Yesh. Right past the legions of non carebears in place to protect their livestock.
Ah crap. I was gonna kill a bear and leave the killmail here. Instead it seems I might have converted him to PVP instead.
Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything. People are just as much entitled to give their opinion in a constructive way as you are.
Are you saying other people are not operating within the boundaries of what Eve is ?
You are calling people disagreeing with you cheaters.
the simple fact that they remain in the game means nobody here is doing this. Your insults are vain and pitiful.
How old is his char?
Exponential security status loss for high security crimes, rather than the glacial reduction presently implemented. Criminals shouldn’t be able to chain ganks together for hours at a time with calculated impunity. Make their security status drop faster and it will be easier to engage them outside of the asymmetric terms of the gank.
Doesn’t look like people in Delve are having to compete much.
Oh, so that’s why all the -10.0 gankers have a hard time ganking… not
I don’t agree with this, but it’s an interesting perspective. I think your implied definition of “fair” is faulty. It’s a slippery slope too: expanding it would change the topic, but you’d be going up against a different part of the “bittervet narrative”, and it would be entertaining
IRL, “competition” doesn’t imply everyone can compete against everyone else at every activity. I’m no more interested in changing the definition of competition than I am in changing the (real world) definition of “PvP”.
No, it will not. Time and time it has been proved the high sec carebears begot nerfs they couldn’t handle.
I’ve never been there, but CCP’s statistics and forum anecdotes support your comment. I suspect it’s a (very) bad thing for EVE.
There’s a (much simpler) multi-player area control game that works according to the principle that sooner or later, one “side” will control something over 51% of the territory, at which point that particular game is abandoned. The fun is in getting the controlling alliance together, and trying to break up alliances that get too large.
The consequences of it happening in EVE would probably be as large as actually implementing a “PvP Off” toggle that could be used at any time (including mid-fight). IMO CCP should be working hard on making very large (and/or very efficient) Corps/Alliances easier to break up.
About five years old.
He aggressed with his Paladin on my Cruor, and in a fit of wisdom immediately microjumped away and warped off. We got to talking in local and luckily there were a few other pvp players in system who were doing pve stuff for isk and whatnot. Turned into an actually decent convo. We urged him to check out groups like Spectre fleet and Bombers Bar, and firstly to ship down to something cheap and go get himself into some low sec fights as well.
Once he realized we weren’t messing with him and were trying to give him some good advice he warmed up to the idea and started asking some good questions. I hope he follows through and at least tries it out because he was starting to feel really burned out with mission running.
Honestly, if he does and finds his path to joy through pew I’ll take it as a bigger win than a killmail.
That’s not what fairness is.
The PVP in eve does not require you to be fit PVP. So it is not fair (people in gank fit can shoot people in PVE/freight fit). Hence they are not competing.
A sandbox by definition allows you to choose your path, your goal, and that is the opposite of what a competition is : you are given goals in a competition.
You can make competitions in Eve but that does not mean Eve is a competitive game.
While we’re on the subject of the definition of PvP, Elena apparently can’t read much beyond a few sentences. The “real world” definition from wikipedia that she keeps touting happens to include the words “PvP can be broadly used to describe any game, or aspect of a game, where players compete against each other”.
You’re cherry-picking. Read the article.
Speaking of cherry picking…
I read the article, apparently you didn’t. If you had, you would realise that when we label trading etc as PvP we are doing so in one of the ways described in the very article you love to push so much; to describe aspects of a game where players compete against each other.
You’re “moving the goalposts”.
"The word “fairness” only came up in your somewhat eccentric redefinition of “competition”. It’s not in the usual (relevant) definitions of compete or competition.
Your last paragraph is either a misunderstanding or equivocation. Assuming it’s a misunderstanding, you’re using “competition” as though it was something like a sporting event.
Clearly these don’t exist in EVE, which (AFAIK) the closest any part of EVE comes to it being a relatively new feature.
…and you are a lying POS that strawmans’ everyone here…
Elena destroyed idiots, amazing PVP campaign.
That was exactly my point.
A competitive game needs to have competition.
When players can interact with each other, it’s just a multiplayer game.
Eve is a multiplayer game, which is centered on spaceships, with access to PvP in all the game, but without a competition design. It thus is not a competitive game.
remember, it is in this context :
It’s a spaceship game, with open pvp, costly death, and free market simulation.