These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE New Citizens Q&A

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

First post First post First post
Author
John FlyingTrucks
Perkone
Caldari State
#81 - 2016-08-26 17:31:34 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:
...Everyone can scam - and so can you

* Scamming and unethical behavior some would consider griefing is not only allowed, it is encouraged and rewarded by the game mechanics.


I'd like to focus on that one little segment, to demonstrate an area where CCP is seemingly at cross purposes with itself: Citadels as the desired structure to replace NPC stations as market hubs with fees being already increased at NPC stations as a way of encouraging people to move their trade over to citadels.

Recently, it became possible to create courier contracts to citadels. The instant a courier accepts the contract and puts up the collateral for it, the station owner can change the access control list to deny the courier, or all pilots from docking. This results in the courier either voluntarily failing the contract and losing the collateral, or the contract issuer waiting out the contract timer, and then failing the contract themselves to collect the collateral.

Side point: Many of these citadels used for scam contracts are set up with a name mimicking/impersonating an NPC entity and station name, in violation of point 8 in the EVE Online - Terms of Service.

As a courier, I won't take contracts I don't have reasonable confidence that I'll complete successfully (seriously, why would I?) and currently, with the situation as it is, I have zero confidence in courier contracts to citadels and won't accept them.

How are you going to get citadels to be successful replacement market hubs to existing NPC stations if the game mechanics undermine couriers' confidence and trust like this?

Messenger Of Truth
Butlerian Crusade
#82 - 2016-08-26 20:08:20 UTC
Yeah the chance of citadels replacing NPC stations is very low while they're a scammer's wet dream.

If CCP do this deliver from tethering range thing they've talked about then it should work out ok.

Trade Hub Price Checker: stop.hammerti.me.uk/pricecheck

Visit "Haulers Channel" in game for all matters courier-related.

Structure name/system API: stop.hammerti.me.uk/api

Kane Kuchera
White Fang Militia
Blades of Grass
#83 - 2016-08-29 10:41:38 UTC
Solu Terona wrote:
Winter Archipelago wrote:
CCP Phantom wrote:
Skills that take less than 1 day to train are short skills. Over one week is long.

Oh, my sweet summer child...

Logi V pilots unite!

Also caps.



Fleet Command V pilots unite.
Alessienne Ellecon
Doomheim
#84 - 2016-08-30 16:04:19 UTC
I, too, disagree with "don't fly what you can't afford to lose". As I mentioned in the twitch chat during the Battle of Nalvula, if everyone followed that rule, a lot of newbies would be stuck in T1 frigates for a long time.

OP forgot some other valuable pieces of advice:

Never, ever, EVER carry PLEX anywhere. Same goes for skillgoo.

And don't give in to the New Order of Highsec!

"CONCORD are the space cops. If you attack someone in a high-security solar system, CONCORD will commit police brutality." - Encyclopedia Dramatica

If EVE is a PvP game, then Anti-Ganking is emergent gameplay.

Jade Voice
Pavillon Rouge
#85 - 2016-09-01 10:49:58 UTC
First time i read a post based upon a such completely biased and idyosincratic point of view about this game.


- Never grant corporation rights to stuff you can't afford to lose either. No exceptions
- People offering free stuff? Probably traps. Be cautious.
- If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Paranoia pays off here. Double-check everything.
- Scamming and unethical behavior some would consider griefing is not only allowed, it is encouraged and rewarded by the game mechanics
- There is no such thing as "a fair fight" or "an unfair fight". There's only a fight. Circumstances are irrelevant.


Tyvm to tell us how we have to play this game and to affirm that we shouldnt be confident ("no exceptions") even with others players who are now our friends after a long time we play with them ....

happily i don't live in the game that CCP Phantom or any others CCP employees wan't for me but in the game i decided to build in their game. And there's a HUGE difference betwwen the two versions of this game.

- In my own game i have a lot of friends/ in their game we are all foe and alone.
- In my game I trust my friends and they trust me / in their game we spent our time to be anxious and suscpicious each others.
- In my game 99% of my friends will never even think about betray me or to betray their others friends / In their game it's impossible to build any community cause all my corpmates want to stole my assets or to gank me.
- In the game i have build in Eve i can tell to my friends irl or to their childrens to come and to have fun / in the game that ccp wan't for us I will never invite any of my friends and certainly not their childrens cause most my friends irl and more genreally most of the ppl just don't wan't to play a game where u HAVE to roleplay a scammer, a grieffer, a suicide ganker, a cloacky perma-camper and so on ...

In summary, we - me and my game's friends - and that guy of CCP who wrote this post we really don't share the same game's values, but he still affirm that his conceptions of the game are the "golden rules" of Eve ?

No, it's not, it's just the conceptions of the CCP staff certainly not the credo of the majority of the players of Eve ... So, please : stop to tell us how to play our game !

Jade

PS : And last but not least, is it possible that programers or ppl from CCP's marketing make a less frequent usage for a mere game purposes of words which refer to concepts that they really don't understand such as "paranoia", and stop in the same time to encourage ppl to adopt a behaviour which is a real and heavy disease irl ? ... let the use of these register of words to real life and to competent ppl - as clinicians or psy - and keep yourself in your domains of competence : computing and gaming ...

PPS : and sry for my approximative english ;)


James Zimmer
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#86 - 2016-09-01 15:06:48 UTC
One thing I would add, which seems counter to everything else, but is vital: This is a social game, take risks and trust people, it's more enjoyable to lose to a scam occasionally than to fly alone perpetually.
Akatsuki Hikage
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#87 - 2016-09-01 20:18:43 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:
[center]

You will lose stuff, don't worry!

* If you lose stuff, it's almost always your fault. Really, only yours.


・So, kindly ask the victor what you could have done better.
Akatsuki Hikage
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#88 - 2016-09-01 20:20:07 UTC
James Zimmer wrote:
One thing I would add, which seems counter to everything else, but is vital: This is a social game, take risks and trust people, it's more enjoyable to lose to a scam occasionally than to fly alone perpetually.


I like that!
Temujin Nardieu
Know Your Neighbors Emporium
#89 - 2016-09-01 22:12:15 UTC
Play long enough and a one week skill is a short skill
Blitz Hacker
The Mythically Intoxicated
Solyaris Chtonium
#90 - 2016-09-01 23:25:40 UTC
Liam Geo wrote:
In space, no one can hear you whine Lol

Not true; I hear you whine I'll be back all week long with buckets for the tears, and probably a couple more friends for the 'lulz' :P
Blitz Hacker
The Mythically Intoxicated
Solyaris Chtonium
#91 - 2016-09-01 23:26:31 UTC
Temujin Nardieu wrote:
Play long enough and a one week skill is a short skill

Yeah.. meanwhile JDC 5/TWR 5 :PI think by this time you just stop caring and are half way on the road to 'bittervet' :P
DZazter
Project X3
Silent Infinity
#92 - 2016-09-02 11:07:22 UTC
Hehe Yep
Jasmine Deer
Perkone
Caldari State
#93 - 2016-09-02 13:39:39 UTC
Jade Voice wrote:


In summary, we - me and my game's friends - and that guy of CCP who wrote this post we really don't share the same game's values, but he still affirm that his conceptions of the game are the "golden rules" of Eve ?

No, it's not, it's just the conceptions of the CCP staff certainly not the credo of the majority of the players of Eve ... So, please : stop to tell us how to play our game !

Jade



I followed a link from the DEV where he posted this to provide some context :

Trying to come up with a any set of rules for EVE Online is not only difficult, but almost impossible. That said, the community (and especially Akita T, thank you!) were able to compile some solid, good guidelines based on years of experience.

So , don't take these "rules" as commandments set in stone. You seem to have found your own set of rules which work so good for you, and makes sense if everyone does the same.
Jade Voice
Pavillon Rouge
#94 - 2016-09-05 10:01:52 UTC
Jasmine Deer wrote:
Jade Voice wrote:


In summary, we - me and my game's friends - and that guy of CCP who wrote this post we really don't share the same game's values, but he still affirm that his conceptions of the game are the "golden rules" of Eve ?

No, it's not, it's just the conceptions of the CCP staff certainly not the credo of the majority of the players of Eve ... So, please : stop to tell us how to play our game !

Jade



I followed a link from the DEV where he posted this to provide some context :

Trying to come up with a any set of rules for EVE Online is not only difficult, but almost impossible. That said, the community (and especially Akita T, thank you!) were able to compile some solid, good guidelines based on years of experience.

So , don't take these "rules" as commandments set in stone. You seem to have found your own set of rules which work so good for you, and makes sense if everyone does the same.


Jasmine, I understand your statement and i would be of course agree with you if the name of the post was "8 golden rules that a [small] part of the community of Eve agreed with" or something like this, and if the quote you mention about the "almost impossibility" to come up with a set of rules for Eve Online was clearly express in the post itself and not indirectly in another post.

But it's not the case.

The title is "8 golden rules for Eve Online" which is an affirmation by a dev that these rules are the real rules of eve, and i saw no comments of that dev about the fact that some players may be [strongly] disagree with this point of view.

In these circumstances and in absence of any kind of nuance in the original dev post, i fell free to express my own feelings about these "golden rules" that CCP wan't to decreet, and to ask them to stop to tell us how to play our game.

Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#95 - 2016-09-05 23:42:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Ralph King-Griffin
Mate, step back from the keyboard, calm down, and stop flinging vitriol at a man doing his best to inform you.
was in response to an incinerated post, see below
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#96 - 2016-09-06 03:04:19 UTC
31. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.

CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, “outing” of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties.

Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts.


Post Removed for the above reason.

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE mails about forum moderation.

Shallanna Yassavi
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#97 - 2016-09-06 04:54:06 UTC
These aren't so much "rules" as "guidelines you would be dumb to not follow."

Not following these guidelines is how you set yourself up to faceplant hard.

A signature :o

Mraow Mreow
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#98 - 2016-09-07 13:53:02 UTC
maybe the most useful guidelines to a new players (and even for old ones).

the truth of those are so striking that it should be cited on the character choose screen.
Marcus Binchiette
Federal Vanguard
Evictus.
#99 - 2016-09-12 01:32:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Marcus Binchiette
CCP Phantom wrote:
Consent to PvP

* You consent to PvP when you click "undock".
* You are not safe in 1.0 security space. CONCORD is there to punish, not to protect. Get used to the idea.
* In most cases, the only way to be 100% safe from aggression inside the game is to be docked in a station. Being cloaked in a secret safespot could work too.

Unfair circumstances?

* There is no such thing as "a fair fight" or "an unfair fight". There's only a fight. Circumstances are irrelevant.
* Just because you can fly something doesn't mean you should.


CCP Phantom,

While much of this is wise advice and I appreciate the sentiment. I must contend with these particular points above; not because I think 'griefing' should not be done. But rather because it seeks to legitimise it morally. As there are two different forms of PvP. Consenting and non-consenting PvP... I completely reject your initial premise that undocking implies consent to all manner of PvP, because, I reserve full discretion in regard to my own consent - and regard anything less than this as an infringement upon my own empowerment.

By this I do not mean to say that I would impose upon mine-bumpers, suicide gankers, scammers, and thieves to discontinue their deeds. What I mean to say is that we should not buy into the notion that these are moral or ethical behaviours. We should not buy into the notion that we ought to congratulate or respect any such persons. As I reserve full discretion in this matter also... Such players are designated as criminals for a reason - and I don't believe it proper or acceptable to lessen the implications of this.

The reason why high sec space was created was so that players would have an environment to pursue PvE without the full impacts of highly adversarial PvP. I hold to the ideal that if a player is paying money to play the game, then, they should be able to play the game however they choose. Should such players which to engage in PvE then should they not be allowed to do so?

In fact, there is a certain degree of cowardice in fighting a non-consenting opponent. Because, such players manipulate the terms of their PvP actions within a narrow frame. By essentially attacking their victim's livelihood - and limiting their means of accumulating the war materiel necessary to fight consenting PvP battles. Yet, should the tables be turned, and these criminals find their own livelihoods threatened they would quickly discover what a bitter experience this could be.

Essentially, just because an action is possible does not mean that it ought to be regarded as acceptable. Futhermore, the nature of PvP within the EVE universe does not preclude the possibility of counter PvP, such as: Declaring War on criminal gangs, Bounty Hunting, and Counter-Piracy. Should the law-abiding folk of New Eden rally to the cause of giving these greifers a taste of their own medicine, we could consign these criminals to null space where they belong.
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#100 - 2016-09-12 01:59:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Marcus Binchiette wrote:
CCP Phantom wrote:
Consent to PvP

* You consent to PvP when you click "undock".
* You are not safe in 1.0 security space. CONCORD is there to punish, not to protect. Get used to the idea.
* In most cases, the only way to be 100% safe from aggression inside the game is to be docked in a station. Being cloaked in a secret safespot could work too.

Unfair circumstances?

* There is no such thing as "a fair fight" or "an unfair fight". There's only a fight. Circumstances are irrelevant.
* Just because you can fly something doesn't mean you should.


CCP Phantom,

While much of this is wise advice and I appreciate the sentiment. I must contend with these particular points above; not because I think 'griefing' should not be done. But rather because it seeks to legitimise it morally. As there are two different forms of PvP. Consenting and non-consenting PvP... I completely reject your initial premise that undocking implies consent to all manner of PvP, because, I reserve full discretion in regard to my own consent - and regard anything less than this as an infringement upon my own empowerment.

By this I do not mean to say that I would impose upon mine-bumpers, suicide gankers, scammers, and thieves to discontinue their deeds. What I mean to say is that we should not buy into the notion that these are moral or ethical behaviours. We should not buy into the notion that we ought to congratulate or respect any such persons. As I reserve full discretion in this matter also... Such players are designated as criminals for a reason - and I don't believe it proper or acceptable to lessen the implications of this.

The reason why high sec space was created was so that players would have an environment to pursue PvE without the full impacts of highly adversarial PvP. I hold to the ideal that if a player is paying money to play the game, then, they should be able to play the game however they choose. Should such players which to engage in PvE then should they not be allowed to do so?

In fact, there is a certain degree of cowardice in fighting a non-consenting opponent. Because, such players manipulate the terms of their PvP actions within a narrow frame. By essentially attacking their victim's livelihood - and limiting their means of accumulating the war materiel necessary to fight consenting PvP battles. Yet, should the tables be turned, and these criminals find their own livelihoods threatened they would quickly discover what a bitter experience this could be.

Essentially, just because an action is possible does not mean that it ought to be regarded as acceptable. Futhermore, the nature of PvP within the EVE universe does not preclude the possibility of counter PvP, such as: Declaring War on criminal gangs, Bounty Hunting, and Counter-Piracy. Should the law-abiding folk of New Eden rally to the cause of giving these greifers a taste of their own medicine, we could consign these criminals to null space where they belong.
Eve is a PvP game, hisec is as much a PvP area of the game as any other by design.

New Player FAQ (p21) wrote:
Furthermore, as we mentioned previously, once you enter New Eden you must consider every action you take as a form of PvP since this is the core game concept. In the asteroid field you’re competing with other pilots to obtain resources; you may also have to defend against ore thieves. On the market you battle for control of the economy in certain areas; for the supply and demand of your products versus other aspiring tycoons. On the battlefield you may fight for glory, for money, or for the right to rule whole areas of space.


CCP Phantom is correct, by playing a PvP game you consent to PvP; the legal term is implied consent.

Implied consent
n. consent when surrounding circumstances exist which would lead a reasonable person to believe that this consent had been given, although no direct, express or explicit words of agreement had been uttered.

The surrounding circumstances being that Eve is a PvP game, thus leading any reasonable person to believe that if you're logged in, you're here for some kind of PvP.

Implied consent also exists in the real world, for example the action of driving a motor vehicle on a public road implies that you have agreed to submit to chemical tests of your breath, blood, or urine to determine alcohol or drug content, if asked to do so by a law enforcement officer.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack