CGs, Narrative Inconsistency and Player Activities (Nova Imperium example)

[Jmanis]

tl;dr While this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, FD need to stop using CG's as a narrative crutch, where they tell a non-interactive story which culminates in a single, week long CG for two equally uninspiring sides. Instead, they should use narrative via galnet to sow activities for players to undertake over time with small, incremental effects. That will attract players who are committed to the narrative and incremental change which can happen over weeks, even months. There's plenty of in-game mechanics for FD to hook activities onto, but they keep falling back to contrived CGs to drive events.

---

I risk prejudicing this whole situation by posting this, but I'd rather draw attention to something and risk having it burned down in a perhaps interesting narrative, than for it to sit abandoned like so many other storylines.

Did you know that Nova Imperium are now in a *stronger* position than prior to the conflict that decimated them in Paresa? They now control the Paresa system and hold *three* assets within the system. Of course, if you listen to the narrative, Nova Imperium is all but defeated. The execution of key senators may, in plot terms may indeed have "decimated" Nova Imperium, but by any in-game measure, Nova Imperium are now a rising force of greater power than before the CG conflict which "ended them". If you don't know what that means and want a "story so far"...

- FD began the Hadrian Duval/Nova Imperium storyline via Galnet, with no player interactivity available.
- FD eventually injected the Nova Imperium faction into Paresa.
- NI then entered an Election with one of the local factions, and was actually winning, and would have seized their first asset.
- FD hand-of-godded things in the system, and put NI at war with some rando faction not even native to the system, for a CG essentially touted as the battle for the future of the empire.
- Of course, the Empire, represented through some rando faction, won. Pitting an established, known entity like the Empire against a comparatively unknown insurgent entity was always going to have a predictable outcome, notwithstanding the somewhat broken nature of conflict CGs[1]
- All this went down, signalling the apparent defeat of NI much like the League of Reparation. (Personal note: At this point, I expected NI to be removed just like LoR were)
- Since then, without moths to the flame of the CG keeping them down, NI has won three conflicts earning them as many assets and control of the system.

So, what's happened? Put short, not many people actually cared about supporting the Empire, they just cared about the CG. All those people have cleared out to the next activity... meanwhile people who actually care about propping up Nova Imperium have continued doing so, with apparent success. Now, it might sound like I've got a problem with the "Not many who actually cared about the supporting the Empire", but that's actually not the case. Conflict CGs will always get people wanting to line their pockets supporting the winning side. But FD should know this, and if their goal is to make convincing, engaging narratives, they need to stop thinking a conflict CG is sensible way to conclude a narrative.

One of the problems with the NI narrative highlighted by Empire supporters was the concept of "What if NI won?". The way it was painted was as if NI won, Hadrian would become Emperor, and the concern was "How the heck can a small insurgency like that suddenly take over the Empire??"... and the truth of the matter is it couldn't, and wouldn't, because the concept of a small insurgency group fighting a rando faction in a rando system resulting in a change leadership for the entire Empire is completely absurd. Frankly, why would the Empire even care so much about such a small group? And this is exactly the scenario we have now post-CG... those who were "Supporting" the Empire have moved on in the mind that NI has been defeated... but they were "moved on" before the CG even started, it was only when the CG slapped an impossible to remove target on their back that everyone "Came to the Empire's rescue".

Meanwhile, everything that's happened *since* that CG, resulting in Nova Imperium seizing Paresa, is compelling and interesting, and importantly, slow, incremental change, as that generally how insurgencies will work. Be off-the-radar enough for people to not see you as a threat, giving you freedom of action to build, develop and eventually, conquer.

Unfortunately, as far as I can tell from FD's narrative, NI was defeated. So are they going to care? I'll believe it when I see it... but I think it would've been far more sensible for FD to tell the NI story as something like this:
- Throw Nova Imperium into the game as a faction, like they did.
- Let players run with it for a while. Weeks, maybe a couple months. Passively, FD could check in now and then with the progress and cack up some sort of narrative to accompany the player-driven development of NI.
- Eventually, they might expand to and conquer several systems, at which point Empire supporters may actually start to care (Lugh, anyone?)
- If FD wanted to throw a conflict in there, have it represent a key flashpoint in NI's expansion, but not a game-ender.
- If they eventually wanted to bring it to the end-game, turn it into a multi-front battle. FD could even have done a process where PMF leaders could nominate their faction to support NI in said multi-front war (with consequences if they lost, or becoming a control system for a new power if they won)

That's just one spitball example of how FD could have cut it. I'm not trying to provide that here, just saying there exists more interesting ways than 1. Non-interactive storyline, followed by 2. CG whose outcome is pretty much already decided, to determine the ultimate outcome.

