These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Crime & Punishment

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The 'Unfairness' of EVE

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Exaido
Fire Over Light
Astral Alliance
#101 - 2016-05-24 18:58:02 UTC
Maekchu wrote:
Exaido wrote:
I actually think this is a healthy conversation about Eve and to a lesser extent definitions, that aren't fixed - see tomatoes. To that extent, my position on Ganking has shifted, and shifted in line with the original premise of the discussion.

Definitions change based on proofs. The reason why the definition of a tomato changed, was because proof of the opposite was presented.

If you can give me proof that ganking does not involve two Player characters, then I will gladly call it whatever you prove it to be. But as it stands, all arguments show that ganking, alpha'ing stuff or bumping is "PvP".


Bumping that blocked the ability to go to warp has been removed as it did not allow resistance (versus). There is your proof, the tomato (bumping) ceased to be a fruit. There is my definition of a Gank.
Exaido
Fire Over Light
Astral Alliance
#102 - 2016-05-24 19:01:16 UTC
Maekchu. Don't think I don't appreciate the debate. I do.
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
#103 - 2016-05-24 19:02:20 UTC
So many electrons wasted that could've been used to make more pairs of spectacles, so sad...it's the senseless waste of it all that gets me. :'(

Perfection is a dish best served like wasabi .

Bumble's Space Log
Exaido
Fire Over Light
Astral Alliance
#104 - 2016-05-24 19:06:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Exaido
Bumblefck wrote:
So many electrons wasted that could've been used to make more pairs of spectacles, so sad...it's the senseless waste of it all that gets me. :'(


It's Obama. Not you of course. It's Obama's fault (TM).
Maekchu
Doomheim
#105 - 2016-05-24 19:07:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Maekchu
Exaido wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
Exaido wrote:
I actually think this is a healthy conversation about Eve and to a lesser extent definitions, that aren't fixed - see tomatoes. To that extent, my position on Ganking has shifted, and shifted in line with the original premise of the discussion.

Definitions change based on proofs. The reason why the definition of a tomato changed, was because proof of the opposite was presented.

If you can give me proof that ganking does not involve two Player characters, then I will gladly call it whatever you prove it to be. But as it stands, all arguments show that ganking, alpha'ing stuff or bumping is "PvP".


Bumping that blocked the ability to go to warp has been removed as it did not allow resistance (versus). There is your proof, the tomato (bumping) ceased to be a fruit. There is my definition of a Gank.

Bumping has not been removed, there just exist a limit on how long you can bump someone.

So yeah, since bumping still exists you have proved nothing. Also, even if bumping was removed it wouldn't change the definition of "bumping", it would just have been removed. Having something removed like that, doesn't change the definition of "PvP".

Anyway, we are going round in circles here and you don't seem to come up with any credible arguments. But it was entertaining. Gave me an insight into why some people truly believe the earth is flat. If you believe your opinion shapes the definition of reality, then reality can be whatever your mind can come up with.
Exaido
Fire Over Light
Astral Alliance
#106 - 2016-05-24 19:09:35 UTC
Maekchu wrote:
Exaido wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
Exaido wrote:
I actually think this is a healthy conversation about Eve and to a lesser extent definitions, that aren't fixed - see tomatoes. To that extent, my position on Ganking has shifted, and shifted in line with the original premise of the discussion.

Definitions change based on proofs. The reason why the definition of a tomato changed, was because proof of the opposite was presented.

If you can give me proof that ganking does not involve two Player characters, then I will gladly call it whatever you prove it to be. But as it stands, all arguments show that ganking, alpha'ing stuff or bumping is "PvP".


Bumping that blocked the ability to go to warp has been removed as it did not allow resistance (versus). There is your proof, the tomato (bumping) ceased to be a fruit. There is my definition of a Gank.

Bumping has not been removed, there just exist a limit on how long you can bump someone.

So yeah, since bumping still exists you have proved nothing. Also, even if bumping was removed it wouldn't change the definition of "bumping", it would just have been removed. Having something removed like that, doesn't change the definition of "PvP".

