EVE Search - FW salary / other income

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

FW salary / other income

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nagel far Space Cavalry 7th	Posted - 2008.06.28 22:44:00 - [1] Edited by: Nagel far on 28/06/2008 22:53:39 Im sorry in case this already came up in another thread, or some similar mechanism of which im not aware is already in existance, anyway heres the ideas: It would be nice if there was some kind of salary paid out to FW soldiers by the respective faction/militia. This could be based on the rank of the capsuleer (which of course would have to be based on how well he is doing). This should by no means be an incredibly large sum (i dont want to talk about numbers here, such matters have to be carefully discussed and balanced imo), but is meant to compensate the soldier for the losses he suffered, or even, depending of the ammount of that salary, allow pilots to fly more expensive ships than t1 frigates/destroyers/cruisers which are very common shiptypes at the moment. Im aware that FW isnt horribly expensive as long as the pilots stick to cheap t1 ships (or just dont lose anything). But still there doesnt seem any money to be made just with the PVP Part of FW, apart from the looting. Introducing some kind of salary would make soldier a viable profession. Being able to do PVP for a living - or at least covering a part of the expenses - without having to be really succesful (making money through loot) or relying on alternate sources for income is probably a thing many players would like. Another idea for generating income would be that there could be some kind of reward system, that enables players to get modules/ships from their faction, much like the current LP-shop, but using more common equipment. My final idea for generating income is, that there could be a default bounty on the ships of enemy players (based on the shipclass). This would result in the whole fleet benefiting from kills, not just the ones that are the fastest looters. These bounties should of course only be collectible by the players of the respective militias enemy. I hope that i was able to clearly express my ideas. Please bear with my english as it is not my mother tongue.
Nagel far Space Cavalry 7th	Posted - 2008.06.28 22:44:00 - [2] Edited by: Nagel far on 28/06/2008 22:53:39 Im sorry in case this already came up in another thread, or some similar mechanism of which im not aware is already in existance, anyway heres the ideas: It would be nice if there was some kind of salary paid out to FW soldiers by the respective faction/militia. This could be based on the rank of the capsuleer (which of course would have to be based on how well he is doing). This should by no means be an incredibly large sum (i dont want to talk about numbers here, such matters have to be carefully discussed and balanced imo), but is meant to compensate the soldier for the losses he suffered, or even, depending of the ammount of that salary, allow pilots to fly more expensive ships than t1 frigates/destroyers/cruisers which are very common shiptypes at the moment. Im aware that FW isnt horribly expensive as long as the pilots stick to cheap t1 ships (or just dont lose anything). But still there doesnt seem any money to be made just with the PVP Part of FW, apart from the looting. Introducing some kind of salary would make soldier a viable profession. Being able to do PVP for a living - or at least covering a part of the expenses - without having to be really succesful (making money through loot) or relying on alternate sources for income is probably a thing many players would like. Another idea for generating income would be that there could be some kind of reward system, that enables players to get modules/ships from their faction, much like the current LP-shop, but using more common equipment. My final idea for generating income is, that there could be a default bounty on the ships of enemy players (based on the shipclass). This would result in the whole fleet benefiting from kills, not just the ones that are the fastest looters. These bounties should of course only be collectible by the players of the respective militias enemy. I hope that i was able to clearly express my ideas. Please bear with my english as it is not my mother tongue.
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.06.28 22:51:00 - [3] I REALLY want to hate this idea... But reading the whole post, I don't know if I can. It kinda makes sense.
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.06.28 22:51:00 - [4] I REALLY want to hate this idea... But reading the whole post, I don't know if I can. It kinda makes sense. --- Don't take my rantings personally. I'm more than likely arguing the point at hand, and anyone playing "Devil's Advocate" will feel my wrath.
Nikita Alterana Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2008.06.28 23:17:00 - [5] Originally by: Marcus Gideon I REALLY want to hate this idea... But reading the whole post, I don't know if I can. It kinda makes sense. yeah, same. the bounty thing is what really bought me on it. __________________________________________________
BlondieBC Minmatar 7th Tribal Legion	Posted - 2008.06.28 23:36:00 - [6] I like the bounty idea.
Joe Starbreaker Starbreaker Frigateers	Posted - 2008.06.28 23:39:00 - [7] There shouldn't be a bounty on the player ships, because that would be farmed with alts. However, bounties on the NPCs would be good. Tags are great and valuable, yes, but putting the bounty in the form of a looter-take-all item discourages teamwork and encourages free-riding. The whole fleet should be rewarded for killing NPCs and for holding the positions as long as possible.
Nagel far Space Cavalry 7th	Posted - 2008.06.28 23:54:00 - [8] Edited by: Nagel far on 28/06/2008 23:56:20 Originally by: Joe Starbreaker There shouldn't be a bounty on the player ships, because that would be farmed with alts. [...] If I get this right, your concern is, that people could put alts in enemy militias, kill them and farm the money. This only seems a problem to me, as long as the bounty exceeds the cost of the ship (also capsules, rookie ships and maybe shuttles would have to be excluded). Also: Thank your for your comments so far.
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.06.29 00:10:00 - [9] 1) What about a "bounty" per head entirely. Not by ship, or anything like that. Just a flat rate, "You killed an enemy, good job" payment system. Although that greatly rewards the combatants, and not the logistical support. So how about... 2) Participants in FW fights are recorded somehow. Otherwise there wouldn't be a way to keep track of ranks. I'm not terribly sure if that's the way it works, since I haven't tried FW yet. But it COULD, and that's the idea! So everyone gets a payment, once per battle, based on rank. Sure, it could be abused. If someone showed up, fired a single shot, and then ran away then they'd still get a payment. But at least they contributed in some fashion. Based on rank, makes it just like military today. But based on combat involvement means you can't join the militia and log off for a year just to come back to a stinking rich character either. ideas --- Don't take my rantings personally. I'm more than likely arguing the point at hand, and anyone playing "Devil's Advocate" will feel my wrath.
Nagel far Space Cavalry 7th	Posted - 2008.06.29 00:27:00 - [10] Edited by: Nagel far on 29/06/2008 00:31:16 Originally by: Marcus Gideon 1) What about a "bounty" per head entirely. Not by ship, or anything like that. Just a flat rate, "You killed an enemy, good job" payment system.[...] With that system, the concern joe starbreaker brought up (or at least the way i understood it) would apply, people could create alt chars and farm them with their main. I like your other idea and yes, rooting out freeriders would be an issue. another issue would be to define when one battle ends and a new one begins.
snaike Black Crowes Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2008.06.29 00:29:00 - [11] While this is am extremely logical idea, and with careful tuning, could be a good implementation, I do have a problem with it. First things first, this isn't an FW whine at all. The problem with making it a career in this way, is I can see it pretty much eliminating all other forms of pvp. Players would be drawn from 0.0 due to the potential for earning more in pvp, and pirates/mercs would be drawn to the bounties. I don't have a problem with fw as itself, but I worry about it becoming the sole employment of pvp, and then we may aswell have a pvp server. Ok, it's a nightmare vision
Nagel far Space Cavalry 7th	Posted - 2008.06.29 00:42:00 - [12] Edited by: Nagel far on 29/06/2008 00:43:16 You make some points there, but let me see: I dont think it would eliminate all other forms of pvp, as 0.0 space has some benefits (for example high bounty rats, rare ores and very valuable moons). So PVP can be seen as means to protect these sources of income (whereas there is not much pecuniary appeal for FW pvp) Furthermore, the attractivenes of such a new career depends on the ammount of money made from the FW (as already mentioned, this has to be balanced carefully). For the pirate/merc thing, im not sure on how well the average earnings of those are - but well, my intent isnt to make FW the most rewarding thing ever seen.
BiggestT Caldari Fun Inc	Posted - 2008.06.29 09:58:00 - [13] I agree, FW isnt really that profitable, i mean when i get low on isk i have to go back to misisons for a bit, which is lame as my agent is petty far away for blackrise. I dont think their should be an emphaisis to get people out of t1 cruisers/frigs, as fw is designed to allow young players a more equal chance in pvp. I do think that vp's should give u offers from faction stations for new ships mods etc. Not like an lp store, but more of a medium between cheap market and lp store, so u have a store to buy t1 cruisers, mods etc for the new ppl. I also think that bounties on faction npc's would be nice. Remember its not concord paying the bounties,(is the original reason faction npc's never had bounties) its the opposing faction, and they want the ships dead so should supply bounties.
