Beyond is great but please let the next updates focus on combat and PvP

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

You 100% absolutely and plainly stated out loud in public that you will grief if you don't get your way, though. And since what you asked for in black and white is already there but you call it rubbish proves that you don't HAVE what you "want" and therefore are willing to grief.

And funny, since griefing is a bannable offence (though that would require owning and playing the game to be possible), you won't find anyone saying they DO grief. Just like the jails are full of the innocent, to hear them speak of it...

You brought it on yourself by threatening people's game if you aren't appeased.

What a grief is to your understanding. Is legit gameplay.

if you feel griefed. Thats on you then right? not me. Thats your understanding of the game.

Ill never be banned for blowing someone up in Open.

 

[AP Birdman]

You 100% absolutely and plainly stated out loud in public that you will grief if you don't get your way, though. And since what you asked for in black and white is already there but you call it rubbish proves that you don't HAVE what you "want" and therefore are willing to grief.

And funny, since griefing is a bannable offence (though that would require owning and playing the game to be possible), you won't find anyone saying they DO grief. Just like the jails are full of the innocent, to hear them speak of it...

You brought it on yourself by threatening people's game if you aren't appeased.

Every post I've seen from you is just trying to put words in others people's mouth and twisting what they say to fit your agenda. Go kick rocks

 

[Sterling MH]

Not Power Play.

Yeah. frumdad said "What? No PP?".

Then said it totes was PvP as soon as you attacked a PG. Ooops, he meant PMF...

Not power play.

and do PvE activities in order to promote their power. Recently enough, the Dev's made some P&G exemptions for PP opponent driven PvP.

C&P, you mean? Yeah. And no problemwith that. To be "forced" into PvP via PP you still need to
1) Sign up to a PP faction. This may be solely to get the toys, may just be "because it's *A* reason to be here rather than somewhere else". So not really agreeing to PvP.
2) Go to a PP contested area. Well you may be playing Duval's side. They're not combat oriented, someone RPing isn't still wanting to be forced to play combat.
3) Do it in open. Just going in open should not be consent. Most noisy posters refuse to accept this.

If you do all three, it's fairly certain that you really did want PvP combat to be possible, even if you hoped to luck out. After all you could decide not to do it in Open. Or not go to a contested area. Or not sign up for PP. Any one could, with increasing certainty, denote a non consent to PvP combat.

 

[Roybe]

So what? Every update needs to be exploration and mining?
I literally have nothing to do in the game right now except shoot at the same players I've been shooting at and players that rage when I blow them up in their exploration ships, and a bunch of terrible combat missions that are literally not even worth doing.

Thanks for adding your ignorance to the conversation.

Give me one example of a worth while combat or pvp uprade that have been added to the game this year. Name ONE!

BTW, if the next update is combat focused I'm gonna laugh in your face.

So..'go play in Mobius, noob!' ain't working out?

 

[Thepirateorc]

You 100% absolutely and plainly stated out loud in public that you will grief if you don't get your way, though. And since what you asked for in black and white is already there but you call it rubbish proves that you don't HAVE what you "want" and therefore are willing to grief.

And funny, since griefing is a bannable offence (though that would require owning and playing the game to be possible), you won't find anyone saying they DO grief. Just like the jails are full of the innocent, to hear them speak of it...

You brought it on yourself by threatening people's game if you aren't appeased.

they wont ban people for clogging then I highly doubt anyone will get banned for griefing ppl

 

[Sterling MH]

Ill never be banned for blowing someone up in Open.

We note you have not stated you will not be a griefer in open.you don't get banned for blowing up a player ship in open. Only for griefing. Which you 100% absolutely said you WILL do if you don't get your own way. Which can be bannable. If you don;t actually play, this will be no deterrent from posting that you totally WILL grief, but it makes it moot to everyone in the game. And you will OF COURSE insist you aren't CURRENTLY a griefer, because if you did, you'd be banned for admitting to a bannable offence.

That is irrespective of whether you ARE one. It's just a fact of the ability of people who break rules to break other rules too.

Having made the threat, nobody is wrong to conclude you ARE a griefer. They just can't prove it and it is VERY unlikely you get banned because people think you are one. they don't know what the truth is, but the truth is not necessarily what you are claiming.

You should not have threatened people's gameplay if you don't get your way.

Simple as that.

 

[AP Birdman]

So..'go play in Mobius, noob!' ain't working out?

???
I do my best to encourage people to fly in open and attempt to teach them how to survive though I admit I get frustrated by a lot of the arrogance and ignorance and I say mean things sometimes.

 

[Sterling MH]

they wont ban people for clogging then I highly doubt anyone will get banned for griefing ppl

They do. Carebear PvPers just thing logging off the game before you kill them is the same as the term combat logging, which is not logging off the computer. So when you see someone disappear, you insist it is CLogging, but FDev may find that they used the menu exit to just decide they did not want to play with you. It's their game, they CAN decide not to play with you, no matter how they leave you hanging. Pulling the network cord out, for example, stuffs up the P2P and instantiation server, damaging the game of everyone, so is bannable.

 

[Mohrgan]

Yeah. frumdad said "What? No PP?".

Then said it totes was PvP as soon as you attacked a PG. Ooops, he meant PMF...

Not power play.



C&P, you mean? Yeah. And no problemwith that. To be "forced" into PvP via PP you still need to
1) Sign up to a PP faction. This may be solely to get the toys, may just be "because it's *A* reason to be here rather than somewhere else". So not really agreeing to PvP.
2) Go to a PP contested area. Well you may be playing Duval's side. They're not combat oriented, someone RPing isn't still wanting to be forced to play combat.
3) Do it in open. Just going in open should not be consent. Most noisy posters refuse to accept this.

If you do all three, it's fairly certain that you really did want PvP combat to be possible, even if you hoped to luck out. After all you could decide not to do it in Open. Or not go to a contested area. Or not sign up for PP. Any one could, with increasing certainty, denote a non consent to PvP combat.

A well reasoned final paragraph. And yes, I meant to type C&P. Thanks.

As to where you might find PvP. The orientation of the Power has very little to do with it. If you are in the wrong System, and a PP Opponent catches you, you better expect to be attacked. We have to concede that when in open, you are possibly subject to PvP. Philosophical discussions aside, it is unfair to be in open, and be angry about being attacked by other Commanders. There are too many ways to avoid PvP outright, to expect some kind of exemption in open. This notion isn't practical, nor fair.

 

[Sterling MH]

A well reasoned final paragraph. And yes, I meant to type C&P. Thanks.

No probs. Though it would be amusing if it WERE "Proctor and Gamble"...

As to where you might find PvP. The orientation of the Power has very little to do with it. If you are in the wrong System, and a PP Opponent catches you, you better expect to be attacked.

Aye, but the point is that the one initiating the attack would resonably expect it is consenting. It would be VERY Queensbury Rules to message an opposing faction's ship and say "I say, old bean, do you mind awfully if we have a bout of the old fisticuffs due to my utter disdain for the actions of the people you support?".

Funny though.

The point is that it is what is reasonable to expect. Open only? No, that is not consenting to PvP. It's supposed to be the default mode for a game where everybody's play style is just as valid as any other. Or a noob who has been either led astray or doesn't know better. But after three indicative, but not conclusive, factors that could mean consent, we can gently rule out malice on the part of someone who takes it at face value and opens up.

See the jokes about microsoft's dialogue going "Are you sure?" "Are you really sure?" "No, really, you certain you want to do that?"...

 

[GODofDUTY83]

My point was that you WANT to do PvP. And that if it's ust combat against NPCs, the lack of "challenge" makes it
meaningless, meaning that you are already rewarded for your PvP combat.

Go on, answer my hypothetical. If PvE combat were upped to, lets say, new mining level ROIs. Would you spend your time now doing NPC kills because there's a lot of credits in that, and the PvP side can go float in a bath? Or would you find that so boring you don't WANT to play, you merely feel you HAVE to play? Because in the latter case you are proving that the challenge of PvP is a reward in and of itself.

Which may be why you don't want to answer, because you'd like to answer honestly. It would be ruinous for your case.

Like I said, if trading earned a lot more, ESPECIALLY if combat paid LESS, then those who want PvP with traders, so as to play pirate, get their meaningful PvP with other PvPers who have been practically forced to play that (or were playing prey all along, in which case the upgrade in profit is pure gravy) so that they can get their chance to play predator.

It would ensure that even if everyone bar PvPers were playing in Solo, that there would be a maximal amount of PvPers to play with, unless either the trader payout was not high enough compared to combat, OR paid too much. There would definitely be a goldilocks zone.

I don't give a rat's reputation for what bullying you think some other person who wants combat payout buffed. Not that he said that anyway.

Indeed upping the combat payout would REDUCE that meaningful asymmetric PvP so many want. If combat pays out enough to keep EVERYONE playing full time as the predator, then there will be nobody who is playing the prey. Because they don't HAVE to and it's more fun being the bully than the bullied.

But if I profess this idea that combat payout needs to be nerfed for the sake of PvP, do you think I will get more or less of the backlash you were "really talking about"?

MY version has a causal process that informs an optimal outcome is possible. His has a causal process that shows it is counterproductive.

No thanks.

 

[Sterling MH]

No thanks.

Didn't think so. So don't claim that you need more credits or that low pay for PvP actions are an atrocity, because you want the "thrill" of player vs player no matter. It is worth a lot to you to feel challenged. THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM. You're 100% allowed to love the challenge or the thrill of losing in a test of skill. Knock yourself out. Just not literally, okay? E sports is all about that, and a lot of them (usually kids a lot younger than you) are great sports about it, even though they lost.

But it isn't the lack of credits that is putting you off PvP.

The PvP *is the reward*.

Like I said, if you had to play as a trader to pay for the rebuys half the time you play the game, then there will be, assuming you are indicative of the PvPers as a whole, as many traders in open to be preyed on as there are commanders to prey on them. And then EVERY ONE OF YOU gets PvP, meaningful PvP, where you aren't stuck grinding a combat PvP meta build player only. Someone hauling cargo, even to engage in PvP while doing it, will not be able to meta build a T7 or even a Cutter into a combat meta build.

And if you bemoan being "forced" to play a hauler in a dangerous world, that's what you're asking those in PGs and Solo to do when insisting they consent to PvP if they play in open, and they MUST play in open.

Not forgetting that your turn WILL come and YOU will be the one trying to nail down a trader for sweet loot while the one lording it over you is running from the hunters now.

Paying better for combat would put fewer people to play with unless you WANT to grind shields before a high wake.

 

[GODofDUTY83]

Didn't think so. So don't claim that you need more credits or that low pay for PvP actions are an atrocity, because you want the "thrill" of player vs player no matter. It is worth a lot to you to feel challenged. THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM. You're 100% allowed to love the challenge or the thrill of losing in a test of skill. Knock yourself out. Just not literally, okay? E sports is all about that, and a lot of them (usually kids a lot younger than you) are great sports about it, even though they lost.

But it isn't the lack of credits that is putting you off PvP.

The PvP *is the reward*.

Like I said, if you had to play as a trader to pay for the rebuys half the time you play the game, then there will be, assuming you are indicative of the PvPers as a whole, as many traders in open to be preyed on as there are commanders to prey on them. And then EVERY ONE OF YOU gets PvP, meaningful PvP, where you aren't stuck grinding a combat PvP meta build player only. Someone hauling cargo, even to engage in PvP while doing it, will not be able to meta build a T7 or even a Cutter into a combat meta build.

And if you bemoan being "forced" to play a hauler in a dangerous world, that's what you're asking those in PGs and Solo to do when insisting they consent to PvP if they play in open, and they MUST play in open.

Not forgetting that your turn WILL come and YOU will be the one trying to nail down a trader for sweet loot while the one lording it over you is running from the hunters now.

Paying better for combat would put fewer people to play with unless you WANT to grind shields before a high wake.

I didn't claim I wanted more credits.
Are you ok ?

 

[Sterling MH]

I didn't claim I wanted more credits.
Are you ok ?

And I said "Don't claim it". Do you want to tell the mods you are sorry for sniping...

 

[GODofDUTY83]

And I said "Don't claim it". Do you want to tell the mods you are sorry for sniping...

You do what you must. I think it best to ignore you.

 

[AP Birdman]

Didn't think so. So don't claim that you need more credits or that low pay for PvP actions are an atrocity, because you want the "thrill" of player vs player no matter. It is worth a lot to you to feel challenged. THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM. You're 100% allowed to love the challenge or the thrill of losing in a test of skill. Knock yourself out. Just not literally, okay? E sports is all about that, and a lot of them (usually kids a lot younger than you) are great sports about it, even though they lost.

But it isn't the lack of credits that is putting you off PvP.

The PvP *is the reward*.

Like I said, if you had to play as a trader to pay for the rebuys half the time you play the game, then there will be, assuming you are indicative of the PvPers as a whole, as many traders in open to be preyed on as there are commanders to prey on them. And then EVERY ONE OF YOU gets PvP, meaningful PvP, where you aren't stuck grinding a combat PvP meta build player only. Someone hauling cargo, even to engage in PvP while doing it, will not be able to meta build a T7 or even a Cutter into a combat meta build.

And if you bemoan being "forced" to play a hauler in a dangerous world, that's what you're asking those in PGs and Solo to do when insisting they consent to PvP if they play in open, and they MUST play in open.

Not forgetting that your turn WILL come and YOU will be the one trying to nail down a trader for sweet loot while the one lording it over you is running from the hunters now.

Paying better for combat would put fewer people to play with unless you WANT to grind shields before a high wake.

Your lack of knowledge and empathy for pvpers is shocking.

 

[Mohrgan]

Your lack of knowledge and empathy for pvpers is shocking.

The lack of empathy is a two way street. Tossing around carebear and like comments doesn't imply a lot of empathy for the PvE-Way. If we can all get beyond name calling and stereotyping, issues like these could be handled a lot easier. As we have it now, everything stalls on ancient resentments.

 

[Havvk]

Your lack of knowledge and empathy for pvpers is shocking.

There has been countless suggestions and ideas on how to "Make PvP great again" without CQC being involved, nor needing anything to be restricted to any game mode while locking it out of the other 2. But you still somehow seem to just look the other way and ignore those posts or threads and instead make something like your OP.

 

[DukeIronHand]

See this thread is not aging well.

 

[Havvk]

See this thread is not aging well.

Implying that this thread would provide extensive, thorough and long-lived discussion