EVE General Discussion

1) I use the term very broadly to essentially include every other activity in EVE, aside from player combat. The reason I do so, is for purposes of re-affirming that even PvE activities happen in a PvP setting, and though the specific context of for example Incursions or ratting is PvE, the results of those activities invariably feed back into the PvP interaction of all players in EVE, as well as being PvP interactive in terms of competition/interruption in those activities

It sounds like stating the obvious, or hairsplitting, but I think keeping this firmly in mind, might help design decisions towards increasing competition and PvP in non-player combat activities.

As an example, I submit Ice fields (especially in HS). If the sites spawned "randomly", and required probing to find, the essential PvP and competetive nature of this activity would be notably increased, even though the activity of mining the field itself remains as non-combat PvP.

See what Im trying to get at?

2) Yes, being unable to dock at a station not controlled by your faction is a good example of what Im talking about. The rewards of the combat itself being incidental, the station access is a huge boon and reward with a net aggregate benefit for the participants, both combat oriented and otherwise.

The station becomes a significant player interaction multiplier, where hundreds/thousands of player interacrions take place, whereas before, for your faction, there was none. Ideally the level of individual player interactions enabled by the station is quadratic to the actual amount of activity outside of it. Greater than the sum of its parts.

3) Yes, pretty much. But perhaps that too could use improvement to incentize competition between other non-combat interactions in that space, rather than just the combat interaction imperative of defending it.



You need to understand that even when you are "PvE"ing, you are doing so in a PvP game, and a PvP setting.

The sandbox is a universal interaction between all players in it.
Every action reflects on every other player.
As such, it is utterly PvP.
Its like gravity. Nowhere in EVE can you escape it entirely.

This seems to be very difficult for some people to grasp and conceptualize, and as Tippia points out, may be part of player attrition, when they go beyond not understanding it, to REFUSING to accept it.

Yes, I get it now

I'm 100% in support of that design philosophy.

Make it so !

I understand fully what the guys point was.
I sympathize with his position, and understand why he thinks as he does.
Nonetheless, his perception of the sandbox boils down to his misunderstanding, that he can isolate a part of it for himself, and do only PvE in it, without being subject to the universal PvP nature of the game.
It is, however, EVERYONES sandbox. Nowhere can you cut off a piece of it and escape player interaction.

And the irony of you, the guy trying to shoehorn fictional terms like "competetive PvE", and citing CCPs simple conveniance of addressing PvE in a subcategory of the EVE environment (which is nonetheless entirely PvP) as "proof" its considered somehow magically separate from EVEs PvP nature, making claims of pedantry is ENORMOUS.

You really should reflect onto yourself first as to the accusations you make.
It looks extremely bad for you, when you commit yourself that which you presume to accuse others of (and which they have infact not committed).

Its called hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty.

Furthermore, there seems to be a direct correlation between players who view PvE as a separate activity in EVE, and isolated somehow magically from EVEs pervasive PvP nature, and whining that EVE is dying, and that PvP is driving players away. Now their arguments have also started including "competetive PvE", as an unsubstantiated marketing buzzword introduced in other games.

Coincidence? I think not. Not a rule yet, but the correlation is quite strong.

Sure, the difference with EvE is:

In WoW, the millions of players are divided into groups of roughly 2000 - 4000 players per server, with 0 ingame interaction with other servers.

On each server, game content is often instanced. Instancing: an exact copy of a dungeon is created for a small group of player, so that they don't impinge or interact with other players doing the same quest in a copy of the same dungeon.

In EvE on the other hand, we're all in the same universe.
A price change in Jita has influence throughout all market hubs.
A mission-runner can get ganked inside his mission area.
...



Yes, it's PvP. But PvP comes at different levels.
When items are bound to your character and can't be destroyed or looted permanently, the PvP is shallower than it is in EvE.
When you can run your quest without interference from other players, because the quest is instanced, than the specific mechanic of this quest is PvE. The ability to put your loot on the market in competition with other players makes the trading PvP, but the quest itself remains PvE.



It's just easier to tag any interaction with AI as PvE, even if there is a PvP component to it. It's also reasonable to separate a specific mechanic as PvP or PvE, when you knowingly ignore that said mechanic is part of a bigger system which makes the overall thing a PvP experience.

See my earlier example of missions (in high-sec):
Getting a mission from an agent = PvE
Flying to the mission location has a risk of being ganked = PvP
Shooting NPC ships and structures = PvE
Getting wrecks salvaged by a different player = PvP
Shooting the salvager in revenge = PvP
Getting Concorded = PvE
Getting your wreck looted = PvP

So, missioning in the safest place of high-sec = PvP, because there is at least 1 part of all the mechanics involved, that is PvP.
[/quote]



Being pedantic is not about taking the easier route, it's about being precise. Precision makes it easier to understand what's being talked about. It allows to put forward informed ideas rather than uninformed opinions.

Even the PvE servers are PvP under the definitions given here. Think about it. You mine a copper deposit, that's the same impact as mining veldspar in EvE. Noone else can mine the bit's of copper ore you miner. You sell copper ore on the market, that's exactly the same as selling velsdspar on the market. You kill a monster and get isk, that increase the amount of gold in the economy, no different from bounties in EVE.

This is the problem with broad definitions, that they can cover almost anything.

It may. It also may not. For the most part, the whole point is that it does not. The fact that it is instanced means you have already removed a form of interconnectedness and ensured that competition simply cannot occur, a design decision that is informed by the idea that such influence is considered undesirable.

No, it's being accurate and to the point. It's a direct, relevant, and entirely constructive counter to the position that the existence of PvE content suddenly makes the game not PvP. It speaks directly to the argument being made, and exposes it for the red herring it is.

No. He tried to set up a false dichotomy by saying that EVE is a sandbox game, as if this would in any way, shape, or form contradict the very simple fact that it is a PvP game through and though. The fact of the matter is that there is no such dichotomy or contradiction. Eve is a sandbox. Therefore it is a PvP game. He was also wrong about what this sandbox nature entails. Players cannot crete any PvE content, nor “anything else in-between” PvE and PvP. Players can only create PvP. This is hardly surprising since EVE is a full-time PvP game by virtue of being a multiplayer sandbox. The PvE content, in EVE as in pretty much every game, is created by the devs and offered purely for consumption. So context or no context, he was just flat-out wrong, both in the details and in the larger perspective he tried to create.

EVE's nature as a PvP game has nothing to do with the choices you make in the sandbox. It is deeply ingrained in every last facet of the game, and is inescapable. That's what sets EVE apart from most other MMOs: you have no choice as far as PvP goes. It is fundamental, unavoidable, omnipresent. That's the funny paradox about the whole sandbox concept: if you did have a choice, it wouldn't be a sandbox, even though choice is supposedly the cornerstone of a sandbox design.

Technically speaking, so is EVE. WoW has individual servers and those servers cross over into battlegroups and such. The markets are separated (like regional markets in EVE) but players can move things between them. When you go to a hub or levelling area, you see people from multiple servers (that's why they have the server name on the end of theirs). The only reason there's multiple battlegroups is because there's so many players. And note, EVE is actually 2 universes not counting the test servers.

Instanced content? That exists in EVE. Missions for example spawn the same content for everyone, well, either that or there's an awful lot of identical looking damsels needing to be saved.

Exactly what I was saying. Broadly defining EVE as PvP can be done to any game.

And no, it doesn't make the PvP shallower, it simply makes the losses less. Elite insures your ships and modules at 95%, but I wouldn't call the PvP in that shallower than EVE.

Sure, but then you end up with a situation like we have now, where everything is defined ad PvP, which is useless. The whole point of having categorisation is so that similar types of content can be grouped.

But the reason for being pedantic is to avoid the point being made, and so taking the easy route. And how is it more precise to say "everything is PvP"?

I'd say it's more precise to say:
Keeping PvP to it's classic definition of direct interaction with an opposing player, with PvE being direct interaction with NPCs, most PvP activities have an erratic reward structure which make them less appealing and less able to be performed without having to fund yourself through PvE. Improving the reward structure may increase the number of players actively participating in these activities, leading to increased retention of players with an interest in PvP.

EvE is no more a PvP game through and through than WoW.

PvE content is pretty much always created by the devs for consumption. That's why it's PvE. The devs in wow made all the raids and quests too.

And? That's no different from the inability to mine a single piece of veldspar that someone else has mined. You're still competing for resources that have a limited volume and a set respawn. If anything, that you can't mine the same node shows that it's more of a PvP activity.

But on either type of server, you impact other players whenever you do anything, thus under the same definition that is being used to claim that everything in EVE is PvP, everything in WoW is also PvP.

No, it does not.
You're confusing creating an instance of something and instancing as a way to section off the game world.

No, it can't, because almost every game will have tons of hard restrictions, limitations, and circumscription that excludes content from being PvP:able. In EVE, no such restrictions exist.

How is it useless? It's the truth, and it demonstrates very clearly what sets EVE apart on a fundamental design level from most other games, especially in the MMO domain.

You can still categorise content in EVE, but trying to separate stuff into PvE and PvP isn't a particularly constructive way of doing it. And no, there's no contradiction between these two claims — quite the opposite. We can still use the PvE/PvP split to differentiate EVE from other games, and the fact that everything in EVE ends up being PvP only highlights that we need different categories for the actual in-game content.

It is more precise because it doesn't incorrectly label activities as something they're not; it's not pedantic because it is the whole point, not something that avoids it; and it allows us to break out of a clichéd terminology that isn't suited for what we want to describe.

If you want to increase retention, in particular, this reliance on inaccurate terminology can only ever be harmful and suck in people who draw the wrong conclusions from what they associate with the terms. Keeping PvP to its actual meaning of denoting a conflict with other players lets us explain a very short sentence a fundamental truth about the game that lets players decide early on if it is something that might interest them.

Not enough people noting that EVE mainly tells its players that 'you dont need to be online for more than 15 minutes a day'....

Unless you do missions or mine, which are some of the most boring activites in the game at the moment. Not helping the issue either.

The tools CCP gives us to play the game are too restrictive and specific. Most of the game is played while not logged in.

How this is a bad thing is something i hope i don't have to explain.