Are you in favor of non consensual PVP? (Ganking)

Communications Center General Discussion
1
  • Yes
  • No
  • Don’t know
0 voters
2

Yes! :smiley:

3

Bad survey.

I am in favor of high-skill professional ganking. That means identifying lucrative targets, tracking them down, following them to their area of activity, ambushing them in the right moment and quickly looting the field. EVE should even offer career options and benefit attached to this “Piracy/Outlaw”-Gamestyle.

I am against stationary highsec-camps with the ever repeating cycle of blowing someone up, buying tags, blowing someone up, buying tags… It feels stupid, unworthy of a well designed game mechanism and the majority of all “gameplay” done is ‘waiting’ (probably mining ice with another 10 alts in the meantime ^^).

So yes, I am in favor of boosting active professional ganking and nerfing lazy stationary ganking at the same time. Confusing, isn’t it?

3 Likes
4

Ofc, HS ganking is the only real piracy in the game. Why? Because you can make a living exclusively out of PvP while being an outlaw.

No other activity gets even closer beyond very few wardec groups, but they are not pirates/outlaws.

The lowsec “pirates” are just miners and missioners who use this income to pay for their lowsec adventures. Making then effectively people who has to PVE to pay for their PVP.

Only the true elite pays and plex with PVP only while living in the shadows.

1 Like
5

This is a deeply flawed post.
There is no such thing as ‘non consensual PvP’ in EVE.
You explicitly and knowingly consent to PvP in all areas of space when you click the button marked “undock”. It’s one of the core gameplay principles of EVE.
Hence, all PvP is consensual.

1 Like
6

Please explain this then?
image

1 Like
7

That is a warning that CONCORD is not present in the destination system.
It’s also very badly worded.

8

What is the purpose of CONCORD?

1 Like
9

“The main purpose of an agency like CONCORD was to ease the tension and create a foundation for peaceful cooperation between the empires. This endeavour is widely regarded as a success, given that while several flare-ups have occurred, and indeed the empires have come to blows since CONCORD’s formation, a situation of all-out war has been avoided through careful mediation and negotiation”

It helps keep peace between the 4 empires

10

Retribution.

11

What is the point of that? And for what? And why? lol :slight_smile:

“When you undock you consent to PVP in all areas” “But CONCORD will retribution in some areas” i guess it makes sense

1 Like
12

You know full well what CONCORD is and how it operates. Make a compelling case instead of this pathetic line of passive aggressive questioning.

13

Its the socratic method bro you considering it hostile says alot and i will put you back on ignore now for both our sake i think

14

Concord is there to create a fake sense of protection, allowing EVEs famous emergent gameplay.

15

This is sophistry.

You consent to accepting that CCP has settled on a design that makes other’s content for others. And that it is in a system where there is little skill, and poor risk versus reward for an individual. Eve PvP in many matters is a joke, high sec sit and gank is one of them many times. Because if CCP, and more so the PvP anytime and anywhere crowd were serious about it, we wouldn’t have predator and prey dynamics throughout the entire ship type and fitting aspect of the game to the extreme that there is. Tactical cruise missile type weaponry allowing frigates to one shot capitals (or kamikaze) would exist. Why don’t they? Because the lone individual striking a blow of even near trivial significance or cost to collectives would lead to an uproar within the PvP segments that mostly engage in this type of play. Eve PvP, for all its talk with a grim dark tone of being the most hardcore PvP is far from it, because it completely shields collectives from the realities and cost of asymmetrical conflict. If CCP, and more so Eve’s PvP community for non-consensual PvP anytime and anywhere, groups were serious, nullsec’s biggest security risk and cost wouldn’t be the ‘safety’ of fighting off huge lumbering fleets at gate choke points. It be a pissed off solo player on a suicide mission in a stealth popping a few billion ISK ship leaving the yard fresh after construction.

16

Mining and missioning is also repetitive and boring to make you sleepy, which also allows EVEs emergent gameplay.

17

It isn’t ‘sophistry’. it’s the way the game mechanics work. it works that way by design, not by accident.
any player can attack any other player at any time when they’re both undocked.

in hisec, you accept CONCORD retribution for your actions.

18

The polite way of asking: are you quite sure that you want to enter a system with a higher risk than the one you are leaving ?

The less polite way of asking: are you quite sure you know what you are doing ?

The EvE way of asking: do you pretend you know what you’re doing ? Fine, let’s see.

That sign does not tell you that the hisec system you are leaving was “safe”. It tells you the next system is less safe.

This type of question should be asked in Rookie Help, or in the New Players section. Then again, we wouldn’t have these amusing threads full of squirming from someone ill at ease in New Eden, and very at home on the forum front.

2 Likes
19

If the recent, and really good ‘Down the Rabbit Hole’ documentary exposed anything about Eve, it is the idea of deeply thought out and planned design. I am pretty sure Hilmar would even concede a staggering amount of what is there has developed with time organically, with best effort to be hands off as much as possible. That is miles away from it being all ‘designed that way’ and more so ‘this is the best we have, which works for now.’

20

I think i know what the next poll could be :slight_smile: