Welcome to Jester's Trek.
I'm your host, Jester. I've been an EVE Online player for about six years. One of my four mains is Ripard Teg, pictured at left. Sadly, I've succumbed to "bittervet" disease, but I'm wandering the New Eden landscape (and from time to time, the MMO landscape) in search of a cure.
You can follow along, if you want...

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Declaring war on the QOTW

Mid-week Quote of the Week from CSM member and EVE mercenary Alekseyev Karrde:
The ally system has destroyed the viability of the mercenary profession as EVE has known it since launch. The fact that Inferno's "mercenary marketplace" has cause said destruction is very ironic and not a little bit insulting. Mercs would have been better off if CCP just patched the holes in the war dec system without meddling.
This of course relates to my post yesterday about the Star Fraction/Goon "foreverwar."

Either I missed it or it's been added since yesterday, but there's another change to this system that's being made to Inferno 1.1:
Added cost for hiring multiple allies for a war – hiring more than one ally now incur a cost that goes to CONCORD. The cost rises exponentially the more allies are hired into the same war.
As far as I can tell, this completes the job of neutering the so-called Mercenary Marketplace.  It certainly puts paid to any thought of a small alliance war-dec'ed by a larger one being able to defend itself with multiple small allies.  If a big alliance war-decs you, you're left in the unenviable position of trying to talk another alliance of equal size to your aggressor into being your ally.  Gathering a coalition of small alliances to match their size will no longer be viable.

Since there's now going to be a large ISK sink cost for securing allies anyway, it will make more sense to procure allies or mercenaries in the traditional pre-Mercenary Marketplace way.  Just negotiate with them to declare war on those that war-dec you rather than entering into a formal alliance.  Unless the alliance war-dec'ing you is of truly monstrous size, there's going to be an ISK sink whether you use the ally system or not.  You also gain the flexibility to negotiate shorter or longer-term mercenary contracts rather than the arbitrary two week limit of the ally system.

In short, Aleks seems to be getting his wish.  I feel kind of bad for the team that put the new ally system together.  It's still somewhat useful, of course: presumably war-dec'ed corps will still use it to gain their first ally, and depending on what "exponentially" means may use it for an additional ally or two if the entity attacking them is of large enough size to make the new war-dec costs unwieldy.  But beyond that?  The Mercenary Marketplace is certainly no longer going to be the one-stop shop and EVE Market analogue that the developers obviously originally visualized.

Back to the forums with you, war-dec'ed corp!

27 comments:

  1. As a member of a highly successful small gang PVP organisation, I find your suggestion that you need a corporation as large as your opponent's in order to beat then a little bit odd! ;)

    The provisional costs are fairly low:

    - 1st ally free
    - 2nd ally 10m per 2 weeks
    - 3rd ally 20m per 2 weeks
    - 4th ally 40m per 2 weeks
    - and so on.

    Assuming your aggressor is small enough that the minimum 50mil per week wardec fee applies, you can have *four* allies for cheaper than it would cost for a single corporation to issue a regular wardec.

    With that in mind, I don't really see how this harms the idea of a Mercenary Marketplace (there's no way they were going to price it as *more* than a regular wardec, for exactly the reason you describe). Right now there is no marketplace, since you can get all the help you want for free - why hire the best when you can hire the rest?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rote's quite good, but there are limits. We've been seeing occasional 200-ship Goon fleets around Syndicate lately.

      The aggressor in these war-decs is rarely small enough for the minimum fee to apply. I suggested on the forums that the aggressor should pay a fee corresponding to the sum of the size of the aggressor and the aggressed. Others have suggested that the aggressor pay the difference in members between the aggressor and the aggressed. Either would balance things out a little better.

      Delete
    2. That's exactly my point though. Even at minimum price, you get 4 allies for the price of one conventional merc wardec. Against a larger alliance, you get more again. The ally system is still the cheapest option by far.

      Delete
  2. Are you fucking serious? Read a forum thread once in a while.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. -2
      Love for emergent gameplay is obiously clouding your judgement, Poetic. You are barking on the wrong tree here and you know it. How can you support burn Jita as emergent gameplay while condemning Goon "hunting" wardec mechanic at the same time? Players banding together to teach Goons a lesson in bullying sounds like emergent sand box at its finest. CCP is full of it by caving in to Mittens and his lackeys. Do not be part of that mob, you will not like it where it will lead you.

      Delete
    2. Alekseyev Karrde read some of your posts lately and not only are you a really offensive piece of work but are obviously concerned ONLY with ensuring your customers continue to pay you through the nose and that your 0.0 backers are not inconvenienced.

      Delete
    3. Anon, pushing a button then doing nothing whilst people dogpile everyone (not just Goons) isn't emergent gameplay, it's an emergent problem.

      Ironically, the people helped least by this change are large alliances who live in nullsec, but you're too blind to see it.

      Delete
  3. There will never be a war system which everyone is happy with. It will never be 'fair' to all parties, because that's not how war works.

