EVE Search - Carebear

All Channels

EVE New Citizens Q&A

Carebear

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Apoctasy	Posted - 2006.11.18 01:16:00 - [1] What is the official definition of a carebear or carebear corp. I have heard many definitions and I do not know what to think... Thanks for your time...
GC13 Caldari FATAL REVELATIONS Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.18 01:32:00 - [2] There is no "official" definition. Carebear is generally accepted to mean miners, scientists, and builders. Depending on the usage, mission runners sometimes can be included if the person is differentiating between NPC content players rather than PvPers. -- Science and Industry guide Eve and roleplaying games blog
Letouk Mernel	Posted - 2006.11.18 04:25:00 - [3] Not a PvP'er.
Athena Starfire Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.18 07:04:00 - [4] Edited by: Athena Starfire on 18/11/2006 07:12:30 As one who has been voted by many as 'Carebear of the Year', I will give it a go at explaination. IMHO, A 'Carebear' as the EVE community uses it, is one that would rather embrace the other aspects of EVE (Mining,Manufacturing,Research,Trading and 'Ratting' and amassing power ecomonically.) Someone who does not 'care' to indulge much in the mindless killing of other ships for the sake of killing other ships, either for 'joy', 'grief' or for 'loot', wither the combat was consentual or not.(In other words, its ok to wreck someone elses game while they are in Hi-Security Space becuase 'your playing you own way' and not see this in any way, shape or form) About like the old 'frag fanatic' of the Quake and Unreal Tournement Days Although some may call people who combat with others out in space with mutual consent of both parties,and never "pod", Some of these are called 'carebears', you know the ones that are honourable. 'Carebear' termage is usually meant in a derogatory, and unflattering manner. Equating a 'carebear' to the term of 'coward' or 'wuss' Playstyles in EVE are infinate, and you will find fanatics on both sides of the track. Guess which track I'm on
EffBee Primus Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2006.11.18 11:27:00 - [5] Hey - I'm a Carebear! I love empire building games like Civ IV. Playing Moo2 I would always leave one enemy colony on 1 tiny wretched planet then colonize everything, research everything and aim to beat the antareans with just 1 ship. I love economy based games like railroad tycoon. I played world of warcraft for a year solid and only PvP'd in it for a couple of hours one afternoon. I love exploring, both the game world as the game designers intended, and the game mechanics which they probably didn't consider so much. I treat with contempt people who buy credits or even accounts on the internet then rush in buy ships and shoot 'em up. Each to his own I may not ever set foot in space less than 0.5 unless its a new alt for a bit of suicidal fun exploring. Cuddly teddy bears of the world unite! (If it doesn't upset anyone and doesn't get too thrilling that is) Proud to be a CareBear
Sakura Nihil Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.11.18 13:26:00 - [6] Carebears in my book are people that want to change EVE to suit a more peaceful living style without holding some respect for the way the other half (or so) lives, i.e.: - By preventing all highsec aggression - Vastly increasing gate guns range and power in lowsec - Making PvP consensual etc...; I differentiate between carebear and say industrialist. A carebear will again try and change the world to fit their playing style, an industrialist however will say "hmm, nice potential for a lowsec market eh?" and move into the void to earn a profit for example.
Wolfways Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2006.11.18 15:11:00 - [7] In its simplest term, carebear is an insult used by morons who refuse to believe that other playstyles are as viable as theirs. Delusions of invincibility combined with a strong homicidal urge... I have a kick-your-ass fetish
Timmy Bettenson Caldari Total Mayhem. Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:02:00 - [8] i'd say a carebear is a person who would rather not fight, and would prefer mining or making isk.
Celvice Klein	Posted - 2006.11.18 22:34:00 - [9] Like you said, there's so many definitions that no one really knows what it means. Just consider it a generic insult, specifically towards one's courage or fortitude, something like 'wuss' or 'coward'.
