After last weeks post, the logical follow-on is to outline what I think a successful alliance under full FozzieSov should look like.
I say should with good reason. Because, chances are, it will never come to light in the fullest sense. The reason for that is the inescapable reality of the human habit of congregating in the safety of numbers. That is, the habit of filling an alliance with like-minded people, and throwing hostility at all who beg to differ.
Entities like The Imperium, while they have proven themselves adaptable in a broader sense, will remain as close to what they are as possible. It’s the reason redundant systems like PAP links and deployments will continue. They like it that way, therefore it stays that way.
Humanity has proven time and again that it is fond of clinging to things that have proven themselves as rank absurdity over time, simply because it’s what they’re used to. The Eighteenth century notion of growth has endured as the determining factor of a nation’s success. Yet, it is causing havoc across the planet, and is a shining example of this phenomenon.
So, although the following is my dream of what an ideal alliance would be under FozzieSov, I acknowledge that the dinosaurs who hold the reins will fight tooth and nail to ensure it doesn’t happen.
Preamble done, let’s move on.
Every alliance needs to ensure that their member corporations are pulling their weight. PAP links are an example, albeit an absurd one. Metrics are required, though, unless one is to personally monitor member corps activities, a thankless task if ever there was one.
I personally feel that broad-based corps are at a disadvantage, as I mentioned last week. But, FozzieSov demands alliances maintain their space, as well as defend it. It is handy, therefore, that FozzieSov uses a ready-made metric to regulate defense feasibility; indices.
So, a dedicated PVE corp, were an alliance to admit it needed one, could, in fact, be regulated simply by using indices as the requirement metric. Now, set down the torch and pitchfork before you even get the matches out; I know most would argue they don’t need ratters and miners in their alliance. However, let’s just consider how such a corp might be utilized, rather than any foaming at the mouth rage against those who ‘Ain’t like us, is they?’, okay?
Most alliance’s space has a few systems that are ratted to death, while much of their area lay largely unused. Goons have gone about this problem in a rather cack-handed fashion by putting up ratting and mining fleets and dishing out the beloved PAP links for those that lower themselves from the lofty PVP heights.
They need not do so, if they are prepared to think outside the bee-shaped box.
If they had a PVE corp in their ranks, they could assign a number of systems, all the lower true-sec pipe and intersection systems that the hairy-chested PVP’ers avoid because they don’t want their terri-bad fit Ishtar blown out from under them. That PVE corp would be under obligation to maintain those indices, on a total responsibility basis. That means they not only maintain those systems, they do it without any help.
The current idea of populating lower viability systems with semi-rental corps is right up there with growth based politics; it’s bloody stupid. Because the alliance still has to defend the space, which sees them doing deployments and other such nonsense to keep the ratters safe. There is plenty of people out there who are capable of maintaining system indices in the face of opposition. Some enjoy it. I know I do.
It’s simple enough. Use scout alts, tank properly, use bait ships, and actively oppose campers. All those things 30Plus has done in the past, and continues to enjoy doing. There are many other players out there who can do the same. If a PVE corps raison d’etre is to maintain indices, and they have no other obligation, they will do it in the worst systems and still thrive. People don’t understand something fundamental about gankers; they exercise the same pragmatism as any other human being. If they get their ships blown up, their hot drops counter dropped and their campers negated, they go somewhere else. They enjoy blowing up ships, not losing them. I’ve said it before, you don’t need to make a house impregnable, just more secure than the one up the road.
Miners are the same; if a corp has a group of miners that are there to keep the industry index up, they can do so. Ask any small gang what it’s like to warp in on a decent-sized group of mining ships; it tends to go badly. Especially if they have an Eos with combat links running to keep the rats at bay.
PVE in null-sec is largely done on an individual basis, by players who would rather PVP and see PVE as a chore. Yet, there are literal hordes of players who actually enjoy ratting and mining, but who are kept to a minimum, because they are cancer, etc, etc. Yet, alliances run fleets to get something begrudgingly done that others would willingly do for free? The Eighteenth century called, guys, they want their thinking back.
What about industry? Alliances encourage builders to stock markets and supply ships, and use the potential profit as incentive, then let the guys build what they want. Again, I’ve got the Eighteenth century on hold at the moment. What if those builders were organized properly? What if they had requirements to meet? Deadlines and orders to fulfill, not as individuals, but as a group? They could be coordinated with the miners to supply minerals, and so on.
Explorers need not go neglected. Alliances might specify faction modules required for fleet fits, and again, orders could be set. Who would oversee all this? Yet more “Undesirables” would happily do such tasks, as that is what they enjoy doing.
The problem is, to achieve such lofty goals, an alliance would need to have more than one type of player in its ranks. This is, under the current climate, heresy.
It’s all about mindset. The game has changed, but the alliances are slow to adapt, the ones that are changing at all, that is. The crowd will continue to reject others who play differently, simply because “They ain’t like us”.
Then again, is the real world any different?