Because it's fun (although it's not for everyone & the game caters to that crowd) to beat their blockade & complete your own objective
How do you feel about ganckers?
- Thread starter husky of snow
- Start date
- Status
Because it's fun (although it's not for everyone & the game caters to that crowd) to beat their blockade & complete your own objective
That's a rather bold assumption.
And this is an outright ridiculous one.
The game, sans PvP, is an unassailable safe-space where next to nothing ever goes wrong, virtually nothing unexpected ever happens, and utterly nothing need be ventured to see rapid gains. It's a permanent bull run where everyone's CMDR is clad in plot armor and even the most gratuitous displays of ineptitude can barely dent one's progress. Everyone, no matter how lazy, clueless, willfully ignorant, or outright stupid is the hero of the story. This is entirely at odds with the lore of the setting and the game's own marketing, both of which describe a cutthroat dystopia.
Not that PvP, in and of itself, changes this equation much (as the networking implementation, out-of-context tools, and entirely contextual mechanisms all being stacked heavily toward safety and defense), but I certainly find it much easier to pretend it matters, suspending my disbelief with regards to the negative aspects of direct player interactions, than to embrace the otherwise profound lack of challenge and consequence, which are completely antithetical to the experience the lore tries to convince me is present.
I opt in to anything that goes by clicking 'Open' and having to make my consent even more affirmative can only detract from my experience.
@Morbad
I understand by clicking 'Open' you have consented to what occurs on the server: the good, bad and ugly. By the fact that clicking 'Open' consents can be problematic and does not resolve unifying players into one "cutthroat dystopia" galaxy under one umbrella. The twelve+ circle of players that play Elite with me come from hardcore PVP 1v1 and team v. team genre games, and even those players, are turned away by 'Open' gameplay. In the current iteration of Elite with the different server options allows players to pick their own Elite experience. Elite will simply exist with a fragmented player base separated between 'Open' and 'Private Group' or 'Solo' servers.
Frontier built the game, so the current server option model is working-as-intended than that's all good. On that note, there would be no further reason to discuss the 'Whys' that players are deciding to skip clicking on the 'Open' and deciding to play Elite with their online friends in 'Private Group' or on the 'Solo' server. This, working-as-intended, also puts the OP topic an ill relevant discussion and no reason to consider 'more affirmative' consent than clicking 'Open'.
At the end of the day, the Elite game experience will be decided by the choice on which server to go with.
I understand by clicking 'Open' you have consented to what occurs on the server: the good, bad and ugly. By the fact that clicking 'Open' consents can be problematic and does not resolve unifying players into one "cutthroat dystopia" galaxy under one umbrella. The twelve+ circle of players that play Elite with me come from hardcore PVP 1v1 and team v. team genre games, and even those players, are turned away by 'Open' gameplay. In the current iteration of Elite with the different server options allows players to pick their own Elite experience. Elite will simply exist with a fragmented player base separated between 'Open' and 'Private Group' or 'Solo' servers.
Frontier built the game, so the current server option model is working-as-intended than that's all good. On that note, there would be no further reason to discuss the 'Whys' that players are deciding to skip clicking on the 'Open' and deciding to play Elite with their online friends in 'Private Group' or on the 'Solo' server. This, working-as-intended, also puts the OP topic an ill relevant discussion and no reason to consider 'more affirmative' consent than clicking 'Open'.
At the end of the day, the Elite game experience will be decided by the choice on which server to go with.
What part of the ED lore covers Pad blockers, Hackers, folks flying Thargoid ships in SOL or ships/commander names trying to over compensate?
PvP isn't the issue, there is no PvP in Elite as most altercations are not a level playing field.
Open doesn't work, my block list became so big i was virtually playing in Solo anyway.
Don't blame us Solo folks for the failure of Open, if it wasn't for the actions of some muppets we would be happy to be inclusive, but for me anyway, immersion is something that is really important.
O7
That's just factually false. There absolutely is PvP in Elite (unless you were talking about some earlier single player version of the game and not about Elite: Dangerous).
"Level playing field" does not mean what you seem to think it does. It does not mean that everyone is flying the exact same build, it means equality of opportunity (in other words, it means that everyone has equal access to the same tools and equipment to build their ships), which is exactly the case in this game (with the exception of a few CG-only modules gated behind one-time events).
Open absolutely does work.
Hate to break your bubble, but the actual reason why it does not appear to work for you is not the devs or other players but your way of thinking. You simply don't seem to be an Open-compatible player in ED.
Don't get me wrong, there's absolutely no problem with that, but it most probably would have been a benefit to everyone (including you) if you simply had stayed in Solo or Moebius instead of building ridiculously long block lists.
Nobody I know blames "Solo folks" for playing in Solo if that's what works for them the best.
Last edited:
I feel that gankers are sawing through the branch they're sitting on.
Never claimed it was anywhere near perfect (I've been complaining about the lack of a docking queue and Frontier's unwillingness to enforce their own rules since 2014), just still closer to that lore, despite all of these negative aspects, than the game that is left over once one starts arbitrarily limiting what CMDRs are around to interact with.
I've never subscribed to the idea that PvP cannot be asymmetric. Indeed, most of what I consider good PvP has been as the underdog...which requires, perforce, someone of greater power (if only situationally) to fight against...which sure as hell isn't going to be NPCs in this game. I want opponents where I can try my level best--across the full spectrum of gameplay provided--and still be at a disadvantage. It makes the victories all the sweeter and even the losses (which can still only happen in ED due to mistakes on the looser's part) become more glorious than embarassing.
Level playing fields in organic conflicts are, by and large, rare...flukes that should only occur when one or more sides have grossly underestimated their opponents, or overestimated themselves. This is even more the case in dystopian settings, where the concentration of power should make resistance seem all but hopeless, but the goals and means of those in power are so repugnant that we're compelled to resist anyway.
If you're talking about equal opportunity from the player perspective, rather than some arbitrary level of balance at the in-character encounter perspective, we already have that. All rule abiding players (and most are) play by more or less the same rules. There is certainly some content and experience gatekeeping, and more of the former than I find ideal, but everyone who sticks around puts the minimum time in.
I've never needed a block list. I would have liked a chat-only block, but once it became clear what the feature was actually doing, I've been content with the modest downsides of having to listen to all sorts of unsolicited out-of-character nonsense and the much more mild downside of having to encounter a rare cheater (and they are rare), or the game's absurd lack of docking queues become an immersion breaker. The downsides of excising those negative encounters--i.e. the exclusion all the positive interactions that can occur in instances that contain one or more of these individuals I may view as disruptive--is significantly greater than tolerating them.
I've never really blamed anyone other than Frontier for the state of their game, and those in other modes least of all. It's people who insist on making Open less Open that are out of place, but even then, they can only be problematic due to Frontier's shoddy mechanisms.
This sounds like a group of people looking for a sporting event to participate in. Anyone can have that, provided they are willing to organize things, and Open doesn't really make it any easier or more difficult than PG.
I'm looking for a credibly hostile setting filled with unpredictable and at least potentially dangerous organic encounters.
Last edited:
That's plain wrong and i think we had this topic discussed in the past
You, as a pvp-er, get to play an optimally built ship for your in-game goal - which is PVP
I, as a pve-er, if i wand to survive in Open, i need to play with a ship that is build very un-optimaly to the goal i have, which may be mining, trading, running random missions or whatever
Even more, your in-game goal will interfere with my in-game goal as in it will either prevent me from achieving my goals or in a better case, it will only delay my game progress (not simply preventing it)
In other words, you get to play the game you want, flying the ship you want.
I get to play a crappier ship and more often than not, i will not be able to play my game because i have to keep avoiding your attempts at pvp-ing with me.
How is this even a remotely level playing field?
it's simply not
And thanks DBOBE for Block and Solo and PG - there is still a game to play for the less pvp inclined players.
Last edited:
Sometimes the gankers are MY content...
"Cmdr's did not come into this world to be Carebears - we came to be warriors. Be brave. Stay strong."
"The Carebear mindset dilutes the Cmdr's potential. By not accepting personal responsibility for our circumstances, we greatly reduce our power to change them.”
o7
No, it's not wrong at all.
The equality of opportunity is still there.
What you are flying is a free choice of yours, you can pretty easily build a ship that's pretty much unkillable, you have the same tools and equipment at your disposal as I do. You can even build a combat ship yourself and hunt me down if so you choose, even when I'm not in my combat ship.
Edit:
Sure, if I interdict a trader in my combat ship, that encounter seems to be one-sided, if it's only the combat itself you consider.
But actually the winning conditions are very different for you and me in that scenario. I win, if I can shoot you down. You win in all other cases (when you survive). Ofc nobody expects you to kill a combat ship using your trader.
Last edited:
Out of morbid curiousity, what do you mean by "very un-optimaly"?
Quite frankly, I fly the same kind of ship in Open that I would in solo: one built to survive long enough to accomplish my goals. I took this ship, with legacy G3 engineering except for the FSD, into a CG fairly recently, and it survived a broadside by a ganker lurking at the destination station. Granted, if I flew this ship frequently, I would've upgraded that 5A shield generator, but this was a test run to sate my curiosity, so I flew what I had.
The game presents a level playing field. It does not mandate equal levels of viability for every goal, nor equal degrees of success for every approach to any given goal.
A willful choice to ignore potential threats in favor of using loadouts that are only viable in the absence of these threats, while neglecting the skills to compensate, is exactly that. The game not being perfectly suited to those who want to be perfectly safe, irrespective of effort at all times doesn't mean there is not an equality of opportunity. Some players simply neglect the opportunities presented to them.
The PvE/PvP dichotomy is also neither here nor there. There are at least as many frustrations expressed over the NPC threats (these kinds of threads are not uncommon), without which the game would deviate even further from it's intended vision, as there are with the broadly higher difficulty, but much less common, PvP ones. And the same sentiments apply. There is a setting we all chose to interact with, but many people, despite the opportunities they are given, fail to take advantage of them, leading to outcomes they find undesireable.
There are always trade-offs and we're all given the same opportunities to learn what trade-offs are worthwhile for our particular goals.
more shields, less cargo, more hrp/mrp, more skill boosters
My CG cutter is a 784t shieldless cutter - which has no problem to survive any npc attempt, but will crumble in less than 10s versus any half competent player.
Sure i could fly a 720t cuttter that could survive interdictions - but that would be un-optimal in terms of ferrying capacity not to mention that each interdiction and the potential high wake - are counterproductive to the goal of ferrying goods
If we would get a CG to kill other players, the premise would be absolutely different - but all we have are PVE missions and objectives, and PVP is a drag to any and each of those missions/objectives.
Anyway - with that ship is quite a miracle you survived, possibly because you were already at the destination station - if you were interdicted on the way i'm afraid you'd have wasted a run and a full cargo hold - which might not be a big issue in a normal CG, but IT REALLY IS a big issue in the current "rares" trade cg
My wife and I, are decided. We will raise our children and discipline them without ganking them.
Lay them low in the Emperor's new casket, my Imperial friend, and yet.. yet, give them a pair of Emperor's new clothes too as well, would you? As it can be very cold in space.
"Oh, CMDR Darren - your blocklist is so long!"
Lay them low in the Emperor's new casket, my Imperial friend, and yet.. yet, give them a pair of Emperor's new clothes too as well, would you? As it can be very cold in space.
"Oh, CMDR Darren - your blocklist is so long!"
^^^
This.
When I Kickstarted ED, my plan was the same as every other game I've ever played with a mixed PvP/PvE environment: try playing in Open until it became intolerable, and then switch to solo to have fun. I've played similar MMOs in the past, including Ultima Online, so I'm very familiar with the problematic type of player this kind of environment tends to attract.
Much to my surprise, Open never became intolerable, and is, in fact, quite fun. While I suspect it was entirely by accident, the self-selecting nature of Open helps keep the actual jerks to a minimum, because the type of player they preferentially target won't play in Open in the first place. The fact that this game is much more heavily skill-based than other games I've played in the past helps, combined with the relatively low time requirements for engineering to survive an attack, also helps.
Which Cutter is more optimal to ferry goods? The 784t one which will get shot down by every low tier noob career ganker and their dog in under 10s, or the 720t one which few gankers will even bother to interdict after a brief look at the modules panel?
The 1st one is only viable in Solo. If those extra 64 tons are that important for you, then go fly it in Solo, although tbh it would be much more interesting if these hauling CGs were Open-only events so that you won't have to worry about the competition working in Solo
Not even the 720t is the good one since if you interdict me and you keep doing so and all i can do is a high wake, which means i already wasted a lot of time playing your game instead of playing The Game and fulfill it's objectives.
You get all the kicks, i get nothing
again, if ED would ever have any pvp objective, i will start treating it as a pvp game, until then, it's a pve game with a mild pvp annoyance (only mild because pvp can be easily removed out of the equation, being purely optional in ED)
Not even the 720t is the good one since if you interdict me and you keep doing so and all i can do is a high wake, which means i already wasted a lot of time playing your game instead of playing The Game and fulfill it's objectives.
You get all the kicks, i get nothing
again, if ED would ever have any pvp objective, i will start treating it as a pvp game, until then, it's a pve game with a mild pvp annoyance (only mild because pvp can be easily removed out of the equation, being purely optional in ED)
The 720t one that high wakes will be left alone eventually since the interdicting player will realize that you know what you are doing and only a fool would keep repeating the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome.
This is an argument for smarter NPCs not evidence that players aren't playing on a level playing field with each other.
That's not exactly true. Bonds and CZ vouchers count no matter who they came from. In the past certain massacre missions even considered CMDR's targets. Regardless, not everyone goes out of their way to avoid encountering CMDRs while in pursuit of ostensibly PvE objectives.
I was "PvE" bounty hunting in these encounters (two of which were at CGs I still placed pretty highly in), for example...
...but there is a reason I didn't upload the PvE segments. The PvP part was more fun (not to mention educational...I made quite a few mistakes in that first video) and the ultimate objective of playing a game is always the fun; it's just that some entertainment cannot be scripted.
I spend most of my time in game having my CMDR do these ostensibly PvE things, often going weeks without encountering other CMDRs...but I'm always ready and I don't lose anything at all by being ready. Quite the opposite really.
That's a pretty narrow, tunnel-visioned even, view of "the game". Reminds me of this neighbor I had when I was a kid who would get LEGOs for his birthday, build the thing, exactly as the instructions stated, then leave it on a shelf to collect dust. I'd get the same kit, build it once as instructed, throw it down the stairs to see how it exploded, then build something better. I'm pretty sure I had more fun, but to each their own.
I get all the kicks, no matter which side I'm on, and no matter who is also having fun. Kicks are not a zero sum game.
(you can tell this ship is a smuggler build cause the shock cannon)
I don't need the game to go out of it's way to incentivise activities for them to be part of my game. Indeed, the game has messed up the incentives so throughly that there aren't any incentives, aside from whatever gameplay is implicit in an activity, any longer. A trillion credits and all the materials my CMDR can carry? That may as well be nothing at all due to years of negligible scarcity. A few Odyssey components may still be reasonable scarce, but they also lack the kind of utility that would serve to really drive demand.
Everything is optional in ED and there is no reason for any of those CG goals to matter more than any arbitrary CMDR goal. Half the player base seems to do nothing other than wander around taking screenshots of sunsets, but at least they do that without needing a mission board to tell them they can.
Last edited:
- Status