Ganking is NOT impossible.

GǪbut doing it for profit is not, and the problem is that this isn't because the players choose to make it so but because CCP took away the choice because the players in question refused to make good decisions.

So it's my fault for not putting on a raincoat when it rained and I got wet. OK. I got that.

100% correct.

But it's not my fault it rained.

Ya sorta think that ganking would inevitably have been unprofitable ANYWAY.

Musta had a really good reason.

No. If the combination of inherent, unavoidable HP and time available ensures that enough oomph is required to get the kill in time, then it is not just GÇ£harderGÇ¥, but impossible.

This is a bad thing.
GǪand they could. They just chose not to by using fits that made them profitable when they could just as easily have chosen fits that made them unprofitable.

The difference is that now they no longer have to make that choice GÇö they are inherently unprofitable unless they actively load up their ships with bait goods. This is a bad thing.

Ganker post #1278645: it's not about the profits, it's about the lulz

I'd just like to say that I do not approve the way you are insulting IKEA here.

IKEA is a great store with awesome offers and sales and i LOVE the fact that they have a restaurant in the store. It is not particular great but the meatballs are really nice and the salmon is not bad either. Also you get free refills. It is one of the few places i know that has actually free refills. Not like Pizza Hut where you order free refills and they just never refill it. I was there like three times and each time odered free refills and never got a single refill. I complained to the waiter and he/she spoke with the manager. Afterwards he/she told me that it would come of her/his salary because it was her responsibility with felt like he/she was trying to guilt me into dropping it.

Anyway, that is why i do not go to Pizza Hut anymore, meaning that effectivly IKEA is the only place with free refills around here.
Also they offer hotdogs and a drink after the cashier area with is just awesome and it is just like 1.50 Gé¼. Admittedly the hotdog isn't that great but it is decent and nice to have right after throwing out money for furniture that you do not know if you can assemble it properly

So leave IKEA alone already. Sometimes I wish EVE was more like IKEA and you could get food right there too and it would offer you a hotdog with you logout. In return i'd could get used to the idea that "Assemble Ship" returns sometimes: "Not possible, there are parts missing or you just read the instructions wrong - you will never know because you kicked everything into small pieces now".

Notice how your definition does not include any of the words GÇ£completeGÇ¥, GÇ£totalGÇ¥, or GÇ£absoluteGÇ¥. So yes, highsec should be no different than the other sec levels in terms of what PvP dangers you might face.

The schism in EVE can be roughly boiled down into this. Some players believe in Darwinian gameplay and some believe in Socialist gameplay.

In Darwinian style the weak get weeded out early and (hopefully) never come back. This has been more or less EVEish since its debut but less and less so every year. We are now trending towards a more (for lack of a better term) socialist gameplay. Don't let the unfit unsubscribe lets coddle them and help them for better or worse. Neither version by your definition has less PVP but the socialist style requires gameplay changes instead of player adaptation.

This is the best I can do to try and describe the hatred in my eve online heart when players call for change based on player ineptitude.

TLDR: Read the title.


This is a comment I gleaned from a "click here to read my blog" thread which is, as much as it might hurt some to hear, the crux, the POINT of Eve. I totally agree.

In the context of the thread it came from however, PvP is being coralled into a singular "ship v ship" argument. This is where it's wrong.

- Johnny Reb orbiting MaverickMan firing lasers is PvP+¡ng.
- Nullseccer A taking sov from Nullseccer B for the purpose of having more T-Moons is PvP+¡ng.

However,
- Miner X, racing to get his minerals to market and under-cutting Miner Y is PvP'ing.
- Indy C, researching a BPO to be a better ME than Indy D is PvP'ing.

i.e. PvP is NOT restricted to ship v ship - it's relative to the individual. As it should be.

In recent days, I am seeing a belligerent POV (from only a few it must be said) that CCP is dumbing down Eve, turning it into a carebear heaven yaddy ya. I am even seeing fairly strong reactions from CCP locking threads against this belligerence and getting pretty pointed as to why.

Eve-O modding seems to be shifting stance from being fairly apolitical to fairly pointed - perhaps defensively - perhaps they are calling BS for BS when it is - a good thing too imho.

And really, it is all getting a bit stupid. CCP, is, from my where I stand, simply quantifying what PvP should be in highsec, the "safer environment". They are putting some wrappers around some rather confusing aggression mechanics in highsec that for mine, have been stumbling blocks to inject and RETAIN noobs into the game.

HS is MEANT to be safer. The angst against changes to make HS rules clearer and perhaps, more consensually based is keeping me quite bemused. Why?

Reality check: The person paying the sub that presses F1 to add a mark to his KB pays exactly the same amount of money as the person who presses F1 to kill a roid or an NPC.

If a miner for example strips every belt and dumps to market, other miners pay the price - that's THEIR problem. They can outstrip him, cut the price, whatever. He's PvP'ing. He can in fact, kill him or hire someone to do so.

Put bluntly, "Everything in Eve is PvP" as meaning "you HAVE to asplode" is plain and simply wrong.

Eve as a whole is not an IKEA store where you can expect every item in every store to be exactly the same. It's NOT a convenience store where you, the ganker, the PvP'er, use the safety of Concord so YOU can move around "safely" and then bemoan the user who stays in HS, also using Concord to "safely" move around.

As much as anyone has the right to say "FITE MY FRIG NOOB", MinerMan, MissionMan and IndyMan have the rght to say "NO, SORRY, I'M BUSY UNDERCUTTING PLAYER X".

