PvP My issue with PVP...

What's being asked for by a number of people is that cargo ships become combat viable against specialized human opponents, so the trader can have his cake and eat it too. I just don't see how that makes any sense; why would anyone bother flying a combat ship again if a trader which can haul massive amounts of cargo is also capable of running hardcore combat ops? The problem is, you guys are interested in catering to the lowest common denominater--the player who has no interest in skill, just wants to roll and unbeatable ship and have the best of both worlds.

The thing is, all this will accomplish is the bizarre homogenization of the various build options, and these players clamoring for it will still get their collective rear ends kicked up around their ears when they do actually stick around to see how it goes.

For the love of god, people, just learn how to fly and outfit your damn ships, and quit trying to ruin what diversity there is in the game.

I haven't been killed by a player yet, so outfitting isn't really an issue. Nor do I want to turn traders into combat ship.
I want combat ships to have restrictions similar to what trade ships have, to retain capacity for other activities.
This would make encounters less predictable and reduce TTK.

Of course a good PvPer would still win. But that good PvPer could be the one with cargo onboard, destined for the CG.
 
What's being asked for by a number of people is that cargo ships become combat viable against specialized human opponents, so the trader can have his cake and eat it too.

ermm, i reckon i've not read the whole thread but op isn't really about that. best we stay on topic maybe?

For the love of god, people, just learn how to fly and outfit your damn ships, and quit trying to ruin what diversity there is in the game.

depends.

if learning to fly means actual flying, maneuvers, escape routines, pip management, awareness, evasion, fa-off ... i'm all in.

the moment learning to fly means getting acquainted with the dozens of bizarre and silly named magical effects and onerous hit point sponges, all acquired by extensive pve farming, elite pvp lost me and your recommendation makes actually so little sense as to be hilarious.
 
Last edited:
ermm, i reckon i've not read the whole thread but op isn't really about that. best we stay on topic maybe?

Try reading some of the other comments in the thread, then.



depends.

if learning to fly means actual flying, maneuvers, escape routines, pip management, awareness, evasion, fa-off ... i'm all in.

the moment learning to fly means getting acquainted with the dozens of bizarre and silly named magical effects and onerous hit point sponges, all acquired by extensive pve farming, elite pvp lost me and your recommendation makes actually so little sense as to be hilarious.

The emboldened parts fall under "learning to fly" while the underlined part falls under "outfitting," both of which I clearly delineated in the comment of mine you chose to quote.

Seriously, read the thread and some of the comments/opinions that I'm addressing before singling me out for amatuer moderation, okay?
 
Last edited:
You'll see me in a Python the day I decide to engineer the one I have parked for module storage... so probably not any time soon.

You jest with the FDL comment, but the modular cargo bays almost caused me to drop ED early on. Sure, you should be able to add additional cargo space.

But every ship should have some cargo space (SLF's excluded of course).

You could fit a a few pallets in the cockpit (or bridge... the ships we fly are pretty big) with many of the ships in ED.

Sure, my point was just that the Python actually is capable of doing what it is that people are asking for. Heck, even the Cutter is, (isn't it? Been a while since I flew one) if the pilot is willing to compromise on total cargo capacity.
 
The emboldened parts fall under "learning to fly" while the underlined part falls under "outfitting," both of which I clearly delineated in the comment of mine you chose to quote.

Seriously, read the thread and some of the comments/opinions that I'm addressing before singling me out for amatuer moderation, okay?

okay, please realize that "learning to fly" has a slim chance against "outfitting", and that's exactly op's point. how others (including you) choose to derail the thread has little bearing. plus your recommendation is still meaningless, or else i'm waiting for your youtube video showing how you superior flying skills allow your unengineered fdl to pwn an engineered one [haha]
 
okay, please realize that "learning to fly" has a slim chance against "outfitting", and that's exactly op's point. how others (including you) choose to derail the thread has little bearing. plus your recommendation is still meaningless, or else i'm waiting for your youtube video showing how you superior flying skills allow your unengineered fdl to pwn an engineered one [haha]

And this is where I challenge you to show a quote from anywhere, anytime in any thread I've ever been a part of where I opine that I could. All I've said, consistently and within the rules of the forum, is that a) I doubt if a single FdL took down a Cutter's properly equipped shield "in a matter of seconds" and b)trade ships should have to ultimately run away from specialized combat ships, as opposed to standing their ground with a chance at winning a fight.

Try again, old friend, and bring something better:)
 
As Vin pointed out; your argument relies on the premise that a trader should be able to slug it out with a specialized combat ship, as opposed to being able to simply survive the attack and make a run for safety, which is perfectly feasible at present. Put another way, the guy in the delivery lorry packed with flowers should be able to trade blows with the guy in the armored tank loaded with state of the art weaponry, not running away but actually standing a chance in bare knuckle dragging battle. Bluntly, it doesn't make sense, and it relies on laziness on the part of people who advocate for it. Vin has the right of this argument; combat ships are good at combat, while traders can be augmented to survive anything and still make it to their destination. I've seen nothing even remotely resembling a decent argument for it to be any other way.

You don't have to "take your PvP outfitted ship to a CG to pick on traders" by the way. You could take your PvP outfitted ship to a CG and pick a fight with other like minded individuals in similarly outfitted ships. I hope you can take my disagreement with a sense of proper perspective, as I largely agree with you on many, many other points, and while a disagree with you here, I'm not trying to disparage you or pick a fight. After Ziggy, you're still my favorite. My second favorite, but still really close.

D'awww. :D

Just to be totally clear, I'm not really saying whether I think it 'should' or 'shouldn't' be like that, just that it could have been the other way and that from my own perspective, it would have meshed more closely with my own preferred gameplay if it had been the other.

I don't want a game where combat ships aren't good at combat, or aren't better at combat than traders and that's not remotely what I said mate, bit naughty that but I'll let it slide because, well bro love. I actually said the opposite - that a combat ship should be able to beat a non-combat ship, otherwise what's the point of a combat ship to begin with? It's the degree of difference that's problem for me. PVP is almost a different game than PVE due to that, there's effectively no overlap at all between the two. I actually think it's a more fundamental schism in the game than the modes to be honest.

Ultimately they're just two different ways of balancing a game though, and through that, directing the way people engage with its content. You can go for a significant degree of overlap between the ability of various 'types' and work along a sliding scale to having such vast differences in relative ability that you end up with a high school football team playing the Patriots, but I don't really think there's a hierarchy in terms of one being objectively 'better' than the other. One would be better than the other for me but I'd be the first to accept that's an entirely subjective point of view.

Oh and I can totally understand why you read what I said about CGs the way you did within the context of this forum lol. The only reason I didn't specifically refer to fighting other players in PVP builds at CGs is because (in my head) I'd already covered that when I said I wouldn't just be in a combat ship jumping around looking for fights; I was just trying to encompass the two main strands of PVP encounters in the game, fights against players who are geared up for it and ganking those who aren't. I wasn't making a point about either one of them in particular, just highlighting the fact that I'm unlikely to do either of them but for different reasons - one because I'll never find myself just happening to be in a ship that's equipped for it and the other because I won't get much fun out of it regardless of what I'm doing it in.

Dude. The frikkin' Millennium Falcon was a cargo ship. He has a good point.

Christ, one sentence and he manages to say more than I did in three paragraphs lol. Asolutely perfect example.
 
Last edited:
And this is where I challenge you to show a quote from anywhere, anytime in any thread I've ever been a part of where I opine that I could.

maybe i misunderstood. my bad in that case, and then i have no clue what exactly you meant with this:

For the love of god, people, just learn how to fly and outfit your damn ships, and quit trying to ruin what diversity there is in the game.

see, a cutter is not any trader ship. it should not be obliterated by a fdl in seconds (see op). it only is if the fdl is engineered and the cutter isn't, which means everybody is forced to engineer, and only after doing so flying skill becomes relevant (see op & quote above). the point is "outfitting" is mandatory and more important than "learn to fly", which is the issue (see op). then all you are saying is "shut up and outfit anyway"? for the sake of ... "diversity" (having a hard time avoiding a facepalm at this point)?
 
All I've said, consistently and within the rules of the forum, is that a) I doubt if a single FdL took down a Cutter's properly equipped shield "in a matter of seconds" and b)trade ships should have to ultimately run away from specialized combat ships, as opposed to standing their ground with a chance at winning a fight.

My Cutter's shields with 4 pips to systems:

zVomOv5.jpg


So yeah, that would appear to be a claim with little validity.
 
"it seems you are almost always at a sIgnificant disadvantage, as you find yourself with a trading configured shiploadout against a combat designed vessel."
You are right. That's reality in Elite I am afraid. They probably shot cascade torpedos towards you. Then your shield dropps immediately no matter how big it was and your shield generator is down to zero.
 
Last edited:
Not your claim, the one you were replying to. Make more sense now?

Probably worth noting that's a one billion credit ship with a lot of engineering though, hardly a breadwagon.

Ah, yes, now I see. Good point.

Btw, you haven't commented on my avatar yet. I started using it to give you some competition.
 
Ah, yes, now I see. Good point.

Btw, you haven't commented on my avatar yet. I started using it to give you some competition.

It creeped me somewhat in its original incarnation, although the blue mustache is adding an air of light comedy that is making Dr Decker frown beneath his mask. Full disclosure: I know I should recognise who it is but I can't drag it up from the memory banks and it's been bugging me since you started using it. :D Go on, put me out of my misery.
 
Last edited:
It creeped me somewhat in its original incarnation, although the blue mustache is adding an air of light comedy that is making Dr Decker frown beneath his mask. Full disclosure: I know I should recognise who it is but I can't drag it up from the memory banks and it's been bugging me since you started using it. :D Go on, put me out of my misery.

Oh c'mon. You know who it is you devious person!
 
- Good stuff as usual -

I would like to add on that degree of disparity point. I have a pretty goofy build on my clipper that I use for undermining during powerplay. I won't go into details but suffice to say it uses beam lasers and inertial impacts as its only weapons, has minimal HRP and only 1 4A scb, so it's nowhere near a pvp build. That being said it is basically g5 on everything engineering wise.

Last week I was opposing the hudson expansion in wherever using that build, and since hudson is a combat power that meant that all his players were ALSO in their PvE builds trying to grind npcs just like I was. Naturally, whenever I ran into one of these players I tried to murder them violently because I can. I didn't expect much success, because as I said I have a very silly build that's not met to kill other players. I killed 3 vultures, a viper and chased off another vulture a python an anaconda and a corvette. I took the anaconda down to 30% hull without losing my shields before he high waked. The python and viper that I chased away were in a wing with the one of the vultures I killed, the python jumped before anything happened and I killed one of the vultures before fighting his buddy after a SC interdiction in which the first vulture came back to be killed again before his buddy had to run away at 40% hull.

I am not a pvp player. I have like 6 pvp kills total including those 4 and one time a wanted courier rammed into me. Yet because my ship was engineered and theirs presumably weren't, I was able to force a corvette and anaconda to high wake and take on 2 vultures at once. Yet whenever I come across a player with a pvp build the battle basically goes like this: Attack them, my shields are down, highwake. Every time. I have no chance at all against a fully engineered pvp build yet I am able to (nearly) kill player anacondas. That's a huge disparity there.
 
I would like to add on that degree of disparity point. I have a pretty goofy build on my clipper that I use for undermining during powerplay. I won't go into details but suffice to say it uses beam lasers and inertial impacts as its only weapons, has minimal HRP and only 1 4A scb, so it's nowhere near a pvp build. That being said it is basically g5 on everything engineering wise.

Last week I was opposing the hudson expansion in wherever using that build, and since hudson is a combat power that meant that all his players were ALSO in their PvE builds trying to grind npcs just like I was. Naturally, whenever I ran into one of these players I tried to murder them violently because I can. I didn't expect much success, because as I said I have a very silly build that's not met to kill other players. I killed 3 vultures, a viper and chased off another vulture a python an anaconda and a corvette. I took the anaconda down to 30% hull without losing my shields before he high waked. The python and viper that I chased away were in a wing with the one of the vultures I killed, the python jumped before anything happened and I killed one of the vultures before fighting his buddy after a SC interdiction in which the first vulture came back to be killed again before his buddy had to run away at 40% hull.

I am not a pvp player. I have like 6 pvp kills total including those 4 and one time a wanted courier rammed into me. Yet because my ship was engineered and theirs presumably weren't, I was able to force a corvette and anaconda to high wake and take on 2 vultures at once. Yet whenever I come across a player with a pvp build the battle basically goes like this: Attack them, my shields are down, highwake. Every time. I have no chance at all against a fully engineered pvp build yet I am able to (nearly) kill player anacondas. That's a huge disparity there.

Cool, maybe I should sign up for powerplay at last and take my PVE Corvette for a shakedown. :D

You've highlighted two differences there though mate, in terms of your successes.

Part of it is engineering like you said, I mean see my PVE battle Cutter's shields on the last page - good luck against that in a trash tier Anaconda. I can tell you from personal experience of fighting you elsewhere though, the other part of it is almost certainly the difference between someone who analyses gear properly and fights tactically and someone who doesn't. You might not consider yourself a 'PVP player' in this game but you have the mentality for it.

As you say though, the gap between a PVE capable combat ship and a properly engineered and specifically built PVP ship remains overpowering.

Oh c'mon. You know who it is you devious person!

I love it when you tease me.
 
Last edited:

Achilles7

Banned
I don't know what OP is on about here; the argument that trade ships need to be able to stand up to combat ships is one thing, but stating that his example is representative of the issue - where his shields visibly capitulated in 2 seconds on an engineered Cutter with boosters & SCBs available - is simply ludicrous!

However, if this apocryphal story is true, then OP almost certainly did something catastrophically wrong &/or has neglected to mention something crucially important...or it's just a bug!

Hence, to get to the bottom of this mystery, the vid is imperative.

NB: That's the great thing about DVR - Something weird happens > hit 'record last X mins' > post on forums (if not too embarrassing [big grin]) > hey presto - within 10 mins - full answer from the most knowledgeable community in gaming....easy!
 
Back
Top Bottom