Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lillith Blackheart]

Whenever you are using game mechanics to force your playstyle on others you are telling them that their playstyle is wrong.

Same applies to RP.

>.< Wat?

How about: If their playstyle doesn't mesh with the game being played, they should either play the game that's there, or go play their game elsewhere.

To wit: If I pull out a board and some checkers and you start setting up chess pieces, there's something very wrong.

Non-metaphorically: EVE is a game where people can wardec you. This is not "forcing your playstyle" this is a reality of the game environment. If this is something that someone is uncomfortable with, there are workarounds built into the system (which were stated above) that they could then use.

If they opt to not use those, then they are open to it.

Corollary to other games: If you enter a PVP zone, you have done so voluntarily. You are going to get stabbed/shot/whatever. By leaving the newbie corp, every individual has voluntarily agreed to PvP, with or without direct consent.

This is a reality of the game environment we are playing in. People can accept it or not, but it is an unreasonable expectation to think that one is going to be free from PvP just because they want to be when they're in a non-newbie corp.

[Ciarente]

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with IC actions stemming from IC motivations, in space or not. And I'm the biggest carebear out there.

I'm not quite sure how using game-mechanics (so long as it's not an exploit) can be seen as forcing your playstyle on others?  If we say we can't do a range of things that the rules and the game allows without prior permission ... well, nobody would engage in a fight they had a disadvantage in, nobody would agree to be suicide ganked when they were flying anything more than an empty T1 hauler, etc ...

In my opinion, I tend to think that RPers should be able to use everything 'non-RPers' can use, so long as they have an IC motivation and are acting on IC information. I.e. I'd think it wasn't cricket to wardec someone because you found out they had an IRL blog in which they professed a love for early French noir, which you hate, for example.

 

[lallara zhuul]

Big part of EVE is doing things without the consent of the other people participating in the activities that you participate in.

I don't think there is nothing wrong with that IC or OOC.

Pretending that forcing someone to do something that they have not agreed to just because it is possible through the game mechanics does not take away the inherent violence of the action.
Which is forcing someone that is playing the game in a certain way to play the game in the same way that you are playing.

This is quite a fundamental thing that constantly happens in human communication, when someone says that someone should do something, you are trying to force them to agree with you, it is of course up to the individual to comply or not, but it does not take away the nature or the intent behind the communication in the first place.

To me this is a similar situation, someone is saying that they want to handle the situation in a certain way, then the other person says that they should do it in another, because they have a different playstyles, when the other party does not have compunctions about using in-game means to affect the others RP (the good old Carebear vs PvP player argument, the dynamic RP vs good brother RP, you can come up with your own dichotomies to suit the situation) they are using the in-game means to force their own playstyle on the other party, also on their RP.

I see nothing wrong with this, I just find that people should be aware of the implications of their actions and not pretend that just because they can do something means that it is right or that they should.

Personally I thought that Backstage was the place where you could have constructive discussion about things, not go for the good ole Harden The Fuck Up approach to things that seems to be the norm in EVE at the moment.

Of course it is a viable viewpoint but personally I think it has been a bit overused.

Too internet tough guy for my taste.

[Kaleigh Doyle]

Well, you see, not everyone views competition in such a pessimistic manner.  Or do you normally see a game of chess as 'forcing your viewpoint on another'? Some people actually like it, and see it as a challenge rather than a non-consensual act. Hence why the 'mutual' option exists. I figure someone in PIE for all these years would be one of the first to understand that. I recall a long time ago when you guys and the U'K guys had something similar going.

I think the debate at this point has been reduced to semantics.

[Lillith Blackheart]

Wow that's... a way to see it.

This is not forcing people. You can not force someone to leave the newbie corp. You can not force someone to drop their corp and create a new one, causing you to waste isk when you wardec them. You can not force someone to leave highsec.

These are decisions other people made freely and voluntarily.

They are not forced.

This is quite a fundamental thing that constantly happens in human communication, when someone says that someone should do something, you are trying to force them to agree with you, it is of course up to the individual to comply or not, but it does not take away the nature or the intent behind the communication in the first place.

Since when? You may simply be telling them that it's in their best interest. If someone is overweight, and you tell them they should go on a diet, you're not in any way trying to force them to go on a diet. You're just letting them know "It is in your best interest to do this, in my opinion," no more and no less.

To me this is a similar situation, someone is saying that they want to handle the situation in a certain way, then the other person says that they should do it in another, because they have a different playstyles, when the other party does not have compunctions about using in-game means to affect the others RP (the good old Carebear vs PvP player argument, the dynamic RP vs good brother RP, you can come up with your own dichotomies to suit the situation) they are using the in-game means to force their own playstyle on the other party, also on their RP.

Are you serious? There's nothing Carebear v PvP player here, and also there's no making them play your way. They made the decision to open themselves to PvP, therefore they get PvP. That's really the nuts and bolts of it.

One thing that drives me insane is when people will defend that someone did not voluntarily accept the possibility of PvP and is having it forced upon them when the game makes it very very clear when you do certain things that you are voluntarily accepting the possibility of PvP and also how to get around it.

Personally I thought that Backstage was the place where you could have constructive discussion about things, not go for the good ole Harden The Fuck Up approach to things that seems to be the norm in EVE at the moment.

Of course it is a viable viewpoint but personally I think it has been a bit overused.

Too internet tough guy for my taste.

This is not a "HTFU" argument. Let me restate the fucking question again because no one is willing to address it:


Is it reasonable expectation, if you leave the newbie corps and/or leave highsec, that you will still get to be free from PvP consequences?



There's nothing about "forced" or "htfu" or any of that nonsense. This is all about the fundamental core of the game and whether or not an individual has a reasonable expectation that they get to be free of the core mechanics of the game they agreed to, and even have the option to move away from. No more and no less.

They were not forced into anything, and wow that took restraint.

[Lillith Blackheart]

Best analogy ever from my girlfriend.

"It's like playing PacMan and complaining about the Ghosts being there. Y'know, 'I just want to eat the dots. . .' I mean, really."

Heh.

[Wanoah]

Best analogy ever from my girlfriend.

"It's like playing PacMan and complaining about the Ghosts being there. Y'know, 'I just want to eat the dots. . .' I mean, really."

Heh.

The problem with Eve is all the other MMOs. They are all entirely pussified, with very few exceptions, and with so many developers jumping on the WoW clone train to Dullsville, people are now in a mindset that this is how an MMO is. It makes Eve such a shock for newcomers: they are entirely unprepared for it.

Frankly, though, who gives a shit if a bunch of effete weaklings are too terrible to bring it in space? I always maintain that Eve should be harder - much harder - to weed out more of the clueless and the mentally deficient. even then, it'd still be pretty easy to ride the coattails of some 0.0 alliance and get by as long as you have basic social skills. That's the only rational explanation for a lot of the players I encountered over the years...

[Lillith Blackheart]

It further is exemplified that they aren't going into it unawares. Everything you do that could open you to pvp comes with a giant popup that says "YOU MIGHT GET SHOT IF YOU DO THIS". There's no excuse.

Further, a wardec costs isk. It requires a 24h lagtime before you can engage in combat. Oddly, there's a 24h lagtime in dropping roles in your corp. Astonishingly: You can make people waste their money and keep following you through dummy corps, or revert to the newbie corp for a week or so.

There are so many ways around the issue that complaining about it when you are warned in advance just strikes me as... I don't know.... unreasonable.

[Graanvlokkie]

Lets strip out the roleplaying aspects of the decision.

What we have here is one corp declaring war on another in terms of the game mechanics. My view is that there is nothing wrong with declaring war on another corporation. People do it all the time with no reason at all, other than the possibility of getting some easy kills in high sec. Not necessarily carebear kills, as 0.0 sec freighters are a nice target for corp.

Now, the argument of the “target player” seems to be that because I give an in character reason for the declaration of war it is suddenly not fair, or is forcing my platstyle on them?

I don’t need to give a reason to declare war. I would like to give a reason to declare war and make it part of my RP but there is no need to.

It would be nice if the other person would RP along with me with the declaration of war, but if they don’t want to its totally within their power to ignore the RP aspect totally and treat the declaration the same as any other war declaration that they may receive from any number of other non RP corps.

[Gottii]

I personally dont feel that Miz has done anything inappropriate here.  Shes making an IC decision for IC reasons.  No ones accused her of griefing or metagaming.  

RPing with a character, but then dictating to the rest of the EVE RP player base which actions they can and cant respond to, and which actions are appropirate, smacks to me of godmoding a bit.  Youre telling people how they should conduct their characters without their consent and limiting their ability to respond independently without your say so.  Youre confining and controlling another players legitimate IC choices based on a particular way you personally want to play and define it.  

There should be a distinction between limiting someones choices IC through game mechanics (i.e. starships, mercs, violence,etc) versus limiting their choices through OOC means (the above mentioned metagaming, godmoding ,griefing, etc). Like Cia mentioned, I dont think there is such a thing as forcing someone to play the game as presented, marketed and intended (i.e. a dark and violent place where bad things happen).  At the end of the day, we're all playing the same video game, and its a violent one where things and people and players blow up.

If you consent to RP, then that IMO should mean consenting to the fact that other players will react to you IC however they view their character would.  In a dark, violent place like EVE, those reactions can (and should) include them finding a way to do violence to your character.  

[Kazzzi]

It seems pretty rare that both sides of any RP conflict mutually agree on every aspect of RP between them. So far the RP gods haven't killed anyone for it.