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

Vetinari

V
Anarchy in RL is debateable and deleteable..while Im here thank you Mods, I have been laughing the past few days thinking of you all seeing a new post on this thread and expecting the worst, I know I am always surprised its still running, its done much better than most. Who'd have though that on this thread the mod warning is for politics and not the usual? Anyway back to topic.

Anarchy in game is defined as 'This group is known to have a disdain for any laws outside of those which it has laid down to govern its members behaviour'

Which means that all Anarchies in game lore wise have their own rules, or their own version of what is Anarchy. But Im not sure how their laws differ from other laws in other forms of government that govern its members behaviour.

Wanna please the 84ers? take over Riedquat and make it a hell hole where you're just glad to get to the station and somewhere you have to be ready for. Leesti too. Theyre both too safe for old timers.
 

Phisto Sobanii

Phisto Sobanii
Vetinari said:
Wanna please the 84ers? take over Riedquat and make it a hell hole where you're just glad to get to the station and somewhere you have to be ready for. Leesti too. Theyre both too safe for old timers.
Click to expand...

It was anarchy for a while but a bunch of griefers decided to wipe out weeks and weeks of hard work to flip it to Federation control.

Riedquat.png


Getting ganked after a long exploration trip? Explorer types don't know how good they have it.
 

ACowForAllSeasons

ACowForAllSeasons
Havvk said:
The same should apply to you as well, actions have consequenses.

If mine should be the loss of my stuff and a rebuy, then yours should be "equal", for the lack of a better word, in nature as well. Attackers gain nothing but salt in the game, because the game does not "reward" organic PvP, such as powerplay warzones or what CQC could have been for conflict zones and such. But it never happened. Instead, our only reasons to ever do PvP is more along the lines of "haha gun go brrr". I'd love to PvP, but I will never do so until this game puts in some real reasons to partake in it in terms of gameplay and risk/reward and all that kind of stuff.



If I wanted a "haha funny booms and weee shooty mc shootface lmao" I'd go play a game that emphasizes that.


Elite is far too grand a game world for me to care about nonsensical fun sprees for the sake of random shenanigans. Meeeeh, I don't see any content potential in doing some of the things that certain players here does. I mean, hey it's the way they play and all. But it still ruins MY game, if and/or when it happens.

MY game cannot and will not ever be able to possibly ruin yours. No, not because solo or that dumb BGS reason for "open only"(I dont like this, I like "shadow opponents" because it gives me that vibe that there's secret organizations trying to manipulate things to oppose you, very espianage-like imo)or whatever. Because I don't play this game in your typical "imma hop on CoD for a few with the mates to rek some noobs and boost my K/D" or whatever other video gamey mindset you might wanna have. Not with this game, at least. The same goes for a number of other players, I'm sure, where they like having their "emergent gameplay" at lease FEEL as if it makes sense in the setting. It doesn't seem fitting to have a 5-month long murder spree that has been happening nonstop to every single pilot having entered the system...with said system supposedly being "considered one of the best and safest places in the galaxy" for example, in said game's world setting. Yet at the same time, the system that is SUPPOSED to be just like a Mos Eisley type place where all sorts of the purist forms of murderous barbarian-like anarchy is running rampant and out of control...but in-game it's the actual safest place in open for the wimpiest of crybaby pve carebears.
See the difference?
Click to expand...

I do have consequences, they've been well outlined in my prior post. Annoying NPCs, notoriety, etc. If you don't play the game to make pretty pixel explosions, good for you. I do, and I paid money and am playing the game within the parameters allowed by the devs. My play style is equally as valid as yours. Everything else is your feelings which frankly, I don't care about.
 

Screemonster

Screemonster
Vetinari said:
Wanna please the 84ers? take over Riedquat and make it a hell hole where you're just glad to get to the station and somewhere you have to be ready for. Leesti too. Theyre both too safe for old timers.
Click to expand...
Apparently that upsets people who are mad that the code have something. Personally I don't care whether the code specifically controls riedquat, but it should absolutely be anarchy.

If FDev actually cared about the lore of the old games rather than a vague procedural-generated sandbox, they'd have stuffed the system with 7 native anarchy factions and let it go nuts from there. No slots left for any lawful factions to expand in, and a constant forever-war between criminal gangs as control rises and falls.
Just like the little lore-book in FE2 described.
 

Zieman

Zieman
Screemonster said:
If FDev actually cared about the lore of the old games rather than a vague procedural-generated sandbox, they'd have stuffed the system with 7 native anarchy factions and let it go nuts from there. No slots left for any lawful factions to expand in, and a constant forever-war between criminal gangs as control rises and falls.
Just like the little lore-book in FE2 described.
Click to expand...
This!

And no PMF there either!!
 

Danquememe

Danquememe
Question: I'm curious how player factions get created?

I understand I could go to a system and choose a faction to support, but what about the above, where Code is recognized in-game? Likewise at Hutton Orbital with the Hutton Orbital Truckers, and similar.

So many things still left to learn about this game. It does seem the BGS griefing is actually some of the harshest in game.
 

Havvk

Havvk
ACowForAllSeasons said:
I do have consequences, they've been well outlined in my prior post. Annoying NPCs, notoriety, etc. If you don't play the game to make pretty pixel explosions, good for you. I do, and I paid money and am playing the game within the parameters allowed by the devs. My play style is equally as valid as yours. Everything else is your feelings which frankly, I don't care about.
Click to expand...
Right back at ya
 

Phisto Sobanii

Phisto Sobanii
Danquememe said:
Question: I'm curious how player factions get created?

I understand I could go to a system and choose a faction to support, but what about the above, where Code is recognized in-game? Likewise at Hutton Orbital with the Hutton Orbital Truckers, and similar.

So many things still left to learn about this game. It does seem the BGS griefing is actually some of the harshest in game.
Click to expand...

Behold!

www.elitedangerous.com

Elite Dangerous

Take control of your own starship in a dangerous galaxy.
www.elitedangerous.com www.elitedangerous.com
 

Jace Harriman

Jace Harriman
ACowForAllSeasons said:
I'm not going to shame someone for using solo or a PG. They're tools in a video game to get the experience you desire. Open gives me that mode, you have other options. This is by design.
Click to expand...

As has been discussed at length already, ganking is not the only aspect of PVP, and in order to avoid your brand of it, players are forced to hide from all other brands of it as well. That is the reality of the game, but that is unfortunate.

As for not shaming someone for using Solo or a PG... perhaps you aren't, but that isn't necessarily a widespread sentiment. How many times have you seen complaints on these forums or elsewhere about how open is dead, and how everyone is "hiding" in Solo? You certainly seem like a reasonable person, and I certainly hope that next time I get blown up it's by someone who is going to have a nice chat and a cup of tea after the fact - but this, clearly, is not everyone's experience. It is not everyone's experience in this game, nor is it everyone's experience of PVP in general, and we would be naive to pretend that those other experiences do not exist. You may be one of the good ones, but this thread isn't a complaint about your specific conduct, we're talking in broad strokes here.

Like it or not, condone it or not, there are stigmas attached to Open and Solo. Every time you point out that Open is the game as intended, you're implying a tiny bit that Solo isn't. Every time that someone feels they have to play in Solo to avoid ganking, it reinforces the idea that they're being driven away from the game as intended. For every person saying folks should play in Solo, there's another complaining that they don't play in Open. So no, maybe you aren't going to shame someone for using Solo or PG. But can "we" collectively (the ED community) say the same? You can point out that the majority of players choose to play in Open, as if that's an unspoken sanction of ganking, but also bear in mind that "we" keep saying that Open is the game as intended: so why are we surprised that, even in the face of unpleasant risks, the majority of people choose to play that way? Of course they do, because "we" collectively frame it as if Open is correct and Solo is lesser.

A lot of it has to do with language and perception. It would be interesting to see if players would make different choices if there were PVP and PVE options for Open. If the premise that "people play in Open because they're okay with ganking" holds true, PVP would remain the most populous, and Solo would wither away into something that's purely for folks with bad internet and who want to minimise the queues at an Outpost, with PVE as an acceptable middle ground for those who want to play in Open while avoiding PVP.
 

Rat Catcher

Rat Catcher
Danquememe said:
Question: I'm curious how player factions get created?

I understand I could go to a system and choose a faction to support, but what about the above, where Code is recognized in-game? Likewise at Hutton Orbital with the Hutton Orbital Truckers, and similar.

So many things still left to learn about this game. It does seem the BGS griefing is actually some of the harshest in game.
Click to expand...
Players may request a faction be created by Frontier, if agreed it is then inserted into the game... Losts of apparently 'dead' PMF's exist in Colonia these days.

ETA: Ganked by Phisto for the reply 🍻
 

Screemonster

Screemonster
Rat Catcher said:
Players may request a faction be created by Frontier, if agreed it is then inserted into the game... Losts of apparently 'dead' PMF's exist in Colonia these days.
Click to expand...
The number of dead PMFs is why I stick to adopting factions as I go and haven't bothered trying to get people together to add one. I know I would get bored and move on somewhere else. Probably do the exact same thing with a new faction. A single faction to maintain in a single, small area of the bubble would be like a millstone around my neck.
 

Vetinari

V
Screemonster said:
Apparently that upsets people who are mad that the code have something. Personally I don't care whether the code specifically controls riedquat, but it should absolutely be anarchy.

If FDev actually cared about the lore of the old games rather than a vague procedural-generated sandbox, they'd have stuffed the system with 7 native anarchy factions and let it go nuts from there. No slots left for any lawful factions to expand in, and a constant forever-war between criminal gangs as control rises and falls.
Just like the little lore-book in FE2 described.
Click to expand...

Could that be done with PMF and Anarchy factions now? That does sound pretty good. Note I used hell hole in my description, the Anarchy allows the hell hole it doesnt necessitate it but some should be absolute firepits and Riedquat and Leesti are certainly 2 of them with lasers and firefights out of every window. If we can Turn the Wheel we can have a go at installing as many Anarchy factions as possible in Riedquat and Leesti. Can always see if Fdev might be open to the idea of resetting those particular systems to allow it as lore wise it is right. I wouldnt object if t
 

Havvk

Havvk
Screemonster said:
Apparently that upsets people who are mad that the code have something. Personally I don't care whether the code specifically controls riedquat, but it should absolutely be anarchy.

If FDev actually cared about the lore of the old games rather than a vague procedural-generated sandbox, they'd have stuffed the system with 7 native anarchy factions and let it go nuts from there. No slots left for any lawful factions to expand in, and a constant forever-war between criminal gangs as control rises and falls.
Just like the little lore-book in FE2 described.
Click to expand...
Then make the population slowly decrease if it's a true all anarchy system.


You know..


Because everybody would have all killed themselves off...and end up just like the guardians. Good job
 

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
Rat Catcher said:
Losts of apparently 'dead' PMF's exist in Colonia these days
Click to expand...
They're mostly less dead than they look. :)

Vetinari said:
Could that be done with PMF and Anarchy factions now?
Click to expand...
You can't add a PMF to a system which already has a PMF in it, and you can't add new PMFs (some existing ones got in before they thought to add this rule) to lore-sensitive systems which Riedquat probably counts as. So the best you could probably do is kick out the Baijungu faction and introduce a third non-native Anarchy. Still, so long as you could avoid either of the non-native anarchies retreating, and kept an eye out for people trying to set up an invasion, it should be relatively stable.
 

Bottom Hat

Bottom Hat
Screemonster said:
Apparently that upsets people who are mad that the code have something. Personally I don't care whether the code specifically controls riedquat, but it should absolutely be anarchy.

If FDev actually cared about the lore of the old games rather than a vague procedural-generated sandbox, they'd have stuffed the system with 7 native anarchy factions and let it go nuts from there. No slots left for any lawful factions to expand in, and a constant forever-war between criminal gangs as control rises and falls.
Just like the little lore-book in FE2 described.
Click to expand...

It would have been good, and probably respectful to the history of lore of the game, if they had done something along these lines for the two systems in particular. They could have probably done it in a little more subtle a way, and gone for 5 anarchies, leaving two fiercely opposed non anarchies, but made it difficult for the non anarchy guys to maintain a hold - by engineering nearby systems to not promote anarchy decline through missions and so on. I can't specify how to do it as I'm not an expert, but I imagine it could have been possible.

This would have given an opportunity for the non anarchies to be supported by players, much like the anarchies would be, and would have made for a wonderfully volatile system.

I'm not saying your idea is bad in the slightest - the opposite is true! I was just thinking of ways they could have stirred it up even more, but without having local bgs systems naturally push against the anarchy factions. If that makes sense? A bit spitbally to use a fake word, but hopefully you know what I mean!!

I know it's probably not going to happen due to other alliances, but perhaps Colonia Jesus could plan to make a pilgrimage there in the future? He could look at working with the local naughty boys, and try to spread the good word, thus converting the heathens to either the word, or to space dust?!


Maybe I'm just thinking too much about the funny side of having Colonia Jesus try to convert a system?!

I'll get me coat now....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom