Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Tissa
Minmatar Alice in Wonderland Derek Knows Us
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 16:53:00 -
[31]
I really do feel for the RP alliances, but complaining and being angry on the forums isn't going to help. (for once) I agree with jade, you need to put a plan together. I have seen reams of text on this subject filled with angst, the time has come for you to direct your energies into working your way round this. If I were in your situation I would be setting up a specialist alliance corp, with devisions for each corp and sorting out permissions for a Alliance+corp channel and Corp+corp channel. Ranks within corps and forums would stay the same. This way you would be in constant contact with your alliance mates and non of your spirit would be lost. Space holding Alliances would have to create a rosta to insure you could defend your space. It is workable if you make it work.
No wonder you're late. Why, this watch is exactly two days slow. www.evefront.com
|
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 16:57:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Elsebeth Rhiannon on 19/05/2008 16:59:09
Originally by: Tiirae If SirMolle left Evol to join Goonfleet, would everybody suddenly forget who he is and what he's achieved? If Evol left BoB and joined AAA, would their reputation suddenly evaporate? Of course not. Why would they? And why would you be any different?
If everyone in Evol left and joined GoonFleet, would Evol still exist? If 80 percent of BoB left and joined AAA, how long till BoB as it exists now were history? (Mmm....) If SirMolle left Evol and joined the GoonFleet, would that not make him "a Goonie" instead of, well, who he is now? If Evol left BoB and joined AAA, whould they still be "of BoB"?
We are also different because our gameplay and our RP is based on the fact that we are loyal to this one faction entity. When that faction entity does things, it directly affects us. We cannot just decide "meh, let's not do that" -- imagine reading The Lord of the Rings and the hobbits deciding on page 800 that screw the ring, they actually rather be highwaymen and live off robbing refugees from the war?
I am sorry if you do not understand, as that suggests you have missed a major part of the game.
But right now, however, this thread is about solving this issue for those who it is an issue -- if you do not think it is an issue for you, then fine, why not just leave the thread be?
Originally by: Tissa I really do feel for the RP alliances, but complaining and being angry on the forums isn't going to help. (for once)
Did you actually read the thread? There's a bunch of actual partial solutions there. Complaining and being angry about other people complaining and being angry is not very helpful, either.
-- Help us defend the Republic; join Gradient today.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 16:57:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Goumindong On the game balance front regarding steamrolling: Since this will be taking place largely in low-sec. There is nothing preventing alliances from coming in and dominating anyway
As well: There is nothing preventing alliances from forming a militia and steamrolling.
All it does is: Cause people headaches if they want to participate in FW and 0.0 alliance warfare. And/or strip them of their identity as a player.
On an RP Front: It makes zero sense for factions to not allow large swaths of elite pilots who are willing to supply their own ships to fight their sworn enemies to do so.
I'll be the odd man out here and say I appreciate CCP keeping established 0.0 Alliances out of it.
I think that steamrolling the FW is a real concern. If (say) Jericho Fraction signed up as an alliance how welcoming of other pilots in FW would they be? What are the chances they would engage in the Militia channel as opposed to staying in their own channels? What chances they would let wingman not aligned with JF to join their groups? What happens if someone is in the Militia who is opposed to JF on the 0.0 side of things (so they get in their own little private war right there)? [NOTE: Not picking on JF...just using them as a handy example...replace JF with any 0.0 alliance for this]
TBH 0.0 has gotten a lion's share of attention from Devs especially considering they represent ~20% of the player community. I find it hard to get bent out of shape that the Devs are for once providing to the long, long ignored low sec scene.
how is that any different mechanically if Jericho Fraction dropped their alliance and signed up as a corp only to find they aligned with another corp that they have been fighting?
Note: Jericho Fraction is a corp in Star Fraction and they are not a sov holding alliance.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Tissa
Minmatar Alice in Wonderland Derek Knows Us
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:04:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Tissa on 19/05/2008 17:04:18
Originally by: Elsebeth Rhiannon
Originally by: Tissa I really do feel for the RP alliances, but complaining and being angry on the forums isn't going to help. (for once)
Did you actually read the thread? There's a bunch of actual partial solutions there. Complaining and being angry about other people complaining and being angry is not very helpful, either.
Did you just complain and be angry about me complaining and being angry about you complaining and being angry?
No wonder you're late. Why, this watch is exactly two days slow. www.evefront.com
|
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:06:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Tissa
Originally by: Elsebeth Rhiannon
Originally by: Tissa I really do feel for the RP alliances, but complaining and being angry on the forums isn't going to help. (for once)
Did you actually read the thread? There's a bunch of actual partial solutions there. Complaining and being angry about other people complaining and being angry is not very helpful, either.
Did you just complain and be angry about me complaining and being angry about you complaining and being angry?
-- Help us defend the Republic; join Gradient today.
|
Tenebrys
Havoc Violence and Chaos R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:07:00 -
[36]
Quote: 1. The Empires do not want Alliance politics dragged into their conflicts, which are already quite complicated enough as it is. 2. The Empires do not trust capsuleer Alliances. The "loyalist" Alliances are appreciated and encouraged and supported but they cannot be trusted because they cannot be controlled. Ushra'Khan's relationship with the Republic encapsulates the problem here quite succinctly. Requiring corporations to leave their Alliance structures before signing up establishes a clear military chain of command and forces the capsuleers in question to demonstrate that their loyalty to their chosen Empire is greater than their loyalty to their Alliance.
You mean, you want the faction militia to be more concerned with defending their faction's territory than with who gets to gather plush compounds in Perrigen Falls? Well, I never.
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:12:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 19/05/2008 17:14:22
Originally by: Goumindong how is that any different mechanically if Jericho Fraction dropped their alliance and signed up as a corp only to find they aligned with another corp that they have been fighting?
Note: Jericho Fraction is a corp in Star Fraction and they are not a sov holding alliance.
To an extent they might. However I doubt they would forgo their 0.0 interests completely. As such they (or again any current 0.0 corp/alliance) is unlikely to jump into FW wholesale. And if they did choose to go for it en masse then so be it but hopefully with then having no divided "loyalties" (maintaining their 0.0 presence) they would be more fully invested in FW and come to engage with other FW players more and more.
-------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
Jakke Logan
Caldari F Off And Die
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:13:00 -
[38]
So, the gist of this dev blog is, "we know you hate this decision, therefore we will ram it down your throats anyway".
Devs, what you need to understand is that alliances WILL be a factor in faction warfare, and you are being blind and naive to think that excluding alliance members from direct participation will prevent your perceived negatives of allowing alliances to be involved.
First off, and I ENDORSE this action, since it is apparent at this point that it's going to take the complete breaking of faction warfare into chaos and irrelevance to get the Devs to admit their plan is fundamentally "dead before arrival" is that alliances wil GO OUT OF THEIR WAY to make sure to grief the crap out of the lowsec battle zones. Unless CCP is prepared to break the rules themselves, or to basically "CONCORD" protect those who are in FW, this will have the effect of making this system irrelevant within hours, thus forcing CCP to either remove it or revamp it into what it SHOULD be, a fundamental new game system that has something for everyone.
I'm talking parking motherships there and blowing the crap out of everyone who shows up who is the member of the "faction wars" npc alliances. I think this is going to happen on it's own anyway, thinking back on the Goons systematic attack on highsec exhumer users as a protest on the broken risk/reward of highsec vs lowsec vs nullsec mining. Hell, all the more reason for the Goons to do so, since in lowsec they won't face CONCORD and won't even have to suicide.
The exclusion of alliances while granting all these new goodies essentially to empire only players is NOT a positive step forward for EVE. Indeed, this represents a fundamental break with the past, in that it's a move towards "directed" content the way World of Warcraft and basically every MMO works. If we wanted that sort of stuff in our MMO, we'd be playing those MMOs and not EVE.
