These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why does everyone (sort of) want to make GANKING easier ?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#141 - 2012-01-09 05:57:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Mars Theran
RubyPorto wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:

I read the rest of it after, if that's any consolation. I didn't really believe you felt that way; I was just making a point.


So... you decided to proverbially open your mouth and remove all doubt. Then used the slightly wordier version of the teen "J/K, like ell-oh-ell" to cover. Gotcha. Fair enough.

Quote:

As for the WoW stuff, I tend to pretty much go blank when I see comments of that nature. Never liked WoW, and never will. Specifically though, EVE doesn't have to be that harsh and cold for everyone, and it doesn't have to be sushine and lollipops either.

EVE has different levels of security space, and in-game mechanics that are intended to create different levels of the PvP experience. That is the way it is designed. There are different layers to the harsh reality of EVE; a semblence of variety, to allow for different playstyles and interests.

The only thing that is changing that, or attempting to change that, is the playerbase who enjoys ganking and griefing other players. It is griefing, yes; in many cases. Read back through the responses and posts in this thread; and you'll see it freely admited that that is the intention and what is desired as a result. The grief of other players.

Anything that is intentionally done to upset another indivdual, or cause them to lose their temper or flare up in an emotional outburst is griefing. If it is not done for that sole purpose, then it is not; even if that is the result.

Players trying to loosen the restrictions in High and Lowsec, to better allow them to achieve these results through ganking and other related activities, (including wardecs), is what this thread is trying to address; even if it is only formulated as a question to that effect.

So, the question has been answered many times in this thread; all you have to do is look to see it.


EvE's EULA, and TOS/Player Conduct Guide fail to mention this "Griefing" you speak of. They mention Harassment and quite narrowly define it. If you can find a place where those two documents mention this so called "Griefing" I'd love to see it.

EvE does have different levels of Sec space. With them come different PvP mechanics. None have ever been meant to be safe. The only thing that has been changing in HiSec is that it has become continually *MORE* profitable while at the same time becoming *MORE* secure.

CONCORD Buff from Tankable/Escapable to OMGWTFBBQWINBUTAN (Good Change, IMHO)
Insurance Nerf, no more suicide gank insurance (Sensible Change, cause the old way made no sense)
WarDec Bork (WTF, CCP?)

L4s in Hisec, there once were only 3 levels of Missions (Good Change)
Hisec Incursion farming (Incursions = Good, 100m isk/hr in singlebox HiSec PvE?=No so good, and crushed 0.0's population when the Sanctum nerf came by[this is why so much space is empty])

So what's this about the Ganker's causing changes? It's the Carebear whining (and ingenuity in the case of Incursion farming) that's causing changes in EvE's Hisec, and it's not in favor of the ganker.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=482176#post482176

^^ A really well written gudpost on the topic.


Griefing doesn't have to be mentioned in the TOS or EULA to be defined as such; and, as such, it doesn't have to be against the rules to be what it is. Fair?

Funny, I thought this was the thread with all the talk about tears. It is sort of the one that asked the question. Too many threads around here to keep track of. Okay, so it wasn't answered here, but it was somewhere else.

edit: I can't believe you actually looked that up; and no, I don't want to check it. Also, wasn't much concerned as to mention of it there. I read through the TOS and EULA a few days ago; more than enough to know that there isn't any real definition existing that can carry weight.

Regardless, it doesn't have to. Players make their own decisions; and provided they are not actually going against the enforceable content of those documents, I'm generally fine.

That doesn't mean I think EVE should be limited to one perspective and such a narrow viewpoint. Many players may feel that such activities are perfectly acceptable and have the right to play that way; but that doesn't really make it right in all respects, (purely as a moral standing), or indicate that all players should and do feel that way.

Obviously, they/we don't. Personally, the thought of ganking someone and costing them time and effort in the game turns my stomache. I don't think I'll ever be able to play that way. I'm up for a good fight, all things being equal, or provided I am flying a ship I'm prepared to lose just for the sake of testing my metal.

I'm even fine with going out to Null/Lowsec, flying in gangs and fleets, and cloaking/scouting for them. I do however, have a problem if that fleet/gang decides to start ganking people who didn't ask for it, and aren't looking for a fight. That's when I start to question who I'm hanging around with; if it continues, then I am forced to leave by my own conscience.

It is just something I cannot abide.

That doesn't mean I feel any great judgement against those who practice it; rather that I accept that is how they play, and not something that I can do. Would be nice if that was reciprocated sometimes.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#142 - 2012-01-09 06:24:02 UTC
Mars Theran wrote:
Regardless, it doesn't have to. Players make their own decisions; and provided they are not actually going against the enforceable content of those documents, I'm generally fine.

That doesn't mean I think EVE should be limited to one perspective and such a narrow viewpoint. Many players may feel that such activities are perfectly acceptable and have the right to play that way; but that doesn't really make it right in all respects, (purely as a moral standing), or indicate that all players should and do feel that way.


So now playing a video game within its own rules is immoral? Please tell us more.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#143 - 2012-01-09 06:44:24 UTC
Mars Theran wrote:

That doesn't mean I feel any great judgement against those who practice it; rather that I accept that is how they play, and not something that I can do. Would be nice if that was reciprocated sometimes.


We accept that you want to play Ponies in Space. We have no problem with that. We do not accept that you want to turn EvE into something it's not so that you can play Ponies in Space in EVE.

There is no judgement in our hearts when we call you a Carebear (Stare!) or when we violence your boats, only calm serenity, at one with New Eden.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#144 - 2012-01-09 07:28:31 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
Regardless, it doesn't have to. Players make their own decisions; and provided they are not actually going against the enforceable content of those documents, I'm generally fine.

That doesn't mean I think EVE should be limited to one perspective and such a narrow viewpoint. Many players may feel that such activities are perfectly acceptable and have the right to play that way; but that doesn't really make it right in all respects, (purely as a moral standing), or indicate that all players should and do feel that way.


So now playing a video game within its own rules is immoral? Please tell us more.


Somehow, I don't think you understand that Moral or Immoral activity is not defined by the rules of a video game.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#145 - 2012-01-09 07:30:48 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:

That doesn't mean I feel any great judgement against those who practice it; rather that I accept that is how they play, and not something that I can do. Would be nice if that was reciprocated sometimes.


We accept that you want to play Ponies in Space. We have no problem with that. We do not accept that you want to turn EvE into something it's not so that you can play Ponies in Space in EVE.

There is no judgement in our hearts when we call you a Carebear (Stare!) or when we violence your boats, only calm serenity, at one with New Eden.


I actually thought that banner was a bit ludicrous. Interesting though.

Thank you for your consideration; now I won't feel so bad when you violence my boats.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#146 - 2012-01-09 07:56:11 UTC
Mars Theran wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
Regardless, it doesn't have to. Players make their own decisions; and provided they are not actually going against the enforceable content of those documents, I'm generally fine.

That doesn't mean I think EVE should be limited to one perspective and such a narrow viewpoint. Many players may feel that such activities are perfectly acceptable and have the right to play that way; but that doesn't really make it right in all respects, (purely as a moral standing), or indicate that all players should and do feel that way.


So now playing a video game within its own rules is immoral? Please tell us more.


Somehow, I don't think you understand that Moral or Immoral activity is not defined by the rules of a video game.


If I enter a Boxing ring, wearing gloves and big shorts, is it Immoral for the other boxer to punch me?

It's a video game. You chose to play one in which ganking and otherwise violencing boats is legitimate gameplay, socially accepted, fun, and encouraged (by phat lutz). Why are you bothered by being ganked or otherwise violenced?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#147 - 2012-01-09 07:58:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Mars Theran
RubyPorto wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
Regardless, it doesn't have to. Players make their own decisions; and provided they are not actually going against the enforceable content of those documents, I'm generally fine.

That doesn't mean I think EVE should be limited to one perspective and such a narrow viewpoint. Many players may feel that such activities are perfectly acceptable and have the right to play that way; but that doesn't really make it right in all respects, (purely as a moral standing), or indicate that all players should and do feel that way.


So now playing a video game within its own rules is immoral? Please tell us more.


Somehow, I don't think you understand that Moral or Immoral activity is not defined by the rules of a video game.


If I enter a Boxing ring, wearing gloves and big shorts, is it Immoral for the other boxer to punch me?

It's a video game. You chose to play one in which ganking and otherwise violencing boats is legitimate gameplay, socially accepted, fun, and encouraged (by phat lutz). Why are you bothered by being ganked or otherwise violenced?


Anyone ever tell you, you ask too many questions. Quite right, I enter the boxing ring, (Lowsec), and don't complain about getting ganked. Would be nice if it didn't happen as often though.

edit: Actually, Nullsec is more the boxing ring; while lowsec is the underground fight club, or dark alley with the guy that wants to carve you up with his shiny knife. Highsec is more like walking down the street getting mugged.

Side note, I actually had a guy try to invite me into a dark alley once. Had to wonder if anybody ever followed him.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#148 - 2012-01-09 09:53:29 UTC
Mars Theran wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
Regardless, it doesn't have to. Players make their own decisions; and provided they are not actually going against the enforceable content of those documents, I'm generally fine.

That doesn't mean I think EVE should be limited to one perspective and such a narrow viewpoint. Many players may feel that such activities are perfectly acceptable and have the right to play that way; but that doesn't really make it right in all respects, (purely as a moral standing), or indicate that all players should and do feel that way.


So now playing a video game within its own rules is immoral? Please tell us more.


Somehow, I don't think you understand that Moral or Immoral activity is not defined by the rules of a video game.

Well if I was breaking the rules I guess you could call that immoral. I'm having trouble figuring out how you are telling me I'm immoral for playing the game without breaking any rules.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.
Jill Thiesant
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#149 - 2012-01-09 10:36:00 UTC
Ladie Harlot wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
Regardless, it doesn't have to. Players make their own decisions; and provided they are not actually going against the enforceable content of those documents, I'm generally fine.

That doesn't mean I think EVE should be limited to one perspective and such a narrow viewpoint. Many players may feel that such activities are perfectly acceptable and have the right to play that way; but that doesn't really make it right in all respects, (purely as a moral standing), or indicate that all players should and do feel that way.


So now playing a video game within its own rules is immoral? Please tell us more.


Somehow, I don't think you understand that Moral or Immoral activity is not defined by the rules of a video game.

Well if I was breaking the rules I guess you could call that immoral. I'm having trouble figuring out how you are telling me I'm immoral for playing the game without breaking any rules.


Morality has absolutely nothing to do with rules but it's also subjective so the entire argument you two are having is completely pointless, you don't think it's immoral but he does.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#150 - 2012-01-09 15:55:45 UTC
Mars Theran wrote:

Anyone ever tell you, you ask too many questions. Quite right, I enter the boxing ring, (Lowsec), and don't complain about getting ganked. Would be nice if it didn't happen as often though.

edit: Actually, Nullsec is more the boxing ring; while lowsec is the underground fight club, or dark alley with the guy that wants to carve you up with his shiny knife. Highsec is more like walking down the street getting mugged.

Side note, I actually had a guy try to invite me into a dark alley once. Had to wonder if anybody ever followed him.



Ah, see that's where you've gotten it wrong.

EvE is the boxing ring in the metaphor. You log in, you've entered the ring. The station is your corner stool. Nobody can punch you there, but the fight is won or lost there.

Lowsec is what happens after you sucker punch the Ref, and Nullsec is what happens when the Ref never showed up and everyone brought automatic weapons. The boxing ring metaphor pretty well falls apart in Low/Null.

If HiSec were called Safesec, you might have a point. But there are no PvP/Not-PvP areas in EvE. There are just PvP areas with different mechanics.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon