EVE General Discussion

Rugby evolved from Football (Soccer). Webb Ellis.

See? Many ways to win. For some like myself, denying the kill and tying up people is a win. So tactically, eve's best way to assure victory in a SOV/combat situation is to for a retreat/surrender. Is great for reality if you can force unconditional surrender without firing a shot... not so great for a video game whose greatest selling point is the sheer scale of shot firing combat.

Right now I think the best way to remedy this is a faction warfare for pirates vs empire. No silly contest sites. Just you flag yourself with a pirate faction and join up with them. So you are actually a blood raider. If you kill the pirates they are not allied with, you gain LP (player pirates) and other people even if they are not a part of the warfare. Higher standings get you access to their own network of hidden jumpgates that have acceleration gates which move around. Only show to those in standing.

Kinda like a criminal organization eh? Secret stations and all that. Similar to the bounty system, you gain LP based on value of what was destroyed. LP has an approximate isk value which can be used as a base conversion. the higher your standings, and the lower the opponent standings, plus the lower your security and higher theirs will affect the exchange rate. Hardcore pirates can go out, raid, fight and gank to try to get that LP. LP stores are expanded and the isk requirements are lowered/removed to make a self sustaining pirate lifestyle feasable.

Like faction warfare, add this to alliance sov holding. Make the fights earn rewards. Align to... something? Or think of it this way. There is a populous in your sov. So sov=LP and as such, can maybe make a mechanic so that each sov can have it's own LP store of some sort?

If it is LP only and not paying out isk, it keeps it from adding to the system but rewards combat. If two fleets face off and fight to the last man, it very well could balance out. If you fight and lose, but take out more of theirs, it pays off. So LP for honor.

If there is a system to make underdog fighting a viable tactic that can pay off plus combine it with more dynamic combat mechanics to make large fleet more squad on squad fighting, eve would change dramatically without stepping on toes.... Well, the F1 pushers might complain....

Edit: This makes me kinda think about somebody else saying free ships, but note it is different. Killing pays off, not the dying.

Fortunately Malt, they have the tools to change that.

In the Hydrostatic Podcast (I think it was) they were talking about AI rollout and would like to apply drifter AI to every NPC in eve. As such, that might make standings matter more.

I really love this talk. I gotta revive (well, re-write) my old resurrect eve thread.

It put together ideas I had gathered through the years to make eve choices a zero sum decision. Increased the unknown factors of pvp, improves ship versatility and meta, and lastly adds a good choice of highsec/lowsec/nullsec for self reliance as an individual or large alliance.

With the new AI and stuff, it even adds more. It can now add pirate raids (ganking) to high security space and other validities that keep the secure space and the lawless frontier.

It will take a while to write up, but should be fun for me to do up. Keep an eye out. Will put it here since it isn't fleshed out features and idea, just more of my vision of what eve potentially could be by expanding by what it offers and without eliminating what it has.

Killboards and killmails, the worst thing ever. Catering to the lowest common denominator.

At least they are honest about what makes them play. Certainly better than arm chairing about sov problems and sov-holders all day.

And that is what makes it tough. Killboards are a probably the sharpest double edged sword in the game. A permanent record of every battle. How can one compete? I have a battle report from years ago I still love to talk about, but concern for it is the most paramount. What can be added to eve that has more importance to alliances and corps than a killboard? For those that are concerned.

Just don't link them in GD and we're good.

Yes it is.

Is the opposition “the environment” (which in computer game terms means the AI)? → PvE
Is the opposition other players? → PvP

There is no environment in the market, only other players. Thus the market is PvP.
When you try to collect more flowers than the other guy, the other guy is the opposition, not the flowers.

Competition over resources in EVE is unquestionably PvP. Even in cases where the collection itself might be tricky or dangerous you are still engaged in a zero-sum game where anything you get is inherently lost to the other competitors (and vice versa), so the tug of war is still with other players, irrespective of how many blisters you get from the rope in the process. The closest this game has to offer to your beloved “competitive PvE” is incursions, but even then, the PvE is pretty much irrelevant — the Sansha are not the ones who are keeping you from getting your money; other players are. If you fail a site, you can just keep doing it indefinitely until you succeed because without that competition from other players, there is nothing to keep you from earning the rewards. There is no opposition if no players are there to oppose you.

Whether it's direct or indirect is of absolutely no relevance. Whether it involves destruction or not is of absolutely no relevance. All that matters is who your opposition is, and in EVE, it is always other players.

…but not EVE. That's why I play EVE rather than Pacman Championship DX.
(Side note: play Pacman C-DX — it's brilliant.)

No, it isn't for the simple reason that it can't be. There is no “E” involved in the EVE markets. This is the part you're having such a hard time understanding. There is no environment to struggle or compete against. It is all other players. it is all PvP. For the EVE markets to be “competitive PvE”, you'd have to set up a private kill trade board, where you compare how much you earned from NPC trades compared to how much the other guy did. The instant you go outside of NPC trade goods, it ceases to be anything that could even remotely be called PvE.

Everything you say are legitimate part of EVE must come with the understanding that everything else which takes part of official EVE channels are aswell. And also with the understand that what doesnt, doesnt.

But the problem is not what, but how. That which does not bring any ingame or lore benefits, is not part of the game, even if people somehow try to include it in the game. That is where the problem starts.

Example:
- Kill you because you are Caldari, is part of the game.
- Kill you because you are American, is not.

Following the reasoning posted on and on by CCP and the EULA, Killboards arent part of the game either.

And killmails as function of anyhitng else than comm also is not.

IT is hard for some people to understand that because they assume everything you CAN do is legitimate, which is of course, back to that same principle, some people has a hard time understanding that Democracy is not Freedom, Freedom is not the ability to do everything, and Order is not the opposite of Chaos.

But, as much as they dont understand that, as much useless is to say that to them.

I did a little reading around about "competetive PvE".

There isnt much on it.

Apparently its a recent buzz word coined by marketers and players in some other games communities.

Essentially, it amounts to the "competetive" comparison of the results of two separate PvE instances, in which neither instance had any player interaction or influence on the instance of the other.

Its not a new thing in and of itself, but calling it "competetive PvE", is.
An example of it, was kids in the 80/90s comparing their Space Invader scores.

You are using the term wrong when trying to apply it to EVE.
An example of "competetive PvE" in EVE, would be players comparing their isk/hr results.
Thats about as far as it translates into EVE, where everyone exists within the same essential environment, and is constantly in a state of interaction with each other, whether immediate or distant.

Your asteroid example fails.
When someone else starts mining the same field or rock as you, that is another player (hence, PvP, not the environment, PvE).
If an NPC miner could enter the field or tap your rock, that would be PvE.
If the interaction with the other player escalates into violence, then that too, is still PvP, albeit with weapons rather than mining lasers.

Weve already established and shown property destruction or loss is not a condition of PvP.
FPS are PvP. LoL is PvP. Hearthstone is PvP. None of them involve loss or destruction of assets.
Minecraft is PvE. Minecrafters comparing their PvE results, is "competetive PvE".