THE SOLUTION TO ALL THE WORLDS PROBLEMS! :-) CCP, CSM

[Rhett_Schouten]

@Kezrai_Charzai

And the part I quoted above, where first you talk about the monolithic end-game being stagnant and newbro corps being the “only method for advancement” and then stick in a huge paragraph in all caps demanding “coalition management” tools in-game is just pure farce.

This statement is objectively untrue.

Here’s what I actually wrote;

@Rhett_Schouten

Extreme power (Veteran Domination) has made Null Bloc’s immobile and stagnant, similar to a Nuclear arms stand-off where the initiative is blunted by the consequences.

@Rhett_Schouten

New Bros are facing a solved META that locks them out from the opportunities for exploration and discoverability that players enjoyed during the earlier formative years of EVE and made it challenging, exciting, unpredictable and fun. Creating tools that give New Bro’s and Veterans a chance to explore in new directions is essential. (Veterans have addressed this issue through in game new bro corporations, unfortunately these organisations have become the only means of advancement and therefor are endemic of the problem).

I think that you were trying to frame my argument as contradictory, however these points are made in separate sections of the article.

I’m doing two things here, I’m explaining why I think that the null blocks have been hesitant to go ham at each, mutually assured destruction tends to be an effective deterrent. I might be wrong in understanding their motivations and I’m ok with that.

The second thing that I am doing is contrasting the experience of the current wave of players joining the game with the experience of earlier waves of players joining the game. Nothing contradictory so far.

---

The below is a critique not a demand. I describe the missed opportunity as a mistake. I did not demand that it be included as a feature.

If mutually assured destruction is a factor in Null Bloc entities committing to war, and it may well be, what could potentially change that stalemate is the import of tools that provide a more nuanced approach, tools that allow for engagement and mitigation of risk. If one side believed that it could eek out an advantage, it might be more willing to commit it forces to war. The introduction of any system that aided in the establishment of such an advantage would very likely be the spark that sets the wheels in motion. Coalitions already attempt to sway the odds, why not give them a functional nudge?

@Rhett_Schouten

OF ALL THE FACTORS THAT YOU COULD POINT TO THAT MIGHT DESCRIBE OR DEFINE THE BIGGEST AND MOST EGREGIOUS DEFICIT IN EVE’S DEVELOPMENT, IT’S MOST SIGNIFICANT BALANCE ISSUE, IT’S MOST GLARING FAILURE, NONE IS MORE OBVIOUS OR MORE PRESSING THAN THE ABSENCE OF AN IN-GAME TOOL FOR THE FORMING AND MANAGEMENT OF COALITIONS. IT IS SO OBVIOUSLY THE NEXT STEP IN EVE’S EVOLUTION AS A ‘SAND-BOX’ ‘EMPIRE BUILDING’ SIMULATION, A BLIND DOG WITH NO SENSE OF SMELL COULD HAVE DISCOVERED IT. LEAVING IT UP TO THE PLAYERS TO BUILD WAS THE CORRECT MOVE, LEAVING IT UP TO THE PLAYERS TO MAINTAIN WAS A MISTAKE AND A MISSED OPPORTUNITY. THE PLAYERS CREATED IT, YOU F------G ADD IT, THEN CHECK WHAT THEY CREATE NEXT, THEN YOU ADD THAT

Much later in the article I describe how such a feature might be implemented. Again I do not demand it’s inclusion.

@Rhett_Schouten

Imagine if coalitions had to commit to a formal agreement that locked them in over a contracted period of time at some meaningful but significant financial cost and provided them some benefit. Perhaps an industry boost, or resource acquisition boost, or sovereignty boost across their alliances. The risk is the locked-in time commitment and cost and the possibility of having their benefit discovered by spies and a counter strategy employed by their rivals. The benefit is whatever granular element they’ve customised within their contractual agreement. Depending on the coalitions objective, territorial expansion, defence, production, market domination etc. The point is that what is missing are the tools that would enable this dynamic play. (The changes to Faction Warfare may be the beginning of this change-time will tell)