These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Faction Warfare: Moving Forward.....

First post First post
Author
Galatica789
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#881 - 2012-01-23 14:19:35 UTC
Alliances Tommorw!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nachshon
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#882 - 2012-01-23 15:05:27 UTC
There are two major areas of FW that I think need improvement:

1. Occupancy. Right now, it's just cosmetic. There need to be substantial changes that actually make it worthwhile. One idea would be to incorporate POS's. Perhaps the kind of permit needed changes with occupancy - and militia pilots don't need permits at all in friendly territory.

2. Rank. It should mean something beyond your standing. I once suggested that pilots be able to call in NPC support based on rank.

Caldari by birth, Minmatar by choice. Give me the word, and I'll bring down the sky.

ShardowRhino
Legion 0f The Damned
#883 - 2012-01-23 16:23:43 UTC
Nice, a big thread about FW. I think the most fun I have had in this game was small empire wardecs. That is followed by the time in FW where I could fly cruisers, frigates, and destroyers and have a fight against similar ships. It was no longer a matter of getting tons of isk just to pvp as I could mine here and there and build some ships to run. It wasn't about months of training for a particular ship that is going to cost nearly 50-100mil and completely uninsurable. I think the biggest losses ended up being my pod without imps, but it was well worth it because of the fun factor of FW.


The fun part about FW is that you can jump into a fleet, get into a fight, get wiped out, podded, and go again without caring to much. Of course the isk I could pull in was a lot more then some new player could have a wet dream about. Its just a load of fun where there is the risk of losing isk, but without the constant paranoia that people get in 0.0, or even about being in 0.0. In empire most of the pvp I had got was defending a gate system. I missed all the big fleet fights and many of the roams resulted in zero action, unless we ran into a massive gate camp.

I think if CCP were to stop and think about it, they would realize that FW should not be treated like the afterbirth coming out after that redheaded stepchild, but instead a twist on their original game. There are plenty of people that are going to want to go to 0.0, thats great. But, there is also going to be a lot of people that would want to get into FW if it was treated like it was at least that redheaded stepchild, instead of the afterbirth. Why not cater to both groups that want to pvp in slightly different ways? Both lose ships and gear and fuel the market. Not only that but they fuel the producing of the T1 ships and hardware. Instead of just new players buying caracals and heavy launchers, or t2 manufacturers buying it, FW creates additional demand which allows new industrial players a way to make better money as they grow.

I plan on going to 0.0 soon, but would love to keep some lower SP alts in empire to get in on the FW fights for when I want a fight sooner then later, or without a huge hit to my wallet if i get popped.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Wild Geese.
#884 - 2012-01-23 18:27:34 UTC
ShardowRhino wrote:
Nice, a big thread about FW. I think the most fun I have had in this game was small empire wardecs. That is followed by the time in FW where I could fly cruisers, frigates, and destroyers and have a fight against similar ships. It was no longer a matter of getting tons of isk just to pvp as I could mine here and there and build some ships to run. It wasn't about months of training for a particular ship that is going to cost nearly 50-100mil and completely uninsurable. I think the biggest losses ended up being my pod without imps, but it was well worth it because of the fun factor of FW.


The fun part about FW is that you can jump into a fleet, get into a fight, get wiped out, podded, and go again without caring to much. Of course the isk I could pull in was a lot more then some new player could have a wet dream about. Its just a load of fun where there is the risk of losing isk, but without the constant paranoia that people get in 0.0, or even about being in 0.0. In empire most of the pvp I had got was defending a gate system. I missed all the big fleet fights and many of the roams resulted in zero action, unless we ran into a massive gate camp.

I think if CCP were to stop and think about it, they would realize that FW should not be treated like the afterbirth coming out after that redheaded stepchild, but instead a twist on their original game. There are plenty of people that are going to want to go to 0.0, thats great. But, there is also going to be a lot of people that would want to get into FW if it was treated like it was at least that redheaded stepchild, instead of the afterbirth. Why not cater to both groups that want to pvp in slightly different ways? Both lose ships and gear and fuel the market. Not only that but they fuel the producing of the T1 ships and hardware. Instead of just new players buying caracals and heavy launchers, or t2 manufacturers buying it, FW creates additional demand which allows new industrial players a way to make better money as they grow.

I plan on going to 0.0 soon, but would love to keep some lower SP alts in empire to get in on the FW fights for when I want a fight sooner then later, or without a huge hit to my wallet if i get popped.


I only wish the current council understood why we participate in Faction Warfare as well as you do! You've summarized our sentiments precisely.

Thank you for your contribution, its nice to have some fresh blood in this thread - far too many of the same people in here saying the same thing, even though bumps are always appreciated.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
#885 - 2012-01-23 21:08:57 UTC
Damassys Kadesh wrote:
The reason any militia is sad atm is because it's hard to justify fighting for something that has no consequences, not because there are NPCs in high-sec.

Having a level of protection is important because otherwise FW would turn into 100% griefing on stations where you are trying to buy ships to go out and do real PvP in the designated low-sec areas. THAT would be sad.

Having the occasional destroyer trying to gank at Jita station, or the occasional fleet rip through high-sec and catch inattentive pilots is one thing, perma-camping Jita and forcing people to rework their logistics is just a huge pain and would only hurt the fun, people would probably un-sub, and you'd have even less good fighting overall.... terrible idea in every way.

Did you read anything past my first statement? Seems to me you haven't and they wouldn't be able to camp Jita IV-4 because 1. it has lots of sentry guns and 2. they wouldn't be allowed to dock into it if they ran into trouble.

But you just saw me say "remove NPCs" and went with that. It's ok though I understand those that don't have reading comprehension trained past 1.

SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Wild Geese.
#886 - 2012-01-23 22:43:28 UTC
Galatica789 wrote:
Alliances Tommorw!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Thank you for your contribution. And for stating the obvious.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Damassys Kadesh
Dirt 'n' Glitter
Local Is Primary
#887 - 2012-01-23 23:13:54 UTC
Schalac wrote:
Damassys Kadesh wrote:
The reason any militia is sad atm is because it's hard to justify fighting for something that has no consequences, not because there are NPCs in high-sec.

Having a level of protection is important because otherwise FW would turn into 100% griefing on stations where you are trying to buy ships to go out and do real PvP in the designated low-sec areas. THAT would be sad.

Having the occasional destroyer trying to gank at Jita station, or the occasional fleet rip through high-sec and catch inattentive pilots is one thing, perma-camping Jita and forcing people to rework their logistics is just a huge pain and would only hurt the fun, people would probably un-sub, and you'd have even less good fighting overall.... terrible idea in every way.

Did you read anything past my first statement? Seems to me you haven't and they wouldn't be able to camp Jita IV-4 because 1. it has lots of sentry guns and 2. they wouldn't be allowed to dock into it if they ran into trouble.

But you just saw me say "remove NPCs" and went with that. It's ok though I understand those that don't have reading comprehension trained past 1.


lol thanks for the unnecessary condescension. If you read MY post (jeeeez) you'd see I responded to your sentry gun reference, but I wasn't thinking in terms of combining the mechanics, mostly because CCP Soundwaves original suggestion of NPC removal was in fact only NPC removal. So, yes, combining the mechanics you cited wouldn't be quite as bad, but you are still left with the first problem, which is that you suddenly have a massive area (the entirety of empire) for the relatively small number of active pilots. There wouldn't even be a reason for Gallente to fight mainly Caldari, or Amarr/Min, because the specific low-sec bridge between their high-sec semi-havens would not be any more desirable a place to fight than any high-sec.

We'll see how much activity increases with alliances... personally I hope it doesn't turn into a cluster-eff :P

Sourem Itharen > Congratulations Lady Kadesh, you have been selected by trial of fire and blood, under the watchful eyes of God, to represent Lord Khanid as his champion in the Imperial Succession trials -YC117

Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
#888 - 2012-01-24 00:46:04 UTC
Damassys Kadesh wrote:
Schalac wrote:
Damassys Kadesh wrote:
The reason any militia is sad atm is because it's hard to justify fighting for something that has no consequences, not because there are NPCs in high-sec.

Having a level of protection is important because otherwise FW would turn into 100% griefing on stations where you are trying to buy ships to go out and do real PvP in the designated low-sec areas. THAT would be sad.

Having the occasional destroyer trying to gank at Jita station, or the occasional fleet rip through high-sec and catch inattentive pilots is one thing, perma-camping Jita and forcing people to rework their logistics is just a huge pain and would only hurt the fun, people would probably un-sub, and you'd have even less good fighting overall.... terrible idea in every way.

Did you read anything past my first statement? Seems to me you haven't and they wouldn't be able to camp Jita IV-4 because 1. it has lots of sentry guns and 2. they wouldn't be allowed to dock into it if they ran into trouble.

But you just saw me say "remove NPCs" and went with that. It's ok though I understand those that don't have reading comprehension trained past 1.


lol thanks for the unnecessary condescension. If you read MY post (jeeeez) you'd see I responded to your sentry gun reference, but I wasn't thinking in terms of combining the mechanics, mostly because CCP Soundwaves original suggestion of NPC removal was in fact only NPC removal. So, yes, combining the mechanics you cited wouldn't be quite as bad, but you are still left with the first problem, which is that you suddenly have a massive area (the entirety of empire) for the relatively small number of active pilots. There wouldn't even be a reason for Gallente to fight mainly Caldari, or Amarr/Min, because the specific low-sec bridge between their high-sec semi-havens would not be any more desirable a place to fight than any high-sec.

We'll see how much activity increases with alliances... personally I hope it doesn't turn into a cluster-eff :P
I like the "frontline is everywhere" mentality though. Yes FW has problems. Most of which I think are player made to begin with but you can't fix that. So why not just allow it to be a global wardec and remove the NPCs and make stations shoot at enemies. And if they couldn't dock at enemy stations all the better. Does a 0.0 alliance allow it's enemies to dock at their stations? Then why should FW players be able to dock in hostile space?

SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Wild Geese.
#889 - 2012-01-24 01:24:09 UTC
Schalac wrote:

Yes FW has problems. Most of which I think are player made to begin with but you can't fix that.


I can guarantee you the problem isn't with the community. CCP developed a half-baked feature, the first in a line of many over the last few years, that they have now owned up to. Part of the reason we are now seeing change is two-fold. One, because of the restructuring of the company, now there are resources for FW again. Secondly, that we as a community have been extremely vocal starting about year ago when we were snubbed at Fan Fest, and we have rallied as a single voice to the developers especially over the last few months.

Shalee Lianne's excellent Sov Wars blog has dozens of quality interviews - if you want to know the number #1 reason that the players stick around, its the other players and the plentiful fights. (The fights, however, are waning) We enjoy fighting together, and we enjoy fighting each other.

The problem is that we're also reasonable people, with clever minds, and as boredom-prone as any other player in the game. Plexing with zero occupancy meaning can only be entertaining for so long....when faced with a lack of incentives, gameplay stagnates.

You can observe the exact same phenomena out in nulsec - totally different mechanical issues, but the same problem. Restlessness and boredom leftover from half-baked content pooped out in the Dominion expansion.

Faction warfare pilots inspire me. Their dedication has made the most of a crapass feature because they ran with it, making the best of the least and fighting wherever and whenever they could. Even when CCP put all the spawns at down time, FW pilots continue fighting round the clock, even with nothing of any substance to fight over.

But seriously. Its three years. Three years of bugs, three years of no consequence to victory, and most importantly - three years of failed promises on behalf of CCP. Wouldn't you get discouraged too?

And yes, I know I'm a bit riled up here. But I'm taking precious time away that I could be out fighting because I care too damn much about the players here to just give up and allow FW meet its fate in the hands of CCP and the current CSM. So when I hear misconceptions like this, I'm gonna get testy!! Twisted

I know you didn't mean any harm with it, but I just have to fix that statement for you.....

Schalac wrote:

Yes FW has some awesome things going for it. Most of which are player made to begin with because someone had to finish the job after CCP gave up.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Wild Geese.
#890 - 2012-01-24 01:57:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
Schalac wrote:
So why not just allow it to be a global wardec and remove the NPCs and make stations shoot at enemies. And if they couldn't dock at enemy stations all the better. Does a 0.0 alliance allow it's enemies to dock at their stations? Then why should FW players be able to dock in hostile space?


Alrighty. Now that I've taken a moment to get that off my chest, I'm happy to address the other ideas here!

As for stations shooting at enemies, this to me is a no-brainer. I have yet to hear any opposition amongst FW pilots, and its the very first "simple fix" I'd push for if I ever was in the same room as a developer.

Docking games suck. Having enemy factions loitering on your station in your system sucks. It makes no sense gameplay wise, breaks immersion, and allows the WORST kind of engagements to persist.

As for docking, people are more split. I personally am opposed because FW pilots enjoy their freedom, their mobility. Just as we don't enjoy 0.0 because of the thought of waking up in someone elses space and not being able to access your own belongings, neither do we relish the idea of working hard for ships to wake up the next day and not be able to blow them up. Locking people out of their ships to me just seems like an unnecessary shackle to frequent, quality PvP.

I AM however, in favor of restricting docking services. If you have to make an emergency landing in enemy station, or wake up to find that your faction's station is now being occupied by the enemy, you shouldn't be able to repair your ship, purchase insurance, and use medical services. (Ok, from a RP standpoint even enemy stations might still provide med services to POW's as part of mutual agreement).

This way, there is a real sense of "our space" and "their space", along with estabishing home "turfs" that gather fleets together, foster cooperation (without forcing it) and provide a safe place for newer players (of which FW will always be involved with on some level) to undock and prepare to fight with a minimum of random attacks.

The bottom line is, some of the stuff that makes 0.0 "hardcore" really would just slow down our primary goal - fast, everyday, quality, small-scale, PvP. We are more than willing to give up some of the more major consequences, and give up some of the rewards of networked resources and forces leadership decisions, all in the name of the almighty pew.

We're not very disciplined and we don't take orders well...we just like to hang out in the borderlands making sure pilots of the enemy race can't TAKE AWAY OUR FREEDOMS!!

This is probably the best way to explain our culture:

We are not the military. We are the militia.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
#891 - 2012-01-24 04:18:28 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Schalac wrote:
So why not just allow it to be a global wardec and remove the NPCs and make stations shoot at enemies. And if they couldn't dock at enemy stations all the better. Does a 0.0 alliance allow it's enemies to dock at their stations? Then why should FW players be able to dock in hostile space?


Alrighty. Now that I've taken a moment to get that off my chest, I'm happy to address the other ideas here!

As for stations shooting at enemies, this to me is a no-brainer. I have yet to hear any opposition amongst FW pilots, and its the very first "simple fix" I'd push for if I ever was in the same room as a developer.

Docking games suck. Having enemy factions loitering on your station in your system sucks. It makes no sense gameplay wise, breaks immersion, and allows the WORST kind of engagements to persist.

As for docking, people are more split. I personally am opposed because FW pilots enjoy their freedom, their mobility. Just as we don't enjoy 0.0 because of the thought of waking up in someone elses space and not being able to access your own belongings, neither do we relish the idea of working hard for ships to wake up the next day and not be able to blow them up. Locking people out of their ships to me just seems like an unnecessary shackle to frequent, quality PvP.

I AM however, in favor of restricting docking services. If you have to make an emergency landing in enemy station, or wake up to find that your faction's station is now being occupied by the enemy, you shouldn't be able to repair your ship, purchase insurance, and use medical services. (Ok, from a RP standpoint even enemy stations might still provide med services to POW's as part of mutual agreement).

This way, there is a real sense of "our space" and "their space", along with estabishing home "turfs" that gather fleets together, foster cooperation (without forcing it) and provide a safe place for newer players (of which FW will always be involved with on some level) to undock and prepare to fight with a minimum of random attacks.

The bottom line is, some of the stuff that makes 0.0 "hardcore" really would just slow down our primary goal - fast, everyday, quality, small-scale, PvP. We are more than willing to give up some of the more major consequences, and give up some of the rewards of networked resources and forces leadership decisions, all in the name of the almighty pew.

We're not very disciplined and we don't take orders well...we just like to hang out in the borderlands making sure pilots of the enemy race can't TAKE AWAY OUR FREEDOMS!!

This is probably the best way to explain our culture:

We are not the military. We are the militia.
I say BS. You can leave militia any time you choose and if you wake up one day and have a ship or item you need but can't get because you are in the enemy militia. Leave militia and get it. That is all you would need to do. But after seeing Loren kill countless comrades and then run to a station in my highsec when I have the capability and the manpower to smite him down and then JC out of there I say no. Have I docked in enemy territory before? Yes I have, but I feel that if you have the audacity to raid an enemies high sec you should be shown no quarter in that space.

You choose the join FW. It is not forced upon you. Therefore if you choose a side that is in opposition to the area you would like to live then you have a problem. I feel it would make FW more meaningful if you couldn't enter enemy highsec and dock at their stations. I feel there would be more meaning to killing those that invade my space and I feel that it was a bad choice to not add stations docking rights to lowsec FW players in conquered systems. In lowsec anyone can erect a POS. Good you have a POS in tama. Now you would have a place to hide when the system is owned by the enemy.

I also feel that Caldari and Gallente should be able to conquer Minmatar and Amarr space respectively. We are allies right? So why can no Caldari pilot go to Amarr/Minny lowsec and conquer a Minmatar system?

Maybe CCP need to add more outlying systems like Khanid. A buffer where none of the main races own it and it still has high/lowsec.

So you would have no docking rights in enemy highsec, and station guns firing at you. No docking rights in lowsec pipeline conquerable systems for the side that doesn't own it. 2.5 more regions where they are highsec but not one of the 4 races. No faction navy NPCs shooting you. A reason to plex. A reason to get other trade hubs known other than Jita.

If anything I think that my ideas would make for a much better game all around coming from a FW pilots point of view.

SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac

Damassys Kadesh
Dirt 'n' Glitter
Local Is Primary
#892 - 2012-01-24 07:26:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Damassys Kadesh
Things I do agree with you on:

Schalac wrote:
I also feel that Caldari and Gallente should be able to conquer Minmatar and Amarr space respectively. We are allies right? So why can no Caldari pilot go to Amarr/Minny lowsec and conquer a Minmatar system?


Allied assistance would definitely be nice.

Schalac wrote:
A reason to plex


mmmhhmmmmm

However:

Schalac wrote:
I say BS. You can leave militia any time you choose and if you wake up one day and have a ship or item you need but can't get because you are in the enemy militia. Leave militia and get it. That is all you would need to do.


This is one of the points that has frequently been made against station lockouts. Flip-flopping in and out of militia and changing your allegiance frequently, and thus wildly varying the number of pilots in a given militia, would only upset the war in a completely unproductive and unnecessary way. I share Hans' (and many others') opinion that restricted station services is much more balanced an appropriate for FW.

Schalac wrote:
Does a 0.0 alliance allow it's enemies to dock at their stations? Then why should FW players be able to dock in hostile space?


As for this, I don't think the dynamics of null should be considered when discussing FW at all. It is completely different, and I hope it only grows more-so, not more similar to null-sec.

If high-sec is opened right up like you envision, it sounds a lot like a pair of war dec'd alliances fighting in high-sec. We have that mechanic, so I think FW should continue on the path of being something unique in EVE.

Adding the station-guns into the mix certainly removes basically all station-camping (as long as it's not tankable), and I think everyone can agree that would be a positive attribute, but I still don't think widening the landscape of war makes sense. At least not now.

Sourem Itharen > Congratulations Lady Kadesh, you have been selected by trial of fire and blood, under the watchful eyes of God, to represent Lord Khanid as his champion in the Imperial Succession trials -YC117

Damassys Kadesh
Dirt 'n' Glitter
Local Is Primary
#893 - 2012-01-24 07:33:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Damassys Kadesh
double-post again ... :(:(:(

Sourem Itharen > Congratulations Lady Kadesh, you have been selected by trial of fire and blood, under the watchful eyes of God, to represent Lord Khanid as his champion in the Imperial Succession trials -YC117

Rel'k Bloodlor
Guldan Age Stories
Nisuwa Cartel
#894 - 2012-01-24 07:46:17 UTC
I still think they should scale the faction police back one step EX-.5 have none and 1. would be like how .9's are. the .5's would give use all a place to only fight each other only, no hot drops, no pie's, and no wham null alliance. I know as a Gallente pilot this would hurt us as Villor is a .5 but I still think it would be worth it! At least part of the reason fights have gone down in black rise at lest is the quagmire of neutrals that may or may get involved.

I wanted to paint my space ship red, but I couldn't find enough goats. 

Lord Meriak
State Naval Academy
#895 - 2012-01-24 08:19:51 UTC
As far as fliping stations,
I can see where locking a station down and cant get any of your stuff would be bad for fw.

I would like to see if the station / system is flipped you would lose access to the agent and perhaps if you undock or go to dock timer is increased say 2 minutes to dock for the opposing side.
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Templis CALSF
#896 - 2012-01-24 09:14:21 UTC
Lord Meriak wrote:
As far as fliping stations,
I can see where locking a station down and cant get any of your stuff would be bad for fw.

I would like to see if the station / system is flipped you would lose access to the agent and perhaps if you undock or go to dock timer is increased say 2 minutes to dock for the opposing side.


Just deny station services (such as fitting/repair) to anyone but the militia that owns the system. I am personally against any form of completely denying access to ones assets (at least via in game mechanics, if a player wants to camp a station so you can't get stuff out thats totally fine) in lowsec/npc null. Nullsec sov should have its own flavour, and I think that flavor is losing access to assets if you lose in the most "hardcore" space. Lowsec and npc null are different and should remain to be different from this.
Kade Jeekin
Masuat'aa Matari
Ushra'Khan
#897 - 2012-01-24 11:40:14 UTC
Denial of assets is the only way to defeat an immortal enemy. For this reason I am for locking out of enemy factions from occupied and hisec stations. If you want meaning and consequence to system occupancy then this would be the most meaningful.

However, I am against the removal or downgrading of NPC navies, as doing so does remove a unique RP feature of FW combat.
Baneken
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
#898 - 2012-01-24 12:36:06 UTC
I think what would really make some interest for FW would be allowing corps/alliances of at least 50members in size to allow moon mining in "higher" low sec or perhaps even in high sec.
Limit would be minimum 50 members and the combined 9.0 alliance/corp standing for the said faction or mining stops and your moon drills go would go offline immediately.

Of c. question is how to make this non-exploitable and while were at it these elite corps migh also be granted a priviledge of using bubble in low sec as long as the standings are met ?
This of c. would call for harsh standing penalties for invoving agressing those not involved in enemy faction, for shooting eggs, agressing your own militia and so forth.
Maybe free custom gantries for involving FW as well or extra rewards for high standings with your faction.

Locking 0.4 and lower sec stations from your FW enemy as default might be good as well.

but what i'm trying to say is that there should be tangible rewards for fighting for your faction instead of getting a free for all war dec and some plexes with missions to grind.
Mutnin
SQUIDS.
#899 - 2012-01-24 12:45:28 UTC
On subject of Alliances, I think it might of been interesting if CCP had come up with a way to allow alliances between corps in their sister Militia. It might of made for an interesting way to broaden the fighting landscape if groups from Minmatar & Gallente or Amarr & Caldari were able to form an official alliance.

This could have the potential to broaden the aspect of the wars if various groups had added interest in one another's wars for something other than just extra targets if your area of space was too dead on a particular night. We are already technically on the side of our allied alliance, so it could be interesting to have a tie in to both fights in one Alliance.
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#900 - 2012-01-24 13:13:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Rodj Blake
Kade Jeekin wrote:
Denial of assets is the only way to defeat an immortal enemy. For this reason I am for locking out of enemy factions from occupied and hisec stations. If you want meaning and consequence to system occupancy then this would be the most meaningful.

However, I am against the removal or downgrading of NPC navies, as doing so does remove a unique RP feature of FW combat.


I agree with the Minmatar psychopath.

Dolce et decorum est pro Imperium mori