Akasun
   |
Posted - 2009.09.23 07:05:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Akasun on 23/09/2009 07:06:59
While I have no objection to a tax that has actual justification behind it, this is not that. For example, saying that wardec protection requires paying off Concord would have sufficed. Instead, we get the following:
 Quote:
We would prefer that players join player corporations, or other entities that shape the world of EVE at a higher degree than the NPC corporations do, due to their impersonal and somewhat isolated role.
Quote:
11% is our starting estimate. If it turns out that this number is too low and the changes do not have the impact we hope, it can always be adjusted to a higher level. Right now though, we are hoping 11% will provide the balance we are looking for.
The above indicates a supreme lack of faith by CCP in their own sandbox and a misunderstanding of what NPC corps provide. People stay in NPC corps for a variety of reasons. One of those happens to be the large amount of social interaction that occurs from having a randomly selected group of people that have no direct obligation to each other but just happen to enjoy chatting. In my experience in FNA, I've seen a wide gamut of human experience and perspectives, only some of which coincides with my own perspectives.
We have missioners, miners, salvage snipers, pirates, explorers, trolls, scammers, wardec hiders, teachers, and more. We have the compassionate and the incorrigible. From this happenstance association, FNA has evolved a unique identity based upon the conversations of its participants. In all the randomness, something happened: emergence. Apparently, that's not what CCP and a number of players want. I guess the NPC corps have become emblematic of a dangerous idea: that you can form a community based upon no actual obligations or power structure that, while possibly amused by the antics of the sundry corps and alliances, feels no compunction whatsoever to participate in their struggles.
I agree with a previous post that the NPC corps should provide a baseline against which the player corps can be compared. If you can't provide the incentives to make player corps attractive for more people, then trying to push them there regardless won't work. Applying increasingly onerous disincentives as proposed by a number of posters signifies a profound failure of creativity and imagination. As for myself, I could care less about corp drama and intrigue. I like the freedom that comes from a mostly solo experience with the option to regularly converse with others if I so desire. I'm sure I'm not alone there.
Burn the land and boil the sea. You can't take the sky from me.
|