| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
dudley
   |
Posted - 2009.11.25 11:27:00 -
[1]
I no this question is probably somewhere in the forums but i cannot find it my question is do you have to be part of an alliance to claim sov as i tried to put up a claim unit on the test server on it would not allow me it said i needed to be part of an alliance if this is so then corps that do not wish to be part of an alliance we not be allowed sov
dudley
|
Alex Raptos
Caldari
Phoenix Rising.
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 11:32:00 -
[2]
And why the hell do you think corporations not part of an alliance should have the capabilities to hold a solar system and be sovereign within it? No you will not be able to. No you will never be able to. Sovereignty is Alliance business, join one and join in or stay out and...stay out.
 Originally by: Dirk Magnum
I've become gay for Mark Harmon despite my initial reservations about the show NCIS but nobody will ever know
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 11:33:00 -
[3]
that was a bit uncalled for i was just asking a question
|
Taurus Millenium
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 11:38:00 -
[4]
Yes, you need to be part of an alliance, sorry.
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 11:40:00 -
[5]
and why should sov just be for alliances it should be for all and not just the greedy alliances
|
Alex Raptos
Caldari
Phoenix Rising.
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 11:41:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Alex Raptos on 25/11/2009 11:42:40
Originally by: dudley
that was a bit uncalled for i was just asking a question
Well logic dictates that if you try something and it does not work, its not going to work. You were quite clearly told by an error that you needed to join an alliance. Ontop of the fact nobody, nowhere has even mentioned corporations holding sovereignty in anything but a passing musing and certainly no developers have motioned towards it in the slightest. Where you would get the idea that Corporations should be capable of claiming Sovereignty is beyond my imagining.
Edit: Sovereignty should be for "the greedy alliances" because that is the entire direction of it. Greedy alliances drive 0.0 because everything else fails to survive, in short, Greed is a necessity to survive out there in the big bad world of nullsec
Originally by: Dirk Magnum
I've become gay for Mark Harmon despite my initial reservations about the show NCIS but nobody will ever know
|
Eben Rochelle
Gallente
RPS holdings
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 11:53:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Alex Raptos
Edited by: Alex Raptos on 25/11/2009 11:42:40
Originally by: dudley
that was a bit uncalled for i was just asking a question
Well logic dictates that if you try something and it does not work, its not going to work. You were quite clearly told by an error that you needed to join an alliance. Ontop of the fact nobody, nowhere has even mentioned corporations holding sovereignty in anything but a passing musing and certainly no developers have motioned towards it in the slightest. Where you would get the idea that Corporations should be capable of claiming Sovereignty is beyond my imagining.
Edit: Sovereignty should be for "the greedy alliances" because that is the entire direction of it. Greedy alliances drive 0.0 because everything else fails to survive, in short, Greed is a necessity to survive out there in the big bad world of nullsec
Dude... W.T.F? sand in your vag?
Why exactly shouldnt corps be able to claim Sov? Surely the difference between a corp and a corp using an alt corp to create an alliance is arbitrary mechanics. Seriously mate i dont know what the heck (O_o) your problem is either way kindly take it somewhere else you whiney little biatch
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 11:56:00 -
[8]
I was not whining as you so called put it i was led to believe that all was able to have a bit of there own space in 0.0 are the big alliances afraid of smaller corps
|
tradealt4tw
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 12:01:00 -
[9]
Edited by: tradealt4tw on 25/11/2009 12:00:58
 LRN2READ Dudley then re-read my post. Its clearly aimed at mr "angry about your question" not you...
*edit* woops this is Eben
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 12:04:00 -
[10]
sorry for misunderstanding
|
KPPA
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 12:10:00 -
[11]
I think corps should be able to hold sov. for one, they are a sovereign entity when not part of a alliance and should be given the same rights as any other sovereign entity. and two, what happens to sov when an alliance goes belly up? shouldn't the sov just go to the crops so that all the hard work isn't lost?
p.s. you say "greedy" like its a bad thing. don't you remember that money is the root of all good?
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 12:32:00 -
[12]
Originally by: dudley
and why should sov just be for alliances it should be for all and not just the greedy alliances
You know that you can create your own, non-greedy alliance, right? You dont even have to let any other corps in (they might be greedy)
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 12:42:00 -
[13]
i no i can create my own alliance but if i am still only one corp in that alliance then surely it would make sense for ccp to allow single corps to take sov
|
Di Mulle
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 12:48:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Di Mulle on 25/11/2009 12:53:06
Originally by: dudley
and why should sov just be for alliances it should be for all and not just the greedy alliances
Internet is ruled by memes, hehe.
What exactly make alliances "greedy" - and, even more intriguing, what exactly makes your corp, or you personally "not greedy" ?
You gonna make charity fund, or something ?
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 12:54:00 -
[15]
if myself or my corp was greedy we would have a lot move isk in wallet i am in the game to have fun
|
KPPA
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 13:03:00 -
[16]
sigh. i don't understand why ppl think wanting money is evil or money its self is evil. read about what money is...
|
Di Mulle
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 13:05:00 -
[17]
Originally by: dudley
if myself or my corp was greedy we would have a lot move isk in wallet i am in the game to have fun
That is nice, games are for fun after all.
However, why you think you are so exceptional? Maybe your imaginary "greedy alliances" also have fun, exactly the way they do ?
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:05:00 -
[18]
i think you all are missing the point to have to be in an alliance to obtain a system for your own is open to abuse by alliances just suppose that you are in an alliance and they say there you go have these systems so your corp pays and puts up the required structures to build up the system and you start to get the system running well and all of a sudden the you have a falling out will alliance and you get kicked out or the alliance folds for what every reason then you have lost time and isk spent in to building up that system
|
Lexx Khadar
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:24:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Lexx Khadar on 25/11/2009 15:25:30
Originally by: dudley
i think you all are missing the point to have to be in an alliance to obtain a system for your own is open to abuse by alliances just suppose that you are in an alliance and they say there you go have these systems so your corp pays and puts up the required structures to build up the system and you start to get the system running well and all of a sudden the you have a falling out will alliance and you get kicked out or the alliance folds for what every reason then you have lost time and isk spent in to building up that system
Well if an alliance is that fragile to falling apart then it clearly isn't in any way capable of maintaining its own space. So shouldn't even bother.
|
Mashie Saldana
BFG Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:32:00 -
[20]
Originally by: dudley
i think you all are missing the point to have to be in an alliance to obtain a system for your own is open to abuse by alliances just suppose that you are in an alliance and they say there you go have these systems so your corp pays and puts up the required structures to build up the system and you start to get the system running well and all of a sudden the you have a falling out will alliance and you get kicked out or the alliance folds for what every reason then you have lost time and isk spent in to building up that system
Nothing stop you from creating an alliance for your 1-man corp tbh (ok you might need to train a skill or two).
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:36:00 -
[21]
your still missing the point you can still get kicked from an alliance but if individual corps could hold sov then alliances we be less incinded to kick you out
|
SlapNuts
Gallente
Lost Wacko's
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:36:00 -
[22]
Really if a corp is big enough and has the means to claim sov, then why not. There are lots of systems in 0.0, more then enough to go around.
The fact you have to be an allaince to claim sov seems flawed to me.
Dudley, u fight the fight cause you might have a lot more ppl that agree with you then you think. 
..........................
|
Grall Sek
Caldari
Eve Defence Force
Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:39:00 -
[23]
create an alliance and then claim sov
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:41:00 -
[24]
Originally by: dudley
if myself or my corp was greedy we would have a lot move isk in wallet i am in the game to have fun
In that case, 0.0 alliances are "greedy" in exactly the same way that your corp is "lazy".
|
Tia Langs
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:42:00 -
[25]
Quote:
Nothing stop you from creating an alliance for your 1-man corp tbh (ok you might need to train a skill or two).
but there is no reason for why it should be that way , that is game mechanic that dont need to be there.
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 15:50:00 -
[26]
I also believe that ccp said that sov space was for all and was getting away from major alliances claiming all od 0.0 space haw can this be when individual corps are unable to have there own space is eve not big enough for this or is it just another plow of ccp to please the major alliances
|
Oriens Pars
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 16:09:00 -
[27]
Hmmm...I kind of agree that corps should be able to hold sov, as long as CCP doesn't make it any easier for those corps to hold that sov. In other words, if a corp wants to have a system, then it should be able to......under the current (or soon to be released) mechanics. No changing things just to make it easier for them.
Also, I think it might lead to more whining later if corps start complaining that CCP needs to change this or that because "we can't hold it without CCP changing something!" Tough ****....you can't hold it, move along.
|
Di Mulle
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 17:26:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Oriens Pars
Hmmm...I kind of agree that corps should be able to hold sov, as long as CCP doesn't make it any easier for those corps to hold that sov. In other words, if a corp wants to have a system, then it should be able to......under the current (or soon to be released) mechanics. No changing things just to make it easier for them.
Also, I think it might lead to more whining later if corps start complaining that CCP needs to change this or that because "we can't hold it without CCP changing something!" Tough ****....you can't hold it, move along.
I would agree with this. Though, it will probably make alliance mechanics even more complicated than it is now.
However, seeing how op is stuck with his stupid conspiracy memes, I think it is clear indication, that whining you speak about would be imminent. "I want it all, right now, for free" syndrome.
|
Hegbard
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 17:28:00 -
[29]
Since it's possible to create one man corps, it should be possible to claim personal sov.
|
Oriens Pars
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 17:42:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Hegbard
Since it's possible to create one man corps, it should be possible to claim personal sov.
True, but how long would one realistically be able to hold onto it?
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 18:37:00 -
[31]
my question still stands why should i have to be part of an aliance or have to pay to make a 1 corp alliance to be able to hold sov if my corp is big enough to sustain sov why should i have to be in an alliance when ccp said that sov will be viable to all
|
SlapNuts
Gallente
Lost Wacko's
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 18:53:00 -
[32]
I think if ccp put a required amount of members for a corp, then they should be able to do this. I do not agree one man corps should be able to lay claim to SOV.
There are some big corps out there and they are more then capable of holding sov for a period of time. As for politics and keeping that space, that should be up to the corp involved, if they want blues to help keep that space...well that's another topic altogether there.
..........................
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 18:56:00 -
[33]
Because that's the way the game works. Sov is an alliance level activity.
|
Liz Laser
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 22:31:00 -
[34]
There was once a primate research facility that had a cage full of apes. The researchers introduced a ladder to the cage and each day hung a banana at the top of the cage. Eventually, one of the apes used the ladder to reach the banana.
When they removed that ape from the cage, other apes that had witnessed his feat duplicated it to reach the banana.
The researchers then set up a sprinkler system above the cage. The sprinkler system would be activated whenever the hanging banana was tugged on.
The first time an ape activated the sprinklers by grabbing a banana, all the apes were surprised and rather displeased by their cold shower. As time went on, any ape trying to climb the ladder to reach the hanging banana would be beaten by the other apes.
The researchers then deactivated the sprinkler system.
Over time a new ape would be introduced and an existing ape would be removed. Each new ape that tried to use the ladder to reach the banana would be beaten by the other apes to dissuade that activity.
Eventually, the rotation of apes through the cage was such that no ape in the cage had ever been subjected to the sprinklers that were long ago deactivated. Yet, any ape trying to reach the hanging banana continued to be savagely beaten by the other apes.
And that's why you need an alliance to claim sov. 
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 06:18:00 -
[35]
The post by Liz Laser is just stupid if you are a 100 to 200 man corp then why do you need an alliance to take sov there is nothing in the game mechanics to stop ccp from allowing this not everything has to be alliance based this game is for everyone and everyone should be able to have a nice piece of the pie no matter what
|
Omal Oma
Aurelius Federation
Apotheosis of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 06:35:00 -
[36]
Damnit CCP, turn off the sprinklers!
Originally by: Liz Laser
There was once a primate research facility that had a cage full of apes. The researchers introduced a ladder to the cage and each day hung a banana at the top of the cage. Eventually, one of the apes used the ladder to reach the banana.
When they removed that ape from the cage, other apes that had witnessed his feat duplicated it to reach the banana.
The researchers then set up a sprinkler system above the cage. The sprinkler system would be activated whenever the hanging banana was tugged on.
The first time an ape activated the sprinklers by grabbing a banana, all the apes were surprised and rather displeased by their cold shower. As time went on, any ape trying to climb the ladder to reach the hanging banana would be beaten by the other apes.
The researchers then deactivated the sprinkler system.
Over time a new ape would be introduced and an existing ape would be removed. Each new ape that tried to use the ladder to reach the banana would be beaten by the other apes to dissuade that activity.
Eventually, the rotation of apes through the cage was such that no ape in the cage had ever been subjected to the sprinklers that were long ago deactivated. Yet, any ape trying to reach the hanging banana continued to be savagely beaten by the other apes.
And that's why you need an alliance to claim sov.
|
Di Mulle
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 12:14:00 -
[37]
Originally by: dudley
The post by Liz Laser is just stupid if you are a 100 to 200 man corp then why do you need an alliance to take sov there is nothing in the game mechanics to stop ccp from allowing this not everything has to be alliance based this game is for everyone and everyone should be able to have a nice piece of the pie no matter what
Dude, apart from failing to write comprehensive text, you also got wrong idea of "everyone should be able to have a nice piece of the pie no matter what".
It is like saying every team should win Superbowl each year no matter what.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 12:54:00 -
[38]
Originally by: dudley
The post by Liz Laser is just stupid if you are a 100 to 200 man corp then why do you need an alliance to take sov there is nothing in the game mechanics to stop ccp from allowing this not everything has to be alliance based this game is for everyone and everyone should be able to have a nice piece of the pie no matter what
If you've got 200 people in corp then you can get 5M each from them and set up an alliance. If having sov isn't worth 5 mill to them, then you'll never get sov anyway. You'll certainly never keep it. Because let me tell you, the alliance creation fee is the least of the expenditures you'll need to take, claim and maintain your space. You'll often lose more than that in even a smallish fight vs a roaming gang. 3 or 4 HACs, a couple of inties and a dictor? Bang, there goes a bill.
Why the hell are you whining so much about setting up an alliance to claim sov? That's what sov is: an alliance's claim to a system. Jesus. Want sov? Set up or join an alliance. Create your alliance and you're good to go. You dont even need to train up skills for it; Hardin will create one for you for a reasonable fee.
|
Gartel Reiman
The Athiest Syndicate
Advocated Destruction
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 13:53:00 -
[39]
OK - what happens if you claim sovereignty as a corporation, and then join an alliance? Do you maintain that the corporation still holds sovereignty despite not being an independent political entity, or should the alliance inherit the sov? If the latter, what then happens if the corporation leaves?
Anyway, the main reason is simply that alliances are the only sovereign entities that are recognised with the ability to claim land. Corporations are organisational entities, but not sovereign ones.
It's not unlike saying "why do I have to form a one-man company in real life to get corporate benefits (different VAT schedule in the UK, limited liability, etc.)? If I can just go through that loophole then it should be possible for individual people to get the same benefits!"
It's pretty clear that a one-person company is distinct from that person. And likewise, a one-corp alliance in EVE is very distinct from the corp. Alliances are required for certain operations, and you need to be in an alliance to do this, even if it's a "trivial" one-corp alliance.
I see nothing wrong with this at all and think this is vastly preferable to the alternative.
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 14:08:00 -
[40]
Originally by: dudley
The post by Liz Laser is just stupid if you are a 100 to 200 man corp then why do you need an alliance to take sov there is nothing in the game mechanics to stop ccp from allowing this not everything has to be alliance based this game is for everyone and everyone should be able to have a nice piece of the pie no matter what
Are you just trolling? That's my guess.