Of course, by posting this, I may draw negative attention to NI and they'll just get smacked down again now. But hey, maybe FD could make something of it.

[1] I won't go into it here because it's a whole post on it's own, suffice to say any conflict CG is decided on Day 1... even hour 1. As soon as one side gets an advantage, any new people going to the CG with no particular allegience to either side, will go with the winning side, and there's no recourse at that point because of the cumulative increasing difference in bonds. Conflict CGs should ditch the combat bond aspect, and have the outcome decided purely by the new BGS conflict mechanics.

 

[Nova McCool]

tl;dr While this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, FD need to stop using CG's as a narrative crutch, where they tell a non-interactive story which culminates in a single, week long CG for two equally uninspiring sides. Instead, they should use narrative via galnet to sow activities for players to undertake over time with small, incremental effects. That will attract players who are committed to the narrative and incremental change which can happen over weeks, even months. There's plenty of in-game mechanics for FD to hook activities onto, but they keep falling back to contrived CGs to drive events.

---

I risk prejudicing this whole situation by posting this, but I'd rather draw attention to something and risk having it burned down in a perhaps interesting narrative, than for it to sit abandoned like so many other storylines.

Did you know that Nova Imperium are now in a *stronger* position than prior to the conflict that decimated them in Paresa? They now control the Paresa system and hold *three* assets within the system. Of course, if you listen to the narrative, Nova Imperium is all but defeated. The execution of key senators may, in plot terms may indeed have "decimated" Nova Imperium, but by any in-game measure, Nova Imperium are now a rising force of greater power than before the CG conflict which "ended them". If you don't know what that means and want a "story so far"...

- FD began the Hadrian Duval/Nova Imperium storyline via Galnet, with no player interactivity available.
- FD eventually injected the Nova Imperium faction into Paresa.
- NI then entered an Election with one of the local factions, and was actually winning, and would have seized their first asset.
- FD hand-of-godded things in the system, and put NI at war with some rando faction not even native to the system, for a CG essentially touted as the battle for the future of the empire.
- Of course, the Empire, represented through some rando faction, won. Pitting an established, known entity like the Empire against a comparatively unknown insurgent entity was always going to have a predictable outcome, notwithstanding the somewhat broken nature of conflict CGs[1]
- All this went down, signalling the apparent defeat of NI much like the League of Reparation. (Personal note: At this point, I expected NI to be removed just like LoR were)
- Since then, without moths to the flame of the CG keeping them down, NI has won three conflicts earning them as many assets and control of the system.

So, what's happened? Put short, not many people actually cared about supporting the Empire, they just cared about the CG. All those people have cleared out to the next activity... meanwhile people who actually care about propping up Nova Imperium have continued doing so, with apparent success. Now, it might sound like I've got a problem with the "Not many who actually cared about the supporting the Empire", but that's actually not the case. Conflict CGs will always get people wanting to line their pockets supporting the winning side. But FD should know this, and if their goal is to make convincing, engaging narratives, they need to stop thinking a conflict CG is sensible way to conclude a narrative.

One of the problems with the NI narrative highlighted by Empire supporters was the concept of "What if NI won?". The way it was painted was as if NI won, Hadrian would become Emperor, and the concern was "How the heck can a small insurgency like that suddenly take over the Empire??"... and the truth of the matter is it couldn't, and wouldn't, because the concept of a small insurgency group fighting a rando faction in a rando system resulting in a change leadership for the entire Empire is completely absurd. Frankly, why would the Empire even care so much about such a small group? And this is exactly the scenario we have now post-CG... those who were "Supporting" the Empire have moved on in the mind that NI has been defeated... but they were "moved on" before the CG even started, it was only when the CG slapped an impossible to remove target on their back that everyone "Came to the Empire's rescue".

Meanwhile, everything that's happened *since* that CG, resulting in Nova Imperium seizing Paresa, is compelling and interesting, and importantly, slow, incremental change, as that generally how insurgencies will work. Be off-the-radar enough for people to not see you as a threat, giving you freedom of action to build, develop and eventually, conquer.

Unfortunately, as far as I can tell from FD's narrative, NI was defeated. So are they going to care? I'll believe it when I see it... but I think it would've been far more sensible for FD to tell the NI story as something like this:
- Throw Nova Imperium into the game as a faction, like they did.
- Let players run with it for a while. Weeks, maybe a couple months. Passively, FD could check in now and then with the progress and cack up some sort of narrative to accompany the player-driven development of NI.
- Eventually, they might expand to and conquer several systems, at which point Empire supporters may actually start to care (Lugh, anyone?)
- If FD wanted to throw a conflict in there, have it represent a key flashpoint in NI's expansion, but not a game-ender.
- If they eventually wanted to bring it to the end-game, turn it into a multi-front battle. FD could even have done a process where PMF leaders could nominate their faction to support NI in said multi-front war (with consequences if they lost, or becoming a control system for a new power if they won)

That's just one spitball example of how FD could have cut it. I'm not trying to provide that here, just saying there exists more interesting ways than 1. Non-interactive storyline, followed by 2. CG whose outcome is pretty much already decided, to determine the ultimate outcome.

Of course, by posting this, I may draw negative attention to NI and they'll just get smacked down again now. But hey, maybe FD could make something of it.

[1] I won't go into it here because it's a whole post on it's own, suffice to say any conflict CG is decided on Day 1... even hour 1. As soon as one side gets an advantage, any new people going to the CG with no particular allegience to either side, will go with the winning side, and there's no recourse at that point because of the cumulative increasing difference in bonds. Conflict CGs should ditch the combat bond aspect, and have the outcome decided purely by the new BGS conflict mechanics.

I remember Lugh quite well, nice reference. Anyway I totally agree FDev should hire a few dedicated writers who are able to focus on the in game lore and BGS in order to create the narrative storytelling like you suggested... On that note do you think the current state of our BGS could be why NI has more systems than before the CG?

 

[Jmanis]

I remember Lugh quite well, nice reference. Anyway I totally agree FDev should hire a few dedicated writers who are able to focus on the in game lore and BGS in order to create the narrative storytelling like you suggested... On that note do you think the current state of our BGS could be why NI has more systems than before the CG?

Nope... it's dedicated support, I'm aware of a few groups actively supporting NI.

 

[Chaparral]

1) There really needs to be a vehicle / mechanic beyond the CG for advancing the game narrative.
2) Stories in Galnet always seem to self-resolve without changes to the game landscape.
3) FDEV sweeps aside PMF actions when it suits them.
4) Making the game focused on the BGS instead of the player, then playing fast and loose with the BGS (and ignoring bots), is off-putting.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

You mean, the Dungeon Master railroads things?

 

[moorison]

In other words, you want more "mini CGs" like the station repairs, but with many different scenarios, is that right?
I think that could work, even though this might work againstit would run counter to the purpose of CGs, to know where the majority of players can be found for a time.

I think it is interesting that NI got more influence already, Galnet just has not caught up yet. If they establish a presence in several systems, the next step of the civil war has to commence.

 

[Rainbro]

As one of the people supporting Nova, I completely agree with you, there needs to be less reliance on CGs. At the very least, the first Empire vs Nova CG shouldn't have happened so early on. A standalone Nova CG to get their name out there for those who dont read Galnet would have been nice.

Although, I think the fact that Nova weren't immediately removed like LoR as you mentioned shows that Frontier is beginning to move away from reliance on CGs. League of Reparations and Emperor's Dawn were both removed after defeat in a CG; Nova weren't, and even got GalNets emphasizing their continued survival.

I think the Battle of Paresa as a CG was never going to be the final decider regardless of the outcome, but as a modifier before allowing the story to progress a little further based on the BGS and player action. The Empire CG hit tier 5, the Nova CG hit tier 2. A clear victory for the Empire, but not decisive. So Mordanticus dies, there is a large purge, but Hadrian escapes. And then things pickup from the "Let players run with it" stage.

TL;DR I think (hope) it'll end up playing out pretty close to what you've suggested. Paresa was a setback for Nova, but I don't think Frontier are done yet with this storyline.

 

[Jmanis]

In other words, you want more "mini CGs" like the station repairs, but with many different scenarios, is that right?
I think that could work, even though this might work against the purpose of CGs, to know where the majority of players can be found for a time.

Not even. I just want them to actually tell a narrative story which players can interact with through the mechanics already in the game, without FD having to "hand of god" a CG to solve. In this situation, it would've developed a far more convincing narrative if FD let NI just "be" and let the BGS do it's thing. If they didn't grow within a month or so, then sure, have something occur to knock them out and try another story arc... or if they did go, track it, pay attention to it.

I recall when FD used to accept Galnet articles, "Reporting BGS changes" wasn't a type of article they accepted, yet in this case, FD would be crazy to not do it themselves. as a means of building their narrative.

I think it is interesting that NI got more influence already, Galnet just has not caught up yet. If they establish a presence in several systems, the next step of the civil war has to commence.

Except if you take FD's current narrative as gospel, NI should be done and dusted. This is where the narrative inconsistency occurs. In the case of LoR, FD had already "removed[1]" them from the game by now.

[1] They actually still exist, and you can pledge your squadron to them, but they aren't present in any system (except TEST2)

 

[Jmanis]

As one of the people supporting Nova, I completely agree with you, there needs to be less reliance on CGs. At the very least, the first Empire vs Nova CG shouldn't have happened so early on. A standalone Nova CG to get their name out there for those who dont read Galnet would have been nice.

Although, I think the fact that Nova weren't immediately removed like LoR as you mentioned shows that Frontier is beginning to move away from reliance on CGs. League of Reparations and Emperor's Dawn were both removed after defeat in a CG; Nova weren't, and even got GalNets emphasizing their continued survival.

I think the Battle of Paresa as a CG was never going to be the final decider regardless of the outcome, but as a modifier before allowing the story to progress a little further based on the BGS and player action. The Empire CG hit tier 5, the Nova CG hit tier 2. A clear victory for the Empire, but not decisive. So Mordanticus dies, there is a large purge, but Hadrian escapes. And then things pickup from the "Let players run with it" stage.

TL;DR I think (hope) it'll end up playing out pretty close to what you've suggested. Paresa was a setback for Nova, but I don't think Frontier are done yet with this storyline.

Yeah, I hope so to, but the track record doesn't fill me with hope.

 

[Backelaer]

First of all, Nova Imperium should, and will, be crushed. Evaporated.

But seriously, OP you make a good point. With reasonable arguments and no rants. That's a feat on it's own.

And you lay bare the binary CG storyline that we currently get fed. For or against. Pick your side.
There's enough CG's I actually have a reason to support one side or the other. It's just that I know there's no following through on em that keeps me from participating nowadays.

 

[Hadrian Augustus Duval]

Hadrian was figurehead, without the death of imperator he will never become leader but a figurehead. So in my opinion this is part of the story that FDev trying to tell. A Faction that lead by a Duval.

 

[metatheurgist]

Part of the problem is the BGS is so malleable that a handful of players can control the fate of systems with billions of people. That should just have never been made possible. It's like a couple of guys in vans deciding whether the Mafia or the NYPD control New York City by doing some deliveries and driving a couple of cars of the road. They would just get stomped if they tried.

 

[Jmanis]

Hadrian was figurehead, without the death of imperator he will never become leader but a figurehead. So in my opinion this is part of the story that FDev trying to tell. A Faction that lead by a Duval.

To what end? To be defeated again in another equally pointless CG?

This is the whole point of this thread... it doesn't matter whether it's the Imperator, Hadrian or whoever, it'll suffer the exact same fate if FD just whack another CG in to further the narrative to it's "dramatic conclusion".

 

[Jmanis]

Part of the problem is the BGS is so malleable that a handful of players can control the fate of systems with billions of people. That should just have never been made possible. It's like a couple of guys in vans deciding whether the Mafia or the NYPD control New York City by doing some deliveries and driving a couple of cars of the road. They would just get stomped if they tried.

A small handful of people controlling the fate of billions. So just like the real world, eh?

But I don't see this as a problem... systems with billions are much harder to influence than systems with a couple thousand. Nonetheless, I don't see this as a problem from a gameplay perspective. A small handful of players could equally oppose it. There's plenty of engaging and interesting conflicts between PMFs/Player Groups when there's call for it, and not just of the actual conflict (war/civil war/election) variety.

Conversely, Powerplay allows domination of an entire region by delivering a couple-ten-thousand pamphlets.

 

[Hadrian Augustus Duval]

To what end? To be defeated again in another equally pointless CG?

This is the whole point of this thread... it doesn't matter whether it's the Imperator, Hadrian or whoever, it'll suffer the exact same fate if FD just whack another CG in to further the narrative to it's "dramatic conclusion".

There can be many possibility, Bovee once said: "The great obstacle to progress is prejudice." Don't let hate cover ur eyes. Nova Imperium can have many end, either rise or fall. With age of 19 Hadrian have the biggest chance of becoming next Emperor, and with the History of Empire and power play leader It might not a bad Idea to form a "New" Empire. Hadrian is young but that is also his capital, he is clean with traits of a main character: both parent are dead, his father is son of the former Emperor, also son of a slave, he was a pilot with his own story to tell, he is age of 19 and own a system already with billions of supporter among the galaxy, and with heart of a true Empire that really care for it, want to bring back the glory of the Empire and pick up their tradition once again. People see only his youth but ignore the fact he is an uncut jade that have great potential. And that is the reason why I support Nova Imperium! After I supporting them, I start to doing research, and find out many possibility of many things, Does Aegis really what they are like they claim to be? Why not have some counter measure for the Empire? Federation and Alliance will not stab Empire in the back once they have a chance? Why not a counter measure for the Empire. After all Nova Imperium is still Empire!

 

[sgurr]

Thinking about the 'lore' and Galnet in ED just makes me little sad, particularly the storylines that have been dropped or forgotten about or the binary choice outcomes of CGs.
And slightly OT there are also little vignettes in game that you are very, very unlikely to come across unless using 3rd party sources

I'd like to see a lot more done, is it worth putting this in the suggestions forums too?

 

[moorison]

Gaining control of the Empire or complete eradication are just two more or less satisfying results, since they are the bookend to this story, both are probably not that useful. I speculated in another thread the possibility of Hadrian becoming a recurring villain, creating some tension at inopportune moments. Although that would imply a disconnect to the actual influence of his faction, which brings me to my previous post about the next major conflict in the civil war, I was not expecting NI to recover that fast.

Another option would be a split of the Empire in two (or more) power structures (- we need more colours!).
A similar troublemaker from a different superpower would probably lead to losing focus of the narrative.

 

[Zenith]

I can't say I'm surprised.

Frontier have repeatedly tried to force Emperor's Dawn storylines on the playerbase, and Emperor's Dawn got completely and utterly STOMPED every time players had a say in the outcome!
So what do Frontier do? They have a long-term storyline they want to advance but no vehicle to move it along.
Hey, let's make another Imperial faction to do exactly the same thing that Emperor's Dawn did!

I personally couldn't give a stuff about the imperial storylines and that's another part of the issue. If you've got a load of players like me who don't care about that storyline, then the ones who DO care about it are unopposed. You have a small number of players making a big change to the faction because no-one has challenged them. As Jmanis points out, that is exactly what has happened.

Once upon a time, Frontier had visible people working on the big overarching plot behind Elite with a number of pokers in the fire that would eventually lead to something noticeable. Right now in Galnet we're getting stories about art thefts with a winking cat icon, tech getting stolen, people disappearing, and shady financial goings-on. It's adding atmosphere to an empty space, but they don't seem to be going anywhere. Even taken collectively, they don't match up together.

 

[TheSynopticVision]

Elite is not a true MMO with full emergent gameplay/politics/economy, where the players craft both the story and the environment.
Elite is not a top-down story-driven game either, since you could play for 1000s of hours completely ignoring Galnet and the lore in general, seeing no tangible effect in your gameplay (except maybe the stations under Thargoid attack)


Why is that? Because Elite is a game designed with the 1984 core mechanics in mind (polished up, prettied up, slightly updated, sure, but it's still the same game) -- thus pleasing the 1984ers and the VR crowd (who'll go "G AMAZING!!" whatever new thing you throw at them).

It pains me to say so, but it is true. At bottom, this neither/nor nature of the game has always been its curse, and I doubt there's anything that can really intervene on this problem at this stage.

 

[Jmanis]

Elite is not a true MMO with full emergent gameplay/politics/economy, where the players craft both the story and the environment.
Elite is not a top-down story-driven game either, since you could play for 1000s of hours completely ignoring Galnet and the lore in general, seeing no tangible effect in your gameplay (except maybe the stations under Thargoid attack)


Why is that? Because Elite is a game designed with the 1984 core mechanics in mind (polished up, prettied up, slightly updated, sure, but it's still the same game) -- thus pleasing the 1984ers and the VR crowd (who'll go "G AMAZING!!" whatever new thing you throw at them).

It pains me to say so, but it is true. At bottom, this neither/nor nature of the game has always been its curse, and I doubt there's anything that can really intervene on this problem at this stage.

It's also not what I'm asking for. To consider only 1984 Elite as the fuel for Elite Dangerous is to only consider a small amount of origin for the game

Take a look at Frontier First Encounters. In that, you looked to the local news articles to get clues about fixed story points which you could alter the outcome of, within a pre-defined left and right of arc.

I remember one story arc from there where the player could decide the outcome of a war by supporting one side or the other, and dropping a nuke on the base. You got onto this by spotting the appropriate article at the right date and successfully completing some lead-in missions. Of course, much like the same thing ED currently suffers from, the only way people became aware of that plot arc was by revenging the game and inspecting the code.

Another example of FD "getting it right" (to a degree) was Jacques. Although we'll never know entirely, FD may have planned for Jacques to misjump all along... but if not, they left the opportunity there for it to be UA bombed. Now, if that was unexpected, FD could've just ignored it, but they didn't, and actually acknowledge that as part of the misjump. But again, Jacques could've been intended to misjump, and the whole thing just conveniently fell within the constraints FD put on the plot. And the misjump then put Jacques somewhere else which, unbeknownst to people at the time, created the ability for someone to actually go and locate Jacques.

Wait... what's that? A Galnet event *with* an associated in-game activity to undertake? Paint me red and roll me down a hill! It really doesn't take much.

Let's look at Nova Imperium again. If I were FD, I would go:
- Hmm, we want an Imperial Civil War type of story to play out. Lets build some narrative around a group called Nova Imperium, then throw them in the game and see where the BGS takes things. From here, Players will either:
- A) Ignore Nova Imperium; it eventually washes up as a failed cause and the Empire just stomps them.
- B) Players support Nova Imperium, but ultimately, players fight back, go back to the outcome for A)
- C) Nova Imperium actually start to gain some serious power (maybe 30 systems?). Maybe we can hook a CG or two in there to spice things up and give a hard push-back. If they survive that, step them up as a power (FD *did* say new Powers would rise and old powers crumble and be replaced over time; that has never ever happened apart from the contrived Yuri injection)

Not a complicated plan, but entirely functional and robust to player interaction without actually giving much agency; just an interesting hook for players to latch on to.

Instead, NI got injected, an impossible to win CG got hand-of-godded over the top of things, and were "wiped out". Now there's this awkward scenario where they're actually more powerful than they were before the CG, but the narrative has already explained them as "defeated", so what do FD do? Roll back the dramatic conclusion with the execution of NI's proponents with an embarassing "Wow, we really didn't end them that well", or do they just retcon the whole thing? Or will NI just suddenly disappear like LoR did a few days after the CG because "It's all too hard" ?

These are all substandard outcomes which are *easily* worked around.

Take the Zlota missing nuke thing as another example. They don't even need to have a nuke out there to be found (I get having a single "winner" of an event is hard given the game's architecture), I'd just like to go into that system and find some missions to scan data points where the flavour text is "We might be able to pinpoint the location of the nuke from this data". But we have the TIp-off mechanic. Maybe one lucky player gets the tip-off which points them to the exact location of the nuke (which doesn't show up on FSS scans). That's a stratightforward, linear plot and plot device... not emergent gameplay where players craft the story.

Or take the Guardian Ruins as another example. That was a bit of a saga, largely due to FD under-estimating how difficult it would be to find new ruins, and people needed to exploit a PG bug to get all the scans early. But ultimately, there was a set-piece event, and FD was able to observe who got there first and have an in-game outcome branch off that (For Guardian Ruins to appear within 1,000Ls... a moot point now with the FSS/DSS changes).

All the mechanics are there and functional, FD just need to have faith in their own abilities and use them, and stop leaning on CGs as the answer to everything.