I hope DW2 gets ganked all the way to Beagle Point.

[Ian Skippy]

I personally applaud FDev (for once) for restoring ships and data in the event of PKing during DW2. This is supposed to be a peaceful cooperative event, and all possible precautions have been taken, and they’re not going to put up with any from ne’er-do-wells this time.

I think they should go one further and automatically eject the offender from the group on the spot, and send thrm back to the Bubble.

Then what are those 1000+ security ships for? Is my role supposed to be to write angry PMs ro Brett? I understand it is normally lame to 'grief' in PGs, but when you explicitly build the largest defence fleet and then brag about it on social media, surely at least some resistence is ok?

 

[Weps]

If they admit to restoring the ships of anyone ganked in Fleetcomm, they'll have to do it for any other PG that's got a "no PVP" policy. So they were probably hoping to keep it in the down low.

Yes, I guess this could create a precedent for Mobius for example, empowering members to request restores whenever there is any foul play. Just the number of tickets alone would shake things up a little.

I'm kinda rooting for this to happen now.

 

[Brrokk]

Well it's always good when things get made clear.

What this demonstrates is that there's a certain class of player who want to make sure no-one has a good time unless its in their approved fashion. All they like is blowing stuff up and for people to set off in unarmed ships doing something other than combat really grinds their gears. So does the very existence of Mobius, and now FleetComm has attracted the same notice. The term "griefer" gets bandied about, but I now think I've got a more accurately descriptive one: "control freak". It's the mentality in which someone is focussed on not only playing the game themselves, but also making sure someone else only plays it their way.

FD have given advice about how to get support when destroyed because in certain contexts that destruction is a violation of the ToS. It's certainly right for them to restore game assets which have been lost because of another player violating ToS, although I think the workload might prove unexpected. I guess they will also consider sanctioning the violator although I wouldn't expect them to ever publicise that.

Ironically, if DW2 does get ganked all the way to Beagle Point all the gankers will achieve is to focus FD on the elephant in the room: the need for an Open-PvE mode in which PvP damage is disabled. This is the solution all other successful multi-player games come to, and if FD can't keep up with the repair work I expect they'll finally be driven to it in ED too.

 

[Bigmaec]

Then what are those 1000+ security ships for? Is my role supposed to be to write angry PMs ro Brett? I understand it is normally lame to 'grief' in PGs, but when you explicitly build the largest defence fleet and then brag about it on social media, surely at least some resistence is ok?

You should know that an semi-explorer/"security" build usually doesn't stand a chance against a PvP vessel, and with all the instancing shenanigans it's not possible to fly reasonable CAP anyways, especially if the ship you want to guard isn't hardened.
The security-bragging was funny, though, in a facepalm-way. 1000 Anacondas wow. I'd love to see some SDC versus DW2 security videos. I'm sure they will entertain me.

edit:

*snip*

That!

 

[Ian Skippy]

There is a fundamental difference between building an explorer for open and one for PG/PvE. Babbling about "real life exploration" is as nonsensical as calling PvPers "psychopaths". Name calling people who get ganked "namby pamby cry babies" doesn't give your cause weight either. I agree that FD shouldn't bother with reinstating explorers killed in open, though.


edit:
I guess that's spot on. Keeping it low profile, don't talk about it, but now the cat is out of the bag.... Interesting days.

True, but 'its not fair, the thargoid shot me!' was a result of the same mentality. Some explorers simply prepare for nothing and practice nothing, only to blame everybody else when something goes wrong.

On my way to colonia at one of the reststops I met another cmdr when on final approach. He was in his SRV, gathering mats. With his conda parked. Just outside the firing zone. In Open. In the only spot in a 1000LY radius where you are likely to run into other cmdrs.

 

[Bryan K]

Then what are those 1000+ security ships for? Is my role supposed to be to write angry PMs ro Brett? I understand it is normally lame to 'grief' in PGs, but when you explicitly build the largest defence fleet and then brag about it on social media, surely at least some resistence is ok?

Gankers combat-log (they are richards, afterall), so a defense fleet’s effectiveness is questionable. Plus, unless you have a ship personally guarding every single explorer, you likely won’t get to them fast enough to save them if they’re in a shieldless build.

I commend your efforts, though.

 

[Bigmaec]

True, but 'its not fair, the thargoid shot me!' was a result of the same mentality. Some explorers simply prepare for nothing and practice nothing, only to blame everybody else when something goes wrong.

On my way to colonia at one of the reststops I met another cmdr when on final approach. He was in his SRV, gathering mats. With his conda parked. Just outside the firing zone. In Open. In the only spot in a 1000LY radius where you are likely to run into other cmdrs.

Yes, that was/is equally stupid. Fly open, build for it and live with consequences. The same doesn't hold necessarily true for PG though.

 

[Ian Skippy]

You should know that an semi-explorer/"security" build usually doesn't stand a chance against a PvP vessel, and with all the instancing shenanigans it's not possible to fly reasonable CAP anyways, especially if the ship you want to guard isn't hardened.
The security-bragging was funny, though, in a facepalm-way. 1000 Anacondas wow. I'd love to see some SDC versus DW2 security videos. I'm sure they will entertain me.

edit:
That!

Its what I explained on reddit. A wing of condas can be annoying enough to a real griefer to not be ignored, but if your asp dies in three seconds nothing will keep you alive other than common sense and awareness.

 

[Rampant]

There is an open pve server "mobius"

Wrong

 

[Rampant]

This just stupid, I mean Frontier restoring their ships.

If you going out exploring with out shields and weapons, as some do, as part of a large expedition, then there a real risk you are going to be attack, either don't join the expedition and go explore solo, take weapons and shields or take the risk and enjoy some of the edge of your seats flying trying to avoid those pirates weapons fire.

If I was Frontier I would just wrap a whole story around it, that some mysterious organisation have hired these people to prevent this expedition from going ahead. An that people should be prepared to be attack for the whole length of the expedition.

In the context of expeditions being attacked, why is this actually a thing? Explain if you dare.

Yours Aye

Mark H

 

[Siobhan]

Yes, that was/is equally stupid. Fly open, build for it and live with consequences. The same doesn't hold necessarily true for PG though.

Not saying it's sensible, but a lot of explorers in PGs or Solo will switch to Open when out in the deep black, just so that they are more likely to see someone else, on the premise that anyone they do meet will be another explorer. Not always the case though, I guess, now that it's easier to give ANY ship a long jump range and keep some combat capability.

It's a mindset that's been ingrained since the beginning, and right or wrong, it's unlikely to change much, at least not quickly. On the other hand, mining for minerals might attract enough NPC pirates that at least people will start carrying shields and minimal weapons. Nothing's going to protect a ship stripped down for jump range from a determined gank squad though.

 

[Mag1cMushrum]

All that happened was a bunch of players who got their kicks out of shooting down ships that were unarmed for a long journey of exploration that was a part of gaming history.

There were gankers - a lot of them, I personally lost 2 asp explorers at a cost of 3.5million - do I care - not really, I find it more of an irritation than anything. Maybe those ships got ganked by the forces protecting the system, they could have ended up losing a lot more than I did (I hope they did actually).

If I were FDEV, gankers reported during DW2 go into an hour timeout session for their account, not just commander profile as well as get sent back to the bubble.
If they dont like it, they can always go play something else. Everyone else playing ED isnt going to miss you.

 

[Siobhan]

long journey of exploration that was a part of gaming history.

LOL No, DW1 was part of gaming history. This is just a follow up so that johnny-come-latelys can follow in their footsteps.

 

[Ashnak]

L
At least 600 CMDRs were killed in Pallaeni in today. It was in open, but if only a fraction of them wrote support tickets, I assume it's a heck of a lot of work on FD's plate.

I highlighted the important part here.

In open = no reason for a support ticket in any case. You fly in open at your own risk. We told everyone in the Fleetcomm Discord to stay out of open.

Quite apart from the issue that being killed in an inhabited system with a shipyard nearby really isn't an issue. Rebuys are cheap and not really worth the bother of writing a support ticket.

For everyone else clamouring about wanting to see the official statement: Fleetcomm Discord, public area, #joining-fc-pg.

 

[Bigmaec]

Not saying it's sensible, but a lot of explorers in PGs or Solo will switch to Open when out in the deep black, just so that they are more likely to see someone else, on the premise that anyone they do meet will be another explorer. Not always the case though, I guess, now that it's easier to give ANY ship a long jump range and keep some combat capability.

It's a mindset that's been ingrained since the beginning, and right or wrong, it's unlikely to change much, at least not quickly. On the other hand, mining for minerals might attract enough NPC pirates that at least people will start carrying shields and minimal weapons. Nothing's going to protect a ship stripped down for jump range from a determined gank squad though.

You can build an Anaconda with 2400 mj of shields. 2400 mj! with a jumprange of 67 LY. Don't tell me that's not enough for everything you need and completely gank proof.

 

[Ashnak]

Bless the genius of the organisers, setting off in a low sec sec system.

Historical imperative.

If I interpret your avatar correctly, you of all people should understand that.

 

[babelfisch]

Wonder if they'll reinstate ships if I make my own PG with PvE only rules?

If your PG is important enough that it gets infiltrated by PvPers, probably yes.

 

[Tifu]

Then what are those 1000+ security ships for? Is my role supposed to be to write angry PMs ro Brett? I understand it is normally lame to 'grief' in PGs, but when you explicitly build the largest defence fleet and then brag about it on social media, surely at least some resistence is ok?

What 1000+ security ships? There are only 150 and those are for roleplay purposes. The Fleet defense function was handed over to Iridium Wing but I'm pretty sure they're nowhere near that many

 

[Siobhan]

You can build an Anaconda with 2400 mj of shields. 2400 mj! with a jumprange of 67 LY. Don't tell me that's not enough for everything you need and completely gank proof.

That would be about how my jump-conda is built...
But they build them for about 80LY now...

 

[Ian Skippy]

You can build an Anaconda with 2400 mj of shields. 2400 mj! with a jumprange of 67 LY. Don't tell me that's not enough for everything you need and completely gank proof.

Does it have heatsinks and xeno utilities?