EVE Search - I don't think non-consensual PVP means what you think it means

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

I don't think non-consensual PVP means what you think it means

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2008.09.05 08:08:00 - [31] Originally by: Evelgrivion What non-consensual PVP means is that at any time, anywhere, someone can shoot you if they decide to. If your ship is helpless, so be it. If you can't stand it, I'd prefer you quit than drag EVE Down to the level you defined. What level is that? I didn't ask for anything to change, I simply called out the whimpering dogs for what they are. I don't expect or want anything to be changed as far as the game itself is concerned, and frankly I don't really care if these guys continue picking on weaklings. I just want them to know they are pathetic for it. I have nothing but respect for any 0.0 pilot. And nothing but contempt for empire gankers. I would think you would understand that. ______________________________________________ Goon FC(08/12/06):"its a trap" "that thing is fully operational"
Evelgrivion Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.09.05 08:16:00 - [32] Originally by: Locke DieDrake Originally by: Evelgrivion What non-consensual PVP means is that at any time, anywhere, someone can shoot you if they decide to. If your ship is helpless, so be it. If you can't stand it, I'd prefer you quit than drag EVE Down to the level you defined. What level is that? I didn't ask for anything to change, I simply called out the whimpering dogs for what they are. I don't expect or want anything to be changed as far as the game itself is concerned, and frankly I don't really care if these guys continue picking on weaklings. I just want them to know they are pathetic for it. I have nothing but respect for any 0.0 pilot. And nothing but contempt for empire gankers. I would think you would understand that. Where do you draw the line on Empire Gankers? I'll fly in 0.0 and shoot stuff up, and I'll fly in lowsec and gank miners in asteroid belts. I do it because I like to watch things explode; it's fun. Do I thus fall into the category of "whimpering dog"? If someone makes themselves opportune, I'll attack them because I love to make space pixels into explosions. If you find this cowardly, can you give a concise definition of the metric you're using?
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2008.09.05 08:22:00 - [33] Originally by: Evelgrivion Originally by: Locke DieDrake Originally by: Evelgrivion What non-consensual PVP means is that at any time, anywhere, someone can shoot you if they decide to. If your ship is helpless, so be it. If you can't stand it, I'd prefer you quit than drag EVE Down to the level you defined. What level is that? I didn't ask for anything to change, I simply called out the whimpering dogs for what they are. I don't expect or want anything to be changed as far as the game itself is concerned, and frankly I don't really care if these guys continue picking on weaklings. I just want them to know they are pathetic for it. I have nothing but respect for any 0.0 pilot. And nothing but contempt for empire gankers. I would think you would understand that. Where do you draw the line on Empire Gankers? I'll fly in 0.0 and shoot stuff up, and I'll fly in lowsec and gank miners in asteroid belts. I do it because I like to watch things explode; it's fun. Do I thus fall into the category of "whimpering dog"? If someone makes themselves opportune, I'll attack them because I love to make space pixels into explosions. If you find this cowardly, can you give a concise definition of the metric you're using? Concise? Probably not. In a general way, I think shooting anyone you don't have a political beef with inside .5 or better is probably boarding on greifing. Feel free to do it, but don't expect any respect for it. That is to say, everyone in 0.0 should know what they are doing. No problems with anything you might do here. I feel much the same about low sec with the caveat that you will occasionally find a soft target that wondered off path. So be it, sometimes you shoot first and don't ask a lot of questions. Shit happens. However, on the opposite side, war decing a baby corp, or picking on afks, or targeting ONLY (or specifically) weak targets is pretty pathetic. Wouldn't you agree? ______________________________________________ Goon FC(08/12/06):"its a trap" "that thing is fully operational"
Hurrum Hurrum Gallente	Posted - 2008.09.05 08:42:00 - [34] Originally by: Locke DieDrake However, on the opposite side, war decing a baby corp, or picking on afks, or targeting ONLY (or specifically) weak targets is pretty pathetic. Wouldn't you agree? Eve is a competetive game and nobody likes to lose. That's why newbies will always be prey to the older players. Someone recently said: Ever notice how, in consenual PvP games, the only people that want to fight you are always 3 levels higher. That applies to non consensual PvP games as well.
Evelgrivion Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.09.05 08:42:00 - [35] Originally by: Locke DieDrake However, on the opposite side, war decing a baby corp, or picking on afks, or targeting ONLY (or specifically) weak targets is pretty pathetic. Wouldn't you agree? It's certainly not something I would do, but if people decide to role in that manner, I'll let them. In eve's geopolitical atmosphere, water finds it's own level. People who pick on the fragile will draw the ire of others, and people will play back. It's all a matter of the way you choose to interact with people. I'll agree that it's pretty crummy to pick on a new corporation, but at the same time, the social networks people create can solve the problem far more effectively than any thread in a forum can. Broadly speaking, things are fine the way they are. A lot of the details need tweaking of course, but on the whole, there is no need to proactively attempt to turn people away from things like making war with new corporations.
Tao Han Ginnungagaps Rymdfarargille Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2008.09.05 09:10:00 - [36] Meh, if it bleeds I will try to kill it. To much morale on this thread, this is a game, games have rules. As long as one of those rules doesnt forbid me to shoot unarmed, harmless nublets I will keep on killing them.
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.05 09:39:00 - [37] Originally by: Locke DieDrake What non-consensual PVP DOES NOT mean is that you gank defenseless pilots. It does not mean you can flip a noob and pop his frig. It does not mean waiting for an AFK autopilot to go by so you can gank it. It does not mean picking on targets that are incapable (and you damn well know it) of defending themselves. That is crap, it's ~~boarding on griefing~~ smart as a play style and most importantly it's ~~pathetic~~ profitable. Fixed. I'm sorry, I for some reason shouldn't shoot haulers with hundreds of millions worth of stuff in them who are AFK and autopiloting? Because, what, it doesn't make me a honourable warrior? What are you, the carebear Garmon? Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.09.05 09:51:00 - [38] The OP's dreadnoughts have exceptional tanks I hear. Anyway, the OP took a point I agree with (specifically targeting weak targets is lame), then shot himself in the foot, the other foot and the head by turning it into "it's not really non-consensual PvP unless the other person is ready for a fight" nonsense. Arguing against the dictionary definition of a term is a losing battle. Thanks for the laugh though, I just got done with the ZP EVE thread, and thought it would be a while before I'd get to see failure on that level again. - DesuSigs
qantua gnartians Gallente Amistad Annihilate Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.09.05 09:57:00 - [39] Originally by: Evelgrivion Where do you draw the line on Empire Gankers? I'll fly in 0.0 and shoot stuff up, and I'll fly in lowsec and gank miners in asteroid belts. I do it because I like to watch things explode; it's fun. Do I thus fall into the category of "whimpering dog"? If someone makes themselves opportune, I'll attack them because I love to make space pixels into explosions. If you find this cowardly, can you give a concise definition of the metric you're using? Empire gankers play in what is an battlefield system, they never have to worry about bigger fish doing to them what theyr planning on doing to a carebear in low sec and 0.0 your yourself vounerable non-consensual first strikes. Yes if your good and fit polycarbs you can escape most but anyone can fire first on you. This is the entire problem with empire pvp, the mighty pirates they have to give me PvP flag by flipping a can before i can PvP them, and they of cause wont ever do that unless they "know" they have the advantage, this is actully less non-consensual then a battlefield system where you at least have to risk 3rd party involvement.
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.09.05 09:59:00 - [40] Originally by: Dez Affinity Actually there's lots of skill involved in getting people to fight who don't want to. Also go get a definition of consent. Should be /thread right there. I also submit the following: If people did not shoot others for little to no reason, a LOT of the conflict in EVE would be gone, which is bad for a PvP game. -- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html

Steamroll McGee Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Militia	Posted - 2008.09.05 10:12:00 - [41] Sounds like someone was doing an afk autopilot trip in a shuttle through lowsec and got waxed. Time to turn on the butthurt machine.
Lrd Byron	Posted - 2008.09.05 10:32:00 - [42] People play this game precisely because of its uniquely harsh environment, you are only doing players a disservice by not living up to the games reputation. Your whole point was ridiculous anyhow. Someone points out you killing a defenseless little shuttle and all of a sudden all this moral grandstanding only applies in high and low sec? Lol, be more arbitrary why don't you.
Tippia Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.09.05 10:37:00 - [43] Originally by: Locke DieDrake I don't expect or want anything to be changed as far as the game itself is concerned, and frankly I don't really care if these guys continue picking on weaklings. I just want them to know they are pathetic for it. So why bring the matter of non-consensual PvP into the mix, and even make it the main thrust of the title? It has nothing to do with the point you're trying to make and only serves to confuse the issue.
5pinDizzy Amarr Umpteenth Podding	Posted - 2008.09.05 10:42:00 - [44] I find the title of this thread hilarious considering the irony. The "invading my sovereign space" answer always given for popping defenceless explorers is weak given the incredible amount of space alliances are able to take over and hold. There isn't really anywhere left whatsoever that isn't owned by someone in nullsec, effectively including the npc zones. The people who try to keep a not red don't shoot it policy even in nullsec certainly have more balls then you. Pretty much "I'm allowed to kill anything defenceless I want in nullsec because that's a well defined pvp arena, you're not allowed to do exactly the same thing in highsec because the victim might not have been expecting it!" Since if I hang around anywhere long enough, even in highsec, I consider it my territory, I'll kill haulers if I can because they bring market competition, I'll kill miners if I can because they are resource competition. Though even I'm not craven enough to bother trying to kill shuttles all the time. The only place you ever have a leg to stand on is not killing noobs Suicide ganking is going to become very punishing once the system is all put in place, and anyone who ganks anything that isn't a total beginner in highsec will certainly have payed for the right to.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2008.09.05 11:05:00 - [45] Originally by: Locke DieDrake Now, Non-consensual PVP, to me, means that I do not get to pick when and where I can be engaged. ... What non-consensual PVP DOES NOT mean is that you gank defenseless pilots. Despite the fact that your post is well written and well thought out, those two statements contradict each other as defenseless pilots rarely 'pick' themselves to be 'engaged'. Although I don't find any joy in blowing up a complete noob or a shuttle on autopilot (unless they're orange/red), and I often won't do it because it's just not worth the sec hit, it is still non-consensual PvP. I respect you for your view, but please go back to 'getting your rocks off in 0.0' instead of trying to convince people that ganking noobs and morons is not okay. It'll always happen and that's part of what makes EvE EvE. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.05 11:07:00 - [46] Originally by: 5pinDizzy Though even I'm not craven enough to bother trying to kill shuttles all the time. As long as people keep hauling tons of valuable stuff in shuttles, I'll keep killing shuttles whenever I get the chance to. The absolute best ISK any of my corpmates got was from a noobship. Not POS theft (done that), not killing freighters with faction BS (done that, too), not faction-fit battleships, not even high-value industrial/transport ships. Best loot any of us ever got was from a noobship. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
5pinDizzy Amarr Umpteenth Podding	Posted - 2008.09.05 11:14:00 - [47] Aww come on!! Aren't you even going to share with us what you got?
Babel Utopian Research I.E.L. The ENTITY.	Posted - 2008.09.05 11:19:00 - [48] Edited by: Babel on 05/09/2008 11:20:19 Originally by: Locke DieDrake Green isn't what you think it is - It is just the shade of Green that I approve of ... Shades of Green that I do not like are NOT Green. Kudos to you for wanting some degree of fair-fight, but truly - it's Eve. Folks will do what they can with what they have - gloves off :) ------- "Out of the good of evil born, Came Uriel's voice of cherub scorn"
Rehtom Lamina Minmatar The Movement	Posted - 2008.09.05 11:28:00 - [49] If I notice a possible target is very young and most likely defenceless it doesn't stop me killing them, why should I pass on a kill because the target is in the wrong place at the wrong time. However if I engage/kill a very young player (like last night) I generally send them an eve-mail with some friendly advice about not going into low sec or at least realising the risks. In the eve-mail i will also add some pointers on ships they might want to aim for flying (no doubt they are running for battleship asap, I like to kill that dream if possible). Lastly I will also send them some isk, at least enough to cover 2 or 3 new ships unless im feeling generous then ill send them a bit more.
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.05 11:37:00 - [50] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 05/09/2008 11:38:31 Originally by: 5pinDizzy Aww come on!! Aren't you even going to share with us what you got? Not me, but a corpmate of mine a few months back while solo camping. He got a fully researched Maelstorm BPO netting a bit over 1.8 B. I think, but I'm not sure, a Hurricane BPO dropped (our KB died recently, so no old mails) as well. It was autopiloting, too Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint

Vex Cachet	Posted - 2008.09.05 11:38:00 - [51] Originally by: Locke DieDrake much text I understand your sentiments completely and in any other game I would agree with your point. But where I think you go wrong is that you misunderstand a fundamental premise of EVE: there is no morality. The game is completely devoid of it. It is often said that CONCORD is there to punish, not protect, and this might be mistaken as evidence of a moral code, but this really just provides a predictable set of rules of engagement that serves the practical purpose of facilitating travel (e.g. gate sentry guns), commerce (e.g., loot can aggression timers), and other related gameworld requirements. An amoral game universe is consistent, in my opinion, with the cold and harsh realities of impersonal deep space and provides a consistent tension that makes this game exciting and like no other. The day that someone tries to impose a moral code on this universe is the day that EVE becomes just another MMO set in space. In an amoral game universe there will be imbalanced combat, acts of provocation, and scams, but there won't be any "griefing". As someone else in this thread has stated very well, "consent" is defined as hitting the little yellow and black button in the bottom left of your station view. . . Vex & Kesha Cachet . She's the Brains - I am pure DPS. . Men do not stop playing because they grow old, they grow old because they stop playing - Oliver Wendell Holmes
Sarin Adler Caldari	Posted - 2008.09.05 11:41:00 - [52] Non-consensual pvp means you can engange whenever and whereever you want. You can do that in EVE. What it does not mean is you will do without consequences. You can suicidegank in hisec, but concord will pawn you, but you CAN (yes, you still can). Too much babycrying ftl. --- Alts, the root of all evil.
PsychoBones II R.E.C.O.N.	Posted - 2008.09.05 11:44:00 - [53] Originally by: Locke DieDrake It does not mean picking on targets that are incapable (and you damn well know it) of defending themselves. Posting in a NC whine thread. -------------------------------------------------- z0r chains in CAOD are bad, m'kay?
Gonada Gallente Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.09.05 11:45:00 - [54] i humbly suggest if you are too stupid, or too scared to play a game where there is risk, to stop playing it and go back to whatever pathetic game you came from. Please, jump into traffic
Armoured C Gallente The Aztecs Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.09.05 11:52:00 - [55] wow see i thought non consenual mean pick on anyone, doesnt matter if it weak stong , fight back or doesnt fight back it still none the less non-consenual and that is was pirating is , preying on the weak for a better advantage. i lol that you come over with this big preying on stuff that cant fight back when there is a shuttle kill right in this thread, "and dont try and inspire us with this little gem "You want a FIGHT? I've got one for you. Come get it. " which i lold because i was comming to get it but never got it =( damm bobbits
Dihania Gallente SniggWaffe	Posted - 2008.09.05 12:00:00 - [56] Originally by: Locke DieDrake Now, Non-consensual PVP, to me, means that I do not get to pick when and where I can be engaged. This means I might get jumped in a mission, or in low sec or in 0.0 or anywhere in between. It means that I may be flying a hauler when that attack comes, or a faction fitted navy raven, or a shuttle for that matter. It also means that as long as I have enemies, I am not safe. And there are more than enough of those to go around I think. It sucks or it doesn't, borderline griefing or not. It is still NON-Consensual PvP! [hrhr] Sniggwaffe is recruiting. Visit channel "join sniggwaffe" in game.
Commander Wiggan	Posted - 2008.09.05 12:01:00 - [57] blah blah blah
Rubra J. S. Bach In memoriam	Posted - 2008.09.05 12:04:00 - [58] ITT we see the reason the OP is no longer in IRON, because he doesn't get it.
Evanade Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.09.05 12:07:00 - [59] it means that after we undock, i can shoot you anywhere i want in any way i like --------------------------- sok alt - main got banzored
Malcanis RuffRyders Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.09.05 12:18:00 - [60] Originally by: Rubra ITT we see the reason the OP is no longer in IRON, because he doesn't get it. Actually, the fact that he was in I Run Or Nap lends a hilarious subtext to his comments. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: 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.