Player pirates - aren't they supposed to demand loot?

[Daemonhahn]

A pirate demanded my cargo, i jumped off into supercruise, he did too, and the last thing i heard was him screaming about stutter before he vanished.

Only time stuttercruise didnt make me die/end up in the side of a station.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

You again. And yet again your own words provide the means to contradict yourself.

<Snip>

looking forward to your next reply and my utter dismantling of your own logic.

Certainly there are degrees of suffering, but to say it is even a blip on the suffering radar is laughable. It's a mild annoyance at worst.

If you're going to use strong language expect to get called out on it. At worst it's some idiot being annoying, not a sociopath inflicting suffering on others. Calling it sociopathy, and suffering, just demeans both words.

 

[jacozilla]

Certainly there are degrees of suffering, but to say it is even a blip on the suffering radar is laughable. It's a mild annoyance at worst.

If you're going to use strong language expect to get called out on it. At worst it's some idiot being annoying, not a sociopath inflicting suffering on others. Calling it sociopathy, and suffering, just demeans both words.

Only an idiot believes they can decide for others what on the the scale of minor suffering counts as a blip vs annoyance vs damn this sucks but still not a major disaster.

We're agreeing that clearly there is a normal, emotionally mature response difference to minor suffering and major disaster affecting your family - so far so good. Where you become the idiot you proclaim others are who feel differently than you on minor issues though is deciding what gets to count as minor suffering, and to what degree in that minor scale, AND declaring a sociopath can't be a sociopath unless they are a successful one.

The degree to which something actually impacts something / someone does not remove the quotient of possible sociopathy - take a psych 101 class, it is the degree to which the perpetrator feels joy or no sense of emotion over inflicting distress, not whether he got away with it doing relatively little actual harm to the victim.

If some sociopathic juvenile lights one hair on fire on every cat in his home, every day. That cat could arguably be said was not harmed in any way other than that one single hair being singed. So by your definition- because the actual suffering or harm here was just a "blip" - it removes any connotation of being able to call this sociopathic behavior.

Yes survey any pool of people you like, and I will just use the safe word of "most" - but most people are going to call that one very disturbed kid and at the very least an entry level sociopath just waiting for bigger opportunities, regardless of the actual damages that may or may not have been done. You tying successfully being able to actually inflict major harm as the only meter stick to qualify for sociopathic behavior is exactly why so many closest sociopaths exist in online games and justify their behavior with the no-harm-no-foul trite response.

 

[jacozilla]

So many words.. got bored..

When there are two ways to read something, you my friend read it the wrong way.. Now i'm sure there will be an epic post about how this statement is something blah blah blah but anyway

Example pirating

A) WHEN YOU ARE INTERDICTED BY A NPC, THEY USE A FRAME SHIFT INTERDICTOR, THEN SCAN YOU AND DEMAND YOUR CARGO. THEN THEY SHOOT AT YOU IF YOU DO NOT COMPLY.

Still with me... here it comes

B) When you are interdicted by a player, they use a frame shift interdictor, then scan you and demand your cargo. Then they shoot at you if you do not comply.

In the example A, you will win the fight feel all happy about it being so easy and move on. YAY.

In the example B, you will probably lose and you will cry about it and say its unfair and that you were griefed and that crime isn't being handled correctly and shield cells and hacks and real world feelys. BOO!

Long as you are still with me..

THE SAME THING HAPPENED

The difference is the one with the players was a lot harder and maybe you lost.

So now if you go back and read what i said.. Maybe you might understand what I was saying.

If you don't well that's fine too.

I will use twitter generation responses then so that your limited attention span may understand this time -

1. Only in TL'DR, juvenile attention deficit disorder era would a short 9 paragraph statement fitting on small hotel stationary be called "epic"

2. Only an utter hypocrite would declare "so many words..got bored" and then write their own 13 paragraph - roughly equal word count response. LOL?

3. Hooked on phonics is on sale - if you use words like 'there is no difference' and then immediately use differences you self admit exist to support your there-is-no-differece argument, that is not two ways to read something - that is illiteracy.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

The degree to which something actually impacts something / someone does not remove the quotient of possible sociopathy - take a psych 101 class, it is the degree to which the perpetrator feels joy or no sense of emotion over inflicting distress, not whether he got away with it doing relatively little actual harm to the victim.

The degree with which it effects others absolutely does matter since that's what sane people use to tell if they should feel empathy for the other person. If i break a friends pencil, well i probably shouldn't feel bad about it, it's no big deal. Even if he was freaking out about it, I'd just tell him to man up, it's only a pencil. However, if i broke his arm, well yea i'd should probably feel bad about that one.

 

[jacozilla]

The degree with which it effects others absolutely does matter since that's what sane people use to tell if they should feel empathy for the other person. If i break a friends pencil, well i probably won't feel bad about it. Even if he was freaking out about it, I'd just tell him to man up, it's only a pencil. However, if i broke his arm, well yea i'd probably feel bad about that.

Ok so I will re-ask my example then - Yes or No - is this sociopathic behavior or not?

If some sociopathic juvenile lights one hair on fire on his cat in his home, every day. That cat could arguably be said was not harmed in any way other than that one single hair being singed.

So by your definition- because the degree which this harmed or affected the cat was effectively nil - we should feel no anti-empathy and call this sociopathic behavior regardless the degree which it affected the cat?

A non yes-no question as well - who gets to decide your friend's pencil meant so little? By that analogy, stealing 1 penny from him is also nothing to feel bad about - it's just one penny. Is theft not theft because the degree it affects someone is nil or very small?

I haven't called YOU a sociopath yet, but it's disturbing how closely you are aligning with disregard for actions unless they somehow rank to whatever in your mind = large or devastating impact.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Ok so I will re-ask my example then - Yes or No - is this sociopathic behavior or not?

If some sociopathic juvenile lights one hair on fire on his cat in his home, every day. That cat could arguably be said was not harmed in any way other than that one single hair being singed.

So by your definition- because the degree which this harmed or affected the cat was effectively nil - we should feel no anti-empathy and call this sociopathic behavior regardless the degree which it affected the cat?

If you knew anything about psychology you would know that how abnormal the behavior is also plays a part in the diagnosis.

Set a cat's hair on fire is pretty strange even if the cat is unharmed. It would probably raise a few eyebrows.

You know what isn't strange? Killing someone in a video game. It happens all the time in fact. In this very game if you believe the forums.

A non yes-no question as well - who gets to decide your friend's pencil meant so little? By that analogy, stealing 1 penny from him is also nothing to feel bad about - it's just one penny. Is theft not theft because the degree it affects someone is nil or very small?

Who gets to decide about my friend's pencil? The trained profession making a diagnosis of sociopathy that's who.

It's up to them to determine whether or not your behavior and lack of empathy is abnormal. I highly doubt any trained psychologist will say, "oh my god this man stole a penny off his friend and didn't feel bad about it. He may have antisocial personally disorder".

 

[Lanz]

Personally I just attack people on sight because it's more fun. I don't really care about the cargo, I just want to fight something less predictable than an AI. If they don't fight back, then it's nice to give my weapons a nice warm-up test and see how fast I can blow away someone who doesn't want to fight back.

Besides, it's very tedious to sell stolen cargo anyways. I do it for sport. It's like hunting, just with a bit more challenge.

 

[Darkphoenix]

I do feel badly for some of the pirates as I do believe that the goal for them is not ruining another gamers day........and then every so often someone posts something that is honestly better than any recruiting for solo or Mobius could ever be. I no longer wonder why so many pirates have peglegs.....it has to be from constantly shooting themselves in the foot trying to defend the more colorful and psychotic members of their fraternity when in all honesty they should despise them every bit as much as traders do for driving all the "customers" away.

 

[jacozilla]

If you knew anything about psychology you would know that how abnormal the behavior is also plays a part in the diagnosis.

Set a cat's hair on fire is pretty strange even if the cat is unharmed. It would probably raise a few eyebrows.

You know what isn't strange? Killing someone in a video game. It happens all the time in fact. In this very game if you believe the forums.
Who gets to decide about my friend's pencil? The trained profession making a diagnosis of sociopathy that's who.

It's up to them to determine whether or not your behavior and lack of empathy is abnormal. I highly doubt any trained psychologist will say, "oh my god this man stole a penny off his friend and didn't feel bad about it. He may have antisocial personally disorder".

Sure, abnormal behavior is part of any diagnosis. And feeling no remorse over actions that harm others - whether slight or major actions that have slight or major harm - is abnormal as currently defined by our society. Killing digital pixels has no harm to anything but the binary digits. Pretending using social interaction in the guise of ganking clearly new players on new player starter zones or unarmed combatants is not taking pleasure in other's distress is just where we part as clearly never agree - you think that's ok and normal.

You think stealing from your friend if it is small i normal. You think vandalism as long as it is only minor is ok, and/or if it is minor and only with your "friends". Sure glad am not your friend where the line apparently is minor vandalism is perfectly fine as long as it isn't something like breaking an arm.

As I said in my quite - abnormal behavior is included here - unless you don't believe it is abnormal to feel joy over inflicting distress - which apparently you've now replied enough in strong defense of gankers and tormentors that you are or agree to that same camp; that knowing they are not just exploding pixels but actually looking to ruin someone's day is "normal"

"The degree to which something actually impacts something / someone does not remove the quotient of possible sociopathy - take a psych 101 class, it is the degree to which the perpetrator feels joy or no sense of emotion over inflicting distress, not whether he got away with it doing relatively little actual harm to the victim."

And sure, killing digital avatars happens in this game and many others - the difference you persist in ignoring, persist in conveniently never answering but deflect to other responses - is that neither I or anyone else here has said all PVP = bad; all PVP players = bad.

You can play CoD, CS, or this game and have perfectly agreeable pvp where one side kills each other or just 100% wins all the time. Perfectly normal if both sides are WILLING COMBATANTS.

You keep ignoring the issue that was the original point of the thread - PVP on unwilling non-combatants, and with the can-not be separated issue that these gankers clearly realize, gloat in, and have openly admitted they don't care that the "whiner", "loser", "noob" loses days or weeks of progress in what he/she has clearly played as non-combat progression (e.g. trading).

You want to kill someone in a video game? Do it like normal society already agrees to physical altercations in real life is "normal" - when two grown adults want to pummel each other, while some municipalities may consider that illegal, most people aren't going to consider that immoral - two consenting adults wanting to pound each other is just fine.

What you're pretending to hide in 'its just a video game' language, is the unwilling pummeling of defenseless victims - the elderly guy on the street some hood thug knocks down for the sake of video recording it for world star uploads. that is the society we live in today where physical and digital representations of our actions are more and more being defended by closet supporters of sociopathic behavior such as yourself.

So final reply because at this point, I now DO consider you in the same camp as sociopaths - at minimum supporting their efforts if not joining in. Rationalize it all you want - when the victim is CLEARLY saying - please stop, this really bothers me, this makes me lose game progress, I don't want to be part of this unwilling content for you to get your rocks off on - whether you think that is whining or not - let's say for arguments sake it is.

But even if it is - what is the god damn matter? You have a human being saying - whether you agree with me or not - I am being hurt here. Please stop.

But rather than stop, you continue, or you support the thugs doing it - either way, you sir are the problem why there has always been, and always will be people that act with empathy, and those that rationalize that as long as it doesn't break the letter of the law somewhere, even if causes emotional distress or physical distress - it's no big deal "because it's just a game"

 

[SmileyMan]

What to do about psychos/pew pew/role playing archons who kill everyone?

Allow players to post bounties on other players, perhaps they post the insurance price of the ship the pirate is in. Or whatever multiple they like of that. So 10 x ship insurance price, means 10 x bounty-collection. The idea here is that the more you indiscriminately shoot others the more often you pick up a price, the more likely and often someone comes to dish out some frontier justice.

These bounties do not expire unless the poster decides to let it go. That build up attracts bounty hunters. As your player posted bounty increases so does the availability of buyable intelligence of your whereabouts.

Been suggested soooooo many times. In fact, you'd think the 'insurance' companies would have this built into the premium you pay - they must lose money hand over fist in the pew pew universe. Every time someone dies and doesn't take the free sidey, then a chunk of bounty gets put on the killer.

- - - Updated - - -

Personally I just attack people on sight because it's more fun. I don't really care about the cargo, I just want to fight something less predictable than an AI. If they don't fight back, then it's nice to give my weapons a nice warm-up test and see how fast I can blow away someone who doesn't want to fight back.

Besides, it's very tedious to sell stolen cargo anyways. I do it for sport. It's like hunting, just with a bit more challenge.

So you kill for the challenge, even when no challenge is actually there? I think you're deluding yourself...

 

[Lanz]

Been suggested soooooo many times. In fact, you'd think the 'insurance' companies would have this built into the premium you pay - they must lose money hand over fist in the pew pew universe. Every time someone dies and doesn't take the free sidey, then a chunk of bounty gets put on the killer.

- - - Updated - - -



So you kill for the challenge, even when no challenge is actually there? I think you're deluding yourself...

No, I kill for fun, and it's more fun with a challenge. If the target isn't challenging me, I challenge myself, like can I keep him in my crosshairs and under fire non-stop until he's dead, or can I kill him with only a specific weapon, or something. Usually the damage race before they can jump out is fun too. It's nice killing someone a split second before they would have escaped. Makes things interesting.

 

[Mouse]

I love Mobius and all who sail in her.
I have never shied away from my time there. ( Which i left of my own accord... Them the facts )

The reason you are all still so QQ over it is because it was the single most exciting thing that has ever happened in your PVE group, Good or Bad. You are welcome.

But lets get back to the matter of my post.

My post was about how there is no different between being attacked by NPC's or Human players, except for you can loose to a human player and it hurts your feelys.

Thank you for backing that up.

Human players are better than NPC's, which means you can and will lose. That is why you hate it so much, because you can lose.

Please read what I put.

I am an equal opportunity ganker. I interdict without mercy and my scent.... Solar Flare.

Long after this game is dead and buried, my name will be remembered.

Infamy for the win!

Majinvash
*edited my sig to make sure everyone knows about mobius, you know to save future confusion*

Question.. do you have trouble swimming? Cause that is one self important inflated ego you have there.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

And sure, killing digital avatars happens in this game and many others - the difference you persist in ignoring, persist in conveniently never answering but deflect to other responses - is that neither I or anyone else here has said all PVP = bad; all PVP players = bad.

You can play CoD, CS, or this game and have perfectly agreeable pvp where one side kills each other or just 100% wins all the time. Perfectly normal if both sides are WILLING COMBATANTS.

You keep ignoring the issue that was the original point of the thread - PVP on unwilling non-combatants, and with the can-not be separated issue that these gankers clearly realize, gloat in, and have openly admitted they don't care that the "whiner", "loser", "noob" loses days or weeks of progress in what he/she has clearly played as non-combat progression (e.g. trading).

Getting attacked is part of the game, there is no way to avoid it. Sure you can avoid the pvp aspect of the game but someone will be doing the attacking and killing. The role is picked up by the npcs.

You view the 2 as completely different, fine. Well I don't, to me getting attacked and killed by a player is exactly the same as an npc.

But even if it is - what is the god damn matter? You have a human being saying - whether you agree with me or not - I am being hurt here. Please stop.

But rather than stop, you continue, or you support the thugs doing it - either way, you sir are the problem why there has always been, and always will be people that act with empathy, and those that rationalize that as long as it doesn't break the letter of the law somewhere, even if causes emotional distress or physical distress - it's no big deal "because it's just a game"

I defend killing because it's part of the game. If the game were to remove the random killing with a pve mode, guess what profession is getting removed with it? Piracy.

So I like the random killing? No, it effects me too. I've been killed a few times randomly too. It even effects my profession too by drawing more people to Mobius or solo. I don't participate in it, and I don't like. I do support and defend it however.

 

[ankhorion]

That gives you the idea of what real life would be if there were not laws and police, you go out one day to go to work and a guy kills you just for fun.

It actually happens now in real life. Senseless violence, they beat up somebody because they are bored, and some die from that. or just to make a video on their cellphone. (senseless violence. well most violence is senseless)

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

No, I kill for fun, and it's more fun with a challenge. If the target isn't challenging me, I challenge myself, like can I keep him in my crosshairs and under fire non-stop until he's dead, or can I kill him with only a specific weapon, or something. Usually the damage race before they can jump out is fun too. It's nice killing someone a split second before they would have escaped. Makes things interesting.

You are the cancer which is killing Open.

 

[requ1em]

It may not be for pirate/loot purposes. It could be for powerplay merits. If you are aligned to a different power and you are in a system they may kill you to pick up the 15 merits.

 

[Mephane]

It may not be for pirate/loot purposes. It could be for powerplay merits. If you are aligned to a different power and you are in a system they may kill you to pick up the 15 merits.

The OP has stated he or she is not pledged to any power; plus, at one point an attacker even said "don't come here without being pledge", i.e. people who use PP as an excuse to attack anyone, even people who decide to stay out of it.

 

[Commander Debic]

If getting killed or having your fake money stolen, in a video game causes someone real suffering, I feel sorry for them when something actually devastating happens to them.

I feel sorry for them too.
But to answer those who say it is just a game it's not real, just video pixels. To some people what happens to their emotions in video games is very real, as is what happens to them on social internet sites like Face Book, My Space, Twitter etc. The argument of not real doesn't apply, and in fact now laws are being enacted to protect vulnerable members of those social sites, when a person comes under certain types of virtual attack, even though the communications that affect them, whether written word, images or video, are just video pixels on a screen.
It could be said those people being attacked should not be on social sites or in video games if they can't hack it. But it is no different from someone being bullied in the real word by verbal hate crimes. Perhaps the pensioner should not go and collect their pension, or the young black woman not go shopping for food for her family. Or many other examples. The same logic applies as the, its not real brigade tries to justify what they do. Sadly the only thing that is real, is that a number of people get vicarious pleasure from ruining other peoples day whether on line or offline.

 

[Mephane]

If getting killed or having your fake money stolen, in a video game causes someone real suffering, I feel sorry for them when something actually devastating happens to them.

This is not just regular victim-blaming, it also fails to realize the ultimate currency in almost every video game, including ED: time. If you kill someone for the lulz, and that death costs them a rebuy for which they have to grind 2 hours to recuperate the credits, then you just stole 2 absolutely real hours from them.

Besides, just when does suffering become real for you to consider it "legitimate", anyway? Only with physical violence, or what?