The best way to prevent the alliance pvp'ers from completely ruining the faction warfare experience is to NOT put this into the game half assed, which is the current proposal, but give us a faction warfare system that we deserve, one that has something for everyone. Give the alliances and even pirates a role in it, and there will be less griefing. The FW players will have a role alongside everyone else. Pirates could choose to support one faction over another by targeting their enemies even.
|
Alz Shado
Ever Flow
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:14:00 -
[39]
This is what happens when you try to shoehorn new features into existing game mechanics.
Factional Warfare should be it's own entity, not a replacement for Alliances/Corporations. The issues with standings and such are a prime example of why the two code bases should be separated.
In terms of balance, I can understand the case for not allowing whole Alliances to pledge to a faction. But for corporations and individual pilots to get excluded simply because they're members of an alliance? That's just plain nonsense.
I'm sure there's a lot of nifty and swell ideas buried within FW. But since a vital part of the community is automatically barred from it, I honestly think CCP has wasted their (and by extension their customers') time and money on this dog of a featureset.
//// ---------=== []= ---------=== \\\\ Rifter(RedBad)
"Kill a man one is a murderer; kill a million, a conqueror; kill them all, a God." -- Jean Rostand |
Lobster Man
Metafarmers
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:15:00 -
[40]
Personally I am interested to see how this is going to unfold with alliances excluded, as it will open up a whole new area to solo or less-frequent players than those who are in the large alliances. I just hope CCP doesn't cave in to everyone complaining and sticks with their original plan
|
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:18:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 19/05/2008 17:14:22
Originally by: Goumindong how is that any different mechanically if Jericho Fraction dropped their alliance and signed up as a corp only to find they aligned with another corp that they have been fighting?
Note: Jericho Fraction is a corp in Star Fraction and they are not a sov holding alliance.
To an extent they might. However I doubt they would forgo their 0.0 interests completely. As such they (or again any current 0.0 corp/alliance) is unlikely to jump into FW wholesale. And if they did choose to go for it en masse then so be it but hopefully with then having no divided "loyalties" (maintaining their 0.0 presence) they would be more fully invested in FW and come to engage with other FW players more and more.
if 0.0 sov warfare was the end game why should they have to forgo their 0.0 interests?
Since this is a "RP" issue. History is rife with nations accepting the help of others even if the helping entity doesn't have the accepting nations best interests at heart or are working towards different ends.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Hober Hardin
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:21:00 -
[42]
Create RP "These are terrible times, upon hearing the call to arms from our Empire, [Insert RP alliance name here] have immediately without hesitation decided to pledge our allegience and join the cause, our corporations will sign up for the militia, we will fight the enemy until they are no more."
Marvel at your new super alliance made up of all your rp faction buddies
Create private chat channel for rpers named after your alliance
Honour the alliance in your bio
Fight the enemy
All fixed, anything else...?
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:21:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Goumindong if 0.0 sov warfare was the end game why should they have to forgo their 0.0 interests?
Since this is a "RP" issue. History is rife with nations accepting the help of others even if the helping entity doesn't have the accepting nations best interests at heart or are working towards different ends.
What happens if you allow Alliances in and Star Fraction is fighting Goonswarm tooth and nail in 0.0. Then you also both show up in FW on the same side.
That would be akin to the United States entering WWII with the Allies but France is attacking New York. However, while fighting in Germany the French and Americans are going to stand shoulder-to-shoulder? Somehow I do not think it would work that way.
-------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:23:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Elsebeth Rhiannon on 19/05/2008 17:24:42
Originally by: Hober Hardin All fixed, anything else...?
Just a couple of things.
Read the thread before posting, pls.
Unfortunately also, people joining the Militias will not all be "our RP buddies". A lot of them will, I think, not be RPers at all, but just people looking for pewpew in the empire and actually scorning anyone who does try to stay IC on the Militia channel.
-- Help us defend the Republic; join Gradient today.
|
Tissa
Minmatar Alice in Wonderland Derek Knows Us
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:24:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Goumindong History is rife with nations accepting the help of others even if the helping entity doesn't have the accepting nations best interests at heart or are working towards different ends.
I hate to break it to you but eve is not reality, we have not flown into the stars and discovered new eden and you are not a space ship pilot in real life. In the fictional reality of eve earths history has no bearing on eve and CCP's word is reality.
No wonder you're late. Why, this watch is exactly two days slow. www.evefront.com
|
Tobias Sjodin
Ore Mongers Black Hand.
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:27:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Elsebeth Rhiannon Three fallacies at play here:
- alliance = big, corporation = small
- alliance = 0.0, corporation = above 0
- alliance = isolationist, corporation = open to interaction with others
The third is a new one, thanks.
None of those are very true, though.
Nail meet head.
"Techical difficulties" is not a valid excuse for limiting such a huge player base from a new part of the game design. If you are afraid of powerblocks then you design around that premise, not around the assumption that all alliances are the same and are made to do one and the same thing. This is supposed to be a sand-box game, remember?
Now, designing based on numbers is what is a possible option here. How do we limit alliances with 2000+ players to NOT be able to join one and the same faction and thus annihilating one area of space where said alliance base out of?
Solution 1:
* Admission requires a new type of skill, similar to alliance control. This skill would make so that only a part of a huge alliance would be able to join FW. This skill would limit any alliance executor to select a maximum (at level 5) of, say 300 players from his alliance to join FW. That way you could make so there is a select few corporations (or one corporation) with less than the maximum of members that are able to participate, all decided by the executor of said alliance.
This enables people to join a corporation inside an alliance and try FW out, whilst not losing allegiance to their alliance as well as the faction, but at the same time it prevents the problem with immense power blocks taking over.
Solution 2:
* Alliances or corporations cannot join, but players in corporations in an alliance can. This makes it up to each individual to be able to participate. He can still sign up and have fun with his corp mates, but they can't protect him in high-sec space or if he gets attack because of him signing up with a group in war.
Having multiple allegiances shouldn't be a problem, it certainly doesn't seem to be a problem that the Khanid with all it's population is also a part of Amarr.
Solution 3:
* Any single player inside an alliance & corp. can join a warring faction, but ONLY his own faction. This is probably the least desirable option, but it certainly prevents power blocks to trample over everything. So what happens if 200 from alliance A join minmatar and 200 from alliance A join Amarr? Simple, they still have standings to each other - while technically being at war, personal standings will still count as much as in any hostile situation.
Black Hand.
|
Dapanman1
Amarr Beets and Gravy Syndicate The InterBus Initiative
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:28:00 -
[47]
How about using a higher barrier of entry and allowing anyone, regardless of what corp/alliance they're in to join without leaving the corp/alliance. Adding alliance standings wouldn't be to hard if you just averaged the standings of the corps.
Make it 5.0 or something, non-rp alliances will have a hard time getting those standings without shedding members, and any alliance willing to do that for FW is probably better of not holding their space.
Letting individual players join without them having to destroy their corp will get more turnout from players I believe, keep the same barrier for entry as the alliance one, maybe higher, there's no rp reason that I can see than I as an individual with 8+ standings with the empire wouldn't be of some service to them, even if I do head a corp and alliance.
Keep the militia entry requirements low so new players can take advantage of it, but instead of disallowing the people you're suggesting and detracting from your sandbox, raise requirements. Up until now that has generally been CCP policy, offering incentives and creating barriers rather than restrictions and removals. Sig removed for inappropriate content.~~~Applebabe |
Jakke Logan
Caldari F Off And Die
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:29:00 -
[48]
Originally by: CCP Ginger
Originally by: Fakespace
Player in a corperation in an allicance are/are not allowed to enlist (Signing up as an individual) ?
To sign up as an individual, you cannot be in a corporation, and therefore, not an alliance.
I'm hoping that you guys will consider that releasing a broken faction warfare will be worse than not releasing it at all.
