’ll find that this is an impossible task.

Wardec mechanics win condition it may be a structure that defender need to destroy(to end war) and aggressor to defend(to extend it for another week).
Or not.

Words. Examples.

It’s up to CCP, war decks are mentioned each CSM Summit even this one and that leads to nowhere thus far.

PS. He who does nothing makes no mistakes. If that’s the goal in this case.

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Akrasjel_Lanate

Second EVE is and open world world sandbox game with many forms of PvP - Player(s) vs Player(s), you like many sems to limit it to pure combat ignoring other elements of interaction between players.

I apply no such limit. Market PvP and similar elements are still valuable parts of the game, but combat PvP is always part of the game. The idea that you can opt out of combat PvP is directly contradictory to EVE’s core concept, and if you don’t like it then EVE is not the game for you.

Aggressor retreating/docking doesnt means winning in any way.

Of course it does. You have successfully defended your space, forced the aggressor to withdraw, and allowed your corp to go back to normal operations. You may claim not to care about killboard stats, but that’s the only thing you didn’t get out of the event.

Wardec mechanics win condition it may be a structure that defender need to destroy(to end war) and aggressor to defend(to extend it for another week).

That’s ****ing stupid. If my goal as the aggressor is to deny you the use of key market systems (for example, because I know you’re an alt corp of a nullsec alliance I’m at war with) what does some random structure have to do with any of it? You’re replacing the natural interactions between players and their conflicting goals with a structure-kill gimmick arena fight. And no, just no.

[Do_Little]

The second chart is “of everyone who logged in”. My expectation is that Nullsec players tend, on average, to be more invested in the game and likely spend more time logged in.

There are probably as many, if not more fleets in highsec as nullsec - you can’t get a mining boost without joining a fleet!

If you look at the MER, 7 of the top 10 regions for destruction (a.k.a PVP) are in Empire. There is probably as much PVP in highsec as there is in Nullsec.

Last but not least, CCP quant has given us a chart that shows where people are when they move through New Eden:

However you slice and dice that chart - most of the activity is in Empire and I’m willing to bet most of that is in highsec.

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Do_Little

There are probably as many, if not more fleets in highsec as nullsec - you can’t get a mining boost without joining a fleet!

On the other hand, how many people with mining boost fleets are bothering to mine in highsec anymore? Even if you knock off a decent percentage of the fleet total to account for miners you’re still left with a very large PvP population, much higher than the 14% counted under “PvP”.

If you look at the MER, 7 of the top 10 regions for destruction (a.k.a PVP) are in Empire. There is probably as much PVP in highsec as there is in Nullsec.

I’m not really sure how this is supposed to counter the idea that PvP is way more common than certain graphs suggest…

However you slice and dice that chart - most of the activity is in Empire and I’m willing to bet most of that is in highsec.

But, again, you aren’t accounting for alts. For example, if my hauler alt makes a Jita run to resupply my PvP main that counts as a bunch of highsec jumps on the graph, even though they’re being done by a lowsec/nullsec PvP player.

This particular map also doesn’t account for differences in player behavior between regions. For example, just consider PvE farming. In nullsec you’re running anomalies, which means spending most of your time camped in a single system (preferably one with a nice PvE modifier built up) and generating zero stargate jumps from an entire day of playing EVE. In highsec, on the other hand, you’re farming missions which means a ton of stargate jumps back and forth between the 3-4 systems adjacent to the agent you’re using. Over the same amount of playing time you’re going to generate way more stargate jumps and a much bigger presence on the map. A single mission farmer in highsec could easily generate a bigger spike than a whole PvP fleet in nullsec.

[Do_Little]

@Merin_Ryskin

But, again, you aren’t accounting for alts

So what? I had characters in Nullsec for 2 years but most of my gameplay was in highsec. That jump chart is for the month, so it’s a fair representation of where people are actually playing the game.

Edited: I mistakenly said average for the month but believe it is actually cumulative.