|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:50:47 -
[1] - Quote
Since IGÇÖve started playing EVE, one thing has been bothering me: the pointlessness of the bulk of PVP. Now, IGÇÖm not questioning the fun factor. Each player will have their own definition of fun. IGÇÖm more puzzled by its lack of in-game benefit. I think most will agree that PVP is, at best, a poor isk maker or, at worst, a money sink (some form of well-planned piracy excluded). Consider some common PVP activities: FW plex hunting, when youGÇÖre not in a militia, low-sec roams, gate camping, high-sec corp wardecs, high-sec ganking or missioner baiting. They all share the same things: relatively easy, little preparation required and little to lose or gain (for the attacker at least). I get that GÇ£Some men just want to watch the world burnGÇ¥. But I want to imagine some nefarious evil scheming in the darkness of space. Instead, we have psycho capsuleers on booster induced rampages shooting at everything for no particular reason. I would like players to blow things up more because they want to, need to and less because they canGǪ Maybe IGÇÖm too rational a guy, but I think it would cool for the EVE villains to be more Pr. Moriarty and less the Joker. Anyway, any suggestion to make fighting more meaningful in general in EVE? |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:00:23 -
[2] - Quote
Doc Fury wrote:I know some industrialist types that benefit greatly in-game from shooty-shooty PVP.
Rule #34 (no, not that one)
" War is good for business. "
PVP happens to create a market opportunity for the industrialists, they profit from it, but they don't organize it. Well, in EVE at least. |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:11:02 -
[3] - Quote
Doc Fury wrote:Mooh Bear wrote:Doc Fury wrote:I know some industrialist types that benefit greatly in-game from shooty-shooty PVP.
Rule #34 (no, not that one)
" War is good for business. " PVP happens to create a market opportunity for the industrialists, they profit from it, but they don't organize it. Well, in EVE at least. Really? You are 100% sure of that after playing less than a year?
Do I believe some groups encourage and support other players to blow ships for profit? Sure. Do I believe the majority of the PVP I mentioned falls into that category? No. |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:16:00 -
[4] - Quote
Marsha Mallow wrote:Mooh Bear wrote: Do I believe the majority of the PVP I mentioned falls into that category? No. What do you believe PVP stands for?
In that instance:
Quote:FW plex hunting, when youGÇÖre not in a militia, low-sec roams, gate camping, high-sec corp wardecs, high-sec ganking or missioner baiting
As mentioned in the first post. |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:29:53 -
[5] - Quote
Doc Fury wrote:Mooh Bear wrote:Doc Fury wrote:Mooh Bear wrote:Doc Fury wrote:I know some industrialist types that benefit greatly in-game from shooty-shooty PVP.
Rule #34 (no, not that one)
" War is good for business. " PVP happens to create a market opportunity for the industrialists, they profit from it, but they don't organize it. Well, in EVE at least. Really? You are 100% sure of that after playing less than a year? Do I believe some groups encourage and support other players to blow ships for profit? Sure. Do I believe the majority of the PVP I mentioned falls into that category? No. Moving the goalposts to defend your OP invalidates your position.. You said there was no in-game benefit, and I presented one. You then said industrialists did not organize PVP and when challenged you now want to change your position to something else.
I don't think we're talking about the same thing here. Point taken anyway. |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:37:36 -
[6] - Quote
Marsha Mallow wrote:Mooh Bear wrote:FW plex hunting, when youGÇÖre not in a militia, low-sec roams, gate camping, high-sec corp wardecs, high-sec ganking or missioner baiting
As mentioned in the first post. PVP = Player vs Player. Not Pewer vs Pewer. The term can be applied to the player driven market as well as combat activities. Actually trade and heavy industry can be a more ruthless arena to engage in than combat and requires significant preparation and execution. It's one of the few areas you can excel as a solo player. If your ingame activities are measured in terms of profitability you will probably find it a bit difficult to understand the appeal of player driven combat.
Precisely. And I think it's not a good thing. Why does it have to be this way? Making ship fights more important overall in a ship fighting game seems like a good feature to me. |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:02:27 -
[7] - Quote
Marsha Mallow wrote:
I see your point though. Generally combat isn't a great earner, which is annoying for people who hate grinding to fund their hobby. If anything it's a time and ISK sink, which you have to finance by taking up a second job in the form of a mini-profession.
The lack of incentive is driving the current state of combat. If there's no reason to shoot a ship then any ship will do :/ |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 18:48:37 -
[8] - Quote
DaReaper wrote:
Every time you go on a date to try to make a gf/bf/get laid you are pvping, not in a violent way, but your are trying to outmaneuver your partner to each your own goal.

That's a pretty ****** way of dealing with a potential partner. No offense, but you sound like a douche here. What about actually caring about that person? Showing empathy and respect for their needs and desires? |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 19:45:27 -
[9] - Quote
DaReaper wrote:Mooh Bear wrote:DaReaper wrote:
Every time you go on a date to try to make a gf/bf/get laid you are pvping, not in a violent way, but your are trying to outmaneuver your partner to each your own goal.
 That's a pretty ****** way of dealing with a potential partner. No offense, but you sound like a douche here. What about actually caring about that person? Showing empathy and respect for their needs and desires? Correct, that's is still a form of pvping. Any and all human interaction is a form of pvping. You may care about someone and want to date and be with them, so you will do things to try and 'win them over' by either, being nice, kind, sweet, treating them like trash, whatever. You are still interacting with someone and using the tools you have to try and make the like and want to be with you. And not just in dating, you treat various people differently for various reasons. There is prolly a friend that you are 'nice to' and another that you trash talk with and others might say you treat like dirt, but that's your relationship with said person. Its all about adapting and competeing for whatever your goal or prize is. You just do it without thinking about it, cause its ingrain in your thought process. Its not a douche observation if you actually think about it. We as humans are selfish creatures, but when we want to be without, we fight out own nature to try and be what they want. *shrugs* you just do it without even really thinking about it. But in dating you are competing against others with the same goal, being with someone you are interested in. you just have to be whatever they want most. And no, not really a douche irl, a blunt ******* as my wife will agree to, but douche? naw.
We have a different values then. I don't talk trash to my friends or my wife. I respect them. I don't try to cajole, deceive or coerce them to do my bidding. Friends don't do that to friends. People to that to competitors or enemies. I don't see any mention of collaboration, working together or compromising in your statement. Just "I do what I need to get what I want, everybody else be damned". As far as dating is concerned, hiding your true self to seduce your "target" and out-compete others, that may get you laid; however, that's a poor foundation for a relationship. |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
5
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 22:02:59 -
[10] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote:I'm fighting to restore Pithum C-Type Invulnerability Fields to 500+ mil a piece. It's a small goal, but a tough fight, and I'm not having much success. Perhaps in part because I can't be arsed to play this game every day. Give me a hand?
Shooting ships might help with that. You'd need a good intel network to identify targets carrying that module and gank squads to blow them up 
Or you could just try to corner the market? Buy all of the orders <500M and control the supply. The volume traded isn't that high. |
|

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
6
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 23:35:53 -
[11] - Quote
Tear Jar wrote:Cynadore wrote:Mooh Bear wrote: PVP is, at best, a poor isk maker or, at worst, a money sink Not a single ISK is removed from the economy through the loss of a ship. PvP is a material sink. It's actually an ISK faucet, through insurance payouts. The money you pay for your ship and modules changes from your wallet to the manufacturers' wallets. It does not disappear. I realize it might look like a "money sink" if you look at your wallet only, but this is not the case. Pod loss is an isk sink. You have to update your clone and if you have any implants those cost isk.
That was a specious argument from Tear Jar anyway. Your in-game wealth is not determined only by your wallet. Your assets count as well. If all your assets are destroyed, it won't affect your wallet. But no one would argue you haven't lost any wealthor that those assets had no isk value. |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
6
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 23:33:15 -
[12] - Quote
Ima Wreckyou wrote:Mooh Bear wrote: but I think it would cool for the EVE villains to be more Pr. Moriarty and less the Joker. But I adore Mr. J.
What! A CODEy worshipping the Joker? I can't believe it! /s
Joke aside, I think I have been looking at the problem the wrong way. In EVE, the only point of blowing spaceship is the one you want to make. Still, I wish we could fight over more things.
Imagine turf wars for mission agents or belts in high-sec... |

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
8
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 15:56:28 -
[13] - Quote
Ruskarn Andedare wrote:Mooh Bear wrote:Ima Wreckyou wrote:Mooh Bear wrote: but I think it would cool for the EVE villains to be more Pr. Moriarty and less the Joker. But I adore Mr. J. What! A CODEy worshipping the Joker? I can't believe it! /s Joke aside, I think I have been looking at the problem the wrong way. In EVE, the only point of blowing spaceship is the one you want to make. Still, I wish we could fight over more things. Imagine turf wars for mission agents or belts in high-sec... You say that like there aren't wars over belts in high sec And a lot of missioners get ganked regularly enough to drive them from the system they were using
There aren't any war over belts in places I play. Plenty of ore and ice there 
|

Mooh Bear
Gurista Testing Group LLC
9
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 00:04:44 -
[14] - Quote
inta Vakaria wrote:While I do engage in random pvp for me it's not about the mindless destruction it's more about pitting my mind against someone else's. Trying to work out a better ship and fit then your potential opponent. Finding someone who you believe would make a excellent target. Hunting said target down and try to catch him in a position that works to your advantage. Picking the perfect moment to strike . Useing my modules, range and ship to its fullest potential and finally getting my target. I find all of these things much more entertaining then the feeling that I've destroyed something. Though the explosion at the end is nice. 
It's all fine to want challenge. But the line between challenging and suicidal is very thin (and very wobbly) in EVE. Plus, many of the activities I cited do not really present much challenge actually. |
|
|
|