My petition, and if the CSM were seated today would be for the expansion to be delayed until the FW system includes everyone who wants to participate in it without forcing them to give up what they've already built.
What good is it going to be to aim this at new players, as it clearly is, when they are going to get repeatedly STOMPED by the veteran players who will do it simply because they can? Why not? Nuking noobs in T1 cruisers is essentially all that FW is giving to us.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:29:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Tissa Edited by: Tissa on 19/05/2008 17:25:42
Originally by: Goumindong History is rife with nations accepting the help of others even if the helping entity doesn't have the accepting nations best interests at heart or are working towards different ends.
I hate to break it to you but eve is not reality, we have not flown into the stars and discovered new eden and you are not a space ship pilot in real life. In the fictional reality of eve, earths history has no bearing and CCP's word is reality.
It is when you are making the RP argument that it is not in the best interests of the factions to take on essentially non-aligned mercenary nations to do their dirty. It goes to establish the legitimacy of optimal play choices in the game[that the factions are playing against each other]. Unless you think that winning is of no concern to the factions then it is directly relevant.
In short. Its better to accept other powers influence than it is to lose.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Spoon Thumb
Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:30:00 -
[50]
I think the point is that RP alliances feel they are being frozen out of the storyline
Up until now we have not had a formal mechanic to claim systems or show support in the name of the Factions we support.
Players have done the next best thing, which was to form an alliance and claim space or do whatever in support or on behalf of an Empire
This decision not to allow alliances really creates so much feeling because now you tell us we are not the loyal supporters of our respective factions but some greedy out for ourselves group grabbing 0.0 for personal gain
You've given us the tools, and we've done things based on that, now you're saying "oh but alliances were never meant for faction supporters or roleplayers." You've given us a blank slate and we've made our own interpretations. Now you turn round and tell us those interpretations are wrong and we need to start over
If you don't want alliances to compete in this new mechanics of FW, give some other way we can interact with the storyline, with the prime fiction, or support their respective factions
|
|
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:31:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 19/05/2008 17:32:11 nm... -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
Tissa
Minmatar Alice in Wonderland Derek Knows Us
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:32:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Elsebeth Rhiannon
Unfortunately also, people joining the Militias will not all be "our RP buddies". A lot of them will, I think, not be RPers at all, but just people looking for pewpew in the empire and actually scorning anyone who does try to stay IC on the Militia channel.
I think you do the eve community a disservice, if this were wow you may have a point but the NPC corps generally embrace RP and whenever I have gone through pator I generally post some RP in local and have never had any negativity from it. I have never been in a RP corp but I would imagine you are quite the target for idiotic RP smack, if this is the case then I would understand if you may have a warped view of the general eve population
No wonder you're late. Why, this watch is exactly two days slow. www.evefront.com
|
SPIONKOP
Caldari Imperial Technology
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:34:00 -
[53]
Alliance have way to much influence in this game and I for one am glad they can not directly participate in this.
I am worried however that they will do their level best with splinter groups and alts to try and gain a foothold in any conflict. If they wanted to any major alliance could screw this up for non alliance players by using their power to distrupt access to the low sec zones, distrupt comabt, support their friends and thus allow their splinter groups to hold space etc.
I have no faith in most of the alliances. Many of them will try and screw it up for everyone else. Prove me wrong.
--------------------------------------------- Space For Rent.
100mil ISK/Week.
|
Hober Hardin
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:35:00 -
[54]
Quote: Just a couple of things.
Read the thread before posting, pls.
Unfortunately also, people joining the Militias will not all be "our RP buddies". A lot of them will, I think, not be RPers at all, but just people looking for pewpew in the empire and actually scorning anyone who does try to stay IC on the Militia channel.
So as suggested create your own private channel for your rp, and just use the Milita one for intel, after all your only after the target and ship type so how can you go ooc with that?
