ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
5182
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 23:40:00 -
[1] - Quote
Niluso wrote:Something most people agree with in FW is that it needs to be revamped, updated, revived and so on. ItGÇÖs dying a slow death and people are burning out left and right, and motivation/morale is at an all time low. Morale is actually quite high in the Minmatar militia... at least it is within the circles I'm a part of anyways.
Niluso wrote:The militias are pretty weak, either side doesn't have much isk to do anything other than frigs/dessies or they canGÇÖt amount to the large neutral groups that come around in T3s or hacs with logi or the like. Hahahaha... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
Speak for yourself. I have billions of ISK worth in ships and mods that are all ready to go when the time calls for it... and billions of liquid ISK on top of that.
And I'm one of the POORER people in my alliance.
The reason I mainly use frigates, destroyers, and the odd cruiser is because...
1. they are equally useful running solo and in small gangs (versus a larger ship that often needs support). 2. they aren't caught as easily (because they are faster and more nimble) 3. they can bypass those large neutral T3 and HAC gangs with ease (refer to point #2). 4. no one is going to hotdrop a frigate/destroyer/cruiser... --- and if someone is actually willing to hotdrop a frigate/destroyer/cruiser refer to point #2.
Niluso wrote:no fucks are given to bash ihubs nowadays, because either the militias canGÇÖt form up to spend the time to bash or just being able to deal with pirates that crash the bash party. How about... "it's boring structure grinding and I have better things to do with my time... like hunt down war targets."
Niluso wrote:And when a FW manages to grind enough to get to T4, itGÇÖs all just grinding L4s solo in a bomber or stabbed plex farming. When militia only amounts to all this, thereGÇÖs no reason to be in militia at all. I'll give you this one. Most of the "vets" just go inactive when their militia hits Tier 4 because there are simply no targets around to shoot (because they have all been locked out of the low-sec stations).
Niluso wrote:Militia as a whole is weak, new people have a hard time funding pvp without tons of grinding, or corps/alliance donGÇÖt have numbers or even resources to field a solid T3 or even battleship fleet. I don't think you quite understand how much effort is required to set up a proper BS fleet. Especially when the threat of hotdrops is very real.
Niluso wrote: if I canGÇÖt dock in an amarr held system in LOW SECURITY SPACE, then I shouldn't be able to dock in amarr HIGH SECURITY SPACE. Sorry for the caps, but it should be self explanatory. FW shouldn't be all about ganking unaware WTs in highsec then docking in their space. ItGÇÖs stupid and if anything we want to bring more people to the warzone not push them away from it.
Counter proposal: remove all docking restrictions on all stations. I personally believe this was one of the least good changes that came with the FW re-vamp. It does not encourage people to spread around the warzone... instead forcing people to concentrate their numbers and operations in "stronghold" systems... base out of "neutral" systems just outside the warzone... or base out of high-sec.
And honestly... bypassing the station lock-out is a joke. If you lose a system you drop militia for a day or two, move stuff around, then reapply (which some simply don't because they quickly realize, "hey, being neutral has most of the PvP benefits with none of the hassles!"). Or you can get neutral alts to do the moving for you.
Niluso wrote: Next up is the missions/LP making ways. For the min/amarr warzone, being able to run L4s solo in a bomber is just ****** up. It discourages group play and encourages people not really invested in FW to come in and get rich with no real effort.
Let me let you in on a little secret... NO ONE who joins militia wants to PvE. Least of all with others. At all. Unless that PvE leads directly to PvP (like complexes, which force you to sit around for awhile). Otherwise... no one wants to do it unless they have to. Which again, they don't. It's a means to an end. That end being more ISK for more PvP.
Niluso wrote: Security status and standings. If IGÇÖm fighting for minmatar but canGÇÖt go into minmatar highsec without being shot by the NAVY IGÇÖM WORKING FOR because IGÇÖm -9 then well, that just doesn't make sense does it. Being in the militia I shouldn't take any security hits in the warzone for shooting neutrals or sentry gun aggro. Because militia should take priority not random non-FWs that come into our space, our warzone to blow things up.
Sorry... but roleplaying is the main reason for this. You are a privateer in the purest sense... not a soldier. And place we call the "warzone" is, to everyone else, just another part of "normal low-sec"... only with more people planting little flags and shooting each other. So the "normal rules of engagement" still apply to anyone who is not clearly marked as your enemy.
And just because you kinda work for for a Sovereign government and blow up people in their name... it doesn't mean yoru "criminal activity" should be excused or tolerated! You did, after all, shoot people who are recognized by CONCORD as neutral! So what if they entered your complex? They could just be curious! It's not their fault you are paranoid!
Seriously though... man up. Use that LP you farmed to buy some security status tags. Or just use a neutral hauler character like everyone else. There is rarely a reason for you to be in high-sec anyways... what with all the killin' and farmin' down in low-sec. Arrrrrrrrr. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?" |