First off, IWS is absolutely a "real CPM" and one of our workhorses on the team, disrespecting him isn't going to impress me, or CCP, or anyone else for that matter. If you're going to lecture about maturity, make sure you're exuding it yourself. Also - I'm not sure how long you've been around these forums, but while IWS has been blessed with the urge to post prolifically, eloquence has never been his strong suit. This is a classic case of players having an absolute meltdown over a series of extremely rational (and truthful) comments about the issue.

The bottom line is this, no one (not the CPM, not CCP) is putting some foot down and refusing to deliver Corp Battles. This whole approachj of "GRAB THE TORCHES, FIRE UP THE PETITION, LETS HAVE A REVOLUTION" is a huge mistaken waste of effort, just as IWS previously said.

Here are the unadulterated facts, scrubbed of hyperbole and emotion:

1.) CCP does not respond to petitions. They have never been a recognized form of getting a feature or change pushed, They're not about to be, and signing and spamming one carries zero weight in terms of actually accomplishing what you want to accomplish.

2.) There is no need to convince either the CPM or CCP that there is plenty broken with PC, and plenty of merit in having pitched battles between corporation. I've personally brainstormed ideas with devs directly and seen interest in offering this type of gameplay in the future, the lack of them coming out and promising to work on this feature tomorrow does not mean that anyone's saying "corp battles will never happen in the future".

3.) CCP is undergoing some heavy internal examination under the leadership of the new EP, they're not ready to discuss the future of Dust at this time, but they will in the not-too-distant future. No, we cannot give you an ETA.

4.) The long-term planning taking place under the new EP will have a lot to do with what major features like this get worked on and in what order.

5.) CCP is working on dropsuits and weapons and balancing in the meantime, because work must continue, and this is low-hanging fruit they can manage without needing the long-term plans finalized yet. Work on dropsuits and balances does NOT indicate that this is the most important aspect of the game, only one that is manageable independent of the larger picture, which is still being painted.

6.) Pretending that there's some battle here between the will of the players and the will of CCP or the CPM is pointless and harmful, it wastes other community member's energy by leading them into a confrontation that is both unnecessary and only going to lessen your credibility as someone trying to make positive change.

So by all means, continue to berate IWS for sharing the truth, which is that Corp Contracts are not going to magically appear in 1.8 because you made a petition and got a bunch of people angry at a perceived slight. Corp contracts will also not return in their previous form, certainly not tied to Faction Warfare and certainly not without some of the design issues addressed in the process. Will they return in some form, some day? I certainly hope so, as do all of the rest of the CPM. No one's fighting the -idea- of corp contracts, all IWS is trying to explain is that stamping our feet and bumping threads is not going to be the way this gets implemented.

If any of MY statement above is factually untrue (such as devs EXPLICITLY declaring they will not be re-implementing a corp contract system or providing corps freedom to create their own content at districts) , feel free to correct me here. Otherwise, I'm more than happy to dowse the torches and send everyone home from the riot party with the comfortable knowledge that there's no need to obnoxiously bump threads and lead a faux revolution just to "be heard". You've been heard by the CPM, you've been heard by CCP, everyone knows PC is broke and corp contracts were more fun, and all there is left to do is to chill for a bit until the new EP can share with you his plan for the future.

....and THAN you can go grab your pitchforks again if don't hear what you're looking for. Fair enough?