EVE General Discussion

I put EvE in the priority video games deserve for someone with a life: low, very low. So low that I will never commit in a large scale operation.

If I don't play with the mercs, my log in time is 10 minutes. For PI and setting market orders.

Well, that's sandbox, and the true one, where you can choose whether to be a loyal merc with an history and prestige or a betrayer.
TBH it's much more bearable to risk having unloyal mercs than having to be loyal puppies.

Ah phew. Glad we didn't accidentally do too much damage to your trading, then.

This thread is losing focus pretty quickly. Let's start over with what we know:

1) Players in empire space, specifically systems colloquially known as highsec, are inserted and trained in an area where all indications, besides anecdotes, point to these systems being "safe." These players often have to face a vastly different reality - that they either misunderstood or were misinformed as to the security of "highsec" space. It's in the name.
2) Empire space does not provide any incentive for either new players or longtime empire space dwellers to leave the NPC corporations, except to form their own shell corporations to dodge the 11% tax rate.
3) Because NPC corporations are immune to wardecs, the only conflict in faction space comes from factional warfare, selective and dedicated, but ultimately contrived, efforts like Rifterlings and RvB, and ganking.
4) Resources in faction space are essentially unlimited. NPC stations have the ability to manufacture, research, copy, clone, fit, repair, and store items and ships in nearly limitless storage space.

Conclusions: there is NO natural driving force behind conflict in faction space. Players do not have to fight over resources. Players have too many options available to them to avoid any contact with other players. Players also have limited means and little incentive to work together and form their own real, living breathing corporations, with shared goals and access to the ability to stage out of their own base of operations.

These game mechanics are the reason that carebears exist, and not (only) because they're scared of losing their ships; it's that they have no chance to fight back and few alternatives other than to either quit the game and move on or mothball their mining ships and run missions or Incursions instead.

Because there is a lack of natural conflict, the situation leaves open a gaping hole that only artificial conflict can fill. Hulkageddon, suicide ganking, lazy gatecamping...these are all examples of artificial conflict. What we should want is REAL conflict, with real driving forces behind it.

Remove NPC corps besides factional warfare corps (which new players will then start in, baptizing them in fire without exposing them to incredibly frustrating things like capship hotdropping). NPC stations should stop offering services (besides agents), or charge much, much more for said services. Players should WANT to form up with other players and fight for their place in EVE, whether that means factional warfare, or simply fighting other industrial corps for control of resources in a system.

I live in faction space known as "highsec." I am in an NPC corporation because there's no good reason to leave it. I don't have the desire to kill other miners, because there's enough Veldspar and Scordite and ice to go around. I dislike the artificial conflict currently rippling through faction space. But you know what? I wish it were different. I would love to join up with a small corp in which we could set up a POS wherever we wanted, work together to protect it, mine ores and ice to fuel our station and build our ships, and be able to legally fight off gankers and any other corporation who moves in to take our resources. I realize that most of that is POSSIBLE. The underlying problem and the reason this thread was created, along with so many others, with so much arguing, bitching, and moaning, is that it's mostly possible, but almost entirely pointless and not encouraged by game mechanics.

The carebears OR the gankers aren't the problem. The problem is that "highsec" and "lowsec" are too fundamentally different from 0.0 and WH space. They consequently breed fundamentally different types of players, which is why the two groups constantly bicker. After thinking about it, I agree with the sentiment that "highsec" just doesn't feel like EVE, and it doesn't feel like an MMO. We always say EVE is a sandbox, but the problem with that analogy is that sandboxes are small, and right now, some players are trying to actively stay out of the sandbox, in the grass, so they don't get dirty. That's a problem. EVE should be a beach. No matter where you are, you're gonna get covered in sand and that crap sticks to you and gets all in your car's carpet no matter how hard you try to wash it off. I got a little off-track, but my point is that I believe faction space needs a serious revamp. The transition from high to low to null should be fluid. Right now, leaving highsec is more like falling off of a cliff.

ITT OP forgets that CCP making their decisions based on revenue streams is what cause Incarna, the closest EVE has ever come to dying.

I rather think that the bean counters have lost power to call the shots at CCP, and now get to just make the numbers add up right.

1) If you think combat ability comes from SP, you're wrong. HAG is actually proof that SP is no barrier to PvP.

2) The month old guy is an alt. Most likely has another 2 toons that he uses to make his ganking efficient (Orca+Scout).

3) What negligence is that? CCP offered to provide access to a game world with certain rules in exchange for $15 a month. They provided access to said game world. If you don't like the rules, you can simply end the business relationship. The EULA and the TOS are the only things CCP is bound (kind of) to enforce in its game world. Hulkageddon and its ilk very clearly breach neither the EULA nor the TOS. Even if all that weren't true, the EULA clearly states that all in game items and isk are property of CCP, so what damages could you prove?

hahahaha

legal action

holy ****

Already looked at it, frankly, after someone mailed me about something similar in game.

Short answer is no, I wouldn't have done something like that anyway, but the way the EULA is written, you would have a tough road to hoe on that one, legally speaking.

I am certainly no attorney but sections 11 through 14 pretty much offer the usual blanket preclusions that you agree to in using the software. In CCP's position, they have two options.

FIrst is to force you as a US player to escalate your costs by claiming incompetent jurisdiction based on the acceptance of the EULA whose section 16 forces you to the courts of iceland.

Alternatively, if you could claim jurisdiction in federal courts predicated on the US presence established in Georgia together with governance of US players in several states, etc, then in thier place, I would put in a motion for Summary Judgement on the grounds of having sole control of the game per section 2D where they clearly note they are not obligated to enforce the rules, as well as on the grounds of waiver predicated on end user acceptance of the EULA generally as well as on the acceptance of section 14 where you provide CCP indemnity based on your use of the game.

The idea of a legal suit over something this trivial is ludicrous.

No, what's at stake here is player enjoyment in certain segments of the paying audience and whether CCP wants to act to preserve the game for some viewpoints or if they are happy with the status quo induced by organized large scale manipulation of the game, particularly in areas where game elements have been written to control those game elements.

Be specific, what game elements are designed to control what game elements?

CONCORD is designed to control HS PvP, limiting it to baiting, Wars, and Suicide Ganks. Unless you're getting killed by something that doesn't fall under one of those categories, CONCORD is working exactly as intended.

Yeah CCP owns it all.