EVE General Discussion

Industrials are squishy targets, and great for hampering an alliance's ability to make ISK.

As soon as you undock, you consent to the possibility of being shot at. As soon as you jump into lowsec, you consent to the very high chance of being shot at.
As soon as you jump into nullsec, you consent to the certainty of losing your ship AND your pod. Nothing I have taken into null has survived the experience, and I took nothing there I couldn't afford to lose anyway.
As for wormholes, you may as well just be hitting the self-destruct button. There's the locals, the sleepers, and then you've got to find your way out.

Welcome to EVE. Tank your goddamn ship, don't fly what you can't afford to lose, don't trust anybody you can't punch in the face, and have a nice day.

Indies are squishy targets , EXCELLENT for crippling opposing forces 's retaliation capability in the long run.
As long as you're in war , I'm ALL FOR IT !

And no, undocking doesn't equate to consent to the possibility of being shot at.
Under the current social situation it equates to the possibility to being ganked .

Which is something I do not agree with during peace time .
None of the both parties with query with one another , but one party CHOSE to be a criminal and prey on an innocent, honest to god , hard working man of the empire.
THAT is morally unjust .

PS: I always tank my god darn ships , but you can't tank against PL hotdrops (Thats another story)

…and in being one, you are always in conflict with everyone in every way. In those other games, not killing the enemy is also a valid choice. You are there to win, which you can do in any number of ways. EVE being a sandbox just means that there are even more ways to do that. So the distinction you're making doesn't really exist — especially not on any kind of moral level. Game of conflict is game of conflict is game of conflict.

EVE has just as clear-cut a distinction between friends and enemies as any other game, and your failure to properly identify the other guy does not in any way make it immoral for him to blow you up when he correctly identifies you as an enemy.

…which means you're wrong, and which just further highlights the difference between game and real life, even when we're talking about game wars and real wars.

…except that the same choice exists in all games of conflict, and regardless, they're games so they have no bearing on real-world morals.

…if the game allows for it, which isn't necessarily true. At any rate, the same core concepts exist in other games too through clans and private servers.

Also, in EVE, you're inherently in conflict with other people when doing that so you've already defined your enemy by default.

…and no different than any other kind of conflict in this conflict-based game. He has stuff; you do not; in having the stuff you do not, he is your enemy so you blow him up and take it. It's pretty much what you'd expect from a game of conflict over scarce resources. Morals never even enter into it — it's just standard, working-as-intended gameplay.

Again, your failure to properly identify the enemy does not mean that he's immoral when he properly identifies you as one.

Then you're talking about the newbie systems, which are actually safeguarded against these kinds of things. Beyond that, though, at some point, you just have to start beating your kids at scrabble (and you have to hurry because they'll soon be beating you)… in fact, not doing that will do them far more harm than good.

SO you are saying... for them to grow up you have to beat them up and set them back 500 mil ?

On a side note, I just found the silliest page in the world when I was searching for stuff

You're still rambling about real-world consequences and “holding people responsible” for what happens in a game…

Holding people responsible by making it ONE ROOT account per person which can be traced back through the API key despite of the use of alts .

Which in turn can be traced using 3rd party programmes such as Griefer Watch
Which currently can only trace back towards the SINGLE toon , but not the person using that toon

We are NOT talking about extending accountability TOWARDS the real world person and affecting their life OUTSIDE of the game.
We are talking about making it ONE ROOT account per person ,which at his will could be an ALIAS representing him or by linking it towards his REAL WORLD social networks ,depending on his desire.

So why are you bringing up irrelevancies such as moral and the real world?

you can always OPT out of providing your API key

Why do you people think that just becuse you're an industrialist you're somehow not a worthy target.

I"m an industrialist, I can't fly anything worthwile to shoot **** with, but by all means please come and ******* shoot me.

Not all of us are little bitches afraid that someone might not want me being able to produce and sell lots of goods, and thereby cutting into their profits.


If you're an industrialist, I want you to get blown up as often as possible, more then anyone else . The **** do I care if youc an fight back?

I'm stinking rich. If I need to, I know I can pay people to protect me. I can bounty you to make the ganker more likely to want to harrass you. I can ask some friends to come bump or gank you.

I will do everything within my means to see that you, AS MY COMPETITOR, are unable to operate, BECAUSE IT BENEFITS ME.

Poor you with no guns, go **** yourselves; your mining lasers are more dangerous to me then any gun you could ever equip.


You do not exist in your own little world, where being an industrialist means you have no impact on other people. As an industrialist you are having more impact then most every other person in EVE, and as long as you are having an impact on other people, other people will want you to get blown up.