29 October 2009

Cold, Harsh Mistress

I made the mistake of getting into a conversation in the Eve Bloggers channel. Lesson learned. That wasn't too much better than the forums. It seems I cried many a carebear tear because I disagreed with everyone. It seems that simply the desire to have a balance between pew and non-pew means you are a crybaby. Clearly, I don't get it. And now I have lost respect for some.

To highlight the discussion:

Criminally tagged capsuleers can enter a high security system in only their capsule, and the local authorities will ignore them. They can board a ship in space, like one pulled from the ship maintenance bay of an Orca. The discussion started on what part of that needed to be nerfed.

Someone related that there was calls in the forums to have the Orca nerfed. I don't think it makes sense to nerf the Orca just because it can be used for piracy. You don't hurt the pirates, you just hurt the miners. I don't mind if pirates smuggle ships of war into high sec. But common sense to me says that if they approach a gate or a station, then the standard faction spawn should appear.

I don't know how that works, but apparently I'm too much of a carebear, using common sense and all. Clearly, the authorities are blind, and they can only attack you if somehow you enter through a gate or undock. Pointing this out, apparently, is an act of carebear crying.

Another part of the conversation spawned from ninja salvagers. Personally, I don't think it makes sense. You now have a zero-risk occupation. The ninja salvager should risk something. I don't see why the loot in the wreck should be protected, but not the wreck itself. The easiest answer is, salvage or loot, you go flashy.

Again, this is me crying great carebear tears, using common sense and all. What I truly don't understand, are some of the defenses used to protect these behaviors.

"CCP has been very clear about this topic."

CCP has also made mistakes in the past. A lot of them. Big ones. CCP is not infallible. To use the defense that it is structured that way, intended that way, legal that way, is very scary, in New Eden and out. Something is just, balanced, and fair based on its own merits, not because the game designer says so.

I like that Eve is dangerous and you are never completely safe.

Yet, the same people who say this, also think that ninja salvagers should keep their risk-free lifestyle. I'm sorry, but I have to think that the people using this defense really mean, "I like that Eve is dangerous for the mission runners." To my way of thinking, it should be dangerous for everyone equally. There shouldn't be a no-risk occupation that is built around harvesting the spoils of others.

Again, I don't think that ninja salvaging is wrong. I don't think it should be stopped. I just think it shouldn't be risk-free, particularly since it does directly involve another capsuleer who has extremely limited means of recourse. And is anyone complaining about ninja looting? They should be the same.

New Eden should be dangerous, but it shouldn't be the responsibility of griefers to bring the danger. There are very common sense solutions that would make piracy dangerous such that only smart pirates will actually do it.

  1. Transferable kill rights. How often does anyone actually have the ability to claim a kill right? It isn't a deterrent by any measure. Again, I don't want to end piracy, just make sure there are pressures acting against it so there is balance and people have to work to succeed.

  2. Looters are flashy. Today, the suicide pirate falls onto your kill rights board, but the hauler next too him does not. Why?

  3. When CONCORD is involved, there is no insurance payout. Immediately I'm sure there are those that will think I'm trying to break the back of high sec piracy and end it. I am not. One can make more than enough money in suicide piracy to pay for well fitted suicide ships. What I seek to end are the silly upside down attacks. Suicide attacks involving a battleship? Against a barge? Barges can't hold much. They don't have many slots and aren't likely to drop but so much. The only way this is profitable is because the battleship is nearly free. I am not a pirate, and even I can find targets that will not only pay for the ship involved, but will pay for ten more so one can continue suicide attacks even when droppings are slim. Again, it all goes back to life should be hard for everyone.

In the course of full disclosure, I am not a mission runner by trade. I run some missions for standings, and as a result, I run courier missions because they are quicker. I rarely run kill missions. I've never had anyone bother me in a mission. I've never had anyone flip a can while mining (even when I'm bored and leave bait cans). I also would not consider myself a carebear. I currently have limited access to PvP, but there are reasons for that, and eventually I'll have the chance to either return to the militia or return to 0.0. And yes, I've been in 0.0 wars, before there were cynos, before there were dreads and titans and doomsdays. And yes, that is tougher (and more fun) than anything in low sec.

p.s. It seems that this has been dragged out into the Tweeterverse and into other blogs. That is fair, and to be expected, I guess. But I have to admit that I'm really bothered that others have made this so personal and can't seem to make a comment without following it up with how I am a carebear crybaby or that I am simply and completely wrong.

I also am disturbed by the mindset of some that those that do not engage in PvP are inferior. That really bothers me. I love this game. I love to play it my way. I don't get missioning. That doesn't mean missioners are less of a player, aren't as good as me. I enjoy 0.0 wars, and I think they are much harder than FW or any low sec combat. That doesn't mean I think FW or low sec pirates are inferior to 0.0 warriors. I completely don't understand how anyone could enjoy scamming others (seriously, dude, where is the fun in that? "Your shoe's untied. Made you look." was only funny once.). That doesn't mean I should consider them inferior.

Okay, in all honesty, I would never knowingly hire a scammer into my corp.

I am not upset or worked up by this, but I do feel there has been more personal attacks against me than appropriate. And as a result, I feel I've lost some respect for capsuleers that I was really eager to work more closely with.

There is also some confusion, I feel, over just how anti-PvP I may seem. I am not anti-PvP. I do not think the game mechanics should be changed to the point where there is no PvP, or PvP-free zones. But I do think that New Eden needs to be harder for those that instigate unprovoked attacks. I do not think they are wrong, I just think they have it too easy.

p.p.s I meant to mention this earlier: all spawns should be like Sleeper spawns. I don't like kill missions cause they are just one big rinse/repeat. The only way the mission can defeat you is through sheer numbers. It should work smarter, not harder. Making the spawns smarter will not only give the missioners a challenge, but make things more interesting for the ninjas.

28 October 2009

Blog Banter 13

Welcome to the thirteenth installment of the EVE Blog Banter, the monthly EVE Online blogging extravaganza created by CrazyKinux. The EVE Blog Banter involves an enthusiastic group of gaming bloggers, a common topic within the realm of EVE Online, and a week to post articles pertaining to the said topic. The resulting articles can either be short or quite extensive, either funny or dead serious, but are always a great fun to read! Any questions about the EVE Blog Banter should be directed CrazyKinux. Check out other EVE Blog Banter articles at the bottom of this post!

The first banter of this 2nd year of EVE Blog Banters comes to us from Zargy, A Sebiestor Scholar, who asked the following: On the EVE Fanfest 2009 page are pictures of prizes for the Silent Auction that was held during the event. One of these photos was entitled "Design your own EVE mission". My question now would be what kind of mission would you write if you got that prize? What would the mission be about? Would it be one using the new system of epic mission arks? What would be the story told by it? Feel free to expand upon his questions and put together your very own mission!

I've read a couple other banter posts, and so far, I feel everyone has the same general response to this. We aren't simply proposing new stories, but whole new ways to do missions. I have two, and I'm sure my two are echoed by one or more other banters.

Player Created Missions

I think this is really a no brainer. Players can create contracts, but they are rife with problems. One of the contracts that I'd like see made into a mission is the courier contract. I'm sure mining missions would be easy to do, too.

I would want this to be structured and anonymous, to a degree. The mission runner doesn't know the name of any capsuleer that put out the mission, and the mission requester doesn't know who is running the mission, or that it is even being run, until it is complete. I would not want capsuleers to be able to randomly create missions, though. I would want it to be a grantable role in a corporation. The corporation would have to hire mission agents (like renting an office) and missions would be posted on behalf of the corporation through the agents.

When one completes a mission, there is a standings increase toward a capsuleer corporation. Corporations at war, or in alliances that are at odds, can negatively impact standings.

Basically, I want to recreate the existing mission system, but have the whole thing fueled by the capsuleers.

Opposing Missions

Ms. Minme Tar accepts a mission. The mission is to defend a mining operation that is under attack. There are a few waves of hostiles that descend on the mining operation. Once the miners are done though, the mission is over, and Ms. Tar can return to her agent.

Meanwhile, Mr. A. Mar accepts a mission. His mission is to clear hostiles away from a gate and allow friendly warships to move through to complete their own mission. Eventually, one of those waves will return and report that the mission was a success or a loss. It depends on how quickly he can get reinforcements through the gate.

The careful observer will notice that these two capsuleers are increasing the difficulty of each other's mission. The faster Mr. Mar gets the gate clear, the faster waves descend on Ms. Tar.

