CODE blockade and roleplay

[Mercy Killing]

escaping encounters like blockades, piracy, maniacs, in open by going to another game mode is an option that FD poorly chose to allow to exist. So long as it exists, you wont ever have a really effective player driven event in the game that consists of opposing players.

It's not that open play NEEDS players to be kept in open even if they dont want to deal with scary human players. It's that open play NEEDS the players in the other modes to not have any impact on what goes on in open play. Only then can you have an effective player driven / determined event.

Sorry, but every event so far HAS been player driven and determined. Unless it's being played by programs, that is. Mode does not determine player participation. PLAYERS determine participation. Personally? You'll NEVER have to worry about seeing me in open. Why? The attitude displayed by posts much like this one, which boils down to "play our way or go play another game". I spent just as much to purchase the game as anyone else, therefore I have as much "right" as anyone else to play the game. Oh, and to play it how it was advertised. I suggest that punishing the reaction to blockades, piracy, maniacs, etc. (hopping to solo) is lunacy.

Punish/eradicate the cause, not the reaction. Then you'll stop getting the reaction.

 

[Bertak]

What David Braben had to say about Guilds/Clans in Elite: Dangerous, during that EGX 2014 Q&A....

From that it seems like Braben didn't want clans etc. Braben has also said that the game has a place for the lone cmdr. So why would they give us wings when only an idiot wouldn't foresee it would bring clans and force the lone cmdr to solo?

 

[GluttonyFang]

I don't really get why naming yourself after the guys from eve when you don't want people to think you are the guys from eve. That will never quite work out ^^

Face-plants into monitor*

Bloody hell read my replies, we discovered that there's a CODE in EvE after we established ourselves in ED...

I wonder why I do not have a heart attack yet.

- - - Updated - - -

CODE's Achilles' heel.

If anything it's a personal Achilles' heel, but nevertheless, =-= gonna die at this rate if they keep asking about it.

 

[GluttonyFang]

It is tempting to macro up a canned response guaranteed to bring the red mist and cloud your attacker's judgement whilst you make good your escape;

"Yarrrr. Go back to EvE you slovenly dogs!"

I think if anything it guarantees my weapons to malfunction and somehow accurately lined up to certain power plants, but of course I am a being of composure and sophistication, mostly.

 

[Greyhawk]

Could understand it if they had an agenda they disagreed with but they seem to just leap on any CG. The Diso CG was purely mercantile - there were no politics or powerplay involved yet once again they are there like flies around the proverbial. You know you don't have to blockade or disrupt EVERY SINGLE FLIPPING CG for crissakes.

That's why I think the "roleplay" is pure sham. Its just an excuse to feel some justification for being jerks and just wanting to disrupt any and all CG's they can. Kudos to all who did the CG in open but its not for me - at least not yet.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

From that it seems like Braben didn't want clans etc. Braben has also said that the game has a place for the lone cmdr. So why would they give us wings when only an idiot wouldn't foresee it would bring clans and force the lone cmdr to solo?

Well, the unwanted clans thing appeared well before Wings came into being.

And I suspect Wings was meant to be for cooperative play amongst players for reasons other than to cater for unwanted clans/guilds/gankers.

 

[Bertak]

I don't have anymore troll food, sorry.

Someone has a problem with reading comprehension

 

[Iain M Norman]

Stop the bickering.

Rise above it people.

 

[deathmagnet]

- Guys opposed to slavery and freeing these poor souls by destroying the ship (not sure this makes them any good).

I love this!

"I am going to free you from your wretched bonds"

I imagine the slaves are like, "Yes! Our savior.....wait...YOUR GOING TO BLOW UP THE SHIP!!! NO! We LOVE being slaves! PLEASE DON"T BLOW UP THE SHIP! Really we don't mind!"

 

[Iain M Norman]

No more name calling. Bored of the troll word being thrown around by multiple parties.

I don't want to have to clean up again.

Keep Forum Tidy! As the old crisp packet thing used to say.

 

[Rafe Zetter]

You've already answered your question. It is in that instance a RP blockade of one particular group. If someone chose to kill you rather than talk that was their choice to freely make. If you died you weren't prepared, if you survived you were.

I don't play this game with all my decisions revolving around "hmm I wonder if this decision will keep more people in Open play?!" Solo and group are legit modes just like open mode. It is a bit arrogant to make suggestions on how someone else play (in the form of questions) in open mode...open is to play however you wish with other people, solo is to decide how everyone who plays the game plays exactly how you want them to.

But the truth is if this were a real universe - they wouldn't do it, no person in their right mind would act this way - it's the E: D version of going into a theatre and gunning people down because they can. So they aren't even technically playing within the "rules" of the gameplay universe - I know it has no "rules" but every human being has some form of internal mechanism that governs behavior - and I'm not even talking about being nice to people. Even the richest of idiots with ships to burn would not in RL fly around gunning everyone down - too many chances of their own death or being locked up for life. The psycho serial killer would also be less indiscriminate - having some form of "preferential qualifier" for their targets.

(I've just had an idea but I'll post it elsewhere.)

They do this because they can, and because FDev's measures are (currently - lets be optimistic here) impotent to stop them.

 

[pluton]

That's why I think the "roleplay" is pure sham. Its just an excuse to feel some justification for being jerks and just wanting to disrupt any and all CG's they can. Kudos to all who did the CG in open but its not for me - at least not yet.

What's the point of a community goal if there's no challenge and no attempt at disruption? Just shuttling back and fro between two adjacent systems carrying cargo all day without thinking is pretty boring.

The CODE "blockade" was pretty tenuous, but at least you could IMAGINE that it was there. I did over 30 trips and saw CODE ships on perhaps 4. I dropped out of supercruise a few times to avoid ships that might have been targeting me. I got interdicted once by a wing and had to drop my cargo of Water Purifiers (no great loss). I expected running a blockade to be more eventful.

The other things that made it interesting were docking amongst the busy traffic of large ships, and exchanging news and stories about the pirate hazards.

I'd say that the blockaders performed a useful role, and not so effective as to be a major annoyance. Apparantly there were a few who just summarily destroyed traders. These were the jerks.

 

[Rafe Zetter]

Could understand it if they had an agenda they disagreed with but they seem to just leap on any CG. The Diso CG was purely mercantile - there were no politics or powerplay involved yet once again they are there like flies around the proverbial. You know you don't have to blockade or disrupt EVERY SINGLE FLIPPING CG for crissakes.

That's why I think the "roleplay" is pure sham. Its just an excuse to feel some justification for being jerks and just wanting to disrupt any and all CG's they can. Kudos to all who did the CG in open but its not for me - at least not yet.

It's been openly said before that there are players who's sole reason for being here is to create issues with E: D in the hopes it'll fail, and I'd imagine that CG's have much heavier than normal system traffic so they are the obvious gathering points for these parasites. Many (most) seem to be the same idiots that like to do the same in Eve Online, namely the goon squad and similarly unhinged cohorts.

It's not that common knowledge but the "leader" of the Goons called "The Mittani" openly told his followers to grief another Eve player until he committed suicide. He did this ON STAGE at an Eve Convention. (and to CCP's eternal shame they did not slap a lifetime ban on him for doing it)

Add them plus the weak minded, easily influenced players who are "doing it because someone else is doing it" together and the net result is what you are encountering. There is no talking to them, there is no negotiating with them, they are what could be considered the internet gamers version of the extremist fascists, who think this type of behavior will push all the QQ carebears off the internet and out of their backyard.

And I'm not even half joking, they really are like that, and they ARE in E: D - in my 4 years of Eve Online (and some other online games) it's been my unfortunate experience to see this first hand, over and over and over. They revel in it, it's their entire reason for being in E: D.

 

[Greyhawk]

If you are going to be a pirate just say you're a pirate and stop trying to paper some nonsense "roleplay" on the thing. Your scum, just say your scum and get on with it.

 

[Herik]

I salute CODE for taking the role of bad guys in this game within the rules.

Well played you pillocks!

Yeah ; well I guess you think they are following their own rules. Not what I've seen.

 

[Archvillain]

While I think players should interfere with the CG and the game can be better for this, the way it happened at Diso was awkward and makes no RP sense and hurts pirates (by training traders that there is no point dropping loot for pirates - interdictions are just run or die. Also giving us the impression that Code members doen't know what they're doing or why, losing respect, etc.)

The blockade was not roleplaying - no-one managed any rationale or motive that explains pirates wanting to shoot their own feet over corn - it looks to me more like the blockade was an abandoning of stated (RP) goals in favor of having a good time doing a Fun Thing together. That's a totally legit way to play the game (doing Fun Things together), but it was confusing for others and I think aim could be higher in future - if you don't want to RP, don't say it's RP, and if you want to RP, then at least understand why you're doing what you're doing, ideally at least enough that people being interdicted can understand too.

Blockade: Great idea! Worth fleshing out!
Blockade policy that teaches traders there is no point responding to pirates: Own-goal. Not such a good fit for a pirate organization. (Unless it's not a pirate organization?)
Blockade that does that, and is also confused and not sure why it's necessary: Well... let's just assume that maybe it's baby steps. Code is pretty young after all.

Herding players is like herding cats, so it's not realistic to expect all Code members to be a good face for the organisation, but even the spokespeople in the forums couldn't articulate a vaguely non-contradictory reason for blockading or a method that wouldn't shoot pirates in the foot. Maybe in those situations, consider roleplaying to figure out whether and how a CG should be supported or opposed or ignored?

I think a better blockade policy is needed. Something that offers that game-theory "third way" like the pirate interdiction does (eg. give me a cut of your business as a cost of doing business, because I have the guns.) The Diso policy offered nothing like that. If, for example, the blockade policy was "turn around or be destroyed... unless you have some platinum to bribe passage" I'd totally start carrying platinum, and the pirates of Code would turn a healthy profit out of their little adventure

 

[Fire70]

You could just avoid the places they hang out.

Stop making sense..

I say the same reason that you posted this post.

We are delivery a message/pursuing our interest by doing the blockade. Whether how successful it is, well that depends on our satisfaction in RP. I personally had a lot of fun in the blockade, trader after trader and I didn't even have time to restock rail guns/heat sinks in my FDL.

So for us it was a success in the sense that we committed to something as a group and stood for some principles.

I can't speak for the other categories.

This is the reason why you see groups like this because the game can get a bit monotonous, this is why I like the CG's gives you a sense of purpose, again it gave Code a reason to log on..

Could understand it if they had an agenda they disagreed with but they seem to just leap on any CG. The Diso CG was purely mercantile - there were no politics or powerplay involved yet once again they are there like flies around the proverbial. You know you don't have to blockade or disrupt EVERY SINGLE FLIPPING CG for crissakes.

That's why I think the "roleplay" is pure sham. Its just an excuse to feel some justification for being jerks and just wanting to disrupt any and all CG's they can. Kudos to all who did the CG in open but its not for me - at least not yet.

Why shouldn't they get involved they are pirates Diso was going to be packed with traders, seems pretty obvious to where they were going to go. I think it was a bonus that they tried to use a back story, ok you can pick holes in it (as you have done) but it is a back story.. They could have said nothing and just headed over there.

Given about 5k players participated in the Diso GC I am pretty sure the amount of players who actually ran into pirates was minimal. Unless Code (not CODE did I do that right??) has 5k members as well..

I was interdicted by a wing who shot first asking now questions. I didn't think to see what they were as I high tailed it out of there but they didn't mass lock me.. I also was rammed by the "famous" landing pad rammers a few times..

Yes they were annoying but I just kept my eye out. These experiences were only about less than 1% of my time..

Other than that the CG was a lot of fun and it got me trading which I don't normally do, I stayed in open because there was that extra element of risk, plus the interactive aspect of it..

 

[Nonya]

I don't think folks quite understand what's going on in the game:

The gankers gank so those folks will come into the forums and complain about it to the goody-two-shoes who will go out to try to destroy the gankers so they can come back into the forums and brag about their kills creating more gankers who then kill them on sight so those folks come into the forums and complain about it....

 

[Archvillain]

Why shouldn't they get involved they are pirates Diso was going to be packed with traders,

No, they were not pirates. Pirates make money by obtaining stuff at gunpoint. Psychos have fun simply by killing people and don't acquire their stuff.
What happened at Diso resembled the later and was absolutely not the former. Hence people don't know if Code is really pirates, or if they're just sucky pirates, or if they're psychos claiming to be pirates, or if they're pirates that had a dumb idea, or players who had a good idea but botched it, or what.

When a trader encounters a pirate, they are best served by parley. When a trader encounters a psycho, they are best served by running or fighting.
All we know from Diso is that there are people who think they are pirates but who act like psychos, so we are better served by running or fighting.
BUT... when traders only run or fight (instead of dropping loot) the ultimate loser is the pirates. (The real pirates that is - not psychos who just think they are pirates.)

I may be confused, but I was vaguely under the impression that Code was set up to do the exact opposite of this - to spread a code of piracy, so traders would gain more faith in parley and pirates could grow richer as a result. So to my (confused) understanding, Code just became the very thing it was created to stop.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Personally, I'd be disappointed to find a player group telling individual player traders they are on a kill-on-sight list of theirs, and they should permanently go away. There's nothing I can really see that's "big picture" positive in that... for either party.

Everything else sounds like perfectly normal gameplay.