EVE Search - Goodbye RP Alliances

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Goodbye RP Alliances

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 16 post(s)
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.15 23:09:00 - [1] What do you want to be? Loyal 'nationalists' finally allowed to serve your race with the implicit approval of its (npc) leaders? OR Independant Corporations/Alliances who have assumed that you speak for and act on behalf of billions of souls? You cant be both. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.15 23:48:00 - [2] Originally by: Ryas Nia Originally by: Cailais What do you want to be? Loyal 'nationalists' finally allowed to serve your race with the implicit approval of its (npc) leaders? OR Independant Corporations/Alliances who have assumed that you speak for and act on behalf of billions of souls? You cant be both. C. First real argument i have seen, but it still sucks. Some of these alliances are well known, where as the member corps are not. My previous alliance Fimbulwinter would lose its entire identity to play in faction warfare and that makes me sad. I spent a lot of time and effort building logo's and working on that alliance, we have been maintaining it for several mths now even though its more or less dead. we kept it open for the one or two remaining members in hopes that once faction warfare came out we could restart it and do what we did best, empire terrorism. Now it looks like that wont be an option :( wel I didnt say it would be an easy decision. But then isnt that a cause for some great role play? The angst of a person torn between his loyalty to his adopted Alliance - or to answer the call to arms from his 'nation'? My point being - the RP Alliances are supposedly full of RPing players - no? So: faced with an Imperial/Faction decree that the militias (defacto npc alliances) will not be signing on pod pilots who are members of potentially soveriegn claiming Alliances - how would your character react? What's more important; that you role play your character or that you keep your organisation? If the answer is that your character would stay loyal to your Alliance: so be it. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 00:20:00 - [3] Originally by: Ryas Nia Edited by: Ryas Nia on 16/05/2008 00:12:13 Originally by: Cailais wel I didnt say it would be an easy decision. But then isnt that a cause for some great role play? The angst of a person torn between his loyalty to his adopted Alliance - or to answer the call to arms from his 'nation'? My point being - the RP Alliances are supposedly full of RPing players - no? So: faced with an Imperial/Faction decree that the militias (defacto npc alliances) will not be signing on pod pilots who are members of potentially soveriegn claiming Alliances - how would your character react? What's more important; that you role play your character or that you keep your organisation? If the answer is that your character would stay loyal to your Alliance: so be it. C. I think my real issue is that CCP promised us RPers faction wars, but this really is just a mechanic to get people who have never pvped to try it out with some safety. CVA have done something amazing, its an alliance that has been around 5 years, they love RP and would like to play with the game CCP has been saying for years was coming only to find out its really not for them. That sucks. I can find a way around it maybe... but Im not happy that CCP renigged on their promise for faction wars, this from the sound of the dev blog is nothing more than hand holding for carebears and wow like battlegrounds with restrictions on the ships that can access FW complexes. Also.. the RP stuff. My character and fimbulwinter (the alliance im not in anymore :( ) go hand in hand, yes i give up a LOT of my character having to give up my alliances, even Veto. Ryas has been and always will be a terrorist in the true sense of the word. Fimbulwinter and Veto alliances do that to the T. Well I disagree on your point regarding WOW battlegrounds - its clear from the live dev blog that you'd be a legitamate War target anywhere not just in a given area. Your opposing factions territory might end up as 'out of bounds' but thats not the same thing at all. If the RP alliances want to continue their faction v faction war they can still do so utilising the current mechanics, its simply not as easy for them to scale down to FW. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 14:49:00 - [4] Originally by: Swamp Ziro CVA you guys are making kind of a big deal out of this. Or did you really think CCP would let the entirety of CVA stomp into lowsec and kick the **** out of the poor minmatar pubbies that haven't shot missl in their life before? Pretty much. In fact I think some amongst the big RP Alliances expected to be made the equivalent of the NPC Faction Militias - want to fight for the Amarr in FW?: join CVA. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 14:58:00 - [5] Originally by: Cpt Constantinus No, we just expected to be able to participate in FW without having to leave our alliance. Its a case of join FW for small scale pvp with empire level rewards, or stay in an Alliance and conduct large scale pvp with .0 level rewards. You'll just have to choose, you cant have both. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 15:09:00 - [6] Originally by: Haverloth Edited by: Haverloth on 16/05/2008 15:05:53 Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Cpt Constantinus No, we just expected to be able to participate in FW without having to leave our alliance. Its a case of join FW for small scale pvp with empire level rewards, or stay in an Alliance and conduct large scale pvp with .0 level rewards. You'll just have to choose, you cant have both. C. And what about Vigilia Valeria or Electus Matari or Ushra Khan who do not claim 0.0 space? We've been doing the small gang warfare thing for a lot longer than faction warfare has been promised. We're not big enough to "steamroller" anyone as well, so why are we being excluded? Why not roll up your alliance membership into ONE corp: heck call the corp Vigilia Valeria. There you go - problem solved no? C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 15:25:00 - [7] Originally by: Rodj Blake Quote: Why not roll up your alliance membership into ONE corp: heck call the corp Vigilia Valeria. There you go - problem solved no? C. this. I see where CVA is coming from and I guess I understand their issues, but any empire RP entity has no excuse not to just reorganize into a single corporation and enroll. So what, the alliance "Vigila Valeria" will become the corp Vigila Valeria is that such a big deal You could say the same about any alliance. In fact, why have alliances at all? Why not just do away with alliances and allow corps to hold sovereignty? Good point. But one might assume that CCP created Alliances to differentiate between just 'big corps' and those groups that wanted to establish their own 'kingdoms' If you were to look at the scale of the organisations in EVE you aught to get; Faction Alliance Corp Individuals A soveriegn holding Alliance is, essentially, a faction in its own right (Id argue thats how Alliance should be termed once they gain soveriegnty). Ergo, in factional warfare the player 'factions' (read: Alliances) arent at war with the NPC factions - as it doesnt involve their space. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 15:35:00 - [8] Originally by: Rodj Blake Here's another problem... PIE has over the years fought wars against a lot of different enemies. These enemies haven't just been Minmatars, but have also included various anarchist, blooder, Sansha and non-RP pirate groups. In fact, three of our current war enemies have no affiliation to the Minmatars. If we're forced to dissolve our alliance and join the FW militia, we will lose the ability to go to war against corps and alliances who are anti-Amarrian but don't like the Minnies much either. Brilliant! No doubt youre role playing out this serious dilema as I type? Whats the greater threat? The subversive elements of anti-amarrians?! The minmater?! Seriously - you do actually RP dont you? C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 15:50:00 - [9] Originally by: Rodj Blake Edited by: Rodj Blake on 16/05/2008 15:37:28 Originally by: Cailais Originally by: Rodj Blake Here's another problem... PIE has over the years fought wars against a lot of different enemies. These enemies haven't just been Minmatars, but have also included various anarchist, blooder, Sansha and non-RP pirate groups. In fact, three of our current war enemies have no affiliation to the Minmatars. If we're forced to dissolve our alliance and join the FW militia, we will lose the ability to go to war against corps and alliances who are anti-Amarrian but don't like the Minnies much either. Brilliant! No doubt youre role playing out this serious dilema as I type? Whats the greater threat? The subversive elements of anti-amarrians?! The minmater?! Seriously - you do actually RP dont you? C. Yes, I do. That's why I'm annoyed right now. Cool your annoyed. And seriously I can see why, and you do have my sympathy (Ive even proposed a solution to the problem on features and ideas forum). But how will your character Rodj Blake feel? Isnt that an opportunity to roleplay? Nobody is saying 'right FW is here - all RP is banned'. Its an unparraled opportunity for RP'd debate, angst ridden discussion, angry words said in haste, bitterness and emotion. So what if someone (the Amarrian Empire) has thrown your orderd world into chaos - RP out the collapse and rebirth of PIE in perhaps