Opinions on combat logging

[[VR] M4st0d0n]

True - but two wrongs do not make a right.

If the target terminates the session by any means other than the menu then they are behaving as bad as the aggressor in many ways. Assuming we are talking about griefers and gankers here rather than genuine role-playing pirates.

It's funny you cant even think about ending the session by any other means than the menu for it to be legit.

Let's maybe consider a game where pvp can give a chance for people to defend themselves, by trying to understand, because people here like to assert about word's meanings a lot, what the word versus actually means.

Versus means people are facing each other. That's pretty much the opposite here, and that's why you are all so wrong.

 

[Limpboot]

Doesn't it just comes down to the simple task of choosing whether or not you want to pvp? If not, don't select open. Easy way to solve that dilemma.

 

[Siobhan]

It's funny you cant even think about ending the session by any other means than the menu for it to be legit.

Let's maybe consider a game where pvp can give a chance for people to defend themselves, by trying to understand, because people here like to assert about word's meanings a lot, what the word versus actually means.

Versus means people are facing each other. That's pretty much the opposite here, and that's why you are all so wrong.

Versus implies that both parties are involved. Often enough, one party wants nothing more than to not be there. Is your feeling of superiority more important than their time?

 

[Riverside]

True - but two wrongs do not make a right.

If the target terminates the session by any means other than the menu then they are behaving as bad as the aggressor in many ways. Assuming we are talking about griefers and gankers here rather than genuine role-playing pirates.

I think you neatly sum up the issue here - one of escalation into a reaction the other side isn't happy with.

You accidentally insult me, I insult you back. You push me, I punch you. You get out a knife, I run away. This is a chain of events the game allows for. One side using magic to disappear isn't part of the game, it's choosing not to play (textbook griefer's objective). The 'Griefer' is at least playing the game. I enjoy beating them at their own game (just by surviving & continuing to play mostly), but sometimes they win too

 

[Krash]

I think you neatly sum up the issue here - one of escalation into a reaction the other side isn't happy with.

You accidentally insult me, I insult you back. You push me, I punch you. You get out a knife, I run away. This is a chain of events the game allows for. One side using magic to disappear isn't part of the game, it's choosing not to play (textbook griefer's objective). The 'Griefer' is at least playing the game. I enjoy beating them at their own game (just by surviving & continuing to play mostly), but sometimes they win too

When does the griefer lose in his own mind? i.e. griefer: "I lost that encounter"?

 

[Perseus]

If that were correct, Open would be called PvP Mode. Strange it's not, and even in Pgs where PvP isn't allowed, people manage to force it on others, meaning the only way to guarantee to avoid PvP is to play solo.

It's a loophole in the ruleset that means that PvP is always possible (there is no PvP protection in the code so a PvE mode is impossible without a rewrite).
This is abused by those who wish to prove their superiority by victimising weaker players (or non-minmaxed ships). Call it fair play if you like, but you'll never win any hearts and minds.

If you attack a non-combat ship/player and you are flying an optimised combat ship, then you are a coward. No ifs, no buts, just fact.

If a non-combat ship logs out using the menu, then the player has done nothing wrong. If you cry that they have, then you are a coward.

Good grief!
So you want them to label OPEN as PVP when in actual fact OPEN explains what can happen in an open environment. Weak sauce, I'm afraid. Try thinking about open possibilities.
PvPers are not really out to win hearts or minds. They are out to win combat engagements. Then again, by your own admission, you wouldn't know this.
Attacking weaker ships - whose fault is this? Let's consider those modes again and player choice in outfitting, shall we? As to cowardice - there is no bravery component even relevant to CLogging under any circumstances - it's pure cheating!
I'm "crying" that I don't want cheaters in open and you call me a coward - MOO! My poor little heart is broken, you advocate of 'griefing' you!

 

[[VR] M4st0d0n]

Versus implies that both parties are involved. Often enough, one party wants nothing more than to not be there. Is your feeling of superiority more important than their time?

No. If a party does not want to be there, it's not a versus. It's a chase. And there is plenty of ways needing less than four key pressed for them to win by leaving. It's hilarious.

I have a feeling "pvp" in this game, as of many other mechanics, simply does not value anyone's time.

You'll read here people arguing it would be worthless to engage pvp if the looser dont watch a rebuy screens. Those are the same nooblets I would uterly destroy in CQC, except there's no grind to pay back, just a simple and elegant respawn mechanism who prroved to be tried and true in many competitive games.

So my point is, there is no versus in Elite. Design just failed to provide people reasons to fight against each others.

 

[Siobhan]

Good grief!
So you want them to label OPEN as PVP when in actual fact OPEN explains what can happen in an open environment. Weak sauce, I'm afraid. Try thinking about open possibilities.
PvPers are not really out to win hearts or minds. They are out to win combat engagements. Then again, by your own admission, you wouldn't know this.
Attacking weaker ships - whose fault is this? Let's consider those modes again and player choice in outfitting, shall we? As to cowardice - there is no bravery component even relevant to CLogging under any circumstances - it's pure cheating!
I'm "crying" that I don't want cheaters in open and you call me a coward - MOO! My poor little heart is broken, you advocate of 'griefing' you!

Label it how it is, I don't care
Nobody needs to be brave to CL or not. The victim doesn't need to claim to be brave, they just need to not pull the plug or alt-f4.

On the other hand the attacker (aka coward or crybaby) needs to not attack non-combat players... I mean sure, you may not know... There's a t-6 in space flying from a to b. How are you to know they aren't carrying enough munitions to take out a coriolis... (UAs notwithstanding) ..

Seriously though it might be a Python or a Conda... You attack and they try to leave... No fighting back. You jam their FSD, you shoot out the engine... They can either log out or get a rebuy screen... What difference does it make to you? If you Want to ruin their day you can insist on the rebuy. If you're a reasonable human, then let them go. It doesn't need to hurt your ego. You don't need to put them on a list. I mean... It's supposed to be a game. It's supposed to be fun. I'm sorry I assumed that meant fun for all parties and not just those with a point to prove.

 

[Siobhan]

I have a feeling "pvp" in this game, as of many other mechanics, simply does not value anyone's time.

If nothing else, on this point at least, we agree.
Either a) it values the time of the aggressor but not the victim... Or b) it values the time of the victim but not the aggressor.
Balancing that is difficult in any game, but where the default mode is "open" to whatever, then it's doubly so and often values the time of neither.

 

[Krash]

Label it how it is, I don't care
Nobody needs to be brave to CL or not. The victim doesn't need to claim to be brave, they just need to not pull the plug or alt-f4.

On the other hand the attacker (aka coward or crybaby) needs to not attack non-combat players... I mean sure, you may not know... There's a t-6 in space flying from a to b. How are you to know they aren't carrying enough munitions to take out a coriolis... (UAs notwithstanding) ..

Seriously though it might be a Python or a Conda... You attack and they try to leave... No fighting back. You jam their FSD, you shoot out the engine... They can either log out or get a rebuy screen... What difference does it make to you? If you Want to ruin their day you can insist on the rebuy. If you're a reasonable human, then let them go. It doesn't need to hurt your ego. You don't need to put them on a list. I mean... It's supposed to be a game. It's supposed to be fun. I'm sorry I assumed that meant fun for all parties and not just those with a point to prove.

Reasonable? Gankers take out your shield gen, then your FSD and expect you to explode. Maybe they expect you to fight back until they take out your weapons then explode, either way their ganker tactics only work as a gang and any result that does not end in you exploding is a dishonorable affront to all human decency.

 

[Perseus]

Label it how it is, I don't care
Nobody needs to be brave to CL or not. The victim doesn't need to claim to be brave, they just need to not pull the plug or alt-f4.

On the other hand the attacker (aka coward or crybaby) needs to not attack non-combat players... I mean sure, you may not know... There's a t-6 in space flying from a to b. How are you to know they aren't carrying enough munitions to take out a coriolis... (UAs notwithstanding) ..

Seriously though it might be a Python or a Conda... You attack and they try to leave... No fighting back. You jam their FSD, you shoot out the engine... They can either log out or get a rebuy screen... What difference does it make to you? If you Want to ruin their day you can insist on the rebuy. If you're a reasonable human, then let them go. It doesn't need to hurt your ego. You don't need to put them on a list. I mean... It's supposed to be a game. It's supposed to be fun. I'm sorry I assumed that meant fun for all parties and not just those with a point to prove.

And nary a mention of modes. Just justification for cheating in open with a laughable attempt at name calling. I merely want a game with rules and no cheating - I'm so craven, aren't I?!
In addition, all this tripe from someone with no experience of the subject. I guess you're more of a fan of Plato than Aristotle, eh?

 

[Riverside]

When does the griefer lose in his own mind? i.e. griefer: "I lost that encounter"?

Failing to extract grief (rebuy or whatever). The Griefer is mostly Hypothetical (eg expecting Besieger to be waiting for me after every jump). In the cat & mouse game, I very much play the mouse, but if the cat catches me I'm not going to leave the game just because they played the game well.

 

[Siobhan]

And nary a mention of modes. Just justification for cheating in open with a laughable attempt at name calling. I merely want a game with rules and no cheating - I'm so craven, aren't I?!
In addition, all this tripe from someone with no experience of the subject. I guess you're more of a fan of Plato than Aristotle, eh?

Because modes don't matter. The only mode that's not PvP is solo. Even when in for instance Mobius, PvE is agreed... When someone abuses the fact that they can't vet everyone and that FD won't help enforce it...
Basically open is PvP, pgs are PvP. Even Mobius is PvP... The only thing preventing PvP in solo is there's nobody to PvP with.
Modes are not the issue here.

 

[[VR] M4st0d0n]

If nothing else, on this point at least, we agree.
Either a) it values the time of the aggressor but not the victim... Or b) it values the time of the victim but not the aggressor.
Balancing that is difficult in any game, but where the default mode is "open" to whatever, then it's doubly so and often values the time of neither.

Just to be clear. You people want to balance timers. Not time nor value. Timers.

The lowest game mechanism you'll find only in mobile cashgrabs.

We don't talk "any game" here. There are basic pvp mecanisms Elite just didn't implement at all. They sugarcoated development hiatus by calling it "emergent" design you'll be excited about.

 

[Krash]

Failing to extract grief (rebuy or whatever). The Griefer is mostly Hypothetical (eg expecting Besieger to be waiting for me after every jump). In the cat & mouse game, I very much play the mouse, but if the cat catches me I'm not going to leave the game just because they played the game well.

I have never interdicted another CMDR. I have had plenty of PvP encounters with strangers when the "griefer" earned my respect through excellent skill and bested me. OTOH... there's the ganker encounter where 2 or more griefers, with their specialized engineered builds, remove my ability to fight and/or retreat. For some reason, I have zero respect for those guys, utter contempt even more. Is that wrong of me to hate their guts?

 

[jasonbarron]

I have never interdicted another CMDR. I have had plenty of PvP encounters with strangers when the "griefer" earned my respect through excellent skill and bested me. OTOH... there's the ganker encounter where 2 or more griefers, with their specialized engineered builds, remove my ability to fight and/or retreat. For some reason, I have zero respect for those guys, utter contempt even more. Is that wrong of me to hate their guts?

"Hating their guts" seems like an overwhelming over reaction, honestly. I've been wing ganked so many times I can't even put a number to it, and I can honestly say that I've never felt anything more negative than minor indignation.

 

[Rampant]

Ah no, if you haven't done an activity, you have no experience to draw upon.
The only possibility is making things up.

It's pretty simple and not presumptuous at all.

"If you haven't done an activity", you say?

What if that activity is foisted upon you?

There's the rub. I, and other players here, have *never* pursued PvP combat. But you have no authority to say we have no experience of it, because PvP combat happens to get thrusted upon us even though we have absolutely no interest in it.

And you think that be funny?
That simply demonstrates your disingenuity of trying to discredit individuals even though they do have the experience required to contribute to the discussion.

Distilled down, that's just as hominem.

 

[Perseus]

Because modes don't matter. The only mode that's not PvP is solo. Even when in for instance Mobius, PvE is agreed... When someone abuses the fact that they can't vet everyone and that FD won't help enforce it...
Basically open is PvP, pgs are PvP. Even Mobius is PvP... The only thing preventing PvP in solo is there's nobody to PvP with.
Modes are not the issue here.

Modes don't matter unless there was a pure PvE mode - is that where you're trying to steer?
The lady doth protest too much, methinks (about something she's admitted she know's nowt about).

 

[Riverside]

I have never interdicted another CMDR. I have had plenty of PvP encounters with strangers when the "griefer" earned my respect through excellent skill and bested me. OTOH... there's the ganker encounter where 2 or more griefers, with their specialized engineered builds, remove my ability to fight and/or retreat. For some reason, I have zero respect for those guys, utter contempt even more. Is that wrong of me to hate their guts?

I saw the one linked to in another thread recently, I made no comment at the time but I thought it was an interesting scenario. The two aggressors used an innovative tactic to maximise their alpha strike on a large target. It wasn't cowardly, it was emergent and I felt some empathy for the victim because I've been in similar situations (and learned from them).

I think the main takeaway from that experience is not to insult others imo, I try not to (sometimes not hard enough).

I wrote a story a day or two ago about being attacked in a CZ. My reaction was similar to yours - just retract hardpoints & (try to) leave. My attacker was not as successful as yours.

 

[Perseus]

"If you haven't done an activity", you say?

What if that activity is foisted upon you?

There's the rub. I, and other players here, have *never* pursued PvP combat. But you have no authority to say we have no experience of it, because PvP combat happens to get thrusted upon us even though we have absolutely no interest in it.

And you think that be funny?
That simply demonstrates your disingenuity of trying to discredit individuals even though they do have the experience required to contribute to the discussion.

Distilled down, that's just as hominem.

Constant use of the word 'authority'? Do you use it, per chance, in an attempt to give your own good self some of it?
You have the authority to hit that solo mode. Or the numerous PGs.
Where is your dog in this fight exactly (and a chicken ain't a dog, by the way- I have that on authority).