They're afraid to lose their stuff.

Strangely, some people don't like shooting intelligent opponents capable of adapting to the situation at hand, and prefer shooting at AIs or newbies.

My reaction to meeting one has always been confusion, despair and pity.

Most of the new guys I take out on roams simply dont understand the mechanics of pvp be it hisec war or low/null. They are more afraid of "doing it wrong" than actually losing a ship.

Yesterday I had my first kill. But it was pore miner in Osprey. Broke my hearth:cry] No more PvP for me.




naaaaaaa

Your topic says it all.
You don't understand Pve'ers, so you think that something is wrong with them.
They "choose " to play the game in a way that suits them, I have known a lot of them during my years in the game, some very good people among them.
They don't care about how you play the game, they play it their way.....

lol people still refuse to put VoIP programs on their computer? May I ask why?

I don't even think the OP is reading this thread anymore.

But once you have satisfied your curiosity, do you plan to do anything? Because the only people with the power to seriously affect the situation would be the developers, most of those reasons have their roots deep in the game mechanics. Even the social reasons.

If you aggress somebody and that guy does not flee like a sissie it's because you got baited and 10 seconds later your battlecruiser is surrounded by 80 supercaps.

I have nothing against you or your play style, and your choice whether or not to pvp is yours and yours alone, but please. please don't bring real-life morality into a discussion about shooting people in video games. Your intent might be amicable, but by doing so, you essentially become the soccer mom who blames Grand Theft Auto for the local school shooting. When you rationalize video game violence with moral stances, you hurt both gaming and freedom of expression as a whole.

Also (and don't consider this as anything but friendly advice), you need to work on developing a thicker skin toward interaction with other people on the Internet. Once again, there's nothing wrong with having a type-B personality (heck, I have one myself), but if you can't deal with some 13-year-old calling you a ****** every once in a while, you should probably not be online in the first place.

Quick edit: and the reason you need to work on a thicker skin isn't because you have some obligation to do so, or because some stranger told you to, but because it will help you cope when some 13-year-old inevitably does call you a ******, and despite your best efforts, you won't be able to avoid reading/hearing his words.

You didn't really read my post, did you?

if you can't deal with some 13-year-old calling you a ****** every once in a while, you should probably not be online in the first place.

That was one sentence out of three paragraphs. It seems like you're throwing out the baby along with the dirty diaper.

Look, I'm not saying that people have to be fine with being insulted online. What I did say was that it's inevitable that someone will insult you, so you'd be much better off learning to deal with it instead of relying on avoidance, which at some point is guaranteed to fail.

And there's nothing wrong with my claim that people who have zero tolerance for asshattery don't belong on the Internet. They really don't have any business signing into a social online environment, just like epileptics have no business watching Pokemon episode #38, and people with arachnophobia have no business moving to Florida. *shudders*

The real problem is that we're disagreeing over what I said, instead of the message I'm trying to convey. I said "apple," and you said "nuh-uh, you said 'orange'."

And then I look at you, bug-eyed, and ask "what?" Because I clearly confirmed that it's okay to not be okay with someone being mean to you online, and you act as if I've taken the exact opposite stance.