Question for Open players who don't like PVP/ganking... help me understand

[Bigmaec]

Without getting into all that jazz there: it's not just a spaceship shooting game. There's a lot of other things to do.

If this was a complaint in say - Star Wars Squadrons - I'd be right there with ya

OP's original point was to understand the other aspects of why people seek social engagement with others in Open and run the gank risk. It's about encountering random new folks and - whilst there's a risk ofc they'll just kill you - they might do other stuff too.

I think it's wrong to characterise ED as purely a spaceship shooting game. It's a spaceship game, allowing interactions with others if you're lucky enough to see em.
How they choose to act is a different matter. etc. etc. etc.

So use that socializing to your advantage.
We have players in the squadron too who don't like fighting.
Find escorts. Scout ahead in a courier, clear the instance. Get that ridiculous low trade bonus, do wing missions.
All this talk about social engagement. You can't only mean o7 o7 o7 o7.
This game thrives if people work together, and do their own thing. Ganking / PvP is just a small part.
And you'll only get ganked in ~5 systems anyways.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Where are you getting this "we only prefer weak targets" from? Nearly all the gankers in Elite are the best pvpers in the game and fight each other to the death on a regular basis.

We're not lying to ourselves, you're just making up what you think we're about to fit your narrative.

There are 4 discords that I know of, made specifically for helping players of all levels of experience, backgrounds and playstyles. All of them are ran by gankers.

You know nothing about us and our motives.

After reading a little bit of that Wikipedia article do you know what making judgments about the mental well-being of someone based on a handful of on-topic posts on a computer gaming forums sounds like to me?

The Online Disinhibition Effect.

 

[Chrystoph]

Read your own link.
What your link describes has nothing to do with people shooting other people's spaceships in a spaceship shooting game.
What's next? Gankers eat little babies for breakfast again?

Eye rolling indeed... You do realize that intentional obtusism only works when the other party believes you?

Another type of online disinhibition is called toxic disinhibition which represents a phenomenon of online flaming and inappropriate behaviors that often contain hostile language, swearing, and even threats.[1] This norm describes the negative side effect of the loss of inhibition on the cyberspace. The antisocial behaviors caused by toxic disinhibition not only occur in multiple online platforms like blogs, hate sites, and comment sections, but also exist in diverse forms which include cyberbullying, social loafing and more.

Attacking another player for no good reason other than you can get away with it is both the definition of ganking AND bullying.
Since you want to Appeal to Ridicule:

Ganking

It is a word commonly used in online video games, usually used in an MMORPG. Ganking is the process in which a group of characters gang up on one or more players that do not have a chance to defend themselves, Or when one high level player does the same action to a player way below his or her own level

It would seem, when applied to gankers (your word choice), your argument is self defeating.

Since a gank rarely produces anything of value within the game, your enjoyment must be external to the game. That means you are looking for a player level "interaction". Since you are not trying to connect with the player long term, your actions needs must be less wholesome. If you want it in more common terms, if it smells like feces and it looks like feces, it probably is feces.

 

[Bigmaec]

After reading a little bit of that Wikipedia article do you know what making judgments about the mental well-being of someone based on a handful of on-topic posts on a computer gaming forums sounds like to me?

The Online Disinhibition Effect.

Do you know how that sounds to me?

We should recombulate the frame shift disturber to raise our online disinhibition effect.

Make it so, Mr. Data.

 

[Bigmaec]

Eye rolling indeed... You do realize that intentional obtusism only works when the other party believes you?

Attacking another player for no good reason other than you can get away with it is both the definition of ganking AND bullying.
Since you want to Appeal to Ridicule:
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ganking
It would seem, when applied to gankers (your word choice), your argument is self defeating.

Since a gank rarely produces anything of value within the game, your enjoyment must be external to the game. That means you are looking for a player level "interaction". Since you are not trying to connect with the player long term, your actions needs must be less wholesome. If you want it in more common terms, if it smells like feces and it looks like feces, it probably is feces.

What you call antisocial, FD advertises as gameplay. I stay with FD.

 

[Danquememe]

One of the direct consequences of ganking is the creation of in-game vigilante groups dedicated to fighting gankers. These "Lawful" groups band together in the high-traffic systems where gankers congregate, leading to organic PVP fights between lawfuls and outlaws.

That, to me, is an awesome example of emergent gameplay and player organization. I welcome and support every lawful player I come across and try to give them encouragement in their goals. Because I literally want them to come and find me and try to kill me (and with my low skill level, it's quite likely they will succeed).

I approach this game very much like playing "cops and robbers", and I've chosen the path of the robber, or "bad guy" - because it means I get to pick the most fights, and therefore get the most practice in all the related game mechanics, and thereby improve the quickest in the game. And of course, my character needs to actually be a bad guy - and do bad guy things - in order for the good guys to have a purpose and reason to come after me.

Now, if nobody ever attacked anybody in this game unless they were a PowerPlay enemy or had gotten a bounty from killing a clean NPC, there would be HUGELY less opportunity for PVP in this game. But I want PVP, and in fact, as much of it as I can find. So, as a rational human being, I choose to do the bad guy things - because I am literally trying to provide the excuse required for a Lawful good guy to come after me.

Because at the end of the day, I am here to learn how to fly a 6 degree of freedom spaceship in simulated space combat. The rest of this stuff is truly irrelevant to me and, usually, an impediment to that desire. I have absolutely no ill will towards any player and will help everyone I can in their own quest to progress in this game. So that they and I can shoot at each other with our virtual spaceships. That's what the game promised me, and it's what I paid for.

To quote a meme - "It's nothing personnel, kid"

 

[Deleted member 121570]

So use that socializing to your advantage.
We have players in the squadron too who don't like fighting.
Find escorts. Scout ahead in a courier, clear the instance. Get that ridiculous low trade bonus, do wing missions.
All this talk about social engagement. You can't only mean o7 o7 o7 o7.
This game thrives if people work together, and do their own thing. Ganking / PvP is just a small part.
And you'll only get ganked in ~5 systems anyways.

I agree - 100%!

 

[Chrystoph]

So use that socializing to your advantage.
We have players in the squadron too who don't like fighting.
Find escorts. Scout ahead in a courier, clear the instance. Get that ridiculous low trade bonus, do wing missions.
All this talk about social engagement. You can't only mean o7 o7 o7 o7.
This game thrives if people work together, and do their own thing. Ganking / PvP is just a small part.
And you'll only get ganked in ~5 systems anyways.

You could, oh, I don't know, try not contradicting yourselves. You either do or do not gank. As I have said repeatedly, I am talking about people that kill others in the game REGARDLESS of the circumstances. PvP and Ganking are two different things. One may encompass the other, but that doesn't make them synonymous.

Tell me, squadron member, do you remember why you killed the last three noncombatant ships? If it involved a competitor (BGS, PP, other squadron, actual piracy), BZ. If not... I rest my case.

 

[Bigmaec]

You could, oh, I don't know, try not contradicting yourselves. You either do or do not gank. As I have said repeatedly, I am talking about people that kill others in the game REGARDLESS of the circumstances. PvP and Ganking are two different things. One may encompass the other, but that doesn't make them synonymous.

Tell me, squadron member, do you remember why you killed the last three noncombatant ships? If it involved a competitor (BGS, PP, other squadron, actual piracy), BZ. If not... I rest my case.

I didn't answer or quote you, but Sanderling.
But to answer your question, I propably ganked a handful not wanted CMDRs in my game career. And?

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Tell me, squadron member, do you remember why you killed the last three noncombatant ships? If it involved a competitor (BGS, PP, other squadron, actual piracy), BZ. If not... I rest my case.

I told SPEAR I'd be in Deciat until they left Colonia. In game quid pro quo. The last three kills have been in support of that.

Did I pass the test?

 

[ACowForAllSeasons]

I told SPEAR I'd be in Deciat until they left Colonia. In game quid pro quo. The last three kills have been in support of that.

Did I pass the test?

Hang on CMDR, it takes time to keep moving those goal posts so that this is now invalid too.

 

[DemiserofD]

That's very true. However when you log into open, you are giving implied consent to PVP. That's because you know PVP can happen, you know it's within the rules, such as they are and you still choose to enter that mode.

You know when you see one of those signs at a car park that advises you you're using it at your own risk and the owners will not be responsible for any damage, theft etc. If you then park there, you're giving your implied consent to those conditions. That's open. So although it's not exclusively for PVP, that doesn't change the fact that if you play in open, you absolutely have to accept that PVP is a possibility and that no other player is required to take your wishes into account when deciding whether to engage in PVP with you.

You can like it or dislike it as you see fit, as long as you accept it.

I don't see any reason why I should accept it. It's a bad system, and I want to see it changed, as I've said repeatedly. Just because the rules currently exist in a current way does not mean those rules are good.

To use your example, yes, if a car park has those signs they're technically free of liability. But if 50% of cars that are left in that lot get vandalized or stolen, pretty soon the number of people who go there are going to drop off dramatically and income is going to plummet.

There's a reason most games continually edit out methods that make the game unfun for the losing side. Right now, 90% of the power is on the pirate side, which is a ridiculous idea from a gameplay balance perspective.

 

[Chrystoph]

Congratulations, Don Sobanii, I cede the thread to you.

Please note, however, that I still hold Ganking, as opposed to motivated PvP, in disgust.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

I don't see any reason why I should accept it. It's a bad system, and I want to see it changed, as I've said repeatedly. Just because the rules currently exist in a current way does not mean those rules are good.

This debate has been happening since the game's inception. Better to drop the matter and adapt.

Congratulations, Don Sobanii, I cede the thread to you.

 

[DemiserofD]

This debate has been happening since the game's inception. Better to drop the matter and adapt.

I mean, I exclusively play on solo or player groups, so problem solved, I guess?

Except, that means Open has lost at least one player, and is lessened because of it.

Any system where the solution is not to play is a bad system.

 

[Bigmaec]

I mean, I exclusively play on solo or player groups, so problem solved, I guess?

Except, that means Open has lost at least one player, and is lessened because of it.

Any system where the solution is not to play is a bad system.

Doesn't matter, you already gave FD your monies.
Like all of us.

 

[Rat Catcher]

I mean, I exclusively play on solo or player groups, so problem solved, I guess?

Except, that means Open has lost at least one player, and is lessened because of it.

Any system where the solution is not to play is a bad system.

No, it hasn't lost one player - think about what you have written

But if you were to play in open, it has gained one!

 

[Alyssa]

or calling a Fuel Rat out to the edge of the galaxy then killing someone that came to rescue them.

Is that an existing thing?

 

[Bigmaec]

Is that an existing thing?

That happened once at Beagle imho.
And yes, that was a duck move - from an ingame pov. And fuel rats don't care, or retaliate anyways.
They see that ganking thing relaxed, as everyone should.

 

[DemiserofD]

That happened once at Beagle imho.
And yes, that was a duck move - from an ingame pov. And fuel rats don't care, or retaliate anyways.
They see that ganking thing relaxed, as everyone should.

Well, if anyone wanted absolute confirmation of jerkhood, there you go.