Quote:
- Replicating standings from the alliance to another entity (400+ in EM right now) - Exponential amount of mutual positive standings from another entity to the alliance (100+ in EM) - Alliance contracts (currently over 30 up in EM) - POS access that is both easier than and not as abusable as the password feature - War decs (not necessarily the number, but the logistics and the reduced cost) - Open fleet invitations - In-game recognition by name
- Postive/Negative Standings, at last you are now governed by your faction, as the Militia you are now friendly with one faction and enemies with two others. (Set additional standings via your corp) - War decs, at last you are now governed by your faction, you are friendly with one faction, and at war with two others. (If you want to ignore your empires main cause and you have the time and resources to have a war with anyone other than the two warring factions, declare additional wars via your corp) - POS Passwords are a limitation for alliances too, or as EM would you not provide passwords to U'K when fighting the Amarr and Caldari? - Alliance contracts - use a chat channel, setup corp contracts, use external website/forum, lots of easy work arounds. - In game recognition - is your corp not good enough to be recognized?
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:35:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Goumindong if 0.0 sov warfare was the end game why should they have to forgo their 0.0 interests?
Since this is a "RP" issue. History is rife with nations accepting the help of others even if the helping entity doesn't have the accepting nations best interests at heart or are working towards different ends.
What happens if you allow Alliances in and Star Fraction is fighting Goonswarm tooth and nail in 0.0. Then you also both show up in FW on the same side.
That would be akin to the United States entering WWII with the Allies but France is attacking New York. However, while fighting in Germany the French and Americans are going to stand shoulder-to-shoulder? Somehow I do not think it would work that way.
How would that be any different with two empire corps that fight each other joining up on the same side?
P.S. In WWII The Allies included the U.S.S.R. and China. The U.S.S.R. that the U.S. had attempted to stop from forming by providing support for the whites over the reds and China where the Nationalists and Communists were currently in direct confrontation over control of the country, yet still all three fought together against Japan despite the U.S.s stance on communism.
Or maybe it just means that if SF and GS landed on the same side, we would not fight together and fight against each other elsewhere. The same way you separate companies and other mercenaries from main forces.
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Jakke Logan
Caldari F Off And Die
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:43:00 -
[56]
Originally by: SPIONKOP Alliance have way to much influence in this game and I for one am glad they can not directly participate in this.
I am worried however that they will do their level best with splinter groups and alts to try and gain a foothold in any conflict. If they wanted to any major alliance could screw this up for non alliance players by using their power to distrupt access to the low sec zones, distrupt comabt, support their friends and thus allow their splinter groups to hold space etc.
I have no faith in most of the alliances. Many of them will try and screw it up for everyone else. Prove me wrong.
Why shouldn't alliances try to screw this up? They don't even have to form up alt corps and set them blue, they can show up with a blob supported cap fleet and blow up everyone if they so choose. And trust me, this IS GOING TO HAPPEN unless CCP changes the rules by making FW participants unattackable by non FW participants (something that would **** off enough players to turn out CCP's lights) or to bring CONCORD into lowsec to protect FW participants (just as bad).
That's why they need to be a formal part of this system, only by giving alliances a PLACE in faction warfare thus giving them incentive and something to gain by doing so will you encourage them to be a supportive, rather than disruptive force.
There shouldn't even be a controversy here. CCP needs to listen to us, go back to the drawing board and do a better job with faction warfare.
Or else lose a bunch of players who wanted something better, and other players who are now looking at another half year before the next expansion which MIGHT give us something new.
|
Indigo Johnson
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:43:00 -
[57]
At least more pvp will happen because of this right?
More people will be able to get into pvp more easilly, which is one of the base aims right? 0.5 is a v low faction standing (take about a week if that?)
Ranks look interesting, but will have to see when this gets on test what it all really means
|
Becq Starforged
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:46:00 -
[58]
This is very disappointing. Most of those people who are actually interested in the RP storylines and interested in constant PvP are in one of a number of RP alliances to pursue that interest. Which means that FW will result in one of the following: 1) FW will kill RP alliances as individuals and corps are forced to quit in order to take part in the RP endgame, thereby causing the RP alliances to collapse. 2) FW will fail as insufficient numbers choose to participate, since those RPers who want PvP will stay in their alliances and those who are uninterested in constantly being ganked will stay out of FW.
I understand your motivation for not allowing alliances to join, but by excluding the factions' largest supporters, you are killing the system or the support.
Constructive suggestion: instead of trying to reuse the corp/alliance structure for militias, use a new mechanic. I suggest a two-part mechanic of individual/corp/alliance affiliation combined with the ability to join militias semi-independantly of corp membership.
The affiliation mechanic would add an 'affiliation' selection individuals, corps, and alliances. The affiliation could be toward one of the FW factions, or 'neutral', and and affiliation would automatically flow down, so that the affiliation of an alliance would be imposed on all of it's corps, and a corp's affiliation would be imposed on it's members. Declaring affiliation would have no particular requirements, now would it confer any special abilities, except that it would it would be a prerequisite for joining militias.
Actually joining a militia would have several requirements: membership in a corp or alliance with the proper affiliation, and sufficient personal faction standings. I would tend to set this requirement fairly high, perhaps similar to level 4 agents. Assuming the requirements were met, the individual would be accepted into the militia in parallel to their corp/alliance membership. Think of this as being akin to joining the National Guard (at least for Americans): you maintain a normal job, but spend part of your time on militia duty.
The resulting structure has a few useful features: 1) You have to have exhibited some measure of commitment to the faction's goals to participate in the militia, measured by having performed missions for the faction. 2) The ability to switch sides is limited, as it's difficult to have high faction standing for opposing sides (though switching between two allied factions would be easier). 3) The ability for alliances or large corps to screw up balance would be minimal. 4) It would be impossible for members of a corp or alliance to be on opposing sides due to the affiliation requirements. 5) Even if a corp is geared toward FW, there is an automatic exemption for trainee pilots until they get their standings high enough.
One decision that would have to be made is how aggression works when a gang has militia members and non-militia members, and the anwser should likely be that it should be handled much the way mixed gangs with wardecs are handled now.
Any thoughts on this so far?
-- Becq Starforged proprietor of Starforge Industries, a subsidiary of Minmatar Ship Construction Services
At Starforge Industries, the world of tomorrow is being blown apart today! |
Imperator Jora'h
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:47:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Goumindong How would that be any different with two empire corps that fight each other joining up on the same side?
A matter of scale for one thing. A matter of likelihood another. 0.0 alliances frequently have one group or another nipping at their heels. Hi sec corps of course do have war decs but they are less frequent and almost always smaller scale. As such their impact on the FW side of the fence would be mitigated to some degree.
Quote: P.S. In WWII The Allies included the U.S.S.R. and China. The U.S.S.R. that the U.S. had attempted to stop from forming by providing support for the whites over the reds and China where the Nationalists and Communists were currently in direct confrontation over control of the country, yet still all three fought together against Japan despite the U.S.s stance on communism.
They were opposed on their fundamental outlooks but as long as WWII was engaged none of the allies were shooting at each other. In my analogy SF/GS would be shooting at each other somewhere else. Big difference.
Quote: Or maybe it just means that if SF and GS landed on the same side, we would not fight together and fight against each other elsewhere. The same way you separate companies and other mercenaries from main forces.
Maybe. But this is EVE and someone, somewhere, would likely break such a tenuous state of affairs and I would not want to be in a gang preparing to fend off the opposing FW blob where such tension existed (I can see it now, "Oops...targetted you by accident alliance dude...sorry about the ship" then let the accusations spiral from there and next you know you (no 0.0 guy) are between two fighting "allies").
-------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
Elsebeth Rhiannon
Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 17:49:00 -
[60]
Becq, I like that as a long-term plan, but for now, it seems clear FW will go live as it is explained in the devblogs, and what we need to concentrate on is how to find a way for that to incur minimal damage...
-- Help us defend the Republic; join Gradient today.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |