These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Corporations, Wardecs, and yet another thread about them.

Author
Nylith Empyreal
Sutar Rein
#1 - 2012-02-29 04:38:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Nylith Empyreal
We always see these circle jerks of real world and game comparisons. Ie. that whole Allies / Axis having to meet one another in terms of surrender and then it's about risk reward, nothing should be 'free'. As someone who loves history I'll always lean to realism, but I can agree nothing should be free and you should be safe no where.

We have four major empires, I have no idea why they would allow combat within their own zones and without their sanctions, honestly **** concord, who the hell follows this geneva crap? Do you really think the Amarr empress is really going to go 'ok' these two corps that have declared war on each other to happen in her borders? I apologize I'm probably losing you on this political bullshit but it's stands.

It is of my proposition to give made corps in a sense, two options. One that demands affiliation with an empire, and simple put one that doesn't. You're going to point straight to Faction warfare and they should join this subjugation for the proposing purpose, but not every branch of a nation is 'waring' we got the banks etc. surely they're funding the war, but these fat bastards aren't in it.

While the navies battle one another in lowsec, they would be in essence in highsec, to which I propose a complete 'lessening' of the faction 'security' wnere both business in opposing empires would be at constant war and of course to the opposing navies. The benefit they have scaling protection, an opposing fleet is going to lose muscle after wedging itself deep into highsec to pop a miner, but this at the same time barricades and reduces their movements to which they are in essence locked into two empires, but safe within their respective borders. You are not perfectly safe, this will encourage a larger front in regards to the war, but I don't think the caldari navy gave two ***** when they shuved a titan up the gallente's ass. But you're protector by a scaling navy, in the sense of wear and tear of incoming hostiles, should an outside bystander seek to engage one of these skirmishes they are declaring war with the empire shot, and will have to pay accordingly in regards to peace(this assuming they chose to opt. out of empire bit).

No, I do not suggest electing an alliance lord of the gallente federation like the navy as ccp seems to wish. They like any corporation in an established world do what they can in the legal bindings they reside. Now given that it would essentially limit you to base amongst your nation and your nations ally, and you can be willingly shot by the aggressing empire. You cannot be wardec'd by your own militia or your allies militia.

The original concept was that you cannot wardec one another, as it would be silly for an empire to allow infighting. I'm sure one could argue whoever pays the most to the authorities about might turn a blinds eye for a moment or two, but intelligence will catch you eventually. But like npc corps require a tax, you're going to have to pay for the navy that protects you and all the other penny pinching the empires are willing to turn your upside down upon. I'm sure the price and percent can be negotiable, depending on the strength deemed crucial to the different navies by ccp. Hell could even make it based on what the various corps are willing to put in on average and that will strengthen or lessen the rats. Combinations of the federation and the militia contributing to the empire for it's security.

For those who opt out the empire choice, you're concord's list of self declared entities. You may roam freely where ever you want within the empires and wardec each other to whatever desire, you may even wardec an empires corp, but you'll have to deal with their navy if you seek such, and will effect standings as such. Minmatar will tolerate your war only to a point as it is now with basic missions. As with indirect help via missions etc.

i think it's pointless to discuss the mechanics specifically other than saying that any 'duck-dodge' abilities will now be scrapped under this system. You're not completely protected in any fashion(not that you were much now given a dedicated group.) But the odds are in your favor to contribute to the space you chose to live in, and truly make it all player driven.
This is my suggestion on what should be done, I played eve on and off, I don't claim to be utterly and completely knowledgeable. In regards to niche things like suicide ganking, well they have to make the trip through every security ridden gate to get to you, and that stealth is unphased, a dedicated group should be able to stealth there way in and apply terrorism as needed.

I'm sure I'm missing something, no I'm not doing a TLDR I welcome anyone to do so though, though I'm sure it'll be troll-like. It matters not to me truly if this is favored or not, I'll deal, I think it adds a spice and removes this dec dodging and reward/risk bs. No i'm not an alt, I sold my main 'Rakwa' and decided to reroll. Alts don't look this good Blink

Who's the more foolish the fool or the fool who replies to him?

Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#2 - 2012-02-29 07:17:12 UTC
The general intent I get from your post seems good, but your off on some of the lore, and therefore the mechanics suggested also seem a bit off base to me. I think your conceptualizing EVE too much in the framework of our real world Nation States in the current era.

That said ditching CONCORD as the uber unbeatable space cops is good, making players tie themselves to NPC Factions in order to gain protection from random Wardecs and other attacks is good, and making remaining wardecs unavoidable also good.
Nylith Empyreal
Sutar Rein
#3 - 2012-02-29 16:05:48 UTC
My biased is to real world tendancies, I wont lie, and it's been a while since I've read any of the short stories. In either case I was trying to divide as much of it as I could to both hinder and support. I'm all too well welcome of suggestions.

Who's the more foolish the fool or the fool who replies to him?

Velicitia
XS Tech
#4 - 2012-02-29 16:11:41 UTC
Pretty much, the reason that the empires let us shoot each other in the face (after getting the OK from CONCORD) is that they know if they got in our way, we'd obliterate them. CONCORD is the only entity that has any real sway in our affairs (and the firepower to do anything about us).

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Nylith Empyreal
Sutar Rein
#5 - 2012-02-29 16:19:16 UTC
Really, why are we even created then in their empire if we're uncontrollable? Or is it some private service. It's been a while since I've read into pod pilot origins.

Who's the more foolish the fool or the fool who replies to him?

Velicitia
XS Tech
#6 - 2012-02-29 16:38:15 UTC
The empires essentially create us as a deterrence to the other empires (see: cold war arms race).
Once created however, we're no longer "directly" controllable by the empires ... sure we help them out (missions, FW), but most of us go off and do our own thing. CONCORD was created to oversee us and make sure we wouldn't (coundn't?) actually overthrow the empires.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Nylith Empyreal
Sutar Rein
#7 - 2012-02-29 16:45:18 UTC
Fair enough, but truly given the current state know all to well of power and by organization seek to take which is already established? And by extension the pod pilots patriotically inclined would rise to aid them? I understand it's all in mechanics at this point, i doubt ccp will go outright say we can conquer highsec places thus making them nullsec.

But they do have plans as I remember it to make both fw and nullsec sov the same thus allowing the conquering of both planes, I see why not this wouldn't broaden the war and force said empires to want these massive pod pilot corps to join their empire in exchange for protection. NPC corps I would just leave as is, undeckable etc etc. I would suggest starting us out in concord controlled agencies, but that is a new section of changing tutorials and what have you.

Who's the more foolish the fool or the fool who replies to him?

Velicitia
XS Tech
#8 - 2012-02-29 17:05:01 UTC
I don't exactly follow your first paragraph. Though I was unclear in my last post.

Provided that we're in NPC corps (e.g. FNA, like yourself), then we are effectively "agents of the empire" (though, they still have relatively little control over us -- see:suicide ganking). Once we "sever" those ties by joining a player-run corporation, then the empires no longer have any say over what we do. If a capsuleer is "patriotically inclined", they sign up to be part of the militia (either as part of the NPC militia corporation, or as a capsuleer-led "mercenary"* corporation) .

I think you're misunderstanding what they're doing with FW and SOV. The plan is to use FW as a smaller-scale test bed for the new mechanics, rather than breaking everything in null. If it works for FW too, then that's just a bonus and they don't have to touch it later to make FW actually work.

*mercenary in the sense that they're employed by the faction, and not formally part of its navy/militia.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Plyn
Uncharted.
#9 - 2012-02-29 17:30:08 UTC
I like the gist of your proposal, though it does yearn for some smoothing between the lore and mechanics.

However, I think you would find it difficult to get much of the highsec community on board for such a massive change.

Ironically, I expect more of the highsec bear population to oppose this as a highsec nerf, while the people it really hurts the most are the wardec-griefers. Corporations don't have to declare, and thus can move around freely and go about their business as they always have. Missioning corps, and mining corps that don't see the need to travel much, can declare and continue their highsec ISK train in near complete safety... suicide ganks still happen, but no more decs ruining their ops.

I think this benefits the majority of the players, mechanic wise. This also makes the game much more immersive, and creates a conflict system that makes a lot more sense than the indiscriminate slaughter-fest that currently goes on inside empire borders.

This gets a +1 from me.
Nylith Empyreal
Sutar Rein
#10 - 2012-02-29 19:22:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Nylith Empyreal
Ugh forum troll, why must you eat my thoughts.

Trully history changes, the fact they wish to involve alliances into the militias by extension seek their aid. Which would inspire others to involve themselves as well. But those not structured or PVP inclined can aid indirectly via the protection of boarders and the space they reside in. I do not wish them to be completely safe, any desperate force will truck there way in the same way the caldari did straight to caldari prime and i would like to see the same. As proposed above adds a bit of terrorism aspects via stealth and what have you.

I know they are using FW as a test groudn for sov mechanics, but assuming both turned out the same it would be of an interesting thought to get directly involved both null / high empires in wars. Given the drama undoubtably added via the whole militia president, behind the scenes coversion will be present in some form. And like any particular empire it would be in their best interest to persuade those not within those secs to join them in opposition of the others.

