| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 .. 12 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ayrianna Nagaya
   |
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:00:00 -
[301]
 Originally by: Skyy
Bottom line is FW is broken... you want change... others want change. But then you contradict yourself saying its not broken. I don't care about the outcome, but at least I can sit here and admit there's a current problem. The fact you can't do that is quite amusing, maybe it has to do with the fact YOU are abusing the current problem.
It's not about militia whiners afraid to pvp... please, go try your egotrip spins elsewhere. How about we all just let you debate this issue alone? Get real... the opinions of everyone here matter. You can try and place Caldari on the front page, but until other militia corps deal with this, you have no right.
Finally, grow up... name calling and faction bashing is no place for the chair of CSM.
Skyy is right, SF thinks its ok for alliances to be 100% involved with FW. However, the DEVS CLEARLY stated that FW is NOT for alliances to particiapte in.
And yes I don't think there should be some immunity to deccing a milita corp. No one suggested that so STOP SAYING THAT!!! Jade you are putting words in peoples mouths!
We just think that when you dec a milita corp there needs to be something to LEVEL the playing field so that the deccing alliance doesn't have this massive advantage.
And you do have an advantage. You get to pick off 1/4 of the fleets and be safe with CONCORD protection.
The NPC navies should SHOOT YOU! It is not an immunity! It is somehting to level the field. Plus it is realistic with the RP. Why would the Caldari navy let YOU anarchists dec thier militia force and come into high sec and shoot them YET not let the Gallente militia come in and do the same thing!
YOU have a DISTINCT advantage over the Gallente militia.
It is more productive to be a Gallente militia corp and NOT join the militia and just dec Caldari Militia corps! then you get to hide in high sec like the militia get to do anyway, AND hunt THEM in THIER HIGHSEC!!
How are you SOOO dense you can't understand this? Your vocabulary does NOT match your actual intelligence. You are really stupid. |
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:04:00 -
[302]
Originally by: Skyy
Bottom line is FW is broken... you want change... others want change. But then you contradict yourself saying its not broken. I don't care about the outcome, but at least I can sit here and admit there's a current problem. The fact you can't do that is quite amusing, maybe it has to do with the fact YOU are abusing the current problem.
You really aren't understanding this. Faction War is not broken. But it does need some additional functions. Alliance corporations need the ability to join. I think it would be a good thing for militia corps to be able to buy-in to 3rd party wardecs against corps in that same militia. The problem is while you sit there crying "exploit" "abuser" "broken" you aren't helping the discussion in the slightest. You are overreacting and spreading crazy rumors because you have been wardecced. Thats the bottom line Skyy, you are behaving precisely like every hisec whiner since the beginning of time has reacted to being the subject of an empire war with the additional sting that this time you are in an corporation that willingly signed up for a thing called FACTION WARFARE . Why on earth you believe you should have more protection against wardecs than a 2 day old mining corp should is something thats quite beyond sensible analysis.
Quote:
It's not about militia whiners afraid to pvp... please, go try your egotrip spins elsewhere. How about we all just let you debate this issue alone? Get real... the opinions of everyone here matter. You can try and place Caldari on the front page, but until other militia corps deal with this, you have no right.
And yet are we hearing about the Amarrian Miltia corps whining about the Ushra'khan wardecs here? I haven't noticed any. And I have had a very productive debate with some of the your FW members and an ISSUE thread has come from this that I'll be supporting to the CSM discussion after the 7 days of discussion have passed. Reality is Skyy you have gotten too close the matter because you personally are very upset that your corporation has been wardecced. Its natural to be upset if you really have no confidence in your fighting ability in game of course - but this is Eve, hire mercs, fight back, find friends, or even surrender or quit your corp. These are you options, but don't come crying "nerf wardecs" and expect to find much sympathy from a CSM delegate who was elected on the vote of small unit pvp'ers from across the server.
Quote:
Finally, grow up... name calling and faction bashing is no place for the chair of CSM.
Act with some dignity and I'll treat you accordingly. Address this issue objectively and it'll get discussed as such. But you are the one who has come here crying out about "exploits" "griefing" and "abuse" and you are the one continuing to claim that a specific mechanic that has been verified as functioning exactly as it was intended is "broken" simply because it means that you have might have to fight outside of the caldari faction blob on the TAMA gate in NOUV.
Chair of the CSM means I conduct meetings of the CSM and ensure ISSUEs get heard and debated and voted on.
Chair of the CSM doesn't mean I'm not going to point out that Eve players crying their eyes out and falsely accusing others of exploits and griefing and utilizing "broken" mechanics are behaving like spoiled children.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Anomara
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:08:00 -
[303]
I probably missed something but how about this one:
1. No wardecs allowed on FW corporations.
This makes makes sense from a lot of points. You do not get to declare war on only part of an entity that works together in PvP ops.
2. Put a long delay (1 month?) or a high price tag for a corporation to leave a Faction (desert) once joined so one can not use it to hide from a war deck.
This should repress the joining and leaving of FW as a game mechanic.
3. In general: When one attacks a player in fleet once should become a valid target to all members of that fleet for the next 15 minutes.
Maybe one should allow wardecs on corporations within the Faction by other corporations in that faction so the faction can police itself and target griefers creating alt-corps.
|
Skyy
Caldari
Sigillum Militum Xpisti
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:24:00 -
[304]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Faction War is not broken. But it does need some additional functions.
OMG 
I hereby tender my involvement in this thread. Good luck to all of you.
|
Ayrianna Nagaya
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:26:00 -
[305]
Originally by: Skyy
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Faction War is not broken. But it does need some additional functions.
OMG
I hereby tender my involvement in this thread. Good luck to all of you.
LOL its like saying, "Its not broken! But we could fix it..." |
Narine Evan
Derelik Capital Constructions
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:27:00 -
[306]
Edited by: Narine Evan on 03/07/2008 18:35:17
Originally by: Anomara
1. No wardecs allowed on FW corporations.
This makes makes sense from a lot of points. You do not get to declare war on only part of an entity that works together in PvP ops.
The issues surrounding this are many fold. One obvious one is that if a corporation wanted to never be war deced than all they had to do was sit in the Faction and happily go about their business. Now this may seem like not a bad thing and for those Mining corps out there I am sure they would love it and some people wouldn't see the problem with it. But then look at what happens when you get a Corp that specialises in Suicide Ganking in Missions or Freighter Ganking. How are those people supposed to get their own back on the corp? What about the corp with half a dozen High Sec POSes that they want to be immune. I mean it difficult enough to take down a High Sec POS as it is and that's WITH being able to war dec the corp running it. These are only a few of the ways in which that could be abused in my opinion.
Quote:
2. Put a long delay (1 month?) or a high price tag for a corporation to leave a Faction (desert) once joined so one can not use it to hide from a war deck.
This should repress the joining and leaving of FW as a game mechanic.
Unfortunately without any major loss of functionality from joining FW (apart from being able to enter opposing territory which has already been proven perfectly possible) this will be little deterance in regards tot the time issue and with isk as easy to obtain in Eve as in any other MMO once you have experience I can't see any amount of isk being an issue. I mean some alliances folded their alliance and swallowed the 1B isk fee just to join FW to try it out. if 1B means little to people I can't imagine any other amount would make a dent.
If FW corps are to act outside of the way in which nomral player corps work which they defintly would be by not being allowed to be war deced then maybe there needs to be a new unit introduced that can be used for FW i.e. the Militia which would have limited features compared to Corps but would equally have their own advantages such as:
Militia: Not allowed to War Dec, only allowed to have offices in allied stations, Not allowed to anchour POSes, Not allowed to be war deced on, can support each other in fleet fight within same faction.
That is of course off the top of my head but I am sure others will have ideas.
Originally by: Ayrianna Nagaya
LOL its like saying, "Its not broken! But we could fix it..."
Errr or not. The way I think Jade is trying to put it across is "It's not broken, but we could improve on it." much in the same way I have my computer and it works great. It runs everything I want it to and runs it well. it's not broken but I could still improve it further by adding a second monitor, or more memory or another Hard Disc. *shrug* Sorry I just had to edit my post to add this as it's so very obvious.
|
Steel Tigeress
Gallente
Steel-Wolfs
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:34:00 -
[307]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
You really aren't understanding this. Faction War is not broken. But it does need some additional functions. Alliance corporations need the ability to join. I think it would be a good thing for militia corps to be able to buy-in to 3rd party wardecs against corps in that same militia. The problem is while you sit there crying "exploit" "abuser" "broken" you aren't helping the discussion in the slightest. You are overreacting and spreading crazy rumors because you have been wardecced. Thats the bottom line Skyy, you are behaving precisely like every hisec whiner since the beginning of time has reacted to being the subject of an empire war with the additional sting that this time you are in an corporation that willingly signed up for a thing called FACTION WARFARE . Why on earth you believe you should have more protection against wardecs than a 2 day old mining corp should is something thats quite beyond sensible analysis.
Funny that your are supporting the idea in this thread that only has 15 votes of support:
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=812583
and not the idea in this thread that has over 200-300 votes of support:
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=792898
Originally by: Jade
Chair of the CSM means I conduct meetings of the CSM and ensure ISSUEs get heard and debated and voted on.
Unless that vote was for your removal, the day that vote was asked to be brought up suddenly "Administrative issues must be discussed on the forums for 7 days befor blah blah blah..... Fact of the matter is, until it was time for the vote for your removal, CSM's , including you, brought up and voted on administrative issues all the time. Now when its a vote for your removal, the policy gets changed cause you said so.
Originally by: Jade
And I have had a very productive debate with some of the your FW members and an ISSUE thread has come from this that I'll be supporting to the CSM discussion after the 7 days of discussion have passed. Reality is Skyy you have gotten too close the matter because you personally are very upset that your corporation has been wardecced. Its natural to be upset if you really have no confidence in your fighting ability in game of course - but this is Eve, hire mercs, fight back, find friends, or even surrender or quit your corp. These are you options, but don't come crying "nerf wardecs" and expect to find much sympathy from a CSM delegate who was elected on the vote of small unit pvp'ers from across the server.
Funny, the issue thread you talk about is the one I linked above that only has 15 people agreeing with it, while the 200-300 that want you removed get ignored and laughed at by you. Its strange Irony that you say Skyy has gotten too close to an issue to be objective in its debate. Pot meet kettle. Dont let the door hit you on your way....oh nevermind I hope it does.
|
nVChicky
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:39:00 -
[308]
im sure steel thats mixing personal opinion and game playability
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:40:00 -
[309]
Originally by: Steel Tigeress
Funny, the issue thread you talk about is the one I linked above that only has 15 people agreeing with it, while the 200-300 that want you removed get ignored and laughed at by you. Its strange Irony that you say Skyy has gotten too close to an issue to be objective in its debate. Pot meet kettle. Dont let the door hit you on your way....oh nevermind I hope it does.
15 meaningful posts are worth more than 200 moronic nonsense posts. Part of our role in the CSM is to sort between the useful comment and the useless comment. And like I said, CSM is proceeding very well. And you would find your time more profitably served by posting an actual ISSUE thread with your proposed solution rather than making silly attacks on CSM members.
Or you could keep crying because you've been war-decced.
There's always that.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Slave 775
Privateers
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:47:00 -
[310]
Originally by: Anomara
I probably missed something but how about this one:
1. No wardecs allowed on FW corporations.
This makes makes sense from a lot of points. You do not get to declare war on only part of an entity that works together in PvP ops.
2. Put a long delay (1 month?) or a high price tag for a corporation to leave a Faction (desert) once joined so one can not use it to hide from a war deck.
This should repress the joining and leaving of FW as a game mechanic.
3. In general: When one attacks a player in fleet once should become a valid target to all members of that fleet for the next 15 minutes.
Maybe one should allow wardecs on corporations within the Faction by other corporations in that faction so the faction can police itself and target griefers creating alt-corps.
Narine Evan was faster on point 1. and 2. but let me add something to 3.
You shoot a loothief and his whole fleet can attack you ?
You shoot a pirate and his whole fleet can shoot you without sentrys ?
I shoot you, your fleet shoots me and my fleet then can shoot yours ?
i really hope you dont want to get support from your fleet, and my fleet cant do anything about it.
But tbh that's probably what these whiners want.
EVE ONLINE
Adapt or die ?
more like:
go and whine on the ForumsÖ |
Ayrianna Nagaya
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:49:00 -
[311]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
15 meaningful posts are worth more than 200 moronic nonsense posts.
There is more of your elitism. Just because you say they are moronic. The majority thinks they are correct.
|
Steel Tigeress
Gallente
Steel-Wolfs
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:53:00 -
[312]
Edited by: Steel Tigeress on 03/07/2008 18:53:15
Originally by: Jade Constantine
15 meaningful posts are worth more than 200 moronic nonsense posts.
