These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Eve is not IKEA - deal with it

First post
Author
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#61 - 2012-10-10 20:11:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Touval Lysander
Hestia Mar wrote:

Sorry but once again someone is mixing up pvp - ship fighting - with market competition. Its like confusing the activities of the Free Syrian Army with those of investment bankers, but you might need to wait until you get to be an adult to realise the difference.

No-one dies in EVE market competition, you plonker.

Ho Hum, posting in another "where's my pvp game wah wah wah thread"

Errr cough. Market competition is PvP and no, you can't die. You can make losses well exceeding an SvS PvP players loss however.

And errr.. Cough. No-one ACTUALLY dies in SvS PvP either. Certainly not a ganker anyway.

How about Concord POD THE GANKER...

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

Hestia Mar
Calmaretto
#62 - 2012-10-10 20:14:45 UTC
market competition is not pvp because you can't pick individual targets to try and bankrupt them, so any trading is PvM - Player versus Market.

You need to do something about that cough of yours.
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#63 - 2012-10-10 20:17:16 UTC
Hestia Mar wrote:
market competition is not pvp because you can't pick individual targets to try and bankrupt them, so any trading is PvM - Player versus Market.

You need to do something about that cough of yours.

It's all these loose hair folicles.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

Xen Solarus
Furious Destruction and Salvage
#64 - 2012-10-10 22:32:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Xen Solarus
I've always been against the opinion that EvE is a PvP only game. Sure, the EvE economy is driven primarily by PvP, but by no means does that mean everyone is engaged in it. Player vs Player is a term not limited to EvE, and is used in many MMO's to describe situations where a player is fighting against another player, as opposed to a player fighting against an NPC. By this very defintion, a player is required to be shooting at another player for it to be described at PvP. There are many professions and activities that do not fall into this field, most of them located in high-sec. I've got a friend that literally never undocks, and he spent a long time building mining barges while (sarcastically) boasting about his uber-PvP-skills. Lol

Now i'm sure people can start saying the things they generally say, that everything in EvE boils down to PvP to some degree, with everything ultimately fueling the materials and objects that eventually end up being destroyed in some sort of PvP-based activity. This however, is just another reference to EvE's unique player-driven economy. It doesn't mean everyone is engaged in simultaneous PvP the instant they log in. That requires two or more players shooting at eachother. A miner shooting rocks for minerials is not PvP, nor is those that run missions over and over, or people that trade endlessly, or those that build lots of stuff. Any arguement made to suggest that it is PvP is foolish, and is made by the very people that argue that EvE is a PvP only game. PvP just fuels the demand of the player-driven economy. Of course, you can try to force this "PvP-only" opinion onto people by exploding them, but they will continue to play eve for all the things that have nothing to do with PvP.

Personally, i think EvE is unique and special because it caters to players interested in both PvP and PvE activities. Those interested in PvE stay in highsec, become carebears and do all those boring things that keep them happy. Those that are more PvP orentated (should) go to low and null, where they can blast other players to their hearts content.

I think its a shame that the "PvP-Only" crowd continue to try to force their opinion onto those unwilling and uninterested in that side of EvE. Surely both sides have the right to play EvE for the aspects they enjoy? Though imo, as long as their is a constant flow of easy risk-free gankable targets in high that don't shoot back, the "PvP-only" crowd will continue with their arguements, if only to justify their highsec easy-mode.

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.  

Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#65 - 2012-10-10 23:26:22 UTC
Xen Solarus wrote:
I've always been against the opinion that EvE is a PvP only game. Sure, the EvE economy is driven primarily by PvP, but by no means does that mean everyone is engaged in it. Player vs Player is a term not limited to EvE, and is used in many MMO's to describe situations where a player is fighting against another player, as opposed to a player fighting against an NPC. By this very defintion, a player is required to be shooting at another player for it to be described at PvP. There are many professions and activities that do not fall into this field, most of them located in high-sec. I've got a friend that literally never undocks, and he spent a long time building mining barges while (sarcastically) boasting about his uber-PvP-skills. Lol

Now i'm sure people can start saying the things they generally say, that everything in EvE boils down to PvP to some degree, with everything ultimately fueling the materials and objects that eventually end up being destroyed in some sort of PvP-based activity. This however, is just another reference to EvE's unique player-driven economy. It doesn't mean everyone is engaged in simultaneous PvP the instant they log in. That requires two or more players shooting at eachother. A miner shooting rocks for minerials is not PvP, nor is those that run missions over and over, or people that trade endlessly, or those that build lots of stuff. Any arguement made to suggest that it is PvP is foolish, and is made by the very people that argue that EvE is a PvP only game. PvP just fuels the demand of the player-driven economy. Of course, you can try to force this "PvP-only" opinion onto people by exploding them, but they will continue to play eve for all the things that have nothing to do with PvP.

Personally, i think EvE is unique and special because it caters to players interested in both PvP and PvE activities. Those interested in PvE stay in highsec, become carebears and do all those boring things that keep them happy. Those that are more PvP orentated (should) go to low and null, where they can blast other players to their hearts content.

I think its a shame that the "PvP-Only" crowd continue to try to force their opinion onto those unwilling and uninterested in that side of EvE. Surely both sides have the right to play EvE for the aspects they enjoy? Though imo, as long as their is a constant flow of easy risk-free gankable targets in high that don't shoot back, the "PvP-only" crowd will continue with their arguements, if only to justify their highsec easy-mode.

A good post.

The question must be asked. If you take out the obvious engagements that occur in low/0.0/WH's, just how much PvP does occur in Eve?

From that we then we need to ask how much PvP in HS is "consensual" - wardecs/cans etc.

Then ask how much of it as actually non-consensual?

Then ask how many FW, Incursion and Mission runners get ganked? (thousands of NON-PvP players).

And we'll be right down to the whole point - miners are singled out.

Why?

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#66 - 2012-10-11 00:39:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Asuri Kinnes
Touval Lysander wrote:
As much as anyone has the right to say "FITE MY FRIG NOOB", MinerMan, MissionMan and IndyMan have the rght to say "NO, SORRY, I'M BUSY UNDERCUTTING PLAYER X".

Who said YOU decide?

And really, trying to make HS as "dangerous" and as "PvP centric" (by the incorrect definition) as LS and 0.0 would turn Eve into an IKEA store where everything is the same.

If that isn't "dumbing it down" then what the hell is?

That's a lot of words just to say "I don't get it..."
Player vrs Player
Quote:
PvP can be broadly used to describe any game, or aspect of a game, where players compete against each other.

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.

ISD TYPE40
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#67 - 2012-10-11 00:47:00 UTC
Thread has been cleaned, again. Can people please refrain from petty insults and troll posting. Let's keep the discussion amicable at least Big smile

[b]ISD Type40 Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#68 - 2012-10-11 01:03:45 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
BORRIS DEMONTFORD wrote:
What about if you don't undock, is it still not ikea?

I heard (last night to be exact) that IKEA doesn't have windows in their stores to inhibit the sense of "natural passing of time".

Maybe station camping all day is a direct result of no windows on the stations. Straight


WiS buff thread detected
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#69 - 2012-10-11 01:09:59 UTC
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
Touval Lysander wrote:
As much as anyone has the right to say "FITE MY FRIG NOOB", MinerMan, MissionMan and IndyMan have the rght to say "NO, SORRY, I'M BUSY UNDERCUTTING PLAYER X".

Who said YOU decide?

And really, trying to make HS as "dangerous" and as "PvP centric" (by the incorrect definition) as LS and 0.0 would turn Eve into an IKEA store where everything is the same.

If that isn't "dumbing it down" then what the hell is?

That's a lot of words just to say "I don't get it..."
Player vrs Player
Quote:
PvP can be broadly used to describe any game, or aspect of a game, where players compete against each other.

No. I DO get it. What the advocates of "PvP" are stating is that it MUST occur FOR all TO all.

And this is NOT happening. The argument being touted is it should happen to everyone including miners bla bla. And so it should.

BUT

The fact remains that the PvP - I want ganking to be possible - gang are NOT PvP'ing EVERY player.

You show me the KM's of the thousands of OTHER PvE players that play hour by hour, day by day, week by week and I will concede that PvP is "neccessary" and a "part of Eve".

It's a lame attempt to make mining boats subject to a free-for-all because the gankers are too fn lazy to have to WORK for their iskies.

Why don't they
- Go pop a commander fit Incursion boat to make a profit.
- Use some alts and awox miner boats for 100% profit.
- Go mining (God forbid) and use the minerals to make a FREE gankmobile for profit.
- Keep popping freighters for profit.

Nope.... It's tooooo hard Mr. CCP. MinerMan MUST suffer because I'm a lazy SOB.

I'm not even saying that train of thought is even wrong. But it IS the train of thought and it's totally uneccessary.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."

Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
#70 - 2012-10-11 02:08:23 UTC
So much whining in this thread. Wah we can't gank anymore. Wah.

As far as I know a freighter has more HP than a barge and those still get ganked, so what is stopping you from ganking a miner?

The people that think that market or indy PVP is consentual are morons. I'll spend a billion just to buy up every mod and cut the price in half because it's fun to sometimes.

SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac

Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#71 - 2012-10-11 02:34:14 UTC
Schalac wrote:
As far as I know a freighter has more HP than a barge and those still get ganked, so what is stopping you from ganking a miner?

An arbitrary, outside mechanic was introduced that acts as a dis-incentive (removing the ability to *profitably* gank miners). Freighters get ganked (WAIT FOR IT) because it's *usually* profitable...


All those "pve" players *directly* impact all the other players in the game when they sell their LP points, salvage or loot on the market.

Faction and officer fit mission runners *do* get ganked (and I'm too dam lazy to go searching killboards) - usually when there is a % chance it will be profitable.


It would be as if CCP suddenly increased freighter HP by X%.

No reason for it.

Don't want your freighter ganked? Carry less than X billion in goods.

Don't want your miner ganked? Fit X tank...

oh wait...

/pants-on-head.

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.

Cede Forster
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#72 - 2012-10-11 02:59:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Cede Forster
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
Schalac wrote:
As far as I know a freighter has more HP than a barge and those still get ganked, so what is stopping you from ganking a miner?

An arbitrary, outside mechanic was introduced that acts as a dis-incentive (removing the ability to *profitably* gank miners). Freighters get ganked (WAIT FOR IT) because it's *usually* profitable...


All those "pve" players *directly* impact all the other players in the game when they sell their LP points, salvage or loot on the market.

Faction and officer fit mission runners *do* get ganked (and I'm too dam lazy to go searching killboards) - usually when there is a % chance it will be profitable.


It would be as if CCP suddenly increased freighter HP by X%.

No reason for it.

Don't want your freighter ganked? Carry less than X billion in goods.

Don't want your miner ganked? Fit X tank...

oh wait...

/pants-on-head.


Well, not trying to slit hair with you here BUT

miners not getting ganked anymore means they make more profit (do not have to replace ships) and people are not quitting mining as often (because they quit if they are ganked).

leading to an increase in people who are mining and subsequently to more competition which lowers the prices for the product

leading to the fact that miners have to take more risks in order to make a profit, taking a ship that has less tank


the fact that a ship can be tanked properly for sacrificing the profit (be it PVE or Mining) is pretty clear, the only question remaining is simply wether the recent mining update did not lead to a situation where the best yield is in fact the best tanked ship as well.

Wait what? The ship that makes the most profit is the one with the best yield, is it not?

No, that is what we just talked about, the ship with the best profit is the one that makes the most yield and does not get killed.


So the result is there is a very sensible balance between

a) the likelihood a ship gets killed (aka the tank mostly)
b) how much interaction is required (aka cargo hold, cycle duration - because if you can run 10 miners at the same time you have effectively 10 times the profit margin)
c) the yield

I suspect a quite simple problem here. Currently there is a ship, lets not name and shame, that has a likelihood of 0 to get killed, requires very little interaction in compare to the others and has a relatively high yield making a higher yield not efficient enough to offset this feature.

There you are - before the patch it was / people believed it was more efficient to take the loss of your mining ship for the higher yield, now they do not anymore - just like PVP, if everybody is flying it, nerf the popular one, buff the unpopular one, until it stops.

Or dont.

Soon enough, when ganking dies down more, it will be more profitable to use the not tanked ship because there is no risk to loose a ship and you can start killing them again. Will take a while though.
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
#73 - 2012-10-11 08:07:53 UTC
Tippia wrote:
I'm on about how before the patch, ganking miners for profit was possible if the miners chose to; impossible if they chose not to. After the patch, it's impossible regardless because the inherent HP means you have to use a sledge that is more expensive than the loot.

With the change in resist bonuses surely the Hulk's EHP went down - and therefore the cost to gank one went down and profitability went up? Unless the miner chose greater protection of course...

I would also point out that at least one of the "global" HP boosts skipped mining barges and haulers and so forth, perhaps erroneously, perhaps deliberately; which effectively reduced the relative cost to gank several years ago. The CONCORD "boost" a while back (the one which gave them "heal=0" attacks rather than conventional but high damage) meant that people intending to "break the law" no longer had to fit tank and could go all damage, reducing the cost to gank. The removal of the Destroyers' ROF penalty increased the damage output of those ships significantly (which of course means fewer ships would be required to chew through a set amount of EHP, fewer modules are required to outfit those ships)... reducing the cost to gank. Then the introduction of the Tier 3 BCs provided a cheaper and more effective alternative to the Arty Apoc in situations where tank isn't a priority and reduced the cost to gank.

Perhaps the choice of miners to use the Mackinaw, the increase in EHP that offers, has a greater effect than all of these things but perhaps it's just the pendulum swinging back...

Of course a question noone has yet answered in any of the threads I've seen is why mining barges should be profitable to gank. A T1 hauler can be fitted with nothing but cargo expanders and not be profitable to gank - depending on what it's carrying, why should the barges be profitable without that consideration?
Ryuichi Hiroki
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2012-10-11 09:23:50 UTC
Quote:
Eve is not IKEA - deal with it


thats a shame because IKEA is awesome.

Yeah I know, eve isn't awesome.
ShadowStarZero
Smile just smile inc
#75 - 2012-10-11 09:25:28 UTC
I like Billy hyllan :) its easy to assemble! Then you can pvp it!Shocked
SegaPhoenix
Chicks on Speed
#76 - 2012-10-11 10:11:57 UTC
D-Mob wrote:

People like you are very sad.

You hope the "weak" get "weeded out" and "never comeback"...

This coming from a pimple-faced ginger who's probably about 115 pounds soaking wet IRL.

This is a firggin' game dude.


This IS a game and any comparison between my views in and out of game are illogical.

D-Mob wrote:

That Elitist crap in where you actually hope to stunt EvE's growth because you perceive players who aren't "on your level" to be weak and thus seek to scare them away is what's killing this game. You WANT a SMALL community?


I would prefer a smarter and more motivated community hell bent on improving their knowledge and skill in the game as opposed to whining about pushing a button and not receiving bacon. If that community happens to be smaller that would be fine by me.

D-Mob wrote:
Of course you don't. It's "hardcorez Pee Vee Pee'ers" like you who constantly ***** about how the targets are dwindling.

