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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 16 post(s)

CCP Dionysus	Posted - 2008.05.17 16:06:00 - [331] Edited by: CCP Dionysus on 17/05/2008 16:06:20 Originally by: Upright Originally by: CCP Dionysus Sorta like the british and australians - both commonwealth, but different governments. But the Australian head of state is still the Queen of England. I keep forgetting that as I'm a Republican at heart.. Still galls me that we aussies voted to keep her as head of state in a national referendum

Spoon Thumb Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.17 16:19:00 - [332] So if we all quit CVA and join the Empire, then all those systems CVA currently control will be claimed by the Empire? That is kinda the implication of what you're saying, which is what we'd have done in the first place if the mechanics had existed years ago

CCP Dionysus	Posted - 2008.05.17 16:25:00 - [333] Originally by: Spoon Thumb So if we all quit CVA and join the Empire, then all those systems CVA currently control will be claimed by the Empire? That is kinda the implication of what you're saying, which is what we'd have done in the first place if the mechanics had existed years ago Its like walking in a minefield... I'm not good at removing implications from what I say.... All I said was that you, as players, have choices to be your own masters in your alliances and claim your own stuff, or sign up as part of a faction. Implications are obviously beyond my control, but I dont mean any of them....

Spoon Thumb Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.17 16:29:00 - [334] Sorry that just doesn't wash. CVA have claimed 0.0 in the name of the Empire for years Will there be a mechanic that will let human players claim 0.0 systems for NPC factions?

CCP Dionysus	Posted - 2008.05.17 16:33:00 - [335] Originally by: Spoon Thumb Sorry that just doesn't wash. CVA have claimed 0.0 in the name of the Empire for years Will there be a mechanic that will let human players claim 0.0 systems for NPC factions? everything I've been saying above is "personal opinion" of how I feel factional warfare should work from a RP perspective... I'm not saying anythign about how planned features will work in any way. so I cant answer your question. I'm only talking personal opinions. If you want to have facts you have to wait until sisi is opened with FW and test it yourself. sorry

Kuseka Adama Gallente Paxton Industries Paxton Federation	Posted - 2008.05.17 16:44:00 - [336] Originally by: CCP Dionysus Originally by: Spoon Thumb Sorry that just doesn't wash. CVA have claimed 0.0 in the name of the Empire for years Will there be a mechanic that will let human players claim 0.0 systems for NPC factions? everything I've been saying above is "personal opinion" of how I feel factional warfare should work from a RP perspective... I'm not saying anythign about how planned features will work in any way. so I cant answer your question. I'm only talking personal opinions. If you want to have facts you have to wait until sisi is opened with FW and test it yourself. sorry Here is my choice. Have one of your your groups try to encroach on a null sec alliance. Personally i think you should open up the mechanic because short of GM/Dev Intervention millitary wise nullsec has the power to wipe out every high sec pod pilot and at least 1 of the major factions. This is a slap in the face to me and i think i am reflecting the opinions of many who say bring it on. You really want FW to be such a mistake? Take it to the end game where empires feel forced to try to grab nullsec. We would love a chance to hot drop 30+ captials on stations on Luminare and Ours.
Spoon Thumb Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.17 16:44:00 - [337] Well if it isn't in current plans or developments, I'd suggest it'd be a good idea to put it in some time soon
Hober Hardin	Posted - 2008.05.17 16:46:00 - [338] Edited by: Hober Hardin on 17/05/2008 16:56:18 Edited by: Hober Hardin on 17/05/2008 16:51:25 Thanks for the posts Dionysus o/ Quote: Technically you have claimed the systems for CVA, and just happen to follow most of the same laws/customs. Thats the key point imho.. ..now cva (and other rp alliances) simply have to make the choice, do they continue as splinter groups of activists aligned to their respective Empires, or do they disband and fall fully under their banner..
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris	Posted - 2008.05.17 16:49:00 - [339] Originally by: CCP Dionysus Originally by: Rodj Blake Edited by: Rodj Blake on 17/05/2008 15:28:52 So it sounds as though alliances will be able to war-dec the militias. Interesting. Although that does raise the question of why alliances should be prevented from signing up for FW when they'll be able to cause as much mayhem simply by declaring war. Personal opinion - nothing to do with game design etc etc. The factions claim sov over systems, and are asking for people to help defend their own sov systems... Why on earth would they trust anyone else who is trying to gain sov over systems as well? Bing in an alliance is effectively declaring to concord that you (as an entity) want to start claiming systems as "yours". It makes a kind of sense that the Empires will not be asking their competitors to help them... Just my opinion - dont take this as anything from design... Lots of alliances regularly ask other alliances for help in defending their territory. Why should factions be any different? Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
Elsebeth Rhiannon Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.05.17 16:58:00 - [340] This might sound harsh -- but the thing EM mostly gives us is identity, and the ability to screen people who join so that we know we get the kind of people we want, to contribute to the alliance spirit. Our alliance chat and all our fleet operations are IC at all times and we enforce that. People who do not like that kind of stuff simply do not join the alliance or leave very soon. Joining an alliance where we lose that control and just simply anyone can join up -- I am sorry, but that is not appealing at all. I find the idea that the RP alliances should or do not exist for anything but sovereignty quite offensive and clueless, to be honest. Elsebeth -- Help us defend the Republic; join Gradient today.
Malak Synn Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:00:00 - [341] Originally by: CCP Dionysus The factions claim sov over systems, and are asking for people to help defend their own sov systems... Why on earth would they trust anyone else who is trying to gain sov over systems as well? Bing in an alliance is effectively declaring to concord that you (as an entity) want to start claiming systems as "yours". It makes a kind of sense that the Empires will not be asking their competitors to help them... Just my opinion - dont take this as anything from design... The Enemy of My Enemy Is Not My Friend, and by his current actions of claiming sovreignity, is a Potential Enemy. paraphrasing Tsun Tsu, and throwing the EVE Twist in for good measure where it applies. Quote:* *... Are You Watching Closely?*
Arlenna Molatov Caldari The 59th Parallel	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:01:00 - [342] If anyone here listened to the live Dve Blog.... the main reason they DONT want to let alliances in on one side or the other is because they dont want to have 1000's of playes throw their support to one side right off the bat. They don't want blob tactics. They wanted to control...to some extent, the size of engagements to try to keep it a little more even fights, not 800vs400. And I totally agree with that!
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:04:00 - [343] Originally by: Arlenna Molatov If anyone here listened to the live Dve Blog.... the main reason they DONT want to let alliances in on one side or the other is because they dont want to have 1000's of playes throw their support to one side right off the bat. They don't want blob tactics. They wanted to control...to some extent, the size of engagements to try to keep it a little more even fights, not 800vs400. And I totally agree with that! I can sort of see the point of that, but it sounds as though existing alliances will be able to war-dec these faction militias. And on top of that, you're forgetting that there's corps out there with a thousand members. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
Kuseka Adama Gallente Paxton Industries Paxton Federation	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:04:00 - [344] Originally by: Arlenna Molatov If anyone here listened to the live Dve Blog.... the main reason they DONT want to let alliances in on one side or the other is because they dont want to have 1000's of playes throw their support to one side right off the bat. They don't want blob tactics. They wanted to control...to some extent, the size of engagements to try to keep it a little more even fights, not 800vs400. And I totally agree with that! Mechanic wise it makes SOME sense However people who have kept the story going and have fought wars over RP reasons get the shaft. Personally if it was allowed i might be looking at trying to get nullsec to take down an entire empire. We have the power to do so. But eh i can dream. Either way FW has turned into a slap in the face for RPers and unless something is done its going to remain that way.
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:05:00 - [345] Originally by: Arlenna Molatov If anyone here listened to the live Dve Blog.... the main reason they DONT want to let alliances in on one side or the other is because they dont want to have 1000's of playes throw their support to one side right off the bat. They don't want blob tactics. They wanted to control...to some extent, the size of engagements to try to keep it a little more even fights, not 800vs400. And I totally agree with that! It's semi-arena warfare is it not? Then just designate different corporations to defend or attack targets and match them up. Or they were just tossing this in to be some no-influental killinggrounds for those who cannot find themselves a regular war to be in? Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav! Also Known As

CCP Dionysus	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:11:00 - [346] Originally by: Rodj Blake Lots of alliances regularly ask other alliances for help in defending their territory. Why should factions be any different? Lots of alliances then regularly backstab their former allies and take their systems. (Bob, mercenary coalition, etc etc...) From that past history would you trust any of them? making exceptions is always bad... if they let CVA fight for AMARR, what is to stop GoonSwarm, or BoB, signing up with a militia en-masse? You are both (from an ingame Rp perspective) exactly the same - a sovereign entity that is claiming space. Sure, the Amarr empire should have positive standings to you (similar to how they have positive standings to the Khanid, Ammatar and Caldari) but the Amarr dont let (f.ex) Ishukone Watch fight and defend Amarr system and personel as they have other loyalties... If you are loyal to the Amarr, sign up already. If you have more loyalty to the CVA as as entity, then just set the Minmatar and Gallente militia as red and shoot them on sight in low sec... <shrug> I'm really trying to see your point of view, but am struggling with the idea of having two masters. Choose one or do work arounds (like you did in the first place by making the alliance....)

Spoon Thumb Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:22:00 - [347] We're trying to claim a region in the name of the Empire. Here, have it. But the Amarr Empire is controlled by CCP, you have to take it form us or let us give it to you You could if you really wanted think of CVA as a placeholder, until such time as the Empire can take Providence or we the players can give it to the Amarr Empire

CCP Dionysus	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:24:00 - [348] Originally by: Spoon Thumb We're trying to claim a region in the name of the Empire. Here, have it. But the Amarr Empire is controlled by CCP, you have to take it form us or let us give it to you You could if you really wanted think of CVA as a placeholder, until such time as the Empire can take Providence or we the players can give it to the Amarr Empire That would indeed be a very cool thing. But it is would be outside the scope of "factional warfare". You are asking for a mechanic for alliance politics/treaties. Maybe how an alliance can now hand over ownership of outposts... you want to do the same and give the outpost to the Amarr empire? correct?


CCP Dionysus	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:26:00 - [349] Originally by: Danton Marcellus It's semi-arena warfare is it not? Then just designate different corporations to defend or attack targets and match them up. Or they were just tossing this in to be some no-influental killinggrounds for those who cannot find themselves a regular war to be in? No. There are points of confict, but no "arenas". An arena implies "closed off". Nothing is closed off in eve. (unless you are in an NPC station)

Disteeler Segunda Fundacion T e r c i o s	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:34:00 - [350] Edited by: Disteeler on 17/05/2008 17:34:59 I don't really know if letting alliances sign into militias structure is a good idea (technically and rp wise in lots of cases), but at least you MUST make some sort of system for them to give support to those militias without leaving the alliance. Wardeccing might be something like that, but also some sort of condecorations and rewards. RP alliances does indeed matter in EvE storyline, making them outisde Factioanl Warfare is just nuts and bad for EvE/CCP for sure. Sig by Black Necris
El Covah LOCKDOWN. HUZZAH FEDERATION	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:40:00 - [351] What CVA et.al. did the past years is impressive and I think it would be fair to honour it by the Amarr Empire in some way. I doubt they will find more loyal pod pilots again.
Clavius XIV Auctoritan Syndicate Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:42:00 - [352] Originally by: CCP Dionysus making exceptions is always bad... if they let CVA fight for AMARR, what is to stop GoonSwarm, or BoB, signing up with a militia en-masse? I absolutely agree, exceptions are bad, and nothing should stop BoB or GoonSwarm supporting a faction either. As for betrayal... corps, and invdividuals are just as likely to be "backstabbers" or at least have other agendas. The empires are getting cheap podpilots that pledge to them but they could always turn later... they must view the short term benifit worth the risk... and one could apply the same logic to Alliances.
Spoon Thumb Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:42:00 - [353] Originally by: CCP Dionysus Originally by: Spoon Thumb We're trying to claim a region in the name of the Empire. Here, have it. But the Amarr Empire is controlled by CCP, you have to take it form us or let us give it to you You could if you really wanted think of CVA as a placeholder, until such time as the Empire can take Providence or we the players can give it to the Amarr Empire That would indeed be a very cool thing. But it is would be outside the scope of "factional warfare". You are asking for a mechanic for alliance politics/treaties. Maybe how an alliance can now hand over ownership of outposts... you want to do the same and give the outpost to the Amarr empire? correct? Well I can't speak officially for the entire alliance, but I think it is fair to say "yes, pretty much". We've made the customs and laws, the environment as close to Empire as mechanics in 0.0 allow to that end
Gunner Dark	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:43:00 - [354] From a RP point of view CVA etc could easily work around this, form a mega corp and sign on to fight the cause , i dont think any alliances should be allowed, role players or not, the mechanics shouldnt be gimped just to keep a game minority happy. Your either a sovereign space holding entity, or you go fight for your race.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.17 17:53:00 - [355] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 17/05/2008 17:55:14 Originally by: CCP Dionysus There is the whole thing - an "Alliance" and all the fees involved is supposedly for the legal paperwork fot CONCORD to recognised the alliance as a Sovereign Entity. If you dont want to be a sovereign entity, they why become an alliance? For example, the Star Fraction does declare itself Sovereign - you dont want to be under the power of any authority other than your own. As an alliance the SF shouldn't be able to sign up in the concord recognised war between the Empires. You still would be pirates effectively. Well as to the "why" with SF: its pretty simple. We formed the alliance because a) we wanted our custom insignia to go into the server code. b) alliance standings management was far superior to corp standings management. c) alliance wardec functionality is far superior to corp wardec functionality d) we wanted to enter the alliance tournament. So thats not so much a statement of desire to conquer space as a desire (as players) to have access to game content. We've by and large given up on the multi-corp system for Star Fraction, but we keep the alliance structure for the advantages expressed above. Consider it a "work-around" so we don't get denied access to better organizational tools and events like the tournament. As for our specific role with faction warfare I think you can guess, our RP considers that capsule pilots signing up as soldiers for the 4 empires are betraying their post-human potential and we're intending to shoot them lots to illustrate the error of their ways. If you like we'd not be "signing-up" for a faction, but intending to shoot the militia's because they represent everything we despise in the current environment. Quote: The CVA constituent corps(as an example) were doing a work around as they were not able to sign up to fight directly for the Amarr Empire and so formed the CVA alliance to fight for the same beliefs. Now the Amarr Empire is effectively sayign "thanks, but now we're accepting pod pilots, just sign on this dotted line...." The Empire Militia are a part of the Empires, and joining up for them (and getting a rank etc) means you are giving up the right to self-governance/sovereingty (can never spell that word). There is nothing stopping Imperial Dreams from saying "we wanted to fight for the Empire all along, so we now give up sovreignity and will fight for our Holder lords and masters". Harsh but yes, I do see your point on that example. But nonetheless I think CVA (and anyone else) should be able to declare war directly against a Militia entity if they oppose it. So in your model CVA couldn't sign up with the Amarrian militia (and get access to all the good rewards/medals/etc) but they COULD, actively play a role at shooting Matari militia members and thereby act as privateers I guess, indirectly aiding the Amarrian Empire. Quote: You have to decide -do you want to be your own master (and be in an alliance) or finally be able to officially work for the Empires and join in their wars. Thats fine, but what about the entities that want to declare "against!" Quote: Personally I cant see how this breaks the "sandbox" either. You have a CHOICE. Like currently if you mission for the Caldari, the Gallente start to hate you until you get to a point that you can no longer access their agents or even enter the space as the navy shoots at you. This just takes it to the next level. You still have a CHOICE as to what you want to support or ignore. Give us the CHOICE to declare war on a Militia entity and I think you'd find most alliances would be very satisfied CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.17 18:03:00 - [356] 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
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.05.17 18:05:00 - [357] Originally by: Gunner Dark From a RP point of view CVA etc could easily work around this, form a mega corp and sign on to fight the cause , i dont think any alliances should be allowed, role players or not, the mechanics shouldnt be gimped just to keep a game minority happy. Your either a sovereign space holding entity, or you go fight for your race. I think what the CVA guy was saying is that he would not mind to give sov to Amarr empire and/or fight for his race without telling everyone to disband their alliance. I do not think people forming up megacorps are the solution since a lot of people have pride in their alliance or exising corps. -- Billion Isk Mission
Octavinus Augustus Amarr Auctoritan Syndicate Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.17 18:18:00 - [358] What people need to understand is that the RP community has spent 5 years building up the social structures we have today. Further, being an RP'er is completely tied up to the backstory of EvE in one way or another - wether we play Minmatar freedon fighters, Amarr religious reclaimers or fractionite anarchists. The amount of effort put into expanding the backstory of EvE by the RP community is immense to say the least. As RP'ers, we live and breathe that backstory in a way that few other organisations out there does. Now there's a real fear that we have to choose between the RP that we love and all we have built over all those years. It seems we can either stick with the social structures we have built, or we can roleplay the backstory of EvE that we love - but not both. So CCP doesn't want 30000 alliance members from various 0.0 sec alliances swamping FW - fair enough, I can certainly see the point in this view. But does this really mean you're willing to completely ignore the effort put into this game by the RP community? "Thanks for the time you spent building up all this boys and girl, but we've had a better idea so we don't need what you've done anymore? We appreciate the effort though." I'm sure there must be more to CCP than this. If CCP wishes to see alliances as sovereign "equals" to the empires, then will the alliances be given the same tools? Will alliances be able to declare war on the factional militias and the factions themselves? Will alliances at war with one faction or another be able to claim "occupancy" over systems they take from that faction? Such "occupancy" need not even hold any ingame advantage whatsoever apart from the display of the alliance logo in the top left of the screen. If you've cooked up something like this I can see the point. I'm sure U'K would just love to attack an Amarr system or two and throw out the opressors and free their people. I'm equally sure that the various Amarr alliances would be happy to mount a counterattack in the name of God, empire and the producers of Vitoc. Wether we'd be flying under the colors of a factional militia or not. What I'm looking for right now is simply an acknowledgement from CCP that you're aware of the havoc you can cause on the RP community by this - and that you'll do whatever you can to avoid any damage. After that, we can all check out SiSi and if the product needs tweaking then I'm sure the candidates for CSM will be very good at representing the playerbase when it comes to actually fixing the problems. In short: Don't force us to choose between either keeping all we've built over the past 5 years or else to continue to roleplay in the world of EvE. Q: How do you make a disobediant Minmatar slave scream? A: Skin it and roll it in salt.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.17 18:20:00 - [359] Edited by: Jade Constantine on 17/05/2008 18:24:03 Originally by: Cailais 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. C. Okay Cailais let me explain to you what happens if we're restricted to declaring war on corps only inside the Militia entity. 1. Those corps inside the Militia are joining the militia because their likely to want to fight together right? That means they are going to be in the same gang sometimes. 2. Say we (as we're likely to) have wardecced the top 3 scoring corps in X Militia. When the other corps join up with our targets they are joining gangs "at war" and are going to become free targets for us too. This means that newer players without much experience in empire wars are going to put themselves into the position of being shot at by us (because they are in gangs with people at war) and are probably going to get concordokkened horribly the first time a SF gang bounces in and targets our wardec targets only and the FW gang mates try to help them. Its a problem with war mechanics and mixed gangs. *** On the broader point of Alliance wardecs against the militia entity I don't buy it. Most alliances are mixed race characters that care about standings with all four entities. If you make it that declaring war against X militia will deliver standings penalties for that empire on each kill you'll quickly get the alliance mission-runners complaining to high heaven at the political alignment of that entity. Maybe they do persist and tell their mission runners that they are a nationalist alliance now and anyone that doesn't like it better join "the other side". Thats roleplay and consequence right there - but its a long way from Privateers mk2. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Tissa Minmatar Alice in Wonderland Derek Knows Us	Posted - 2008.05.17 18:26:00 - [360] Originally by: Elsebeth Rhiannon This might sound harsh -- but the thing EM mostly gives us is identity, and the ability to screen people who join so that we know we get the kind of people we want, to contribute to the alliance spirit. Our alliance chat and all our fleet operations are IC at all times and we enforce that. People who do not like that kind of stuff simply do not join the alliance or leave very soon. Joining an alliance where we lose that control and just simply anyone can join up -- I am sorry, but that is not appealing at all. I find the idea that the RP alliances should or do not exist for anything but sovereignty quite offensive and clueless, to be honest. Elsebeth I'm just going to go ahead and quote this one, you do realise that this is exactly the attitude that turns people off joining RP corps and alliances and is the attitude no one wants to see in FW. In all honesty I hope that anyone with a "we have been rping for years and are better than you so do what we say" attitude avoids the minmatar channels as they are clearly more suited to the amarr way of thinking. No wonder you're late. Why, this watch is exactly two days slow. www.evefront.com

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.