Well, I was kind of humouring this insanity by thinking, why make a whole new mechanic? CCP dont do that, they co-opt existing ones.
Just tie it into fuel cost. No fuel, no dec. You dont need fuel to defend, either, to ease wiping low power stations off the map
No, it was not.
The post you linked is not related to your post being called rubbish.
Well that’s your issue.
If you are fine with being rubbish, it’s good enough to not care about your opinion, that other people are rubbish or not. Since yo don’t mind if THAT opinion is rubbish.
Which will be, when CCP removes citadels form HS.
Not really. One date to do the three in succession every week : remove everybody, declare 50 wardecs, accept everybody.
Just because you would not do that, does not mean that nobody would. And once it’s done correctly, you can even create several group chat for the three groups to invite.
If it’s possible, someone will do it. That’s the basic of IT security. Just because YOU would not abuse it this way, does not mean that nobody would.
If they’ve split into 50 corps they’ll need to war dec each corp 50 times if they wish to achieve the same result as their mega alliance of war deccers.
I have come to understand that, yes
As someone who fuels our structures, you are making me cry (yes…tears in the forum…unthinkable). It’s kind of boring play.
I think I’d rather see a module introduced that could be installed as a service and then offered out to other corps at a cost (like services are now).
A corp would still need a structure to be able to declare war, but then could pay for a different structure to be the War HQ.
That way, you could have a heap of unfueled structures across the smaller corps, with centralised HQ services. If any of the other structures die, that corp would become war ineligible and the war would end within 24-hours like now, but the refueling needs would be lower.
I don’t know. Probably plenty of downsides to that too, but seems like a HQ service would provide lots of incentive for defenders to ally to each other and/or just coordinate attacking so they can end all of the wars.
Can you explain how a 50m isk cost becoming 100m equates to a 4900% increase? 100m is 200% of 50m, not 4900%
Hmm some sort of CONCORD bribery outlet?
With hats and keyrings for sale
And fudge
Prior to the changes in 2012, wars weren’t 50 million base cost.
Read again, my initial figure is from 2012, when wardecs cost 2M isk.
50M is a 2400% increase when compared to the initial 2M, 100M is a 4900% increase over that initial figure.
I distinctly remember the chances of being decced were signifigantly higher back then, of course.
I mean, thats why Ive no rear fear of them nowadays.
Edit: was going to correct that typo but ■■■■ it, it works
Use ESI and you can easily be warned of upcoming fuel, reinforcement, wars. You can even deduce how much fuel you need to remain, get warned if your fit is not optimal for a loss (that is, reprocess service + 1d of fuel). That’s pretty neet, and you just need a station in system to make that 700M structure kill worthless, and don’t need to connect your holder toon unless specifically said so.
Indeed they were, and those of us that dealt with it thrived regardless.
Yes, it was. It was a continued discussion between us.
There are two paths that Namtis can take.
Either he can accept his own argument was rubbish opinion and be thanked for being a pot calling the kettle black, and accept defeat,
Or.
He can accept the understanding that if he considers his argument as being more than rubbish opinion, then hello pot, meet kettle, who is also black, and my argument isnt rubbish opinion either.
Of course not, I dont mind if people point out that my opinions are rubbish, as that’s just a subjective opinion. But I do have a problem with hypocrisy, and will call that out whenever I can.
They could do it, but it would not be efficient. They’d have one day every 7 days where their wars are down for at least 24 hours. It would mess with structure bashing. They would have to have 3 sets of pvp characters each and this gets far worse if they use alts, which they do. And for all this, they’d still pay an increased fee for wars, at a billion per war once they have 100 wars because doing this does not shield them from that mechanic.
So yeah they could try to jump through all of those hoops. But it would barely be worth the effort and they still pay a fortune for blanket decs
CCP could also say you’re not meant to circumvent the war fee mechanic in this way. This could be prevented entirely by instead of making the war dec fee increase with the number of players, they simply increase the fee for issuing war decs to 25m per additional war. Starts at 100m for first war. By time you’re at 100 wars the fee is 2.6 bill per war.
Think I prefer the first system because it encourages people not to group into mega sized war dec alliances. Just need to have a mechanic that prevents abuse to circumvent the player count part of the fee.
Just don’t be war eligible and it doesn’t matter if they want to group up.
Why do you hate people being social?
You mean the hisec pvp crowd who all group together for the most easy and efficient killing of as many prey as possible?
Yeah, why do you hate that they can group up, but insist that you should be able to?
Just don’t be eligible for wars in the first place and you have no issue to face. It’s pretty simple.
They could form a 10,000 person alliance and they could not touch you with a war if you are not eligible for them.
Here’s an idea, to prevent them all leaving the corp and cycling alts to circumvent the player count portion of the war fee, it works like this: The calculation is based on the average number of players in their corp or alliance over the past 30 days. All players dropping corp to dish out the war decs on the cheap will be a wasted effort.
So newer players are not allowed small structures in hisec? Less they want legion of wolves upon them.
Literally, in the case we are talking about, it’s factual, not opinion : You claim a definition, that you use for morale judgement, from nowhere. You try to force arbitrary morale on people, because they fit your point. Which is the opposite of morale, that is rubbish.
Therefore if you don’t mind that your opinion is rubbish, then it means your opinion in general is worth nothing : since you don’t care about its value, it can be considered as having literally zero value.
Please make correct quotes. I can’t answer someone whose quote are so general. They could do WHAT ?
No. Just, no. This proposal is literally a stupid request to abusing. I gave you an example, and told you that the only way to prevent abuse is to literally prevent corps/alliances in a wardec from accepting people. Otherwise it won’t work.
That is rubbish. He did not complain that they can group up, AFAIK.
And it pretty simply is completely irrelevant to the issue.