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)
Joshua Foiritain Gallente Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.05.16 10:29:00 - [91] Originally by: Scagga Laebetrovo Will it be possible for rp alliances to wardec enemy militias? I doubt it, every 0.0 alliance would wardec them for easy officer fitted navy raven ganks. -----
maarud Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams	Posted - 2008.05.16 10:30:00 - [92] Originally by: Colonel Rykef Originally by: maarud I'm almost tempted to put this down to lazy programming. CCP have decided to treat each faction as an alliance and the militia corp as a corp in that alliance. So if your corp is already in an alliance, you can't join up with a new one and if you are already in a corp, you can't join a new one. Why they didn't just implement a new mechanic like "alignment" I have no idea. They didnt want the huge 0.0 alliances to just come and dominate and destroy people new to pvp with huge teams Dude, there are people that have been preparing for FW for years. Big alliances that are in 0.0 can't be bothered with empire politics, they are busy with their space. An alliance like CVA on the other hand, have been gearing up for FW since it was mentioned. Why shouldn't they have the upper hand, they've been preparing, you haven't. Also, if the CCP have their way, it will be way more benificial to break up in smaller groups and cover multiple objectives rather than blobbing one. Its just stupid that you have to leave the alliance that you currently play in, the people that have made friends with etc. "Oh but you can just have alts join a alt corp". What about people that don't have multiple accounts, why do you NEED and extra account to be apart of FW AND still fly with your alliance mates. Its just a lazy mechanic and it could have been implemented way better. The excuse that they didn't want alliances interfering is a weak one. Maarud. Proudly a Ex-BYDI member
Scagga Laebetrovo Delictum 23216 San Matari.	Posted - 2008.05.16 10:32:00 - [93] One irony is that we formed our alliance up 2 weeks ago...with fighting for the Ammatar in factional warfare in mind San Matari Official forums
Redbad Minmatar Tempered Steel Legion	Posted - 2008.05.16 10:59:00 - [94] I thought that in the live dev blog yesterday it was mentioned that they would find a solution with an alliance if that alliance would report to them. Could have misunderstood as English is not my first language, but it was sure something along those lines. RB
N'irrti Amarr Reach Fuileach	Posted - 2008.05.16 11:00:00 - [95] well from a rp point of view, the amarrian empire will probably lose the only effective, trained and determined fleet they have if CVA isn't able to participate as whole alliance (same goes for any alliance, well most alliances at least). from my pov: less golden shiny lazor blobs = more profit
maarud Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams	Posted - 2008.05.16 11:02:00 - [96] Originally by: Redbad I thought that in the live dev blog yesterday it was mentioned that they would find a solution with an alliance if that alliance would report to them. Could have misunderstood as English is not my first language, but it was sure something along those lines. RB No, they said they would be working with alliances to find a solution, but I'm not wagering too much on it, but if they really wanted to find a solution, they could have asked before hand, while they were still doing the bulk of the development. That in my mind would have been a bit more productive. All thats going to happen is that CCP are just going to highlight the options availible to the members or RP alliances, none of which I'm sure will be good enough and will probably involve corps/members having to leave the alliance. Maarud. Proudly a Ex-BYDI member
Kyusoath Orillian UK Corp Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.05.16 11:09:00 - [97] no dev response yet ? i think they know they ****** up here. _________________________________________________
Redbad Minmatar Tempered Steel Legion	Posted - 2008.05.16 11:18:00 - [98] Edited by: Redbad on 16/05/2008 11:18:16 Originally by: maarud Originally by: Redbad I thought that in the live dev blog yesterday it was mentioned that they would find a solution with an alliance if that alliance would report to them. Could have misunderstood as English is not my first language, but it was sure something along those lines. RB No, they said they would be working with alliances to find a solution, but I'm not wagering too much on it, but if they really wanted to find a solution, they could have asked before hand, while they were still doing the bulk of the development. That in my mind would have been a bit more productive. All thats going to happen is that CCP are just going to highlight the options availible to the members or RP alliances, none of which I'm sure will be good enough and will probably involve corps/members having to leave the alliance. I see, well, perhaps they can name the faction militias after the alliances that want to join in or whatever; but it will be pretty difficult for all parties to get things straightened out regarding assets and stuff. RB
