These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Remove corp friendly fire [in high sec]

Author
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#101 - 2013-04-18 10:14:47 UTC
Tchulen wrote:
Some people play just for the kicks of upsetting other RL people purely because they get their jollies from other people's pain.


C'mon, who feels pain because of his pixels exploded?

Invalid signature format

Velicitia
XS Tech
#102 - 2013-04-18 10:15:09 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
... you're probably stupid if you trust anyone who's not yourself or an alt...


alts = goonspais.

don't trust them either.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#103 - 2013-04-18 10:23:41 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Tchulen wrote:
Some people play just for the kicks of upsetting other RL people purely because they get their jollies from other people's pain.


C'mon, who feels pain because of his pixels exploded?


New players (or older players in blinged ships), generally. I meant psychological pain (ie extreme annoyance and/or anger/rage), not physical pain,obviously. You can tell this to be the case every time you hear someone go rant-mental in local after getting their ship ganked.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#104 - 2013-04-18 11:10:52 UTC
Tchulen wrote:
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Tchulen wrote:
Some people play just for the kicks of upsetting other RL people purely because they get their jollies from other people's pain.


C'mon, who feels pain because of his pixels exploded?


New players (or older players in blinged ships), generally. I meant psychological pain (ie extreme annoyance and/or anger/rage), not physical pain,obviously. You can tell this to be the case every time you hear someone go rant-mental in local after getting their ship ganked.


If you suffer psychologically because a thing in a video game died/exploded then you should immediately unsub and check yourself into a mental health clinic. Seek treatment, you are not ready for video games, let alone the real world.
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#105 - 2013-04-18 11:27:02 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Tchulen wrote:
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Tchulen wrote:
Some people play just for the kicks of upsetting other RL people purely because they get their jollies from other people's pain.


C'mon, who feels pain because of his pixels exploded?


New players (or older players in blinged ships), generally. I meant psychological pain (ie extreme annoyance and/or anger/rage), not physical pain,obviously. You can tell this to be the case every time you hear someone go rant-mental in local after getting their ship ganked.


If you suffer psychologically because a thing in a video game died/exploded then you should immediately unsub and check yourself into a mental health clinic. Seek treatment, you are not ready for video games, let alone the real world.


Lol. You're making a series of false assumptions. I didn't say anywhere that I suffer psychological pain because of anything in any game but from watching local chat channels and reading anecdotal evidence on forums etc. it appears that some people do. Especially when they're either new to the game or when they've been closeted in high sec gathering a false sense of security for enough time to build a bling ship but not know how to protect it from ganks.

Stating that I'm not ready for video games let alone life in general is quite amusing and just goes to show how little you grasped of what the big boys are discussing [pats poor child on the head]. There there, things will look better after you've had your milk and cookies.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#106 - 2013-04-18 11:45:29 UTC
Well I understood you were talking about newbies but it is not like Eve ads say "Come play with us, we are fuzzy and friendly". It says "Shape your destiny in cold harsh universe". What is different from other MMOs danger comes not from NPCs but from players. You may argue that even in such environment some people take their pvp too far but again, they only use opportunities given to them by you (or that poor innocent newbie) and tools given by game designers.

After all nobody cries to change chess rules because people lose their pawns and ragequit. You know what you are getting into from very beginning: a game based on player versus player aggression where sacrifice and loss are integral part of experience.

Invalid signature format

Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#107 - 2013-04-18 12:02:41 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Well I understood you were talking about newbies but it is not like Eve ads say "Come play with us, we are fuzzy and friendly". It says "Shape your destiny in cold harsh universe". What is different from other MMOs danger comes not from NPCs but from players. You may argue that even in such environment some people take their pvp too far but again, they only use opportunities given to them by you (or that poor innocent newbie) and tools given by game designers.

After all nobody cries to change chess rules because people lose their pawns and ragequit. You know what you are getting into from very beginning: a game based on player versus player aggression where sacrifice and loss are integral part of experience.


No, absolutely, it does advertise itself as a harsh universe. I'm certainly not advocating changing that just like I haven't been advocating the proposed change in this thread which I've managed to accidentally derail and therefore will be leaving.

Basically put, I disagree with the actions of those who pick on new players or players completely unable to defend themselves in exactly the same way I disagree with the actions of "bullies" in real life. Do I think that EvE should be changed to do anything about this? No, absolutely not. It's one of the great things about eve and that's why I disagree with the OP regarding stopping corp mates from killing each other.

It is merely not in my moral makeup to do such things or agree with others doing it on a moral level but that's a personal viewpoint and not a viewpoint I think should be foisted on the game as a whole as it removes an awful lot of the potential choices and excitement out of the game. Even in high sec you should always be prepared to fight and/or lose one's ship whenever you undock. Making it actually safe would also make it boring.

@OP - Please accept my apologies for accidentally derailing your thread. I'll leave you to it now.
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
#108 - 2013-04-18 13:24:03 UTC
Tchulen wrote:
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Well I understood you were talking about newbies but it is not like Eve ads say "Come play with us, we are fuzzy and friendly". It says "Shape your destiny in cold harsh universe". What is different from other MMOs danger comes not from NPCs but from players. You may argue that even in such environment some people take their pvp too far but again, they only use opportunities given to them by you (or that poor innocent newbie) and tools given by game designers.

After all nobody cries to change chess rules because people lose their pawns and ragequit. You know what you are getting into from very beginning: a game based on player versus player aggression where sacrifice and loss are integral part of experience.


No, absolutely, it does advertise itself as a harsh universe. I'm certainly not advocating changing that just like I haven't been advocating the proposed change in this thread which I've managed to accidentally derail and therefore will be leaving.

Basically put, I disagree with the actions of those who pick on new players or players completely unable to defend themselves in exactly the same way I disagree with the actions of "bullies" in real life. Do I think that EvE should be changed to do anything about this? No, absolutely not. It's one of the great things about eve and that's why I disagree with the OP regarding stopping corp mates from killing each other.

It is merely not in my moral makeup to do such things or agree with others doing it on a moral level but that's a personal viewpoint and not a viewpoint I think should be foisted on the game as a whole as it removes an awful lot of the potential choices and excitement out of the game. Even in high sec you should always be prepared to fight and/or lose one's ship whenever you undock. Making it actually safe would also make it boring.

@OP - Please accept my apologies for accidentally derailing your thread. I'll leave you to it now.


Nah, your not derailing it that much. Most cries against high-sec deaths are in one form or another cries against bullying. The posts that are made to stop ganking, to make miners invulnerable, to stop war decs, to prevent AWOXing, to stop corp theft and POS hacking and can flipping and alt accounts and spying and ...

I believe you get the point. Someone was affected by someone elses playstyle, and wishes a change. Unluckily for the op, that's all this will be seen as. They aren't trying to protect new players; we've already proven that this isn't the case, just the catch phrase. But they are trying to stop bullying.


This is where the split is the greatest. Do you prevent bullying by hardcoding it into the game, the devs working day and night to add stricter and stricter devices because bullying evolves, inevitably losing a vast portion of your original playerbase, your focus on freeform game design, and your identity in the gaming world?

Or do you allow bullying to happen ... nay, support it even ... and teach the one lesson in life that our school systems don't have the balls to teach anymore: The only way to stop a bully, is to become brave and stand up and fight.





As an aside, most carebears (players who attempt to be non-combatant pacifists and avoid pvp as much as possible) I've run into are the first to threaten real world, physical violence, or try to allude somebody is a rapist or serial killer when they are affected in game.

I see these individuals as very emotionally unstable, as they seem to be chronically incapable of separating the virtual world and the real one.

If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that?

Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#109 - 2013-04-18 14:00:46 UTC
Ruze wrote:
This is where the split is the greatest. Do you prevent bullying by hardcoding it into the game, the devs working day and night to add stricter and stricter devices because bullying evolves, inevitably losing a vast portion of your original playerbase, your focus on freeform game design, and your identity in the gaming world?

Or do you allow bullying to happen ... nay, support it even ... and teach the one lesson in life that our school systems don't have the balls to teach anymore: The only way to stop a bully, is to become brave and stand up and fight..

Sorry, I know I said I'd GTFO of this thread but I really wanted to respond to this because I agree with you totally. The or is certainly the best way to go for EvE.

Whilst I will fight to protect the weak or innocent (or at least try to) I will also fight for the right of other people to do the opposite within EvE because the reason I've played EvE for years and played most other MMOs for a short period each is because EvE allows freedom of action and consequence where other MMOs mostly cut off freedom in order to avoid consequence.

Well said. Very well said.

Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#110 - 2013-04-18 14:09:33 UTC
As far as I know you can petition "bullying" in case when you are specifically and deliberately targeted by somebody. Hell, you can petition every lossmail you experienced. Of course you have to really have a strong case to have "justice" system on your side. I think I remember somebody petitioned stalking by wardec of every corp he was a part of although I don't remember what was the outcome of that.

Also newbie systems are protected by possibility of ban if newbie is tricked into aggression by more experienced players. Also there are numerous newbie friendly corps that take those fuzzy newbros and teach them about doing terrible things to fellow capsuleers. So it is not like newbies are automatically fresh meat on cell block B.

But once you are out of newbie system and you chose not to be a part of player corp and use their support and help and protection you are on your own and you have to deal with consequences of your decision. Why is it so hard to understand? I don't know but there is a saying around forums that basically says it all "you can't patch sto0pid".

Invalid signature format

StrongSmartSexy
Phenix Revolution
#111 - 2013-04-18 14:14:01 UTC  |  Edited by: StrongSmartSexy
Ruze wrote:
Tchulen wrote:
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Well I understood you were talking about newbies but it is not like Eve ads say "Come play with us, we are fuzzy and friendly". It says "Shape your destiny in cold harsh universe". What is different from other MMOs danger comes not from NPCs but from players. You may argue that even in such environment some people take their pvp too far but again, they only use opportunities given to them by you (or that poor innocent newbie) and tools given by game designers.

After all nobody cries to change chess rules because people lose their pawns and ragequit. You know what you are getting into from very beginning: a game based on player versus player aggression where sacrifice and loss are integral part of experience.


No, absolutely, it does advertise itself as a harsh universe. I'm certainly not advocating changing that just like I haven't been advocating the proposed change in this thread which I've managed to accidentally derail and therefore will be leaving.

Basically put, I disagree with the actions of those who pick on new players or players completely unable to defend themselves in exactly the same way I disagree with the actions of "bullies" in real life. Do I think that EvE should be changed to do anything about this? No, absolutely not. It's one of the great things about eve and that's why I disagree with the OP regarding stopping corp mates from killing each other.

It is merely not in my moral makeup to do such things or agree with others doing it on a moral level but that's a personal viewpoint and not a viewpoint I think should be foisted on the game as a whole as it removes an awful lot of the potential choices and excitement out of the game. Even in high sec you should always be prepared to fight and/or lose one's ship whenever you undock. Making it actually safe would also make it boring.

@OP - Please accept my apologies for accidentally derailing your thread. I'll leave you to it now.


Nah, your not derailing it that much. Most cries against high-sec deaths are in one form or another cries against bullying. The posts that are made to stop ganking, to make miners invulnerable, to stop war decs, to prevent AWOXing, to stop corp theft and POS hacking and can flipping and alt accounts and spying and ...

I believe you get the point. Someone was affected by someone elses playstyle, and wishes a change. Unluckily for the op, that's all this will be seen as. They aren't trying to protect new players; we've already proven that this isn't the case, just the catch phrase. But they are trying to stop bullying.


This is where the split is the greatest. Do you prevent bullying by hardcoding it into the game, the devs working day and night to add stricter and stricter devices because bullying evolves, inevitably losing a vast portion of your original playerbase, your focus on freeform game design, and your identity in the gaming world?

Or do you allow bullying to happen ... nay, support it even ... and teach the one lesson in life that our school systems don't have the balls to teach anymore: The only way to stop a bully, is to become brave and stand up and fight.





As an aside, most carebears (players who attempt to be non-combatant pacifists and avoid pvp as much as possible) I've run into are the first to threaten real world, physical violence, or try to allude somebody is a rapist or serial killer when they are affected in game.

I see these individuals as very emotionally unstable, as they seem to be chronically incapable of separating the virtual world and the real one.

I would hate to subscribe to your idea of school system, in where the problem of bullying would probably be left up to the bullied. There are many times when being brave and fighting back gets you nothing but a nose bleed or a broken arm and in which case, outside intervention is necessary.

What kind of example would you be setting for a school when bullying is enabled by having the problem ignored by authorities on the basis of some twisted attempt to make the bullied overcome adversity on their own and 'toughen up' so to speak?
I understand the intention you're trying to convey, but the means cannot be justified in that case.
Regardless, I don't think this a good analogy to draw on anyway.

Anyway on-topic, the point is that there are limits to how harsh, parts of EVE, are intended to be.
Metagaming can turn ordinary gameplay into grief tools and this is when CCP is required to intervene.

Freeform contracts were removed due to excessive use for scamming.
Auto-shutdown on remote assistance modules was introduced to stop the high risk of players using criminal flags to destroy entire logi/fleet chains in Incursions.

Highsec AWOXing needs some tempering - to say nothing of the fact that AWOXers are free to use as much neutral RR as they want without consequence.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#112 - 2013-04-18 15:12:25 UTC
StrongSmartSexy wrote:

What kind of example would you be setting for a school when bullying is enabled by having the problem ignored by authorities on the basis of some twisted attempt to make the bullied overcome adversity on their own and 'toughen up' so to speak?
I understand the intention you're trying to convey, but the means cannot be justified in that case.
Regardless, I don't think this a good analogy to draw on anyway.


authoroties already pretty much do nothing about it. kid in our school got a pen and note book to write in everytime he was bullied...great.

StrongSmartSexy wrote:

Highsec AWOXing needs some tempering - to say nothing of the fact that AWOXers are free to use as much neutral RR as they want without consequence.


both AWOXers and the victim are free to use logistics. and making the logistics go suspect would mean that the victim cannot use logistics without it going suspect also, and who is more likely to bring friends to take out said logistics?

there are good reasons for shooting corpies: 'testing' tanks, duelling, intra corp tournaments, whoring kill mails, killing spais, pointing ur corpy when he DC's, AWOXing, webbing freighters, shooting wrecks etc etc. some of the best ways to **** about in eve involve shooting corpies.

the duelling system is good for fighting a single person u dnt trust, but is a faff when it comes to doing things with multiple players. the freedom from constraints that shooting corpies gives is irreplacable

whatever steps u take to protect the victim, the AWOXer/spy can also use. if u think there is a problem with AWOXing then the solution lies with teaching ppl not to be stupid rather than altering mechanics.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Trii Seo
Goonswarm Federation
#113 - 2013-04-18 15:30:00 UTC
Psychotic Monk wrote:
Well, it's been my experience that my fellow belligerent undesirables contain fewer reprehensible people per capita than your typical highsec carebear corp. I havn't seen the inside of a nullsec corp for any period of time in a couple years, but I remember a lot of line members getting treated like **** and a lot of people calling each other ******.

If you view us as bullies there's nothing I can do about that except to remind you that all areas of space are for pvp and engaging in it is not morally wrong and even with CONCORD around it is still your responsibility to protect yourself.


It happens. Hell I wouldn't call our own bunch exactly cuddly - still, extremely mistreating your members is asking for being robbed/awoxed/end up without them. But yes, those are the lies we force-feed ourselves, along with "OUR SOV MAKES US AWESOME" and "WE CAN PVP MKAY GUYS GET ON DA TITAN."

Asking for the "friendly" fire thing to be removed is a prime example of carebear mentality - give them a finger they'll take a hand. Gank nerfs, concord buffs, all-time low of hisec ganks, forcing gankers to find new realms of stupidity to exploit.

There were mechanics that had no sense (I'd actually agree on insurance removal nerf.) but CCP can't just fix stupid...

(Also Psychotic Monk 4 CSM)

Proud pilot of the Imperium

Arek'Jaalan: Heliograph

StrongSmartSexy
Phenix Revolution
#114 - 2013-04-18 16:01:15 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
both AWOXers and the victim are free to use logistics. and making the logistics go suspect would mean that the victim cannot use logistics without it going suspect also, and who is more likely to bring friends to take out said logistics?

Except that the AWOXing only ever really happens when the victim does not have access to logistic support at the time or at all. Also, if the victim happened to have logi at the time, chances are it's in the same corporation as well which allows the AWOXer free reign to destroy it too.
Meanwhile, AWOXers always use neutral RR which does not receive any flags when assisting.

The problem is crimewatch - and I keep repeating this in many threads because it invariably leads to this point.
Crimewatch is not sophisticated enough. Ideally, aggression between corp members should generate a unique type of flag (on both the attacker and the victim) that causes any player, outside of the corp, providing remote assistance to either person, to become suspect.
This would get rid of the remaining risk-free neutral RR gameplay in high sec.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#115 - 2013-04-18 16:21:58 UTC

Quote:
What kind of example would you be setting for a school when bullying is enabled by having the problem ignored by authorities on the basis of some twisted attempt to make the bullied overcome adversity on their own and 'toughen up' so to speak?


I was heavily bullied in Elementary and Middle School. I was pretty much one of the scrawniest children in my school, while always over-participating in class and scoring top-marks on every test. I was often told by administrators that I should toughen up, that I should ignore them, and even occasionally that I should fight back. No matter what I did, none of these seemed to change my social status within the school, and I was always picked on until highschool. What changed in highschool? I became a social butterfly, making friends beyond count to the point my old bullies left me alone. That's how you stop bullying, you make friends.

The best way to destroy you, is to isolate you. Point out to everyone why you are a terrible person to hang out with, point out how your faults weaken anyone standing next to you, and show why you aren't worth anyone's support. And once you are utterly alone, I can easily overpower and brutalize and violate you without fear. That's the essence of bullying.

The solution to bullying is to covertly place the bullied into an atmosphere where they can make friends. Sometimes this requires being away from the bully's presence, sometimes this requires addressing their social inadequacies, sometimes it requires publicly standing up to the bully.

Unfortunately, our schools instead focus on "zero tolerance laws" which remove personal responsibility, and simply attempt to make our schools a super-safe zone. So we get common sense removed, and end up with amazingly dumb incidents: Children receiving expulsion from school for having safety scissors, kids expelled for giving their teachers their boyscout pocket-knife they accidentally brought to school, and tons of other ridiculous reasons. And guess what... we have just as much bullying in schools as ever, not to mention just as much violence there too!

In EvE, this no different: Making it so people can't AWOX you, or can't suicide gank you, or can't bump your precious ship is completely the wrong direction. The best solution to bullying is to make friends, and that's all that EvE needs. I know that making friends in a cold dark universe where trust is a dangerous thing is difficult, but this is where CCP should change the universe. There aren't a lot of friendship-building activities available for strangers to come together (Incursions & FW are pretty much the only community-building activities strangers regularly partake in), and frankly, this is what needs to be remedied.

Once you have a group of people to play with, AWOXers are a welcome disruption that creates conflict and ultimately delivers massive content. Do you have any idea how many capitals, supercarriers, and Titans have died because of revenge plots, where AWOXing is a major component of the story?
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#116 - 2013-04-18 16:39:00 UTC
StrongSmartSexy wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
both AWOXers and the victim are free to use logistics. and making the logistics go suspect would mean that the victim cannot use logistics without it going suspect also, and who is more likely to bring friends to take out said logistics?

Except that the AWOXing only ever really happens when the victim does not have access to logistic support at the time or at all. Also, if the victim happened to have logi at the time, chances are it's in the same corporation as well which allows the AWOXer free reign to destroy it too.
Meanwhile, AWOXers always use neutral RR which does not receive any flags when assisting.

The problem is crimewatch - and I keep repeating this in many threads because it invariably leads to this point.
Crimewatch is not sophisticated enough. Ideally, aggression between corp members should generate a unique type of flag (on both the attacker and the victim) that causes any player, outside of the corp, providing remote assistance to either person, to become suspect.
This would get rid of the remaining risk-free neutral RR gameplay in high sec.


Risk-free Neutral RR is crappy... and should be nixed in the butt whenever possible...

Before things get changed though, you need to look at what the changes might cause. How would your flag effect Neutral RR in incursions (could this be used maliciously)? How would it alter FW, where many corps are often in the same gang with RR, fighting the opposite militia. And, would it truly solve the problem?

In truth, this sounds like a major revision to Crimewatch to fix something that, to my knowledge, is not that prevalent. It would be good to get statistics on how significant of a problem this is! In the mean time, take some time and do some research on the people whom you invite to corp. Be aware of the risks AWOXers represent, and take some time with your corp mates to discuss how to respond to an AWOXer if it ever happens. It may not prevent all your losses, but it will go a long way to minimize them!
Velicitia
XS Tech
#117 - 2013-04-18 16:53:01 UTC
StrongSmartSexy wrote:

The problem is crimewatch - and I keep repeating this in many threads because it invariably leads to this point.
Crimewatch is not sophisticated enough. Ideally, aggression between corp members should generate a unique type of flag (on both the attacker and the victim) that causes any player, outside of the corp, providing remote assistance to either person, to become suspect.
This would get rid of the remaining risk-free neutral RR gameplay in high sec.


buff hisec, nerf CONCORD Cool

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#118 - 2013-04-18 17:06:40 UTC
This would just be another reason why a high sec corporation is just an NPC corp with less taxes and a pos.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#119 - 2013-04-18 17:59:54 UTC
StrongSmartSexy wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
both AWOXers and the victim are free to use logistics. and making the logistics go suspect would mean that the victim cannot use logistics without it going suspect also, and who is more likely to bring friends to take out said logistics?

Except that the AWOXing only ever really happens when the victim does not have access to logistic support at the time or at all. Also, if the victim happened to have logi at the time, chances are it's in the same corporation as well which allows the AWOXer free reign to destroy it too.
Meanwhile, AWOXers always use neutral RR which does not receive any flags when assisting.

You're doing it wrong. You're trying to have people use brute force against someone who has outsmarted them. And since they can't, you're trying to give them more tools to use brute force, which won't work in the first place.

Why are you trying to out-rep and out-dps someone who has already determined it to be mathematically impossible?

You don't need to shoot his neutral logi. You need to bring a blackbird, warp in at 50k, jam him and warp the prize away. No one can fly one? Bump him away, web him down and throw range scripted sensor damps on him. Having trouble bumping him? Bump the corp member he's shooting at to safety.

Nope. Can't think. Must. Kill.
That's how the people who don't understand what's going on get concorded shooting the logi.

If you really want to kill him, you can worry about it after you got what he was after off the field. If you still have tackle on him tanking the damage, come back with Tornadoes and just alpha him despite reps.

PS: There's a reason why we bring not one, but two logies when we bring some new guy along with our shineys. I'm also "too tired to dual box" and leave my Caldari alt docked.

Science and Trade Institute [STI] is an NPC entity and as such my views do not represent those of the entity or any of its members

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=276984&p=38

Psychotic Monk
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#120 - 2013-04-18 18:19:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Psychotic Monk
Legitimate gameplay is not bullying.

I'm honestly at a loss as to how you could think that. I'm not called a bully if I win a hand of poker and you lose some money. I'm not called a bully if I take your rook.

Further, you knew what you were signing up for. Eve does not hide its nature. One of the ads literally says 'Be a Villain'. We all joined this game because of its competitive nature and tangible loss for losing. Not only that, but Eve stands alone in this. We did not choose eve from among a palette of genre-swapped similar games. If I am mistaken about the nature of eve, I'd like it if you can please direct me at the game I should be playing instead and also how long I can expect to be able to play it before you show up and call me a bully and I'm forced to play find another game.

But if we're requiring explicit consent for interaction now I would like to note that I did not consent to having a game I love being changed in this way and your arguments are causing me mental anguish. I'd therefore like you to stop being a bully, please.