Elite Babysitter...

[hunvagy]

We now have the player base divided into those who want to be identified as PCs (player transponder on) and those who don't (player transponder off).

We're also now discussing having full time GMs or Game Security people to scour the spaceways for bad behavior that slips through all the nets.



Ironically as one of the 'champions of the pvper group' I'm not a pvper....

Ah, then I understand the frustration in your original post. Sorry, I only have insight on the archive, which only had the groups and alliances.

Honestly I don't mind the PVP, if it doesn't dissolve into camping spawn points, starbase entrances and the like to blow up people just for kicks. As I understand, there will be places for PvP, and piracy I don't count as such.

Skimpering off into a private group just to keep my cargo safe seems detrimental to the trading process. We should give the pirates something to run after.

What I do have a problem with is the minority who ONLY wants to specialize in PKing. If there's no reason behind it (you don't get paid for offing someone) then I see it as something that doesn't fit with the universe.

 

[Thorn Black]

So you are meaning to say that alpha and beta testers are mindless animals that are so starved of content that instead of doing what we are supposed to do (as in test the game and offer insight on how to make it better) we should just duke it out battle royale style?

Also, you say that it's your right as a free person to do what you want and when you want. But you also say that "No PVPers stating that its their right to fight and party". Which means you are saying that you are not a PVPer yet you want to PVP. Now there's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one.

Sorry there should be like this : No, PVPers stating ... and so on.
(need to pay attention to those little things that likes to run away from the subject thus changing it tottally to some individuals ie. ",")

 

[warbaby2]

Secondly what do You think will happen if you close pack of rats in small area, big amount of those rats, and threw in some food, just a scraps there and there. What do You think will happen ?

Somethng that is totally irrelevant for the discussion at hand, I assure you.

Seriousy though: ED is no PvP game, it never was meant to be. It's a decentralised multiplayer game where the players have to adhere to all the same rules the rest of it's (simulated) universe has... they are only part of the simulation, not the focus of it.

Players will not be able to draw borders, build or destroy stations or influence power blocks... we have to follow the same laws and systems then NPCs, or die by them... simple as that.

 

[Adept]

Ironically as one of the 'champions of the pvper group' I'm not a pvper....

This is actually a little worrying when it comes to your motives. What is your own goal then? Are you planning to play in the all group with the ident transponder on? What does the "not a pvper" mean in this case? Will you just lower your shields and launch the escape capsule if you're attacked and unable to run?

 

[Globusdiablo]

No, I'm right!

Rage quit anyone?...

Btw, where do trolls fit in to all of this?... <...ducks and weaves...>

 

[ianw]

Amen. And I don't know which side of the argument you're on. And it doesn't matter. I think we /were/ heading for some sort of balance with groups and ignore features and whatnot but I feel we've steered too far in the other direction now. Hence the OP.

I guess I would be in the consensual PVP camp - sometimes. I'd like to test my abilities against other players in the right context sometimes - but I wouldn't entirely feel happy about attacking another player in game first unless I knew they were signed up for that sort of thing.

Definitely up for cooperative play and I really do get both sides of the transponder argument.

Truth is - this is the first MP game I've ever really played. At this point until we see more of the game mechanics in play and the consequences I haven't got a clue what to suggest!

 

[Susimetsa]

If Youre weak You are goin to die in RL, simple natures way.

Survival of the fittest does not apply to humans or human societies - not since humans started coming up with ethics, values, laws, rules of social conduct etc. etc. that protects us from the purely environmental/biological system.

The purpose of a civilised society is, actually, to protect its weakest members (not to give the strong/rich/handsome a nice playground, although it is all to often skewed that way).

Also "survival of the fittest" does not mean that the physically strongest or most talented will survive. It means that the specimens most adapted to the current conditions will survive (i.e. strongest in that environment). Sometimes too much strength/talent in one area is bad for your overall survival.

 

[hunvagy]

Sorry there should be like this : No, PVPers stating ... and so on.
(need to pay attention to those little things that likes to run away from the subject thus changing it tottally to some individuals ie. ",")

Sorry, I probably misunderstood then. And I certainly didn't mean my post as an attack on your individual freedom. It just seemed detrimental that the beta should devolve into a "let's just murder each other" contest in a 5-star bloodbath arena I guess when the world opens up, and we actually get the police forces doing their job, we'll see how the current rules hold up.

 

[JeffRyan]

Ah, then I understand the frustration in your original post. Sorry, I only have insight on the archive, which only had the groups and alliances.

Honestly I don't mind the PVP, if it doesn't dissolve into camping spawn points, starbase entrances and the like to blow up people just for kicks. As I understand, there will be places for PvP, and piracy I don't count as such.

Skimpering off into a private group just to keep my cargo safe seems detrimental to the trading process. We should give the pirates something to run after.

What I do have a problem with is the minority who ONLY wants to specialize in PKing. If there's no reason behind it (you don't get paid for offing someone) then I see it as something that doesn't fit with the universe.

We're on the same page. Ironically in the anti-griefing threads I'm firmly on the 'why are you such a buttmunch?' camp.

 

[Adept]

Also "survival of the fittest" does not mean that the physically strongest or most talented will survive. It means that the specimens most adapted to the current conditions will survive (i.e. strongest in that environment). Sometimes too much strength/talent in one area is bad for your overall survival.

Nice to see a person who can state so clearly why the so called "social darwinists" completely misunderstand Darwin.

You're here by mistake... And yeah it's quickly become 'play how you want, just don't make anyone else mad.'

What exactly is wrong with that btw? Sounds like the basis of a functional society. The maximal amount of freedom without infringing on other people's freedoms.

 

[Maxeren]

...Skimpering off into a private group just to keep my cargo safe seems detrimental to the trading process. We should give the pirates something to run after.

What I do have a problem with is the minority who ONLY wants to specialize in PKing. If there's no reason behind it (you don't get paid for offing someone) then I see it as something that doesn't fit with the universe.

+1 Well said..

 

[JeffRyan]

Survival of the fittest does not apply to humans or human societies - not since humans started coming up with ethics, values, laws, rules of social conduct etc. etc. that protects us from the purely environmental/biological system.

The purpose of a civilised society is, actually, to protect its weakest members (not to give the strong/rich/handsome a nice playground, although it is all to often skewed that way).

Also "survival of the fittest" does not mean that the physically strongest or most talented will survive. It means that the specimens most adapted to the current conditions will survive (i.e. strongest in that environment). Sometimes too much strength/talent in one area is bad for your overall survival.

Yeah those guys tend to go extinct... I agree but the problem of society is always a balance between liberty and security. Too liberal and the whole place goes to hell, too much security leads to fascist states.

Now I'm not saying Frontier are turning ED into a fascist state of a game in order to protect the people who don't want to be insulted, but I do feel that the balance of security vs freedom is leaning far too much towards security as things are playing out.

Understand this is NOT a problem with any one system (damned Transponders) but more a stepping back and looking at the big picture now, from what has been proposed...

 

[warbaby2]

What exactly is wrong with that btw? Sounds like the basis of a functional society. The maximal amount of freedom without infringing on other people's freedoms.

You wouldn't believe how many people are still under the dillusion that this kind of society is "weak"... ironically said people wouldn't survive in any other form society, no matter how "hard" they think they are.

That being said: Internet spaceships aren't actually that serious business.

 

[Thorn Black]

Survival of the fittest does not apply to humans or human societies - not since humans started coming up with ethics, values, laws, rules of social conduct etc. etc. that protects us from the purely environmental/biological system.

The purpose of a civilised society is, actually, to protect its weakest members (not to give the strong/rich/handsome a nice playground, although it is all to often skewed that way).

Also "survival of the fittest" does not mean that the physically strongest or most talented will survive. It means that the specimens most adapted to the current conditions will survive (i.e. strongest in that environment). Sometimes too much strength/talent in one area is bad for your overall survival.

Yes with all those shinny toys and trinkets we still kill eachother, exlude and run away from who we realy are, fear reasoning all it is.

Yeah by invading other lands for the trinkets we like so much cos its not enough for our people, its simply "our way or the highway" (aka we are the law and you will obey peasant). no thanks ...

I wasnt stating only the phisical or talented will survive, i was stating exacly what you said in a little smaller scale. i agree, the human nature strikes again, fear of other dominating your territory is enormous, this guy has too much talent, eliminate him he is dangerous for my social position. hahahaha exalcy the behaviour youre against.

 

[Thorn Black]

Sorry, I probably misunderstood then. And I certainly didn't mean my post as an attack on your individual freedom. It just seemed detrimental that the beta should devolve into a "let's just murder each other" contest in a 5-star bloodbath arena I guess when the world opens up, and we actually get the police forces doing their job, we'll see how the current rules hold up.

No worrys i did not take it personally im stating what i think, it purelly polemic subject. I like it tho listening to others points of view, who knows maybie il change my life cos of it ?

 

[Alric]

Very much agree with the OP. I think that this community lets itself down badly in discussing the multiplayer and social side of the game.

 

[JeffRyan]

What exactly is wrong with that btw? Sounds like the basis of a functional society. The maximal amount of freedom without infringing on other people's freedoms.

But this is a game and in game there's competition and in competition there are winners and losers. It feels like we're trying to make this 'everyone's a winner'. I grew up learning to win and lose. And dealing with people who bother me and taking care of my own schnazz. I don't need to be hand-held. Some of the best and greatest moments of my gaming career are when someone has made me mad as hell. And I dealt with it myself.

 

[Susimetsa]

Now I'm not saying Frontier are turning ED into a fascist state of a game in order to protect the people who don't want to be insulted, but I do feel that the balance of security vs freedom is leaning far too much towards security as things are playing out.

I'm not sure we've seen enough evidence to think either way. At least I assume that the core worlds of the great powers will be very protected (they are not anarchies, after all), while the non-aligned frontier worlds will vary - anarchies being the most restless and good playground for PvP players as well and democracies being as safe as they can afford to be.

 

[Thorn Black]

But this is a game and in game there's competition and in competition there are winners and losers. It feels like we're trying to make this 'everyone's a winner'. I grew up learning to win and lose. And dealing with people who bother me and taking care of my own schnazz. I don't need to be hand-held. Some of the best and greatest moments of my gaming career are when someone has made me mad as hell. And I dealt with it myself.

Exacly "deal with it yourself".
Game is huge, space is huge, this galaxy is huge ! There is enough space for us all in it. No need to exlude ourself from one eachother.

 

[warbaby2]

But this is a game and in game there's competition and in competition there are winners and losers. It feels like we're trying to make this 'everyone's a winner'. I grew up learning to win and lose. And dealing with people who bother me and taking care of my own schnazz. I don't need to be hand-held. Some of the best and greatest moments of my gaming career are when someone has made me mad as hell. And I dealt with it myself.

Agreed absolutely... IF what happened was within the rules (NOT just game mechanics) of the game, and not the result of a poorly implemented system that favours one form of playstyle over the other.