WarDec System Change Failure

Communications Center General Discussion
355

It’s still about the same.

There’s 473 active wars at the moment (including wars back to RvB which has been active since 20 Feb 2013). Sorry for the long table here, but this is the breakdown just pulling the data from the API:

Declared Wars Percent Cumulative
corp alliance 99001134 80 16.91% 16.91%
corp 98605263 alliance 50 10.57% 27.48%
corp 98604198 alliance 48 10.15% 37.63%
corp 523912322 alliance 39 8.25% 45.88%
corp 98600918 alliance 15 3.17% 49.05%
corp 98211606 alliance 13 2.75% 51.80%
corp 98323091 alliance 13 2.75% 54.55%
corp 1568385512 alliance 12 2.54% 57.08%
corp alliance 99005338 10 2.11% 59.20%
corp alliance 99004159 8 1.69% 60.89%
corp alliance 99007529 8 1.69% 62.58%
corp 98592680 alliance 8 1.69% 64.27%
corp 98508428 alliance 7 1.48% 65.75%
corp 98134066 alliance 7 1.48% 67.23%
corp alliance 99008459 6 1.27% 68.50%
corp 98580520 alliance 6 1.27% 69.77%
corp 98491538 alliance 6 1.27% 71.04%
corp alliance 99005136 5 1.06% 72.09%
corp alliance 99008270 5 1.06% 73.15%
corp alliance 99008725 5 1.06% 74.21%
corp 98591385 alliance 5 1.06% 75.26%
corp alliance 99006881 5 1.06% 76.32%
corp alliance 99009213 5 1.06% 77.38%
corp 98362785 alliance 4 0.85% 78.22%
corp alliance 99006495 3 0.63% 78.86%
corp alliance 99002107 3 0.63% 79.49%
corp 98589103 alliance 3 0.63% 80.13%
corp 98603988 alliance 3 0.63% 80.76%
corp 98397588 alliance 3 0.63% 81.40%
corp alliance 99007531 3 0.63% 82.03%
corp alliance 1354830081 3 0.63% 82.66%
corp alliance 99002775 3 0.63% 83.30%
corp 98601178 alliance 3 0.63% 83.93%
corp 98105508 alliance 2 0.42% 84.36%
corp alliance 99004389 2 0.42% 84.78%
corp 98554656 alliance 2 0.42% 85.20%
corp alliance 99008706 2 0.42% 85.62%
corp 98598530 alliance 2 0.42% 86.05%
corp 98274382 alliance 2 0.42% 86.47%
corp alliance 459486691 2 0.42% 86.89%
corp alliance 99009192 2 0.42% 87.32%
corp alliance 99007715 2 0.42% 87.74%
corp 98602007 alliance 2 0.42% 88.16%
corp alliance 99002302 2 0.42% 88.58%
corp 98377029 alliance 2 0.42% 89.01%
corp alliance 99008909 2 0.42% 89.43%
corp 98502153 alliance 2 0.42% 89.85%
corp alliance 1884595530 1 0.21% 90.06%
corp alliance 99006411 1 0.21% 90.27%
corp 98564479 alliance 1 0.21% 90.49%
corp 98299827 alliance 1 0.21% 90.70%
corp alliance 99009047 1 0.21% 90.91%
corp 98603891 alliance 1 0.21% 91.12%
corp alliance 99004582 1 0.21% 91.33%
corp 98574873 alliance 1 0.21% 91.54%
corp alliance 150097440 1 0.21% 91.75%
corp 98406827 alliance 1 0.21% 91.97%
corp 98599924 alliance 1 0.21% 92.18%
corp 98081421 alliance 1 0.21% 92.39%
corp alliance 99005746 1 0.21% 92.60%
corp alliance 99004425 1 0.21% 92.81%
corp 98588764 alliance 1 0.21% 93.02%
corp alliance 99009203 1 0.21% 93.23%
corp 98604875 alliance 1 0.21% 93.45%
corp alliance 99006371 1 0.21% 93.66%
corp 98582301 alliance 1 0.21% 93.87%
corp alliance 99006291 1 0.21% 94.08%
corp alliance 99009002 1 0.21% 94.29%
corp 98603889 alliance 1 0.21% 94.50%
corp 98034589 alliance 1 0.21% 94.71%
corp alliance 99005627 1 0.21% 94.93%
corp 98481182 alliance 1 0.21% 95.14%
corp 98351543 alliance 1 0.21% 95.35%
corp 98127617 alliance 1 0.21% 95.56%
corp 98533347 alliance 1 0.21% 95.77%
corp 98558112 alliance 1 0.21% 95.98%
corp 1460687218 alliance 1 0.21% 96.19%
corp alliance 99002938 1 0.21% 96.41%
corp 98365717 alliance 1 0.21% 96.62%
corp alliance 99008278 1 0.21% 96.83%
corp 98444378 alliance 1 0.21% 97.04%
corp 98541442 alliance 1 0.21% 97.25%
corp 98373312 alliance 1 0.21% 97.46%
corp 98199332 alliance 1 0.21% 97.67%
corp 1239532844 alliance 1 0.21% 97.89%
corp alliance 99008425 1 0.21% 98.10%
corp alliance 99000645 1 0.21% 98.31%
corp alliance 131511956 1 0.21% 98.52%
corp 98542597 alliance 1 0.21% 98.73%
corp 98503584 alliance 1 0.21% 98.94%
corp alliance 99009226 1 0.21% 99.15%
corp alliance 99008968 1 0.21% 99.37%
corp 98557184 alliance 1 0.21% 99.58%
corp 98469752 alliance 1 0.21% 99.79%
corp 99449654 alliance 1 0.21% 100.00%

Normally, PIRAT (alliance_id: 99001134) have more than 100 wars, but they dropped a lot that had their HQ as the Fortizar in Piak). That will build up again.

However overall, it’s still sits in the top 5 groups having approximately half of all wars, and the top 10 having 60% of all wars.

Not much has changed, since before the wardec changes in terms of the percentage of wars that are the “griefer wardeccer” groups (I don’t like that term, but it’s the most easily understood - wars declared to grab kills on trade hubs and routes).

There still needs to be more changes for this to achieve all of the objectives that CCP have discussed.

1 Like
356

Yet again, thanks for pulling and posting the data. Great work.

I do really like the “must have a station” dynamic but that itself would fix what CCP is after (as we are seeing). PIRAT will probably now put-up more stations and spread the WarDecs around a bit as to not be so vulnerable (I don’t know who/how they lost their station mind you).

Still think CCP needs to add exponential increases to WarDec fees…nothing anybody else has said would fix this issue.

SA, are you still thinking along those lines too or has anything shifted for you?

357

I have read through this thread and others like it commenting on the changes; and many, before the changes and after, have criticized, the number of war decs prosecuted by “the 5” (whichever five they are at whatever point in time) without, to the best of my knowledge, ever considering that a number, and perhaps a good number of those war decs declared by “the 5” were in fact paid for…by other entities. I speak as a war deccer, and as a consumer of war decs, meaning I have contracted and paid for war decs by members of “the 5”.

I have played for a number of years now and have directly, meaning my alts have declared war directly, on my own behalf, or on the behalf of my group, at least 20 times. Not a lot for someone who’s played for over six years now, I think. However, I have contracted with mercenary groups and paid them, either in isk or in services, for at least that many wars, again, and probably more.

I paid mercenaries to fight bigger groups than I felt comfortable in taking on, either by myself, or with the players I was assisting (speaking of assisting, that’s another war dec category I’ve not included in my numbers for the purposes of this discussion).

My reason for hiring mercs ranged from: 1. broader time zone coverage than I could manage on my own, 2. reputation (no one’s scared of me, however they were scared of Marmite, P I R A T, the old VMG, Danger Gnomes, The Devils Warrior Alliance, etc.), and 3. when I first started hiring mercs, for sheer fire power. Yes, the professionals…outgunned me, and I was not so stupid as to refuse the take advantage of that fact.

One of the very first things I was taught about this game was “hire mercs” if you can’t fight on your own. This is a MMO, you can colloborate with and/or hire others to accomplish a goal you cannot manage on your own.

And I seriously feel any discussion of the number of wars prosecuted by “the 5” need to include in that discussion the number of wars initiated by those “5”, on behalf of others, because otherwise the discussion is meaningless.

There is a very valid distinction to be drawn between wars initiated on their own behalf to create content for themselves, and wars declared and prosecuted on behalf of others.

And I suggest one of the reasons so many wars are declared by a handful of merc corps is simply brand name awareness.

On the old forums, the mercs, and would be mercs, seriously advertised for business. That has died somewhat with the new forums, which is a shame, as there is no longer an easily accessible way for a new merc corp to advertise for business.

Unfortunately for purposes of this discussion, my point is not likely to be verified in any way that can be documented, as any successful merc group realizes “confidentiality” is one of the paramount reasons for their success as a “merc” group. You keep your client’s secrets, or you don’t get work.

It’s as simple as that.

So, hard stats on this aspect are next to non-existent, but I don’t feel I’m alone in being a war dec “consumer”, and I expect many wars declared by “the 5” are in fact paid for, and ordered, at the behest of other entities.

And I felt, for purposes of this discussion, this should, at least, be noted .

2 Likes
358

They play the numbers game…it really is that simple. Yes, a few might be contracts but the vast majority are just fishing expeditions. I was WD’ed once just for flying by in my Charon…

When you analyze their kills too, this is very obvious…you’re point while valid and a likely possibility, probably represents a very small percentage of the WD’s…

Also, and with respect, it’s a bit of a moot point anyways is it’s not about the “why” do just the “5” have so many…

359

Totally true, I use to wardec a corp for 50mill and then they went and doubled that.

But now a large alliance can pay the same fee
(The fee should be set based on the number of people in their corp/alliance that could show up and fight in high sec)

Right now it sends a very clear message that they don’t want small corps owning structures who are not willing to pay high extortion fees for anchoring on moons in Hi sec.

Frostpacker made a new enemy after rejecting an extortion mail sent by some big fish who today now decared war and I had received a quote read was 10b to take care of their HQ structure. I strongly wish it had of been 1/4 of that but I guess it is normal compared to the time and effect to take on this huge Alliance who owns most of 0.5 minmatar space.

I found a solid solution and that will save me spending money.

360

No the message is POSes are out.

Seriously, the message is stop being poor. Raitarus are cheap as chips.

361

About to lose my 3rd Athanor, I was able to take down my control tower.

362

Sorry not sure what kind of reaction you are expecting?

Sorry for your loss? Given you were suggesting that the data sheets were too expensive for high sec poses and that structures were too expensive for new corps, Im afraid I cant see the relevence of this loss.

363

re “You’ve doubled the price for “the little guys” and made it cheaper for huge sharks. WTF!”

It is in reference to the topic

364

Ok but am Athanors costs do not compare to a piece of crap raitaru, and those high sec POSes were even cheaper.

Im pointing out it wasnt an extortionate fee, and it certaiy isnt now for a raitaru.

Athanors are giant targets and if youve put a lot of value in them, its hardly accurate to include them in a discussion about why ypu think being eligible for Wardec is too expensive.

Unless I missed something?

365

I wasn’t clear enough in my comment. I was trying to offer a possible safe haven for small corps to be mostly only wardeced vs other small corps by setting the fee based on the number of members that could attend a hisec war.

It wouldn’t bother me to be wardeced vs small corps, but when a huge alliance with 2k+ members can show up, it is right then that message I feel is being sent.

Maybe if fees reflect the size of the corp then the wardecs will become more enjoyable in higsec.

366

Ah gotcha.

I think most people agree with that, that a scaling system is very much preferrable.

Personally, Id just like the frickin “Make Mutual” button to work.

1 Like
367

War Dec system is fair.

It costs a lot of isk to War dec on mass. Clearly its beneficial for groups to come together. The ISK has to be generated through clients and hard work.

We cannot dec anyone without a structure so new players are safe.

War dec cost for small groups doubled to 100mil

Anyone can team up vs our War HQ.

I’d say this was balanced.

If you want more PVE…go play WOW!

368

CODE. ?

4 Likes
369

Unless they changed their name of their parents to Zulu People.

/

Yes, though it would be even better if it costs even more based on number of members,

The skills show +20 corporation members per training level so how about reflecting this into the cost to declare war?

370

I totally agree with the people that this change makes wars less accessible for small groups and encourages people to grow into bigger entities yet again.

CCP already ■■■■■■ up with the previous changes to the war dec system and yet they screw the little guys even more.

All they had to do is reverse the pricing for wars from the previous system to make it unattractive for large forces to wardec small groups.

A little example of what I mean:

Set the base wardec cost to 200(ish) million (or whateve people assume as being reasonable as base fee under this concept.

The base fee is changed based on the size difference from wardeccer to the target.

If the corp that declares war is larger the cost goes up based on the member ratio between the corps / alliances.

So let´s say the attacking corp has 100 members and the defender only has 10 we have a 10:1 member ratio and the cost goes up to 2 Billion ISK.

However if a 10 man corp wardecs a 100 member corp the cost goes down to 20 million ISK.

That system would have motivated people to stay in smaller groups to cut down the costs. The so called griefing wars would have been mostly gone. “Mercs” mass wardeccing small corps with players that don´t offer enough value in target´s to even nealy make up for the wardec costs would have been undesirable.

At the same time this system would have allowed equally large groups to wage wars against each other for a reasonable price, without having to deal with the whole structure crap, which in general only favors large groups.

Once again CCP made changes that only results in more of the boring n+1 crap. While a fair solution would have been so easy…

4 Likes
371

It’s linear…I really don’t need to say more than that I hope.

So then that would be a bad thing right or is the “fair” and balanced" you mentioned not directed at the small guys?

Nobody but you has mentioned PvE…We’re encountering MORE smaller wars and less wardec farming.

1 Like
372

What is interesting here is that many people on both sides of the argument see pointless mass blanket war decs as being the issue and that is what needs to change. It is certainly true that real nitty gritty small corp wars are so much fun, but they hardly happen, all we get is farming, which is pretty boring. It is an impasse that the player base has got themselves into by just following their basic natures.

The real solution is to get people to change, but that takes real effort and requires both sides to change their approach. Personally I cannot see that happening…

373

Yes. The changes have forced wardeccers to come together.

Nothing stops those wardecced from getting allies to go pop the attackers structure though. Or multiple groups working together to destroy a structure like what happened to us (PIRAT). Before that happened I was pretty meh about these changes but even after loosing our structure and getting to fight outnumbered like we did. I cannot remember the last time I had so much fun in EVE. Back when I use to fly alone and engage 10-20 people on my own without Logi. That was the last time.

I still believe, as old school as the old systems of 3 limit Wardecs was. An adaption of the 3 war limit but allowing allies would have seen the small wardeccing corp still exist. engage each other like they had in past. I remember really good fights against PIRAT in the past when they use to fly their 100mn Tengu (Yes that long ago).

Even then without the new changes I would not have gotten a fight like we did this last weekend. Or a couple weeks back when we had a fleet of 200 people engage our rattle fleet when we took down a Tatara. So I am a bit split between the two. :slight_smile:

@Dracvlad The fact these ALPHA Predator players have formed together into one group shows people are willing to change and force new content onto people. It just takes time.

3 Likes
374

No, they really haven’t.
The wardec corps have CHOSEN to band together in order to simplify their mass wardecs.
Just like they were already doing before the wardec changes, slowly merging because it made for the most ‘content’ while complaining that small meaningful wars were going away.
Classic example of wanting to have your cake and eat your cake also.