|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 69 post(s) |
michael boltonIII
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
203
   |
Posted - 2012.06.13 02:12:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm so glad that Jade is actually still checking this thread so I can dumpster him.
Jade have you ever thought that if you are making enemies out of 5000 man alliances, then it would logically be reasonable that in order to fight them maybe you should be good enough at making friends to have another large alliance ally you. Or you could have friends who are close enough to help split the costs with you. Eve is a social game bro, looks like you just need to work on your play style.
All-in-all it sounds like you want game mechanics to be altered to help cover up the fact that your social skills are not good enough to make friends with anyone of significant military note. Do you also throw food that you get for free onto the street corner and call every homeless person who picks it up your brother-in-arms? |
michael boltonIII
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
203
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 02:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:michael boltonIII wrote:Jade have you ever thought that if you are making enemies out of 5000 man alliances, then it would logically be reasonable that in order to fight them maybe you should be good enough at making friends to have another large alliance ally you. I've got 36 allied corps and alliances ready to go. If CCP don't nerf the alliance system by this time next year it'd be 300. You guys are the ones who want to stop my space-friends from being part of the war.
Quote:All-in-all it sounds like you want game mechanics to be altered to help cover up the fact that your social skills are not good enough to make friends with anyone of significant military note. Do you also throw food that you get for free onto the street corner and call every homeless person who picks it up your brother-in-arms?
You forgot to mention the part where none of those people are your actual friends. They are the homeless people on the street corner who you give free bread too, now your complaining that you have to pay for all the free food you give out. I can't even imagine how quickly they'd peace out if they had to pay for the food.
I'd have no problem ponying up a bill a week to protect test's allies in game if they needed help, it sounds like you just aren't good enough at the social game to build those kinds of allies. |
michael boltonIII
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
203
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 02:35:00 -
[3] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:michael boltonIII wrote: You forgot to mention the part where none of those people are your actual friends I'll let you into a secret. I know those people in the allied wardec coalition as well as you know most of the mooks who are registered with TEST alliance.
Oh you mean the guys in test who would show up by the hundreds to get in fleet with me if it needed to be done?
How often do the people in that allied wardec coalition work together as a team I wonder? Oh right, never. |
michael boltonIII
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
203
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 02:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:michael boltonIII wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:michael boltonIII wrote: You forgot to mention the part where none of those people are your actual friends I'll let you into a secret. I know those people in the allied wardec coalition as well as you know most of the mooks who are registered with TEST alliance. Oh you mean the guys in test who would show up by the hundreds to get in fleet with me if it needed to be done? How often do the people in that allied wardec coalition work together as a team I wonder? Oh right, never. Well you are a big hat space dictator. Your followers are supposed to follow you like some cult leader. I on the other hand am a space anarchist and I prefer distributed asymetrical warfare and psychological traps. The heroic cells of freedom-loving anti-goon partizans may well never meet or share a cup of tea or indeed have to gather and listen to some speech by a "great leader" but that doesn't stop them being comrades-at-arms in the great struggle against eve imperialism encroaching on the capsuleer trade hubs. Your big mistake is to assume everyone fights their wars the way you do. (your second mistake is to overestimate the number of jaegerbombs you can sustain before critical balance failure)
Oh good, since all of your allies are making such sacrifices for their lofty beliefs then they should have no problem paying what is comparably a small fee in the fight against oppression. I'm sure your so glad that the new mechanics will weed out the pretenders who are merely exploiting your noble cause for their own evil capitalist cost cutting ventures. As for the mean of "psychological trap" I can only assume you are referring to your own indeterminate gender identity, I fail to see what affect this has on the war but you should talk to Xenuria, as I believe he is the leading expert on such tactics and I feel you two would get along like father and son.
Also, they were rum bombs, I hate Jager. I never fall over when drunk, I am merely a balance anarchist who prefers an asymmetrical center of gravity and psychological inebriation in order to combat more ~mainstream! concepts of standing up. |
michael boltonIII
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
210
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 14:22:00 -
[5] - Quote
Unfortunately CCP/ISD removed my earlier dumpstering of Jade, probably because the burns were so sick that they thought he might actually need to be hospitalized. I'll recap my earlier argument in a way less harmful to the fantasy land that Jade has created for himself.
The new system ensures that the people who ally you in a war dec are your actual friends who are joining because they are there to help you. The current dog pile mechanic is just being used as a way for corps whose entire business is wardeccing to not have to pay for their wardecs. The person who is accepting these allies can do so with zero cost or fear of repercussions. What other things can you do in Eve that have absolutely no risk or cost (hell even ship spinning costs time)?
How about some constructive suggestions instead. If people are so opposed tot he current change, what if we bring back the dogpile free war mechanic, but instead flag all allies as a having the same aggression rules with each other as corpmates. Think of all the intrigue and emergent gameplay that it would create. If you truly trust these people then you could amount a group of people that could challenge a large alliance, but if you are just accepting any riff raff, then you'll have to deal with getting awox'd 23/7. It's not biased at all, 0.0 groups already have to filter their allies to minimize awox'ing and even then it is an accepted way of life. This would just be introducing a similar risk system to people looking for allies in highsec. |
michael boltonIII
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
211
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 14:47:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:
Would it be fair to say that you have been pressuring for this apparently very unpopular change through your CSM rep?
Seriously, I'm getting confused where Test and Goonswarm stands on all this. Either you don't care about the allied wardecs and its all "more targets great!" or you do care and you think that you're in trouble.
So tell me how its unfair (on your guys) that a defender entity thousands of pilots smaller than your organization can add allies to a defensive war without paying multiple times your declaration fee for the pleasure?
I actually don't really talk to our CSM rep at all, he's a Romeo Squad Officer and I'm one of the Zulu Squad Officers (it's a cultural thing you don't really have to understand it).
I'm saying that the current dog pile mechanic doesn't make sense from an all around general design style of Eve. In Eve there is nothing you can do that doesn't cost money or accept a risk. Currently there is zero cost or risk to you accepting an unlimited number of allies, this does not fit with the general design ideas of eve. You conveniently skipped over this question in my first post.
Jade Constantine wrote:
So are you basically asking all the various wardec allies that join for free can shoot each other freely in concord space? I think you'd need some work on the overview so they could decide whether they were shooting the target they allied against or each other.
The UI doesn't need any work at all for this. Your allies would be able to aggress you without concord responding just like people in your corp can aggress you without concord responding. In 0.0 I don't know or see that I'm getting awox'd until a ship who is blue on my overview, and up until that point in every way my friend, points me and opens up a can of 1400mm howitzers. The only thing I see is his bracket outline turn red.
If you actually trust your allies then there is no problem, but if you're just accepting anybody without checking them out at all then you are completely open to corps who have loose membership restrictions or even entire confederate corps out just to awox. This also has the added bonus of encouraging corps who want to be the ally of a dec'd group to check them out as well and charge a bounty, to help ensure that they won't be immediately awox'd as well. |
michael boltonIII
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
211
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 15:00:00 -
[7] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:michael boltonIII wrote: I'm saying that the current dog pile mechanic doesn't make sense from an all around general design style of Eve. In Eve there is nothing you can do that doesn't cost money or accept a risk. Currently there is zero cost or risk to you accepting an unlimited number of allies, this does not fit with the general design ideas of eve. You conveniently skipped over this question in my first post. I think you should read the Inferno war devblog a bit closer. Any allies we bring into a war have their successes and failures recorded on our permanent war statistics. If we hired nothing but a bunch of innept clowns then our space e-pride would be dangerously wounded and people wouldn't take us seriously in future wars. But seriously, the question of risk cuts both ways some see a very large organization wardeccing a small one has virtually no risk attached. You aren't going to lose your space, you aren't going to lose even a significant portion of your isk. But by having the defender able to add allies to the war to make the numbers more even and risk more balanced we're sharing the risk out.
I would caution that ~honour~ is not really a viable enough stat to base a game mechanic around since it not quantifiable in any way.
Also, There is a world of difference between virtually no risk and ZERO risk. If I'm mining in a hulk, aligned to a safe pos, and ready to warp if someone enters local, then I have virutally no risk. If i want to fly around and pvp in a rifter, it costs me virtually no money to lose it. I cannot think of a single activity in game where I can gain something for myself or my alliance with ZERO (as in absolutely none) risk or cost aside from the current dogpile mechanic.
If you can come up with something other than getting a high score on the ship spin counter, then I am all ears. |
michael boltonIII
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
214
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 17:43:00 -
[8] - Quote
michael boltonIII wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:
I think you should read the Inferno war devblog a bit closer. Any allies we bring into a war have their successes and failures recorded on our permanent war statistics. If we hired nothing but a bunch of innept clowns then our space e-pride would be dangerously wounded and people wouldn't take us seriously in future wars.
But seriously, the question of risk cuts both ways some see a very large organization wardeccing a small one has virtually no risk attached. You aren't going to lose your space, you aren't going to lose even a significant portion of your isk. But by having the defender able to add allies to the war to make the numbers more even and risk more balanced we're sharing the risk out.
I would caution that ~honour~ is not really a viable enough stat to base a game mechanic around since it not quantifiable in any way. Also, There is a world of difference between virtually no risk and ZERO risk. If I'm mining in a hulk, aligned to a safe pos, and ready to warp if someone enters local, then I have virutally no risk. If i want to fly around and pvp in a rifter, it costs me virtually no money to lose it. I cannot think of a single activity in game where I can gain something for myself or my alliance with ZERO (as in absolutely none) risk or cost aside from the current dogpile mechanic. If you can come up with something other than getting a high score on the ship spin counter, then I am all ears. Edit: Oops, I missed losing a noobship (but even then you lose an asset you could have sold) or losing an unimplanted alpha pod when you have less than 900k SP (but that is a mech designed to protect the very newest of players)
I'm still waiting on a reply Jade. I can understand that you don't enjoy getting dunked on, but I'm pretty much the Shaquille O'Neil of posting, I can't help but break the backboard.
I originally made my proposal of allowing war allies the same aggression rights with each other as corp mates as a joke, but now that I think about it, it solves the arguments on every side.
You get to build a coalition that is as large as you like, with as many members as you can gather, and you get to do it for free. You take the same risk in giving someone your trust that any 0.0 group does when picking allies, so it's a proven mechanic, and there are consequences for carelessly giving away your trust. Mercs are happy because suddenly reputation is very important, good groups can charge fees again because unkown merc groups could just be awox'ers.
It'll fit in with the revamp of Crime Watch, hell I think big alliances would even concede a big nerf and let alliances have the same aggression mechanics as corps, so that everything is congruent. You should already trust corps you let into your alliance enough not to aggress you, and it cuts out confusing and frustrating events when alliance fleets try and figure out who is in what corp (plus highsec alliance thunderdomes can happen again, hooray).
|
michael boltonIII
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
215
|
Posted - 2012.06.14 03:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
Halstrom Whitestar wrote:GÇó Ally contracts have fixed length of two weeks
GÇó Allies can not be part of mutual wars GÇô defender cannot hire allies into mutual wars and existing ally contracts are cancelled (with a 24 hour grace period)
So Goon can seek to permanently fund Hulk killing in high sec, and to bully the tiny man with never ending wardecs, but people aren't allowed to band together behind The Star Fracture and hold them to account?????
Goon sponsored CCP nerf???
NC. Ladies and Gentleman. You realize that this has nothing to do with suicide ganking and the people who are doing the majority of the ganking aren't even in goons. It's almost like goons have unlimited money because of a mutually profitable cartel between several large 0.0 alliances, but NC. wouldn't have anything to do with that would they?
Also, "Goon sponsored CCP nerf?" would mean that Goons just nerfed CCP. English is a hard language. |
|
|
| |
|