FlameGlow Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.06.29 10:46:00 - [14] Originally by: Joe Starbreaker There shouldn't be a bounty on the player ships, because that would be farmed with alts. However, bounties on the NPCs would be good. Tags are great and valuable, yes, but putting the bounty in the form of a looter-take-all item discourages teamwork and encourages free-riding. The whole fleet should be rewarded for killing NPCs and for holding the positions as long as possible. If the bounty on playerships is about on same level as bounty on average rat of same ship class I doubt anyone will bother farming it with alts, but if it's on level of faction rats ppl probably will farm it - so this is the range of possible bounties. I think 2-3 times the bounty of same sized average rat would be about right.
Blancanieves Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations	Posted - 2008.06.29 11:50:00 - [15] Edited by: Blancanieves on 29/06/2008 11:55:36 Edited by: Blancanieves on 29/06/2008 11:51:30 Suggestion to avoid farming of bounties on player ships: Make the bounty payout be taken from the insurance payout the victim gets, e.g., 1% of it. This does mean several things: - No additional money is injected into the game - Insurance payout will be less than normal for militia members, if the final blow comes from a member of an opposing militia - Rookie ships won't payout any bounty - Farming wouldn't be profitable if just self-destructing the insured ship wouldn't be as well Edit2: - (what I forgot) It hurts a bit more to loose against the enemy :-) Edit: Typical bounties at 1% would be: - BS 600k-1.5mio - Cruiser 50k - 100k - T2 Cruiser ~150-200k - Capitals ~8mio? Thoughts about this? -
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.29 11:57:00 - [16] I would like to make money by PvPing in this way. It would be very nice. I don't think this should be a factional warfare thing though. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Nagel far Space Cavalry 7th	Posted - 2008.06.29 12:03:00 - [17] Edited by: Nagel far on 29/06/2008 12:03:58 Edited by: Nagel far on 29/06/2008 12:03:36 Originally by: James Lyrus I would like to make money by PvPing in this way. It would be very nice. I don't think this should be a factional warfare thing though. As already mentioned the other forms of pvp have some sort of benefit (0.0 Space=Rats, Moons, Ore; Pirating=Ransoming; Mercs=Fee). But thinking about it, it might be an idea to enable alliance leaders to but a bounty on enemy ships (i dont see why npc factions should pay for this)
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.06.29 13:33:00 - [18] Edited by: Marcus Gideon on 29/06/2008 13:34:21 First off, this doesn't need to be a "PvP" thing at all. Pirates get more than enough money, without the game supplying them extra ISK for being d!cks to everyone. If the intent is to get money back like NPC bounties... then just use the Bounty system already in place. Of course, that'll mean that ~someone~ has to front the cash to begin with. And only one person is getting paid. Now if the intent is to establish something resembling a paycheck for services rendered to the government endorsed militia... that's where NPCs fronting the cash and establishing a rate would have to come in. Hence my suggestion about rank and involvement. If you're a General in the militia, then you'll make more than the Private does. And if you don't show up for a few battles, then you don't get paid for them. A "battle" to me, is over when your opponent is no longer on the grid or possibly in the system. So when you've all run away, or they have... then it's over. Yes that could mean that some battles could go on for a while, but that's the way War goes. And perhaps a way can be found, to reflect that you were in said battle for the entire three days it took, and so you get more than the guy who fired twice and want home.
Terak Noor	Posted - 2008.06.29 17:42:00 - [19] I like this idea as a military should provide for it's soldiers; full stop. But how about the opposite end of the spectrum? How about if you buy insurance for your ships at the normal cost, but if you lose your ship in a FW, you get 90% (or 100%?) of the insurance cost back? This means that FW losses aren't so dire and it encourages people to participate because there's a lot less to lose. It also means that isk is draining out of the economy, but at a much slower pace. Personally, I won't participate in the FW because I just don't have the isk to spend frivolously on the first 10-15 ships that I'll lose gaining the gang and pvp experience. So to me, FW is just another feature of Eve that I'm not going to use.
Astria Tiphareth Caldari	Posted - 2008.06.30 13:26:00 - [20] Edited by: Astria Tiphareth on 30/06/2008 13:28:42 I'm with Marcus on this one. I'd like to say it's exploitable and not a good idea, but actually, with some work and thought by the powers that be, some combination of the ideas here could work out quite nicely. FW is probably unusual in terms of PvP where the intended participants don't have that much cash, will lose quite a few ships, and take a while to get into a stage of not losing ships. It also, unlike other PvP, immediately cuts you off from quite a proportion of empire space, which in some cases can be quite a limitation. A salary of some form does seem an intriguing notion.
Grayhem	Posted - 2008.06.30 20:28:00 - [21] hey m8 really nice idear! continue like that and make eve better. btw thx for the isk ;).
Sophie Daigneau Risky Advanced Production Enterprises GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.30 20:47:00 - [22] A big concern with a system like this is how does it change the dynamics of fleet warfare? Let's just assume for a second that you get a percent of the bounty for each enemy combatant that is killed and you are on that killmail. In a large fleet fight, to maximize your bounty received you'd want to fire one shot at every enemy. Now if everyone in the entire fleet did this targets wouldn't die, and nobody would get anything, its the classic tragedy of the commons problem. Related to this though, I do still think that FW needs additional rewards to make the pvp within it sustainable over time. I'm not sure how exactly they should be implemented, but this definitely isn't it.
Svartkraft	Posted - 2008.06.30 21:31:00 - [23] Edited by: Svartkraft on 30/06/2008 21:31:52 well, there are a lot of valid concerns and this must be thought over carefully to prevent exploitation. I have thought about the problem you brought up. what came to my mind is, that the critical factor shouldnt be being on killmails, but being on the grid at the time the kill occurs (also for the sake of logistic pilots). In case this is the chosen way, there would have to be some kind of mechanism to prevent exploitation (bringing pods or the cheapest sh** you can bring / staying aligned and make a run once you are targeted). There might be other ways to exploit this im not aware of right now. Heres some ideas to fix these problems: Apart from that a factor in the way the money is split could be the risk you take (=value of the ship you bring). That might be a crazy idea that cant possibly be implemented into the game but im not the one to judge that. In case this is too complex there might simply be a "black list" where fcs can put on the names of freeriders, so its up to other fcs if they accept these people in their fleet. (again there a some details to such a feature that have to be carefully designed and balanced - im just throwing around ideas not complete concepts) sry wrong char
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.06.30 21:53:00 - [24] These concerns are based on the idea that you're collecting a Bounty from each kill. I suggested a base pay rate for participating in combat, period. Factional Warfare already has a rank structure, and rank determines pay in the military today. So if a player only shows up, fires a few shots, and runs away... they'll never advance past a Private or whatever. Whereas the folks who participate a lot will become General or something. So Generals get paid more for a battle than the Private does. Now if the Private sticks around, fights for a while, and does his duty... he'll advance in the ranks and get paid more too. This way, there's no cheating... or not as much at least. If you fight, you get paid. If you don't fight, no money for you. --- Don't take my rantings personally. I'm more than likely arguing the point at hand, and anyone playing "Devil's Advocate" will feel my wrath.
Blancanieves Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations	Posted - 2008.07.01 09:59:00 - [25] Edited by: Blancanieves on 01/07/2008 09:59:25 Originally by: Sophie Daigneau A big concern with a system like this is how does it change the dynamics of fleet warfare? Let's just assume for a second that you get a percent of the bounty for each enemy combatant that is killed and you are on that killmail. In a large fleet fight, to maximize your bounty received you'd want to fire one shot at every enemy. Now if everyone in the entire fleet did this targets wouldn't die, and nobody would get anything, its the classic tragedy of the commons problem. Related to this though, I do still think that FW needs additional rewards to make the pvp within it sustainable over time. I'm not sure how exactly they should be implemented, but this definitely isn't it. This should be of no concern. If this new bounty system is implemented like the NPC bounty system, it will work like this: The player which gets the final blow receives all of the bounty, if he is not in a gang. No need to fire on several targets: This won't increase your chances of getting a final blow. Furthermore, if the "final blower" is in a gang, the bounty will be divided equally among the gang members (edit: which are on the same grid, of course). Dynamics of fleet warfare wouldn't be changed at all. -
Maceross Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.07.01 10:54:00 - [26] I wish id seen this post before I made mine. Really nice idea. Id like to add my suggestion to the bounty on player system (this should not be based on rank as you dont get rank for pvping). A player's bounty increases each time they gain vp, or are in a fleet which makes a kill. This will stop people from farming as the inital bounty will be quite minimal, but quickly increase once players actually engage in faction war. This will also inherantly balance the system, as more succesful factions will give out more bounty to their opposition due to their level of success. For example the average gallente pilot will be worth more than the average caldari pilot due to their current greater sucess. This will help the Caldari PvPers a bit and also make things more risky for the more successful Gallente who will not make as much from these bounties.
Dmian Gallente Starline Engineering Corporation	Posted - 2008.07.01 15:51:00 - [27] Well, my first ideas was to give ships at official prices. Many people gave very valid arguments against it, the one I like most being that actually, a player driven corp was already supplying a faction with free/cheap ships. But maybe it's as simple as re-thinking the rewards given in FW missions. It's funny that, to sustain your FW PvP you have to run regular missions and not FW missions... ---- Eve Alpha - The font of Eve - Get it here
Zirconium Blade Ass Pounding Space Monkeys	Posted - 2008.07.01 18:18:00 - [28] Lowsec pirates have survived for years without a salary???
Astria Tiphareth Caldari	Posted - 2008.07.01 18:26:00 - [29] Originally by: Zirconium Blade Lowsec pirates have survived for years without a salary??? Whilst a fair point, low-sec pirates... pirate. FW militias don't work the same way. It's all about fleets and blobs and generally actually being able to stop and loot, or ransom, just isn't in it. Indeed looters are at greater risk because they don't have any friends hanging around also looting - the fleet has moved on because looting isn't on the agenda. Perhaps in time it will be when they run low on cash; hard to predict. Indeed this is part of the greater low-sec 'issue'. Piracy is a very effective and profitable venture in low-sec. To provide sufficient and continued targets for those pirates, the alternative low-sec careers of which militia is pretty much the only other non-high-sec one need to be equally profitable. Therein lies the problem, combined with risk-aversion, else everyone would already pirate. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...
Zirconium Blade Ass Pounding Space Monkeys	Posted - 2008.07.01 18:33:00 - [30] Edited by: Zirconium Blade on 01/07/2008 18:33:56 Unlike piracy, however, nothing is stopping you from returning to highsec to make ISK in whatever way you were making ISK before. Also piracy is not profitable unless you are very lucky or very good, and usually requires a combination of both to come out in the black.
Astria Tiphareth Caldari	Posted - 2008.07.01 18:41:00 - [31] Edited by: Astria Tiphareth on 01/07/2008 18:42:25 Originally by: Zirconium Blade Edited by: Zirconium Blade on 01/07/2008 18:33:56 Unlike piracy, however, nothing is stopping you from returning to highsec to make ISK in whatever way you were making ISK before. Yes and no. Militia that fire on pesky neutrals are going to end up in the same boat. Plus, you can pirate and still stay on the light side of -5, just you have to take breaks and go rat. Of course, there are those that would argue you're not a real pirate if so. Originally by: Zirconium Blade Also piracy is not profitable unless you are very lucky or very good, and usually requires a combination of both to come out in the black. Hang on, hang on - you can't go arguing it's profitable in your first statement and then say it isn't in the second Edit: Ok you said survive - still, I'm standing by the notion that militia in PvP just aren't going to derive the same benefits as pirates. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...
Zirconium Blade Ass Pounding Space Monkeys	Posted - 2008.07.01 19:04:00 - [32] Originally by: Astria Tipharet I'm standing by the notion that militia in PvP just aren't going to derive the same benefits as pirates. Well, why should they. Remember, you signed up for the milita to do service for the State, (or Federation or whatever) of your own free will. Militias dont usually get paid, they're fighting for a cause. Pirates are fighting for personal glory or wealth, and naturally try to do whatever they can to maximize that.
Astria Tiphareth Caldari	Posted - 2008.07.01 19:17:00 - [33] Originally by: Zirconium Blade Well, why should they. Remember, you signed up for the milita to do service for the State, (or Federation or whatever) of your own free will. Militias dont usually get paid, they're fighting for a cause. Pirates are fighting for personal glory or wealth, and naturally try to do whatever they can to maximize that. Well what rule says that militia shouldn't be trying to make money fighting that cause? I think the notion is a valid one to explore. If we want people in FW, it needs to be sustainable. This might be one way of achieving that. On the other hand, it might just happen anyway and not need any changes to the game, so I think CCP's 'sit back and see what the players do' is a good one. The salary notion is a good one to keep on the back-burner, to throw around, see if it is a) needed and b) viable. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.07.01 19:20:00 - [34] Originally by: Zirconium Blade Originally by: Astria Tipharet I'm standing by the notion that militia in PvP just aren't going to derive the same benefits as pirates. Well, why should they. Remember, you signed up for the milita to do service for the State, (or Federation or whatever) of your own free will. Militias dont usually get paid, they're fighting for a cause. Pirates are fighting for personal glory or wealth, and naturally try to do whatever they can to maximize that. From my take on the matter, CCP used "militia" because there were already NPC military organizations in place. You enlist for the militia, for service to king and country. And you do so of your own free will. But that's no different than the military today. And yet... soldiers still get paid for their service. Once upon a time, the militia was a group of farmers who wanted to strike back at the raiders who came on horseback. So they used torches and pitchforks to ward off the aggressors. Their tools were fiery sticks, or sticks with sharp metal pointies on the end. Our militia is using T2 BS with Faction ammo and modules. So expecting a little compensation for using more than sticks isn't entirely out of the question. If compensation were offered up front, then we wouldn't have had ideas like Militia ships. But fighting for free does beg the question "Are you gonna give me a stick to swing then? Cus I'm tired of bringing my own." --- Don't take my rantings personally. I'm more than likely arguing the point at hand, and anyone playing "Devil's Advocate" will feel my wrath.
Zirconium Blade Ass Pounding Space Monkeys	Posted - 2008.07.01 19:41:00 - [35] Since FW already provides a relatively safe (as in numbers), organized means of consentual PVP, you think that the ships you fly in it should be provided to you as well? Should your regular mission agents provide you with a ship for each mission also? Some alliances provide free fleet warfare ships, you are welcome to fly for them. I agree that CCP's "lets see what the players do" attitude is the best, and I don't think that extra compensation is necessary for the militia. No one is forcing you to bring a T2 ship with Officer mods.
Lugburz	Posted - 2008.07.01 20:05:00 - [36] Should be something in the way of isk earning to offset ship losses, i'd imagine FW is quite expensive even flyin t1 cruisers?
Astria Tiphareth Caldari	Posted - 2008.07.01 20:14:00 - [37] Originally by: Zirconium Blade Since FW already provides a relatively safe (as in numbers), organized means of consentual PVP, you think that the ships you fly in it should be provided to you as well? Should your regular mission agents provide you with a ship for each mission also? Whilst I think we're getting to the point of arguing about semantics and fine detail, I have to disagree with this. FW is no more consensual than any other form of PvP, just as dangerous (there are fleets in low-sec anyway, not just small-gang stuff) and definitely not that well organised. As for missions, if you lose ships in level 3 or below missions, you'll quickly learn what you're doing wrong and never lose another ship. It's just not a fair comparison. Even level 4s don't exactly offer much challenge or people wouldn't be able to AFK run them. As it happens, several are providing T1 frigates free, so as I said, it may be that no game changes are needed. We can but wait and see. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...
Hatch Minmatar Bug-Blatter Beasts of Traal	Posted - 2008.07.01 21:01:00 - [38] if there is to be a bounty system in place for FW, it should be on the pod, not the ship. make them bleed for your isk.
Nagel far Space Cavalry 7th	Posted - 2008.07.01 23:26:00 - [39] Edited by: Nagel far on 01/07/2008 23:29:30 Edited by: Nagel far on 01/07/2008 23:27:34 Originally by: Zirconium Blade Since FW already provides a relatively safe (as in numbers), organized means of consentual PVP, you think that the ships you fly in it should be provided to you as well? Should your regular mission agents provide you with a ship for each mission also? Some alliances provide free fleet warfare ships, you are welcome to fly for them. I agree that CCP's "lets see what the players do" attitude is the best, and I don't think that extra compensation is necessary for the militia. No one is forcing you to bring a T2 ship with Officer mods. Pirates dont have to hold or conquer any ground usually, they can choose when to fight and when not - so you can pick your fights. That and usually rather small fleets enganging each other leads to pretty neat chances of survival. You might say that fw pilots have that choice too... well they have in theory, but this is not how the fleet dynamics work... if a fc leads you into an engagement with about 75 pilots on your side and 50 for the enemy (or any other engagement with okay odds) you usually dont hightail out because there is a good chance that you can lose your ship. But in fact, such things will happen in engagements of that kind both sides will probably lose ships. A small group of pirates on the other hand, as already initially mentioned, has the benefit of picking profitable targets. Apart from that they probably know each others and the loot can be split. Such kind of sharing is likely never to occur in FW since the groups are just too big. Originally by: Hatch if there is to be a bounty system in place for FW, it should be on the pod, not the ship. make them bleed for your isk. which then again would raise the issue of players being capable of putting alts in enemy militias and podding them for the isk.
Thirzarr	Posted - 2008.07.02 07:14:00 - [40] EvE is not that way. You lose something its gone.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.