Routes of Expansion: An Updated Design Framework for EVE Online (2025)

Posted on by Khannea Sun'Tzu

Disclaimer

I’ve never been particularly skilled at playing EVE Online. While my main character, Daugar Draaken, dates back to 2006 and has accumulated over 100 million skill points, I’ve always been more of a casual, mediocre player than a hardcore capsuleer. I’ve struggled to connect with the broader player base—my blog posts are often met with dismissiveness or outright hostility, and I know I come across as a bit odd in person. As a result, I’ve never really been invited into corporations or larger player organizations, despite how much I admire the depth and beauty of the game.

I attended the EVE Amsterdam event in June 2024, and it made me realize that my time in the game has likely come to an end. I’ve decided to unofficially retire Daugar Draaken. If someone genuinely wants to take over the character and associated accounts, I’d be open to that—but only if you respect the character and don’t strip-mine it for skill points.

Over the years, I’ve written two lengthy PDFs with speculative ideas and designs for the future of EVE Online. One was written during my time at the HKU Game Design program around 2008–2009, and the other in 2021. These documents are messy and a bit chaotic, but they were created with deep affection for the game’s potential. I am interested in that aspect only – creating deep and immersive game design, world building, storytelling. 

I am not seeking a formal position with CCP. I am just randomly spewing out thoughts. If these find a receptive ear, no attribution is needed.

Preface

EVE Online has always been a bold sandbox, and over its decades of evolution the game has both realized and missed various ambitious ideas. In the late 2000s and early 2020s, two visionary design proposals – “Routes of Expansion for EVE Online” and “EVE Exodus” – outlined grand possibilities for the game’s future. These documents imagined expanding EVE’s gameplay, universe, and player agency far beyond the status quo of their time. Some of these once-hypothetical concepts have since been partially implemented by CCP Games (e.g. player-built citadel stations, planetary colonization, NPC invasions), while others remain unrealized dreams (such as dual-faction gameplay, fully procedural star systems, and player-run NPC civilizations).

This consolidated framework distills and restructures the ideas from those proposals into clear thematic chapters. Each chapter focuses on a major aspect of game design – Infrastructure, Simulation and Immersion, Exploration, NPC Factions and Warfare, and Emergent Gameplay – updating the ideas in light of EVE’s current state (2025) and offering concrete proposals for the future. Occasional retrospective sidebars acknowledge when earlier ideas proved prophetic, noting how EVE’s actual development has aligned with or diverged from the vision. The tone here is deliberately design-focused and professional, intended for internal consideration by CCP’s developers and strategists.

(In reading this framework, keep in mind the goal is not to upend EVE’s core identity, but to broaden its scope. The proposals emphasize gradual, opt-in evolution – adding new dimensions to New Eden’s sandbox without alienating the existing player base. With careful execution, EVE Online can continue to grow in richness and longevity, remaining vibrant well into the coming decades.)

Infrastructure and Industry Expansion

One foundational theme in the proposals is a dramatic expansion of player infrastructure and economic gameplay. EVE Online’s universe should be more constructible and customizable by the players themselves. At the time of the original writing, player-built structures were limited (NPC stations dominated, and Player-Owned Starbases were static and utilitarian). The vision called for opening up a “wider palette of in-game structures” for players to build, manage, and profit from. Today, some of these ideas have been realized, while others could still push the envelope of what is possible in New Eden’s economy.

  • Player-Built Structures & Citadels: The proposals envisioned players constructing vast space installations of many types – trade hubs, industrial platforms, refineries, defensive forts – effectively extending the sandbox to include empire-like infrastructure. This concept was partially fulfilled with the introduction of Upwell Structures in 2016’s Citadel expansionen.wikipedia.orgen.wikipedia.org. Capsuleers can now deploy citadels, engineering complexes, and refineries to anchor their operations. The design framework encourages diversifying these structures further: for example, introducing specialized “faction citadels” with unique aesthetics and functions tied to EVE’s major factions or pirate groups. Players might choose to build an Amarr-themed trade station or a Blood Raider shipyard, each conferring distinct bonuses or services. Such variety would deepen immersion and give more identity to player strongholds (beyond the generic Upwell style that prevailed initially).

  • Modular Expansion and Services: In the original vision, stations and citadels would not be monolithic structures but evolving hubs where players attach modules and extensions over time. The framework proposes a modular expansion system for citadels: visible add-on structures that provide new services or capabilities. For instance, a capsuleer-run trade center could add a “market annex” module to expand its trading capacity, or a corporation might bolt on extra hangar bays, research labs, or defensive arrays to tailor a citadel to their needs. These modules would be graphically represented on the station model (an idea of “studying a citadel with add-ons” was imagined), making each station look unique and advertizing its function. Players could even rent out modules or sections of their citadel to other players – creating a player-driven real-estate and service economy. This would turn citadels into true player cities in space, where cooperation between industrialists, traders, and mercenaries thrives under one roof.

  • Planetary Development & Colonies: Long before Planetary Interaction became a feature, the documents argued for bringing planets fully into the economic simulation. The concept goes beyond simple resource extraction toward player-built planetary colonies and industries. The idea is to allow players (or corporations) to found settlements on planet surfaces, developing infrastructure like mining towns, cities, or agricultural complexes that contribute to the EVE economy. In 2010, CCP did introduce the first iteration of Planetary Interaction with the Tyrannis expansion, enabling players to harvest and process resources on planetsen.wikipedia.org. That system, however, remains largely a solo minigame with limited depth. The framework proposes expanding it into a richer gameplay system: players could manage colony populations, build power grids and transportation, and even engage in intra-planetary politics. For example, rival player-run colonies on the same planet might compete or cooperate, perhaps even vote or fight for control of planetary governments. These planetary societies could tie back into space gameplay by providing economic bonuses or by becoming flashpoints for conflict (e.g. orbital bombardment of a rebel colony during a war). The key is to make planets an integral part of the sandbox – not just background scenery, but living worlds that players can influence.

  • Industrial Automation & Resource Management: With the expansion of structures and colonies, players would gain new tools to automate and specialize their industry. The vision includes ideas like player-managed trade networks and shipping routes (e.g. setting up NPC or drone convoys between stations), advanced resource processing chains (turning raw planetary materials into high-tech goods via multi-step fabrication), and logistical challenges such as maintaining supply lines to distant colonies. Such features would enrich the gameplay for industrialists and organizers – a demographic the original author believed could be grown significantly by offering “a wider palette of gaming experiences” beyond combatdaugardraaken.wordpress.com. The long-term payoff is a more dynamic economy where savvy players can truly build an empire of production and trade, and where disruptions (like blockades or pirate raids on shipping) have tangible effects.

Retrospective Sidebar: Citadel Infrastructure Realized – The call for player-built station infrastructure was largely answered by CCP in 2016. The Citadel expansion introduced player-owned citadels, allowing corporations to establish their own space stations for the first timeen.wikipedia.org. This was a game-changer: today virtually all trade and industry in New Eden happens in player-run structures. The introduction of Upwell structures (and later engineering complexes and refineries) proved the appetite for infrastructure gameplay was huge. The vision in Routes of Expansion went even further – imagining faction-themed mega-stations and modular growth – which remains fertile ground. As of 2025, citadels are ubiquitous but relatively uniform in design. There is an opportunity to incorporate the proposal’s ideas: e.g. adding visual module attachments or allowing more customization to differentiate a war fortress from a commercial mall. The success of citadels so far suggests CCP could confidently expand this system with more variety and player control, fulfilling the original vision of players literally building the world of EVE.

Retrospective Sidebar: Planetary Interaction and Beyond – The concept of players exploiting and developing planets was partially implemented as Planetary Interaction (PI) in EVE. With Tyrannis (2010), players could begin extracting minerals from planets and setting up basic industryen.wikipedia.org. This validated the idea that planets could be a gameplay domain. However, PI has remained mostly an instanced, low-attention activity. The framework outlined here argues for deepening planetary gameplay – effectively moving toward a light city-building or 4X strategy layer within EVE. While this is ambitious, it aligns with CCP’s experiments outside EVE (such as the planetary colonization game Dust 514’s concepts, or more recent talks of integration with a shooter). Enabling players to shape colonies and even societies on planets would open a new frontier of content, one that might attract players who prefer tycoon or simulation-style gameplay over piloting starships. The technology and design challenges are non-trivial, but if achieved, EVE would transcend its space sim genre into a full-fledged sci-fi universe simulation.

Simulation and Immersion Enhancements (Space & Crew)

A recurring theme in the original proposals is that EVE Online should strive for greater simulation depth and immersive detail in its universe. This means making the setting feel more like a living, physical cosmos – rich with astronomical phenomena, scientific plausibility, and the kind of intricate detail that engages players’ imagination. Two areas highlight this philosophy: the nature of star systems themselves, and the inclusion of ship crews as part of the gameplay. These might seem disparate, but both serve the goal of enriching the fantasy of being a capsuleer in New Eden.

  • Dynamic and Realistic Space Phenomena: EVE’s current star systems (even in 2025) are relatively static: planets and moons hang in fixed positions, most systems have a single star, and space weather is minimal. The vision is to inject real astrophysical variety into New Eden. Imagine binary (double-star) or trinary systems where orbiting within different stellar configurations creates unique tactical effects – e.g. a close binary star could bathe the area in intense radiation that interferes with shields, or a pulsar could periodically emit bursts that disrupt cloaking devices. The original author specifically asked, “Why are there no double star systems? Why don’t ships experience side effects from being at particular distances from a sun?”daugardraaken.wordpress.com. Addressing this, the framework proposes adding new system types and environmental mechanics: black holes, neutron stars, accretion disks, comet clouds, etc. Some of these concepts have seen limited implementation – for example, wormhole space introduced in 2009 added systems with special effects (magnetars, pulsars, etc.) influencing ship performanceen.wikipedia.org. More recently, the Triglavian invasion brought localized stellar phenomena and roaming “metaliminal storms” that alter conditions in systems. These are promising steps. Building on them, CCP could create dynamic space weather that evolves over time. For instance, after a massive player battle, the system might develop a temporary radiation field (from all the destroyed reactors) that poses hazards for a few days. Or solar flare cycles could periodically boost or dampen certain activities (imagine a powerful flare that briefly increases all mining yields in system, or conversely knocks out stargate functionality for an hour). The aim is a universe that feels alive and unpredictable, where understanding the cosmos can be as important as fitting your ship.

  • Gradual Retcons for Science-Fiction Plausibility: Hand-in-hand with new phenomena, the documents argue for keeping EVE’s science fiction up-to-date with contemporary scientific knowledge. Described somewhat tongue-in-cheek as coaxing CCP to “retcon” certain aspects of the game, this means introducing features like true binary star systems, more diverse planet types, and realistic orbital mechanics in a non-disruptive waydaugardraaken.wordpress.comdaugardraaken.wordpress.com. A practical approach is to add new regions or special systems that have these enhanced properties, rather than overhauling all legacy systems at once. For example, a future expansion could unveil a cluster of star systems recently charted by Upwell that exhibit complex orbital layouts and exotic cosmic phenomena, serving as a testbed for more realistic mechanics. Over time, if player feedback is positive, similar features could be back-ported to older systems or introduced during major lore events. This cautious implementation ensures that the current gameplay is not destabilized overnight, but the universe’s fidelity increases step by step. The payoff is a more immersive sandbox where the environment itself can inspire new gameplay (e.g. navigation puzzles, environmental hazards, and opportunities tied to scientific exploration).

  • Ship Crews and Crew Management: One of the boldest proposals from Routes of Expansion was to end the “absolute vacuum in terms of ship crews” in EVE’s designdaugardraaken.wordpress.com. Currently, lore says that even large ships have crews, but in gameplay they are invisible – capsuleers operate solo, and only the pilot’s skills and modules matter. The vision calls for making crews a part of the game’s mechanics and narrative. This could involve recruiting and outfitting specialized crew members or teams for your ship, each conferring certain bonuses or abilities. For instance, a battleship might perform better with an experienced engineering crew that boosts armor repairs, or a starship could equip an elite navigation crew that improves warp speed or agility. Crews could gain experience over time or be traded on a market, introducing a new facet to EVE’s economy (imagine a marketplace for skilled gunnery teams or exotic alien advisors). With this system comes new risks and opportunities: an enemy might attempt to kill or capture your crew instead of destroying your ship outright. The original text even floated the idea of boarding actions – incapacitating a ship’s crew to hijack the vessel intactdaugardraaken.wordpress.com. Such mechanics would create a new layer of strategy (and menace) in combat, as well as storytelling (“Remember that time we stormed an enemy titan and stole it?”). Implementing crews should be done gradually – perhaps starting with limited crew roles on larger ships or as an optional bonus system – to avoid over-complicating the new player experience. Over time, however, this could blossom into a rich extension of EVE’s RPG element, giving life to the notion that thousands of souls serve aboard the giant vessels we command.

  • Humanizing the Capsuleer Experience: Beyond mechanics, acknowledging crews and other immersive details serves a narrative purpose. EVE’s setting has always been dark and cold, with players often acting as ruthless demigods in space. By introducing human elements (crew, civilian populations on stations and planets, etc.), the game gains more context for player actions. This can fuel emergent stories: losing a ship might mean something if one has to consider the fate of the crew who served on it; conversely, investing in crew survival systems or escape pods could be a gameplay choice. It also opens avenues for new missions or career paths – perhaps a “Rescue & Salvage” profession where players recover crew from wrecks, or a mercenary role in training and selling high-quality crews. All these ideas stem from the core belief that EVE can be made more immersive and believable without sacrificing its sandbox freedom. The space and the ships should feel like more than just backdrops; they should behave and live like a real universe wherever possible.

Retrospective Sidebar: Walking in Stations – Cautionary Tale of Immersion Attempts – In pursuing immersion, one must remember past lessons. CCP’s attempt at avatar gameplay (Incarna in 2011, also known as “Walking in Stations”) showed both the potential and pitfalls of expanding EVE’s simulation domain. Incarna introduced captain’s quarters where players could step out of their shipsen.wikipedia.org, but the rollout was met with mixed reception and was eventually shelved. The failure was not in the concept of greater immersion – many players did desire more human-scale interaction – but in its implementation and the perception that it detracted from core spaceship development. The proposals in this framework (crews, planetary cities, etc.) should be implemented with that history in mind. They must complement, not replace core gameplay. For example, introducing ship crews should enhance ship combat, not turn EVE into a character RPG. The lesson is to integrate new immersive features in ways that serve the sandbox and give players more options, rather than pulling players entirely into a different mode of play. Done right, features like crews or dynamic environments can actually deepen appreciation for the ships and space – adding texture and realism – without repeating the missteps of past experiments.

Exploration and New Frontiers

The vastness of New Eden has always been one of EVE’s selling points – over 7,000 star systems exist today, each ripe for adventure. Yet the visionary proposals argue that EVE should go even further in providing new frontiers and exploration-driven gameplay, potentially through procedural or dynamic content. The idea is to ensure that the universe continues to feel boundless and full of surprises, even for veterans who have seen it all. By introducing new types of space, content that can evolve or generate unpredictably, and long-term changes to resource distribution, EVE can keep its exploratory edge sharp.

  • Procedural or Uncharted Systems: A key suggestion is to incorporate procedurally generated or unexplored star systems into the game. Unlike known systems which are static and permanently mapped, these would be places that players discover and perhaps even consume or transform. The original documents hinted at an EVE that could expand ad infinitum – “in 50 years time there will be some kind of mostly unrecognizable virtual experience still called EVE” – implying the game must keep growing. One approach is to use wormholes (or new types of spatial anomalies) to access semi-randomized systems that exist temporarily or reset periodically. For example, imagine a new class of ancient gate or rift that leads to a procedural constellation – a cluster of systems generated anew for each expedition, full of rare resources or dangers, which collapses or changes after some weeks or months. Players could establish forward bases there, race to exploit the riches, and then evacuate before the area disappears or becomes uninhabitable. This would echo the success of wormhole space (introduced in Apocrypha 2009) which added unpredictable exploration content and the mysterious Sleeper NPC factionen.wikipedia.org. It goes a step further by making parts of space truly dynamic. In an era where games like No Man’s Sky or Elite Dangerous leverage procedural galaxies, EVE can marry that concept with its single-shard sandbox – giving players a way to continually push beyond the known map, but always looping back to impact the shared economy and politics of New Eden.

  • Resource Depletion and Renewal: One rationale for opening new frontiers is the idea of resource exhaustion. The lore scenario described in EVE Exodus suggests that over time, known regions (like parts of high-sec or null-sec) could face depletion of resources – asteroids mined out, economies stagnating – prompting a need for new resources elsewhere. This is not currently modeled in EVE (mineral belts respawn like clockwork), but adding even subtle resource dynamics could drive conflict and exploration. For instance, the game could simulate long-term mining depletion in heavily farmed systems, forcing industries to venture further out or invest in new technology to reach untapped belts. Alternatively, periodic events might cause resource windfalls in unexplored areas – say a comet strikes a distant moon, depositing valuable new minerals there. By creating a moving frontier of resource opportunity, CCP would encourage veteran groups to spread out rather than consolidate, and give newer players a chance to strike it rich on the fringe. This dovetails with procedural space: dynamic resource distribution could be tied to those new systems that appear and disappear. The goal is to avoid EVE’s world ever feeling “solved” or fully charted – there should always be a myth of El Dorado beyond the next gate.

  • New Exploration Gameplay and Tools: To make exploration compelling, the framework also calls for expanding the tools and roles for explorers. This could include new scanner probes for exotic phenomena, ships optimized for long-distance autonomous operation, or even NPC interactions unique to explorers (e.g. encountering non-hostile alien life or derelict ancient constructs to study rather than just combat). The original ideas mention things like major cosmic discoveries – perhaps finding a truly remote system with an Edenic planet that players could compete over, or uncovering the secrets of ancient races (the Talocan, Yan Jung, etc., which EVE’s lore touches on but never fully realized in gameplay). One concrete proposal is to implement narrative exploration missions that utilize procedural generation: for example, an “expedition generator” that gives a chain of sites and clues across multiple systems, ending in a unique discovery or reward. This would provide a PvE experience akin to treasure hunting or archaeology, benefiting solo players or small crews who enjoy the journey more than the destination. Crucially, any such content should tie back into the player-driven universe – perhaps the data or artifacts found could be used to unlock new technologies or build new types of structures, thus feeding the broader game.

  • Permanent Changes and Player Influence: True exploration should leave a mark. The proposals champion the idea that players ought to be able to change the universe in noticeable ways. We see glimmers of this in current EVE – most notably, the Triglavian invasion of 2019–20 allowed players to determine which systems were pulled into the new Triglavian region, thereby altering empire space foreveren.wikipedia.org. Building on that, future exploration content might let players be the agents of change. For instance, if a group discovers a new stable wormhole route to an untouched constellation, maybe they can build a stargate to make it a permanent part of New Eden (similar to how the empires built new gates in Uprising 2022). Another idea is terraforming or strategic destruction: extremely dedicated efforts by players could potentially improve a planet (for industrial use) or, conversely, destroy a celestial object. While dramatic, these kinds of actions would be endgame goals requiring immense collective effort, and their occurrence would become legendary events in EVE’s history. The underlying principle is that exploration isn’t just passive sightseeing – it’s about shaping the world. When capsuleers venture into the unknown and back, they should have the power (within balanced limits) to introduce something new to the known universe, keeping New Eden in a state of ever-renewing possibility.

Retrospective Sidebar: Wormholes and Triglavian Space – Expanding the Map – EVE has demonstrated the appetite for new frontiers with features like wormhole space and the Triglavian-created region of Pochven. Wormholes (added in 2009) opened 2,500 uncharted systems and showed that players would eagerly colonize and fight over unknown space. More recently, the Triglavian invasion blurred the lines between known space and abyssal deadspace, culminating in players actively siding with an NPC faction to yank certain systems out of empire controlen.wikipedia.orgen.wikipedia.org. The result was Pochven, a dangerous new region that did not exist before, controlled by the Triglavians. These successes validate the idea that dynamic expansion of the universe is feasible. However, both examples were hand-crafted content by CCP. The next step – as foreseen in the proposals – might be to introduce self-generating or player-triggered expansions of space. If CCP can find a way to algorithmically create new systems or locales on the fly (even if limited in scope or time), EVE would truly achieve a kind of living galaxy. Every few years, the starmap could look a bit different, with new areas to explore or conquer, driven by narrative or player action. This would keep veteran players on their toes and ensure EVE’s world remains as dynamic as its player politics.

NPC Factions and Emergent Warfare

Another core pillar of the design framework is the introduction of new NPC factions and more dynamic forms of warfare that involve those factions. EVE’s backstory features many NPC empires and pirate groups, but historically their behavior in-game was relatively static. The proposals imagine a much more active and unpredictable role for NPC entities – sometimes as adversaries that shake up the status quo, other times as tools that clever players can manipulate. This chapter explores how EVE could implement more lively NPC faction gameplay, ranging from large-scale invasions to covert player-driven machinations.

  • The “Implacable Foe” – New Major NPC Threats: Drawing from the idea of an “implacable foe” with advanced technology and a distinct culture, the framework suggests introducing a powerful new NPC faction that can challenge all of New Eden’s existing powers. In the original documents, the Jovians (a lore-rich but absent empire) were a candidate for this role – for example, a scenario was described where Jovian forces invade empire space, destroy some planets, and carve out occupied territories in high-security spacedaugardraaken.wordpress.comdaugardraaken.wordpress.com. In hindsight, CCP effectively implemented a version of this concept with the Triglavian Collective’s invasion: an alien force appearing suddenly and taking over star systems with superior technologyen.wikipedia.org. The framework would encourage CCP to continue this path: periodically introduce NPC-driven crises that upset the balance of power. This could mean an incursion by another dormant faction (perhaps the mysterious Sleepers or Drifters escalating their activity), or even an entirely new extragalactic invader. The key design point is that these events shouldn’t be mere time-limited PvE incursions; they should have lasting geopolitical effects if not addressed by players. For instance, if players fail to contain a new invasion, maybe a chunk of nullsec space falls under NPC control for a time, with all the star gates shut off or taken over. Players would then have to rally – possibly uniting rival coalitions – to reclaim the lost territory. By raising the stakes in this way, NPC adversaries become a catalyst for emergent player stories and content, not just background flavor.

  • Fifth Empire or Faction Emergence: Alongside outright enemies, the game world can be diversified by adding new factions that aren’t simply pirates or aliens to shoot at, but potential political players. The original vision posited the idea of a “fifth faction” beyond the four empiresdaugardraaken.wordpress.com. We have seen glimmers of this with the introduction of entities like the Triglavians (now essentially a fifth sovereign power) and the Society of Conscious Thought taking over Jovian stations. The framework formalizes this: EVE could benefit from one or more new major factions that occupy territory and interact diplomatically. These could be lore-based (e.g. Jovians returning, or a coalition of pirate states forming a quasi-legitimate government), or emergent from player actions (more on that in the next chapter). A new faction might hold regions of space, have its own agents and missions, and offer players new avenues for reputation and narrative. For example, a “mercantile cartel” faction could arise, offering an alternative to empire and pirate standings – players could ally with it for trade benefits but face hostility from pirates and certain empires. The purpose of a fifth (or sixth, etc.) faction is to break the long-standing equilibrium and to provide fresh dynamics in factional warfare and story. It’s worth noting that CCP’s recent expansions like Havoc (2023) have started focusing on pirate factions and allowing players to align with them in conflictsen.wikipedia.org, which is a step in this direction. The framework encourages extending this concept: let players meaningfully support or oppose new factions that have their own goals, and let those choices reshape the political landscape in-game.

  • Incursions and Player-Prompted Conflicts: One of the earlier realized features in this domain was the Sansha’s Nation incursions – NPC invasions of constellations that players have to beat back cooperativelyen.wikipedia.org. The proposals applaud this kind of content but suggest taking it further. Instead of incursions always being CCP-triggered PvE events, players themselves could gain ways to prompt or direct NPC activity. A concrete proposal is a system where corporations or alliances, upon achieving certain standings or completing special operations, might “hire” or lure an NPC pirate faction to attack a rival’s territory. For example, if an alliance entrenched in nullsec has made many enemies, those enemies could invest resources into convincing the Blood Raiders to launch a large raid against the alliance’s space (effectively a player-initiated incursion). The affected alliance would suddenly find NPC dreadnoughts and raiding parties harassing their infrastructure – creating a new dimension of warfare. Of course, such a feature must be balanced (perhaps very costly or risky to invoke) to prevent abuse. But if done right, it introduces a cloak-and-dagger element: the notion of indirect warfare via NPC proxies. An alliance under siege might wonder, “Are these pirate attacks truly random, or is there a puppet master?” – exactly the kind of intrigue the original author envisioneddaugardraaken.wordpress.com. This would also make PvE content less predictable, as it could strike when politically opportune rather than on a fixed schedule.

  • Improved NPC AI and Autonomy: For NPC factions to feel truly impactful, their behavior needs to be less scripted and more autonomous. The proposals emphasize enhancing NPC artificial intelligence so that NPC entities act with some degree of independent strategy. We have seen prototypes of this in events like the Drifter attacks in 2019, where advanced AI-controlled fleets began attacking player structures with no prior warningpcgamer.compcgamer.com. Those Drifter assaults forced players to react in real time, even causing major player wars to pause as everyone dealt with the unexpected threatpcgamer.com. Building on this, the framework suggests that certain NPC fleets (e.g. roving pirate armadas or faction task forces) should operate on their own logic – choosing targets of opportunity, responding to player presence, even retreating and regrouping. Modern AI and scripting could allow NPCs to simulate tactics like an enemy that scouts for weakly defended systems or strikes logistics lines rather than head-on fights. The goal is not to replace player adversaries with AI, but to add a new layer of emergent PvE that feels organic. If a region of space is left too unguarded or chaotic, an NPC force might take advantage until players push them out. CCP’s advances with AI (such as the smarter Sleepers in wormholesen.wikipedia.org and recent experimental opponents in PvE) indicate this is feasible. By 2025, even more sophisticated behavior could be within reach, making NPC factions credible actors on the stage of New Eden.

Retrospective Sidebar: Triglavian Invasion – Prophecy Fulfilled – The ideas of massive NPC invasions and a new faction entering New Eden were vividly realized in the Triglavian Invasion of 2019-2020. What began as mysterious incursions evolved into full-scale invasions where players had to choose sides between the NPC Triglavians and the Empires’ defense force EDENCOMen.wikipedia.org. This war culminated in 27 star systems being conquered by the Triglavians, permanently altering the starmap and establishing Pochven as a new region under NPC controlen.wikipedia.org. For the first time, players experienced a dynamic where an NPC faction could win territory and fundamentally change the game’s geography. This event closely mirrors proposals in Routes of Expansion that called for NPC-driven shake-ups (e.g. Jovian invasions destroying systems, a fifth faction emerging) – proving that such radical changes can be done and even embraced by the community. The Triglavian arc also demonstrated players’ appetite for influencing outcomes in lore; tens of thousands participated in deciding which systems fell. Moving forward, CCP can take this lesson to heart: narrative events with real, lasting consequences energize the player base. The framework’s suggestions for future NPC factions and wars build on this foundation, pushing the boundary of what NPCs can do in EVE. Just as the Triglavians left their mark, perhaps the next great foe (or ally) will arise, and New Eden will again be reshaped – with players at the center of the story.

Emergent Gameplay and Player Agency in the World

The final theme ties all the others together: empowering players with greater agency to shape the game world and its narrative. EVE Online is often lauded for its player-driven stories – wars, alliances, market scams, and so on. The proposals seek to amplify this by giving players even more tools to influence not just each other, but the fabric of the universe, blurring the line between player action and “game content.” Several visionary ideas fall under this umbrella, from the concept of dual-faction gameplay that divides the player base in interesting ways, to the notion of players effectively creating and controlling what we think of as NPC elements (civilizations, missions, designs).

  • Dual-Faction Gameplay – New Players vs. Old Guard: Perhaps the most radical idea is the “Exodus” scenario, a form of dual-faction gameplay that reframes how new players enter EVE. In this model, the player base is split into two broad groups with differing starting conditions and perspectives: the established “Old Guard” (veteran players in the existing empires) and a new wave of “Exodus” players who enter the game through a completely different narrative. According to the EVE Exodus concept, these new players would be taught by the game’s storyline to view the old capsuleers as monstrous, warlike, and exploitative. In essence, the newbies form their own faction – with their own safe territories, technologies, and objectives – rather than being thrown directly into the sandbox with veterans. As they progress, the plan is that their gameplay gradually converges with the main sandbox, eventually pitting the new faction against the old in a galaxy-shaking confrontation or uneasy symbiosis. Implementing this would require careful design: one approach might be to start new players in a protected region (separate from the current map) where they learn the ropes by building up a nascent civilization. During this phase they would use unique mechanics (as described below) and develop a culture of cooperation and preparation. After reaching a certain milestone – perhaps after a fixed time or by achieving specific goals – the new faction “breaks out” and gains access to the wider universe, bringing with them fleets and assets built in their enclave. The end result is a dual-faction conflict unlike any seen in EVE before: two groups of players with different histories, each regarding the other with distrust. This would generate endless emergent stories (vets might band together to repel the upstarts, while new players might crusade to reform the corrupt old order), and crucially, it offers a narrative-driven solution to new player retention. By unifying newbies on a common cause and delaying direct competition with veterans, EVE could give them a sense of identity and collective power, thereby easing the steep learning curve in a constructive way.

  • Player-Run NPC Civilizations: A hallmark of the Exodus idea is that new players wouldn’t just pilot individual ships; they would operate at a higher strategic level, controlling NPC forces and infrastructure. In practical terms, early-stage Exodus players might play a hybrid of EVE and an RTS or city-builder. For example, instead of immediately flying a frigate themselves, a new player could be tasked with managing a base or colony – directing automated miners, constructing defenses, and producing ships that NPC pilots (or drones) operate under their command. The snippet from the proposal notes that “Exodus players don’t fly ships themselves, at least not initially. They commandeer AI-driven ships and fleets like we see NPCs use every day.”. This intriguing mechanic essentially makes a new player the “commander” of a small fleet rather than a lone pilot. Over time, as they become more proficient, they could take direct control of advanced ships (perhaps in later stages of the tutorial or campaign) – but even then, their identity is tied to the idea that they lead an NPC organization. They could found their own militant crew, trading company, or mini-faction which persists and grows. By the endgame of the Exodus path, the goal is that these players have built formidable NPC-run assets: stations, colonized systems, defensive fleets, etc.. In essence, they will have created a civilization in microcosm. When the wall between new players and veterans comes down, these “Exodus” civilizations enter the sandbox as fresh actors – effectively new NPC factions, but ones directed by player leadership. This is a bold paradigm shift for EVE: players would no longer only be characters within the world; they could become, in a sense, world builders, akin to dungeon masters within the universe, using NPCs as their extended avatars. It’s like allowing players to be both the general and the foot soldier.

  • Integrating with the Existing Sandbox: The dual-faction system must eventually merge with the single-shard sandbox that is EVE’s hallmark. The design challenge is ensuring that when it happens, it feels like a natural story event, not a forced game mechanic. The framework envisions a build-up – possibly framed as a major expansion narrative – where the separate new player realm (let’s call it “Nova” for illustration) finally connects to New Eden. Perhaps the new players’ civilization perfects a gate technology or overcomes a barrier that had kept them isolated. When that day arrives, both sides gain the ability to cross over. The Exodus players would bring their NPC-built armadas through to known space, and the veteran players would, for the first time, be able to venture into the novice civilization’s territory. To prevent a slaughter of one side by the other, game mechanics and narrative can ensure a rough parity or deterrence – for instance, the new faction might have home turf advantages or powerful defensive AI fleets, while the old faction has the advantage of experience and player-trained skills. The result is an extended endgame where conflict can scale from individual dogfights all the way up to factional warfare involving tens of thousands of NPC ships backed by players. Diplomacy and betrayal could occur at an epic scope: maybe some veteran alliances secretly ally with the newcomers to undermine their old rivals, or vice versa. Meanwhile, new players who “graduate” from the isolated zone would now fully join the broader sandbox but retain an allegiance or identity from their origins (similar to choosing a faction allegiance in other MMOs, but here it’s based on your entry cohort). Over years, the line between the two factions could blur as politics shifts – which is fine, because the true outcome is that a massive influx of players would have been integrated into EVE through a memorable saga rather than trickling in anonymously and quitting alone.

  • Player-Created Missions and Content: Another dimension of player agency highlighted in the proposals is enabling players to create content for each other. This ranges from designing ship skins or even ships (one idea was that players could propose ship designs or custom faction ships – e.g. a GoonSwarm-designed frigate – which CCP could formally incorporate if balanceddaugardraaken.wordpress.com) to more immediately feasible systems like player-generated missions. In fact, CCP is already experimenting with this concept as of 2025 – recent discussions of a “mission arc toolkit” or a contract system where experienced players can package missions for newbies echo the idea that “veterans making missions for newbies”pcgamer.com could greatly enhance engagement. The framework strongly supports features that let advanced players script or suggest objectives that others can undertake for rewards. Imagine a corporation posting an NPC bounty expedition (“We need pilots to scout system X for pirates; any takers will be paid and gain standing with us”), or tools for players to write branching mission narratives that CCP can endorse if they gain popularity. Such systems leverage the community’s creativity to fill the world with more content than CCP alone could produce. Care must be taken to prevent abuse (e.g. farming or scams), but with moderation and incentives aligned (perhaps CCP curates the best player-made missions into official content), this could blossom into a whole new avenue of emergent PvE/PvP crossover content. It’s essentially the gamification of contracts and sandbox goals – something EVE players already do informally (on bulletin boards, etc.), but integrated into the game’s mechanics.

  • Shadow Economy and Influence Networks: Lastly, emergent gameplay isn’t only about open conflict – it’s also about subtle influence. The proposals mention “shadow players – moguls and power brokers working in the shadows”daugardraaken.wordpress.comdaugardraaken.wordpress.com. EVE certainly has its share of meta-game strategists and market kingpins, but the framework suggests introducing formal ways to play that role. This could include advanced economic tools (like the ability to create one’s own mini-faction or corporation that exists purely as a financial entity, issuing shares, influencing NPC markets) or political tools (perhaps sponsoring NPC events as touched on earlier, or bribing NPC officials to alter faction warfare conditions). An intriguing idea would be a Galactic Council feature (beyond the player-elected CSM in real life) – imagine an in-game Senate where the top alliances or influential individuals could vote on certain live events or NPC policies (for example, deciding which pirate faction the empires crack down on this quarter, thereby affecting spawn rates or security status in some regions). While potentially complex, these kinds of systems would give schemers and leaders more to do than just fight wars; they could literally legislate the environment of the game. The endgame of emergent gameplay is to allow the player community to steer the sandbox in ever more nuanced ways, truly fulfilling the notion that EVE Online is the ultimate player-driven universe.

Retrospective Sidebar: A Glimpse of Duality – Echoes in Other Media – The dual-faction and player-run civilization idea in EVE Exodus is unprecedented in mainstream MMOs, but we can find analogous concepts elsewhere that validate its potential. For instance, CCP’s own shooter spinoff Dust 514 (now long-defunct) attempted to link a new player base (FPS players on console) with the EVE universe – a one-way form of dual gameplay. Though Dust didn’t last, it proved that separate player communities could contribute to the EVE ecosystem. More recently, games like Star Citizen talk about players managing NPC crews and AI blades on ships, and strategy games such as Dual Universe flirt with letting players script AI units. While no game yet has two distinct player start paths that collide, the popularity of asymmetrical games (like survival games where newbies have protective grace periods or different roles) suggests players are open to non-uniform experiences. If CCP were to pioneer the Exodus concept, it could solve a long-standing industry problem: how to make a 20-year-old game welcoming to new blood without diluting what makes it special. By making the new player experience a collective, story-driven journey rather than a solo tutorial, EVE would turn the hardest part of its growth into a source of content. It’s a risky endeavor – essentially running two games in parallel and then merging them – but the reward would be a regenerated universe. EVE Online, in its third decade, could undergo an Exodus of its own: a rebirth with a new generation of capsuleers not as mere recruits, but as a transformative force that even veterans must reckon with.

Addendum: New Concepts Beyond the PDFs



From great distance 

Inside the Vortex Clouds

1. The Maelstrom System

A colossal, late-game discovery: an ancient, rotating system centered on a black hole with a vast accretion disk and 10 concentric orbital lanes. Navigation is dynamic and hazardous—proximity to the center inflicts escalating electromagnetic and thermal damage. Inside the outer layers are hidden stations, ruins, and rare resources. Players can “squart” derelict structures, turning them into forward bases—permanent until destroyed. NPC factions may also inhabit and defend these structures.

  • Gameplay loop: Deep logistics planning, orbit prediction, survivability, and extraction in a rotating, ever-changing battlefield.

  • Prestige: The first discoverer can name it—e.g., Eelsass Maelstrom—cementing their name in EVE history.

2. The Pilgrim 

An idea for a wandering artefact Arc Vessel – The Pilgrim: a rare archetype of gargantuan wandering space ark, with the capabilities of a  smaller  station (It can only providing docking for up to Battleship vessels, and then  only a limited amount) that randomly jumps from nulsec to nulsec system to system. It has a very small chance to jump into lowsec systems. It only jumps intol adjacent systems. It jumps rougly every 30-90 minutes, randomly. These things can not be damaged, and are twice as big as a Hordage World Arc. 

3. Emergent System Ecology

The expanded universe now includes:

  • Brown dwarf systems: Compact, low-resource systems—moons, icy belts, minor rings—often overlooked by major alliances. 

  • Non-localized regions: Initially spawn without chat, NPC factions, or infrastructure. Colonization gradually shifts their sec status.

  • Gradual civilization: As factions (Amarr, Minmatar, pirates) move in, NPC trade routes, pirate cells, and infrastructure begin forming.

4. Docking Limits and Realistic Ship Management

All stations now feature hard limits on how many and what kind of ships can dock internally. Once limits are reached:

  • Capital ships must dock externally and are vulnerable.

  • Dormant accounts are protected, but returning players must move if a station is full.

  • Hidden Kuiper Belt “stealth docks” become key for capital storage and long-term stashing.

5. Advanced NPC Ecosystems

NPCs have become:

  • Algorithmically scalable: Intelligence scales from 0–100, influenced by player skills and infrastructure.

  • Persistent: Some mission sites evolve into permanent infestations with their own logistics, strategies, and shipbuilding.

  • Factions with depth: Mercenaries, pirate syndicates, loyalist patrols—all behave dynamically, with morale, betrayal, and tactical adaptation.

6. Dual-Path Progression

A new character creation system allows players to start not as pilots, but as planetary dukes or station barons:

  • Entirely new skill trees.

  • Emphasis on indirect play, NPC control, resource logistics, and long-form strategy.

  • The two trees (classic capsuleer vs. strategic overlord) merge at higher levels for hybrid mastery.

7. Systemic Bookmarks and Drift

Bookmarking is now affected by celestial motion. Planets orbit, belts shift, stations drift slightly—your “safe spot” might slowly become a crater. Planetary crashes and solar incineration are very real risks.

8. Continuous World Expansion

  • 1–2 new star systems appear daily.

  • Chat activation is optional and tied to corp influence or faction presence.

  • Unclaimed systems become NPC colonization targets.

  • Total systems expanded to over 60,000, not counting wormhole space.

9. Legacy Respect

All of this honors—not erases—the original EVE Online foundation. The new universe is coherent, fractal, and always opt-in. Players can engage at their own pace—pirate, emperor, trader, baron, or vagabond.

Concluding Reflections and Future Pathways

The consolidated design framework presented here paints a picture of EVE Online’s future that is undeniably ambitious: a sandbox enriched with player-built metropolises, realistic cosmic systems, ever-evolving frontiers, cunning NPC adversaries, and even a schism (and reunion) of its playerbase to rejuvenate the game’s social dynamics. Not every idea outlined will be easy or even possible to implement – technical and design hurdles abound. However, the spirit behind them is something CCP can embrace: never letting EVE stagnate, always pushing the envelope of MMO design in service of player engagement and emergent storytelling.

Several of the once-radical proposals have proven their worth in hindsight. The success of features like citadels, wormhole space, incursions, and the Triglavian invasion shows that EVE thrives when given new sand and new toys for its sandbox. Players responded with enthusiasm to being able to own their universe more (through structures and industry) and to defend or change their universe when faced with novel threats. These lessons encourage CCP to continue in this direction – albeit with careful pacing and respect for what makes EVE’s core gameplay work.

From a design perspective, a few guiding principles can be distilled for future development:

  • Iteration with Vision: Big changes (like those proposed) should be introduced in stages. Each chapter of this framework can be broken into smaller features that build toward the grand vision. For example, test the waters of ship crews by adding a simple crew bonus system on one class of ships before scaling up; or pilot the idea of player-created missions through a live event or contest before formalizing a tool. Iterative development, guided by the long-term vision, will reduce risk while keeping players invested in the journey.

  • Player Choice and Opt-In Complexity: A recurring concern with expansive features is complexity. EVE is already complex; adding more could overwhelm players. The answer is to make participation in new systems optional and rewarding. Not interested in planetary politics? You can ignore it and continue flying in space – but those who dive in get new avenues of profit and influence. Dual-faction gameplay for new players would be an opt-in at account creation (or perhaps a temporary event for veterans to experience the other side). By preserving choice, CCP can cater to varied playstyles without fragmenting the game.

  • Leverage the Community: Many of these proposals effectively outsource content generation to the players – and that’s a good thing. Whether it’s through player-driven missions, design contributions, or emergent conflicts, CCP can act more as a curator and enabler than a traditional content provider. EVE’s community has repeatedly shown they can surprise and delight (or terrify) with what they do when given tools. The future of EVE should double down on this strength: give players the tools, then step back and watch the universe evolve.

In closing, the synthesis of “Routes of Expansion” and “EVE Exodus” reminds us that EVE Online has always been more than just a game – it’s a grand experiment in world-building and collective participation. As of 2025, the game stands at a crossroads of opportunity. The past years have proven it can adapt and reinvent aspects of itself (free-to-play clones, new graphics, shifting story arcs). Going forward, the ideas in this framework urge CCP to be fearless in imagining EVE’s next decade. It could be the decade where EVE transcends all competition by offering an experience no other virtual world can match: a persistent universe where every layer – from the orbital mechanics of stars to the fate of empires – can be influenced by the players.

Such a future would fulfill the prophecy that EVE Online will outlive us all, not as a relic of the past, but as a living, evolving testament to the creativity and resilience of its community and designers. The capsuleers of tomorrow are ready to write the next chapters of New Eden’s story – and with the right game design choices, CCP will give them the pens to do so. The route of expansion lies ahead, and it is as limitless as the cosmos itself.