I wouldn't say I 'enjoy' it but it is a risk when playing open. Some people take great enjoyment from attacking other human players but that is life. This is why the game offers the Solo and Private Groups play modes so as to cater for all interests.
Poll : Does anyone enjoy being taken as another player's victim
- Thread starter Rampant
- Start date
I wouldn't say I 'enjoy' it but it is a risk when playing open. Some people take great enjoyment from attacking other human players but that is life. This is why the game offers the Solo and Private Groups play modes so as to cater for all interests.
Eat or be eaten ...
I have been playing since the 8th of December. My only ship is a DBS, which I've used exclusively since the 15th, during which period my bank balance has hovered constantly around 5 million (going as high as 8.5 once, and down to barely over 2 at one point).
That should make me part of your intended audience.
You skewed the poll. The only answer which is actually in favor of this behaviour is worded so as to put off people from choosing that answer.
I do enjoy being attacked by human players, no matter what ship they fly. I don't enjoy being blown up, but I do enjoy the fight, and an uneven fight is fun.
I'll quite happily have a go even against Anacondas or Corvettes, although I don't expect to win. If I do manage to win, the uneven odds make victory that much sweeter, and if I lose, who cares, it was fun, and I learnt from the experience.
It's the game. I don't see how you can have a space combat game and not allow this type of behaviour.
There are some notorious psycho killers out there (I'll not name and shame), and they make things more dangerous and exciting.
There are also some more entertaining pirates out there like Rappy the Rapscallion who flies a sidewinder and tells a sorry tale to beg 4t of cargo off you, and Cillit Bang who flies a Viper and preys on much bigger ships (I heard a rumour he keeps resetting his save so that his combat rank never goes above 'mostly harmless', but make no mistake - he's a very skilled pilot)
It's like being in the real world - there are lots of people out there. Some have more, some have less. Some are good, some are bad.
There are some notorious psycho killers out there (I'll not name and shame), and they make things more dangerous and exciting.
There are also some more entertaining pirates out there like Rappy the Rapscallion who flies a sidewinder and tells a sorry tale to beg 4t of cargo off you, and Cillit Bang who flies a Viper and preys on much bigger ships (I heard a rumour he keeps resetting his save so that his combat rank never goes above 'mostly harmless', but make no mistake - he's a very skilled pilot)
It's like being in the real world - there are lots of people out there. Some have more, some have less. Some are good, some are bad.
Viajero
Volunteer Moderator
*Mod hat off
I guess the question and poll answers themselves are a bit limiting?
I do not think anyone enjoy too much being blown up in general or in a vaccum. What I (and others, I suspect) really enjoy is the challenge itself of trying not to be blown up in the first place, while trying to make your opponent blow up. And then it is a matter of "some you win, some you lose".
I guess the question and poll answers themselves are a bit limiting?
I do not think anyone enjoy too much being blown up in general or in a vaccum. What I (and others, I suspect) really enjoy is the challenge itself of trying not to be blown up in the first place, while trying to make your opponent blow up. And then it is a matter of "some you win, some you lose".
Last edited:
Every on-line game has sadistic twits that need to kill/grief other players to feed their ego, that is a simple fact. It has usually nothing to do with "piracy" or any other excuse, it's just a way to inflict themselves on others, knowing that it causes pain. (pain being a very generic term to cover the emotional gamut)
With the above, I'd say fine, that's what open is for, but the game needs to have a methodology to address such behavior, and at the moment the "risk" is utterly trivial for such actions. The current in-system bounty is laughable.
DayZ had a "Bandit" marker that identified a player across the entire world as someone who killed "Neutrals" or "Heroes". Oddly enough, you could work your way out of being a "Bandit" by killing other bandits!
ED just needs to broaden the scope and methodology of how the wanted system works in respect to PvP "murders", by making a unique galaxy-wide 7-day PvP wanted tag/status (readily visible in all populated systems), with readily recognizable tagging (red box in scanner/different colour WANTED text?), to distinguish between a PvP bounty and an utterly irrelevant NPC bounty.
Anarchy systems would be exactly that, anarchy, and there would be no tagging for actions taken in those systems (but active bounties would still be shown, as a "heads-up" to those in-system).
Also, if two PvP "wanteds" engaged in combat, there would be no impact whatsoever in bounty value or duration, making it a great way for those that want PvP action to self-identify. (the downside being that you need to kill a neutral commander to initially get it!)
The above would generate an entirely new gameplay role of a real bounty hunter, not just going after someone who may have shot up some poor NPC somewhere, but a real bona-fide "murderer" that has taken out another player.
To balance it slightly, you could have it that although there would be no bounty for attacking a "murderer", if you die after initiating an attack, the "murderer" does not get the bounty time-out reset. (might work this way already, not sure...)
In summary, ED tries to make the crime/punishment methodologies work for both NPC and human players, which is completely ridiculous since the abilities and "motivations" are completely different. "Hostile" NPCs are an irritation and never a real threat, whereas a motivated hostile player can easily be impossible to escape from.
With the above, I'd say fine, that's what open is for, but the game needs to have a methodology to address such behavior, and at the moment the "risk" is utterly trivial for such actions. The current in-system bounty is laughable.
DayZ had a "Bandit" marker that identified a player across the entire world as someone who killed "Neutrals" or "Heroes". Oddly enough, you could work your way out of being a "Bandit" by killing other bandits!
ED just needs to broaden the scope and methodology of how the wanted system works in respect to PvP "murders", by making a unique galaxy-wide 7-day PvP wanted tag/status (readily visible in all populated systems), with readily recognizable tagging (red box in scanner/different colour WANTED text?), to distinguish between a PvP bounty and an utterly irrelevant NPC bounty.
Anarchy systems would be exactly that, anarchy, and there would be no tagging for actions taken in those systems (but active bounties would still be shown, as a "heads-up" to those in-system).
Also, if two PvP "wanteds" engaged in combat, there would be no impact whatsoever in bounty value or duration, making it a great way for those that want PvP action to self-identify. (the downside being that you need to kill a neutral commander to initially get it!)
The above would generate an entirely new gameplay role of a real bounty hunter, not just going after someone who may have shot up some poor NPC somewhere, but a real bona-fide "murderer" that has taken out another player.
To balance it slightly, you could have it that although there would be no bounty for attacking a "murderer", if you die after initiating an attack, the "murderer" does not get the bounty time-out reset. (might work this way already, not sure...)
In summary, ED tries to make the crime/punishment methodologies work for both NPC and human players, which is completely ridiculous since the abilities and "motivations" are completely different. "Hostile" NPCs are an irritation and never a real threat, whereas a motivated hostile player can easily be impossible to escape from.
Last edited:
Maybe not always to cause pain. I'm not a psychologist but deep inside the minds of those causing griefs, maybe there is a need to be recognized, have some kind of feedback that they are alive? They may have a very lonely life, or a boring one. Knowing that they are causing pain might just be so that they feel "alive". Like I said, I'm no psychologist but I'm sure someone in their doctorate could write a paper on this...
So much this. The other day I got a murder bounty because an npc bounty hunter didn't know where the brakes were in his eagle so he went full speed head first into my Python.
Python went: "was there something?"
His buddies went: "You are wanted, prepare to DIE!"
I went: "
you too ED..."I wasn't even ramming him, he just flew right into my face, and I got the punishment. ED's bounty system in a nutshell.
Or perhaps some of them just want to fight a real person instead of an npc, and probably assume that anyone who is not agreeable for that sort of thing would be playing in solo or mobius instead of open.
I'm not saying they would be right to think that, but I can imagine people thinking that way.
Personally I tend to let PvP come to me, because if I let myself get interdicted, I know I'm not interdicting someone who doesn't want to PvP. The only time I interdict a CMDR is if I have been interdicted by them before, in which case they are probably a willing PvPer. Also, I fly a DBS, so it's never going to be a massively unfair fight in my favor.
The entire premise of this post is just wrong.
You are only a VICTIM if you allow yourself to be.
Second, what in the world is going on where some moan about players interdicting them and not NPCs doing it (oh, wait.. actually people do moan about that).
And third, I keep hearing this, he opened fire without saying anything. This is by far the most asinine point of them all. There is no time to type out a role-playing essay to any ship one encounters since people submit and bolt to escape.
And.. FOURTH.. Is it not enough there is a dedicated PvE group you can play in that I never stop hearing about?
Okay, rant over.
You are only a VICTIM if you allow yourself to be.
Second, what in the world is going on where some moan about players interdicting them and not NPCs doing it (oh, wait.. actually people do moan about that).
And third, I keep hearing this, he opened fire without saying anything. This is by far the most asinine point of them all. There is no time to type out a role-playing essay to any ship one encounters since people submit and bolt to escape.
And.. FOURTH.. Is it not enough there is a dedicated PvE group you can play in that I never stop hearing about?
Okay, rant over.
Please read my post #219 which explains the terms I used.
I'm yet to see anything constructive about how other people would re-word the poll to capture a cross-section of player opinion on this.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
I salute you. I really do. I expect your DBS is fitted out as a general purpose ship as well, rather than a combat optimised build just to take out less powerfully equipped players. Have some rep. This is the kind of behaviour I and many others would prefer to see in Open E: D.
Cheerz
Mark H
I enjoy it to some degree, but only because my Asp Explorer is armed better than 95% of those who interdict me and I get to blow them out of the skies.
I wouldn't say general purpose, exactly, as I nearly always fly pure combat builds (unless I'm doing a mission or community goal which needs some cargo racks). However, they are usually fun experimental builds rather than optimised, they are intended for PvE as much as PvP, and if anything they tend to be optimised more vs bigger ships, and struggle a little with small nimble ships. Which is what I think you probably meant anyway (ie not optimised for smashing players in smaller and/or weaker ships).
The reason a lot of people are unhappy with your poll is that it doesn't account for people who enjoy PvP, even if it's against more powerful opposition.
You have 3 answers which are varying degrees of "I don't like being attacked by CMDRs" and one which basically says "I like getting blown up". No-one enjoys getting blown up (well, there are always a few "interesting" people in any community). So if people answer completely honestly, the only options are variations of "I don't like being attacked by CMDRs" or not answering.
That is confirmational bias, whether you intended it or not, because there is no answer people can honestly give if they actually enjoy being interdicted by the people you are talking about.
In other words there is no honest answer in the poll for people who don't agree with you.
Last edited:
Stopped reading right there since this is the most asinine statement anyone can make about any crime/assault in general.
will be , ya we get it, and there will be those that will kill Commanders simply for the sake of destroying them, what is needed is a toolset to level the playing field to combat this kind of behavior (if you want to), not some ridiculous system that makes it as noticeable as an insect bite on an elephant.- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
So Open is essentially now a "Troll Me" button? If you think that Open is limited to those that are bristling for a fight (no matter how one-sided it might be) then you've got a really limited view of the game.
Open should be an elevation of risk/reward, but for now the risk component is the complete bias, and there is zero reward from a gameplay perspective. The social aspect is compelling, but without the tools to counter the risk, it is a pointless exercise for most players.
Last edited:
It's called Elite: DANGEROUS not Elite: Walk in the park with flowers and sunshine.
Space is harsh, you got away, lived to tell the tale. The few times it's happened to me it has been an exiting experience that I have enjoyed.
I honestly can't understand why it's something to complain about in an online game.
Space is harsh, you got away, lived to tell the tale. The few times it's happened to me it has been an exiting experience that I have enjoyed.
I honestly can't understand why it's something to complain about in an online game.
lol
I love how people continue to insist that just because they clicked "open" it doesn't mean you're allowed to target them. Just wow..
The #1 rule of Elite: Dangerous is that there are no rules. No amount of blubbering on the forums is going to change this. Frontier has given us the tools to avoid pvp if we want and that's all that they needed to do.
I love how people continue to insist that just because they clicked "open" it doesn't mean you're allowed to target them. Just wow..
The #1 rule of Elite: Dangerous is that there are no rules. No amount of blubbering on the forums is going to change this. Frontier has given us the tools to avoid pvp if we want and that's all that they needed to do.
Last edited:
I never lose!! Evaah!!
I enjoy the battles and if I have to lose a few ships now and then I'm fine with that. One of the reasons I'm not a bad combat pilot is because I used to PvP a lot during development. We don't actually pilot our most expensive ship all the time either.
Since your mod hat is off, let me ask an open question. Exactly how many moderators on the forums are into PvP or emergent gameplay? The answer should speak for itself. :/
You clearly didn't read my whole post did you?
The very next sentence said:
That said, you don't have to play in open. You can get the complete open experience, minus the uninvited PvP, by playing in Mobius. If you CHOOSE to play in open instead, then you have to accept that uninvited PvP may hapen, because it is a fully intended aspect of the game, and every bit as legitimate as trading, exploring etc.
You have the ability to avoid it, and lose nothing by doing so. If you choose not to avoid it, and then go throwing around terms like "Troll" for that kind of play, I have absolutely no sympathy for you.
You don't have to be "bristling for a fight" to go into open, but you do have to at least accept the possibility.