Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Rambling: What May Be




Yesterday, I commented on logistics which spurred a broader discussion about logistics needing to become harder. I'm not on the side of making them harder because I believe that logistics are more a piece of a greater picture than a singular activity. I do not do logistics because I have a great love for wallowing around in a freighter or managing multiple accounts up and down a cyno chain. I do it because I firmly believe that with the work and effort that I put into logistics I can make some bit of Eve a better game.

I don't consider myself a dreamer. I am not a romantic. I did learn that if you put your time and effort into something you created the possibility of improvement. There was no right to this improvement. It is often a fragile thing. The whim of another person can destroy what you spent years to build. That I knew and that I also learned first hand. I came out of that with the firm belief that Eve if full of tools and you take those tools to shape the game.

One thing that came up was that if logistics were harder people would have to think more about what they had to have. They would think more about what they wanted and plan more in that direction. It would not just be "Oh I want all of these things," and those things magically appear.

I disagree. At some part of that chain there is a person doing the work. Those things do not magically appear. The cause and effect may be diminished. When I stock TCS and take the time to move those items and stock those items I lose that time to do something else. That is often PvP. I don't get to do both. I do not feel that I am entitled to both. I simply believe that what I am doing has so much worth that I chose it over other things. Even thought others do not agree with that choice and may insult or ridicule me for my decisions.

I'm not entitled to PvP and market stocking. I choose one. Similarly, the people who buy from me are not entitled to the market. It happens to be that someone is there who believes in its existence. What we are entitled to is the potential to have these things. Potential, in all of its fluid and intangible pieces is what Eve is made out of. Potential and opportunities. We are entitled to them. We are not entitled to success. We are not entitled to failure. We are entitled to the myriad of chances that may play out with what we do.

Just because I am willing to work does not mean I am willing to be someones doormat. I know that it is not glorious to do these things. I do believe in them. But, I am not an altruist. I will not just lay down and work hard to lose everything whenever someone feels like kicking me. I've been engaged in several risk vs reward discussions and I very much disagree that there is some exact balance that every action must teeter on and that those actions and reactions always equal absolute destruction at one side.

Failure does not mean a ship exploding. There are thousands of pilots who explode every day and they do not find their explosion to be a failure. If TCS was to shrivel up and die, the market sit full of stock and not a single person ever but, it would fail. My jump freighter does not need to be destroyed for failure to happen. I'd lose my investment. I'd lose my time. I'd be proven wrong. All of these things are risks that I am willing to take. It is just that those risks are not the explosion of a space ship.

As always, it may very much be a me thing. I was asked the other day, "You do agree that Eve is a PvP game." The answer is still no. I know that is not the right answer according to many but it is mine. Eve is a game in which player interaction is a core building block. I consider it interaction. I think building things is just as much a part of the game as destroying them. We interact with each other closely or as far away as we do in real life if you look under case and effect. When I sit and work with Wex to build things we are absolutely building things that will destroy. But Wex and I are working together. When I work on TCS it is about improving the region and that means increasing the immediate capability for violence because I believe that Eve thrives on production and destruction.

But, none of us are entitled to success. My ships may not sell. The fight may not happen. Just the opportunity and the possibility. Its there for us to create, size, and attempt. It is a lot of work. I don't feel that it will be improved by making it harder. I often talk to people who are exhausted with the effort that it takes to create.

It may be a bit romantic. It however is the game that I am playing. It is the game that I work to improve. It is the game that I like to log into. I love it for the vastness. I am enthralled by the potential. Entitle is an interesting word. It can be very soft. It can be normal. Or it can be a vicious sword wielded to strike down another. It all depends on how it is used. I am motivated by the fact that I work to earn what I have and I am entitled to no single thing in it.

11 comments:

  1. People who tout the; 'But EVE is a PvP game' argument in the context of such things have a very narrow definition of PvP.

    PvP doesn't always have to involve ships exploding. Besides EVE is a space ship game with the 'PvP alwyas on' option ticked, that is not the same as it being just that. EVE is also a PvE game and a roleplaying game and a puzzle game and a crafting game, a politics game and I could go on for a bit :P
    And PvP isn't any more paramount then any of hose things, PvP is just that hostile or competing interaction between players no space ship violence need be involved.

    Anyways nice write up, good to see this p.o.v. highlighted.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The phrase “eve is a PvP” game doesn't catch the real essence of the game. It isn't a versus every time. Players cooperate and help each others. They do selfish sings like earn money or destroy others doing so. The die hard pvp dude that wants to kill you while in a defenceless freighter isn't after pvp as first goal. That's just a side effect. What he really wants is having your freighter show up on his kill board. He will boast around with having killed you, so it is not the PVP he is looking for but the story he can tell about engaging (with/on) you.

    And that's more describing for eve, its a PeP or Players engaging Players game. Be it with guns or markets or hard working mineral collection. Every action in this universe engages with other players. This tritanium the combat pilots ship is made off wouldn't be there if non hadn't acquired it first from rocks. The lonely miner is no more and no less engaging with other players than any other profession in eve. And all players can get more enjoyment out of there game if they would acknowledge this simple fact.


    To the point of logistics: it is already hard enough. with the not so brilliant mechanics of cyno the other wise fully capable and rich single player with one character has totally no value from a jump freighter. He has to rely on others to place those for them and even as multi account user the cyno mechanic is simply unnecessary complexity for non combat jump mechanics. If I want to jump my dreadnought or carrier into battle yes there needs to be a cyno. But for the JF that's just jumping from station to station, with at worst case loosing a cyno ship every time? Cut out the cyno field and let JF jump direct to station. give them a 30 second spool up time so someone has the ability to block it. but having an alt sitting in a cyno ship on station for 10 minutes waiting for the next funny guy pointing and webbing your immobile ship before killing it isn't much engaging game play. Make logistics faster and we get more time to do other stuff like going out and kill some rats or those who try to stop us doing so.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Big picture: I think all areas of space need to thrive in order for eve as a whole to grow in both subscriptions and depth of play. Hauling things in eve has always been a core gameplay idea. Things having 'positional value' is a big deal for eve. And I'd not erode that. As a former wow player, I understand the slippery slope of compromising to make an entitled playerbase more "happy" by removing obstacles and streamlining gameplay.

    All that said, I'd be against most mechanics that makes it more difficult to get bulk shipments in and out of low. I am, in general, in favor of changing mechanics to improve the flow of logistics in low. Market hubs need to happen more often in low in order for that part of space to grow.

    Sugar doesn't need me to defend her, but a word of caution: some of these posts are just spitballing and high level big picture ideas. Some of you respond with down in the weeds detailed arguments and spewing rhetoric that doesn't help move the conversation forward. Sweeping generalization, i know, but stop for a minute before you post your 572 point counter argument and decide how the volume of text is helping your case. :)

    // Abavus, posting as anon from his phone.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I started Eve just over a year ago with several toons as I was unsure what road to follow. I have a Hauler, Trader, Explorer and a Maker of things. They have all been attacked at some time or other, at gate camps, sites, whilst doing pi and on the market where it can sometimes be ruthless. PvP is everywhere.

    Like you my game is making and selling things to other players in my region, I enjoy what I do and like you find it time consuming and hard work. I agree that it is already hard enough and that there are more important areas of the game that need attention.

    Do I feel entitled? Yes, to play the game how I want to play it. To play without having interaction or interference from other’s, No.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Eve is not a PvP game, but a game about ISK pure and simple. If you have ISK you have more options than if you don't have ISK. It mirrors real life where money does allow for more opportunities.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. While I appreciate your bold simplicity, I caution that money blinders can be every bit as constricting as PvP blinders. Enjoy your pure simplicity while it lasts Saint Ambrye, the onward march of muddy, gray edged complexity is unrelenting and will one day capture you too.

      Delete
    2. Thanks Dire. My point was that this is more than just a social interaction related shooter game. It has the potential to be so much more, but as long as one pays to play the game it is pretty much an economics based game.

      Delete
    3. In my neck of the woods a statement like "[Eve] is a game about ISK pure and simple" doesn't read as a 'more that just' claim but rather a 'only this' claim. C'est la vie. Your neck of the woods may differ and artistic license befuddles us all.

      You're follow up elaboration, however, leaves me a little baffled. I've heard tale that parents buy board games like Chutes & Ladders for their children using real life money. Little did I know that pretty much makes Chutes and Ladders an economics based game. (Economics may help illuminate how Milton Bradley produces the physical board , physical dice and physical pieces but I doubt it has much useful to say about the delight little tykes take in playing the game.)

      Delete
  6. The boat-violence advocates don't realize that for an industrial pilot, combat means that the PvP encounter is over and they lost, barring a serious mistake on the part of the combat pilot. The killmail is just a formality.

    CCP Seagull used a colorful word to describe the way EVE treats enablers. In a game that depends absolutely on the work of a small minority of enablers it's kind of important to keep their work from being too thankless.

    100% agreed.

    -D

    ReplyDelete