Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
PvP cannot compare to PvE in that if you ask me.
PvP requires other players to be PvP, it requires someone to attack and someone to defend from. Add that the amount of people participate in griefing and call themselves PvP'ers is something you cannot really know or judge properly because they can effectively claim anything online.
In my book for PvP to work, people need to have a nature of good sport about it, otherwise PvP can end up killing itself, and given the amount of complaint threads with low open population, that could on the surface seem to be what is happening?

PvE does ultimately not require any other players, and as such is based around game mechanics, which you cannot really blame those players for.
Indeed. Luckily griefers tend to announce themselves as griefers when they are extracting salt, so they're happy to be identified. The griefer's aim is to get attention for their griefing. So when judging individually it's easy to do.

I say you judge individuals based on their actions and statements they make in the forum. If an explorer is being rude, that explorer is being rude. It doesn't mean explorers are rude. If a PvPer gets joy out of ruining other player's game, and boast about this on the forum, you judge that individual on getting joy out of ruining other player's games.
 
I'm not saying you cannot explore with a lower range ship, it will just take more time and certain areas will be out of your range, why should explorers be forced to do that?

No one is forced to do anything. Everyone has a choice.

It's just natural for people to be critical of choices that lead to foreseeable consequences that are at odds with the success of the apparent goal.

In my book for PvP to work, people need to have a nature of good sport about it

All that's required for this is for people to adhere to the game's rules.

Any further imposition on what's possible, or attempts to enforce in-game symmetry of encounters, could never be anything other than diametrically opposed to organic PvP, and is totally unnecessary for organized PvP.
 
Indeed. Luckily griefers tend to announce themselves as griefers when they are extracting salt, so they're happy to be identified. The griefer's aim is to get attention for their griefing. So when judging individually it's easy to do.

I say you judge individuals based on their actions and statements they make in the forum. If an explorer is being rude, that explorer is being rude. It doesn't mean explorers are rude. If a PvPer gets joy out of ruining other player's game, and boast about this on the forum, you judge that individual on getting joy out of ruining other player's games.
Exactly.

No one is forced to do anything. Everyone has a choice.

It's just natural for people to be critical of choices that lead to foreseeable consequences that are at odds with the success of the apparent goal.
Everyone has a choice, that is very true.

But given that this is a game and not real life, a game they presumably bought to have fun, then yes you can indeed force people to do something they do not find fun. Gankers can effectively take the fun out of the game for others, and can force them to do stuff.
All that's required for this is for people to adhere to the game's rules.

Any further imposition on what's possible, or attempts to enforce in-game symmetry of encounters, could never be anything other than diametrically opposed to organic PvP, and is totally unnecessary for organized PvP.
Game rules generally do not contain 'good sport' as such last I checked, though the EULA and other do state something that I would say leans towards good sport and it could most certainly be argued that many do not do that, however proving those things is another matter.

That said, I would say that this thread isn't really pointing towards organic PvP, because my view on PvP is that it is two sided, not just one sided squashing of easy targets. But yeah, that is something that is subjective.
Can and should there be organic PvP? in my book definitely. But such should not be after the weakest and easiest targets, which this currently seems to be baring few exceptions.
 
Last edited:
Game rules generally do not contain 'good sport' as such last I checked

When it comes to in-game actions between in-game characters, such rules would only be an immersion defying burden.

though the EULA and other do state something that I would say leans towards good sport and it could most certainly be argued that many do not do that, however proving those things is another matter.

Some players certainly do cross the line into out of character harassment of other players, using a wide variety of means do so. I've long been an advocate for stronger enforcement of the rules meant to keep this behavior in check.

However, one CMDR (or many CMDRs) blowing up another doesn't imply anything of the sort, even in the most lopsided and unsporting of encounters.
 
DW2 isn't pure, or even primarily, exploration. It's a pre-scheduled guided tour and social get-together, with a public itinerary.

This mandates very different considerations.

Reaching systems few other vessels can reach or minimizing the number of systems one needs to pass through to reach a waypoint is hardly the be all and end all of exploration.

Very, very little exploration ability is lost by making sure your ship can boost then adding a few E rated shield boosters and an MRP. If anything the increased safety margin is an asset to exploration, even in the absence of hostile ships. In the presence of such ships, survival and successful exploration become synonymous.

