Ignoring or harming PvP in game design is contributing to ganking

[bigmuthatrukka]

Aww, bless!

Imagine attempting to use morality and decency as a barometer of what's right or wrong within a video game.

Next you'll be telling us you care about the feelings of other people you meet in-game too.

You're darn right. I have just spent the last 30 minutes writing repentant apologies to the entire enemy team I just murdered in team deathmatch on COD.

 

[Rubbernuke]

A lot of the time people forget that a player attacking another player who isn't engaged with PvP is wrong.

? So that means FD have been lying to us all this time saying its within the rules, pirates are just proto-gankers and people who shoot rival Powerplay pledges are maniacs?

If the possibility of PvP exists, it will exist. Don't assume that any player you see is friendly because they might not- the default state of Open is not holding hands, its keeping your guard up.

 

[Rubbernuke]

That's a fairly long winded way of saying that the ganker takes basically no risk.

Stop obsessing over how unfair life is, its not healthy in the game. If you are prepared and plan, the ganker has to work harder to find and kill you.

This what you envision PvP to be? Do you envision it to be a turkey shoot where fully kitted out engineered meta build vessels find the weakest prey and attack them relentlessly? I don't want to be on either side of that equation.

I gather a lot of other people don't want to be on either side of that equation either which is basically my point. It's why you are flying around in open staring at a star field.

Not passing judgment on either play style, it's your game you can play however you want obviously. The rest of the community is going to react how they do and that's how the votes have gone so far.

Votes? Really? Where are they? Is this the silent vocal majority again?

PvP in ED is opportunistic, you have to be in the wrong place at the wrong time flying the wrong ship. Remove one or more of those variables and the problem stops- and its all within your power to do. So stop being so wet and take control.

I already covered that. If you relog to get favorable circumstances then you're basically cherry-picking to say re-logging during a fight is somehow breaks a game ethics code while the other re-logging for favorable circumstances are okay.

So if you log holding merits that could win a cycle of Powerplay, thats OK then? If a win / lose condition is dependent on it, I'd say you are talking cobblers.

Either you play the game straight up and you don't relog to change your circumstances or you think re-logging is okay. If you think relogging is okay then combat logging isn't very far away. It all comes down to exiting the game and restarting to change the circumstances you are dealt by the game.

Granted I don't combat log, I don't even play in open but the concept seems the same basically. To an extent the griefer is being griefed. There are some exceptions though and I believe I covered those already with consensual PVP.

If someone logs at Davs Hope, a) its dull b) shows FDs poor design choices and c) does not affect a game loop between people fighting in space. There is no equivalence because one is gathering an item, the other is player v player interaction.

But it's not about being a pirate. That role role is covered already. It's about the person being pirated wanting to play along with that entire scenario. That's why I said I will decide what I need. I'm not going to be the pirate. So if I'm going to be pirated I would like at least to have some type of roleplay where I understand this individual who is pirating me is indeed playing this role and doing so with a code of conduct even if it doesn't match mine completely. This is why I enjoyed playing alongside the Code because even though I was destroyed a few times by them they always introduced themselves to me and asked me what I was doing there and it was up to me how I wanted to deal with that. Just saying give me your stuff makes you no better than an NPC so why should I honor anything you want?

You can't make consent of a crime consensual beyond clicking Open, which according to how ED market the game means other commanders might be hostile towards you.

Again, what is wrong saying "stop, drop cargo or die?" thats a pirate, and if you don't stop they make you stop. The problem arises in ED from being able to log out even when the pirate is doing the right thing, and that for ages trader ship hulls were made of cardboard (meaning they were weaker than the thrusters you try to disable).

I don't think anyone here has asked for that one hundred percent cast-iron way of never being destroyed. I'm not worried about being destroyed - I've got billions upon billions of credits to fall back on. I just want something out of the exchange other than a rebuy screen. Otherwise I do not feel in the least bit compelled to offer gameplay to a group of players who aren't offering any gameplay back.

The problem in ED is that there is no ecosystem- its totally dysfunctional. With credit scarcity and high running costs traders and miners have the money to pay for protection from mercs (who rely on danger money) while pirates have to be as good as possible- and that gankers soon run out of cash. In reality we have too many credits, leading to gankers who can eat rebuy after rebuy. Thats the problem.

I understand all the nuances in the ins-and-outs of pirating and being pirated - I've been playing this game for a long time. I'm telling you why most of the bubble is going to be empty in Open and why people are going to combat log against you much of the time.

And shows why they don't understand what Open is, which is sad.

Besides, I wouldn't be against a "you win" flag where the loser can limp off and lick their wounds somewhere and not actually lose their ship. This would mean you get something out of it for winning other than a moral victory. It would certainly be better than looking at a combat log empty space with a vapor trail.

Then what is left is a long line of broken game loops and unsatisfying interactions, fuelling more bored gankers rather than via design encourage fully formed outcomes.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Is it though?
Does Fdev describe Elite as such a game? I would say that Fdev doesn't do so at all. And that is kinda a problem..
Since they want to make a game for everyone, thus everyone has to suffer.

But you don't have to suffer at all. You have total control over what you do, what you fly and where you go and at what time. FD themselves say there are hostile commanders about, the default state should be caution. Fly expecting trouble and you won't be surprised.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

So that means FD have been lying to us all this time saying its within the rules, pirates are just proto-gankers and people who shoot rival Powerplay pledges are maniacs

No. Game contextual behaviours that are wrong, are permitted, however they remain wrong, as they attract fines, notoriety and bounties

 

[Rubbernuke]

No. Game contextual behaviours that are wrong, are permitted, however they remain wrong, as they attract fines, notoriety and bounties

Destroying someone because you felt like it is not against the rules though either.

Continually doing it, following someone and harassing them is.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Destroying someone because you felt like it is not against the rules though either.

Neither is blocking them or exiting the game at any time.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Neither is blocking them or exiting the game at any time.

And in general play (bar pirating and Powerplay) I'd agree.

 

[Robert Maynard]

And in general play (bar pirating and Powerplay) I'd agree.

Even in pirating and Powerplay - just as any player can shoot at anything they like, even if to do so may seem unsporting (due to massive advantage), any player can block any other player or leave the game when they want, even if to do so may seem unsporting - the game places no limits on use.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

Destroying someone because you felt like it is not against the rules though either.

According to the EULA it is though, not just someone but a group of someones, which could be seen to be "anyone not entertaining my game style of Pvp"

 

[Rubbernuke]

Even in pirating and Powerplay - just as any player can shoot at anything they like, even if to do so may seem unsporting (due to massive advantage), any player can block any other player or leave the game when they want, even if to do so may seem unsporting - the game places no limits on use.

But pirating and Powerplay requires attackers and defenders. Both these require interaction and a conclusion- if there is no conclusion, what is there?

Players who click Open are consenting to that, and yet they don't feel its right when it happens which breaks any sense of gaming narrative making it redundant.

 

[Rubbernuke]

According to the EULA it is though, not just someone but a group of someones, which could be seen to be "anyone not entertaining my game style of Pvp"

The physical act of blowing someone up is not wrong- if it was then Open in ED is stuck in denial or just very, very confused.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But pirating and Powerplay requires attackers and defenders. Both these require interaction and a conclusion- if there is no conclusion, what is there?

Piracy itself does not require players as targets - as NPCs can be pirated. It's a player choice to specifically target players - and any play-style that relies on other players is vulnerable to other players not wanting to play along.

Powerplay does not require PvP either - however Powerplay PvP is available if opposing players are so inclined.

Players who click Open are consenting to that, and yet they don't feel its right when it happens which breaks any sense of gaming narrative making it redundant.

Players who click on Open may be attacked by any player they encounter - and may choose to block that player or leave the game at any time. There is no lock-in to player interactions in this game, even though some players quite obviously want there to be.

 

[Dragsham]

It's snide. It's not gameplay. It might be legal. Endorsed. Doable.
But blocking or combat logging in a fight at any point.. is snide. An exploit to those that would never even consider it an option.
To those who think it's not snide. I respect your opinion. As you should mine.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It's snide. It's not gameplay. It might be legal. Endorsed. Doable.
But blocking or combat logging in a fight at any point.. is snide. An exploit to those that would never even consider it an option.
To those who think it's not snide. I respect your opinion. As you should mine.

Just like ganking.

 

[Morbad]

That has nothing to do with the removal of a player's ability to play their game in the manner they choose due to the actions of other players.

A multiplayer game automatically implies such concessions and this game is multiplayer only.

Even if I never used any mode other than Solo, there would be constraints on my play due to the actions of other players. The game does not revolve around me and as long as it's a multiplayer game, cannot revolve around me.

No. Game contextual behaviours that are wrong, are permitted, however they remain wrong, as they attract fines, notoriety and bounties

You are conflating 'illegal' with 'wrong'.

According to the EULA it is though

What part of the EULA do you believe implies this?

 

[Dragsham]

Ganking is wrong..if by it's definition it's picking on those who are not able to fight back...totally agree it's wrong.
And yet their here doing it.... cos like combat logging they can..
Broken mechanics let's address em

 

[Rubbernuke]

Piracy itself does not require players as targets - as NPCs can be pirated. It's a player choice to specifically target players - and any play-style that relies on other players is vulnerable to other players not wanting to play along.

And yet, when you are in Open only players have the hauls that actually matter. Plus, a player consciously logs into Open for a reason, and that is interaction. If they don't want interaction, why are they there?

Powerplay does not require PvP either - however Powerplay PvP is available if opposing players are so inclined.

Again, you log into Open for a reason, interaction and greater risk. But, when that risk gets too much you pull the plug or block you deny the valid opposition of a 'win' (denying merits, space, time).

Its not a matter of something requiring PvP, its actually making the PvP meaningful when it happens. If people break the game loop and there is no valid conclusion, thats not a game, its just random events.

Players who click on Open may be attacked by any player they encounter - and may choose to block that player or leave the game at any time. There is no lock-in to player interactions in this game, even though some players quite obviously want there to be.

Its like playing a game of football and blocking people who tackle you- is that football? The same is true for Powerplay, if you are caught and are about to lose merits that should be a win, and yet you can win even when you lose. The same for piracy- you lost should have no more options but to give the cargo- but instead you remove yourself and you win by trading the full amount.

Thats not a game for anyone.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

there would be constraints on my play due to the actions of other players.

And yet the suggestion is being made that gankers can do as they wish and it's up to the targets to alter their game style to account for it.

You are conflating 'illegal' with 'wrong'.

Same thing.

What part of the EULA do you believe implies this?

The bit quote above.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Ganking is wrong..if by it's definition it's picking on those who are not able to fight back...totally agree it's wrong.
And yet their here doing it.... cos like combat logging they can..
Broken mechanics let's address em

Both menu exit and the block feature exist because "people" - and some of those people are players that no-one should have to play with.

Ganking exists because "people" - and some of those people are players who take delight in zero skill no-risk (to themselves) attacks on others.

To remove ganking, all player/player damage would require to be removed, in my opinion.