EVE General Discussion

Save it from what threat? Keep it in what state?

The code is nothing at all

THIS is what I think takes the game too seriously.

Sure, EVE is a place where a lot of people find some kind of self-validation by being assholes. But other than showing up at fanfest they have only pseudonymous fame.

It's fair to say that people find self-validation in good acts too—kindness, generosity—if you want to call that greed, that's fine. Greed is good when it produces good (and it's not good if it's at the expense of another), greed is not good when it causes destruction.

I'm beginning to see a bifurcation of responses, and an inherent contradiction. So much talk about EVE comes with the assumption that it's a zero-sum game, when it quite obviously is not. But seeing it that way limits what you can see in the game. The contradiction is saying it's a sandbox, then saying you can only play it like a zero-sum game.

Not everyone plays EVE with the pretentious of being antisocial in a way they couldn't muster in real life. Players are also in the game as a distraction from the corrosion of everyday life. Exploring, mining, manufacturing are not zero-sum games.

I want to add that ideologies do NOT need leaders in order to prosper, it is leaders who distort ideologies; one example is Gnosticism, and how the organized church stamped it out.

That's right, it would all be redistributed according to the 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need' principle. There's the danger greed would get the better of people, but if the right people joined who genuinely wanted the experiment to succeed, combined with strict limitations on how much people could claim, it would be very interesting indeed.

Eve Online is a competitive single universe sandbox game. Therefore, it is by definition a zero-sum game. My strength comes at your expense and vice-versa. True, Eve is a complex universe-simulator and there is plenty of complex game play that makes game theory choices nuanced and unpredictable. The advantage of allying with (or betraying) an entity is not always clear or obvious, but ultimately strength and power in Eve Online is relative so every bit of ore you mine, or loot you acquire by exploration devalues my ore and loot, and vice-versa.

That of course does not mean the "anti-social" choice is always the correct one to get you ahead, just like it isn't in real life. Two allies are usually more powerful together than the sum of their parts, but Eve is a zero-sum competitive game where the strongest/biggest group of players wins. Now, you can play Eve how you want - it is a sandbox after all - but that doesn't change the fact that might makes right and power, and thus ultimately victory goes to who can bring the most and biggest guns, not who is most "virtuous".

So as to your OP, ideology only has utility as to how many, and how efficiently it can motivate players. The Signal Cartel ideology attracts sufficient bodies to make an impact on New Eden, as does that of James 315 and his Code. Many more players don't connect with a greater purpose and wallow in their individual greed, but their isolation means their activities largely pass unnoticed.

Feel free to espouse whatever ideology you want. With a sufficiently attractive source of meaning, and a charismatic/dedicated leader, you will amass sufficient human effort to make a difference in New Eden. Otherwise, your "ideology" will only be of academic interest. I wish you success in your experiments in our shared living work of science-fiction.

But how do you "win" EVE? Seriously, how do you win at the game? Once one player wins, that game is over. How can that happen?

How do you take all the ISK, so no one else has any, so everyone else has zero? Sorry, I don't see how EVE can possibly played to a zero-sum point. If you blow up my ship, you win that engagement, I go back to my hanger and get in another ship, and I keep playing. If the things you lose are replaceable, they aren't really lost.

You also mistake what I'm doing—I espouse no ideology and I'm not interested in any ideology "winning," I'm curious about what's possible, especially because the dangers of monotony are pretty strong.

It's a sandbox so you can set your own victory conditions, but classically you "win" at Eve by defeating the other players and securing your objective. Whether that be a Rogue Drone site in highsec, a Faction Warfare complex or claiming sovereignty over a system. The biggest, most powerful, and most competently piloted fleet will win an objective over the smaller, weaker, or more incompetent side.

That is a fundamental truth of Eve Online. Power comes from the barrel of a blaster in space, and the deepest pockets when it comes to economic matters.

You don't need all the ISK (or ore, or ships or whatever), you just need more than the other guy. If you can afford to field X ISK worth of ships on contesting an objective and I 2X, then I most likely will win. You can have 1B ISK, but if I have 1.2B ISK I will get that PLEX on the market and you won't.

Power is relative in this game, both in terms of assets and players that one can call onl. I agree though, if you just want to fly a shuttle around all day and don't care about objectives, well then I can't stop you. But if you want to impose your will on the sandbox, you need to have more than the other groups you are attempting to dominate.

I guess anything is possible, if you can convince enough people to join you. Trust is in short supply however in New Eden, and this may limit how far any experiment in ideology can get.

There must be some small corps that do this, hang together and share.

Are the mechanics such that a corp must have shares? Can you make a corps without shares?

If you have to have shares, then a corp like this would spread them around equally, right? Anyone who joined would then get shares from all the other members. That seems pretty cool.