This is atleast my thought process on what such nations would possible do. It might not follow these direct lines, but surely the commoner must be weary of know there are pod pilots who own more than there entire empire combined. This is of course an extension of my proposal I do not wish to extend this far without knowing the basis of, works. Given responses have been fairly neutral i'd like to see this tweeked as needed, by those lore inclined and machiavellian inclined while acknowledging that people will avoid pvp as they can, but given an indirect way for them to pvp without doing so might be a better alternative to forcing them outright. While still acknowledging they are not completely free riding and that it's still in the realm of their possibility to lose their ships. The more they hoard the more they'll lose.

Edit: We know they are working on crimewatch and by extension of wardecs, however from what is read though they seem to know what they wish to act upon in crimewatch there has been no mention of the directions of wardecs. I do not like griefer corps, however giving them a designation as terrorist is far more wanton, and they have to suffer the consequences as well because of it. As stated above, you join empire and hoard wealth your safety declines and by extension you'll lose more in reason to. If you seek to engage in terrorism (which I fully endorse over the term griefer and holds weight in this type of reality, such as the nyx driving into a station like at the start of FW) you will be ousted and hunted in the respective empire while welcomed in the others, albiet indirectly supported.

No further thoughts for or against? I understood eve players love tearing up this perticular topic in regards to wardecs Shocked

Who's the more foolish the fool or the fool who replies to him?

Nylith Empyreal
Sutar Rein
#11 - 2012-03-01 15:02:24 UTC
Bump

Who's the more foolish the fool or the fool who replies to him?

Kahz Niverrah
Distinguished Johnsons
#12 - 2012-03-01 17:48:59 UTC
EVE spaceships handle like submarines. Your realism argument is invalid.

I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main.

Nylith Empyreal
Sutar Rein
#13 - 2012-03-01 18:19:41 UTC
Kahz Niverrah wrote:
EVE spaceships handle like submarines. Your realism argument is invalid.


No kidding? That was a decision made to ease the load on servers and to promote grander feet fights, doesn't mean nothing else can't be realistic. Ugh, why am I arguing you didn't even read beyond a paragraph or two.

Who's the more foolish the fool or the fool who replies to him?

Kahz Niverrah
Distinguished Johnsons
#14 - 2012-03-01 18:38:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Kahz Niverrah
Nylith Empyreal wrote:
you didn't even read beyond a paragraph or two.
I think that's being a little optimistic.

I don't always post on the forums, but when I do, I post with my main.

Nylith Empyreal
Sutar Rein
#15 - 2012-03-01 22:17:12 UTC
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, how foolish of me.

Who's the more foolish the fool or the fool who replies to him?

Plyn
Uncharted.
#16 - 2012-03-03 06:50:08 UTC
Dont feed the trolls!

It hurts your argument.

I was expecting this to get blasted with stuff i didn't consider!

Am I to believe people actually stand behind this idea?
Nylith Empyreal
Sutar Rein
#17 - 2012-03-03 07:06:05 UTC
Now now, though none have taken a stance against there are certainly none in uproar for it's proposal. And yes, I know not to feed the trolls, but I took it as a chance to bump the topic a bit. That said always welcome to see more support, or atleast activity, good or bad. Don't jinx it yet.

Who's the more foolish the fool or the fool who replies to him?

TheBreadMuncher
Protus Correction Facility Inc.
#18 - 2012-03-03 18:38:43 UTC
Problem is, concord is meant to be a kind of "USA" in the international politics of EVE. They can intervene into anyone's affairs and get away with it because they've got massive egos.

"We will create the introduction thread if that is requested by the community. Also, we will have an ISD Seminar about the CCL team in the coming weeks in which you can ask your questions about the CCL team and provide some constructive feedback to us." - Countless pages of locked threads and numerous permabanned accounts later, change is coming.

Nylith Empyreal
Sutar Rein
#19 - 2012-03-03 18:42:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Nylith Empyreal
TheBreadMuncher wrote:
Problem is, concord is meant to be a kind of "USA" in the international politics of EVE. They can intervene into anyone's affairs and get away with it because they've got massive egos.


Does not mean they cannot lose said influence due to shakey ties in truce and interaction with capsuleers, and they do not hold a significant amount of sov / fleet power to engage everyone let alone a mixed coalition.

In regards to them one shotting ships, they use to not have that kind of power and they technically aren't that powerful, CCP uses them in regards as guards in way WoW has guards protecting Light's Hope chapel, though they were level 40 and now 85 it doesn't detract that they are still just guards and no more.

Who's the more foolish the fool or the fool who replies to him?

Velicitia
XS Tech
#20 - 2012-03-03 19:39:05 UTC
CONCORD stuff

It's not much (any) of the backstory, but it'll probably help you.

As for CONCORD (technically, the DED) being able to insta-kill us ... if we could tank them (again), groups like m0o would lock-down Jita or something (again). Not saying this is a bad thing per se...

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

12Next page