Speaking from experience, it should lead to better ship design and escape tactics. Torps + pro murderhobos are not a guaranteed kill.Nice story, until you run into someone capable, using reverb torps or a wing that knows what it's doing.
Then the false sense of security about "PvP heroes not daring" leads to another salty forum thread or reddit post about ebul gweefers
Gankers' rights movement?
- Thread starter BigBadBeef
- Start date
Well I do not deny that there are people who can and will break big bad shipsNice story, until you run into someone capable, using reverb torps or a wing that knows what it's doing.
Then the false sense of security about "PvP heroes not daring" leads to another salty forum thread or reddit post about ebul gweefers
But seems to me that there is certain subset of people who really dare to attack only weak looking targets, and are very pacifists if anything that looks like it can fight back comes to their sights. 
True, but these guys are those that pose no threat at all when you fly a somewhat competently engineered and equipped ship.Well I do not deny that there are people who can and will break big bad ships
Which is not a 3D shielded Asp
Quite likely my friend would have escaped with minor damage if he hadn't need to get in to that station. His ship was quite a speed machine, and usually can just boost away from most problems. Even in that fight it was luck and speed that allowed him to not explode
Pablo Escobar says hi:
High-security should mean that an area has both enough crime, and enough assets to protect, to justify the cost of maintaining rapid response forces capable of being a credible deterrent and possibly even stopping a crime in progress.
Using reality as an analog, it doesn't matter how high the security is somewhere, if I want someone dead badly enough, chances are they will die. When every second counts, help is minutes away. The reason there isn't considerably more violence and chaos in places with effective security is that the consequences are extreme. Yes, I could stab, shoot, run down with a large vehicle, or stuff my van with a ton of homemade explosives and five hundred pounds of tungsten ball-bearings and kill just about anything...but the chances of me doing this in a 'high security' area, and escaping are negligible. If I want to survive, freedom intact, as a killer, I need to target nobodies, or ambush people where response times are long, witnesses few, and surveillance absent.
Elite: Dangerous is too soft on consequences. There is no crime prevention system, and no credible deterrent, because of this lack of consequence. There is no way to make an ATR response swift and potent enough to actually protect anyone as long as CMDRs inclined to attack clean targets can be clean while doing so and ATR, as ineffective as they are, already have absurd and immersion defying capabilities (weapons no CMDR can get a vague analog to and the ability to teleport).
Waiting for criminals to act is acting too late, but deterrents need to be as proactive as possible, because making them heavy handed like ATR is both ineffectual and implausible. Unfortunately, the game is completely lacking in the mechanisms (mostly persistence related) to do credible C&P.
How does that shot of Mr Escobar compare to a fully engineered PVP kill machine? It doesn't, if PVPers turned up in a hi sec system in a caravan with the kids the ATR wouldn't respond, if Mr Escobar tried to approach the Whitehouse with a Browning 50 cal in each hand how far would he have got?
Everyone says Elite is a dystopian future "Wild West" so to speak, well then the Authorities should be heavy handed, that's why I mentioned Mr Dredd. Hell we have the death penalty for loitering in a station fer gawds sakes!!
You are presuming I mean once the greifer has started to attack.....no I mean as SOON as the greifer enters Hi sec, kill squad of Godzilla proporations are sent against them...No time to look at the scanner to find a juicy(weak) target.
I know that's how the system is triggered now, I'm saying that's wrong in some circumstances.
FD really need to do expand criminal career!
FD need to work on a system of working out who the Dbags are, excessively combat focussed ships against much weaker targets (in hi and med sec, low and anarchies exempt area, valid PVP kills also exempt PP, BH, Faction etc), too many "seal clubbings" and the player is kicked out of the Pilots Federation, someone posted a page from the Elite site that mentions the ne'er do wells in the galaxy "going rogue" "betraying the PF", well the PF NEEDS to have teeth. Players going "rogue" and "betraying the PF" by attacking other PF members excessivly get booted out, NO insurance, insta kill squads in hi and medium sec. Maybe even random attacks from Ai Bounty Hunters....make life HARD for someone playhing the game that way. The ultimate test of skill, "Dark Souls" level if you will.
Agreed, but I think it needs to be done, would make the galaxy more believeable, it'll make more sense and it'll give those wanting a challenge what they want. And it'll hopefully make the Dbags go to another game?
This is possible- I tried to make an even, skill based and simple version that keeps killers on their collective toes:
At notoriety 10, each full NPC / player scan spawns an ATR vessel
A half though out idea, but: If a player is at notoriety 10, they have to be very careful about being scanned by random ships, security or other players as if they are, an ATR security vessel drops in to hassle them. The handwavium being that a scan is like a sighting of you thats disseminated...
Plus, I agree about security in general- these for example:
Notoriety should come with more consequences in high security systems
Right now the security level of the system means nothing - and can be safely ignored by just about every player, even if you are wanted. It's a waste of a game mechanic. How about making high security systems a true "safe-haven" for players that desire it? High Security should mean something...
They do, and that as you go up and down its scale, doors open and close. The trick is to keep some doors far away from each other, while others overlap.
