Funny, name where I’m complaining about the game??
I pointed out that there are folks doing the stupidity of “hey, I like to Do A… but the other guy doesn’t… waaaaaaa, CCP Make a nerf so they have to come into my yard to play” “hey, they are forced to have to come to my yard, but they found a way to avoid me, waaaaa, CCP make a nerf so they have to play with me”
so if the direct obesevation is toxic, it must be because what is observed is toxic, no?
Xuxe,
but if they choose to avoid dangerous places, and folks bitch about demanding a nerf to -force- them against their wishes, that’s a different kind of consent, no?
Black Pedro,
They should consider how they label it, don’t say “here’s a you did something bad timer” when they hadn’t done something bad, otherwise it’s saying blame the victim 
No one is forcing anyone.
Everyone knows the rules of the game.
Anyone who doesn’t can only blame himself.
When you don’t like them you can leave the game.
Barely anyone complains about the non-consensual part …
… because it’s actually one of the main selling points of the game.
You’re being toxic in the sense that you call it sodomization …
… which would make the players “sodomizers” …
… and actually seem to think of non-consensual combat as rape?
1 Like
well, if you don’t call nerfs being put in place to -make- you do X as being forced, then I guess you are operating on a different set of definitions for words…
I never feel forced to do anything.
But they’re not forced to play EVE, right?
So is non-consensual combat rape in your eyes?
Tell me all about your 30+ BDSM experience!
That’s kinky! 
OOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh…
well, if you look at my original observation, I pointed out that one set of folks is forcing other folks to have to play in a way that Group A finds fun, but group B does not… then group A is whining and complaining when group be follows the option of “I don’t have to be forced to do X”…
Not saying non-con combat is rape, just that some may not find it as their kind of fun… and the ones who like to initiate it are complaining that the other group isn’t indulging their wants, hence the comparison to it being more fun for the one doing the action, than the one recieving it.
what would you like to know about the BDSM part… been mostly a Top… 6+ years experience in a tack shop as a leatherworker makes it easy to pad out your own toybag.
But both sides do that!
Just their wants are different!
I don’t know what I want to know about BDSM!
ISD are going to kick us out for this. 
Glad you know that non-consensual combat isn’t rape.
You had me worried there for a second! 
So, would you care to post what CCP has put in place to make it fun for that other side, and not the GANK side?
Side A goes… “okay, I choose to not go into Low/Null Sec, because that’s not the kind of fun I’m looking for, I’d rather stick to High Sec for my kind of fun”
Side B goes “waaaaaah… Side A isn’t providing me with the kind of fun -I- want… they shouldn’t be allowed to having -their- kind of fun, CCP make a nerf”…
Survival. The fun lies behind the necessities of survival …
… and the dangers which demand it.
Imagine people watching horror movies.
They’re doing it for the experience!
Same applies for EVE.
The rules of the game are known!
When someone doesn’t like them, he can always leave! 
*eating fish right now nomnomnom*
2 Likes
Then they should have the -option- of that kind of fun if they -want- it, no?
and so the topic comes around full circle again…
“if they don’t like that kind of fun, they can always leave”
“KK, BAI”
“Waaah, they left, and there’s no new folks for me to attack”
Apparently not, because that’s not a part of the rules of the game!
These rules can’t be changed without ruining the experience for all those customers who want everyone to be playing on an equal level. That’s the vast majority, apparently, otherwise no one would be playing this game!
I can’t eat and type at the same time. 
so, would you care to explain how “Side A gets all the bennies, Side B gets all the nerfs” is playing on an ‘equal level’?
This has nothing to do with it in the first place, so why bring it up?
Changes to game mechanics always affect everyone equally. 
ok, so tell me how exactly asking for them to nerf the cloak/mwd thing affects the GANKER equally to the GANKEE?
inserts joke about trying someones family member and not recommending it
That’s not the same thing.
Both participants, in any situation, experience the same world.
Both participants know that at any minute someone might ambush them.
You are making the mistake of taking sides to what you think is a victim of someone else, ignoring that people know the rules of the game! Rule number one is that you consent to ship combat when you undock. if you don’t wish to consent, then don’t undock.
It’s like accepting an EULA, you know?
It’s your fault for not reading it, yet accepting it anyways.
You shouldn’t be taking sides. Your whole BDSM thing screws your perspective on the matter. No one here’s ever a victim, because everyone knows that one of the most fundamental rules - and one of its selling points - is that you can get attacked anytime, anywhere, unless you stay docked.
Why would anyone want to play a game he doesn’t like the rules of?
Do your BDSM clients complain about the pain? They don’t! Of course not!
They know what they’re getting into!
It would be stupid not to, right?
1 Like
They label it pretty accurately:
Cause: Combat with another capsuleer.
Consequence: Ship will remain in space on log-off until timer expires (15 minutes).
I mean, all it is for is to allow a PvP with another player to run its course. There is no judgement or blame here - it is just a timer to prevent you from logging out and immediately removing your ship from the shared universe.
The “bad” timers are clearly labelled. They are ‘Criminal’ and ‘Suspect’. That has connotations that aren’t there in the you-are-involved-in-combat-with-another-player timer which has a pretty neutral name.