According to who?
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Part of our role in the CSM is to sort between the useful comment and the useless comment.
Where is that power given too you? I dont recall seeing anything that says you can ignore and bypass issures you dont like..
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Or you could keep crying because you've been war-decced.
There's always that.
Funny thing is, I'm not involved in FW at all, on either of my accounts in any way. I'm just objuective enough that when I see a problem I can look at it from both sides of the issue, unlike certain Chair CSM's in this thread.
|
Anomara
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 18:59:00 -
[313]
Originally by: Narine Evan
Originally by: Anomara
1. No wardecs allowed on FW corporations.
This makes makes sense from a lot of points. You do not get to declare war on only part of an entity that works together in PvP ops.
The issues surrounding this are many fold. One obvious one is that if a corporation wanted to never be war deced than all they had to do was sit in the Faction and happily go about their business. Now this may seem like not a bad thing and for those Mining corps out there I am sure they would love it and some people wouldn't see the problem with it. But then look at what happens when you get a Corp that specialises in Suicide Ganking in Missions or Freighter Ganking. How are those people supposed to get their own back on the corp? What about the corp with half a dozen High Sec POSes that they want to be immune. I mean it difficult enough to take down a High Sec POS as it is and that's WITH being able to war dec the corp running it. These are only a few of the ways in which that could be abused in my opinion.
Quote:
2. Put a long delay (1 month?) or a high price tag for a corporation to leave a Faction (desert) once joined so one can not use it to hide from a war deck.
This should repress the joining and leaving of FW as a game mechanic.
Unfortunately without any major loss of functionality from joining FW (apart from being able to enter opposing territory which has already been proven perfectly possible) this will be little deterance in regards tot the time issue and with isk as easy to obtain in Eve as in any other MMO once you have experience I can't see any amount of isk being an issue. I mean some alliances folded their alliance and swallowed the 1B isk fee just to join FW to try it out. if 1B means little to people I can't imagine any other amount would make a dent.
If FW corps are to act outside of the way in which nomral player corps work which they defintly would be by not being allowed to be war deced then maybe there needs to be a new unit introduced that can be used for FW i.e. the Militia which would have limited features compared to Corps but would equally have their own advantages such as:
Militia: Not allowed to War Dec, only allowed to have offices in allied stations, Not allowed to anchour POSes, Not allowed to be war deced on, can support each other in fleet fight within same faction.
That is of course off the top of my head but I am sure others will have ideas.
I think the war-dec as a way to get back at people is rather overrated. Especially with many people having all their soft targets in NPC or secret alt corps. Putting a war-dec on SF will not do anything about their supply of cheap ships.
If a member of a large alliance is suicide ganking then war-decing them is not an option most of the time anyway.
I am fine with not allowing/limiting pos ownership for militia corporations. You are enlisted in the navy what are you doing running a factory?
It may even be better to not have something other than a corporation but maybe a militia squad:
- Can never leave milita.
- Has player controlled membership.
- Can not be war-deced.
- Can not declare war on others.
- Can only anchor pos in faction space.
We may need a way to deal with people who join a faction but do not play 'by the rules' of that faction. (They join for a reason other than the fight for that faction.)
Maybe a some faction wide voting on a banning of squads from the faction?
|
Dara Benediction
Grey and Black's Second Hand Modules Co.
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:01:00 -
[314]
Edited by: Dara Benediction on 03/07/2008 19:01:46
Originally by: Ayrianna Nagaya
Originally by: Jade Constantine
15 meaningful posts are worth more than 200 moronic nonsense posts.
There is more of your elitism. Just because you say they are moronic. The majority thinks they are correct.
What majority? 200 moronic posts from the same five or six people does not a majority make. I'm rather certain that most people reading this thread, like myself until this post, look at it and say "Oh look, the Caldari are whinging about the game working as it should do. Again." and then roll their eyes heavenwards while continuing on to threads with actual content. Generally these people are referred to as the 'Silent Majority' as opposed to your 'Vocal Minority'.
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:02:00 -
[315]
Originally by: Ayrianna Nagaya
Originally by: Jade Constantine
15 meaningful posts are worth more than 200 moronic nonsense posts.
There is more of your elitism. Just because you say they are moronic. The majority thinks they are correct.
I think I told you yesterday Ayrianna, you don't seem to understand what the word Majority means.
I'll give you a hint. It doesn't mean a couple of dozen embittered posts from the alts of butt-hurt FW characters sore about getting war-decced.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:08:00 -
[316]
Originally by: Steel Tigeress
Where is that power given too you? I dont recall seeing anything that says you can ignore and bypass issures you dont like..
Ultimately there are 2 ways an issue gets onto the table for CSM discussion. Either it gets advocated and presented by a CSM candidate who has been persuaded of the merits of the issue. Or - 25% of the voting electorate need to show support for the issue to force it onto the agenda. In either case no Issue is going to discussion with CCP unless it receives majority support from the CSM (and that generally means 5 of 9 delegate votes).
I have full authority to ignore and bypass issues I'm not convinced by. Thus far nothing you have said convinces me in the least. But you can try to convince another CSM delegate if you wish. Put it another way, the only Issues I'm going to personally advocate to CSM discussion are those I'm convinced are good for Eve and need raising. If I'm not convinced they won't get raised by me.
Not sure what you are complaining about here. This is all pretty straightforward stuff.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Steel Tigeress
Gallente
Steel-Wolfs
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:13:00 -
[317]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
I have full authority to ignore and bypass issues I'm not convinced by.
Where is this power given to you. From all I've seen this is somthing that you have just contrived on your own. Show me in your charter where it says the chair can change policies to avoid issues it dissagree's with.
|
Anomara
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:14:00 -
[318]
Originally by: Slave 775
Originally by: Anomara
3. In general: When one attacks a player in fleet once should become a valid target to all members of that fleet for the next 15 minutes.
Maybe one should allow wardecs on corporations within the Faction by other corporations in that faction so the faction can police itself and target griefers creating alt-corps.
You shoot a loothief and his whole fleet can attack you ?
You shoot a pirate and his whole fleet can shoot you without sentrys ?
I shoot you, your fleet shoots me and my fleet then can shoot yours ?
i really hope you dont want to get support from your fleet, and my fleet cant do anything about it.
But tbh that's probably what these whiners want.
I do not see your point here. If someone steals my stuff/pirates then I really should treat all the others that fly with him at that point the same way.
So if I do not have the backup needed in my own fleet to do something about it. I should take that loss and wait for a better moment to engage.
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:17:00 -
[319]
Originally by: Steel Tigeress
Originally by: Jade Constantine
I have full authority to ignore and bypass issues I'm not convinced by.
Where is this power given to you. From all I've seen this is somthing that you have just contrived on your own. Show me in your charter where it says the chair can change policies to avoid issues it dissagree's with.
I think you are confusing yourself now. I have absolutely no obligation to raise an issue I don't agree with. Is that easier to understand? No CSM delegate can be forced to raise an issue they don't agree with. And the only way an issue that no delegate agrees with is getting onto the agenda is with 25% of the voting electorate in favour.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Teliot Rebburcs
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:20:00 -
[320]
This worries me greatly that Jade Constantine, the CSM is taking such a one sided approach to this issue obviously for personal benefits. I hereby impose an impeachment of said CSM.
|
Steel Tigeress
Gallente
Steel-Wolfs
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:31:00 -
[321]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
I think you are confusing yourself now. I have absolutely no obligation to raise an issue I don't agree with. Is that easier to understand? No CSM delegate can be forced to raise an issue they don't agree with. And the only way an issue that no delegate agrees with is getting onto the agenda is with 25% of the voting electorate in favour.
FALSE!!!
This issue was going to be raised by the Goons at the meeting! That is until you changed policy and said he could not raise the issue untill it had 7 days discussion on these forums. Which I'll point out up untill this time, no other administrative issue had been forced to do this. Even admin issues raised by you could just be brought up and voted on.
But now that its the issue of your removal, its got to wait 7 days, be discussed, be endorsed, be voted on, then its forwarded to CCP for their approval. Thats alot of added things that somthing has to go through because you dont like it.
Grow a pair and get out.
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:37:00 -
[322]
Originally by: Steel Tigeress
Originally by: Jade Constantine
I think you are confusing yourself now. I have absolutely no obligation to raise an issue I don't agree with. Is that easier to understand? No CSM delegate can be forced to raise an issue they don't agree with. And the only way an issue that no delegate agrees with is getting onto the agenda is with 25% of the voting electorate in favour.
FALSE!!! This issue was going to be raised by the Goons at the meeting! That is until you changed policy and said he could not raise the issue untill it had 7 days discussion on these forums. Which I'll point out up untill this time, no other administrative issue had been forced to do this. Even admin issues raised by you could just be brought up and voted on.
But now that its the issue of your removal, its got to wait 7 days, be discussed, be endorsed, be voted on, then its forwarded to CCP for their approval. Thats alot of added things that somthing has to go through because you dont like it. Grow a pair and get out.
I think you need to get some fresh air. (And post your ISSUE. I'm sure everyone is waiting with baited breath to debate it).
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Drenan
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 19:45:00 -
[323]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
I'm sure everyone is waiting with baited breath to debate it).
I think 'bated' is the word you are looking for?
|
Ayrianna Nagaya
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 20:02:00 -
[324]
Edited by: Ayrianna Nagaya on 03/07/2008 20:02:43
Originally by: Jade Constantine
I think I told you yesterday Ayrianna, you don't seem to understand what the word Majority means.
I'll give you a hint. It doesn't mean a couple of dozen embittered posts from the alts of butt-hurt FW characters sore about getting war-decced.
Hmm and where do you get your statistical information? Please link it. Yeah I don't have any either. But if there are MORE people posting about it, you can assume the MAJORITY of the population thinks that way.
If you want to debate the statistical "sample" then you will also be a hypocrite because only a few thousand out of the hundred thousand plus players voted for CSM. You were also voted in CSM on a statistical sample.
So which is it? Are the forums not a good indication of peoples feelings? And therefore you were voted in on a lopsided bunch of people voting for you and thier alts? OR...
Are both valid sources of data?
Stuck between a rock and a hard place it seems...
|
AltyNr1
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 20:04:00 -
[325]
of course militia corps need to be wardeccable. this is eve online for anyone that missed it. every noob that gets into his first playercorp needs to deal with it and so will you.
as for deccin whole militias tbh i can see some problems with that. with the privateer nerf it seems apparent that ccp doesn't want wardecs to enable people to just go and have a huge number of random targets in hisec for little cost. in a way deccing a militia would enable you to do exactly that - have thousands of random war targets for just a single wardec. moreover you wouldn't have to deal with enemy navys.
my proposal would go along the lines of:
1.make militia corps deccable with normal rules applied (i.e. no faction navy coming after you) just like we have it now.
2.make militias deccable. basically this would be comparable to having every single corp of the militia wardecced but with a key difference: you are now considered an enemy of the state/empire/federation/republic whatever and thus enemy faction navy will respond to you just as they would for a corp that enlisted.
additionally this wardec should be much more expensive. (1b/per week as an idea)
this would allow alliances to enter the war without giving up their independance - but at a cost. they would have to pay up for the wardec quite literally but would also be deprived of the privileges that come with enlisting. (i.e. lp shop and ranks or whatever ) also due to the enemy navy chasing them around they would suffer the same penalties their target has to accept.
i think that would solve most problems. but maybe not?
|
Drenan
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 20:18:00 -
[326]
We waited years for Faction Warfare.
Is anyone at CCP actually paid to carry out a basic 'impact assessment' before major changes to game mechanics are introduced?
If they are, how did they miss this one, and the navy response loophole?
|
Steel Tigeress
Gallente
Steel-Wolfs
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 20:59:00 -
[327]
Originally by: AltyNr1
of course militia corps need to be wardeccable. this is eve online for anyone that missed it. every noob that gets into his first playercorp needs to deal with it and so will you.
as for deccin whole militias tbh i can see some problems with that. with the privateer nerf it seems apparent that ccp doesn't want wardecs to enable people to just go and have a huge number of random targets in hisec for little cost. in a way deccing a militia would enable you to do exactly that - have thousands of random war targets for just a single wardec. moreover you wouldn't have to deal with enemy navys.
my proposal would go along the lines of:
1.make militia corps deccable with normal rules applied (i.e. no faction navy coming after you) just like we have it now.
2.make militias deccable. basically this would be comparable to having every single corp of the militia wardecced but with a key difference: you are now considered an enemy of the state/empire/federation/republic whatever and thus enemy faction navy will respond to you just as they would for a corp that enlisted.
additionally this wardec should be much more expensive. (1b/per week as an idea)
this would allow alliances to enter the war without giving up their independance - but at a cost. they would have to pay up for the wardec quite literally but would also be deprived of the privileges that come with enlisting. (i.e. lp shop and ranks or whatever ) also due to the enemy navy chasing them around they would suffer the same penalties their target has to accept.
i think that would solve most problems. but maybe not?
This isnt bad, but the only thing that needs worked on more is #1, by deccing somone in a militia, you are basically giving yourself a safe haven. For example my pilots are Galente. I could war dec a Caldari corp, go to caldari space because their faction wont attack me. Then if I wanted I could retreat back to Gallente space. The Caldari corp I decc'd could not come after me.
There are ways to fix it,but me personaly dont think that letting alliances into FW has anything to do with the fix. CCP disallowed it for a reason, and I think that was right. They just didnt iron out all the other bumps befor they added FW.
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 21:18:00 -
[328]
Originally by: Drenan
We waited years for Faction Warfare.
Is anyone at CCP actually paid to carry out a basic 'impact assessment' before major changes to game mechanics are introduced?
If they are, how did they miss this one, and the navy response loophole?
They didnt miss it, it is intentional and the only way corps are allowed to join Fw without disbanding. If you cant deal with the wardec from within the militia then jusrt drop out of the militia for a bit until you finish your war.
|
Teliot Rebburcs
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 21:22:00 -
[329]
Originally by: AltyNr1
of course militia corps need to be wardeccable. this is eve online for anyone that missed it. every noob that gets into his first playercorp needs to deal with it and so will you.
as for deccin whole militias tbh i can see some problems with that. with the privateer nerf it seems apparent that ccp doesn't want wardecs to enable people to just go and have a huge number of random targets in hisec for little cost. in a way deccing a militia would enable you to do exactly that - have thousands of random war targets for just a single wardec. moreover you wouldn't have to deal with enemy navys.
my proposal would go along the lines of:
1.make militia corps deccable with normal rules applied (i.e. no faction navy coming after you) just like we have it now.
2.make militias deccable. basically this would be comparable to having every single corp of the militia wardecced but with a key difference: you are now considered an enemy of the state/empire/federation/republic whatever and thus enemy faction navy will respond to you just as they would for a corp that enlisted.
additionally this wardec should be much more expensive. (1b/per week as an idea)
this would allow alliances to enter the war without giving up their independance - but at a cost. they would have to pay up for the wardec quite literally but would also be deprived of the privileges that come with enlisting. (i.e. lp shop and ranks or whatever ) also due to the enemy navy chasing them around they would suffer the same penalties their target has to accept.
i think that would solve most problems. but maybe not?
This is simply a terrible idea. Faction Warfare corporations and/or militia should not be able to be war decced and vice versa.
War deccing milita corps draws away from the Faction Warfare experience that these players are trying to indulge themselves in. It is a new aspect of the game that could be entirely ruined by an individual, player controlled corporation, or alliance war deccing multiple corporations involved in faction warfare for a certain faction making it impossible for those players to concentrate on the faction war, resupply, pve, and as stated before it draws away from the Faction Warfare experience.
Saying that the corps should disband and simply join the NPC faction militia is absurd. There shouldn't be such a major drawback to having a FW corporation. Think of these corporations as battalions or regiments of a greater military force or even as a branch of a faction military. You can't just declare war on the US Marines (not to mention it would just be a bad idea)without declaring war on the U.S.!
In summary: Declaring war on FW corps is a bad implementation of game mechanics by CCP and it is dirty.
Jade Constantine is taking advantage of this for her own purposes regardless of the community uproar and therefore should be forced to step down.
+++ I hereby state as before that a movement to remove Jade Constantine from her self righteous position should be implemented asap!+++
.
|
Demitria Fernir
Caldari
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 21:30:00 -
[330]
If you can't defend yourself in high security space, how can you stand in low security space?
if you're in factional warfare, it means that you want to PVP. that's consensual.
if your corp gets wardec'd while being in factional warfare, means that the wardeccing corp wants to pvp. that's unconsensual, but has been here for ages and has been fix'd various time.
if you can't stand a wardec, how can you stand to be in factional warfare?
10100110010100101010011010100101001100101110101001
I will Conquer My Signature
Somewhere in the future
10100110010100101010011010100101001100101110101001 |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 .. 12 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |