These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

wanting to move to nullsec...

Author
AlleyKat
The Unwanted.
#121 - 2013-01-02 15:44:22 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
This is a person who probably should not even be joining an alliance in the 1st place (and probably didn't even ask himself the question BEFORE joining an alliance).

Group goals take group organization. If your only goal is to "virtually punch people", why would you join an alliance in the 1st place? You can "virtually punch people" on day one of EVE, hell, yo don't even have to BE in a player corp to join faction warfare (for example.

I find it irritating to see people like this poster, people who feel the need to denigrate people who make choices consistent with their goals (like joining a null sec alliance) instead of admitting that THEY made a bad choice they didn't think through.

I've seen many a person do that in real life , like joining the military THEN getting ticked off at the fact that some people can give them orders lol. If you don't like being ordered around, like to be an individual, why would you brilliantly join a uniformed service?

It happens so often people make inside jokes about it , like how a relative who is a Marine told me: "USMC" really stands for "U -Signed the Motherxxxxxxx Contract" (so quit yer bitchin).


Thank you for proving my point?

AK

This space for rent.

Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#122 - 2013-01-02 16:12:48 UTC
Taking a huge leap and assuming you're not a troll:

You're in that awkward situation where you have very little to offer a nullsec alliance, so the only alliance that will take you is an alliance full of equally inexperienced players. That doesn't mean you can't get in, there are always corps in any alliance that are somewhat lax/lazy with their recruiting and will take just about anyone. It's a start. After that you get to know people and you could be offered something better.

EvE is as much about networking as anything else in life. A lot of the time it comes down to who you know. If you prove yourself as a reliable player who is willing to help, then you won't have trouble "trading up" in terms of alliances. If you're a player that just shows up to take advantage of the space for your own profit by mining/ratting and never participate, then no one will remember your name.

You see nullsec alliances are faced with a dilemma when recruiting. Every alliance (except maybe goons and test because they're big enough already) needs new players. However every player is a security risk, a potential spy, a potential useless person that's only good for putting silly losses and lolfits on the killboard, etc. So we make it hard to get in to try to reduce that risk. But hard is not impossible. Persevere. If you don't, it's because you just don't want it enough.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#123 - 2013-01-02 16:34:52 UTC
AlleyKat wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
This is a person who probably should not even be joining an alliance in the 1st place (and probably didn't even ask himself the question BEFORE joining an alliance).

Group goals take group organization. If your only goal is to "virtually punch people", why would you join an alliance in the 1st place? You can "virtually punch people" on day one of EVE, hell, yo don't even have to BE in a player corp to join faction warfare (for example.

I find it irritating to see people like this poster, people who feel the need to denigrate people who make choices consistent with their goals (like joining a null sec alliance) instead of admitting that THEY made a bad choice they didn't think through.

I've seen many a person do that in real life , like joining the military THEN getting ticked off at the fact that some people can give them orders lol. If you don't like being ordered around, like to be an individual, why would you brilliantly join a uniformed service?

It happens so often people make inside jokes about it , like how a relative who is a Marine told me: "USMC" really stands for "U -Signed the Motherxxxxxxx Contract" (so quit yer bitchin).


Thank you for proving my point?

AK


If your point was "I (Alleykat) was irresponsible in the choices I made" then yes, I did prove your point.

Saying "but it's a game" is a cop-out, everyone with any sense knows or has heard the EVE is a "grind" of a game that in many ways resembles a 2nd job. EVE's player alliances are notoriously military in their outlook and behavior. If you can't get with that program, it simply means your not mentally suited to enjoy a game such as this. Rather than realizing that , you choose to rant and insult people who CAN "get with the program", which is most likely a simple defense of ego.

Accomplishing Group Goals require group heriarchy ("chain of command") and that obviously means subordinating yourself to those goals. High Sec is FULL of people who literally can't do this, which is why you see so many of them in npc corps, and so few of them On (or even voting for) things like the CSM.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#124 - 2013-01-02 16:42:58 UTC
Ptraci wrote:
Taking a huge leap and assuming you're not a troll:

You're in that awkward situation where you have very little to offer a nullsec alliance, so the only alliance that will take you is an alliance full of equally inexperienced players. That doesn't mean you can't get in, there are always corps in any alliance that are somewhat lax/lazy with their recruiting and will take just about anyone. It's a start. After that you get to know people and you could be offered something better.

EvE is as much about networking as anything else in life. A lot of the time it comes down to who you know. If you prove yourself as a reliable player who is willing to help, then you won't have trouble "trading up" in terms of alliances. If you're a player that just shows up to take advantage of the space for your own profit by mining/ratting and never participate, then no one will remember your name.

You see nullsec alliances are faced with a dilemma when recruiting. Every alliance (except maybe goons and test because they're big enough already) needs new players. However every player is a security risk, a potential spy, a potential useless person that's only good for putting silly losses and lolfits on the killboard, etc. So we make it hard to get in to try to reduce that risk. But hard is not impossible. Persevere. If you don't, it's because you just don't want it enough.



Well said.

I have never be rejected from a corp i've applied to. I've been made a manager or director in every corp/alliance i've been in except -A- (I wasn't there long, most of my buddies who came with me from IT to -A- left to join Raiden and i went with them). So much so that it's a bit annoying, i just want to be a grunt and play the game by eventually I get asked to help run things.

I'm not even some brilliant EVE player, i just TALK to people and help out when things need doing. I'm able to do all this because it's natural to me, and so I am able to survive and thrive in null sec.

Lots of other people don't really take stock of themselves before making choices, which is why you find all this "individualist" high sec players who have nothing good to say about null alliances, when the real truth is it's them who are the problem. if i were a less cooperative/more individualistic player, I'd choose do individualistic things. That's just common sense....which is rather uncommon when you think about it Cool
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#125 - 2013-01-02 17:06:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
AlleyKat wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
And I improved it by using a better, more accurate analogy.

Completely changing something does not improve it; it changes it.
In your case, it also improves it. So how's paddleball?
silens vesica
Corsair Cartel
#126 - 2013-01-02 19:00:42 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Ship with shiny bubble. Drop bubble, get primaried.

It's a 'Circle of Life' kinda thing...

Tell someone you love them today, because life is short. But scream it at them in Esperanto, because life is also terrifying and confusing.

Didn't vote? Then you voted for NulBloc

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#127 - 2013-01-02 19:15:30 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Catharian Sabezan wrote:
Someone else mentioned the $10 fee for the Something awful forums. I don't know if anyone in their right mind would give their real name and credit card number, ip address, email address, to a group of people who have a serious rep as scammers. I would think one day you would end up the victim of identity theft.

Yeah, cause scamming in an internet spaceship game where scamming is explicitly allowed translates to a proclivity for scamming in real life where it's illegal.


EVE is Real™


(And All Suicide Gankers are RL Murderers.)


Technically, only if they pod the target no?
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#128 - 2013-01-02 19:17:30 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Thomas Hurt wrote:
Definitely don't join Goonfleet; I wouldn't want to be a part of any group that made you buy friends with $10. They also engage in casual anti-semitism.

The collection of :tenbux: is for our Goon Carrier/Island

Lol, :tenbux:


I spent :tenbux:. Would spend again.
Ginger Barbarella
#129 - 2013-01-02 19:23:17 UTC
Simetraz wrote:
Corps don't rent space per say Alliances do.

Currently there is only one place that I know of that you can go to null as a neutral.
That is CVA space or Providence (they run under NRDS)
Make sure to check you actually are neutral to them though before you go.
From there you could get contacts and start learning where else to go in null.


I thought CVA bailed on that NRDS thing two years ago after they got their arses handed to them...

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac

AlleyKat
The Unwanted.
#130 - 2013-01-02 19:38:55 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
If your point was "I (Alleykat) was irresponsible in the choices I made" then yes, I did prove your point.

Saying "but it's a game" is a cop-out, everyone with any sense knows or has heard the EVE is a "grind" of a game that in many ways resembles a 2nd job. EVE's player alliances are notoriously military in their outlook and behavior. If you can't get with that program, it simply means your not mentally suited to enjoy a game such as this. Rather than realizing that , you choose to rant and insult people who CAN "get with the program", which is most likely a simple defense of ego.

Accomplishing Group Goals require group hierarchy ("chain of command") and that obviously means subordinating yourself to those goals. High Sec is FULL of people who literally can't do this, which is why you see so many of them in npc corps, and so few of them On (or even voting for) things like the CSM.


Yes, you did prove my point.

Regarding group goals; when they are for the benefit of everyone, they work.

Regarding null-sec; your opinions are the very reason high-sec is full of people. They do not want to play by the rules that govern null-sec. I'm not speaking about risk-adverse behavior; but control-adverse behavior.

People do not want to be controlled, especially by other human beings who (introspectively) do not have the right.

In other words - you are saying people can come to null-sec, but must either conform to an existing corporation/alliance; or create one which follows the same rules as the ones who reside there.

Again, it comes back to conflicting ideologies; free-thinkers and conformity. A free-thinker would say 'why?' and a conformist would say nothing for reasons that I cannot comprehend. My lack of comprehension is not a failing, my brain is simply not wired in a way that can conform blindly to something.

Perhaps we lack the in-game necessities/mechanics to govern null-sec effectively - because there no player-created hubs, law enforcement, rules, structure in a very large part of space where the best resources are. No matter what CCP have done or what the CSM (I do vote) discuss and theorise on, has there been anything in practically ten years.

And the response when questions like this are raised? 'get with the program' and 'I guess this game is not for you' - and I'm not berating your answers/statements per sé. I'm suggesting there would need to be a formal introduction of game mechanics to change null-sec by the players.

Should null-sec always be null-sec?

Just because it is null-sec now, does not mean that by player intervention on a large scale it would always need to be.

We have regions of space - these regions should be fought after: I fully agree with that. But, to what end? So the resources can be divided? So that an entity can control a region? So they can use the region to create more wealth and power for their entity? And in the future another entity does the same, ad infinitum?

There is no end-goal for any alliance interested in putting a name on the map to control because this control is an illusion. No alliance controls anything; they have structures and stations, but do not control gates, taxes, laws, jumps or anything - and so require mass numbers in mass fights that CCP spend an inordinate amount of time to appease computationally.

Look, the idea of governship is strongly lacking in the game and I am the last person to suggest it or raise it, but 'fixing the game' can be compartmentalized in a thousand different ways.

Until Alliances can genuinely control regions, complete with all that term embodies, potential recruits are submitting themselves to subservient existence in a large part of the map that cannot be controlled or have an eventuality to it.

Please do not debate this issue to me, debate it to the CSM and hopefully CCP will offer game mechanics to provide null-sec with something of value.

Or you can debate the definition of space exploration and territorial control in a space adventure mmo game to me and get nowhere.

You take a chance either way, but I think you know what I believe.

AK

This space for rent.

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#131 - 2013-01-02 19:55:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
AlleyKat wrote:


Yes, you did prove my point.

Regarding group goals; when they are for the benefit of everyone, they work.

Regarding null-sec; your opinions are the very reason high-sec is full of people. They do not want to play by the rules that govern null-sec. I'm not speaking about risk-adverse behavior; but control-adverse behavior.

People do not want to be controlled, especially by other human beings who (introspectively) do not have the right.


Instead of saying "people", you should say "I". Everyone isn't like you.

And High Sec is "full of people" because in many cases it's just easier to do things.

Quote:

In other words - you are saying people can come to null-sec, but must either conform to an existing corporation/alliance; or create one which follows the same rules as the ones who reside there.


