Your entire 'devils advocacy' has been exactly this. You're dismissed
Question for Open players who don't like PVP/ganking... help me understand
- Thread starter Danquememe
- Start date
I wonder if we have reached the point where it's worth dishing out the Bartle taxonomy of player types?
It might help readers to establish where I'm coming from at least. It's not perfect but then every explanation is a simplification
I think it's a pretty good way to look at situations like this.
It might help readers to establish where I'm coming from at least. It's not perfect but then every explanation is a simplification
I think it's a pretty good way to look at situations like this.Well perhaps OP is not Big Bad Ganker, just Ganker trying to be Bad
Deleted member 192138
D
Then where's your fuss that someone can be both a ganker and someone that offers advice for surviving ganks? You have an exceptional level of emotional investment demonstrating your disgust of someone if you recognise that the gains and losses of the game are fleeting.
The grind wall to make a PvP capable ship is too high for a game as old as Elite. Unlock engineers, gather mats, make credits, learn how to build, learn how to fight. It's too much for all but the most committed players. So, PvP is stuck with a slow trickle of new players and Frontier couldn't care less.
Before I respond, I suggest you re-read my previous post again. A bit more carefully this time. You didn't 'ruin my immersion', I am not 'white knighting on behalf of noobs' and am not pretending 'gankers are worse than Hitler'. You completely misread what I typed, probably partly due to pre-conceived notions you have about me. This is also not the first time this has happened in this topic.
In any case, let me go back a bit more to provide some context. Maybe that will clarify a few things. I started flying on the day ED launched, which is getting close to six years ago. Back then things were quite different from how it was when you started a little while ago. Explaining all the differences would be a bit too much for this post, but let me at least point out some essential differences:
1) Credits were earned much slower. As in orders of magnitude slower. As a result, many cmdrs (including me) started the game with the idea that ships like the conda were simply never a realistic goal. This had as a secondary effect that losing a ship also had considerably more consequences given how long one had to grind for the insurance, and that many people frequently flew without rebuy despite their better judgement. In short: getting anywhere was harder, and losses were more meaningful.
2) At the same time, the game was considerably more... rough. There was no minimum speed near stations; if some sidewinder crashed into your conda and blew up, that was on you. A viper with dumbfires would machine-gun-salvo through your conda;s shields and hull in seconds. NPC cops had virtually no AI whatsoever. Shield boosters, SCBs, mods, HRP, MRP; none of it existed. There were no godshields.
At this time, griefing was among the most hotly debated topics. No surprise, really, considering how fragile your ship was and how much you lost when it happened to you. All the way back then I took the same position as I do today; Open means everyone gets to do whatever they want as long as it is within the rules. If the rules are unfair: tough luck. It is your job to be mindful of possible ramming-winders near stations, check if other ships have dumbfires and so on. If something goes wrong you can moan about it on the forum or you can spend that time getting back on your horse. Gankers are just another thing you have to deal with as a responsible cmdr of your virtual spaceship.
Now back to the present day. Credits are virtually showered upon you, shields can easily be turned into invincible machines and all kinds of safety nets have been created by FD to further protect the player. In short, progress is easy and lossess are nearly meaningless. Simultaneously, the Big Bad Griefers have likewise regressed to the point of wishy-washy dress-up-dolls mumbling about 'helping others' and 'being appreciated by other players' while worrying about 'being perceived as toxic'.
So, for the umpteenth time: I don't care what you do. Not my circus, not my monkeys. But what you are doing now is the griefer-equivalent of I can't believe it is not real butter. And I hate to admit it, but I can taste the difference quite easily.
Last edited:
None of what you've written here would seem to apply to Ian Skippy, the actual words that he wrote, or his significant involvement in the game and this forum.
edit - comprehensively ninja'd by the man himself.
