Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Archbishop
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.02.12 12:46:00 -
[1]
While I realize roleplay corps (official ones) are a small part of the Eve cluster the truth is we're all RPing of sorts in Eve. What I'd like to see is having a corp standing reflect a corporations idealogical position more closely rather than being tied to the members standing (which is mission running and not related to corp loyalty at all). Corp standings should be all about loyalty to the Empire or disloyalty and enemy status to another.
Here is my idea:
- A corp would have a "corp standing" determined by their views to each individual Empire and would live with those decisions (standing would be the consequence of you taking a particular stance ingame).
- For example PIE a RP corp for Amarr would be 9.0 to Amarr and the Ammatar Mandate but -9.0 to the Minmatar Republic.
- NPC Navy ships would be "reduced" power wise but would be able to fire on negative standing ships.
- Each Empire would have a "capital" where the systems around it get progressively more difficult to enter with bad standing and NPC navy ships get stronger.
This has the effect of making a capital a true "refuge" for an Empire and have surrounding systems be more vulnerable. This is realistic in a way since a capital would naturually have more protection than some outer system of an Empire.
This would enable things like hit and run attacks, border skirmishes, raids into outside territories and massive fleet attacks against an Empires core systems that would require more ships and manpower. This would give us more realism in the game and more benefit as Empire supporters allowing us to experience the loyalty and hatred of the various Empires.
RP corps would have to register with CCP their "standing" toward an Empire (or some interface on the corp management screen) and this could be used as an RP tool as well. For example if PIE were to set its standing to the Minmatar at 9.0 it would be powerful RP evidence to use against PIE ingame and thus would never happen. This is about living ingame with the consequences for ones ideology.
Standings could also then be adjusted for "allied" Empires. For example the Amarr and Caldari are friendly and the Minmatar and Gallente are friendly thus Amarrians might be 9.0 for Amarr and 4.5 for Caldari but -9.0 for Minmatar and -4.5 for Gallente. This means weaker NPC navy ships in those "other" Empires that don't prevent you from entering but still harrass you.
You could tie some tangible benefit to the process as well. Right now standings help determine mission rewards and stuff but imagine if declaring your loyalty to an Empire in this fashion brought benefits as well. Imagine for example you declare this type of loyalty to an Empire and as a result get a 10% boost in gun damage in the core systems or get Navy assistance fighting enemies in those systems or something. Some benefit to make people WANT to register corps with Empires.
We're going to have faction warfare but I think this could be REAL faction warfare.
What do you think?
Archie
PIE WEBSITE & FORUMS PIE INFORMATION CENTER |
ITTigerClawIK
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.02.12 14:07:00 -
[2]
Not only would this re-enforce RP and Factional warfare but stop those RP guys storeing ships in the enemys home system... you know who you are -_-
Sig (partially) nerfed. Only one image allowed, and that one image has to be under 400x120, and below 24,000 bytes. -Conuion Meow ([email protected])
|
Viktor Fyretracker
Caldari Worms Corp
|
Posted - 2007.02.12 14:17:00 -
[3]
EVE does lack a fully fuctional NPC faction system. look at WoW and EQ for example, you kill an NPC of one faction you loose standing but also gain points with the other. does EVE have this? ie if i blew up a Gallente Navy ship would i gain Amarr standing.
|
ITTigerClawIK
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.02.12 15:24:00 -
[4]
im sorry but i hate hearing WoW compared to EVE i really do
Sig (partially) nerfed. Only one image allowed, and that one image has to be under 400x120, and below 24,000 bytes. -Conuion Meow ([email protected])
|
Spoon Thumb
Khanid Aerospace Group Khanid Provincial Authority
|
Posted - 2007.02.12 16:42:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Spoon Thumb on 12/02/2007 16:38:43
Originally by: Archbishop
We're going to have faction warfare but I think this could be REAL faction warfare.
What do you think?
Archie
I think anything less than this wouldn't really be factional as just another form of consentual pvp.
The danger is that factional warfare is implemented to let any old corp with members from every race and no real attachment to just pick a random side and it be no better or worse than any other. That just like some random Team Death-Match mode, it doesn't actually matter what team you pick as ultimately 90% of all weapons are the same and 90% of the time you win by just killing all the other team
----- Khaldari KPA are recruiting! |
Stig Sunshine
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.02.12 16:44:00 -
[6]
I like this idea. I'm not sure about the mechanics of it but I definitely like the results. The heart of an empire should be harder to raise hell in than the outlands, and it would require NPC naval units to respond appropriately to incursions to make this happen.
It also gives players a chance to "ally" themselves along RP lines by doing more than just shooting their chosen enemies. There are actually factional risks and protections by aligning. -----------------
|
Carinae
Minmatar Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2007.02.12 17:14:00 -
[7]
Archbishop, may I say you are on form today
I 100% go along with this suggestion.
Make it difficult for use Freedom Fighters to enter +0.5 Amarr space. Should a low standing corp anter higher sec space, the Gate NPC pilots have a role and engage the low standing pilots, all be it less aggressive but enough for the low standing pilots to feel the pain and have to be organised i.e a tanking ship.
Fighting for the freedom of all held in slavery Warrior of the Ushra'Khan Death to slavery |
Carinae
Minmatar Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2007.02.12 17:19:00 -
[8]
I would also like to suggest the lower standing pilots could also engage the NPC at the gate, but this would only happen with factional NPCs' and not Concord.
The result from the NPC would be a very heavy response but not overwhelming, the equivelant of a 7/10 complex maybe
So if the lower standing corp is properly organised they can activly hunt the factional NPCs'
The higher the systems Security, the harder the response (and the better loot!)
Fighting for the freedom of all held in slavery Warrior of the Ushra'Khan Death to slavery |
Lakotnik
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.12 17:40:00 -
[9]
Hmmmmm I strongly agree. Starting +9 and -9 would be probably too high, but this should increase when you do something good/bad for faction. Also, NPCs should sometimes take initiative and assault hostile systems. In those systems, massive battles would be fought, till minmatars get completely eradicated. High standing towards faction could also result in some benefits - alliance could get offers like mission ones for faction ships and modules to get some extra edge against oposing force.
I am really interested in true faction warfare. Perfect oportunity to sort some territorial conflicts.
-- Smile, tomorrow will be worse. |
Amira Silvermist
The Aegis Militia
|
Posted - 2007.02.13 15:05:00 -
[10]
Now that would be great way for factional warfare!
Amarr racial trait: Nerfbat damage resistance 0% |
|
Erim Solfara
Amarr Tarlos INC
|
Posted - 2007.02.14 11:47:00 -
[11]
I like this idea.
New ship class |
Archbishop
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.04.21 01:12:00 -
[12]
Quote: I would also like to suggest the lower standing pilots could also engage the NPC at the gate, but this would only happen with factional NPCs' and not Concord.
The result from the NPC would be a very heavy response but not overwhelming, the equivelant of a 7/10 complex maybe.
Very good idea after all if you're -4.5 in a system and are being attacked you should be able to shoot back at the NPC's shooting at you.
How about it CCP???? Real faction warfare!
Archie
PIE WEBSITE & FORUMS PIE INFORMATION CENTER |
Katana Seiko
Made in Germany
|
Posted - 2007.04.21 01:49:00 -
[13]
Umm... for the Roleplay thingie... If a player is i.e. in a gallente noob corp and flies into amarr space, he can do and not do what he wants (mainly)... Well, as far as I've seen they're not really green (or blue) with each other... Well, there's something wrong about that, right? --- The future begins now - in EVE we live it, in real life we create it!
Your sig is too big. Please keep it under 400x120, and less than 24000 bytes. -<enter mod name here> ([email protected]) |
Archbishop
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.04.21 02:18:00 -
[14]
Quote: Umm... for the Roleplay thingie... If a player is i.e. in a gallente noob corp and flies into amarr space, he can do and not do what he wants (mainly)... Well, as far as I've seen they're not really green (or blue) with each other... Well, there's something wrong about that, right?
Hi good question. The way I envision it would be a corporation would have to set a standing to an Empire first. For example PIE (my corp) is Amarrian RP oriented so we'd of course set +9.0 to Amarr. By counter we're "enemies" of the Minmatar so we'd be -9.0 to them.
This has two benefits the first explained above and the second being as a "tool" for RP. For example if PIE were to set its Minmatar standing to +9.0 and attack Pator it would be visible to the enemy (the standing) and would be an RP and PR disaster. How can we "support" the enemy empire that way? We can't. So there is a real consequence for having a "wrong" standing just to obtain a tactical advantage.
For your question if a corporation doesn't set a standing level to an Empire it just goes on as normal with no intervention from anyone.
Archie
PIE WEBSITE & FORUMS PIE INFORMATION CENTER |
Aneroi
Amarr VIRTUAL LIFE VANGUARD Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.04.21 18:04:00 -
[15]
the only problem would be corps that has more then one race in them. but if they could just choose a side it would be nice.
http://aneroi.tk |
Kakita Jalaan
Viriette Commerce and Holding
|
Posted - 2007.04.23 07:46:00 -
[16]
If I may post a link to a suggestion that would effectively incorporate this effect, and also fix some security status issues along the way.
Linking security status to faction standing
In brief, killing player and NPC ships affects your faction standings. Faction standing decides outlaw status in that empire. Leaves piracy basically as it is, but enables bounty hunting and RPing. Also enables faction standing gain/loss without grinding missions.
I would love any and all feedback on that thread, especially from people interested in the RP/factional warfare aspects. ______________ Join the Family |
Ruah Piskonit
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.04.23 15:30:00 -
[17]
Ideas such as this would improve the realism of being part of an RP corp. I wholy support this idea and any idea that brings factional warfare to the fore.
----
|
Nareg Maxence
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.04.23 16:43:00 -
[18]
A couple of comments from a n00b. :)
Factional affiliations could be improved for sure. In fact from my experiences so far, the whole npc part of the game gives me a kind of strange feeling. It seems like all npcs live in some kind of mirror universe that works differently from the way the player universe works.
Examples:
NPC rats can engage you and you can engage them without concord intervening. I understand that this is a purposefully chosen game mechanic, but still.. Huh?
I see a particular RP corp affiliating themselves with the NPC Serpentis Corporation, being based out of their home system, placing their HQ at a Serpentis station. At the same time they have significant negative standing with Serpentis Corporation, presumably because their members keep blowing up Serpentis Corp stuff all around the place. Huh? :)
Regarding your suggestions, I like most of them. I don't know about the 'register with CCP their "standing"' part. I think standing should be decided by in-game mechanics.
|
Saragael
|
Posted - 2007.05.07 12:29:00 -
[19]
I think this idea can be added to as well. What if corporate and alliance standings with Empires where possible? Go back in time a bit to the SF vs KD war. Imgaine if you will that the State stepped forward to help a loyalist group to their cause.
Now while I am not sure how easy it would be to make the AI come to the defense, what about the other playrs? What if the loweer standing in effect granted EVERYONE privateer status within the empires (the State in this case) space and made the enemy corporation or alliance a free war target.
Imagine this scenario where SF forces enter a Caldari system. The State has decalred them enemies of the state. While for SF the only people that will show as red are thier war targets for EVERYONE ELSE SF ships are open targets. Now of course firing on the SF ship will mean they can shoot back for the next hour but suddenly the fight within Empire space is less a good thing.
Also move the logic forward a bit more and have the state place a bounty on killing an SF ship, similiar to an NPC kill. Now the other people in the system get cash for killing an enemy of the state and possibly some of the bounty.
While not the same thing as the state getting directly involved the overall effect could be close and it shows state support for it's loyalist groups.
For this to work however there needs to be a system for a group (alliance or corporation) to build loyality with the state.
|
Sepherim
Amarr Ordo Quaesitoris
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 01:19:00 -
[20]
I support this idea completely. I had already proposed a mechanic for something like this back some time somewhere.
Basically, the corp would have a new menu with all the factions listed in it, and a sliding bar for each of them. The bar would go from -10 on one side, to +10 on the other. Once a month, every corp would be able to modify one (or two, or whatever) of them one point to the left or right. If they choose to augment one, they have to reduce another, and if they choose to reduce they can either augment another or keep that point for future using (or for RP reasons). If you want an example of how this works, check out the economic bars in most of Paradox's games, Europa Universalis 3 for example.
Just my 0.2 cents.
Ordo Quaesitoris Forum |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |