EVE New Citizens Q&A

Hmmm ... saying the game is PvE focussed cos mining is a bit like saying Hitler's Germany was a peaceful fun loving regime because they had lots of farmers and fishermen,

Wow... I seem to be poorly communicating here. In an attempt to cut down on the wall of texts posts, I was being as brief as possible and as such I seem to have been unclear. So I apologize for the wall of text...

I didn't intend to imply EVE was PvE *OR* PvP oriented. I think both are quite possible and the game seems to do such quite well. I did say that I've only seen the claims of it being primarily PvP oriented from hardcore PvP'rs. ergherhdfgh is the first stated PvE'r I've seen making the claim as well, so I'll take it with more consideration as being fact.

I also never said or implied that anyplace should be 'safe'. That is a carebear dream. I am well aware that EVE does not offer safe harbor anywhere but in dock. I have actually read that from EVE devs. However, that does not mean that EVE is PvP focused. That is an interpretation to say that. Without PvE, the game collapses, even I can see that much. PvP does not sustain the game and it would not be built the way it is if it was primarily a PvP focused game. PvP seems to be ONE of the primary aspects of the game, but not the end all of the game.

That leads to my mining comment. I'm just making that observation from an economic point. While, yes, there may be enough resources to sustain the economy without mining for a while, eventually it would collapse if everyone stopped mining. That is why they need to keep it a viable 'job' for ISK earning, unless they intend the function to go the NPC route. So, I appreciate peoples comments on this, but I'm looking at a reality of game design here. CCP has to keep PvE in the game and they have to have some method of protecting those PvE folks. My read is that is what HiSec is, a risk reduction mechanism for PvE players. It makes a reasonable trade off of safety for lower income rates for SOME players.

Now, ergherhdfgh, my read of your intent was based on your comment that HiSec was intended to protect PvP'rs, and not to protect PvE'rs. If I have misconstrued that comment or your position was improperly stated, then I am sorry and happily toss out my previous comments that are causing some issues for you. That seems to be what has happened. So I'm sorry for misreading your intent.

HiSec, from everything I've experienced so far is what I stated before. A risk reduction mechanism for PvE activities to move forward for players not wanting to have to be hyper paranoid at all times. It is true that you are not safe in HiSec, however, if your cargo holds never hold more than a couple million ISK of materials, your only worry is the suicide ganker that is in it for the fun of it, because it's not profitable for other forms of suicide gankers. The War Dec costs, as they are, are high enough to protect smaller mining ships from being plundered for profit. That does not apply to some ORCA sucking up millions of ISK to take to market. So, I'm fully aware of the mechanisms folks. My points are to game realities.

Thus my comment about game mechanics. The War Dec costs are low enough that if my Procurer hold is full and I'm in HiSec, a kill of my ship would pay for the War Dec cost if you'd get 100% return on value of hold and salvaged items. Since that's not probable, and a Procurer isn't an easy kill, it's not really profitable. The same can't be said for the other mining barges. Thus my comment about the costs for War Dec being a little low as a game mechanic. To me, all the Tech 1 mining barges should be 'covered' by a higher War Dec cost so that it would take more than 1 kill to make it profitable to declare War. It's easy enough to train into a mining barge so newbies can start bringing in heavier loads for profit as they build up their corps or give them something to do to earn steady income while they learn the game and find ways to pay for warships and fitting lessons. It doesn't help the game to have some newbie get whacked, thinking they are protected by HiSec, when they have someone declare war on them so they don't get smashed by Concord. To a lot of newbies, this would look like game rules manipulation and would be a turn off. The player doing the whacking may not think a thing about it, as it's allowed, but often we don't consider larger consequences.

I am NOT saying HiSec should be safe, I've never said that nor intend that. My comment is that mechanics like a single sided War Dec being used to dodge consequences of attacking players in HiSec doesn't add up to 'War' to me, it's more like buying a Monopoly "Get out of Jail Free" card. I would prefer that the cost for War Dec be double what it currently is, and if the War Dec is mutual, each side pays half and they go to war- any time, any place. If it's a single sided War Dec, meaning "I'm going to War against you NOW!", they pay the full Concord fee and they are free to go after a HiSec corp. The game mechanic for the "War" concept is strengthened and the perceived abuse of it is slightly reduced, providing a little more protection for ships that newer pilots are likely to fly in HiSec.

So, I'm making comments regarding game mechanics and what I'm seeing as their intent. To me, the War Dec use seems to be at odds with the intent of what its purpose seems to be and why it's named the way it is.

aside from the fact that EVE is designed as a PVP sandbox game by CCP as stated in the FAQ i linked, EVE economy will die if there won't be any ship explosion. PVE activities are there or in place to support PVP.

let me ask you a question, what do you intend to use all the ISK you accumulated? just to hoard?

Thank you.

I'm not seeing where I'm wrong though. It says it's a sandbox game, check. It says it is 'essentially a PvP game at it's core', check. That doesn't necessarily mean it has a PvP focus.

I can see the temptation to link those two concepts but that's not how I'm reading that or seeing it in the current design of the game.

If it were focused that way, at least half the game is wasted coding effort. The game mechanics REQUIRE PvP to drive the end output of the economy, just as it requires PvE to drive the input side of the economy. The 'sandbox' has nothing to do with either of those. The game could exist on multiple servers, multiple instances, etc. etc. just like other MMO's. The sandbox is everyone is playing together all the time and human nature actually drives the conflict aspect as well as development aspect.

Proof of that would be this... if everyone stopped PvP'ing, would the game still exist? Yes, it might be boring, people just getting rich building massive corps and industries, but yes, it could keep going. The same can't be said for PvE. If everyone stopped doing the PvE side, eventually the economy would grind to a halt. ISK would be harder and harder to obtain as the loss in salvaging ships would be the last haven. Players make all the goods, that's a PvE aspect of the game. Take the aspect away and the game dies a long, slow painful death as it is currently coded. You can't have output without input. Well, I take that back, everyone could keep PvP'ing in rookie ships, forever. That side is automatic. So, I'm wrong there, but the game would be reduced to that. It's essentially death.

So yes, the game is PvP at it's core, but core is not 'focus' to me. The focus is likely the balancing act between PvP and PvE. Something I think CCP is doing reasonably well at so far.

EvE Online New Pilot FAQ, page 15, Section 5, Clause 5.3
and this colourfull post from CCP Falcon our community manager


Source

i think you are misunderstanding something, production, buy/sell, etc are all different types of PVP. do you know the -0.01 game? that's the type of PVP i hate the most. it's impossible to gather all the materials for producing stuff, you need to buy some of it. you need to plan and outwit other producers/sellers for you to gain. so actually market is vicious pvp.

even mining sometimes can be considered PVP since asteroid belts can be consumed and depleted. miners are fighting for good mining spots near trade hubs.

Thank you, Griffin just educated me on that as well.... I appreciate your patience with me.

My entire game time for almost the last two years has been under multiple wars.
I'll agree that war needs some attention but the cost shouldn't be the balancing factor,
They tried and it directly resulted the smaller aggressive entities forming larger block groups to spread the cost about , now for the most part aggressive hs entities tend to be big 80+ member count groups.

You'll often see the advice "forget everything other MMO's have taught you" thrown around in New Citizens Q&A, now you know why.

You are correct that it no longer represents my opinion directly, but indirectly not much from an observational point has changed.

What has changed for me is how things are based and balanced. Your comments about 'protected PvE' were trying to tell me what Ralph King Griffin's post echoing CCP Falcon actually did get across to me. THERE IS NO PVE.

So, your points are valid and experience is really the best teacher. How we adapt is really the telling factor of how much pain we have to suffer through before we stumble on what works for us.

What I'd advise at this point is a continual stressing of not calling it PvE. While in EVE, it has relevance to a concept, to anyone not familiar with that concept or coming from outside EVE, it means something else entirely and man does that go a long way to explain the disconnect between tear-collectors and carebears, at least to me.

Inside the context of EVE, it's really resource/corporate PvP, not ship vs. ship PvP.

This is still a mind blower to me and it's really hard to dump traditional PvE concepts when I see the term... sheesh!