My Main Concern with ED

[Windscreen Smudge]

Let me tell you from first hand experience, (been playing on and off since 2004).

Yes, there are those who would gank newbies just for fun.

They are far from "very advanced veterans that would spend tons of time playing". The "very advanced veterans" have much better things to do in the end-game, than gank newbies at a loss.

Those that are ganking newbies are not very advanced in terms of game progression, you could do that within a week even, if not less. It's just that it doesn't take much to kill a newbie ship.

Absolute newbies (those who just started) are safe from griefing. The starter systems are highest security, and pilots that shoot unauthorized targets gain negative security status, which prevents them from entering those systems.

Even more, the game developers made it a bannable offense to grief newbies in those starter systems.

Will they still die? Yes, and they will get a free replacement ship, while the killer will have his ship blown up by police (which is much more costlier) and won't be able to return there to continue griefing. Would a new players quit over this? Prolly, but then we didn't want that weakling anyways. For others, they would have learned the lesson, gotten smarter about the game and continued.

The only way older players would be able to legally [in-game] shoot at newbies (which is a bannable offense out-of-game anyways) in the starter systems is if the newbie committed a criminal act.

This is again a great lesson, as you would rather learn the criminality-system in a free starter ship, than in something expensive. The most common "trick" older people would use is to trick a newbie into stealing jettisoned cargo outside the station. Well, guess what, even ED punishes you for stolen cargo.

At least EvE made new UI improvements that prevent newbies from doing criminal acts, without first warning them that it's criminal. This was a rather new change, and quite needed, as before they game didn't inform you that your actions were criminal.

But just like in ED, it's common sense. Don't steal in front of authorities.

A lot of elitism and exclusivity here. Which is the same behavior on a different part of the spectrum that we see from PvE players calling normal PvP interaction "griefing".

I do not endorse this product, and this is a good example of what I meant by saying I had found that all of the dead wood that is currently being trimmed from Eve seems to be finding it's way here.

Amazing how the extremists always find themselves to be the representatives of a social group, when outside of that group.

I used to have a lot of fun exploiting this mentality for profit in Eve, and I'm going to have a lot of fun doing it in Elite. Every time I visit the forums my excitement grows because I see more and more gameplay content laid out before me in the communities behavior.

 

[Chris Majere]

Your trade run? How are you not understanding how Elite works? That one player hauling a boot load of fish isn't going to have much impact on the trade prices, its the combined hauling of all the instances you can't get to that will.

If he is not trolling, he is probably just trying to influence the Devs here to make Elite like Eve. Seeing their beloved game slowly dying, some Eve griefers seem to be desperately looking for other games to jump into. Other games where they can continue to grief and extract tears from other players just for the lols.

 

[hydraSlav]

You can rationalize it to yourself anyway you need to, but yes that is exactly what griefing is and when the game mechanics are in place and working properly you won't be able to do that because of the no fire zone.

I will wait for you outside the no fire zone. I will ram my ship at you inside the dock (I get a free new one, while you bounce up and down the narrow slit and blow up). If you are pinching on my trade run, I know what system you are jumping to next, so I will wait for you at the Nav beacon there.

The point is, how else would I prevent you from ruining my trade run? If you got a big hauler, you will turn my profitable trade run into measly profits, while you still get profit from bulk. Let's say I don't have a big hauler to compete with you on quantity, but I do have a combat ship to force you out of business.

It's all within the game (unless the stupid solo mode and non-crossing-"islands" stay for the launch), so why wouldn't I use all means at my disposal to stop you from ruining profit on my trade run?

 

[hydraSlav]

Your trade run? How are you not understanding how Elite works? That one player hauling a boot load of fish isn't going to have much impact on the trade prices, its the combined hauling of all the instances you can't get to that will.

My trade run, my corporation's trade run, my alliance's trade run, my power-bloc's trade run. The scale can go up as much as needed .

If player's actions don't matter on the market, don't advertise it as "player driven". And if they are, as in "every little thing counts", then so will my interdiction efforts.

Like I said, maybe a big alliance, who got hundreds of traders running the route has hired me (and dozens others) to eliminate the competition.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

If he is not trolling, he is probably just trying to influence the Devs here to make Elite like Eve. Seeing their beloved game slowly dying, some Eve griefers seem to be desperately looking for other games to jump into. Other games where they can continue to grief and extract tears from other players just for the lols.

Eve is growing, not dying. Players like him are leaving because of that growth. The game is finally getting to the point where all varieties of gameplay are equally viable, slowly but surely, and that upsets players who envisioned themselves as space tyrants or some such.

Especially when they became more vulnerable to players who didn't try to brute force their way through every goal they set for themselves. Just as the PvE players who're being "griefed" by PvP gameplay refuse to accept it as legitimate, this variety of PvP player has refused to accept that they should be affected by indirect PvP or soft power.

Times are changing in gaming in general. Especially in the MMO environment. Eve is just one example, and a very interesting one. Anyone thinking otherwise had either a very limited experience with it or none at all.

The problem is Elite: Dangerous is getting caught in the middle of all of these changes, with design philosophies that begin before the changes started and a development period that's ending right in the middle. Without some careful consideration the multiplayer aspect of the game will be dead on arrival.

 

[Wavey]

My trade run, my corporation's trade run, my alliance's trade run, my power-bloc's trade run. The scale can go up as much as needed .

If player's actions don't matter on the market, don't advertise it as "player driven". And if they are, as in "every little thing counts", then so will my interdiction efforts.

Like I said, maybe a big alliance, who got hundreds of traders running the route has hired me (and dozens others) to eliminate the competition.

Best read the DDA http://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6305

 

[hydraSlav]

In Eve, because of the continual progression of characters, noobs can never catch up with established players and can be bullied with impunity.

That is not the case though, is it.
Besides, comparisons between the two are pointless here anyway I think.

This whole "newbies can never catch up to veterans" stems from people not understanding how "skills" work in EvE.

Yes, EvE "skill" training is real-time, so while a veteran may have 20 million skill points (SP), the new players will only have a few thousand. And by the time the new players has gained 200,000 SP, the vetarn would have gained addition 300,000 SP (because of costly implants and optimized attribute distribution).

But that does not mean that new players cannot catch up. Yes, you will never have as much SP, but there is only so much SP needed to max out skills in a certain area.

Let's say you want to "catch up" (not spatially) to a veteran interceptor pilot. He has 20 million SP, you have 1 thousand SP. If we assume (random number here) there is only 200,000 SP required in all interceptor pilot skills.

Once you max those out (in a few weeks, or months) you are "just as good" in terms of in-game stats. Sure, his 20 million SP allow him to fly interceptor, haulers, carriers and titans; but your 200,000 SP allows you to fly an interceptor just as well. Similarly, he can probably fit any weapons system he wants, but you specialize on a particular subset (the one that interceptors get a bonus for), and within short time, you are on-par in terms of in-game stats.

The whole "you can never catch up to 10-year veterans" is ignorance beyond believe.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Best read the DDA http://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6305

Why would I want to limit what I tend to do in the game based upon the opinion of the developer on what he thinks I should do?

That isn't how a sandbox works. That's a point and click adventure.

When I step into the sandbox, the sand is mine. I'll do with it as I please. Some people like to build castles, some like to play with army men, others like to throw it around a bit and get it in their hair and eyes.

And then you have the little brats who pee in it and bury it like a cat.

That isn't me, but I'm keeping a close eye on him and making sure I don't play in that corner.

 

[hydraSlav]

Best read the DDA http://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=6305

Thanks for the link!

 

[Zenicetus]

It's all within the game (unless the stupid solo mode and non-crossing-"islands" stay for the launch), so why wouldn't I use all means at my disposal to stop you from ruining profit on my trade run?

It's all within the game? What game, the imaginary one that you wish ED was? Meanwhile the rest of us are playing the current Beta, which doesn't work that way, and can't work that way. And coincidentally, also coincides with the design docs for how the developer wants the game to work.

Reminds me of a certain Greek legend, just substitute "David Braben" for "Zeus" and "Elite Dangerous" for "Xenia" here (lifted from the Wiki page about the legend)...

King Sisyphus promoted navigation and commerce but was avaricious and deceitful. He also killed travellers and guests, a violation of Xenia which fell under Zeus' domain. He took pleasure in these killings because they allowed him to maintain his iron-fisted rule.

As a punishment for his trickery, King Sisyphus was made to endlessly roll a huge boulder up a steep hill.[8] The maddening nature of the punishment was reserved for King Sisyphus due to his hubristic belief that his cleverness surpassed that of Zeus himself. Zeus accordingly displayed his own cleverness by enchanting the boulder into rolling away from King Sisyphus before he reached the top which ended up consigning Sisyphus to an eternity of useless efforts and unending frustration.
​

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

It's all within the game? What game, the imaginary one that you wish ED was? Meanwhile the rest of us are playing the current Beta, which doesn't work that way, and can't work that way. And coincidentally, also coincides with the design docs for how the developer wants the game to work.

Reminds me of a certain Greek legend, just substitute "David Braben" for "Zeus" and "Elite Dangerous" for "Xenia" here (lifted from the Wiki page about the legend)...

King Sisyphus promoted navigation and commerce but was avaricious and deceitful. He also killed travellers and guests, a violation of Xenia which fell under Zeus' domain. He took pleasure in these killings because they allowed him to maintain his iron-fisted rule.

As a punishment for his trickery, King Sisyphus was made to endlessly roll a huge boulder up a steep hill.[8] The maddening nature of the punishment was reserved for King Sisyphus due to his hubristic belief that his cleverness surpassed that of Zeus himself. Zeus accordingly displayed his own cleverness by enchanting the boulder into rolling away from King Sisyphus before he reached the top which ended up consigning Sisyphus to an eternity of useless efforts and unending frustration.
​

Ah yes... If only game devs were as omnipotent as Zeus.

Sadly they can't snap their fingers and produce miracles, nor can they smite every foolish player who goes against their whims. That would be the majority of the players, and the players pay the bills.

 

[Hermit]

That's kind of sad to hear. What made you think it was meant to mimic a war monument though? I saw it as a celebration of the community and everything they've worked together to achieve.

It's just the way it looked and with all the names on it. It reminded me of war memorials and I was a bit uncomfortable with that. It doesn't mean I won't go back to the game. I probably will if I ever get the spare time.

What did make me laugh when they built the monument, though, was that they showed players visiting it having to get down on their hands and knees in front of it to find their names because they were so small. It looked like they were praying in front of it. Do you think that's what CCP intended? - LOL!

Anyway, good to see that there are Eve players coming into this game, because I know they'll find ways to spice it up a bit :smilie:

 

[Adept]

What a load of bull... So by your definition, if I sit outside the station, killing the guy trying to leave in his hauler over and over again, I am griefing? Right.... Has it occurred to you, that maybe I am killing him over and over because he is competing in my trade run. Yes, I am causing him loses. Yes, I am causing him frustration. Yes, I do this on purpose, so that he would leave. That is my in-game goal. If he quits the game, he is weak-minded and doesn't belong in the cutthroat deep space. If he is smart, he will get the message and take his trade elsewhere.

Yes, that is griefing. It's also a made up justification. If you were competing with the trader, you would be actually trading, in a Hauler or a Lakon. Instead you are station camping in a combat ahip.

I very much doubt thar sort of player will next dock up, trade the fighter for a hauler, and start ferrying goods between A and B. I also very much doubt that is a cost effective use of the station camper's time. What it is though, is a figleaf of a reason to justify repeatedly aggravating the same person.

Lucky for us, it won't actually work.

a) even anarchy system stations won't actually let you do it in the future.

b) the trader will just swap to a private group and put you on ignore for good measure (and warn his buddies to do the same)

 

[xaccers]

Ah yes... If only game devs were as omnipotent as Zeus.

Sadly they can't snap their fingers and produce miracles, nor can they smite every foolish player who goes against their whims. That would be the majority of the players, and the players pay the bills.

Well so far with the anecdotal evidence of this forum, the majority of players aren't into griefing, in fact some will go out of their way to put an end to it, and the reports of PvP are minor, it would suggest that the majority of the players are happy that PvP is only a minor aspect of the game and in many cases can be avoided.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Well so far with the anecdotal evidence of this forum, the majority of players aren't into griefing, in fact some will go out of their way to put an end to it, and the reports of PvP are minor, it would suggest that the majority of the players are happy that PvP is a minor aspect of the game and in many cases can be avoided.

Correction: The majority of beta testers aren't into "griefing".

This is because the beta is a premium priced product that is above what the average player is willing to play, and the general population will be joining us on release. But the true common denominator won't arrive until Elite: Dangerous sees it's first decent sale.

Then you will know what the majority of players are into.

Hint: Take a look at 4chan and Something Awful, along with popular videos on Youtube of similar games.

That will be Elite: Dangerous' majority opinion when the paywall comes down.

 

[Hootmon]

That will be Elite: Dangerous' majority opinion when the paywall comes down.

...which demonstrates the wisdom of having it there for the development stages.

 

[Adept]

Hint: Take a look at 4chan and Something Awful, along with popular videos on Youtube of similar games.

That will be Elite: Dangerous' majority opinion when the paywall comes down.

No matter how much they think it's so, 4chan and SA dwellers are not the majority of gamers. If anything they are the dying misogynistic "gamers" who have been making headlines with the frankly insane attacks on Zoe Quinn and other females who are "clearly ruining gaming".

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

...which demonstrates the wisdom of having it there for the development stages.

What you call wisdom is commonly referred to as folly. Because they selectively excluded that crowd from beta testing, they will never be prepared to handle it and the lowest common denominator will take control.

This has happened every time a developer has used a select crowd for the testing phase of a game that will have a much broader audience on release. Without fail. Elite: Dangerous will not be an exception to the rule.

No game design concept survives first contact with the player population, and by restricting contact to a specific group Frontier development has guaranteed that the multiplayer experience will be a disaster on launch and for the foreseeable future. How they adapt to the circumstances will determine if the multiplayer aspect of the game will even be feasible or if it will just result in game-breaking ad-hoc damage control patches that ruin the experience for everyone and have single player implications.

No matter how much they think it's so, 4chan and SA dwellers are not the majority of gamers. If anything they are the dying misogynistic "gamers" who have been making headlines with the frankly insane attacks on Zoe Quinn and other females who are "clearly ruining gaming".

No, they're not the majority, they're the lowest common denominator. That means that they will have the same effect as the lowest common denominator has on any other form of media such as literature, TV, livestreaming etc...

FD have not inoculated themselves to the effects that this group will have, and so the infection will run unchecked. I don't care, because it's all content to me, but everyone who is looking around in their current secret little garden and thinking that it only gets better from here is going to have a rude awakening.

 

[xaccers]

Correction: The majority of beta testers aren't into "griefing".

This is because the beta is a premium priced product that is above what the average player is willing to play, and the general population will be joining us on release. But the true common denominator won't arrive until Elite: Dangerous sees it's first decent sale.

Then you will know what the majority of players are into.

Hint: Take a look at 4chan and Something Awful, along with popular videos on Youtube of similar games.

That will be Elite: Dangerous' majority opinion when the paywall comes down.

And anyone who thinks that griefing is acceptable behaviour will be sorely disappointed. If the bounty system doesn't stop them griefing players then the ignore list/solo/private group mode will.
It may be a sandbox but it isn't your sandbox

 

[hydraSlav]

No matter how much they think it's so, 4chan and SA dwellers are not the majority of gamers. If anything they are the dying misogynistic "gamers" who have been making headlines with the frankly insane attacks on Zoe Quinn and other females who are "clearly ruining gaming".

Really?

The SA (Goonswarm) have started in EvE from 200 newbie ships, to 200 Titans in almost no time. They have uprooted the previous (considered evil) power bloc and took it's place. They form the game's most numerous corporation and alliance by sheer numbers, in fact some game limits were raised to accommodate their numbers. When they decide to do thing one way, it either becomes "the consensus", or the DEVs are forced to change mechanics to nerf it.