Anyway, we are going round in circles here and you don't seem to come up with any credible arguments. But it was entertaining. Gave me an insight into why some people truly believe the earth is flat. If you believe your opinion shapes the definition of reality, then reality can be whatever your mind can come up with.


Dude. Bumping to the point where someone can't offer resistance. Entering warp provides an exit / resistance.
Exaido
Fire Over Light
Astral Alliance
#107 - 2016-05-24 19:25:35 UTC
Maekchu wrote:
Exaido wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
Exaido wrote:
I actually think this is a healthy conversation about Eve and to a lesser extent definitions, that aren't fixed - see tomatoes. To that extent, my position on Ganking has shifted, and shifted in line with the original premise of the discussion.

Definitions change based on proofs. The reason why the definition of a tomato changed, was because proof of the opposite was presented.

If you can give me proof that ganking does not involve two Player characters, then I will gladly call it whatever you prove it to be. But as it stands, all arguments show that ganking, alpha'ing stuff or bumping is "PvP".


Bumping that blocked the ability to go to warp has been removed as it did not allow resistance (versus). There is your proof, the tomato (bumping) ceased to be a fruit. There is my definition of a Gank.

Bumping has not been removed, there just exist a limit on how long you can bump someone.

So yeah, since bumping still exists you have proved nothing. Also, even if bumping was removed it wouldn't change the definition of "bumping", it would just have been removed. Having something removed like that, doesn't change the definition of "PvP".

Anyway, we are going round in circles here and you don't seem to come up with any credible arguments. But it was entertaining. Gave me an insight into why some people truly believe the earth is flat. If you believe your opinion shapes the definition of reality, then reality can be whatever your mind can come up with.


I'll break it down for you.

PVP requires that people be able to apply resistance or response; that mechanism may not work but they have opportunity to do so. As offence (an attack), defence (a fit) or escape (a warp). When people cannot do any of the three they are being unfairly 'ganked' and that is not PVP. I have proved CCP removed a 'Gank' that fits that category. In other games being killed on-load would be a 'gank'.

I have also stated, that I don't consider an 'alpha strike' a gank, a gank is not simple numerical superiority, it shares similarities because the person cannot resist the mass of damage. We're talking also about 'fairness' in PVP, and again that circles back to the ability to apply a resistance or response.

And yes it has been entertaining.
Mike Adoulin
Happys Happy Hamster Hunting Club
#108 - 2016-05-24 19:30:02 UTC
Nitshe Razvedka wrote:
rabblerabble



*chews sandwich*

Who are you again?

Why are you relevant?

I forget.

Are you a furry? I think you're in the wrong topic area.

*nomnomnom*

Everything in EVE is a trap.

And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)

You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.

Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.
Nitshe Razvedka
#109 - 2016-05-24 19:43:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Nitshe Razvedka
Mike Adoulin wrote:
Nitshe Razvedka wrote:
rabblerabble



*chews sandwich*

Who are you again?

Why are you relevant?

I forget.

Are you a furry? I think you're in the wrong topic area.

*nomnomnom*



You started munching that sandwich at 1651 hrs.ShockedSad


AttentionYour ears are red with steam rising off the tops.Attention

Go back to work and.......

.........Be happy Mikey your proctologist did find Lemmiwinks.

Thieving pirates discuss INTEGRITY; Anarchist gankers give us LAWS; and Whoring merc's cry then blow off clients with INSULTS.

Up is down and down is up in the C&P Forum.
Nitshe Razvedka
#110 - 2016-05-24 19:51:16 UTC
Exaido wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
Exaido wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
Exaido wrote:
I actually think this is a healthy conversation about Eve and to a lesser extent definitions, that aren't fixed - see tomatoes. To that extent, my position on Ganking has shifted, and shifted in line with the original premise of the discussion.

Definitions change based on proofs. The reason why the definition of a tomato changed, was because proof of the opposite was presented.

If you can give me proof that ganking does not involve two Player characters, then I will gladly call it whatever you prove it to be. But as it stands, all arguments show that ganking, alpha'ing stuff or bumping is "PvP".


Bumping that blocked the ability to go to warp has been removed as it did not allow resistance (versus). There is your proof, the tomato (bumping) ceased to be a fruit. There is my definition of a Gank.

Bumping has not been removed, there just exist a limit on how long you can bump someone.

So yeah, since bumping still exists you have proved nothing. Also, even if bumping was removed it wouldn't change the definition of "bumping", it would just have been removed. Having something removed like that, doesn't change the definition of "PvP".

Anyway, we are going round in circles here and you don't seem to come up with any credible arguments. But it was entertaining. Gave me an insight into why some people truly believe the earth is flat. If you believe your opinion shapes the definition of reality, then reality can be whatever your mind can come up with.


I'll break it down for you.

PVP requires that people be able to apply resistance or response; that mechanism may not work but they have opportunity to do so. As offence (an attack), defence (a fit) or escape (a warp). When people cannot do any of the three they are being unfairly 'ganked' and that is not PVP. I have proved CCP removed a 'Gank' that fits that category. In other games being killed on-load would be a 'gank'.

I have also stated, that I don't consider an 'alpha strike' a gank, a gank is not simple numerical superiority, it shares similarities because the person cannot resist the mass of damage. We're talking also about 'fairness' in PVP, and again that circles back to the ability to apply a resistance or response.

And yes it has been entertaining.





WELL DONE YOU GOOD THING!!!!! sometimes you have to bash ganker heads together to make them see sense. (personally I don't care if they see sense, just like seein their brain goo)

Appears Exaido's argument has carried the day. Hip Hip HUSSAR!!

Thieving pirates discuss INTEGRITY; Anarchist gankers give us LAWS; and Whoring merc's cry then blow off clients with INSULTS.

Up is down and down is up in the C&P Forum.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#111 - 2016-05-24 20:53:14 UTC
So this is about what PVP is, eh? I'll just leave this here then.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Bing Bangboom
DAMAG Safety Commission
#112 - 2016-05-24 21:08:32 UTC
Not only is ganking PvP, its ELITE PvP. Who says so? James 315 says so and as the leader of the New Order of Highsec he's a lot more believeable than some forum alt hamster who's bushido requires a combination of leather gloves slapped across the face and meeting at dawn. Except they are fine with blobbing.

And the reason CCP modified bumping wasn't because they analyzed it and it didn't meet the secret CCP definition of PvP. They nerfed it because CODE. and Miniluv had gotten so good at it that no freighter could get through the Uedama pipe if loyalanon and friends decided they weren't. Even AFTER all the nerfs the devs threw at freighter ganking before that.

Ganking, for a purpose, is power projection. The New Order ganks in order to exert control over highsec. You can debate how effective we are. I would say that the bumping nerf proves our power but you might want to retain some shred of dignity and go down swinging by denying it. But you cannot deny its why we do it.

Welcome to another Code relevance thread. You just can't avoid talking about it.

Highsec is worth fighting for.

By choosing to mine in New Order systems, highsec miners have agreed to follow the New Halaima Code of Conduct.  www.minerbumping.com
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#113 - 2016-05-24 22:16:30 UTC
Exaido wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
Exaido wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
Exaido wrote:
I actually think this is a healthy conversation about Eve and to a lesser extent definitions, that aren't fixed - see tomatoes. To that extent, my position on Ganking has shifted, and shifted in line with the original premise of the discussion.

Definitions change based on proofs. The reason why the definition of a tomato changed, was because proof of the opposite was presented.

If you can give me proof that ganking does not involve two Player characters, then I will gladly call it whatever you prove it to be. But as it stands, all arguments show that ganking, alpha'ing stuff or bumping is "PvP".


Bumping that blocked the ability to go to warp has been removed as it did not allow resistance (versus). There is your proof, the tomato (bumping) ceased to be a fruit. There is my definition of a Gank.

Bumping has not been removed, there just exist a limit on how long you can bump someone.

So yeah, since bumping still exists you have proved nothing. Also, even if bumping was removed it wouldn't change the definition of "bumping", it would just have been removed. Having something removed like that, doesn't change the definition of "PvP".

Anyway, we are going round in circles here and you don't seem to come up with any credible arguments. But it was entertaining. Gave me an insight into why some people truly believe the earth is flat. If you believe your opinion shapes the definition of reality, then reality can be whatever your mind can come up with.


I'll break it down for you.

PVP requires that people be able to apply resistance or response; that mechanism may not work but they have opportunity to do so. As offence (an attack), defence (a fit) or escape (a warp). When people cannot do any of the three they are being unfairly 'ganked' and that is not PVP. I have proved CCP removed a 'Gank' that fits that category. In other games being killed on-load would be a 'gank'.

I have also stated, that I don't consider an 'alpha strike' a gank, a gank is not simple numerical superiority, it shares similarities because the person cannot resist the mass of damage. We're talking also about 'fairness' in PVP, and again that circles back to the ability to apply a resistance or response.

And yes it has been entertaining.

The regular gankee doesn't get bumped.
So he can still warp out (which is his resistance)
So if the miner can warp away, your whole rabble is irrelevant :)

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Exaido
Fire Over Light
Astral Alliance
#114 - 2016-05-25 05:11:18 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:

The regular gankee doesn't get bumped.
So he can still warp out (which is his resistance)
So if the miner can warp away, your whole rabble is irrelevant :)


No one gets ganked AFK. Under any condition. They were reckless.

If miner is AFK. They were not present to defend themselves. Miner failed.
If the miner doesn't tank his ship, have a flight of light drones. Miner failed.
If the miner rolls over and dies without making an effort to escape. Miner failed.

Being bubbled in low sec and alpha struck. Lack of preparation.
Being alpha-struck in FW coming through a gate. Lack of preparation.

If a player fails to prepare, to take precautions. Is it a gank?
Sasha Nemtsov
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#115 - 2016-05-25 05:20:01 UTC
Dom Arkaral wrote:

So if the miner can warp away, your whole rabble is irrelevant :)


Precisely. D-Scan.

minerbumping

New Order Audio Archive

NEW! MinerBumping Video Vault
Saeger1737
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#116 - 2016-05-25 05:25:07 UTC
Instead of arguing over the morality of ganking ask yourself why the the gankers ganks the gankie in the first place? Is it for pure Gankidom, that the gankers not only gank his ship but gank the gankie 's wallet as well? Is flying a freighter or mining that boring that the gankers would rather gank himself IRL then touch a mining ship? At the the end of mining, when the gankie has become bored with it enough doesn't the gankie just become the gankers and thus completing the cycle of GANK?

MERC WITH A MOUTH, Send me DPS and my fleet will double it back! Special offer!
Dom Arkaral
Bannheim
Cuttlefish Collective
#117 - 2016-05-25 09:23:58 UTC
Exaido wrote:
Dom Arkaral wrote:

The regular gankee doesn't get bumped.
So he can still warp out (which is his resistance)
So if the miner can warp away, your whole rabble is irrelevant :)


No one gets ganked AFK. Under any condition. They were reckless.

If miner is AFK. They were not present to defend themselves.

You invalidate your own argument... Gg

There's nothing left to argue about

Tear Gatherer. Quebecker. Has no Honer. Salt Harvester.

Broadcast 4 Reps -- YOU ARE NOT ALONE, EVER

Instigator of the First ISD Thunderdome

CCL Loyalist
Morgan Agrivar
Doomheim
#118 - 2016-05-25 11:10:16 UTC
You know what is absolutely amazing?

This thread is still alive due to its irrelevance. You will never convince the other that you are correct. Let us just get one true fact in and hopefully the ISD will close this thread.

Eve is PvP.

That is all. Please return your seats to its full and upright position and make sure to take your luggage with you.
Nitshe Razvedka
#119 - 2016-05-25 15:44:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Nitshe Razvedka
The Duke said: "There are real men, an all the rest just smoke pole..."


In Eve there are REAL PvPers the rest are just ganking with themselves.



John Wayne would roll over in his grave if he saw this pisss weak entitled generation.





God rest his soul o7

Thieving pirates discuss INTEGRITY; Anarchist gankers give us LAWS; and Whoring merc's cry then blow off clients with INSULTS.

Up is down and down is up in the C&P Forum.
lollerwaffle
Perkone
Caldari State
#120 - 2016-05-26 14:47:01 UTC
ITT: OVER 9000 definitions of 'PVP'