Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Did you know:

That greasy, deep-fried Caldari takeout food is eaten with tongs and remains popular in the Federation?  (The Burning Life pp 40,41)

Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes  (Read 2708 times)

Sakaane Eionell

  • Wetgraver
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 51
    • Solitary Pilot
IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes
« on: 01 Jul 2013, 18:43 »

Hey all.

tl;dr: I am now CEO of ILF and I have plans! First, I’ve decided to change how we interact with FW groups because what we have been doing doesn’t work. Points of interest:
  • No, we are not actually neutral and never have been.
  • No, we are not going to join FW.
  • Because of our RP, we need to treat militia corps more or less the same as any other corp so we can actually interact with them and do more stuff. Being neutral has meant doing a lot of nothing.

Changing our “neutral” stance could cause confusion, etc, so this post is here to hopefully foster OOC understanding and support from our RP peers as we move forward and try to improve.


Wall o’ text explanation:
Historically, IPI/ILF has stated we are “neutral” when it comes to Faction Warfare. It has meant we would not join a militia, trade militia intel, share fleet time with militia pilots, etc etc. In practice this has resulted in what (I believe) people call an RP block, or negation. How many opportunities have we missed to build relationships and do stuff in-game because we repeatedly turned people down solely because they are in FW? I wouldn’t blame anyone if they’ve given up on ever trying to interact with us again at this point.

Fact is, being “neutral” isn’t realistic considering our RP. To be truly neutral about FW would mean not caring one way or another ICly who has occupancy in the Intaki sov. However, last I checked, we’re a bunch of secessionists, so by definition, we don’t support either government fighting over Intaki nor its neighboring systems, and we don’t want either of them to have power in that area. That doesn’t sound like neutrality to me!

Additionally, ILF wants to participate, even marginally, DUST514. We have four mercs so far (we had five but one biomassed, sadface). The change CCP made to the availability of DUST FW missions is pretty inconvenient if we try to say we’re “neutral”. DUST players can just hop into those missions whenever they like and there is no chance in hell I can expect any of them not to for the sake of RP.

We also need balance between having this antagonistic political agenda and being able to engage in more meaningful in-game actions, regardless of FW.


What does this mean for our RP?
We are still not going to join FW. Wanting to create an independent Intaki sovereignty means not being aligned with any empire. We will continue to lobby for secession.

FW is a persistent game mechanic. We can’t engage in FW and we can’t ignore it, so we need to find a way to mitigate its effects on how we interact with others.

We can do this by saying, ICly, that CONCORD has created a stalemate, as there is no allowance in the militia war powers act for any empire to be able to formally declare victory, and thus no reason for us to lend the act any special credence. Combat that occurs in a war that cannot end is no different to regular, anytime combat between sworn enemies, except there are no gate guns and no sec hits. Thus the “militia” designation will carry no special weight with us either. After all, any corporation with a combat group could technically call itself a militia, too, and we recognize that New Eden is full of groups who blow each other up every day according to whatever reasons are meaningful to them.

This should allow us to build relationships with any group on their own merits, supposing we can find common ground with them.

Neither will we set all the Federation and State militia corps red “just because” we are abandoning the “neutral” stance. We are in no position to launch a campaign like that (and have no desire to), as we don’t have the manpower nor the PVP experience. Our NHDS philosophy means any corp not dabbling in hostile acts against us, peaceful neutrals, or blues in our area of operations is free to go about their personal business.

Some militia corps will end up red over time just like any other group we’ve ever set red. Aggression is aggression regardless of what uniform is being worn or what loyalty is sworn to, and we all know there are pirates in FW. Whether this is giving “aid and comfort” to the opposing militia (empire) will be irrelevant to us, because any time we manage to blow up a non-militia red, we are technically giving “aid and comfort” to someone. Rather, our point will be: if we perceive a threat to the safety of the Intaki sov, we’ll act according to our mandate of providing security to the citizens who live there.

Ideally I hope to start working with more groups for other reasons: joint ops into exploration sites, non FW mission running, mining, and anti-pirate patrols for mutual reds could all become viable activities for us to partner up on. For RP purposes it could be said those pilots are flying with us in an “off duty” capacity or some such. As for our DUSTers, if the militias are making contracts available to unenlisted troops, well, the mercs go where the money is and that money will benefit ILF.

--

We will integrate these changes gradually rather than making something like an IC press release, to see how it goes and give ourselves a chance to back off if it goes badly. Our IGS posts, website content, and live chats will start to take on these new ideas, and our ROE will be amended accordingly.

Looking forward to doing new stuff with some of you. :)
« Last Edit: 04 Apr 2014, 17:53 by Sakaane Eionell »
Logged

Havohej

  • Friendly Neighborhood Forum Admin
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1624
  • Ex-convict
    • Insurmountable Logic
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #1 on: 02 Jul 2013, 00:06 »

Hell yeah!  Will be watching you lot to see how this develops.  Hope it goes well for you.
Logged

Twitter
This is a forum on steroids tbh. The rate at which content worth reading is being generated could get you pregnant.

Aelisha Montenagre

  • Guest
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #2 on: 02 Jul 2013, 03:34 »

Very good summary and exactly what i would do in your position. 

Remember you always have a friend in Aelisha, and by extension Dead Six Initiative.  Caldari loyalist she may be, but the home world is something special and if independence is the only way to ensure it is both NOT Federation controlled and protected culturally, then so be it. 

If your dusties want to squad up any time, I will be sure to pick them up if they add Mendov Ishenko.
Logged

Hamish Grayson

  • Guest
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #3 on: 02 Jul 2013, 08:37 »

Is there a lot of RPers involved in the Caldari/Gallente FW scene and do the non-RPers care about Intaki?
Logged

Alain Colcer

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 847
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #4 on: 02 Jul 2013, 09:32 »

Wanting to create an independent Intaki sovereignty means not being aligned with any empire. We will continue to lobby for secession.

The above is soemthing i don't quite understand yet, the Intaki Assembly holds sov and control over Intaki and surrounding colonies AFAIK. Thats why the Mordu's Legion was hired for security at some point.

Currently, the State is taking over the whole warzone, isn't that against your goals? i know if the Federation was capturing back it would also be against your goals....but it would seem you have better chances to be heard within the Federation, and eventually be given more liberties as a Federate member.....

The smaller of two weavels?


Logged

Bataav

  • Egger
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 125
    • Intaki Liberation Front
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #5 on: 02 Jul 2013, 11:05 »

Is there a lot of RPers involved in the Caldari/Gallente FW scene and do the non-RPers care about Intaki?
It definately seems that both sides want to be the one holding the system simply because it's acknowledged to be a system that's important, even if it's not deemed strategically valuable in terms of "winning the war".

In RP terms, there's definately more from FedMil, but it's only usually occurs when FedMil take the system from CalMil, at which point there'll be an IGS thread. Interestingly enough the most vocal FedMil pilots seem to have a deep (IC?) hatred for Intaki and only make an effort to deny their opponants.

CalMil are generally much quieter on the subject, and there's been little or no RP I'm aware of, prompted by CalMil taking the system on Friday.


Wanting to create an independent Intaki sovereignty means not being aligned with any empire. We will continue to lobby for secession.

The above is soemthing i don't quite understand yet, the Intaki Assembly holds sov and control over Intaki and surrounding colonies AFAIK. Thats why the Mordu's Legion was hired for security at some point.
It's likely we'll become more vocal about the failings of the Assembly too. There are a couple of angles we could use, such as their limited ability to act being a symptom of the Federal model, where the meaningful stuff happens at Senate level. They could always be more vocal though which suggests a lack of willingness in which case we can hold them to task for that too.


Currently, the State is taking over the whole warzone, isn't that against your goals? i know if the Federation was capturing back it would also be against your goals....but it would seem you have better chances to be heard within the Federation, and eventually be given more liberties as a Federate member.....
What we're doing here is effectively acknowledging, formally as a corporation, that the pendulum swing of the conflict has become so perpetual and innevitable in its cycle, that we're better off ignoring the flag on the map. Chances are it'll be a different flag in a few weeks anyway, so the fact CalMil are currently doing well is largely irrelevent to our long term goals for the Intaki sov.

Changing the system from within as an ongoing Federal member is a valid approach, but we argue that so far that's not worked so a change of approach is needed.

Overall the idea here is to give ourselves some room to manouver. AFter all we're based in a core FW area, and have the Syndicate on our doorstep, so being strictly non-FW and anti-Serpentis/pirate is very restrictive in terms of gameplay and avenues of potential RP. Honestly I believe it's what's prompted some former pilots to move on.

Addressing interaction with FW is the "lesser of two weavils" and should loosen the straight jacket a little. We can come back to the Syndicate's potential at a later stage.
Logged

Alain Colcer

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 847
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #6 on: 02 Jul 2013, 13:28 »

Uhm, interesting, then i have a proposition for you......

Will write you an evemail later.
Logged

Pieter Tuulinen

  • Tacklebitch
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 662
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #7 on: 02 Jul 2013, 13:28 »

In RP terms, there's definately more from FedMil, but it's only usually occurs when FedMil take the system from CalMil, at which point there'll be an IGS thread. Interestingly enough the most vocal FedMil pilots seem to have a deep (IC?) hatred for Intaki and only make an effort to deny their opponants.

CalMil are generally much quieter on the subject, and there's been little or no RP I'm aware of, prompted by CalMil taking the system on Friday.

Everytime the GalMil takes significant systems from CalMil there are a series of fairly obscene threads where they pat themselves on the back so hard that they risk putting their arms out of joint.

Given how little the fortunes of the warzone actually have to do with the dedicated FW pilots and corporations and how much it actually has to do with several large alliances that operate a revolving door policy of faction loyalty to keep the LPs and iskies coming in, I've always felt that it's just poor taste *SNIP -Havo wuz heer* to start threads like that.

Yes, our Glorious State controls the space around Intaki again. But as soon as the Russians decide they can make more money as Amarrians or Minmatar or Gallente, we'll be on our arses again, so far be it from me to emulate pilots like X-Gallentius.
« Last Edit: 03 Jul 2013, 10:27 by Havohej »
Logged

Shintoko Akahoshi

  • Red Mom of War(?)
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 533
  • Red Mom of War!
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #8 on: 02 Jul 2013, 13:54 »

Speaking as a newly out of the closet GalFed loyalist (sorry, Pieter), this is probably the most irritating thing about GalMil FW. Say what you will about the other factions, they certainly seem to behave a little more tastefully.

I'd love a chance to talk to some of the IPI/ILF pilots, though. There's a lot of latent potential for RP that I think is largely being missed by the more FW-minded folks.

Pieter Tuulinen

  • Tacklebitch
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 662
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #9 on: 02 Jul 2013, 14:13 »

Shiiiiiin.... You know Veik gets angry if I have friends in GalMil!

Ugh!
Logged

Sakaane Eionell

  • Wetgraver
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 51
    • Solitary Pilot
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #10 on: 02 Jul 2013, 14:13 »

Everytime the GalMil takes significant systems from CalMil there are a series of fairly obscene threads where they pat themselves on the back so hard that they risk putting their arms out of joint.

Self-aggrandizment is never attractive and I've been thankful the Caldari FWers choose to portray themselves differently when pressing their advantage in recent campaigns.

Is there a lot of RPers involved in the Caldari/Gallente FW scene and do the non-RPers care about Intaki?

Despite the note about how GalMil tends to be louder, it's definitely worth noting that almost all of the offers of support IPI received in the last year came primarily from Caldari FW RP groups (which we, regrettably, couldn't really accept).

So, while there might not be a ton of RPers involved in the Caldari/Gallente FW scene in general, there are some going about their business and I'm hopeful we aren't too late in finding opportunities to work with them now.

It's gratifying to receive positive indications on this topic so far. We definitely will be putting out feelers to some groups in the coming days/weeks while we continue to work on other plans as well.

@Shintoko: Our public in-game channel is "FreeIntaki". It's quiet a lot of the time but feel free to pop in.

Alain Colcer

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 847
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #11 on: 02 Jul 2013, 15:23 »

Speaking as a newly out of the closet GalFed loyalist

Intriguing  :?:
Logged

John Revenent

  • Taisho - Friendly Neighborhood Caldari Liberal (Punching Bag)
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 505
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #12 on: 02 Jul 2013, 21:44 »

+1 Good to see these changes are starting up.
Logged
 

Makkal

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Khanid victor
    • At the End of Your Journey
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #13 on: 02 Jul 2013, 22:14 »

Speaking as a newly out of the closet GalFed loyalist

Intriguing  :?:

[Investigate]
Logged
Ask not the sparrow how the eagle soars!

Current Events

Hamish Grayson

  • Guest
Re: IPI/ILF – Ch-ch-ch-changes (Faction Warfare)
« Reply #14 on: 04 Jul 2013, 05:22 »

Speaking as a newly out of the closet GalFed loyalist (sorry, Pieter), this is probably the most irritating thing about GalMil FW.  Say what you will about the other factions, they certainly seem to behave a little more tastefully.

I always thought it was quite befitting of Federation culture.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2