Kade Jeekin Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2008.05.16 11:43:00 - [99] The problems here are caused by CCP not being willing to tell the RP alliances that, "sorry we want to use the alliance system for FW". If we were told this during development, we could have made plans, and not be so shocked just weeks before its release. RP players have been in direct consultation with CCP over FW development for years. We would have understood the coding limitations, swallowed our dreams and coped. Now, it sounds like we've been betrayed. However, given that FW will happen next month, I suggest that CCP make Providence part of the Amarr Empire, relieving CVA of their 0.0 responsibilities and enabling them to take an active part in the war. CVA can't complain that they're losing billions of ISK investment. Making Providence Amarrian is their stated aim. Give this to them and they should be happy. Down the line if FW moves to 0.0 then Providence could be the first warzone - this would also be a fantastic test for a new sovreignity system based on FW principles. This is an opportunity. --------------------------------------- Outface the depths of evil with clarity ---------------------------------------
Haverloth Amarr 1st Praetorian Guard Vigilia Valeria	Posted - 2008.05.16 11:57:00 - [100] Originally by: maarud No, they said they would be working with alliances to find a solution, but I'm not wagering too much on it, but if they really wanted to find a solution, they could have asked before hand, while they were still doing the bulk of the development. That in my mind would have been a bit more productive. All thats going to happen is that CCP are just going to highlight the options availible to the members or RP alliances, none of which I'm sure will be good enough and will probably involve corps/members having to leave the alliance. The "solution" CCP gave us yesterday was to put an alt holding corp to hold the Alliance whilst the rest go off and join the Faction. This obviously does not work for CVA, or many of the other alliances - the only alliance I could see this working for is PIE, as they have just their own corp in their alliance. I think Kade is right, in that CCP have just recycled Alliance code; instead of coming up with a top-tier "Faction" > Alliance, they appear to have made it such that Faction = Alliance (and "Militia" = Corp for the individual pilots who wish to sign up). If we had been told in development some months prior that this was the case, we could have made some plans - instead, we're left high and dry. San Matari has just been formed, Legio Ammatar just joined -VV- as an Imperial Navy Ammatar Wing... and that still doesn't solve the mammoth problem that the CVA are going to have to do what they were created to do. The lack of Dev response does irk me though - one would think that they'd have said something by this point, even it's just "sorry, that's the way it is." ____________________ http://1pg.vigilia-valeria.org
VinkNut Gallente Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:00:00 - [101] Edited by: VinkNut on 16/05/2008 12:03:24 I haven't read most of this and I dont RP BUT..... CCP need to rethink what they are doing here, CVA, PIE etc have been around since the start, and with a total lack of content on the RP side of EVE they've created there own. Now CCP releases tools to which RP becomes meaningful and they isolate the group thats done what CCP has neglected for 5 years. Why should the members of the said alliances have to leave there corps / friends / roles within a corporation? CVA imo have done a great job of keeping "RP" and a 0.0 alliance, and they probaly did this purley because of lack of content within RP side of eve and trying to keep things moving and not stale. Now there is tools for content an they can not partake as an alliance.
Hardin Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:15:00 - [102] Originally by: VinkNut CVA imo have done a great job of keeping "RP" and a 0.0 alliance, and they probaly did this purley because of lack of content within RP side of eve and trying to keep things moving and not stale. Now there is tools for content an they can not partake as an alliance. EXACTLY While I think that FW as it stands is unlikely to be the death of RP alliances I do think this is an ill thought out proposal from CCP and if I am elected to CSM will be doing what I can to get this sorted... At present pretty most of the major RP factions who have been busy creating their own content for the past 5 years will be excluded from Factional Warfare unless they try and play around it - and they shouldn't have to. I also believe that there are lots of other people (outside the traditional RP alliances) who will want to participate in this opportunity but will be faced with the choice of leaving friends and colleagues to do so. I fail to see why CCP have built up expectations around this launch with some admittedely lovely looking stories and videos and then excluded a large percentage of the player base from participating unless they willingly abandon the very structures/organisations that CCP has been encouarging them to develop for the past five years! ----- Alliance Creation/Corp Expansion Services Advert
Marmios	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:17:00 - [103] Edited by: Marmios on 16/05/2008 12:17:37 100 % agree to Hardin. I can understand, that CCP doenst want 30+ Cap Fleets in FW to crush the noobs trying PvP but this case will be hard to solve. Atleast to hard to satisfy your long term customers in 0.0 and player alliances.
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:29:00 - [104] Originally by: Hardin While I think that FW as it stands is unlikely to be the death of RP alliances I do think this is an ill thought out proposal from CCP and if I am elected to CSM will be doing what I can to get this sorted... At present pretty most of the major RP factions who have been busy creating their own content for the past 5 years will be excluded from Factional Warfare unless they try and play around it - and they shouldn't have to. I also believe that there are lots of other people (outside the traditional RP alliances) who will want to participate in this opportunity but will be faced with the choice of leaving friends and colleagues to do so. I fail to see why CCP have built up expectations around this launch with some admittedely lovely looking stories and videos and then excluded a large percentage of the player base from participating unless they willingly abandon the very structures/organisations that CCP has been encouarging them to develop for the past five years! Here is an issue that gets Hardin and I in full agreement and making the same promise about actions on the CSM. That alone should make people sit up and take notice really ... Lets hope we can get this potentially terrible blunder reversed and see Faction Warfare delivered as it should be. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:29:00 - [105] The thing is, for years now we've been asking for more RP stuff. The reply from the CCP devs and the forum nay-sayers has traditionally been "go and make your own RP". So we did. And now we're being punished for it. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
O'Ran The Sunset Squad Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:31:00 - [106] (Suggestion 1) why cant CCP monitor ALLIANCES that sign up for faction warefare?? Sure, the process would take a while. But it would be the easiest fix. Im sure CCP is aware of the history of certain alliances, so those who have RP'd for a long time - and have a history of it - should be allowed to join it. BRUCE has never had a history of faction warefare, so they would be rejected. Plus CVA is the only space holding alliance that is interested in faction warefare, and EVERYONE knows it, so i dont see why they have to suffer. Many smaller alliances can also apply. (Alliance creation date must have been before this news) Sure it may take a while, and be a big task, but it'll be easier to monitor than petitions. It will also keep the community happy!! (Suggestion 2) Hell, you could monitor the NUMBER of people in the allaince and whether they own sov. If it exceeds more than...lets say 500 member and owns a constellation (or something), the monitor system kicks in and it needs to be checked. I dont see what the problem is with small alliances with no sov joining for faction warefare. I understand with big alliances there can be greifing etc. But small alliances, (like VV) shouldnt have any problems getting in! First one maybe too much, but i dont see any problems with the second suggestion. ----- My views do not represent the views of my Corporation or Alliance. Long live the BRUCES \o/
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:32:00 - [107] Originally by: Marmios Edited by: Marmios on 16/05/2008 12:17:37 100 % agree to Hardin. I can understand, that CCP doenst want 30+ Cap Fleets in FW to crush the noobs trying PvP but this case will be hard to solve. Atleast to hard to satisfy your long term customers in 0.0 and player alliances. Point is any kind of artificial "sandbox" is going to be exploitable, nothing stops 0.0 powers putting some of their dreads and fighters in one corp as some kind of "foreign legion" and doing this anyway. Its the bitterest of ironies that the alliances least likely to "game around the restrictions" in this way are the RP alliances who have been waiting for FW for years. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:33:00 - [108] Originally by: Scagga Laebetrovo Will it be possible for rp alliances to wardec enemy militias? This really is a critical question. CSM Manifesto 2008 \| Destroy Outposts!
Marmios	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:37:00 - [109] Originally by: Jade Constantine Originally by: Marmios Edited by: Marmios on 16/05/2008 12:17:37 100 % agree to Hardin. I can understand, that CCP doenst want 30+ Cap Fleets in FW to crush the noobs trying PvP but this case will be hard to solve. Atleast to hard to satisfy your long term customers in 0.0 and player alliances. Point is any kind of artificial "sandbox" is going to be exploitable, nothing stops 0.0 powers putting some of their dreads and fighters in one corp as some kind of "foreign legion" and doing this anyway. Its the bitterest of ironies that the alliances least likely to "game around the restrictions" in this way are the RP alliances who have been waiting for FW for years. Exactly this will happen to 99%. This is a major design issue. There are enough people who only want to harras the noobs with their cap fleet. A Dev in the Devblog yesterday admitted, that players are smart and will soon try to exploit that. Why the heck cant it be real sandbox then? Let the alliances in but disband caps from Black Rise.