OR they can come and ninja around, OR they can create a social movement so powerful they group up, go to null sec, conquer it then become the same type of conservative overloards they just deposed (looks at Goons and winks :) )

Quote:

Again, it comes back to conflicting ideologies; free-thinkers and conformity. A free-thinker would say 'why?' and a conformist would say nothing for reasons that I cannot comprehend. My lack of comprehension is not a failing, my brain is simply not wired in a way that can conform blindly to something.


Translation: your brain is not wired to be able to subordinate yourself enough to fit into a group. There is nothing wrong with that...EXCEPT THAT THIS IS AN MMO. A single player offline game would suit you better.

I always loved watching those non-conformist kids in high school rail against the realities of the world (the same way many high sec residents rail against the cold realities of the game outside of high sec while they hide behind concord's skirts), realities us "conformists" navigated with extreme ease. EVE is just a big Assed High School in space.

Quote:

Perhaps we lack the in-game necessities/mechanics to govern null-sec effectively - because there no player-created hubs, law enforcement, rules, structure in a very large part of space where the best resources are. No matter what CCP have done or what the CSM (I do vote) discuss and theorise on, has there been anything in practically ten years.

And the response when questions like this are raised? 'get with the program' and 'I guess this game is not for you' - and I'm not berating your answers/statements per sé. I'm suggesting there would need to be a formal introduction of game mechanics to change null-sec by the players.

Should null-sec always be null-sec?

Just because it is null-sec now, does not mean that by player intervention on a large scale it would always need to be.

We have regions of space - these regions should be fought after: I fully agree with that. But, to what end? So the resources can be divided? So that an entity can control a region? So they can use the region to create more wealth and power for their entity? And in the future another entity does the same, ad infinitum?

There is no end-goal for any alliance interested in putting a name on the map to control because this control is an illusion. No alliance controls anything; they have structures and stations, but do not control gates, taxes, laws, jumps or anything - and so require mass numbers in mass fights that CCP spend an inordinate amount of time to appease computationally.

Look, the idea of governship is strongly lacking in the game and I am the last person to suggest it or raise it, but 'fixing the game' can be compartmentalized in a thousand different ways.

Until Alliances can genuinely control regions, complete with all that term embodies, potential recruits are submitting themselves to subservient existence in a large part of the map that cannot be controlled or have an eventuality to it.

Please do not debate this issue to me, debate it to the CSM and hopefully CCP will offer game mechanics to provide null-sec with something of value.

Or you can debate the definition of space exploration and territorial control in a space adventure mmo game to me and get nowhere.

You take a chance either way, but I think you know what I believe.

AK


I pretty much didn't read any of this, it's just a lot of words masking a fact. That fact is you're not the right type for null sec. That YOU aren't the right type for null sec doesn't mean null needs to change, as there are literally thousands upon thousands of us who "live" there as it is just fine.

Most gamers are like you (which is partially why the high sec population numbers look the way they do, EVEN in a hardcore pvp-centric multiplayer game many people opt out of pvp and even social interaction) but also like you, they don't really take stock of themselves, and have little ability to say "this thing is not for me, and that's ok, I'll do something else.

This is why we always have the "EVE would get so many more subs if" type threads. Yea, EVE would get more subs if CCP totally sold out the way themepark MMOs do, by catering to what the player wants rather than what a good niche game needs, but then the game would cease being EVE.

TL:DR There really is no problem, null sec if mostly fine, anything done to it to make it attractive to people like you would ruin it.
No More Heroes
Boomer Humor
Snuffed Out
#132 - 2013-01-02 20:10:07 UTC  |  Edited by: No More Heroes
Kaylyis wrote:
Ok, in null you are cog in machine. I accept this, and am willing to work. Mindless cog in machine that only drools when waiting for orders from on high (this is the highsec perception) is what I wish to dodge. Cog in machine that is allowed to do **** on the side is what I want. I want to do a few things. like learn fleet command. I can only do this by... joining fleets and learning how they operate


Any organization worth their salt will have content for members. Meaning: things to do. Most of the 'things to do' in 0.0 are categorized as either pve or pvp. Spaceholding alliances will have upgraded systems where there are always at least 10 or so anomalies, maxed out ones will have Sanctums and Havens and stuff. So ratting is a thing for some and others do exploration, the types of sites you find in deep 0.0 are much better 10/10 possible than in high or low sec.

