Modes Is BGS PvP a Myth?

[Rampant]

Lol that is some quality toy-throwing and foot-stamping there

Quality tantrum material indeed, with just a *hint* of blackmail going on in the background.


"If you don't get this game Open only so those that *want* to engage in PvP can do so, then all the PvP players will just turn murder-hobo...

(Except, of course, that those who *want* to engage in PvP are absolutely free to do so, and those that do murder-hobo stuff are most likely just looking for more murder-hobo content and not, actually, legit PvP combat.)

^
that's me discussing the content of the post and not the poster, btw.


Yours Aye

Mark H

 

[Old Duck]

And if people want to be selfish because they dont want to die in a video game.

I really have a hard time understanding your English, but if you are suggesting that people play in Solo because they are "selfish" and don't want to die, then you are wrong. I will soon be restricted to Solo due to external real-life circumstances (limited bandwidth and the expiration of my PS+ membership).

As I said in my OP, I did my BGS influencing experiment in Open, and I might as well have been in Solo because nobody showed up to stop me. There was no PvP. So will I feel guilty if I influence the BGS in Solo? Nope.

ps - if you get your wish and ED becomes an Open-only game, then I'll switch to one of the myriad of other games that support "solo mode" - No Man's Sky, Red Dead Redemption 2, etc. I suspect I wouldn't be the only one. Your dream of an Open Utopia is just that, a dream.

 

[Dietger]

Maybe it shows that, maybe not. If those core ideas were as Sandro suggested then it surprises me greatly that the feature was implemented in all three game modes - especially as DBOBE commented on Solo players affecting Powerplay in a forum post around the time of its introduction.

Perhaps not so surprisingly, if what Goose suggested is relevant. Game was ready, before PvP ever happened.
And any mode could be played.

The evaluation Sammarco suggested is, by all means, only possible in retrospect.

 

[xondk]

Then all thats left is griefing. And if people want to be selfish because they dont want to die in a video game.

Leaving griefing all that's left. Then griefing is what this community gets.

If you guys are happy with that. Then I am happy with that.

Im sure thats completely healthy for this community.

That simply is not true, griefing has absolutely nothing to do with PvP, so saying "since I cannot PvP I am going to grief" is in fact, quite selfish, it is the "I can't have things my way so I am going to affect others negatively"

At best it is a temper tandrum, because you cannot have things your way, where you at the same time blame others for being selfish?

Though yeah, this reaction has been seen repeatedly before and people have repeatedly refused to see the inherit issues that view has.

PvP is in the name Player vesus Player, there is no versus, no challenge in griefing, because it is inherently attacking people in a significantly weaker position

 

[Martind Forlon]

Imo thinking that PvP is just shooting between ships with lasers and plasma is the main mistake here. PvP in Elite can have much more forms simply due this game design when it is related to the BGS. ... it is not easy understand ... obviously

 

[Bob Lighthouse]

Imo thinking that PvP is just shooting between ships with lasers and plasma is the main mistake here. PvP in Elite can have much more forms simply due this game design when it is related to the BGS. ... it is not easy understand ... obviously

Nuance?!

What do you think this is?!!!

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Lol that is some quality toy-throwing and foot-stamping there

Call it what you want.

What I am saying is not wrong.

You cant have a buncha idiots running around yelling griefer griefer all the time. When the people that are supposed to be fighting each other arent.

All thats left is the people to get greifed because the people trying to win are going to take the options to reduce their rebuy against each other and Min/Max ships safely. Even PVPers do this because its more effective.

Its not toy throwing or foot stamping.

Its talking to people that limit themselves and refuse to understand why PVP needs to be implemented in the correct spots of this game.

If you cant see past the " foot stamping", then maybe you should get a little more experience in the game like the rest of the people thats been trying to ask for those changes.

Again, the words playstyle has 0 to do with this conversation.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Its talking to people that limit themselves and refuse to understand why PVP needs to be implemented in the correct spots of this game.

In a game where PvP is an entirely optional play-style, the word "need" in the quoted sentence is a matter of opinion, not fact.

 

[Zieman]

When the people that are supposed to be fighting each other arent.

Why aren't they? What stops them fighting each other?

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Why aren't they? What stops them fighting each other?

We both know the answer to this question. play your games somewhere else. Thanks.

 

[Zieman]

We both know the answer to this question. play your games somewhere else. Thanks.

Lol, apparently you don't.

 

[Havvk]

inb4 lock

 

[Dietger]

In a game where PvP is an entirely optional play-style, the word "need" in the quoted sentence is a matter of opinion, not fact.

Fundamentally, weather or not "optional" isn't the point Waynard, since PVP exists.
So ignoring choices doesn't render them opinions. Since you'll can't ignore the fact, being "assaulted" in Open isn't matter of "Opinions".

Why would anyone complain about Open if it were, Hm?

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

I really have a hard time understanding your English, but if you are suggesting that people play in Solo because they are "selfish" and don't want to die, then you are wrong. I will soon be restricted to Solo due to external real-life circumstances (limited bandwidth and the expiration of my PS+ membership).

As I said in my OP, I did my BGS influencing experiment in Open, and I might as well have been in Solo because nobody showed up to stop me. There was no PvP. So will I feel guilty if I influence the BGS in Solo? Nope.

ps - if you get your wish and ED becomes an Open-only game, then I'll switch to one of the myriad of other games that support "solo mode" - No Man's Sky, Red Dead Redemption 2, etc. I suspect I wouldn't be the only one. Your dream of an Open Utopia is just that, a dream.

Good switch. We dont care.

What do people think rebuys are supposed to be for? Especially against one another.

Its part of the game, it gives us winning and losing conditions.

Especially when it comes to something like Powerplay and BGS player faction wars.

 

[Dietger]

There seems to be a fundamentally confusion about which is which.

Pvp in Open is...

...and needs requirements.

Beside the LIBERTY (choices) engaging in PvP comes the matters of doing so (requirements = how to do or don't or Why ever). One owns (the assaulted) opinions to the fact is not mandatory relevant.

 

[Dietger]

There seems to be a fundamentally confusion about which is which.

Pvp in Open is...

...and needs requirements.

Beside the LIBERTY (choices) engaging in PvP comes matters of doing so (requirements = how to do or don't). One owns opinions to the fact are not mandatory relevant.

...since by nature, PvP does not require necessarily cooperation. Piracy springs to mind ....

 

[Robert Maynard]

Fundamentally, weather or not "optional" isn't the point Waynard, since PVP exists.
So ignoring choices doesn't render them opinions. Since you'll can't ignore the fact, being "assaulted" in Open isn't matter of "Opinions".

Why would anyone complain about Open if it were, Hm?

PvP exists, to be sure. Yes, players in Open engage in PvP (whether the target wants to or not). However, the possibility of being engaged in PvP remains a choice - as the player has to choose to play in a multi-player game mode before PvP is even possible, much less likely.

...since by nature, PvP does not require necessarily cooperation. Piracy springs to mind ....

It requires the target to co-operate by playing in the same game mode, on the same platform, as the Pirate.

 

[Mouse]

We both know the answer to this question. play your games somewhere else. Thanks.

Wow talk about an evasive answer that claims to be right. Z isn't "playing a game" like that. They asked a direct question... that you answered the way you did... well you want to talk about playing a game.

And if you notice both PVErs and PVPers are saying your post was ludicrous... so what does that tell you?

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Wow talk about an evasive answer that claims to be right. Z isn't "playing a game" like that. They asked a direct question... that you answered the way you did... well you want to talk about playing a game.

And if you notice both PVErs and PVPers are saying your post was ludicrous... so what does that tell you?

It tells me people limit their experiences. Because there is a game underneath all this mess. And many of us would like to play it.

They know the answer to the question they are asking. Its why they asked it. That person has been around for quite a while.

Its not evasive at all. Its been explained. By lots of people.

 

[Zieman]

It tells me people limit their experiences. Because there is a game underneath all this mess. And many of us would like to play it.

They know the answer to the question they are asking. Its why they asked it. That person has been around for quite a while.

Its not evasive at all. Its been explained. By lots of people.

Yes, I know the answer: nothing at all.
People who want to fight each other can do so.