Again great stuff. There should be a Jedi / Sith relationship with the Pilots Fed / The Club so that actions do have consequences.
That would only happen if the general food source was more difficult to kill- this is either via modes, or the population learning to evade and avoid trouble when they can. I only wish the pilot training had a module where you could practice all this in controlled ways.
Yup that's good ideas right there, maybe next era has some of this? (we can hope eh?This is possible- I tried to make an even, skill based and simple version that keeps killers on their collective toes:
At notoriety 10, each full NPC / player scan spawns an ATR vessel
A half though out idea, but: If a player is at notoriety 10, they have to be very careful about being scanned by random ships, security or other players as if they are, an ATR security vessel drops in to hassle them. The handwavium being that a scan is like a sighting of you thats disseminated...forums.frontier.co.uk
Plus, I agree about security in general- these for example:
Notoriety should come with more consequences in high security systems
Right now the security level of the system means nothing - and can be safely ignored by just about every player, even if you are wanted. It's a waste of a game mechanic. How about making high security systems a true "safe-haven" for players that desire it? High Security should mean something...
They do, and that as you go up and down its scale, doors open and close. The trick is to keep some doors far away from each other, while others overlap.
Again great stuff. There should be a Jedi / Sith relationship with the Pilots Fed / The Club so that actions do have consequences.
That would only happen if the general food source was more difficult to kill- this is either via modes, or the population learning to evade and avoid trouble when they can. I only wish the pilot training had a module where you could practice all this in controlled ways.
)IMO at least, block should not be a monolithic feature, but it should adapt to features inside the game. Which in reality is that Powerplay (which logically breaks block) should have an exemption.
Not everyone is out to get you- its up to you to take that risk. Thats what Open should be about, a dimension above simple NPC interactions.
True, but you'd think FD would think things through logically and look at what blocking should be for in the context of the game at certain times.
That picture was taken in the early 80s, well after Pablo Escobar was known internationally as a drug trafficker, cartel leader, and mass murderer. He's on vacation, having his photo taken with his son in front of the White House.
ATR should be after criminals, irrespective of what they are flying, and not after well armed independent pilots, which is going to be most of them. Now if carrying weapons in high-sec was itself illegal, that would make things trickier, but one would still need to be scanned and intercepted by authorities.
Probably only to where he is in that photo, but mostly because Escobar was a fairly small man and 186+ pounds of weapons would probably have made it hard to climb the fence with just his feet.
Prior to the closing of Pennsylvania Ave to vehicular traffic in 1995, you could haven driven up in your van, hopped out with your Brownings akimbo, posed for a few photos, and likely driven off before being stopped. You might get a very uncomfortable no-knock warrant served on you by the ATF later, but it's not difficult to get a weapon to the front gates of the White House, even today.
That heavy handedness certainly hasn't made crime uncommon or impossible in Mega-City One.
I've noticed the SLF lag is hit and miss. Some outlaws interdict me, deploy their SLF and proceed to attack me. Sometimes I notice lag sometimes not. If it gets so bad that its impacting my survival, I'll bail on that encounter. No crying over comms about it, just "gg - catch you later"
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Different levels in addition to the full instance block might indeed be useful.
Indeed it is up to each player whether or not to potentially waste their game time trusting other players. The idea of what Open should be about varies between players.
I expect that the primary reason for the existence of the block feature is unaffected by which game content the player doing the blocking is engaging in, noting that the block feature has only ever been strengthened as time goes on.
I thought the number was this small as well. I was corrected on another thread. There is a facebook group dedicated to ganking in this game that has 1000 members (claim made by poster that corrected me).
Its ironic since I seem to remember talk of trustworthyness with NPC wingmen at one point as well. But then, thats what squadrons are for too, more stable groups with internal codes of conduct.
It should be strong for some features (like generic open) where there is no gameplay focus, but limited in Powerplay (i.e. language) where the feature is about conflict. It then works to the strengths of the features, and not working against them at a conceptual level.
The opinion of "most players". Absolutely inconsistent with the AAA mmos that offer a PVE open environment, or offers separated PVE and PVP servers that serve MILLIONS of players. Very gankcentric point of view. Enjoy your marginal point of view tuber.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The irony being that we are still awaiting NPC wingmen but got Squadrons instead - the former would likely be useful to all players whereas the latter are not necessarily.
On the other hand, if NPC fighter crew are considered to be a form of implementation of NPC wingmen, then the trustworthiness question has been removed, possibly because it was decided that it wouldn't be "fun".
In which case the players it is rather obviously implemented as is to deal with would pledge to Powerplay to be unblockable by other pledged players.
But you still had that issue of trust- maybe new era will bring it with the AI.
Thats the problem: if you pledge for whatever reason, you are a target. There are no innocent pledges, and even random destruction at the hands of another powers pledge is part of Powerplay.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Might have had, maybe - as the DDF topic didn't make it in to the game as discussed.
While it presents a problem to some, it does not seem to over-ride the primary purpose of the block feature (otherwise the block feature would include exemptions).
There is no 'some' about it- either Powerplay is about adversarial conflict or its not.