These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Let me tell you why people are killing highsec miners. A manifesto.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#561 - 2012-02-11 22:20:59 UTC
Arlbash Dested wrote:
Quote:
I have but one rebuttal point, imagine if tomorrow CCP came and said "We're going to make hisec totally safe, from now on weapons can only be activated on rats and WT's." There would be absolute OUTCRY!! VERY few people would support this course of action.
This is because of ONE simple reason, this would restrict the way people play THEIR game, that THEY PAY for, either with hard earned isk or with RL money.


Or the way we could think about this is that it allows other people (carebears) to play the game they want to without being harassed by gankers (to be generous and call them that).
Suppose they did announce that - where would those complainers go? Low and null-sec - there's plenty of space there to fight over.

High sec is for carebears who don't want to bother with the rest of you. So far, the CB's tolerate an occasional gank, but why should they even have to tolerate that much? Especially when there are true bastards like the OP, or people who just revel in other people's misery.

My other two points remain:
1) if CCP worked to make the rest of the game more interesting, the gankers wouldn't get so bored to begin with.
2) if you want us to treat ships as throwaways, then don't make us work so hard (long) to earn them. How long did that first Raven or Hulk take you to get? Probably a few weeks at least, months if you include training time.



Great points, AD, well-made.
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#562 - 2012-02-11 22:29:44 UTC
Alec Freeman wrote:
10/10 great effort. Very high quality troll and I actually enjoyed the read. Bravo my brother. Bravo.


That's right - make yourself known to us. Allegiance noted down in our little black book Smile
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#563 - 2012-02-11 22:48:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Milo QUinn
Sir Smythe wrote:
An absolutely epic treaty! 315 may not have been the originator of the highsec gank miner ideology, but he is first I've read who put all the pieces together. P AND changed my mind about opposing it!

This logic can not be ignored by CCP. This is "exactly" what CCP has designed this game to do and become. They advertise this constantly: "1 person can make a difference in the universe."

CCP, you are getting what you wished for, so beware of nerfing it to much!


Complete. And. Utter. Rot!

Where is your brain?

Yes, one person can change history, either in EVE or in real life. But who said that history always has to be written by the generals, the mercenaries, the thieves and the pirates?

Good, decent, law-abiding, honest people can make history too, and EVE should have a place for such people, alongside all the testosterone- and adrenalin-driven jar-heads who are only in it for the quick and simple (some might even say childish) thrill of pew-pew (and why those people don't find FPS console games more to their liking is beyond me, because what they do in EVE doesn't exactly require much brain-work, dedication, logistics or planning).

EVE is big enough for all types of players, and suggesting that it should all be geared towards the desires and appetites of PvPers and gankers is selfish, undemocratic, bullying and dictatorial. And if CCP go down that route, it will ultimately be to the massive detriment of both the game and their player revenues. It will kill the game.
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#564 - 2012-02-11 23:10:49 UTC
Halcyon Ingenium wrote:
tl;dr Fallacy of Composition. Op's post is a bloated, over-wrought, self indulgent stop liking things that I don't like whine.

The fallacy here is, and it is subtle, is that the OP defines a bot as any self correcting system which seeks to maximize activity and minimize energy and material consumption/loss. This definition is so wide it could encompass every living thing ever. He then offers the caveat that he is exempt from his proscription because he wants to be there when the trigger is pulled. But he gives no justification as to why he should be allowed this exemption from his own proscription; only he knows he is there pulling the trigger. There is no Turing test issued before that trigger is pulled, so to everyone else, he is just a bot, by his own definition. If he allows himself the assumption that others are bots based on his own conjecture, then he must allow others such an assumption based on theirs. And this is where the manifesto outlining his struggle falls apart; he makes no such allowance and reveals either hypocrisy, or if he is unaware of the contradiction then it is simply a matter of a fallacy of composition. Some miners are bots, but it does not necessarily follow that all are, despite the natural min/max metagame that all living things engage in.


Great post, but I think you just went over the OP's head by several orders of magnitude. Try rewriting it in crayon with simple words Smile
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#565 - 2012-02-11 23:44:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Milo QUinn
Lonox wrote:
The best thing to ever happen to EVE would be to remove industry entirely. CCP could slap bounties on the drones then, seed the market with everything you'd need, go F2P and open up the cash shop. EVE wouldn't die, maybe all the whiner's would finally leave and they'd make a killing. Lol


Your John Travolta profile pic kinda suits your air-headed remark.

Get rid of all industry in EVE? Yeah - let's make it like every other low-brow pew-pew MMORPG on the web, so that low-brows like you can feel at home, and safely unchallenged by all the smarter people out there who might otherwise be tempted to join the game. Yeah, let's allow the lowest common denominator of the IQ bell-curve to dictate everyone's gaming experience, eh? Because we'd hate to appear to elitist, wouldn't we? We'd hate to give the impression that an MMORPG could ever aspire to be something that offered real intellectual challenge, as opposed to being just another formulaic thumb-exerciser for spotty adolescents...

And if the industry element of EVE went, who would make all the ships and equipment you need to play the game? NPC corps? Oh yeah, then you wouldn't have to worry about price differentials between different stations and regions, cos the prices would be the same everywhere. It would be like a galactic Wal-Mart or McDonalds - everywhere the same, no challenge, no variety, just bland, anodyne sameness from one end of EVE space to the other. Mind you, I guess that might even appeal to some people - the types who have no imagination, no craving for stimulation, and who are happy to inhabit a virtual world that is as boring, unchallenging and dreary as the one they probably inhabit IRL.

Newsflash, mate - we don't all live in the American Mid-West. Some of us actually live in more interesting parts of the world!

The beauty of online games is that they offer an escape from reality, and a chance to experience something more exciting, more varied, more colourful (in certain respects, at least) than our day-to-day lives. But people like you and the OP just want to make it an exact replica of RL.

I pity you for your lack of imagination.
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#566 - 2012-02-11 23:56:30 UTC
Russell Casey wrote:
Lonox wrote:
The best thing to ever happen to EVE would be to remove industry entirely. CCP could slap bounties on the drones then, seed the market with everything you'd need, go F2P and open up the cash shop. EVE wouldn't die, maybe all the whiner's would finally leave and they'd make a killing. Lol


Actually the best thing would be removal of isk bounties/mission isk payouts. Make ratting as much about harvesting resources for a player driven economy as every other profession. Missions would be about getting loyalty points to spend on items plus whatever was dragged in and incursions would actually be run like the loot-dropping boss encounters they were meant to be instead of rat-chaining in highsec.

No more isk faucets to inflate the economy, isk truly becomes a currency and the capitalism game is actually capitalism because people compete and fight over control of resoures and not the biggest money-trees.


Read the old QENs, about the early days of EVE. They tried to run EVE as a closed economy, with no external resource/revenue injections.

It didn't work.

So the experiment you are suggesting has already been tried, and it failed.

There is a very good reason why there are faucets constantly injecting liquidity into the EVE markets: without them, those markets would collapse.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#567 - 2012-02-12 00:00:26 UTC
Milo QUinn wrote:


Good, decent, law-abiding, honest people can make history too


No. Outlier (often charismatic) people make history, the others follow like sheep.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#568 - 2012-02-12 00:01:26 UTC
Lonox wrote:
Russell Casey wrote:
Lonox wrote:
The best thing to ever happen to EVE would be to remove industry entirely. CCP could slap bounties on the drones then, seed the market with everything you'd need, go F2P and open up the cash shop. EVE wouldn't die, maybe all the whiner's would finally leave and they'd make a killing. Lol


Actually the best thing would be removal of isk bounties/mission isk payouts. Make ratting as much about harvesting resources for a player driven economy as every other profession. Missions would be about getting loyalty points to spend on items plus whatever was dragged in and incursions would actually be run like the loot-dropping boss encounters they were meant to be instead of rat-chaining in highsec.

No more isk faucets to inflate the economy, isk truly becomes a currency and the capitalism game is actually capitalism because people compete and fight over control of resoures and not the biggest money-trees.


Yeah, about that player driven economy thing, turns out noone cares. Well, maybe a few economists that bring their work home do but that's about it. People like making things go boom and detest players that go against the grain. I like my way better, it gets rid of the crap and ships go boom. It's a win/win for everyone, except for industry players but who cares?


Spoken like a true trigger-happy jar-head who'd be happier playing an X-Box FPS, where kinaesthetic reflexes are more important than joined-up thinking.

Do the serious players of EVE a favour, and consider switching, eh?
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#569 - 2012-02-12 00:38:34 UTC
Stahlregen wrote:
Demosthenes returns.

James 315, I believe this to be one of, if not the most poignant and heart-felt of your many essays.

The fact that your powerful manifesto of Eve's currently disheartening zero-risk empire zeitgeist resulted in 14 pages of posts, (most of which only serves to prove your arguments regarding the insidious and corrupting thought processes of the self-enslaved-hisec-miner) is truly a testament to your oratory prowess.

As a long-time follower of Karttoon's teachings it gives me much pleasure to see that while the directorate of my own alliance has since tried to distance themselves from the one true prophet his lessons have not been forgotten.

I am afraid that until exclusively empire players are willing to apply a modicum of self-analysis and realise the stupidity in their own self-inflicted misery your valiant struggle will never end. Although that is perfectly alright because as you say; Those willing to give up their own possessions in order to take away those of the mewling, unthinking masses will always hold the initiative, relegating their victims into a perpetual reactionary stance, forever on the back-foot and forever held to the whims of those with the intelligence and drive to control them.

Never forget that you are not alone in this.


Well, as one of those pretentious ****'s who's paid silly money for one of those even sillier monocle thingies, I guess we know where your ego's centre-of-gravity lies, eh? No wonder you rate the OP's rabidly psychotic tirade. I guess you've found agreeable company...
Xen Solarus
Furious Destruction and Salvage
#570 - 2012-02-12 01:26:03 UTC
Completely disagree with this thread.

The true strength of eve as a mmo is its ability to cater to everyone's play style. That includes people not interested in pvp, moron.

Your selfish acquisition of tears only harms eve's continued development. Nicely done!

Post with your main, like a BOSS!

And no, i don't live in highsec.  As if that would make your opinion any less wrong.  
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#571 - 2012-02-12 01:32:16 UTC
Anshio Tamark wrote:
Hellen Kurvora wrote:
People are suicide ganking, because it's starting to get really old that the carebears in this game just chill in empire space and never leave. All the while complaining that income from mining is garbage.

Guess what? Try leaving empire space and going out where the money is, like the rest of us have to do to make decent isk. In all my years playing eve I don't think I have ever seen a miner in low sec. This ruins the game for non-carebears and makes the pirate profession limited to gate camping. That is not how the game was designed. It is risk equals reward.

You want to chill in empire space for your entire Eve life? Fine, you are entitled to do that. Just don't complain that you are not making any isk. The carebears are getting old.

To the suicide gankers: nice work, keep it up.

And just what do you think would happen if nobody were to hang around in high-sec? I can answer that with just five words: The economy would die horribly. Seriously. If all the high-sec players were to move out to null-sec, who would produce all the stuff that is for sale at tradehubs? Nobody. Because nobody would dare move a convoy of freighters filled with goods anywhere in null-sec, maybe except for Goons, and as far as I know, they don't fly non-combat ships.

As it looks right now, the high-sec players are actually the ones keeping the market up for you pirates, so you can get ships, ammo, modules and other stuff to blow up our competitors (and sometimes the ones selling you the stuff) but you don't seem to take that into consideration, do you? Like it or not, the only way the game can continue to exist the way it always has, is if high-sec players and pirates can actually live in a symbiotic relationship (no, I'm not implying that everyone has to become gay. That's not the kind of relationship I'm talking about). If the pirates were to go away (which they're not), the market would be filled with lots of unused stuff. If the high-sec manufacturers were to go away (which you want us to), the market would quickly run out of items and you would have to mine the minerals and build the stuff yourselves.


Well said, AT. Though I fear your words will have fallen upon deaf ears (or an uncomprehending mind), because the realities of economics (on which EVE depends) are too complex and abstract for the monocellular brains of gankers... They just don't get stuff like that, cos they flunked high school... What?
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#572 - 2012-02-12 02:05:10 UTC
Bill Lane wrote:
You're an idiot. Finished the whole first post, wasn't worth my time to continue on.


This.

In addition to that, I never knew someone could be so self centered and prejudiced with a diluted sense of self worth to actually write that kind of dribble..

'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#573 - 2012-02-12 02:10:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Milo QUinn
.
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#574 - 2012-02-12 02:13:30 UTC
Velicitia wrote:
Ghurthe wrote:
Whoa! Look at all the tears. Y'know OP inspires me to go out and do exactly this... hmm I wonder what the best way to kill a large gaggle of Mackinaws is.


Naga, Oracle, Talos, or Tornado.


Yeah, those really expensive T3 ships, nice fat targets for CONCORD...and ships which, of course, hi-sec miners couldn't possibly have....
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#575 - 2012-02-12 03:00:31 UTC
Crumplecorn wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
While true, it's no more presumptuous than the op.
OP uses deductions, not presumptions.


The OP wouldn't recognize a proper deduction if it bit him on the nose! His arguments are riddled with so many non sequiturs, logical fallacies, gross generalizations and other flaws that it's difficult to know where to start in tearing them to shreds. There are just too many choices.

Kudos to you for not spotting any of that, though: it speaks volumes for you own cognitive acuity Lol
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#576 - 2012-02-12 03:09:26 UTC
Crumplecorn wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Crumplecorn wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
While true, it's no more presumptuous than the op.
OP uses deductions, not presumptions.

So you are saying that the op has fully observed and defined the set of motivations and characteristics that universally apply to all highsec miners? A talented man indeed. I suppose during my time mining I was doing it wrong. Though, I'm not aware that my activities, nor the uses of the isk that I made doing it were observed by him.
No, I am saying that he has observed and defined a set of motivations and characteristics which apply to a subset of highsec miners.


Yes, and then he has proceeded to denigrate and demonize, in the most virulent and venomous terms, all hi-sec miners, on the basis of that 'set of motivations and characteristics', even though it only applied to a (tiny) subset. In the real world, such sweeping generalizations form the basis of racism, xenophobia, misogyny, homophobia and a host of other sociopathies that, if acted upon, would constitute hate-crimes. But you're saying that, in EVE, that same logic is perfectly sound, right?

Quote:
I was a highsec miner once too. Well, technically it was lowsec, but it was right next to highsec, so close enough.


Ah, so not really a hi-sec miner at all, then. Your fake empathy is noted....
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#577 - 2012-02-12 03:13:08 UTC
Crumplecorn wrote:
Telegram Sam wrote:
I only read as far as when OP said something like, "Most miners are bots who should be killed. Human miners mine right beside them. I will not tolerate bots or people who harbor them." So human miners are harboring bot miners? What kind of deduction is that? A fallacious, false, convenient-for-one's-argument presumptious one-- that's what kind. Five lines into the argument, and we already had a non sequitur.


Quote:
Of course the highsec miners harbor the bots. They camouflage them. They act as human shields. If it weren't for human players mining in highsec, the remainder would be known botters, and would be instantly banned.
Seems logical to me. Or are you saying {Bots, Miners} \ {Miners} != {Bots}? That's a fallacy.

Now you may argue that it implies that miners intentionally harbor bots, which they don't, and I'd agree, but the OP was written for maximum trollololing effect, so it applies a bit of hyperbole. The underlying point however, is sound.


Sorry? You admit that it was trolling and hyperbole, and then try to assert that the underlying point is still sound? What kind of pathetic apologetics is that?!
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#578 - 2012-02-12 03:17:21 UTC
ReptilesBlade wrote:
Bill Lane wrote:
You're an idiot. Finished the whole first post, wasn't worth my time to continue on.


This, I got half way through post 3 when I just stopped. There are so many fallacies in the OPs arguments there is not even room enough on the Internet to point them out.

You suicide gank because you have a small ***** and you want to compensate for it. That is all there is to it.


***Applause***
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#579 - 2012-02-12 03:20:56 UTC
People's Republic ofChina wrote:
ReptilesBlade wrote:

You suicide gank because you have a small ***** and you want to compensate for it. That is all there is to it.


My anecdotal evidence says otherwise.


Aha, obviously a toon Smile
Milo QUinn
United Free Space Inc.
#580 - 2012-02-12 03:30:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Milo QUinn
Freezehunter wrote:
OP, I must confess that your thread is the most well thought out, intelligent, factual, and content rich thread I have ever seen on these forums, and I appreciate that you spent a lot of time writing all of that, and attempted to make us more intelligent and less ignorant by doing so.
You are truly an inspiration for all of us.

However, tl;dr.


The combination of rank idiocy and greasy sycophancy in that remark makes me want to laugh hysterically and vomit uncontrollably, at the same time, which could be a medical first....