Going against your own word - "infiltrators" please note

[Rampant]

Players who deliberately infiltrate a no-PvP Private Group - please take note.

Entering into an agreement, as a person, and then going against that agreement, as a person, is an entirely different thing than your "character" might do as a fifth columnist pledging to a power.

The PG agreement is between the *players*, not their "characters", and reneging on your agreement is not an acceptable act for the person to perform.

You enter into the agreement as a person, not the character in the game, so it is not acceptable to call this "fifth column" or be the person's "character as a saboteur".

Your agreement is between people and should be treated as sacrosanct.

There is a world of difference between how your character acts in game, and how you, as a person, act after giving your agreement to a set of rules.

Yours Aye

Mark H

 

[Nick Sticks]

I support this.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

whilst i fully agree with you and my thoughts for those who are griefing - and it IS griefing if done in PG where it is not allowed - cannot be printed here.

however unless FD sack up and implement the account locked hellmode that they promised (or just account ban) in the KSer then i see no fix.

even then, the problem is the game is so cheap now that for some, the throw away pennies the game now costs will be worth it for them due to a few extra hits on their youtube accounts even if there was a permanent account ban for such.... "emergent gameplay".

 

[Rampant]

Part of my point here is that since the agreement is between *players* prior to entering ( and not their characters ), we can quite feasibly do 2 things:

First, we can make factual comments on the player. The agreement they made is not "inside the game" as it is when pledging, or forming a wing or meeting with "friends" in the game. Ergo, we can make comments about the actual trustworthiness and actual moral fibre of the *player* themselves. Importantly, these comments would be factual and not merely subjective. They broke their word. They have no honour as humans, etc. Fact.

Secondly we can trash that made up concept of destroying ships in a PG being "within the rules of the game". They're not. "By clicking on PG", they agreed to be bound by the rules of the PG.

I'm not asking for opinion in this. I'm writing down fact and therefore it is not open to interpretation or subjective opinion.

Yours Aye

Mark H

 

[Old Duck]

I'm not asking for opinion in this. I'm writing down fact and therefore it is not open to interpretation or subjective opinion.

That describes every post I've ever made, including this one

In fact, that would make a great signature!

 

[Ouberos]

Part of my point here is that since the agreement is between *players* prior to entering ( and not their characters ), we can quite feasibly do 2 things:

First, we can make factual comments on the player. The agreement they made is not "inside the game" as it is when pledging, or forming a wing or meeting with "friends" in the game. Ergo, we can make comments about the actual trustworthiness and actual moral fibre of the *player* themselves. Importantly, these comments would be factual and not merely subjective. They broke their word. They have no honour as humans, etc. Fact.

Secondly we can trash that made up concept of destroying ships in a PG being "within the rules of the game". They're not. "By clicking on PG", they agreed to be bound by the rules of the PG.

I'm not asking for opinion in this. I'm writing down fact and therefore it is not open to interpretation or subjective opinion.

Yours Aye

Mark H

You seem a little upset.

Would you like to talk about it?

 

[biot]

You seem a little upset.

Would you like to talk about it?

Why the ad hominem? OP's post is practically emotion-free compared to the raving gibberish this forum generates.

 

[Nadreck]

however unless FD sack up and implement the account locked hellmode that they promised (or just account ban) in the KSer then i see no fix.

I'm curious, what was this "hellmode"?

I've heard of "shadowbanning" (restricting a player to Solo only, and that seems appropriate, as it prevents further mayhem (with that account, at least). For a repeat offender, a shadowban for the duration of the expedition (300 days?) - if they try with a new account, at least they'd be in unengineered ships unless they repeat the engineer unlocks.

 

[2ndBad]

whilst i fully agree with you and my thoughts for those who are griefing - and it IS griefing if done in PG where it is not allowed - cannot be printed here.

however unless FD sack up and implement the account locked hellmode that they promised (or just account ban) in the KSer then i see no fix.

even then, the problem is the game is so cheap now that for some, the throw away pennies the game now costs will be worth it for them due to a few extra hits on their youtube accounts even if there was a permanent account ban for such.... "emergent gameplay".

Easy fix. If you violate the ToS and grief PG's FD would make your account solo only and block you from buying another copy of Elite.

 

[Rob At Work]

Are you suggesting that people control their character, rather than their character controls them?

What if their character is a rule breaker? are you suggesting they play as a non-rule breaker?

PS the operative word here is PLAY. It's not RL, it's escapism.

 

[Aashenfox]

Where's that dude with the wicked tribal signature that says something like 'Without the threat of violence, laws are merely suggestions".

While this is a video game, and the threat of real life (or even in game) violence is both wrong and largely meaningless, the point is that laws that are not enforced are worthless.

FD has every legal right to take action against these players and should. I have no issue with player killers in Open, but as stated, this is not roleplayable, as the agreement was human to human not character to character.

 

[VR StarLightPL]

[video=youtube;FopyRHHlt3M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FopyRHHlt3M[/video]

OP you're a lawyer perhaps? The only thing you can do is to have the group admin remove someone from PG. And you can probably ask support for help, given that this expedition has some degree of unofficial FDev support in terms of "publicity". And the only "rules" other players need to abide to, are Frontier's ToS. And they protect both the attacker and the attacked.

 

[Watcher]

Part of my point here is that since the agreement is between *players* prior to entering ( and not their characters ), we can quite feasibly do 2 things:

First, we can make factual comments on the player. The agreement they made is not "inside the game" as it is when pledging, or forming a wing or meeting with "friends" in the game. Ergo, we can make comments about the actual trustworthiness and actual moral fibre of the *player* themselves. Importantly, these comments would be factual and not merely subjective. They broke their word. They have no honour as humans, etc. Fact.

Secondly we can trash that made up concept of destroying ships in a PG being "within the rules of the game". They're not. "By clicking on PG", they agreed to be bound by the rules of the PG.

I'm not asking for opinion in this. I'm writing down fact and therefore it is not open to interpretation or subjective opinion.

Yours Aye

Mark H

We could real do with some in game tools for directly adjusting game rules for a PG.
If you could make a PG explicitly PvE that would mitigate this whole conversation. If people were behaving nicely that wouldn't be necessary and I'm not convinced it is preferable but since people aren't playing nicely it probably is preferable. Hey ho.

 

[2ndBad]

Are you suggesting that people control their character, rather than their character controls them?

What if their character is a rule breaker? are you suggesting they play as a non-rule breaker?

PS the operative word here is PLAY. It's not RL, it's escapism.

Let's say that you are right. You break your character when you enter the game menu and join PG to grief. Your character only exists in the game. Your ED game character doesn't exist in real life.

 

[Rob At Work]

Where's that dude with the wicked tribal signature that says something like 'Without the threat of violence, laws are merely suggestions".

While this is a video game, and the threat of real life (or even in game) violence is both wrong and largely meaningless, the point is that laws that are not enforced are worthless.

FD has every legal right to take action against these players and should. I have no issue with player killers in Open, but as stated, this is not roleplayable, as the agreement was human to human not character to character.

Fair point!

But the problem with humans is, like pigs they are very intuitive when it comes to rules and experience.
Using their intuition and experience they eventually built a house that withstood all the huffing and puffing their opposition could muster.
This happens when you are no longer afraid of the big bad wolf.

 

[Aashenfox]

I'm curious, what was this "hellmode"?

I've heard of "shadowbanning" (restricting a player to Solo only, and that seems appropriate, as it prevents further mayhem (with that account, at least). For a repeat offender, a shadowban for the duration of the expedition (300 days?) - if they try with a new account, at least they'd be in unengineered ships unless they repeat the engineer unlocks.

I remember some suggestions along the lines of 'notoriety 10 folks would be hunted down constantly by ATR'. That would certainly work.

No player can win an encounter with 4 or 5 ATR, they'd just be running ALL. THE. TIME. I think it would work, but it should only be applied to player kills, this idea that NPC and humans are equal in the eyes of the law is ridiculous, and while it might be immersive for some, it's holding the game part of the game back.

 

[Aashenfox]

Fair point!

But the problem with humans is, like pigs they are very intuitive when it comes to rules and experience.
Using their intuition and experience they eventually built a house that withstood all the huffing and puffing their opposition could muster.
This happens when you are no longer afraid of the big bad wolf.

Agree, big bad wolf needs to show more teeth and less tolerance.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Easy fix. If you violate the ToS and grief PG's FD would make your account solo only and block you from buying another copy of Elite.

That would be nearly impossible to do. Countless free e-mail services, anonymous Steam cards from nearly everywhere.. just wouldn’t work.

Are you suggesting that people control their character, rather than their character controls them?

What if their character is a rule breaker? are you suggesting they play as a non-rule breaker?

PS the operative word here is PLAY. It's not RL, it's escapism.

Escaping what though? Aggravation? When someone else is inflicting aggravation where is the escape?

There is, however, a penultimate solution. A PvE or PvP setting to select when setting up a Private Group. Turn on PvE and one player firing on another results in an Assault fine, but does zero actual damage. Ramming a player ship with a player ship yields the same result. Then let the griefbags come. They will get bored in seconds and leave. Problem not only solved, but prevented entirely.

Set the PG to PvP and everything works the same as it does now.

There is a huge list of other games that do variations of this exact thing already.

 

[2ndBad]

That would be nearly impossible to do. Countless free e-mail services, anonymous Steam cards from nearly everywhere.. just wouldn’t work.

It's not impossible to FD to remove ED from the Steam store. Improbable yes impossible no. At their own store they can pretty easilly block people from buying the ED second time with same payment credentials.

 

[Aashenfox]

It's not impossible to FD to remove ED from the Steam store. Improbable yes impossible no. At their own store they can pretty easilly block people from buying the ED second time with same payment credentials.

No business would do that. I completely see what you are saying and in an ideal world...but...

Businesses are in business to make money. Expecting anything else is unreasonable. I know of no game that wouldn't allow a banned player to buy a completely brand new account and have another chance based on that. Money is money.