If carebears don't want to PvP, they shouldn't have to. WHat I find hilarious is how you talk about how weak" others are but you're bitching because you can't one shot f**kin Miners. Why aren't you fighting other SUPELEETS bro??? Why are you wanting such easy targets mister tough guy??

F**k out of here man,PvPers tend to be the BIGGEST goddamned carebears from my view.


Labeling me a carebear or an elite pvper is laughable. Check my killboard history, apart from a few failed ganks, a couple hauler losses of t2 invention crap and your occasional pvp loss I am just another player in the scrum competing for resources and profits.

I revel in my ability to learn from my experiences and/or suffer the consequences when I lose my patience and make a bad decision. The same people that whined for the mining barge change are the same players who went right back to the place they got ganked with the same ship and never learned. So am I elitsit for being upset that CCP would cater to those who had the opportunity to prevent their demise but chose not to? I guess so!
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
#77 - 2012-10-11 17:41:54 UTC
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
Schalac wrote:
As far as I know a freighter has more HP than a barge and those still get ganked, so what is stopping you from ganking a miner?

An arbitrary, outside mechanic was introduced that acts as a dis-incentive (removing the ability to *profitably* gank miners). Freighters get ganked (WAIT FOR IT) because it's *usually* profitable...


All those "pve" players *directly* impact all the other players in the game when they sell their LP points, salvage or loot on the market.

Faction and officer fit mission runners *do* get ganked (and I'm too dam lazy to go searching killboards) - usually when there is a % chance it will be profitable.


It would be as if CCP suddenly increased freighter HP by X%.

No reason for it.

Don't want your freighter ganked? Carry less than X billion in goods.

Don't want your miner ganked? Fit X tank...

oh wait...

/pants-on-head.

So you are admitting that you are not a ganker, you are actually a carebear? Basically a PVE player that thinks that just because it is against another person somehow you are above those people that mine rocks, scan sites or run missions for money. And your perfered "profession", if you can even call it that, is basically the easiest of them all because all you need to do is scan a ship and then shoot it. Minimal effort for big gain. That is the complete opposite of how risk vs. reward is supposed to work.

And now you have the gall to come onto the forums and ***** that your method of making money in the game is being nerfed while at the same time crying that highsec is becoming to safe? This after the missions loot nerf, the site nerf, the datacore nerf, the incursion nerf all that you cried for because it was too easy to make ISK. You are coming here complaining that the easiest profession of them all is now finally getting its just rewards. And it is somehow bad?

How about this. H.T.F.U. chump.

SCHALAC HAS SPOKEN!! http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schalac

Hestia Mar
Calmaretto
#78 - 2012-10-11 19:43:30 UTC
EVE isn't like IKEA anyway because in EVE you can get out without having to go through the whole thing - unlike IKEA where you have to walk through the whole store to escape...
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#79 - 2012-10-11 20:11:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Barrogh Habalu
SegaPhoenix wrote:
I would prefer a smarter and more motivated community hell bent on improving their knowledge and skill in the game as opposed to whining about pushing a button and not receiving bacon. If that community happens to be smaller that would be fine by me.

What people with this PoV fail to realize is that average internet whiner playing your MMO won't "adapt" no matter what. He'll just leave. You have no choice between "smaller and clever community" and "large and dumb one". It's rather either "X players you'd like to see in EVE" or "X players you'd like to see in EVE and Y inneffectual players who whine". What's your problem with latter players you won't be converting into former type anyways paying subscription and thus discouraging CCP from terminating EVE for good for some more time? They probably won't ever visit your space, won't cause inconveniences etc (unless you yourself choose to waste your time messing with them). I don't get what's people's problem with them, except that many EVE-O boards poster will have to learn something the rest of internet learned a long time ago: don't waste your time with forum threads you consider pathetic or worthless, including QQ threads. Not that they aren't closed for the lack of content lately.