open All Channels
seplocked Market Discussions
blankseplocked Economic Issues for the Good Doctor
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2007.09.07 20:37:00 - [61]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 07/09/2007 20:42:28
Originally by: Shar Tegral
in this particular instance Akita is incorrect. Of course the Eve market does not simulate real life very well. The reasons for this are apparent and have been denoted ad infinitum ad nauseum.

Straw man argument !
Just to make myself clear, I will use YOUR argument against you now, just to make a point.
EVE is a game, like you said.
Games are supposed to be fun.
There's nothing fun about 0.01 ISK wars.
Ergo, 0.01 ISK wars must stop in EVE.

I didn't claim the EVE market should mirror real-life markets completely, I merely mentioned in passing that the attachment to the "0.01 ISK wars is ok" notion is related to getting used way too much with EVE's market system as opposed to... well, just about anything else.

Then I went on describing WHY 0.01 ISK wars are not necessarily such a good idea as you might think they are.
To reiterate, it doesn't matter if "it's just a game" and "it shouldn't be like real-life", the moment time spent online can mean the difference between good profits and no profits... that's when you realize something's not quite right.

Finally, I gave no less than four separate alternatives, each of them with advantages and disadvantages, that maintain the "status quo" yet make time spent online less relevant to this particular issue.
___

Of course, my whole line of reasoning could just be thrown out by the "but if you're not online, why do you expect to make any income" argumentation line.
Oh well... but if we go that way, why don't we also nerf "datacore gatherers" and pure industrialists too, I mean, they also generate potential income while offline.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.07 20:48:00 - [62]
 

Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Micro bidding like this favors those with the time and inclination to babysit their orders 23/7. I do not think it makes for a good game mechanic.

Okay, we may have something here. Please tell me why those who have the time and dedication to "babysit" their orders should be punished? Why is it that people so consistently try to be punitive to people who have the leisure to be online more than they do?


Who is being "punished"? Absolutely no one (or everyone if you prefer). The point is it affects everyone the same. Are you saying it is necessary to bid in 0.01 increments to do any business?

And this is not punitive to people who spend more time online. Indeed they still would possess some advantages. For instance they can respond to good deals more readily since they are on to spot and exploit them. Even if you did away with the need to micromanage micro bidding being online more still allows you to adjust your orders to changing conditions more quickly than someone who is not online as much. You can trade more.

And as for myself I spend all too much time in EVE as it is (not complaining mind you). Yes there are ways to avoid microbidding but it is there and unavoidable and it does affect gameplay. And remember this is a game afterall primarily meant to be fun.

Unless your idea of fun is micromanaging a pile of orders ad nauseum for hours on end I cannot see the point (and you could still micro bid if you like. You say you think microbidding is one of EVE's strongest points yet I have yet to see anyone say why beyond, "Cuz I can".

As it stands market competition can devolve to who bids 0.01 less (or more) most frequently to snap up orders/get sales. Some argue ANY other pricing strategy is counterproductive and downright dumb. Would EVE not be far more interesting if you had to use your head when going to market and deciding prices because endless tweaking, in the long run, becomes counter-productive?


Quote:
I think you need to realize the scope and position of the Good Doctor before you can begin to think your favorite pet peeve (we all have them) is his bailiwick.



Whose bailiwick is microbidding if not the Doctor's?

I realize he does not work in a vacuum and does not have control over game design. But for such a game change (were it to be made) he'd be the first person they'd talk to about it.

The Doctor can look at such a mechanic and tell us that it tends to have effects X, Y & Z. If the mechanic were to be changed we could expect to see effects A, B & C. Then CCP, with or without community input, can decide which they think makes for a better game.

Certainly there is no one more qualified at CCP to comment on how things like price caps and microbidding push markets. In time as he becomes more familiar with EVE he will be better able to comment on how it impacts the game overall. A bad idea in a real world economy may make eminent sense in a game environment (or vice versa). Indeed somewhere down the road we will probably be seeing him publish on these aspects and it should be fascinating.

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2007.09.07 21:26:00 - [63]
 

Originally by: Akita T
EVE is a game, like you said.
Games are supposed to be fun.
There's nothing fun about 0.01 ISK wars.
Ergo, 0.01 ISK wars must stop in EVE.

There's the supposition that is unprovable. You can say that they are not fun for you. You can say that everyone you have talked to says that they are not fun. You can even find many who will join saying that they are not fun. However you can not prove that it is not fun... ... to someone else.

I think 0.01 isk wars are undignified however I've engaged in them and have had plenty of fun doing so. Swinging my technique back and forth to frustrate my fellow price-gougers. Eventually identifying them not by name but by "Damn Hakera XI - M5 - CreoDron Factory is being a pain today!". Fun can be identified in many ways and challenge, even in monotony, is one of them.

And I didn't say that you were totally incorrect just in the assertion you made about intentional blindness in relating to real life. Your argument, not mine.
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
You say you think microbidding is one of EVE's strongest points yet I have yet to see anyone say why beyond, "Cuz I can".

Little do you realize how powerful "Cuz I can" is. "Cuz I can" is the prime motivator behind pvp, alliances, 0.0 ownership, tournements, piracy, wars, and even your posting "fix" something that is not broken.

"Cuz I can" is the most powerful ideal of western civilization in total. And you simply want to do away with what freedoms there are "Cuz you can" to the exclusion of everyone else. Just because everyone else will have their range of choice diminished "equally" to satisfy a vocal few does not make it an improvement.

If the majority of Eve did not wish to engage in 0.01 isk tactics, they can stop of their own free will without Daddy Jora'h to tell them to stop.

Neat that "Cuz I can" thing ain't it?

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.07 23:29:00 - [64]
 

Originally by: Shar Tegral
If the majority of Eve did not wish to engage in 0.01 isk tactics, they can stop of their own free will without Daddy Jora'h to tell them to stop.

Neat that "Cuz I can" thing ain't it?[/justify]


"Cuz I can" is not "neat". Cuz I can is the province of tyrants and bullies.

And people engage in 0.01 tactics not because it is fun but because the game forces it as a reliable tactic. Love it or hate it people will do it because that is the current route to profit.

And I've noticed you do a good job of sounding reasonable but you've never actually made your case and opted instead to dodge and tell people why their opinion is wrong with thinly veiled, ad hominem digs tossed in for good measure (usually that is the province of people who have no other argument to make).

How is 0.01 micro bidding wars a preferable mechanic to anything else suggested? So you had fun in some 0.01 micro bidding war. Is EVE a better place with this particular mechanic in place versus any of the other ideas proposed?

Nyphur
Pillowsoft
Posted - 2007.09.07 23:57:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Roemy Schneider
something i've been troubled about since invention:

static moon mineral supply - increasing demand


Indeed. Also, the T2 materials and moon materials markets are being forcibly manipulated to a very large extent recently.

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2007.09.08 00:18:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
And I've noticed you do a good job of sounding reasonable but you've never actually made your case and opted instead to dodge and tell people why their opinion is wrong with thinly veiled, ad hominem digs tossed in for good measure (usually that is the province of people who have no other argument to make).

Crying ad hominem does not ad hominem make. Besides what do I need to suggest anything when you yourself made my argument for me?
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
I've never seen price controls like this work in real life. Perhaps in a game they are necessary. I tend to have faith in the market and think EVE's market system is robust enough to trust in market forces but it could be you are right given this is still a game and limited in some ways

In one hand you are for market forces and yet you wish to add additional "controls & regulations" because you find the existence of a thing annoying or not fun. Mining is supposedly not fun but yet you wish to make it more prominent. Grinding, anything of any kind, is inhirently monotonous
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
"Cuz I can" is not "neat". Cuz I can is the province of tyrants and bullies.

Yes it is... because you can't stop them until they actually do some tyranny or bullying. Anything else is in the realm of punishable pre-crime.
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
And people engage in 0.01 tactics not because it is fun but because the game forces it as a reliable tactic. Love it or hate it people will do it because that is the current route to profit.

It is not the only route to profit. Furthermore it has it's risk/effort vs reward ratio. If you wish to win at 0.01 isk tactics you have to be present and committed to being there. Grind is not always fun but you conveniently make it sound like the effort many of the 0.01 isk war wagers expend is some sort of crime.

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
And I've noticed you do a good job of sounding reasonable but you've never actually made your case and opted instead to dodge and tell people why their opinion is wrong with thinly veiled, ad hominem digs tossed in for good measure (usually that is the province of people who have no other argument to make).

How is 0.01 micro bidding wars a preferable mechanic to anything else suggested? So you had fun in some 0.01 micro bidding war. Is EVE a better place with this particular mechanic in place versus any of the other ideas proposed?

I might add that you were the one to get a bit shrill early on in your own thread mate so I'd not be so casual to say "ad hominem". I've made the arguments many times over, if you wish to actually research the points you may do so I don't feel like going through the nth explanation over and over again. Mostly I should just point out that I actually was here in Eve when many of the things you are saying "broke" did not exist.

This is not some sort of speculative logic exercise that I'm doing here nor is the current environment one of arbitrary decision by CCP. Since you like to point out that this is yet another of many "0.01 isk" thread why don't you go read all those other threads and see what there is to discover.

Dr Slurm
General Commodities
Posted - 2007.09.08 00:39:00 - [67]
 

For one thing you guys type way too much so I just skimmed the last couple of pages.

Basically someone said microbidding isn't fair because it favors the player with more time.

My response:
Here's where this game and real life are similar, neither are fair.

There is a definite advantage in having more time. This is why there is a timer on your mining lasers. So you can only X every Y seconds. Is it fair that some people have skills that raise that rate? Is it fair that even more people have modules to raise that rate?

Martosh Toma
Gallente
Fraction Investment
Posted - 2007.09.08 01:17:00 - [68]
 

I could put whatever i want here but those that agree with me would not need reading it and those that disagree would not change their mind over it.. so what is the use and whay can't I prefent myself from trying?

you seem to want changes implemented limiting the price changes people can make.
To what end I ask you?
It will not sell more modules in that station/system/region
In the end it will not incease your market share
In the end it will not improve the prices you get for your goods
It will only increase the cost for engaging in market pvp

If it is your opinion market based PVP should be more expensive then ask for a simple increase in broker cost for modifying prices. Not forcing people to pay the full amount as if setting the order up anew, but say 10% of that
I personally think there is even merit in such a change, they could also:
-Change the calculation for broker cost on buy orders to something based on the base value of the market item rather than the often pityfull amount offered for those goods (maybe even some calculation where you pay less broker cost if you attempt to buy at a more realistic price
-Differentiate broker cost for sell orders of a different durtation (make those short term orders cheaper to sell (or buy) your goods with)
-Differentiate taxes/broker costs for the relative busyness of the system. Make it help in spreading the market around creating more and smaller trade hubs

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.08 01:25:00 - [69]
 

Originally by: Shar Tegral
Crying ad hominem does not ad hominem make.

<snip>

I might add that you were the one to get a bit shrill early on in your own thread mate so I'd not be so casual to say "ad hominem".


I'll quote you from this thread:

"...imho you are mentally deficient"

"...they can stop of their own free will without Daddy Jora'h to tell them to stop."


Now look up what "ad hominem" means and feel free to point out where I did the same to you (or anyone) here.


Quote:
I've made the arguments many times over, if you wish to actually research the points you may do so I don't feel like going through the nth explanation over and over again.


Actually you haven't. You have taken shots at my opinions but you have never laid out why 0.01 ISK micro bidding is the best solution. You have said why you think other alternatives are deficient but that does not make the status quo better. I've asked point-blank on this point a few times and you see fit to dodge it. You clearly write well and are willing to write at length (not being snarky...you do) so I do not buy your unwillingness to expound on your ideas.

And I am sorry this thread has gotten so throughly derailed like this. The intention was to perhaps provide a list of things the EVE Community would like to see our economist tackle. In my OP I stated I did not mean my list to be definitive or the only list. It was just a starting point. If it was all crap fine...others could add what they felt was more pressing. Sadly little of that has happened here.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.08 01:34:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: Martosh Toma
you seem to want changes implemented limiting the price changes people can make.


It may seem a point of semantics but I think it is important. This is not about limiting what price changes you can make. This is about making it unreasonable to make endless fiddly modifications. How many products can you name in the real world where the manufacturer modifies the price up or down by a penny 50 times a day? It's silly.



Quote:
-Change the calculation for broker cost on buy orders to something based on the base value of the market item rather than the often pityfull amount offered for those goods (maybe even some calculation where you pay less broker cost if you attempt to buy at a more realistic price
-Differentiate broker cost for sell orders of a different durtation (make those short term orders cheaper to sell (or buy) your goods with)
-Differentiate taxes/broker costs for the relative busyness of the system. Make it help in spreading the market around creating more and smaller trade hubs



I actually like these ideas on the face of it. I'll have to think on them more to comment better. Certainly your second item was one I have thought of before. Maybe not in those terms exactly but I always found it odd that regardless of how long the duration the cost remained the same.

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2007.09.08 02:27:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
I'll quote you from this thread:
"...imho you are mentally deficient"
"...they can stop of their own free will without Daddy Jora'h to tell them to stop."


Ahh... I was answering your generic loaded question in the same broad sweeping response. If I really thought you brainless I wouldn't bother using words of more than one syllable. (Truly honest intent "good will" intent in that sentence.)
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
You have taken shots at my opinions but you have never laid out why 0.01 ISK micro bidding is the best solution. You have said why you think other alternatives are deficient but that does not make the status quo better.

The problem is that I pointed out my freedom under this system. Ergo I defend the status quo simply because it does not dictate to me what my actions or abilities are. I am free to choose, without penalty;

- a non-0.01isk marketing strategy requiring no more than 60 minutes a week to monitor or;

- an aggressive 0.01 isk marketing strategy requiring my constant attention.

- not to be in that market entirely.

Again I say it is all about my freedom of choices and I care little how equally you reduce the choices to everyone. You still impose a limit upon me and I'm against that entirely.

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
And I am sorry this thread has gotten so throughly derailed like this. The intention was to perhaps provide a list of things the EVE Community would like to see our economist tackle.
Don't be sorry about it. You could post your ideas in the already existing thread. Or you could have even posted your ideas on the devblog response thread. However you choose to make a thread of your own (woot the human ego!) instead of possibly getting lost in all the other posts (intelligent or not). You reach widely and boldly with your op and there was alot of response to it.

Learn, absorb, and try again.
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Sadly little of that has happened here.

Don't think this a failure mate. You proved yourself intelligent, persistent, and fairly civil in the face of an ass. (Myself of course) While some here will agree and disagree you not only have your dignity fully intact... you earned some respect.

Don't let yourself miss that point. (You're still wrong!!!)

Apalonius Christ
KANGC Logistics
Posted - 2007.09.08 02:35:00 - [72]
 

I can only hope and pray the new isk dev stays the hell out of this forum and does REAL work, instead of TRYING to do anything anyone in here wants.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.08 03:03:00 - [73]
 

Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 08/09/2007 03:08:56

Originally by: Shar Tegral
The problem is that I pointed out my freedom under this system. Ergo I defend the status quo simply because it does not dictate to me what my actions or abilities are. I am free to choose, without penalty;

- a non-0.01isk marketing strategy requiring no more than 60 minutes a week to monitor or;

- an aggressive 0.01 isk marketing strategy requiring my constant attention.

- not to be in that market entirely.

Again I say it is all about my freedom of choices and I care little how equally you reduce the choices to everyone. You still impose a limit upon me and I'm against that entirely.


I am all for freedoms. I am a freedom freak. But unrestricted freedoms can be bad too. Not sure where you live but the United States has enshrined freedom of speech as one of our hallmarks. Nonetheless it is restricted and rightly so. The famous example being shouting "fire" in a crowded theater when there is no fire. It is an abridgment on my right to free speech (and maybe having a bit of fun) but I think most people would see this as a reasonable curb on my ability to say what I want.

So too with the 0.01 deal. I do not find the freedom to do it a persuasive argument on why it should be done. Mind you I never argued to disallow it. Just to put some boundaries on its use. We could argue a whole other thread on where those boundaries should be drawn (were they to come in) but I think they should be there.


Quote:
Don't be sorry about it. You could post your ideas in the already existing thread. Or you could have even posted your ideas on the devblog response thread. However you choose to make a thread of your own (woot the human ego!) instead of possibly getting lost in all the other posts (intelligent or not). You reach widely and boldly with your op and there was alot of response to it.


I felt the existing thread here was on an entirely different tack than what I was after. I was looking towards game mechanics more than possible features and some frankly esoteric minutiae of the market here (not that those are not interesting). As for the response to the Blog thread it is so scattered in what people are responding to (the blog itself) I felt it'd be lost in there and not get a good discussion.

That and perhaps a bit of hubris on my part. Wink


I guess we will just have to agree to disagree (presumably we can agree on that).

I'd still love for the Doctor (sorry but his name always throws me...I keep reading it as Eyegouge when mentally pronouncing it) to weigh in on some of these things. I know there is about zero chance of that but hey...hope springs eternal.

Dr Slurm
General Commodities
Posted - 2007.09.08 06:05:00 - [74]
 

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Originally by: Martosh Toma
you seem to want changes implemented limiting the price changes people can make.


It may seem a point of semantics but I think it is important. This is not about limiting what price changes you can make. This is about making it unreasonable to make endless fiddly modifications. How many products can you name in the real world where the manufacturer modifies the price up or down by a penny 50 times a day? It's silly.



Quote:
-Change the calculation for broker cost on buy orders to something based on the base value of the market item rather than the often pityfull amount offered for those goods (maybe even some calculation where you pay less broker cost if you attempt to buy at a more realistic price
-Differentiate broker cost for sell orders of a different durtation (make those short term orders cheaper to sell (or buy) your goods with)
-Differentiate taxes/broker costs for the relative busyness of the system. Make it help in spreading the market around creating more and smaller trade hubs



I actually like these ideas on the face of it. I'll have to think on them more to comment better. Certainly your second item was one I have thought of before. Maybe not in those terms exactly but I always found it odd that regardless of how long the duration the cost remained the same.


Show me where in the world a free market exists like eve's does and also where you can shop all the stores at once? You can't because it doesn't exist. The closest thing we have to it is the internet, and guess what micro under/over bidding does exist on the internet. Ebay is a good example. Why don't you bid 10$ on a item on ebay when the minimum is merely 1$, because its a waste of money.

Problem is you guys keep trying to fit eve's market in your little idea of the consumer world. Guess what? Its way different. It would be like going to a giant ware house where different companies stock each item of the same type on a shelf next to each other, and then line them up by price. Because we all know how if you choose one order to buy/sell to and its not the one the market thinks should get the sale it will decide. In the mind of the consumer they will always choose the product of the same type that is cheapest. It makes no sense otherwise.

I repeat, there is nothing wrong with micro bidding, get over it.

Daeva Vios
Posted - 2007.09.08 08:02:00 - [75]
 

Edited by: Daeva Vios on 08/09/2007 08:04:34
Edited by: Daeva Vios on 08/09/2007 08:03:12
I had posted my offer for all of the people complaining about .01 bids to put their isk where their mouth is.

This offer is 100% serious. I will gladly work out a deal with anyone tired of the .01 isk wars. I will take current market value for whatever item you desire and sell these to you at that price + taxes and fees. I will not reduce this price as the price is reduced by .01 bidders. I will increase this price if the price rises by whole percentage values of total cost, in order that overhead does not exceed profitability and I can remain in business.

This is exactly what you are asking for when you request the ability to willingly pay more instead of buy from .01 bidders. I am offering you exactly what you want. I have yet to receive an EVE-mail regarding this offer.

I'm considering calling my business "Vios Organic Module and Ship Market"

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.08 09:25:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Dr Slurm
Show me where in the world a free market exists like eve's does and also where you can shop all the stores at once? You can't because it doesn't exist. The closest thing we have to it is the internet, and guess what micro under/over bidding does exist on the internet. Ebay is a good example. Why don't you bid 10$ on a item on ebay when the minimum is merely 1$, because its a waste of money.


Ok...let's go with your E-Bay idea. Say you are selling a Ferrari. $100,000 starting bid. No minimum price increase. Wanna guess what will happen? An orgy of bids of $100,000.01, 100,000.02, 100,000.03 and so on.

It is absurd and more than a little obnoxious. Really.


Quote:
I repeat, there is nothing wrong with micro bidding, get over it.


I am increasingly convinced the biggest complaints here are coming from people who live on the 0.01 mechanic. The 0.01 thing may not be 'wrong" but it sucks. Any way you slice it. If it was a cool gameplay mechanic you'd never hear about it. You never hear people complaining about 10MN afterburners because they are not an issue.

Funny thing is you saw the same thing with nano's. There was a contingent who went on they were fine. 10K m/s battleships were ok. Adapt! But most people knew, even if they benefitted from it, that it was indeed a messed up mechanic.

Same idea here.

The arguments supporting it in this whole thread and others like it are specious at best.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.08 09:27:00 - [77]
 

Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 08/09/2007 09:29:26
Originally by: Daeva Vios
This offer is 100% serious. I will gladly work out a deal with anyone tired of the .01 isk wars. I will take current market value for whatever item you desire and sell these to you at that price + taxes and fees. I will not reduce this price as the price is reduced by .01 bidders. I will increase this price if the price rises by whole percentage values of total cost, in order that overhead does not exceed profitability and I can remain in business.



Define "Market Value". Has a habit of moving 0.01 at a time every few seconds.

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2007.09.08 09:59:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
I am increasingly convinced the biggest complaints here are coming from people who live on the 0.01 mechanic.

Are you absolutely sure you want to go with this supposition?

Daeva Vios
Posted - 2007.09.08 10:02:00 - [79]
 

Well, as stated, I will not be adjusting my price by .01. In the event when a price change must be made (to ensure survivability of the enterprise in a competitive marketplace), I will only be making whole percentage point adjustments based on total cost of the item in question. I do not wish to compete on a .01 adjustment basis. If I did, I would not be offering this opportunity.

Market Value in this case is determined by current average value of the product in one of the four major trade hub regions at the time of purchase, plus the cost of transportation in the event that transportation is requested. As stated, this Value will be adjusted upward if overhead increases to the point of decreasing profitability.

In the interest of market fairness, I feel this is a worthwhile venture. We can fight the .01 adjustments by reducing the number of people willing to buy from them. All we have to do is, as suggested, accept a higher price to buy from those unwilling to participate in pointless .01 adjustments.

Daeva Vios
Posted - 2007.09.08 10:05:00 - [80]
 

Edited by: Daeva Vios on 08/09/2007 10:07:30
Edited by: Daeva Vios on 08/09/2007 10:05:15
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
I am increasingly convinced the biggest complaints here are coming from people who live on the 0.01 mechanic.


I for one am slightly offended by this. I haven't modified my prices by any amount in several days, and the last time I did modify them it was by several hundred to several thousand isk. Do not make unfounded assumptions.

I am interested in preserving this unique, truly free market. Freedom is always under attack by those who want to restrict in their own best interests. It should be preserved whenever possible.

Imperator Jora'h
Posted - 2007.09.08 19:07:00 - [81]
 

Originally by: Daeva Vios
Edited by: Daeva Vios on 08/09/2007 10:07:30
Edited by: Daeva Vios on 08/09/2007 10:05:15
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
I am increasingly convinced the biggest complaints here are coming from people who live on the 0.01 mechanic.


I for one am slightly offended by this. I haven't modified my prices by any amount in several days, and the last time I did modify them it was by several hundred to several thousand isk. Do not make unfounded assumptions.


Fair enough.


Quote:
I am interested in preserving this unique, truly free market. Freedom is always under attack by those who want to restrict in their own best interests. It should be preserved whenever possible.


This more an argument from emotion rather than a specific reason. You are fighting for an ideal and what could be more noble than freedom?

But if you think about it you accept curbs on freedom all the time and would probably have it no other way. As I mentioned earlier you accept restrictions on free speech. You accept laws that punish people if they go out and exercise their freedom to kill someone. In EVE we accept rules that define the game.

So "freedom" is not necessarily good in and of itself. The freedom in question needs to be defined and quite often boundaries need to be put on that freedom in order for everything to work better. This is one case where I believe some boundaries (not prohibitions) would improve game play.


Pages: 1 2 [3]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only