I see too much abuse if capsuleers were to directly encounter each other in a mission, so I suggest a system where the mission they are in affects another mission in progress. Mind you, there may be times when the missions have to be time shifted. So, the activities of one mission are recorded and played back for an opposing mission some hours later.

This could be made as complex as one likes. Perhaps there was a mining mission first. The miner's performance dictates how long Ms. Tar must defend the operation.


25 October 2009

Yes. Yes, I am that loser.

For those of you who didn't keep up, today was The Party. I mentioned it to my wife, and twice yesterday, but didn't receive positive traction. She gives me such grief for the Wednesdays I spend with "the guys", so I didn't press it too much. In all honesty, she is better than the wives of many of my other friends in that regard.

I did attend the party briefly. The three year-old was still napping, the six-year old was playing quietly, I was doing some corp bookwork and the party started. I signed up for the door prizes, and turned on Voice and started to tune into SI Radio.

I was in the party for three minutes, when the three-year old woke up. I scurried to get to her to tell her to be quiet so she didn't wake her mother.

I logged out of the party. At this point, I could rant how I did nothing. I let my wife sleep longer, I cleaned the kitchen and did laundry and let the kids play by themselves. I could rant how I could've just as easily been at the party.

And I was looking forward to the party. I was looking forward to the social aspect, but I was also looking forward to going out to Evati and losing some Rifters. I've been doing too much carebearing recently, and would enjoy just some fun, no-stress pew pew.

Then came the tweet.

Pastor_Phelps @vol_jbolaz You won the Loki in Hellcats party. Type x in Hellcats Pub in the next 5 min to claim it.

The tweet was already forty minutes old, so even if it weren't a joke, I was too late for it to matter.

I had a laugh, thinking that Pastor was picking on me. Sage seconded Pastor's comment. Again, I can only think this is a joke.

The party ends as the kids go up for baths and bedtime. I go through that routine, getting more indications that it really isn't a joke. When I finally log in, I learn that I indeed was chosen for the Loki.

Sage pastes the announcement from Mynxee into the Eve-Bloggers channel. She had called my name for the Loki. It was me! I had won!

Yes... yes, I am that loser.

And I had to log out. I had to decompress for a moment.

I got lots of sympathies, and I do appreciate it. It makes me feel nice. It really does, and I do thank everyone for that.

Luminus Aardokay has offered to make a signature gratis. I do appreciate that. I think given the circumstances, it should have a Loki in it. I've been wanting to get everything running smoothly with the corp so I can get to a point to start advertising. So, I'll probably ask to get something with Odinsdagrting instead of my name.

I'll seriously consider getting a t-shirt that reads, "Yes. Yes, I am that loser."

The evening wasn't a complete waste. In addition to the sig offer from Luminus, I finally made my way to Evati in Adventurer. I got a couple of the left over party Rifters and lost them, one even to Mynxee herself. I finally undocked Adventurer and decided to have a second round with Mynxee.

The first 1 on 1, I only got Mynxee into half armor before her like fitted Rifter destroyed mine. My second 1 on 1, with me0de, went a little better. I managed my range better, and overheated sooner. I got him into structure, but again, capped out and lost my second party Rifter.

The third 1 on 1, with Adventurer went very well. I did like the results, but Mynxee and I both agreed that it was a much better fit than the party Rifters. For starters, it used an afterburner instead of a microwarpdrive.

Not that it mattered in the end. I don't recall how badly damaged Mynxee was, but she destroyed Adventurer.

As a final note. I have posted the fittings and killmails to Battleclinic. But I don't like their killboard. I haven't found them again to get the links. I'll do that in the next day or so for anyone interested and update this post.

Adventurer was one of my Rifters from the militia. She had seen combat and had been on four killmails. Feel bad losing it, but I do like that it was lost to someone like Mynxee.

17 October 2009


First off, I need to help promote The Epic Celebrity Death Match. It will be a two-on-two featuring Nashh Kadavr and Mynxee against Luminus Aardokay and Quivering Palm of Planet Risk.

Teadaze has put up a teaser. The match has already taken place, but it will be one of the main events at the upcoming Hellcats Party.

I know no one will miss me, but I would like to be there. I would even fly into Evati just for the party. But alas, I won't be there.

Now, announcing all of that isn't really the reason behind this blog. I've just been working on this blog for a little while now, and I figure all of this is a nice lead into my thoughts on dueling.

I've been following Nashh's Celebrity Death Matches, and I've been poking at the idea of joining Eve Arena (since I don't have a chance for PvP at the moment), but I do have a slight complaint about both of these. This complaint extends really to all arranged 1-on-1 matches, and is the biggest reason I've never bothered going to Evati and challenging anyone in the Hellcats Pub channel to a duel.

It always seems that the duels have to have some rules laid out before hand. The two most common are no warping away and no ECM. I do understand why people ask for such restrictions, but to me, they are artificial ways of nerfing aspect that don't seem to need a nerf through out the rest of New Eden. They also remove abilities or cripple ships that usually shine, and they remove, to me, the biggest part of any engagement, the part that requires the most skill.

Take for example the Rifter and the Punisher. I've seen enough evidence that on paper, I would argue that a Punisher is tougher, stronger, and more deadly than a Rifter. Recently, there was even a duel between Sage and Spectre to stress this point.

However, I would always opt to pilot the Rifter. The reason being is simple, the Rifter has more speed. The Rifter has the option to disengage. The Punisher doesn't. Once these two ships commit to a fight with each other, the Punisher has to stick it out to the end.

The Punisher pilot has to hope that all the work he did before the engagement can carry him through the engagement. After all, as long as the two pilots do their jobs nearly equally, the deciding factors are the ship fittings and the influencing skills (and implants/boosters) of the pilots. It doesn't matter how good a pilot one is, if they don't have the skills to mount a better fit, or have a ship that isn't adequately fit for the circumstances, chances of surviving are dramatically lowered.

I'm not saying the Punisher is a bad ship, but the Rifter is chosen by low sec capsuleers much more often for a very good reason: The Rifter can evade that which it can not destroy outright.

The no warping away rule puts a Rifter in an artificial position. Now, knowing that, I would opt for a Punisher in a frigate duel. The idea there is bring the right tool for the job. But I think the duel would promote a tool that wouldn't have quite the same real world application.

I think Nashh's range-tanking Kestrel is a good idea of this, too. If the Kestrel wants to stay at range, then he runs the risk of his adversary warping away, only to return at a more advantageous range.

The no ECM rule is similar, but in the opposite direction. It might imply that certain ships are less successful in the real world.

The other thing these rules do is avoid the biggest part of the engagement. Selecting a target, electing where to engage, and sometimes chasing or letting them chase are all part of the tactics that happen before an engagement. These will often play a bigger role in fleet versus fleet engagements, where sometimes your goal is too pick off stragglers and use herding techniques to cut the other fleet into manageable portions, but it has its place in one-on-one engagements.

I've not had much time soloing. That was the point behind my A-Riftering project, but what I have learned, or what I think I've learned is, two things: The outcome is decided before the ships open fire, and don't panic.

I still panic, so I'm no good at these things, yet, but everything that goes into training skills, fitting ships, and choosing when and where to attack affect the outcome of the attack more so than what one does during the engagement.

The question is, how does one fix the dueling problem (assuming they recognize a dueling problem)? I don't have a good answer. I have some ideas, but I think they are are lacking.

Simply requiring combatants to bring tackle gear isn't enough. Even with the appropriate webifiers and warp disruptors, the Rifter could still outpace and eventually evade the Punisher.

One idea is simply don't duel. Instead, people who agree to a duel should simply agree that they will make an effort to hunt each other. Who ever gets the first kill, or gets the most kills in a certain time period, wins the duel. This isn't as dramatic. It is long and drawn out. This type of duel would also require some war declarations or be limited to low/null sec. Also, good capsuleers are not alone. They have friends. This style of duel would require some weird workings with friends. This duel wouldn't need any restrictions, though.

An idea that I like better is to simply broaden the borders of the duel. Instead of limiting the duel to one scanner grid, limit it to one planetary system or one solar system. Combatants may warp between the moons and asteroid belts of a given planet, or within a given system. This would require that the combatants don't use safe spots or cloaks.

A last idea is to set a third target where the combatants play a game of assault. One capsuleer would have to defend a hauler or can or structure while the other would be tasked to destroy it. Either one could warp away, but they would be forced to return if they wanted to be successful. This would require multiple rounds since the defender should have a slight advantage. This would require some set up since the target would have to be made ready. This idea could be adapted to be one camps a gate/system that the other must pass through.

07 October 2009


I had a problem posting a response to my own blog in follow-up to responses that others posted. Instead of fixing that problem, I'm just going to respond here. If you, too, had problems posting a response, just send me a mail.

Wait... I had three responses, and only two people read this, so... nevermind.

The first response was from Helicity:

Making money from piracy is much harder than you think, this is mainly due to the low droprate on player modules.

No, making money from piracy is as hard as I think. The problem is, there is no pain for those that don't make money. They just get their money from somewhere else and wreak havoc yarring. A pirate doesn't have to make money as a pirate to be effective at taking money from others.

I'd also like to see upkeep on ships. It costs nothing for a blob of battleships to undock and camp a gate. If no one shows up, nothing is lost save some time. Some form of upkeep would help cut down on blobbing gate camps through out New Eden, not just in low sec.

I'd like to make piracy just hard enough that only those that are smart enough to figure out how to make money actually do it.

Mind you, I would like all aspects of the game to be that way, its just I don't think we have too many industrialists that continue manufacturing when losing money, or too many mission runners that can't keep themselves in ships, and so on. I think piracy and faction warfare are money-sink occupations, and I wish they were both fixed.

Mynxee followed with a few points. The first:

...don't be misled--piracy is an extremely difficult profession. Its biggest reward is the fun it offers

That fun is probably what drags in the griefers. I don't mind piracy, I just think that there are more griefers hiding behind the defense of "piracy is legitimate, you whiny carebear" then there are actual pirates. Again, I think the Hellcats and The Bastards Alliance have done a lot, at least in Republic space, to demonstrate that piracy can be profitable if you work at it.

Again, the fun is the only draw for FW. That may change with Dominion, but I still see FW as a money sink for most of the participants. I do think that should be addressed.

Mynxee's second point was,

"No alts" would be a losing proposition for CCP.

Yes, which is why it would never be considered. Still, I think it would dramatically improve the game.

She went on to say,

But were such a thing implemented, it wouldn't only affect pirates--it would affect solo players, 0.0 alliances, high sec mission runners, etc. Alts are as necessary as having multiple ships in your hanger for a good many players with widely varying play styles once they reach a certain level of experience in the game.

She was seconded by Selina:

As a 0.0 dweller, and not a pirate, I have to agree with Mynxee. I heavily rely upon my alts for moving goods in haulers through empire to the logistics point for our jump freighters. Soon I'll need them to move built goods through Empire so that I can keep my main industrialist at his work station. Think of it, as many call it in blogs, "associates" that work for you.

I have to disagree, ladies.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I have to admit to actually using one of my "associates", Ven Tamnej. I also have to admit to having a Power of Two account at one point, Vris Jungos.

Vris was a covert ops pilot who would run escort for me in Aridia and Fountain. It was a wonderful boon and made life much easier. Vris was sold after the six months.

Ven maintains a position as an occasional CEO alt and market tender. He can also run five copy jobs.

Still, I have to disagree. Yes, alts are nice, and they help, but they undermine one of the core tenets that CCP is trying to promote: players working with players. Why should I be allowed to run an operation from beginning to end completely by myself? Why not share that? Why not spread the wealth and build the teamwork and build the communities?

I've recently formed Odinsdagrting with a few close friends. They are still fresh out of the academy, so it is just me as the engine for this corporation. As a single personality, I'm still shocked at how much I can produce. My bottlenecks right now are the free time to stay on top of my jobs, and the money to buy the materials to actually build stuff. I can turn over battleships worth of materials in just a couple days, and I'm not really dealing in high-end stuff. So, with alts, wow!

Yes, alts are great, but they can make formidable operations out of a single player. Just as CCP wants to bust up the power blocs that are 0.0 alliances, I would like to see the high-sec production individuals forced to rely on others more. I'd like to the see the profession opened up more.

Really, I don't ever want any part of Eve to feel full or hard to get into. I want everything to always feel like the wild west. Lots of opportunities for those brave enough to dive in, regardless of the profession they chose.

I do realize, though, that a lot has to happen before this can happen.

A last point from Mynxee was,

I'd like to see the bounty system overhauled and made more interesting and into a true profession. There have been some good threads in the Assembly Hall forum with interesting proposals on this topic.

I have to admit to not being active in the forums. There are entirely too many trolls and short-fused flamers. I should at least give the CSM forums a look though. I don't think I could ever consider running for a seat, but I would like to be more involved in things. Perhaps if there were political parties I could help be an organizer.

A few last notes, so you can stop reading now if you are bored:

I don't comment on other blogs nearly as often as I should. I do appreciate comments. They let me know that at least someone is reading. And I have no delusions that I am always correct, so feel free to disagree.

In that vein, a gold star to Mynxee for being the biggest supporter of this blog. Thank you, I do appreciate it. Just goes to show that some pirates are nice people.

Or some nice people are pirates.

02 October 2009

Helicity's Quiz

I want to make clear that I do not think piracy should be driven from New Eden completely. I want to make clear that I do not hate all pirates. I also want to clear up the confusion that I am not a pirate. Yes, I do frequent the Hellcats Pub channel, but I am not a pirate.

My response to Helicity's quiz can be summed up as, "When piracy is hard, only pirates will do it."

My complaint with piracy is that it is too easy. And by that I mean, pirates don't have to rely on piracy as their income. I would wager that most pirates don't make money at it. Most pirates likely have a side business, possibly through an alt, or a steady supply of PLEX.

That isn't to say that all pirates fail to make money. I think The Bastards Alliance demonstrates that one can make quite a healthy living off of loot and ransoms. My run in with Teff nogero has taught me that one can make a healthy living off of suicide piracy.

I will admit that I don't have the ability to survey piracy in New Eden. I doubt anyone does. I can't say for certainty how widespread these situations are. That aside, I am still going to give these examples as the basis for my complaints because no one can get better data.

As to solutions, my first answer, and I'm sure the biggest game changer, is to remove all alts. Not just second accounts, but remove the two alts on any single account. I know this would never happen, but it would do a lot to cut out those pirates that are really just griefers. It would cut out those pirates that can't make money at it.

Consider for example the high-sec suicide pirate. He has an alt in a hauler, waiting to loot the wrecks, the victim's and the suicide ship. That venture becomes less profitable when there are really two mouths to feed and not just the two alts of the one mouth.

Consider for example the low-sec pirate. These pirates tend to be proud of their -10 security rating. This security rating is a badge of honor, not the hindrance that CONCORD intended. Without high-sec alts to make beer runs, these pirates would have to pay a premium to get their goods, either through low-sec traders, or though high-sec supply contracts.

On a side note, I would be more than happy to help fill the new market needs that emerge from this stripping of alts.

That isn't to say these ventures wouldn't still be profitable. And that isn't to say that I think these ideas are wretchedly horrible and should be banned. It just shouldn't be so easy and so prevalent. Pirates should have to work for their ISKies just like the rest of us.

Another solution that I want to propose is selling kill rights. There is a bounty system in place today, but several pirates just have themselves offed by a corp mate with the bounty gets high enough to cover the clone. They pocket the rest. The bounty system doesn't create the encouragement to have bounty hunters.

In high-sec, suicide pirates should be more susceptible to kill rights. Currently, members of the victims corp may respond for a period, but this means that the corp has to have PvPers. This may be the same corp that hires mercenaries during a war. Can they hire mercenaries for kill rights? Again, there is no market for bounty hunters.

I don't see this being as big a deal in low-sec. The only time the kill rights will really matter is on the gates and stations where there are guns to respond to illegal aggression. Still, it may give an incentive for more people to move to low-sec if they can be hired as bounty hunters.

A third solution that I would like to offer is to change the way security standings are calculated. Low-sec pirates are proud of their -10, and I do applaud them for that. If they were willing to be brave enough to do that in a world with no alts, I would have much respect for them.

High-sec pirates will yarr for a bit, then trundle off to grind back their security status so they can yarr again. The security status doesn't become an accurate indicator of the intentions of a pirate. CONCORD suddenly considers him not so bad because he busted up some lowly Angel's?

I would like to see positive security status either awarded painfully slowly, or awarded only for dispatching someone with a equally low or lower security status. In other words, pirate with a -6 has to defeat the pirate with -6 or lower to raise his own. I would hope this would promote some pirate-on-pirate violence.

I might only give them a reason to have rookie frigate evenings where they all reach around and raise their security status together.

My last solution is simply to open up a capsuleer's interaction with the environment. Why is System X only a .5? Why can't a corporation invest in or work with CONCORD to raise it (and why can't pirates work to lower it)? This idea starts down a rabbit hole of possibilities that tie into New Eden as a platform spanning beyond what capsuleers do in Eve. And I'll leave that and SimStation and other ideas for a future post.