Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Both types exist - and there's no need to like PvP to buy or play a game that does not require it.
Mistakes cost in any game mode.
I’d like more commanders in the Open
- Thread starter Moriarte
- Start date
The first part is a great observation
Sadly the highlighted part is just invective - but I guess gives you reason to touch yourself once again
if you make every thread that talks about the mechanics of dealing with other players into an immediate anxiety trigger then you deserve to be insulted (way more than i did). There's ZERO reason to be afraid or concerned with pvp if you dont want to be, and so no reason to knee jerk react to every thread as if fdev was going to turn this game into some version of Eve or Vendetta-Online (as if they could...which they can't). I have no respect for the kind of players who get all antsy whenever someone starts mentioning pvp in this game. I find them to be a cancer to the game and the forum in general by being overly reactive all the time. Invective enough? (who the hell uses that word? )
A proper escort mechanic would allow players to hire wingmen to protect them and would be governed by rules based on the faction the wingmen were hired at and if they were assigned by mission or freelance. Pirates could do the same even. Player could be either in an npc wing or a player wing but not both. Prices could be set as some fixed amount + percentage of mission reward if a mission or if freelance, some amount based on time (hazard pay would be charged if hostilities encountered and they would disband if you couldn't pay the hazard fee) ...etc.
New players in open would be encouraged to use them via discounts based on total asset value. That cost would scale with total asset value such that it would be a significant deterrent on the high end (outside of those that offer them via missions). This would mean, highly expensive pvp builds would be unlikely to spend the credits to have pirate escorts/wings - just as really rich traders would be hesitant to spend credits on them. But newer players may (think of them as training wheels). Missions would be a totally different story though, and escorts could be used to create much more entertaining large scale encounters for single players or that were out of reach of any single players before.
That would make players who insist on being in open in areas where they're likely to draw unwanted attention but are incapable of dealing with that attention from being guaranteed a bad time all the time if they dont want to switch modes. Escorts are something that should be in the game, like when Wings were introduced. It's extremely odd that they're not.
Are you saying that if I make a character which behaves in the confines given by the DM or whoever sets up the over arcing rules and somebody on the table doesn't like it for whatever reason I have to change it? I could understand it if it's for a party member, which in EDs world would be a squadron.
But for anybody else it seems excessive and wrong. That would be like me telling people how to play Elite in the way I like it even if the rules allow for a different play style. That can't be right.
I'm saying that if it causes issues at the table and they center around you then the DM is likely to change his mind. But if it's only one person having an issue and everyone else is fine then it wouldn't really be you or your character that is the center of the issue, would it?
I do, obviously
ETA: I also don't get bothered by PvP being in the game... only by those players who consider it to be the 'pinnacle of achievement'
And, yes: I use the word "Pinnacle" too
Last edited:
Not exactly. In solo if you go into an area in with a shieldless t9 and lose the interdiction game, the mistake of 0 shields probably won’t cost you anything but some hull damage. Vs in open if you’re interdicted by a player in that same ship, and same scenario, that mistake of flying a shieldless t9 may very well cost you a rebuy.
same scenario, extremely different costs for the mistake of a poor build choice.
Careful, you're bumping up against the 'you must fly a properly equipped ship in Open' argument that we keep hearing. If I can choose to have any character then I can choose to have any ship and nobody else can tell me what I should or shoudlnt fly in any game mode as its not up to them.
Cheese Helmet wins - its just an easier mode, everyone say yes and they can go home happy, that's all they want, us to say that Solo is easier, that's all, just say it and move on. Like you would with a toddler who keeps demanding attention, you just say what they want to hear so you can actually have a conversation about the topic.
A typical new player journey may be Open until Deciat, switch to Solo or PG, a long time later if at all venture into Open again and maybe stay there maybe hop between depending on location. I think the OP is saying it would be better for the game if the bit around Deciat wasn't there and more people may stay in Open.
Gankers need victims, they need people to play in Open. Players don't need gankers, they don't need to play in Open.
Never said? Dude, we're on a tangent created from this post right here.
Did you miss that?
Allow me to rephrase, I never said that in all the posts from me you quoted.
I just took umbrage with the idea that people here are playing out fantasies devoid of and personal motivation and that all emotional response is wholly unwarranted.
I used to play Open for immersion reasons. Today Open feels like a colourful space Overwatch type of PvP MMO game, so I play Solo for immersion now.
Some of them may be. Some may not. Emotional response should be encouraged. However, we alone are responsible for handling them.
In other words if you choose Open Play and get ganked by me, regardless of why I did it, how you handle your emotions is on you.
Why? Well, who else can really control them anyway?
Which circles all the way back around to me pointing out that this is why people play solo, and escorts aren't really an answer to that.
Circular arguments are a specialty with that one.
If you hadn't blocked me you might actually see what I'd written.
I don't know of a nice or easy way to say this but if you get angry or mad at a player killing you in open, no matter what you say, do or think, you are wrong and there's no if's, and's, or but's about it, plain and simple. The player that killed you for whatever reason or no reason at all has done absolutely nothing wrong and is simply playing the game they want to play it. But as soon as you, the victim, starts name calling, going to the forums to complain, imagining what the other players personal life is like, ect. you immediately become the only player in the wrong.
No matter how far they set you back, no matter how much your rebuy cost, no matter how many diamonds you just lost, the only way you don't come out of it as the bad guy is if you take it on the chin and maybe send them a GG.
I saw this happen first hand the other night when my PVE buddy and I were on our way to a station to sell the 200+ diamonds we had just mined. I stopped at the station in Irula to store my mining equipment and replace it with hull reinforcements and PA's while my buddy just went ahead with what he already had on his ship. As soon as he gets to the system to sell them he tells me there's a player following him. I tell him to stay calm, put full pips to shields and prepare to submit and pick a system to jump to.
He all but ignored me thinking he could win the interdiction and within moments he was screaming and calling the player every name in the book. I told him to calm down and send the player a GG. He did and ever since has started taking my advice on building his mining ships to be able to survive a player encounter.
All this to say, calling gankers names or even going to the forums to try to convince the devs to somehow remove them is just wrong, period. Gankers aren't out there hoping that you're gonna rage, they just wanna see a players ship pop whether its a fully engineered pvp ship or an unarmed mining ship and if you rage over it, that's on you not them. Although the rage messages do make for some fairly entertaining content on facebook
I think there's definitely a discussion to be had about introducing a simple player bounty system to encourage and incentivize police/white knight players to get more involved and to give gankers at least some slight repercussions for murdering players though.
Last edited:
Have you ever tried escorting? It's a regular feature of our gameplay in Colonia.
As a player who is hunted in open all the time, I say this. You can be a slow, easily murdered lamb set with no defenses designed around the premise of maximized profits per hour, or you can be a lean, lithe gazelle ready to bolt at the first sign of danger. Fast ships, big shields. Maybe some chaff. Always be ready to high wake.
Sometimes the lions still catch me, almost always due to a mistake I made, but most of the time the lions are left drooling.
Be a gazelle. The thrill of dodging danger is exciting.
Sometimes the lions still catch me, almost always due to a mistake I made, but most of the time the lions are left drooling.
Be a gazelle. The thrill of dodging danger is exciting.
Fair question, the answer is no because:
- I don't like PvP
- I have no yaw in my setup which already makes NPC combat interesting at times
- I don't have the will to create a PvP competent engineered setup, my stuff is all based on attempts at PvE sustainability but would be melted by human DPS and tactics
- I can't help but feel I'd rather be doing something else
We did have a player bounty system once. It got gamed so badly for easy credits that it was effectively nerfed into the ground. This is the fate of most kinds of bounty systems that I've seen implemented. EvE Online's is a great example of this as well (at least when I played 2-3 years ago).I don't know of a nice or easy way to say this but if you get angry or mad at a player killing you in open, no matter what you say, do or think, you are wrong and there's no if's, and's, or but's about it, plain and simple. The player that killed you for whatever reason or no reason at all has done absolutely nothing wrong and is simply playing the game they want to play it. But as some as you, the victim, starts name calling, going to the forums to complain, imagining what the other players personal life is like, ect. you immediately become the only player in the wrong.
No matter how far they set you back, no matter how much your rebuy cost, no matter how many diamonds you just lost, the only way you don't come out of it as the bad guy is if you take it on the chin and maybe send them a GG.
I saw this happen first hand the other night when my PVE buddy and I were on our way to a station to sell the 200+ diamonds we had just mined. I stopped at the station in Irula to store my mining equipment and replace it with hull reinforcements and PA's while my buddy just went ahead with what he already had on his ship. As soon as he gets to the system to sell them he tells me there's a player following him. I tell him to stay calm, put full pips to shields and prepare to submit and pick a system to jump to.
He all but ignored me thinking he could win the interdiction and within moments he was screaming and calling the player every name in the book. I told him to calm down and send the player a GG. He did and ever since has started taking my advice on building his mining ships to be able to survive a player encounter.
All this to say, calling gankers names or even going to the forums to try to convince the devs to somehow remove them is just wrong, period. Gankers aren't out there hoping that you're gonna rage, that just wanna see a players ship pop whether its a fully engineered pvp ship or an unarmed mining ship and if you rage over it, that's on you not them. Although the rage messages do make for some fairly entertaining content on facebook
I think there's definitely a discussion to be had about introducing a simple player bounty system to encourage and incentivize police/white knight players to get more involved and to give gankers at least some slight repercussions for murdering players though.
It's not unreasonable to expect forced content that affects a player adversely that they were not actively seeking to be poorly received. Is the playstyle allowed? Yes. Does it have to be appreciated simply because it exists? No, absolutely not, much like one doesn't have to appreciate ALL art or ALL writing. Different people like different things, and few people like to have to experience things that they don't want to experience. As stated before, content creators are judged by the content they create. Successful content creators tend to aim their content at receptive audiences. Unsuccessful content creators never really grow past being niche because they consistently fail to connect with people that appreciate the content created as a result.
It's actually extremely unreasonable though. It doesn't matter if you didn't ask for it or not, you're the one who chose to fly in open. This is like if you were playing in an online match of Battlefield or Call of Duty and all you wanted to do was walk around and explore every corner of the map then getting mad when another player kills you. I'm by no means comparing ED in open to an online match of Battlefield or COD but I'm trying to make the point that you're playing an online game where players shoot and kill each other then getting mad for about getting shot and killed by other players.