Atreides Horza Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:38:00 - [110] Edited by: Atreides Horza on 16/05/2008 12:40:20 Originally by: Maidel Edited by: Maidel on 15/05/2008 22:49:24 Originally by: Thanos Draicon [Or just create a CVA-affiliated para-military corporation that members of CVA could join, and have it act as a liason between CVA and the Amarr Militia? Why - why should we have to meta game just to play. It makes no sense - the empire goes to war and PIE sits there saying 'sorry, not our fight...' This factional warefare was 'aimed' at roleplayers - its been promised to us for years - why 'ban' us from taking part now? I'm not an RP'er and I'm not an expert on CVA either. But correct me if I'm wrong here: CVA was intended as an amarr RP alliance, who then later opened up for pilots of other races and the use of different ships to overcome handicaps concerned with flying just one race, right? I mean, don't get me wrong. Your alliance have obviously proven that you are well capable of playing with the big boys, and some might say you have done so by cutting down on the RP part and bringing in new elements into your alliance in order to compete in 0.0 - but wanting in on the whole factional warfare gravy train, I can see how CCP would be reluctant. After all, what then would prevent Goons or some other flying cirkus from proclaiming themselves roleplayers and bringing their massive numbers to bear in the conflict? To plunder, to slaughter, to steal, these things they misname empire; and where they make a wilderness, they call it peace. - Tacitus
Sykosys Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:41:00 - [111] Ok this idea sucks for people like me. Why?? Im the ceo of my corp in ushrakhan. I cant just up and leave my corp. We have a pretty crazy logistics infrastructure around our corp let alone the alliance. This idea for FW really shafts alot of the RP groups for this reason. The majority of RP alliance have done all sorts of backsotry things even RP events (Ever been in pator during one heh) CCP even began throwing us bones at one point with the defiant arc. It was great. . .but now this? I am a dissapointed.
Sykosys Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:44:00 - [112] Edited by: Sykosys on 16/05/2008 12:44:49 Originally by: Marmios Edited by: Marmios on 16/05/2008 12:17:37 100 % agree to Hardin. I can understand, that CCP doenst want 30+ Cap Fleets in FW to crush the noobs trying PvP but this case will be hard to solve. Atleast to hard to satisfy your long term customers in 0.0 and player alliances. Well considering that every low sec system will be up for grabs only 30 dreads can be active in one system at a time. It will be easy for a couple fast pilots to secure other low sec space for their faction if the other faction is busy camp the node in only certain systems. But still this idea (FW) is a straight slap in the face for those who have actually been asking for this.
maarud Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:51:00 - [113] Originally by: Atreides Horza Still, there are - I guess - ways around that in a roleplaying sense, isn't there? Create a seperate corp and call it 'Crusaders of Ushra Kan' or some sh*t, grab those of your members who want to zoom off and fight for the holy land - and then go have your fun. So basically his whole corp/alliance? Maarud. Proudly a Ex-BYDI member
Sykosys Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:51:00 - [114] Originally by: Atreides Horza Originally by: Sykosys Ok this idea sucks for people like me. Why?? Im the ceo of my corp in ushrakhan. I cant just up and leave my corp. We have a pretty crazy logistics infrastructure around our corp let alone the alliance. This idea for FW really shafts alot of the RP groups for this reason. The majority of RP alliance have done all sorts of backsotry things even RP events (Ever been in pator during one heh) CCP even began throwing us bones at one point with the defiant arc. It was great. . .but now this? I am a dissapointed. I see your problem. Still, there are - I guess - ways around that in a roleplaying sense, isn't there? Create a seperate corp and call it 'Crusaders of Ushra Kan' or some sht, grab those of your members who want to zoom off and fight for the holy land - and then go have your fun. In your own sense, you're the King of England. You wanna fck off to fight a holy war, you should do that - but at the risk of your evil brother being a d*ck in your house and playing grab-@ss with the local farmer girls while your gone. It's classic history! From what I understand corps cannot join this. Only individual pilots.
maarud Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:56:00 - [115] Originally by: Sykosys From what I understand corps cannot join this. Only individual pilots. Indvidual corps can join up, but they can't be in an alliance when they do. Maarud. Proudly a Ex-BYDI member
Sral TBear Mark Of Chaos	Posted - 2008.05.16 12:58:00 - [116] Damn....i am not a cva supporter the resons are easy to know But how the heck can they leave them out. They should be under direct control of the emporer or something I understand and feel for CVA something is wrong here. Dedication is punished, the emporer (ccp) is failing them.... If you can gank there will be ganks, all it neesds is a name change, and there is many many many people out there that will blob for a side......let CVA blob with them... You just cant take one of the most dedicatet alliances and say...hey brake up make new corp go fight....
Sykosys Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2008.05.16 13:06:00 - [117] Realize this doesnt just affect CVA It affects every major and minor RP alliance CVA just has more 0.0 space than most so it sucks more for them from that perspective. But it sucks for all of us who have tried as hard as we have for the last couple years. The entire RP community is in the same boat on this topic and its sinking fast im afraid.
Takal Cylotar Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.16 13:10:00 - [118] I really start to believe the root of all evil here is CCP not wanting to touch too much code. So far they have presented the simplest solution for them. Make factions Alliances, let FW participant corps join those alliances and create new npc corps in there for individuals to join. 100% compatible with current system not much coding needed. I don't have to stress that I don't like this, but given the (probably) tight timeframe until the release of "Empyrean Age" it is unrealistic to ask CCP to start from scratch (that can be done later on). So here are some suggestions to improve the situation for the RP alliances until this can be handled properly. 1) Give Alliances the opportunity to wardec FW Factions (The alliance like constructs that take part in FW). This should result in an immediate standing loss with the decced faction and a possible standing gain with its enemies. There should be limitations to who can wardec a FW faction. For example to wardec Minmatar you need an alliance standing to Amarr of say 3.00 (this is an arbitrary number). This should keep pirates from wardeccing all factions just to get a plethora of targets. This feature should mitigate the massive security rating loss an Alliance operating in an FW area would have to deal with. 2) Each individual within an Alliance that has wardecced a Faction gets an automatic standing boost of +6.00 with the respective FW agent corporation, which gives him the ability to use those agents (the very basic ones at least). There will be no FW agents who needs less standing than 6.00 so there is no way to get to them other than joining FW or deccing a Faction. Faction standing alone should not be enough for those agents, like it is with many R&D agents. Dropping the wardec to a FW faction will of course result in an appropriate standing loss (-6.00) with the FW agent corporation. This will give Alliance pilots the opportunity to use FW agents as long as their Alliance is at war with an Faction 3) Since the proposed FW Faction mechanics are based on the standard Alliance mechanics it should not be a problem to implement the statistics that we are going to see with FW on an alliance level. (I admit this is a guess) 4) Finally we have the problem that Alliances won't be able to trigger timers on objectives since, they are not really part of FW. This is a tough one. I don't know what will trigger timers but I imagine you shoot down the shields of a structure drop 50 marines in there and the clock starts ticking (yes, pure imagination). So easiest solution would be to make structures only attackable by war targets, thus every wartarget (proper FW Faction and all deccing alliances) can start the timer. Furthermore I think it should be possible to detect the presence of wartargets to a faction in a deadspace (but again, this is a guess). Adding this would make another FW feature accessible to alliances without the need to mess too much with current Alliance/Corporation and wardec mechanics. Would be nice to have a Dev comment here what the main problems are. I am sure there are quite a few brains out there that would love to help CCP to cook up solutions. ____________________ Faith is my armor and Conviction is my sword.
Jakke Logan Caldari F Off And Die	Posted - 2008.05.16 13:15:00 - [119] I couldn't agree more. You can't put this in the game and leave alliances out. The FW system as currently proposed is a half-assed implementation and we deserve better than that. What needs to happen is allow the alliances to join or wardec factions.
Atreides Horza Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.05.16 13:17:00 - [120] Originally by: maarud Originally by: Atreides Horza Still, there are - I guess - ways around that in a roleplaying sense, isn't there? Create a seperate corp and call it 'Crusaders of Ushra Kan' or some sht, grab those of your members who want to zoom off and fight for the holy land - and then go have your fun. So basically his whole corp/alliance? Admittedly, it's silly. Hell, I think CCP should grow the testicular fortitude and make factional warfare an all-encompassing conflict and make it the concerns of EVERYONE in the game, bar none. It would thin the herds somewhat in systems like Dodixie and Motsu, I suspect. Still, wfth the mechanics involved enabling widespread fighting, can you really blame CCP for being hesitant about bringing alliances into this? Allowing them indiscriminately would be like the US government dropping containers with automatic rifles on public schools nation-wide. Sure, the majority of those affected won't have the first fcking clue how to use the tools they're provided with and will probably self-destruct before they hurt anyone else - but it's a safe bet that someone WILL know how to abuse it, and a lot of people are gonna want to leave because of it. To plunder, to slaughter, to steal, these things they misname empire; and where they make a wilderness, they call it peace. - Tacitus

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.