Although PP powers do deals behind closed doors, most of the time a rival is KOS. Now, anyone can block just as they do outside PP, so you wind up with people using the feature as a proxy shield in a mode about being aggressive.
Although PP powers do deals behind closed doors, most of the time a rival is KOS. Now, anyone can block just as they do outside PP, so you wind up with people using the feature as a proxy shield in a mode about being aggressive.
I thought it was already a different instance. During DW2 it happened many times I saw people in SC dropping at the same planet but then the planet was empty.
I think you are missing the bigger picture...
I'm not interested in PP, so you won't need to worry about me, but how is this any different than playing PP from Solo or PG?
@Captain Willard here ---^
that's fine. you don't have to. why is this even a problem? who cares who you block? 'open' is generally assumed to be that participatory space where stuff happens but that's really just an illusion, it's randomly sharded all over anyway, you only slightly affect distribution across shards which is negligible even if it was anyhow relevant, which it is not.
however, feel free to shout your rights nobody is disputing!
as a gesture of good faith i will suck my little finger on next full moon. i guess that's exactly as consequential
now, please, don't let me disturb, you gentlemen were having a debate ...
Deleted member 182079
D
I like a block of cheese!
I guess no-one knows detailed answers about the instancing choice algorithm. This is probably a good thing: if the algorithm was public, malefactors would be hard at work trying to game it to do what they wanted.
I started a few in the past, what happens is furious open only proponents (who failed to do pre-purchase research) will show up and call you all sorts of names trying to close down the thread because (in their own words) they really don't want players to know that block exists at all. They will also tell you its your fault and/or a mod conspiracy when they get in trouble for constantly calling you names.
.Don't leave, I find your meaningless participation in this thread to be good for bumps.
quite on topic, then.
and no problem in helping you bump your imaginary vindication. all of it keeps this show rolling!
I've been playing for about 2 months now, mostly open - I have been ganked three times I think and it's obviously not a great experience to get rekt, but at the same time it's part of the game. At this point, I'm ok with the current solutions and all three modes offer different characteristics that I find appealing, depending on my mood and needs.
I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. From my perspective, griefers are a minor inconvenience - but at the same time, maybe I'm not playing when most of them are online or they are active in other regions of space, thus my negative experiences are rather limited, meaning I don't perceive them as such an issue at this point.
Coming from EVE, I can understand the desire to reduce interactions with certain types of players though - it's actually quite an ancient debate (since MMOs have been made) and different humans have different ideas/desires. Having played games for almost 30 years now, I have yet to find a game that has found a good solution in that regard (other than separating the playerbase).
If blocking does the job for you, why not? I just think it's more of a short-term approach in general because it doesn't really address the actual root of the problem. Then again, I doubt the devs are interested in implementing changes that would reduce the amount of griefing or toxic behaviour in general, since that would limit the current gameplay experience for everyone else as well (unless there are solutions I'm not aware of).
Personally, I'd love to see some sort of shadow pool where all griefers would end up, shooting each other and drowning in toxicity until the end of days. If anyone deserves a dark, dystopian universe, it's those guys.
I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. From my perspective, griefers are a minor inconvenience - but at the same time, maybe I'm not playing when most of them are online or they are active in other regions of space, thus my negative experiences are rather limited, meaning I don't perceive them as such an issue at this point.
Coming from EVE, I can understand the desire to reduce interactions with certain types of players though - it's actually quite an ancient debate (since MMOs have been made) and different humans have different ideas/desires. Having played games for almost 30 years now, I have yet to find a game that has found a good solution in that regard (other than separating the playerbase).
If blocking does the job for you, why not? I just think it's more of a short-term approach in general because it doesn't really address the actual root of the problem. Then again, I doubt the devs are interested in implementing changes that would reduce the amount of griefing or toxic behaviour in general, since that would limit the current gameplay experience for everyone else as well (unless there are solutions I'm not aware of).
Personally, I'd love to see some sort of shadow pool where all griefers would end up, shooting each other and drowning in toxicity until the end of days. If anyone deserves a dark, dystopian universe, it's those guys.
As a Solo/group only player I really find this an "easy" subject. You play in Solo if you don't want to interact with people, group if you have some friends or join a likeminded group of people. Open, well you choose to play in open, thus you agree to what happens in open. So I really believe that there should be no option at all to block people, unless!: you are being harrassed/stalked/bulied/trolled, and as such it should be reported*
My pocketchange worth of meaning
*this would requiere some foundation from FD to handle, so not gonna happen
MDH
My pocketchange worth of meaning
*this would requiere some foundation from FD to handle, so not gonna happen
MDH
If and when another player for what ever reason deliberately choose's to keep me from playing my. I block'em!
I was at Dav's Hope this A.M., been there so many times, I've got gathering all ten available items down to 1 minute per round trip; Takes two minutes to relog as to do it again and again until I've reached my goal. Thus I can do 20 round trips per hour which equates to 600 mats per hour. Today some "Richard Noggin" choose to interupt me and started shooting, he/she/it is now blocked. Whom ever it was playing their way, and I didn't want any part of it. If everyone blocked the ganker's, eventually they would have anyone to play with but themselves.
I was at Dav's Hope this A.M., been there so many times, I've got gathering all ten available items down to 1 minute per round trip; Takes two minutes to relog as to do it again and again until I've reached my goal. Thus I can do 20 round trips per hour which equates to 600 mats per hour. Today some "Richard Noggin" choose to interupt me and started shooting, he/she/it is now blocked. Whom ever it was playing their way, and I didn't want any part of it. If everyone blocked the ganker's, eventually they would have anyone to play with but themselves.
I would agree with you 100%, if we had the one obvious mode which is missing. As it is, we're left to try and construct it for ourselves using lower-level game tools.
I've used the other two modes in the past (Solo and PG), and I'm now on the waiting list for Mobius, but I actually like Open, including occasional PvP. This idea of strategically using blocking to "bring balance" to a CG, where gankers often outnumber and outgun traders (despite it being a trading CG), this idea is new to me, and thus why I'm "thinking out loud". If it's "old hat" to everyone else, then okay, I suppose that explains some of the negativity in this thread.
As for being selfish, I actually think this is way less selfish than switching to Solo or PG, as I'll still be available in Open to the vast majority of players, including the vast majority of gankers, but just not in the "griefer gauntlet" between the star and the station for the CG (see my OP for what I'm trying to achieve). I don't see how this selfish, unless playing in Solo and PG is also considered selfish, in which case anyone thinking that clearly does not understand the game we are all playing.
It already exists its called the shadow server. In it you will only meet other banned players and none of you can effect the BGS.
Its apparently potentially problematic doing flat out game bans in the EU as its a product you paid to have access to. With a shadow server as a dumping ground you completely negate that potential issue whilst protecting the game itself from being effected by them. They do temp bans to it, plus permanent multi-account bans to it, depending what exactly the miscreant in question did.
All info gathered from the salty whining of the banned themselves as FDEV don't do naming and shaming.
Let's try this again:
First, if I'm friends with someone in the same instance shared with someone I have blocked, which wins, the priority to instance with a friend or avoid a blocked player? I have friended some of the "guardian" PvPers who defend traders, and I'm happy to jump into an instance with gankers if my guardian buddies are there to protect me. Second, what happens if I'm in an instance with a few non-blocked gankers (or anyone), and then a blocked player tries to enter the system? Do they get sent to empty-instance jail, or do I get kicked out of my current instance? This I suspect, depending on the answer, might be the controversial aspect to blocking.
I'll add a new question to this. If my blocking scheme works, and a friend jumps into a system where I'm in an alternative instance due to my clever use of blocking, will they be preferentially instanced with me instead of in ganker alley? If so, then perhaps that warrants calling me selfish. So if this is a concern to any of my friends, please feel free to defriend me - I won't take offense.
First, if I'm friends with someone in the same instance shared with someone I have blocked, which wins, the priority to instance with a friend or avoid a blocked player? I have friended some of the "guardian" PvPers who defend traders, and I'm happy to jump into an instance with gankers if my guardian buddies are there to protect me. Second, what happens if I'm in an instance with a few non-blocked gankers (or anyone), and then a blocked player tries to enter the system? Do they get sent to empty-instance jail, or do I get kicked out of my current instance? This I suspect, depending on the answer, might be the controversial aspect to blocking.
I'll add a new question to this. If my blocking scheme works, and a friend jumps into a system where I'm in an alternative instance due to my clever use of blocking, will they be preferentially instanced with me instead of in ganker alley? If so, then perhaps that warrants calling me selfish. So if this is a concern to any of my friends, please feel free to defriend me - I won't take offense.
As far as I know:
- Ganker 1 (blocked)
- Ganker 2 (not blocked and friend of Ganker 1)
- Ganker 3 (no one friend)
- You
- Your friend (got no one blocked)
Case 2: You are in an instance with Ganler 2. Ganker 1 can join the same instance so the block doesn't work.
Case 3: Your friend is in an instance with Ganker 1. You log into the game later. You will join the same instance with your friend and the Ganker 1. No one will be kicked out. When you jump to a new system and your friend follows you, if also Ganker 1 tries to follow you it will end up in a different instance.
Case 4: If your friend becomes a friend of Ganker 1... change friend!