I've been repeatedly called a "carebear". When I earned billions a day without mining or shooting a single red cross, gaining all the money from other players, I was a carebear. When I took part in capturing regions with TEST alliance, I was a carebear. When I killed ships with ISK/month in a magnitude of small-gang alliances, outperforming the members of even the most "elite" alliances hundred times, I was a carebear.
For long, I believed that the word "carebear" means nothing else than "pubbie", used by Goons: someone who is not us, therefore we hate him. But it was always odd. The word "carebear" was used descriptively instead of pejoratively. I mean when you call a fat man "pig", you are fully aware that he is not a household animal. You mean that he is similar to the household animal, therefore use this unfavorable comparison. However when you just call him "ugly, fat man" you mean your words literally. It always felt they mean "carebear" literally, despite I'm obviously not someone who cares about the feelings of others or scared of losses.
Mabrick calls himself a carebear, maybe the only man doing so openly, since "carebear" isn't a badge of honor in EVE. His post about being one helped a lot to understand what "carebear" and it's opposite, the "PvP-er" means.
The other thing that helped is my time in TEST, which is indeed a PvP-er alliance, therefore a place where I never belonged, no matter how hard I try to contribute to their stated goals. Neither supporting their budget or TEST_free, nor flying in their fleets did not bring me any closer to them. I was always a "carebear". Similarly I was constantly puzzled about their frigate/cruiser roams and their obvious happiness flying them and telling stories about their adventures. To me these were rather meaningless and stupid waste of time with kills that could be replaced by a single AFK miner.
The "carebear" is someone who fights other people for a goal. I want your loot so I kill you. I want your region so I fight you. I want to pad my killboard so I kill you. I want your ISK so I steal your corp hangar. While such "carebear" does PvP, he only does when there is a point, and usually there is not. In most cases it's easier to farm than kill another guy for the same loot.
The "PvP-er" is someone who fights for the experience of fighting or for domination over other person (tears). He can't care less about ISK and objectives and when forced to care by game mechanics, he whines about the game being horrible and tries to avoid it as far as he can: he flies cheap ships so he doesn't have to care about ISK loss and grinds Sov only when he is absolutely forced to. In wormholes there is an often recited moral guidline: "do not evict PvP corps".
If we understand this, the myth of the Blue Doughnut becomes understandable. It's a belief held by "carebears" that nullsec alliances are all friendly with each other. This is because they do not evict each other and miss on obvious opportunities to gain the upper hand. The source is the "carebear" thinking: I want their moons or ratting space, so I take it the most effective way. If they don't do it, but clash in Talwars, they don't really want to go to war. Which is true: they want to have fun fighting with each other and complain when their leaders blue someone, decreasing the number of players to shoot. The NCdot line members indeed didn't want the moons of TEST (their leaders might) and just went to fight TEST for the fight itself.
The problem is the difference of objectives: a "carebear" thinking says "if you want the same objective as me, we are enemies". The "PvP-er" thinking says: "if you don't respect me, don't afraid of me, we are enemies". When "carebears" see "PvP-ers" fighting, he sees a thunderdome, while the participants are doing their best to gain respect and to humiliate their opponent. When "PvP-ers" see "carebears" fighting, he sees cowardice, bargaining and blobbing, while the participants are doing their best to get as good ISK ratio as possible.
For long, I believed that the word "carebear" means nothing else than "pubbie", used by Goons: someone who is not us, therefore we hate him. But it was always odd. The word "carebear" was used descriptively instead of pejoratively. I mean when you call a fat man "pig", you are fully aware that he is not a household animal. You mean that he is similar to the household animal, therefore use this unfavorable comparison. However when you just call him "ugly, fat man" you mean your words literally. It always felt they mean "carebear" literally, despite I'm obviously not someone who cares about the feelings of others or scared of losses.
Mabrick calls himself a carebear, maybe the only man doing so openly, since "carebear" isn't a badge of honor in EVE. His post about being one helped a lot to understand what "carebear" and it's opposite, the "PvP-er" means.
The other thing that helped is my time in TEST, which is indeed a PvP-er alliance, therefore a place where I never belonged, no matter how hard I try to contribute to their stated goals. Neither supporting their budget or TEST_free, nor flying in their fleets did not bring me any closer to them. I was always a "carebear". Similarly I was constantly puzzled about their frigate/cruiser roams and their obvious happiness flying them and telling stories about their adventures. To me these were rather meaningless and stupid waste of time with kills that could be replaced by a single AFK miner.
The "carebear" is someone who fights other people for a goal. I want your loot so I kill you. I want your region so I fight you. I want to pad my killboard so I kill you. I want your ISK so I steal your corp hangar. While such "carebear" does PvP, he only does when there is a point, and usually there is not. In most cases it's easier to farm than kill another guy for the same loot.
The "PvP-er" is someone who fights for the experience of fighting or for domination over other person (tears). He can't care less about ISK and objectives and when forced to care by game mechanics, he whines about the game being horrible and tries to avoid it as far as he can: he flies cheap ships so he doesn't have to care about ISK loss and grinds Sov only when he is absolutely forced to. In wormholes there is an often recited moral guidline: "do not evict PvP corps".
If we understand this, the myth of the Blue Doughnut becomes understandable. It's a belief held by "carebears" that nullsec alliances are all friendly with each other. This is because they do not evict each other and miss on obvious opportunities to gain the upper hand. The source is the "carebear" thinking: I want their moons or ratting space, so I take it the most effective way. If they don't do it, but clash in Talwars, they don't really want to go to war. Which is true: they want to have fun fighting with each other and complain when their leaders blue someone, decreasing the number of players to shoot. The NCdot line members indeed didn't want the moons of TEST (their leaders might) and just went to fight TEST for the fight itself.
The problem is the difference of objectives: a "carebear" thinking says "if you want the same objective as me, we are enemies". The "PvP-er" thinking says: "if you don't respect me, don't afraid of me, we are enemies". When "carebears" see "PvP-ers" fighting, he sees a thunderdome, while the participants are doing their best to gain respect and to humiliate their opponent. When "PvP-ers" see "carebears" fighting, he sees cowardice, bargaining and blobbing, while the participants are doing their best to get as good ISK ratio as possible.
0 comments:
Post a Comment