Yeah the 'respectfully' caveat is an important one when looking for friendlies. Probably applies both way too i'd guess.
Opinions on combat logging
- Thread starter mephisto9466
- Start date
Yeah the 'respectfully' caveat is an important one when looking for friendlies. Probably applies both way too i'd guess.
What are you trying to say? The community isn't bothered about combat logging despite the size of this thread? Or that 117 pages is a common occurrence? Or something else I've misunderstood...? I didn't say a thread necessarily reaching 116 pages means a topic is important, but I do think it's a good indicator, generally.
Griefing is also an important topic for those that participate in it, and those on the receiving end.
Yep. If someone tries or succeeds in destroying me, and I immediately assume they are a reprehensible person in real life and fire off a few chats on comms to that effect, it's a safe bet the other guy isn't going to be friendly or helpful. On the other hand, if I keep an open mind and assume that the guy was just having fun, didn't wish real life harm on me, and was simply playing a violent sci fi game in a competitive multiplayer environment that the devs not only provided for but intended and communicate with him based on those more mature filters, I can almost guarantee that in 99/100 cases he will be cool, funny and helpful.
Last edited:
I am not factually incorrect at all. You are reaching. A lot.
You are projecting.
Please tell me the steps you achieved to confirm, with positive evidence, that "MOST" Elite Dangerous PvP combat players even know of the existence of that Discord.
Yours Aye
Mark H
(I might add that I don't even know what Discord is. I see the word written occasionally, but have no idea what it is.)
I think the time for providing citations proving anything is now on you. Why don't you prove something for a change instead of making wildly subjective assertions based on your feelings?
"If approached respectfully" works both ways.
Can you see the flaw in your logic yet?
Yours Aye
Mark H
And if someone opens fire with no comms on me I'm going to make some basic assumptions about their social skills. Some people get really upset over the least little thing, even being called out when they are wrong.
All of this applies both ways. There are jerks in every section of the community, aren't there?
Last edited:
Nope, that's a logical fallacy.
I was responding to an assertion by somebody else that said "most PvP players are helpful".
With respect, JB, the burden of proof is not on me.
The burden of proof would require some kind of citation or study or statistical analysis to back up the original claim of "most" being helpful, and that clearly isn't available. Hence I say that the assertion of "most being helpful" is impossible to prove. Hence it is bull.
Which means you don't get to try to turn the tables with your own anecdotal evidence. No sir. That would be a logical fallacy.
Slàinte Mhath
Mark H
Your ego is writing cheques that your body can't cash.
Nobody is going to supply any useful evidence either way, it's just opinion based on personal experience. JasonBarron has taken the time to get to know some players that PvP, and s/he thinks all their friends are awesome. You have met some players too, and one of your criteria for thinking less of a player is that they don't play the same rules you do.
And of course each of you naturally puts more weight on your own assessment. None of this is a reason to quit playing, just try to avoid players of that type if you know they'll only annoy you. Or stop complaining about what others do that you don't like and be grateful when you find some common ground.
Yes. The "community" doesn't care. This is just pushed by the crowd who like to congratulate themselves in their ongoing circle jerk of trolling and trying to rile up peeps. An activity they have become quite proficient in.
99/100 is propably to high but MY personal anecdotal evidence is that at least 70/100 are helpful and nice afterwards, regardless if they "won" or "lost"
I can't agree. Anyway, please don't accuse me of confirmation bias (I find it insulting), it was a simple and valid statement, 116 pages are not made from trivial topics.
It's a logical fallacy. You confuse (at best) edge case interest with majority interest. And try to make a fuss of it.
You're the one making a fuss of it. It's not a fallacy, it's a statistical truth that the size of a topic (combined with the rate at which it grows over a period of time) on a forum is a general reflection of the community's investment in that topic. Anyway, no worries, I don't want to argue about it.
Last edited:
I think you make a good point. There is a significant section of the community that seems to be looking for some reason why their own slightly shameful behaviour is someone else's fault.
There is little interest in actually finding ways to deal with the problem, because then they would have only themselves to blame. Personally I stand to neither gain or lose from any of this, I just think it makes sense to close the loophole, just as is being done with board flipping.
Last edited:
If you have ever pulled the plug on your router or menu logged on another Cmdr you shouldn't be in Open play.
You're just lying to yourself about your abilities. You're an also ran, a figure of fun.
You're just lying to yourself about your abilities. You're an also ran, a figure of fun.
When was your first session in Open? How did you know how good you needed to be and what opposition you would face?
I think the point is you take your lessons like a man. And I kinda agree to be honest. It's about who you are, not how good you are.