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

[Bigmaec]

They do quite clearly- friendly fire is always on' is the phrase they use I believe.



Or you can run away, not go to hot systems, form groups of your own.....



You seem to forget....Powerplay is about being able to kill others. Reporting me for doing what the feature is about just shows how deluded a lot of players are in Open.



I don't care what they say or think about it- what I find equally funny and bewildering is that some think Open is this peaceful, hand holding land of sugary tea and free cake.

Well newsflash, its no.

But it's not REALLY powerplay if I do it for MY modules, you gankergriefer!

 

[Rubbernuke]

That's false and you know it. How else would you keep the opinion columns in your tabloid magazines populated?

OK, the salty 'y u kill me im unarmed carrying pp suff' is premium body scrub that makes my skin radiant with its use.

 

[Leper Messiah]

Sorry. If people "have gone through something recently" that makes them insult or worse other people behind their CMDRs when they get blown up in open in a space ship pew pew game I seriously question their decision to play said game in said mode.

I play games to de-stress, they are fun (usually), I have a bad temper and cannot take losing all that well (having had a bit of a ty life), It's why I avoid MP......the things I say would make James Herberts toes curl!!

Just because I avoid MP/open doesn't mean someone else should, just as someone has no right to say how you play or what games you play, you have no right for the same reasons.

 

[Rubbernuke]

But it's not REALLY powerplay if I do it for MY modules, you gankergriefer!

AND REALITY CRASHES THE PARTY

 

[Bigmaec]

I play games to de-stress, they are fun (usually), I have a bad temper and cannot take losing all that well (having had a bit of a poopooty life), It's why I avoid MP......the things I say would make James Herberts toes curl!!

Just because I avoid MP/open doesn't mean someone else should, just as someone has no right to say how you play or what games you play, you have no right for the same reasons.

I don't question their decision to open, if they don't question my decision to blow them up.

 

[CMDR Corky the Great]

challenge is subective, what is challenging to one person is easy to another. RESPECT the other players and the game would be better for it. You reap what you sow.



Humans label, it's what we do, we've always done it and always will. We are biased and labelling things makes it easier to make decsisions based on our bias. Hell this forum is divided by labels, it's how we know what to expect.

You HAVE to moralise it because it's a person on the other side of the screen, like it or not. If you give them a negative expereince then expect negative comments back, that's the risk you all take, someone is going to hate you for it. That's human nature.

ah talking about labels I was waiting for "carebear".......you cannot moan about labels then use one, that's hypocrisy.

Oof, you'd have got me there, if I was moaning about labels. I was moaning about moralizing, which you seem to think you have to do. You don't. It's a leisure activity. A game. With encounters you can win or lose. That's it. You're not a bad person for winning at tennis, chess or poker. You're not a bad person for beating someone in Elite. You might be a bad person and beat someone in Elite, or you might be a bad person and only ferry cargo from A to B. The one thing is unrelated to the other.

 

[MishaTX]

OK, the salty 'y u kill me im unarmed carrying pp suff' is premium body scrub that makes my skin radiant with its use.

Was he an enemy pledge upset that you shot at him in Open? If that's the case, then count me in as shaking my head and rolling my eyes (which is really a remarkable feat, when you think about it, and bound to make you quite dizzy rather quickly. Ow, I need to go have a lie down now).

 

[CMDR Corky the Great]

I play games to de-stress, they are fun (usually), I have a bad temper and cannot take losing all that well (having had a bit of a poopooty life), It's why I avoid MP......the things I say would make James Herberts toes curl!!

Just because I avoid MP/open doesn't mean someone else should, just as someone has no right to say how you play or what games you play, you have no right for the same reasons.

This is self-aware and reasonable. If more people thought like you, there would be less contention over these issues.

 

[Deleted member 121570]

But... you agree with me. You said yourself, even the greatest challenge is at worst an inconvenience. I'm not begging the question here. PVP ships are an objectively great challenge than rank-scaled bots. Even at Elite combat rank, no single bot presents as big a threat as a PVP ship to any player. So given that the declaration of players being the "greatest challenge" is not in contention, your own statement means that any lesser challenge is... well, what's less than an inconvenience? My choice of diction was to call it no challenge at all, but if you have a better term in mind, I can certainly be convinced. What turn of phrase do you prefer?

You're misunderstanding, and I accept I might not have been clear.

I think that you're not in a position to dictate what anyone else might find challenging or not, certainly not to the level of saying "the greatest challenge". PVP is not a challenge at all if it can merely be ignored trivially in preference of something else altogether.

Eg. For someone, committing their time and planning a galactic circumnavigation in a Hauler, and having the endurance to complete this (without getting bored - I know I would!) may represent to them - the greatest challenge in the game.

For others, it might be driving an SRV up Mt. Neverest or taking an SRV around Mercury mostly in flight.

Who are you to tell them they're wrong, because you've done a bunch of stuff and feel like pontificating about the greatest challenge like it's some kind of an objective fact?
The fact you felt you could is hubristic.

I get that PvP combat requires multiple skills and multitasking - fighting is a complex task and players are more challenging than NPCs.
I disagree that it's the "greatest challenge" though. It's just the greatest challenge for you.

 

[Leper Messiah]

They do quite clearly- friendly fire is always on' is the phrase they use I believe.



Or you can run away, not go to hot systems, form groups of your own.....



You seem to forget....Powerplay is about being able to kill others. Reporting me for doing what the feature is about just shows how deluded a lot of players are in Open.



I don't care what they say or think about it- what I find equally funny and bewildering is that some think Open is this peaceful, hand holding land of sugary tea and free cake.

Well newsflash, its not.

That's not clear enough IMO, same as Brabens "meaningful combat".......it's the gankers/greifers stetching the lmits of those statements too far.

Yup all valid, but apart from one surely encouraging people out of open is not good for your playstyle and a bit of an own goal?

again I don't think FD are clear on what "powerplay" means in open, but largly we totally agree on the power play issue. You pledge, you're a target in open....should be VERY clear.

That's not what people think, the games problem is quantifying "challenge" and having such a VAST disparity of "challenge". Also I think many play Elite thinking it's systems will make sense and we both agree the game fails miserably at that.

Hi sec should be safe for lawfull people, unsafe for unlawfull
medium should be a litle less safe for lawfull, bit easier for unlawfull
low risky for lawfull, easy for unlawfull
anarchy anything goes.

The game isn't like that, FDs biggest failure is the lack of consequence that "makes sense". IMO

 

[Brrokk]

I will do whats allowed by the game. I clicked on open and so do some explorers and open can be a dangerous place...
Also changing what i actually said how evil! lol

The game allows me to gank too, but I don't gank. This proves that ganking or not ganking is a feature of the player, not of the game.

 

[CMDR Corky the Great]

You're misunderstanding, and I accept I might not have been clear.

I think that you're not in a position to dictate what anyone else might find challenging or not, certainly not to the level of saying "the greatest challenge". PVP is not a challenge at all if it can merely be ignored trivially in preference of something else altogether.

Eg. For someone, committing their time and planning a galactic circumnavigation in a Hauler, and having the endurance to complete this (without getting bored - I know I would!) may represent to them - the greatest challenge in the game.

For others, it might be driving an SRV up Mt. Neverest or taking an SRV around Mercury mostly in flight.

Who are you to tell them they're wrong, because you've done a bunch of stuff and feel like pontificating about the greatest challenge like it's some kind of an objective fact?
The fact you felt you could is hubristic.

I get that PvP combat requires multiple skills and multitasking - fighting is a complex task and players are more challenging than NPCs.
I disagree that it's the "greatest challenge" though. It's just the greatest challenge for you.

So it is a point of diction you disagree with. Greatest threat, then... Only the greatest challenge when they are presented with it... Greatest potential challenge...

We've had this argument elsewhere. It's not hubris to know what requires more knowledge and skills, but you can decide to do whatever random thing that takes a long time and requires dedication and say that's a personal challenge. That doesn't really make it more challenging, though, does it? Just makes it take longer.

Think of it this way: if someone offered a year's RL salary to the person who could circumnavigate the galaxy, is there doubt that ANYBODY on this thread could do that? We all have the required knowledge and skills, and probably most of us have the required build ready to go somewhere. The CHALLENGE doesn't prevent us from doing it, it's the fact that it is as you said, utterly boring, and leaves you with nothing at the end. If we could make bank doing it, I'm sure there are a lot of people who'd rather do that than their 9-5. If we offered the same pot of gold (or bag of stuffing in my case) to beat Yamato in a mirror-match 1v1, who here could do it?

 

[Leper Messiah]

This is self-aware and reasonable. If more people thought like you, there would be less contention over these issues.

On the personal issue, counselling helps. On the Elite issue, took a while for me to get there, it's making that disconnect beween game actions and a person in reality. The realisation that humans have a long history of "playing" bad but not actually "being" bad.

But I do have to say the impersonal nature of MP has led to this not caring about the person on the other side of the screen. A bit more understanding of the "victims" and target selection would also lead to less contention on the issue IMO. Don't just see pixels.

 

[CMDR Corky the Great]

Yup all valid, but apart from one surely encouraging people out of open is not good for your playstyle and a bit of an own goal?

I think for most of us and certainly speaking for myself, encouraging only the people who WANT the risks associated with Open combat to play in Open is a win all around. I dunno why so many people choose Open and decide they're gonna be wilfully unprepared for it, but they DID choose it. It's unpleasant when they turn around and act like they didn't make that choice and you're the scum of the Earth for doing what's expected.

That's not what people think, the games problem is quantifying "challenge" and having such a VAST disparity of "challenge". Also I think many play Elite thinking it's systems will make sense and we both agree the game fails miserably at that.

Hi sec should be safe for lawfull people, unsafe for unlawfull
medium should be a litle less safe for lawfull, bit easier for unlawfull
low risky for lawfull, easy for unlawfull
anarchy anything goes.

The game isn't like that, FDs biggest failure is the lack of consequence that "makes sense". IMO

I agree with all of this.

 

[Rubbernuke]

That's not clear enough IMO, same as Brabens "meaningful combat".......it's the gankers/greifers stetching the lmits of those statements too far.

How much plainer can it be?

Yup all valid, but apart from one surely encouraging people out of open is not good for your playstyle and a bit of an own goal?

What do you want me to do, let them go and they win the cycle- u mad bro?

again I don't think FD are clear on what "powerplay" means in open, but largly we totally agree on the power play issue. You pledge, you're a target in open....should be VERY clear.

Its them being stupid, lulled into mixing up space with safe space. Fly like you are going to die and quite often you'll be fine.

That's not what people think, the games problem is quantifying "challenge" and having such a VAST disparity of "challenge". Also I think many play Elite thinking it's systems will make sense and we both agree the game fails miserably at that.

People think they can win any fight with anything- ED is not that. At the start you run and hide, and build up your skills. Its not equal or fair, but rather than trying to distort the game accept that new people are weak and vulnerable and need to first learn to run rather than try to fight.

Hi sec should be safe for lawfull people, unsafe for unlawfull
medium should be a litle less safe for lawfull, bit easier for unlawfull
low risky for lawfull, easy for unlawfull
anarchy anything goes.

The game isn't like that, FDs biggest failure is the lack of consequence that "makes sense". IMO

And with a few small tweaks it can be that in PvE- the problem is engineering makes players above any NPC making all systems anarchy. In such cases the only response is to form protection, learn or avoid places that are busy as much as possible. But other modes have stopped such structures permanently forming so the mindset of solo in open is pervasive and IMO the root problem.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Was he an enemy pledge upset that you shot at him in Open? If that's the case, then count me in as shaking my head and rolling my eyes (which is really a remarkable feat, when you think about it, and bound to make you quite dizzy rather quickly. Ow, I need to go have a lie down now).

Its mental as well as being funny. It was this that showed me how distorted some players views are on combat and what is 'fair' int he game.

 

[MishaTX]

I think for most of us and certainly speaking for myself, encouraging only the people who WANT the risks associated with Open combat to play in Open is a win all around. I dunno why so many people choose Open and decide they're gonna be wilfully unprepared for it, but they DID choose it.

Some of them don't choose it because they specifically want to get ganked, you know. Some of "them" choose it because they want to meet other people (and no, Mobius isn't even close to that, even with its member count).

Not saying they shouldn't expect danger lurking around the corner, I agree there, that's actually another draw for me, but don't make the mistake of stating that every single player clicking Open does so because they choose to play pew pew all the time. It's not the only thing you can do in this game.

 

[Deleted member 121570]

So it is a point of diction you disagree with. Greatest threat, then... Only the greatest challenge when they are presented with it... Greatest potential challenge...

We've had this argument elsewhere. It's not hubris to know what requires more knowledge and skills, but you can decide to do whatever random thing that takes a long time and requires dedication and say that's a personal challenge. That doesn't really make it more challenging, though, does it? Just makes it take longer.

Think of it this way: if someone offered a year's RL salary to the person who could circumnavigate the galaxy, is there doubt that ANYBODY on this thread could do that? We all have the required knowledge and skills, and probably most of us have the required build ready to go somewhere. The CHALLENGE doesn't prevent us from doing it, it's the fact that it is as you said, utterly boring, and leaves you with nothing at the end. If we could make bank doing it, I'm sure there are a lot of people who'd rather do that than their 9-5. If we offered the same pot of gold (or bag of stuffing in my case) to beat Yamato in a mirror-match 1v1, who here could do it?

Again, nope.

It's not a "point of diction". Wherever the argument is held - you're still wrong.

It's the fact that you keep imagining your own measures and ideas of 'knowledge and skill' apply to anybody else. When you say "That doesn't really make it more challenging, though, does it?", the answer for you may be "no", but for somebody else - it could easily be "yes".

Just because you or I might find it boring doesn't invalidate the potential challenge involved, if it's challenging somebody's perseverance or patience. It's just that you don't consider those things a challenge.

Think of it this way: Different people consider different things challenging. You don't get to invalidate those because you think you're right. That's hubris in action - as I pointed out.

I do, very seriously, doubt there's many people on this thread that could circumnavigate the galaxy in a Hauler. I doubt Yamato could either. Silly strawmen about RL salaries aren't relevant.

 

[[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos]

FDs biggest failure is the lack of consequence that "makes sense"

This is correct I think but for some understandable reasons.

Some people don't want to be blown up at all but play in open, well you could have the PvP flag thing making you immune from other CMDR fire, but how long does it take to work after activating it, how long does it take to deactivate it? That is a horrendous knot to sort out that will leave many complaining, probably as many as are complaining now. That is only one idea, there are probably loads more with as many complex details to sort out.

So then you look at C&P but that appears to be complicated for them to sort out, no one can really agree how that should work, more complaints, inevitable exploits, so they didn't bother.

They just fudged it. Have PG and sort it out yourselves. It is unsatisfactory but as the x2 potency Trit thread shows, any adaptation or change brings happy people and upset people out in equal numbers.

 

[Rubbernuke]

This is correct I think but for some understandable reasons.

Some people don't want to be blown up at all but play in open, well you could have the PvP flag thing making you immune from other CMDR fire, but how long does it take to work after activating it, how long does it take to deactivate it? That is a horrendous knot to sort out that will leave many complaining, probably as many as are complaining now. That is only one idea, there are probably loads more with as many complex details to sort out.

So then you look at C&P but that appears to be complicated for them to sort out, no one can really agree how that should work, more complaints, inevitable exploits, so they didn't bother.

They just fudged it. Have PG and sort it out yourselves. It is unsatisfactory but as the x2 potency Trit thread shows, any adaptation or change brings happy people and upset people out in equal numbers.

You can't sort out the problem without removing engineered player ships- or, making players police other players.

C+ P is very close to being something useful, but FD have to have the stones to go through with it as well as players taking responsibility for their own safety because any system requires at least one death to set off- the idea being that death is not you.