- Have you actually worked out the tank of a Proc or a Skiff? Or an Orca?
I dont think you have.
2)If that 5 man corp stands there and takes a kicking rather than easily evading the enemy, they are doing it wrong.
Eve is as fair as any system involving humans can be.
The human element can unbalance that to an extent. But even that can be mitigated.
Sure I have look at an Orca, most have 1.2B isk fit now spend that on any other ship and it will do more damage then an Orca can tank! Same with the Procurer vs any other tech ! ship in the same cost bracket and same with the Skiff. I also noticed you failed to mention the indy ships.
Most the corp I see that get treated like just quit Eve. Nothing like driving customers away!
- ?? If you can show me a single ship that can output what a Proc can tank for less than 40mil, then please do.
What are you putting on your Orca thats making it cost so much?
You mean haulers? Have you ever flown a Blockade Runner or DST?
No, I didnt think so.
- So if you quit soccer practise, then soccer should be changed because you dont like it?
Evading a war when you have a 5 man corp is really easy. Can you give an example of the war you are referencing?
Or a properly fitted Nereus? Cheap-ass hauler, aligns like a cruiser, tank somewhere between a cruiser and a battle cruiser. Badgers are a thing too.
1 Like
Well, if they still want to be in the same corp while in the war, there is rather small chance that 5 players will not happen to stumble upon few of the 600 player alliance. Evading by not logging in, or logging on unskilled alpha alts in some npc corp?
Go to WH?
Go to a Null region where them following is certain death for them but 5 buzzards can live for months easily?
Thereâs plenty of ways. Im not about to play the game for them but Ive been there and Ive done it loads of times.
Or heck even drop corp if theres no assets. Dropping corp is a tool, otherwise it wouldnt be there. Its a crappy tool for losers but its still there.
Or anyone who can read tells.
âGadget has the bomb and wins all ties
You should write that survival handbook for EVE. 
2 Likes
This is not assuring equality of outcomes, but setting minimal levels of welfare. A very different thing.
1 Like
Reading back on this, I fear she and I may have misconstrued your comment as more politically charged than it was intended or should have been read.
Depends on the time sink needed to play, wife aggro, boss aggro, rl aggro, also right now time is the biggest problem.
As for fairness some races are harder to play. I donât think itâs hard enough to keep my interest at the moment, as other interest have left little time to come back to play. 
Well, the only way we can have equality of outcomes is to force everyone to the lowest common denominator. Try to force everyone to the highest common denominator is not at all feasible. As somebody noted, there are issues with, âwife aggro, boss aggro, rl aggroâ. We canât overcome that in terms of going for the highest common denominator, but we can with the lowest. If you have X-aggro and canât play, then log me out so that we have equality of outcomesâŚneither of us playing. And if I make ISK after playing for an hourâŚyou should get the same amount of ISK in your wallet? You should be forced to do what I just did to make that ISK? Equality of outcomes really cannot work. Equality of opportunitiesâŚthat can work. But depending on player choices it is almost surely the case youâll get inequality of outcomes. But we should be fine with this as it is a result of player choicesâi.e. players doing, in game, what brings them the most enjoyment.
1 Like
Theoretical equal quality of outcomes is equity.
Equality meaning that everybody is treated the same, equity meaning that someone is given what they need to be successful.
Both are true of Eve, the game treats us all the same and the players often help others by providing them with what they need to be successful, in addition to what the game already provides; what the receiver does with what they have been given is where equality and equity get defenestrated.
6 Likes
+1 for using defenestrated. 
And also a good post, too.
2 Likes
I like that word too.
Had to be done, always worth throwing the odd rarity into a post; besides some old words are just class and need to come back.
6 Likes
No, no game is âfairâ, as we tend to think of the word âfairâ. All âgamesâ artificially weight certain attributes and unweight others. It is the nature of âgameâ.
As this fact (but feel free to dispute it) plays out in EVE, two things become apparent.
- More of the good attributes are better than more of the bad attributes.
- More characters = more [good] attributes.
The only way to prevent âunfairâ scenarios would be to limit the number of characters that are brought to bear on a problem or limit the [good] attributes brought to bear on said problem, which would obviate the first solution, but would be practically impossible to implement, except for in-game attributes like velocity modifiers and tax rates and Memory, Perception, Intelligence, etc. External attributes like latency, actual intelligence, enthusiasm for the game . . . finger length, shape, muscle tone, coordination . . . these things could not really be equalized among players.
tl;dr - Games are not fair.
Nothing is fair in war just like EVE.
I like about this game that it show the true face of players which give fair judge on them.
I do not like that it make them more agressive agianst each other which not fair for some players.
1 Like