| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Jade Constantine
    |
Posted - 2008.08.20 19:00:00 -
[481]
Edited by: Jade Constantine on 20/08/2008 19:02:43
 Originally by: Beltantis Torrence
Your roleplay is fail. I'm not whining. I'd like to shoot at you without having to deal with sec losses and expensive war decs though or leave my corp for the explicit purpose of shooting at you.
So you'd like to shoot at us without:
a) getting sec loss in lowsec
b) having to pay wardec fees
c) leaving your corp to join a corp we've wardecced?
Would you like the moon on a stick while you're at it? 
Seriously. Take the advise that VERY VERY many good folks replying to this thread have already given you and realize that FW is a part of Eve - its not a different game altogether. Play the game and deal with adversity as it comes.
*PS. Anarchist "alliances" are not unknown in the history of social movements. You could do some homework before leaping to silly preconceptions. Course the operative word there is "work" and given your actions in the Militia thus far I'm not exactly optimistic on that score 
|
Ecky Ptang
Achmed Fleet
|
Posted - 2008.08.20 20:48:00 -
[482]
rather then protecting the social order, the only thing caldari militia protects are its borders. but nice try anyway |
Beltantis Torrence
|
Posted - 2008.08.20 21:03:00 -
[483]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
*PS. Anarchist "alliances" are not unknown in the history of social movements. You could do some homework before leaping to silly preconceptions. There is rich history of anarchy in science fiction and you shouldn't be amazed to find adherents alive and well in Eve online. Course the operative word there is "work" and given your actions in the Militia thus far I'm not exactly optimistic on that score
My point is there is no difference between an alliance and a militia in practice in Eve (you are not part of a military by joining the militia). Whatever degree of free reign you have over your actions in an alliance likewise applies to the militia. No one is barking orders at you in the militia. You're just afraid to get your hands dirty and *gasp* have people shoot back at you. So keep hiding in high sec and talking smack about how we should chase after you with expensive war decs to get a fight you claim to want to have with us. If you want to fight the leadership of Caldari to show your disapproval with them then grow a pair and do it. |
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.20 22:04:00 -
[484]
Originally by: Beltantis Torrence
Originally by: Jade Constantine
*PS. Anarchist "alliances" are not unknown in the history of social movements. You could do some homework before leaping to silly preconceptions. There is rich history of anarchy in science fiction and you shouldn't be amazed to find adherents alive and well in Eve online. Course the operative word there is "work" and given your actions in the Militia thus far I'm not exactly optimistic on that score
My point is there is no difference between an alliance and a militia in practice in Eve (you are not part of a military by joining the militia). Whatever degree of free reign you have over your actions in an alliance likewise applies to the militia. No one is barking orders at you in the militia. You're just afraid to get your hands dirty and *gasp* have people shoot back at you. So keep hiding in high sec and talking smack about how we should chase after you with expensive war decs to get a fight you claim to want to have with us. If you want to fight the leadership of Caldari to show your disapproval with them then grow a pair and do it.
I refer you to the answer I gave you some hours ago.
|
Farrqua
Minmatar
Turbo Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 00:47:00 -
[485]
Originally by: Beltantis Torrence
Originally by: Jade Constantine
*PS. Anarchist "alliances" are not unknown in the history of social movements. You could do some homework before leaping to silly preconceptions. There is rich history of anarchy in science fiction and you shouldn't be amazed to find adherents alive and well in Eve online. Course the operative word there is "work" and given your actions in the Militia thus far I'm not exactly optimistic on that score
My point is there is no difference between an alliance and a militia in practice in Eve (you are not part of a military by joining the militia). Whatever degree of free reign you have over your actions in an alliance likewise applies to the militia. No one is barking orders at you in the militia. You're just afraid to get your hands dirty and *gasp* have people shoot back at you. So keep hiding in high sec and talking smack about how we should chase after you with expensive war decs to get a fight you claim to want to have with us. If you want to fight the leadership of Caldari to show your disapproval with them then grow a pair and do it.
Yea there is a huge difference between and EVE alliance and an EVE militia. For one EVE alliances are from the ground up ran by players. Alliances expend huge amounts of ISK, man power and time in which the players themselves have to contribute. Each corp works, fights and support each other to reach a player driven goal.
A militia is a bunch of individual corps with no allegiance to each other except when it comes into play or forced. They are governed by a script and NPC's.
Alliances can be war dec'd and destroyed, burnt to the ground by any and every one in EVE. Militia can not be destroyed. Just ships. Militia territories still stay in place.
Corps in the militia do not pay dues to help keep the wheeles rolling in the train. They can leave at any time and come back with out any repercussions.
And as you have mentioned....no one is barking orders at you to get you off your carebear ass to take the field or GET out. |
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 01:35:00 -
[486]
Time to end the militia experiment ccp - I for one promise not to ridicule you if you do.
SKUNK |
Takimoshi
The Aztecs
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 02:59:00 -
[487]
Here's a thought what is one issue that militia members have had issues with? Lack of central command.
Here's a brainstorm - make a "special" kind of alliance. The militia is supposed to be a proto-alliance. Make it a separate deccable alliance. That way you have access to tools like alliance mail (they already have "alliance" chat as it were). This way when you wardec you have to do so to the whole alliance.
Now obviously there are some issues with that. Namely you take away the npc status of the militia corporations themselves (ie Federal Defense Union, State Protectorate, etc.) which leaves a lot of newbies is a situation where they are suddenly up against a 0.0 alliance without any sort of protection. A thought would be that declaring war on the militia "alliance" is a war declaration on the whole faction itself - thus making anyone who wants to wardec the militia deal with the Faction Navies when they are in high sec - but not gate guns as those are only used against global criminals. Concord would stay out of it - but at least it would afford the less experienced players a "safer" place to run back to and it provides a challenge to the 0.0 players. If that were the case - make the amount of Faction Navies that respond to war target presences a little less harsh that way you don't get a wardec fleet fighting the faction navy ships and one target instigating it.
Now the militia alliance would not have the power to declare war on anyone else - nor make a war mutual. That way they don't have to pay for wars (because honestly what does the Caldari State care about a 0.0 alliance anyway? :P ) So this makes the wardec the choice of the 0.0 alliance if they do indeed want to spend a lot of resources then that is their choice. Now because there is no space to lose on the part of the militia (being a part of an npc faction) they don't have to worry about their alliance being destroyed and that makes the war all about pvp which is what people seem to want.
Now also included should be the ability of the militia alliance to set standings (mostly for use with friendly militia alliance) that way they can know who is friendly and who is not when out on ops in addition to regular war targets.
Now in the case of Star Fraction this would be a difficult task to say the least. If this did happen and they RP their desire - wardec all 4 Factions at once - that would mean they well and truly would be a 0.0 alliance as any venture into empire space would be risky because every high sec gate would be hostile to them. Technically in true 0.0 alliance warfare they would not be allowed docking rights - that's a little harsh. Also when attacked by Faction Navies typically speaking the frigates don't warp scramble you - that's fine because that way the militia fighters don't get "free interceptor" basically. However I think the practice of those frigates neutralizing capacitor is ok - just maybe tone down the number of ships who do so and the amount neutralized. That way it gives a slight advantage to the militia defenders and makes it a little harder for 0.0 alliance to sit and camp in high sec systems.
Anyway I'm sure you guys have all kinds of holes to poke in this so go fire away.... but try and be constructive. |
Pithecanthropus
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 04:24:00 -
[488]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
We don't want to join any militia. No idea whatsoever gave you that entirely incorrect idea.
your whole campaign has been to get ALLIANCES to join MILITIAS. Now you are flip-flopping to say you just want to declare war on them?
Quote:
Star Fraction is an anarchist roleplay alliance that opposes nationalism in the star cluster.
wtf does that mean?
Quote:
Play the game. Stop whining on the forums. Join fleets, help the corps at war. Respond to adversity with courage and camaraderie and you might just find that fighting back is fun. Thats what this game is all about. And for those trying to paint this as some kind of campaign against novice pilots I invite you to examine the public campaign records for "a touch of anarchy" (our overall campaign statistics for the anti Caldari movement). Novice pilots don't fly faction-fit CNRs.
People never have stopped playing... you're an ego maniac you know that. What you call whines, is a travesty to this game and your position. Do your job, listen constructively to people, or step down.
I invite you to examine all other aspects of Eve... and learn from ALL of them, so you can then do your elected job.
|
Tara Armitage
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 04:39:00 -
[489]
We have never wanted to join a militia. It would end our 5+ years of consistent roleplay saga if we did. If you thought we wanted that, I am politely pointing out that you are mistaken. Instead we initially long before FW was ever introduced wanted to war dec all the militias. Can you see how that is a bit different goal than joining one, Pithecanthropus?
As for the part of Jade's post you didn't understand - Jade was simply describing our rather complex and somewhat demanding roleplay angle in a very short way, for your information. As you implied that you didn't understand that, I will point you to our web site where you can collect more detailed information:
The Star Fraction
As for what is and what not is a travesty, any mechanics that would create an asylum for third party corporations that are not interested in FW in any way, but that would shelter them from war declarations ranks fairly high on my personal list. Your mileage may vary, but having been played this game for five years, and having taken part in countless discussions about these matters, I do state with some confidence that Eve was meant to be a rather harsh game. The mechanic for non-consensual war declarations is very close to heart of the game itself. Messing with that is unwise, and whining about it is ill informed - all in my opinion only, of course.
There is nothing from with war deccing corporations, I am afraid. If the corporation is in FW there is even less wrong with it, to be honest, because they are at least seeking some sort of PvP anyway, unlike pure carebear corporations. And there is nothing wrong with war deccing those carebear corporations either.
|
Le Cardinal
ECP Rogues
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 07:49:00 -
[490]
I think it boils down to this:
Milita: all militia corps/members should be able to shoot back when a single entity within the militia get wardecced.
SF: No problem.
All this RP or no RP or you suck or i suck discussion is just a waste of time. Alliances shouldnt be able to join the militia just to get a rediculous amount of wartargets. Everyone is free to create a corp and temporarily jump over to it, and/or join it with alts. Alliances is far too proffessional, coordinated and resourcefull for new players and the militia to handle. It will mean the end of what FW is about and a playground for alliances without having to commit to whatever they do in 0.0. |
|
Victoria Ehr
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 07:51:00 -
[491]
Originally by: Heartstone
Edited by: Heartstone on 20/08/2008 12:37:33
Edited by: Heartstone on 20/08/2008 12:35:41
Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik
If the CCP powers to be read any posts at all in this thread, I hope it is these two. Surely this portrays better than any other shitpost or epeen posturing the reality for the playerbase. SF are clearly having a great time, the Squidies want to have a great time and GFs too BUT are being hampered by unfair, and unbalanced mechanics.
Except the post above was a lie. We took sec hits and took gate gun fire. We just don't whine about it.
Oh and edit: I really can't be bothered with this anymore. I am sure this thread will go on and on with the same comments over and over. in the meantime I will be having fun as will those who actually bother trying to fight in space rather than on the forums. Once I thought you could have a somewhat rational discussion on these forums... Oh well.
Edit2: and why is this bolding ffs. Stop it damn you
If the fight was so good and you had a fleet firing at you, why not just accept our argument and let the fleet have a 15 min aggro on you guys, why the need for gate guns and criminal aggro?
OKay so jericho fraction wants gate guns involved in all the faction war fights? and the fact gate guns must factor in fights doesn't warrent concern and a need for a fix?
star fraction guys in here keep dancing around the issue, they either call everyone not of their opinion "idiots" and "clueless" or they cling to their concept that Faction war needs no tweaks, its perfect for them.
|
Tara Armitage
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 08:10:00 -
[492]
I am afraid you are simply mistaken on quite a few things that have already been rather extensively covered in this thread. Did you see how our CEO was the one supporting changes to FW mechanics in the CSM? Did you see quite a few members of ours give support?
The short story: FW is pretty crummy for us, because we can't war dec all four militias and go out to have fun. We have adapted and we are using the mechanics that are there. Our targets do not wish to use mechanics that are there and are calling for tweaks - some of which we support even if they would mean comparative disadvantage to ourselves. Some others of our targets are just whining because they can't have it all their way, they get repeatedly killed or whatever. The problem for them, really, is not the mechanics but the attitude. Different mechanics would not save them at all.
And then there are the people that are simply mistaken, like yourself. And finally the few that are just spitting lies about the whole thing or are too bitter to actually take a look at the whole situation. Most of this thread is filled with this nonsense how we either never go to low sec, always go to low sec to "hide", use this or that or the third thing etc. Nonsense.
FW could use a bit of tweaking, but many of the solutions proposed here would be breaking far more important game mechanics while not really fixing FW at all. Hence the arguing from my personal point of view.
|
Victoria Ehr
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 08:53:00 -
[493]
Originally by: Tara Armitage
Did you see how our CEO was the one supporting changes to FW mechanics in the CSM?
I saw that. then Why is your CEO so opposed to some of the suggestions offered in this thread, many people have offered constructive, logical ideas.
Originally by: Jade Constantine
So you are arguing that people in fleets should automatically be able to fire back at their gang mates if targetted by aggression then?
So if I see some guy fighting at a gate in jita I should be able to invite him into my fleet and then we get to blow up his aggressors regardless of whether we have a prior wardec against them or not?
If that guy is in the same alliance then YES, or in this case same FACTION.
|
Beltantis Torrence
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 09:06:00 -
[494]
Originally by: Farrqua
Yea there is a huge difference between and EVE alliance and an EVE militia.
Try reading the context of the post. Jade was saying that its against their arpee to join a militia. But for whatever reason it isn't against their arpee to join an alliance. And from a roleplaying standpoint, there isn't a huge difference. The sort of RP where you just make up stuff that doesn't happen and expect everyone to go along (like militias ordering you around and being part of a formal military) is stupid - because that doesn't actually happen in the game. It reminds me of those lame IRC rooms years ago where people would be like /me punches you in the face and you DIE! and then get ****y when you're like "...what?".
Anyway, whatever. |
Tara Armitage
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 09:57:00 -
[495]
I can't speak for Jade. I am opposed to some of the ideas offered in this thread because of the reason I already stated - many of them would break far more important mechanics while not necessarily helping FW. Having a reason to oppose an idea or several ideas does not mean the same as being opposed of everything. I hope you understand and see how some of the constructive ideas in this thread are utterly crap in the context of the whole game?
Thing is, our ideal FW - selfishly - would have been us being able to wardec all four militias and everyone involved. That was "the perfect" for us. I can see why it didn't happen. I like many of our members are very old players, we have stuck with this game and we care for it. Quite a few of us also understand the mechanics fairly extensively due to having played a long time and in many many different roles with our mains and alts. We want to see the game thrive and remain good perhaps even improve. This is a pretty good reason to oppose crappy ideas that would break core mechanisms of the game such as wardec -system, don't you think? It is not always selfishness, you see. If we were selfish we would be pushing for one of the crappy ideas in this thread - the one stating that a wardec against a single corp should be a wardec on the whole militia. That would effectively be what we wanted - but there are good reasons why it is not so when the issue is looked from a wider angle. This wider angle seems to be missing a lot in this thread. Which is not unlikely in whine threads, really.
If you take a look a few pages back I am in favour of a suggestion that I thought would be pretty good. I don't think individuals being able to wardec would likely be technically workable, but at least in theory it looks pretty good.
|
Tara Armitage
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 10:00:00 -
[496]
Beltantis, you too are mistaken. Being an alliance is not the same as joining a militia for us for a good reason. You see, for more than five years we have been against all empires. It would be renouncing all that to join one in their faction, wouldn't it? Joining up is not the problem, joining up to support an empire we are against is. See?
Also, we are not too keen on RP that doesn't take place in game which is why we do it in game. |
Pithecanthropus
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 12:51:00 -
[497]
Originally by: Tara Armitage
The short story: FW is pretty crummy for us, because we can't war dec all four militias and go out to have fun.
If you nor any of your rolemates can't comprehend how alliances joining FW, whether it be in militias or deccing war, can GREATLY stir up more abuse than good... than you ALL are so frickin naive and selfish. PERIOD.
If its crummy... then leave! What's the problem? Look at both sides... your objective to will NEVER HAPPEN!
Waaa-waaa-waaaaaaaa... you can't dec war on ALL FOUR MILITIAS! You serious! You want to dec war on roughly 20,000 players! Who in the right mind would find THAT appropriate jsut to let whining little roleplayers play! OMFG... you guys are idiots.
|
Lucai
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 13:23:00 -
[498]
Edited by: Lucai on 21/08/2008 13:25:50
Pithecantropus, didnt your doctor tell you to never skip your medication?
And please enlighten me how the militias objectives, like expanding the state and defeating the Gallente, or retaking caldari prime for the gallente, and all else will happen by the hands of players? |
Pithecanthropus
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 13:34:00 -
[499]
Originally by: Lucai
Pithecantropus, didnt your doctor tell you to never skip your medication?
That's one of those responses when you have no valid reply. Thanks for proving my point that all your SF mates are anti-Eve Online and pro-Jade Online.
We get it now... it's all clear as a bell. I'm sharp as a ball, ya know. Take some advice, if you're gonna roleplay, be honest about it. If you just want a system to abuse even more... say that. Don't sugar coat it with roleplaying drama. LOL. You RPers prolly make up 2.1% of the entire player base... and maybe an actualy .4% online at any given time.
I find it hilarious how Jade has you all hanging from puppet strings.
All you want is to dec war on 4 militias, have the safety of each high sec... not deal with npcs, not worry about bubbles or titans, and pick and choose who, what, when, and where at any given point to target. FW is low sec war, people with high sec needs. You know damn well trade hubs are close, you know damn well its easy pickings... its not roleplay at all.
Get off your lazy ass, if FW is so crummy leave, and find some 0.0 space where pvp talents shine. For crying out loud, you are all lame.
|
Pithecanthropus
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 13:39:00 -
[500]
Originally by: Lucai
And please enlighten me how the militias objectives, like expanding the state and defeating Gallente, or retaking caldari prime for the gallente, and all else will ever happen by the hands of players?
Who is to say it won't ever? It's a game, it's like football... scoring points, moving on, going on defense, offense... if CCP intended it to have an end, they would of put a finalized goal... but no, they want factions to continuously defend and attack, retaking space. It's not for you to say. Factions are a constant revolving door... new players in, old bored players out. Get used to it. If you don't like what you are eating, don't force it down... jeez. |
|
Drykor
Minmatar
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 13:53:00 -
[501]
Originally by: Pithecanthropus
Originally by: Lucai
Pithecantropus, didnt your doctor tell you to never skip your medication?
That's one of those responses when you have no valid reply. Thanks for proving my point that all your SF mates are anti-Eve Online and pro-Jade Online.
We get it now... it's all clear as a bell. I'm sharp as a ball, ya know. Take some advice, if you're gonna roleplay, be honest about it. If you just want a system to abuse even more... say that. Don't sugar coat it with roleplaying drama. LOL. You RPers prolly make up 2.1% of the entire player base... and maybe an actualy .4% online at any given time.
I find it hilarious how Jade has you all hanging from puppet strings.
All you want is to dec war on 4 militias, have the safety of each high sec... not deal with npcs, not worry about bubbles or titans, and pick and choose who, what, when, and where at any given point to target. FW is low sec war, people with high sec needs. You know damn well trade hubs are close, you know damn well its easy pickings... its not roleplay at all.
Get off your lazy ass, if FW is so crummy leave, and find some 0.0 space where pvp talents shine. For crying out loud, you are all lame.
It's funny how you say all this when your previous post was entirely made up of flaming. Pot and kettle? |
Sykes
Minmatar
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 13:53:00 -
[502]
Well, different people have different motivations.
Many Eve pilots set themselves conventional objectives. For example to take a piece of 0.0 for themselves, build outposts, mine moons, get rich, have laggy fleet battles and so on. The majority of Star Fraction have spent at least some time doing that stuff, some of them spent years doing it before the emergence of their revolutionary conciousness caused them to join Star Fraction.
Star Fraction's objectives involve opposing territorial claims of whatever kind and by whatever means are most effective, sometimes that involves long-term campaigns of brutal 0.0 guerilla warfare, sometimes it means decapitating FW militias by executing members of their leadership corps. One of the very liberating things about being interstellar revolutionaries is that we aren't tied down to holding any territory, have a rich selection of potential targets and can pursue a variety of creative strategies against them.
Apparently the present strategy is working very well, to judge from the outraged howls of protest from the Caldari militia corps. |
Farrqua
Minmatar
Turbo Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 14:24:00 -
[503]
Originally by: Beltantis Torrence
Originally by: Farrqua
Yea there is a huge difference between and EVE alliance and an EVE militia.
Try reading the context of the post. Jade was saying that its against their arpee to join a militia. But for whatever reason it isn't against their arpee to join an alliance. And from a roleplaying standpoint, there isn't a huge difference. The sort of RP where you just make up stuff that doesn't happen and expect everyone to go along (like militias ordering you around and being part of a formal military) is stupid - because that doesn't actually happen in the game. It reminds me of those lame IRC rooms years ago where people would be like /me punches you in the face and you DIE! and then get ****y when you're like "...what?".
Anyway, whatever.
I understand what you were talking about in reference to Jade and company. I was discussing the statement. Originally by: Beltantis Torrence
My point is there is no difference between an alliance and a militia in practice in Eve
I had an issue with this statement because FW'rs want the benefits of a player alliance, but the funny thing is they are not willing to accept the responsibility nor the consequences of being in one. |
snotvomit
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 14:39:00 -
[504]
I want to ask about this suggestion again - just in case it's getting lost in all the flames and trolls:
How about this rule...
If you're in Militia, and in a fleet, then you can return fire on anyone who's not in the militia who fires on a fleet member?
Am I missing some way this could be horribly abused or something?
This would still allow all the wardecs etc, but would stop the fleet getting disrupted by outsider corps.
Maybe it's a bad idea, and I've missed something, but could someone suggest whether this seems reasonable or not? |
Grimnir
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 14:54:00 -
[505]
Edited by: Grimnir on 21/08/2008 14:54:32
Originally by: snotvomit
I want to ask about this suggestion again - just in case it's getting lost in all the flames and trolls:
How about this rule...
If you're in Militia, and in a fleet, then you can return fire on anyone who's not in the militia who fires on a fleet member?
Am I missing some way this could be horribly abused or something?
This would still allow all the wardecs etc, but would stop the fleet getting disrupted by outsider corps.
Maybe it's a bad idea, and I've missed something, but could someone suggest whether this seems reasonable or not?
Wasn't this just turned off because people were unwittingly joining gangs and then getting involved in wars that weren't their own ? I guess that was just gangs though, not fleets ...
|
Pithecanthropus
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 14:58:00 -
[506]
Originally by: Sykes
currently it means decapitating FW militias by executing members of their leadership corps. One of the very liberating things about being interstellar revolutionaries is that we aren't tied down to holding any territory, have a rich selection of potential targets and can pursue a variety of creative strategies against them.
Apparently the present strategy is working very well, to judge from the outraged howls of protest from the Caldari militia corps.
No one cares what the bitter task of SF and its meaningless goals are. We're here to debate whether or not the FW mechanics are in-line with Eve and its best interests and for the best interest in FW and its design. In the end, if there is a fix, you can still perform your gallant efforts of amusement. Thus, stop whining that militias are whining, cuz it really makes you seem arrogant and stupid. |
snotvomit
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 15:03:00 -
[507]
Originally by: Grimnir
Edited by: Grimnir on 21/08/2008 14:54:32
Originally by: snotvomit
I want to ask about this suggestion again - just in case it's getting lost in all the flames and trolls:
How about this rule...
If you're in Militia, and in a fleet, then you can return fire on anyone who's not in the militia who fires on a fleet member?
Am I missing some way this could be horribly abused or something?
This would still allow all the wardecs etc, but would stop the fleet getting disrupted by outsider corps.
Maybe it's a bad idea, and I've missed something, but could someone suggest whether this seems reasonable or not?
Wasn't this just turned off because people were unwittingly joining gangs and then getting involved in wars that weren't their own ? I guess that was just gangs though, not fleets ...
**sigh**
No. You're referring to the lofty scam. That's completely different.
Please note that I stated that if people were in the MILITIA, and in a FLEET, they could return fire at someone who fired on the fleet.
The lofty scam worked because if you were in a gang/fleet with someone who was at war, then the war targets could fire on YOU - and you couldn't fire at THEM until they fired at you.
If the suggestion I made applies only to Militia members, in fleets, returning fire at someone who attacks a fleet member, then that's not the same thing. |
Sykes
Minmatar
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 15:06:00 -
[508]
Edited by: Sykes on 21/08/2008 15:11:40
Pithecanthropus, if you took responsibility for defending yourselves, you wouldn't need a 'fix' from CCP ...
It's not like you don't have the necessary numbers, were you only able to organise them. |
Barstander
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 15:34:00 -
[509]
Originally by: snotvomit
Originally by: Grimnir
Edited by: Grimnir on 21/08/2008 14:54:32
Originally by: snotvomit
I want to ask about this suggestion again - just in case it's getting lost in all the flames and trolls:
How about this rule...
If you're in Militia, and in a fleet, then you can return fire on anyone who's not in the militia who fires on a fleet member?
Am I missing some way this could be horribly abused or something?
This would still allow all the wardecs etc, but would stop the fleet getting disrupted by outsider corps.
Maybe it's a bad idea, and I've missed something, but could someone suggest whether this seems reasonable or not?
Wasn't this just turned off because people were unwittingly joining gangs and then getting involved in wars that weren't their own ? I guess that was just gangs though, not fleets ...
**sigh**
No. You're referring to the lofty scam. That's completely different.
Please note that I stated that if people were in the MILITIA, and in a FLEET, they could return fire at someone who fired on the fleet.
The lofty scam worked because if you were in a gang/fleet with someone who was at war, then the war targets could fire on YOU - and you couldn't fire at THEM until they fired at you.
If the suggestion I made applies only to Militia members, in fleets, returning fire at someone who attacks a fleet member, then that's not the same thing.
Essentially, I believe this is the best solution. However, some people are concerned that if this goes into effect, whenever they war dec a corp, that corp will join a Militia as a response. This supposedly makes militias a 'war dec avoidence' system. Of course, that only works if said corp always travels in fleets, and only has an effect if those fleets are made of other militia members.
Personally, I think it is a better solution than the current situation, but that is a matter of strong contention here. |
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 15:41:00 -
[510]
Originally by: snotvomit
I want to ask about this suggestion again - just in case it's getting lost in all the flames and trolls: How about this rule...
Well, first of all let me tell you that I spent a decent time with the CSM debating empire space aggression rules on various things. Loot flagging, remote repping, dock and jump timers and suchlike, and yes also elements of the wardec system. It is actually pretty complex - take even a simple think like "do mission-runners own the wrecks they create?" -> this leads to issues like whether they can shoot at ninja loot salvagers or not? Loot ownership leads to issues of whether a pvp gang killing a victim in hisec can shoot at the thief or whether the victim's gang can? When is it fair to shoot in hisec is a big issue.
So, to your your proposal. Basically you have two types of player in the Militia. There are those that join the npc corp and those that join as player corps. These two types have different "powers" and vulnerabilities.
1. The npc corp types are immune to empire wardec. They cannot be wardecced and they only have to worry about the opposing faction and due to the npc faction police spawn they only really have to be wary of the enemy faction in lowsec. Its a highly protected form of pvp and its virtually impossible for other players to impact them in their home hisec. This is probably where the genuine "new" players to FW should be.
2. The player corp types. These are not immune to wardec, they can make their own wardecs in fact - even against other militia corps. The primary advantage for player corps in miltiia is a) access to militia content/missions/ranks/direct influence on the war and b) access to free wardecs against any corp/militia member in the opposing militia. The vulnerability is that they are (like any other corp in eve) available to be wardecced by their enemies.
The reason the Militia is not an Alliance is that there is no central command structure, neither corps nor individuals can be "kicked out" by command if they fail to perform. And the Militia npc members are effectively immune to reprisal for deeds done by the corps.
Its entirely possible (and in fact happens routinely) that pirate corps join militias - why should victims of these pirates not be able to wardec the pirate corps and gain vengeance without involving the npc pilots (who presumably just want to run complexes and fight the FW?)
Some wars and conflicts have nothing to do with FW at all. Why should the targets in these engagements have the option of associating with the militias as corps and gain the advantage of hundreds of potential allies immediately and without price?
Anyway, in specific answer to your "rule". Here are some problems:
1. It would allow members of an npc corp that is immune to hostility in empire to unilaterally take hostile action at a point of their choosing. That isn't balanced or reasonable.
2. It would allow people to exploit the wardec system by joining militias when wardecced to gain the support and protection of npc militia fleets.
3. It represents a kind of "instant-threat" in hisec space that isn't within the spirit of the game. There is a reason that wardeccing somebody involves a 24 hour timer - thats there to ensure that the victims have time to prepare and assess the situation and get ready for hostility.
4. It confuses the mechanics - at the moment you can literally return fire in hisec against anyone that aggresses you sure. But tying together the individual corp wars with the militia npc pilots breaks that rule - you are getting to fire at somebody who hasn't aggressed YOU. Doesn't work that way with conventional fleets with mixed corps/alliances / some at war some at not. So you are asking for a specific mechanic to benefit the militia ABOVE how corp/alliance fleets work and its not on.
5. You need to be thinking of how to achieve your effect without specific partial buffs for just one side really.
|
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |