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

[Sandmann]

I've not blocked anyone yet, but now that I see how much it es off griefers I will get on it asap.

*snorts coffee out of nose onto keyboard* Well done sir.

And PvPers say only a small percent are the naughty ones, but then they forget it is exactly because of that small percent we avoid them.

Yep. Bad apples spoiling the bunch, bad players spoiling open, and all that. You may only run into a ganker with one in ten players in open, but the fact that the other nine are decent still isn't a reason to have to put up with number ten.

 

[Spiridon]

A small percentage of players honestly believe that we have an obligation to be their content, and that if we're somehow managing to enjoy the game where they can't shoot us that is in some way a personal insult to them.



Would that be the same little grin seal clubbers exhibit when they pop a harmless trader?

This, right on.

The discussion here is only one of many similar over the months and years here. And all are the same - gankers don't like people being able to get away from them. That's all. Veiled in "issues" of blocking, instancing, hi wake low weake 15 secs...

Maybe it would be beneficial to Forum's health if one of git gud people do start a thread with the one and only true titile "I want moar victims!" where this discussion can go on and on in a Hotel California form.

 

[Riverside]

I've not blocked anyone yet, but now that I see how much it es off griefers I will get on it asap.

You don't even have to actually do it, just tell them you will

See how many times you can 'block' the same player

I don't condone this...

 

[StiTch]

imo too many PvPers bought it on themselves for not making a stand against those making open intolerable for many. the shoe on the other foot has landed and this is what happens

Sorry bud but...pull your head out from where the sun don't shine

If people are happy to sit here and whine (since the beginning of time itself, honest) that combat/whatever should be optional, and the game is therefore being written around risk being optional, why is it the fault of those few who want a natural/anything-goes environment?

PvPers have often been fighting for an environment where Wanted targets are a true target. I myself have been pro-PvP bounty hunting since the start and have advocated advances for PvP bounty hunting to be more prolific. I have in fact advocated any changes that allow a single environment where consequence exists.

It's not our fault if every discussion on the subject ever gets taken over by "well I saw PvP somewhere, so this has to be pro-ganking, down with the gank0rz!".

Give me the chance to take care of griefors and I'll do it. But don't campaign for a riskless environment and then blame PvPers for not being able to enact risk on murderers.

Anyway, this has become something of a PvE circle featuring a biscuit that's about to get very soggy, and lots of self-congratulating going on. I'm going to leave and come back to see who got the biscuit

 

[Lateralus]

IMO blocking beyond comms should require a player report to be filed, otherwise it's simply gaming the system.

But I think we are beyond this game ever being an emergent multiplayer experience now aren't we? There are far too many ways to circumvent player opposition - rendering PvP meaningless (literally the opposite of what DB said in the kickstarter campaign).

Shame, the competitive multiplayer side of this game had so much potential....

<F>

 

[Jason Lightning]

It isn't "choose what happens" though, it's "choose who I don't want to play with" which are two very different things.

I play in Open. I've been pirated twice by players, and it was an absolute hoot both times. I've never blocked a Pirate. I probably never shall.

However, both of the players I blocked were of the "no comms, flying a monstrously overpowered PvP deathtrap, killed me in seconds" ilk that I have little interest in. There's no challenge in it for them, and there's no entertainment in it for me. By blocking them I've saved us both a bit of time in future.

Have you considered high waking? A Trader Python can be made durable enough to survive pretty much any ship attack, just needs stronger shields.

 

[MickyG1982]

I have no problem with the function as it is.

If people don't want to play the game with me then so be it, chances are I don't want to play ED with them either. It doesn't affect me any. I'll quite happily block the prat that hangs about outside the station, I don't want to play with them. I'd expect someone to block me if I combat log on them (I don't do that by the way) just as I would do to them if they logged on me.

I won't block someone for blowing me up once or twice, PvP is a part of the game of cat & mouse I'm playing (where I'm the mouse in my type 6) and inevitably I'm gonna get caught. There are occasions where I will block people, but so far I can count that total on one finger...

 

[metascrawl]

Yes. The block tool should not be used to eliminate risk from the game, and the annoying thing is there is a lot of goal post moving going on in regards to what people think is ok and what isnt.

This comparison is so faulty. If playing in open conferred some advantage on the player that playing in solo or private didn't, then you can make an argument that it would be wrong to play in open while avoiding dangers that other players face. But it doesn't, so playing in open and blocking everyone is no more an exploit than playing in solo. You can of course argue that it's pointless to do this and you might as well play in solo in the first place. And I might agree with you. But the question remains:

Why

do

you

care?

 

[Riverside]

Shame, the competitive multiplayer side of this game had so much potential....

<F>

...And you think it's the blocking system that spoils it?

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Sorry bud but...pull your head out from where the sun don't shine

If people are happy to sit here and whine (since the beginning of time itself, honest) that combat/whatever should be optional, and the game is therefore being written around risk being optional, why is it the fault of those few who want a natural/anything-goes environment?

PvPers have often been fighting for an environment where Wanted targets are a true target. I myself have been pro-PvP bounty hunting since the start and have advocated advances for PvP bounty hunting to be more prolific. I have in fact advocated any changes that allow a single environment where consequence exists.

It's not our fault if every discussion on the subject ever gets taken over by "well I saw PvP somewhere, so this has to be pro-ganking, down with the gank0rz!".

Give me the chance to take care of griefors and I'll do it. But don't campaign for a riskless environment and then blame PvPers for not being able to provide risk to murderers.

see here is the thing.... we both agree on a lot (believe it or not i used to play in open all the time internet permitting). BUT..... The game is what, getting close to 3 years old now and FD have done naff all to stop a subset of players.

where is the risk for the serial killer in the game. FD have been teasing us with this crime and punishment update for well over a year now. perhaps when it is in and up and running, perhaps when a player cant run amok indefinitely with a G5 cutter with no consequences then FD can revist the block lists. until then, the way i see it, we have had 3 years of consequence free ganking..... time to try another way and see if it gets those folk no longer in open back in open... imo.

when consequences exists for BOTH sides of the equation, and not just the trader / legal PvE player then perhaps we can revisit the discussion about not trying to dodge risk because right now it feels like 1 size with an uzi and the other side with an air pistol... and the guy with the uzi is telling the other to stop complaining

 

[Sandmann]

But if Open becomes "choose what happens" then what's the point of there being an Open mode?

The idea that "everybody in open will block me" is as flawed as the idea that "everyone in open in a ganker and there's one behind every star" (which ironically also comes from the PvPers in a false attribution to PvEers). Hyperbole of the highest order.

The difference however is that when you DO meet the occasional ganker, you get ganked. When you meet the occasional person who's blocked you, you don't have a clue. It's as if they're not even there.

 

[Noctover]

Same old, same old.

Face it, being able to not meet up with the prats is a pretty good idea and this goes a long way to solving the issue. As for your reply, you missed the obvious point and I presume that was deliberate.

Think i'll make my last post something we can both agree on, the ability to block prats is a good thing. People who interdict people using the tools FD provided, and shoot people for whatever reason within the rules, don't qualify as prats; people who message abuse and grief are.

So yes, the ability to block prats is a great feature. The ability to block people you worry might decide to shoot you, not so much.

Many other people saying the same thing as me here so i'll hand over the baton and move on.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Have you considered high waking? A Trader Python can be made durable enough to survive pretty much any ship attack, just needs stronger shields.

The most recent one yanked me out of SC and had burned through my A-Rated shields (plus single booster) and hull before my FSD was even halfway there. I can boost to about 410-ish. Didn't help. I've no idea what the hell he was firing, but it was extremely potent.

 

[StiTch]

where is the risk for the serial killer in the game. FD have been teasing us with this crime and punishment update.

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.

 

[ForeverN00b]

...And you think it's the blocking system that spoils it?

It's not high on the list but it doesn't help either.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

lol - You know I try to be on the side of PvPers in most cases, but this really takes the cake.

Sorry OP, the block list is available for players to use as they see fit.

 

[Sandmann]

That's not what ED was supposed to be, but is what this discussion is about.

I thought ED was supposed to be about "blazing your own trail"... not "doing what Cmdr Stitch says"?

 

[Lateralus]

...And you think it's the blocking system that spoils it?

It's one of many poorly thought out features than undermine the MMO side of Elite. I have no problem with comms blocking, or instance blocking after a genuine incident - but how it is implemented now it's just too easy to misuse it for gaming reasons.

 

[Riverside]

It's not high on the list but it doesn't help either.

It's one of many poorly thought out features than undermine the MMO side of Elite. I have no problem with comms blocking, or instance blocking after a genuine incident - but how it is implemented now it's just too easy to misuse it for gaming reasons.

I'll refer you to my previous comment about requiring others for a playstyle to work

 

[ForeverN00b]

The most recent one yanked me out of SC and had burned through my A-Rated shields (plus single booster) and hull before my FSD was even halfway there. I can boost to about 410-ish. Didn't help. I've no idea what the hell he was firing, but it was extremely potent.

If your shields are unengineered, they wont take much punishment from a pvp setup from a medium or large ship.