Who said YOU decide?


And really, trying to make HS as "dangerous" and as "PvP centric" (by the incorrect definition) as LS and 0.0 would turn Eve into an IKEA store where everything is the same.

If that isn't "dumbing it down" then what the hell is?

Sorry but once again someone is mixing up pvp - ship fighting - with market competition. Its like confusing the activities of the Free Syrian Army with those of investment bankers, but you might need to wait until you get to be an adult to realise the difference.

No-one dies in EVE market competition, you plonker.

Ho Hum, posting in another "where's my pvp game wah wah wah thread"

lots of stuff about IKEA

market competition is not pvp because you can't pick individual targets to try and bankrupt them, so any trading is PvM - Player versus Market.

You need to do something about that cough of yours.

I've always been against the opinion that EvE is a PvP only game. Sure, the EvE economy is driven primarily by PvP, but by no means does that mean everyone is engaged in it. Player vs Player is a term not limited to EvE, and is used in many MMO's to describe situations where a player is fighting against another player, as opposed to a player fighting against an NPC. By this very defintion, a player is required to be shooting at another player for it to be described at PvP. There are many professions and activities that do not fall into this field, most of them located in high-sec. I've got a friend that literally never undocks, and he spent a long time building mining barges while (sarcastically) boasting about his uber-PvP-skills.

Now i'm sure people can start saying the things they generally say, that everything in EvE boils down to PvP to some degree, with everything ultimately fueling the materials and objects that eventually end up being destroyed in some sort of PvP-based activity. This however, is just another reference to EvE's unique player-driven economy. It doesn't mean everyone is engaged in simultaneous PvP the instant they log in. That requires two or more players shooting at eachother. A miner shooting rocks for minerials is not PvP, nor is those that run missions over and over, or people that trade endlessly, or those that build lots of stuff. Any arguement made to suggest that it is PvP is foolish, and is made by the very people that argue that EvE is a PvP only game. PvP just fuels the demand of the player-driven economy. Of course, you can try to force this "PvP-only" opinion onto people by exploding them, but they will continue to play eve for all the things that have nothing to do with PvP.

Personally, i think EvE is unique and special because it caters to players interested in both PvP and PvE activities. Those interested in PvE stay in highsec, become carebears and do all those boring things that keep them happy. Those that are more PvP orentated (should) go to low and null, where they can blast other players to their hearts content.

I think its a shame that the "PvP-Only" crowd continue to try to force their opinion onto those unwilling and uninterested in that side of EvE. Surely both sides have the right to play EvE for the aspects they enjoy? Though imo, as long as their is a constant flow of easy risk-free gankable targets in high that don't shoot back, the "PvP-only" crowd will continue with their arguements, if only to justify their highsec easy-mode.

As much as anyone has the right to say "FITE MY FRIG NOOB", MinerMan, MissionMan and IndyMan have the rght to say "NO, SORRY, I'M BUSY UNDERCUTTING PLAYER X".

Who said YOU decide?

And really, trying to make HS as "dangerous" and as "PvP centric" (by the incorrect definition) as LS and 0.0 would turn Eve into an IKEA store where everything is the same.

If that isn't "dumbing it down" then what the hell is?

PvP can be broadly used to describe any game, or aspect of a game, where players compete against each other.

I heard (last night to be exact) that IKEA doesn't have windows in their stores to inhibit the sense of "natural passing of time".

Maybe station camping all day is a direct result of no windows on the stations.

That's a lot of words just to say "I don't get it..."
Player vrs Player

As far as I know a freighter has more HP than a barge and those still get ganked, so what is stopping you from ganking a miner?

An arbitrary, outside mechanic was introduced that acts as a dis-incentive (removing the ability to *profitably* gank miners). Freighters get ganked (WAIT FOR IT) because it's *usually* profitable...


All those "pve" players *directly* impact all the other players in the game when they sell their LP points, salvage or loot on the market.

Faction and officer fit mission runners *do* get ganked (and I'm too dam lazy to go searching killboards) - usually when there is a % chance it will be profitable.


It would be as if CCP suddenly increased freighter HP by X%.

No reason for it.

Don't want your freighter ganked? Carry less than X billion in goods.

Don't want your miner ganked? Fit X tank...

oh wait...

/pants-on-head.

I'm on about how before the patch, ganking miners for profit was possible if the miners chose to; impossible if they chose not to. After the patch, it's impossible regardless because the inherent HP means you have to use a sledge that is more expensive than the loot.

Eve is not IKEA - deal with it

People like you are very sad.

You hope the "weak" get "weeded out" and "never comeback"...

This coming from a pimple-faced ginger who's probably about 115 pounds soaking wet IRL.

This is a firggin' game dude.

That Elitist crap in where you actually hope to stunt EvE's growth because you perceive players who aren't "on your level" to be weak and thus seek to scare them away is what's killing this game. You WANT a SMALL community?

Of course you don't. It's "hardcorez Pee Vee Pee'ers" like you who constantly ***** about how the targets are dwindling.

If carebears don't want to PvP, they shouldn't have to. WHat I find hilarious is how you talk about how weak" others are but you're bitching because you can't one shot f**kin Miners. Why aren't you fighting other SUPELEETS bro??? Why are you wanting such easy targets mister tough guy??

F**k out of here man,PvPers tend to be the BIGGEST goddamned carebears from my view.