To Fly in Open or Not - Is Ganking/Griefing Really That Bad?

[NeilF]

I am here to violence spaceships. You are in spaceships. The end.

Sorry? Are you trying to say, you are into fighting spaceships? I am not?


I'd have to say I very much am into the idea of fighting spaceships, but preferably within somesort of game framework that means it has some logic and sense behind it.

ie: The game should give mechanics/reasons for PvP, and not simply really on mindlessly interdicting anyone and everyone and opening fire for no in game reason/benefit.


I cannot see how any sensible player could find fault with:-
1) Heavily penalising any CMDR who illegally destroys another Pilots Federation member,
2) The game offering legal PvP in the shape of for example missions/tasks where (in OPEN) you know you face the chance of encountering hostile CMDRs on counter missions. Consider what could be achieved in Powerplay alone? Pivotal battles around a station to effect the outcome between two powers. CMDRs trying to enforce a blockade. CMDRs trying to break the blockade. CMDRs trying to run the blockade to get supplies in, or civilians out. Surely all sounds a bit more sensible and rewarding than interdicting CMDRs who are not even outfitted for PvP and blowing them up?

 

[Ralor]

Sorry? Are you trying to say, you are into fighting spaceships? I am not?


I'd have to say I very much am into the idea of fighting spaceships, but preferably within somesort of game framework that means it has some logic and sense behind it.

ie: The game should give mechanics/reasons for PvP, and not simply really on mindlessly interdicting anyone and everyone and opening fire for no in game reason/benefit.


I cannot see how any sensible player could find fault with:-
1) Heavily penalising any CMDR who illegally destroys another Pilots Federation member,
2) The game offering legal PvP in the shape of for example missions/tasks where (in OPEN) you know you face the chance of encountering hostile CMDRs on counter missions. Consider what could be achieved in Powerplay alone? Pivotal battles around a station to effect the outcome between two powers. CMDRs trying to enforce a blockade. CMDRs trying to break the blockade. CMDRs trying to run the blockade to get supplies in, or civilians out. Surely all sounds a bit more sensible and rewarding than interdicting CMDRs who are not even outfitted for PvP and blowing them up?

I don't think you'll be able to talk sense into someone like this person. They get off on making someone miserable because that's all they have, and they make a lot of noise like a spoilt child when there is actual accountability. According to them, because the controls in the game are not yet up to scratch apparently means that anyone who has been killed had it coming, and it was their divine right.

I'm not saying PVP and crime aren't a viable gameplay option, but there is a negligible amount of control mechanics in the game to limit this gameplay, so it ends up with griefing and mindless murder instead of intuative robbery and violence.

Just like in other games, you'll always get some bad eggs who hide behind the internet like it's their mother's skirt while they throw rocks and insults at people. Yet none of them are brave enough to go and do it in public because there is accountability and they'll probably get the daylight knocked out of them. It's sad and frustrating that people who just want to play the game have to deal with their nonsense. Frontier will eventually start losing their player-base (if it hasn't already) unless things change.

 

[Weps]

I am here to violence spaceships. You are in spaceships. The end.

That's not the premise on which this game has been sold to tens of thousands of Kickstarter and after-Kickstarter backers.

 

[Ralor]

It looks like you're the one throwing around insults here.

That's not insults, it making an apt comparison about the sort of people who grief others over the internet. If you somehow feel that it describes you and you take offense at it, then you're free to do so. But please don't try and twist our words to make others out like we're being unreasonable when we have a valid concern, that would be incredibly immature. This is forum post is about griefing in the game so we don't need people doing such things here, we're discussing the problem and solutions. On that note, playing a game a certain way because you CAN, does not mean it SHOULD be played that way or that it must stay that way. For example, just because it was possible to stack large amounts of donation missions out in 17 draconis a while back, does not mean that was how it was meant to be played or how it should be played. Player could spend a few million credits to get fast and easy ranks up for the federation, instead of doing other kinds of missions in other systems. So FD took steps to reduce the issue. Why should this not be another issue to be attended to when there is imbalance and gameplay issues?

 

[Deadspin]

I've said it before a dozen times and I'll say it again:

I've played in Open for over two years, since the original Gamma soft-launch.
I'm not some hardcore pvp enthusiast, nor have I partaken in Engineering very much (my current ship has zero engineer mods).

I rarely encounter hostile players. The handful of times I have it's been a relatively short encounter. I've lost some ships, I've destroyed some ships.

