These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Question: How is Hulkageddon not considered "griefing?'
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Xen Solarus
Furious Destruction and Salvage
#81 - 2012-01-23 17:21:34 UTC
Lexmana wrote:
Xen Solarus wrote:
Lexmana wrote:
sYnc Vir wrote:
A large part of the problem is the fact alot of null players don't understand that Eve isn't a pvp only game.

A large problem is that alot of highsec bears refuse to accept that this is a PvP only game. If you think otherwise, explain why it is even possible to target anyone in highsec ...


Well, that isn't true. I know players that play eve that have NEVER done pvp, and we're talking about players that have played for over 5 years. Plenty of industralists out there playing with spreadsheets, making isk and having the time of their life. Others mindlessly haul stuff from one place to another for profit, while others mindless shoot at npc's in missions.

Are you trying to say that producing ships, selling loot and playing the market is not PvP?


You do realise that pvp stands for player vs player right? As in, a player fighting against another player?

I don't deny that pvp is a big factor of eve, and certainly the biggest factor when considering the economy of eve. But its by far not the only factor. Feel free to go and look up the the way eve is advertised. You won't find massive PVP ONLY signs everywhere.

Here's an example:

BUILD, TRADE, CONTROL
"Are you a person who knows how to close a deal? Does competing in a marketplace with 2,000 transactions a minute pique your interest? Are you looking for a game where one can build a legacy as a financial market leader, CEO of a company, or even just the main guy to go to for the best arms deals in New Eden?"

All mmo's have both pve and pvp. Otherwise, you wouldn't attract all that many people. Not everyone likes exploding ships. Roll

Post with your main, like a BOSS!

And no, i don't live in highsec.  As if that would make your opinion any less wrong.  
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#82 - 2012-01-23 17:34:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Xen Solarus wrote:
You do realise that pvp stands for player vs player right? As in, a player fighting against another player?
You do realise that you're doing exactly that when producibg ships and going to the market, right?

Quote:
You won't find massive PVP ONLY signs everywhere.

Here's an example:

BUILD, TRADE, CONTROL
"Are you a person who knows how to close a deal? Does competing in a marketplace with 2,000 transactions a minute pique your interest? Are you looking for a game where one can build a legacy as a financial market leader, CEO of a company, or even just the main guy to go to for the best arms deals in New Eden?"
Your point might have worked better if you didn't quote something that makes the PvP aspect so obvious.

Quote:
All mmo's have both pve and pvp. Otherwise, you wouldn't attract all that many people. Not everyone likes exploding ships. Roll
…except that in EVE, PvP goes way beyond exploding ships. Here, there are exactly two things that are not a matter of PvP, and on their own, they do nothing. For any practical purpose, EVE has no pure PvE.
Lexmana
#83 - 2012-01-23 17:36:26 UTC
Xen Solarus wrote:
Lexmana wrote:
Xen Solarus wrote:
Lexmana wrote:
sYnc Vir wrote:
A large part of the problem is the fact alot of null players don't understand that Eve isn't a pvp only game.

A large problem is that alot of highsec bears refuse to accept that this is a PvP only game. If you think otherwise, explain why it is even possible to target anyone in highsec ...


Well, that isn't true. I know players that play eve that have NEVER done pvp, and we're talking about players that have played for over 5 years. Plenty of industralists out there playing with spreadsheets, making isk and having the time of their life. Others mindlessly haul stuff from one place to another for profit, while others mindless shoot at npc's in missions.

Are you trying to say that producing ships, selling loot and playing the market is not PvP?


You do realise that pvp stands for player vs player right? As in, a player fighting against another player?

I don't deny that pvp is a big factor of eve, and certainly the biggest factor when considering the economy of eve. But its by far not the only factor. Feel free to go and look up the the way eve is advertised. You won't find massive PVP ONLY signs everywhere.

Here's an example:

BUILD, TRADE, CONTROL
"Are you a person who knows how to close a deal? Does competing in a marketplace with 2,000 transactions a minute pique your interest? Are you looking for a game where one can build a legacy as a financial market leader, CEO of a company, or even just the main guy to go to for the best arms deals in New Eden?"

All mmo's have both pve and pvp. Otherwise, you wouldn't attract all that many people. Not everyone likes exploding ships. Roll


PvP is not restricted to combat. Playing the market is very much PvP and that is what makes it fun or do you think people would be attracted to play an NPC driven market too?

The fact that a lot of highsec carebears like to compete on the market by selling mission loot, minerals or ships they have produced makes them PvPers wether they like it or not. And in EVE there is no opt-out, everything is PvP. Even PVE in incursions or anomalies/belts is PvP since you can deny the competition what they want by taking it for yourself (duh!).
MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
#84 - 2012-01-23 18:00:05 UTC
If hairsplitting were "pvp"......

Clearly the Eve community needs to have some way to differentiate between two types of "pvp"; so that when a poster is referring to a "pvp" that is clearly intended to mean the pew pew type....other posters don't feel the urge to pedantically point out how everything is "pvp".

I propose the convention of PVP (uppercase) to indicate the pew pew, shoot 'em up interaction, and pvp (lowercase) for successfully undercutting your market competition, or mining competition, whatever.

I am not Prencleeve Grothsmore.
Xen Solarus
Furious Destruction and Salvage
#85 - 2012-01-23 18:30:56 UTC
Mental. If your an industrialist that makes ships/weapons etc then your certainly contributing to PVP, or more accurately, profiting from PVP, by no means is that directly you engaging in PVP. Otherwise the term PVE wouldn't exist in eve, or industrialists or miners, or people that play the market for that matter. They'd all be too busy with the pewpew. PVP isnt a term unique to eve, it's a term used in all mmo's to describe situations where players are fighting against other players. It's true that in eve, unlike other mmo's, the economy and most aspects are driven by players, by no means does that mean everyone is similtaniously engaging in PVP. I think you're being a bit pedantic here.

If everyone did PVP, then there would be no eve economy, as people would be too busy shooting eachother, and not spending time making stuff. The many different sides of eve coming together to make the whole makes the game possible. The only way i'd agree with you is if CCP switched off high-sec and made the game one giant free-for-all. But as it stands, carebears do what they do because PVP isn't their thing. If there wasn't an area like empire for them to play the way they want to play, then they'd just all unsub.

The fact that the majority of players in this game are not PVP players only strengthens this further.

But don't worry, if you don't agree, you can go sucicide gank some random and make yourself feel better. Roll

Post with your main, like a BOSS!

And no, i don't live in highsec.  As if that would make your opinion any less wrong.  
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#86 - 2012-01-23 18:31:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
MeestaPenni wrote:
Clearly the Eve community needs to have some way to differentiate between two types of "pvp"; so that when a poster is referring to a "pvp" that is clearly intended to mean the pew pew type....other posters don't feel the urge to pedantically point out how everything is "pvp".
That would be nice, except that the people trying to claim that they aren't PvPing are often trying to make a distinction where none exists.

They want to be excluded from pew-pew because, according to them, “they don't PvP” and they're just doing “their thing”. The problem is that they are PvPing, and that “their thing” has a definitive impact on their PvP opponents — they're just competing on their terms, and what's really happening is that someone else brings the fight over to an arena where it's on that other person's terms. As long as those self-proclaimed non-PvPers are allowed to PvP on their terms, others need to be able to change the arena.

The only useful distinction would be something along the lines of production vs. destruction, but it still needs to be noted that both of them are entirely done in competition with other players — it is always PvP.
Xen Solarus wrote:
Otherwise the term PVE wouldn't exist in eve, or industrialists or miners, or people that play the market for that matter. They'd all be too busy with the pewpew. PVP isnt a term unique to eve, it's a term used in all mmo's to describe situations where players are fighting against other players.
Bad news: EVE is a unique game, and the terms don't work the same here as they do in other games. The distinction comes from games where it actually is a difference between the two — that difference does not exist here. Strictly speaking, there is no PvE in EVE because the environment is never really an opponent — other players always are. You are always fighting against other players.

Sloppily, you could classify shooting rats as PvE, but since you're doing so in competition with other players — PvP — the term is inherently insufficient and pretty much incorrect. Just because people use the term doesn't mean it's actually applied to things that would qualify as PvE in other games. Industrialists, miners, and most definitely traders are 100% PvPers — there is quite literally nothing about their activities that could even remotely be considered PvE.
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#87 - 2012-01-23 18:43:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Ris Dnalor
Atticus Fynch wrote:
Exactly how does CCP define "griefing" and why isnt Hulkageddon not considered it?

Seriously.

CCP wrote:


A grief player, or "griefer," is a 1. player who devotes much of his time to making others’ lives miserable, in a large part deriving his enjoyment of the game from these activities while he2. does not profit from it in any way. Grief tactics are the mechanics a griefer will utilize to antagonize other players. At our discretion, players who are found to be 3. consistently maliciously interfering with the game experience for others may receive a warning, temporary suspension or permanent banning of his account.

This should not be confused with standard conflict that might arise between two (or more) players, such as corporation wars. The EVE universe is a harsh universe largely driven by such conflict and notice must be taken of the fact that 4. nonconsensual combat alone is not considered to be grief play per the above definition.

An example of grief play would be the so called "Can baiting" in starter systems. An experienced player drops a cargo container with some items in front of a station in a starter system and waits for a new player to take from it. The new player is flagged and promptly attacked and killed by the owner of the container. Doing the same in starter tutorial complexes is also considered grief play and will not be tolerated.


Responding to the underliney-bits.

1. Hulkageddon doesn't really have to take much time :)
2. Hulkageddon is potentially profitable in many ways. one is that people can speculate on the price of all things related to ice production here.
3. Hulkageddon is not maliciously interfereing with the game experience,
- - - because no space is intended to be safe. As long as the gankers do not avoid death by concord, it's WAI
4. Read this one twice. it's not grief play.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
Anke Eyrou
Hades Sisters
#88 - 2012-01-23 18:59:45 UTC
I do pvp ie as an idustrialist against other players trying to produce and sell my product cheaper. I also mine to try and save costs on the basic materials. I am against hulkageddon as I am just trying to mind my own business as a soloist. ( I mine in a hulk by the way).

My solution to hulkageddon as it is not going to be stoppable which should be built into the game if the victim has not tried to fight back is
A) the ganker has no rights to the wreck he destroyed nor should he have any rights to his own wreck once it has been destroyed by CCP.
B) ships destroyed by gankers should not drop any loot.
C) all wrecks including the gankers belong to the victim. Any theft that takes place by the ganker should result in him being flagged to the victim.

(not sure if c happens anyway.)

I did venture into lowest once but lasted 2minutes and have not been back since.

As an industrialist I intend to fight back by not putting my wares up for sale during hulkaggedon. I normally produce close on a 10,000,000 missiles a month and between 60 -70 rifters a month. I could with a holiday from eve Big smile.

Has it been decided when hulkageddon is anyway?

I expect to get this post deleted or locked. So much for freedom of expression.

Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#89 - 2012-01-23 19:29:21 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
People use the term griefing in situations where it obviously dosen't apply all the time. Mostly because they are WoW nerds who think that literally anything anyone does that they don't like is an active attempt to cause them to quit the game and kill themselves because obviously they are the centre of the universe and everything is about them.

I'm starting to like you.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Minta Contha
Emergent Entity
#90 - 2012-01-23 19:35:21 UTC
I'm a miner (I start so many posts this way!) and I don't consider Hulkageddon to be griefing, for the following reasons:
1. It's advertised. You KNOW there's an increased risk of beng blown up.
2. You can tank your mining vessel (at the expense of yield) to last long enough for Concord to turn up and save you in many situations - of course not always, but it can be done if you're willing to.
3. You can bring corpmates to protect you while you mine. If you're defenceless, that's your choice, and you increase the chances of being ganked. Bring a friend with a Basilisk and some shield maintenence bots, perhaps.
4. Most miners will not be affected by Hulkageddon. I have mined through a few of them now, including one occasion when Helicity Boson was in the system and I taunted him in local, and still I did not get attacked. Given the thousands of miners out there, the probability is quite low unless you spend 12 hours a day in the belts or are in certain places.
5. You can CHOOSE not to mine. This, to me is the critical difference that stops it being griefing - griefing is something you cannot escape from.

Personally I lie low in wormholes during the event. In there, every day is like Hulkageddon. You see any ship you don't know while mining, assume you're about to get shot Blink

My cooking is like my lovemaking - fast, greasy, and unsatisfying.
Feligast
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#91 - 2012-01-23 19:37:48 UTC
Bill Loney wrote:
Ninavask wrote:
simple answer: Loss of ingame assets =/= griefing. Humiliating/constant insulting/generally ruining someone's life over internet == griefing.

Plus they are getting paid for it while boosting botters/RMT.
It will only be scum, botters and RMT'ers left in the game soon, while all the half decent players are getting pushed out and all supported by the owners, nice 1.
There is only way for eve now with all this going on, making isk was hard enough as it is.


Someone said this very same thing.

In 2005.

EVE IS DYING
Serge Bastana
GWA Corp
#92 - 2012-01-23 19:42:42 UTC
Anke Eyrou wrote:

My solution to hulkageddon as it is not going to be stoppable which should be built into the game if the victim has not tried to fight back is
A) the ganker has no rights to the wreck he destroyed nor should he have any rights to his own wreck once it has been destroyed by CCP.
B) ships destroyed by gankers should not drop any loot.
C) all wrecks including the gankers belong to the victim. Any theft that takes place by the ganker should result in him being flagged to the victim.




This isn't what happens anyway and shouldn't ever be that way, that's just a sense of entitlement making you think that's a good idea. All the wrecks of the ships involved belong to the victim? What difference does it make if anyone looting from those wrecks was flagged to the victim, it's hardly likely that a lot of them will come back with a combat ship and try to defend their gains.

If you don't want your ship to drop any loot, self destruct it. Simples.

WoW holds your hand until end game, and gives you a cookie whether you win or lose. EVE not only takes your cookie, but laughs at you for bringing one in the first place...

MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
#93 - 2012-01-23 20:23:20 UTC
Tippia wrote:
MeestaPenni wrote:
Clearly the Eve community needs to have some way to differentiate between two types of "pvp"; so that when a poster is referring to a "pvp" that is clearly intended to mean the pew pew type....other posters don't feel the urge to pedantically point out how everything is "pvp".
That would be nice, except that the people trying to claim that they aren't PvPing are often trying to make a distinction where none exists.

They want to be excluded from pew-pew because, according to them, “they don't PvP” and they're just doing “their thing”. The problem is that they are PvPing, and that “their thing” has a definitive impact on their PvP opponents — they're just competing on their terms, and what's really happening is that someone else brings the fight over to an arena where it's on that other person's terms. As long as those self-proclaimed non-PvPers are allowed to PvP on their terms, others need to be able to change the arena.

The only useful distinction would be something along the lines of production vs. destruction, but it still needs to be noted that both of them are entirely done in competition with other players — it is always PvP.


I guess you missed the snarky part about the "pedantic" responses.

A distinction does exist; as you helpfully pointed out in the last sentence of your post.

What is wrong or illegitimate about an industrialist's desire to not engage in pew pew? And if they have a thing to do, why would their thing need scare quotes around it? Pew pew is the only game play that is nearly effortlessly thrust onto any player at any time....yet, a market trader can't yank a pew-pewer out of space and force him to make crappy trades.

If it's all equally "PvP".....it's imbalanced.

Quote:
As long as those self-proclaimed non-PvPers are allowed to PvP on their terms, others need to be able to change the arena.


So the demand is that pew-pewers can set "their terms" with impunity, but industrialist terms can be ignored? Let's turn it around...

As long as those self proclaimed PvPers are allowed to PvP on their terms, others need to be able to change the arena. The sentence has the same actors....presumably on equal footing as far as "PvP" goes......are both statements valid?



I am not Prencleeve Grothsmore.
Ziranda Hakuli
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#94 - 2012-01-23 20:43:04 UTC
1. Purposefully shooting or otherwise sabotaging your teammates in an online game.

2. In online gaming where one repeatedly killing the same individual or individuals over and over again, or camping their corpse to prevent them from retrieving it, or otherwise performing actions in a game to prevent the player from enjoying the game.

3. In online gaming, someone who takes pleasure in creating grief for an opponent via various "cheap" tactics.
Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
#95 - 2012-01-23 20:46:37 UTC
MeestaPenni wrote:

I guess you missed the snarky part about the "pedantic" responses.

A distinction does exist; as you helpfully pointed out in the last sentence of your post.

What is wrong or illegitimate about an industrialist's desire to not engage in pew pew? And if they have a thing to do, why would their thing need scare quotes around it? Pew pew is the only game play that is nearly effortlessly thrust onto any player at any time....yet, a market trader can't yank a pew-pewer out of space and force him to make crappy trades.

If it's all equally "PvP".....it's imbalanced.

There are ways to avoid getting shot, and even more ways to ensure your survival when you do. The thing is, most industrialists don't WANT to reduce their yields in order to avoid getting shot at. What's even more absurd is your claim that traders can't force others to trade...
Every time you buy something, every time you sell something, or put it up for contract, you're pretty much guaranteed to be dealing with a trader. The buy/sell orders in whatever hub you do your shopping at? Who do you think sets those prices? If I want, say, an ishtar, there are 2 ways I could go about getting one (well, 3 if I can find a corp with poor ship security in WH space Pirate ). The first is to buy one off a sell order, requiring that I deal with traders, bascially I'd be "yanked out of space to make a crappy trade". Surely I could set up a buy order, or gather the parts to make one myself, for cheaper than what the traders want, which is the second way to go about getting one: Become a trader/industrialist.

Oh and a "pew-pewer" can't do a damn thing to a market trader; stations are the only place in eve that are 100% safe.


MeestaPenni wrote:

So the demand is that pew-pewers can set "their terms" with impunity, but industrialist terms can be ignored? Let's turn it around...

As long as those self proclaimed PvPers are allowed to PvP on their terms, others need to be able to change the arena. The sentence has the same actors....presumably on equal footing as far as "PvP" goes......are both statements valid?

Industrialists CAN change the arena. Mine far from any hubs, mine in quiet nullsec and learn to warp off/cloak when neutrals show up, mine with a rokh instead of a hulk. Don't mine at belts + learn how to scan for probes. The people doing the shooting don't dictate the terms of the engagement, because they have to come to YOU in order to actually shoot you. YOU get to pick the location, the ship, and if you're paying attention even whether or not there will be an engagement at all. The fact that you (and indeed, most miners) choose NOT to dictate the terms of the fight is nobody's fault but your own.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#96 - 2012-01-23 21:40:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
It is true that all of EVE space is potentially dangerous, that is the nature of it's design. You are well aware of this when you start playing the game.

The person looking for combat is making conscious choices as to the level of difficult they are willing to put up with to get their desired result... that being combat.

The person looking to pursue a career that involves flying relatively defenseless craft (Hulks, Industrials, Covert Ops frigates) does the same thing (as far as choosing the area they wish to call home) but their combat objectives are to simply avoid combat instead of looking to engage in combat.

Both activities are combat related.
Both activities are fundamental to the concept of EVE being an inherently dangerous place.
None of these activities involve "Griefing" by any definition that has ever been applicable to this game.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ai Shun
#97 - 2012-01-23 21:53:07 UTC
Tippia wrote:
…except that in EVE, PvP goes way beyond exploding ships. Here, there are exactly two things that are not a matter of PvP, and on their own, they do nothing. For any practical purpose, EVE has no pure PvE.


I wish there was a Love button next to posts as well as a Like one.

MeestaPenni wrote:
What is wrong or illegitimate about an industrialist's desire to not engage in pew pew? And if they have a thing to do, why would their thing need scare quotes around it? Pew pew is the only game play that is nearly effortlessly thrust onto any player at any time....yet, a market trader can't yank a pew-pewer out of space and force him to make crappy trades.


And yet, an Industrialist expects the combat pilot to pay the prices they set for the goods on the market. Yes, the combat pilot has the option of shopping around, of producing it themselves. They can go without and wait for the price to drop. They can try just about anything to work around that form of PvP.

And equally, the Industrialist can use a hauling corp, hire mercenaries, fly safer during Hulkageddon or not mine for that period at all and do something else. They can also try just about anything to work around that form of PvP.

Both pilots have options. One pilot takes and uses his. The other doesn't so often and just comes to the forum Blink
Arctur Vallfar
Knights Adamant
#98 - 2012-01-23 22:01:14 UTC
Hulkageddon is a most interesting time. The fact that various pirate factions (perhaps only fleetingly in the spirit of their chosen profession) collaborate in an event to wreck as many mining vessels as possible is awesome. Mainly because I could see this kind of ridiculous thing actually happen assuming Humanity reaches such a spacefaring presence in a galaxy. The omnipotent CONCORD would certainly not be around to crash the party, only heightening the validity such pondering.

Regardless, others have pointed out that this is a PvP oriented game. You can be podded anywhere at any time when you click the undock button. Understand that this can happen. Accept that this can happen. Besides, such an infamous event should serve as more than fair warning to mining fleets traversing the space lanes. If you can't increase your defensive measures, be content with a 'vacation' in a station hanger, pay for protection or make so much isk that a few ganks won't bother your profits... then you should reconsider your line of work or MMO of choice.
MeestaPenni
Mercantile and Stuff
#99 - 2012-01-23 23:23:25 UTC
Ai Shun wrote:
And yet, an Industrialist expects the combat pilot to pay the prices they set for the goods on the market.


But the industrialist cannot force the pilot to pay his price, without undercutting his competitors prices and potentially his own profit; effectively losing that element of 'pvp'.

Here's the rub....the pew pew player has all the means needed to force other players to play on their terms. There is no genuine means for the industrial segment to do so....other than refusing to sell product of course, and you know that isn't going to happen. You mentioned hiring mercs, or haulers; with the level of ripoffs and scams in this game? Really? I don't trust a single other player in this game. And given the ease at which war decs can be avoided now....what's the point?

Again, there is no reciprocity in the relationship between the pew pew play style and the hauler/miner playstyle. All the hauler or miner can do at this point is get pissed because they must adjust and play on someone else's terms. The ball is completely in the pew pewer's court.

A real, usable, and effective bounty system will at least give an aggrieved industrialist some means to exact a measure of revenge and force the pew pew play style to make it's own concessions to another play style.

I have nothing against pew pewer's shooting industrialists. Shoot 'em up boys! But watch your back now, 'cause you've a serious bounty on your head and other players are hunting you.....and you don't have the increased security of high sec to protect you.

See how that works now? Everybody gets to play.

Do you get what I'm sayin' here?




I am not Prencleeve Grothsmore.
Ai Shun
#100 - 2012-01-23 23:32:26 UTC
MeestaPenni wrote:
[Again, there is no reciprocity in the relationship between the pew pew play style and the hauler/miner playstyle. All the hauler or miner can do at this point is get pissed because they must adjust and play on someone else's terms. The ball is completely in the pew pewer's court.


I don't think you are thinking this through enough. As an Industrialist, I have several options to avoid the players that try to pew pew me. Sometimes, yes, I do get caught. Usually because they are better at playing the game than I am. I am better than some others and manage to avoid them. I have so many options open to me, to carry on doing what I am doing. I am surprised you cannot see them or appear to be so unwilling to accept those options.

I refuse to be a victim and will control my own destiny in-game.

MeestaPenni wrote:
A real, usable, and effective bounty system will at least give an aggrieved industrialist some means to exact a measure of revenge and force the pew pew play style to make it's own concessions to another play style.


I don't disagree with that; I would fully support a non-abusable bounty system. And I quite like the idea of Transferable Kill-rights, especially if that can be done through a Contract to a Mercenary corporation. It would give me more tools to pay-back those who try and succeed to blow me up.