I don’t think “meaningful” content really needs a definition. CCP should just acknowledge that unique player interaction is a good thing. Until something gets severely out of hand, let the players sort it out. I wonder what kind of changes we’d see if a group like Goonswarm were interested in burning every inch of Highsec to the ground? CCP has made balance passes and changes before according to how a single group uses them.
To put some universally accepted meaning on what is and isn’t meaningful content would tend to have us categorize and be elitist with what is and isn’t content. A miner can most certainly have meaningful content in an end product or goal he’s working toward. It may not directly impact you as a pvp’er or nullsec FC, but it’s still an activity that does something.
You have to understand that nowhere in Eve Online is truly safe. I have no issue with a player not desiring non-consensual pvp (can’t really blame them) and I don’t even have an issue with players mitigating risk by using available mechanics to avoid that kind of pvp or pvp in general. The core theme for me is that Eve Online is a competitive game in which the rules are built around players interacting with each other (for the most part) even if it’s only desired by a single party.
In a perfect Eve Online I would prefer that players aren’t artificially shielded from pvp and risk, but that they are able to outsmart or outplay someone that would want to use a one-sided fight or tricky gameplay to their advantage in order to get a fight.
I think that there’s great potential for good content here. I believe it all comes down to perspective.
If you are a smaller or more casual group looking to throw out decs, do you think it’s wise to wardec some larger group that’s going to showup and destroy your structure?
Sure lets say your small group of 5-10 pvp’ers find that your structure is under attack by someone you declared war on. I don’t see it being a far fetched idea to have friends that you can rely on to help you defend or push them off. Think of how a lot of the smaller - medium sized groups in wormholes operate. A small group may be getting evicted or something and they’ll temp blue another group seeking help.
There’s a lot of worry about larger merc groups such as Pirat, Marmite, and maybe Riot going around and snuffing out a lot of the smaller groups. I only see this happening if you intentionally step on their toes, get in their way, and/or do something to annoy or piss them off, wardec a protection contract of theirs.
It takes effort in scouting out an area and finding potential targets or “content”. You will definitely probably want to not just hang around trade hubs and pipes and instead stretch your legs. It’s do-able.
If you’re in it for profit, we can apply farmer logic: have no reason to target ships that won’t give you enough ISK/hour to cover your time and expenses. An easy selection rule for PvP-proofing some ships.
Eve’s economy is driven by destruction and players tempered with risk. Hunting other players to have an impact on them is more engaging/empowering than people want to admit.
Ccp will tell you that having an impact on your surroundings is very attractive to a player. To have your actions resonate not just with the game, but other players. To be recognised for your actions. To defeat your opponents and rise to victory.
Nothing does that better than non-consensual pvp.
Compared to a duel in low sec where both sides expect to lose their ship at one point. Neither side are fighting over a meaningful objective, there’s no goal aside from ‘a friendly duel’. Not much emotion.
Which part of I don’t shoot people in the face are you having difficulty understanding?
I do not partake of pew-pew style PvP, ergo I don’t target those using cheaper ships; other than as a potential customer.
My PvP is conducted on the market, I sell lots of cheaper ships and the guns and ploughshares that go with them. Most are low margin, high turnover items, but still very much worth my while.
You haven’t claimed that you personally would lose anything if you couldn’t force PvP on unwilling fellow players. Instead you’re being altruistic towards your fellow EVE players (except, of course, those who do not like unlimited non-consensual PvP in highSec).
On behalf of some of your fellow players you said the issue would be that the EVE economy would be significantly negatively affected if there was less or no non-consensual PvP in highSec.
This can be quantified. It’s up to you to do so. After all, you had to know the numbers in order to make the claim.
You just described the part of my gameplay that I would encourage others to do. It gives a huge advantage over those that do not.
The core theme for me is that Eve Online is a competitive game in which the rules are built around players interacting with each other (for the most part) even if it’s only desired by a single party.
:nods:
I think that there’s great potential for good content here. I believe it all comes down to perspective.
I’m sure there is, pretty much everyone agrees that wardecs have been broken for ever, moreso IMHO when the watchlist was killed off. A change was needed, but I’m not sure that essentially changing non structure owning corps into social corps was the way to go about it; but hey I’m an ignorant bear
Mercs will find a way to use it to their advantage, and when the tears start the circle of nerf will be complete.
Excluding griefers (real world definition), what does it cost PvPers if it becomes easier for players to avoid being attacked while in highSec?
This one?
I told you, repeatedly, that I can’t speak for them, as I am not one of them. Any answer I give other than the one that you already have would be worthless.
For myself, and others who do the sort of stuff that I do, the cost is economic.
Aren’t you talking about “Market PvP”? Even an EVE player should find it difficult to conflate that with “non-consensual PvP” which has an obvious, unambiguous context of ship combat.
You do know there’s a formal name for misleading readers/listeners by redefining words?
– https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation –
It’s so common in this forum I’ve taken to calling it “bittervet cryptospeech”. I don’t use it myself.
Yes, that would have been fairly obvious if you had actually read my posts; especially the post where I specifically refer to PVP, as in shooting at others, as traditional PVP in order to differentiate the two.
Both are considered to be PvP here, one driving the other.
In terms of consent in Eve you give implied consent for others to engage you in myriad facets of PvP by logging in, just as you imply consent for others to engage you in PvP when you play Call of Duty online.
