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

[Brrokk]

Players can't touch what FDEV does themselves. Take Community Goals and Galnet, for example. DG2 pales in comparison to those continuing low points.



Nope. They've learned what it's like to fight an enemy who doesn't just dare defy them but also is just plain good at it.

OK... I was trying to be polite; I'll speak more plainly. By "low" I didn't just mean "incompetent", I intended a moral judgement.

The DG2 participants were the sort of scum who aren't worthy of a place in my gameplay. Blocking them might occasionally mess up instancing but it's a price I'm prepared to pay.

 

[Screemonster]

Distance Ganks felt like it was intended to ruin another's enjoyment. However, I'm not too hard on DG because 1) It took real commitment to move a combat-focused ship across the galaxy, and 2) There was a DW private group created specifically to avoid PvP, so explorers had the choice to avoid you murderhobos completely (and "hobo" is apropos considering the distances covered).

You're forgetting a lot of them were in DW2's Discord trying to help people with strategies and builds should they choose to fly in Open. Then DW2 management freaked out about having "gankers" around and banned a bunch of folks. In my view, their campaign against DW2 was wholly justified.

But then again, a lot of these DW2 people are the same folks my group is fighting in Colonia. I dare say I know them a little better than you.

In regards to the charity Livestream, I'd be more worried about the fact I have cancer... not whatever shenanigans SDC got up to. Still part of the game, in any case, and if the streamers didn't plan for what Open Play allows that's again their problem.

Take Danque's point about soccer. It's like doing a cancer stream in FIFA and then getting mad people kicked the ball into your goal.

Personally, I lay that whole mess at FDev's door.

It should never be up to players to gatekeep any aspect of the game, and as soon as FDev put their official stamp on DW2, advertising it in galnet and all over every social media account they had, that whole expedition was as close to an official event as you can get. They even had CGs to go along with it.

But if you wanted to participate in it in PvE.... you had to go through a group of players to get in the group. Not the devs. A bunch of, for all intents and purposes, randos. There wasn't even any information given in-game to tell you fleetcomm existed, never mind how to get in touch with them and get them to let you in. And being a bunch of rando players with their own private group, there was absolutely nothing stopping them from applying whatever rules they like to their PG. Oh, you do PvP? Well, we don't like PvP so we're going to boot you out regardless of whether you're planning it or not. (and what people do in open isn't even a good indicator of how they play in PG - Harry Potter showed up to one of my old squadron's events once and some people were freaking out expecting him to cause trouble, but... no, he wanted to race like everyone else)

It's one of the reasons why I'm a strong advocate for some sort of flagging system, if not a PvE mode. Mobius and Fleetcomm show the demand for it, might as well just rip off the bandaid and support PvE play properly. At least if the devs took control of it it'd help deal with the incredibly petty grudge matches we've seen crop up over the years over it - PvPers knocking over Mobius's minor faction because Mobius is personally depriving them of targets, lawful players going after ganker sympathisers, in one case last week someone told me they were going after a PvP group's minor faction specifically because they couldn't do PvP and wanted a way to hurt them, which I honestly found incredibly petty - way to give them an actual reason to gank you, dude. But hey. It is what it is.

 

[Pristine_Bump]

Step 1: CTRL + B shows the bandwidth meter. If you're alone in an instance, it will show very little incoming and outgoing bandwith, but when it spikes to 10,000 KB/s and above, you can be sure something is afoot. This is your "early warning" device and, honestly, one of the best ways of knowing when other players are about. IMHO it's an essential tool for playing in Open and I tell people about it all the time.

Excellent advice however is 1: even a thing on PS4

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

OK... I was trying to be polite; I'll speak more plainly. By "low" I didn't just mean "incompetent", I intended a moral judgement.

Behold the limitations of moral judgements:

At least DG2 was providing content to the people DW2 refused. Why? Because FDEV is unable to. Welp.

 

[Riverside]

I'm not talking about my CMDR. I'm talking about me, the player. The human being behind the screen.

And here's what he thinks: it's absolute hogwash of the highest order to talk about "consent" in Elite PvP interactions when the following is true: adversarial player vs. player content is advertised on the website. The mechanics of the game clearly support adversarial interaction (guns, interdictors, defenses). Open Mode explicitly explaining you may encounter other CMDRs.

Never mind that Frontier Developments have told people again and again and again that we are free to attack other players in Open Play at any time for any reason or none. Period. Dot. End. Of. Story. How. Do. People. Not. Get. This. Still.

It's like Open Only folks complaining about Private Group and Solo Play. Sorry you didn't research your purchase and are disappointed by it's design and features. Same answer to the kind of stuff you and others are saying here: tough crap.

Okay, so apparently you just don't understand & maybe you should have a think about that. If you act like a buffoon people will laugh at you. You may not consider that laughter at your buffoonery to be a bad thing, you may be happy to act the clown & entertain others at your own expense, but it is an action and a consequence.

If you don't care about consequences at all (as Sir Ganksalot has described earlier in this thread) that's a boring way to play to me.

If you simply do not understand that there are consequences, that's kinda naive. From your previous comments I had the impression that you were aware of the concept of escalating.

Consent is a well defined word already, it is not implied. IRL failing to grasp that could land you in prison, in the game the consequences are not as great. It would be helpful if you understood this. It is a thread about understanding after all

 

[Brrokk]

Personally, I lay that whole mess at FDev's door.

It should never be up to players to gatekeep any aspect of the game, and as soon as FDev put their official stamp on DW2, advertising it in galnet and all over every social media account they had, that whole expedition was as close to an official event as you can get. They even had CGs to go along with it.

But if you wanted to participate in it in PvE.... you had to go through a group of players to get in the group. Not the devs. A bunch of, for all intents and purposes, randos. There wasn't even any information given in-game to tell you fleetcomm existed, never mind how to get in touch with them and get them to let you in. And being a bunch of rando players with their own private group, there was absolutely nothing stopping them from applying whatever rules they like to their PG. Oh, you do PvP? Well, we don't like PvP so we're going to boot you out regardless of whether you're planning it or not. (and what people do in open isn't even a good indicator of how they play in PG - Harry Potter showed up to one of my old squadron's events once and some people were freaking out expecting him to cause trouble, but... no, he wanted to race like everyone else)

It's one of the reasons why I'm a strong advocate for some sort of flagging system, if not a PvE mode. Mobius and Fleetcomm show the demand for it, might as well just rip off the bandaid and support PvE play properly. At least if the devs took control of it it'd help deal with the incredibly petty grudge matches we've seen crop up over the years over it - PvPers knocking over Mobius's minor faction because Mobius is personally depriving them of targets, lawful players going after ganker sympathisers, in one case last week someone told me they were going after a PvP group's minor faction specifically because they couldn't do PvP and wanted a way to hurt them, which I honestly found incredibly petty - way to give them an actual reason to gank you, dude. But hey. It is what it is.

I agree. FD have been incredibly lazy leaving the running of the "missing mode" to Mobius too. Private players curating the PvE "mode" with inadequate admin tools and their own rules. I've seen people complaining of being banned from Mobius just because of posts on forum and discord, and since it's a private group they can't appeal to FD.

I hope that a proper PvE option (mode or flag) is in the works for Odyssey.

 

[Screemonster]

Gankers use all three of those tools constantly, but really, anyone playing in Open can and arguably should be doing the same.

Step 1: CTRL + B shows the bandwidth meter. If you're alone in an instance, it will show very little incoming and outgoing bandwith, but when it spikes to 10,000 KB/s and above, you can be sure something is afoot. This is your "early warning" device and, honestly, one of the best ways of knowing when other players are about. IMHO it's an essential tool for playing in Open and I tell people about it all the time.

Honestly this is something that I'd love to see implemented more... immersively.
You know those messages you get with "x new contacts" or "y contacts lost" and so on when things pop in and out of sensor range?
Just display the symbols for those contacts so it'd be like... "3 new contacts: ▮▮▲"

Step 4: Once the scan is complete, go to your Contacts panel on the left and see what their ship is like. What kind of weapons are they carrying (if any)? What kind of shield? How many shield boosters? Etc. This step is optional and honestly I don't always do it - I am almost certainly going to interdict them regardless of their loadout. However, if you're at all unsure about whether you're biting off more than you can chew, this is the place to make that go / no go decision.

protip: if you have a key bound to cycle subtargets, interdictors and docking computers are always last on the list. So if you hit cycle previous target a couple of times and see their life support without seeing an interdictor, they don't have an interdictor.

 

[galahad2069]

Yep, that one's nice too.

Comms panel is nice though as before you scan them, it tells you what kind of ship they are in, making it somewhat faster to find them in the contact panel on the left, if it's a busy instance (or by spamming next target)

Anyway...

That wasn't... really... my point...

I was actually trying to be a bit of a Richard(abbreviated) about the OP - but you ruined it by giving out handy info.

Cheers, pal.

Ruining anything wasn't my intention, lol.

I agree that the contacts (and history) panel is generally a better tool, e.g. it can even show people before they finish their jump into your instance.

While it's somewhat easier to use (it's always onscreen, no need to look at any panels), the bandwidth indicator is just a quick way to detect whether or not you're on your own. It has its limitations, for instance it's useless while you're in a wing.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Okay, so apparently you just don't understand & maybe you should have a think about that. If you act like a buffoon people will laugh at you. You may not consider that laughter at your buffoonery to be a bad thing, you may be happy to act the clown & entertain others at your own expense, but it is an action and a consequence.

If you don't care about consequences at all (as Sir Ganksalot has described earlier in this thread) that's a boring way to play to me.

If you simply do not understand that there are consequences, that's kinda naive. From your previous comments I had the impression that you were aware of the concept of escalating.

Consent is a well defined word already, it is not implied. IRL failing to grasp that could land you in prison, in the game the consequences are not as great. It would be helpful if you understood this. It is a thread about understanding after all

This is all rubbish. Stop conflating the "real world" with a game based in fantasy. Let me again boil it down for you. I don't think I can be any clearer than this (at least on this forum).

If you click Open Play and simply don't realize people might attack you're merely ignorant. This can be easily fixed, and usually is. If you click Open Play and refuse to adapt what that means you're a fool and should probably play another game.

 

[Vetinari]

The only stat I've ever looked at (and it was in the last couple of weeks) was the achievement unlocked for buying your first ship. 49% of PS players have unlocked it. Now I don't know how many play on the PS, but my guess is, if only half played enough to purchase a new ship, at least half again are unlikely to have purchased an FC. When I log on later I'll have a look art the carrier trophies.

Old news but Im still interested so dragging it back up. Thanks for looking. Does imply a large % of people never get very far with the game, worse on XB so either larger audience or just flip quicker to another game for some reason (learning curve).

Personally, I lay that whole mess at FDev's door.

Personally I lay the mess at the door that did the deed. If Im building a sandcastle and somebody comes and kicks it down I dont blame the local council for not having enough attendants around or 'allowing' it to happen. I still lay the mess at the door of the person who ignored the entire beach and all the sights and fun fairs and amusements and shops and stalls and rock pools and hillside and cliffside but instead came to my one small portion of the beach and decided to destroy what I was trying to build. I dont blame them I just dont like their attitude.

 

[Riverside]

This is all rubbish. Stop conflating the "real world" with a game based in fantasy. Let me again boil it down for you. I don't think I can be any clearer than this (at least on this forum).

If you click Open Play and simply don't realize people might attack you're merely ignorant. This can be easily fixed, and usually is. If you click Open Play and refuse to adapt what that means you're a fool and should probably play another game.

We are talking about consent - you are arguing the wrong point Phisto. Consent is not implied.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

We are talking about consent - you are arguing the wrong point Phisto. Consent is not implied.

YOU HAVE TO CLICK THE BUTTON TO ENTER OPEN PLAY. YOU. YOU HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION. NO ONE MAKES YOU DO IT.

Ye gods, dude.

EDIT: Congratulations, that's the first time on this forum I've ever hit cruise control for cool. Consent is the act of agreement. Clicking a button that clearly communicates you may encounter other CMDRs in Open Play is literally agreeing to that. You signed your name. You said yes. You've consented. Explicitly. It makes no other warranties as to what may happen between you and those other players. Again, any person with half a brain can figure combat might be one of those things.

 

[Vetinari]

you cant have implied consent, thats why theres so many T&Cs on things, to get consent without you knowing

 

[Screemonster]

I've seen people complaining of being banned from Mobius just because of posts on forum and discord, and since it's a private group they can't appeal to FD.

What got me to give up on Mobius was when they banned PvP even in conflict zones. I played there when I was new to the game just because "I just don't wanna be randomly murderhoboed", but it ended up with a case of having to pick between the two extremes of law-of-the-jungle (aka open as it is now) or being persona non grata if you even think about shooting another player. I chose the former, at least in open I don't have some random other player dictating what I'm allowed to do.

 

[Brrokk]

What got me to give up on Mobius was when they banned PvP even in conflict zones. I played there when I was new to the game just because "I just don't wanna be randomly murderhoboed", but it ended up with a case of having to pick between the two extremes of law-of-the-jungle (aka open as it is now) or being persona non grata if you even think about shooting another player. I chose the former, at least in open I don't have some random other player dictating what I'm allowed to do.

Yes, I find Mobius too restrictive, although I still use it sometimes. I get why they brought in that policy though: people were getting in the group and using CZs as an excuse for attacking other players. Again with inadequate tools, there was no way for Mobius admins to figure out who fired first in a disputed case.

 

[Danquememe]

I still lay the mess at the door of the person who ignored the entire beach and all the sights and fun fairs and amusements and shops and stalls and rock pools and hillside and cliffside but instead came to my one small portion of the beach and decided to destroy what I was trying to build.

This is a poignant image and one that anyone who has ever had a sand castle crushed can relate to.

However, what if there was a section of the beach where you could have built your sand castle without anyone's interruption, or with only the company of trusted friends who you'd invited along?

If you still chose to build your sand castle in the general public part of the beach, even when you had your own private, completely walled off section available to you - where you'd still be able to hear all the other beachgoers and even interact with them, though they could not have infringed on your castle building - then does it change things at all?

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

you cant have implied consent, thats why theres so many T&Cs on things, to get consent without you knowing

Consent is implied as well. Please reference the outfitting menu of your nearest station. You will notice there are guns, armor, shields, and other materials for sale. Open Play plus CMDRs plus guns equals possibility of pew pew. Once again, it blows my mind this has to be explained.

What got me to give up on Mobius was when they banned PvP even in conflict zones. I played there when I was new to the game just because "I just don't wanna be randomly murderhoboed", but it ended up with a case of having to pick between the two extremes of law-of-the-jungle (aka open as it is now) or being persona non grata if you even think about shooting another player. I chose the former, at least in open I don't have some random other player dictating what I'm allowed to do.

Edicts like Mobius' or the actions of DW2 are signifcantly more problematic than those of Distant Ganks 2.

The latter really never rises beyond petty in game vandalism. They at least come at you straight with what they're trying to do too.

The former puts on a mask and seeks to control your choices.

 

[Riverside]

YOU HAVE TO CLICK THE BUTTON TO ENTER OPEN PLAY. YOU. YOU HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION. NO ONE MAKES YOU DO IT.

Ye gods, dude.

EDIT: Congratulations, that's the first time on this forum I've ever hit cruise control for cool. Consent is the act of agreement. Clicking a button that clearly communicates you may encounter other CMDRs in Open Play is literally agreeing to that. You signed your name. You said yes. You've consented. Explicitly. It makes no other warranties as to what may happen between you and those other players. Again, any person with half a brain can figure combat might be one of those things.

I think you are failing to understand. Not gaining consent does not mean you cannot do something. The game allows for criminal activity & has consequences (bounties gained, notoriety etc).

You are simply using the wrong phrasing in a way that is important. Please take this on board. If you are finding it frustrating to grasp this perhaps it would be better for you to take a moment to consider what I am saying rather than just getting angry.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

If you still chose to build your sand castle in the general public part of the beach, even when you had your own private, completely walled off section available to you - where you'd still be able to hear all the other beachgoers and even interact with them, though they could not have infringed on your castle building - then does it change things at all?

They're not lamenting their newly created pile of sand. What they're really doing is demanding control of the entire beach. To that I say...

 

[[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos]

you cant have implied consent.

I hate to argue the point, non-game related, there is such a thing as implicit consent, I use it all the time in my work. Someone sends me a bunch of paperwork because they want something, I have to phone another organisation to get more details, by using the information on paperwork sent to me by the applicant. I gain implicit consent to get access to their records. This is one government agency dealing with another, so you know it has to be lawful (one hopes)

That the applicant gave me so much detail in the first place implies to the other organisation they give my their consent to discuss their details. However, the applicant may not even know that I'm going to phone this other organisation, so they haven't directly given consent.

It is a real thing.

I tend to agree with the game relate consent idea. Imagine I was in open and someone killed me. I have to know that was entirely possible mainly because I could kill anyone else. By entering the arena you consent to the idea that it is possible.