These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

How many more players must we lose to bullying

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#361 - 2017-03-31 04:29:26 UTC
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:
Oh really?

Go read the new player handbook, If I remember, the first mention of pvp is around page 15, then another mention in the 30's.

Before any mention of pvp are pages and pages extolling the virtues of mining, hauling, exploration, industry etc etc.
If you had bothered to read it fully you'd have noticed that CCP also state the following, on page 21, concerning the "PvE" activities in Eve.

CCP wrote:
Furthermore, as we mentioned previously, once you enter New Eden you must consider every action you take as a form of PvP since this is the core game concept. In the asteroid field you’re competing with other pilots to obtain resources; you may also have to defend against ore thieves. On the market you battle for control of the economy in certain areas; for the supply and demand of your products versus other aspiring tycoons. On the battlefield you may fight for glory, for money, or for the right to rule whole areas of space. As always in EVE, it’s your choice.
If it touches the market it's PvP; if you build stuff for your own consumption, you compete with people who sell their stuff on the market by depriving them of a sale thus PvP etc.

The activities that are considered PvE are only there to drive and fund conflict; mining and ratting etc are PvE, what people do with the rewards is PvP.


Quote:
So tell me this, after all the usual propaganda links have been posted (again) why isn't it in massive capitals in said handbook on the front page, THIS IS A PVP GAME, PLAY IT AND YOU COULD/WILL LOSE EVERYTHING?

It isn't is it?
It wouldn't make any difference if they did, people would still whine on the forums about PvP in a PvP game.

Quote:
Yes pvp happens, but nowhere is it advertised as a pvp game only. Lots of other methods of play get massive amounts more advertising, look at the packs you can buy as a new starter.
The starter packs are aimed at newbies, mining, exploration and the like are within easy reach of newbies.

Advertisement wise pretty much every expansion trailer features PvP, every news article features PvP; rarely does any of CCP's advertising feature exciting activities such as explosion free mining.

By CCPs ******** definition of PvP WoW, Everqueat and Hello Kitty are all PvP then, at least in non-instanced areas. Who would have thought when I was running around the barrens looking for herbs or poopsockibg Rasta in lower guk that I was actually PvPing.

Rubbish definition. But then we also had that gem about cost not being a balancing factor when its actually the most significant balancing factor in any resources based game.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#362 - 2017-03-31 04:44:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Infinity Ziona wrote:

By CCPs ******** definition of PvP WoW, Everqueat and Hello Kitty are all PvP then, at least in non-instanced areas.


Not even close, because that's not CCP's definition, and in fact PVP wasn't even defined at all in anything you just responded to. It is, in fact, nothing more than competition between one or more players, but the big difference between EVE and all those other games you listed is that none are set up in such a way that a single player's actions and choices can have persistent effects on the game's environment or other players like EVE is, which is what really defines EVE as a PVP game at its very core above all else. The lack of instancing is only one component of that, and blindness to the bigger picture of EVE's nature and reality is what I imagine sets so many, like you, on this path of self-entitlement as if the game owes you something it never promised.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#363 - 2017-03-31 05:23:48 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

By CCPs ******** definition of PvP WoW, Everqueat and Hello Kitty are all PvP then, at least in non-instanced areas.


Not even close, because that's not CCP's definition, and in fact PVP wasn't even defined at all in anything you just responded to. It is, in fact, nothing more than competition between one or more players, but the big difference between EVE and all those other games you listed is that none are set up in such a way that a single player's actions and choices can have persistent effects on the game's environment or other players like EVE is, which is what really defines EVE as a PVP game at its very core above all else. The lack of instancing is only one component of that, and blindness to the bigger picture of EVE's nature and reality is what I imagine sets so many, like you, on this path of self-entitlement as if the game owes you something it never promised.

Lol. Rubbish.

Take blue EQ, you had often 10 guilds competing over NPCs that spawned often on 7 day cycles. You couldn't advance to harder content until at least the core part of the guild had obtained gear from those 7 day cycle mobs. Often people would cockblock others by killing the mobs to prevent advancement or would deliberately train the other groups to kill them before they downed the mob.

That's significantly more pvpish than buying or selling wars but definitely was not classified as PvP. PvP is and always has meant direct player vs player combat. End of freakng story.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#364 - 2017-03-31 05:49:09 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

By CCPs ******** definition of PvP WoW, Everqueat and Hello Kitty are all PvP then, at least in non-instanced areas.


Not even close, because that's not CCP's definition, and in fact PVP wasn't even defined at all in anything you just responded to. It is, in fact, nothing more than competition between one or more players, but the big difference between EVE and all those other games you listed is that none are set up in such a way that a single player's actions and choices can have persistent effects on the game's environment or other players like EVE is, which is what really defines EVE as a PVP game at its very core above all else. The lack of instancing is only one component of that, and blindness to the bigger picture of EVE's nature and reality is what I imagine sets so many, like you, on this path of self-entitlement as if the game owes you something it never promised.

Lol. Rubbish.

Take blue EQ, you had often 10 guilds competing over NPCs that spawned often on 7 day cycles. You couldn't advance to harder content until at least the core part of the guild had obtained gear from those 7 day cycle mobs. Often people would cockblock others by killing the mobs to prevent advancement or would deliberately train the other groups to kill them before they downed the mob.

That's significantly more pvpish than buying or selling wars but definitely was not classified as PvP. PvP is and always has meant direct player vs player combat. End of freakng story.


In those games you cannot attack anyone anywhere unless you go to a pvp area. EVE is the game where you are open to attack every time you undock, it's the big selling point that you are never safe in space. You can't scream people are bullying you because they shot at you in a game that is well known and advertised as a pvp game. It's like complaining about pvp happening in a battlefield game.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#365 - 2017-03-31 05:54:38 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

By CCPs ******** definition of PvP WoW, Everqueat and Hello Kitty are all PvP then, at least in non-instanced areas.


Not even close, because that's not CCP's definition, and in fact PVP wasn't even defined at all in anything you just responded to. It is, in fact, nothing more than competition between one or more players, but the big difference between EVE and all those other games you listed is that none are set up in such a way that a single player's actions and choices can have persistent effects on the game's environment or other players like EVE is, which is what really defines EVE as a PVP game at its very core above all else. The lack of instancing is only one component of that, and blindness to the bigger picture of EVE's nature and reality is what I imagine sets so many, like you, on this path of self-entitlement as if the game owes you something it never promised.

Lol. Rubbish.

Take blue EQ, you had often 10 guilds competing over NPCs that spawned often on 7 day cycles. You couldn't advance to harder content until at least the core part of the guild had obtained gear from those 7 day cycle mobs. Often people would cockblock others by killing the mobs to prevent advancement or would deliberately train the other groups to kill them before they downed the mob.

That's significantly more pvpish than buying or selling wars but definitely was not classified as PvP. PvP is and always has meant direct player vs player combat. End of freakng story.


In those games you cannot attack anyone anywhere unless you go to a pvp area. EVE is the game where you are open to attack every time you undock, it's the big selling point that you are never safe in space. You can't scream people are bullying you because they shot at you in a game that is well known and advertised as a pvp game. It's like complaining about pvp happening in a battlefield game.

Its not a "selling point" if its having a negative effect on growth.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#366 - 2017-03-31 06:09:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Its not a "selling point" if its having a negative effect on growth.
Citation needed.

If the all-pervasive PvP gameplay of Eve is having a negative effect on growth how do you explain the almost constant growth that Eve enjoyed for nigh on a decade, when there were more options for PvP than there are now?

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#367 - 2017-03-31 06:13:25 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

By CCPs ******** definition of PvP WoW, Everqueat and Hello Kitty are all PvP then, at least in non-instanced areas.


Not even close, because that's not CCP's definition, and in fact PVP wasn't even defined at all in anything you just responded to. It is, in fact, nothing more than competition between one or more players, but the big difference between EVE and all those other games you listed is that none are set up in such a way that a single player's actions and choices can have persistent effects on the game's environment or other players like EVE is, which is what really defines EVE as a PVP game at its very core above all else. The lack of instancing is only one component of that, and blindness to the bigger picture of EVE's nature and reality is what I imagine sets so many, like you, on this path of self-entitlement as if the game owes you something it never promised.

Lol. Rubbish.

Take blue EQ, you had often 10 guilds competing over NPCs that spawned often on 7 day cycles. You couldn't advance to harder content until at least the core part of the guild had obtained gear from those 7 day cycle mobs. Often people would cockblock others by killing the mobs to prevent advancement or would deliberately train the other groups to kill them before they downed the mob.

That's significantly more pvpish than buying or selling wars but definitely was not classified as PvP. PvP is and always has meant direct player vs player combat. End of freakng story.


In those games you cannot attack anyone anywhere unless you go to a pvp area. EVE is the game where you are open to attack every time you undock, it's the big selling point that you are never safe in space. You can't scream people are bullying you because they shot at you in a game that is well known and advertised as a pvp game. It's like complaining about pvp happening in a battlefield game.

Its not a "selling point" if its having a negative effect on growth.


CCP looked into this, they found that people people that get ganked are more likely to play longer than people who never experience pvp. It's also no coincidence that as safety has gone up (via removal of pvp) numbers have gone down. The game grew at its fastest rate when pvp was far easier to do.

There is no evidence that pvp causes people to leave but we do have evidence that nerfing pvp is causing people to leave.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#368 - 2017-03-31 06:15:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

By CCPs ******** definition of PvP WoW, Everqueat and Hello Kitty are all PvP then, at least in non-instanced areas.


Not even close, because that's not CCP's definition, and in fact PVP wasn't even defined at all in anything you just responded to. It is, in fact, nothing more than competition between one or more players, but the big difference between EVE and all those other games you listed is that none are set up in such a way that a single player's actions and choices can have persistent effects on the game's environment or other players like EVE is, which is what really defines EVE as a PVP game at its very core above all else. The lack of instancing is only one component of that, and blindness to the bigger picture of EVE's nature and reality is what I imagine sets so many, like you, on this path of self-entitlement as if the game owes you something it never promised.

Lol. Rubbish.

Take blue EQ, you had often 10 guilds competing over NPCs that spawned often on 7 day cycles. You couldn't advance to harder content until at least the core part of the guild had obtained gear from those 7 day cycle mobs. Often people would cockblock others by killing the mobs to prevent advancement or would deliberately train the other groups to kill them before they downed the mob.

That's significantly more pvpish than buying or selling wars but definitely was not classified as PvP. PvP is and always has meant direct player vs player combat. End of freakng story.


There's absolutely nothing rubbish about the fact that what happens in EVE Online is directed by the players, and what happens in EQ and virtually every other game is directed by devs, and nothing you said right now is an contradiction of that fact, that core element that makes EVE Online a PVP game. Your denial of this fact doesn't make it not a fact either. PVP = player vs player. If it was meant to specify combat, it would be more specific. The fact is, a game of chess is as much PVP as a gladiatorial deathmatch. Another fact that your denial won't change. Neither will that 'example' you provided above, which was little more than an example of a themepark game gating content via PVE, something that isn't even comparable to EVE. I'm sure it makes sense in your own head, but to rational human beings who understand EVE, it's complete and utter nonsense.

If you want to talk specifically about combat between players, then specify PK'ing and/or combat PVP. While it's true that a player can get through EVE and totally avoid any aspect of combat, it's not true that a player can avoid PVP. Just by logging in, you PVP, because you are sharing that game environment with other players who are competing against you to some degree, whether you like it or not, and whether you deny it or not.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#369 - 2017-03-31 06:32:35 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Its not a "selling point" if its having a negative effect on growth.

Blizzard catered to idiots and made WoW into a pile of ****.

Sure they still have way more subscribers than EVE. And I don't know how bad it is today. But back when I was playing, random groups were literally camped by people destroying other players fun by kicking,leeching, tanks leaving in the midst of a boss fight and loads of other shenanigans. The forums were overflowing of players complaining about each other and basically the player base was split in two like here: Those who managed to find decent groups they could play the game with and those who didn't. For whatever reason.

And what was Blizzards reaction? They catered to the masses and basically made a single player game out of WoW. Piled one stupid rule after another on group play in a desperate fight to keep the bullies in check.

The path WoW took was, what brought me to EVE. It's a long way better here!

Remove standings and insurance.
Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#370 - 2017-03-31 07:04:25 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
I could stop playing tomorrow and have no effect on the in game market. Saying that using the market is pvp is almost laughable. Market trading is not pvp, it's market trading. Yes, what I sell or buy comes from another player, but the market for near anything is so saturated that I alone have very little effect on prices. I mean sure, siting in a trade hub 0.01 isking is market pvp, but I don't think that's what you were talking about.


The same can be said of anyone. It doesn't matter, every small contribution that one player makes adds up when combined with the contributions of others. Your argument that 'one person wouldn't make a difference' applies to literally every aspect of the game. The fact that one person CAN make a difference is enough. And no, market PVP is not laughable at all. Some of this game's strongest competition is price competition. Don't believe me? Try doing some real trading for once, some high-volume stuff. That is PVP, player-vs-player, direct competition between players, that is the very definition of PVP. If you've limited your own thinking of PVP to combat only, that's your own problem, but it doesn't change the simple fact that every element of this game, by virtue of its very core design, is PVP to some degree, and whether you like it or not, you consent to that PVP by virtue of logging in.

Don't want PVP? Don't log in to EVE online. Because despite IZ's assertions to the contrary, that is what this game has been, and has meant to be, from the very beginning.


So based on what you are saying, one guy doesn't affect much so shouldn't expect much harassment justified by 'you're market pvping'. I agree pvp can exist on the market and I did say so, but let's not pretend the majority of people are engaged so deeply with the market. You can label everything pvp if you want, but it makes these discussions needlessly vague. Pvp to me is player ships fighting each other, sure there's other forms of competition but none with such consequences as losing all your stuff.

On consequences, what consequences do wardeccers face? Being able to be shot? That's what they want. There are no consequences to the wardec mechanic and all the purpose it serves is sticking your e-peen in someone else's face.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.
Gwenaelle de Ardevon
Ardevon Corporation
#371 - 2017-03-31 07:09:28 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

By CCPs ******** definition of PvP WoW, Everqueat and Hello Kitty are all PvP then, at least in non-instanced areas.


Not even close, because that's not CCP's definition, and in fact PVP wasn't even defined at all in anything you just responded to. It is, in fact, nothing more than competition between one or more players, but the big difference between EVE and all those other games you listed is that none are set up in such a way that a single player's actions and choices can have persistent effects on the game's environment or other players like EVE is, which is what really defines EVE as a PVP game at its very core above all else. The lack of instancing is only one component of that, and blindness to the bigger picture of EVE's nature and reality is what I imagine sets so many, like you, on this path of self-entitlement as if the game owes you something it never promised.

Lol. Rubbish.

Take blue EQ, you had often 10 guilds competing over NPCs that spawned often on 7 day cycles. You couldn't advance to harder content until at least the core part of the guild had obtained gear from those 7 day cycle mobs. Often people would cockblock others by killing the mobs to prevent advancement or would deliberately train the other groups to kill them before they downed the mob.

That's significantly more pvpish than buying or selling wars but definitely was not classified as PvP. PvP is and always has meant direct player vs player combat. End of freakng story.


There's absolutely nothing rubbish about the fact that what happens in EVE Online is directed by the players, and what happens in EQ and virtually every other game is directed by devs, and nothing you said right now is an contradiction of that fact, that core element that makes EVE Online a PVP game. Your denial of this fact doesn't make it not a fact either. PVP = player vs player. If it was meant to specify combat, it would be more specific. The fact is, a game of chess is as much PVP as a gladiatorial deathmatch. Another fact that your denial won't change. Neither will that 'example' you provided above, which was little more than an example of a themepark game gating content via PVE, something that isn't even comparable to EVE. I'm sure it makes sense in your own head, but to rational human beings who understand EVE, it's complete and utter nonsense.

If you want to talk specifically about combat between players, then specify PK'ing and/or combat PVP. While it's true that a player can get through EVE and totally avoid any aspect of combat, it's not true that a player can avoid PVP. Just by logging in, you PVP, because you are sharing that game environment with other players who are competing against you to some degree, whether you like it or not, and whether you deny it or not.



THIS!

You log in,
you undock ............. you compete with other player.
Simple as that, what ever you do, you do PvP.

«An hour sitting with a pretty girl on a park bench passes like a minute, but a minute sitting on a hot stove seems like an hour». Albert Einstein - [11, S. 154]

More Quotes, Poetry & Prose on: https://gwenaelledeardevon.wordpress.com/
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#372 - 2017-03-31 07:16:46 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
So based on what you are saying, one guy doesn't affect much so shouldn't expect much harassment justified by 'you're market pvping'.


No, and you clearly misunderstood what I said. In short, if you aren't logging into this game expecting other players to make trouble for you, then you are playing it wrong, because players are going to make trouble for you. Whether it's intentional or otherwise, and to what degree that trouble comes, is dependent on any number of factors but the primary one is going to be the players themselves. Always.

And if you don't know what consequences wardeccers face, then you haven't done enough wardeccing. This question stems only from your own ignorance of the game, and is not worth answering, especially seeing how often it has been answered on these forums before. Go wardec someone and find out what consequences they face. People say there are no such thing as stupid questions: that depends on how you go about finding the answers. Asking that one here when you have it within your own power to find out the answer makes it a stupid question.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Salvos Rhoska
#373 - 2017-03-31 07:44:31 UTC
Salt extraction is a fine art.

Unfortunately many lack the skill/finesse for it, or prefer quantity over quality.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#374 - 2017-03-31 07:44:35 UTC
Really the consequences of a wardec is... you are at war. Which is exactly what you wanted. If you attack someone you can't beat well that's kind of nobody's fault but your own.

A game where everyone is trying to make trouble for you makes sense when you are actually competing over something, but honestly most wardecs are seal-clubbing. The 'victims' are not competing over anything and I refuse market pvp as a legitimate reason, they don't affect the economy and I'd have no problem with nerfs to HS income.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.
Azalyn Akiga
Doomheim
#375 - 2017-03-31 07:50:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Azalyn Akiga
I will keep saying it the mechanics in eve are not the problem sure there are things that can be done better. That pvp is the focus of eve is not the problem. The problem is the community and it needs big improvements.

First of new players need to learn the hard way that space is dangerous they need to learn don´t fly what you can´t afford to lose.

Old players needs to learn that not every one plays eve the same way as they do. They also need to learn that insulting people on how they play is just childish.

Also the damn drama needs to bloody stop it is a game stop comparing it to real life are you messed up in the head you can´t see the difference between fantasy and reality.

I say there are some nice eve players but majority of the eve community is bad and could stand improvements.


Also if you don´t like war dec or pvp maybe you should rethink of what game you wanna play.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#376 - 2017-03-31 07:51:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Gwenaelle de Ardevon wrote:

THIS!

You log in,
you undock ............. you compete with other player.
Simple as that, what ever you do, you do PvP.


I tried asking this question to Remiel and the CODE players but not quite in this format but it was similar to this in terms of the value from the kills they have, I just got told I did not understand Eve or insulted, but let me try you.

Would you call doing a 100m sprint against a man with no legs a competition or something that makes you feel good about winning. Or is it that you got him to compete in a race he could never win and you could goad him for being so stupid as to get in a race he could not win.

I don't get Eve because I see no value in winning such a race? Is that correct.

And by the way I am not knocking them for doing such kills or insulting them, but more to say that it does not rock my boat or gives me very little sense of achievement.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#377 - 2017-03-31 07:55:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Really the consequences of a wardec is... you are at war. Which is exactly what you wanted. If you attack someone you can't beat well that's kind of nobody's fault but your own.

A game where everyone is trying to make trouble for you makes sense when you are actually competing over something, but honestly most wardecs are seal-clubbing. The 'victims' are not competing over anything and I refuse market pvp as a legitimate reason, they don't affect the economy and I'd have no problem with nerfs to HS income.


Your refusal of legitimate reasons doesn't make them illegitimate. You are nobody. What you call 'seal clubbing' is evidently your own disagreement of legitimate gameplay at this point, making what you call anything completely irrelevant. At the end of the day, you can call it 'seal clubbing' all you like. In this game, seal clubbing isn't illegal, nor is it a crime, and you alone choose the situations you are in, and if you've chosen to be a defenceless 'seal', then that's on you.

You keep giving legitimate gameplay labels with morality bents like 'seal clubbing' as if you're trying to say something about the people who do it. Ironically, that says more about you and your penchant for unsubstantiated and irrelevant morality judgements of other people than it does about the people you judge. I hate to break it to you, but it's just a game. The only real consequences that come from playing games are the ones you bring on yourself for playing them, like being late to work or some such. Otherwise, in-game consequences don't really account for much where reality is concerned, so you and your ilk can play the 'seal clubbing' card all you like. I'll just sit here and remind you that you can call it whatever you like, I'm still going to do it regardless of what you think of me, because who even are you that I should give one seventeenth of a flying ****?

As for wardecs not affecting the economy, this reveals you to be completely moronic when it comes to EVE Online. EVERY ship destroyed effects the economy. Each one to a small degree, but when you add them together, you have pretty much the entirety of the economy right there revolving around ship loss and replacement. One only need take a look at the total value of losses in high sec to see what drives a substantial portion of the economy in EVE Online. If any one player thinks they should be exempt from this for any reason, then they think far too highly of themselves.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#378 - 2017-03-31 08:10:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Mieyli
Ha.

I'll repeat my earlier point, so long as eve continues to defy normal expectations you will continue to have threads like these, and no big growth in subscribers. Make of that what you will, I'll have fun in other games and check on eve now and then to see what's happening. CCP could wake up one of these days.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#379 - 2017-03-31 08:12:18 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Really the consequences of a wardec is... you are at war. Which is exactly what you wanted. If you attack someone you can't beat well that's kind of nobody's fault but your own.

A game where everyone is trying to make trouble for you makes sense when you are actually competing over something, but honestly most wardecs are seal-clubbing. The 'victims' are not competing over anything and I refuse market pvp as a legitimate reason, they don't affect the economy and I'd have no problem with nerfs to HS income.


In the ice interdictions miners were killed on sight for 3 reasons. First was to blockade the production of caldari ice, this cased a rush on this form of ice which spiked prices. When it hit it's peak we fed out vast supplies into the market and made hundreds of billions in profits.

Second, untanked miners were profitable to gank.

Third, back then the primary ingredient in T2 production was tech which was almost entirely sourced from CFC moons. Most of the cost of a new hulk was the price you paid for tech from the CFC. Hefty profits were made.

So yea, you don't have to be doing anything to still be worth shooting. The average carebear screamed they were being bullied for no reason, they had no idea they were making themselves profitable as targets and couldn't grasp the concept of being shot for any other reason than the gankers were psychopaths
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#380 - 2017-03-31 08:34:41 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Ha.

I'll repeat my earlier point, so long as eve continues to defy normal expectations you will continue to have threads like these, and no big growth in subscribers. Make of that what you will, I'll have fun in other games and check on eve now and then to see what's happening. CCP could wake up one of these days.


Before 2013, EVE was a lot harder than it is now, and was growing steadily. EVE doesn't lose subscribers because of what it is, or because of what people expect it to be, because players like me who learn what EVE is and adapt will always exist, even if we're only a minority. You have no point beyond demonstrating further ignorance if you expect a game like this to ever have mass appeal without becoming something it was never intended to be. CCP isn't asleep. They're just not catering to weaklings like yourself.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104