Two problems with this: First, as mentioned, "indie" is a poor label outright, for reasons this thread has made clear. Second, we bought the entire planet, wholesale, extremely cheaply. (Any tiny indy group can do this, alliance or no alliance.) We did it largely because we figured we'd have some such big power come attack us sooner or later (ended up being sooner), and were hoping having the extraneous districts would draw out the event, so we could get more practice. Unfortunately, we weren't expecting like three major powers to come simultaneously hit us on the same day.

Thankfully, I feel our alliance has risen to the occasion, as we haven't no-showed a single fight, even though we're facing between 5 and 10 fights a day with a very small number of participating players that can actually field proto gear.



We were working on coordinating some attacks before a bunch of EoN and Zion ringers as well as the ROFL alliance all attacked us simultaneously. We're sorry we can't handle more than the ten fights per night we've demonstrated we can handle.



With probably about 600 of which not playing, at all. (Goons are busy waging war in EVE, and some of our corps don't purge inactives often enough. Game is dying and such.) And a lot of the rest have low SP.

well by that definition there are literally 2 or 3 corps that could be considered that...

maybe

I agree the 'indie' name just needs to go, which is why we're trying to sort out what it should be and who should be included.

if we abolish all labels, the landscape will be much less diverse in a matter of days...

which is why I keep TRYING to get some sort of understanding amongst everyone regarding the distinction

One of the options with a three tier distinction would be the ability for a corp to fall back down, but not all the way. For instance:

Low Tier: New, inexperienced, entering PC. Once you leave low tier, you aren't coming back.

Mid Tier: Stable, less competitive. As a corp or alliance, capable of fielding full teams, and winning against other midtier corps. Collapsed top tier alliances and corps might also now be classed here.

Top Tier: Those who would pubstomp any Mid Tier or Low Tier corps or alliances they attacked. Highly competitive, large territory is likely or possible.

i dont mind being a low tier now, as i will eventually pull my corp into mid tier. its just that all i see here is another way to label the 'not-so-good players/corps as scrubs or wutever other lingo us gamers use.

Hmm... I think low tier corps should be given free space when available, mid tiers should pay for it. Once you're stable, you shouldn't need charity, and if you need to buy in again, you should be able to raise the funds.

One of my big peeves with the existing/previous concept: I think regardless of whether a current match is attack or defense, if a corp initiates hostilities within it's own tier, it can't ring people from a higher tier. (For instance, if mid tier Corp A attacks mid tier Corp B, and Corp B retaliates, Corp A can't ring a top tier for defense. Reap what you sow, and such. Let the fight play out.)

There really shouldn't be any restrictions on "ringing" if it's within groups among your own tier. Everyone should be able to fill a 16-man team, even if that means calling in another corp to help.

just playing pubs I make over 20m a week.. just ME, and I don't play nearly as much as I did.

Ive gotten to the point where I believe its time that us among landowners and active participants in PC to sit down and make a hard definition of 'indie' as this has several definitions currently and lots of people are abusing the term and using it to ring, hold land, attack so and so, etc etc.




ANY corp that calls themselves 'indie' MUST have personnel to wage a battle.

ANY corp that is established and experienced cannot fall under this 'Indie' label
example: 187, Pro Hic (were independent before), STB, and many others.

ANY corp that acquires a preset # of districts is no longer considered 'indie' 3 is the current # still up for discussion

*removed* alliance membership being a factor

the entire premise of the term 'indie' is for the little guy... the corp that is up and coming, building up their roster and bottom line are at an SP and experience level much lower than the veteran corps.

I now open the floor for discussion. I will edit the OP as we agree on parts of the definition

Rogatien Merc:

New Eden's Most Wanted is 33 players, with never more than 6 or 7 online at the same time, and you place us on the same pedestal as Molon Labe.? I mean, we're making progress, I'm proud of our team. B

Realistically, in New Eden, there should not be any special considerations given to anyone, everyone should torch everyone else, and such and such. Sandbox. The problem is, unlike EVE, DUST has a sandbox with no sand, that we've all roughly figured out becomes no fun if we use it as intended.

This discussion shouldn't be necessary. But it is. Because CCP sucks.

One of the options with a three tier distinction would be the ability for a corp to fall back down, but not all the way. For instance:

Low Tier: New, inexperienced, entering PC. Once you leave low tier, you aren't coming back.

Mid Tier: Stable, less competitive. As a corp or alliance, capable of fielding full teams, and winning against other midtier corps. Collapsed top tier alliances and corps might also now be classed here.

Top Tier: Those who would pubstomp any Mid Tier or Low Tier corps or alliances they attacked. Highly competitive, large territory is likely or possible.

If you only have 6 or 7 online at the same time, why would you ever think you can hold a district? You shouldn't even be in PC if you can't field even half a team for any of your battles. I have a lot of respect for S.e.V.e.N. for fielding most of their own players. And I understand needing help every once in a while, it's unavoidable.

But if you need over half a team of fill-ins every battle that should be a hint that you don't belong in PC.

Hell there are a lot of corps in Eon that aren't getting any better because they aren't able to fend for themselves. At the first sign of weakness they call in the big dogs.

These aren't tears either. Because I'm past giving a **** about PC. But I would like to have some interesting fights from time to time and that doesn't happen 99% of the time in pubs. So WTF is left to do?

I respect what you guys have done. It is/was impressive. But if you guys don't back off you will be the kings of a shitpile.

If you only have 6 or 7 online at the same time, why would you ever think you can hold a district? You shouldn't even be in PC if you can't field even half a team for any of your battles. I have a lot of respect for S.e.V.e.N. for fielding most of their own players. And I understand needing help every once in a while, it's unavoidable.

But if you need over half a team of fill-ins every battle that should be a hint that you don't belong in PC.

If you only have 6 or 7 online at the same time, why would you ever think you can hold a district? You shouldn't even be in PC if you can't field even half a team for any of your battles. I have a lot of respect for S.e.V.e.N. for fielding most of their own players. And I understand needing help every once in a while, it's unavoidable.

But if you need over half a team of fill-ins every battle that should be a hint that you don't belong in PC.

If you only have 6 or 7 online at the same time, why would you ever think you can hold a district? You shouldn't even be in PC if you can't field even half a team for any of your battles. I have a lot of respect for S.e.V.e.N. for fielding most of their own players. And I understand needing help every once in a while, it's unavoidable.

But if you need over half a team of fill-ins every battle that should be a hint that you don't belong in PC.

If you only have 6 or 7 online at the same time, why would you ever think you can hold a district? You shouldn't even be in PC if you can't field even half a team for any of your battles. I have a lot of respect for S.e.V.e.N. for fielding most of their own players. And I understand needing help every once in a while, it's unavoidable.

But if you need over half a team of fill-ins every battle that should be a hint that you don't belong in PC.

They're not fill-ins, we function as an alliance. The alliance is "our own players". We took the planet as an alliance, and spread out the districts across the most active corps. (While small, active NEMW players make an extremely strong showing in PC.) But to some how call out our 33-man corp specifically as equivalent to Molon Labe. is outright absurd. In terms of geared, experienced players... our entire alliance as a whole compared to their corp might be a more fair comparison.

(While small, active NEMW players make an extremely strong showing in PC

Personally, I don't take pride in attacking "low tier" corps because they may be redline matches and offer no learning experience and cause you to slack if real competition launches against you. I, don't even take pride in attacking a vet corp that would give us the same no experience. I feel that midtier and low tier corps shouldn't even ask for ringers from top tier corps. We can say that to tier corps shouldn't accept but if they are deciding to be mercs and a contract was issued.....it is really hard to argue with that.

Then again it is the issue of players wanting fights and there aren't that many corps out that can give an enjoyable fight to some of the top tier corps. Don't have an answer for that about other corps. For us, I will say that if RND launches an attack on a low/mid tier corp......it won't be for the district. It will be a win/win because we'll get the ISK payout and they will get experience and to keep their district.

They're not fill-ins, we function as an alliance. The alliance is "our own players". We took the planet as an alliance, and spread out the districts across the most active corps. (While small, active NEMW players make an extremely strong showing in PC.) But to some how call out our 33-man corp specifically as equivalent to Molon Labe. is outright absurd. In terms of geared, experienced players... our entire alliance as a whole compared to their corp might be a more fair comparison.

So let's cut to the chase... with well-established corps like Molon Labe, New Eden's Most Wanted, and MSF wanting some sort of consideration... it is no longer about corps needing to become established or gain experience (5-10 matches a day is an indy corp apparently...).

It is about corps not being able to beat EoN. but still wanting to be involved in PC. They want a farm league that they can be moved down to from the majors. Farm leagues not only house new greenhorn players, but also older guys who may have been injured, replaced, or just lost their mojo.

Basically the community consensus Cubs, is that no corp in EoN. should attack anyone at all whatsoever period, and that no EoN. member should participate in any PC match period.

If that makes sense, wouldn't it make sense that your entire alliance should hold as much as Molon Labe? You guys do kind of hold a disproportionately large amount of land for "indie" corps.

They're not fill-ins, we function as an alliance. The alliance is "our own players". We took the planet as an alliance, and spread out the districts across the most active corps. (While small, active NEMW players make an extremely strong showing in PC.) But to some how call out our 33-man corp specifically as equivalent to Molon Labe. is outright absurd. In terms of geared, experienced players... our entire alliance as a whole compared to their corp might be a more fair comparison.

It was rough, I think we pulled through okay though.

We're well established? Sure we have been around for awhile but we still have a lot of work to do to pull our s hit together.