Blocking feature being abused or was it intended to be this way? FDEV?

Ok, well my opinion is that if you happen to be in an instance with someone who has people on their block list (randoms at a CG say), you are also blocked from seeing the people of their block list because they are being kept out of the same instance.

Therefore someone else is dictating my game experience which is classed as griefing by some, ergo people who have block lists in open are griefers.. [where is it]


Your Fiends list is just as much a Griefer. What next? Ridiculous is about as far you can go.
 
I can see some people doing this, since Fdev didn't outright ban the module cheaters. I guess Fdev likes that sweet sweet money more than the integrity of the ED playerbase. Banning the cheaters would have been the best option or what Fdev should have done atleast is to publish a list names of all the cheater commanders. Who wants to play with cheaters? I surely don't.

I hate how the cheaters really changed the BSG and ED lore now. Salome should be alive etc.. It's getting harder to even fire up the game since you know the cheaters gonna cheat again and Fdev is just going to allow it. Sad.
 
I do think it's a little lame if it's being used to create 'safe space mode' rather than as a harassment prevention tool.

I've never blocked anyone in Elite, but I have to admit I've never considered this tactic to make Open a "safer" play mode. I've not played in Open for a year and a half now, I just got tired of the gankers, but blocking known player killers? And that actually works??? Never even occurred to me. Until now.

Thanks Powderpanic, your thread has been most enlightening and useful! :cool:
 
Last edited:
I can see some people doing this, since Fdev didn't outright ban the module cheaters. I guess Fdev likes that sweet sweet money more than the integrity of the ED playerbase. Banning the cheaters would have been the best option or what Fdev should have done atleast is to publish a list names of all the cheater commanders. Who wants to play with cheaters? I surely don't.

I hate how the cheaters really changed the BSG and ED lore now. Salome should be alive etc.. It's getting harder to even fire up the game since you know the cheaters gonna cheat again and Fdev is just going to allow it. Sad.

FDev are not in the business of naming and shaming, and that's a good thing.
 
Last edited:
I can see some people doing this, since Fdev didn't outright ban the module cheaters. I guess Fdev likes that sweet sweet money more than the integrity of the ED playerbase. Banning the cheaters would have been the best option or what Fdev should have done atleast is to publish a list names of all the cheater commanders. Who wants to play with cheaters? I surely don't.

I hate how the cheaters really changed the BSG and ED lore now. Salome should be alive etc.. It's getting harder to even fire up the game since you know the cheaters gonna cheat again and Fdev is just going to allow it. Sad.
Salami would still be dead. Get over it.
 

Deleted member 115407

D
Actually, it was about surviving "in a cutthroat galaxy" where players can "just hunt other CMDRs":
https://www.elitedangerous.com/en/gameplay/

Choosing playstyle =/= choosing outcome. Choosing how you play, yes - but blazing your own trail was never meant to imply "you get to disable risk".

Salami would still be dead. Get over it.

I don't understand why people are so upset about this NPC? Who is she and why should I feel attached to her in any way?
 

Ozric

Volunteer Moderator
I don't understand why people are so upset about this NPC? Who is she and why should I feel attached to her in any way?

Please let's not turn this into a discussion about that. She was a NPC involved in a story, that story has played out. End of!
 
Is this thread still ongoing, without being able to come to any kind of conclusion?

I'll just leave this here then:

[video=youtube;GLQRZgfASyc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLQRZgfASyc[/video]
 

verminstar

Banned
exploit on exploit is pushing an exploit
in fact the biggest abuse is using PG to 30k commanders, instead of few friends.

Speaking of exploits...some of us simply dont want to play with the worst cases which is why groups like mobius not only exist. they flourish. Last I heard, PG was working more or less as intended, therefore not an exploit ergo there is no abuse.

However, if one wants to talk about actual official exploits...?

One would advise a moment to consider where that conversation might lead to :rolleyes:

Im still not understanding the reasoning behind the complaint apart from not wanting players to have a choice based on...some ballix argument that aint worth the forum space its written on. There is no open pve mode, so this is a compromise...hardly an exploit if frontier were the ones who put it there, go cry a river to them.

I mean, why should open be all or nothing? Who gets to make that call and what makes their opinions more important than others? Not frontier because they designed the feature in the first place so why should they get to decide if I have to play with everyone or nobody? Whats the issue with filtering out the cheats and the griefers and perhaps making open play viable to solo and PG players?

If we dont choose to play with everyone then we should just stick to solo and PG? Like I said...go cry to FD ^
 
This isn't broken and doesn't need fixing.

If a player doesn't want to play with me, where do I get off being a dbag and trying to force them to? Anyone who wants to can block me anytime they want for any reason they can come up with. In fact I'd rather they did that than get all bent out of shape about how I'm playing.

If you don't want to be blocked, don't play like somebody who other players block. Simple.

They get to pick who they play with. If that isn't you, you can still share the sandbox but you have to find other kids to play with. Didn't your mother teach you that by the time you were 5? Perhaps if your idea of a good time wasn't to throw rocks at their sandcastles, they'd let you play with them in that corner of the sandbox.

Or were you the kid that threw a screaming paddy so that all the other moms gave yours the stink-eye until she either took you home out of embarrassment or turned you over her knee to teach you some manners? Because that's how this thread reads.
 

Ozric

Volunteer Moderator
You home yet?

I was waiting for you to explain how indirectly inheriting portions of someone else's block list isn't really inheriting a portion of someone else's block list.

That's where I left off anyway...

I thought that was obvious by the fact I posted, sorry I didn't address you directly ;)

I don't think we disagreed on what happens, but my original point you picked up on I believe I had misinterpreted the original intent. I had though the original issue was inheriting for ever, which I don't think it was, as I acknowledged to Riverside, in my reply to you as well [knocked out]
 
Well no, the OP can still absolutely play in an environment where his "own ability is the sole rule for survival". If the developer has also provided means for people to choose to play another way (as is being argued) and not forcing the OP to do so, they've delivered the game to him as promised.

can he? well, technically he does but it is sort of a frustrating experience because there is no ground to hold. he can expose himself to danger but cannot expect others to have to do the same. this is expected in such gameplay.

note i'm not advocating any particular form of play, both these broad catergories seem perfectly fine for me, the problem is that the game is ambiguous about it (you might argue even deceiving) and feeds a lot of unmet expectation. and then forumdads have to mop up ;-)
 
There was something in a live stream iirc about this. I am immensely surprised there hasn't been more noise on it.

Players need to be reminded though it's not about removing risk. It's about consequence. No offense if this doesn't include you but there are a lot of players that simply want a riskless environment. That's not what ED was supposed to be, but is what this discussion is about.


but the current situation is Gankers have no risk, since there are no consequences to the act of ganking. So what you are complaining about others requesting, is what you are advocating, but to your side...

To the person suggesting a refund based on false advertising people who abhor open, also could request compensation based on the lie that the game was going to run offline, or that this is an MMO. Go ahead, do it, lets all request refunds and finally dry up open and pgs.
 
I thought that was obvious by the fact I posted, sorry I didn't address you directly ;)

I don't think we disagreed on what happens, but my original point you picked up on I believe I had misinterpreted the original intent. I had though the original issue was inheriting for ever, which I don't think it was, as I acknowledged to Riverside, in my reply to you as well [knocked out]

You are correct in that it was not meant to mean inheriting outside the particular instance. I possibly should have been clearer on that point.
 
LOL exactly. It might inspire players to not be at the top of others 'moron' list (if they want to see anyone at all in OPEN) :)

Hat's off to FD for doing this. Makes the necessity for a "Dead list" no longer. Of course you'll have the real babies come on and cry they have no one left to pick on.....weee....where's my bahbah.

Just laugh at them.....They'll eventually git gud. In the true sense of the word "good".
 
can he? well, technically he does but it is sort of a frustrating experience because there is no ground to hold. he can expose himself to danger but cannot expect others to have to do the same. this is expected in such gameplay.

note i'm not advocating any particular form of play, both these broad catergories seem perfectly fine for me, the problem is that the game is ambiguous about it (you might argue even deceiving) and feeds a lot of unmet expectation. and then forumdads have to mop up ;-)

He can expect others to do so, he just can't expect everyone to do so. The people that block everyone aren't looking for PVP anyway, so they don't contribute any of danger you say FD promises. And hey, the OP is never even going to be aware of their existence in game, so how does this affect his experience? Is it just the abstract idea of it that annoys people? You need to know that other people are in danger for you to have a good time? If so, that's weirdly obsessive.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom