EVE General Discussion

I'm not gonna lie, that actually sounds pretty relaxing and interesting.

I am surprised this has not been posted yet.

What is best in life?

edit: for a more modern take: https://youtu.be/4VRtRnWoFo0?t=17s

My corp mates. Without fun people to talk to, this game is too much like a job. After that, in no particular order, rage, tears, isk, fights, sex, candy, bourbon, scotch, and beer.


My wife, Tuxford resetting the wrong server, boredom.
Oh, and downtime.

SP accumulation, isk goals, exploration, and trying the different aspects of the game.

I log in just to read the Anti-Ganking chan some days.

I have a question. I think your perspective is in slight need of actualization.

PvE in pretty much every game, including EVE, already is instant gratification.
Why would you think otherwise?
It shares all the attributes with all the other PvE in other games.

You grind a little, get a little reward, level up.
You grind a little more, get a little more reward, level up.
You grind a lot more, get a lot more reward, level up.

Didn't people warn you not to play the game like all the others, because that's a fruitless approach?
Of course you got burnt out!

And what dods this part mean?

That's seriously contradictionary! Did you do PvE for seven years or did you actually play the game and explore every facet of it?

There is simply nothing else i am in mood doing after work. So i log in and hope to make as much as possible ISK in a short time

And on weekends ... just too lazy to do something else

You mean it being an act out of boredom?

Jenn-

I'll have to disagree with you on the fundamental concept of risk aversion... not necessarily on how you are using it though.

Risk Averse is risk averse, there is no middle ground. What you are calling 'Smart Gameplay' is 'Normal Human behavior'.

Humans by nature (like nearly every intelligent animal) are Risk Averse. Thus when people say that players are 'risk averse' and then proceed to lay out case x, y or z in order to support their play style it's actually all noise because you can't differentiate the levels without having a perspective and agenda that surrounds it.

There is no difference in EVE between a RISK AVERSE HiSec play style and a RISK AVERSE Lo/Null/WH play style. The only difference may be the level of Risk Aversion, but that's down to splitting hairs and ego elevation.

I'll say this again: Once you accept that all play styles are VALID, then the entire universe of EVE becomes very clear to evaluate fairly and completely. Risk Aversion is irrelevant, it's only a game requirement for tools that allow different players to play in the same sand box together.

Example:

I am moving my corp into Null Sec (Providence). I took a rookie ship to explore down there first. I contacted some locals and tried to make some friends there and seem to have succeeded. I went to move my first ship (my battlecruiser) and just had the misfortune to run into a roam from "The School of Hard Knocks". I had left my ship PVE Long Range fit, and when I was tackled by 3 ships on a gate (after being tailed for a while, yeah, I knew I was in trouble but they knew what they were doing, I didn't even know they weren't CVA because I didn't have the intel at the time to figure it out... I do now) the result was inevitable. I just made sure to get my pod out. It was a 150mil ISK lesson. I'm not going to whine and cry about it, I knew about the risk, I wasn't entirely prepared for how to do the move and they got a kill for that. It was my fault, don't fly what you can't afford to lose.

I am risk averse, I did more research and now fit my ship for PVP before I move it. I am risk averse and am more ready for the challenge the next time. Will I win? Probalby not, I'm not a great PVP player but at least I'll be prepared, see them coming and take them on more on my terms... or just dock and blow raspberries out the porthole of the station at them. I did say I was risk averse, but that doesn't mean I won't take on challenges.

They were risk averse too. They wouldn't have engaged my Talos with an equal amount of fire power and they made certain they had me solid before engaging me. That makes them smart, but also risk averse. The Cynabal alone would've been a match for me, but their risk aversion drove them to engage with more than just a BC, it would've been too fair of a fight. Had I gotten range on him, I would've likely won, so I don't blame them, but it doesn't make them any less risk averse.

The non risk averse person is very rare.

None of this dampens my motivation to play. Risk Aversion and Motivation to play would only be an issue in someone that finds no fun in conflict. That person will not last in EVE regardless of anything we or CCP does.

Yes, but that is exactly my point. We can't really use the term Risk Averse because it's actually part of human nature. Using it to judge or degrade others is pointlessly hypocritical. Even those willing to 'throw it all to the wind' still tend to do so with smarts and have some kind of a plan in mind. They are sill risk averse, but at the same time, a bit reckless.

So, kind of like the term PvE where in EVE it has something of a unique definition, Risk Averse really isn't a useful term either for describing any activity or play style with any degree of accuracy because the people where Risk Aversion is really an issue just don't want to play the game.

We are all risk averse to some degree. Welcome to humanity. Conquer your fears and go have fun!