I don’t call a 48m ISK tag fee plus 6m ISK Concord fee, plus having a kill right on oneself, ‘no consequences’…lol. Given that Concord already destroy your original ship, a kill right is effectively a free pot shot rather than actual retribution.
A sunk cost isn’t a “consequence.” When I pay $5 for 3 balls to try to dunk the clown into the water tank at the carnival, losing $5 isn’t a consequence of dunking said clown.
Being able to capture a griefer and force them to mine would be a consequence though, as this outcome isn’t guaranteed, and requires proactive action on behalf of the victim of griefing (or someone who acts on their behalf).
To make an analogy: if I’m robbing a bank in real life, permanently losing a getaway car when switching vehicles under a bridge isn’t a consequence, but a sunk cost. Getting arrested if caught is a consequence, however.
1 Like
It definitely is a consequence of deciding to do a gank. I mean, I could always decide not to. Thus the decision to do the gank has a cost consequence. In your clown example you don’t get to dunk the clown unless you pay the consequential $5. The fact that you dunk the clown after you’ve paid the $5 does not stop the $5 being a consequence of your decision to dunk the clown…which comes first.
This is essentially a semantic argument.
Generally speaking, costs come before something, and consequences after. Yes, we can technically say that cost is always a consequence, but that’s not what we’re talking about when we talk about consequences in the sense implicitly understood by most people who are aware of the term. In this regard, ganking (for example) is a transactional mechanism, and becomes a consequential one only when someone does something to the gankers as a post-fact retaliation, but aside from kill rights, which are usually pointless to enforce, there are no player-enforced consequences for criminals. Being able to “arrest” criminals and make them mine for a few years would be a genuine “consequence” for their actions.
I’ve always wondered how many new players have bought your “PvP is an an abomination” arguments without realizing what you actually do in game.
What do I do in the game? I am a defender of the innocent. I protect honest, hardworking PvE players from reprehensible aggression by vile null-sec griefers. Yes, I hunt and destroy other players, but I’m doing it because I’m a warrior of justice, and not because I’m some kind of real-life criminal scumbag.
Shame on you, sir, for trying to portray me as a villain.
1 Like
You have to care because they’re bored enough to come find and kill you. Avoiding PvP is a form of PvP. D-Scan and Local are your best friends.
I did no such thing ma’am! I just know there are full time miners out there thinking “see, Destiny said PvP should be banned and she knows what she’s talking about” without ever knowing anything about you.
These types of ganks happen every day and they shouldnt? Seems like the person was ganked just to inflict 300M loss on him.
A solution is to reduce the cost of exhumers.
I’m sorry but do you really think he got ganked? By a Proteus and an Orca? What?
What do you think happened?
I’m all for furthering progressive ideals and removing PvP from EVE Online, but that’s obviously not a gank in any sense of the term, suicide or otherwise, because the Mackinaw pilot had to have initiated the fight, e.g. by becoming/attacking suspect(s).
That makes no sense tho
Why not?
You are also conflating high sec ganking with PVP it seems
I think all PvP is evil and should be removed from all games.
But that aside, what doesn’t make sense about that kill?
You said it wasnt a gank which is what doesent make sense
It can’t be a gank because the victim was the one initiating the attack.
If you attack me and I destroy you, did I gank you?
How do you know who initated the attack?
Because logic dictates that someone wouldn’t use an expensive Proteus and an even more expensive Orca to gank someone.
Which leaves 2 possibilities:
- The victim attacked suspects, resulting in a legal engagement.
- The victim became a suspect (via kill right or theft) and was fairly engaged.
It couldn’t have been a war because the victim was in an NPC corporation.
There’s also the very remote possibility that the victim accepted two separate duel requests (extremely unlikely).
1 Like