If they did that then the self prefessed elite pvp players posting here would have to actually pvp against other players who pvp…that is a big no no for most of the pvp players in eve.
1 Like
Everyone in EVE does PvP. Some people just do it badly because they’re under the delusion that EVE can be a PvE game.
2 Likes
I wouldn’t call High-sec combat outside of possibly FW and war-decs really PvP. gankers are protected by the mechanics of the game up until the point they fire.
High-sec mechanics are all wrong for any proper combat PvP. CCP have tried to keep both PvP and PvE players fairly happy, but they’ll never achieve that when they’re on the same playing field as they require different things.
1 Like
Thank you for providing an excellent example of someone who is bad at EVE because they think PvP is some subset of the game instead of EVE’s most basic identity. Gankers have some mechanics protecting them but the other side has mechanics to oppose them. The players who don’t think that PvP begins until someone opens fire are the ones who suck at EVE and lose ships to ganking.
CCP have tried to keep both PvP and PvE players fairly happy, but they’ll never achieve that when they’re on the same playing field as they require different things.
Which is perfectly fine. EVE doesn’t need “PvE players” and it’s long overdue that CCP stops pandering to them.
I’m aware of what the game is supposed to be.
They need to make their mind up which players they are going to cater for.
If they are considering just PvP players, I’d suggest changing low and high-sec into NPC null space.
1 Like
Or not. The current design works just fine.
HS gankers will just turn into cloacky campers.
1 Like
And this is why we can’t have open and honest discussions right here. There is probably half a dozen ways the same thing could have been written with a helluva lot more tact and sensitivity, but nope. Just go straight for “You suck at EVE” and then wonder why tempers might flare.
Something like “Those who don’t understand that EVE is ALWAYS a PVP game and only sometimes also a PVE game are doomed to play this game poorly” might have gained some traction. But nope. Go straight for the testicles and then wonder why people got defensive.
Post your lossmail, miner.
And jita all gates bubbled up to make 1dq look like an ice cream social. At least I imagine 1dq is bubble city at this point.
1 Like
Another fine example of how to derail discussion.
1 Like
You’re right, your words are an excellent example. Now can you return to the actual topic, which is why CCP should stop caring about “PvE players” who add nothing to EVE?
I propose to keep PVE’ers in the game we provide them this safe space to play in, far away from PVPers.
We can call this place Care Bears. It can have some mechanism like … i dunno. Security status ratings? The higher the rating the safer the space.
We can make it safer by people with low standings being blasted out of the sky by hmm, turrets? Wait no! We can have police ships that warp in on them and destroy them. Very cool role-playing ability there too.
AND! If someone attacks you, the police swoop in like a bird and vaporize them.
We can call them … hmm.
Raptors?
No too malicious…
Eagles…yeah.
Eagles swoop in with blue/red lights and pew pew the baddies in these High points security zones for carebears.
Sounds good to me.
1 Like
Its an interesting point. Balancing PVP alongside PVE is tricky at best, and impossible at worst. On the other hand, EVE has stood the test of time so what is the definition of success here?
Well I think CCP’s definition is going to be profits, which depend on a stable, or better yet, expanding player base. If most players are shying away from PVP then CCP will likely lean toward PVE…unless they think PVP adds to the excitement of PVE…unless they think PVE players disagree strongly enough to quit…even if those PVE players are wrong even about their own excitement.
Abyssal space and manufacturing inside an NPC station. Also, most carebears are not in HS but in Null. Null pvp is overrated. The only real pvp is in the proving grounds because you can’t cherry pick your opponent.
3 Likes
Neo I sailed around Null and was super disappointed. Not even a bubble in sight
1 Like
This sounds like the theory behind high sec that isn’t really true.
It’s true enough. Don’t fly anything worth more than a suicide ball is worth. And if you do. Take countermeasures
It is true if you’re smart enough to understand the difference between safety and loss rate. Highsec is safe because the mechanics discourage aggression. Nullsec is “safe” in the same way that a Mexican standoff is “safe”: everyone could kill each other at any moment without the game doing anything to stop them, but they choose not to as long as everyone else cooperates. It is inherently dangerous space that can have a low loss rate as long as you stay far enough away from anyone who isn’t your ally.
1 Like