Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Not really. Some might, but most don't.

The attitude cuts both ways. For some the carebear has no rights at all. Because he does not play the gankbear game he is a nonperson. There is zero thought of balance, they exist only to provide targets that feel real rage, shed real tears. Even better when they can then turn around and claim it's the victim who is unbalanced and needs help. The ganker could get that exact same level of challenge from NPC freighters, but would not bother to hit a hauler spawn if it dropped out of warp dead on their optimal. It's not "providing challenge", "seeking challenge" or anything other the perverse satisfaction of sadistic urges at the expense of unconsenting fellow players.

How do we know? They say so themselves. They want to attack the weak and defenseless. They joke about collecting tears, even pass out a link to a mocking questionnaire so as to bask in their dickery as much as possible.. They won't go to areas of space where people look for fights, they want to stay in high sec and harass people who would rather not play that way, and it's funny because to these guys their prey are worth less than they are.

They take pride in finding ways around the rules that are supposed to control that behavior enough to make the game fun for the people they want to hurt, and in turn ensure that victims will be there in the future.

No, what is really being asked for in this case is that the rules high sec is supposed to work under actually do so. Supposedly if you avoid wars, criminal action, and killing people then when you are attacked (the slotting plain English definition, ffs) Concord will intervene. The average person does not care about loopholes and gimmicks, they care about end results. The end result is that they were prevented from entering warp for several minutes and then executed.

Personally I don't have a problem with the execution. But the lead up was stupid and not in keeping with the intent of high sec.

It's funny Kaarous, how you almost have a point, and then lose it amongst your hate filled babble.

Everyone has the right to play purely by making an account and logging in. It's a sandbox. All they want is for the rules to work as described. They don't like the way you play? Too bad, they are still people with the right to log in and play how they want in the sandbox. They aren't destructible terrain or any other fantasy you use to justify yourself. It's one of life's truths that just because you can do a thing does not mean you should. Of some relation is the thought that just because something is legal that does not make it moral. Embrace who you are, you don't have to pretend to be some kind of noble crusader for the right way to play to justify being a sociopathic dillweed.

Your only thought of balance is how to make it easier to make more people more miserable. You have said as much repeatedly in your rants about carebears and the abomination of concord

You act like you don't personally go out of your way to push buttons and provoke people into making those kinds of threats. I don't condone the threats, but I don't condemn people who have been intentionally provoked either. You are the worst sort of hypocrite, accusing others of crimes you pushed them to commit just so you can bring down even more pain on them by attempting to get them officially sanctioned in some way.

Non-consensual PvP isn't evil. However in certain areas of space it's supposed to be limited in certain ways, which you and your ilk intentionally look for loopholes and gimmicks to get around since those in your reach without them are more than willing to play the game in a way where you are the one who suffers the non-consent. Just look at the frothy spew you put up at the suggestion of letting you point anyone you want with just a criminal flag as the response. The very idea that someone be afforded a direct response has your shorts brown and your rage burning.

There is nothing wildly different from current mechanics in anything I suggested. The idea that you not be able to hide behind 'the game can't tell it's aggression' is hardly radical. The idea that self defense not subject someone to penalties and concord isn't radical. I suppose the idea that you actually face a one in a hundred chance of someone actually shooting back is pretty radical to you- after all your type are rarely as keen on taking it as they are dishing it out.

Also... You should stop calling people liars for disagreeing with you. There is more than one way to live in the world, and yours isn't any better or more truthful than any other.

Oh, and this.

It would not be self defense. Self defense is presently legal in highsec, but you do have to have an actual aggressive act made against your ship, not just a microwarp drive.

If you want the Mach dead, grow a pair, play the game right for once, and gank him.

It was an over-generalisation. My bad. There is a correlation though.


Who argues this? I've seen plenty of "carebear vs ganker" debate and have never seen anything suggesting this ideal.


Actually, I find the pro-gank croud are the only ones even aware that ganking has balance implications not only for ganker and victim, but indirect consequences, too.


Whoa. There are NPC freighters with billions of ISK of loot? Where?


It's shooting space ships in a game who's core feature is shooting space ships.

Also, the undock button is consent. Players can claim ignorance precisely once in their EVE careers.

That lead up is precisely in line with the intent of HiSec. It's the mechanism through which knowledgeable, prepared freighter pilots prosper and through which, greedy inept and lazy freighter pilots lose.

Losing it means ganking would continue, yes, but once again the inept would prosper and the players that prepare lose out, in addition to the newbro thanks to the haulage industry being devalued further thanks to a new oversupply.

This whole butthurt post (thats giving many a reader quite the laugh mind you), proves your as much of a "non player" as those risk adverse carebears you hate so much, that you'd actually launch into forum attacks on characters to 'legitimize" your ramblings about how only gankers are true players in a video game. Then again, your "true player" forum alt's killboard proves exactly that, doesn't it? A true playing ganker with 64 kills in 3 years. Amazeballs. /mindblown.

Nah, you dont "play eve"... you "play on the forums" and attack people who do log in to play a different version of a game, after which you like your posts with your alts. That, according to the "code", makes you little more than a scripted bot, as evident by your blatantly bot-aspirant behavior. If only the forums had captchas.

Please mr scripted salt factory, can we have some moar?

As you said, carebears always project.

Guess what?

Nothing I suggested affects the ability to gank autopiloted freighters, or really even unescorted freighters.

People *beg* for foolish carebears to shoot them when they are suspect.

You aren't afraid of that one in a million guy looking to defend himself actively are you?

I've already explained why it's a nerf right here.

I think you should sit down and think about your position here Mike. Where else in your human experience is it acceptable to threaten another person and their family with death, or call them vile homophobic, racial, or misogynistic slurs? I don't care how bad your day at work was, how mad you are at yourself that you weren't paying attention or angry with yourself that you went to make a sandwich with your mining barge in the belt, or how much gloating that ganker did in local, but you have no right to threaten me and my family over a video game. There is not one other interaction or social situation where I have seen rational, otherwise intelligent people, saying it is ok to "not condemn" homophobic slurs or death threats against fellow human beings until I started playing Eve. I find the bad behaviour that the disconnect a monitor and keyboard spawns to provide a fascinating, and a little sad, insight into human behaviour.

This lack of empathy and to be honest, civil behaviour, is at the core of the toxicity that bubbles up from time-to-time from the rabid carebear community. Thankfully, most Eve players get that this is just a video game; a complex, unique virtual world for sure, and one specifically designed to stir up emotions, but it is still just a video game. You are welcome to despise, trash-talk, hate, deride other players in-game, but it is never acceptable to personally insult or threaten the person behind the keyboard.

Mike, you need to stop enabling other players who engage in this toxic behaviour. This is a game we all play for fun. Remind people of that when someone starts with the personal insults and/or threats against gankers or anyone else, instead of just standing back and "not condemning" them because you think that behaviour is justified when a player loses an imaginary spaceship.