As far as the cog in a machine goes- large organizations like us have 'squads' or special interest groups that do different things together like cloaky stuff, blackops, hotdrops, and deploying to various areas other than where we live; as a way for people to make friends and not feel like such a faceless cog in a massive machine.

Waiting around for orders is up to you- like last night I was working some Caldari State standings on my station trader when a broadcast went out and a fleet went up because a thing was happening. I could've kept doing my thing on my station trader but instead I logged to this guy and got in the fleet, went out and accomplished our task, had some pvp, lost a Maelstrom and went home. Sometimes things are scheduled in advance like when timers are coming out during regional conflicts, those are really easy to plan your playtime for.

Right now after almost a full calendar year of war and conquest we are at relative peace, so theres not a whole lot going on. I can go to Syndicate where one squad is and do the small gang stuff with those guys or I can go with the other smaller groups that have been heading eastward; and often do. This is just a tiny snapshot of what life is like in 0.0 but I couldn't imagine living any other way.

.

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#133 - 2013-01-02 20:17:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
No More Heroes wrote:
Kaylyis wrote:
Ok, in null you are cog in machine. I accept this, and am willing to work. Mindless cog in machine that only drools when waiting for orders from on high (this is the highsec perception) is what I wish to dodge. Cog in machine that is allowed to do **** on the side is what I want. I want to do a few things. like learn fleet command. I can only do this by... joining fleets and learning how they operate


Any organization worth their salt will have content for members. Meaning: things to do. Most of the 'things to do' in 0.0 are categorized as either pve or pvp. Spaceholding alliances will have upgraded systems where there are always at least 10 or so anomalies, maxed out ones will have Sanctums and Havens and stuff. So ratting is a thing for some and others do exploration, the types of sights you find in deep 0.0 are much better 10/10 possible than in high or low sec.

As far as the cog in a machine goes- large organizations like us have 'squads' or special interest groups that do different things together like cloaky stuff, blackops, hotdrops, and deploying to various areas other than where we live; as a way for people to make friends and not feel like such a faceless cog in a massive machine.

Waiting around for orders is up to you- like last night I was working some Caldari State standings on my station trader when a broadcast went out and a fleet went up because a thing was happening. I could've kept doing my thing on my station trader but instead I logged to this guy and got in the fleet, went out and accomplished our task, had some pvp, lost a Maelstrom and went home. Sometimes things are scheduled in advance like when timers are coming out during regional conflicts, those are really easy to plan your playtime for.

Right now after almost a full calendar year of war and conquest we are at relative peace, so theres not a whole lot going on. I can go to Syndicate where one squad is and do the small gang stuff with those guys or I can go with the other smaller groups that have been heading eastward; and often do. This is just a tiny snapshot of what life is like in 0.0 but I couldn't imagine living any other way.


Down with you, you mindless conformist.

How dare you have freedom to choose your in-game activities and then choose to participate with other people despite the fact that it wasn't YOUR original idea to do that activity? Don't you know you should be a free thinker, which means free enough to think up a crappost in GD about how crummy everyone else is?!?

If y'all have sarcasm meters, turn them off for this thread Lol .
Inxentas Ultramar
Ultramar Independent Contracting
#134 - 2013-01-02 22:55:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Inxentas Ultramar
Jenn aSide wrote:
If you can't get with that program, it simply means your not mentally suited to enjoy a game such as this.


Hold on there missy... would you mind if I stopped you in your tracks a bit there? Roll

You probably mean mentally suited to enjoy nullsec life? Because as you know, Eve also has a few places outside of hisec where a non-military mindset can work out fine. Lowsec and WH are fine alternatives if you want to hang out somewhere in between individualistic play and co-operation.

But I agree fully on the principle of your point, namely the willingness of people to contribute to group goals. This isn't fully absent outside of null and - believe it or not - it happens in hisec too. Organized industry, co-operative mission running... it's more casual, but that doesn't mean it's less social or absent of group goals. Doing the grind for hisec JC's together is just as valid a group goal then blasting that TCU, don't you agree?

The different secs are there for a reason: you should pick one that agrees with your playstyle, and demands a level of cooperation you feel most comfortable with. I personally feel I need some group goals to keep me interested in the game, but I also dislike having to deal with lots of complex coalition politics. Lowsec and WH are thus logical choices for me, and despite null being attractive ISK wise I prefer the herpaderpa pvp going on everywhere else.

$$$/Fun is a more logical calculation then ISK/Hr Big smile Chose your sec accordingly.
AlleyKat
The Unwanted.
#135 - 2013-01-03 00:30:38 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

I pretty much didn't read any of this, it's just a lot of words masking a fact. That fact is you're not the right type for null sec. That YOU aren't the right type for null sec doesn't mean null needs to change, as there are literally thousands upon thousands of us who "live" there as it is just fine.

Most gamers are like you (which is partially why the high sec population numbers look the way they do, EVEN in a hardcore pvp-centric multiplayer game many people opt out of pvp and even social interaction) but also like you, they don't really take stock of themselves, and have little ability to say "this thing is not for me, and that's ok, I'll do something else.

This is why we always have the "EVE would get so many more subs if" type threads. Yea, EVE would get more subs if CCP totally sold out the way themepark MMOs do, by catering to what the player wants rather than what a good niche game needs, but then the game would cease being EVE.

TL:DR There really is no problem, null sec if mostly fine, anything done to it to make it attractive to people like you would ruin it.


I'm not masking any facts, and I'm not specifically arguing with you; I'm arguing for null sec to actually mean something - sorry if was not clear from the post you admit to not reading.

Not even trolling or baiting. Honestly. And no, that was not masked reverse-psychology. Neither was that. Or that.

Wouldn't null-sec be better if it actually had a control system, that actually meant something.

I went there and other than belt rats and asteroids being worth more, what exactly is the point or goal of being in null-sec? Territorial control as I already stated in the post you didn't read is an illusion.

Wouldn't it be better if instead of a CSM, Alliance leaders of the main regional control met to discuss and debate? Isn't that worth something?; To actually and genuinely 'own' something and control it through tax, trade, commerce?

As it stands right now; you either sell your goods at cost to your alliance/corps or give them away for 'official PvP duty', or, you haul them to Jita via long and laborious route.

Wouldn't it be better to have direct control over who comes in and out of the regions you control and setup trade and real markets?

Isn't that something worth fighting for? Or is that you (plural) simply want to kill anyone that does not conform to your ideologies? Because that's the easy thing to do - all you need to do is point a finger and say 'I do not like you and I am going to kill you' The hard thing to do is govern and work hard to actually create something.

That's working together that mutually benefits - and until that happens, all anyone needs to do to 'invade' space is to get an alt and get a velator and fly to null-sec. You have now been invaded - grats. I know this because I did it on my first day playing the game.

Now, if you (again - plural) actually had control over systems/regions, this would not be possible, but it is.

That is poor game design and until it is fixed, null-sec has no meaning other than (excuse the vulgarity) a pissing contest amongst children who will keep doing this until they are drenched in each others urine, or one of them runs out of 'ammunition'.

Sorry - but I did not create the game, but show me a piece of paper that says null-sec territorial control needs to mean something other than this, and I'll sign it.

What I won't do is sign myself up for something that has no more meaning than that which I have stated.

It's not about ISK, it's about an MMO with no goal disguised as 'the ultimate sandbox' - if you mean it is an arid dry landscape, you are correct; if you mean it has spades and tools to build and create an Empire that will overwatch all territories through brilliant governship, you are not.

If null-sec meant something, people will either return to it or go to it - until then it is, sadly, what it is.

AK

This space for rent.

Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#136 - 2013-01-03 10:06:24 UTC
AlleyKat wrote:


I went there and other than belt rats and asteroids being worth more, what exactly is the point or goal of being in null-sec? Territorial control as I already stated in the post you didn't read is an illusion.

...

As it stands right now; you either sell your goods at cost to your alliance/corps or give them away for 'official PvP duty', or, you haul them to Jita via long and laborious route.



Sounds like you don't "get" it, or you've had the unfortunate experience of being in one of those alliances that treat their members like drones.

The whole point of nullsec is you get together with a bunch of friends on teamspeak. You chat and have fun while you run your sites, mine, build your stuff, do PI, etc. Once you've got enough income like, after half a day, you buy fancy ships and modules and go out with your comms buddies and tear your neighbors a new one. Or get wtfpwned. It's all good fun. Once in a while you get roamed, so you form up with your friends and try to wtfpwn the roamers. Sometimes you take the bait. Sometimes you set a trap for them. You learn tactics and stuff.

And yeah once in a while you have to really, seriously defend your space, with CTA's every day, sometimes even several times a day. That is a pain. But it has to be done. Good thing it's not all the time.

If you join an alliance where they treat roams as "CTA's" and burn people out regularly, where they force you to sell your stuff on the market at a loss, where all the product of your labor goes to the alliance, then quit that alliance and join another one. They're not all like that.
Aracimia Wolfe
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#137 - 2013-01-03 12:56:12 UTC
Threads like this make me miss being in the CFC.

I better go find my :tenbux:

Kill it with Fire!

AlleyKat
The Unwanted.
#138 - 2013-01-03 13:17:57 UTC
Ptraci wrote:
Sounds like you don't "get" it, or you've had the unfortunate experience of being in one of those alliances that treat their members like drones.

The whole point of nullsec is you get together with a bunch of friends on teamspeak. You chat and have fun while you run your sites, mine, build your stuff, do PI, etc. Once you've got enough income like, after half a day, you buy fancy ships and modules and go out with your comms buddies and tear your neighbors a new one. Or get wtfpwned. It's all good fun. Once in a while you get roamed, so you form up with your friends and try to wtfpwn the roamers. Sometimes you take the bait. Sometimes you set a trap for them. You learn tactics and stuff.

And yeah once in a while you have to really, seriously defend your space, with CTA's every day, sometimes even several times a day. That is a pain. But it has to be done. Good thing it's not all the time.

If you join an alliance where they treat roams as "CTA's" and burn people out regularly, where they force you to sell your stuff on the market at a loss, where all the product of your labor goes to the alliance, then quit that alliance and join another one. They're not all like that.


All valid points, but that is more day to day operations instead of an actual measurable goal long term that can influence actual measurable change on a system/constellation/region/territory.

As it stands now, today, is as you've described; which is akin to rinse and repeat or just repeat - and I'm not denying the fun which can be had or would wish to take anything away from anyone, but there is a certain futility to what alliance warfare is.

If there were genuine governorship of space and territory able to have direct control over travel/tax/law/markets - then you have a collective goal to attempt to control a region.

Looking at the structure of power, I think corporations and alliances do not have enough power, or rather, that there needs to be more options for the creation of entity types. Example; right now there is no difference in an alliance which has 10 corporations in it totally 1,000 characters or one which has 100 corporations in it totaling the same.

What I'm getting at is there needs to be more than alliances and corporations, and structurally an entire region should be made up of systems/constellations/regions with a clear divide on which entities can control what.
So, a corporation can control a solar system which can be fought over by another corporation, but nothing larger than a corporation can control a solar system. If you then extend this to constellations/regions/territories and apply governorship you could have a tiered structure to combat.

Blergh, my head needs to think some more on this and take it to CSM for them to ignore.

AK

This space for rent.

Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#139 - 2013-01-03 14:11:23 UTC
AlleyKat wrote:

Blergh, my head needs to think some more on this and take it to CSM for them to ignore.


ROFL