It does not mean its game core implementation can be ignored.
This simple thing would prevent a lot of complaints and a lot of better suggestion for Crime/punishment/reward.
Last edited:
Deliberate Ramming
- Thread starter shadragon
- Start date
It does not mean its game core implementation can be ignored.
This simple thing would prevent a lot of complaints and a lot of better suggestion for Crime/punishment/reward.
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
This, 100 times. It's one thing to interdict a clean T6 in a CG system and smash them to pieces - fair enough. But popping defenceless, parked ships that have no chance to defend is something different altogeteher.
Also, calling both of the above examples PVP is a bit of a joke. I understand when PVP is about a skirmish of more or less equal opponents. That's player VERSUS player. Blowing ships that can do nothing about it or can only run away is not much of VERSUS, it's just bullying.
Sorry but it is Player VERSUS Player. One wants to kill VERSUS the other who wants to survive.
Players who wants to survive have already all the tools in-game to do it. The fight for an explorer/trader is not in shooting back but in escaping.
The game already offers everything to defend ourself. It is only the player decision that will determine if it is a win (escaping) or a lost (rebuy screen).
Last edited:
By your definition of bullying, EVE is nothing but a bullying simulator then?
Here's my order of preference for the outcome of a karma system, descending from most to least desirable:
- eradicates griefing while still permitting some non-consensual but fair and immersive PvP
- completely erases non-consensual PvP and gankers move on to just doing consensual duels and wing fights
- drives gankers fully out of the game with ship loss and shadowbans
- fails at its core goal and allows griefing to continue unchecked at the expense of the majority of players
Last edited:
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
But I'm there to haul cargo for CG - do you suggest I do it in a PVP kitted FDL?
And with all due respect - I didn't lose until my ship blows up. I know how to run away, I did it many times, recently from 3 FDL's in a Python loaded up with cargo, made it to high wake with 20-something hull integrity left
99% of my game time is in Open. (As an anecdote I was even recently killed by Harry and his 2 friends at an alien wreck site. Luckily - a split second after my ship blew up I had a disconnection error. After logging back in, instead of a rebuy screen, I found myself back at the planet side with 38% hull still intact. I contacted Harry to confirm it wasn't a CL and he's actually seen my ship blowing up on his screen too. We chatted a bit and went our own ways).
I'm not talking about the definition of PVP. Plus, It's all semantics really. I'm talking about putting things in certain context. To me attacking a ship that's only choice is to run away is not really "PVP". Especially when done for poos and giggles, rather than to for example stop a CG from being completed for RP reasons. Anyway, that's just my opinion - and you guys have yours.
::EDIT::
I only played EVE for 3 hours maybe, but basing my opinion on the reviews and various stories/articles I read - pretty much, yeah
And I really would not like Elite to become something like that. While I accept Open has it dangers, there is a certain line between being social and having fun with other players in game (even when it means killing other players or being killed for others) and just being an antisocial twunk I'll give you an example - you have killed me recently (see above) and I found it fun, even though I lost my ship (well, I didn't really due to an error, but I lost the encounter, and I have seen a rebuy screen many times before. It has never made me hide in Solo). That was fun, that was part of the dangers of being in Open. I enjoyed that, despite the defeat.
A few days later I was with couple of mates at a Barnacles site. Our ships were parked nearby, as we were there only with a short visit. All of a sudden a Cmdr logged in, right next to our ship and lo' and behold first thing he did with his PVP-kitted Cutter was to blow our defenceless ships to smitherins. We had no chance to counter his actions, no chance to escape - we couldn't do anything to prevent that (one of us managed to dismiss their ship, 2 were blown up). That was not fun, that's just intentionally causing grief to other players that you are fully aware can't do anything about it - as opposed to ganking, which you flawlessly performed on me.
Perhaps you don't see the difference, but to me there is a massive difference in those 2 scenarios.
And I am of an opinion that griefing is just as bad as combat logging, in fact combat logging IS griefing too in my eyes.
Last edited:
But I'm there to haul cargo for CG - do you suggest I do it in a PVP kitted FDL?
And with all due respect - I didn't lose until my ship blows up. I know how to run away, I did it many times, recently from 3 FDL's in a Python loaded up with cargo, made it to high wake with 20-something hull integrity left
99% of my game time is in Open. (As an anecdote I was even recently killed by Harry and his 2 friends at an alien wreck site. Luckily - a split second after my ship blew up I had a disconnection error. After logging back in, instead of a rebuy screen, I found myself back at the planet side with 38% hull still intact. I contacted Harry to confirm it wasn't a CL and he's actually seen my ship blowing up on his screen too. We chatted a bit and went our own ways).
I'm not talking about the definition of PVP. Plus, It's all semantics really. I'm talking about putting things in certain context. To me attacking a ship that's only choice is to run away is not really "PVP". Especially when done for poos and giggles, rather than to for example stop a CG from being completed for RP reasons. Anyway, that's just my opinion - and you guys have yours.
::EDIT::
I only played EVE for 3 hours maybe, but basing my opinion on the reviews and various stories/articles I read - pretty much, yeah
I'll give you an example - you have killed me recently (see above) and I found it fun, even though I lost my ship (well, I didn't really due to an error, but I lost the encounter, and I have seen a rebuy screen many times before. It has never made me hide in Solo). That was fun, that was part of the dangers of being in Open. I enjoyed that, despite the defeat.
A few days later I was with couple of mates at a Barnacles site. Our ships were parked nearby, as we were there only with a short visit. All of a sudden a Cmdr logged in, right next to our ship and lo' and behold first thing he did with his PVP-kitted Cutter was to blow our defenceless ships to smitherins. We had no chance to counter his actions, no chance to escape - we couldn't do anything to prevent that (one of us managed to dismiss their ship, 2 were blown up). That was not fun, that's just intentionally causing grief to other players that you are fully aware can't do anything about it - as opposed to ganking, which you flawlessly performed on me.
Perhaps you don't see the difference, but to me there is a massive difference in those 2 scenarios.
And I am of an opinion that griefing is just as bad as combat logging, in fact combat logging IS griefing too in my eyes.
There is nothing Frontier can do in your scenario even with a new C&P, your location was lawless the very nature of exploration is lawless... the only advice I could give you is dismiss your ship, now this will come as a surpise to many but I would prefer the beta approach to the situation, ships that are landed are invulnerable. But with some changes, the ship is only invulnerable so long as the player is not in the ship, E.g in the SRV. The SRV would still take damage as normal, AI police would still damage the ship its just that player assets wouldn't.
Its not a lore friendly idea but one that comes from a game play perspective.
This is not true. You could have dismissed your ship in order to prevent this knowing it can happen. But you chose to keep your ship parked on the planet.
No matter the intentions of the attackers. You felt griefed because of your own mistake.
Last edited:
Permit locking any area in game and only giving select CMDR's access to it would be the beginning of carving up the galaxy for specific player groups and that would be the death of this game.
It would give those with permit access a guaranteed recruiting pool and a safe place to hide when things got too hot to handle. It's absolutely sensible that FD rejected such a self serving suggestion.
It would give those with permit access a guaranteed recruiting pool and a safe place to hide when things got too hot to handle. It's absolutely sensible that FD rejected such a self serving suggestion.
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
Yes, I could have dismiss the ship, but even then he'd just kill our SRV's - so no, we could not prevent being killed. I didn't feel griefed because of my own mistake, I felt griefed because it was 100% unfair, twunk behaviour on his side - as opposed to the other example, when I did have a chance to survive Harry's attack, but I panicked and made some mistakes, which resulted in my death. I did not feel griefed then.
Also, you couldn't possibly know WHY I felt griefed, because you're not me, unless you can read people's minds?
Javert
Volunteer Moderator
Good point, but I think the proposal listed earlier was that this would only be done specifically for protecting starter systems and maybe a small area around them. That doesn't mean it would be expanded to having locked off areas for player groups.
It also depends who you choose as experienced players to be allowed into those areas - for sure it would require careful thinking through in order to avoid the issues you describe above, and that's exactly why I raised the issue of SDC members being part of that. That said, maybe it's possible that some players play murder folk for some of their playtime and helping newbies for other part of their playtime - I don't have data either way (but FD probably do).
Motives can't be for sure, but it's also probably true to say that a newbie will feel even more upset if they get ambushed and murdered by the same player who was previously helping them to learn the game. What's for sure is that you have to be a bit careful if someone who was previously talking themselves into trusted situation and then betrayed it (and afterwards specifically admitted that they had planned the betrayal from the beginning), is then offering similar scenarios again.
This could indeed become difficult to control and you may be right, but these are all just suggestions and ideas at this point.
Last edited:
Pretending the insults where not there you have a point about a recruitment pool, but there is nothing stopping you getting the permit yourself by helping out... if a player group offers their service to new players its only natural the player would be introduced into their player group. Ironically too you have proved my system would work... the whole point of the Galactic Academy was to train new players how to play and feed them into a player group to continue their adventure.
Yes, I could have dismiss the ship, but even then he'd just kill our SRV's - so no, we could not prevent being killed. I didn't feel griefed because of my own mistake, I felt griefed because it was 100% unfair, twunk behaviour on his side - as opposed to the other example, when I did have a chance to survive Harry's attack, but I panicked and made some mistakes, which resulted in my death. I did not feel griefed then.
Also, you couldn't possibly know WHY I felt griefed, because you're not me, unless you can read people's minds?
The solution to your problem here is to team up and fight back, I have seen it and done it myself. I wouldn't be a PVPer if I didn't decide to stand up to players like that. As I said before no amount of C&P will fix that encounter too.
I don't agree.
Those who have been exposed to PvP from the get go are much better prepared for it than those who avoid it until they feel 'ready', because nothing other than combat against other CMDRs can prepare on for combat against other CMDRs.
An over abundance of fair fights is intrinsically counter-immersive.
Anyone who wants a game setting that makes sense will find something seriously wrong when most hostile CMDR encounters they didn't initiate are not heavily stacked against them, and will try to stack the odds in their favor as much as possible when they have cause to initiate hostilities with others.
It's very hard to find an SRV that doesn't want to be found, without hostile SRVs on the ground at the same time.
Last edited:
See this is the issue everyone jumps to conclusions about us PVP folk but why is our share of the player base growing so fast? we are introducing players into the game and then into PVP, some enjoy it other not so much and go do their thing... I offered to help train CoR after the 29th event, I constantly help new players get into the game.
Its just the only side anyone takes notice of is the murder hobo side.
It's more the fact, that it would create a de facto player group with exclusive access to certain systems. Access that even newbs would eventually be unable enter.
Additionally the BGS and Powers would have to ignore these systems because they couldn't be flipped.
It's just a really really bad and incredibly dangerous idea. In a game where we're all supposed to be nobodies, elevating some CMDR's is exactly how you cause problems amongst the player-base.
With the attraction of the "meta game" most easily seen in Eve, giving any player groups power would be greeted with a lot of complaints/requests for similar areas.
Additionally the BGS and Powers would have to ignore these systems because they couldn't be flipped.
It's just a really really bad and incredibly dangerous idea. In a game where we're all supposed to be nobodies, elevating some CMDR's is exactly how you cause problems amongst the player-base.
With the attraction of the "meta game" most easily seen in Eve, giving any player groups power would be greeted with a lot of complaints/requests for similar areas.
But I'm there to haul cargo for CG - do you suggest I do it in a PVP kitted FDL?
And with all due respect - I didn't lose until my ship blows up. I know how to run away, I did it many times, recently from 3 FDL's in a Python loaded up with cargo, made it to high wake with 20-something hull integrity left
99% of my game time is in Open. (As an anecdote I was even recently killed by Harry and his 2 friends at an alien wreck site. Luckily - a split second after my ship blew up I had a disconnection error. After logging back in, instead of a rebuy screen, I found myself back at the planet side with 38% hull still intact. I contacted Harry to confirm it wasn't a CL and he's actually seen my ship blowing up on his screen too. We chatted a bit and went our own ways).
I'm not talking about the definition of PVP. Plus, It's all semantics really. I'm talking about putting things in certain context. To me attacking a ship that's only choice is to run away is not really "PVP". Especially when done for poos and giggles, rather than to for example stop a CG from being completed for RP reasons. Anyway, that's just my opinion - and you guys have yours.
Ship balance being what it is is FDs fault, I would much rather have a more even term between all ships and even have traders be durable atm you have massive, gigantic differences between ships that it is not even funny.
If you know how to escape and have good situational awareness then you don't need any system to fall back on to prevent PVP encounters.
No matter what you say about PVP the definition is the definition, it's PVE'ers who put the cringy label of 'griefing' on pvp encounters they do not favor (for some that is any pvp encounter).
What people are not brining up here but its true no matter what people say.
In elite we already have a proven way to avoid any unfavorable PVP, that is solo mode and if you want to see the occasional cmdr, the popular and great idea that is mobius.
I support mobius alot, it is a great idea and I am glad people who really just wana do their thing go there.
However I am at the same time as you can see greatly for defending the integrity of open being a very dangerous place where you must suspect any cmdr might decide to attack and kill you.
Playing in these different modes does not mean you are a lesser player or anything like that, if open where anything goes is not for you there are very good alternatives already in place.
CNP needs to be changed not because PVP must be prevented like some desire but more because it lacks any real consequence when it should have one. Just not one that removes people from the game, just one that makes them think twice where as right now you don't need to think about risk at all.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
You really need to providea citation for that one, please.
Yes, I could have dismiss the ship, but even then he'd just kill our SRV's - so no, we could not prevent being killed. I didn't feel griefed because of my own mistake, I felt griefed because it was 100% unfair, twunk behaviour on his side - as opposed to the other example, when I did have a chance to survive Harry's attack, but I panicked and made some mistakes, which resulted in my death. I did not feel griefed then.
Also, you couldn't possibly know WHY I felt griefed, because you're not me, unless you can read people's minds?
You are correct, i assumed it when i should not. Excuse me for that (i made the same mistake as people who assume my mentality or reasons through the way i play the game) :/
But yeah i can understand you felt griefed but you can't expect a SRV to compet against a ship. It will always be 100% unfair. But loosing a SRV is nothing compared to loosing a ship.
I also agree that there are griefing situation in this game but they are very specific (station ramming - killing new players over and over).
Last edited:
Is your share of the playerbase growing quickly? As compared to what? I know that Mobius grows quickly too, but I'm not suggesting a PvE server.