Elite Babysitter...

[Robert Maynard]

So You say goverments can kill who they want and larger societies can kill who they want as they want cos theyre big or "grieef hungry" on people who stand against enslavement and opression in any form ?

Governments do. Laws are enacted with the support of the population that democratically elected the government making those laws.

You bring up "enslavement" and "oppression" - they're not exactly part of the current discussion. Slavery is included in the game, however.

 

[tooterfish]

"Griefing" is so ill-defined

It's not ill defined at all, the waters have just been deliberately muddied by those who want to create a negative association with PvPers in general, and pirates in particular.

 

[JeffRyan]

The Pilot's Federation will, I believe issue bounties when their members are preyed upon.



It is a group game, absolutely, however the sandbox belongs to no particular play type (although I get the feeling that some of the PvP proponents assume that it is theirs and those who do not like it can lump it by removing themselves to private groups or solo play).

Not sure what you mean in the last paragraph.

I'd say if it belonged to no particular type then why are all these rules making it harder to have any type of conflict being brought in?

The game is seriously in danger of becoming excusively PvE or if you have confict with a player it's assumed to be griefing at best or you didn't even know you were engaged with a player at worst.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It's not ill defined at all, the waters have just been deliberately muddied by those who want to create a negative association with PvPers in an attempt to steer the narrative towards cutting PvP from their game completely.

Can you point me to a definitive (and uncontested) definition, please?

 

[Malicar]

Maybe we should give the pirates a local chat and Starmap that shows blobs every 7 mins so they quit whining?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NQxT7ab07jk

NOT!

 

[Phaedra]

A "walls in space" approach won't work. First they don't affect the different general professions equally. For example, an explorer by necessity will be going to systems that have no local authority and therefore no law enforcement. Making these systems "all player group" only would make it impossible for people to be explorers without exposing themselves to the risks of non-consensual PvP. Second, it doesn't really fit with the dynamic background simulation in which player actions will result in changes to system economic development, security statuses etc.... In fact by skewing the risk/reward ratio in certain systems and pushing players towards certain activities in those systems it could easily lead to a complete stagnation in their development.

Walls in Space can work in Eve, because the background is static and there is nowhere to explore or develop. They would be a complete disaster for Elite.

 

[Adept]

I play a ton of PvP games, and I'm not worried in the least.

What we have had in the Alpha is a totally unregulated Wild West. I look forward to rules and consequences being implemented.

 

[Thorn Black]

The Pilot's Federation will, I believe issue bounties when their members are preyed upon.



It is a group game, absolutely, however the sandbox belongs to no particular play type (although I get the feeling that some of the PvP proponents assume that it is theirs and those who do not like it can lump it by removing themselves to private groups or solo play).

Not sure what you mean in the last paragraph.

There You go ... pilots federation ahh it sounds good ... wonder how many credits they will have, may i can infiltrate their ranks hmmm.


No PVPers stating that its their right to fight and party, and space police can go somwhere else (delicatelly put). Noone from PVPers is telling others what to do we just counter the arguments of implementing sanctions or code in game disallowing other type of gameplay that game was assuring us will have. Its like cutting Your own arm or two with one leg too (just to make sure some people will be happy) off the final product.

For now we have closed alpha in small space little tiny space of alphas (sounds like some documentary about wildlife). its controlled by dev team zone serving some specified purpouse, so we betas be more happy. We betas will make sure Gammas and release spiecies will be happy too. So right now we cannot implementthose tools restricting anything as it wont do any good in small space. i hope they will make it bigger tho for betas. otherwise there will be kill fest

 

[tooterfish]

Can you point me to a definitive (and uncontested) definition, please?

Definitive and uncontested? Hah, that's pretty weasely.

The definition is going to change depending on the context, how can I find something definitive when the context for it doesn't even exist properly yet?

In the context of Elite, the definition of griefing shouldn't include piracy and murder. Agree or disagree?

 

[Robert Maynard]

There You go ... pilots federation ahh it sounds good ... wonder how many credits they will have, may i can infiltrate their ranks hmmm.

You will be a member by default - every player is.

 

[Thorn Black]

A "walls in space" approach won't work. First they don't affect the different general professions equally. For example, an explorer by necessity will be going to systems that have no local authority and therefore no law enforcement. Making these systems "all player group" only would make it impossible for people to be explorers without exposing themselves to the risks of non-consensual PvP. Second, it doesn't really fit with the dynamic background simulation in which player actions will result in changes to system economic development, security statuses etc.... In fact by skewing the risk/reward ratio in certain systems and pushing players towards certain activities in those systems it could easily lead to a complete stagnation in their development.

Walls in Space can work in Eve, because the background is static and there is nowhere to explore or develop. They would be a complete disaster for Elite.

Agree 100% and yes and yes. ED is NOT eve

 

[Malicar]

So what are you a hacker selling cheats?

Then he reports me lol... That's a griefer for ya. Can't win so starts driving backwards to cause more problems.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Definitive and uncontested? Hah, that's pretty weasely.

The definition is going to change depending on the context, how can I find something definitive when the context for it doesn't even exist properly yet?

In the context of Elite, the definition of griefing shouldn't include piracy and murder. Agree or disagree?

Weasely, no - you state "It's not ill defined at all".

Agreed, it is not well defined in the context of Elite: Dangerous.

Agree, day-to-day piratical / murderous encounters with different targets should not be considered to be griefing - unless, as an example, one player continually seeks out and destroys another.

 

[JeffRyan]

Guys can we keep the subject on topic and leave the personal insults out, on both sides of the discussion. Maynard and Co are arguing their side, as are we. We have already found /some/ common ground about the weaknesses of the proposed systems and a few philosophical points.

I respect their opinions and will concede some points, no reason to throw around insults just because we disagree.

 

[JeffRyan]

Then he reports me lol... That's a griefer for ya. Can't win so starts driving backwards to cause more problems.

I didn't report you. Just for the record. I don't report anyone for that matter

It'd be very ironic for the guy who's arguing we're going too far because people can't handle other people or insults to report someone for insulting him. I prefer to deal with things personally or ignore them.

 

[Malicar]

I didn't report you. Just for the record. I don't report anyone for that matter

I'll take your word for it then and I apologize I just think that was a low blow whoever did it.

 

[Steve O B Have]

Also just for the record - discussing moderation decisions is a fast track way to a holiday. Get back on thread subject please.

 

[Thorn Black]

Governments do. Laws are enacted with the support of the population that democratically elected the government making those laws.

You bring up "enslavement" and "oppression" - they're not exactly part of the current discussion. Slavery is included in the game, however.

Enslavement and opression have wide meaning touching the subject of freedom, if You use force to rule the force will hit You back, simple law of phisics.

For the first You typed here, no and hell no I will never accept that. Goverments are simply creations and name for unjustice and war and all the is hitting us in RL. People simply go with the Your "law" and "order" rules and kill in the name of whover is in the "top dog" position currently. (aka empire or federation or any other big creation in game)

Freedom means anarchy, no control, no laws of other man imposed on other man, chaos with its own rules but no restriction. Beauty. Freedom is precious, some do not understand that. Some are afraid of it, fear dictates them who they are, fear takes controll of their humanity and their behaviour.

Who told You who can kill and who not, who are You to dictate rules ?

We can discuss it futher, but we running away from the topic i think a little.

 

[tooterfish]

Weasely, no - you state "It's not ill defined at all".

Agreed, it is not well defined in the context of Elite: Dangerous.

Agree, day-to-day piratical / murderous encounters with different targets should not be considered to be griefing - unless, as an example, one player continually seeks out and destroys another.

My point was that it's kept deliberately vague, and could be clearly defined... i.e. it's not an inherently tricky thing to pin down. I apologise for the perceived personal attack.

It seems we're on the same page. What needs to be done is that the term needs to be clearly and unambiguously defined by Frontier, because I've seen the phrase "pirates and griefers" crop up here numerous times and they're absolutely not the same thing.

 

[Jason S]

I think the OP is a nice sensitive guy and hence wants not the "Nanny state" feeling in the game.

I also believe he may be a little over worried.