EVE General Discussion

So, none of this is objective fact, just subjective opinion. Let's start with that foundation.

There is no expectation or requirement that Eve Online (or any MMO I am familiar with for that matter) be played as a roleplayer. Sure, that is an option if that's your thing, and Eve is supportive of that. But its not required. I don't get "immersed" in the Eve universe when I play - I barely know the context or the history of the universe (or galaxy?) or races or politics. And I'm doing nothing wrong because of that. I break no rule by not interacting with the game that way. Neither do you if you deeply immerse yourself into the Eve world, and know all the history and lore, and think "what would my characters motivation be" before any action you take. Good for you. That's neat.

But you have no ground at all to criticize someone else for not doing that. Why? Because there's nothing in the EULA that dictates other people have to play like you, or enjoy the game for the reasons that you do. But even IF we looked at the situation from an "immersive" perspective, you're argument still falls a bit short, in my view.

See, if I'm a pirate in game, my objective would be the following (1) kill other people and steal their stuff and (2) establish territory where other pilots know they will be shot on site if possible or antagonized until they leave territory I control. As I establish dominance in a certain territory of systems, I would then venture outside of those systems looking for isk to make of the backs of other players, and I would look for ways to attack or antagnoize players attempting to work out of systems I claim that I control. That would include actions like disrupting their mission running activities in systems I claim for my own pirate corp, including stealing their mission cargo if I can.

Now, you may not "like" any of that. But its a direct counter example to your claim that actions you just don't like make "zero sense in the context of the game world." They most certainly do, you just don't like them.

Fun fact, I'm not even a pirate. I've never stolen from anyone in Eve. But I've been held at ransom, and had missions disrupted and lost look to pirates. And I still defend them. In fact, they are a big part of what makes Eve great to me, rather than just another MMO like so many others out there. I'm GLAD that there is danger. Staying on my toes is thrilling. And losses make the game feel that much more valuable to me, when losses actually matter.

I think my biggest frustration with "carebears" (I'm sorry I think that term is offensive to many, but I'm not sure what better term I should use for people who are offended by some or all forms of PvP) over the years has been, CCP has made it EXPLICITLY clear that it does not SHARE your opinion on what the game should be. It's declarations, multiple times that:

(1) You are not "safe" in highsec
(2) You consent to PvP the moment you click undock

Should tell anyone what the game is, and what kind of actions are considered acceptable and intended. And yet, people continue to argue that the fundamental underpinnings of the game - that have been that way since day one - should change to suit them, rather than them adapting to the rest of the community and to the game as its been defined forever.

It makes me sad , and also a little scared too, because if "carebear" players ever did manage to get sway over CCP (not likely at this point) they would take away just about the ONLY MMO still in existence that supports a free and open PvP world with significant penalties and maximum player freedom.

People who want that kind of game aren't wrong. Or sociopathic, or defective, or necessarily jerks or any of the other hyperbolic namecalling that gets thrown around. Again, I am on the side of those who GET ganked more than I ever gank and I STILL want to be in this game world. We are probably a smaller minority of total MMO players in the world, and there are hundreds of MMOs big and small that totally CATER to the kind of game world YOU want to play in.

YOU could go play in one of those, rather than trying to change the ONLY MMO out there that creates the kind of high-risk, high-reward PVP-focused world I want to play in.

Fun fact I actually am a therapist IRL. :P Also, yarr!

Read again: I wrote "'play pretend and suspension of disbelief". This is not the same as roleplaying, I myself don't know about Jamil Serum or whatever the Emperor's heiress cousin's name is, nor do I care (I wish background had more importance though), but I would enjoy playing in a gaming universe that made a little sense.

I don't mind pirates play pretending pirates, but as many people who have tried this game and found the community or the most active part of it, insanely toxic, I mind people using an online game as a platform for harvesting Schadenfreude, at the expense of coherence (ex permabumping) and ingame immersion.

As has been proven before (and your "pirate interdiction scenario" makes no sense for high-sec missions) there's no ingame reason for blowing up MTUs of random dudes, nor stealing their mission's unique item. This is simply done to annoy them, the goal is purely meta and IRL-oriented.

Which is the problem with this game (and how CCP makes bank out of letting people with issues expressing them)
- Most gamers want to play pretend spaceships in space
- Some very active types of players don't give two craps about ingame immersion: the game is just an interface to make some random joe mad, in a pervert zero-sum game approach: they can only have fun if their opponent is frustrated

Strange that a therapist doesn't see that, that's been obvious for at least 8 years. How long have you been playing?

Yes yes we know that the expected result is to have the garebear agress

It's hard to say that the motivation for getting the carebear to aggress is just about meta and RL when you can occasionally scoop hundreds of millions of ISK worth of modules from their smoking wreck.
This has happened for me on a number of occassions.

Also, this one time, at band camp, a guy ejected from his Navy Apocalypse and warped off. Apparently he figured he wouldn't get a lossmail that way. He was right, because I got a slightly dinged up but very free Navy Apoc out of the deal.
When I got it back to the station I found that he also had left nearly half a billion in imperial navy issue modules in his cargohold. I had that thing up on blocks with a new paintjob in minutes.

Profit is a VERY real and compelling reason for this kind of activity as well.

fun fact: when MTU's were introduced ,
if you had your drones set to aggressive they would defend your mtu.
generating a limited engagement automatically

they were desighned to be a conflict driver as much as a quality of life improvement.
the only reason this isnt the case anymore is the colossal amounts of wailing and gnashing of teeth that happend from the bears.

yeah im inclined to agree , the choice is a pretty important factor in my mind.

damn it omar now i want to flip some bears!

1) Drones auto-engaging someone that attacks an MTU was an oversight, especially for HS.

2) Clinical socio/psychopathy or similar personality disorders are rare. There is a low reporting of it, due to such persons rarely realizing they have that condition, much less perceiving it as something "wrong" with themselves, much less its impact on others. The low universal rate is deduced from generalized studies.

3) There are such persons playing EVE, but they are a tiny minority. Tbh you are unlikey to encounter one in EVE.

4) Human behavior is complex. Excluding the clinical conditions above, our behavior is guided, informed and restricted by legal and social constraints. War being one of the most obvious examples, where otherwise universally held restraints are redacted, and behavior to its exact opposite are allowed, encouraged and necessary. Duress and extreme need is another. If you are hungry or thirsty, in deadly danger, or your loved one/child etc is, those priorities override legality and social constraints by necessity.

5) EVE, as a virtual environment, is such an exception. The rules and restrictions are different. Additionally we are separated from the human consequences of our action, by anonymity, both on the part of the "victim" and the "aggressor". Furthermore, the assets in question are, after all, just pixels and code which none of us even actually own. We are merely allowed use of them as per TOS/EULA agreement with CCP.

6) "Opportunity makes a thief". Even IRL, if people think they can get away with picking up an abandoned wallet/phone, they are faced with a moral dilemma. possibly for the first time. They know it is "wrong" in terms of law and social norms, but they also know they want what is in it.

7) People commit crime IRL, despite legal and social restraints, and consequences. Reasons for this are an ongoing, probably inexhaustible, area of study. Theft, scamming, destruction etc are not crimes in EVE. Thus it is not rational to expect people to behave according to constraints that do not exist in this virtual environment.

Why should they?

IRL morality and laws, are distinct from those in the virtual environment such as EVE.
In an FPS game, it is called "killing" when you shoot an enemy. But you didnt actually kill them.
There would be no point in playing an FPS, if you didnt shoot the enemy, or in expecting others not to shoot you.

Proof of this is also in its inverse equation. It would be irrational to expect in IRL that theft, scamming and destruction would be allowed, just cos they are allowed in EVE. Or that killing people IRL would be allowed, just cos it is allowed in an FPS.

This shows there is no equivalence between the IRL and the virtual.

However since the virtual space is enacted by systems existing IRL, and the players within it exist as persons IRL, they are bound by and subservient to IRL laws, insofar as any action applies to an IRL entity outside the virtual environment.

8) On the other hand, some people ascribe too much value to their own morals and expectations of what constitute norms. They assume those to be universal, and that everyone else should follow them too.This is termed "sociocentrism", and every instance of it is false, in terms of the universality or superior positioning in norms and values it claims.

9) This sociocentrism occurs ingame, and IRL. It is furthermore bridged by some players attempting to press their norms from one, to the other, in either direction, onto others. As demonstrated above, this is false, both in that some "universal" norm would be justified by one group, and in the case of the distinction between the IRL and the virtual environments.

10) TLDR:
-EVE is distinct from IRL, as a virtual environment. Albeit its existence is based IRL, and its players exist IRL.
-EVE is subservient to IRL legality, insofar as actions extend beyond its constrained virtual environment, towards IRL.
-Things are allowed in EVE, which are not allowed IRL. Things are allowed IRL, which are not allowed in EVE.
-We dont own the pixels/code we are using in this virtual environment. CCP does.
-Sociocentrism is as invalid in-game, as IRL, in-terms of defining a universal norm.
-Persons with clinical disorders mentioned above, are rare. You are unlikely to ever encounter one in EVE.
-EVE, as a virtual environment, provides and allows for behavior which appears to be "wrong" when compared to IRL legality. But they are not "wrong" in EVE, and hence calling them wrong is invalid in this virtual environments internal context.

You mean if anti-gankers follow me from region to region this is considered harassment? Or does it only work for carebear stuff?

Actually, yeah it is harassment. Agondray's point is actually quite valid. If you persist in following a player around and messing with them and their assets when they've made an obvious attempt to relocate away from you, then yeah... it's likely to be considered harassment in the eyes of CCP and if you file a ticket they will likely take action. Now, if there's a war involved that's a different matter. You've paid good money for sexy time with them.