Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Who you talking to? Obviously the term PvP we use in combat sense. Nobody here ignores the market is players market. I dont know how old is your character and I will not go and see but you should know by now what we reffer no matter how noob you'd be.

Tell that to your mate Rina, who quite clearly didn't get that both Tippia and I are well aware of what is and isn't PvP :)

Your post, quoted by itself, is extremely wrong: _everything_ in EVE is PvP, you just might not realize it at first. And that's what the draw is, that _everything_ is against and/or with the other players. That's what Tippia was picking at (and even through the goofy grin on, to make it even more obvious). That is what your mate missed, and what you are clearly missing as well.


Joe, just quit before you end up even further behind lol

Even more directly than the abstract you paint, a lot of the motivating force behind much of EVE's blow-each-other-up PvP is economic at its core. People build the ships and weapons to fight the wars. The wars are fought over resources and territory to build with. Wars are fought to push out the competition. Price wars are waged to help push people out. It's all PvP, and it all feeds into everything else.

Also, no, me, a player, shooting you, a player, is not PvE, no matter how you spin that one. Even if you try to gank me while i'm ratting, as soon as you threw that player into the mix, it stops being PvE, and it becomes PvP. There's nothing to spin about it lol. I think you've been playing a bit too much of the Crafts of War.

No, Joe, they can't:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_versus_environment

I find it amusing that EVE in particular is cited making my exact point, and no, I didn't just edit it to make it say that lol

As soon as the thing the player is going against is another player, instead of the computer, it stops being PvE, and it becomes a PvP situation.

We'll agree to disagree, and you can continue quoting definitions that have been altered beyond their original meaning.

Player vs environment used to be defined as exactly what is suggest until the entroduction of other players into the environment to which lead to a change of the definition to meaning player vs computer, which, again, used to have a definition seperate from pve.
Pve used to be exactly that, such as puzzle games that pitted the player against a puzzle I.E. the environment. Then, games introduced artificial intelengence, which was defined as player vs AI. Then players were pitted against each other which became known as pvp. However, due to the complexity of the system, Pve and Pvai were wrapped into one definition and given the meaning to represent anything not player controlled. Hence why I suggest the "true" and/or "original" meaning of player vs environment would still include anything created by the environment. However, we seem to be using the botched definition that was defined after the introduction of pvp, so in that case, sure you're correct.

Now, I'd like to get back on topic and quote my suggestion that I had introduced in relation to this thread

No, we'll agree that you're wrong, and wish to remain willfully ignorant. And no, the term "PvE" has never been accurately used to describe competitive interaction between players. Ever. I've been in this genre since we started adding graphics to go with the text. Your "definition" strips the term of any and all meaning, because it applies to anything and everything in any and every game ever made. Saying everything in EVE is PvP, on the other hand, does not do this, as the interactions and emergent behavior responsible for it cannot be applied to all cases in all things, as your definition of PvE.

Try better next time.

As to the topic at hand, it's quite simple: either add bubbles to lowsec, or kill WTZ. The problem with lowsec isn't that there are secstatus penalties, it's that there's no reason to go there. Why would I go to lowsec for negligible potential profit improvements compared to high-sec? Since warp to zero, it's nearly impossible to secure a low-sec system in any meaningful way, thus causing massive increases in risk to people operating there (and virtually zero risk to people passing through), why would I go there, to fight or otherwise? Thanks to WTZ making it so you can't secure a system, we now make nullsec and high-sec the only viable locations to operate. The rewards are greater, and with bubbles, we can actually secure the area to make the risk manageable / worthwhile.

Secstatus is ridiculously easy to burn off, especially in nullsec (where there are also no penalties). that's the very reason they made it harder to do (single biggest payout per bounty cycle, instead of constant increases as you kill things) and made it so that you can't go over 5.00 (so that you can't "hide" behind a positive secstatus to lull victims into complacence). Ganking in high-sec (where the penalties are even more severe than low-sec) is rampant (which is fine) with the current system in place. There's quite simply no good end results from reducing these penalties anywhere.

The trick to getting people into lowsec isn't to reduce the penalties for fighting there, but rather to improve the risk/reward ratio of going there in the first place.

Here let me break it down the definitions in relation to the expansion of Gaming.

A game came out. It pitted the player against random puzzles to which were preordaned by the game itself. This was known as the game's environment.
Then along came games that pitted the player against AI opponents. This became known as player vs AI, and caused a redefining of pve to disclude anything related to AI.
Then, along game the introduction of player vs player which required another redefining of pve to disclude anything in relation to being player controlled.
So you had player vs environment, which now only included thngs that had no AI and weren't player controlled.
You have player vs AI which included anything with artificial intelegence and was not player controlled.
Then you had player vs player which pertained only when one or more players were pitted against other players.

However, then more advanced games were introduced, and the so defined at the time player vs environment became an obsolete term since almost everything had some form of artificial intelegence. So the definition for pve and pvai were intertwinned and thus became known solely as player vs environment in which the AI became the environment, since everything in the game was no longer set in place, but had variable outcomes depending on the player's reaction to the environment. So since the environment was given it's own AI, the two definitions were defined as having the same meaning.

Anyone else who has been gaming long enough to have experienced these redefinings will agree with me because they know as well as I that there used to not be AI and there used to not be pvp.

There is not such a thing as competitive margin. Ore is free, it grows every morning in the asteroid belt, so missions do. I can sale at the price I want and all is profit. Admit this: you skipped the tutorials when you first joined, didn't you?

Actually, what little there was in the way of tutorials, I did those nearly 7 years ago. You kids these days are spoiled, the current tutorials are amazing (and give tons of free stuff!). I've run through those too, at least the ones introduced in Apocrypha.

Minerals are 1) not free, 2) not always mined. You can choose to devote time to mining or time to making isk to buy ore/mins, or reprocess loot, either way it is time and resources spent doing one thing instead of the other. The adage "time is money" is not an empty comment. How you handle this, and how efficient you are at how you choose to go about it, absolutely affect your margins.
"high-sec ore" doesn't disappear in lower security areas, the occurence of more rare ore simply goes up proportionally (and certain types are only found at X and lower). Supply lines are critical, though, and normally what occurs is the rare low/null-sec ore is transported to highsec, and sold and they bring the abundant high-sec stuff back. It's more efficient use of time and resources. And yes, they protect their miners in null; you can't operate without teamwork.

Further, this in-and-out traffic is essential to the functioning of both. If I can get everything in nullsec, why interact at all with high-sec? If no one interacts with high-sec, how are the newbies supposed to get started? The two are interdependent on each other, as it should be. The only real problem is the disproportionate risk/reward between high-sec and low-sec. There's simply no reason to work in low-sec, the improved rewards are marginal, and the increased risk is even greater than in null-sec. Which is why you see the current dichotomy: carebears in highsec, almost everyone else in nullsec, and little more than griefers and FW noobs in low-sec.

http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/freeminerals.jpg

Ore requires time to mine. Time that could be spent doing something else. If the ore you mine results in minerals that could be bought on the market for less isk than you could have made doing something else in the same amount of time, you have wasted time and money, even if your wallet never flashes. This is not a complicated economic concept.

Actually, Elite is widely regarded to be the predecessor / inspiration for EVE (and the inspiration for Escape Velocity, for that matter). And around that time, for me, it was Atari 2600 and a Digital-built 80286. First MMO for me was NWN back in 1991, when they added graphics to go with the text ^^

As to PLEX, the reason they're allowed is because money is obtained legitimately within the economy, and used to purchase them. CCP receives RL money for the creation of the time code, so they get paid either way, and the end result is a decrease in the number of RMTs and people willing to use them, since there's a safe, secure way to "buy money," all within existing, well-balanced game mechanics.

Lastly, I don't think anyone that disagrees with me is an idiot; I think idiots are idiots. It just happens that a lot of idiots like to disagree with me when they're wrong.

Besides the entirety of empire space and everything in it? Ill list specifics.

NPC mission agents
Epic arc and cosmos missions
exploration
industry
mining
standing, in general
incursions

the list goes on, I dont understand why you specificly deny all of this like it doesnt exist? You have the entirety of null space to engage in whatever kind of pvp you wish to play, and I dont want to stop you from doing that at all, but the problem with you people is thats not what you want to do, you want to invade the pve portion of "space" to pick on players that are defenseless, and thats about all you wanna do. If that wasnt the case you wouldnt be complaining about the security increases pve players are asking for to protect them from the kind of play intended for null space.

The entire fictional storyline of the game, all of it, is entirely for PVE play, not PVP. ALL OF IT. If the game was supposed to be based round pvp entirely, there would be absolutely no reason for a storyline, content, or any of it, with the exception of a small area of space reserved for noob players until they could join a corp and join a sovereign area. I have litterally played games EXACTLY like this. Dont ask me to recall the names because I havent played them since i was a teen and that was over 10 years ago.