These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

More ruthlessness, less madness?

First post
Author
Mooh Bear
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#1 - 2014-10-30 17:50:47 UTC
Since I’ve started playing EVE, one thing has been bothering me: the pointlessness of the bulk of PVP.
Now, I’m not questioning the fun factor. Each player will have their own definition of fun. I’m more puzzled by its lack of in-game benefit. I think most will agree that PVP is, at best, a poor isk maker or, at worst, a money sink (some form of well-planned piracy excluded). Consider some common PVP activities: FW plex hunting, when you’re not in a militia, low-sec roams, gate camping, high-sec corp wardecs, high-sec ganking or missioner baiting. They all share the same things: relatively easy, little preparation required and little to lose or gain (for the attacker at least). I get that “Some men just want to watch the world burn”. But I want to imagine some nefarious evil scheming in the darkness of space. Instead, we have psycho capsuleers on booster induced rampages shooting at everything for no particular reason.
I would like players to blow things up more because they want to, need to and less because they can… Maybe I’m too rational a guy, but I think it would cool for the EVE villains to be more Pr. Moriarty and less the Joker.
Anyway, any suggestion to make fighting more meaningful in general in EVE?
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#2 - 2014-10-30 17:55:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Fury
I know some industrialist types that benefit greatly in-game from shooty-shooty PVP.

Rule #34 (no, not that one)

" War is good for business. "

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.

R0mparkin
Th3 Illuminati
#3 - 2014-10-30 17:57:02 UTC
Mooh Bear wrote:
Since I’ve started playing EVE, one thing has been bothering me: the pointlessness of the bulk of PVP.
Now, I’m not questioning the fun factor. Each player will have their own definition of fun. I’m more puzzled by its lack of in-game benefit. I think most will agree that PVP is, at best, a poor isk maker or, at worst, a money sink (some form of well-planned piracy excluded). Consider some common PVP activities: FW plex hunting, when you’re not in a militia, low-sec roams, gate camping, high-sec corp wardecs, high-sec ganking or missioner baiting. They all share the same things: relatively easy, little preparation required and little to lose or gain (for the attacker at least). I get that “Some men just want to watch the world burn”. But I want to imagine some nefarious evil scheming in the darkness of space. Instead, we have psycho capsuleers on booster induced rampages shooting at everything for no particular reason.
I would like players to blow things up more because they want to, need to and less because they can… Maybe I’m too rational a guy, but I think it would cool for the EVE villains to be more Pr. Moriarty and less the Joker.
Anyway, any suggestion to make fighting more meaningful in general in EVE?


Few things to consider about EvE

1 Its not for everyone
2 you get out of it what you put into it :EFFORT:
3 Its not for everyone
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#4 - 2014-10-30 17:57:10 UTC
Mooh Bear wrote:
I think it would cool for the EVE villains to be more Pr. Moriarty and less the Joker.



Its simple Mr Holmes.. we gank the Batman.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?

Mooh Bear
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#5 - 2014-10-30 18:00:23 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
I know some industrialist types that benefit greatly in-game from shooty-shooty PVP.

Rule #34 (no, not that one)

" War is good for business. "


PVP happens to create a market opportunity for the industrialists, they profit from it, but they don't organize it. Well, in EVE at least.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#6 - 2014-10-30 18:05:38 UTC
Mooh Bear wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
I know some industrialist types that benefit greatly in-game from shooty-shooty PVP.

Rule #34 (no, not that one)

" War is good for business. "


PVP happens to create a market opportunity for the industrialists, they profit from it, but they don't organize it. Well, in EVE at least.


Really? You are 100% sure of that after playing less than a year?

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.

Mooh Bear
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#7 - 2014-10-30 18:11:02 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
Mooh Bear wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
I know some industrialist types that benefit greatly in-game from shooty-shooty PVP.

Rule #34 (no, not that one)

" War is good for business. "


PVP happens to create a market opportunity for the industrialists, they profit from it, but they don't organize it. Well, in EVE at least.


Really? You are 100% sure of that after playing less than a year?



Do I believe some groups encourage and support other players to blow ships for profit? Sure. Do I believe the majority of the PVP I mentioned falls into that category? No.
Marsha Mallow
#8 - 2014-10-30 18:12:35 UTC
Mooh Bear wrote:
Do I believe the majority of the PVP I mentioned falls into that category? No.

What do you believe PVP stands for?

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day

Eternus8lux8lucis
Guardians of the Gate
RAZOR Alliance
#9 - 2014-10-30 18:15:30 UTC
No I understand the OPs sentiment and I share it to some extent. Im much less zerg and more cerebral, in fact thats why I enjoy Eves many complexities, and want to fight for a good reason or cause not just mindless PvP for its own sake. Thats why I have never been much into shooters and couldnt handle much WoTs as its mostly just that. I do enjoy it on occasion though so Im not entirely adverse to it.

Yet that being said I think that most people dont see it that way regarding PvP games. The purpose for most people is the enjoyment of destruction for its own sake and for them that is enough. Some need or want more to engage in it and some I think are really adverse to destructive tendencies and want to construct things and so wont engage in any PvP at all unless theyre getting ganked.

I also think that there is more than enough PvP to suit most tastes in Eve, but for the greater purposes youll probably have to dig deeper. Fighting FOR something rather than fighting just because will be a big step towards what youre looking for. So go out and find a group of people that are worth fighting for, and together find a reason to fight. Common goals will help a lot in this area.

Have you heard anything I've said?

You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?

That's right.

Had to end sometime.

Mooh Bear
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#10 - 2014-10-30 18:16:00 UTC
Marsha Mallow wrote:
Mooh Bear wrote:
Do I believe the majority of the PVP I mentioned falls into that category? No.

What do you believe PVP stands for?


In that instance:

Quote:
FW plex hunting, when you’re not in a militia, low-sec roams, gate camping, high-sec corp wardecs, high-sec ganking or missioner baiting


As mentioned in the first post.
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#11 - 2014-10-30 18:21:33 UTC
PvP in Eve for the most part is ganking and griefing.

Sure its content, the lowest form of it.

Sadly, that is the type of pvp player that makes up most of Eve atm.
Cynadore
3 R Corporation
#12 - 2014-10-30 18:25:30 UTC
Mooh Bear wrote:
PVP is, at best, a poor isk maker or, at worst, a money sink


Not a single ISK is removed from the economy through the loss of a ship. PvP is a material sink. It's actually an ISK faucet, through insurance payouts. The money you pay for your ship and modules changes from your wallet to the manufacturers' wallets. It does not disappear. I realize it might look like a "money sink" if you look at your wallet only, but this is not the case.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#13 - 2014-10-30 18:26:59 UTC
Mooh Bear wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Mooh Bear wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
I know some industrialist types that benefit greatly in-game from shooty-shooty PVP.

Rule #34 (no, not that one)

" War is good for business. "


PVP happens to create a market opportunity for the industrialists, they profit from it, but they don't organize it. Well, in EVE at least.


Really? You are 100% sure of that after playing less than a year?



Do I believe some groups encourage and support other players to blow ships for profit? Sure. Do I believe the majority of the PVP I mentioned falls into that category? No.


Moving the goalposts to defend your OP invalidates your position..

You said there was no in-game benefit, and I presented one. You then said industrialists did not organize PVP and when challenged you now want to change your position to something else.





There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.

Mooh Bear
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#14 - 2014-10-30 18:29:53 UTC
Doc Fury wrote:
Mooh Bear wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
Mooh Bear wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
I know some industrialist types that benefit greatly in-game from shooty-shooty PVP.

Rule #34 (no, not that one)

" War is good for business. "


PVP happens to create a market opportunity for the industrialists, they profit from it, but they don't organize it. Well, in EVE at least.


Really? You are 100% sure of that after playing less than a year?



Do I believe some groups encourage and support other players to blow ships for profit? Sure. Do I believe the majority of the PVP I mentioned falls into that category? No.


Moving the goalposts to defend your OP invalidates your position..

You said there was no in-game benefit, and I presented one. You then said industrialists did not organize PVP and when challenged you now want to change your position to something else.







I don't think we're talking about the same thing here. Point taken anyway.
Marsha Mallow
#15 - 2014-10-30 18:32:24 UTC
Mooh Bear wrote:
FW plex hunting, when you’re not in a militia, low-sec roams, gate camping, high-sec corp wardecs, high-sec ganking or missioner baiting

As mentioned in the first post.

PVP = Player vs Player. Not Pewer vs Pewer.

The term can be applied to the player driven market as well as combat activities. Actually trade and heavy industry can be a more ruthless arena to engage in than combat and requires significant preparation and execution. It's one of the few areas you can excel as a solo player.

If your ingame activities are measured in terms of profitability you will probably find it a bit difficult to understand the appeal of player driven combat.

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day

Mooh Bear
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#16 - 2014-10-30 18:37:36 UTC
Marsha Mallow wrote:
Mooh Bear wrote:
FW plex hunting, when you’re not in a militia, low-sec roams, gate camping, high-sec corp wardecs, high-sec ganking or missioner baiting

As mentioned in the first post.

PVP = Player vs Player. Not Pewer vs Pewer.

The term can be applied to the player driven market as well as combat activities. Actually trade and heavy industry can be a more ruthless arena to engage in than combat and requires significant preparation and execution. It's one of the few areas you can excel as a solo player.

If your ingame activities are measured in terms of profitability you will probably find it a bit difficult to understand the appeal of player driven combat.


Precisely. And I think it's not a good thing. Why does it have to be this way? Making ship fights more important overall in a ship fighting game seems like a good feature to me.
Marsha Mallow
#17 - 2014-10-30 18:48:00 UTC
Mooh Bear wrote:
Precisely. And I think it's not a good thing. Why does it have to be this way? Making ship fights more important overall in a ship fighting game seems like a good feature to me.

The combat you describe doesn't include mercing, null or wormholes - which (in theory, at least) is where the money is. Fighting over areas of space which have assets you can extract is the reward. If ships lost for corp/alliance ops are covered by SRP policies it's generally just an exchange of time for the right to exploit the space you have access to.

I see your point though. Generally combat isn't a great earner, which is annoying for people who hate grinding to fund their hobby. If anything it's a time and ISK sink, which you have to finance by taking up a second job in the form of a mini-profession.

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day

Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
#18 - 2014-10-30 18:48:19 UTC
Marsha Mallow wrote:
Mooh Bear wrote:
FW plex hunting, when you’re not in a militia, low-sec roams, gate camping, high-sec corp wardecs, high-sec ganking or missioner baiting

As mentioned in the first post.

PVP = Player vs Player. Not Pewer vs Pewer.

The term can be applied to the player driven market as well as combat activities. Actually trade and heavy industry can be a more ruthless arena to engage in than combat and requires significant preparation and execution. It's one of the few areas you can excel as a solo player.

If your ingame activities are measured in terms of profitability you will probably find it a bit difficult to understand the appeal of player driven combat.



It's less of a competition than you think.

The reason all T1 ships sell for 'below mineral value' is because production cost in exclusive zones is lower than most of us can imagine. As I sit in a .6 station making an Omen, someone deep in Null has a .5 fuel block cost, .4 time cost that impacts the production cost, I was cut out of the race and didn't even know it.

On the military side, most of EVE can be determined from a spreadsheet. There is really no need to practice and no cost benefit to it or even cost effective ways to try. While Canada and the US can sit in the Atlantic and have War games, Goons can't and while I have seen them try, people don't show up because the outcome is all that matters.

EVE is a means to an end.

I have no immediate idea on how to change that. None that can't be exploited anyway.
Mooh Bear
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#19 - 2014-10-30 19:02:27 UTC
Marsha Mallow wrote:


I see your point though. Generally combat isn't a great earner, which is annoying for people who hate grinding to fund their hobby. If anything it's a time and ISK sink, which you have to finance by taking up a second job in the form of a mini-profession.


The lack of incentive is driving the current state of combat. If there's no reason to shoot a ship then any ship will do :/
Trii Seo
Goonswarm Federation
#20 - 2014-10-30 19:11:38 UTC
Both exist in the environment.

Not every madman with an autocannon, zooming through space to kill and get a kick out of fighting has to be a mastermind. They're just people who like to fight - from psychos to honorable warriors (as rare as they might be).

There are masterful criminals that run their latest, revolutionary scam and making billions by fooling gullible people into following them. Beyond that, there are also nullsec masterminds who do, in fact, scheme and plot - signing pacts, breaking them, maneuvering around each other and fighting. To quote the Tyrannis trailer - "Your interests may align with some, and with others - collide with the force of suns".

EVE is a game so diverse it's hard to put all those who do PvP into one bag. Some are, in fact, the in-game equivalent of madmen doped up on boosters, rampaging through space (despite likely being cool cats in reality). Others are merely grunts in an army of one 0.0 warlord or another, and most of their fights have a strategic objective - they're just a cog in the machine.

Proud pilot of the Imperium

Arek'Jaalan: Heliograph

123Next page