PvP is dead because the majority of ED players isn't interested in PvP.
PvP Just got killed
- Thread starter babelfisch
- Start date
PvP is dead because the majority of ED players isn't interested in PvP.
PvP is far from dead, the content for PvP however is non existent and the some that exists can be exploited due to the nature of the game design.
If these things are gamebreakers for you and the information was easily available prior to you buying in, maybe we've hit on a problem and a solution. I read up on things like modes and block before I bought the game, and I wouldn't have considered buying it without them.
Why did you come to the conclusion that this is a game breaker for me. I repeated numerous times that blocking did not alter my game play in any way. I even forgot it exists untill I stumble on a thread such as this.
What I repeatedly stated that this option has no place in a MULTIPLAYER game, that's all.
Hey hey, my my
PvP can never die
There's more to the picture
Than meets the eye.
Hey hey, my my.
I'd say multiplayer games that lack such features are badly made and not worth buying.
PvP will never die.
Well. Unless the Devs do something. But I have faith they won't
Well. Unless the Devs do something. But I have faith they won't
Cry me a river. Nothing's going to change.
I can't stand carebears, nor can I stand poorly veiled insults toward carebears. Tact is always good. If you have a deep down desire to improve things, it would be reflected in your choice of antagonistic vs cooperative wording.
Backtracking your vocabulary to make it sound softer and less offensive is an admission that you wrote what you did to offend. Check your subconscious and be honest with yourself because others can tell before you do if you don't pay attention.
So when people start saying "You just want more targets!" I can't disagree with them based on the wording of your replies.
It's not enough to viel or hide your disdain, you have to come at it with a less disdainful approach or they'll pick right up on it and be validated for it.
That and headbutting a brick wall you know is there.
I can't stand carebears, nor can I stand poorly veiled insults toward carebears. Tact is always good. If you have a deep down desire to improve things, it would be reflected in your choice of antagonistic vs cooperative wording.
Backtracking your vocabulary to make it sound softer and less offensive is an admission that you wrote what you did to offend. Check your subconscious and be honest with yourself because others can tell before you do if you don't pay attention.
So when people start saying "You just want more targets!" I can't disagree with them based on the wording of your replies.
It's not enough to viel or hide your disdain, you have to come at it with a less disdainful approach or they'll pick right up on it and be validated for it.
That and headbutting a brick wall you know is there.
I wonder what ED would be like if we eliminated all activities the majority of players are not interested in...
Look, you completely got that wrong. I didn't say that I want to eliminate PvP. I don't even believe that PvP is dead. AGLOMATIC believes that PP is dead because "undermining can be done in SOLO". He also thinks that PvP will be dead because of the block function:
My point is that if PvP dies, it will because the majority of players isn't interested in it, not because someone added a block or solo function.
As always, if you want to participate in a discussion I advise you to read the comments.
BTW, I still believe that AGLOMATIC is a combat logging PvE solo care bear who tries to mimic the behaviour of PvPers to make them look stupid in order to discredit their points. He is an agent provocateur! 
I didn't say that you said you wanted to eliminate PVP and didn't even want to imply that. My humble remarks are merely food for thought for the benefit of the community and the greater good of the galaxy.
BTW, I still believe that AGLOMATIC is a combat logging PvE solo care bear who tries to mimic the behaviour of PvPers to make them look stupid in order to discredit their points. He is an agent provocateur!
You'll get Jason Baron all excited about the conspiracy to kill open again with posts like that.
Into both, trading and pewpew. I smile more after evading a 4vs1 combat ship on trader vessel interdiction than after destroying an attacker's ship when in a combat equipped ship myself. Brain over muscle.
Last edited:
I don't think PvP will die due to lack of interest. There will always be some that want to do it, for the sake of PvP itself.
The general lack of interest is more due to the implementation, than people hating PvP on prinsipal.
I belive the lack of interest would decrease if made more fun.
As an example, we have pirating. Pirating other player should be made fun. Fun for the pirate and fun for the trader and fun for a potential bounty hunter.
To achieve this, it needs to be attractive and practical for all involved.
- Traders want big profit and a fair chance of killing a pirate.
- Pirates want big profit and a target rich environment.
- Bounty hunters wants lots of wanted pirates.
A high value CG to an anarchy system could provide such an environment, but things would have to change.
- To avoid having all traders going to Solo or Group, these events would have to spawn extra nasty NPC pirates in these modes. Essentially making Open, the 'easy mode'.
- To give Pirates a decent chance of profit, all trader cargo should drop on kill. I don't belive in the gentleman pirate.
- Both the trader and the pirate needs cargo capacity. The pirate also needs interdictor, collector limpets and manifest scanner. If internal defensive modules were restricted to military slots(or just removed), they cold both have what they need and still have very close to full combat capability. A hard cap on the number of SBs allowed would also help.
- The bounty hunter would be able to fit an interdictor, kill-warant scanner and wake scanner, without giving up any relative combat ability.
These are simple changes that would create a combat rich environment of players that want to be part of it. Those that don't want part of it can just avoid the system during the event.
It's not that hard to make and the negative consequences are minor, because no one is forced.
It will probably never happen, though. [blah]
All Bond flicks would be better with less convoluted plots and more believable villains.
Then they wouldn't be James Bond movies anymore.
Last edited: