These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Let carebears be carebears (PVP Opt Out)
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Orlacc
#41 - 2012-05-13 15:57:02 UTC
Without a box it is just sand. This box includes PvP.

Remember what killed UO.

"Measure Twice, Cut Once."
Five Thirty
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#42 - 2012-05-13 16:28:07 UTC
Orlacc wrote:
Without a box it is just sand. This box includes PvP.

Remember what killed UO.


I don't remember what killed UO, how about you remind me?
Zoidberg Gahiji
Doomheim
#43 - 2012-05-13 18:26:35 UTC
Five Thirty wrote:
Follow me for a minute here, we're going to take a logical journey!

Many players in this thread and others have stated that there are not nearly as many carebears as you think.

So, why is it such a big deal to all these "PvPers" that opting out of PvP is made / kept impossible? If the amount of true PvE only carebears in the game is as small as many people claim, what's the overall loss to PvP in EvE? The loss is minor, if even noticed by actual PvPers, since most carebears don't go anywhere near the PvP focused areas in the game.

No, the people who lose by allowing carebears to opt out of PvP are the griefers. Please, don't try to call yourselves PvP players, you who spend your time waging war in high security space. It is not PvP when the only people who can shoot at you are industrial players who can't even fly a T1 frig properly. High sec warriors (LOL) lose out on their safe form of PvP if carebears get their way, and that just can't happen.... can it?

My final question is about weighing the losses attached with implementing some sort of change.

- If CCP decides to make high security space more (or completely) safe, what is the loss? Will 1000 griefers quit in rage or will they go out to low / null and join the rest of the hardcore PvP crowd? What if 1000 players re-subscribe because they can now play the game how they like without being SUDDENLY BETRAYAL by random griefers?

- What is the loss to subscribers if CCP decides to make high sec griefing easier? Will carebears quit in droves? Can / will CCP support people pissing in the sandbox when it affects their bottom line?

Time will tell, I'm sure.


It's certainly a good thing to kill what made EVE what it is today, what makes EVE special and what defines EVE's core. What lets it stand out against its competition and made it successful to begin with. An omni present sense of danger is as fundamental to EVE as fantasy to WoW is and has nothing to do with griefing.

Complaining that there is PvP in a PvP game is ridiculously moronic and stupid. If you don't like PvP don't play a PvP game. End of story. And if you think EVE is not a PvP game you certainly do not even comprehend what you are actually playing.

This whole thread is nonsense.
Charlotte Elizabeth
Exit Bois
#44 - 2012-05-13 18:31:20 UTC
Five Thirty wrote:
Follow me for a minute here, we're going to take a logical journey!

Many players in this thread and others have stated that there are not nearly as many carebears as you think.

So, why is it such a big deal to all these "PvPers" that opting out of PvP is made / kept impossible? If the amount of true PvE only carebears in the game is as small as many people claim, what's the overall loss to PvP in EvE? The loss is minor, if even noticed by actual PvPers, since most carebears don't go anywhere near the PvP focused areas in the game.

No, the people who lose by allowing carebears to opt out of PvP are the griefers. Please, don't try to call yourselves PvP players, you who spend your time waging war in high security space. It is not PvP when the only people who can shoot at you are industrial players who can't even fly a T1 frig properly. High sec warriors (LOL) lose out on their safe form of PvP if carebears get their way, and that just can't happen.... can it?

My final question is about weighing the losses attached with implementing some sort of change.

- If CCP decides to make high security space more (or completely) safe, what is the loss? Will 1000 griefers quit in rage or will they go out to low / null and join the rest of the hardcore PvP crowd? What if 1000 players re-subscribe because they can now play the game how they like without being SUDDENLY BETRAYAL by random griefers?

- What is the loss to subscribers if CCP decides to make high sec griefing easier? Will carebears quit in droves? Can / will CCP support people pissing in the sandbox when it affects their bottom line?

Time will tell, I'm sure.


Oh yeah, lets just allow people to opt in and out of PvP at their own convenience.

That won't break the game at all. Roll
Five Thirty
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#45 - 2012-05-13 18:33:52 UTC
Zoidberg Gahiji wrote:
It's certainly a good thing to kill what made EVE what it is today, what makes EVE special and what defines EVE's core. What lets it stand out against its competition and made it successful to begin with. An omni present sense of danger is as fundamental to EVE as fantasy to WoW is and has nothing to do with griefing.

Complaining that there is PvP in a PvP game is ridiculously moronic and stupid. If you don't like PvP don't play a PvP game. End of story. And if you think EVE is not a PvP game you certainly do not even comprehend what you are actually playing.

This whole thread is nonsense.


Listen to me and don't make assumptions.

I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT REMOVING PVP.


PvP will still exist in every facet of the game, except high sec griefing of people who are not interested in PvP.

The argument is that the amount of actual carebears is small, so I'm still waiting for someone to come along and explain what the detriment to PVP would be if 1000 people who actively avoid pvp were suddenly immune to it?
Rond Dorlezahn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#46 - 2012-05-13 18:35:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Rond Dorlezahn
Five Thirty wrote:
Zoidberg Gahiji wrote:
It's certainly a good thing to kill what made EVE what it is today, what makes EVE special and what defines EVE's core. What lets it stand out against its competition and made it successful to begin with. An omni present sense of danger is as fundamental to EVE as fantasy to WoW is and has nothing to do with griefing.

Complaining that there is PvP in a PvP game is ridiculously moronic and stupid. If you don't like PvP don't play a PvP game. End of story. And if you think EVE is not a PvP game you certainly do not even comprehend what you are actually playing.

This whole thread is nonsense.


Listen to me and don't make assumptions.

I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT REMOVING PVP.


PvP will still exist in every facet of the game, except high sec griefing of people who are not interested in PvP.

The argument is that the amount of actual carebears is small, so I'm still waiting for someone to come along and explain what the detriment to PVP would be if 1000 people who actively avoid pvp were suddenly immune to it?


You haven't thought this through at all. If you were to implement this opt-out mechanic, it would get abused harder than CONCORD response time in hisec is currently being abused. It would not be 1000 players who used it, it would be anyone who could get an edge out of it at any time, unless you're talking about creating a character from the ground up who cannot PvP--which means it wouldn't be able to shoot at OTHER players, mind, because it has to go both ways. If you roll a character like that, I might refer you to several other MMOs that will wipe your baby ass for you.
Five Thirty
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#47 - 2012-05-13 18:37:28 UTC
Charlotte Elizabeth wrote:


Oh yeah, lets just allow people to opt in and out of PvP at their own convenience.

That won't break the game at all. Roll


Nobody is talking about opting in and out of PVP. We are talking about removing non-consensual PvP as a tool for griefers. Stop pretending the PvP world would fall apart if you couldn't grief highsec industrialists.

A vast majority of PvP takes place in low and null security space. In fact, nearly all PvP that occurs in high security space is griefing. So what's the loss to PvP if high sec griefing is curtailed?

Is the game really that worse off with griefing removed?

I'm still waiting on a valid, non slippery slope argument to why griefing in high security space should be allowed to continue.
Thomas Kreshant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#48 - 2012-05-13 18:40:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Thomas Kreshant
CCP is already planning on enchancing NPC corps and adding social tools etc so those that wish to avoid wardecs can and still enjoying hanging out with their friends so why not let that happen before wanting to make radical changes to the game such as pvp flags.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2012-05-13 18:42:47 UTC
Five Thirty wrote:
Zoidberg Gahiji wrote:
It's certainly a good thing to kill what made EVE what it is today, what makes EVE special and what defines EVE's core. What lets it stand out against its competition and made it successful to begin with. An omni present sense of danger is as fundamental to EVE as fantasy to WoW is and has nothing to do with griefing.

Complaining that there is PvP in a PvP game is ridiculously moronic and stupid. If you don't like PvP don't play a PvP game. End of story. And if you think EVE is not a PvP game you certainly do not even comprehend what you are actually playing.

This whole thread is nonsense.


Listen to me and don't make assumptions.

I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT REMOVING PVP.


PvP will still exist in every facet of the game, except high sec griefing of people who are not interested in PvP.

The argument is that the amount of actual carebears is small, so I'm still waiting for someone to come along and explain what the detriment to PVP would be if 1000 people who actively avoid pvp were suddenly immune to it?


The problem is that what you are trying to advocate goes against the wonderful sandbox that is eve. As I said on page two (which probably got missed). The thing about the sandbox is that every choice you have has consequences. What you and the OP seem to be glossing over is this fact. You seem to want some way of avoiding pvp altogether without any consequence. The OP for example wants his 5 man corp without being prone to wardecs.

Adding some opt out without any consequence would break the sandbox. So the question would be what would you be willing to sacrifice or pay for this opt out program?
Five Thirty
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#50 - 2012-05-13 18:42:59 UTC
Rond Dorlezahn wrote:
You haven't thought this through at all. If you were to implement this opt-out mechanic, it would get abused harder than CONCORD response time in hisec is currently being abused. It would not be 1000 players who used it, it would be anyone who could get an edge out of it at any time, unless you're talking about creating a character from the ground up who cannot PvP--which means it wouldn't be able to shoot at OTHER players, mind, because it has to go both ways. If you roll a character like that, I might refer you to several other MMOs that will wipe your baby ass for you.


How would it be abused? If you don't want to PvP you stay in high security space, that's it.

Lower security space provides better rewards in line with the danger of going there, so the only people who will stay in high security space are people who don't want to PvP. Why is this bad? If you want to get really rich fast you'll have to leave the safe area. If you want to be bored out of your mind you can sit in highsec and mine veldspar until your eyes bleed.

Honestly, I haven't seen a valid argument about why highsec shouldn't have PvP removed. Everyone who posts is just talking about the danger factor... which still exists in low and null sec.

No, the only people who would fight against high sec being safe are the griefers themselves, who cannot survive in low / null because they can only win when they fight easy targets.
Rond Dorlezahn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#51 - 2012-05-13 18:47:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Rond Dorlezahn
I have a positive sec status and have never even considered griefing miners in highsec, but I would rather those people still be able to do so. Don't pry open the whole community's mouths to start shoving words in.

Also, if you think people will be bored mining veldspar, why would you remove the only tension they might ever have? You're just another bitter player who thinks s/he has been served injustice and "will not stand for it any longer". What you are not is some kind of representative for all hisec players.
Zoidberg Gahiji
Doomheim
#52 - 2012-05-13 18:47:24 UTC
Five Thirty wrote:
Listen to me and don't make assumptions.

I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT REMOVING PVP.


PvP will still exist in every facet of the game, except high sec griefing of people who are not interested in PvP.

The argument is that the amount of actual carebears is small, so I'm still waiting for someone to come along and explain what the detriment to PVP would be if 1000 people who actively avoid pvp were suddenly immune to it?



Maybe you should listen instead. That you can be killed everywhere by everyone, including and even especially hi sec, is a fundamental core principle of EVE. If there are 1.000 people who think this is wrong then there are 1.000 people who play the wrong game.

I don't like pushing people out of a game because in the long run it only hurts the game but it is what it is. To demand absolute safety for your activities is as much against what EVE defines as demanding full loot PvP everywhere in WoW is. I'm sorry but if you don't like that you play the wrong game. It's just that simple.
Commissar Veldt
Progressive State
#53 - 2012-05-13 18:48:11 UTC
AxelFuller wrote:


a game which allows as much freedom to its player base to choose a game style which suits them and entertains there own desires.


And what about the play style, desires and entertainment for the less law abiding types in the universe? If their preferred gaming style is to shoot high sec mining care bear types then you cant deny them that pleasure according to what you have said here.

It can be annoying losing ships or being war dec'd yes, but its part of the game full stop. EVE is marketed on its ability to give ALL players the freedom do what they want within its universe. This includes the criminal element.
Five Thirty
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#54 - 2012-05-13 18:48:35 UTC
Derath Ellecon wrote:
The problem is that what you are trying to advocate goes against the wonderful sandbox that is eve. As I said on page two (which probably got missed). The thing about the sandbox is that every choice you have has consequences. What you and the OP seem to be glossing over is this fact. You seem to want some way of avoiding pvp altogether without any consequence. The OP for example wants his 5 man corp without being prone to wardecs.

Adding some opt out without any consequence would break the sandbox. So the question would be what would you be willing to sacrifice or pay for this opt out program?


The sandbox argument is complete bull. If the sandbox were true, there would be no CONCORD and no faction navy, and everyone could just mill about blowing up whatever they wanted without consequence.

The game as it is now goes against that logic because CONCORD and faction navies do exist.

If concord followed logic, anyone who commits a crime in the area they patrol would be prevented from entering that area permanently. Hell give them a 3 strikes rule would even be more likely than it is now. Instead concord simply blows up their ship and effectively forgets they ever did anything wrong after 15 minutes. The notion of a sandbox is not true, it's just what griefers try to use to guard their ability to grief.
Five Thirty
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#55 - 2012-05-13 18:51:14 UTC
Commissar Veldt wrote:
It can be annoying losing ships or being war dec'd yes, but its part of the game full stop. EVE is marketed on its ability to give ALL players the freedom do what they want within its universe.


This statement isn't exactly true, because players who want to avoid PvP by staying in the supposed secure area cannot avoid PvP. A player who wants to remain free of PVP is unable to do so, which makes your statement blatantly false.
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2012-05-13 18:59:15 UTC
Five Thirty wrote:
Derath Ellecon wrote:
The problem is that what you are trying to advocate goes against the wonderful sandbox that is eve. As I said on page two (which probably got missed). The thing about the sandbox is that every choice you have has consequences. What you and the OP seem to be glossing over is this fact. You seem to want some way of avoiding pvp altogether without any consequence. The OP for example wants his 5 man corp without being prone to wardecs.

Adding some opt out without any consequence would break the sandbox. So the question would be what would you be willing to sacrifice or pay for this opt out program?


The sandbox argument is complete bull. If the sandbox were true, there would be no CONCORD and no faction navy, and everyone could just mill about blowing up whatever they wanted without consequence.

The game as it is now goes against that logic because CONCORD and faction navies do exist.

If concord followed logic, anyone who commits a crime in the area they patrol would be prevented from entering that area permanently. Hell give them a 3 strikes rule would even be more likely than it is now. Instead concord simply blows up their ship and effectively forgets they ever did anything wrong after 15 minutes. The notion of a sandbox is not true, it's just what griefers try to use to guard their ability to grief.


Nice try but wrong. For one, concord will attack repeat offenders. If they are below a certain sec level they are attack on site and their shop can get blown up. But also, which. IMO is good, concord is not all omnipotent. They can be outrun, they are not everywhere at all times. Working as intended IMO.

Again, the issue of what you propose is that it would break the sandbox. If you cannot figure out how it would, debating this topic becomes moot.
Diablo Ex
Nocturne Holdings
#57 - 2012-05-13 19:04:58 UTC
Zoidberg Gahiji wrote:


I don't like pushing people out of a game because in the long run it only hurts the game but it is what it is. To demand absolute safety for your activities is as much against what EVE defines as demanding full loot PvP everywhere in WoW is. I'm sorry but if you don't like that you play the wrong game. It's just that simple.


Ahhhh, Thank you....
I now know that after two years of playing EvE, that I'm playing the wrong game.
You just saved me another month of subscription cost.

No you can't have my stuff, there is honestly not much left. After repeated tries at living in Nullsec and Lowsec, and finding that a 20 mil SP character has no chance against Titan Blobs, I returned to High Sec to recoup and rebuild via Mission Running and Mining. BUT!!! Now after 4 weeks of Stupid, Inane, and Totally Immature Griefer Kiddies (who if in real life I would happily teach some manners too) I'm now waking up to the reality that "I DON"T NEED THIS GARBAGE".

I pay my money to play a DIGITAL INTERNET SPACESHIP GAME because I enjoy the Genre.
Bullies and Immature punks I've grown tired of. I'm in real life a 50+ year old who has a somewhat successful (if stressful) career. I don't have the time, or the inclination to Live EvE 23/7 !!!

Sorry gang, but enough is enough, and I'm sure that I'm not going to be the only one who will leave CCP's little GRIEFFEST like a bad marriage...

Diablo Ex Machina - "I'm not here to fix your problem"
Katja Faith
Doomheim
#58 - 2012-05-13 19:07:04 UTC
Why are the loud minority so willing to crap up this game? If EveO isn't to your liking, **** off. WoW awaits. Get your duels in with Aeon. Go to SWtOR.

The VAST majority of people playing EveO like it just as it is. Go **** in someone else's pool.
Zoidberg Gahiji
Doomheim
#59 - 2012-05-13 19:16:08 UTC
Five Thirty wrote:
The sandbox argument is complete bull. If the sandbox were true, there would be no CONCORD and no faction navy, and everyone could just mill about blowing up whatever they wanted without consequence.


You know what's funny? In the beginning this was the case. EVE already catered to people like you and PvP free zones do not belong to EVE.

Why don't you troll the Egosoft forums and demand they make X a MMO and remove the twitch controls instead? What you want here is just as much nonsense and you got told multiple times why already too.

If you can't stand that look for a different game that caters to your needs better but stop destroying it for the people who like the one unique game of its kind. And I don't say that as a suicide ganker, or "griefer" as you like to put it, I say that as a player who hauls hundreds of millions through hi sec and fears getting one shot. I say that as someone who flies a Hulk and has an Orca alt. That I can die everywhere is what makes EVE good and exciting. It is what defines it.


Now go troll the Egosoft forums. They are that way --->
Abannan
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2012-05-13 19:49:53 UTC
It won't happen. Accept it, move along. If you love your style of gameplay that much, you'd fight tooth and nail to play the way you want, not cry on the forums. And besides, if you have opt out pvp, by default every bear in highsec will opt out. Who will buy the modules + ships you build? Nullsec political blocs? Just kidding they build their own. Wormhole corps? Just kidding they build their own.

Stop asking. It won't happen