Liz's post was great. Entertaining, humorous, descriptive of actual human behaviour (kosher foods etc), and last but not least, she actually implied there is no longer any real reason for this limitation in alliances vs corps, i.e. you could have taken it as somewhat supportive of your agenda, instead of being insulting.
Go Liz 
|
Ana Vyr
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 15:33:00 -
[41]
I don't see any reason why a corp should not be able to claim sov. Look at Caldari society. For example, Spacelane Patrol is a single corp that has stations all over EvE. Is that corp considered to be an alliance?
As long as a single corp is big enough to hold their space, they should be able to try without forming a "one-corp" alliance, IMO.
I guess it's just a technicality really though. As far as I know, there is nothing stopping a corp from forming an alliance with say their own alt corp, and then claiming sov.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 18:49:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Ana Vyr
I don't see any reason why a corp should not be able to claim sov. Look at Caldari society. For example, Spacelane Patrol is a single corp that has stations all over EvE. Is that corp considered to be an alliance?
As long as a single corp is big enough to hold their space, they should be able to try without forming a "one-corp" alliance, IMO.
I guess it's just a technicality really though. As far as I know, there is nothing stopping a corp from forming an alliance with say their own alt corp, and then claiming sov.
I looked on the map, but I didn't see any systems with Spacelane sovereignty.
You know that player outposts are all managed by corps, right?
|
Jeddak Tarkas
Laughing Leprechauns Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 20:44:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Jeddak Tarkas on 26/11/2009 20:45:53
Edited by: Jeddak Tarkas on 26/11/2009 20:45:03
Originally by: Qui Shon
Originally by: dudley
The post by Liz Laser is just stupid if you are a 100 to 200 man corp then why do you need an alliance to take sov there is nothing in the game mechanics to stop ccp from allowing this not everything has to be alliance based this game is for everyone and everyone should be able to have a nice piece of the pie no matter what
Originally by: Qui Shon
Are you just trolling? That's my guess.
Liz's post was great. Entertaining, humorous, descriptive of actual human behaviour (kosher foods etc), and last but not least, she actually implied there is no longer any real reason for this limitation in alliances vs corps, i.e. you could have taken it as somewhat supportive of your agenda, instead of being insulting.Go Liz
Actually the post by Liz Laser actually proves why apes are not the dominant species on earth as they do not struggle against adversity and follow a pack mentality where no individual comes forth to challenge the preset rules. So in fact its an argument as to why cant corps hold sov just because they have not up to now and thats the way its always been are not valid arguments as proved by Liz's helpful post.
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 20:47:00 -
[44]
reading all the above and i find that my question about corps not being allowed sov has not really been answered all i have seen is excuses such as it`s not in the game mechanics this can be altered by ccp if they so wish to do so, and as for alliances saying that sov is just for them well this is rubbish, if a corp is big enough and can afford it then why not allow the corps to be able to take sov. I personally believe that alliances are afraid for corps to take sov as the corps would no longer need alliance, hence most of the alliances that charge there corp to be in said alliance will loose a lot of isk`s and maybe they will not be as big as they are and would have to work a bit harder for there isk`s and this is what they do not want to do. Untill CCP itself can justify a good reason as to why corp are not allowed sov i will be posting more on this subject I AM NOT GOING AWAY I FIGHT FOT THE LITTLE MAN
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 21:16:00 -
[45]
You got your answers, you just dont want to listen to them.
Just pay the fee and form an alliance, jesus it's not hard.
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 21:37:00 -
[46]
why should i need to pay to have a 1 corp alliance if i could be allowed to do the same with my corp
|
Alexeph Stoekai
Stoekai Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 21:59:00 -
[47]
Originally by: dudley
The post by Liz Laser is just stupid if you are a 100 to 200 man corp then why do you need an alliance to take sov there is nothing in the game mechanics to stop ccp from allowing this not everything has to be alliance based this game is for everyone and everyone should be able to have a nice piece of the pie no matter what
1. EVE is a game about social darwinism. If you can't beat another guy up you will not get a nice piece of pie, and in this case you must also carry a valid invitation to the pie party to be able to partake.
2. You have no idea what EVE's code looks like or what sort of work CCP would need to do to allow corporations to hold sov. Contrary to your slim idea, I am pretty sure that it's a massive task - not only in the technical implementation but also in terms of game design (aforementioned issue where a sov-holding corp joins an alliance, etc. It opens up a ma-ha-ha-ha-hassive can of worms, one that can simply be solved by the corporation creating an Alliance)
Originally by: dudley
why should i need to pay to have a 1 corp alliance if i could be allowed to do the same with my corp
Because you won't be allowed to do so with your corp. It's as simple as that. Alliances/Factions have special mechanics that CCP will not and probably cannot implement on a corporation level, and as there is already a mechanic implemented for allowing a corporation to claim space (CREATING AN ALLIANCE!) there is no need for a new solution.
Originally by: dudley
reading all the above and i find that my question about corps not being allowed sov has not really been answered all i have seen is excuses such as it`s not in the game mechanics this can be altered by ccp if they so wish to do so,
Odds are, they don't wish to do so. There is no good reason for them to do so.
Originally by: dudley
and as for alliances saying that sov is just for them well this is rubbish, if a corp is big enough and can afford it then why not allow the corps to be able to take sov.
Corps can take sov, by creating an Alliance.
Originally by: dudley
I personally believe that alliances are afraid for corps to take sov as the corps would no longer need alliance, hence most of the alliances that charge there corp to be in said alliance will loose a lot of isk`s and maybe they will not be as big as they are and would have to work a bit harder for there isk`s and this is what they do not want to do.
If that poor underdog bullied corporation could stand on its own two feet it could just create its own Alliance and steal the systems from that ebil bully overlord Alliance. Allowing corps to take space will not automagically make those corps able to take space, and if they were able to take space in the first place they could have done so by creating their own alliance.
Originally by: dudley
Untill CCP itself can justify a good reason as to why corp are not allowed sov i will be posting more on this subject I AM NOT GOING AWAY I FIGHT FOT THE LITTLE MAN
You have no case, just let it drop.
-----
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 22:05:00 -
[48]
your only a 1 man corp so you would find it hard to control a system on your own
|
Alexeph Stoekai
Stoekai Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 22:11:00 -
[49]
Originally by: dudley
your only a 1 man corp so you would find it hard to control a system on your own
I don't want to control a system.
You're the one who brought the matter up, I'm simply arguing against your feeble points.
-----
|
Catherine Frasier
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 22:19:00 -
[50]
Originally by: KPPA
sigh. i don't understand why ppl think wanting money is evil or money its self is evil. read about what money is...
sigh. i don't understand why ppl think ayn rand was some kind of economist or psychologist or anything other than an angry pernicious sophist...
|
Klyde
R.E.C.O.N.
Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 22:23:00 -
[51]
I see no reason a corp can not get sov. If they have the isk and the members let them have it. Having to forum an alliance to hold space can be changed, yes it requires work on the DEV's team to make it happen but it should be done.
CCP has stated time and time again they are working towards getitng more ppl to 0.0 and they do not favour alliances, now is their chance to prove it.
Sure some of you ppl here might not agree with it but really, how does it hurt you? Let the little ppl in this game have their piece of pie.
|
Di Mulle
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 22:51:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Klyde
I see no reason a corp can not get sov. If they have the isk and the members let them have it. Having to forum an alliance to hold space can be changed, yes it requires work on the DEV's team to make it happen but it should be done.
CCP has stated time and time again they are working towards getitng more ppl to 0.0 and they do not favour alliances, now is their chance to prove it.
Sure some of you ppl here might not agree with it but really, how does it hurt you? Let the little ppl in this game have their piece of pie.
If for anything else, the reason would be purely technical. People cry so often (and sometimes not without a reason) that CCP puts developer resources into unneeded things, and this one would be perfect case.
If some poor corp can't make an alliance using workaround, it does not belong to 0.0 anyway.
Also, what you mean by ""CCP do not favour alliances" ? Alliances are technical feature of game mechanics at first place, so you can't "favour" or "disfavour" them.
As for alliances aka organized groups of people - I am sure CCP wants MORE of them in 0.0, probably much more. And yes, they want GREEEEEDY alliances 
|
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 23:21:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Catherine Frasier
Originally by: KPPA
sigh. i don't understand why ppl think wanting money is evil or money its self is evil. read about what money is...
sigh. i don't understand why ppl think ayn rand was some kind of economist or psychologist or anything other than an angry pernicious sophist...
Wow, we actually agree on something.
My deepest sympathies.
Prof. Tarantula, Esq. |
Katy Karkinoff
Minmatar
Psycho Chicks
|
Posted - 2009.11.26 23:30:00 -
[54]
Corps A, B, and C all are part of the same alliance. Corp A and Corp B put up a bunch of towers nearby the main systems of the alliance. Corp C does the same, but also puts up a few towers in a few systems, by themselves. Noone else has towers in this system, but since they are part of an alliance, the alliance name shows up in the upper right.
Corp C gets kicked from alliance because they are terrible posters - said alliance would then lose sov in the systems that Corp C had exclusively anchored towers in.
So as it is, corps do hold sov for their alliance, I assume this will be true after dominion however towers will be replaced with TCU's or w/e.
I suppose I should mention that say if Corp B for instance had also put up towers in a system with Corp C but Corp C was the one with the greater amount of large poses then when Corp C gets kicked Corp B would then be the holder of sov for said alliance.
|
Korizan
Red Mercury Incorporated
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 03:43:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Alex Raptos
And why the hell do you think corporations not part of an alliance should have the capabilities to hold a solar system and be sovereign within it? No you will not be able to. No you will never be able to. Sovereignty is Alliance business, join one and join in or stay out and...stay out.
Although this is correct in that you have to be part of an alliance, it always bugged me @ the same time.
In the old system POS's controlled SOV and POS's are Corporation Assets NOT an alliance asset.
So Really corporations should have been able to claim SOV, so the whole system was messed up anyways.
Either way as as there are several corporations out there that are bigger then most alliances the simple solution is just create an alliance and claim SOV.
There is ZERO requirements for a 1 Corporation Alliance to invite anymore corporations.
And if you need 2 them simple make a dummy corp to full fill the requirement.
SO the bottom line is you NEED the Alliance tag but that doesn't mean you have to share said alliance tag with any other corp.
|
Jeddak Tarkas
Laughing Leprechauns Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 10:17:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Korizan
Either way as as there are several corporations out there that are bigger then most alliances the simple solution is just create an alliance and claim SOV.
There is ZERO requirements for a 1 Corporation Alliance to invite anymore corporations.
And if you need 2 them simple make a dummy corp to full fill the requirement.
SO the bottom line is you NEED the Alliance tag but that doesn't mean you have to share said alliance tag with any other corp.
You see this is the part I fail to understand myself it seems a bit redundant. Why force a corp to make or join an alliance just to be able to have Sov status what does that actually achieve?
If you used the CCP RP for Minmatar for example they are supposed to be tribal only coming together in times of conflict. A Tribe is more akin to a corp than an alliance and tribes hold their own territory (ie sov). When they decide to form together then all that sov is combined under 1 alliance banner.
The main reason I can see in the game to allow Corps alone to hold sov and not have to join an Alliance is to avoid the alliance politics and the stupid alliance roles system that allows one disgruntled or traitorous director to destroy every individual corps hard work. Until they fix the roles properly they should allow corps to hold sov.
|
dudley
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 19:32:00 -
[57]
It seems to me that the only people that have a real problem with corps being able to take sov are the allinces and 1 man corps that are probable alts of alliances i have han over 1500 reads and not many corps have posted on this issue maybe if more corps who want to have sov posted there views it might be something for ccp to look into
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.11.27 19:40:00 -
[58]
Originally by: dudley
why should i need to pay to have a 1 corp alliance if i could be allowed to do the same with my corp
Because CONCORD want to see some ISK before they file all that paperwork. You gotta pay the Man.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |