Well, people proved it is. They fly to Low-Sec or J-Space. Like Jonah doing…
1 Like
Changing location to somewhere hisec mercs rarely venture or using an alt to carry on business as usual is an avoidance, but the fact remains that wardecs have no discernible effect on how and when I play; both using my alt long term and wormhole spelunking being something I have done on and off for years.
I’m not escaping PvP, I’m minimising the chances of it happening to me in hisec; if I venture into wormhole space I accept the associated risks, and plan my expedition accordingly. Just as I plan my hisec operations and redundancy around the risk present there.
Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance.
2 Likes
The reason EVE is PvP, is because its a contained aquarium.
Every player action, no matter how insignificant, has a pneumatic effect on the rest of the aquarium.
All of us as players are in a constant state of PvP, even when we work together.
I know this is hard to wrap ones head around, but its the genius of EVE, and the truth of its nature.
Think of us all as organisms living in a pond.
Everything any of us does, affects the pond and everyone else in it.
There is no escaping that pervasive effect.
4 Likes
This is a philosophy, EVE philosophy.
Initially I’m pointing to the OP problems and why many new corp players quit EVE after a couple of months online. I’m pointing that payers are different, they want to do different things, they absolutely don’t care about any kind of direct PVP, they want to play space games, they want some fun after work.
You arguments are it’s total armageddon, it’s total masochism, it’s total PVP, no way, it’s ultimate ‘The Shawshank Redemption’. Of course they’ll quit EVE, who for the fake sake will enjoy to live in Shawshank for 3 hours after a long work day?
A lot of replies to my posts are like philosophy comparison:
Between two boxers on the ring is the same or even less PVP than between a boxer and his dentist after the match.
They do it for the loot pinatas or ransom, so paying guarantees the next war. It’s an universal extortion racketing scheme.
EDIT: If a merc group pretends to fight against other mercs, they are lying, they just take your money and “lose” or stage the fight.
But dentistry has nothing to do with boxing. If eve is boxing and the boxers are the pvp’ers then everyone else still participates in the boxing match. Even the audience because they paid for tickets.
Well if it’s a reasonable rate might be best to pay it. Come to an agreement with the mercs. Once it ends they can’t agress for two weeks (I think that’s what the article said). That’s two weeks to come up with something. Hire help, recruit, or move. Or just keep paying and write off as an expense, tho I could see how that would be taken advantage of so idk if that’s a good idea. 
This is only for ONE corp, what do you think the other friendly mercs will do if they see you paid the first a couple of B to end the war?
I see your point. Maybe paying isn’t a good plan.
If they want a game without any kind of direct (or indirect) PvP affecting them, at any time or place, EVE is not the game they are looking for.
EVE cant accommodate them for that wish without destabilizing the entire ecology of this aquarium.
CCP could theoretically set up a PvE server, but within a matter of months all of the players there will be drowning in isk and resources.
Without PvP, whoever claims the most of NS first, will be impossible to remove, cos you cant aggress them.
Nobody would live in HS/LS/WHs.
The “PvE” server would commit suicide in less than a year.
Do you see what I mean?
EVE cannot exist/function without PvP.
I like your attitude, but that doesn’t work, wardec “spam” corps consist of 100% pvp alts, all pve is done on out-of-corp-alts. Also the largest wardec spam corps are funded by ratting bots in nullsec using super carriers, meaning they have more isk than they can ever hope to use.
Funny, you pretty much describe the game play of hi sec mercs. They may have limited game time and want their fun too. Yet they don’t request free war decs be added.
Last time I tried to dual a hi sec POCO, it refused to dual and I could gank it before CONCORD wiped me put repeatedly.
1 Like
Dont play this game then, as you’re clearly not in the right mindset for it at the moment.
Maybe you’ll reconsider at some point and I can understand the bitterness, but by all means do take it to your own time and terms, we’ve all been there.
Peace 
I kind of get the sense that this is an emotional statement moreso than an actual question, but I’l go ahead and answer it as if it were a more conventional question.
If you are a gazelle and there is a hungry lion trying to eat you, then not getting eaten, however you manage it, is “against” the lion. Those aren’t technically people, though so let me try again.
If someone is trying to punch you in the face and by your actions, you manage to AVOID being punched in the face, then you have acted “against” that other person.
I’ll do another one. This is a good one. Trust me: If you have a chocolate cupcake, and a choclatey-mouth little boy is attempting to acquire it for consumption purposes because he already ate his own cupcake, so you hide it on top of the refrigerator to prevent it being eaten, then you have “PvPed” against him, much like a carebear hiding his blingy Vindicator in high security space. And, actually, much like in a chocolate cupcake battle with an insidious little cupcake monster, gankers and other “pvpers” will often piss and moan about how it’s “not fair” that they don’t get to eat your cupcake since that’s what cupcakes are for; you can just get more cupcakes. “I promise to eat my vegetables.”, etc.
So, you see, not losing is inherently part of “winning”.
2 Likes
You don’t lose, or win, when you avoid the competition all together. You don’t win by not participating. You can call it PVP by proxy of the broadest definition of the term - competition between players, player vs player. But to call it winning is a stretch, if not utterly delusional.
Oh boy you opened a can of no sympathy, eve players (many), cannot understand the concept of ‘not everyone likes to be under constant molestation’, yes it’s a PVP game, but also a PVE game, and your right, it’s no fun, but, there is no escape from the blood thirsty crazies.
I’m trying to explain it in your terms but, really, PVP doesn’t exactly have winners and losers. Games have winners and losers, but “PVP” isn’t “game”.
It is perfectly rational to declare that one does not “win” by simply surviving. It is also absurd. If you get yourself killed to win a game of checkers, you lost. Calling it a victory would be delusional.
At this stage, it seems like you’re intentionally ignoring my points, and are trying to argue against things I haven’t said. Nothing you’ve said refutes anything you’ve quoted. And yes, you do win PVP. There are killboards full of wins and losses. You simply don’t get on them if you don’t participate. Same with the market - if you don’t trade, you don’t participate, and you don’t win or lose anything. I suggest you stop thinking in riddles, and try to get a grip on reality.
So, OP, why are you so attached to the current character/corporation?
You have three slots on your account. Open a second slot, put some basic skills via injectors. Play in a different corp, different region and a different character (with a different name convention, of course). Provided you do not Contract between the two characters, the war-deccers will know nothing. You can playing how you want and when you want.
You win - they lose.
Avoiding PVP is PVP in theexact same sense as PVP vs non-pvp ing targets. Player vs Player means there are 2 players involved. if only 1 of them is involved, be it to for example: Failed game design that doesn’t allow to meaningfully fight back (at least stand a chance) while performing ceirtain crutial tasks in the game is not PvP.
Imbalances are ok, they make things interesting, but only as long as they don’t cross the rediculous threashold, which many things in this game have. There is a big difference between a lopsided fight and a fight where one of the participants literally can’t participate due to provided game mechanics. the whole risk vs reward thing comes into play, one side takes zero risk, not smaller risk, zero risk.
As far as the OP goes, while current wardec mechanics are stupid and rediculous, they are somewhat necessary, the only question is how to cut out the idiotic cheese ones and leave the good ones alone, I am not sure that can be done within the current game and how it all works.