Blocking in Elite Dangerous

[Rubbernuke]

i'm afraid not. how is it different from switching to solo? i totally get your point but my point is that that ship already sailed with modes, and frontier not leaving the tiniest split open for you to make a case here.

if they change this, then maybe!

Why do players object to being shot at in an opt in feature that explicitly allows being shot at in a mode that is ED at max possible player interaction?

In the end it comes down to intention- PP groups outwardly say 'we play in open' but several times have been caught out using blocking to circumvent rivals. And in Powerplay being true to your word means a lot since you are in a competitive feature in a game where everyone defines their own rules- sometimes having imposed limits has to be a thing for a feature to work to its fullest.

Its like having a football league where every player defines how they play and what is acceptable. And because there are so many ways to get round each other it causes a great deal of dissatisfaction when the sole mode for interaction can be nullified for dubious reasons. Its like a striker disallowing a defender if they don't like being tackled. Outside a competitive game I have no problem people picking and choosing, because no underlying gameplay is stopped by blocking.

If you have a rival that posts 'hehe! Power X is not happy with us, lets block them and use multiple wings to really UM / combat expansions' thats exploiting the feature. Blocking intercepting players when you are delivering fort supplies is not playing fairly in that mode.

This is why the block feature is currently too blunt, and needs a way to pare down how its used at certain times (like Powerplay).

 

[Old Duck]

I chuckled reading this, unfortunately I can't challenge the logic in the least!

The more I think about it, the more I like this "dead is dead" approach - it's kinda like a reverse iron-man mode!

It's brilliant in its simplicity and immersive quality. I'm very tempted to adopt this as my own "golden rule" of blocking, which actually will make the game MORE dangerous for me because that means no more preemptive blocking based on hair color, LOL.

The other interesting "challenge" is if this were applied to ALL PvP, not just griefing, because as someone mentioned, one can effectively end up in a "Solo in Open" limbo by blocking too much. In other words, it adds incentive to actually survive PvP encounters for one's own "I want to meet people in Open" experience. Like I said, a different take on iron man mode.

@Glassfish - brilliant, ol' chap, brilliant!

 

[znôrt]

This is why the block feature is currently too blunt, and needs a way to pare down how its used at certain times (like Powerplay).

i understand completely. it's just that frontier is not playing along with this. best course of action would be making them aware of this problem. sandro was (not about blocking specifically, but no doubt about the pp problem (ppp?) in general). you have no case for a tribunal but a quite good one to demand a legislative change time for a good old open letter?

 

[jasonbarron]

I chuckled reading this, unfortunately I can't challenge the logic in the least!

I'm glad the friend I play online with meets with your second definition - having 'accidentally' (honestly!) killed him at least 3 times when 'messing around'

The logic can be challenged on the basis that the player isn't actually dead and is instead back in the game, effecting change in the simulation. The logic isn't going to remove the block functionality of course, but there it is.

 

[Old Duck]

time for a good old open letter?

Yeah, because all the previous "Make PP Open-only" campaigns were met with great success.

 

[Old Duck]

The logic can be challenged on the basis that the player isn't actually dead and is instead back in the game, effecting change in the simulation. The logic isn't going to remove the block functionality of course, but there it is.

But if you look at my previous post, in some ways this is the lesser of two evils (if you see blocking as 'evil'). At least this way everyone, regardless of hair color, gets to kill the "death blocker" once, unlike my original (and currently under reconsideration) approach of preemptively blocking anyone who appears to be a threat. It also costs the blocker, as eventually Open will become more and more empty if the blocker keeps blocking everyone.

And it's immersive! You kill me, I'm dead. Within your frame-of-reference, that's the way it would be, realistically (you are charged with murder, after all, not ship destruction). Come visit my grave if you want to see me again, LOL.

 

[znôrt]

Yeah, because all the previous "Make PP Open-only" campaigns were met with great success.

influencers weren't a thing back then! times change!

 

[jasonbarron]

But if you look at my previous post, in some ways this is the lesser of two evils (if you see blocking as 'evil'). At least this way everyone, regardless of hair color, gets to kill the "death blocker" once, unlike my original (and currently under reconsideration) approach of preemptively blocking anyone who appears to be a threat. It also costs the blocker, as eventually Open will become more and more empty if the blocker keeps blocking everyone.

And it's immersive! You kill me, I'm dead. Within your frame-of-reference, that's the way it would be, realistically (you are charged with murder, after all, not ship destruction). Come visit my grave if you want to see me again, LOL.

As I said to Ratcatcher, the logic falls apart because you came back to manipulate the simulation which effects us all. It's a cute attempt at roleplay, I'll give it that

 

[Old Duck]

As I said to Ratcatcher, the logic falls apart because you came back to manipulate the simulation which effects us all. It's a cute attempt at roleplay, I'll give it that

I do see what you are saying. If the game were Open-only, then I would agree that this would feel like an exploit, but with PG and Solo (and my PS4), I can already manipulate the simulation hassle-free.

At least this way you get a chance to stop me. And if I were to play strictly by the "dead is dead" rules, and you know I'm doing this, then you could stop me without killing me. For example, pull me over and demand I abandon all my cargo. This allows you to stop me from influencing the simulation without ending up on my block list.

But let's be honest - the majority of purple-hair clowns don't give a rat's behind about the simulation

 

[Mohrgan]

This comes back to some kind of player devised Bushido. Some kind of hive-mind adaptation of how the game's rules should be used. It's the wild wild west out there until you use a rail-de-lance, or the heat mechanic, or healing beams, or Report Crimes, or blocking, or menu logging, or ect. Then it's all about being fair and considerate to your fellow players.

Just remember, once you log into open, you consent to being Blocked.

 

[Old Duck]

If someone kills me. I block them. They have killed me, I am dead to them.

I'm tempted to make this my new signature, it's so brilliant. I just had to give you another plug!

 

[Rubbernuke]

Yeah, because all the previous "Make PP Open-only" campaigns were met with great success.

Believe it or not, I'm actually talking about how Powerplay is now with blocking. Please don't muddy the issue by bringing in a totally different issue.

 

[Rat Catcher]

The logic can be challenged on the basis that the player isn't actually dead and is instead back in the game, effecting change in the simulation. The logic isn't going to remove the block functionality of course, but there it is.

True... but at least that player's attitude is straightforward. I don't have a block list - but that is probably due to being lazy (or not having met anyone who required such a radical solution) and knowing the first name on my block list would indicate time to give up as my tolerence had reached zero...

ETA: ...and sorry @jasonbarron - I refuse to block you solely on reputation - even if you do have purple hair these days

 

[Old Duck]

Believe it or not, I'm actually talking about how Powerplay is now with blocking. Please don't muddy the issue by bringing in a totally different issue.

Believe it or not, I don't care about PP. In fact, nobody but you cares about PP, LOL. Please don't muddy this thread by bringing in a totally different issue.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Believe it or not, I don't care about PP. In fact, nobody but you cares about PP, LOL. Please don't muddy this thread by bringing in a totally different issue.

I can tell you don't care. I can also tell you don't understand how blocking is misused in ED either.

 

[Mohrgan]

I can tell you don't care. I can also tell you don't understand how blocking is misused in ED either.

There is no mis-use of Block in E|D. It's there for people to use. I don;t remember seeing FD put stipulations on it's use. Some peeps just try to make the rules up to suit themselves. It is pretty ridiculous.

 

[Rubbernuke]

There is no mis-use of Block in E|D. It's there for people to use. I don;t remember seeing FD put stipulations on it's use. Some peeps just try to make the rules up to suit themselves. It is pretty ridiculous.

If you use block as a proxy cloaking shield to stay in Open in Powerplay but block attackers / defenders, whats the point of being in Open and in Powerplay in the end?

Blocking should be used to block abuse. Verbal abuse is inexcusable and should be blocked / filtered in all cases. However in Open Powerplay being destroyed and subjected to violence is a valid outcome. It is something that in Open is a prompt to use teamplay to overcome or to go into Solo.

* I don;t remember seeing FD put stipulations on it's use. *

FD have never actually taken a hard look at things, along with many other areas that look good on paper but create issues.

 

[Mohrgan]

If you use block as a proxy cloaking shield to stay in Open in Powerplay but block attackers / defenders, whats the point of being in Open and in Powerplay in the end?

Blocking should be used to block abuse. Verbal abuse is inexcusable and should be blocked / filtered in all cases. However in Open Powerplay being destroyed and subjected to violence is a valid outcome. It is something that in Open is a prompt to use teamplay to overcome or to go into Solo.

* I don;t remember seeing FD put stipulations on it's use. *

FD have never actually taken a hard look at things, along with many other areas that look good on paper but create issues.

We don't get to make the rules. The rules of the game impose no restrictions on attacking another player, nor Blocking them. Many players feel that attacking clean, cargo-less ships as out of game character, but it isn't against the rules, so it's ok. It's the same with Block. You can have no idea why people block, what their intentions are, so you just have to live with the rules as they are. Your code of gamer ethics doesn't have an impact on any other player. Crying won't change that.

 

[Havvk]

@Old Duck I have to drop a like for your sig.

 

[Rubbernuke]

We don't get to make the rules. The rules of the game impose no restrictions on attacking another player, nor Blocking them. Many players feel that attacking clean, cargo-less ships as out of game character, but it isn't against the rules, so it's ok. It's the same with Block. You can have no idea why people block, what their intentions are, so you just have to live with the rules as they are. Your code of gamer ethics doesn't have an impact on any other player. Crying won't change that.

The whole point of features like Powerplay is that they impose structure onto a structureless game if we opt into those features. Misusing other features to get around those imposed situations makes that gameplay largely redundant and pointless. Its not 'crying' pointing out how incompatible and illogical these concepts are when mixed.