Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The Khanids were fellow settlers alongside the Amarrians on Athra, better known today as Amarr Prime? For more, read here.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4

Author Topic: Alliances in FW  (Read 6764 times)

Shaalira

  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 135
Alliances in FW
« on: 05 Jan 2012, 13:12 »

Logged

Bacchanalian

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 449
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #1 on: 05 Jan 2012, 13:36 »

3 years too late.
Logged

BloodBird

  • Intaki Still-Rager
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1635
  • The untraditional traditionalist
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #2 on: 05 Jan 2012, 14:07 »

By now, most, if not ALL, major FW corporations are either pirates not taking sec-hits for shooting enemy X, or quasi pirates that will have to chose; fix sec-rating or go full pirate. With piracy beign the rampant 'cool' thing to do, you have 3 guesses as to what option will be preferred.

As such, FW will soon be 'revitalized' in that there will hardly be FW anymore - there will be the low-sec play-ground for bored alliance folks tired of the failure null-sec has become, and the pirates, all who have a few fellow pirates or alliance mates in the actual militias. Low-sec will be nothing more than a huge, flashy-red hell-hole where anyone you meet HAVE to be shoot simply to avoid your own destruction. Any non-pirate non-alliance noob joining any militia will no longer be able to trust their own militia mates - those militia 'mates' are nothing more than alliance members who generally have no respect for people not in their alliance, or pirates who don't care how much the militia corp hates them or what their rank is.

In a year from now, FW as it was intended will be extinct. Low-sec will be entirely Untraversable by anyone who has not blued every flashy or, are one of them. Up until a couple years ago, I had always hoped CCP would fix the pirate vs vigilante mechanics, but frankly there is no such thing as a 'vigilante' far as CCP is concerned. Find me any reference to this kind of game-play anywhere, I dare you all.

The militia's staying somewhat honorable so that it would be militias vs pirates was effectively my final hope for a low-sec 'fix' and with every passing month I see less and less difference between militia fleets and corps and the self-appointed 'predators' of low-sec. I could be wrong about all this. I *HOPE* I am wrong about all this, becasue then I'll still have more reasons to keep my subs.

And I've not yet BEGUN on the issue of letting monolitic 1-million capitals alliances in who lost any and all understanding for what constitutes a fight or even 'fun', years ago.
Logged

Logan Fyreite

  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
    • Eve Opportunist
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #3 on: 05 Jan 2012, 14:08 »

* Logan Fyreite waits for Bacch to get Rote into Facwar

 :eek:

I otherwise agree with Bloodbird, though perhaps less extreme of a view.
Logged

Bacchanalian

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 449
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #4 on: 05 Jan 2012, 14:13 »

I don't see how this will change the dynamic of lowsec.  The apocalyptic "this is going to break EVE" stuff is kinda derp.  And what on earth "honor" and "vigilantes" and "pirates" have to do with FW mechanics kinda escapes me inasmuch as the states of all of those things are pretty much completely unaffected by FW, with the possible exception of the latter, as pirates can use FW mechanics to avoid sec hits if they feel the desire to do so.
Logged

kalaratiri

  • Kalalalaakiota
  • The Mods
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2107
  • Shes mad but shes magic, theres no lie in her fire
Logged


"Eve roleplayers scare me." - The Mittani

Morwen Lagann

  • Pretty Chewtoy
  • The Mods
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3427
    • Lagging Behind
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #6 on: 05 Jan 2012, 14:23 »

Yay. It seems CCP is finally taking a shotgun to Lassie's head and putting it out of its misery, several years too late.

No, seriously.

If they are not un-CCP-like levels of careful, they're going to kill FW with this, and probably lowsec too. Alliances are going to need hilariously strict requirements for entry into FW, far more than what CCP seems to be going with on Sisi atm.

At the very least:
- A choice between Sovwar and Facwar - a mutually exclusive choice - needs to be made. If you have sov and want to go FW, you lose your sov the moment you join the militia. No waiting period, no cooldown. Instantly. And while you're in FW, you cannot take sov either. Force people to choose.
- Higher standing requirements (≥2.5 or 3.0 at minimum) would also not go amiss. I mean, seriously. Anyone can get 0.5 standing to a faction for their corp. It's like a day or two of whoring L3s.
Logged
Lagging Behind

Morwen's Law:
1) The number of capsuleer women who are bisexual is greater than the number who are lesbian.
2) Most of the former group appear lesbian due to a lack of suitable male partners to go around.
3) The lack of suitable male partners can be summed up in most cases thusly: interested, worth the air they breathe, available; pick two.

Louella Dougans

  • \o/
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • \o/
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #7 on: 05 Jan 2012, 15:15 »

active RP alliances that would have factional loyalties would include:

Electus Matari
CVA
Ushra'Khan
I-Red

?

I can't think of any others offhand ? I suppose if CVA aren't interested, the Aegis Militia might come out of retirement or something, but it's still looking a bit thin on the ground ?

But, at this point in time, everyone's Rp'd and have gone in different directions, haven't they ?

Like the other RP groups like Rote Kapelle and that one that's the Anti-Sansha one, had SYNE in it.  after this long, what RP motive is there ?
Logged
\o/

Bacchanalian

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 449
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #8 on: 05 Jan 2012, 15:36 »

CCP events died, which hurt RP a lot. 

There was no incentive for RP groups to fight, so the RPers that wanted to see things explode generally moved on to make things explode and relegate their RP to barpee. 

Baised view:  There's very little reason to RP an entire organization when that entire organization isn't working together towards a common goal, and most goals that require an organization to work towards involve making ships explode, and going back to the lack of ships to explode in RP environments, most RP organizations eventually thinned out as people left to find targets or the organizations dropped to RP lite or not RP at all to find ships to explode. 

U'K and CVA are very much an exception to that, because they found a way to incorporate making ships explode into their RP and dragged it out over a long period of time fairly successfully.  Though I think the RP in both has diminished somewhat over the years.
Logged

Kyoko Sakoda

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 505
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #9 on: 05 Jan 2012, 17:00 »

Yawn. Mechanic still boring, no pirate factions, etc., etc.
Logged

Seriphyn

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2118
  • New and improved, and only in FFXIV
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #10 on: 05 Jan 2012, 17:09 »

Why should alliances be able to play both camps?

A lot of us joined FW because we preferred lowsec and none of this 500-man supercap hotdropping nonsense. Being able to participate in both the Nullsec Game and the FW Game is just eh. One or the other, please.
Logged

John Revenent

  • Taisho - Friendly Neighborhood Caldari Liberal (Punching Bag)
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 509
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #11 on: 05 Jan 2012, 18:57 »

I-RED can't join FW. We fight the Protectorate as it is yes, but joining the Gallente is out of the question. Joining the Protectorate would burn all the work we have done in Placid.

vOv so no change for us.
Logged

Esna Pitoojee

  • Keeper of the Harem
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2095
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #12 on: 05 Jan 2012, 19:09 »

I'd be less *facedesk* if they showed any sign of actually balancing FW activities and NPCs. As is... yaaaay. More collossal blobs mindlessly grinding the easiest side's L4 missions for oodles of LP, because there is no other reason for anyone without an RP dedication to be doing anything else.
Logged
I like the implications of Gallentians being punched in the face by walking up to a Minmatar as they so freely use another person's culture as a fad.

Graelyn

  • Ye Olde One
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1349
  • These things just seem to happen...
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #13 on: 05 Jan 2012, 20:29 »

KEEP IN MIND

I don't like this move any more than many of you, but it may be important to look at this change as being one of many possible upcoming changes to the entire FW system.

In conjunction with unknown upcoming stuff, it may not be the disaster that it certainly looks like from here.

Just saying.  8)
Logged


If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!

Victoria Stecker

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 752
Re: Alliances in FW
« Reply #14 on: 05 Jan 2012, 20:48 »

KEEP IN MIND

I don't like this move any more than many of you, but it may be important to look at this change as being one of many possible upcoming changes to the entire FW system.

In conjunction with unknown upcoming stuff, it may not be the disaster that it certainly looks like from here.

Just saying.  8)

How the FUCK can you still show that kind of tentative optimism? You might be losing your :bittervet: edge  :psyccp:
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4