Actually, yes. Until someone puts up resistance, its not fighting.
I disagree with you. PvE is about searching the optimal ways to do things, and it takes a long time to make correct figures.
EG when I try to evaluate conduits (other did it before me, still) it takes at least one hour to ready up myself to the fit I brought, and then I can check the value of red loot + bounty I make in another one hour.
Just testing a fit thus requires at least 2h. any variation I do to the fit requires time to be evaluated correctly (actually more like 1h30).
And I don’t do a lot of conduits. (just evaluated a few fits, did not have perfect skills, now I should do that again but … meh)
Of course I also need to restart the one hour in the case a ganker enters the system, or some other idiot decides he wants to test his stupid fit and do the same sites as I am doing (what a nonsense !!).
There is no fight, when there is no chance for one side. It’s an execution, where gankers have all the choices and the prey are supposed to enjoy being slaughtered.
The gankers know exactly what they pay, the ganked hope they won’t be noticed …
I dont see how you disagree with me. I mean, I know you do. But the effort and time something takes to do does not alter the nature or end result of a set procedure.
Thats what Im agreeing with from DMC, unless he means something else.
That’s all I know to do.
Well in my case, optimizing things take a lot of time, so much actually that I was not able to optimize many thing. That is an ever-changing system.
Well without you being more specific, I dont intend to put words into your mouth.
However if a set up is optimal for a particular scenario, I dont see what is likely to change the next time you wish to engage in that scenario.
I somehow agree with you on this (huuu it hurts) .
But … how do you know it’s optimal ?
1 Like
Me personally no idea. I suck at maths so I tend to read walkthroughs for PvE stuff and hammer a square peg into a round hole for PvP.
Edit: trial and error I guess
Yeah but then … you don’t know if it’s optimal ?
You do the same activity, you don’t try to improve it, therefore of course once you reached the “I can do it” stage, it’s always the same thing.
I have no idea the number of ships I have, that I used for one single thing, and maybe will never use them again.
Just for exploring the sigs in HS, I had started putting stations to change ship, so I had one at most 2j away from any system in metropolis. I stopped because it’s too expensive (each station contains 3b of ships + ammo, and 3b more if I put a loki in here - I just have 7 staging, needed like 6 more). But this was optimizing my exploration routine. Also I had made an optimal route to go through the most systems in metropolis, I also made a program to load that route in Eve, another program to go back to the closest staging station, another program to evaluate the loot of the systems, etc.
There’s a whole world between “I can do it” and “let’s do it better”.
1 Like
This doesnt change the content or make it more challenging though, does it?
Its still the same npc/pc gank target, you can just do it more efficently and quicker.
If Ive missed your point, I apologise but I dont agree that optimisation directly affects whether these activities are fighting, as its only one side thats optimising their capabilities further.
Its probably worth mentioning I hate optimisation. It homogenises the gameplay experience and removes creativity if its too stifling. If theres only one way to do something, then I probably dont do that thing much.
I don’t do optimal, I am just grabbing a boat I like and see how much I can squieze from it.
at this point I’m in the middle of evaluating if I can outmission my current DNI fit with a jackdaw.
I’d sliiightly disagree in here tho. Because even when you are at “I can do it” stage there is always “but can I do it BETTER”?
EDIT: ah nvm I’ve scrolled up further and turns out I have misinterpreted what you were saying, carry on 
IMO there isn’t much of PvE content in EvE that aims to be “challenging”, to be honest I don’t even find EvE as a whole game to aim at being “challenging” on per individual encounter scope. What happens during an encounter (I say encounter because I do not wish to trigger dem leets into fight over what is definition of fight 
) is very oftenly quite predictable once the field is set - the “challenge” is to be prepared, and in case of pvp encounters, to be prepared for enemy preparedness.
Anderson addresses that later in her post.
Not short posting to edit, just to show where Im replying to.
And yes. My point is that a fight must always contain a challenge to any number of different attributes at your disposal.
A “fight” with an AI or a Mining ship could be a challenge, but not the way its done atm.
But short of defining “fight” I dont think theres much to be said about it really.
That’s because you don’t understand that optimization makes only sense at a moment.
You optimize with a specific model in your head, therefore what you can reach is a local optimal, once you have enough experience you must remake your model and restart the whole process of evaluation.
Let me talk about burners evaluation.
I started with anize guide. I just was wondering, which corporation should I work for ? I took the thukker because they had the highest isk/lp. Then I went to freatlidur because it seems the best choice : no LS around, not much people, I would be an idiot to not go there. I also tried the two agents in the .6 system (teonosude and … ) but reached -2 so bye bye.
So I optimized the time, the fights with my skills, the fits. Then I had something strange. I made some missions in another system close by. And I was getting more LP, more rewards (but same loots). I just realized that the missions reward were indexed by each agent. I made some tests and got a formula, which I later knew was already on eve uni. and started redoing my optimization job, this time after checking not the isk/LP but the index isk/LP.
That’s just one step, there are a lot more ^^ took me one year to do that. Now I take in consideration the probability to go in LS, the geography, the different missions I can do, and it tells me where I should go spoiler : you can do much more (MUCH more) than 100 M/h in HS. that is my total value of raw isk for two accounts. add the lp, the drops…
Maybe you don’t like optimization because it requires to take a lot of notes, and to know you may have been wrong for that long ?
