I generally agree with you, but I don't think it's rudeness. Rather a state of mind that abhors confrontation and even the possibility of failure especially by the hands of others.
PVP vs. PVE
- Thread starter BIZZNAWICH
- Start date
No, because they don't have a choice. Unless we're talking about someone who specifically buy an Xbox account to avoid me. But I don't think that's what you meant.
Well, I think its a certain state of mine which try to avoid confrontation. However, this is someone who specifically chose to confront you (by knowingly working against you in BGS). If they chose not to, or tried to talk to you ("Hey, I don't want to fight. Please can you leave this system I was in...") that's a completely different matter.
No, this is someone who wants confrontation; they want to stop you, but who doesn't want to give you a chance to know who they are or a chance to stop what they are doing. They might be afraid you would beat them in open, but the very fact that they -chose- to work against you make it confrontational (which I don't mind). It's those who chose to work against you but also chose to hide which I find rude. I have full respect for anyone else, even if they work against you.
And you assume all people playing in Solo on PC have a choice.
Also, people are not "avoiding" you. That's one heck of an ego you have there.
People are playing the game they bought with their money, you are irrelevant to 99% of the player base as they are playing the game to suit themselves and it has nothing to do with you.
As for Solo on Pc, well some people play on holiday from Hotels with limited internet access, some people are using mobile data connections (David Braben showcased Elite: Dangerous on a moving train using his mobile phone connection and a laptop computer) and some people like myself and my friends live in rural areas that don't get superfast high-speed broadband. (And as a side note, I have 1 friend with PTSD who only plays in small PG's due to their condition.)
And we have not even touched on the fact Elite has an instance limit, so you wouldn't ever see everyone in open anyway or the fact people can put you on block which will also effect if they can be instanced with you - so they are still in open, but not with you.
People only think that because deep down they know that PS folk are a better class of people who would prefer not to be seen with other gamers in public.
Don't put words in my mouth.
I have specifically said people who choose to oppose someone in BGS and who pick Solo to avoid the chance of being seen or opposed. I understand there are legitimate reasons for people to chose solo. I only find it rude by people who chose to do it to avoid opposition while actively opposing you.
Note that I use the generic form of "you" - I don't care if it's someone else they oppose or me, I find the reason to do so rude, whoever the target.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Not finding PvP to be "fun" is one of those reasons.
In a game where PvP itself is optional and where the BGS is designed to be a feature for all players - what may be seen as rude, by some, is "playing the game as intended" for others.
People don't need a reason to play Solo or in PG's and take part in BGS / CGs or PP work though.
The mode system was and still is an advertised feature of the game. It is why I bought the game, to play in PGs with real-life friends.
If I want to oppose you from Solo or my PG, then I can. That always has been part of the game, PvP is optional.
What I find rude is how some people think they can dictate how I spend my free time in a game I bought with my money.
I agree with that. Until you choose to be the aggressor in BGS.
I understand that is the view of some people.
Everyone chose to play a mode for a reason. That reason can vary.
And that's fair, I have no objections to that. I just find it rude if you choose to be an aggressor in BGS while using PG/Solo specifically to avoid contact with the one you oppose.
I agree; and that's exactly why I'm in favour of Open.
If I oppose you in BGS I'm dictating how you spend your free time in a game you bought with your money. I accept that people will try since this is a multiplayer game. What I find rude is people who chose to do that in a way that they can be anonymous and with no chance to suffer any consequences for trying to dictate how I spend my free time in a game I bought with my money.
Which is a PvE activity, so you can attack and defend from any mode.
You don't need a reason to pick a mode, I sometimes pick a mode at random.
The most fun is getting the kids to load me into the game when I'm not looking, so I have no idea what mode or PG I'm in.
Some people also click the wrong mode and don't realise they've done it.
So people can be in Open mode (or Solo) without any reason at all.
You find someone doing a PvE activity in a PvE mode to be "rude" - the problem isn't the game or them, it's you.
They are just playing the game, the way the game Devs say we can.
The BGS has nothing to do with the mode system, Open mode is irrelevant when doing BGS / CG work as people on other platforms, in other modes and in other Open Mode Instances can oppose you without you being able to see or interact with them. This was an advertised feature of the game.
So you need to update how you think about the game, you have an incorrect view of it and how it works.
No, you're not dictating anything, I can choose to engage the BGS changes or I can choose not to engage.
You don't dictate anything, it's my choice if I want to fight or just carry on playing and ignoring the changes.
There are lots of other things I can go and do while you play with the BGS, including letting others know there is a BGS "war" going on so other people can jump on it.
But the BGS was a feature you knew would be affected by all modes before you bought the game.
I know you knew that because of right from the Kickstarter pitch before you could buy the game it was advertised and it still is an advertised feature all these years later.
The link in my Sig has all the historical information on it. So I know this to be true. You knowingly paid for a game where others can attack you via the BGS and you never see them, you paid for that feature on purpose.
Therefore you can not be "forced" to do anything regarding the BGS as you paid for a game where other peoples actions in other modes and on other platforms and other instances will change your game and how you play. You specifically bought that feature, so it cannot be rude for people to play the advertised feature.
So we are back to my above comment, the problem isn't people in Solo/PG (or the game).
The problem is you don't like what you bought and are blaming others for your mistake.
Just remember what is good in life.
To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their BGS experts.
To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their BGS experts.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
There is no such restriction on mode choice.
It's the view that is supported by the design of the game.
Any player can shoot at anything they instance with, players can choose not to instance with other players (even if they could), and every player affects the BGS regardless of game mode.
Your arguments would be way more interesting if it wasn't just "because the Devs allow it".
You know what's also allowed? Engineering grind, menu logging (it's in the game...), new player ganking, station ramming, chain interdictions (players and NPC), mining market crash etc.
In fact, your argument support a status quo where nothing should ever change in the game and you should be happy with everything the way it is. Did you also tell everyone who didn't like the mining changes to just accept it because "it's what the Devs want"? You can't just use the same argument one way. If you think "Devs decided" is valid counter argument for why people attacking other -peoples- work in BGS without any -chance- to be stopped, then you should use it against any features in the game.
You know what's also allowed? Engineering grind, menu logging (it's in the game...), new player ganking, station ramming, chain interdictions (players and NPC), mining market crash etc.
In fact, your argument support a status quo where nothing should ever change in the game and you should be happy with everything the way it is. Did you also tell everyone who didn't like the mining changes to just accept it because "it's what the Devs want"? You can't just use the same argument one way. If you think "Devs decided" is valid counter argument for why people attacking other -peoples- work in BGS without any -chance- to be stopped, then you should use it against any features in the game.
![[PS4] Filthymick420](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/201/201444.jpg?1555738739){kind=avatar}
Not at all. I cant do anything about the people on PC and xbox potentially effecting my bgs so realistically it balances out. Except it doesn't because there are a lot more PC cmdrs so really the argument about console cmdrs effecting bgs is really just whining about nothing. Whether a player is on console or pc means nothing to the bgs fairness. They can be in solo or private either way.
Last edited:
I'm not here to be entertaining, my points don't need to be "interesting" they need to be honest and relevant to the discussion.
And the fact of the matter is that your ego or your opinion isn't relevant to how others play the game. As long as people are not cheating and playing within the Frontier approved use of their software, then people can sit in any mode they like and play the BGS as much as they like.
It is the whole point of the game.
The fact you don't like it means absolutely nothing to anyone else but you. It doesn't change the game design or the rules of the game.
People are not being "rude", mean spirited, cheating or any other way your hissy fit may want to describe it. They are simply playing the game they bought.
Or to put it another way, I think the "offside rule" ruins football and I don't like it.
Is FIFA going to remove it because I don't like it?
Nope, they are not. My feelings don't matter on the topic.
This is a PVE game (because all of it can be played in Solo) with OPTIONAL PvP
So even if people are "avoiding" PvP, they are not doing anything wrong and they are not being "rude".
You are being "rude" by complaining about people who are playing the game legitimately.
Last edited:
If someone's working over your bgs in Solo or private all you got to do is work harder. you're probably just looking for an excuse to gank people. I feel like regardless of any point made, open only suggestions are for the sole purpose of forcing someone into pvp combat that doesnt want to. Play cqc if you cant get pvp in open.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
To what end?
These things are allowed.
Some of those who prefer PvP are swift to point out that simply playing in Open is an acceptance of player interaction that may occur - because the Devs allow it. When those same players complain about players affecting the BGS from Solo and Private Groups things get amusing - as they are complaining about something that is equally allowed.
Demanding that the BGS should only be affected in Open is, in the context of the game design, as reasonable as demanding that one should not be shot at by players in either of the multi-player game modes.
One chooses to use arguments as one sees fit - anyone can use them after all.
Last edited:
^ This
^ Also this
Some people just want lazy, no effort kills.