This is true, if one goes out exploring not part of an expedition, and avoids having hostile parties on their friend list, there is hardly any need to include defenses beyond surviving basic navigational hazards. Provided one isn't dead set on selling the exploration data at Jameson's or similar, the likelihood of encountering anyone else at all is pretty low.

That said, after some reflection I disagree that your recipe amounts to "very very little exploration ability" lost. Yes, it costs little to outfit survivable internals, presuming engineering is in play. But those utility slots are at a premium if the explorer isn't in a large ship! I played around with those engineered 0E boosters before leaving, but wound up only taking one on each of my expedition ships. It cost me a chaff launcher on one, and a xeno scanner on the other. Irrelevant if you consider exploration to include just neutron boosting to distant locales (with some emergency heatsinks), but I'm also bringing various scanners to test interactions with any new oddities we might encounter.

I could live with that interpretation if I only could get where the fun in this sort of activity would be. That's indeed something the "armchair psychologist" in me only can shake his head about in disbelief. But then I also could ask why little boys have lots of fun making knots into earthworms...

Well, to each their own. I have to say, now that I've watched (okay, scrolled through at high speed) a few streams from DG2 players, I don't get the appeal. Combat clips on Youtube don't include the hours spent staring at space or a surface site waiting for a target to appear. At least the ones who are streaming have the distraction of chatting with their viewers and wingmates to fill the time.

Ganking along DW2 is either a common (and loudly decried) phenomenon, or a 0.1% sort of thing. It can't be both. The ~3000 rebuys claimed by DG2 and frequent complaints on this board indicate to me that it is the former, and that a wise player will plan accordingly.

Because if they are weakly outfit and go into open at a DW2 waypoint or similar area they will likely be destroyed. Not 0.1% chance destroyed. I don't have a percentage but it's non negligible. I wouldn't be surprised if it was above 50% (open only - including solo/PG DW2 explorers it is a tiny %).

Not so sure about that. As one of you told me a while back, gankers have to sleep too, and they aren't evenly distributed in timezones. I tend to play at all kinds of random hours depending on my schedule, and I periodically pop into Open (PC) at waypoints and similar just to see what's up. I've seen gankers in the system *maybe* one time out of four. So I could buy that, if I exclusively flew those systems in Open in a weak ship, then I'd have high odds of *eventually* getting unlucky and blown up. But at any given random day and time, even Open on PC is relatively safe.
 
I periodically pop into Open (PC) at waypoints and similar just to see what's up. I've seen gankers in the system *maybe* one time out of four. So I could buy that, if I exclusively flew those systems in Open in a weak ship, then I'd have high odds of *eventually* getting unlucky and blown up. But at any given random day and time, even Open on PC is relatively safe.

The key point is that you periodically pop into Open. As you note, if you flew in it all the time, the odds would shift dramatically. Thus I object to the "99.9%" claim and use terms such as "likely" or at least "non negligible".

Of course at a single (or a few) selected moment(s) there is no danger. I could close my eyes and run across the street at a few quasi-randomly selected moments and probably be fine. I wouldn't call the practice "relatively safe" and if I always crossed the street this way I would likely be hit by a car.

One day I left my SRV largely unattended (periodically I synthed fuel) at waypoint 4 for 8 hours straight. Not a single other contact. This doesn't mean explorers are safe from me in open nor that I have killed them all. It just means ED space is sparse, especially on PS4.

Irrelevant if you consider exploration to include just neutron boosting to distant locales (with some emergency heatsinks), but I'm also bringing various scanners to test interactions with any new oddities we might encounter.

I could have fit my conda with various trappings like that with only a slight decrease in my ability to kill explorers.

Agreed it's trickier on a smaller ship.
 
Last edited:
That said, after some reflection I disagree that your recipe amounts to "very very little exploration ability" lost. Yes, it costs little to outfit survivable internals, presuming engineering is in play. But those utility slots are at a premium if the explorer isn't in a large ship! I played around with those engineered 0E boosters before leaving, but wound up only taking one on each of my expedition ships. It cost me a chaff launcher on one, and a xeno scanner on the other. Irrelevant if you consider exploration to include just neutron boosting to distant locales (with some emergency heatsinks), but I'm also bringing various scanners to test interactions with any new oddities we might encounter.

Smaller ships are harder to hit and can usually be made pretty fast with minimal difficulties. They also benefit proportionally more from HRPs. So, if it doesn't have a lot of utility slots, it probably doesn't need them to be made survivable.

The most popular ships along the DW2 routes are the Anaconda, the Krait Phantom, and the Asp X. Correspondingly, the most popular weapons among DG2 seem to be frag cannon, as they offer the best odds of downing relatively large, but soft, targets before they can escape or disconnect. There is really little compelling reason for larger ships to sacrifice the ability to escape for a handful of tons in defense that will amount to a low single digit percentage loss in jump range. I have seen a fair mix of other weapons, but frags predominate and as frags are extremely poor against smaller ships, if you can survive a railgun hit or two, or some phasing pulse laser fire, you'll reliably be able to jump away with one.
 
Not true. You can block someone from the menu.

I block people from my router - L2 traffic reject. There are two people in there, and six countries.

All you have to do is send a friend request to the people on the list. They do NOT have to accept. Just send a friend request and THEN block, then unfriend. Done. Mr. Potter found himself blocked in this fashion because I don't mind PvP but loathe gankers. Been that way since my days in Ultima. If someone is a ganker that person is a turd and I wish to not play with turds. Play your way, I will play mine.
 
that person is a turd

Hey now, let's watch it with the insults directed at other players. Not only is it a tad rude, that's how threads get shut down.

Why not just play in Solo or Private Group instead of abusing the blocking mechanic?

The blocking mechanism is in the game specifically to give people the option to avoid particular players who harm their enjoyment of the game. The fact that Frontier has included it means it is legitimate by definition. Doesn't mean you have to like it, any more than the anti-ganking crowd likes the fact that uninvited PvP is an allowed behavior, but them's the rules.

Router fiddling, on the other hand, is arguably a TOS violation. Even though it's effectively impossible to police, folks really shouldn't do that.
 
I know what the blocking feature is and what it’s for. Thanks.

What I took issue with is preemptively blocking someone (people you may never have run into in game anyway!) by using the friend request method. At worst it’s an exploit and at best poor form.
 
I know what the blocking feature is and what it’s for. Thanks.

What I took issue with is preemptively blocking someone (people you may never have run into in game anyway!) by using the friend request method. At worst it’s an exploit and at best poor form.

Does Frontier, nerf hammerer extraordinaire, immediate nerf what may be an "exploit?" no.... hmmm....

in a way it's a recourse for those who play in Open and wished to not be ganked by DG2, as the list of Commanders of DG2 has been published by DG2 itself!

and DG2 can continue on its merry way

all is well in Open

Block, Gank, and be Happy!!!

:)


we have not received any updates on DG2 either
 
um um um but what about credit exploits?

aren't they famous for bringing the nerf hammer down toot sweet?


:)

Maybe a few. 17 Draconis, Robigo, and Quince all lasted for quite a while didn't they? I'd argue those were still some of the best times a lot of people had in Elite, but I digress.
 
Does Frontier, nerf hammerer extraordinaire, immediate nerf what may be an "exploit?" no.... hmmm....

in a way it's a recourse for those who play in Open and wished to not be ganked by DG2, as the list of Commanders of DG2 has been published by DG2 itself!

and DG2 can continue on its merry way

all is well in Open

Block, Gank, and be Happy!!!

:)


we have not received any updates on DG2 either



"Not nerfed" does not suggest "not exploit".
 
Player ganks: shut up is allowed by game.
Players who gank gets blocked because they boast about ganking: tears.

Well .... if gankers are to be trusted, it's fun to hunt other players. But if you judge their actions, it's not the hunting fun but the attention and provocation they're after. Just look at the many: lol I killed an explorer, accompanied by an attempt at wit. Greenpeace, speeding limit.

The lovely result is, the constant desire to be noticed and provoke makes it easy to fill the blocklist.

So please Distant Ganks, continue crying about blocking. Ziggy enjoys ganker tears a lot :)

All you have to do is send a friend request to the people on the list. They do NOT have to accept. Just send a friend request and THEN block, then unfriend. Done. Mr. Potter found himself blocked in this fashion because I don't mind PvP but loathe gankers. Been that way since my days in Ultima. If someone is a ganker that person is a turd and I wish to not play with turds. Play your way, I will play mine.
Wel said and making good use of features Frontier has given us to play the way you like.

People cry "exploit" but Frontier has knowingly introduced instancing bias, so that's just hot air. Your game, your decision not to play with specific individuals.
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom