“The presumption of safety”

If you haven’t already, I’d suggest you read The Mittani’s latest article in Ten Ton Hammer:

http://www.tentonhammer.com/eve/spymaster/79

To summarise my personal view (as outlined in my last post), Suicide Ganking Miners is valid in EVE, but I suggest it is currently unbalanced towards the attacker right now due to the buffed destroyer, which is further being helped along by the manipulation of an immensely wealthy player group.

To summarise The Mittani (cheery picked quotes, but they are all there), he seems to feel there is a majority shameful ignorant demographic in EVE who are completely unplugged from the community, and whose unfounded presumption of safety threatens the game, and therefore must be educated or blown up to prevent EVE from turning into a PVP optional theme park.

Interesting how he responded to the outraged commentary of the Ganked Miner – with outraged commentary of his own.  It might be unkind, but I got to the end of the article with the impression I was listening to the self-righteous indignation of a politician.

The Mittani plays a very different game than the vast majority of us.  His in game wealth, income and power are almost unequalled.  That leaves me wondering just how in touch he is with the reality of what the average Empire Hulk Pilot thinks and does.  Is he like the Politician who says they understand the cost of living pressures, with a driver and a car waiting for them outside, fuel cards, food and travel allowances, and a base salary far above average?

My bemused observations aside, this debate is unfortunately not really about the tank on a Hulk, as I would prefer it to be.  Whether The Mittani’s arguments are right or wrong, there appears to be a ground swell demand on CCP to start drawing a line in the sand about how hardcore EVE Online must be.

CCP can do nothing and ignore the ranting and raving.  They will lose some miners and some hardcore players, but in the end all but the most embittered will return to playing the game like they want.  However the next time CCP make a mistake, this pent up aggression will resurface, and The Mittani will still be a thorn in their side.

CCP can come down against the casual player, and would expect to lose a volume of empire miners, and probably shorter subscriptions from those who might come into that profession later.  I don’t envision it will see an increase in the number of players in the game.

CCP can come down against the hardcore player, and would expect to lose a volume of pirates and 0.0 content drivers.  There would be a void there for a while – but that gives opportunities for newer players to possibly fill it.  It might also cut back on some of the angst, and they might even be rewarded by The Mittani quitting.

Personally I am just going to work on remaining calm, and wait with interest to see how this pans out.  EVE is Real…

3 thoughts on ““The presumption of safety”

  1. Actually, I’ve always thought the biggest advantage in ganking destroyers is the elephant in the room.

    In empire space, you can’t shoot first. As long as guards are useless, so is any tank, as you can’t really do much against an alpha.

  2. “Don’t fly what you can’t afford to lose”

    In-game, you have insurance for if your tank isn’t, and you have CONCORD for if it holds out. The bottom line is that, if enough people are enough determined, they *will* gank you.
    Equally, a series of successful mining runs will soon net enough to repalce even a Hulk. As Mittani says, if you want security, mine in a battleship (Veld’naught, anyone ?), where you will pull in less, but be next-to ungankable. Otherwise, learn to mine cautiously, and to be ready to Get Out in two clicks.

    Oh, and watch for can-flippers :: react to them in the wrong way, and they get clearnace to gank you unavenged.

    • Sure, if you want security, mine in a battleship. Only takes care of one link in the chain. Your hauler is still at risk and becomes the primary target. Not hauling? Then your orca might become the target. (Yes, suicide ganks of orcas do happen)

      Don’t have either? Well, then an osprey with a hauler could probably outmine you with how many trips back and forth to the station. The advice of anyone to ‘mine in a BS’ simply shows a lack of mining knowledge.

      If you are every worried about losing your ship, don’t mind in a BS. Mine in a Covetor that’s insured. You can mind Veldspar and make back it’s fitting and non-insured cost in about 30 minutes or less. Telling someone to mine in a BS is like me telling someone that loses a BC to throwing up a cyno to go get a battleship to throw up the cyno. Throw-away ships exist for a reason.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s