Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Why So Much Buzz About the New Order?

Several days ago, I wrote about the "nerf New Order" threads that popped up on the EVE-O forums. Over the past week, there has been an even greater uptick in buzz about the New Order. The general discussion subforum has been filling up with threads that either directly address the New Order and its Supreme Protector, or otherwise delve into the topic of highsec mining and what needs to be done about it.

Some of this is in response to our Gallente excursion. I will address that more fully in an upcoming "State of the Order" post. Today, I'd like to talk more generally about why the New Order has gripped the attention of the EVE populace to a seemingly disproportionate degree. Since it's a related topic, I'll also speak briefly about the phenomenon of denialism.

Whenever one of these threads pops up, certain disgruntled forum residents blame it on "another James 315 alt". Actually, I don't post on any alts. Alt accusations are a form of denialism that's been around right from the start. When I founded the New Order a little over four months ago, anyone who stopped by Halaima local to voice support for me was accused of being my alt. Then my shareholders were accused of being either fake accounts or my alts. When the first bumper Agents appeared, they joined the ranks of my so-called alts.

The great bumper fleets we organized in October put an end to the in-game alt accusations. I don't often see my Agents or shareholders accused of being alts, though occasionally you'll see a denialist or two who thinks no miner has ever paid the 10 million isk fee.

While in-game denialism has shriveled up due to the abundance of Agents flying around, denialism is still present on the forums. Some forum posters don't play EVE or haven't visited our theater(s) of operations, so they haven't seen the New Order firsthand. (In the early days, some denialists questioned whether I had ever bumped miners in Halaima at all!)

Why does this kind of denialism exist? Because the average highsec carebear is absolutely terrified by the New Order and what it represents. The very thought of an organized society putting an end to carebear anarchy turns the denialists purple with rage. They would rather believe the New Order doesn't exist than contemplate the future we would create. If the Agents of the New Order didn't exist, they could write me off as a fanatic. But if the New Order does exist, and if it is a rapidly-growing movement, then all bets are off.

Then there's the question of why the New Order and its philosophical cousins are so dominant on EVE-O right now. The answer requires us to consider the nature of EVE and its playerbase. It's often said that the vast majority of EVE players stay in highsec. The percentage is difficult to track, since many lowsec and nullsec players have alts in highsec for making money (this shouldn't be the case, but it is, since risk/reward is so far out of balance). Nevertheless, it would still be fair to say that most EVE players do live in highsec and never venture outside of it.

EVE's identity doesn't derive from the masses of highsec, though. When people think of EVE, they think of the great stories of nullsec wars and shenanigans. Highsec and its sprawling populace are a void. There are few stories to be told in highsec. There are no empires, no territories to be won or lost, no sense of adventure. There's almost no community, no emergent gameplay, no content of any kind. When something does happen worth noting in highsec, like Burn Jita, Hulkageddon, Miniluv, etc., its origin is still the nullsec players, who briefly invade and then leave. Basically, highsec is a big vacuum.

Then came the New Order.

We stepped into the emptiness of highsec and began to create. And unlike the temporary events staged by nullsec players, the New Order is here to stay, and to grow. To take over. Forever.

For much of the EVE playerbase, the New Order is the only thing happening that is, or could, affect them in the future. Our vision and our Code are the only threats to their routines. Without us, they would continue to mine in silence the same way they have mined in silence for their entire history. And these carebears make up the majority of EVE.

Now the buzz starts to make sense. For much of EVE, we are the only ones shaking things up. We are the change. As the New Order continues to grow in strength and influence, don't be surprised if there are days when people act like EVE Online is the New Order Show, featuring James 315 and the New Order Show Band. For many players out there, we're the only channel broadcasting anything. The rest is just static.

10 comments:

  1. You make a good point, and like it or not your emergent gameplay is what we need in a sandbox.. I can't help thinking that bumping is a loop hole that you are taking advantage of. What impact do you the retribution will have on the new order?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bumping is working as intended & retribution will have little effect on the Order's activities. Having a bounty will not mean that anyone can just attack you, meaning people will need to suicide gank to claim that bounty in most cases. If they can't turn a profit from the gank, people won't bother. Having killrights would allow people to attempt to claim with out Concord intervention, but bumpers don't suicide gank.

      Delete
    2. Last night while doing some missions, some little ninja salvager in our pocket was trying to not only salvage, but bait us. In my N. Omen (Also my bumping omen nonetheless!) I rammed him at 1166 m/s. Needless to say a cormorant goes a VERY far ways when bumped!

      Now, no yellow box, no red box, just sent that dessie out of salvager range. Working as intended? I'd say so!

      It isn't a loophole if CCP keeps collisions enabled in the game.


      =)

      ~Murk Paradox

      Delete
    3. Mallak, as I understood it, the new Bounty System allows you to buy 15-minute kill rights for one pilot with a bounty on his head, meaning that a lot of angry miners will probably buy the permission to try and kill James 315. Of course, the bounty-payout will be worth less than his ship's value, so they won't really gain anything from it.

      Delete
    4. What is even more important, in order to buy the kill rights for James 315, James 315 would need to attack someone in high/lowsec first. If he does not attack anyone within the relevant time period, there are no kill rights to buy.

      Delete
    5. According to what documentation there is now, the Bounty system won't infact allow 15-minute kill-rights on just anyone with a bounty - instead, someone must already have killrights on that character, and have allowed others to purchase it. If nobody has kill rights to an Agent, nobody may purchase them, regardless of the Agent's bounty.

      Delete
  2. This is a good thing hopefully it brings less CCP focus on highsec isk/hr and more focus on giving us the tools to create emergent game play.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have nothing to say about the new bounty system, I will just wait and see what happens and how it can be (there will be no ifs) manipulated.

    What I want to say is THANK YOU.

    Without James315 and the other Agents, the busy mining systems around New Eden would be silent and boring places full of people staring at the rock or spinning their ship in a system, ignorant of the 80+ fellow neighbours.

    Today while mining is still as mind numbing but important as it ever has been, Miner bumping has been a great diversion for those of us who actually do pay attention.

    I am composing an idea for speakers corner which I will allude to here; composition of asteroid belts should be more granulated by sec status.

    I am sure fellow miner bumpers will continue the great work and earn massive amount of iskies for years to come.

    Again thank you for doing the almost impossible; make mining interesting.

    Sidrat Flush.

    PS Captcha Ogtud 6 - What's one of them and why half a dozen? Perhaps some type of pie?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Completely agree, great post.

    I think CCP has to choose, do they want to get the farmville players or do they want to stick to their niche and make an awesome game that will live forever.

    Let's hope the momentum of the carebears isn't too high.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Don't get me wrong, I abhore AFK miners. Yet I find myself understanding their role in the great circle of life that is EVE. People need ships. Ships need minerals (lots of minerals). Minerals require mining. Mining is boring. Frankly I blame CCP for not making mining more enjoyable and, in the end, they have a huge part in making mining an AFKers paradise (and their patches don't help this).

    When I mine, I'm at my computer. I limit myself to an hour or two, listen to music, talk on team speak, and then get done and call it a day. The truth, however, is that people like me do not fund the ship industry. AFK miners do.

    But when the rubber hits the road, the simple choice is this: pay the permit. Pay the permit and then try to check in every so often and not be terribly AFK. You could not pay the permit, but you might come back 4 hours later to find you've not been mining for 3 1/2 hours.

    I would like to see Brother James include in the permit an additional permit for miners who expressly admit they AFK mine. Of course a higher cost, but we're not animals. We fully grasp the reality of the boring mining grind and the need for those minerals.

    As I understand it, the 10 million fee is for active miners. Perhaps a 50 million fee could be for self-confessed sinful AFK miners? They place a registry number in their profile. A google doc can be accessed by any Agent, identify if the registry is up to date and accurate, and what type it is. AFK miners do not have to respond. Active miners need to respond within 10 minutes or their permit is revoked (anything more than 10 minutes is truly AFK, not just bathroom or whatnot). Perhaps out of our generosity, create a strike system, whereby active miners can get 1 strike for being AFK and the next revokes their registry.

    +

    ReplyDelete

Note: If you are unable to post a comment, try enabling the "allow third-party cookies" option on your browser.