Athena Starfire Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.18 23:32:00 - [10] Originally by: Sakura Nihil Carebears in my book are people that want to change EVE to suit a more peaceful living style without holding some respect for the way the other half (or so) lives, i.e.: - By preventing all highsec aggression - Vastly increasing gate guns range and power in lowsec - Making PvP consensual etc...; I differentiate between carebear and say industrialist. A carebear will again try and change the world to fit their playing style, an industrialist however will say "hmm, nice potential for a lowsec market eh?" and move into the void to earn a profit for example. In this post 'PvP' means combat between 2 or more player ships.. I could care less about the 2nd 2 above, the only thing I'm out to change as a 'carebear' - By preventing all highsec aggression I couldn't give a stuff about if anyone 'PvPs' or not.. everyone has the right to play thier own game, but I take exception to this when it interferes with another player (suiciding in hi-sec) that obviously dosen't want to 'PvP', all this does is disrupt that players game and IMHO is harassment, which is against the EULA. There is a huge universe out there and they have to come to Hi-Sec to kill other player ships?. Blah..Blah..they have 'good' loot..blah blah..CCP says we can..blah blahh..blahdy blah blah.. I would call that a coward before I would carebear. If someone goes to low-sec they are 'consenting' to PvP as far as I'm concerned. When they stay in high sec thats pretty much a "I don't care for PvP' statement. So WHO'S the one "without holding some respect for the way the other half (or so) lives, i.e." Cheers
Sakura Nihil Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.11.19 01:51:00 - [11] What you're failing to understand though is that highsec is not 100% safe, and never should be. Wanting to make it so highsec residents are unvulnerable to death, that's being a carebear - accept that risk is part of the game even in safe(r) space, and that if you carry extremely valuable things in a ship with the armor equivalent of a paper plate, you're going to get shot at. Just a comment on the side, if warp to 0 comes in, along with the HP increase, there should be no excuse for getting suicide ganked anymore. It'll take so many BSs that only T2 BPOs and faction mods/ships would really be profitable anymore.
F'nog Amarr Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.19 04:25:00 - [12] You're all wrong. A "carebear" is someone who wants the game mechanics changed so that they are never in danger of dying. This can apply to any type of player, even PvPers, e.g. those who snipe at gates and get mad and come to the boards to rant about how their gate camp was unfairly broken up by someone who fought back and used a little of their stuff between their ears. Basically, it's anyone who wants the devs to solve their problems instead of doing so themselves when that is an option, i.e. most of the time. Originally by: DB Preacher The only time BoB's backs are to the wall is when backdoor bandit is in local.
Athena Starfire Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.19 05:00:00 - [13] Originally by: F'nog You're all wrong. A "carebear" is someone who wants the game mechanics changed so that they are never in danger of dying. This can apply to any type of player, even PvPers, e.g. those who snipe at gates and get mad and come to the boards to rant about how their gate camp was unfairly broken up by someone who fought back and used a little of their stuff between their ears. Basically, it's anyone who wants the devs to solve their problems instead of doing so themselves when that is an option, i.e. most of the time. You are so full of poo that that OPINION is not even worth considering.. Nuff Said There...
Athena Starfire Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.19 05:07:00 - [14] Edited by: Athena Starfire on 19/11/2006 05:10:17 Originally by: Sakura Nihil What you're failing to understand though is that highsec is not 100% safe, and never should be. Wanting to make it so highsec residents are unvulnerable to death, that's being a carebear - accept that risk is part of the game even in safe(r) space, and that if you carry extremely valuable things in a ship with the armor equivalent of a paper plate, you're going to get shot at. Just a comment on the side, if warp to 0 comes in, along with the HP increase, there should be no excuse for getting suicide ganked anymore. It'll take so many BSs that only T2 BPOs and faction mods/ships would really be profitable anymore. Hopefully, you are right. But, unfortuatly you are wrong, because there is scum out there that 'suicide' ships in hi-sec for no reason other than 'because they can', they aren't after loot they are after grief. And there are alot more of them then there are actual 'pirates' that have a reason for it. I DO understand if you have some valuable stuff and someone scans you the tried to take it, I don't condone that in high sec, but I do understand it. But what about someone 'suiciding' a Indy (I) 1st Class with nothing on board, or one mining scrod or empire velspar with 1 laser. There is nothing to be gained by that other than a kill mail? So thats worth it? Or baiting a noob in a noob frigate, just because they can.. You expect me to 'understand' this?
Rod Blaine Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.11.19 09:47:00 - [15] Edited by: Rod Blaine on 19/11/2006 09:47:53 Caebears are nothing else then people that actually think the following could at any time be true: Quote: everyone has the right to play thier own game, but I take exception to this when it interferes with another player (suiciding in hi-sec) that obviously dosen't want to 'PvP', all this does is disrupt that players game and IMHO is harassment, which is against the EULA Thiking that within Eve every possible playstyle you can choose is equally valid is nonsense. CCP created a game with a certain angle to it, and your playstyle is free to be developed within the bounds and directions of the game they designed. Yes, that means that playing with the wish of never being subjected ot agression by another player is not a valid playstyle. Unless you take it to be wholly your own responsibility to avoid that agression. There's also the uber carebear. This is the guy that not only doesn't want to be shot anywhere at any time, but that simply detests all kinds of non-consentual interaction. An example would be those whining about not being able to access all Eve content solo or within high sec through the agent system. People that think profit margins of more then 50% of the market are by default market-griefing and that NPC's orders should limit the market prices for their convenience. Old blog
Erixa Nagel Caldari Autaris INC	Posted - 2006.11.19 09:49:00 - [16] Originally by: F'nog You're all wrong. A "carebear" is someone who wants the game mechanics changed so that they are never in danger of dying. This can apply to any type of player, even PvPers, e.g. those who snipe at gates and get mad and come to the boards to rant about how their gate camp was unfairly broken up by someone who fought back and used a little of their stuff between their ears. Basically, it's anyone who wants the devs to solve their problems instead of doing so themselves when that is an option, i.e. most of the time. Yet another example of Eve's terminology differing from the mainstream MMO parlance. Generally speaking, in MMOspeak, what you describe above would fall into the category/definition of 'nerfherder'.
Wotar	Posted - 2006.11.19 10:03:00 - [17] Originally by: Athena Starfire Originally by: F'nog You're all wrong. A "carebear" is someone who wants the game mechanics changed so that they are never in danger of dying. This can apply to any type of player, even PvPers, e.g. those who snipe at gates and get mad and come to the boards to rant about how their gate camp was unfairly broken up by someone who fought back and used a little of their stuff between their ears. Basically, it's anyone who wants the devs to solve their problems instead of doing so themselves when that is an option, i.e. most of the time. You are so full of poo that that OPINION is not even worth considering.. Nuff Said There... And all you can do is insult people. Seriously, take your ridiculous crusade out of the new player forum. This is an area for new players to ask for and receive advice, not for you to further your insidious 'carebear agenda'.
Athena Starfire Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.19 10:37:00 - [18] Edited by: Athena Starfire on 19/11/2006 10:39:06 Originally by: Wotar And all you can do is insult people. Seriously, take your ridiculous crusade out of the new player forum. This is an area for new players to ask for and receive advice, not for you to further your insidious 'carebear agenda'. If you don't like my opinions you don't have to read them or you can ignore them. I will post my opinions within the rules of these forums. If you don't like them you should take it up with the mods or CCP. Have a Nice Day..
Wraithbane	Posted - 2006.11.19 11:48:00 - [19] Well...As a founding member of Carebear Inc I'd say that carebears are those who don't see any point to PvP. Especially not in a MMO. I mainly run missions, do a little mining(mostly after patches/upgrades) and play with the ships and mods. Thats ALL I want from Eve. As long as thats possible, I'll stay. If the trend of forcing people in to low sec continues, I'll regretfully have to leave.
