Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
218
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 21:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
Alright, this is pretty straightforward and has been repeatedly asked for over the years by other militia members.
Simply put, the fact that enemy war targets are allowed in their opposing faction's highsec is both ludicrous and stupid. It would be extremely easy to program the stations in hisec not to allow docking of enemy combatants much in the same way the current lowsec system works with system control.
The best analogy I can think of to cover how silly this is, would be a terrorist with a visible suicide vest calmly walking into an airport, then getting a cheerful 'all-clear' to him and letting him through. |
Vadeim Rizen
The Scope Gallente Federation
75
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 21:50:00 -
[2] - Quote
No, it would be like having Wal-Mart saying 'you can't shop here because you're from a country we're at war at." The stations are owned by corporations, not the factions. And it's not faction militaries that are at war with each other, just militia - which by definition is its own independent group and nothing to do with the 'governing faction.' It's the militia's war, not the factions or corporations. |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
218
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 22:32:00 -
[3] - Quote
Vadeim Rizen wrote:No, it would be like having Wal-Mart saying 'you can't shop here because you're from a country we're at war at." The stations are owned by corporations, not the factions. And it's not faction militaries that are at war with each other, just militia - which by definition is its own independent group and nothing to do with the 'governing faction.' It's the militia's war, not the factions or corporations.
I'm guessing you've never been in FW since apparently you have no idea how the lowsec mechanic works.
ANY station in the contested warzone space...has the enemy locked out from docking in it. If the gallente hold nisuwa, even though it has a state protectorate station, no caldari militia or amarr militia members can dock there. All this would do is make the hisec stations behave the same way, except permanently blocking enemy forces from docking. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
5629
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 22:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
It took me awhile... but I found my little piece about this subject from awhile ago... _____________
[drill sergeant voice]
Welcome to Faction Warfare maggot!!!
Let's get a few things clear... by enlisting in Faction War you are joining a global WAR DECLARATION that knows no borders and leaves no one safe!
Do you feel safe you nancy boy? Well you ARE NOT SAFE! You are a target twenty four hours a day... seven days a week... unless you lose your nerve and quit like the sissy you are!
You think high-sec protects you? You think you can do what you want behind the warm soft blanket of the Faction Navy? Well think again!!
Lemme introduce you to a MEAN sucker... someone who proved that you are never safe! That if someone wants something dead, he makes it DEAD!! His name is JALMON!!!
Many a mission runner and hauler have met their end at the hands of this sumbitch!! What does he do? He sits and waits in enemy territory til enlisted men such as yourself feel all WARM and comfortable... then BAM!!! He comes like the wrath of GOD HIMSELF and ENDS YOU!
HOW does he do it! WHY does he do it? Cause the great men and women of CEE CEE PEE decided that all should be vulnerable no matter where they are... ESPECIALLY when they are at WAR!!
Awwwwww... did you get killed by someone like Jalmon? Did you think that war is only supposed to happen in certain places and not in others? Well you are WRONG son!! War is WAR!!!
Now suck it up and take it like a MAN! Or better yet... go out and kill the ******* that is pinning you down!
Don't have the power to do it yourself you say? Can't match someone who put thought and effort into their tactics? Well GOOD NEWS!!! You ain't alone son!!! You got other soldiers like you!! They can shoot those clever bastards like YOU!
Now strap yourself in a frigate you price of amphibian **** and LET ME SEE YOUR WAR FACE!!!!!
[/drill sergeant voice] __________________
tldr: station lock-out mechanics are really, really, really dumb and should be done away with entirely. They do not cause conflict, only greater risk aversion and greater safety where there should not be. You already have the Faction Navy in high-sec. Use that to your advantage. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?" |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
218
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 22:51:00 -
[5] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:It took me awhile... but I found my little piece about this subject from awhile ago... _____________ [drill sergeant voice] Welcome to Faction Warfare maggot!!! Let's get a few things clear... by enlisting in Faction War you are joining a global WAR DECLARATION that knows no borders and leaves no one safe! Do you feel safe you nancy boy? Well you ARE NOT SAFE! You are a target twenty four hours a day... seven days a week... unless you lose your nerve and quit like the sissy you are! You think high-sec protects you? You think you can do what you want behind the warm soft blanket of the Faction Navy? Well think again!! Lemme introduce you to a MEAN sucker... someone who proved that you are never safe! That if someone wants something dead, he makes it DEAD!! His name is JALMON!!! Many a mission runner and hauler have met their end at the hands of this sumbitch!! What does he do? He sits and waits in enemy territory til enlisted men such as yourself feel all WARM and comfortable... then BAM!!! He comes like the wrath of GOD HIMSELF and ENDS YOU! HOW does he do it! WHY does he do it? Cause the great men and women of CEE CEE PEE decided that all should be vulnerable no matter where they are... ESPECIALLY when they are at WAR!!Awwwwww... did you get killed by someone like Jalmon? Did you think that war is only supposed to happen in certain places and not in others? Well you are WRONG son!! War is WAR!!! Now suck it up and take it like a MAN! Or better yet... go out and kill the ******* that is pinning you down! Don't have the power to do it yourself you say? Can't match someone who put thought and effort into their tactics? Well GOOD NEWS!!! You ain't alone son!!! You got other soldiers like you!! They can shoot those clever bastards like YOU! Now strap yourself in a frigate you price of amphibian **** and LET ME SEE YOUR WAR FACE!!!!! [/drill sergeant voice] __________________ tldr: station lock-out mechanics are really, really, really dumb and should be done away with entirely. They do not cause conflict, only greater risk aversion and greater safety where there should not be. You already have the Faction Navy in high-sec. Use that to your advantage.
The faction navy is a joke. They literally sit by and get their asses kicked by wt campers who shouldn't be there in the first place. The lockout mechanics are good because not only are the logical, they give militia members the incentive to push for and hold territory. Part of the reason why the old FW mechanic sucked balls for everyone is because nobody lost anything when a system flipped. Lockout works because people flip their **** if they stuff gets locked down in a station and they can't get it back (siri people who don't pay attention to WZ enough and get their carrier or dread stuck in station) .
They don't cause conflict? Try grinding a system and constellation for 10 hours while not being able to resupply in the home system you USED to have before it got flipped. Go to Innia/Eha area and tell me calmil pilots don't want their stations back, or to heyd when we took that for the first time years ago when DCE was running things in templis. The fact that we and they can dock up wherever they want in enemy hisec where in any kind of consistent reality they would be shot, tackled, or taken in the moment they got out of their ship in-station. You want to kill groups of people in hisec with your buds? Wardec like everybody else and don't use FW as an easy out for that. |
Mag's
the united
17571
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 23:06:00 -
[6] - Quote
Ahh FW. They either want a get out of consequences free card, or a shut people out one.
The game is made with NPC interaction, but the least amount of it we have the better. Player interaction that drive content, are what we need, rather than adding yet more NPC roles.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Doctor Mordecai
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 23:15:00 -
[7] - Quote
I have been with FW since it started with various characters and it is probably the most encompassing version to date, not without issues but name a section within eve that doesn't have issues.
I would prefer locks outs to be FW npc corp stations only. The other corps should still allow docking of anyone.
Each system should have a FW 'outpost station' that swaps to whoever the controlling faction is and this is the station that locks the opposition out.
HS is fine if you are in FW, you are at war and have faction navy. Live with it. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
5632
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 23:18:00 -
[8] - Quote
My experience with station lock-outs has been this...
- people consolidate in a few bunker systems. No one even attempts to take these systems because it is almost impossible to do so when major organizations have around the clock coverage.
- the people that do not move to the bunker systems, they move out of the warzone entirely... setting up just outside in "neutral" low-sec or high-sec. They will never move because they know you can never dislodge them. And that is pretty much the point.
- you never set up a new base that is too far away from another base. If you do, you are on your own. And no one wants to risk having their stuff locked up. So no one commits in far flung areas without considerable support.
- before station lock-out mechanics people used to fight because they WANTED to fight... not because they were forced to. Being forced to fight (especially through PvE complexes) makes it a chore and takes away the fun factor.
- it makes being an "outlaw" look MUCH more attractive than it should be. You can either be in militia living with the risk of station lockouts... or you can be a "free agent" with all the pros of being in the militia (see: farmer alts) and only one con; gate gun fire.
- it makes sense lore-wise, yes... however I will argue that high-sec IS NOT SUPPOSED to be safe... not for anyone... least of all FW people. Why do I say this? Because Faction War is a global war declaration. And in joining FW you committed to that war no matter where it shows up.
Less lock-out mechanics are better because they create less safety for the defender and force smarter playing. And yes... the Faction Navy is already an enormous advantage... unless you are living in 0.5 system... in which case you really should not be expecting much. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?" |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
218
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 00:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote: - it makes sense lore-wise, yes... however I will argue that high-sec IS NOT SUPPOSED to be safe... not for anyone... least of all FW people. Why do I say this? Because Faction War is a global war declaration. And in joining FW you committed to that war no matter where it shows up.
Less lock-out mechanics are better because they create less safety for the defender and force smarter playing. And yes... the Faction Navy is already an enormous advantage... unless you are living in 0.5 system... in which case you really should not be expecting much.
Yeah, so if you're fighting enemy war targets in hisec, shouldn't you have better police to back you up, and not leave them any ground to go to in the area? It causes more conflict to fight over systems than it does without; even if it's not a perfect system by far, helping make the battle lines a little clearer helps BOTH sides out quite a bit, and at the same time hinders there mobility to where it's a necessity to capture stategically valuable systems.
Another reason why I like the lockout mechanics is because its one of the things that keeps FW from turning into a bigger farm-fest than it already is; encouraging pilots to capture home systems with militia stations is a great motivator; you have the ability and options to literally cut off enemy supply lines, and have the 'war' itself be more realistically represented.
To be completely fair, there are a few minmatar-run stations in caldari and amarr hisec, so it could be feasible to make it so they can only dock in stations that are owned by their own faction or a friendly. So a compromise I could envision would be that in say, caldari hisec, minmatar and jove stations would be safe havens; they'd just have a lot more difficulty finding purchase to dock up since that wouldn't be allowed in caldari systems. Obviously the same would apply to each of the factions, but it wouldn't COMPLETELY lock them out.
The case was made about making it so it was just the militia stations that locked you out. I would support that if I was given a choice between that and nothing happening. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
5636
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 01:36:00 -
[10] - Quote
Okay... militia stations (like Tribal Liberation, 24th Imperial, Fed Navy, and Caldari Navy) I would agree on. Those you can lock out completely and I would not complain.
I still have a huge issue with system-wide lockouts though. I does nothing really positive except encourage greater consolidation/cooperation of forces (which is not a bad thing) and actively discourage people from spreading out (which hurts smaller corps and soloists).
With regards to the farmers... as long as you can earn LP by semi-passively orbiting a button in a warp-stabbed Tristan... it will forever be infested with farmers. Level 4 FW missions were farmed in the past (before the revamp they were how you could earn billions in a month)... but because there were numerous NPCs in them that required more DPS than what 5 bonused Hobgoblins could produce... and more tank than a single small repper could handle... it largely kept out the hordes we see today.
Of course... a return to this would produce enormous whines from people crying "think of the newbies! A week old newbie can no longer earn an income in FW! How will the newbies ever survive without being dependent on others for help?? CCP hates newbies and favors elitist bittervets!!" There is honestly no way to win in this situation.
With regards to the battle lines being more "clear"... I disagree. It's war. There are no "clear lines" in a war. There are frontlines, yes... but any place is really an acceptable target if the enemy chooses to accept the extra effort involved in operating in enemy territory.
At this point, the whole conversation boils down to two questions; 1. How much effort should someone be expected to put in so they can operate in enemy territory? 2. When does the effort become so unreasonable that it basically creates a new level of safety in a place and situation that is not supposed to have "good safety" by design in the first place?
FW people in enemy high-sec already have to deal with... - the Navy... which is admittedly laughable in 0.5 space but quickly becomes quite "unpleasant" in 0.6 and above... - the Faction Police... which is an entirely different and more aggressive beast from the Navy... but a person does need to have abysmal standings to summon up these things (not hard when you have been in FW for a year or more). - hostile players who have no restrictions on what they can bring, where they can bring it, and where they can get it.
So far... the FW players in their high-sec have all the mechanical advantages except for station lock-outs. If they are still getting killed then that is more a problem with the players themselves than with the system overall. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?" |
|
Tabyll Altol
Caldari Campers
4
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 12:53:00 -
[11] - Quote
How about making boarder High-sec systems attackable which are near the warzone, so the FW could really do something not flipping the same systems over and over again. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
448
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 15:11:00 -
[12] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:
The best analogy I can think of to cover how silly this is, would be a terrorist with a visible suicide vest calmly walking into an airport, then getting a cheerful 'all-clear' to him and letting him through.
Since you want real world....
The US dislikes communism, and north korea. China is both communist and N. Korea's BFF. Should be 2 strikes right there but this does not get in the way of commerce, as we like our electrical gadgets and such lol.
Moral of the story....money > ideology until truly pressed into a corner. Look at this way...empire stations are going sure the other faction are the enemy, but their money is very neutral to us lol.
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
599
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 15:12:00 -
[13] - Quote
Uhm ... I have good standings to Amarr Caldari, Gallente and Minmatar. I earned my respect with each of the empires. And now a FW bunnies comes along and thinks, it can take away my privileges for which I've worked tirelessly and very hard? Talk about booster side-effects. |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
218
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 19:44:00 -
[14] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:Catherine Laartii wrote:
The best analogy I can think of to cover how silly this is, would be a terrorist with a visible suicide vest calmly walking into an airport, then getting a cheerful 'all-clear' to him and letting him through.
Since you want real world.... The US dislikes communism, and north korea. China is both communist and N. Korea's BFF. Should be 2 strikes right there but this does not get in the way of commerce, as we like our electrical gadgets and such lol. Moral of the story....money > ideology until truly pressed into a corner. Look at this way...empire stations are going sure the other faction are the enemy, but their money is very neutral to us lol. Pretty fair counter, I'll concede. |
RavenTesio
Liandri Corporation Liandri Covenant
128
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 22:06:00 -
[15] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:Catherine Laartii wrote:
The best analogy I can think of to cover how silly this is, would be a terrorist with a visible suicide vest calmly walking into an airport, then getting a cheerful 'all-clear' to him and letting him through.
Since you want real world.... The US dislikes communism, and north korea. China is both communist and N. Korea's BFF. Should be 2 strikes right there but this does not get in the way of commerce, as we like our electrical gadgets and such lol. Moral of the story....money > ideology until truly pressed into a corner. Look at this way...empire stations are going sure the other faction are the enemy, but their money is very neutral to us lol.
Racism and Prejudice will always trump Money... not to mention that we're not talking about a simple difference in ideals here, this is an Actual Conflict over disputed territory being mediated by the Eve equivalent of the League of Nations (Concord) who's core role within New Eden is to prevent escalation to a renewed break out in full-scale Wars between the Empires that would draw the Citizens in to such conflicts.
Part of the Charter that was ratified by the DED / Concord during the Yulai Accord, was that Territorial War will be permitted by Concord between the Empires but ONLY within the Designated disputed Territories. This is why Faction Warfare doesn't not extend to the whole of Low-Sec by is restricted to a small area of systems between the Empires.
Now the charter does go on further to point out the "Security" of Empire Space will not be enforced by Concord, but rather falls to each of the nations to police it as they see fit... this primarily means that the Navy itself /IS/ intended to act as the Police Force, while the Naval Reserves (the Faction Warfare Corporations) are intended to also maintain Empire boarders where the Navy is in-capable of providing the resources to maintain security.
Yet here's the thing, we're not talking about "Terrorists"; groups like Goonswarm who participate in 'Burn Jita' or pay bounties during 'Hulkageddon' ... would be deemed as little more than criminal organisations / terrorist groups, and do I think they should also be shut out of High-Sec? Actually, yes and no; there needs to be some kind of "Police" or "Home Security" mechanic in the game to have a combined NPC & Player run form of the FBI or such - that tracks and hunts down known criminal organisations to prevent Terrorist attacks - still let's not get side-tracked with the Criminal "underground" and focus specifically on the Faction Warfare side of things.
Put simply, we're talking about ACTUAL Soldiers fighting an ACTUAL War... as limited scope as it might be, these are still people who are part of Armed Forces for the opposition. While sure it's far more of a "Human Rights" moral debate about how far you go for Home Security when it comes to segmenting a particular group of people simply because of where they were born; There is absolutely NO debate about someone who is wearing the Uniform and is Armed working for the Armed Forces of an Enemy you are currently at War with.
What we're talking about here are the Empires sending the poorly trained Home Guard to hunt down **** Soldiers who literally just walked through border patrols and have decided to setup a beachhead in the middle of London; but not only that but you're telling me every single Trader and Hotel Manager is perfectly fine with providing carte blanc access to these men that prove themselves on a daily bases to be War Criminals?
These same people often set themselves up in High-Traffic Hubs, blocking supply lines and killing loyalist soldiers the second they step out of the Quarter Masters building with their new Equipment.
Let's also not forgets that, actually most of these players are deliberately exploiting the game to maintain the safety that they experience.
I mean CCP talk about Risk Vs. Reward, which also as a point of note while they do say that "High-Sec is not intended to be 100% Safe" ... they're not speaking in regard to the fact that you have a damn enemy bunker nest located right in the middle of Supply Lines; if this were happening in 'real life' right now these Territorial Disputes would not longer be all these Wars were about - Empires would've actually descended their entire Navies upon those systems to not only kill the intruders to maintain the safety of their New Recruits but also we would be looking at Full Scale Wars as such actions are a Breech of the Yulai Accord.
Now no one here has said that such actions /should/ be impossible, allowing RAIDS in to Enemy High-Sec honestly is perfectly legitimate gameplay; and anyone who says that you should never been 100% Safe, especially in Faction Warfare is right.
I think that Denial of Docking Rights in Enemy High-Sec is a perfectly reasonable action, that does not prevent them from utilising a "Neutral" Starbase to base out of.
This said I also believe that /should/ a particular area (system) remain an active hot-spot for Enemy activity then the Security Rating of that System should rise with the Navy presence increasing as a response to a growing threat. Again as I said, Raids are perfectly fine... but it's this whole nature of literally "Living" in enemy High-Sec, outside the reach of most actual PVP pilots who are generally stuck on Low-Sec due to Security Status issues.
Sure the Security Tags have helped with that, but it gets very expensive, very quickly constantly repairing security status specifically to deal with heavily entrenched groups who right now run at the first sense of any force capable of displacing them; there is a very clear indication here that this is Exploit gameplay to remain practically untouchable. |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
307
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 22:14:00 -
[16] - Quote
Doctor Mordecai wrote:I have been with FW since it started with various characters and it is probably the most encompassing version to date, not without issues but name a section within eve that doesn't have issues.
I would prefer locks outs to be FW npc corp stations only. The other corps should still allow docking of anyone.
Each system should have a FW 'outpost station' that swaps to whoever the controlling faction is and this is the station that locks the opposition out.
HS is fine if you are in FW, you are at war and have faction navy. Live with it.
Which is a fine theory until that nasty NPC spawn ceiling takes effect.
Oh look my 10 RR ships are tanking the entire navy of the system. Great. As opposed to saying something like: after x many minutes or y many lost navy ships, the navy ship spawns responding to the interlopers switch to elite versions or otherwise escalate until they reach capitals or super capitals.
This is EMPIRE SPACE. They are AN EMPIRE. One does not simply walk in to Mordor, one should not simply afk tank an entire empires navy. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
307
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 22:15:00 -
[17] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:Zan Shiro wrote:Catherine Laartii wrote:
The best analogy I can think of to cover how silly this is, would be a terrorist with a visible suicide vest calmly walking into an airport, then getting a cheerful 'all-clear' to him and letting him through.
Since you want real world.... The US dislikes communism, and north korea. China is both communist and N. Korea's BFF. Should be 2 strikes right there but this does not get in the way of commerce, as we like our electrical gadgets and such lol. Moral of the story....money > ideology until truly pressed into a corner. Look at this way...empire stations are going sure the other faction are the enemy, but their money is very neutral to us lol. Pretty fair counter, I'll concede.
America has quadrupled the number of troops and war assets on the north coast of Australia. Only a small guess how much extra stuff they've since posted to their bases in the phillipines. China is fighting a war against America, just not yet one that involves bullets. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
219
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 23:11:00 -
[18] - Quote
RavenTesio wrote:
Put simply, we're talking about ACTUAL Soldiers fighting an ACTUAL War... as limited scope as it might be, these are still people who are part of Armed Forces for the opposition. While sure it's far more of a "Human Rights" moral debate about how far you go for Home Security when it comes to segmenting a particular group of people simply because of where they were born; There is absolutely NO debate about someone who is wearing the Uniform and is Armed working for the Armed Forces of an Enemy you are currently at War with.
What we're talking about here are the Empires sending the poorly trained Home Guard to hunt down **** Soldiers who literally just walked through border patrols and have decided to setup a beachhead in the middle of London; but not only that but you're telling me every single Trader and Hotel Manager is perfectly fine with providing carte blanc access to these men that prove themselves on a daily bases to be War Criminals?
These same people often set themselves up in High-Traffic Hubs, blocking supply lines and killing loyalist soldiers the second they step out of the Quarter Masters building with their new Equipment.
Let's also not forgets that, actually most of these players are deliberately exploiting the game to maintain the safety that they experience.
I mean CCP talk about Risk Vs. Reward, which also as a point of note while they do say that "High-Sec is not intended to be 100% Safe" ... they're not speaking in regard to the fact that you have a damn enemy bunker nest located right in the middle of Supply Lines; if this were happening in 'real life' right now these Territorial Disputes would not longer be all these Wars were about - Empires would've actually descended their entire Navies upon those systems to not only kill the intruders to maintain the safety of their New Recruits but also we would be looking at Full Scale Wars as such actions are a Breech of the Yulai Accord.
Now no one here has said that such actions /should/ be impossible, allowing RAIDS in to Enemy High-Sec honestly is perfectly legitimate gameplay; and anyone who says that you should never been 100% Safe, especially in Faction Warfare is right.
I think that Denial of Docking Rights in Enemy High-Sec is a perfectly reasonable action, that does not prevent them from utilising a "Neutral" Starbase to base out of..
Thank you, Raven. This is exactly what I was looking for. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
5643
|
Posted - 2014.06.24 23:26:00 -
[19] - Quote
Guys... I appreciate your arguments and your logic... but really... this is a game. One where conflict and lack of safety is supposed to be a way of life.
Which brings a greater degree of conflict and lack of safety (for defending players)? Locking out anyone who isn't on your side from any station in your area... or allowing anyone to dock up almost anywhere?
I personally believe it is the later. And that is why I do not support station lock-outs. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?" |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
219
|
Posted - 2014.06.25 00:16:00 -
[20] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Guys... I appreciate your arguments and your logic... but really... this is a game. One where conflict and lack of safety is supposed to be a way of life.
Which brings a greater degree of conflict and lack of safety (for defending players)? Locking out anyone who isn't on your side from any station in your area... or allowing anyone to dock up almost anywhere?
I personally believe it is the later. And that is why I do not support station lock-outs. Locking out enemy players brings a greater degree of conflict and lack of safety because the enemy combatants in question are less safe and have an increased degree of conflict from an increased likelihood of fighting capsuleer forces loyal to the empire they're intruding into, since they can't play station games or find a safe haven in enemy hisec. If you don't think that makes it harder for them and forces them to fight more regularly, then I'm not sure what I can say to convince you otherwise. |
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
308
|
Posted - 2014.06.25 00:28:00 -
[21] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Guys... I appreciate your arguments and your logic... but really... this is a game. One where conflict and lack of safety is supposed to be a way of life.
Which brings a greater degree of conflict and lack of safety (for defending players)? Locking out anyone who isn't on your side from any station in your area... or allowing anyone to dock up almost anywhere?
I personally believe it is the later. And that is why I do not support station lock-outs.
How does letting someone play docking games in hostile space with a ******* marauder/rattlesnake make any sense at all? You got nothing on this one mate. The fact they have to meta-game in the first place to get to this point is another nail in the coffin. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
5645
|
Posted - 2014.06.25 00:38:00 -
[22] - Quote
You already have the Faction Navy, Faction Police (if the person in question has terrible standings, which they usually do), free reign over the space you are in (you do not have to consider dps outside of what the player can deal), and a plethora of friendlies nearby supposedly there to help you...
where exactly does the enemy militia in hostile high-sec have the advantage (beyond the element of surprise)?
It is not SUPPOSED to make sense (the same way in-game insurance does not make sense). It supposed to keep you on your toes and keep you "unsafe." That's why station lock-outs were not expanded to high-sec when FW was revamped (it was not an oversight on the part of the DEVs).
If station lock-outs are applied in high-sec then it will just give an extra layer of security and further reinforce the belief that FW is a "low-sec only" thing. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?" |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
219
|
Posted - 2014.06.25 01:19:00 -
[23] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:You already have the Faction Navy, Faction Police (if the person in question has terrible standings, which they usually do), free reign over the space you are in (you do not have to consider dps outside of what the player can deal), and a plethora of friendlies nearby supposedly there to help you...
where exactly does the enemy militia in hostile high-sec have the advantage (beyond the element of surprise)?
It is not SUPPOSED to make sense (the same way in-game insurance does not make sense). It supposed to keep you on your toes and keep you "unsafe." That's why station lock-outs were not expanded to high-sec when FW was revamped (it was not an oversight on the part of the DEVs).
If station lock-outs are applied in high-sec then it will just give an extra layer of security and further reinforce the belief that FW is a "low-sec only" thing. You're flipping the entire point of this on its head; it's not supposed to be safe for THEM because they're in the middle of enemy territory. The idea that it should be less safe for loyal militia forces is a moot point because the same rules with hisec ganking and wardecs are still in place. If you want to play the FW game, you should put your money where your mouth is on BOTH sides. If you want to **** around and play half-ass pvp in highsec with gatecamps, gank gangs, and instalock alpha boats...just be a pirate like everyone else and wardec who you want.
It's profitable enough, and enemy war targets having a foothold in hostile space is rediculous because there is no point for them to be there outside of the war zone outside of grabbing some easy kills. All they are doing there is exploiting a broken and impotent mechanic. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
5645
|
Posted - 2014.06.25 02:01:00 -
[24] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:You're flipping the entire point of this on its head; it's not supposed to be safe for THEM because they're in the middle of enemy territory. It works both ways. It is not supposed to be safe for EITHER the defender or the offender... however the defender already has quite a few safety mechanisms in place to give them an advantage.
In my eyes, a lock-out mechanism pushes the safety unreasonably in favor of the defender and further discourages conflict and incursions in hostile high-sec.
Catherine Laartii wrote:The idea that it should be less safe for loyal militia forces is a moot point because the same rules with hisec ganking and wardecs are still in place. So people should have to go to war twice... or suicide gank... in order to kill someone who voluntarily joined a global war declaration in an area of space where the NPCs will already attack them on sight?
It is sounding more and more like you just do not want to be disturbed in your faction's high-sec area.
Catherine Laartii wrote:enemy war targets having a foothold in hostile space is rediculous because there is no point for them to be there outside of the war zone outside of grabbing some easy kills. The warzone is not in low-sec... it is not in null-sec... it is not in high-sec... it is everywhere.
And there is no problem with "easy kills"... because it is not the mechanics fault they more prepared than you or that you decided to play station games unprepared.
Catherine Laartii wrote:All they are doing there is exploiting a broken and impotent mechanic. No... they are taking advantage a "loophole" that CCP left for them to attack unprepared, and unsuspecting people in an area of space where no one should be safe... least of all people who are technically at war. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?" |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
602
|
Posted - 2014.06.25 05:56:00 -
[25] - Quote
How do you deal with "enemy" stations in "enemy" territory? |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
309
|
Posted - 2014.06.25 07:25:00 -
[26] - Quote
Shah fluffer still isn't addressing why he is allowes to dock in enemy space or why its possible to game the system and run out the local npc forces. These are in the first instance stupid and in the second a ridiculous "loop hole" as he put it. If you want to be a terrorist you should come under attack. No matter how many of you there are. Burn jita is an excellent example of how many npcs a single server can field there really should be no ceiling to how many npcs respond to a foreign insurgent in their presence.
Ukraine is an excellent real life example. Russian sponsored terrorism in foreign soil illicits the host countries military as a reaponse. The answer to state sponsored interlopers is of course military action with the intention of killing. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
RavenTesio
Liandri Corporation Liandri Covenant
130
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 07:06:00 -
[27] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote: And there is no problem with "easy kills"... because it is not the mechanics fault they are more prepared than you and/or that you decided to play station games unprepared.
Bullshit... I'm sorry but you are absolutely full of it. It sounds to me like you are someone who is in favour of maintain the very clear EXPLOITS because these people /had/ to live out of a Neutral Starbase that they wouldn't make as much ISK to cover running costs; but more than that it makes then vulnerable with right now living out of an NPC station gives them almost complete immunity.
Caldari Stations (for the most part) have massive docking areas, NPCs particularly in 0.8 and below are no more of a threat than an L4 Mission since their nerf 2 years ago, in-fact even better is they web you; so being able to "escape" should you get surprised it is considerably easier.
An NPC Station cannot be blown up, no one can force you out, fighting there or on a gate; especially in High-Sec provides a greater measure of protection for Neutral Alts; like Logistics... Boosters don't go Suspect, neither do Cloak Alt Scouts. There are so many Neutrals in Local already that using Combat Probes can easily go completely un-detected.
Get your Faction / Sec Status high-enough (which once you hit Max Rank any gains from your FW NPC Corp doesn't affect it) and the amount of response from the Navy is by-passed (get it high-enough they ignore you) ... that Sir is an EXPLOIT.
....
Now I'm not going to act like we haven't used Exploits in the past to do raids on Gallente or Minmatar space before; the wormhole one was particularly creative; but that's all they were, RAIDS. No one ever sat camping your systems getting kill after kill after kill, that you were unable to respond to because they hid behind a bubble of absolute safety.
Honestly I know I'm not going to change your mind here, because either you are completely oblivious to how absolutely broken these mechanics are; or the group who perma-camp systems like Litura are your alts and you don't want to see anything change because you're too damn chicken to step foot in Low-Sec and actually risk any of your no doubt expensively fit ships to an area of space where they will get the **** kicked out of them by everyone.
But what I am hoping is that CCP are actually bothering to follow this thread, because frankly I think there is more than a strong enough case put forward as to WHY not expanding out Docking Right to High-Sec for Faction Warfare was simply a mistake.
I'm going to be completely blunt here too... either Faction Warfare is PURELY Low-Sec, meaning the Consequences of being part of it remain there; or it is as you say, a War that expands even in to High-Sec and Null-Sec; if that is the case then the exact same restrictions /MUST/ apply. |
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
220
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 18:58:00 -
[28] - Quote
RavenTesio wrote:ShahFluffers wrote: And there is no problem with "easy kills"... because it is not the mechanics fault they are more prepared than you and/or that you decided to play station games unprepared.
Bullshit... I'm sorry but you are absolutely full of it. It sounds to me like you are someone who is in favour of maintain the very clear EXPLOITS because these people /had/ to live out of a Neutral Starbase that they wouldn't make as much ISK to cover running costs; but more than that it makes then vulnerable with right now living out of an NPC station gives them almost complete immunity. Caldari Stations (for the most part) have massive docking areas, NPCs particularly in 0.8 and below are no more of a threat than an L4 Mission since their nerf 2 years ago, in-fact even better is they web you; so being able to "escape" should you get surprised it is considerably easier. An NPC Station cannot be blown up, no one can force you out, fighting there or on a gate; especially in High-Sec provides a greater measure of protection for Neutral Alts; like Logistics... Boosters don't go Suspect, neither do Cloak Alt Scouts. There are so many Neutrals in Local already that using Combat Probes can easily go completely un-detected. Get your Faction / Sec Status high-enough (which once you hit Max Rank any gains from your FW NPC Corp doesn't affect it) and the amount of response from the Navy is by-passed (get it high-enough they ignore you) ... that Sir is an EXPLOIT. .... Now I'm not going to act like we haven't used Exploits in the past to do raids on Gallente or Minmatar space before; the wormhole one was particularly creative; but that's all they were, RAIDS. No one ever sat camping your systems getting kill after kill after kill, that you were unable to respond to because they hid behind a bubble of absolute safety. Honestly I know I'm not going to change your mind here, because either you are completely oblivious to how absolutely broken these mechanics are; or the group who perma-camp systems like Litura are your alts and you don't want to see anything change because you're too damn chicken to step foot in Low-Sec and actually risk any of your no doubt expensively fit ships to an area of space where they will get the **** kicked out of them by everyone. But what I am hoping is that CCP are actually bothering to follow this thread, because frankly I think there is more than a strong enough case put forward as to WHY not expanding out Docking Right to High-Sec for Faction Warfare was simply a mistake. I'm going to be completely blunt here too... either Faction Warfare is PURELY Low-Sec, meaning the Consequences of being part of it remain there; or it is as you say, a War that expands even in to High-Sec and Null-Sec; if that is the case then the exact same restrictions /MUST/ apply.
RavenTesio everyone; telling it like it f*cking is. http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m09y0rR1Hq1r5gvg1o1_400.gif |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
5676
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 20:17:00 -
[29] - Quote
Quote:I'm going to be completely blunt here too... either Faction Warfare is PURELY Low-Sec, meaning the Consequences of being part of it remain there; or it is as you say, a War that expands even in to High-Sec and Null-Sec; if that is the case then the exact same restrictions /MUST/ apply. Personally... I believe the rules must apply everywhere... but the station lock-outs must be abolished almost entirely because I do not believe they cause conflict... they stagnate it.
As for my record... if you look at my killboards you will see I am a low-sec roamer which a penchant for risking expensive stuff. I have no direct stake in the high-sec games outside of my love of trolling the morons in my militia for letting themselves be caught by people playing station games (yes, they "LET" themselves be caught because they should have had bookmarks all over stations they frequent, whether it is high-sec or low-sec).
And no... it is not an exploit if CCP does not deem it so. They left high-sec open to dock in SPECIFICALLY because they...
- do not want to lock people out of half of high-sec and/or NPC stations in general (ask them why, not me... this is what we got from a FW roundtable during Fanfest) - so people have a way to prey on unsuspecting FW people... adding a layer of risk and uncertainty for the defender. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?" |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1134
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 20:53:00 -
[30] - Quote
Vadeim Rizen wrote:No, it would be like having Wal-Mart saying 'you can't shop here because you're from a country we're at war at." The stations are owned by corporations, not the factions. And it's not faction militaries that are at war with each other, just militia - which by definition is its own independent group and nothing to do with the 'governing faction.' It's the militia's war, not the factions or corporations.
Caldari Navy own Jita 4-4... Isn't that the same entity shooting at gals when they enter a system in caldari empire? We hate you enough to shoot your ship but sure, go ahead and dock in the station. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |