These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

(Moderators, Please Lock Thread) To those miners and missioners who wish to be left alone.

First post
Author
Aida Nu
Perkone
Caldari State
#61 - 2011-10-31 09:41:25 UTC
@The Apostle and Justin Credulent

Interesting to see that two players that joined the game a couple of months ago have embarked on a crusade to change a game thats been played a certain way since 2003.
Im sorry but not everything is for everyone. I dont like, for example WoW and other MMOS that spoon feed you and hold your hand.
I and many others enjoy the fact that EVE is unforgiving and that its survival of the fittest. It makes it a challenge.
You have to have your brain turned on when playing this game.

But I cannot understand why a couple new players want to change EVE to something that it is not and ruin what EVE stands for.
As I said, I didnt like WoW. But I sure as hell did not spam their forums that it should be more like, for example EVE. I simply DO NOT PLAY IT.

If you visit another country that has other customs and laws that you dont approve with, do you stand in the middle of their capitol and start ***** and moan about it? If you do not like it, feel free to gtfo.

Get over yourselves. Enjoy the game for what it is and if you dont enjoy it....sorry to say but this may not be the game for you.
There are other space MMOs out there.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#62 - 2011-10-31 09:51:11 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Justin Credulent wrote:


Irrelevant.

A house could have it's doors wide open and no car in the parking lot... but you and you alone would still be held criminally responsible were you to enter the house and take something from it.

Someone could leave their car running and the door wide open... but you and you alone would still be held criminally responsible were you to drive off in it.

And before anyone wants to whine about how "but that's real life, EVE is just a game", my response is: Isn't EVE suppose to be "just like real life"? :-)


If you are stupid enough to do these things you should not be suprised that bad things happen to you.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#63 - 2011-10-31 09:51:50 UTC
bah
Ludi Burek
Exit-Strategy
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#64 - 2011-10-31 09:52:52 UTC
Miners and PVEers are moral, God fearing men that everyone should look up to. The just want to play "Everyone vs Everyone" in peace.

Gankers are degenerates that go against the very fibre of this GAME which was obviously created for everyone to mimic the daily real life. Going to work, paying taxes, being a good law abiding citizen.
Twisted Alice
Doomheim
#65 - 2011-10-31 10:18:54 UTC
Ludi Burek wrote:
Miners and PVEers are moral, God fearing men that everyone should look up to. The just want to play "Everyone vs Everyone" in peace.

Gankers are degenerates that go against the very fibre of this GAME which was obviously created for everyone to mimic the daily real life. Going to work, paying taxes, being a good law abiding citizen.





The problems in this game stems from the two main playstyles and the PvPers are always at fault for the comflict that sprouts up among a community where both playstyles are trying to coexist.

PvE players don't try to impose their playstyle on others whereas PvPers do.

With Eve however it always been marketed more towards PvP so it's understandable the PvPers resent the PvE players to some extent.


The answer to a lot of the communities problems would be to make it either completely PvP or completely PvE. But of course that won't work because people would leave the game, but might attract new players if it was one or the other.

Another option would be to make high-sec completely PvE and low-sec and 0.0 completely PvP, that way you effectively create different servers on the same server.

Or split the PvE players and PvP players up like two sets of servers, the cost is the problem here plus the populations would be lower on both at least to start with.


What would help is for the standing required for jump clones be reduced by quite a bit, make them more accessable very early on in the game.



But as things are at the moment the biggest contribution a player can make is to try and understand the other playstyles view point and respect that view point.
Aida Nu
Perkone
Caldari State
#66 - 2011-10-31 10:30:25 UTC
Twisted Alice wrote:



Another option would be to make high-sec completely PvE and low-sec and 0.0 completely PvP, that way you effectively create different servers on the same server.

Or split the PvE players and PvP players up like two sets of servers, the cost is the problem here plus the populations would be lower on both at least to start with.




And effectively destroy what makes EVE so unique. One universe, one server, where everyone can interact with everyone, aka the Sandbox.
Twisted Alice
Doomheim
#67 - 2011-10-31 10:33:04 UTC
Aida Nu wrote:
Twisted Alice wrote:



Another option would be to make high-sec completely PvE and low-sec and 0.0 completely PvP, that way you effectively create different servers on the same server.

Or split the PvE players and PvP players up like two sets of servers, the cost is the problem here plus the populations would be lower on both at least to start with.




And effectively destroy what makes EVE so unique. One universe, one server, where everyone can interact with everyone, aka the Sandbox.




The term sandbox is irrelevant to what I've said here, yet another example of it's over use.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#68 - 2011-10-31 10:35:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Twisted Alice wrote:
PvE players don't try to impose their playstyle on others whereas PvPers do.
Not quite true.

The problem is that PvEers think they're not imposing anything on others (most likely because in most games, they don't), whereas in EVE, they do. Everything they do — ever ISK they spawn, every mineral they mine, every complex they hunt down — has an effect on the game world and everyone within it. When they then want to make changes so they can do all of that “in peace”, they are effectively saying “we want to be able to affect you, but you shouldn't be allowed to affect us back.”

As EVE is currently designed, it is impossible not to PvP, and disconnecting the (apparent, but not really) PvE parts from the PvP bits would break things immensely. Splitting the game simply doesn't really work, because the PvE side would instantly implode under its own lack of dynamics.
Quote:
But as things are at the moment the biggest contribution a player can make is to try and understand the other playstyles view point and respect that view point.
It also requires for (mainly) the PvEers to understand what kind of game it is they're playing: one where they are indeed part of the war machine, and thus valid targets; one where their actions have a profound impact on everyone else; one where everyone else's actions have a profound impact on them; and a game where the kinds of walls they would prefer to see simply can't be built or there would be nothing left for them to do…

If they want to see how a PvE EVE would work, they can stop logging in to TQ and start to play on Sisi instead — see if it's really the kind of game world they want to live in: one where nothing they do has any meaning or effect, or is even needed.
Quote:
The term sandbox is irrelevant to what I've said here
No, it is not. It just lacks a qualifier: multiplayer sandbox — a place where we all have the same tools to build the same sand castle, and there is a limited amount of sand (and spades, and buckets) to do it with. Trying to split it up would indeed ruin that sandbox.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#69 - 2011-10-31 10:37:53 UTC
Justin Credulent wrote:
(BTW, Announcing that you're going to rob someone's house also does not abrogate your own criminal responsibility.)
Congratulations on the first post in this thread, that links real life with a game. You sir, are a genius.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Aida Nu
Perkone
Caldari State
#70 - 2011-10-31 10:43:03 UTC
Twisted Alice wrote:


The term sandbox is irrelevant to what I've said here, yet another example of it's over use.


Nice try. It is very relevant because what you are suggesting would destroy what EVE is, a big multiplayer sandbox.
The term might be overused but thats because people like you are trying to destroy it.
Twisted Alice
Doomheim
#71 - 2011-10-31 10:53:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Twisted Alice
Aida Nu wrote:
Twisted Alice wrote:


The term sandbox is irrelevant to what I've said here, yet another example of it's over use.


Nice try. It is very relevant because what you are suggesting would destroy what EVE is, a big multiplayer sandbox.
The term might be overused but thats because people like you are trying to destroy it.




There have been completely PvE sandboxes.


Saga of Ryzom when it was released for about it's first 2 years was a completely PvE sandbox and it was more of a sandbox than this one.

Then PvP was added, resulting in a rift between the community, and making it a little less of a sandbox, although still more of a sandbox than this one.



Eve is more of a sandbox for PvP players than it is for PvE players, but I still don't consider it to be a true sandbox, because CCP themselves interfere too much, trying to force players to redistribute around Eve for example.
Kietay Ayari
Caldari State
#72 - 2011-10-31 10:54:45 UTC
Dooon't worry everyone! They will never get rid of highsec ganking! They might make it a little harder to do but that is just CCP doing their balance thing. I don't really mind the people who say ganking needs to be harder, even if I do disagree with them. But all the people who sound like they are talking down on people who attack PvE players and miners... I think they might have a few screws loose ;D if you know what I mean.

There are already tons of games that are for people who want an easy sit, click, do not think, and kill AI, but EVE isn't based around that. Mining and PvE exist to further PvP! By killing miners and PvEers you are just eliminating potential competition! :D

There are a lot of entitled sounding new people though, and entitled people are annoying >:O Yes I am aware that I am also saying we are entitled to PvP but that is what the game has been about since its creation. You can say "the player base has changed" but all that really sounds like is "CCP please sell out and be like every other generic MMO so you can make more money."

Just mine in the Ferox if you are afraid ;D Nothing can stop that guy!

Ferox #1

Aida Nu
Perkone
Caldari State
#73 - 2011-10-31 10:57:19 UTC
Twisted Alice wrote:
Aida Nu wrote:
Twisted Alice wrote:


The term sandbox is irrelevant to what I've said here, yet another example of it's over use.


Nice try. It is very relevant because what you are suggesting would destroy what EVE is, a big multiplayer sandbox.
The term might be overused but thats because people like you are trying to destroy it.




There have been completely PvE sandboxes.


Saga of Ryzom when it was released for about it's first 2 years was a completely PvE sandbox and it was more of a sandbox than this one.

Then PvP was added, resulting in a rift between the community, and making it a little less of a sandbox, although still more of a sandbox than this one.



Eve is more of a sandbox for PvP players than it is for PvE players, but I still don't consider it to be a true sandbox, because CCP themselves interfere to much, trying to force players to redistribute around Eve for example.



Saga of Ryzom sounds like a great game. Why dont you go and play it?


Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#74 - 2011-10-31 11:01:26 UTC
Twisted Alice wrote:
There have been completely PvE sandboxes.
…and they worked because they were designed that way. EVE was not and cannot be converted into one (well… not a meaningful one, at least) without a complete redesign from the ground up, effectively making it a completely new and completely different game — i.e. not EVE.
Quote:
Then PvP was added, resulting in a rift between the community, and making it a little less of a sandbox, although still more of a sandbox than this one.
…much like that, yes. They did the same thing the PvE-ers are trying to do: rejigger a game designed for a different purpose after the fact, which just doesn't work.
Quote:
Eve is more of a sandbox for PvP players than it is for PvE players
EVE is a sandbox for everyone. It is this for a simple reason: because there are no PvE players — just players who are unaware that they are, in fact, PvPing.
EvEa Deva
Doomheim
#75 - 2011-10-31 11:03:02 UTC
This thread again? i remember the last 20 like it was yesterday........O wait it was yesterday
Chopper Rollins
hahahlolspycorp
#76 - 2011-10-31 11:20:07 UTC
Henry Haphorn wrote:

Let me enlighten you with something. Griefing is part of the game..




NO. Griefing is against the EULA. Ganking is part of the game.



Either you have all been trolled or are all stupid bigmouths. Wouldn't be surprised if this one hits 30 pages.


Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.

Psychophantic
#77 - 2011-10-31 11:51:52 UTC
Henry Haphorn wrote:

Let me enlighten you with something. Griefing is part of the game.


Wrong.

http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=336
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#78 - 2011-10-31 12:04:58 UTC
Justin Credulent wrote:
Barbelo Valentinian wrote:


Quoted for truth and relevance.

Quote:
This man is an example for carebears everywhere. Bravo sir. Bravo.


The funny thing is, the real carebears are the ones attacking defenseless miners.

If a an unarmed man runs from a fight wherein his assailant has a knife, who's the real coward?

I mean come on, you're not fooling anybody.

Miners are hard working, industrial persons upon which all of EVE depends. People who make it a point to mess with Covetors in hi-sec "for the lulz" and then try to hide behind the (very thin) defense that "nowhere in EVE is safe" are cowardly carebears trying to push responsibility and blame for their own behavior onto a third party (CCP, "game mechanics", or the miners themselves.)

Get real, no one is buying it. If you grief in hi-sec and/or attack miners, you're a carebeard, period.

PS to the OP: If you really care about people's "bottom lines", i have a bottom line that could use a donation of ISKies from you.



I see there a very good reason to make high sec like null, no Concord and only like null sec alliance politics. Would like to see all those "ubber" carebears tears fill my cup.
Xoria Krint
The Angelic
#79 - 2011-10-31 12:09:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Xoria Krint
+ over 9000

Justin Credulent wrote:

If a an unarmed man runs from a fight wherein his assailant has a knife, who's the real coward?

The word "Carebear" has nothing to do with being a coward. It's about not engaging in player vs players combat. At least get the definition right if you are coming here to discuss it.
Henry Haphorn
Killer Yankee
#80 - 2011-10-31 12:15:00 UTC
Psychophantic wrote:
Henry Haphorn wrote:

Let me enlighten you with something. Griefing is part of the game.


Wrong.

http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=336


My OP has been edited accordingly. Thank you.

Adapt or Die