EVE Search - Choice to pvp

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Choice to pvp

» 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 - 0 post(s)
Ona Otana	Posted - 2003.12.03 23:57:00 - [1] Hello! I wonder why players are not given a choice to pvp or not (besides than staying in secure space). It should be like a value can u can change to true or false, but it would require some time to be changed. Many people are not pvp oriented interested in this game and dont enjoy when they get blown up. On the same side there are players that only enjoy pvp. Those imo should be allowed to pvp with other players that are ready and have made a choice to pvp. I'd very much like to hear your comments. Thank-you.
Nervar	Posted - 2003.12.04 02:18:00 - [2] NO.. how manny people do you think would say yes to being pirated... Only thing that would do is give players the oppertunity to bs min annywhere they feel like. -------------------------------------------------> What I look forward to is continued immaturity followed by death.
wamingo	Posted - 2003.12.04 02:50:00 - [3] No such thing as optional pvp could ever enter the game without making the game need another title. Remove piracy and player killings and the game will instantly become stale. It strikes a little fear in you when you have more to lose, and danger lurking around every corner. Creates adrenaline. Makes it all a whole lot more exciting. And if you've never felt death you will never know living. And don't rob yourself of the sweet sweet taste of vengence when you nail the scumbag who plundered you. It may not be easy, but where there's a will there's a way. Aim for it and it will happen. -- I won't not promise to avoid refraining from harming you! .... What?
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.04 03:53:00 - [4] Quote: No such thing as optional pvp could ever enter the game without making the game need another title. Remove piracy and player killings and the game will instantly become stale. It strikes a little fear in you when you have more to lose, and danger lurking around every corner. Creates adrenaline. Makes it all a whole lot more exciting. And if you've never felt death you will never know living. And don't rob yourself of the sweet sweet taste of vengence when you nail the scumbag who plundered you. It may not be easy, but where there's a will there's a way. Aim for it and it will happen. i agree one of the best things about EVE is the fact that you can do anything you please not like Earth and Beyond where you had to chose the profesion there was laid upon you when you startet the game Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Baldour Ngarr	Posted - 2003.12.04 05:04:00 - [5] Quote: No such thing as optional pvp could ever enter the game without making the game need another title. Remove piracy and player killings and the game will instantly become stale. And who appointed you God, that you have the right to tell everyone else what they enjoy and what they don't? _______ "Soon" is an ancient Icelandic word meaning "some time before the next Ice Age."
Vel Kyri	Posted - 2003.12.04 05:58:00 - [6] NONONO!!!! god no, thats what i hate most about some other "famous" MMOGs out there. no "challenge to duel" or "PvP flag" horrible.. (all IMHO of course) -----
wamingo	Posted - 2003.12.04 14:11:00 - [7] Baldour Ngarr said: Quote: And who appointed you God, that you have the right to tell everyone else what they enjoy and what they don't? Napoleon did!? no, seriously now, it's not really about what everyone enjoys... It's about what this game is about and having a dynamic design where the rules apply to everyone. I merely mentioned a couple of reasons why it should and why you're practically better off why anyhow. Okay, so you got ****ed off when someone pk'ed you, especially when it happens for no reason - that's really annoying I agree, but it's not like you didn't have the choice to avoid it (minus exploits (being fixed)) - e.g you stay out of 0.4 and lower space. Hey, everything is optional in the end. It's optional playing the game! You don't like pvp why not go try something else? -- I won't not promise to avoid refraining from harming you! .... What?
Baldour Ngarr	Posted - 2003.12.04 16:39:00 - [8] Quote: no, seriously now, it's not really about what everyone enjoys... It's about what this game is about ... I tend to agree. Trouble is, there's so many people here who either don't understand "RPG" or never bothered to read the box, and think that the game is about PvP. _______ "Soon" is an ancient Icelandic word meaning "some time before the next Ice Age."
Milk	Posted - 2003.12.04 17:21:00 - [9] Quote: Quote: no, seriously now, it's not really about what everyone enjoys... It's about what this game is about ... I tend to agree. Trouble is, there's so many people here who either don't understand "RPG" or never bothered to read the box, and think that the game is about PvP. How else can you role play a pirate or a corp that wants to claim a section of space as their empire without PvP? ________________________________________________ You know whats good for you.
Ris Dnalor	Posted - 2003.12.04 18:41:00 - [10] Well i played a game, in which you could register your ship as either "Honor Guard" or "Civilian" in the flight registry before you left space dock. If you registered your ship as civilian, people could still attack you, but they would suffer a consequence very similar to the security rating hits we take currently when in secure space, however if you felt like causing a little trouble with other pvp'ers irregardless of where you were at in eve, you could register your ship as Honor Guard, & you'd be freely attackable by anyone, anywhere. This method allowed PVP'ers to easily find other PVP'ers anywhere in the game & duke it out to their hearts content. [ when you targeted or did a mouse-over on the enemy, it would show one of two distinctive icons for either civ or HG ] tralala -- Jump Drive Operation / Rank 5 / SP: 1280000 of 1280000
Ona Otana	Posted - 2003.12.06 06:57:00 - [11] Well, i know this is a lost cause as pvp is fundamental to EVE, but still why not set up a poll and ppl would vote if they like to pvp or not (1 vote per account). Then if the majority doesnt, set the forementioned system or like Ris Dnalor suggested. Dont u think this would be like taking the pulse of the comunity (clients) and set the game accordingly? Thx again.
denzilmason	Posted - 2003.12.06 08:57:00 - [12] Hay, I've been podded more times I've lost count, but I agree without the tension of mining in 0.0 systems and looking in local hoping to god a big bounty players not going to come in and hunt ya down, the game just wouldn't be the same. It a choice to get into them systems and it's even better if you remember to write down the git that podded ya, there's nothing like sweet revenge. Player vs rest of corp style. lol
Venture	Posted - 2003.12.06 12:01:00 - [13] No! No! No! Good God, what are you thinking about?! You basically want to take out an aspect of the game that makes it fun. Although I do agree that it is not fun getting killed but that is part of the game. Since starting I have been killed several times. All those kills came when I had encountered pirates that camp at exit points and jump gates. And I must admit that it was not much of a fair fight but it was a staged ambush, that is what I can't understand why people are complaining about. A "yes or no" to PvP will definitely kill the excitement of the game. I did not pay good money for this game and the monthly subscription charges to play a "Safe" game. If you want to play it "Safe" go buy a Nintendo 64 and buy Mario Cart. ______________________ Ganja Unlimited Security Director/Fleet Admiral "Smoke everyone and be happy!"
Baldour Ngarr	Posted - 2003.12.06 15:28:00 - [14] Quote: How else can you role play a pirate or a corp that wants to claim a section of space as their empire without PvP? You can't. Which is entirely irrelevant to the point I made. _______ "Soon" is an ancient Icelandic word meaning "some time before the next Ice Age."
Wild Rho	Posted - 2003.12.06 20:38:00 - [15] PVP is fundemental to so many aspects of EVE... For some it is a lifestyle for their characters in EVE and is how they have chosen to play the game. The market which is basically an arms industry relies on PVP combat as it generates demand to replace losses. The same would apply for shipyard corps. It generates a risk element for 0.0 mining operations and forces corps or indivudals to think about how to minimize risks etc etc etc. It also generates some tension and excitment for players who want to venture out into 0.0 space. People who do not like PVP combat should stick to high sec space where they will be protected by concord. If they want to mine the rarer minerals etc and venture into 0.0 space then PVP is simply a risk they need to consider. By allowing people the option to choose if they want to be attacked or not you would effectivly be killing piracy since this is essentially what piracy is, and love it or hate it, piracy IS as important in EVE as any other aspect of it. For those not interested in PVP - Stay in high sec space and you will be fine, stop asking for handouts simply becuase you are unwilling to take the risks. I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it...
Redon	Posted - 2003.12.07 07:55:00 - [16] CAN I SAW. U LAME*** CHK THE BOX THIS IS A PVP GAME. GOD. NOT CAN I PLZ SHOT AT SOMEONE GAME. GO PLAY SWG IF U AFRAID OF LOSING SOMETHING U CAREBEAR.
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.07 17:32:00 - [17] Quote: CAN I SAW. U LAME*** CHK THE BOX THIS IS A PVP GAME. GOD. NOT CAN I PLZ SHOT AT SOMEONE GAME. GO PLAY SWG IF U AFRAID OF LOSING SOMETHING U CAREBEAR. come on because you dont agree is no reason to get rude i also like EVE the way it is (PvP) however as everybody knows the Gate campers have to be taken care off i dont have a problem with ambush (hey have 10 BS lay in wait for me at the astoroid field) but gate camping is not an ambush it is just unfair (cheating) since you dont stand a chance to do anything before you are podded Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.07 17:33:00 - [18] also see the thread pirates Thanks Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Roshan longshot	Posted - 2003.12.08 04:11:00 - [19] Just checked the box....Nope does not say "THIS is a PvP Game" It says be anything you want to be....nowhere is there a warning about PvP being the object of this game...It says the players control the aspects of this game. Lets see the type of player you can be. 1. Pirate scurge of the universe too many of you guys...there can only be one so start going after each other. 2. Miner.....nuff said 3. Merchant...have you tried this? If your in USA its impossible to do. 4. Join a coporation and become a Mining Drone...see number 2 above. yes the best thing on the list is PvP pirate. But some people perfer not to do this stuff. They want to make a vast ammount of isk with out risk and cry when they get turned into a corpcycle. THAT IS THEIR Right to cry about it. Free-form Professions, ensure no limetations on professions. Be a trader, fighter, industialist, researcher, hunter,pirate[/i] or mixture of them all. [i]As read from the original box and from this site.
Euthanasia	Posted - 2003.12.08 04:43:00 - [20] Thank you Ris Dnalor for giving one such excellent suggestion! I have wondered for a long time how the rules of battle should be handled here. And i've been in for a long time and have had my fair share meeting people who think this game isnt anything but PvP - as someone said, read the friggin box! There should be other options to this game than to make battle for 10-14 hours a day, even that gets boring in the long run and so is counterproductive for the game as a whole. Yes ive been in battle, I dont mind getting getting beaten - can afford it and most likely will be in battle again. This have nothing to do with with me loosing anything, but my consern for the continued existence of this game - since we wont have ANY growth here when guys in noobships gets whacked all over, they will instead quit distressed after doing their first set of agents missions or whatever. (Yes! Listen in on the game chats for once and hear the few noobs we have tell their story about being camped by noobkillers.) But before I got to the stage of economics im in now, I could have quit so many times. This solution takes care of the jump in and jumppgate lagging problems instantly! Since they wont be able to attack peaceful guys! The security system and rewards will be one add on im happy to keep, but thes problems to those two can also be left for correction for a later time. Lets do it!
Mirvnillith	Posted - 2003.12.08 07:34:00 - [21] On the other hand (to try to even out the sides here) there should also be a "challenge" option where security status penalties get turned off (I know about gang, but that gives away too much) and you get to track the other ship (how about cannot leave system or dock when challenged?). --- Implement forum search already!!!
Euthanasia	Posted - 2003.12.08 07:57:00 - [22] Yes thats one interesting idea Mirvnillith - did I spell that nick right? Cant say im all for it but.... it certainly could be considered. Still wont stop some from warping to a station / planet and log yet.... Theres been talk about how hard it is to get to a guy when some wants to hunt someone / retaliate / get revenge. WBR Euthie
Dukath	Posted - 2003.12.08 09:08:00 - [23] Edited by: Dukath on 08/12/2003 09:09:44 I guess this would be acceptable if and only if the peceful guys cannot switch to pvp later, the peaceful guys cannot fly battleships. (why would a peaceful guy ever want to fly a ship designed for fighting anyway?) of course most battle oriented cruisers and frigates will be out of the question too. Peaceful guys shouldn't be able to use guns and the gates in low empire space and 0.0 space should have plenty of NPC pirates. Only if all that applies will I accept a flag that allows you to choose non pvp in the game. These restrictions are needed simply as a balance for the reduced risk in the game. People who do accept pvp have more risk and should be rewarded for choosing the risky option.
laurax	Posted - 2003.12.08 11:59:00 - [24] I agree with the fact that being Podkilled when you are a merchant is not very fun ... But this game need his freedom to exist. I think the death system is a bit hard. You lose to much when you are podkilled. Maybe the character saving must be cheaper. So if you decide to go in the dangerous systems you can only lost ship, and not all the time you spend to train skills. but it is essential to keep the risk to be attacked and destroyed anywhere in the space. This make the game realistic.
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.08 16:13:00 - [25] as long as the gate camping stops i for one like the system we got now i like the freedom to do what i want even if that is PvP right now the Balance is in the gate campers favor this has also been said so many times before Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
zaqq	Posted - 2003.12.08 17:50:00 - [26] to pvp or not to pvp, if this form of combat is jumping into a roid belt and kill unarmed single miners, then i'm not for pvp, if its bs v bs in low sec then yes. there should be an option in game where you can choose either. obviously there will be limitations if you choose yes or no. if no, you cannot lock or attack another player, same goes for being locked and shot at. let me remind some pvpers here, that when some of us create a char, it is done with a lot of thought and care, i for one deleted my first char of 3.8 million points to create this one. i created it to be of the factory production, research type, not to kill other players, if i wanted to do that i would have been civre etc and chosen the relevant killin skills. so give us a break, you choose to kill we choose to do other stuff, so don't ***** to me that i HAVE TO ACCEPT pvp with you, i would like an official option. REAL PVP PLAYERS HAVE BALLS AND DO IT IN 0.0 not in 0.4 with ppl in lesser ships n skills.
Dreams Desire	Posted - 2003.12.08 18:36:00 - [27] We need to get ride of the camping aspect of gates in this game. That not even close to pvp. That is just *******S looking for loot or target practice. I love the war aspect of the game, that is why i joined. It is fun...
Euthanasia	Posted - 2003.12.09 08:19:00 - [28] The flagging of ships would take care of the problem of jump in campers. Or those at gates as well They would'nt be able to attack anyone but those who are intent on battle of course. WBR Euthie
Dukath	Posted - 2003.12.09 10:29:00 - [29] So how do you prevent a corporation that is intent on PVP to create some 'non' pvp characters so that even in time of war they will always have people bringing them supplies and mining for new ships? An economic blockade is one of the most important aspects of warfare. If you make it impossible to attack and kill some players then you make a blockade impossible and remove the whole concept of a corporation war of the game.
Saar Elyse	Posted - 2003.12.09 13:32:00 - [30] A "NO" from me for make it a non PvP game. Well, i dont like PvP mutch but the game needs it, if you switch to ôNo PvPö the market would be down for the efect people dont loos there ships or equipment. So letÆs stop the cry for "No PvP" and let us finde a new way, to bring fun on both side. The only way i see to let have both side fun are: 1.) Make the space 1.0 - 0.5 realy secure for non PvP combat and give there some asteroids with all minerals the "Non PvP" player need to make ther job. Alsow the good mineral, but on hiden places or special locations with heavy NPC-Pirates, so they can not get it to easy. 2.) A little more hidden base or places with good NPC-Pirate, so the people they dont like PvP can get pirate loot to at secure space. With this both modifications, a player can choise a side then "PvP" or "Non PvP" and we dont need a switch. If he likes one time to change the side to PvP, he only need to fly in non secure space and that's it. best regards Saar Elyse Channel Operator of German Helpchannel best regards Operator of the German Help Channel
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.09 13:58:00 - [31] excuse me but making 0.5 and above more secure how by deactivating all weapons in .5 and above that is about the only way right now if you fout the wrong way in safe space you are dead between concord and the sentry guns you dont stand a chance no please leave .9 and 1.0 the way it is but make .8 to .5 less secure and .4 to .1 more secure (like i said in my pirates thread) honestly have you ever played Earth and Beyond that is what you get if you try to limit the PvP and as i said before what needs to be dealt with is actuelly 2 things that are the real problems with this game right now first and foremost the gate campers they need dealt with and they need gone second these lone miners and loners one thing is freelancers but this game is a MULTIPLAYER game miners,traders etc should have a escort ship (one thing that dedicatet mining vessels would also solve) Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Euthanasia	Posted - 2003.12.10 20:01:00 - [32] In response to Dukat's question: In war all ships of the corporation will be open targets as they are now. Plenty to do for the PvP inclined guys. And the idea would perhaps require we get the suggested alliances working. So people of the same alliance can attack those of one opposing alliance. Same for those in the same gang, currently its not working as it really should. Ill leave details to the devs about this really. WBR Euthie
SwitchBl4d3	Posted - 2003.12.10 21:20:00 - [33] erm well u can stay in 0.4 and above if you dont want to PvP "Teh lord of Nonni"
Dukath	Posted - 2003.12.11 11:14:00 - [34] Quote: In response to Dukat's question: In war all ships of the corporation will be open targets as they are now. Plenty to do for the PvP inclined guys. And the idea would perhaps require we get the suggested alliances working. So people of the same alliance can attack those of one opposing alliance. Same for those in the same gang, currently its not working as it really should. Ill leave details to the devs about this really. WBR Euthie But... all i need to do is have my non-pvp miners/haulers/traders not be in my corporation. Even if everyone in eve knows that they are working for me, that while not being in the same corporation ingame they are part of my corporation. Then you won't be able to do anything at all since they have chosen non-pvp. Right now you can kill them if you suspect they work for the enemy (sometimes you make mistakes, most of the time you don't). In the proposed system that will be impossible.
Slinky Redfoot	Posted - 2003.12.11 18:44:00 - [35] Quote: NONONO!!!! god no, thats what i hate most about some other "famous" MMOGs out there. no "challenge to duel" or "PvP flag" horrible.. Exactly.If this ever becomes anything like UO or EQ, i'm outtha here. Got Banana?
Mon Palae	Posted - 2003.12.11 18:45:00 - [36] Quote: no "challenge to duel" Unless I misunderstand a "Challenge to Duel" option might be kinda cool. Assume you and some other puke decide to go mano-y-mano and duke it out. You either need to find low sec space and worry about a sec hit or you issue a "Challenge to Duel". This would allow the two of you to lock horns anywhere with no reprisals from CONCORD or any kind of sec hit. The challenge might last one hour before expiring or till one person's ship gets nailed. Podding the guy gets CONCORD after you and you take a sec hit. Of course hitting anything else besides your intended duelling target see CONCORD race in and waste the guy as usual (so still a good ide to go find an unsed roid filed or planet to fight near). All the other usual PvP stuff stays as it is now. This would just be for those occasional times where two people want to mix-it up a bit but won't for various reasons.
Mon Palae	Posted - 2003.12.11 18:51:00 - [37] I should add that both parties must agree to a "Challenge to Duel" and there is no downside to rejecting one except maybe a bit of your pride. You also might have it that you can autoset a "No" reply to all requests so rats don't just sit around and bombard people with challenges. With the auto "No" on the receiver of the challenge never even knows it was issued. If through discussion someone decides to go for it they simply toggle the auto-reply off. It would also be neat if a trade screen opened allowing players to put stakes on the match in ISK (dealing with winning goods might be too hard to manage...what if 1 of them doesn't have the cargo room to take the winning?). You put up your money and both accept. To the victor goes the spoils.
Mon Palae	Posted - 2003.12.11 18:56:00 - [38] Edited by: Mon Palae on 11/12/2003 18:57:19 One last thing...perhaps if when duelling the can holding the destroyed ship's goods is a 'secure' can. This would encourage more PvP if the fighters know they won't necessarily lose everything (they still risk the 50% loss of items upon destruction...needs to be some pain there). Perhaps their can has a timer so if not collected in 30 minutes by the owner it reverts to the challenger for 30 minutes and after that it is up for grabs for an hour before imploding.
Sith'ari Adas	Posted - 2007.10.18 16:31:00 - [39] Let me start by saying that I enjoy PvP from time to time. But it in no way enhances my game experience or enjoyment (quite the opposite) being ganged up on by a group of gate campers who shoot anything that moves (that is not PvP). It would seem to me that those who dislike the idea of a PvP on/off switch are exactly those people. They are afraid of a fair fight where they might actually be on the loosing end. All an on/off switch would do is making it so that those that want to PvP can and those who don't can't. I have played many of the MMORP game that has come out. The games that have the option to PvP or not to PvP always have better subscription. And that is what it boils down to. More people in the game and the game gets better because there is more money to develop expansions etc. All these games are supposed to be enjoyable by everyone because there is no warning on the box that says "You're wasting your money if you don't want to PvP" and those silly "This isn't the game for you replies" are just the unintelligible cries of those who can't really PvP and have to prey on those weaker then them. Besides that I would also say that if all you want to do is kill other players then this is not the game for you. There are plenty of free MMO combats oriented games out there and this is an RPG. Now as I see it the reason why the PvP system in Eve does NOT work is #1 If you are going to charge players any kind of monthly fee to harvest skill that take a long time to develop and buy items that are costly, aren't going to give players an option to turn off PvP, then the price of pod death when it is completely out of your control is unreasonable. #2 Some (perhaps not all) of those that claim to be PvP are just gate camping. Come on be a little more enlightened. At least have a legitimate reason to pod kill someone. It's an RPG game. So since #1 would be too extensive to change and #2 those who "PvP" aren't going to change tactics (kind of an exploit) Then the only solution is to give players an option to turn on and off PvP at least as far as destroying ships and pod killing goes. Perhaps make 0.0 systems automatically turn the PvP option on and add a few more 0.0 systems. The other way to go would be to at least temporarily offer a second server where you could only PvP when your corp. is at war with another corp. By doing this the game developers could at least tell what system is preferred by the majority of their player base. I know this second option terrifies some of you so called "PvP'ers" because you know which way that will go. Now with all that said I think the switch should be only accessible at character creation once you choose your path youÆre stuck with it. This will keep people from being able to kill others then turn off the switch. Also to give the PvP'ers more opportunity loosen security so that they can really go at it with each other. Lastly there should be actions in the game that can slowly slide your PvP switch on (like theft etc). This will do two things. It will allow people to build up their char before pursuing a life of crime and it would add an element of real consequence for these lower crimes.
galadran Caldari Alcohol Fueled Brutality Axiom Empire	Posted - 2007.10.18 19:52:00 - [40] Unlike almost every other MMOG out there, EVE revolves around Non-Consenual PVP. Its what makes EVE, EVE. The entire EVE economy and gameplay is founded on this idea. It would so utterly break everything in EVE. God forbid CCP take any idea about changing to consentual PVP seriously. As cliched as it is, I would quit EVE, and I wouldnt join another MMOG unless it could offer me the same hard callous world as EVE.
Valandril Caldari Resurrection R i s e	Posted - 2007.10.18 20:03:00 - [41] neeeeecrooo ! Also u got choice, if u pay for account then u agree to get shoot by anyone anywhere, if u don't pay then u can't be shoot. Simple --- Battlecarriers !
Wardo21 The Arcanum	Posted - 2007.10.18 20:14:00 - [42] Opting out of PvP would be a bad idea. As much as I stay in empire and NPC/mine/vend I choose to do that so that I can enjoy the game. My first obvious problem would be spie/recon would just set "no PVP" and go snooping and there would be no way to deal with this intrusion into areas controlled by alliances/corps. I don't enjoy the thrill of PvP combat. I'm 0 for 2 in forays into lo-sec. Neither time was there any sort of role play or claim staking or ransoming. Warp in, lock down gank. Your fun in this game should not require my misfortune. I prefer the planning and looking for market opportunities facets of the game. My killing of NPC missions/rats doesn't take from anyone else. My competition on the market (PvP in it's own form) is relatively fair, and lets face it, if I under cut you in the market, you can still sell at a lower price or retain the goods for sale later. My competition hasn't lost anything but a sale right now... Wardo21
Crewman Rimmer	Posted - 2007.10.18 20:47:00 - [43] Edited by: Crewman Rimmer on 18/10/2007 20:52:55 To my first responder: Quote: EVE revolves around Non-Consenual PVP. Its what makes EVE, EVE. The entire EVE economy and gameplay is founded on this idea. It would so utterly break everything in EVE. Now thatÆs just silly. That's like saying that EVE is only about combat. If that were the case then whatÆs the point in all the other non-combat skills? What makes EVE unique is the skill system it uses and the fact that there are many ways to achieve your goals. Combat would be only one of those ways. EVE is about Role-playing and while not all, a good portion of the PvP in game interferes with that Role-play. I've never once been offered a way out of being ganged up on by a group of gate campers (which is in no way role-playing and defiantly takes away from the game). The game is also about whatever those who play it choose to make it about. When there is no choice you have a dictatorship. Quote: God forbid CCP take any idea about changing to consentual PVP seriously. As cliched as it is, I would quit EVE, and I wouldnt join another MMOG unless it could offer me the same hard callous world as EVE. You are entitled to your point of view and personal taste but not at the expense of everyone else who would like to enjoy the game. A consensual PvP system takes nothing away from those who enjoy PvP and yet allows others who do not the ability to enjoy the game as well. If as you say PvP is such a big part of the game then the majority would choose to keep PvP on and you have nothing to worry about. But by denying those who would choose not to PvP the option you are trying to force your opinion on others. The only way to settle this debate is to allow players the choice to PvP or not to PvP in some form or another. Lastly if you feel so strongly about having to have a hard callous game environment then all I can say is that you are already playing the wrong game. MMO games are a social atmosphere. If that is not enough of an explanation then I might suggest some long term therapy. To my second responder: Quote: Also u got choice, if u pay for account then u agree to get shoot by anyone anywhere, if u don't pay then u can't be shoot. Simple No my friend that is not a choice. It's not written as a disclaimer on the box. And it is certainly not the game environment or all zones would be 0.0 In closing EVE is only as successful as its subscription base. I wonder how many people have been turned ôoffö from the game simply because this choice is not offered? Or at the very least to make sure cowardly and pseudo-cheating tactics like gate camping is allowed to go on?
Rashmika Sky	Posted - 2007.10.18 22:22:00 - [44] Edited by: Rashmika Sky on 18/10/2007 22:27:17 A couple points: 0 - Epic necro! "Posted - 03/12/2003" Where was this thread located, on like page 10,931 of this forum? Daaamn... Idly wonders if the OP from 2003 is still playing Eve or reading the forums, or if this necro was completely* uncalled for* 1 - Complaints about gate camps. While I find them annoying myself, and would like to see combat in Eve revolve less around "points of interest" like gates, pos's, etc., gatecamps aren't as impossible to deal with as some people in this thread are making it sound. If campers organize a group of players to camp a gate, why shouldn't you be expected to organize a group of players to counter this strategy? All it takes is one scout to determine if there is or is not a camp. 2 - Some here are arguing that Eve shouldn't have non-consentual pvp, because it doesn't let them play Eve the way they wish. They seem to miss the point that if pvp in Eve were consentual, then others would be unable to play the way they wish, i.e., pirates. Now think about it this way - Non-consentual pvp does not prevent you from playing as a merchant/miner/civilian or whatever, it just makes it more dangerous. But consentual pvp does prevent people from playing as pirates, since the types of targets pirates would go for would naturally never consent to pvp. In my opinion, non-pvp ships could use a boost - at the moment they are nothing more than targets. However, boosting the survivability of these ships is far different from making pvp consentual. In the meantime, there's nothing stopping you from fitting Warp Core Stabilizers on your haulter or barge, and increasing your chances of warping away from anything but a warp disruption bubble, which is only an issue in 0.0. 3 - Non-pvp and pvp roles in Eve are tied together. It's been said many times here, but I'll say it again - If ships/modules aren't blown up, or worse, there is nobody willing to be blown up, then there is no need to produce ships or weapons or armor. If there is no reason to produce these things, then there is no reason to mine. Therefore, there would no reason left to play Eve. When we get right down to it, Eve was designed with pvp in mind, it is very obviously so. If it were not, then there would be a lot more content in the game catering to pve, the way there is in World of Warcraft - much fewer "classes" than Eve has ships, for instance, but many more quests, different items, different npc enemies/factions, different zones that... are actually different, unlike Eve's 10,000 identical twin solar systems. The fact is, pvp is rarely fair in any game, one side will always have the advantage. In most games, the cost of losing is less than it is in Eve. For this reason, people will engage in pvp for fun, because they aren't worried about the outcome. In Eve, the cost of losing in pvp is expensive. This causes people to avoid pvp except when it is in their advantage - or when it is forced on them, whether by gate/station camp, or by being jumped in a belt, or by the need to defend territory in 0.0. But almost nobody in Eve fights a battle that they don't expect to win, because losing is costly. It is because of this that Eve is so much more "real" than other MMOs. What does it mean in Warcraft, if a Horde player defends another Horde player against the Alliance, even if the odds are against them? Almost nothing, because the cost of death is exactly that - almost nothing. But in Eve, people remember those that help them and those that harm them, this extends to the corps and alliances as well. This gives Eve a social element than Warcraft will never have. Eve's shardless system, in my opinion, suggests that CCP intended to create a community amongst their players, that everyone should have a role in, and I think non-consentual pvp serves an important part in achieving that. -Rash
Natalie Jax	Posted - 2007.10.18 22:50:00 - [45] Edited by: Natalie Jax on 18/10/2007 22:50:27 1) This thread should be locked as a necro, if not the sheer lameness of the OP's suggestion. 2) CCP has never had any illusions of competing with the other MMO's that do offer purely safe environments: Originally by: "Player Guide page 1" Players that enjoy the freedom and opportunities for creative thinking an open-ended game offers have become mesmerized by EVE, while others that depend on structured, repetitive game style have not. For this reason we don't contend that EVE is for everyone, but for those that enjoy a bit more of a challenge. 3) More evidence that completely safe gameplay was never the intention of CCP: Originally by: "Player Guide page 1" The basic role-playing and space simulation aspects of EVE are really just the tip of the iceberg. When players band together to form factions and alliances, the game becomes a grand-scale strategic drama. Political intrigue, corporate espionage, and the very essence of Darwinism bring dimension and depth to the game as the struggle for fame and fortune ebbs and flows with each new day in EVE. The essence of Darwinism being survival of the fittest. Without PvP, there is no true threat to your survival. Add to that the dilusion that those who focus on PvE in this game don't have a substantial impact on those who PvP and you've got a game with no place for "zero risk" gameplay.
Crewman Rimmer	Posted - 2007.10.18 23:17:00 - [46] In response to: Quote: 1 - ... gatecamps aren't as impossible to deal with as some people in this thread are making it sound. If campers organize a group of players to camp a gate, why shouldn't you be expected to organize a group of players to counter this strategy? All it takes is one scout to determine if there is or is not a camp. This would seem to indicate that you cannot play the game in a solo minded way at all. Not to mention for new players getting that kind of support or the ability to stand a chance against a Battlecruiser is indeed impossible. Quote: 2 ... Non-consentual pvp does not prevent you from playing as a merchant/miner/civilian or whatever, it just makes it more dangerous. But consentual pvp does prevent people from playing as pirates, since the types of targets pirates would go for would naturally never consent to pvp. If you pay to play a game you can expect to play it in whatever way you find fun. PvP or non-PvP. A consensual PvP does not stop those who wish to PvP from pirating each other all they want. But perhaps there is a better fix since some seem to be worried about players alts etc. If you have a char in a corp that is at war with another players corp then all your chars become open season. Quote: In the meantime, there's nothing stopping you from fitting Warp Core Stabilizers on your haulter or barge, and increasing your chances of warping away from anything but a warp disruption bubble, which is only an issue in 0.0. There most certainly is a lot from stopping someone from playing a merchant. You can't get to some systems from other areas to get the best buy/sell price without going through low sec systems. And the EVE market is hard enough already to make a buck on. As for the Warp StabiliHow many new players can afford one of these either slot-wise or monetarily? Quote: When we get right down to it, Eve was designed with pvp in mind, it is very obviously so. If it were not, then there would be a lot more content in the game catering to pve, EVE was designed with role-play in mind first and foremost. That aspect is being abused. Therefore something has to be done. Combat is only one of many types of character in EVE. Minority in fact. There is plenty to do in game without PvP. Quote: The fact is, pvp is rarely fair in any game, one side will always have the advantage. In most games, the cost of losing is less than it is in Eve. This is also not true in most other games PvP is a fair contest. Equal levels, abilities, etc. Quote: In Eve, the cost of losing in pvp is expensive. This causes people to avoid pvp except when it is in their advantage - or when it is forced on them ... Exactly ... forced on them. Also I would point out that you rarely stand any chance at a gate camp no matter what. Quote: It is because of this that Eve is so much more "real" than other MMOs. No if EVE was more real then there would be NPC military out there hunting down the pirates like dogs in every zone. You think that corporations or governments in a futuristic society would allow a few bullies to threaten their shipping lanes? Quote: But in Eve, people remember those that help them and those that harm them, this extends to the corps and alliances as well. This gives Eve a social element ... What if you don't want to be part of a player corp? The social element is similar to jail if you want to call that a social element. "Join a gang/corp or else" Quote: Eve's shardless system, in my opinion, suggests that CCP intended to create a community amongst their players, that everyone should have a role in, and I think non-consentual pvp serves an important part in achieving that. EVE's shard-less system only suggests that there is not enough interest to have more shards ... nothing more. If you have a big enough player base then you need more then one server it is simple math. It's a good game but it could be so much better.
Crewman Rimmer	Posted - 2007.10.18 23:34:00 - [47] Quote: 1) This thread should be locked as a necro, if not the sheer lameness of the OP's suggestion. How constructive of you. Quote: 3) More evidence that completely safe gameplay was never the intention of CCP: Originally by: "Player Guide page 1"The basic role-playing and space simulation aspects of EVE are really just the tip of the iceberg. When players band together to form factions and alliances, the game becomes a grand-scale strategic drama. Political intrigue, corporate espionage, and the very essence of Darwinism bring dimension and depth to the game as the struggle for fame and fortune ebbs and flows with each new day in EVE. There is no drama at all in gate camping which seems to be all to rampant. This means the PvP system is broken. Since we can't trust those that use this tactic to stop of their own accord then something else must be done. As for political intrigue ... where? Corporate espionage ... again where? PvP in EVE has boiled down to a bunch of bullies beating on new players and high powered end game player corps slugging it out like a tennis match. YAWN!!! Again this indicates the intended system has failed and so new measures should be put in place. Quote: The essence of Darwinism being survival of the fittest. Without PvP, there is no true threat to your survival. Then you should only be able to attack those of similar ability. Survival of the fittest doesn't enter into it when a noob ship has absolutly no chance to destroy a battleship. Specially when it's the battleship that ambushes the noob ship. Where is the fun in that anyway? Killing noobs with nothing for what? Is that to keep people from beating their pets or something? Even in real life there is always that slight chance. Quote: Add to that the dilusion that those who focus on PvE in this game don't have a substantial impact on those who PvP and you've got a game with no place for "zero risk" gameplay. I never said PvE focus doesn't and in fact this supports my point. You can have PvE and PvP separate but part of the same system and everything will work out just as it already is except new players won't be crapped on by bullies. If you have the ability for "zero risk" then the market will be that much more accurate. I am one of 15 friends who have tried this game. I am the only one who has played past the free trial. Every single one of them sites the gate-camping BS as a main reason they do not play. About half would still play PvP even if they could get a chance at working up to the level of the competition. End result = fix the system and you have more players. More players means a better market for everyone and more of a real community to the game.
Proxy 13 Minmatar RABBLE-RABBLE Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2007.10.18 23:36:00 - [48] a new expansion is coming out eve-teddies pinky ships and guns
Tsanse Kinske WeMeanYouKnowHarm	Posted - 2007.10.18 23:52:00 - [49] Originally by: Crewman Rimmer If you pay to play a game you can expect to play it in whatever way you find fun. I've never heard of any games like that, actually. Maybe the children's game "Let's Pretend"? All other games have themes, laws, and ideals that don't change, because they -are- the game. EVE happens to be more freeform than most, relying much more on consequences than strict demarcations of acceptable behavior enforced by game mechanics. But that freedom doesn't exist without nonconsensual PvP and the brutality of asymmetrical combat. Your demands are equivalent to insisting that some players be given the option to play with ponies instead of space ships if they so desire, The answer is the same: "Sorry, wrong game, pal. Can I have your stuff?" * * * In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -Douglas Adams, writing about EVE
Reggie Stoneloader Teikoku Trade Conglomerate Visions of Warfare	Posted - 2007.10.18 23:56:00 - [50] I like the idea. There should be an option to have Concord keep out of our business. Maybe a toggle on the option screen that opts you into high-sec PvP. Anyone with that option checked can freely engage anyone else with the same setting, with no reprisal from Concord or sentry turrets. And if you don't select that option, the game is exactly like it is right now. >=====My Current Crusades=====< Security Status
Rashmika Sky	Posted - 2007.10.19 06:19:00 - [51] I'm going to have to break this into several posts because this has gotten too large. Quote: Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 - ... gatecamps aren't as impossible to deal with as some people in this thread are making it sound. If campers organize a group of players to camp a gate, why shouldn't you be expected to organize a group of players to counter this strategy? All it takes is one scout to determine if there is or is not a camp. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This would seem to indicate that you cannot play the game in a solo minded way at all. Not to mention for new players getting that kind of support or the ability to stand a chance against a Battlecruiser is indeed impossible. No, you aren't supposed to play Eve in a solo minded way, it is a Massively Multi-player game. Even as a newbie you start out in a corp with other players. Besides, if you want to role-play, why play single-player? You think your agent is going to care what role you play? If you aren't playing with other people, there's really no reason to bother with a game like this, you would be better off just playing an imaginary game with your mind, that would be exactly what you think it should be. Quote: Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 ... Non-consentual pvp does not prevent you from playing as a merchant/miner/civilian or whatever, it just makes it more dangerous. But consentual pvp does prevent people from playing as pirates, since the types of targets pirates would go for would naturally never consent to pvp. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you pay to play a game you can expect to play it in whatever way you find fun. PvP or non-PvP. A consensual PvP does not stop those who wish to PvP from pirating each other all they want. But perhaps there is a better fix since some seem to be worried about players alts etc. If you have a char in a corp that is at war with another players corp then all your chars become open season. How many games are there where the rules are different from person to person? And I find it funny that you think non-consentual pvp is ok so long as somebody has had war declared on them. It's still non-consentual.
Rashmika Sky	Posted - 2007.10.19 06:25:00 - [52] Quote: Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the meantime, there's nothing stopping you from fitting Warp Core Stabilizers on your haulter or barge, and increasing your chances of warping away from anything but a warp disruption bubble, which is only an issue in 0.0. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There most certainly is a lot from stopping someone from playing a merchant. You can't get to some systems from other areas to get the best buy/sell price without going through low sec systems. And the EVE market is hard enough already to make a buck on. As for the Warp StabiliHow many new players can afford one of these either slot-wise or monetarily? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nobody is forcing you to take the absolute best buy/sell prices, first of all, you could take a safer path for a smaller profit. Secondly, the reason those prices are better in low-sec is because of the risk of moving them. Otherwise, all systems would be the same, and prices would balance between low-sec and high sec. Finally, every ship has low-slots, so even a total newbie can fit WCS on anything other than a shuttle or a freighter. And they cost far less than any ship other than maybe frigates that are so cheap it is laughable to even fit a WCS on them. Have you even played Eve? Or are you just trolling? Because you can't be serious about WCS being costly unless you just don't know better. Quote: Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- When we get right down to it, Eve was designed with pvp in mind, it is very obviously so. If it were not, then there would be a lot more content in the game catering to pve, -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EVE was designed with role-play in mind first and foremost. That aspect is being abused. Therefore something has to be done. Combat is only one of many types of character in EVE. Minority in fact. There is plenty to do in game without PvP. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yes, Eve was certainly designed with role-play in mind. Verily I remember how I lost my welcome in the Amarr Empire when I joined a corp filled with Minmatar pilots... oh wait... that didn't happen. Everyone plays a role in Eve, but it's roles such as pirate, merchant, victim, etc. Your role is what you are doing at any time. Limiting what people can do by making pvp consentual would make the game less RP, if role-playing is what you care about. It makes little sense for a pirate to pass up an easy target just because they have a "non-pvp" flag on them.
Rashmika Sky	Posted - 2007.10.19 06:27:00 - [53] Quote: Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is also not true in most other games PvP is a fair contest. Equal levels, abilities, etc. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Most other games? Maybe. Most MMOs? Absolutely not. Go play Warcraft and get ganked by a level 70 and tell me that was a fair contest. And almost every MMO but Eve is WoW with different graphics, so Eve is actually more fair than most of these games. Quote: No if EVE was more real then there would be NPC military out there hunting down the pirates like dogs in every zone. You think that corporations or governments in a futuristic society would allow a few bullies to threaten their shipping lanes? Yes, because there's no crime in the real world. There are police in Eve, Concord, you may have heard of them. They protect a large section of the territories controlled by each Empire - the core systems, if you will. In sci-fi environments, it is common for outlying systems to be more dangerous, and that's the idea in Eve as well. Finally, if the shipping lanes were being disrupted badly enough, sure, goverments would act on it. But the vast majority of the time, goods make it through the shipping lanes just fine. Quote: Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But in Eve, people remember those that help them and those that harm them, this extends to the corps and alliances as well. This gives Eve a social element ... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What if you don't want to be part of a player corp? The social element is similar to jail if you want to call that a social element. "Join a gang/corp or else" If you are that anti-social, you shouldn't be playing a MMO. You should try Elite, you might enjoy it. Or Solitaire, worst thing that can happen to you in that game is you get a paper cut.
ZerKar Caldari Zen'Tar	Posted - 2007.10.19 06:28:00 - [54] Originally by: wamingo No such thing as optional pvp could ever enter the game. And don't rob yourself of the sweet sweet taste of vengence when you nail the scumbag who plundered you. It may not be easy, but where there's a will there's a way. Aim for it and it will happen. Paraphrasing the first part of your statement a bit I think sums it up very nicely. As for the last part though LOL. I do not know about you but I have 0% Chance of ever tasting that vengence you speak of unless vicariously which is never quite so sweet. Unless you are talking about just some whatever ore thief noob who obviously is making a big mistake and then I am not sure I would care . ------------------------------------------------ everything is never Nothing is Never Not ------------------------------------------------
ZerKar Caldari Zen'Tar	Posted - 2007.10.19 06:40:00 - [55] Originally by: Euthanasia This have nothing to do with with me loosing anything, but my consern for the continued existence of this game - since we wont have ANY growth here when guys in noobships gets whacked all over, they will instead quit distressed after doing their first set of agents missions or whatever. (Yes! Listen in on the game chats for once and hear the few noobs we have tell their story about being camped by noobkillers.) You bring up an interesting point here. Maybe what IS actually needed is some sort of protection to and from a new player. So for instance for the first month or so a freshly created character Cannot be Target Locked by other Players, so they HAVE to kill them with area effect if they are going to do it at all but likewise the new Player cannot Target Lock other Players either. Just for a month to let them get started without being annihilated. After that they are on their own and can do whatever they like. ------------------------------------------------ everything is never Nothing is Never Not ------------------------------------------------
Rashmika Sky	Posted - 2007.10.19 06:42:00 - [56] Quote: Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Eve's shardless system, in my opinion, suggests that CCP intended to create a community amongst their players, that everyone should have a role in, and I think non-consentual pvp serves an important part in achieving that. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EVE's shard-less system only suggests that there is not enough interest to have more shards ... nothing more. If you have a big enough player base then you need more then one server it is simple math. It's a good game but it could be so much better. Um... no, it suggests that Eve was designed differently than other MMOs. Most MMOs have maybe a few thousand people on each shard, Eve has 35,000 at a time on its one shard. It was a conscious decision, and it has a lot of effects on Eve. For instance, if I want to screw over my guild in Warcraft, and take some gear in a raid that should go to somebody else, I can do so and then go to another shard, change my name, and do it again. In Eve, you can steal from your corp, but since there's no other shard to disappear to, your reputation will suffer. Which is the point - in Eve, you have a reputation. In WoW, you're just another Druid/Mage/Warlock whatever, defined solely by your equipment and level. I doubt you'll be convinced by what I say, and it doesn't really matter to me. I know CCP isn't going to change this aspect of Eve that you're complaining about, because they love it. I'll check this thread to see if you make any valid arguments, but so far I'm not impressed with any that you have made. -Rash
galadran Caldari Alcohol Fueled Brutality Axiom Empire	Posted - 2007.10.19 06:45:00 - [57] I stand by my assertation that gamplay in EVE would be broken without PVP. Without a risk to losing ships the market for said ships would crash because 1/2 the population wouldn't want to lose them. Also the (now) easy access to 0.0 with its rich minerals and no risk would skyrocket inflation. If the market crashed the manufacturing and trade based population would suffer. Therefore only Mission Runners would be happy. So this change would cause a population crash. Other problems: Alliance held space would be impossible with consensual pvp Supply runs could no longer be blockaded People could hide from the consequences of their actions by turning off PVP In short, EVE would no longer be recogniseable.
galadran Caldari Alcohol Fueled Brutality Axiom Empire	Posted - 2007.10.19 06:50:00 - [58] You also talked about how a hard callous game was not a MMO. I disagree completely. It forces players to trust it each other because everyone has the capacity to harm others. I can be scammed in EVE, I can be sucided ganked, I can have my loot stolen, etc In short, its far less artifcial than other games and is based more around the players than the game. Thats what makes EVE so good. Sorry for the double post
Oldin Kinrod	Posted - 2007.10.19 07:52:00 - [59] @Rashmika Sky - Ain't that the truth! Agreed 100% @Crewman Rimmer "This would seem to indicate that you cannot play the game in a solo minded way at all." Well I'm playing the game solo and enjoying it the way it is - and I don't pirate or PvP. As much as I might not like gate camping, it is the way that some player decide to defend their territory. If I ever travel thru low sec/0.0 I make sure I can either afford to lose what I have, scout first, or not go at all. Risks vs Rewards. "A consensual PvP does not stop those who wish to PvP from pirating each other all they want." That sentence makes no sense at all. If I'm hauling arms for a corp and have PvP turned off noone can pirate my goods - and I'm sure this would happen for the entire market industry. Otherwise it would just be silly. "As for the Warp StabiliHow many new players can afford one of these either slot-wise or monetarily?" I can. It's called 'making sure I cover my ass'. You don't buy a car without insurance do you? This is mine. "EVE was designed with role-play in mind first and foremost." From the FAQ: Quote: EVE is a massive multiplayer online game (MMOG) set in a science-fiction based, persistent world. Players take the role of spaceship pilots seeking fame, fortune, and adventure in a huge, complex, exciting, and sometimes hostile galaxy. I see no mention of role playing - in fact the game is referred to as a MMOG - no RP. Also take note on the last part. I can't be bother replying to the rest of your comments - but I will end with my post from your thread here Quote: This coming from a "carebear" that has had his share of losing ships and PvP. After reading the forums over the past few days there seems to be more and more complaints on how this should change, or that is overpowered etc. When I started playing over a year ago I was shocked to find how hostile EVE was, and how quickly one can go from having fun to OMGWTFBBQ!! YOU BLEW UP MY SHIP!!! But after the first loss I learnt that it was my own fault - the can flipping pirate had tricked me and I fell for it, and in turn losing my first cruiser and having little to no ISK to buy a new one. It happens. After that I had someone else try the same trick, and ended up having a long conversation about EVE and the PvP elements - where I went wrong in my setup, what I should have done etc. This is the core idea behind EVE, the conflict between players and the 'fun' (interpret how you wish) that ensues. If you want an MMO with Roleplaying at it's core, WoW is this way --->. Or any of the other MMOs out there. EVE is EVE, and that's what makes it so great. While PvP can be a bit of a burden with all the "exploits" as I've heard them called (can flipping, 'stealing' wrecks) that is the nature of EVE. If you don't like the way someone is doing something, TOUGH! Do you expect CCP to hold your hand and tell the player off??? Just like in the real world, people will be jerks, pick on you, steal your stuff - the difference in EVE is that it's up to you to deal with it. Is that 20K ore that some guy stole really worth your 5mil isk ship? Then don't try and take it back. If it bothers you that much, then don't play EVE - it's obviously not for you. The reasons I like EVE so much is for the reasons that you (the OP) are asking us to vote on. There is more riding in EVE than any other MMO out there, and to change any and all that you have posted would ruin all that EVE has become. Don't like PvP - Live in High sec. Don't like the costs of death? Don't fly with stuff you can't afford to lose. These IMO are why I play EVE - I actually have to think about what it is I'm doing and what I may/may not run into.
AshtarDJ Filthy Scum	Posted - 2007.10.19 10:39:00 - [60] I rly hope that this NEVER gets implemented. If you want to PVE only, chose another MMO. If you want to PVE only (in Eve), you can either chose to stay in highsec (prolly in a newb corp) or join a big alliance where youre PVE'ing helps the PVPers in that alliance. EvE is about PVP and that's period! ;)
Cailais Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.19 22:41:00 - [61] Its a necro people. Please let it rest. C. - sig designer - eve mail
Macro Slasher	Posted - 2007.10.22 09:19:00 - [62] Never.

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.