PvP Why PvP is not popular in Elite Dangerous?

[Electric Kite]

I was commenting on your portrayal of an accurate reflection of humans. Which it isn't. Most humans will adhere to the rules of societies. That's why democracies have severe penalties for example for murder. In your statement: "space would be full of murderous trigger happy pilots because of course it would", I feel "of course it would" a little lacking. You follow this by: "Its our nature. Just look at our own planet now."

In America we recently had school shootings. What reaction did human nature provide? Shrug? No, human nature was revolted by it. Of course they were. The Elite universe is nothing like our planet now. Elite isn't very real. It isn't it's biggest strength. People like SDC would be hunted and removed from society.

Ziggly, i always like your posts but i cant agree with you on this and i feel youre missing the point.

My point is space for us would be dangerous. Thargoids aside, what would make it dangerous if we had FTL and stations and colonies? Us. I fully believe this. To take this further, your point on the shootings, terrible as they were, and revolted as we were, they still happened.

Thats my point.

Bad things would happen in the elite universe, Society and law be damned. And thats exactly what is happening in this game.

So in that regard...in my opinion, which im not trying to shove down anyones face, this is realistic.


*Edit - realised i called you "Ziggly" and went to change it but i started laughing and now i wanna keep it.

 

[Riverside]

False - even in the real world the hard and fast written rules do not explicitly define what people can and can not get away with (there are typically. If it did, there would be no need for courts of law.

However, we are not talking about rules specifically but rather the design intent behind ED as clearly declared by FD, there in lies a definition of "the spirit of intended gameplay".

When some PvPers start questioning why PvP is unpopular, what behaviours they choose to engage in become relevant. It is not about applying my personal rules to anyone else's gameplay, but rather pointing out how their own gameplay choices may be adversely affect their own experience.

FD are clearly against certain kinds of gameplay being engaged in with-in the gameplay environment they own and to a degree control. Considering the unilateral changes to C&P introduced in 3.0, that clearly includes habitual and overly-aggressive behaviours whether PvE or PvP in nature. That is not to say such behaviours are expressly prohibited but they are not intended to be unconstrained nor without consequences. In the context of PvP, such behaviours will naturally reflect badly on the PvP community in general and by consequence have a negative effect on PvP popularity.

You can try to blame game balance for overly aggressive behaviours but that is a bit like blaming a hammer for a user missing a nail and hitting their thumb or for using the hammer to attack someone.

I don't disagree with any of that, but fundamentally if the result of the rules doesn't match the design intent the rules need to be changed. There is no 'spirit', only grey areas which you choose not to exploit while others push the boundaries further.

IRL courts & juries decide in these grey areas, we have no such mechanism in-game. There is only clear cut rules and intent, and how closely those two match up.

 

[Han_Zen]

Maybe looking at this from a complete different perspective might clarify my take on it. I'm not going into "the spirit of" because that way madness lies.

Flying shieldless in Open in order to maximize profits is allowed in this game. But the consequence is, if you're caught, you're toast.
Continually ganking other CMDRs is allowed in this game. But the consequence is ....

That last part is what C&P attempts to fill in. Whether it's effective or not, is another thing.

I'm out of rep Dusty, but this is an important point.

If Elite is supposed to be dangerous, it has to be dangerous for everyone.

Rater than adding law enforcement death machines I would have preferred combat ships to be far more vulnerable, but we will see how it works out.

 

[Electric Kite]

I'm out of rep Dusty, but this is an important point.

If Elite is supposed to be dangerous, it has to be dangerous for everyone.

Rater than adding law enforcement death machines I would have preferred combat ships to be far more vulnerable, but we will see how it works out.

Gotta say though ive noticed theres a lot less wanted commanders around and i had basically no hassle at the last CG. Might be too early to tell but ye, lets see i guess.

 

[frostypaw]

I'm out of rep Dusty, but this is an important point.

If Elite is supposed to be dangerous, it has to be dangerous for everyone.

Rater than adding law enforcement death machines I would have preferred combat ships to be far more vulnerable, but we will see how it works out.

I was rather disappointed the whole SCB/HRP/MRP thing keeps growing - reversing that would have made it much easier to implement C+P without requiring the death machines - but if TTK is going to be too high for normal forces to act as a deterrent then they're kinda stuck

 

[jasonbarron]

"CLARIFICATION: Ganking meaning more specifically unprovoked and over-powered attacking of targets with practically zero chance of them escaping the attack - rather than the wider case of in-game unprovoked attacking of targets which is an in-game crime."

I reckon rlsg's definition hits the spot concisely.

Let me cite an example : a wing of SDC flying to a planet surface where there are ships belonging to Science!-type players investigating, say, Thargoid Wreck sites, and just blowing up the ships. Subsequently, chasing after the owner's SRV's, toying with them before blowing those up. Due to the way Thargoid Wreck sites work, players cannot just dismiss their ships, because the ships need to be close-by, for good reasons (corrosive nature of alien items which need to be stored in ships, recalled ships will not land inside the Alien Wreckage zone meaning already-damaged SRV's would be required to drive quite far in very rough terrain.) Even if a player was in their ship, escape is nigh on impossible due to not being able to Low or High Wake away because by the time they have reached sufficient altitude above the planet surface to get out of the masslock zone, the rabidly-fitted SDC ships will have blown them up.

I say that's ganking - and it's very much outwith the spirit of the game. Why bother including such content as Alien Wreck sites if all that's going to happen is scumbag players ganking players wanting to consume that content?

So I'm interested in why that type of ganking is to be considered within the spirit of the game. I am here to have my opinion swayed.

You could say that SDC had that gank down to a science!

I think you amply proved that qualified as a gank, but not that it wasn't in the spirit of the game. And I still think hiring some combat ships of your own as bodyguards would be a good idea.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Ziggly, i always like your posts but i cant agree with you on this and i feel youre missing the point.

My point is space for us would be dangerous. Thargoids aside, what would make it dangerous if we had FTL and stations and colonies? Us. I fully believe this. To take this further, your point on the shootings, terrible as they were, and revolted as we were, they still happened.

Thats my point.

Bad things would happen in the elite universe, Society and law be damned. And thats exactly what is happening in this game.

So in that regard...in my opinion, which im not trying to shove down anyones face, this is realistic.

I think our disagreement is in the wording of: space would be full of murderous trigger happy pilots. I'm not saying there would be none, I am saying that the number of murderous trigger happy pilots would be quite limited and they would consist of a tiny minority in the population. The reason a school shooting is such big news is that considering the number of schools and students visiting it, it's a rare outlier event. Not the run of the mill situation.

Now compare this with hopping in a T-6, and going to Jameson Memorial. A system you would think would be rather strict on fighting crime. But the reality is, every ganker and their dog can camp there and pick of other CMDRs one by one. That is completely unrealistic. If this were to happen in an Anarchy system, fair enough.

*Edit - realised i called you "Ziggly" and went to change it but i started laughing and now i wanna keep it.

No worries

 

[Electric Kite]

I think our disagreement is in the wording of: space would be full of murderous trigger happy pilots. I'm not saying there would be none, I am saying that the number of murderous trigger happy pilots would be quite limited and they would consist of a tiny minority in the population. The reason a school shooting is such big news is that considering the number of schools and students visiting it, it's a rare outlier event. Not the run of the mill situation.

Now compare this with hopping in a T-6, and going to Jameson Memorial. A system you would think would be rather strict on fighting crime. But the reality is, every ganker and their dog can camp there and pick of other CMDRs one by one. That is completely unrealistic. If this were to happen in an Anarchy system, fair enough.


No worries

I see your point.
Sort of.

But out of all the places somoene attempted to kill me, Jameson has been the least Dangerous for me. Im not talking about station ramming im talking flying in Jameson space (the ramming is an exploit that still needs to be addressd better by FD imo)

That said..even so..the same way youd assume a high profile area like say..my current city, the main street is "safe", (and sorry to bring this to a dark place) a woman was ra**d (censored? really FD?) about 20 feet from a police station.

I think, the main point here Ziggy is, you have a lot more faith in humanity than i do.

And thats commendable.

 

[frostypaw]

That sort of horror is rare though, not an hourly occurrence. That's the point.

There'll always be nasty people, it's the quantity and the spread and the lack of consequences that people have issue with - not them existing.

 

[jasonbarron]

That sort of horror is rare though, not an hourly occurrence. That's the point.

There'll always be nasty people, it's the quantity and the spread and the lack of consequences that people have issue with - not them existing.

I have run into very few "nasty" people in the game. The forum, on the other hand, is a different story.

Most of the crowd that goes in for variations on player destruction playstyles are more like a band of high spirited, merry anarchists. I know quite a few of these players and chat with them on several discord channels, as well as play with them ingame, and have found them overall to be a pretty positive, helpful group of people.

Just because someone engages in a playstyle you don't agree with doesn't make them nasty.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I have run into very few "nasty" people in the game. The forum, on the other hand, is a different story.

Most of the crowd that goes in for variations on player destruction playstyles are more like a band of high spirited, merry anarchists. I know quite a few of these players and chat with them on several discord channels, as well as play with them ingame, and have found them overall to be a pretty positive, helpful group of people.

Just because someone engages in a playstyle you don't agree with doesn't make them nasty.

Since he continues on my point, I take it he meant nasty in game CMDRs, not the players playing.

 

[frostypaw]

Since he continues on my point, I take it he meant nasty in game CMDRs, not the players playing.

He knows this really, we've gone over it a good twenty times - he's just trying to score points and continue the standard line of "just because I behave like a donkey in game doesn't make me one out of game"

Of course the problem is on the whole they continue behaving in exactly the same way out of the game, but the principle is sound. Obviously as someone "on their side" you don't get lumped with the carebears and subjected to the worst, but meh

 

[sovapid]

I am saying that the number of murderous trigger happy pilots would be quite limited and they would consist of a tiny minority in the population.

Did you miss like 20 pages of this thread over the past few days where all that was talked about was how small the minority of players that pvp is?

And the is just pvp, not the ones that go on gank fests.

 

[jasonbarron]

In game behavior is debatable, while forum behavior is set in stone: calling people "donkeys" or "nasty" or "carebear" or any of the other pejoratives (and to be clear: slurs against the personality defects of PvPers outnumber slurs against PvEers 50/1) so often thrown around IS being demonstrably, unarguably nasty. I grow weary of it, and I see far more of it from certain people here then I ever do in the game.

 

[Han_Zen]

I was rather disappointed the whole SCB/HRP/MRP thing keeps growing - reversing that would have made it much easier to implement C+P without requiring the death machines - but if TTK is going to be too high for normal forces to act as a deterrent then they're kinda stuck

The game would have been much easier to balance and control if the best defense you could get was an engineered A-rated shield and engineered bulkheads.

Unfortunately that would make NPCs almost as strong as us. This would make the Space Invader style of bounty hunting difficult and make many players sad.

The forum would revolt if a Corvette could not kill a hundred Elite NPC in a CZ, without taking hull damage.

 

[frostypaw]

(and to be clear: slurs against the personality defects of PvPers outnumber slurs against PvEers 50/1)

<citation needed>

It's worth remembering that the current state of the forums is significantly because the Mods make sure that the really bad stuff gets removed. I have seen some phenomenal things over my time.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Did you miss like 20 pages of this thread over the past few days where all that was talked about was how small the minority of players that pvp is?

And the is just pvp, not the ones that go on gank fests.

Not sure how this is relevant in the discussion.

In game behavior is debatable, while forum behavior is set in stone: calling people "donkeys" or "nasty" or "carebear" or any of the other pejoratives (and to be clear: slurs against the personality defects of PvPers outnumber slurs against PvEers 50/1) so often thrown around IS being demonstrably, unarguably nasty. I grow weary of it, and I see far more of it from certain people here then I ever do in the game.

I grow weary of this nonsense victim mentality, but still it's trotted around here all the time.

Sucks to be us I guess.

 

[jasonbarron]

Not sure how this is relevant in the discussion.

I grow weary of this nonsense victim mentality, but still it's trotted around here all the time.

Sucks to be us I guess.

As two of the most polite, diplomatic and politically correct people on the forum, you and I are just going to have to soldier on and keep up the good fight my friend. Bringing the shining light of diplomacy to the darkness of a primitive, uncouth forum is a dirty, thankless job, and if we don't do it, who will (besides the mods)?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

As two of the most polite, diplomatic and politically correct people on the forum ...

Oh shut up already

You had me at "as". .... Wait, no, that's not what I meant.

 

[Achilles7]

As two of the most polite, diplomatic and politically correct people on the forum, you and I are just going to have to soldier on and keep up the good fight my friend. Bringing the shining light of diplomacy to the darkness of a primitive, uncouth forum is a dirty, thankless job, and if we don't do it, who will (besides the mods)?

Okay buster...how much do you want for the safe return of our beloved Jason?

I've already organised a 'GoFundMe' page...& errrm, I hope your ransom demand is less than £3.50...or you'll probably just have to kill him!