Multicrew trolling - it works!

[JetJaguar]

I have played Multi crew once with a mate. The first thing I went to do was to look over at my Fire Groups to see if I (as the helm) could choose what weapons/etc the gunner had access too.

It could be as simple as; any items I have a assigned to a fire group they cant use, any not assigned they can use.

This functionality would be really useful.

 

[SeaFireliv]

Yeh! Far better if they kept quiet about such issues and instead the problem left to quietly fester!

I mean, it's not like it's best if issues like this are highlighted, discussed and ideally then addressed!

People are smarter than you think- they figure these things out pretty fast then warn people on the forums. Saying "I was messing other people`s games to prove how bad the game mechanic is" is much like slashing a bunch of people with a knife then saying you did it to highlight how bad knives are, then expecting a pat on the back.

Also his very way of talking looked like he was enjoying himself in an almost sadistic way, he even said he enjoyed it, far from an attitude that looked like he cared at all about the game or the team itself.

 

[Ian Skippy]

I think what`s particularly interesting is how these kids have the gall to come on a forum and boast about it. i`ve seen it several times here.

Once upon a time such griefers would have had at least the shame to keep their mouths shut.

Most griefers need attention. If need be negative attention from anonymous strangers online. Have pity on them.

 

[Dathayn]

You do realize that, in this context, what you're saying translates literally to: "If you use this new multiplayer feature to play with anyone you dont already know, and it backfires, then that goes on you and not on the troll who chose to ruin your day for their own amusement" right? Its basically the video game version of blaming the victim.

Unless you're going to institute EVE Style player bounties and systems, then outright allowing trolling in your game is WRONG. Its a bug, an exploit. You fix it. You dont go all forum dad and "please guys, this wouldnt be nice, sthop it." This is the internet. Have you SEEN 4Chan and other such sites? Appealing to people's higher nature only works when they HAVE one.

Either institute tools and systems to stop trolling using MC, or this feature is as dead as...well, every other feature since the flight model, now I think of it.

Hey, i said there are lots of problems and if u think i support trolls and griefers u would be pretty far out mistaken. My larger point was that by now we all have to accept that if some punk can do something, they will because the rules allow it. Fix the rules? Heck yeah i'm onboard. But like logging into open with the current setup, multicrew with randoms is a risk. If u do it you should watch your crew like you do hollow squares on the radar.

Hope that's a bit clearer

 

[NeilF]

People are smarter than you think- they figure these things out pretty fast then warn people on the forums. Saying "I was messing other people`s games to prove how bad the game mechanic is" is much like slashing a bunch of people with a knife then saying you did it to highlight how bad knives are, then expecting a pat on the back.

Also his very way of talking looked like he was enjoying himself in an almost sadistic way, he even said he enjoyed it, far from an attitude that looked like he cared at all about the game or the team itself.

Possibly...

But the net effect of this thread at least is an FD member of staff has posted their comments on the matter, a lot of the community have posted theirs, and I suspect the matter is now higher profile within FD than it might otherwise have been.

Given we're talking about basic oversights/options in handling multi-crew, which I suspect are fairly easy to address, I'd take the above as a good thing. ie: It needs fixing, I suspect it now stands a better chance of being fixed...

 

[Arkku]

If folk are going to troll each other, there's a limit to how much protection we can (or should) put in place.

It is not an "if", it is "when", no matter how much you and I would prefer it to be otherwise. If you keep designing mechanisms in this game with the idea that it's not going to happen very often or that you (Frontier) can handle it on a case-by-case basis, it's only going to get worse. Even if it happens rarely, experiences like someone ruining hours or days of progress for the lulz can permanently put a player off the game or away from open or at the very least from that feature (multi-crew) for good.

As for putting protection in place, you can put the tools in place for players to protect themselves. For example, the fairly simple suggestion that helm should be able to put any modules in their ship in groups, and groups can be assigned to other players, would allow limiting access to SCBs and/or heatsinks, and it would even allow players to create their own "roles" for multi-crew by giving access to a different set of features, so this is not even something that should be done specifically against trolling, but as an overall improvement of the game and for increase of player agency in controlling their gameplay. (Of course this particular solution covers only part of the problem, but my point is not that I have all the answers and solutions ready at the moment - instead, I mean to say that the whole approach should be "give players building blocks" rather than "build in a specific set of cases you handle".)

 

[SeaFireliv]

Possibly...

But the net effect of this thread at least is an FD member of staff has posted their comments on the matter, a lot of the community have posted theirs, and I suspect the matter is now higher profile within FD than it might otherwise have been.

Given we're talking about basic oversights/options in handling multi-crew, which I suspect are fairly easy to address, I'd take the above as a good thing. ie: It needs fixing, I suspect it now stands a better chance of being fixed...

I thought he might be a blessing in disguise, but that don`t mean I`m going to thank or reward him. He`s an expert at deceptive talking as he demonstrated in his opening post. "I don`t know the controls!" While destroying the ship, for example.

You can`t trust anyone like that, even here.

 

[Harmoniser]

Isn't this only a problem, in terms of what the op wrote, if the player base is full of d#cks. So do we first need to sort out why there are so many d#icks playing elite and how to turn them into normal people, who don't play out there social problems online. maybe its just easier to get rid of or ban those that are there to annoy and ruin the game for others. or is that what is being suggested.

 

[thirstyfish]

Isn't this only a problem, in terms of what the op wrote, if the player base is full of d#cks. So do we first need to sort out why there are so many d#icks playing elite and how to turn them into normal people, who don't play out there social problems online. maybe its just easier to get rid of or ban those that are there to annoy and ruin the game for others. or is that what is being suggested.

I think what most people want is the ability to take control of SCBs and Heatsinks away from multicrew without the need to totally deactivate the modules.

Its a bit much to ask FD to somehow police all trolling and whatnot, but its not too much to ask for some tools that would allow us to protect ourselves properly. The suggestion is simply having the tools to implement the idea of least privilege. Unless it is someone you know and trust, they don't need access to the SCBs or heatsinks and control of that can stay with the helm. Right now, the only option is to handicap yourself by deactivating the module entirely. That isn't a viable long-term solution.

 

[Minoo Minou]

I think what most people want is the ability to take control of SCBs and Heatsinks away from multicrew without the need to totally deactivate the modules.

Its a bit much to ask FD to somehow police all trolling and whatnot, but its not too much to ask for some tools that would allow us to protect ourselves properly. The suggestion is simply having the tools to implement the idea of least privilege. Unless it is someone you know and trust, they don't need access to the SCBs or heatsinks and control of that can stay with the helm. Right now, the only option is to handicap yourself by deactivating the module entirely. That isn't a viable long-term solution.

No, you can assign yourself (the helm) a firegroup with scb/heatsink and voilà, the crew can't use them.

 

[CMDR-AD]

Possibly...

But the net effect of this thread at least is an FD member of staff has posted their comments on the matter, a lot of the community have posted theirs, and I suspect the matter is now higher profile within FD than it might otherwise have been.

Given we're talking about basic oversights/options in handling multi-crew, which I suspect are fairly easy to address, I'd take the above as a good thing. ie: It needs fixing, I suspect it now stands a better chance of being fixed...

I am also happy to see the overall result, and am very happy that Mr. Sammarco has taken the time to post and say that the door is open for some further improvements to make Multi-crew truly usable in a real-world multiplayer environment.

At the present, however, the number of bugs that arrived with 2.3 would seem to be at an all-time high. The workload must be massive on this, so while I have hope for improvements to the Multi-crew system during the remainder of the 2.x Season, I realize that it may not be an immediate priority.

 

[Dutchman141]

Most griefers need attention. If need be negative attention from anonymous strangers online. Have pity on them.

I don't have pitty for their deranged way of interacting with others, every person with even a tiny awareness of social behaviour knows that actions like the ones OP demonstrated are anti social, immature and plain dumb.
If negative attention is the only way you can get some acknowledgement from others then you're having a serious problem.
OP seems to be part of that category judging by his urge to post his despicable behaviour shamelessly and emphasizing the fun he has doing it on this forum.
I'm well aware that there are plenty of these socially disconnected individuals present in this world, that doesn't mean they deserve any pitty or understanding though.
Accepting them despite their purposely neglect of any social skills will just confirm their right of existence and doing.
Some may have a reason for their behavior but that reason can never be used as an excuse unless the person can be held completely unaccountable for their actions, I do pitty those because they can't even help themselfs let alone others.

The phrase that it's called Elite "Dangerous" can't be applied here because you see this kind of behavior everywhere.

To say that multicrew works as intended like FD so blatantly states is utter ignorance denying the problem these individuals create and giving them a free pass to continue with their disruptive actions.
It's either naive or ignorant to shake this off with "it works as intended" or "It's not a nice thing to do" especially when this problem has been mentioned to happen before the release of this feature.

I'll get my coat now and return to solo play.

 

[thirstyfish]

No, you can assign yourself (the helm) a firegroup with scb/heatsink and voilà, the crew can't use them.

Most people don't bother with a firegroup because there are hotkeys. Kinda redundant. And if you already have more than 1 firegroup anyways, this just makes things weirder when you go to switch.

I have the firegroups of my ships memorized. Switching is nearly automatic. Adding this just to deal with multicrew would mess that up. Easier for me to just not bother with multicrew in the first place.

Not to mention that the firegroup thing is not inherently obvious. A permission flag (simply a boolean value) makes things much more clear. Clarity of communication is important.

 

[ries]

keep supplying them with salt guys

 

[NeilF]

Isn't this only a problem, in terms of what the op wrote, if the player base is full of d#cks. So do we first need to sort out why there are so many d#icks playing elite and how to turn them into normal people, who don't play out there social problems online. maybe its just easier to get rid of or ban those that are there to annoy and ruin the game for others. or is that what is being suggested.

How do you decide who needs banning? On what basis/premise? After one report? Two? Is this a manual process handled by FD?

Far better to - in this case - give CMDRs the ability to better control their ship and dictate what they wish crew member to have control over. And in the case of general griefing in the game (and I call mindless destruction for the lolz that - it's my term), far better if a Crime and Punishment system in the game logically diswades individuals from toxic behaviour IMHO - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot

 

[Ian Skippy]

I don't have pitty for their deranged way of interacting with others, every person with even a tiny awareness of social behaviour knows that actions like the ones OP demonstrated are anti social, immature and plain dumb.
If negative attention is the only way you can get some acknowledgement from others then you're having a serious problem.
OP seems to be part of that category judging by his urge to post his despicable behaviour shamelessly and emphasizing the fun he has doing it on this forum.
I'm well aware that there are plenty of these socially disconnected individuals present in this world, that doesn't mean they deserve any pitty or understanding though.
Accepting them despite their purposely neglect of any social skills will just confirm their right of existence and doing.
Some may have a reason for their behavior but that reason can never be used as an excuse unless the person can be held completely unaccountable for their actions, I do pitty those because they can't even help themselfs let alone others.

The phrase that it's called Elite "Dangerous" can't be applied here because you see this kind of behavior everywhere.

To say that multicrew works as intended like FD so blatantly states is utter ignorance denying the problem these individuals create and giving them a free pass to continue with their disruptive actions.
It's either naive or ignorant to shake this off with "it works as intended" or "It's not a nice thing to do" especially when this problem has been mentioned to happen before the release of this feature.

I'll get my coat now and return to solo play.

Am I a bad person for accepting the OP's right to exist?

 

[Dutchman141]

Am I a bad person for accepting the OP's right to exist?

No not their right of existence as a person but their right of existence as a deliberate anti social entity.
There's no way you can justify the behaviour shown in these cases unless the individual can't be held accountable.

Everybody has the right to exist, not everybody's behaviour.

 

[thirstyfish]

Am I a bad person for accepting the OP's right to exist?

The OP is allowed to exist, but everyone else is at liberty to condemn his/her actions. Just because someone exists does not mean that their actions are free from condemnation.

If the world worked by your logic, murderers would go free simply because they exist. That doesn't make for a functioning society, or any society at all.

You aren't a bad person for accepting that the OP is allowed to exist. You would be a bad person if you condone or even propagate his/her actions.

 

[Crash1099]

Nice video someone talking about it on youtube. Wow the comments are brutal.

 

[Saxon Kili]

With Nerf bats?
About the only thing that wont hurt the owner

Welcome to my ship. You are not allowed to do anything here. Enjoy. lol