EVE General Discussion

The entire EVE economy is fundamentally based on ships being purchased, used to fight each other, and being lost. Everyone takes their turn. You spend a part of your time accumulating wealth and assets, a part of your time destroying other people's wealth and assets, and a part of your time seeing your own assets destroyed. If no-one ever lost a ship, then we'd need only a tiny fraction of the miners, industrialists, traders, researchers, explorers, etc etc that the EVE economy supports today. Every time someone else loses a ship, every miner, ship builder, inventor and so on becomes just a tiny bit wealthier.

Why then do we see a vocal minority posting with such surprise and outrage that they also are occasionally expected to take their turn losing a ship? Do they really think that EVE can work if people are allowed to endlessly accumulate and never lose? Actually, they seem to think that a certain subset of people seem to be entitled to never lose a ship - that it's morally wrong to make them lose a ship.

Cited reasons include "I'm not bothering anyone" (selling resourcs to my enemies), "I'm a casual player" (risk scales exactly with playtime), "I don't like PvP" (I only like scoring points, not conceding them!), "People who do this are sociopaths/abused/have mental illlness/stupid" (crazy emo educationally subnormal people can outsmart me).

Interestingly, the people who complain about being "forced to PvP" never seem to be very enthusiastic about allowing those who aren't that interested in industry, trade, mining, etc in simply being allowed to buy whatever they need to fight with at base NPC prices. Apparently it's OK to "force" people to engage market PvP, just no to combat PvP.

Welcome to the world of the high sec carebear.

I know, I just wondered if there was any logical basis to it other than "I'm a special snowflake and shouldn't have to abide by the rules".

I've lost 19 ships this month. Feels good man.

Edit: 20

I don't really mind an occasional ship, Iost quite a few handfulls as a matter of fact. Although admitted - it hurt when they ganked my shiny faction/deadspace Tengu.

What I DO mind is losing implants.

I don't hate losing ships? I don't hate the Goons for hitting on ice miners. It adds to the game. If I lose a ship, heck, I replace it. If I run out of ISK, I go somewhere else in EVE and do something else.

The only thing I hate is people thinking that they are better players because they spend their ingame day blowing up ships.

EVE has a destructive side and a constructive side. Some people are drawn more to one, the others more to the other. Some people are drawn to both (like me).

All should respect each other as players of the game, I think. There is no wrong way to play in a sandbox game.
Also, development of the game should support both approaches.

Outside of 0.0, losing implants is optional almost all the time. It's actually quite difficult to construct a scenario where you can't avoid implant loss simply by knowing how to play (and actually being at the keyboard), and it involves the co-operation of multiple people.

So you think you should be allowed to gain the benefits provided by using implants but without having to put them at risk?

If you don't want to lose implants, don't use implants.

if(user.PvP==True_
market.priceModifier=$_NPC

If i can't shoot your ships, why should I be forced to pay your prices on the market?

And on that day, you made sure that a mission runner in hi-sec sold his +4 set for enough ISK to buy his first Raven.

Surely you don't want to take that Raven away?