Today I read two blog posts about the recent situation between CFC and HBC. These are the two blocs controlling EVE’s null sec and relations seem to have deteriorated but no true war is forthcoming.
One blog author, Marc Saurus, attributes this to the sovereignty mechanics, quoting the sources as saying that they are not willing to go through the lengthy grind of the mechanic in order to win sov (again).
“A war that would’ve involved 20,000 players, 75% of nullsec space, and hundreds of supercapitals was halted not by diplomacy, but by a game mechanic so dreadful that those who have experienced it previously have no desire to do so again.” [Marc Saurus]
The second blog author, Poetic Stanziel, attributes this lack of will to warring to the fact that it will be economically damaging to the big boy, so in the face of such costs the will to war dwindles.
Being in EVE since 2009 – I am now unsubscribed (since a couple of weeks) but follow it attentively out of game – I tend to agree with Poetic Stanziel more. Before unsubscribing I was in wormholes. I liked them because they resembled null sec, the place I loved most in EVE. The place I couldn’t live in due to the way the “leaders” there expect others to play – a requirement which ultimately results in the leaders’ benefit, not the players. It is always for their benefit, the few who assure for themselves a massive passive income by dictating the gameplay of others. In the years since I left I had been experiencing a “I can’t live with you – I can’t live without you” situation which ultimately lead to not renewing my subscribtion.
Marc Saurus is also right although he misdiagnosed the situation and put the blame on the game mechanic and CCP. Sov warfare is an endless grind because the players, the same few who do not want this war and dictate the gameplay of others, made it such by hoarding so much space under one cap. This in itself is the problem: the sheer quantity of systems that need to be attacked; and not the mechanic. The mechanic is great when holding or wanting a handful (or a few more) of systems. In the mechanic systems are owned by Corporations, not alliances. This was meant to create a dynamic environment in which corps leaving/joining alliances would change the sov scenario and make it highly dynamic. This mechanic allowed for attacking key corporations, breaking them, thus breaking the alliance. The leaders do not like this – they want the ultimate control, to the point that even with a few corps they can still hold on to the space until the next bill comes along. These alliance leaders created the system in which solar systems are held by the alliance’s infrastructure corp, thus avoiding this dynamism and in the process creating the bloc spanning multiple regions. Corps joining or leaving the alliance do not have an effect on the alliance’s holdings. THIS is the problem.
The tendency (or drive by the few in safeguarding their interests) for the focus to be on alliances rather than corps. THIS is the problem.
Can I do something about it?
Poetic Stanziel referred to moon resources (in particular technetium) as the reason behind it.
“The only reason why this war will not happen is because of technetium. The Mittani can try to spin it any way he wants. As crappy as the sovereignty mechanics in EVE Online may be, it certainly did not stop The Mittani from prosecuting several wars to capture more of New Eden’s technetium supply. And at least one war to protect the tech cartel he helped create.” [Poetic Stanziel]
Technetium inevitably pops up whenever null politics is discussed. The location of this (and other valuable) mineral is unknown to the common folk – those who would eagerly harass the establishment through guerrilla tactics. Its location is a heavily guarded secret and whoever has this information will not divulge it readily. This is also part of the information that keeps the large null sec alliance beyond the reach of the smaller ones.
I believe in the old adage that information is power (or a good part of it). I think that if the location of moon minerals is known with precision, initiatives for targeted attacks will arise and a serious challenge to the establishment can be created. The biggest threat will be from those whose only aim will be to watch the world burn, and for these guys I’ll be acting!
The Moon Survey Project
I will return to the game and start a survey of the moons in the North of New Eden and publish here, for public knowledge, my findings. You can help too, by doing the same and posting your own findings. Most importantly I urge you to use my findings and get a fleet to disable these POSes, or go do some other damage and harassment.
THEY deserve nothing better. Because null sec is ours, not theirs. It is mine too!
In reading about EVE Online, especially the debates amongst players-bloggers on their blogs about whether the behaviour in-game reflects one’s real life personality, there seems to be the understanding, accepted as true, that players are allowed to have a separate personality in the game world. These go to lengths in explaining that griefing (and doing all sorts of bad things to) other players is ok because that is the game world, and there are no real world repercussions because after all, this is just a game!
I have tried it myself. I have tried griefing, I have tried being part of null sec alliance, I have tried doing what others command, just to be part of the team, I have tried playing all those style which other players, especially the most loud and verbose of the pvpers and (some) bloggers call fun. As a general conclusion, I cannot behave in a way which is different from that which comes natural to me. I repeat, I CANNOT behave in two different ways in-game and in the real world. I cannot even manage to have two accounts which behave differently from each other. I have settled with two accounts which complement each other.
To clarify a little bit, it’s not the behaviour that I cannot do; it’s what comes afterwards, the conscience if you may. That stays the same, no matter how much you try. If you behave in a way which goes against your inner set of rules, you will feel it. Conversely, if you behave repeatedly in a bad way, even in game, you don’t have those internal set of rules which make you a good decent person.
You’d say that this is a wild conclusion based only on my personal experience. How can I generalise based on one, my own, experience. Well, I tell you that based on my same experiences, there are certain realities which are true to all, and this is one of them.
So stop justifying your bad, psychopatic behaviour as ok because it’s ingame. If that excuse consoles you, well I tell you that you have done a good job in killing your conscience, and that I do not want to meet you in real life, because deep down, you’re bad. Yes you are! Unless you are perfectly capable of having multiple personalities, in which case I also do not want to meet you, for obvious reasons.