EVE General Discussion

So any game that allows players to communicate with each other which eventually will cause arguing among them shall be considered a PvP game? It is "interacting with another player" as you put it and in a hostile manner.

Funny how none this "PvP arguments" are mentioned when it comes to other games that people tend to consider PvE games, to give WoW as the best example of all. I guess some people prefer to live in their own bubble of thoughts.

If you think that mining my belt, or whatever "trading" trickery you think you can do to me, as if I really care, is a form of PvP, Then you shouldn't call yerself a PvP-er. You can't mine from more than 4 asteroids on your Hulk, there is plenty of others in the belt, there are plenty of belts, and there are plenty of system. I can choose to stay or go someplace else any time I want. You can't stop me. Same with trading. You can't stop me from selling at what ever price I want and buying at whatever price I want. If I want I can sell a PLEX for ONE isk. That's not PvP, because in PvP you don't have those choices, don't you get it?

You're wrong.


Last I checked, the max was 3, not 4.


I've driven people away from "my belt" by mining their roids from under them. They didn't have a choice in that, I just mined better than them so in the end, I won the player vs player mine-off. I've effectively denied them that resource.


i.e. you've lost in a player vs player mine-off.


Yeah, no, that's an overly limited definition of PVP. If I force you to sell at a loss because you're too impatient or you're dumb, then I've won in the player vs player trade-off.

Hm, Karl Popper would be sad about that statement I guess.

Of course definitions have a "personality" and of course nobody needs to stick to them. In fact lots of change in science is done by changing definitions. And languages have evolved and changed over centuries, too, which resulted in changed definitions. No definition is set in stone (because, as you said, it's not a fact, but just an arbitrary definition).

This in mind it makes sense to see what someone means when he uses the word "PVP" - different persons will have different definitions for this acronym, without one of them "correct" and one "wrong". The question is just: How helpful is your concept of PVP, does it help to discriminate, to describe something, to formulate an hypothesis?

When you define PVP for instance as "everything a player does in EVE is PVP", I don't find this definition very helpful. When everything is PVP, why use a word for it?

There's a reason for this, and the reason is that unlike most other MMOs on the planet, resources are limited, and almost everything you do has an impact on other players.

Hell, even just running missions have a potential impact on other players, the only way you can potentially run missions without impacting other players is to never use any isk you make off of said missions, never use the salvage you make, never use the modules to loot, and just as importantly never let anyone else salvage/loot the wrecks either. Because the instant you do, you've affected other players.

It might not be immediately noticeable because the economy etc is so huge, but the effect is there.

That's always true when it comes to mutually beneficial interactions.

Mutually benefitial: We have different goals and use one another to achieve those goals.
Cooperative: We have similar or the game goals and work together to achieve those goals.
Supportive: One person has a goal and another person helps them achieve it with little or no tangible benefit to themselves.*



If I buy something for a reasonable price, I'm not being robbed. What you're suggesting here is All Profit == Theft.

I got what I wanted. She got what she wanted. We both walk away satisfied with the transaction. That's a classic win/win situation. And that she profits off the transaction isn't detrimental to me. If she's making money, she'll continue to supply the good that I want. If she's not making a profit, she'll leave and that's more likely to hurt me as a consumer than not.

I read your argument as it being robbery-but-not-robbery and they were winning-but-not-winning, which meant I was losing-but-not-losing, which made it PvP. (But-not-PvP?)

So, yes, my response was a guess as to what you were disagreeing with.

Ehhh, CAN YOU AFFORD to "yield, fold, give in, surrender" and basically lose your ship when you do the real PvP? I don't think those options should even be considered. I can do any of these when I trade or mine, I can afford to. I don't have problem targeting another asteroid, we can even mine from the same one for a while. I can undercut you with 0.01 ISK, it's not a big financial loss is it? And when I am off-line and you or someone else are going to undercut me anyway, your items will sell first then mine either way after I log in I get the money, I can afford to get undercut.

You're missing an important detail there.

I'm not saying that everything in EVE is PvP because everything is a competition. I'm saying everything in EVE is PvP because everything is a competition against other players. The difference from other games is that, in those, this competition is optional. You can choose not to engage in it. In EVE, you can't. It's built into the core mechanic of the game — the market — and in the two mechanisms that feed that market — combat and industry. At every point, someone is out to get your stuff. They might not notice you and you might get away with whatever you're doing, but the competition is there regardless of your luck.

Conversely, while in those other games you could potentially choose to make a competition out of everything, in EVE, you do not have the choice to not take part in the competition. It's one of the few limits to the whole sandbox concept: you cannot choose to be in the sandbox and not be in it (shocking, I know).

Makes no difference. You're still in the competition; you still have a plethora of choices. The presence of choices does not mean it's not PvP. The only choice not available to you is to not take part — yielding is as close as it gets.

In other words, you choose to yield and let the other guy win. You could also have chosen to fight.

They aren't as bad as those who think interacting with it is PvP. "I undercut you, I bought your cheap item then resold it, woopie F dooo. I win." There are no losers in the EVE market "battle", everyone is a winner.

You weren't around for the drone mineral speculation, I take it?
Or oxytopegeddon?
Or any of the PLEX-for-whatever schemes?
Or… hell… just about every materials, ship, or equipment rebalancing patch ever.