PvP Griefers are seriously making me consider quitting
- Thread starter ohigetjokes
- Start date
- Status
Powderpanic
Banned
Senario 3.
She Gits Gud.
Finds a few friends and goes and ganks the people trying to destroy her house.
Records it ... Adds music to it and uploads to a suitable forum/reddit.
Basks in the internet fame and monies!
The analogy is false. Spaceships, unlike houses, are mobile (and far more protectable).
It's funy to me how many of you guys are rooting for her to fail, to cave in and submit. Personally, I think the difference between the 2 "factions" of ED is pretty much epitomized by that little girl and all of the 40+ year old neckbeards piling onto her on this forum. The perfect irony is that her natural inclination is to find a way to succeed...because she hasn't been taught by people like you guys that failure is the only inevitable option.
Powderpanic
Banned
Being a victim no matter what? That's that then? There is more to it, way more than that.
There always is conflict in an OPEN encounter.
Last edited:
It's a perfectly good analogy. The original analogy suggested to "combat up" instead of carrying on what you wanted to do in the first place...
If you're an explorer going to a well know exploration location these days, you'll be attacked by engineered truncheons. You have a couple of (realistic) choice:-
1) Don't play in OPEN.
2) Go in a tank.
3) Just be repeatedly destroyed.
You tell me which is more appealing to an explorer?
And please don't suggest to folks, "get good" and evade this (the last social "exploration" thing I took part in before giving up Open for such events and going Mobius - I was so frustrated by the amount inane toxic cynical gameplay on display, yet again!)...
Last edited:
Not at all.. It's just a poor analogy, trying and make a poor straw man point...
And you're now guilty of the same...
And there's mindless toxic pointless ganking too... Most CMDRs wouldn't play in the fashion, destroying other CMDRs posing no real challenge, in truth just to get a kick from the aggravation/annoyance it causes them.
Then there's minority who make a career out of such "gameplay", and worse still, make groups and thus we see vapid cynical stuff like the screen shot above.
So yes, there's being a victim as you might call it. But I suspect it's a more tasteful option than what appears to be the all too common alternative for a minority.
The day ED actually offers some constructive more interesting PvP is the day I look forward to. At the moment, its folks making best out of a 3 year old mechanics unfit for the job.
Last edited:
OP - rage more, maybe they'll see the error of their ways and stop randomly killing ships in no way capable of defending themselves.
I kid they'll do exactly the opposite after seeing this post. Play in solo in high traffic systems, stay away from engineers in open and don't whine when it happens or you'll be doing a disservice to the rest of us.
I kid they'll do exactly the opposite after seeing this post. Play in solo in high traffic systems, stay away from engineers in open and don't whine when it happens or you'll be doing a disservice to the rest of us.
No, it's not a perfectly good analogy.
The analogy, as per 'git gud', would be build again, learning from what destroyed it before. Then try again. Did it work? No? Adapt your build again, and try again. Did it work? Yes?
Congrats, you've now managed to 'git gud', and it didn't change your gameplay.
Unless, of course, you're implying that the PvE community are incapable of adapting? Hence your analogy of repetition of the same approach time and time again?
Something that a large swathe of this gaming community fails to realize. 'Git gud' doesn't mean 'learn to PvP and build your ships to PvP'. It simply means 'adapt and learn'. You can modify your PvE builds to successfully escape from dedicated PvP builds, and continue to PvE.
It's not hard.
Last edited:
Alas, your comment, while noble, is flawed IMHO. You cannot "get good" when your ship is destroyed in X seconds. And indeed you could for example fly around to exploration based locations in an Engineered tank, but why? So you can increase your chances of surviving pointless toxic ganking every now and then? Or you could get some friends in combat ships to wing up with you and fly around for hour after hour after hour, again not playing the way you want to, and getting bored... Why should a majority of folks have to penalilse their gameplay activity for a minority who get a kick out of destroying other folks at little/no risk to themselves... just for the kicks they get from it?
If there's adapting to do, it's to the 2-3 year old placeholder mechanics we're still trying to make the best of... I still can't believe in the last two years PvP gameplay depth hasn't seemingly made a single step forwards. Yet, we have time for CQC, multicrew and sun glasses!
Last edited:
You have, quite amusingly, missed the point.
You 'git gud', when you learn why your previous build failed, and adapt it.
You do not 'git gud' prior to the loss. You 'git gud' in your effort 'after' the loss. Gitgud is getting better after failure.
Again, this is not hard to comprehend. Please try to follow the points given, not the points you think you're given.
None of this implies flying a damn tank. Learn the tactics, and 'adapt YOUR build' to suit.
I mean, which bit of the end of my first comment was that hard to grasp? You do not need to change your game style. If you're an explorer, stay an explorer. If you're a PvE player, stay a PvE player. But for gods sake, LEARN from mistakes.
You don't get better at sports by appealing the ref to change the rules. You get better at sports by practice and learning. And this applies to more than just sports as well. This game, same as any other game, is no different. So why the hell does the community think it should be?
The great thing about private groups is that you can decide who you want to interact with. Playing in open is like looking for a new friend at a heavy metal concert while playing in PG is more like taking a friend to a heavy metal concert. Either way you're at the same concert, only you don't feel like you need to engage random strangers and hope they don't kill you.
I think adapting by playing in a private group, where I can do all I need without the hassle of the git gud crew is a perfectly satisfactory adaptation.
Dont need 'open' mode for anything.
Thats not really adapting, that's simply removing yourself.
Which isn't a problem. It's just not self nor skill improvement however.
You may not need open. But others do. So, less implied condescension, yeah?
Sort of sad that taking the opportunity to refine ones skills in a game you enjoy playing which has a major competitive aspect is considered a "hassle".
Then again, I'm sure there are lots of people that play fighting games only vs CPU and only on easy mode. because who needs the hassle of higher difficulties or playing against other humans. I can understand, though it feels like ignoring where a lot of the longevity in the product is.
While I personally don't think that killing explorers or traders is good gameplay, it is legitimate gameplay in open.
Honestly, the odds of an explorer dying to a PvPer are incredibly slim, for the one exception of alien sites which really aren't that far from the bubble. As long as an explorer doesn't turn in his findings at the CG or Founder's, they will be alright (also they can ask Iridium Wing for an escort).
Honestly, the odds of an explorer dying to a PvPer are incredibly slim, for the one exception of alien sites which really aren't that far from the bubble. As long as an explorer doesn't turn in his findings at the CG or Founder's, they will be alright (also they can ask Iridium Wing for an escort).
- Status