Greedy Goblin

Thursday, September 6, 2012

Freakshow and carebear hate

The Mittani told that "[the general gaming media says] as if New Eden were a freakshow rather than the only remaining pure-PvP sandbox, populated primarily by hypercompetitive 30something college-educated professionals." If practically everyone agrees in something, it has a reason. Not surely a good one, but has one. No, it's not "sandbox", I've never heard a bad word about Tale in the Desert, nor it's "PvP", WoW arena was never called freakshow.

There is a strange - seemingly unrelated - issue in EVE: the media created by pro EVE players (blogs, forums, sites) usually treat PvE EVE players as the lepers. They are mentioned on the foul name "carebear", their extermination (only in game of course) is demanded and everyone who kills a few gets celebration. Now it's strange. I mean most players don't hate other players who are different from them. I never heard hate for roleplayers in WoW, rather a "yes, they are weird but who cares" attitude. There is no such hate for wormhole players in EVE, despite they are a small minority. Why do they hate "carebears"?

Every MMO has a common point: character progression. From Everquest to GW2 every single MMO offered players to improve their characters either by strength or by giving them "achievement points". They did it differently, they had different settings, different gameplay, but at the end, if you played well, your character improved. PvP is no exception here. If you won arenas in WoW, you climbed the ladder, got closer to Gladiator title and received better rewards. EVE is not considered freakshow by the mainstream because lack of such character progression. If it wouldn't have it, the game simply wouldn't be considered MMO and would be ignored by MMO media like, Second Life. EVE is an MMO because you can progress your character. You gain access to bigger, stronger, better ships, just like this TEST Alliance video says (from 2:20). If we'd look just at the game, we'd see nothing but an MMO where you get spaceships instead of magic swords.

Highsec is "spaceship MMO". The "carebears" do what every single MMO player out there does: progress their character, gaining more ISK and better ships. But the PvP-ers give up character progression in every single way! The linked TEST video is not true for most PvP-ers: today's battecruisers are tomorrows battlecruisers and they will fly Drakes until CCP decides to switch off the servers. Also, the constant podding combined with poverty stop them from using implants, making them get less skillpoints (so they whine to remove it from the game).

EVE is not considered freakshow at all. The typical EVE PvP-ers are considered freaks. If we'd try to find a WoW analogue, the best would be twinks. These characters are locked at lvl 19 or 29, stopped in progression and be much-much weaker than a top-level character. Twinks are created for the sole purpose of inconveniencing newbies by massacring them on low level battlefields. Twinks are considered griefers and freaks. So the average MMO player who tries out EVE (and then writes a review in the mainstream gaming media) will find that EVE is a standard MMO with a bit lame quests, boring material gathering, repetitive but fun NPC grinding and legions of childish griefers, lot more than in other MMOs. No, they would not see "hypercompetitive 30something college-educated professionals" since competition needs some goal and prize. Killing each other over breadcrumbs or even less: lolz is not something that a college-educated professional would do. It's what homeless junkies do in the ghetto.

The "carebears" are MMO players who find the EVE setting good enough to stay. The PvP-ers hate the carebears because they - along with the other MMO players - consider them freaks, griefers, losers. So at least they have the excuse that the PvE players hated them first. But it's hard to like them. My earlier posts where I did not consider them freaks, griefers and losers but the "elite of EVE" and wanted to join by contributing as much as I can became jokes for both sides. The difference between me and the average MMO player is that I can see larger pictures than my own character. I can see that capturing systems on the Sov map, making difference for many other people is something bigger than replacing an ilvl 333 leggings with 346. In WoW I always tried to make something bigger than that. Also I see the value of "griefing" for ones psychological progression. But I'm a rare bird and the MMO players want stronger characters by playing well. PvP is no difference here, PvP-ers merely accept that if they fail, they get weaker (like WoW arena player losing rating). But accepting that you remain forever in a ship that a "carebear" outgrows on the second month of his life even if you are chain-winning is just "freak".

Please spare me from the "in EVE every ship is equal, Drakes are not worse than Rokhs", because it's a plain lie. A battleship in the hands of an equally good player would always win over a battlecruiser, just like the BC would always win against a cruiser, like that against a frigate. There is truth in "every ship is useful", and a 2 days old frig can contribute in a battleship fight while a lvl 2 WoW character cannot do anything in a lvl 85 battleground. But just because a BS is just 10x stronger than a frig and not 100000x like in WoW, it's still worse and before it in the progression path.

The ball is at the field of CCP. They must change the game in a way to make PvP more than freakshow, to make it the way to increase ones power in the game. Currently AFK mining Veldspar beats it.

Alternatively players can make something great here by creating a powerblock that is not a freakshow but a clear progression up from the highsec state. I mean when the 2-3 months old newbie who is starting to get the picture of EVE look into a video, he should say, "yes, I want to be those guys" instead of "why do they fly my old ship? Are they roleplayers or something?". The slowcat fleets, the supercapitals and the recent Navy Apocalpyse fleet are all can be viewed as a "progression", something a newbie can aim for. More about this option tomorrow.

Thursday morning report, which is still not really reliable: 158.9B, (5.5 spent on main accounts, 3.6 spent on Logi/Carrier, 3.2 on Ragnarok, 2.6 on Rorqual, 2.4 on Nyx, 2.8 on Avatar, 2.6 received as gift)


Dave Rickey said...

You're correct that money is power, and that most players (and alliances) in 0.0 are not very good at making money. Frankly, the secret to making ISK is that the Eve markets are cut-throat PvP far more complicated and competitive than any involving ships, and having mastered this form of conflict you have come to feel dismissive of those that merely push fleets around the map.

Which is foolish. Eve is a game, you win by having fun, and pushing those fleets around the map is fun in a way that merely stacking up ISK never can be (and I say this as someone who played both the market and the Great Game of musical chairs that is 0.0). But simply having a shitload of money doesn't move fleets.

You understand the economics of null-sec, but not the psychology that makes those "freaks" burn thousands of hours worth of ISK-accumulation in a single battle. Until you go out there, accept it on its own terms (which includes accepting that you are nobody), you never will.

I cornered the market on CCC's and made billions overnight when a billion was still considered a lot of ISK, I outfitted entire fleets, I hired mercenaries to make life hell for people and corporations that pissed me off or got in my way.

But my fondest memories of Eve did not involve the markets I pioneered or the trade chains I milked. I was there for the Pearl Harbor speech in FAT. I turned out the lights when the Coalition of Dead Alliances took 9CG. I was there for both Battles of the Egg, I personally anchored the egg for Z-U station, and I flew a freighter 19 jumps to deliver the Jump Bridge that broke the siege of 49-U. And if all of these events have faded into distant history even in Eve, they remain the most cherished moments that I have ever derived from a game.

ISK is merely a number, a way of keeping score in a portion of the game that not even its greatest players really care about for itself. It's not until you have used it to turn the course of "internet spaceships" history that it has any significance at all. And you know that, that's why you have been looking for a way to apply it, what you can't bring yourself to accept is that you can't use it as a blunt instrument to batter your way in.

It's a rapier, not a club, and you can't use it with the required finesse until you know what it *feels* like to actually *live* in 0.0.


Gevlon said...

It's like being a millionaire is being nobody in the boxing club. If I want to be a boxer, I have to box.

But can you give me any reasonable reason why should I care about boxing when I'm a fucking millionaire with a Porsche? Please don't give me the "itz fun lol" non-answer, the kid with Down syndrome considers licking the window fun, but that won't make it less stupid.

Nursultan said...

You don't have to care about boxing, just like others may not care about your Porsche.

Also, Drakes can do things that battleships cannot do: they are more mobile and can hit smaller targets.

The same people who fly Drakes in PVP might have pimped-out PVE ships, it just does not make sense to spend that much on a ship that is very likely to be lost.

Anonymous said...

Because boxing captures a very primal part of the human psyche, physically defeating another human being.

The reverse is true as well, why should I give a rats ass about protecting the life of a millionaire who can't physically defend himself, much less pick up a ruck and hump a few miles with it?

The foundation of any civilization is the will and physical capability to inflict coercive, physical pain. The "law" that "protects" the millionaire from a hostile crowd that want his head on a pike is enforced by similarly physically and mentally capable individuals that enforce it.

Anonymous said...

Maybe this helps you understand:

A millionaire with a Porsche walks into a boxing club and goes 'You're doing it all wrong, morons! And you're idiots for boxing instead of buying a Porsche!'

Look, it's Gevlon.

This is pretty much what you have come down to, and must finally grasp. People (boxers) do things because they care to do it. Some box, others buy Porsches (plex their gfs account).

It's sad, hopefully one day you get it.

Gevlon said...

Your points are mostly offtopic and you don't even see that. The point is that the average MMO player considers pointless PvP "freak". They consider those WoW players who go to an enemy capital city to pick a fight "bored idiots" or maybe "griefers".

Now there are PvP games where you can advance via PvP like Starcraft. There PvP-ing is accepted and respected.

I'm merely telling that these people see EVE more like WoW than Starcraft: you advance via PvE and PvP is an ignorable nuance done only by bored kids.

Steel H. said...

About your ship theory:
- You forget that in this game there is no numbers limit, and that numerical superiority is a game layer. In EVE PVP you don’t have one BC versus one BS in some 1-1 space e-honorable duel; you have 10-100 Bss versus 50-200 Bcs.
- You forget that in this game there is real PvP loss. PvPers have to constantly replace ships, whereas hisec carebears don’t, so they can reinvest all their income into more and more pimp hulls and fittings (and then their officer fit Vindicator gets suicide ganked and they ragequit)
- Large scale fleet doctrines also need to take into account price/performance ratios. It does not make sense to spend 200% more money for a 10% perf increase in meatgrinder blob PvP, whereas it (may) make sense in PvE, where you never lose a ship (or so you think). The CFC/HBC didn’t switch to Tengus or Navy Apocs just because they had too much money, but because those doctrines are WORTH their price tags in survivability and performance.
- Doctrines are also are about a coherent fighting philosophy, they are a solution to a given problem (another doctrine) and not “let’s just fly the most super expensive shit we can find”. If you want to skirmish from long range, you use tier 3 BCs because they are the best option. If you fight long range BS, you use small sig AHACs and drop at 0, maelstroms became the dominant BS doctrine because they were the most effective in lag, and so on.
- In EVE ships aren’t so much “better” but “different”, with different roles, purposes, and with HARD rock-paper-scissor (im)balances, the exact opposite of WoWs simplified class homogenization. This isn’t feral druid vs whatever mage where there is a 5% advantage to whatever. A T1 AB cruiser can get “under the guns” of a long range fit BS and there is nothing the BS can do about it, especially if it is alone, carebear fit with huge rat specific resist holes and no ECM drones. Hell, even a stealth bomber can kill a carebear fit BS, and in fact, this is the most common form of 1-1 pvp: a solo stealth recon ganking a blinged PVE BS.
- Since ships are not “better” but “different”, and there are no distinct classes, and you have skills instead of talents, progression is not so much vertical but horizontal. Individual ship performance quyickly caps, the main progression is in the breadth of ships a pilot can fly effectively.
- There are plenty of shinies involved in nullsec warfare. They are used with a purpose, where pimping is warranted and sometimes even necessary. Did you know goonfleet reimburses Machariels (for special ops)? Also, large fleet PvP uses a hugeass variety of specialized ships, that your average officer fit Golem L4 hisec botbear has no clue about – multiple command ships, multiple racial recons, hictors, dictors, logis, multiple config T3s, cloakys, AHACs, snipers, brawlers, capitals. Just because you’ve read about drakes on some news site scribbled in crayon does not mean that’s all fleet warfare is about.

Tl;dr you’ve made yet another totally incorrect yet arrogant post based only on what you read on news sites with zero PVP experience.

Steel H. said...

As for why we hate carebears, a while back some goon wrote an unfathomably (by Cthulhu standards) long forum post about it. I have no mental strength left to search for it, go right ahead. I basically agree with him (all his 20+ maxed chapters) It's basically that bears want to turn EVE into space WOW or something like that... Whatev'

Nursultan said...

How do you define advancement?

To some people it is ISK, to others it is skill points, "elite" PVPers see it as accumulation of player skill, goal-oriented players are looking for killboard stats or territorial conquest.

There is no single goal and measurement.

Gevlon said...

@Steele: A BS always wins against a cruiser 1v1. What stops me from fitting target painter and a web on a BS to get rid of that AHAC?

You are right that there is no cap limit, but 100 BS still massacre 100 cruisers.

300 AHAC might win against 100BS but this is indeed the point of the post: the PvP-ers are poor, not progressed in the eyes of MMO players, therefore considered freaks.

I did not say they are (necessarily) freaks, as I explicitly told that sov warfare, reshaping the map is some worthy goal.

David said...

For me at least the attraction of MMORPGs is the social simulation aspect of the game. If I want to noodle around by myself I'll play a single player game in which other people can't bother me. If I want to play a competitive game I wouldn't want to do it in a MMORPG since all of the things that set MMORPGs apart from non-massive multiplayer games just make the playing field less even.

For me the fun of a MMORPG is seeing empires rise and fall around me. A good rule of thumb is that if a bit of MMORPG gameplay is something in which you could write an interesting history of what the humans do, then it's something I would like.

Now, null sec is a lot more like stone age tribes flailing at each other than the rise of fall of empires but it's better than the alternatives.

Steel H. said...

Funny how everyone in WoW seemed to long for the old days of STV, Southshore vs Tarren Mill, Blackrock Mountain and so on ( Then blizzard ruined everything with instanced BGs and arenas (that also screwed up class balance forever). They added open world tower objectives in the hopes of resurrecting world PvP – nobody cared.

MMOs started out as open world, sandbox, free for all pvp (I wasn’t there), and then gradually turned into pve carepandabear land. When Ultima Online got Trameled, a bunch of pissed off Icelandic UO players founded CCP and decided to make their own game. Welp.

EVE makes it into the news mainly when someone pulls off a massive feat of theft, espionage, treason, counted in tens of thousands of RL $. It is categorically the only game in on the marked where such things are possible. And also the depths of the game and metagame, the politics, the intrigue, the drama. No one has made a news story about how Joe Botengu made another billion of pixel money shooting red crosses all day in hisec and finally upgraded to an officer EM hardener. I certainly didn’t join EVE because I heard that awesome story.

I agree with the Mittani when he said: “the gaming media is a fucking joke”. Most likely because they have no clue about MMOs. Hey, there’s megacompanies that have no clue about MMO and spend hundreds of millions of dollars trying (and failing) to make one, and you want a bunch of armchair game reporters to know about it? ( )

Also and MMO is primarily about Massively Multiplayer, aka massive amounts of player bumping into each other. That’s how MMOs were in the beginning. If you just want progression, why not play a solo RPG like Skyrim, or WoW?

Anonymous said...

It might be a bit extreme to argue that upgrading your il333 chest means more than 0.0 sovereignty, but it probably is true. The chest upgrade means a bit to the person and his peers. Sovereignty changes mean little to the goodfight crowd.

You expected sovereignty to matter, you think it should matter, but to the overwhelming majority of EVE players, it does not. No matter how many times you go to the boxing club, they are never going to share your values.

Now that I write that, it surely seems the assessment of the PvEers, other MMO players and the general public that EVE players are freaks is quite reasonable.

I think you hit on it: they are not "hypercompetitive" - hypercompetitive people would be planning how to keep and expand empires and how to fund same. You would find a home there. They are merely hypercombative; that's not leet, merely poor mental health.

Steel H. said...

Cruisers vs BS. Context, context. A PVP fit Vindicator with faction webs and scrams will win against a solo cruiser sure. A carebear gurista Maelstrom with active tank, no buffer, 0% EM resist and sentry drones won’t. Sure you can fit a bait PvP Dominix or something with points, webs and full tank and try to trick the other guy into attacking. Or the other guy can fit sensor damps and jams and TDs and just laugh at you from outside your reduced lock range. Context, tactics, scenarios, nuances – but that’s not “a BS always wins against a cruiser.”

Anonymous said...

" BS always wins against a cruiser 1v1. What stops me from fitting target painter and a web on a BS to get rid of that AHAC?"

It doesn't work - with one web or two webs, a cruiser can still get under the guns of a turret based BS.

Against a missile boat with one web and a TP, a repping cruiser can still mitigate enough damage to kill the BS.

Sure you could add webs and TPs, or TEs, but in doing so you will sacrifice your ability to take on ships your own size (because of the loss in damage and/or tank).

The BS that can 1v1 an ahac to any degree of success will have difficulties against BCs and BSes fit to take on ships of their own class or above.

l0rd carlos said...

you advance via PvE and PvP is an ignorable nuance done only by bored kids.

So if i do PvP because it's fun and i want to get better at it ..i dont advance in this game?

Gevlon said...

The very point is that NO, you don't.

Just like you can be an infamous ganker in a WoW PvP server, you'll have worse gear and achievements than a random bad player (unless you also spend time doing what you despise: carebearing). You won't be respected or considered winner, just a bored kid.

I left WoW for EVE exactly because I disapprove that competition is bad. But I found little competition in EVE, just a bit more griefers.

l0rd carlos said...

I also have an highsec char, after doing all the math, finding a good LP shop item, a good fitting, a good agent .. nothing changes.
So do i advance in PvE in your eyes?

Anonymous said...

Your assertion that in a straight up 1v1 fight a battleship will automatically beat a battlecruiser, all else being equal (skilled pilots etc) is plain wrong.

Sure a battleship has more tank, more pure on paper damage output - but without the speed it cannot dictate range. The battlecruiser will (in most cases) maintain a higher transversal velocity over its battleship counterpart and mitigate damage by leveraging the tracking mechanics to its advantage.

In eve, "no ship is an island" - there is no single ship that will automatically beat every other ship in the game, regardless of the class. A well handled rifter can get right ontop of a battleship and tackle it without dying. Assuming it has enough time, sufficient damage to overcome the tank and enough ammo it could theoretically burn a battleship down - regardless of how skilled the battleship pilot is.

In reality, time, the amount of damage needed to break the tank and cargo space for the ammo will mean that the rifter will not kill the battleship, BUT the fight will be a stalemate, until one side does something to alter the playing field.

You lack a fundimental understanding of how the game works Gevlon. You sit there in your ivory tower claiming knowledge over all things - slapping down anyone who disagrees with you as "an obvious troll".

Do I think a rifter is "worth" as much as a battleship? no - not in a 1v1 fight of course. But there are ships which will fight outside of their class happily. My favorite toy to fly around in, even though I am a ridiculously space rich worm hole resident, is a cheap and cheerful shield cane. It has neuts on board to assist with breaking tanks, sufficient damage to punch through battleships, and speed + gun range to dictate the fight against a variety of targets.

Drake vs Rokh? hows the rokh fit? A HAM drake produces a fightening amount of damage and has a massive tank for a ship of its class...

Go and *DO* some PvP. Come down from your tower and put aside your self professed know-it-all attitude.. climb into a rifter. A drake. A hurricane. and SEE what its all about. Your EFT warrioring and page long diatribes about how people who know this game inside out are "doing it wrong" is tiring.

Anonymous said...

A battleship in the hands of an equally good player would always win over a battlecruiser, just like the BC would always win against a cruiser, like that against a frigate.

Seriously Gevlon, stop writing about stuff that you have no experience in.

I have killed equally skilled pilots in a frigate while they where in a battleship, simply because it depends quite a bit on the fitting and the purpose of the ship that you attack what you can do. A railgun fit rokh can do very little against a speed tanked, tracking disrupting sentinel, no matter how good the rokh pilot is - as long as the sentinel pilot knows what hes doing.

Obviously with the same sentinel i would not go for a dominix, a raven or an armageddon, while an apoc might be a valid target for it.

to go back to the bc vs bs, my current naga fit is specifically build to kill battleships, and i have no doubt that an equally skilled pilot will lose against it, simply because i won't pick ships to attack that can counter my fit.

Gevlon said...

Don't be stupid. Of course you can design a frigate that can kill a battleship that is NOT designed to kill frigates. Your examples are all surprise attacks: you jumped on an unprepared enemy.

If all else is equal (player skill, preparation), the BS always wins against any BC, cruiser or frig.

Yes, it IS important that in EVE a frigate can kill an unprepared battleship while in WoW a lvl 10 cannot kill even an AFK lvl 85, but it doesn't change the point that BS > BC > Cruiser > Frig

Anonymous said...

I'm merely telling that these people see EVE more like WoW than Starcraft: you advance via PvE and PvP is an ignorable nuance done only by bored kids.

making isk in eve is easy, and the most boring thing todo. There is no achievement in doing so, its not advancing.

To EVE veterans advancing means adding to his own story in the game, having new exciting moments, and competing in fight.

Pure PVE plays who by decision try to avoid this competition are looked down upon because to a pvp player, they refuse the main content that the game offers and focus on the boring stuff.

Carebears and Carebearing on the other hand is not as insulting as you picture it, it's quite common for a PVP player to say "ok, i'm off carebearing a bit for my super-plans", and no one will complain on that.

And, frankly speaking: in EVE everyone is a carebear, that doesn't mean everyone is a pve-only-loser.

IO said...

"But can you give me any reasonable reason why should I care about boxing when I'm a fucking millionaire with a Porsche? Please don't give me the "itz fun lol" non-answer, the kid with Down syndrome considers licking the window fun, but that won't make it less stupid."

Yes, you can be considered a millionaire. However you do not own a Porsche. You are like that accountant with no imagination and big account in the bank, who still lives in his 40m2 flat, wears same suit for 20 years and drives a bus/train to same shitty grindy work every day.

Get outside, experience the game, risk something.

Anonymous said...

You are right that there is no cap limit, but 100 BS still massacre 100 cruisers.

A few years ago, when every major alliance was fielding Sniping Battleships, and the common sight on it was yours "a sniping battleship will allways win" Pandemic legion fielded the first ahac fleets. They would come to a fleet fight, and have exactly the right distance/signature mix so they wouldn't lose much while killing a ton of hostile battleships, quite often going with odds like 50 vs 200.

The Tengu doctrine's we've seen first in the last big northern war - it was very efficient against battleship fleets, usually fighting outnumbered.

The Drake fleets - an equally sized drake fleet is still a challenge to a battleship fleet.

There are thousands of examples that proof you wrong.

Anonymous said...

I left WoW for EVE exactly because I disapprove that competition is bad. But I found little competition in EVE, just a bit more griefers.

quite a funny statement from someone who avoids the competative part of eve.

Look at people like Garmon if you wan't to see people who excel in the arts of the competative parts of the game.

Gevlon said...

@Anonymous: yes, I could go out and try solo PvP. I could also go front of Orgrimmar and duel. What is the point?

IO said...

"@Anonymous: yes, I could go out and try solo PvP. I could also go front of Orgrimmar and duel. What is the point?"

And what is the point of you getting more space pixels called ISK?

Both you and PVP'er get their dose of fun from their achievements. That's fine. Why the fuck would you criticize someone else's preferences only because you don't understand it?

Hivemind said...

"EVE is not considered freakshow at all."

By the wider MMO gaming world, yes it is. The details most non-EVE players are likely to be familiar with cover the cutthroat nature of the game – things like Burn Jita, disbanding BoB and the Guiding Hand Social Club heist are very well known, as is the fact that these are all legitimate gameplay. To someone who doesn’t play, they have to ask “Who would want to play in a game where everything can be taken away from you by other people?” and “Who would want to take everything away from other people?”. In the case of the gaming media, the reason why it’s this stuff that gets the most coverage is because EVE is relatively small for an MMO, so they’ll get more readers writing Article #3964 on Mists of Pandaria than writing Article #39 on EVE.

There’s also the part where EVE rejects a lot of the trappings of themepark MMOs (what with it being a sandbox and all) that are otherwise nearly universal; getting character progression purely through ingame activities, rather than simply accruing it over time as EVE does. Getting handed new gear and items by the game, rather than having to go out and select them for yourself. Characters of any skill level/age being able to participate and contribute meaningfully in EVE activities alongside veterans. EVE not having a true endgame and definitely not having the “The real game doesn’t start until you reach the level cap” attitude themeparks do (for that matter, the fact that in EVE you cannot reach the level cap – new skills are added too frequently to ever master everything). For someone who’s only experienced the many, many themepark MMOs out there, those things are all expected, normal things in an MMO game, so when they hear about EVE… yes, it does come across as a freakshow to them.

“Today's battecruisers are tomorrows battlecruisers and they will fly Drakes until CCP decides to switch off the servers”

Except that there are alphafleets of Maelstroms and Tornados, HellCat fleets of Abaddons soaking up damage, alliances PvPing in fleets of Tech 3s, Capital and Supercapital fleets. There are also the support ships any of those fleets need – logis, fast tackle, heavy tackle, interdictors, scouts, ewar. There’s a lot more than just flying the same BCs day in and day out in Null.

“A battleship in the hands of an equally good player would always win over a battlecruiser, just like the BC would always win against a cruiser, like that against a frigate.”

Any ship can be made to beat any other ship if they know what they’re facing and their opponent is not set up to counter it. PvPers have previously used faction frigates (Dramiels and Daredevils) to pick apart hisec mission runners in faction and T2 battleships that they baited into attacking, for example. A perma-MWD Drake will easily win vs a BS with blasters or autocannons. A Tier 3 BC fit with long range guns will die to a fast-moving frigate or cruiser that can get in close without being killed. Obviously there are counters to all of these ships, but there are also counters to those counters – a BS fit with webs/scrams and short range, high tracking weapons to deal with small, close range enemies leaves itself open to longer range opponents like Drakes or the tier 3’s already mentioned.

“It's like being a millionaire is being nobody in the boxing club. If I want to be a boxer, I have to box.

But can you give me any reasonable reason why should I care about boxing when I'm a fucking millionaire with a Porsche”

Because you and your Porsche clearly care an awful lot about boxing, reading and commenting on the blogs of other boxers, suggesting what sort of tactics boxers should be using in the ring and demanding changes to the rules of boxing to make it more fun for you.

The only times people have told you to go out and PvP have been in response to you either asking for things to do or talking about PvP (As Anon 0906 put it, claiming “You're doing it all wrong, morons!”) and clearly showing your lack of experience.

Gevlon said...

Not I criticize them. Practically everyone who is not them does.

As I wrote, the normal MMO play is for character progression. Having more ISK therefore is naturally good for an MMO player.

I DON'T agree with that and I want to do more than watch a number grow. However watching a number grow is still better than watching nothing grow. "Good fights" are nothing. Sov wars make sov space growing. I respect that form of play.

Anonymous said...

Can't tell if the blog ate my last comment. Anyway, "good fights" improve player skill while repeatedly listing the same buy/sell orders once you've already mastered the basics does nothing. You've learned to blitz arbitrage missions and your earnings rate has flattened out. When are you going to do something more challenging in or out of the market?

Sugar Kyle said...

You iniquities I respect your trading, you are good at it and do well. It is a part of the game that I am not expierenced or good at. I know you don't want to come out and Pewpew just to Pewpew. It's not for everyone.

I still do not understand your complete and total dismissal of what people are doing when they do and the mixed reasons they do it. One thing the players enjoy so much is the fact that they.can wander off the 'beaten path' forever and not be judged negativly by the game for it.

I still feel that you are caught on the concept of bigger and more powerful should be better. People argue with you that its not about bigger and better but usage. Yet, your constant belittlement of drakes and battle cruisers and the fact that they are flown in mass instead of things you consider better seems to boil down to you seeing them as cheap and therefore low or shameful.

Your comments are often full of people who explain why these things work in battle. Why fleets are composed as they are. But you seem to not hear things like fleet doctrine and tactics and instead hear 'we are too poor for better'.

You can like titans to death but that does not make someone obsessed with frigs and refusing to upgrade bad. Battlecruisers are amazing because of what they are. It's not all about cheap. People are not restricting themselves 100% because of cheap.

And then you are flat out dismissive of the PvP that you do not do. You have prejudged it and then conceptualize it and make demands upon it while telling it that it is trash.

Gevlon, Eve doesn't make us do things. It does not make us acquiring wealth. It does not make us Pewpew. It does not even make us undock.

If you respect Sov and what it is that's fine. That is your thing. I hope you find someone that can work with your personalized and help you gain it. That does not mean that everyone else is trash. I announced that I'm throwing my game 100% into low sec. You over look the people for the preconceived perceptions that you have about why one does another.

"This is what I like and am good at" is as valid a reason for anyone else in whatever they do as it is for you and trade.

Gevlon said...

@Sugar: this is nihilism. Everything is good if the actor likes it. So if I just undock a frig, pick some object and orbit around it all day, would you consider it a valuable form of playing?

@Hivemind: I'm interested in winning EVE. My problem is that I DID expect 30 something hyper-competitive professionals and found a bunch of combative youth looking for trouble for no reason.

EVE cannot be considered freakshow because of the reasons you listed, as EVERY SINGLE PvP game naturally mean defeating enemy players, destroying their ingame assets (like shooting their avatar in CS). CS is not a freakshow.

I try to explain it in a post Monday. Tomorrow is already taken by a light of hope.

Hivemind said...


"Not [No?] I criticize them."

Sure, but you're still the guy who purports to only care about his bank account and porsche but who watches boxing matches almost religiously and is convinced that he knows boxing a lot better than the other boxers, and that they're all doing it wrong. That's still "caring about boxing".

@Dave Rickey
"You're correct that money is power"
No, in EVE numbers are power, money is just a means of getting more numbers - direct bribes, lowering barriers of entry to PvP with SRP, using them on incentives like improved space to attract more people, some of whom will PvP, and so on.

Simply having a lot of ISK doesn't actually do anything for you, as Gevlon is finding out now.

Sugar Kyle said...

Where did value come into this? It's your game. If you asked me was it valuable to me for my goals that is one thing. If I were to walk up to you and tell you what you enjoy is valueless and walk off, what is that other then judgement based off.of my .opinion and not yours. If you said that it was for X point then we could debate the value.

Hivemind said...

“I'm interested in winning EVE”
This might be a problem, because there is no predetermined win condition for EVE. You can set a goal to achieve over the course of your career and then stop playing once you’ve reached it, obviously, but don’t expect anyone other than you to say “Congratulations, you have Won EVE”. I know you’ve done that a few times and then changed your win conditions; getting ISK for a titan/flying a titan/founding the One Empire for example, but I’m curious what your current definition of “winning” would be.

“My problem is that I DID expect 30 something hyper-competitive professionals and found a bunch of combative youth looking for trouble for no reason.”

Considering that you don’t PvP, I wouldn’t say you’ve “found” either of those. It seems that you’re kind of pre-judging players in a lot of the game as well; “hyper-competitive professionals” don’t necessarily choose the same competition – some will find meaning in 1v1, simply proving their own superiority over other players on an individual level and not caring about the big picture, others will find it leading small gangs and up-engaging vs less skilled enemies, or playing a role in such a gang. Some may even shun PvP entirely and look at how running missions faster than other players, or acquiring more ISK/time from a particular playstyle. You on the other hand are automatically classing them as “combative youth looking for trouble for no reason” simply because YOU don’t find those layers of competition appealing.

“EVE cannot be considered freakshow because of the reasons you listed, as EVERY SINGLE PvP game naturally mean defeating enemy players, destroying their ingame assets (like shooting their avatar in CS). CS is not a freakshow.”

But EVE isn’t a PvP game – it’s a sandbox MMO RPG. It’s a PvP heavy sandbox, certainly, but there would still be gameplay in EVE if everyone stopped PvPing and decided to settle differences and disputes via online poker or riddle competitions. Also note that in CS, the lost “assets” come back in the following game with no long-term consequences, which is also the norm in PvP games. There may well be consequences for poor playing – losing matches, or having to sit out most of a round because you died early, for example, but those consequences are usually either temporary or inconsequential. In contrast, losing a Titan (which at the very least will take another month and a half to rebuild) is definitely a consequential and long-term consequence.

As with my points about EVE vs other MMOs, this is a massive generalisation, but in PvP games like CS, CoD, the Tribes series or even Warcrafts/Starcrafts the goal is to encourage people to keep playing the game, thus the consequences for dying are relatively low. CS is actually on the harsher end as it makes players sit out the rest of the round rather than respawning them after a short delay. On the other hand, none of them outright penalise you for death; CS doesn’t give you less money to equip yourself in your next match, CoD doesn’t lock you out of using a weapon if you lose wielding it, Starcraft doesn’t increase the cost of all buildings/units after a defeat and leave the winner unscathed. In contrast, EVE’s “If you lose it, it is gone forever” style is very unusual, especially as that style also applies to character XP-equivalent. One might even go so far as to call it freakish.

Debra Tao said...

What Sugar is talking about has nothing to do with Nihilism... You can pewpew for the sake of it while believing in higher values. This is a game, you should play it for fun, or for ego, or for competition or anything that suits you. There is no higher value than what you enjoy and it's not a bad thing because this is not real life. I can have a strong conception of merit and moral as an individual and just put my brain off while playing... There is nothing wrong with that !
You can of course argue that some type of players are more 'skilled' than others, some are more competitive, smart and so on... but you cannot say that someone has an inferior playstyle based on the fact that what he enjoy isn't competitive.

On a more general point of view i am kinda confused... You are not social and don't want to be social, you are looking for a competitive game and stick to MMOs... But MMOs are by definition socials and are not there to encourage competition in essence, some are PvP oriented, some are more global but MMOs are mostly about interaction between players. In EVE, PvP isn't that competitive in the sense that 'fair fights' do not exist and it's easy to have a stupid ISK efficiency on a killboard by just sitting in a cloaky at a gate in high sec. Even sov wars are more about social interactions (gathering more pilots, creating coallition...) than everything else. Moroever there is so much that you cannot control and that can happen that the best leader surrounded by the best FCs can fail miserably.

Starcraft is a totaly fair competitive game. Eve is about good fights and fun.

Gevlon said...

@Hivemind: winning EVE can mostly defined as winning the Sov map. It is a recorded "toplist", it's competitive (if I have XYX-99, you can't have it), and it offers personal character progression (nullsec ore is more expensive than veld)

I'm NOT telling that they are boxing the wrong way. I'm telling they shouldn't be boxing at all, they should grab a gun and blow the head of the other guy off. When I tell them, they reply "but we are here for good fights".

Anonymous said...

If winning eve is winning the sov map (the largest and riches group of players have stated that trying to take over "all of the sov map" is a pointless exercise, mostly because it leaves you with nobody to shoot at - but I'll humor you) - do you intend to *personally* head some alliance with the stated goal of ruling all of 0.0?

Hivemind said...

“winning EVE can mostly defined as winning the Sov map. It is a recorded "toplist", it's competitive (if I have XYX-99, you can't have it), and it offers personal character progression (nullsec ore is more expensive than veld)”

And yet I can make the exact same argument for winning’s top kills; it’s a recorded “toplist”, it’s competitive (if I killed person abc in ship 123, you can’t kill it), and it offers personal character progression (more loot is more expensive than less loot). Or the solo kills, or the most expensive kills; applies to them too and they all tie to your name specifically, not whichever alliance (or more likely coalition) you’re part of.

If you want to generalise while sticking to “Must be measurable and competitive” there’s also things like “Maintain high ISK destroyed/lost ratio”, “maintain high k/d ratio”, “be the best PvPer in my corp” etc. You can even do the same in PvE – “Mine more than my corp mates” is trackable via fleet logs, “Make more ISK/time from missioning” is trackable via wallet.

What you, personally, wish to define as “winning EVE” and play towards is entirely up to you, as is the option of not having any sort of final goal and playing for the journey rather than some far off destination (I can’t remember which post it was, but I know I’ve written a long comment about journey vs destination in EVE previously). By the same token, what you personally define as “winning EVE” isn’t going to matter to a lot of other people, and some of them won’t even understand the concept. They’re not any more right or wrong in that position than you are.

“I'm NOT telling that they are boxing the wrong way. I'm telling they shouldn't be boxing at all, they should grab a gun and blow the head of the other guy off. When I tell them, they reply "but we are here for good fights".”

Because they aren’t you; while holding some sov of their own is important for them, holding all of the sov isn’t something that interests them. They enjoy the ‘journey’ of Sov warfare and want to keep it going, but they don’t care about the ‘destination’ of owning all conquerable space. Naturally they’re going to optimise for the thing they enjoy, which is large fleet battles, rather than spending their time working more efficiently towards a goal they don’t care about.

You’re still caring about what the boxers are doing, and you’re still going to the boxing club and yelling “You’re doing it all wrong, morons! And you’re idiots for boxing instead of being soldiers!” when you’ve got no experience of either boxing or soldiery.

Anonymous said...

battleclinic rankings are progression through pvp

(and consequently, -A- are the only alliance that is not a freakshow)

Gevlon said...

@Hivemind: Kill number or ore collection is mostly time-related. You spend more time playing, you get more ore or kills. That's why I did not like WoW competition for world firsts.

The kill-death ratio is more interesting, but it is NOT competitive because its best done by avoiding the other high kill-death people and farm miners and missioners. (We are back to time spent here)

The Sov map is something that can only be won by defeating other people who wanted Sov map. If you want NC. sov, you have to defeat NC. fleet and can't just farm -A- supercaps on your own station.

I disagree that there are only box-for-fun people are in the room. It's only the matter of finding them and the boxers will be out of the building in no time. Tomorrow I'll contemplate on an option that MIGHT results that.

Anonymous said...

Because boxing can be fun whether you win or lose, same with Eve pvp, I dont think you understand this concept.

Also, ships have rules, yes a BS will probably win against a frig, but a fleet of battleships wont be able to kill that one interceptor thats burning to give his fleet a warp in, where a rifter may have a better chance in the hands of a decent pilot.

Anonymous said...

This whole discussion is ridiculous. On one hand you have Gevlon asking what's the point of participating in PVP. Why climb Mount Everest? There's no point really.

On the other hand you have EVE PVPers saying anyone who doesn't PVP isn't really playing at all. Well that's a silly thing to say in a sandbox game. The whole definition of sandbox is that there are no objectives - you can do whatever you want.

Anonymous said...

Eve has character progression, it just hides it rather well in "Skill Level" rather than character level.

Null players do not forgo this progression, if anything, they take this further than your average PvE'r.

Carebear has been about since PvP was put into MMOs, and probably before that, it existed in WoW in the Tarren Mill days, it is thrown about on MMO forums by those who think that doing PvP is superior to PvE because you never know what you are getting in PvP (Although I will believe that when a top ranked rogue throws a frost bolt at me, or a rifter uses HMs)

Hivemind said...


"Kill number or ore collection is mostly time-related. You spend more time playing, you get more ore or kills."

I could make the same argument that sov conquest is time-related; if you can commit to alarm clock ops to cover all timezones you will beat alliances that can't. It's also based heavily on raw numbers - if you have larger numbers than the other side then you will win; we saw that in Delve earlier this year with SoCo fleets refusing to undock because there are so many hostiles that it would be pointless. Once again, we're back to time spent, just now it's being spent by more people.

"I disagree that there are only box-for-fun people are in the room. It's only the matter of finding them and the boxers will be out of the building in no time."

There's a question of numbers there though; let's say that there are 200 boxers in the gymn, you walk in and declare that boxing is pointless and they should be warring. 10 of the others in the gymn turn out to not be box-for-fun people, draw weapons (let's not speculate too hard on where they were storing them) and set upon the other 190. The vast majority who are box-for-fun types proceed to crush their more efficient combat through sheer weight of numbers and beat them until they are crippled and incapable of fighting back, then resume their old sport.

In other words, yes there probably are other players who don't care about a nullsec foreverwar but just want to own it all, and there are probably others who like the foreverwar but would like to try a campaign to conquer everywhere just to say that they'd done it, and then let it split apart afterwards. The question is, are there enough of them to overthrow the current Nullsec powers and their vast numbers of play-for-fun members who are also long time veterans of null warfare?

Hivemind said...

@Anon 15:53

"I will believe that when a top ranked rogue throws a frost bolt at me, or a rifter uses HMs"

Just for you:

[Rifter, HMS Rifter]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II

Limited 1MN MicroWarpdrive I
J5 Prototype Warp Disruptor I
X5 Prototype Engine Enervator

'Arbalest' Heavy Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Nova Heavy Missile
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]

Small Ancillary Current Router I
Small Ancillary Current Router I
Small Processor Overclocking Unit I

It has incredibly bad performance, though I guess for a frigate it's pretty impressive range. Maybe if you got an entire fleet of them together they could volley tier 3s. At the very least, the targets wouldn't see it coming...

Fade Toblack said...

"winning EVE can mostly defined as winning the Sov map"

LOL - how many months and you still don't get it?


Simply because everybody has different goals and aims and is doing their own thing. Things that some people are doing, others just couldn't care about.

Here's short list of goals that could be described as winning Eve...

* running an alliance that owns more sov than anybody else
* being the richest player in Eve
* owning a maxed-out, fully-officer fit BS for running missions
* leading a miltia and taking control of all FW space
* topping the eve-kill/battleclinic killboard for all kills
* topping the eve-kill/battleclinic killboard but only using solo kills
* being the most well-known go-to trusted third-party
* getting on the CSM
* being the best solo Sabre pilot in the game
* getting a monopoly on a rare product
* scamming the most ISK from other players
* having perfect standings with most corps in Eve
* getting the most ganks in a month
* killing the most JFs in a month
* being the deadliest low-sec pirate
* running the most-profitable Incursion fleets

As you can see some of those are incompatible, the best scammer is never likely to also become most-trusted player. Also goals finally.

Anonymous said...

The average human considers the average MMO player a freak. But who cares what the average human or MMO player thinks? Not me.

Anonymous said...

"winning EVE can mostly defined as winning the Sov map"

What are your plans, Gevlon, to get off the bottom rung of this ladder? You currently have no portion of the sov map personally, and you aren't in an alliance or corporation that owns any portion of the sov map. Virtually all the PvPers are beating you in this respect.

Anonymous said...

As a fellow 30 something Engineer, I can't follow some of your arguments on this blog. You are insisting a stance on things about the game that you have only read about, not done. You are treating the game like WoW, looking for an endgame that doesn't really exist in a sandbox game. If one group of players feel the number of ub3r PVP kills is the only endgame, great for them. That means nothing to mega industrialists making billions crafting. That obviously means nothing to you, a decent station trader.

Please don't forget this is an internet game. Games are traditionally something people play to relax and have fun. Having fun has no real requirements for time speant vs. value an hour. ISKies are pixels stored on a server.

Personally I station trade and also craft for isk. When not setting up orders or manufacturing/invention jobs I enjoy exploration, some PVE, and recently low sec gang PVP. Does PVP make sense for my ISK/hr? Who cares. As long as I am having fun and making enough ISK to cover my loses, its a win for me.

I recommend you go out and try some new things besides sitting in a station.

Remember everyone, opinions are like that special region where excrement comes out of your body, everone has one.

Dersen Lowery said...

Gevlon: You should go read "Finite and Infinite Games," by James Carse. It's a seminal document in game theory.

An infinite game has no finish line. There is no winner, because the only goal is to keep the game going. The rules change, and minigames come and go, at the behest of the players, in order to keep the game going.

This is what any MMO should aspire to. Any MMO designer who proclaims that there is a way to "play," a way to "win," or an "endgame," is predetermining the death of his game, and the means by which it will die.

You snark about going out in a frigate and orbiting something. Go out in a Retriever and mine, instead. Lots of EVE players do. You have more ISK than you did when you started, and it's relaxing. You can work on your spreadsheets while your ore hold fills up, or trade, or just rap with corpmates. Even when it's not fun in and of itself, it's entirely viable as a way to play a game that requires a great deal of calculation and preparation by (many of) its players. At the very least, it's a way to make a few spacebucks during what would otherwise be downtime.

For myself, I'm on EVE because my friends are on EVE. I have fun playing with my friends. As long as I make enough ISK to do that, I'm happy. If striving to acquire all those spacebucks is your idea of fun, have at it! I'll be over here, having my kind of fun. Griefers, pirates, FW warriors, and nullsec fleet members will be having their fun. It's a big universe; there's room for us all.

The only thing I will say about your "psychological progression" is that you should be trebly wary of designing any system that installs your self at the top, looking down your nose at the huddled masses. At best it stinks of elaborate self-justification. At worst, it reeks of narcissism.

Anonymous said...

come play with us .. its all about speed so bring your porsche ...

Steel H. said...

Oh, so about the carebear hate in particular, I found the monsterpost, it's by James 315, that guy that bumps miners and writes on too. Read it here: . It's all in there...

Nielas said...

EVE is not really a game for hyper-competive players. The game has a lot of inertia in everything players do so it is really not designed for players who like to change the playing field through decisive action.

Playing-to-win requires a lot of effort in EVE and your gains will disappear if you fail to keep the momentum going. Instead most players settled into low-effort holding patterns where they can still do fun activities but do not really 'accomplish' anything.

Despite the appearances EVE is not really an 'empire building' game.

Kristopher said...

Value is in the eye of the beholder.

This is not nihilism. It simply is.

The holy grail of absolute value does not exist. We each decide what is value as individuals.

Some folks like PvP. Some like making the Sov lines move. Some like making ISK. And some like doing content, either as individuals, or as a group.

There is no level or achievement system in EvE, and anyone can get the skill points to do what they want to learn to do, given time, or PLEX spent in the Character Bazaar.

We each find something to like in EvE, and do it. Or we quit and do something else.

Welcome to the sandbox. Do what you like. Stay within the EULA. Have fun. Or leave if you cant find or make content you consider fun.

Anonymous said...

"Don't be stupid. Of course you can design a frigate that can kill a battleship that is NOT designed to kill frigates. Your examples are all surprise attacks: you jumped on an unprepared enemy.

If all else is equal (player skill, preparation), the BS always wins against any BC, cruiser or frig"

Now who is reducing all of PvP to arranged duels with Queensberry Rules?

You can prepare a counter to a particular target, you are unlikely to be able to counter every single target and tactic you can possible encounter.

And some things are a matter of who had the edge on the day.

Perhaps you should spend time watching Sard Caid or Kil2's streams - or maybe enroll on an Agony Unleashed class, or five.

Anonymous said...

I think most of the carebear hate is because all the nullbears know they are so closely related.

Anonymous said...

Value is subjective. If you liked orbiting objects and spend all your game time doing it then yes, that is valuable for you, and a perfectly valid way to spend your time. Doing that only seems silly to those who don't value it.

Some people don't value spending all their game time blindly grinding away at profit margins while having no idea on how to spend all that pixel money to achieve anything else. Are you going to tell me that's valuable?

Extra Makots said...

Even if some considerations about PvP are not precise, I like this post because it tries to counterbalance the massive ammount of post against Eve carebears. IMHO this post is mainly directed to all those who say that Eve is ONLY PvP, that hi-sec should be made less secure, to the hundreds who jump in a forum post when some poor carebear get podded just saying HTFU without giving any advice on how to face the same situation the next time. In general this post is directed to all those who don't consider PVE an important part of the world they live in.

Marcus McTavish said...

You over-generalize PVP.

I normally don't troll, but why are you so butt-hurt? Did you get killed at a gate-camp or something?

I feel like you are pissed, because you came from WOW, and could not play the same way here and win like you did there. Its okay you are apparently a market-lord. But the mere fact that you are so determined to speak your mind about all of the flaws about nullsec and pvp is concerning.

A battleship does not always beat a battlecruiser. Eve is designed so that as you gain different skills, it does not make you any better, it makes you more versatile.
-I am talking about different skills, not skill levels.

There is a general distaste in the PVP community about PVE-ers that PVE beyond what is needed. This is because, these people see the game with pvp being the primary "goal". And they tend to not participate in fleets and directly help the alliance or group as much. You do not see many Nullsec Alliances asking for PVE Corps, rather they go for PVP corps.

"The typical EVE PvP-ers are considered freaks."
-Hold your fucking horse. You are under the impression that as the ship class and size go up, so does the actual effectiveness.
Drakes Vs Maelstroms:
1: 15m3 to 50m3
2: Faster
3: Smaller Target
4: Cheaper
5: More Flexible
6: Works under any range.

Just because a Battleship is bigger does not make it a better tackler than an interceptor. You seem to have trouble accepting the fact that there is no "I-Win" ship in Eve. Complimenting you: You are a thinker, and people like you tend to really want to make things "Black and White" as in This is This, and That is That, no exceptions. Object A is always better than Object B. This kind of thought does not work in Eve. Why? Because it is not like that in real life. And Eve is real.

Going to admit, i dont know why the fuck i did that at the end. Just another thing off my list.