EVE General Discussion

You really don't get it though and are just picking spinets of what i said to support your argument.

You have started a new argument here by saying it is ok to uses a general word to replace a specific one. That was what the fruit and water analogies were about.

My main point is that playing a game is not game content. End of.



Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? And why people take offence at it? [/quote]

I did sound ridiculous because you misunderstood what i was saying... So i fixed it for you.

Swimming in water is not a general word for water.

See? You've completely changed what you were saying now - because you *know* you were wrong, and I was right.

As I said, I'm not changing sides with you - you picked the wrong side, you stay there.

Now shut up.

Well when a person who I think is a complete loser thinks I am a loser I take that as a compliment...

Also if you *must* keep arguing this with me - shoot me an eve-mail....we've already derailed this thread too far...

I don't think you're a loser Drac.

Just a liar.

Unfortunately through your lack of integrity you get continuously called out on your lies. If you just stuck to verifiable information, you'd have a lot better position to argue from. But facts seem somewhat inconvenient to many of your claims, though that doesn't stop you claiming to be able to reference devs, etc. when you can't, while calling for others to post figures and then squirming a way to pretend the figures are flawed.

**blinks slowly**

Holy Bob... What happened while I was snoozing?

---

Ok... Couple of things here.

First, basic dictionary definitions aren't going to cut it for jargon.

Second, Gaming jargon and EvE jargon isn't necesarrily the same thing.

Example : Tank.

It means something in gaming jargon: a focal point for damage and/or attacks as a noun, or carrying out the act of being the focal point for damage or attacks as a verb.

In EvE this word also has this meaning, but it can also mean how a ship is set up to deal with incoming damage/attacks (In general use an armor tank if you have more low slots than mid.), and even more recently the word has morphed to mean EHP in general (The Skiff has too much tank in Baltec's opinion.)

Never heard of any other game calling the armor that a character wears "tank".



The concept of Content follows in this path into EvE jargon. To me, and I don't think I'm alone in this, content for EvE means a 'New way to play EvE' regardless of the source, but the not rules themselves. And there's a distinction of just using the rules to play and creating a new way to play.

For example, I would NOT consider getting ganked in a retriever to be content, but the creation of organized suicide ganking I DO consider player made content. The first is business as usual, the second was the introduction of a whole new playstyle.

To me, the difference is in the act of creation in the artistic sense. The first uses existing ideas, the second created new ideas.
I think that creation makes all the difference. And I think that's what makes this definition vastly different (yet derived) from any dictionary definition and is close to the gaming "standard" but is more tailored to the unique game and community that is EvE.

--Gadget

Actually, the one saying that it is filled with liquid is a lot more accurate than the one saying it is filled with water.

-> A swimming pool is filled with water + chemicals which creates a solution which does not exactly qualify as Water
-> the person saying it is filled with liquid actually is the one who not making an incorrect statement (if one wants to be as pedantic as you are trying to be here)

Now let´s switch over to a more serious example:

So you say any player intereaction in a game is merely playing the game and not creating content.....

Situation 1:

Let´s say Player X creates an alliance that has the goal to destroy the amarrian empire and all the members of that alliance start attacking amarrian ships everywhere, no matter if the ships are controlled by players or by npcs.

-> By your statement that is not creating content.

Situation 2:

CCP creates a new NPC faction which randomly shows up all over space and attacks any amarrian ship they can find.

-> By your statement this is content.

Conclusion:

Despite both situations having the same effect on the environment you claim that, when it is done by players it is not content, but when CCP adds NPCs which do exactly the same thing the players are doing, it suddenly is content.


Also your comparison to WoW makes no sense as you are comparing 2 completly different game concepts: Theme Park vs. Sandbox.

PvP in a Theme Park surely qualifies as just playing the game, as it does not have any long term effect on the environment or economy. You just use the games features and so in this case you are not creating any content.

However in a persistant world like EvE the player actions do have a long term effect on the environment. Creating an alliance as in the example above changes the game world just as much as an expansion introducing a NPC faction does and thus players are actually able to create content.

Of course a single gank hardly qualifies as creating content as it has very little effect on the game world. The activitiy of ganking in general however is a tool to create content on a larger scale. So nerfing things like ganking leads to the restriction of content creation.

So you are saying EVE needs to add a down-vote option to the forums, and an option to sort posts by rating?

I would support that.

The whole "On average people who gank mining ships at least break even nearly every time - and often make a small profit."

If you had the experience with ganking that you claim, you'd know that this is incorrect.

The only reason we're even able to break even on the vast majority of ganks is that we are subsidized by the gracious EVE community.

If I invest 10 mil into a gank, I can expect to recover less than 10mil in loot (my own included) on average.

Unless you're super selective about your targets (read as "hardly ever ganking") then you can expect a slight loss over time.



Watching the back and forth over ganking arithmatic, one might think it was complicated or something. It's seriously not rocket science, people.

Alternatively you could just target miners more than a month old who fit t2 modules...

Or scan your targets...

Or just hit the haulers and become rich...