    ReplyDelete
  4. So if Jade wants to match goon numbers and put together a 9000 person coalition from other 100 man corps/alliance it will cost 3,094,850,098,213,450,687,247,810,550,000,000 isk every two weeks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 9000 Goons do not give a shit about wardecs, nor do they chase targets. There are about 75-100 Goons actively taking part in the Ministry of Love. Jade can defend against that cheaply enough.

      Delete
    2. A 75-100 man Goon deathsquad with the personal backing of their Alliance leader and all the resources and back-up a 9000 man Alliance can provide. Sure that can be easily defended against and if you believe that send me any amount of ISK and I'll double it, honest.

      Delete
    3. P'haps there are some members of the corps that are the target of this forever war who would like to going back to doing whatever they were doing before the war, without having to watch local like a hawk even in high-sec.

      Allies are a way of presuring the other 8900 goons so that they drop the war that sees 100 people popping up all over the place like rabbits, only to disappear once again.

      How do you propose they get rid of the wardec? What's the counter?

      Delete
  5. how about

    http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?6964-PROPOSAL-War-Dec-Review

    uh?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Wow. I haven't been paying much attention to this, but, I have one thing to say: ~CCP~

    ReplyDelete
  7. Again, as a thought experiment, let's imagine that CCP caved to the bears and implemented even worse penalties for large alliances/corps than those currently being suggested, mechanics unbearable to current large alliances. Certain corps/alliances would get even more elitist, to keep their numbers down for these new mechanics. Other corps/alliances would just implement fragmented coalitions, where one current alliance would become 10 different alliances according to the game systems, but sharing a common leader and out-of-game comms/forums. Is anyone in favor of these consequences? CCP couldn't take the risk that the inferno changes were enough to bring them about.

    Keeping fights fair as to equal numbers sounds good, until you try to make it actually happen, and then you realize that it sucks. Queues, lockouts, metagaming: these are the only meaningful consequences of attempting to equalize numbers in too heavy handed a fashion.

    ReplyDelete
  8. On this, you are wrong.

    Think about it for an hour or so.

    Keep blogging though.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Implying Goons send combat fleets into hisec...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are a surprisingly large number of goons on killmails in hisec, supported by a large number of goons doing the looting and salvaging after the killing is done.

      There were an awful lot of fake Goons in Jita just a little while back for a big event.

      Just because you don't go to hisec doesn't mean that Goons don't go to hisec.

      Delete
  10. ^ Tries to imagine RK or Syndicate being highsec......luls. though the influx of tears in the region would be amusing....dead bear...dead bear.....dead bear.....

    ReplyDelete
  11. LOL@CCP Most of the changes that came with Inferno are being rolled back. Last summer's Incarna was a bust. The expansion before that, Incursion, has been nerfed to hell and back. OK, Crucible was pretty good although it introduced no major new features.

    That leaves 3 of the last 4 expansions being woefully underwhelming. There's a lot of content there that's turning out nowhere near what the developers obviously originally visualized.

    So this coming winter we're supposed to get a POS revamp, which is long overdue. Probably a few other things too, but by this time next year we'll be 2 years into CCP's vaunted 5-year plan for reworking nullsec (announced last August). Would love to have an update on how that's progressing. My guess: it's not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 10isk says that the POS revamp this winter ends up screwing up a whole bunch of stuff.

      Delete
  12. Its is pretty sad that for all the talk of "giving small corps and alliances breathing room" be it in wars, 0.0, FW and battles (sometimes). The only thing that still matters is size and size alone.

    ReplyDelete
  13. You've jumped the shark, Jester.

    You still fail to see the single most important issue; this is not ALWAYS about "huge alliance out to kill small corp."

    I must congratulate Jade on completely blinding you to any reason.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Sounds like the more things change, the more they stay the same. Originally I could have seen the alliance option getting limited use but now it sounds like it will mostly just gather dust. Honestly, what was so bad about unlimited allies with no cost? The Jade/Goon case was not something that would have become a norm since mobizong that many people takes two conditions; a charismatic leader to present a cause to rally behind and the widespread motivation to join said cause. Goons being goons made that case possible more than anyone else. Most corps and alliances will have a hard time generating the friends or isk to field a large scale opposition. Which is unfortunate because an EVE with more widespread conflict is an EVE worth logging in to

    ReplyDelete
  15. Haha! Did you just say the merc market place was a one stop shop? That's the most ridicolus thing I've ever heard and shows me that you know nothing about what you are talking about.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Funny thing was the WarDeck alley dogpiling was the only thing that was spuring WARs that was supposed to be the theme of Inferno and now hey are taking it out.
    The unintended consequences with the lack o communications by CCP beyond the wardeck issues also gave us a near universally disliked Unified Inventory and the near Death of Incursions. This expansion was a bust a half a magnitude under Incarna.
    Whether the drone poo/Meta 0 deletions are going to help any miners is still up for debate with a permaHulkageddon ( but I see alot of troubles of wars being able to continue with the high prices of T1 ships and now T2 with OTEC )

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.