[VIDEO] CRAZY Encounter - Asp vs. Vette in Atmospheric Combat

StiTch · Jul 10, 2017

Aashenfox said:
This is why I don't play in open, but if I did, I would expect this kind of thing, in open you are fair game, just like in reality, any random person passing on the street could decide to kill you for no reason. So, working as intended, the only disparity is in the consequences. That's why all the fuss about C&P in E : D.

That stunning moment someone manages to go a full paragraph and only speak sense.

Mohrgan said:
By the way, 'for fun' simply has to be a reason. Why else do we play video games?

Two, in short succession? Oh my.

CMDR Minion Blob · Jul 10, 2017

classy move, dude. next time why don't you get into an SRV and show your superior skills instead of blasting that poor dude in his SRV from above without even the slightest warning. Pathetic.

Insane4un · Jul 10, 2017

dognosh said:
I don't PvP,or go in open, but in Open what happened was totally allowed, except the combat log at the end....

What if, just think about.. What if he actually CTD because of packhounds? No, ofc no. Combat log is our only option to think about. This truly become some sort of paranoia.

Aashenfox · Jul 10, 2017

Insane4un said:
What if, just think about.. What if he actually CTD because of packhounds? No, ofc no. Combat log is our only option to think about. This truly become some sort of paranoia.

Have your friends ever accused you of unbridled optimism? Or perhaps naivete.

I jest, but seriously, genuine reasons for a combat log? I'd guess one in every 1,000 at best!

timbero · Jul 10, 2017

Dsign said:
What did that poor guy do to you ? that's mean

He was exploring in a Corvette, that's a crime.

Perhaps not the most CRAZY encounter I've ever seen ..

I like his ship though, looks really sweet (the Vette).

CAPT. Ho Chi Minge · Jul 10, 2017

Smells like cordite from a heat cannon cheese build. Poor show.

Vasco Sapien · Jul 10, 2017

At first i was judging the OP for an obvious Grief using exploited game mechanics.
Then i saw the combat log at the end and realised this video demonstrates alot of what is wrong with ED, its exploit culture and broken PvP.
Everyone featured in this video has no class.

Fdev should watch this vid and learn.

Troy_McClure · Jul 10, 2017

Redan said:
Never really understood this type of "Combat", Shady.

Me neither....then I saw 'Rain Man' & it all made sense!

Rinzler o7o7o7 · Jul 10, 2017

How is this "atmospheric combat" when the planet has no atmosphere?

Alexander the Grape · Jul 10, 2017

You seem oddly attached to that asp, despite the fact that in spite of bugged weapon exploitation it would likely fall in seconds to a decent commander with seekers.

Only advantage I can think of is that it packs maximum cheese into the minimum of tonnage

Beral · Jul 10, 2017

Mohrgan said:
You have to ask yourself: Why? You commented on the need for justifying an attack. That, along with what you wrote, looked like a judgement call. By the way, 'for fun' simply has to be a reason. Why else do we play video games?

Well, under my perspective, this is a simulator, and not only a space flight simulator itself. I think that all the actions that happen in the game, in terms of relationship between players, have to happen under the game context. I mean that a player should not shoot to other player without pretext, in the same way that a soldier does not shoot to another soldier only "for fun". The pretext can be war between game factions, piratery... etc. but not only for fun. Of course this is my personal opinion. I find "the fun" in the game, but, especially, in the way of playing it.

IndigoWyrd · Jul 10, 2017

Nightshady said:
He's pledged Fed, and we're an Imperial combat wing. Nothing more pure than Imperials killing Feds. The fact that it's on a planet doesn't really mean anything.

No different than "He's [that race], we're [this race]." or "He's [this orientation] we're [that orientation]."

Can't argue, it's exactly the same. Speaks volumes for those involved, doesn't it?

timbero · Jul 10, 2017

IndigoWyrd said:
No different than "He's [that race], we're [this race]." or "He's [this orientation] we're [that orientation]."

Can't argue, it's exactly the same. Speaks volumes for those involved, doesn't it?

How about it's a game and it's within the rules of said game?

Mohrgan · Jul 10, 2017

Beral said:
Well, under my perspective, this is a simulator, and not only a space flight simulator itself. I think that all the actions that happen in the game, in terms of relationship between players, have to happen under the game context. I mean that a player should not shoot to other player without pretext, in the same way that a soldier does not shoot to another soldier only "for fun". The pretext can be war between game factions, piratery... etc. but not only for fun. Of course this is my personal opinion. I find "the fun" in the game, but, especially, in the way of playing it.

We cannot go around enforcing our individual gamer ethics on others. We have to be happy about the in-game choices we, personally, make, and at the least, be accepting of how others find fun. Applying this idea, galaxy wide, would go a long long way to ceasing this 'Us v. Them' thing going on in game.

Beral · Jul 10, 2017

Mohrgan said:
We cannot go around enforcing our individual gamer ethics on others. We have to be happy about the in-game choices we, personally, make, and at the least, be accepting of how others find fun. Applying this idea, galaxy wide, would go a long long way to ceasing this 'Us v. Them' thing going on in game.

I am not enforcing anyone to do anything. I respect the ways in which other people play, it is not a problem for me. I only expressed my opinion about the video, that is all.

Father Cool · Jul 10, 2017

Yawn.

The excuse tombola is running out of tickets for both sides of this argument. None of which has ever provided a valid reason/excuse for either ganking innocent CMDR's or victimised CMDR's Combat Logging. Both should be dealt with and would be with much much harsher C&P for killing without a good in game reason.

This encounter was a borderline case as the 'victim' was federation so in essence on an opposing side of things, but as there is no gain for the attacker in killing him regardless of his persuasion I question the validity of the reason other than a thinly veiled gank reinforced by the bully tactics employed to take the kill.

Ddraig · Jul 10, 2017

How boring.

[VR] Enexemander · Jul 10, 2017

So let me get this straight- you needed backup to destroy an unmanned ship?

Lol what a coward.

dognosh · Jul 10, 2017

Insane4un said:
What if, just think about.. What if he actually CTD because of packhounds? No, ofc no. Combat log is our only option to think about. This truly become some sort of paranoia.

Fair point, but in my opinion paranoia is the posts I am reading, asking the justification in attacking that Cmdr. Since when do you need a reason to attack anyone in Open(one reason I rarely venture in to Open) ?

Also,is it a macho thing not to dismiss your ship after landing in Open?

Jukelo · Jul 10, 2017

Beral said:
Well, under my perspective, this is a simulator, and not only a space flight simulator itself. I think that all the actions that happen in the game, in terms of relationship between players, have to happen under the game context. I mean that a player should not shoot to other player without pretext, in the same way that a soldier does not shoot to another soldier only "for fun". The pretext can be war between game factions, piratery... etc. but not only for fun. Of course this is my personal opinion. I find "the fun" in the game, but, especially, in the way of playing it.

I'm sure you'll find plenty of occurences of soldiers , torturing, killing just for fun if they think they can get away with it in real life as well.