So, here we have it. The CSM minutes are finally out and the tears not only continue, but the whole faucet has exploded off the pipe and the geyser of Ol’ Tearful is flooding the house and threatening to drown us all.
Alright, maybe that is a bit of an overstatement, but I deliberately put my opening in that kind of “sky is falling” context to illustrate what we’re going to discuss today. When Eve spin doctors become so overly-dramatized in an effort to either gain followers, promote their corporation or alliance, influence changes on the game, or just generally being drama queen attention whores, the real out of game war begins. For most players, they disregard anything they don’t agree with and carry about their daily existence in-game because it’s not worth their time.
Unfortunately for the spin doctors, I am not one of these people. (Begins singing ‘Two Princes’) Ahem, my bad. So since there is so much we could cover, let’s try to keep it TL;DR in an attempt to dry a few eyes.
When you’re reading any kind of article regarding Eve Online (Yes, even this one) there are several questions I suggest that you ask yourself:
- Is this a biased source that will stand to gain an unfair or unjustified advantage by proposing this point of view?
- Are the proposals or opinions contained in said article helpful or hurtful to the game or community?
- Has there been ample discussion on the topic, or does it warrant further examination?
- Is there a CCP conclusion to the argument?
- Is the opinion or idea expressed backed up by fact, a conjecture of loose facts, or emotion?
- Finally, what is the best course of action for CCP to take in the interests of their BUSINESS?
I emphasize business because as players, we often neglect the delicate balance between what the players may want versus what’s in the game’s best interest as a business. Sometimes, ideas for improving CCP’s business by changing things about the game are difficult to swallow (cough, Ripard Teg). But we’ll take more about how game changes directly impact the business in another article. For now, let’s focus on the importance of proper analysis of data when it’s used in a debate or argument about the game or it’s mechanics.
- The sentry drone argument exalted by Dabigredboat HERE and the subsequent obliteration of that article by Grath HERE, while good to eat popcorn by, is an example of “Made Up”. While loosely based on scattered data, DBRB conjoined the information in a way that on the surface SEEMED convincing, but lacked the ability to stand up to real scrutiny. Grath did an excellent job. If the argument was reversed, I would be applauding DBRB. I always appreciate the ability to scrutinize with fact regardless if it’s biased or not. Also, this was not a subject that would have any significant measurable amount on the number of subscribers. I don’t care how many people sided with DBRB and threatened to rage quit if CCP didn’t nerf Archons or sentries. If Grath hadn’t taken the time he did, DBRB’s article would’ve been allowed to stand an potentially taken as gospel. I’m of the belief that this was a calculated risk based on the assumption that nobody would take the time or effort to debunk the article on TMC, a clear attempt at gaining a meta advantage through deceit.
- Ship doctrines, deployments (or lack thereof), ALODs, strategic escalations, talks of “failscades”, smack talk, adapting to new game mechanics, and other general propaganda are classified under the “Meta”. For example: I could be said that the CFC’s reluctance to escalate fights to a capital level against N3/PL is either a sign that they’re incompetent/incapable in that area, or the CFC is holding their cards close to their chest and waiting for the right opportunity. Whichever way proves to be true in time, one thing that the CFC can be counted on is sticking to a type of “Deadly Ground” standard of warfare as CFC (particularly Goonswarm) forces are rarely engaged on a large level that they don’t want to be. When the CFC have brought capitals to any situation, there is usually a calculated reason to do so.
Alright, I’m not going to delve into the who’s or why’s on either of the above topics. I just wanted to use them as an illustration of the identifying the differences between “Meta” and “Made Up”. Use fact to disseminate between the two before jumping to conjecture and demanding changes be made to the game because someone has an upper hand at the moment. The offline game can be just as important to the online game if facts and opinions are not kept in check.
That’s it for today.