One change I would like to see is NPCs with PvP builds so players trying to get into PvP are not shocked by the difference in difficulty when they try it. Frontier doesn't get it. Not only are players not learning by fighting Swiss Army NPCs but they're also developing bad practices, which makes them more likely to get discouraged when they try PvP.
I don't. Sole reason I did engineering grind for my Cutter was to be able to swat annoying NPC's away. Not to fight 20 mins with scb popping juggernauts....
Are bored spitless?
There could be more challenging USSs, ones you (and probably I tbh) would just ignore. I think FDev tried to do that with wing assassinations.
Yeah wing assassinations those were at least for my combat abilities too much when taken solo
I actually had to help my newbie friend with one of those on the day I got blessed by Jesus' presence in my rear, it was too much for someone who just traded his sidewinder for an imp Eagle. Big numbers are a new player's demise.Yeah wing assassinations those were at least for my combat abilities too much when taken solo
Which made PvP (and the game in general) more meaningful, and for me at least, vastly more enjoyable.
Well, SCBs have been around since Beta 2 (October 2014) and used to have many more charges when they were introduced than they do now. The smaller ones were also proportionally more effective.
For sure. Progression curve was also much betterl; you always got some upgrade each session (whoohoo, C-rated thrusters!) and once in a while a ship upgrade. Now you skip 90% of it and mostly only go for A or D-rated. :/
That allows newer players to quickly catch up (in terms of equipment if nothing else) though. I think 1.3/1.4 was probably peak fun for me.
Technically neither do I. I once played solely in PG/Solo. I can understand those who are lone wolves who want no interaction or 'noobs' put off by the idea of griefing. I was warned of the nasty griefers in Open so I stayed away for well over a year. That all changed mostly when I started playing with like minded individuals doing BGS stuff. Doing BGS stuff, while able to do so in Solo/PG, took some of the experience of interaction with enemy (PC) players away. I've come to enjoy my experience to include my self sacrifice (at the hands of others) to the Rebuy Gods.
While there is little that can be done in the way of direct punishment to griefers, you do have options. People don't have to like them but to suggest this game doesn't cater to one side or the other is nonsensical in my eyes. While individual 'A' might want to play in open and forego the PvP stuff, the reality is they either git gud or git away because PvP exists in Open. Then in the hot spots I wonder where the Law Dawgs are? The coalition of do gooders that claim to anti gank, the ones that are flying their beat and liberating the civilized systems from the uncouth lawless savages? My opinion of them is they're gankers that have put on a virtual badge with their self appointment. Because as it has been noted by one notorious ganker, they, the ganker go unchallenged in these hot spots.
I just happened to pick a side. One where I do play or associate with gankers. That's their RP as anarchists. They also face the consequences of being ganked by not only other gankers but the self appointed Elite Justiciars. They don't complain about it. What they have complained about is the inability to separate the person behind the computer or liberating people in AND out of game. But that's for a whole other discussion.
So whether it was harder eons ago or easy now is irrelevant to the discussion in my opinion.
Bottom line, while I can't entirely speak to why players who want to play in open but don't like PvP/ganking, but to me the answer is simple. Occam's Razor- they want player interaction without the possibility of player consequence (ganking or PvP). Or the idiom of having one's cake and eating it too. This entire thread has devolved into some bizarre game morality debate.
I draw the line at the point where the other player has something to gain in-game. OK, that's subjective; not everyone will agree that criterion, but I believe it's a natural one and it's an appeal to "the rules of the game". I'm basically asking, "Are they playing ED with me, or trying to stop me playing it?"
E.g. if someone blows me up because I have a bounty, I'm pledged to a PP opponent or I'm in a CZ on the opposite side: valid gameplay.
If someone blows me up because it makes them feel superior, or they hope I'll be upset, or they want to spoil my leisure time: selfish behaviour; RL obnoxiousness; they're not someone I want to play with.
The distinction is almost always obvious, but in the rare case that someone has a non-obvious in-game motivation, I think it's up to them to tell me about it.
Thank you for proving my point.