Did someone, not say “eve is pvp centered” but “eve is just about pvp” ?
FYI it’s not the same thing.
If you claim that people said it, but actually nobody did, then your post is crap.
1 Like
Omfg that is WONDERFUL!!!
Out of everything - EVERYTHING - I told them about the only thing you have the fkn cheek to try to deny is in regards to something I didn’t even say?
I said the buyback is “almost” compulsory, due to the way you constantly bang on about selling it to your scheme. “ALMOST”.
I suppose the fact that you didn’t try to deny the locust-farming, infesting systems or being run out of said systems and being too weak to stand a wardec is something but it is just adorable that you only tried to deny something I didn’t say in the first place.
Hahahahahahahahahaha!!!
3 Likes
It’s not.
You can tell 100 times that I stole hydrogen from the core of the sun, me not denying does not make it true. It just makes you an idiot.
Omfg! 15%? Are you actually fkn insane or just high af?
Click on the ingame name/avatar of anyone in a NS corp, go to their corp info and look at the tax rate they pay.
Honestly - go and fkn do it now.
2 Likes
This is an old argument that was stupid when it was new as well. Figures are so damn easy to skew and skew them CCP does. Damn, have a basic understanding of maths and how to word things in the way that biases the arguement towards your benefit and it’s child’s play. Which is why it is also child’s play to pull them apart when someone wants to use them in an argument. That aside for the moment, the best one is “players who engaged in PvP Content”. Honestly, I love that one.
Let me explain why with this example based on a conversation with a guy ingame some short while ago. I was chatting to this guy and he was honest about his playstyle and didn’t try all the RP bollocks and was cool enough to say “I gank them cos I find it fun and I want to do it. So I do” which meant that in his case I respected the honesty of that and found him to be a decent guy rly. But let’s not make this a personal thing and let’s change their name to… idk… “Yaaaarrrr The Pirate Guy”. So, based on my conversation with Yaaaarrrr The Pirate Guy…
1 HS code-monkey ganks 40 miner ships per day over 30 days giving a total of 1,200 miner ships to that one ganker in the 30-day period. Now, please keep in mind that this is ONE ganker and 1,200 MINING SHIPS - not the same as “1,200 different people” or even “1,200 different chars/alts”.
This is shown in CCP figures as “1,201 players engaging in PvP activities in HS” when in reality it is 1 ganker attacking 1,200 mining ships that may or may not be flown by individual people or (more likely as clearly evidenced by the info relayed in these forums as well as ingame etc) by ‘clumps’ of the same person using the same char/chars/main+alt mining ops so instead of being “1,201 people engaging in PvP content” as it would be put forward, it is “1 ganker ganking some mining chars too new &/or not paying enough attention and not warping out of the belt fast enough then getting blown up”.
Now, to some people that may not seem right. It may seem that those figures for “HS PvP content” might not be 100% representative of actual “PvP” as it is understood to be in generally accepted terms. Hmmm… is there anything else I could add…?..
Yes, I think there might well be!
Jita. I do love how people always drag Jita out whether for PvP or any other purpose. It is another skewing of figures. “1 suicide ganker blowing up a Corvette undocking from 4-4 and having 11 people whoring on the KM” is NOT in any way shape or form “13 people engaging in PvP content”. Not in any way. At all.
I guess the short ‘summarised’ version of this post would be:
“Nice charts that mean nothing dude, shove them up your ”.
1 Like
Do you not have any idea at all about how much time/isk/effort it takes to install and maintain even ONE jump-bridge - let alone the citadels, facilities, SRP as well as ALL the other time & help that is freely, and even eagerly, given out for the continued benefit and improvement of others?
Honestly man, think about the vast costs and administration-input that is involved even in a “smaller” NS corp/alliance/coalition. Seriously, just take a few minutes and think it through. It isn’t all 'swinging from the rigging and shouting Yo-Ho while swashing your buckle". But in space ofc so more lasers and fewer parrots obviously. Some of it is actually REALLY boring.
1 Like
I’m afraid he does not.
I concur, it’s a lot of work.
Just having all the ships for doctrines is … ouch.
1 Like
You are totally right. Honestly. It is NOT about making isk at all, it is about playing the game. This really is what it is and always should be about - playing a game that you enjoy in a way you enjoy.
However, I would ask you to please not think that NS is ‘solely’ about PvP. It isn’t. It isn’t about having “an area for the ‘pr0 kill0rz’ cos they is teh kewl kidz” it is (and this may sound kinda tree-huggy but stay with me here) more about the content and the community. The ships that get blown up, the fuel for the stations, the mods, the implants - everything - has to come from somewhere. That is where the people who are still pretty lame at PvP like me come in.
Ngl, I am in the worst 1% of fighters when it comes to killboards etc but so what? I try when I can but mostly I learn what I can from the others who know more than I do and during that time I mine, manufacture, talk poo, tell stupid jokes, sh1tpost in local and generally have a great time!
I really enjoyed my time playing in HS but then it changed for me cos I wanted to try playing in NS and I have to say it is amazing! It is never dull, always plenty to see & learn, always more and more ways to get better at things and so on…
You enjoy what you do and that is how it should be, just please don’t think that NS - or this thread - is about isk. It isn’t. I know it may appear to be the running theme but it goes further than that. It is about playing the game and helping others to find out how much awesome there is in EVE and it is about not ripping off newer players who don’t know that they are being conned by a sociopath.
I’m no seer or anything but I am pretty certain that if you like the industrial side of the game you are going to end up in NS sooner or later. It isn’t a ‘must’ but I promise, it is a lot more fun, a lot more supportive and, you know, there is a lot more isk than just ‘breaking even’ so you get to be able to do even more of the awesome 
1 Like
You seem to be fundamentally confused about the definition of PvP. It is a three letter acronym and it does not stand for “equitable consentual combat.”
2 Likes
No, I’m not as it happens. Not once was I in any way trying to “scale” what does or does not count as “pvp”. What I was doing was pointing out the sheer folly of their use of meaningless charts.
The term “PvP” does of course mean different things to different people. Some people play in a way that, for them, makes “PvP” stand for “Player Vs. Player” while others play in a way that makes “PvP” for them translate as “Pussies Vs Procurers”.
But that is not the point I was making 
Actually the market is player driven and per definition PvP, so it’s fine. I would suggest if you are “PvE only”, good, but please try to not buy or sell on the market or trade with other players as you are clearly engaging in PvP and are therfor fair game to be attacked or interfered with.
Since it is hard to tell and probably extremely rare that people don’t engage in this form of PvP and are “PvE only” I would recommend to limit the “PvE only” activity to the test server where you can enjoy relaxed mining and building without accidentially interacting with the PvP sandbox.
1 Like
is closed.
I really think CCP should make a PVE only server, with no WH, no LS/NS, safety green, no market, no deployable.
Quote the whole piece, not just part of it. When you do, you might understand.
Not based off that data it isn’t. That was the point made. The data that was used to say that highsec has more pvp than nullsec doesn’t actually show what Zirconium thinks it shows.
Off other metrics, perhaps. But not based off that data.
1 Like
It was a genuine question. I see a lot of people who use “dangerous” but nowhere is it defined correctly.
For example, to compare plane travel to car travel, we use a different notion of dangerous (number of issues per travel) than to compare countries(number of wars on the land), or cities(crimes), or jobs (health issues).
Yet those fields have their own definitions of dangerous.
How do you define dangerousity in Eve ?
For the context of the discussion with Zirconium, it’s definition is a bit like defining porn. An exact definition isn’t needed, though I know it when I see it, or in this specific case, I know when I don’t see it from the data.
The second most violent system in highsec, based on the data posted by Zirconium, is new players dying to NPCs (check the killboard for Uitra for example. There’s aint much pvp going on). So claiming, based on that data, that highsec has more pvp than nullsec, doesn’t really say much (different data would be needed to support his claim).
In highsec, outside 3 systems, players face less risk of loss than new players face from NPCs in Career Agent systems, based on that data. For anyone with a bit of skill, that is effectively 0 risk of pvp (and since the data is all losses, not much risk from PVE either).
The danger changes based on situation (eg. incursion runners in highsec face more danger than new players even though they suffer fewer losses, but the data posted by Zirconium doesn’t show what he thinks he showed).
In the broader context, there isn’t an exact definition that everyone would agree. There are many definitions that could be regarded as correct in context, although many that would never be correct. But that isn’t needed for the reply above.
1 Like
That’s exactly why an exact definition is required.
Otherwise any definition is as good as another.
And the arguments become true or false, according to which definition you chose to use.
I don’t know. Maybe someone actually made the effort to create and discuss a formal, fair definition of dangerous. Otherwise, why even talk about it ?
Some people use the isk destroyed / (isk generated - isk removed)
Some other can talk about the time spent in space between losing ship that was not PVP fit. But then “pvp fit” is fuzzy.
To what I know of NS, it’s pretty empty.
PVP != Player vs Pyroxeres
2 Likes
nobody said PVP was fair !
There isn’t one. Using the incursion example in my last post, the danger incursion runners face from NPCs when they are running a HQ site is much higher than they face from pvp in that same situation, and much higher than they face when just moving from one incursion to the next. The danger they face if they jump into a triglavian invasion may be higher than non-invaded systems they are passing through, etc.
It’s situational and dependent on a host of factors. So coming up with a single definition isn’t an easy thing. It’s too nuanced an issue and each situation on its merit.
In the specific situation above, it’s clear that in the context of pvp, claiming that highsec has more pvp than nullsec isn’t supported by the data used to make the claim. There may be other data that shows that, but what was posted doesn’t really show much danger of pvp in highsec outside very few systems that can be completely avoided. In the context of pvp, highsec isn’t dangerous, except for just a few systems.
1 Like