Ethics of conflict

(Lexie Huren) #1

You don’t have to look too far to find people that vilify direct acts of aggression against their virtual property, such as ships. For example, someone gets ganked, and then they get upset and start venting about the attack. Often with claims that the attack was unfair in some way. Then when some time has passed and people have moved on, the victim has to replace their ship if they don’t have some spares in the hanger. So there is an ISK cost involved. But ISK can be jeopardised in other ways, and yet there’s less complaining involved.

I spend most of my time station trading. I buy things cheaply from impatient people and then sell those items to other impatient people with a mark-up. I add nothing of value to the process - it’s the same item and it’s in the same location. Yet, I manage to earn well enough by doing it. I get ahead by taking advantage of people, as do a lot of station traders. But I don’t seem to read a lot of forum threads about how station traders are evil criminals that need to be stopped.

Veterans of Eve will have likely thought about this plenty, but for anyone that hasn’t, take a moment and think about how many overpriced things you’ve bought since you’ve been playing. Think about how many things you’ve sold under value. Take a wild guess at how much excess ISK you’ve spent, and consider how much more you could have purchased or achieved with that ISK.

Obviously, there’s reasons why people let themselves be victims to the market. And it seems pretty clear that it can be costly, just as losing ships can be also. So why do people complain so enthusiastically in public about getting blown up, but barely say a thing about getting taken for a ride on a trade?

5 Likes
(Mr Zeppo) #2

Well said!
As a long time observer of MMO gaming in general, the appeal of EVE has always been the open nature of the game… so now that I am finally here as a new player, it somehow doesn’t surprise me that there is talk of stagnation and death spirals…

1 Like
(Lexie Huren) #3

I’m yet to play an MMO game in which the community isn’t complaining about the game dying, or about how the developer is ruining things. Seems to be a common feature. :grin:

2 Likes
(Qia Kare) #4

Because the former is not a choice they made for themselves, but the latter is. Market PvP, if you want to call it that, is consensual PvP. Being ganked is non-consensual PvP, and it’s the non-consensual type of PvP (or at least the inaccurate perception that it is, for those of you who’d say ‘you consent when you undock’) that raises all kinds of controversy.

6 Likes
(Mevatla Vekraspek) #5

Humans not whining? the dead ones maybe…

1 Like
(Mevatla Vekraspek) #6

Nice to see that you consent to market manipulations aimed at creating artificial inflation. My wallet loves you.

1 Like
(Lexie Huren) #7

That’s an interesting point. Which makes me wonder about the whole “consent when you undock” aspect.

I know people have mixed feelings about comparing real life to the game, so I hesitate to suggest this comparison, but do we consent to being mugged by leaving the house each day?

It’s not likely that it will happen for most of us, but it’s a possibility. Similar to ganking. There’s probably a lot that could be said about the consequences of the two examples. But leaving that aside, is it mostly a matter of player expectations?

(Qia Kare) #8

Nobody can force you to make a purchase or or sell an item you would not choose to. You may not like the price, but you do choose to either pay that price or sell for it. The interaction only happens on your command.

(Mevatla Vekraspek) #9

Nobody forces you to undock.

1 Like
(Qia Kare) #10

Undocking happens on your command, and if that were the end of it the comparison would hold. The interaction that happens when one is ganked happens on someone else’s command.

Making a trade or sale is a direct expectation that happens immediately. Being killed on your way to the market is contrary to the expectation. You wouldn’t set out to reach the market if you expected to die on your way there.

I’m only talking about the reasons people raise more fuss over one of these than the other. I’m not making any value judgements on anyone.

4 Likes
(Mevatla Vekraspek) #11

You don’t get it, when you get popped in space, all that happens besides the explosions is that you lose isk. When i tweak the market for profit, when you buy, you lose isk. That’s the same thing without the emotional roller coaster.

3 Likes
(Qia Kare) #12

Then answer the question, if you are so wise, and show me what I don’t get. Why do people openly complain about being shot in space to a greater degree than they do about getting ripped off in the market?

3 Likes
(Mevatla Vekraspek) #13

Emotions.

(Lexie Huren) #14

That’s what I’m wondering. Why is losing a ship more emotional than losing some ISK more directly?

(Mevatla Vekraspek) #15

I think that you feel more powerless when confronted to explicit violence, without being able to cope with it, or something like that.

1 Like
(Xuxe Xu) #16

Fine - station traders are evil.

1 Like
(Loutro Fift) #17

It’s the time vs Isk equation. I want to buy stuff and fly NOW. Do I care how much I spend to reship? Generally, no. What’s an extra 10 million when I can save 20 minutes going to a cheaper hub.

Why? Time is more valuable than Isk. I can generate Isk at will. I can’t generate time.

you’re simply in the middle of the equation.

It’s got nothing to do with ethics. Markets are driven by greed and fear; time compresses both.

3 Likes
(Nana Skalski) #18

But with a consent. You tried to compare something like nonconsensual PvP to setting a price that people accept on market.

4 Likes
(Nana Skalski) #19

You dont lose ISK, you give isk and get module in return.
Its like buying guns that you can then point at market trader and demand more guns. :grin:

Its not a rollercoaster because its trade. People also have option to not buy but manufacture themselves, and those that agree on price have enough ISK to do so, so if you dont think its a fair trade, they dont have actually anything against it, because they have enough ISK. And then they gain something in return for ISK spent. If they would not accept the trade, they would not buy anything from you. There are other traders and manufacturers.

So no emotional response, at least from buyer, but I think you like to think you have made a deal of century on every overpriced module that nobody cares about that its 100% above, because its just stupid 1000 ISK more, and they can do 100000% of that with that module just after undocking. :grin:

4 Likes
(Teckos Pech) #20

Ahhh…the economically ignorant. Yes, middlemen actually can and do add value. You thicken up the market. See, when Mr. I Can’t Wait To Have That Module shows up on the market…there you are (or some other station trader) providing him with exactly what we was looking for. Otherwise he’d might have to wait for Mr. I Can’t Wait To Have The ISK to show up.

Please tell me you do not vote. People like you should take the moral high road and not vote. You just do not understand the economic process well enough to be out there voting…

You see, transactions in EVE Online are voluntary. When somebody buys a module at whatever price you set they want the module more than the ISK. For them it is a positive outcome. For you it is a positive outcome…you want the ISK more than the module. It is a positive sum game. Taking advantage of someone is a negative sum game.

Nothing. That differential in valuation of a given item in game is what allows trade to take place. Why do I buy a module off a sell order vs. putting up a buy order? I need it right away. My opportunity cost of time is greater than the value of the ISK I am spending.

Yes…every time I buy something I want off the market I’m being victimized. What a load of stupid idiocy.

Were you by any chance a major in something like say poetry?

Because they aren’t being “taken for a ride” market transactions are mutually beneficial.

Or you are a complete misanthrope and think everyone buy you is a completely blinkered moron.

The sad reality is that you just do not understand the process that you are actually good at…at least not from the stand point of ethics.