Uedama anti-gank

Well, yes. PCU was higher in the past compared to what it is today. To infer some cause for this drop, we must look at what has changed in between those times, and what has stayed the same.

What has changed: citadels, rorq Isk printing, risk-averse gameplay, etc etc

What hasn’t changed: high sec ganking

Every single player that plays Eve has been a new player in a game with high sec ganking. Those 50k concurrent players in 2015? All started with high sec ganking.

So, I’m not sure that the stats you quote are supporting your argument. At all.

1 Like

Carebears argue that safety, protection, and progression are the key to player retainment. However, a safe game is ultimately a boring game. CCP should focus on making the game difficult and challenging, because the tears of quitters will entertain others, and that is how you generate a high player count.

Can we have this in youtube format complete with lyrics sung by yourself truely? It would please your fanbase so much I think :wink:

Send me one billion isk.

1 Like

I don’t think I’d ever see anti-ganking in itself as ‘justice’. It’s more that if people claim there are no ethics then they can’t suddenly introduce some.

Its not a claim, its just a fact.

Games do not have any inherent ethical quandry to them.

Thanks for my birthday present , I’ll mount in in our offices as a reminder why we fight .

The unknown miner

Will be its name.

I totally disagree. Even if one is only roleplaying a part, one is still roleplaying a character that either has ethics or doesn’t. Zero ethics would make the entire game pointless…as it would imply zero motivation, and motivation is the very core of ethics. So its impossible to argue that any game has zero inherent ethics. The minute there is a ‘need’ to play it, that in itself introduces the motivation that brings ethics along with it.

It’s unethical to mine without a mining permit.

It’s a crime in real-life. It’s a crime in EVE Online.

So how would you quantify the community Aiko has built then? They certainly enjoy the game. They play it and build community. How is it different from the nullbears?

So, which ethical framework applies to Eve online? If ethics does apply within the game, surely the ethics we should consider are those that are in-game, not RW ethics (at least insofar as they apply to how to play). Within-game ethics in Eve seems to be deontologically based, where anything that does not contradict the rules (both programmed or within the EULA) is ethical, and anything that does in unethical. So, High-sec ganking is ethical, anti-ganking is ethical, not ganking is ethical; but RW money trading is unethical, as is griefing, as are racially motivated insults in chat or via email.

We can argue about whether the rules/framework are themselves ethical, based on RW frameworks, if we accept the rules as applicable to the in-game universe, then Eve has ethics. If we want to consider Eve gameplay from a RW ethical perspective, then which ethical framework should we apply?

That’s also not considering that different groups/corps in Eve might have their own particular shared ethical values/positions ie.

It’s unethical to mine without a mining permit

(sorry, I’m not sure how to attribute quotes to usernames yet)

People can play ethically (by their internal to the game code of ethics) while being in flagrant contradiction of another group’s ethics/ethical framework, especially in a make-believe game with made-up rules and a wide variety of potential gameplays.

1 Like

How would you define griefing in such a manner that it did not include highsec suicide ganking for lulz ?

My understanding is that James 315 promoted the whole ganking thing as a counter to AFK miners in Orcas. In my view a worthy cause. Then there’s ganking for big ISK amounts…again I’ve no issue with that. In fact I’m all for it. The Eve version of The Italian Job is precisely what Eve is all about.

But ganking just because one ‘can’ do and its hilarious watching some noob weep over his lost Venture, with zero reward for the ganker other than a pointless ‘kill’ where the 5 ships lost in the excercise never get subtracted from that. Hmm…that’s about as close to griefing as it gets.

The problem isn’t ganking itself. The problem is that of people using the same justifications for the worthwhile cases to justify the pointless ones.

Can you link your lossmail?

Is it possible you could actually make a point that you back up with a fact, like, ever?

You disagree but bring no supporting facts to back it up.

No it isnt.

A playing piece is not a person therefore if I destroy your piece and it is within the rules to do so there is no question of unethical behavour.

The only unethical behaviour in a game is cheating, and we arent remotely talking about that.

Im starting to think you dont know what ethical actually means.

1 Like

Isn’t the point we can bring our own ethics into eve and if you want fight for them , that’s the great thing about RPG you can be and do anything you like , I’m sure some can’t sway far from their real selves why others can let go and turn into homicidal space pirates or black hearted Unforgiven mercenaries . Why others just want to chill out and mine. Poor ccp having to police this I say.

2 Likes

Well I got there first and thought you don’t grasp that not having any ethics IS an ethic. It’s commonly called ’ I don’t give a ( expletive )’.

1 Like

Let me know when you see a playing piece move of its own accord. I just gotta see this poltergeist activity.

1 Like

In my view CCP should scrap Concord and all security statuses should depend on what local police force people can muster up. Just as there’s people happy to be bored mining all day, I’m sure there’d be people happy to police asteroid belts all day. And so on. A proactive police force ( who could also be open to bribes, corruption, etc, etc ) would make the whole game far more fun.

1 Like

How did you come to the conclusion that was a response that made any sense?

Love the sound of that

1 Like