- Status
Guest 161958
G
I believe it is time for FD to prevent these incivil manners by finally creating an ingame structured way of doing legit pvp. Please report this priority to the forum owners or your moderation is going to be futile in the years to come.
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/475061-Police-bounty-hunting-gameplay-enhancements
My reply to you was removed for some reason, despite being civil and on topic, so I'll repost it.
I'm not seeing any attempt to classify a 'real explorer' in your post. Am I missing something? Honest question.
I don't know what Bob was specifically referring to, it may be a comment from another thread or an interpretation of something we consider to be innocuous.
Normally in threads like this the definition of 'griefer' makes up a significant portion of the debate, I suppose the definition of exploration style gameplay is broad too. Certainly I can see how the DW2/DG2 players' activities could be considered to not be exploring while doing other things, they could be travelling or something.
I don't think the definitions are really important in the general sense of whether unwanted adversarial interaction is a problem or not. The game provides several options already, it could do more but imo it doesn't need to. Any single event could already be countered by using a group, situational awareness, outfitting for more than just jump range, but it's up to the individual player. Not complaining is key imo, and an awful lot of the noise I'm seeing is coming from people attempting to justify their behaviour (both sides) which is best ignored imo.
So I don't see a problem, and if FDev consider it to be one I proposed solutions years ago so clearly it's not a high priority
Last edited:
I don't know what Bob was specifically referring to, it may be a comment from another thread or an interpretation of something we consider to be innocuous.
Normally in threads like this the definition of 'griefer' makes up a significant portion of the debate, I suppose the definition of exploration style gameplay is broad too. Certainly I can see how the DW2/DG2 players' activities could be considered to not be exploring while doing other things, they could be travelling or something.
I don't think the definitions are really important in the general sense of whether unwanted adversarial interaction is a problem or not. The game provides several options already, it could do more but imo it doesn't need to. Any single event could already be countered by using a group, situational awareness, outfitting for more than just jump range, but it's up to the individual player. Not complaining is key imo, and an awful lot of the noise I'm seeing is coming from people attempting to justify their behaviour (both sides) which is best ignored imo.
So I don't see a problem, and if FDev consider it to be one I proposed solutions years ago so clearly it's not a high priority
My thoughts also. A 'no true Scottsman' fallacy simply never occurred the way he is asserting.
Good Grief.
Tech details, how to and dev posts explaining why its the intended go to solution for griefing here :
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=367388
Ironically the phrase 'underhanded rhetorical techniques' is a no true scotsman fallacy
Well, dear Harry, the days of having to endure your silly system chat spamming are now finally history.
Spending a whole evening in DW2 meetup systems without a single annoying kid screaming at you in chat brings a whole new quality to this game.
I wish you luck on your expedition.
It doesn't mean you'll never see them it just decrease the chance of being placed into the same instance as them.
Yes. There is always a tiny chance that the instancing system goes bananas, but generally it works well. If they are winged and you only have one blocked then the chances of still instancing with them is increased. If you have both in the wing blocked then you're good as gold. Nothing is 100% guaranteed but this is about as close as you're going to get for now.
Last edited:
This is going well...
@777Driver, I've got 35 pages too!
@777Driver, I've got 35 pages too!
Those fuel rats are awesome! Always helping out rookie explorers whoever it may be.
You can change the settings, 35 pages is way too much clicking for me.
(change it to 50 posts per page, think the max is 100)
Last edited:
I'd rather click than scroll. EIther way, it's a lot, even for this subject.
i forgot about that one
Yes, the spamming of brackets and other long spoken text symbols, just to have the 'player's text to speech' read out garbage.-But its the players fault for using text the speech in Elite
-Its the players fault for not banning all the player doing it, as multiple people within a group where encourage to also spam other player's text to speech.
-its just a game, why you so mad
This action had little to do with game play and was totally to do with causing upset.
Such action as theses (from a minority of the ganker playerbase ) are what make it difficult to defend people who gank (a ligit part of the game). They don't just upset players but fuel disdain for the ganker class of player.
So, its important to separate what is a ganker, killing others player in open, cus it fun, cus they can (of for no reason at all
) and people that take it too far and use any tactic at hand to torment other commanders... Just to get the biggest reaction they can.Although i try to explain the motives, the thinking behind the actions of some gankers (wich i gonna back away from, lest i get reported for, off topic... though i believe its very relevant, but you know... some fact are to factual) We cant let them get away with whatever they wish just because the game allows it.
Understanding why they do it can take away some of the upset, reduce the salt and over the top reactions from people on the other end (you know, what we would want , but it does kinda reduce the ability of people to salt mine), but if they are the victims of harassment, such as text to speech spamming. Well its only fair its looked into.
Last edited:
i forgot about that one
-But its the players fault for using text the speech in Elite
-Its the players fault for not banning all the player doing it, as multiple people within a group where encourage to also spam other player's text to speech.
-its just a game, why you so man
This action had little to do with game play and was totally to do with causing upset.
Such action as theses are what make it difficult to defened people who gank (a ligit part of the game). They don't just upset players but fuel disdain for the ganker class of player.
So, its important to separate what is a ganker, killing others player in open, cus it fun, cus they can (of for no reason at all
Although i try to explain the motives, the thinking behind the actions of some gankers (wish i gonna back away from, lest i get reported for, off topic... though i believe its very relevant, but you know... some fact are to factual) We cant let them get away with whatever they wish just because the game allows it.
Understanding why they do it can take away some of the upset, reduce the salt and over the top reactions from people on the other end (you know, what we would want , but it does kinda reduce the ability of people to salt mine), but if they are the victims of harassment, such as text to speech spamming. Well its only fair its looked into.
No need to overanalyze, they just want salt.
Reverse the polarity pop anyone you don't want to play with onto block and encourage others to do the same, he who controls the salt controls the universe.
Never happened to me.
I'm not mad about it. I just like my video games without immature jerks in them, that's all.[yesnod]
Last edited:
- Status