Open is what you make of it. I don't flock to CGs or hot spots so I rarely ever have to contend with the hostilities. I visited both CG ports on Saturday though and of the 15 or so players I encountered, nobody even looked twice at anyone else. I'm in a poverty fit eploracombatconda too, so it's not like I'm not a juicy gank target. 7D drives too My cruise speed doesn't even top 200m/s haha.

TL;DR - Open is what you make of it. If you make it hard, it will be hard, if you play smart, it will be easy as pie.

 

[Ralor]

I've said it before a dozen times and I'll say it again:

I've played in Open for over two years, since the original Gamma soft-launch.
I'm not some hardcore pvp enthusiast, nor have I partaken in Engineering very much (my current ship has zero engineer mods).

I rarely encounter hostile players. The handful of times I have it's been a relatively short encounter. I've lost some ships, I've destroyed some ships.

Open is what you make of it. I don't flock to CGs or hot spots so I rarely ever have to contend with the hostilities. I visited both CG ports on Saturday though and of the 15 or so players I encountered, nobody even looked twice at anyone else. I'm in a poverty fit eploracombatconda too, so it's not like I'm not a juicy gank target. 7D drives too My cruise speed doesn't even top 200m/s haha.

TL;DR - Open is what you make of it. If you make it hard, it will be hard, if you play smart, it will be easy as pie.

That I understand, but if the engineers have taught us anything, it's that some things are simply up to chance. Many people may have had less encounters than you, in the same way that some have had more. I've had griefing happen on weeknights as well as weekends. These blasted griefers should stick to a schedule! Just joking. As you've said, we could justplay open and avoid hotspots, but that is counter-intuitive and also a poor solution. If someone is playing a game to have fun and enjoy different aspect of the game, should they have to avoid so much of the game because they might be griefed? In that regard, solo and private play are good alternatives, but still lacks in addressing other issues. I've enjoyed playing in open quite a bit and this CG currently has been fun, with many polite and friendly players. That didn't stop an engineered player from interdicting me and killing me within 100Ls of the target station in a medium security system with 0 system security action and next to no consequences. It didn't matter that I got back into SC because I got pulled right out of it again not 10s later. A simple fix for that issue might be a cooldown on the FSD interdictor.

I've also been playing on and off for years, but it's not just been once or twice. I've lost my ship to players who have no interest in my cargo or the system I am in, it's simply because they can get away with it. What we're talking about here is accountability. SHOULD there be systems in place to make security status and crime enforcement more relevant? Because the current lack of it is most likely a large part of why it does happen.

CG are about getting the community together to work on something bigger than just their own solo journey. I think it's a great system in place to get players working together but due to how the game is in it's current state, CG are very vulnerable to griefers. I'm not against having CGs in variety so that some are more vulnerable to interference than others, but the fact that we now have a little box coming up telling us the security status of the target system is not much more than polite fiction, because some NPC or play can simply jump there too and do what they like.

 

[smiths121]

My friend used to play most of the time in SOLO. More recently he's been trying OPEN. Needless to say, after witnessing some pointless (cynical) ganking, he'll most likely just return to SOLO. And who can blame him.

The game is ignoring mindless destruction... It has no ingame purpose, yet the game does nothing to deter it. Why?

Personally, I think it's becoming and more common, given people getting more and more frustrated with the limited (non-existant) PvP gameplay. Add to this basically no penalty against it... why not do it?



How does my (1) prevent the PvP crow playing the game, when all of my (2) was about actually offering something meaningful, more interesting and constructive to do via legal PvP mechanics. ie: Tasks/missions to specifically pit CMDRs agaisnt CMDRs if you so wish? All of which is clearly more graceful and surely interesting than randomly interdicting innocent CMDRs (most likely not interested in PvP at the time) and opening fire on them?

And of course, there would be nothing stopping CMDRs simply both turning off "Report Crime" and blowing the pee out of each other.


In short, offer easy to access, interesting legal PvP, and penalise mindless/pointless PvP illegal destruction. Seems simple and logical to me...

I hope your friend continues playing, in whatever mode best suits him.

To be honest, although I struggled a bit, I generally hoped that we would keep the harder 2.1 NPCs, it did rather mean there was little difference between some solid and hollow triangles, and rather made the gnaker debate somewhat redundant as the NPCs were probably better at it (they could just appear right behind you and interdict you - no skill to avoid in SC). I understand why FD did not keep this though (it was a bug!).

I agree a lot of non-consenting PvP is mindless, pointless and actually very nasty. Having played in open since we could first share a galaxy, my experience is that non-consenting PvP has reduced a lot. It might be I am more skilled at avoiding it these days, so I see less of it - hence my view that is has gone down, and your view it has increased. I do not think I am that good though, so could not detect any subconscious bias on my part.

I agree with your last sentance about penalising mindless.pointless PvP. My problem is your mechanics treats all non-consenting PvP as mindless/pointless. It is simply is not true, and thus I cannot agree with your C&P point 1. PP, BGS and CGs are all areas of PvE function where PvP interaction is not mindless/pointless.

PP - OK I have only taken propoganda for the blue rinse princess. FD were considering bringing in additional rewards in open for some PP actions because the PvP made it more difficult and to encourage PP in Open.

BGS - well I enjoyed PvP interaction with Contrail beginning of the year when a few (far too few), attempted to stop them establishing their home in Anlave. As getting the crime registered on our death was part of out plan for the Influence and state affects - I could not turn "report crimes against me" off. I do not think Contrail or I would have had so much fun in the more sterile version of Open with your point 1. It would have effectively been a PVE race which we clearly would have lost a lot quicker.

CGs. The Fed CG for expansion in the Pleiades area back in the summer, a classic case of PvP and PvE interacting. There was a single CG with success or failure. I thought the Empire guys did a fantastic job in disrupting this, using both PvP and PvE. Some went too far when they invaded Morbius. That is the bit that should have been punished with shadow bans, and the lockdown should have remained.

Report a Crime probably needs to become transparent. If one side has report crimes turned on and the other does not, it causes annoyance now for PVPers. Change the penalties to severe as you suggest - and I think you accidentally encourage ganking, not stop it. The "suicide Eagle/Fighter on acid" is going to become very prevalent. Rather than ramming, I need to get in front of your weapons, to get them to hit me and destroy me. Sever punishments for the target, and I am the victim. I've seen tactics like this be used in Res sites with the current C&P, imagine if the consequence were serious.

At the end of the day, PvE focussed players and PvP focus players want different things from the game. For PP, CGs and BGS if there is a mode that allows PvP, there will be non-consenting PvP that is not mindless or pointless. Trying to control that interaction with in game C&P, just mean the gankers have to work a bit harder and use their brains, it does not remove the griefers or gankers. It does have affect on other legitimate PvP though. Haivng read and taken part in a number of C&P threads, I cannot see how C&P is going to affect the griefers and gankers. I hope I am wrong about this by the way!

Griefing and Combat Logging are anti-social behaviour that can not be controlled with in-game mechanics alone, it has to be out of game action such as shadow bans. I am not obsessed with encouraging players that would not enjoy today's open back into open, however my understanding is some wish the social benefits of today's open, without the PvP. So my belief is, the quickest, and least development resource way to allow everyone to get on and play the game is 2 open modes.

Simon

 

[Deadspin]

That I understand, but if the engineers have taught us anything, it's that some things are simply up to chance. Many people may have had less encounters than you, in the same way that some have had more. I've had griefing happen on weeknights as well as weekends. These blasted griefers should stick to a schedule! Just joking. As you've said, we could justplay open and avoid hotspots, but that is counter-intuitive and also a poor solution. If someone is playing a game to have fun and enjoy different aspect of the game, should they have to avoid so much of the game because they might be griefed? In that regard, solo and private play are good alternatives, but still lacks in addressing other issues. I've enjoyed playing in open quite a bit and this CG currently has been fun, with many polite and friendly players. That didn't stop an engineered player from interdicting me and killing me within 100Ls of the target station in a medium security system with 0 system security action and next to no consequences. It didn't matter that I got back into SC because I got pulled right out of it again not 10s later. A simple fix for that issue might be a cooldown on the FSD interdictor.

I've also been playing on and off for years, but it's not just been once or twice. I've lost my ship to players who have no interest in my cargo or the system I am in, it's simply because they can get away with it. What we're talking about here is accountability. SHOULD there be systems in place to make security status and crime enforcement more relevant? Because the current lack of it is most likely a large part of why it does happen.

CG are about getting the community together to work on something bigger than just their own solo journey. I think it's a great system in place to get players working together but due to how the game is in it's current state, CG are very vulnerable to griefers. I'm not against having CGs in variety so that some are more vulnerable to interference than others, but the fact that we now have a little box coming up telling us the security status of the target system is not much more than polite fiction, because some NPC or play can simply jump there too and do what they like.

I've pushed for people to enjoy open by avoiding hotspots in the past but I realize I was wrong in suggesting such a thing. I understand where you're coming from, I do, and I've been advocating instead for Frontier to look at CCP and how they implemented their security forces in EVE Online.

I think something like Concord (Perhaps not as supremely OP) would go a long way to helping cull the rash of pointless ganking going on in medium or high security systems, but to completely change the security funtions would require almost a complete re-tooling of the entire game under the ideas I've had. Implementing true high/medium/low/null space and corresponding security forces for each status, as well as a redistribution of the various security status' in order to provide pockets of high and anarchy space for players to operate out of without simply restricting the more nefarious types to the outer regions of the bubble. All of that coupled with new, more lucrative missions to go from one's safe space into the more dangerous (for them) areas to support federation/empire/alliance objectives, etc. CCPs bounty system to avoid exploitation of massive bounties while also giving players the ability to place bounties on other players and a more actively involved bounty hunting system perhaps in the galnet or at stations.

At least then, with a security force that could actually make a well engineered FDL pilot face the rebuy screen more often than not when he/she decides to parade around in medium/high security space, seal clubbing, could we begin to see a drop off in the amount of times it happens.

Engineers should also go the way of the dodo IMO. Like Powerplay, it's been nothing but trouble and broken mechanics.

 

[Karunamon]

I'd just like to point out that dime-a-dozen Asian grindfest pay2win MMOs have figured out the strange and arcane art of not allowing newbies to be ganked in newbie areas.

For it to be missing from something priced at the AAA level is just plain lazy and insulting.

 

[thirstyfish]

It's medium security. They showed up, just not soon enough to help you.

In high security systems, they'll probably show up before you explode. They might even drive off your attacker if he is not fully engineered. But you'll probably still explode.

They could make security more effective, but that would mean harder NPC's.

Harder NPC's make for unhappy carebears.

just harder security NPCs. Wouldn't be that hard to implement, seeing as those NPCs have similar naming conventions, all the names have security somewhere in the name.

 

[Ralor]

I've pushed for people to enjoy open by avoiding hotspots in the past but I realize I was wrong in suggesting such a thing. I understand where you're coming from, I do, and I've been advocating instead for Frontier to look at CCP and how they implemented their security forces in EVE Online.

I think something like Concord (Perhaps not as supremely OP) would go a long way to helping cull the rash of pointless ganking going on in medium or high security systems, but to completely change the security funtions would require almost a complete re-tooling of the entire game under the ideas I've had. Implementing true high/medium/low/null space and corresponding security forces for each status, as well as a redistribution of the various security status' in order to provide pockets of high and anarchy space for players to operate out of without simply restricting the more nefarious types to the outer regions of the bubble. All of that coupled with new, more lucrative missions to go from one's safe space into the more dangerous (for them) areas to support federation/empire/alliance objectives, etc. CCPs bounty system to avoid exploitation of massive bounties while also giving players the ability to place bounties on other players and a more actively involved bounty hunting system perhaps in the galnet or at stations.

At least then, with a security force that could actually make a well engineered FDL pilot face the rebuy screen more often than not when he/she decides to parade around in medium/high security space, seal clubbing, could we begin to see a drop off in the amount of times it happens.

Engineers should also go the way of the dodo IMO. Like Powerplay, it's been nothing but trouble and broken mechanics.

You are definitely not wrong. I also had CCP in mind when considering how security would work if I were to implement it. It took them time to tweak it but the EVE security zoning really worked. Maybe FD can dedicate a patch/update to bringing changes like this and others to reduce/fix other issues. I see this taking time and compromise though.. I'd settle for increased presence of patrols and reaction time, more ships in the security service patrols and better monitoring of their home system occupants. Also to have stations and outposts deny docking to pilots who are wanted in that system, instead of relying on the ships to scan before they rush through the mail-slot.

It's medium security. Security showed up, just not soon enough to help you.

In high security systems, they'll probably show up before you explode. They might even drive off your attacker if he is not fully engineered. But you'll probably still explode.

They could make security more effective, but that would mean harder NPC's.

Harder NPC's make for unhappy carebears.

When I did get interdicted, it happened twice and still no security in sight. And again just recently, NPC interdicted me and tried attacking me appxoimately 110Ls from the same station. I destroyed the NPC ship and waited. 5 minutes after the interdiction and not a single security ship showed. And yes, obviously I checked the Report crimes against me and it was indeed ON. So where is this security?

I'd just like to point out that dime-a-dozen Asian grindfest pay2win MMOs have figured out the strange and arcane art of not allowing newbies to be ganked in newbie areas.

For it to be missing from something priced at the AAA level is just plain lazy and insulting.

Wow, I shouldn't have laughed as hard as I did at this! Trite but true, protect the children(read, newbies).

 

[prd]

For the record, yesterday these 2 guys in cobras were suiciding people in front of the cg port. FOR HOURS. I took a long break to do stuff in the house and they were still there hours later. Another guy was spamming the chat telling people to block them and exit the instance. I'm *sure* the two were 12 and having the fun of their life because I would have done it too. Not the whole day maybe. AND it makes me laugh because it reminds of 90's games and my stupid deaths at Britain's bridge at the hands of the 69863983992 billion pk's camped there. In the end I had fun popping chaffs and flares like a Vietnam-era bomber over Hanoi each time I landed. They must have died a trillion times apparently unless there is some trick to escape station fire. As I said this stuff is funny if you dont care too much about dying every once in a while, but I was carrying oil, not gold, or I wouldn't have risked it. I think that if it's allowed to pvp at stations like this, then it shouldn't be a high security system... security should mean either no-pvp areas in public places, or concord-style justice... while in low/nosec I'm happy to expect a fleet of pirate titans blocking the entrance.

 

[Robbieboy43]

Tried it when i first got the game...... Too many A-Holes just like most PVP games... (They Just want to mess it up for everyone else)

I play on Private all the time now!!!

 

[Exigeous]

Unwarranted mass murder and blatant attack on a member of the pilot federation is HEAVILY frowned upon by the pilot federation itself.

The system in question is THE HQ for the pilot federation and essentially a core world similar to Earth and Achenar.

It should be close to a death sentence to commit to an attack inside these systems due to their security and players should be wanted across the galaxy.

Also, there is no proper PVP in 90% of these attacks since the attacker usually have a far heavier and more dangerous ships than their target since these people VERY seldom attack someone of "equal" firepower.

You are 100% t-totally couldn't be more CORRECT here. While I've clearly "defended" legal play (ganking) I in no way endorse it. For me these are issues of ethics, issues of right and wrong. As I've said multiple times no one, NO ONE, has the right to selectively follow the rules they like and not those they don't like in a group based system. You wanna shoot up heroin at home, you absolutely should be able to (in principal). You want to shoot up heroin in a mall or drive after you are breaking the law. You don't get to make the public decision and in our legal system in the US you don't get to make the private decision either. We all live in a society and as such we all have to follow the rules laid out by those we elect to lead. Do we have to agree with them, no, not at all. I tell you what, go find a cop in a parking lot while sitting in your driver's seat. Chug a beer in front of him, first telling him you're not going anywhere so you won't be driving, so it should be okay for you to drink that beer. What do you think would happen next?

Sure that's extreme as this is a game we're talking about but the core issue is ethics. I very *very* rarely ride on an ethical high horse, that said the one I'm on right now is very comfortable and as such I'll stay here.

Again @Snarfbuckle (great name BTW) you are 100% right the penalties should be FAR more sever here. Because they aren't we have two choices, we can exhibit unethical behavior and cheat or we can lobby Frontier to change the system. Realize I'm in no way saying the current system is "right", I'm simply saying that we all have to follow it, period. In fact lately I've gone out of my way to try to make things better. Last night I got sent to the rebuy screen 4 times, lost $40M of my $90M - how? Dropping in on gankers who were attacking traders at the CG. I managed to save 3 ships, couldn't get there in time for an Asp. Each time I had a very nice chat with the commander I helped when I spawned in the station - and I even had a nice chat with the gankers that killed me. I wasn't mad at all, far from it. I was playing a role. I usually play pirate, this time I played escort/protector. It was a ton of fun and I saw a number of rather amazingly engineered ships. Like an Orca with 5000 armor who killed me from 1 ring of shields to dead in one ram. It was impressive. He and I chatted for about 5 minutes after, where I was tying him up saving other players.

At this point the subject it mute. Some are going to choose to cheat, I hope when I find them I get video evidence so I can report them. I hope Frontier starts to do something about it (yes I know about the controversy). I was even winged with an Anaconda last night who combat logged, and I reported him (and he was "on my side"). I'll choose to spend my time with those I consider to be ethical and will stop wasting my time on those who are not.

 

[rrobes]

The observed lack of inaction by FD seems to indicate that they may not want/can't easily change the C&P, even if they have asked for feedback previously, same for clogging.

To my knowledge, FD has never said one way or another if they can even prevent/track clogging in their software/hardware system. Personally, the number of server connection errors I have experienced seems to be on the uptick, can the system sense a difference between that and clogging?

Unless FD gives a definitive answer on clogging prevention/tracking, all we are doing are burning up pixels on these threads. Right now you are chided, that you "ungracefully" left the game, as if FD expected gentlemanly behavior from everyone, good luck with that one.

Past game history shows a pattern of "balancing" the game, but much of this "balancing" seems to be made up of changing numeric values in the existing code, easily done, instant effects. Other desired/requested changes may be more complex but that shouldn't mean that they never get attention.

IMHO, ganking/griefing is more than likely supported within FD, adds to the "dangerous" part of the game, but ganking/griefing is unbalanced, the advantage is to the attacker. The attack is random, usually superior in number/equipment, and repercussions woeful. Further, the victim, usually powerless to retaliate, has no redress and if they complain, the standard litany of "git gud" "working as intended" "stop you whinge" is trotted out.

So the victim loses the attack, his cargo and ship, is off to the re-buy screen and is ridiculed. Why is anyone surprised if there is some anger there?

To those that say, "well, I'm okay with millions in re-buy costs", good for you, others may not share you feelings as they maybe can't afford the loss and the lost game time.

If flying in open is dangerous, then make it dangerous as well for those that have adopted criminality as a game play style; example: if the griefers/gankers want combat, give it to them with overpowered security force NPC's pursuing them for their misdeeds. The changes would add to the "spice" of the game.

 

[Deadspin]

I'd just like to point out that dime-a-dozen Asian grindfest pay2win MMOs have figured out the strange and arcane art of not allowing newbies to be ganked in newbie areas.

For it to be missing from something priced at the AAA level is just plain lazy and insulting.

Big difference between games like Aion and Elite: Dangerous.

 

[Deadspin]

Security is a joke.

When I was partaking in Power Play in order to get prismatic shields I used to sit in high pop/high security systems and interdict/kill the couriers (NPC) as they came through. Every now and then I'd get a wing of 3 and by the time I finished off the third in my slowboat laser/missile python, the first two system security eagles would have just shown up. Kill them, wait a bit, kill the next group of security drops.

I could go through 4-5 drops until the wings of Anaconda's showed up. Then I'd have to turn tail and jump out. When System Security shows up it should be a full wing, at a minimum, of Vultures.

 

[T.H. Fox]

I play primarily in Solo or Mobius beacuse I'm frequently on a semi-craptastical hotel internet connection, and the more player signals I have to process, the greater chance I have of latency or getting dropped.

That is not, however, the only reason. I'm not keen on PVP, but I can handle it without grinding my molars to dust usually, especially if everyone is on relatively equal footing and it comes down to a test of wits and skill. The problem is that PVP in Elite is anything but when it comes to gankers, especially after Engineers dropped.

Prior to Engineers, there was some parity; if I were in my Cobra and got jumped by someone in an FDL, I could kick all pips to engines and stand a chance of getting away. Anacondas would be left in the dust. Post-Engineers however, a heavily modified gankmobile has either enough speed to catch me, enough "alpha strike" power to pop me immediately, or both. WIth the limitations on my play time and the fact that I'm still coming to grips with Engineers resource farming after a very long break, there is no way I can effectively compete against that, and I don't pick nor permit fights that I have zero chance of winning if I can help it.

And I know, "git gud, git engeeerdz" and all that horse hockey... problem is, I work long hours in strange places, and neither have the time nor the inclination to make a second full-time job out of Elite. I'm slowly getting my modest fleet tooled up, but it's taking time. In the meantime, I'd rather sit down, relax, run some missions or go see something cool than deal with someone pulling me over and ganking me without preamble just because it gives them a tiny space-chub.

 

[Maelkhor]

I saw a guy in an engineered corvette once tanking at least a dozen or so NPC's, as well as everything my little old Viper could dish out.
Not sure what an appropriate security response would look like for a ship like that. Probably pretty sweet.

I wouldn't care for a CCP High Sec like security force in High Sec ED systems, With military grade reserved interdictors (+500 mass lock) , the npc already cheats in ED with alien tech sensors, last time I tested my stealth fitted DBS, and inadvertently scratched the paint of a federation security ship in a high-rez, they still got 90%+ accuracy on me at 3km+

 

[T.H. Fox]

I saw a guy in an engineered corvette once tanking at least a dozen or so NPC's, as well as everything my little old Viper could dish out.

Not sure what an appropriate security response would look like for a ship like that. Probably pretty sweet.

"Warning. Capital ship signature detected."

*wwwwwWHOP!*

*Inception noise*