Warfare & Tactics

Again, taking things out of context. OP stated someone in the same militia killed him and then proceeded to conquer the plex. From a faction point of view, a pilot shot another capsuleer working for the same ffaction for territorial conquest. Technically, in that moment he did the right thing. Given that most of the militias have him as hostile, the only way he could safely conquer a plex is to kill the hostiles in it.

I'm not telling someone to leave the militia or dock up, I'm saying if the idea of pvp scares you, maybe you shouldn't be in a plex, let alone hang around when neutrals approach. No, I don't see the full scope of the issue, because as it's not an issue, unless you assume your enemies enemy is your friend, regardless of circumstance.

There are consequences. According to op the problem is that said consequences are offset by standingsgains from plexing. As for the consequences, there are clear consequences. He's getting shot by NPCs of all factions in plexes, he can barely venture into any highsec, he can be engaged around gates and stations without gateguns, he can't access many agents, etc etc.

If you just for a brief second you stop assuming you're allied with the rest of the militia, a neut shot you, and lost sec status. This is consequence. This consequence is enough according to most post, unless I'm mistaken. On top of this there is a standings penalty, as they are in the same militia. So... either you are assuming members of the same militia are in some way allied or you're saying that neutral agression in lowsec needs more consequence.

Most people that seem to be telling OP to HTFU based upon the fact that he was in a plex. However, weather he was in a plex or not is irrelevant. Current mechanics allow faction warfare awox-ers to operate without penalty. This is unlike hisec suicide ganking, where there are plenty of penalties and restrictions. In highsec ganking, the aggressor loses his ship, his insurance, takes a sec status hit, and gives kill-rights to the victim. Sec status loss restricts movements in hisec as well as the opportunities to further gank. Sec status must be repaired. In current FW mechanics, a militia awoxer does not lose the ability to freely move around in lowsec. A militia awoxer in a player corporation cannot be blacklisted or removed from faction warfare. A militia awoxer cannot be engaged without standings loss.

The OP's suggestion of banning people from fw is unreasonable. FW awoxing is intended gameplay, however it should not be possible to do it indefinitely without penalty. This is just a side effect of using corporation standings in determining FW eligibility. A simple solution would be to set a hard cap on standings below which a player would be ejected from the militia. Basically you would need to require a FW pilot to have a -5.0 or better derived standing toward the faction whose militia he is in. This is a pretty low bar, and you could awox for awhile before hitting it, and it still would allow pilots with negative standing to join FW through a player corporation. The problem of implementing this mechanic is that you would have a standings check remove a player from a player corporation, or kick an entire corporation from FW based off a single player's standings (and not the averaged standings, as is current). However, if CCP was motivated enough to tackle this problem, you would allow for FWers to awox with moderate penalty for awhile, but without allowing dedicated awoxers to abuse the system indefinitely with impunity.

tl;dr what BolsterBomb, Xuixien, or NoNah said, although I do take issue with NoNah's comments here:



dumb and irrelevant.



Purple stars are a CCP construct. It is reasonable to assume you won't be shot by one, although unreasonable to assume you cannot be shot by one. It also intended for there to be consequences for friendly fire. You've listed examples where the mechanics are working as intended: player corps can boot awoxers, npc corps can boot them based on standings, but from the discussion here I would say its clear there is no way to take the purple star from an awoxer, and the awoxer suffers no consequences of note at all.

well, you were equating intentionally shooting a friendly with acceptable losses to the enemy required to achieve an objective, as if somehow shooting his fellow militia member was a necessary action in the pursuit of an objective.



I'm using awoxing losely here, and calling any purple on purple awoxing, as you're attacking a militia member in the guise of a friendly. Shooting a militia member is very different than shooting a fellow member of deep core mining in lowsec. If deep core mining member A attacks corp member B in lowsec, then member A takes a security status hit for doing some regular pirating.

If federal defense union member A attacks corp member B, member A takes the security status hit, but also a hit to federal defense union standings and gallente faction standings. If A continues to do this, A will be ejected from the corp and fw. Hence player B has a reasonable expectation not to be shot by A as a matter of course. The same penalties apply to B, so B is unlikely to make attacking corp members a regular thing.

If player corp FW member and dedicated purple-killer A attacks fellow militia member B, then A takes a security status hit, and a faction hit, but does not risk being ejected or removed from fw. Furthermore, militia member B cannot kill or attack A at all, because it would place his fw status, or the status of his player corporation at risk. B's only option is to avoid A. A can continue this behavior indefinitely, because security status and faction standings are not a sufficient deterrent.

Also, you said that killing a fellow FW member no consequences, but 3 posts back you said there are more than enough consequences to discourage this.

Um. They removed ECM from plexes a while ago.

Again, you're quoting a direct reply so someones real life analogy. I'll happily admit my mistake in at all replying to such, but it is done and I've also already explained WHY it is necessary or at the very least rational


Absolutely, and in this case he has corpmembers to carry his weight. I never said there was no consequence, I said they were equal. You lose sec status, which bottoms out at -10, same as you would lose standing, that bottoms out at -10 and hence can be countered.

Is the mechanic of using averages broken? Maybe. I'm however not convinced this thread is even nearly derailed to the point of discussing that yet. What you're saying could equally well be considered reasons to remove the standings hits, to make being kicked from NPC corps virtually impossible, make fw NPC corps same as any of the other.

The funny part is that you're the one making real life analogies. I'm talking about game mechanics. You're going off on some convoluted tangent about "in RL, derp, territorial conquest, derp".



I never said they were allied or not. I said they were purple. Purple is not blue. But purple is not neutral either.

While we're on the subject, how about you present a solid argument that they're not allied?

So you won't present an argument that militia members are not allied?

I guess that settles it, NoNah.

If you can't accept unknown players as being considered unknown aka neutral standing(regardless of wether you shoot or aid neutrals) as an axiom, then yes, you are right. There is no point in driving any discussionfurther.

The faction war screen says amarr militia is allied with caldari. Why shouldn't we consider other amarr allies?

Thye arent though. Standings loss for killing a fellow FW member is way higher than standings gain for doing a plex. Working as intended.