You can’t even measure that properly. And any way of measuring it, people could abuse by having all their wealth and properties on alt-chars before the war declaration to appear “poor” to the system and then transferring everything to get rolling over their opponent.
For me personally, a simple fee based on the number of pilots involved seems to be as good as it can get. If a large group wants to declare on a small group, they can, but they have to pay a lot, since they can field a large number of pilots. If a small group wants to target a large group, to have lots of targets and basically play a “harassment game”, they will also have to pay a lot. Small groups can target other small groups in local conflicts for a cheap price and huge empires can bring their huge wars to highsec for huge fees.
Black Desert online btw will disable one sided “guild wars” in the future as announced by the developers.
First they increased the cost to maintain wars over a long period of time, but they have seen that it doesn’t lead to “honorable battles” and they look very critical at the aspect of “one-sided suffering to others just for the sake of someone’s fun”. Seems like they don’t want experienced players to kill others because “some players feel pain in the realm of PK where they have to be killed unwillingly even when they are not ready to face it”
“It would have been perfect if the one-way wars were used as enjoyable PVP content between players prepared for war but in reality it was used as a means of harassment too often, so we had to make a choice.” -BDO dev
I guess Eve will not remove it, because Eve is a game that doesn’t care about it’s players feelings that much and they have tied a whole bunch of “highsec citadel mechanics” to the wardec system that are hard to redesign without “station spam” but at least they could adjust the thing for inflation instead of making it cheaper over time x)
I probably should not go here, but oh well. That Eve doesn’t care about players, I think, is a misrepresentation. We don’t leave people vulnerable to scams and wardecs because we want them to feel bad, at least as a general rule. Eve is understood to be a PvP game where people will be trying to take advantage of one another, but it is a fantasy with no bearing on one’s real life that is outside of the player’s control.
It is noble to protect people who can not protect themselves, but it is better to give those people the ability to protect themselves, or enable them to withstand the situation. Whatever protection you provide can only be done up to a point until it is absolute. Either (non-mutual) wardecs exist and the protection must end, or they do not exist at all.
I take issue with the wardec costs, and the structure requirements, because in my view this is effectively backwards from my methodology. It protects new players from the poor and ill-equipped players on the same level as themselves. The ones they /could have/ defended against. It leaves them vulnerable to more wealthy and well-equipped players that they /can not/ defend against. It also forces players to pony up for a fairly expensive floating target just to participate in the system and learn how to operate when under attack. War isn’t just opt in, it’s pay for the privilege of being a target, which I think is ridiculous, but I digress.
Using cost to regulate wardecs doesn’t work (at least I don’t think it does). New players start out unable to defend themselves and remain unable to defend themselves at the point they become a viable target, at which point they stand to lose a lot more than they would have had the wars been cheap and easy enough to declare that more moderate adversaries could afford to.
I understand that some people just don’t want to be exposed to PvP at all, but to them I say this is a strange choice of game to play if that’s your aim. I don’t like to fight people, either, but I accepted that people were going to try and get me now and then. The lack of protection from predators taught me how to protect myself, and I didn’t lose all that much in the process. Sometimes yesterday’s enemy would become tomorrow’s ally because we both recognize that those space pixels were not all that important and we were both just trying to have a good time.
My personal frustration comes from the fact that the wardeccers pay 100Mil per week while I personally loose probably 100Mil per day just not being able to do “usual” business. Even without loosing any ship I will still take some serious losses with every wardec that will come.
Activities like industry and trading constantly change their taxes/fees but wardec fees have stayed the same for a long time and it’s just fair for them to go up a bit.
So you really cannot tell a difference between 100M real ISK being actually paid out of pocket per week, and “not-making 100M ISK per day” because you decided to put a Freighter character in a wardeccable corp?
Oh wow. Seems like I was wrong about the taxation. Weird, I wonder where I learned that it’s dependent on the average price.
How would you make this work? It’s not like SCI works here since wardecs are global.
Idk, it’s just a weird idea. One could have “wardec permits” that drop in special sites or something like that like the ESS keys.
Anyway. Wardecs being now twice as cheap than some years ago if the total ISK is considered is something that maybe needs balancing. The question is OFC… who has the ISK. Is it in the hands of the wardeccers or in the hands of traders or nullsec people or evenly distributed in the community…
I’m not sure how me telling a guy „don’t put your freighter in a wardeccable corp and you won’t have 100M ISK/day opportunity lost“ is somehow mining ore for free.
The freighter is sitting there doing nothing and missing opportunities due to their own choices, whereas the wardeccers are physically paying 100M ISK per week. The point was he has 100M more capital than wardeccers to get up and change the situation because the wardeccers 100M payment vanished into thin air.
If this is too hard to understand it’s because it has nothing to do about mining ore for free. It’s a conversation about fairness between two parties.