They say that any publicity is good publicity. I've never been fond of the concept. I'm also not a marketing expert or a publicity lord. Still, when Vov tossed me a link for a Quitting Eve post I was fascinated when I realized that my boys were the mechanism of this particular posters post about his decision to leave Eve.
The TL;DR is that he died in a Stratios to my boys in Bosena. He had returned to Eve to try the expansion, sold enough stuff to buy a Stratios and died while out exploring.
I do like to find out why people decide they are quitting the game, especially when they point out not only my piece of space but my corpmates as the reason.
I hunted down one of people on the killmail to find out what happened. With two interceptors I was interested in how he had died. The post pointed at gatecamps. I know that two of the people on that killmail do not have the interest or attention span to camp a gate. It is one of those assumptions about 'low sec gates' are all camped. I look around at my corpmates and shake my head. I know that people will never see them as I do and hear them as I hear.
Vania, who secured the intital tackle, told me the story.
This particular situation seems to be that he was sited warping towards the Heild gate from Aedald. The boys were buzzing around in another system and saw him pass through. Bloodlust raged to the surface and they chased. Some people may not know Molden Heath by heart (for shame) and need a map. Vania took off after him (because he flies interceptors under gateguns erryday) and landed at the Bosena gate in Heild first (because Rubicon). They jumped. Vania then tackled, the Huggin came in for secondary, the other Inty came in and they tag teamed to shake gateguns and take him down. So, he was not captured in a gatecamp. My boys chased him down and used teamwork to kill him under the mechanics of low sec. Because he did not cloak fast enough (at all?) he was nabbed. The Bosean/Heild gate is a Constellation gate and huge. He landed close enough to Vania that he had to burn in from 46k away. They had no links.
And thus his ship died. There were no extra points. It was just spaceships shooting spaceships. He lost his ship (and pod). He lost the ISK he put into the ship. He lost a lot in that moment and he lost it because he hoped that it would not happen.
I do not pity him. We are a low sec corporation PvPing in Low Sec and
that needs to stop because spaceships die! My head and my desk make
friends over these things. I can have philosophic and hypothetical
discussions all day about killing people in High Sec. For all the
arguments that I read about and hear about PvP in Eve one I
cannot even muster vague bits of sympathy or understanding for are
arguments against PvP in Low Sec. Leaving high sec is a choice. It is a choice more people should make but at the end of the day it is a choice. To chase more exciting gameplay, to chase more ISK, to experience new things all involve shedding the shackles of comfort and Concord reinforced punishments.
Opinions. I have them.
The loss is what upsets many people. Often people are told to get over their unreasonable love of their space pixiles. While a strong statement, people's aversion to loss is understandable. It is unpleasant. Players spend a lot of time working for their things. That time creates an investment. I've often noticed that the causality of 'its just a ship' tends to change as people develop different and better income sources. The more ISK someone has or the easier it is for them to make ISK the more elastic their sense of loss becomes. Others are so vested in the gain from their loss that the monetary value never engages them. It is why the rule 'don't fly what you can't afford to replace is so important st first or for those who struggle with ISK. Selling all assets to buy an overpriced new toy to take into low sec is a cup of woes waiting to be tipped over.
I often discuss how frustrating I find the economic mantra of Eve. The ISK per hour. The focus on the practical cost of things. Everything is broken down into cost. Even ships are given a real world value that they do not have by doing a backwards conversion to the cost of PLEX with a big 'if' attached to it. Then, should it surprise anyone that people become attached to what they can lose? That the loss hurts them? On one hand the value of an item in time, energy, and internet spaceship money is worked down to minute details and in the other "it doesn't matter" is placed. These two things do not actually even out or particularly make sense to each other.
Loss sucks. I still do not understand why it is glossed over as if the person is silly for admitting that they find loss unpleasant. Some will move past it quickly. Others will immediately forget that they ever cared. To tell someone that they are wrong for feeling the effects of their loss is foolish. It is not finding loss unpleasant that is the problem. It is not moving past the unpleasant part and allowing a negative reinforcement cycle to be created until one develops a phobia. I don't think that it is easy to get used to for every player but it is something that one can get used to. Like so many other parts of the game it involves some mental flexibility from the player base.
Often one has to confront ones fears before one can move forward. I was reading a very brave post by E Dyn where he expresses that he does not like to lose his ships. He also knows that he wants to move past this point and he is pushing himself because he wants to experience the other parts of Eve and knows that he will lose ships in that journey.. I wish him well and I find myself wanting to give him hugs for being honest.
It may be socially wrong to admit weaknesses but ignoring them doesn't help. How many people rage about their ship loss while screaming blob, links, hacks, cheats, and slurs while insisting that they don't care that they lost their ship. Of course they care that they lost it. There is no shame in that. Accepting the loss and moving past the loss are the next steps and ones they cannot even reach because they cannot admit that they care. Care isn't a dirty filthy word. Caring about the game that we play is why we play the game in the first place. It is what brings forth all the passion and rage that keep us playing.
Eve is a game. A recreational game that we choose to play Part of playing it is accepting that games rules. Eve has them to. One of those rules is that people can shoot and kill you in low sec. And for all the understanding and acceptance of the emotional reality of some people, the Stratios' pilot being upset that he died isn't enough reason to break the game to make it better. For those reading further down his post note that he wishes for Eve to have PvP flags where people can go off and explore and become filthy rich and only PvP when they are in the mood.
He enters a new reality with his suggested gameplay. A reality that I cannot enter with any type of understanding or comprehension. Eve is balanced by loss. We need the raw, rampant destruction to happen for the rest of our game to happen. For that Stratios pilot to have the experience that he wants, which is getting rich off of exploration, loss in the game has to happen. Without the loss there is no value and Eve would be stuck in the same cycle that others game are in where items are farmed and then the game company must bring in new more better items to replace them. The NPC loses would not compensate.
The cold fact is that Eve is a game where PvP can and will happen with or without the participation of the player. One does not have to PvP. The game can be enjoyed without it. I will never tell someone that they have to stop doing what they are doing and PvP to enjoy Eve. They don't. But they do have to understand that PvP may happen. And they damn well need to understand that PvP will happen in unsecure space inhabited by PvP corporations that live in that space to PvP. Covering your HUD with your hand so that you cannot see yourself burning in a fire will not PvP safe your game make.