Athena Starfire Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.19 13:13:00 - [20] Originally by: Wraithbane Well...As a founding member of Carebear Inc I'd say that carebears are those who don't see any point to PvP. Especially not in a MMO. I mainly run missions, do a little mining(mostly after patches/upgrades) and play with the ships and mods. Thats ALL I want from Eve. As long as thats possible, I'll stay. If the trend of forcing people in to low sec continues, I'll regretfully have to leave. I mentioned this in another topic where someone wanted CCP to move Omber and Level 3 and 4 mission to low-sec only. If that happened they would see a mass exodous of $$$. There are more of us than alot of people realize. Cheers, Brother
Guile D'Verde Caldari The Crescent Order	Posted - 2006.11.19 17:12:00 - [21] Edited by: Guile D''Verde on 19/11/2006 17:11:54 Originally by: Athena Starfire Edited by: Athena Starfire on 19/11/2006 10:49:53 Originally by: F'nog You're all wrong. A "carebear" is someone who wants the game mechanics changed so that they are never in danger of dying. You are so full of poo that that OPINION is not even worth considering.. Nuff Said There... I don't see how his opinion is out in left field. You have made posts in general claiming that you and your corp are going to actively petition CCP to make all ships empire space not attackable. Given that you've clearly demonstrated that you wish to be not attackable in high sec and you're willing to petition CCP to gain that, I wouild say the poster who you declared to be "full of poo" is pretty accurate in his assesment.
Sepulchura	Posted - 2006.11.19 17:37:00 - [22] http://myeve.eve-online.com/lexicon/mmog.asp
Sakura Nihil Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.11.19 18:53:00 - [23] Edited by: Sakura Nihil on 19/11/2006 18:55:52 Originally by: Athena Starfire Hopefully, you are right. But, unfortuatly you are wrong, because there is scum out there that 'suicide' ships in hi-sec for no reason other than 'because they can', they aren't after loot they are after grief. And there are alot more of them then there are actual 'pirates' that have a reason for it. If they go after random indy ships with BSs just because they're bored, then they're retarded. Ore thieving and can aggro timers are a different matter, but avoidable and even potentially winnable if you know what you're doing. Originally by: Athena Starfire I DO understand if you have some valuable stuff and someone scans you the tried to take it, I don't condone that in high sec, but I do understand it. Alright then. Originally by: Athena Starfire But what about someone 'suiciding' a Indy (I) 1st Class with nothing on board, or one mining scrod or empire velspar with 1 laser. There is nothing to be gained by that other than a kill mail? So thats worth it? Or baiting a noob in a noob frigate, just because they can.. You expect me to 'understand' this? Understand it, yes, they're bored and after easy kills - lame, but understandable. Just keep in mind this can flagging system was introduced specifically because carebears (hehe, that term again) wanted a mechanism to protect their ore from thieves. Y'all got it, and now the tables kinda got turned. Can't we just agree to disagree? I think true, actual carebears are out to ruin EVE by taking the risk and danger out of it to make it easier and safer for them, whereas you think its a term to refer to the peaceful trades of EVE. We're both right, honestly, and so are a lot of the other opinions in this thread - let's leave it at that and have a nice cup of tea in Oursulaert, shall we?
Melianna	Posted - 2006.11.19 19:32:00 - [24] Slightly off-topic: I don't see the harm in making players unattackable in "green" sectors - 0.9 and 1.0, where there aren't any "wild" NPC rats. There are various storyline methods that could be used to accomplish this, and it wouldn't mean that PvP would be banished completely from these sectors - just that unprovoked attacks couldn't happen. People who have things stolen from their cans would still have the right to attack the thief. Players who prey on newbies would still be able to pull the, "Free ore! can" trick to kill stupid newbies. They just wouldn't be able to attack anyone out of the blue. Also, restricting this to the "green" sectors would have the least impact possible, since many of the people who engage in these sorts of activities have low enough Security Standing that they can't go in the top-end systems anyway... - - - - - On-topic, a carebear is someone who wants to enjoy the non-PvE aspects of the game without having other players force PvP on them. I suspect strongly that most, if not all, EVE "carebears" are willing to accept the risks of PvP when they go into low-security - they understand that it's dangerous out there. They just don't want to have to put up with "ganking" behavior in high-security space. I personally make a point when I'm in Rookie Help to correct people who refer to high-sec space as "safe." I know that people can attack you - and possibly kill you before CONCORD gets there - in high-sec space. I know that CONCORD's response time goes way down as you get in lower-sec space, and it's not difficult to kill in 0.5 before CONCORD arrives. You'll still die when CONCORD gets there (you're not "allowed" to evade CONCORD), but you may be able to kill, loot, and jettison before CONCORD takes you out. As I said in the top half, I wouldn't object to having "green" systems provide a "weapons lock-down" status that temporarily lifts when you get kill rights. But I also have no problems with the system the way it is now. It's up to the Devs to decide which is best for the game.
Sakura Nihil Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.11.19 20:08:00 - [25] Edited by: Sakura Nihil on 19/11/2006 20:10:24 I understand your concerns - however, from a pro-pirate point of view, its a slippery slope. If you get a completely safe space, what next? The same people that would have successfully lobbied for a secure half of highsec would likely want the rest of it secured - months later, when you can't even target lock someone in highsec, we could see just how bad it'd have got, but be too late to stop it. System's fine the way it is now, even with the HP and warp to 0km tweaks coming in.
Melianna	Posted - 2006.11.19 20:39:00 - [26] Edited by: Melianna on 19/11/2006 20:40:35 Originally by: Sakura Nihil I understand your concerns - however, from a pro-pirate point of view, its a slippery slope. If you get a completely safe space, what next? I'm not inherently pro- or con- pirate. I'm pro-newbie, and things that scare off newbies are bad for the game. If they wander out into low-sec and get ganked, that's their own lookout - they didn't take the time to learn enough about the game, and they got the consequences of their own rash actions. But having 5-minute old players get podded by pirates who are just there to grief is not fun, and is certainly not going to encourage them to keep playing. Besides, the "slippery slope" argument is a fallacy to begin with. It's always flawed argumentation, because it assumes the worst, and argues from the position of arguing against the worst, instead of arguing against the real point being raised. Would you be willing to allow new players (say, the first 7 days) to be immune to attack in high-sec?
Athena Starfire Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.19 21:37:00 - [27] Originally by: Guile D'Verde I would say the poster who you declared to be "full of poo" is pretty accurate in his assesment. You fully have the right to your opinion, you can think I'M 'full of poo' .. HE can think I'M 'full of poo', it was a statement of opinion, like everything in this forum is.. Cheers
Sakura Nihil Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.11.19 21:56:00 - [28] Originally by: Melianna Would you be willing to allow new players (say, the first 7 days) to be immune to attack in high-sec? The idealistic side of me says that's exploitable by older players, and would be used to run important cargo like BPOs and faction loot through empire in newb/newbish ships without danger. The pro-newb in me on the other hand likes it. I'd say a conditional yes, IP address checks and the likes might need to be looked into if it was seriously considered.
Athena Starfire Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.19 22:01:00 - [29] Originally by: Sakura Nihil Can't we just agree to disagree? I think true, actual carebears are out to ruin EVE by taking the risk and danger out of it Sorry, I can't agree with that, most the people I know that are considered 'carebears' are NOT 'out to ruin EVE'.I really don't see how putting an end to 'suicide ganking' in Hi-Sec is going to 'destory EVE'. Originally by: Melianna Slightly off-topic: I don't see the harm in making players unattackable in "green" sectors - 0.9 and 1.0, where there aren't any "wild" NPC rats. There are various storyline methods that could be used to accomplish this, and it wouldn't mean that PvP would be banished completely from these sectors - just that unprovoked attacks couldn't happen. Pretty much what we are stating, we don't want an 'end to PvP' in Eve or 'Ruin' it, just an end to (I WILL agree with Sakura here, the 'retards' that have nothing better to do than disrupt games for no reason other than being bored) unprovoked ganks in Hi-Sec (And I mean 0,5-1.0) And don't worry about the petition to CCP, they have made it more than clear that you have to put of with bored scum. I applaud some of the change coming in Kali that will (wither planned this way or not) make it easier and much more fun for 'carebears' (ie: Warp to 0, margin buying, auctions etc.)

Santiago Cortes Caldari Forum Moderator Interstellar Services Department	Posted - 2006.11.20 05:16:00 - [30] Cleaned Please attempt to stay on topic and not turn this thread into a virtual chest beating contest. forum rules \| [email protected]


Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.