EVE General Discussion

By the way, there are already proven services to move stuff around lowsec, no matter which corp or alliance or faction you are in, and no matter what station your stuff is located in. There is pretty much no risk, it's just an additional hassle. You just won't be able to stage out of a system that you don't officially own.

You never wondered how a 1600mm plate can cover all of a 1.6km long Apoc just as easily as it can cover all of a 160m long Guardian? Or how armor plates only have a mass when they're fitted to a ship instead of being carried by one? This is the kind of bizarre stuff we accept without thinking because it makes the game actually work.




There's nothing to stop people from fighting the other militia just as fiercely as pirates as they can as militia members.



It is a little surprising, but we don't know anything about the mechanics of cynojammers yet so it's harder to complain. Plus it's pretty easy to abuse FW mechanics, so they probably think there's a good chance that they can get an alt in to control the jammer. Hell, maybe they'll just push them into RF and give themselves a brief window to restock by carrier.



You don't need to get around the system when you can simply decline to be part of it.

People who want to pvp quit a side with a target rich enviroment to join the "winning side" which has less targets to get more kills? Yea, that makes sense.





I'll go with my experiences in game over the last 6 years over some philosophical wiki link posted by someone who clearly is far too cowardly to fight in a war.

[quote=baltec1

People who want to pvp quit a side with a target rich enviroment to join the "winning side" which has less targets to get more kills? Yea, that makes sense.[/quote
I was talking about the pirate advanage, not the glory hunter problem


[quote
"The tragedy of the commons is a dilemma arising from the situation in which multiple individuals, acting independently and rationally consulting their own self-interest, will ultimately deplete a shared limited resource, even when it is clear that it is not in anyone's long-term interest for this to happen.

This is worth a read to see what happens in these situations.[/quote

I'll go with my experiences in game over the last 6 years over some philosophical wiki link posted by someone who clearly is far too cowardly to fight in a war.[/quote

So a person's ability to analyze a situation is based on their experience of shooting people? Mighty big epeen you're fondling there.

In reality it's better to think about militia in economic terms. Militia people join up because they gain something from militia. This can be either kills, mission LP, or a sense of RP achievement. In real wars the vast majority of soldiers are compelled to fight, either because they are conscripted or because they are part of a hierarchy that will imprison or execute them if they don't. Since people can quit militia, and indeed quit EVE without being put in front of a firing squad, the incentives for playing must be broadly positive. When it's all about rewards rather than threats it's basically economics

As far as the stations specifically owned by the militias or the navys I agree. But the stations owned by private corporations the current mechanics make sense. If you have low standings with the corps faction you have some negatives but thats about it.

Im talking about experience not epeen. Having spent the last 6 years fighting wars all across EVE I think I can safely say I have experience in the matter. Also, the british army is made up entirely by volunteers so lets do away with that lie right now.

This is a horrible back and forth, and very weak argument. There will always be reasons someone will not participate in something. Example: Being -10 and essentially locked out of most areas of high-sec, one could argue this is a terrible mechanic because it incentivizes people to not engage in non-consensual PVP. However quite the opposite takes place, people want to take part in this type of PVP, and in fact many are quite proud of there -10 standing.

So you'll have to come up with something better than an "I know you are but what am I" argument.



Thanks for your agreement here - this is exactly the sort of thing CCP wants.



The "pirate gap" is a non-sensical response because you are talking about two separate "features." Faction Warfare has a purpose that is finally being outlined quite clearly. Piracy is something else entirely different. If someone doesn't want to join FW, then why the frack do you care? Seems to me you should be more worried about correcting this risk/challenge-averse attitude you seem to think all FW pilots have. Pretty pathetic for a group that "wants" to PVP. Or perhaps that's the problem, you're upset that you'll be forced to PVP now? Maybe you're the anomaly, the stealth bomber pilot who farms LP all day and is now going to be less able to do so.

That video showed CCP has thought about the long term consequences, and specifically they sort of hope one side beats the **** out of another and takes all the opposing systems "We kind of hope this goes horribly wrong." The argument that people are going to quickly switch sides is silly with the addition of the Datacores being only achievable via FW LP. Suddenly the price of the losing factions datacores go through the roof. But wait, is that another incentive to take part? Gosh who'd have thought.



Just cuz you illustrate the point of my last paragraph so well.

See, I don't think an argument like this is about experience, but if you want to play that game then I probably know a lot more than you. I've been in Gallente Militia for more than two years, and have had spies in Caldari militia for at least a year. I've fought in battles big, small and solo, I've run missions on both sides and I've done plenty of plexing. I know who the main players are, I know something of their motives, and I know about the mechanics that are in the game at the moment.




Volunteers who are now part of a hierarchy. Who get imprisoned if they disobey the orders of their central command, and who, once they are shipped into the warzone have no choice to keep fighting. They can't leave the army at a moment's notice, and they can't log off and play SWTOR instead of army. If they don't do their job they or their friends die. You can't coerce people in the same way in EVE as you have to in even a volunteer army. It's a terrible analogy.

False - A player could go to 0.0, or Wormhole space and commit the same acts of violence at no loss to sec status. Whether or not this is superior is debatable, some will say yes, others will say no - it's a matter of opinion.



The idea of pirates joining FW to circumvent a cyno jammer, was an example. The sorts of things CCP want to see are players infiltrating each-others factions or behind the back dealings with the enemy faction to get access to ships and such in hangars. Taken from the other FW thread.





Again, wrong. Non-faction piracy and faction warfare are seperate, and different from eachother. The fact that they take place in the same systems are irrelevant, that is like saying mining and mission running are the same thing because they happen in the same systems. If you want to go the route of competing alternatives, you have 0.0 both NPC and Sov, you have high-sec wars (which seem like they are getting fixed,) you have wormhole PVP. All of these are "competing" alternative forms of PVP, and yet the pirates are still pirates, the null pvpers still do there thing, the wormholers do theres, and the FW players also continue to do there thing, even though it's been horribly broken for a long time. Says alot about the motivations for each group, which appears to be that they simply like playing that role in the universe.

The rewards don't sound like they are going to be over the top ridiculous, but as you said it's a bit foggy as to how great these rewards are, but it can't be much worse than the way it is now with alts farming LP.

I...actually like this change