I fear you may not be joking when you say this..
Answer this.
- Thread starter BlueLumen
- Start date
I fear you may not be joking when you say this..
I wasn't sure ... and share your fear. But what if he was. I would have typed a retort similar to what I posted to Ziljan, just to get a "kidding!".
So ... we'd like confirmation please on whether that part was joking or not
Unfortunately not. For it to become realistic, the crime/punishment model would need a complete overhaul. The bounty for killing another player in a regulated system is how much? A few thousand credits? About what I'd spend on PA ammo for taking down an NPC[1]?
Sure, keep the psychos in, and permit it as a play style. But it should come with a price. A heavy price. Something that would mean that, if you kill another player and get caught[2], you'll risk being bounced back to square one. If you repeatedly kill other players (and get finally caught), it's a certainty. Without the possibility of escape through suicide. So go ahead, (try to) kill me. But if someone claims your head, it's you who's back in the Sidey.
It will have to be a built-in game mechanism, though. Vigilante groups have a tendency to get out of hand, and are easily abused. GluttonyFang has written a well thought-out paper, also addressing this issue.
[1]Ok, no jokes about hitting barns from the inside, please.
[2]Not 'noticed', that should be automatic. But 'caught' as in 'shot down' - preferrably from a player who is after the bounty on your head.
Me too, so please stop trying to typify large groups of diverse players
The only way to deal with what you want to deal with is to address the poster and the argument directly when you notice the sort of behaviour you don't like. You do not pose the issue as 2 camps and attribute characteristics to all players in those camps. You can sense the weakness in your argument when you have to backtrack: "Some newer PVP posters can strike a tone of smugness and self confidence." From the top of my head I could name quite a few old timers who exhibit just this kind of behaviour.
On both sides.
As I posted above, I have and continue to address posts based on issues. And have already stated that my comments apply to the worst of the bunch, not the entire PVE population. So please stop suggesting otherwise, or cherry picking phrases out of context. I don't speak in buzzwords. And my sentences only have meaning as part of a whole, so please try to avoid reading my posts in snippets.
As for the veteran smug PVP posters, I would advise the same visualization exercise. Imagine them as Starbuck, a Viper pilot, not a space pirate, and their behavior will seem more natural. They are jocks. Annoying to some, entertaining to watch, and you definitely want them in your corner if you find yourself in a dark alley. Unless of course they are an avowed space pirate...
Last edited:
That was easy, cheers!
I feel accepting you're an idiot is very sound advice. I did so years ago, and never looked back.
[video=youtube;nZ9EWcaS7II]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZ9EWcaS7II[/video]
Then please stop addressing it as "the PvE/PvP crowd"
I am not cherry picking your phrases out of context to win one over. Here's the rest of your post:
Kindly point me towards your nuance: "And have already stated that my comments apply to the worst of the bunch, not the entire PVE population".
Ah I see. When "the PvP crowd" is behaving badly, I should romanticize them and go: oh you! And when "the PvE crowd" exhibits that behaviour it's impolite and uncalled for.
Last edited:
That was easy, cheers!
I feel accepting you're an idiot is very sound advice. I did so years ago, and never looked back.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZ9EWcaS7II
I never knew that you'd known me for that long.
My thesis was the toxic corruption on these forums, and since you know my hands are tied in explaining my true purpose, you attack my posts as a partisan joke. I used to think you were such a nice guy too.
Why is PvP unpopular? Simple: we don't want to die. The same dilemma pops up all the time in the Dark Souls community, and the answer there is the same as here: Play offline / solo. You gotta take the good with the bad when it comes to online, currently. I don't touch Open play because the current meta is garbage for anyone not geared towards PvP, and I can count the number of positive PvP encounters I've had while running a trade ship in the past two years I can count on one hand.
What's the issue? PvP guys are upset and bored because they don't have any content (us non-pvp types being the content). PvE guys have no interest in being the content to the game.
How do we fix this? PvE guys refuse to participate in PvP, because Open PvP is a deathtrap for anyone not geared for it. And before you argue with me, allow me to present to you the Fer De Lance's current absolute OP-ness, and the shattered remains of a thousand Type 7 trade ships. Frontier knows there is demand for a "PVE Open" mode, where player damage is turned off. And you know, I would absolutely only go into that mode and let solo and private group fall by the wayside if it were implemented. Another idea is to make trade-centric ships absolute powerhouses of defense, where even a wing of ten FDL couldn't penetrate the shields and hull fast enough for the person to not high-wake away.
What will frontier do? Probably improve the way private groups are managed, and we will deal with a Mobius troll-fest every few months. Personally? I'd just add an "Open PvE" mode that has player damage turned off. But I'm not in charge of this thing.
What's the issue? PvP guys are upset and bored because they don't have any content (us non-pvp types being the content). PvE guys have no interest in being the content to the game.
How do we fix this? PvE guys refuse to participate in PvP, because Open PvP is a deathtrap for anyone not geared for it. And before you argue with me, allow me to present to you the Fer De Lance's current absolute OP-ness, and the shattered remains of a thousand Type 7 trade ships. Frontier knows there is demand for a "PVE Open" mode, where player damage is turned off. And you know, I would absolutely only go into that mode and let solo and private group fall by the wayside if it were implemented. Another idea is to make trade-centric ships absolute powerhouses of defense, where even a wing of ten FDL couldn't penetrate the shields and hull fast enough for the person to not high-wake away.
What will frontier do? Probably improve the way private groups are managed, and we will deal with a Mobius troll-fest every few months. Personally? I'd just add an "Open PvE" mode that has player damage turned off. But I'm not in charge of this thing.
Mobius has proven nothing. Mobius is only 20k or so members. That proves little, other than a small percentage of the population wants PvE.
Last edited:
You're taking this personal, that's not the intention of my posts. I addressed a single sentiment you expressed which I disagree with. I don't think this sentiment is equal to you as a person or your personality. In my view, we can vigorously disagree without being judgemental about each other as a person.
I still think you're a nice guy, who has an opinion, which I very much disagree with.
My point is the ''greifers'' are harmless. they kill you you just loose some fake money and you move on. there punishement? it should be me. my dream in elite was to roam the stars looking for pirates and killers and remove them from the game helping the traders and noobs make there way in the game.
however that is not the case , mostly due to the low risk you take by becoming wanted but there is no risk in any of the game at the moment anyway.
Hi,
I am a pure PvP player here.
I got bored a while ago with NPC interactions. Only PvP brings challenge to me, and keep me playing the game.
As soon as I connect, I seek good fights with other players (I could also pirate or bounty hunt, but FDev is yet to put those two back on track).
Now, make it that NPCs become as challenging as real players (via AI improvement, coordinated and scripted waves of NPCs...etc...) and I may change my mind.
I am a pure PvP player here.
I got bored a while ago with NPC interactions. Only PvP brings challenge to me, and keep me playing the game.
As soon as I connect, I seek good fights with other players (I could also pirate or bounty hunt, but FDev is yet to put those two back on track).
Now, make it that NPCs become as challenging as real players (via AI improvement, coordinated and scripted waves of NPCs...etc...) and I may change my mind.
Last edited:
The reason I've always thought of you as a nice guy is because you never used to take sentences out of context and presume they were still meaningful.
Currently, you vigorously disagree with a position I am not proposing (eg: that PVE is the "bad guy") and paint me as a lout with a lazy and simplistic way of thinking. You also know that I cannot explain further, because that would mean confronting the judgement of a certain class of posters here, which would incur an infraction or banning, so I cannot air my true feelings. So taking my posts out of context and forcing me to explain them could actually get me banned. Hard not to take this kind of baiting as a personal attack, especially when I know you are perfectly capable of reading between the lines.
I wrote an article on my blog on why PvP and even griefers have a place in the game, but the current in-game crime and punishment model is not working.
We need an improved model, that makes such behaviour only possible in anarchy and low security systems. Which is where it is supposed to be.
With such a model anybody can play in open and by sticking to high-security systems would be as safe as they would be in a PvE private group, while low security systems will have higher profits, but greater dangers of piracy. Anarchy systems will be rife with pirates and griefers, but also the most profitable trades and smuggling routes.
The care-bears and newbies can play in safe parts of the bubble and the experienced and more daring traders can venture into the shadows for those extra credits.
We need an improved model, that makes such behaviour only possible in anarchy and low security systems. Which is where it is supposed to be.
With such a model anybody can play in open and by sticking to high-security systems would be as safe as they would be in a PvE private group, while low security systems will have higher profits, but greater dangers of piracy. Anarchy systems will be rife with pirates and griefers, but also the most profitable trades and smuggling routes.
The care-bears and newbies can play in safe parts of the bubble and the experienced and more daring traders can venture into the shadows for those extra credits.
I agree with you and can't understand why this had not been implemented from start.
Higher security would mean more trade traffic (NPCs) and the Background Simulation should lead to lesser demand.
Low security and anarchy would be the opposite, and the demand would increase AKA higher selling price.
Who knows, maybe it is the case already, but the difference is so low that we have not even noticed..?
Last edited:
Because I can't stand teaTo Z&Z: I always thought both of you to be good guys. Sure, sometimes your opinion is different from mine, but I got so much used to being right that I can tolerate that
Why don't you take a break, and have a cup of green tea?
Not my intention. Hey, just noticed we have new smileys. I'm going to use them to make an official declaration.
Ziljan, I have a great deal of respect for you as a poster, a player and an all-around nice guy. Nothing in your postings would suggest to me that you are a lout with a lazy and simplistic way of thinking. If I gave you the impression I did, I am very sorry to hear that. Cue smiley!
[heart]
Last edited:
New smiley emote Accepted. [yesnod][up]
And, in case it wasn't clear before my misplaced dissapoointment, the feeling is mutual
Last edited: