The problem is you’re assuming a new situation without any info from the powers that be.
If you believe things have changed, that’s your prerogative. But your belief does not make it so.
If tomorrow ccp came out and said we’re changing things and now hi-sec is meant to be safe. Now concord are meant to protect. You’d have no argument from me on their stance.
(notice how i don’t demand proof for things that cannot be proven except by statement from ccp)
See how that is incompatible with my desires for this game?
That’s not inequality in my perspective. It’s purely mutually exclusive.
It’s not an inequality issue. It’s not like pve players are 2nd class citizens (i am a miner and industrialist). It’s just that your desires cannot work at the same time as mine (or ccp’s last known words on the issue).
Someone on internet think something about me, threat me like fool …
Why would I care about that, I have RL and important people know who and what I am. Here in my spare time I am trying to tell you something, and don’t care how you wil receive it. I have offered you a certain values and informations but I will not bother myself to make you take it.
you’re talking about players not the game and my response was directed at a player, you! and not the game.
you want a safe place to give you the ability to interact with the market without ever being attacked by those who you might be hurting with that interaction.
Example:
player A (you) gathers, builds, sells, makes a profilt, never has to worry about PVP.
player B buys your shite and uses it to attack people with, player B’s people learn it’s you who builds for them, they can do nothing to stop the enemies supply chain and you have now had a severe impact on the PVP element of the game when it comes to this group you are trading with.
how in the name of sweet jumping jesus can you not see a problem with that?
No you misunderstand. My desire isn’t for me to mine, or for me to be huntable. It’s that all players be exposed to the sandbox and pvp at all times no matter where they are.
That’s how the market works. And it’s just more fun that way,
Because you are what you portray. If you want to be spoken to constructively, then be constructive, not entitled, ill informed and smug. You literally have nothing to be smug about, irrespective of how you feel the new ‘owners’ will act. Your understanding of economics and business despite protestations to the contrary leaves much to be desired.
In which way is this another situation then a pure PVE’er constantly killed in high by a group of gankers?
Also there is nothing the PVE’er can do about it beside deleting his account…in which way is the current situation BETTER beside the fact it benefits PVP?
Your example is just not valid if a situation like in my example is possible at the current status…no real change beside PVE would be safe and PVP still could happen…
And to answer the “question”… i really cannot see a problem as long as is a free market sell you have no right to “punish” the supplier of your enemy…
If this is your problem, you’re doing it wrong. Gankers are easy to avoid, so are mission invaders and wardecs. They’ll even tell you how to do it if you ask nicely.
Also there is nothing the PVE’er can do about it beside deleting his account…in which way is the current situation BETTER beside the fact it benefits PVP?
