Gankers Exploiting block mechanic
- Thread starter Fuego Estelar
- Start date
![[VR] Bulbulunufus](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/261/261245.jpg?1671230473){kind=avatar}
Not seeing this doing good things for powerplay. Seems to mean that if you block all our PvPers, you'll get all your mates, even who've not blocked them, to instance with you and we'll never see them. Also if your PvPers who actively want a fight (or maybe even shoot me as a hauler/underminer) are friendslisted with you, they may not be able to instance with our guys. Seems like it would split things depending on friends lists. It just seems to penalise (even in deciat) those who do not runs blocklists.
A player character killed by another player character is not murdered from your point of view since they are resurrected. This is really a reach.
If I kill a player character in ED that has "crimes on", and is "clean", and in a high security system. I incur a murder bounty in that system.
There are a huge number of MMOs that use in game tools to ban, temp ban, or lock off players from in game resource access when antisocial in game behavior occurs. This is not limited to behaving badly as a human being, it also occurs as a result of committing in game crimes in social centers.
I think you are blurring the line between what is bad social behavior in a human setting and committing a crime in a game setting. Committing a crime in a game setting (ganking a player character and causing the "temporary termination and progress reset" of a character (if "murder" offends your sensibilities) in High Sec) should result in the application of severe in-game consequences. More severe than they are now.
System banning is the easiest, most efficient way to execute an in-game consequence that preserves the security status, protects players in that space from in-game criminals in that space, and has lasting deterrent effects.
You can wring your hands on how it is going to be exploited, but right now - and in the foreseeable future, what we have sucks.
I concur. Typically our forum gankers are against any functional C&P system, be it more effective NPC police forces or more odious in-game consequences for their behauviour. That leaves pretty little ways for redress for the gankee, apart from "git gud" and join in PvP crowd. What is not mentioned is that such way itself is kind of career choice taking your time from doing what you like in game (if you do not like pvp aspects of game). And even if you "git gud" for most only way against wing of attackers is to high wake asap. What I would like to see in this game is real security ratings and making high secs nigh impossible to survive for criminal characters. Med sec just unpleasant, low sec like current high sec, and anarchies free for all.
Block is hated because it IS effective tool against them.
Imagine an idea so awful that players are locked out of their home systems for defending their faction's BGS against hostiles.
Meaning "hostiles" doing lawfull business in said system?
If one is not dead, one has not been murdered. That's not a reach, that's as self evident as anything can get.
Pointing out all the other games that have the same problems that I don't want imported into this one is not an argument for anything.
You've been advocating using in-game setting entities to enforce your ideals of player social interactions. This blurs the line.
I'm doing exactly the opposite of this. I'm pointing out the line.
This is not something we disagree on.
This is patently false. The easiest and most efficient way to prevent a player controlled character from violating in game laws is to prevent that player from playing their character.
The reason that is unacceptable is because it punishes the player for legitimate gameplay, rather than using contextual means to prevent or deter their character from doing so.
Your 'solution' does the same sort of thing (not in magnitude, so don't try to compare a complete ban from an inability to access the system, that's not the point). Your C&P system would leverage mechanisms that lack contextual in-game explanation. That has always been my primary objection.
It's no different than forcing people to log out because someone is hogging a pad, or advocating re-logging to refresh mission boards. These sorts of things are absurdities that should not be part of the game. They most certainly should not be more fully integrated into the game as prerequisites for working C&P.
My objections have little to do with how it could be exploited (though it's obvious that it could) and much to do with how it's the wrong tool for the wrong job.
Again, this has never been in question, but you're advocating breaking the forth wall with C&P.
Because of this, I believe your solution is far worse than whatever disease you perceive it to cure.
Chapparal is, in effect, suggesting that such systems shouldn't even exist for criminal characters.
A permit lock is far more than it simply being illegal to be in the system in question, it's an absolute metaphysical prohibition against entry (except via telepresence). You cannot jump into a permit locked system, because of very handwavy reasons...which is barely acceptable and only as an acknowledgement that a more plausible system would be too difficult to implement. It's lame, but I can't expect Frontier to really go above and beyond when it comes to depth of content, so fine, the handwavium will suffice.
However, you also cannot reach a permit locked system from supercruise because of a purely technical oversight/omission. There isn't even any attempt at explaining this away with handwavium, that's how inexplicable it is! The intended depiction of the setting is obviously not supposed to imply that every system in the game in it's own universe, but this is what requiring a hyperspace transition to leave a system implies.
The problems with expanding such inexplicable absence of content to a law enforcement tool for in-game entities should be clear. Crime and punishment shouldn't need to rely on bugs and oversights to function as intended.
Well permit locks in current way prevent lawfull and criminal characters all from entering systems they do not have access to. But okay no problem lets just implement kind of system that prevents player in RDR2 single campaign to enter Blackwater before epilogue. Meaning very very vigorous law enforcement killing you every time you enter, would you be happy for that. We all know that NPC AI in Elite is dumbed down. Lets put up non dumbed down cop ai, with waves and waves of cops, plus ATR style weapons and non escapable interdiction.
But but trolls do not like block. You just have to accept existence of trolls and allow them to keep trolling.Well, the following things are a given:
- PVP is optional
- trolls are a given in a multiplayer game
So block has to stay or pvp has to go
And it's a terrible system, even without expansion. It never should have been implemented the way it is.
If this could be implemented without violating contextuality (this would rule out waves in excess of demographic/logistical capabilities as well as ATR style weapons, but it wouldn't rule out far more effective police tactics), it would be vastly better than the inexplicably absent system nonsense.
Well, the following things are a given:
- PVP is optional
- trolls are a given in a multiplayer game
So block has to stay or pvp has to go
Roses are red, the sky is blue, therefore potato.
Instancing blocks are not required to avoid either trolls or PvP.
Well without instancing block how you are going to deal with idiot jamming his ship sideways to mailslot? Assuming you dont want to logout and go to solo?
In order of preference, with the game we have today:
- Go around the ship, if my CMDR is in a small ship (there is always a gap).
- Dislodge the ship if my CMDR is in a comparably large ship (not as reliable, but it works at least half the time I try it).
- Wait a couple of minutes for the station to remove the offending ship with the absurdly potent reverberating cascade weapons it has at it's command.*
- Call in some allies and destroy the ship ourselves (there are numerous ways to do this).*
- Have my CMDR come back with a small ship and fly the gap as mentioned above.
- Have my CMDR go somewhere else entirely.
*if these aren't possible, it means the target is actually invincible, and the instance is either bugged or the target is cheating. Since a block requires a re-instance anyway, it's more straightforward (and no more immersion breaking) just to switch modes.
Yes they are.
In any case, FD have no choice about what Block can do on consoles. Why do we have to keep debating something that can't be changed?
As long as other modes are available, I don't see any argument for why another method of excluding instancing can be claimed to be required to avoid encountering CMDRs one does not wish to have their CMDR encounter. The assertion would be stretch enough even if Open were the only mode, as being in any given place is at least as optional as PvP.
I'm not very familiar what's required by Sony or Microsoft, but since PC players cannot instance with console players anyway, it should have no bearing on how block functions on PC.
Oh great, you want PC players to have a different game to console players? So anyone who wants a properly working Block function should move over to a console? In what other ways will the games diverge? (Thought-experiment only; surely you realise FD would never do anything so crazy).
Why PC players should be treated like second class citizens compared to console ones (from viewpoint of one ready to block those players one does not want to play with)
?
Huh... and people blocking gankers in the same manner gets the gankers go all up in arms.
I think it's in a balance.
Yay for Moebius, yay for Solo.
It seems we already do.
For example, I often see comments in the console sections arguing against full crossplay because of perceived advantages provided to PC players.
No different from having to move to a console to directly encounter console players.
And anyone who wants an actually open Open could move over to PC. Just like anyone who wants any of the other capabilities that are supported on PC that are absent on consoles.
Potentially in any ways that would allow the BGS to remain the same, as this is the only manner in which the platforms currently interact.
For the same reason you can't plug a full Virpil HOSAS setup into an XBox...there are evidently different limitations imposed on the platforms by entities outside Frontier's control.