I don’t want to drag this thread off topic but those who believe that gambling is not moral also make the argument that it affects all the people around that person such as friends and family, often times in a negative way as the gambler over extends himself losing more then what can be afforded
There is no legitimate moral argument about lootable PvP even if there is "killing" involved or if that killing happens because of an ambush. It’s a video game, nothing more. Additionally, even though it’s just a video game, real "death" in the game doesn’t happen since your avatar simply revives. The real cash economy component doesn’t affect the morality side of it one way or another. The fact is that it’s a video game, activity within the PvP area is voluntary, there is a reasonable expectation of death even at higher skill levels, and upon death game play does not cease nor is it diminished in any way as a result of "death"
To make a moral argument against PvP in a video game would be akin to making a moral argument against killing animals for sport in a video game. The fact that this is a video game negates the premise of the entire argument thus making it invalid.
1. Gambling
may affect close friend and family, but that is a whole other story as we are talking about an addiction and besides, you can spend and lose just as much on EU as in a casino. Also, I don't believe this to have much to do with moral.
2.
Killing has nothing to do with it. It has to do with whom you are taking from. If you're lucky enough to pull an uber from a mob, the ground or a crafting machine, you're are taking from MA/FPC/the all elusive loot pool and this isn't really true either as MA/FPS descides when and how much to give you. In short, you can never hurt anyone this way. When looting a person it's a very different matter. You are hurting someone, you're taking every lootable resource the person carries plus you get ammo from MA on top and if you're skilled enough and have the right equipment, it's is no longer a game as you're not taking a risk in anyway. even if the person do not carry loot, chances are you'll make a profit on him anyway.
3. As long as we're talking regular, non lootable pvp, I don't have a problem and regarding lootable pvp, if MA would just drop the ammo loot and implement a variable loot percentage so that it is not a rule that all what the person carries has to go, I wouldn't have such a big problem, though I'd still think that players looting players in a game with a RCE is very wrong. This would mean that it would matter if the avatar who is pk'ed doesn't carry loot, the pk'er will lose and that if the avatar has pulled an ATH and am not able to escape with it alive, it would, probably, not be a complete loss. In short. PK'in in pvp 3/4 would suddenly be much more interesting.
4. And if you still do not understand my opinion, and an opinion is what it is, nothing more, nothing less, let me explain in the simplest way I know of.
I could, if I had the money, deposit let say $25.000 PED (less could probably do it) I'd have no trouble becoming a real uber pk'er and in theory be able to make a living of it. The problem is not that most people do not have this kind of money, but that some do. Some has an unfair advantage. This is not the case while hunting, crafting or mining. Sure, this $25k uber will probably be a whole lot better at what he does than most, but the same rules still apply to him as they do to the noob. Only difference is that the uber hunt/craft/mine more eco at a higher level.
Disclaimer:
I'm really tired now (actually fell a sleep while writing this) and there is a chance that what I've written make no sense at all. If this is the case I do apologize.