I agree it’s boring. I don’t even take notes myself anymore.
I agree with you, let’s disagree with me ! (joke)
1 Like
Im sorry but you apoear to be coming from a position that Im against a playstyle?
Im taking from what you are saying that you feel I think theres no enjoyable game in PvE or ganking/gank evasion. If so, you are incorrect. If not, then I dont see the relevence to your points about optimisation being effort. If course it is, but its optimisation in the face of static numbers.
If the enemy was able to optimise in response to what you do, then optimisation would be an important part of defining whether pve and ganking are fights.
But PvE the closest is CCP patches, not the enemy optimising, and in the second again one side changes tactics, and the other employs none at all, regardless of sides and results.
I may be less intelligent than you, but I dont like optimising because I find the idea of everyone doing the same thing with the same build utterly tedious.
You may not like us contrarians, but by nature we will never conform
No, I’m telling you you don’t know what optimization actually is.
You think it’s “let’s find the best fit for the task and use it again”. That’s what vulgar krabbers do. Optimization requires a lot of work outside to model and evaluate the possibility to “escape the local optimal”.
Just imagine krabber as trying to reach the top of the hill. Optimizers believe there are other mountains behind the clouds and are readying themselves to go in the unknown, often knowing they will be climbing a small rock, and that most people despise them for not enjoying normal game.
Krabbers enjoy having a fat wallet. Optimizers enjoy having explored many different models (hence a lot of ships I have)
Ho. You still think CCP made all the results static ? Ho my…
Then people would not do PVE. to do PVE, you need to be sustainable. make the PVE activity in Eve not sustainable, and nobody will make PVE, nor PVP because PVP actually relies on a stable PVE.
No I dont. Youve said Ive said that or suggested Im saying that, but all Ive said is optimisation to me is dull.
I still dont see what it has to do with whether pve and ganking are fighting.
Again, this has nothing to do with it being fighting.
Honestly Anderson, I know you want an argument, but unless gank targets and npcs are able to counter other players, its not a fight.
Im not planning to feel bad because I like having a scram on a PvE fit HAC lol.
And I totally get where making a network of exploration bases is fun, and you wanting to squeeze every isklette out per hour is fun for you.
Im not trying to criticise you, I just dont consider pve or common hs ganking to be fighting by definition.
Lol, I’m glad you’re back around. You manage to get pretty much all muh likes.
1 Like
Aw thanks. I like you too, fella.
1 Like
yeah noticed that being addressed beforehand even - but only after tapping the “reply” button xD
To be honest going by this definition I’d say every “fight” in EvE happens before any weapons are fired - at least from the long run perspective.
Well Mining ships were not intended to fight from what I understand, so shooting a barge hardly ever would count as a proper fight.
But for shooting at a combat ship controlled by AI - there is some measure of challenge when you start with whole thing and are only starting to assemble resources etc. to be even able to do it, then the up climb to be able to do it efficiently, and only then (imo) it falls off, when you cease to feel need of improving further.
Could the game be more challenging overall? of course it could, but I guess it wouldn’t be profitable to develop this way. And as far as history of MMO development in overal goes I am noticing trend of majority player base optimizing the fun out of everything…
I am a simple man, and I define “fight” simply - if there is exchange of hostilities between two or more entities within a game it’s a fight. Even if some of those entities were not meant to “fight” in this specific field I’d still call it a fight. Please note the use of word - exchange. Hostilities in some form needs to go both ways for me to consider it a fight, but the scope of hostilities is no longer relevant for me to label it a fight.
Which would mean that properly executed gank is not in my book a fight - hostilities would be one sided - a gank that gave victim time to return hostilities would be poorly executed one, but security mission would be one already - because while NPCs do lack capabilities for the moment to endanger well being of properly fit mission boat, there is hostility going both ways. They shoot the guns just as much as missioner does - just with less of a result.
oh scratch that I took too long to write a response and there is alot more of interesting posts 
I see guys you have slight mismatch of what “optimization” You talk about.
on one side of the coin - figuring uttermost optimal was of performing activity
and another - is constant process of improving how one performs the activity.
and I agree ironically with both viewpoints presented on that regard:
in the first meaning it is indeed boring - as soon as one person calculated the uttermost optimal way - if everyone jumps the wagon and copy-cat it - it’s boring, no more variety is left there.
but if you do the process of finding out yourself (by research, trial and error, personalized for your liking and capabilities) the process get’s interesting.
I’d disagree tho with notion that npc’s should be capable of optimize against players action - firstly such a thing would be prohibitively expensive just by the sheer count of players engaging, it would very likely also spiral out of control very fast to the point where no one can ever reliably clear PvE anymore.
Please bear in mind I do not mean in here that NPCs should be unable to adapt to player actions at all - but scope of adaptation should not go into realms of optimization. It should stay down on the scope of that single fight - the forces deployed currently on grid, when noticing current strategy is inefficient should be able to rotate between other approaches to the scenario.
Sorry for the long post
EDIT: fixed some typos and error in one sentence.
1 Like