PIRAT and Marmite only joined up to be able to put up a resemblance of a defense against huge null sec blobs like CFC. Other groups, in particular smaller groups, are irrelevant for this decision. Tying wars to structures is a bad mistake regardless.
Not reversing the cost scale is also a huge failure … my bad, can be seen as a huge win for CCP and the GSM. Small groups are still being punished over large groups, and large groups are still unnecessarily being sheltered from a resemblance of a risk in high sec.
The old WarDec system charged more for larger corps than for smaller corps. Now both are charged the same. Hard to see how that was anything but a bonus for the big guys.
…but if you are small it used to be 50M. Now for the same size corps, it’s 100M. Again, I don’t see where you are getting this.
This thread is not about having to own a station…that while it adds a barrier, I mostly agree with. Your next two points are also on owning a stations so…also skipped.
I really don’t understand this part either. Also, I have stations so…
You might be right here as I don’t have data and as you can’t cut/paste from the in game At War window, I’m not doing it manually. But I will point to the main point CCP was trying to fix with these changes; to reduce the huge number of WarDecs by just a few corps. As @Scipio_Artelius pointed out and as I did in my OP, while the numbers may have dropped, we’re still seeing the vast vast vast majority of wars just being WarDec farming.
The fact CCP has hugely missed their goal is alarming and the reason for the thread.
Relative to the old system, the minimum wardec fee has doubled from 50m to 100m, thus making it more expensive for the big boys wardeccing en masse
Wardec fee used to scale with corp/alliance size. The larger the group, the more expensive it was to wardec (more than 100m a week). Now that fee is effectively reduced, making it cheaper to wardec big groups - this is especially important for smaller groups
In contrast to the old wardec system, POSes are a core part of the new system - it is, in fact, a hefty indirect cost of waging war. Apart from being part of FW, an alliance war, or a mutual war, it is not possible to wage war without fielding a POS, therefore you need to consider the expense of fielding and maintaining a POS in order to do this. This was not a consideration previously but is now.
Sorry for the sentence mess up. Basically, you can eliminate the wardec cost by being part of a mutual war (which, by the way, do not required POSes) or by piggy backing off of FW or an alliance war. (You might need to chip in a bit on the alliance war but the cost will almost certainly be cheaper than a la carte)
Thanks to everyone so far for keeping this thread civil and informative. Personally I think this is a HUGE problem for HS and it’s just going to get worse as we’re just a few days into the change.
Keep the comments/ideas and suggested fixes coming…we all know CCP is watching!
I agree and disagree. Whether CCP explicitly said/thought it or not, I believe the “goal” of having these major groups cut back on wars is really a means to an end rather than an end to itself, and the end is, as I mentioned earlier, to cut back on stupid/griefer wars and make wars more meaningful, consequential, and fair for both defenders and attackers, both big and small, both newbie and veteran.
I think it’s perfectly fine if you have a few groups waging the vast majority of the wars as long as those wars are sensible and/or fielded in sensible ways - I believe the mechanics changes, while not perfect and not yet complete (from a long-term perspective), have made leaps and bounds toward this goal.
Also remember that the largest, most deadly wars in the game do not actually utilize the wardec system. These are the wars that take place in LS/NS/w-space. The stuff that happens in HS are peanuts compared to what happens elsewhere
In this regard, we want to protect the newbies moreso than anything else. We don’t want them to ragequit because they got griefed when they weren’t yet ready for PVP.
1+2. If my little 10 guys corp wants to WarDec the Goon, Great! The reality is that doesn’t happen as I want to keep my stuff. If I wanted to fight PIRAT for example, there are dozens of ally requests so…why WarDec.
But this is a barrier to entry for the little guys. I agree that something needs to be risked but it disproportional targets the smaller guys. Plus the station’s location is named basically dooming it to destruction if you WarDec a huge corp.
this is largely irrelevant for the reasons you described and will therefore not be addressed further
This is not a barrier to entry because you can get involved in wars without having a POS to lose via mutual wars, FW, or alliance warfare. This is also a means to get involved with others on a larger scale, be involved in things greater than yourself. This is, after all, an MMO.
At the moment far too many wars are lacking actual combat for either side, and we hope to start refocusing the war system with an aim to generate the types of wars that provide real value to players.
Sadly, wars still lack combat as most are just farming wars that rely on odd; declare 10 wars for 1B and to hit a freighter or two plus odds and ends to make that up. It’s telling that the #1 location and #3 location for kills for one of the major corps is on gates.
They are just playing the numbers game…They see a freighter/bling go by and if it belongs to a corp, it gets dec’ed.
I agree with you. I also believe that these changes give wars more purpose and focus, so I expect them to have more activity on both sides as a result. At least more of an effort on the aggressor side to be met with a proportional effort on the defender side.
But that’s not what CCP is trying to encourage. Of course you can fight if you really want but CCP has stated that they wanted to make the system more person. If my corp and your corp were constantly butting heads over belts/ice, we could escalate it to a war for all the marbles. Now you can do that but there needs to be billions on the table in assets. I’m not saying this is wrong BTW, just that it is a huge step up and easier to just hide assets in dummy corps to avoid the rick in the first place.
Or we can just stay in NPC corps and ignore the sandbox period.
This is our game. CCP’s job is to help shape the game as we see fit. I believe the goals I’ve outlined are a more refined version of what CCP outlined. I see no reason why CCP shouldn’t change course to reflect the will of the player base. They may very well read this post and agree with me on this, or at least agree that these changes had unintentional side effects which were positive and perhaps greater than the intended effects.
This is before the fact. Let’s see what happens after an extended period of time now that the new system is in place.
BTW I am enjoying this conversation with you. As tense as it feels sometimes, it is civil and enlightening, and I feel we’re fleshing out perspectives that others can benefit from and CCP can ponder.
If I recall correctly, that is on the order of ten times lower than it used to be. I also know as a direct consequence of the wardec changes that a lot of the HS groups started doing more ops and contracts and and wars (not involving the wardec system) in LS/NS
Oh very possibly it is lower with the station requirements and 100M, those two changes ruled wars out for many small corps (right or wrong).
IMO, right now there “should be” about 50 wars total…that would be a “realistic” number and if wardec costs dropped (but quantity of wardecs restricted per corp) maybe about 75.
It has though, because most of the wars that were started we against people who didn’t even own structures to begin with, this new system prevents those wars, you now literally have to opt-in to the war dec system, average jow corp can just laugh as they enjoy wardec immunity like NPC corps do
At some point two 5-man miner guilds are going to duke it out 