another form? By all means lament the (possible) fall of PIE - but at least do it with style! C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 15:56:00 - [10] Originally by: 5mokey McPot I understand ccp trying to keep FW away from alliances, it would be easy for certain alliance to just blob everything around empire looking for easy kills and killing any small warfare. On the other hand though, RP has been held together my alliances like CVA and UK and to have them completely excluded seems somewhat unfair. As for the idea of creating alt corps, hows thyat a good idea for a space holding alliance? I bet every pilot in CVA wants to be part of FW so who would that leave to defend and run all the infurstructue they have setup in providence. I dont like the idea of set battlegrounds either, and if i take part in FW i will more than likely roam through high sec and certain low sec trying to avoid these battle arenas it just doesnt appeal to me to have battles setup this way. Naaaarrrgh!!!!! /me bangs head against brick wall. - THATS NOT HOW IT WORKS. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 16:06:00 - [11] Originally by: 5mokey McPot Originally by: Cailais Originally by: 5mokey McPot I understand ccp trying to keep FW away from alliances, it would be easy for certain alliance to just blob everything around empire looking for easy kills and killing any small warfare. On the other hand though, RP has been held together my alliances like CVA and UK and to have them completely excluded seems somewhat unfair. As for the idea of creating alt corps, hows thyat a good idea for a space holding alliance? I bet every pilot in CVA wants to be part of FW so who would that leave to defend and run all the infurstructue they have setup in providence. I dont like the idea of set battlegrounds either, and if i take part in FW i will more than likely roam through high sec and certain low sec trying to avoid these battle arenas it just doesnt appeal to me to have battles setup this way. Naaaarrrgh!!!!! /me bangs head against brick wall. - THATS NOT HOW IT WORKS. C. So the new region wont be fought over, where there is set deadspace areas for the people involved in FW to warp to and fight in? When you join a Faction you are at War with the opposing Faction. You are a valid war target anywhere in EVE. - High Sec, Low Sec, .0. The objectives that determine what faction the contestable systems belong to - these are in Low Sec. So no - you wont be roaming through low sec/high sec avoiding the war: it is global, it is everywhere. Further more - as far as I can determine - even if you are NOT in a Faction you will still be able to warp into and engage players in the deadspace areas. Pirates rejoice. C. Im listening to the dev blog AGAIN to make sure Ive got this right (I was quite tired when I listend to it last night) but Im 98% sure this is how it will work. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 16:15:00 - [12] Originally by: Haverloth [quote=Cailais The RP constructs are ultimately of your own doing: YOU applied those rules within your RP context: not CCP. You roleplayed your way into those constructs - now roleplay your way out of them. If CCP took into consideration the 'rich history' of every corp and alliance in the game when designing content we'd still have mOo flying about! Why not write down your history? Publish it in E-ON, as a web site? Your looking at the end of your Alliance as the end of a book, when it needs only be the end of a chapter. Would you stop RPing with those in your alliance simply because they were not in it any longer??! Dont forget youve also got Ambulation coming: where no doubt you'll be able to create clubs, societies and 'social groupings' that equate to the Alliances in terms of membership. The glass isnt as half empty as you make out in my view. C. They are indeed of our own doing, because CCP did not give us anything. We had some Aurora, but not much. CCP told us to do our own FW, so we did. Now we're being told to throw away all we've done - and all we've done for CCP. We've kept the storyline going when there was nothing from them. We keep on having events such as the "1000 days of Interregnum/Prayer for a new Emperor" that saw a ring of golden ships circle the Emperor station in Amarr. CVA colonised Providence for the Amarr Empire - that's why they've not expanded into other space, and why they (and we) have defended Providence so thoroughly against all-comers. CCP told us to make our own history, so we did. We are unlike m0o in that we have an actual history that is related to EVE and not just random blobbage for fun, and for a large part of the Amarr group (PIE, CVA, -VV-) this history has been very closely intertwined. It already has been published as a website (see the link in my sig). We are being told to throw away all that we've worked for. CVA is being told they cannot protect Amarrian space in Providence as well as Amarrian space in the Bleak Lands. Hell, we ran the trial run of FW with the Defiants arc in the Bleak Lands for CCP. We've kept RP in EVE going when CCP were doing nothing about it. Now they seem to be hotting up the RP - witness the event with the Nyx yesterday- but excluding the RP alliances. Youre excluding yourselves!!! Yes CCP have been unforgiveably lax in supporting the RP in the past: they appear to be attempting to make a massive effort to make ammends for that including: RP'd ISD reports (including the Alliance Tourney). Factional Warfare with a detailed lead up - all in character. A novel by Tony G. Continous Chronicles by Abraxas. Ambulation - which appears to be almost entirely RP based. How much more RP content do you want!? What do you want to be? Your own masters in .0 space? Or support your faction of choice? C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 17:10:00 - [13] Originally by: 5mokey McPot Ok so with this youve just proved you didnt read what i said, when i said i was going to roam high sec it wasnt to avoid FW it was to kill other people there as that would be more realistic to me then going to low sec deadspaces that act like battlegrounds, so before you reply read what people say first. I apologise if I misconstrued your thread which seemed to imply that you intended to 'roam' through high sec 'avoiding' the battle. But I did read it and I was trying to provide you with more information assuming you didnt have it already (listening to dev blog again). Therefore I was trying to be of help to you. But seeing as you decided to respond with an arogant tone ("so before you reply read what people say first") next time I just wont bother. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 18:22:00 - [14] Originally by: Nuyan Zahedi People constantly seem to forget that this doesn't have a to do with "RP" alliances exclusively. This whole thing is having huge consequences for anyone that is in a corporation or an alliance. Don't forget that people that want to join Factional Warfare individually usually have to leave their corporation, since most corporations probably won't sign-up for FW. In a game like EVE you don't just leave/disband your corporation/alliance over a day. And the whole argument is flawed.Corporations aren't always small, alliances aren't always big. If there's a reason for people to show up in big numbers, they will anyway. Also, I don't think making a mechanical restriction between alliances and corporations is a good thing. Alliances aren't there just for 0.0. There are actually probably more alliances that don't do anything with POS's than alliances that do. But personally I'm not overly cynical. Greyscale said in that 'live dev blog' yesterday that fixing this whole thing is a technical possibility and I've faith that CCP will do something about it. I disagree with that view. My corporation is certainly going to sign up to FW (yes Im disappointed that I have to leave our Alliance to do so - but so be it). You'll be delighted to hear we'll be fighting for the Amarr Empire. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 18:32:00 - [15] Originally by: Sykosys I have to ask this question to those who support this FW idea and think the RP community is whining too much. Have you ever RP'd? Have you ever participated in an RP event either by one of these alliance or by CCP? Yes I have RP'd. Yes I have participated in an Aurora Event, though being new to EVE at the time and not being a member of the big RP corps we did feel rather excluded at the time: the RP community does feel rather 'cleeky' at times. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 20:21:00 - [16] Originally by: Haverloth Originally by: kworld I will be trying it out and look forward to it and i am glad that ccp is trying. But complaining about it here isnt going to change anything my friend got to try it before complaining, it could be brilliant for all we know. It could be brilliant but not for the RP alliances that wish to remain together under the flags they have flown for years. This much is established because the RP alliances will not be allowed to participate without breaking up. A quick question: Should the 'RP Alliances' be granted a special exception in order to allow them to participate? If yes: How will you determine what alliances meet the criteria of being an 'RP Alliance' If you believe it should be open to all Alliances how accessible do you believe factional warfare will be for low income, low skill point players when the mega-alliances move down from .0 for a few days factional warring? C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 21:42:00 - [17] This: Originally by: M'ing Pai You all want to roleplay? Here's some roleplay for you. For you CVA chaps, you have no room to complain. You assumed a mandate that didn't exist, claiming Providence in the name of the Amarrian Emperor. I have a news flash for you: that mandate never existed. I don't recall ever reading a press release, and a brief perusal of the archives proves my memory isn't shaky one wit. The Emperor never asked you to do what you've done. You just did it as an excuse to fulfill your own selfish ambition and greed. Now you've set yourself up as an extension of the Empire when in reality, you're no such thing. You're a group of Amarrian nationalists that took the law into your own hands without Imperial sanction. When a REAL Imperial mandate finally comes, you have a choice: either abandon your delusions of grandeur and join the fight for the Empire you claim to hold dear, or hold on to the insane notion that you're doing what your beloved Emperor wishes. You have no letter of marque, and no Imperial backing. You never have. A privateer without a letter of marque is in reality... ... a PIRATE. Funny how that works. plus this: Originally by: MotherMoon personally I will be fighting for the minmatar allaince, and I don't want some super allaince thinking they can boss us around becuase they are the "real" leaders. = win. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 23:45:00 - [18] Originally by: Garreck The rest of the community didn't care enough to talk to CCP and get the ideas rolling that led to faction warfare. Thats blatantly untrue. But what youre implying is that FW was promised to you, and you alone? That FW should be designed and implemented with not only the RP community in mind - but YOUR RP community. Be honest with us - YOU wanted to be 'top dogs' in the FW battles. Is this not the case? If your Alliances were given the chance to participate would we not all have to toe the line and follow your lead? Perhaps Im being a bit unfair there. But Im its how I see it. Massive Alliances hogging all the content and barging the smaller corp, the individual out of the way to further their own glorification. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.17 01:46:00 - [19] Originally by: Sapphrine firstly, i got as far as page 6 before i snapped. Calais, either explain why your opnion on rp is valid or shut up. Rather nicely illustrates my point - why is your opinion on RP more valid than mine? And why should I 'shut up' simply because I disagree with you on certain issues? Quote: Honestly, you're asking people to act moderately when they've been shafted. Im saying you have to see the issue from CCP's perspective, which I think they explained in the Dev Blog -implementing the Alliances is technically feasible, difficult to do and perhaps not right at this early stage. Quote: Your arguments basically revolve aroud using whatever CCP give and making it work somehow. Well thats where we are - Im not saying its an ideal situation, but sometimes you just have to make do with what youve got. Quote: RP allainces have spent 5 years using the constructs given by CCP to just that and they've just moved the goal posts. In short, you think people should agree with what CCP said, we feel some mechanism that involves the rich back story of those that have given up to 5 years to this game is justified. I agree - but I would point out its not the only story. So called non 'RP' Alliances have sacrificed just as much in the creation of their own story: should they be penalized? 'Sorry guys but your 5 years of fighting over Querious wasnt worth it as you can now pew pew each other over some low sec systems near empire...' Its a difficult area to balance for CCP - give too much precedence to FW and you make the 'unsupported' element of .0 Alliance warfare an irrelevant sideshow. Finally, if you care to browse the F&I forum you'll see Ive made a suggestion there supporting the ability of the major RP Alliances to get into the FW picture. I hope youre succesful in your discussions with CCP, while your with them can you ask them to fix the pilgrim. Thx. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.17 02:12:00 - [20] Ok, heres an idea. An Alliance can sign up for Factional Warfare but not in the traditional sense. Instead they are given the term {faction} Expanionist. e.g Ushra'Khan - Minmatar Expanionists. Expansionists do not get war dec rights within Empire, nor can they count towards achieving Militia goals within Empire/Low Sec. However... They do not take secruity rating hits for the destruction of opposing faction player ships within Low Sec space (essentially a privateer function) and when they claim Soveriegnty in .0 space they do so on behalf of their adopted Faction. e.g CVA Soveriegn space becomes Amarrian Soveriegn space - whilst retaining its 0.0 sec rating. Officially furthering the bounds of a factions empire: what more could an RP Alliance want? C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.17 18:03:00 - [21] Oh come on Jade - you really aught to know that allowing Alliances to dec an "NPC" entity such as a faction Militia would be totaly game breaking and would simply result in Privateers Ver 2.0. The Militia's would empty and there would be no factional warfare at all. CCP Dionysis is correct: if you want to claim soveriegn space, or have the potential to do so - you form an Alliance: thereby sacrificing the opportunity to fight for a faction within the bounds of FW mechanics. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.18 10:27:00 - [22] Originally by: cal nereus Alliance-bound RP-PvPers CAN join the faction warfare. You just have to leave the alliance. You can still maintain ties with your alliance, maintain friendships, and even continue flying alongside your corp-mates. Just do it under a faction banner instead of the alliance one and you'll be fine right? The only ones I can see having trouble is CVA. All the other alliances can participate in faction warfare without any sacrifices. Well that's true if you refer to purely mechanical sacrifices. What the RP community is saying is that there are internal story line sacrifices, and potentialy their shared community to be sacrificed in order for them to conduct FW. The problem is that factional warfare is housed within an NPC structure (An NPC Alliance made up of NPC and Player Corps) - which isnt compatible with a purely Player structure (Player Alliance with Player Corps). What FW is, is a means whereby a player can join a NPC corp/alliance and fight other players in an NPC corp/alliance. Its essentially 'Warfare'Lite': the trouble being the RP Player Alliances have already evolved beyond this. The idea, I believe, is that a (new) player transitions from High Sec mission running to Faction Warfare *and then* transitions to Empire War / .0 warfare - hopefully that player would join one of the RP Corps in doing so. So for the experienced player in the RP Alliances in game play terms participating in FW is a regressive step - a move backwards. CCP are attmepting to achieve a tidal shift out of Empire space not into it - one of the reasons for debarring Alliances as they predominatly exist as .0 entities. The next stage, I would expect, is that FW ver 2.0 incorporates Alliances into the picture - but that cant happen until the low level base game play is in place, tested and refined. I wouldnt be in the least suprised to see Alliances being able to join 'Imperial Fleets', a level above the militias achieving a sort of progression for the ardent FW player. Such a concept will almost certainly require a move out of Empire/low-sec and would have FW objectives in .0 space (probably NPC .0 pirate space). I hope the RP community bears this in mind - CCP have made it clear: this is just the start, not the end of the process..there's more to come! C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Cailais Amarr VITOC	Posted - 2008.05.19 19:07:00 - [23] Originally by: CCP Dionysus Edited by: CCP Dionysus on 19/05/2008 18:55:13 Originally by: Elaron Dionysus, with all due respect, why are you being so evasive on the war dec issue? To force us to try it on SiSi (which is closed for the next few days)? If you could give us a clear and concise answer to the following questions, we won't have to speculate (including assuming the worst due to incomplete responses) and can start to actually plan: 1) Will it be possible for entities (that is, corporations and alliances) who are not part of the formal Factional Warfare mechanic to declare war on the Militia corporations themselves? 2) Will it be possible for entities (that is, corporations and alliances) who are not part of the formal Factional Warfare mechanic to declare war on player corporations that are members of the Militias? 3) Will it be possible for player corporations who are signed up for the factional Militias to issue war declarations on other player entities, signed up or not? Also, please bear in mind before posting an obfuscated response that if we know how this is supposed to work, we'll be able to create proper bug reports if our tests on SiSi contradict the given answer. Hokeydokey. Simple clear responses. 1) No. They are NPC corps, and like any NPC corps you cannot declare war. 2) Yes. They are still normal player corps. They are not technically joining an alliance, and dont gain the "protection" that being in an alliance gives you. You will have to pay normal wardec costs etc though. 3) Similarly to above - yes. I was being "evasive" as I was giving opinions. /me puts on flame suit to prepare for the response from vocal players. Cool - me likes! C. VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare!

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.