Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.06.26 14:29:00 -
[1]
Having been encouraged by some people to put in the form of a specific proposal my own suggestions for accommodating non-aligned corporations and alliances in factional warfare (FW) gameplay, I put it forward here.
I have taken the time to make an extensive argument on this in my blog: Faction Warfare and 'Third Forces'
I won't reproduce it here for reasons of space but I will present the offered solution in full. I invite anyone to peruse the blog entry itself and I hope any interested CSM members will do so to better understand my reasoning.
Simply put, it should be possible to enter factional warfare in a fully-featured way by opposing a given faction without joining an opposing militia. In other words, a corporation or alliance should be able to declare against a given militia and the following should then apply:
- They are at war with all corporations in the specific militia.
- They may attack complexes belonging to the empire of the specific militia they are declared against.
- They may not secure complexes belonging to the empire opposed by the specific militia they are declared against.
- They will be fired upon by NPC navy forces of the empire to which the specific militia declared against is a member.
- Any other abilities or penalties as may exist or be developed in future that may apply to opponents of a specific militia will be available but only with respect to the faction of the specific militia declared against.
- A given corporation or alliance should only be able to declare against one militia at a time.
Taking the case of my own organisation, the Star Fraction, and the Amarr militia what would this mean?
- The Star Fraction and Amarr militia corporations would be war targets to one another BUT Caldari militia corporations would not share in this.
- The Star Fraction would be able to attack and capture Amarr FW installations BUT not Caldari FW installations.
- The Star Fraction would not be able to formally secure Minmatar FW installations (or any other for that matter).
- The Star Fraction would come under attack from Amarr NPC navy forces BUT not Caldari NPC navy forces.
This is a consistent and coherent approach to the issue which provides a way to participate in FW with some useful options. Notice that it means people who wish to fight, say, the Amarr militia but not the Caldari will only be limited in their ability to travel and operate in Amarr space and not Caldari space. Immediately a much more nuanced approach to the wars between the empires is available to those who may indeed support, say, the Gallente Federation but have no big quarrel with the Amarr Empire.
It also allows for a much wider participation in FW by many corporations and alliances in a way that makes sense in RP/IC terms. Mercenaries, freebooters, outlaws, minor faction loyalists, loyalists who don't want to be in any militia and alliances in general can declare against whoever and get involved without the absurdities (and impossibilities) that arise from enforced membership of militias. It squares the circle, both for in character reasons (CCP are right, alliances are extra-national entities IC, they have no business being in anyone's militia) and mechanical reasons, of alliances not joining militias.
EVE is a more mature and deeper game of war and politics than the current FW arrangements allow for and this suggestion seeks to improve matters to the benefit of the whole game. There are more levels of detail it is possible to discuss with regard to this proposal but they are more properly a matter for CCP to consider. What is presented here is the broad design suggestion that there be a fully-featured against option for entry into factional warfare participation without the necessity of joining any militia.
Cosmo
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
RaveNight
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.06.26 14:43:00 -
[2]
Thank you for posting this individually. I believe this is well done. The external reading on your blog is also helpful. |
Samuel Cole
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.06.26 14:50:00 -
[3]
Makes a lot of sense, and would get more people involved in FW PvP, which is a good thing. Excellent work, Cosmo. |
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange Coalition of Free Stars
|
Posted - 2009.06.26 15:17:00 -
[4]
This seems an entirely reasonable proposal.
|
Tecam Hund
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.06.26 15:56:00 -
[5]
Supporting.
|
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.06.26 16:36:00 -
[6]
Its a well thought-out, sensible and entirely constructive proposal that provides balance to the potential participants and moreover, will definitely supply a boost to participation in the flagging FW arena and enable small-scale pvp to a wider audience while allowing RP entities to more properly express their opposition to specific causes.
I'd urge the CSM to consider this proposal seriously and I hope that a champion can be found to promote and argue this concept to the current council and CCP in the formal meeting to come.
|
De'Veldrin
Special Projects Executive
|
Posted - 2009.06.26 17:03:00 -
[7]
While I don't participate in FW myself, that is, in large part, because I don't want the baggage associated with being in a milita. This seems like a reasonable and balanced solution to that baggage.
Supported --Vel
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
|
Omber Zombie
|
Posted - 2009.06.26 18:14:00 -
[8]
I actually quite liked this idea in the other thread - It's a way for alliances to get involved in FW without them actually joining a militia with enough downside not to make it grieftastic. I'll give it till next Wednesday for people to comment in here about it and if Erik (who seems to want to champion anything FW related) hasn't picked it up, I will. ----------------------
My Blog |
Elaron
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.06.26 20:51:00 -
[9]
Very happy to give this my support. |
Klyria
Agent-Orange Coalition of Free Stars
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 01:40:00 -
[10]
Supporting this awesome idea.
|
|
Dr BattleSmith
PAX Interstellar Services
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 02:10:00 -
[11]
It's come up on the other thread and do wonder how standings might be used for non-wardec situations also.
The game has sec status and the combat zones are low-sec which takes care of this to some degree.....
NPC corps adjust their standings to players and corporations based on what you do for or again their pilots.
It could be possible that there is some room here for the players in a militia to act much like NPCs when it comes to standings, allowing attacks on anyone who has shown -5.0 worth of hostility. This would mean that the militia would effectively wardec anyone who makes a regular target of faction pilots NPC or otherwise. May have to actually trigger the wardec mechanic though, could get confusing as -5.0 isn't actually a legal attack in other situations but just an indicator of the relationship.....
It gives an automated standings setup for a non-player controlled "alliance".... which sounds handy....
Food for thought anyway, I can't see a complete solution yet but all the pieces are out here on the forum...
|
T'X
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 07:57:00 -
[12]
This is exactly what i was trying to say in the little bit in my post: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1105860
ill link to this post as it explains things better. |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 10:39:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Omber Zombie I actually quite liked this idea in the other thread - It's a way for alliances to get involved in FW without them actually joining a militia with enough downside not to make it grieftastic. I'll give it till next Wednesday for people to comment in here about it and if Erik (who seems to want to champion anything FW related) hasn't picked it up, I will.
Thank you for taking the time to look this over, OZ, and I'm grateful you are minded to pick it up if no-one else does.
Cosmo
|
Larkonis TrassIer
Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 11:25:00 -
[14]
Originally by: The Cosmopolite
Originally by: Omber Zombie I actually quite liked this idea in the other thread - It's a way for alliances to get involved in FW without them actually joining a militia with enough downside not to make it grieftastic. I'll give it till next Wednesday for people to comment in here about it and if Erik (who seems to want to champion anything FW related) hasn't picked it up, I will.
Thank you for taking the time to look this over, OZ, and I'm grateful you are minded to pick it up if no-one else does.
Cosmo
OZ picked this up before me so I'll let him roll with it if Erik doesn't. Looks pretty cool from my end. Supported. |
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 16:12:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Rodj Blake on 27/06/2009 16:16:37 So, you're proposing a method whereby corporations could take part in FW and be able to take credit for the militia's successes without any prospect of also taking the blame for their failures?
Maybe that's a bit harsh, but there's so many other ways that FW could be improved, such as allowing corps that are also in alliances to sign up.
There might also be issues arising from one side's third parties not being able to shoot at another side's third parties. |
Evanda Char
Re-Awakened Technologies Inc Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 16:23:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Evanda Char on 27/06/2009 16:26:56 I will support anything that will let my RP Minmatar Republic loyalist alliance take part in the RP Minmatar storyline, though as the mechanic for letting corps sign up to the militia is already there, regardless of whether or not they are in an alliance, that might be simpler.
-Eva-
Electus Matari - taking it one bad guy at a time |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 16:40:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
So, you're proposing a method whereby corporations could take part in FW and be able to take credit for the militia's successes without any prospect of also taking the blame for their failures?
Maybe that's a bit harsh, but there's so many other ways that FW could be improved, such as allowing corps that are also in alliances to sign up.
I don't know about harsh û I am not proposing this for any one side's benefit but to what I believe is a general benefit û but it's not quite right. It seems to rest on a notion that only conquests of systems can be successes and only losses of systems can be failures. It may be that people are allowed to get away with such a portrayal but that's what counter-propaganda is for.
I think there's a level of detail to how things are interpreted that could be gone into but it's both for CCP design and also CCP story-telling to take care of. For example, I would suggest that only full militia members should get acknowledgement from the empires in the form of medals and so forth. On the other hand, a really outstanding third force could get a news mention quite legitimately if they truly deserve credit.
Allowing individual corps that are also in alliances to sign up is, I think, in conflict with CCP's view of what alliances are and what the empires are, as well as being problematic from a mechanical point of view (though nothing should be insuperable, I would agree) - but it would also be fairly problematical in terms of such things as an alliance having only one corporation exposed to the dangers involved while the majesty of its apparatus as a whole can support them logistically and in other ways.
Quote:
There might also be issues arising from one side's third parties not being able to shoot at another side's third parties.
That is where the CONCORD war dec of old retains its usefulness. A particularly troublesome third force can be decced by an opposing third force. This is an instance where the CONCORD war is precisely the right tool for the job.
At any rate, I am flexible as can be on details and implementations. The main principle for me is the 'against' option for meaningful and active entry into FW and the suitable balance and checks required to make it work are a matter for CCP's judgement.
Cosmo
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 16:47:00 -
[18]
OK then, let's consider the following...
Under this proposal we'd be left with a situation where corps in the militia would be getting shot at the opposition's militia, the opposition's allied militia, and the oppositions's third parties, but the third parties would only be getting shot at by the enemy militia.
Now, given that 90% of Eve doesn't like being regularly outnumbered, why would the average corp join the militia rather than adopt third party status?
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 17:05:00 -
[19]
You may have noticed that I haven't suggested a specific hurdle in terms of enabling a corp or alliance to declare against a militia. This does not mean that I think there should not be one. It may be financial, it may be a standing hurdle, it may be both or it may be something I'm unable to come up with at the moment but CCP might. That's an important element of balance that would I am sure be looked at and I have no problem with it being looked at. I mention this before dealing with:
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Now, given that 90% of Eve doesn't like being regularly outnumbered, why would the average corp join the militia rather than adopt third party status?
Aside from not wishing to overcome whatever hurdles may or may not be involved with declaring against a militia, in order to be able to defend their faction's systems, to gain the rewards and recognition that is only due to full militias and for all the important roleplay reasons that you and I would support.
I do actually anticipate some shifting out of certain corporations to third force status. I think it actually would be better for the integrity of the militias and make for coherent roleplay within the militias.
Note that I don't conceive this suggestion as being implemented, if at all and in whatever form, on its own. I would be startled and amazed if only a single change of this kind was made to FW in its next development cycle. But I'm conscious that I can't suggest an entire raft of reforms with one proposal and expect it to be taken up.
I think people who care about FW should be making proposals on improving plexing and general occupation/conquest mechanics, making FW more meaningful and consequential, dealing with the balance on attack and defence, etc.
This proposal is about unlocking FW for greater participation that makes sense with regard to the cases of a) alliances and b) corporations that don't wish, for whatever reason, to sign up with a militia.
Anyway, thanks for the questions, they are important to consider.
Cosmo
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
Larkonis TrassIer
Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 17:25:00 -
[20]
I think it's probably the best way presented of enabling Alliances to enter FW tbh...
The only problem I see here is the inability of ALLIED FW entities to aid each other in these circumstances, however, I can't recall the last time I saw Amarr and Caldari or Gallente and Minmatar joint fleets.
Fighting for justice
|
|
Furb Killer
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 20:29:00 -
[21]
In principle good idea i think. However fixing FW lag should always be higher priority, doing this wouldnt be usefull anyway when the only result is that alliances can now also get desynced if they try something more than fighting solo.
|
Boma Airaken
The Divine Comedy Celestial Imperative
|
Posted - 2009.06.27 23:24:00 -
[22]
Brilliant in concept. Would love to see the bugs worked out and something like this implemented. Well done Cosmo.
|
Arnulf Ogunkoya
The Causality
|
Posted - 2009.06.28 12:55:00 -
[23]
Good basic idea. As other have pointed out it may need refinement but it has potential.
I am in favour. Regards,
|
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.06.29 21:32:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Furb Killer In principle good idea i think. However fixing FW lag should always be higher priority, doing this wouldnt be usefull anyway when the only result is that alliances can now also get desynced if they try something more than fighting solo.
I agree 'FW lag' needs to be fixed though I would be inclined to view it as 'low-sec lag' or even more: non-hub/non-0.0 warfare lag.
The basic problem is that when battles occur beyond a given scale in systems that are not resourced for it horrendous lag happens.
It's actually a more general problem (and in my view a very longstanding problem) brought into sharp relief by FW's mechanics tending to lead to lots and lots of skirmishes punctuated by a short series of escalating large battles.
At any rate, while lag-fixes should be given high priority I don't think they conflict particularly with this type of game design consideration, particularly as FW development must be done as a package of reforms and updates of which my proposal is only one.
Thanks for the input though.
Cosmo
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
Micia
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 02:17:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Micia on 30/06/2009 02:17:16
Quote: The only problem I see here is the inability of ALLIED FW entities to aid each other in these circumstances
Yah, I got that on my mind, too. If third-forces were to have a big enough impact, then of course the FW enemy would be wanting to utilise their allies... and should be able to.
Aside from that, looks great.
Edit: Forgot the thumb-button |
Temugen
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.07.02 02:32:00 -
[26]
An excellent idea. The FW setup used at the current time is lacking. Too many situations exist that need adjustment in FW.
|
Mitch Taylor
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 20:46:00 -
[27]
Seems reasonable.
The Dark is Rising... Non EVE related content removed. Zymurgist |
Grann Thefauto
Internal Anarchy
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 22:04:00 -
[28]
Here are the downsides:
1. Alliances get to minimize their enemies. You can pick just one of the FW militia entities to pick on and don't have to worry about reinforcements or NPC attacks in the other militia's area. Easy mode for alliances.
2. Alliances shouldn't interfere in FW, they're simply too much coordinated logistically and there isn't a balancing force in the current FW setup. Just imagine the chaos of current FW versus a well organized force of capitals of a massive alliance. Also, low sec should not be incentivized for alliances like 0.0 is because there needs to be a no mans land for small corps and gangs to roam for pvp without huge gate camps protecting these new "sovereign" spaces. This will happen even if they can't secure plexes because its just as beneficial if you can block opposition (pirates and nonaligned being opposition as well) from entering your space.
The upsides for Alliances significantly outweigh the downsides with this idea. If you're going to allow alliances into FW, at the very least they should not be able to pick and choose who their enemies are. Either you're all in and lose access to all opposing faction space, or you stay neutral.
|
Nur AlHuda
Amarr Callide Vulpis
|
Posted - 2009.07.16 16:34:00 -
[29]
NOT SUPPORTED.
Its like regular war and the attacking faction doesnt risk faction hit.
That means they would be able to move trough highsec attacking any war targets around and would be not restricted as minmatar miltia is.
Its like Privateers would demand to lower they wardeclaration fees so they would have more war targets to shoot.
If someones wants wwardec he should pay for it and dont ask for game changes or create an expeditionary corporation that owuld join a militia.
|
BattleStar Crusader
Amarr Absinthe Brothers Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.07.16 16:47:00 -
[30]
I can see the benefits to your organistation Cosmo but to the militia it would not seem as benficial to give you access to 2000+ wartargets and not have any downsides.
I can arleady tell the way this thread is going so i do not wish to start a troll, or any little bikering arugments with snipes and not so whity retorts.
But all im seeing while i read and think upon this is the amarr militia saying no and the minmitar militia saying YES YES YES.
So i regret to say i do NOT SUPPORT this idea. On your side of the fence this idea is actually pretty good and well thought out but on the other side its actually insulting the intellegence of alot of people.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |