Open letter to Frontier
- Thread starter Cowboy Bats
- Start date
- Status
It can affect me at any time and I play in Open these days where I don't even have the extra help to stop it becoming constant.
Logging is officially cheating so if FD own you at some point for it then don't say you weren't warned.
I've "died" plenty of times but I never whine about it, I use the experience to learn so why can't you?
Oh wait...
Last edited:
It is also not up to a business to decide what is morally right or wrong.
All FD have to do is enforce the rules equally to all players.
Once they step outside of that, once they start to say who is playing the game "morally" and who isn't, what is "right" in game and what is "wrong", it opens up a whole bunch of problems.
And to be quite frank, I'd rather my service providers remain neutral in all things and not start to pick and choose moral of the month.
Last edited:
FD have their rule set for Solo and Open.
They have allowed Mobius to conduct their own business for those who wish to socially PvE. They still have to play by FD's rules but a little ground is given to accommodate social gaming aspects.
FD is the daddy in this scenario though and could pull the plug at any time but while Mobius continues to remain viable and it doesn't become to much of a cross to bear then they'll probably let it continue.
And even if outside influences instigate drama into it, FD aren't daft and will know who started what.
Last edited:
Well, as it stands the only thing you can really take from it is that the game has a massive design flaw. But FD's heading in the right direction.
I don't see it as a design flaw to be honest.
I see it as a game that allows players to go do their own thing, also allows players to play together in a social environment against the environment and also allows those who wish to play against each other to co-exist under the one "universe" as such.
That's a minor miracle in gaming in itself.
The only time there are issues are when players decide to play outside their respective areas which is exactly what happened.
If it didn't happen then we wouldn't even be having this epic waste of time thread we now find ourselves involved in.
But Humans...and hysterical ones at that.
Last edited:
But it speaks to a much bigger problem, in that there's little to no consequence for murder. That's a design flaw that FD is aware of and is actually actively working to fix now. They're also reducing police response times and increasing police power in high sec areas, which adds an important factor to consider in your travels. These are things that'll likely reduce the frequency of psychos out there, but will also take the sting out of what events do occur.
It's important that they're not taking away that choice - it's still there, and I think that's a good thing. But it's silly that there's basically no answer to griefers other than "go to solo" or "combat log."
You miss understand, I have no reason to log, I don't play open so little point. And I have died numerous of times thanks. Never once felt the need to whine at the NPC.
Logging isn't in the spirit of the game. Neither is invading a PvE group and going on a killing spree.
If you are inclined to surrender that's on you.
FDev have spoken on other things in the past and then changed their tune. They can change their tune on this as well.
It looks like my idea of financially stunted is your idea of going strong. We may be thinking at different scales.
Some context: Many of the games I work or have worked on are a lot bigger than Elite, a lot bigger than Eve. (Bigger in terms of players and financials, not scale/size of the playable gamespace, Elite is far and away the biggest on that count!
). So wrt my wider point (that FDev cares about the player experience - the "moral" dimension that allows player satisfaction, not just the "legal" dimension of whether a rule got broken) I'm offering an inside perspective. At trade conventions I have seen impressive proprietary internal studies of how player-interaction experiences shape the acquisition and retention of players. I am not representing their (complex) findings, my point in mentioning it is that people creating games care greatly what kind of experiences players are getting from each other and how the game can guide people into getting the most out of it. Rules are merely one tool in the toolbox for what you called "moral guidance". For example, behavioral incentives via game mechanics are another tool that FDev actively uses, carrots as well as sticks, etc.
Studios do care, both because it is profitable to care, and also because studios are made of people who are deeply personally invested in creating something they can be proud of and satisfied with. When hundreds of thousands - if not millions - of people are going to pay to experience an experience that you crafted for them, it can be hard not to care. For a few people it might just be a paycheck, but for others it's a paycheck and your magnum opus.
Last edited:
Because for some, the issue isn't resolved. There is absolutely nothing that will prevent it from happening again. The "drum banging" as you called it, is to make it clear that even though FD feels there is nothing wrong with what happened, some players disagree.
Offline mode?
Or my personal favourite, stating private groups will have an in game toggle for PvP / PvE ... that is yet to turn up.
I'm sure someone is keep score of promises made and promises kept.
Early days yet imo. I'm sticking around, but I've been playing according to the fact ED is a PvP game for a while now.
This I will agree with in regards to consequence for actions because it is allowing players to run riot against others with little or none for their actions.
I advocate the same and I really hope FD can get this rolling asap.
I learnt in Solo, only go back to learn to use a joystick which is handy, and still play Open with a M/B when I give up but I'll get there eventually....but I don't log though. I don't look for a fight. I'm like a BananaChicken so I run and run hard.
Reading this and other threads though and I'm feeling it's coming to a point where they need to address this because it's spiraling out of control to the point where the minor offence of one player ganking in Mobius is now creating massive threads where the original reason for their existence is lost.
They're just being used to attack the existing modes available to the point where they're trying to force FD to favour one or the other when there really is no issue since things were resolved.
@Roland2:
Mobius isn't the same as FD...if a player transgresses in Mobius the it's up to Mobius to fix it. It is sadly, the way things are done because the rule sets are different.
I don't think you guys understand how much FD, as a games company, have allowed you to enjoy the game as you currently do.
If they start choosing sides in all of this between Solo / PG / Open then it'll really get messy and will hurt the game as a whole.
If Mobius wants to continue then the player base needs to flag the bad guys to get them out asap and it's the same for FD who equally have to rely on player reports about cheating.
It's "who" is currently causing the problems, when things were fine before, that are the problem and once known then they can be ejected.
This happens in all games, this one was very lucky until now tbh.
Last edited:
Just to remind those folks who seem to have forgotten, it was not possible for Mobius to "police the group" when this situation first broke because of a bug / glitch / limitation in the group maintenance interface. This had been reported and discussed at length on the forums, and is the reason Frontier support ultimately had to step in and removed the perpetrators from the group themselves.
Had that interface problem not been there, a Mobius administrator would have kicked the offenders immediately and the group would have moved on just as it has done many times before. And these threads would not be here.
Responsibility for the interface problem does lie with FD, either because the code's failure to cope with such a large private group has surprised them as much as anyone else, or because they knew about the limitations and were remiss in not proactively advising administrators that a problem might occur with such a large group.
Responsibility for the timing of the "infiltration" lies with SDC who, upon reading that Mobius administrators could no longer add or remove people from the group, must have thought all their Christmases had come at once. Say what you like about the morality of their conduct, they seized an opportunity and played the metagame blindingly.
Of course many of us had suspected something like this was coming for a while now...
...we just didn't predict that a group management bug would be the trigger, nor that Frontier themselves would follow up with such a weakly worded response that seems to justify the griefing behaviour they had already passively endorsed with the ill-conceived SDC Community Spotlight.
For many of us that is the most disappointing thing about this whole affair, because it's in such stark opposition to everything David Braben once preached about his vision for this game.
Had that interface problem not been there, a Mobius administrator would have kicked the offenders immediately and the group would have moved on just as it has done many times before. And these threads would not be here.
Responsibility for the interface problem does lie with FD, either because the code's failure to cope with such a large private group has surprised them as much as anyone else, or because they knew about the limitations and were remiss in not proactively advising administrators that a problem might occur with such a large group.
Responsibility for the timing of the "infiltration" lies with SDC who, upon reading that Mobius administrators could no longer add or remove people from the group, must have thought all their Christmases had come at once. Say what you like about the morality of their conduct, they seized an opportunity and played the metagame blindingly.
Of course many of us had suspected something like this was coming for a while now...
(September 2015)
That would be cool, but be careful what you wish for. The nice round number of 15,000 might be an awfully tempting trigger point for the well-organized fifth column that is no doubt lurking and ready to play the metagame again. If it happened to coincide with the holidays, you could find yourself overwhelmed with complaints and having to continuously wield the ban-hammer when you'd rather be doing something more festive.
I'm not trying to stir anything, just being depressingly frank. There are folks out there for whom the meta is the only game. Everything else is a means to an end, and the rapidly growing membership number is a double edged sword. The last "infiltration" was a couple of guys jerking off. If there's another it will be better organised. The only questions are how much better, and when?
For many of us that is the most disappointing thing about this whole affair, because it's in such stark opposition to everything David Braben once preached about his vision for this game.
This I will agree with in regards to consequence for actions because it is allowing players to run riot against others with little or none for their actions.
I advocate the same and I really hope FD can get this rolling asap.
I learnt in Solo, only go back to learn to use a joystick which is handy, and still play Open with a M/B when I give up but I'll get there eventually....but I don't log though. I don't look for a fight. I'm like a BananaChicken so I run and run hard.
Reading this and other threads though and I'm feeling it's coming to a point where they need to address this because it's spiraling out of control to the point where the minor offence of one player ganking in Mobius is now creating massive threads where the original reason for their existence is lost.
They're just being used to attack the existing modes available to the point where they're trying to force FD to favour one or the other when there really is no issue since things were resolved.
@Roland2:
Mobius isn't the same as FD...if a player transgresses in Mobius the it's up to Mobius to fix it. It is sadly, the way things are done because the rule sets are different.
I don't think you guys understand how much FD, as a games company, have allowed you to enjoy the game as you currently do.
If they start choosing sides in all of this between Solo / PG / Open then it'll really get messy and will hurt the game as a whole.
If Mobius wants to continue then the player base needs to flag the bad guys to get them out asap and it's the same for FD who equally have to rely on player reports about cheating.
It's who is currently causing the problems, when things were fine before, that are the problem and once known then they can be ejected.
This happens in all games, this one was very lucky until now tbh.
And I disagree with you. Private groups have no rule sets. They have guidlines. Mobius (or any other PG leader) can't prevent PvP in their group, all they can do is punish the guilty. FD can (maybe) provide PG leaders the ability to prevent the actions from occurring (ie: turn friendly fire off, turn off ramming). I don't know if this is feasible with the way Elite is written, only FD know for sure.
from Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003). The content of this ... And thirdly, the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.
Last edited:
Erm, I hope you are not implying that Mobius is sharing his account login details with anyone ???
As that would be a direct breach of the EULA, due to us only having a "non-transferable license" for 1 person to access the account.
And as only the group creator can add or kick from the group, there is no "administrators" for the group.
People can phone Mobius and ask him to login and kick people for whatever reason, but there is no "administrators" who can do it.
Last edited:
Does this make the rule against combat logging more of a guideline since FD can't prevent it, only punish it?
That's interesting as I didn't know the details or didn't take them on board at the time. I also appreciate informative post.
Cheers for the info.
One solution might be to kick players who have been inactive for 6 months or less depending on how many it removes but I hear that players can't even leave the group.
Is that true?
Last edited:
The group owner is unable to add or remove people due to the group, presumably the size caused the functionality to bug out.
Slopey
Volunteer Moderator
/mod hat off
This is the sort of nonsense which doesn't help anything.
Combat logging is an exploit. FD have said so.
A few players going against a gentleman's agreement in a private group, that no pvp should happen without both parties accepting, is NOT an exploit. That's just a few players not following the preference of the group owner.
Does this make the rule against combat logging more of a guideline since FD can't prevent it, only punish it?
This is the sort of nonsense which doesn't help anything.
Combat logging is an exploit. FD have said so.
A few players going against a gentleman's agreement in a private group, that no pvp should happen without both parties accepting, is NOT an exploit. That's just a few players not following the preference of the group owner.
Last edited:
- Status