rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
Not at all. I was simply clarifying that from lore point of view Pilots Federation does not reward being nasty towards your own kind in any way.
Elite Dangerous Blocking System: A Call for Change
- Thread starter CMDR DT
- Start date
-
- Tags
- blocking progression
Sending the player to the hangar does not free the pad.
Just saying that doesn't make it so doesn't make it so.
Thats not complainig. Thats explaining (why gankers get blocked.)
I dont get the meaning of this / dont understand what you want to say. So i will not comment.
You take it much to simple. You dont know anything about me playstyle (and RP play it seems). RP playstyle (the overall intended playstyle for ED) does not exclude PvP or competive gameplay. Ganking etc Just has no place in the ED World. I dont know how often in countless threads i gave this example:
You are a member of an opposing BGS group and want to attack me (even thats a bad idea BGS wise) --> great! Organic PvP that fits in the narrativ. Of course no block.
You are a pirate and want to kill me because i refuse to give you cargo --> great! I love this. Sadly more and more players abandon RP pirate role. Of course no block.
You are an opponent in a combat zone --> great! Of course no block.
You attack me while i just visit earth in sol to watch it --> block
And now the important difference example:
At a CG you attack me while i am delivering goods and before you stated in system chat that the station is under blockade because the evil empire slavers needs to put down etc... --> no block because there is a reason i can understand (even when i did not share it)
You do the same attacking without giving a reason/explanation --> block
Last edited:
LOL!
So, you didn't call him a name but you called him a name. Brilliant. Just brilliant.
putz
/pəts/
noun
- 1.
INFORMAL•NORTH AMERICAN
a stupid or worthless person.
Well and good, but you might be misunderstanding why some play in Open. When I use Open it's not because I want danger or a random chance of being exploded. It's because I want to meet other players; specifically, the ones who play like me, cooperatively, RPing as real space pilots.
Sure, I know some like random explosions. I just don't. Those are just unwelcome interruptions.
When playing a multi-player game I feel a responsibility to help people I meet have a good game experience. I consider that just good manners, but I know that some others don't feel any such restraint.
Block sorts all this out. Not ideally perhaps. I think FD have been lazy giving us just an instancing control rather than a proper PvE mode. Maybe they'll get around to a better solution eventually. But for now we need block.
This has rapidly turned into yet another Open vs. Solo thread and probably should be shut down or moved to the one garbage pile thread they have for the whole Open v Solo thing.
Reported.
@TobiasFuzz, I appreciate the clarification, and I can appreciate the fact that you do in fact invite PvP that has a purpose. I simply maintain that we can't control or understand the motivations of others.
I don't PvP much any more. In any games. I've lost the appetite for it. I just don't try to rationalize the motivations of others or pass judgement on them. Many seal clubbers are budding PvPers who have neither the rig nor the experience to take on people who know what they're doing. And I get that. If one of them kills me, I just give them the old "gf" and move on.
But I get where you're coming from, and I apologize if I have misconstrued some of the statements made here. I just have very thick skin from years of dying in fires and having my corpse camped by the local thugs.
Well said, and fair enough.
A familiar thread with a different ending.
Properly designed, 'Punishment' should be enjoyable in and of itself, even as it actively deters from committing crimes. In GTA, for example, getting chased by the entire army is fun, even as it generally deters people from going to military bases and such without a plan.
Likewise, there's nothing inherently wrong with crime being easy in many places, as long as players have places they can go where it isn't as easy. The objective of a C&P system isn't to prevent player killing entirely. The purpose, as far as I can tell, is to give players the confidence needed to play in open(especially in busy systems) and socialize. If that results in players preferring to play in High security systems, that's perfectly fine.
...and there are a couple of further elements to consider: it seems players don't care about being shattered by Thargoids or NPCs, or even crashing to a planet, whilst a lot of complains arise if the responsible for such kaboom is CMDR X_ganks_X; another point is that beyond a certain experience (i.e. once a ship is 30-40% engineered) there's no real challenge against NPCs as they are just to weak to represent a threat. This is clearly a gameplay issue... so haulers can fly safely their barely engineered shieldless T9s like they're flying a fortress. Having a god-mode like game experience suddenly broken by another CMDR seems something unacceptable by solitaires and hermits.
Playing in open has been likened to swimming in an ocean when it is known that sharks also inhabit the water.
To protect the peaceful swimmers, the authorities net of the area create shark free, swim safe zones for large number of swimmers.
Cages can be used to protect against sharks.
Shark watch to alert everyone of the presence of sharks and possibly shark hunters to drive off the sharks and/or kill them.
Blocking could be the equivalent of the net or cage.
Steve
To protect the peaceful swimmers, the authorities net of the area create shark free, swim safe zones for large number of swimmers.
Cages can be used to protect against sharks.
Shark watch to alert everyone of the presence of sharks and possibly shark hunters to drive off the sharks and/or kill them.
Blocking could be the equivalent of the net or cage.
Steve
Yeah, this is quite a common issues across many games, but especially ED. It's fine of you die to X, but dying to Y is somehow different despite the fact that the outcome is the same. On top of that, if you didn't want to be CMDR X_ganks_X's victim, you didn't have to be. You could be in Solo. You could have found a PG. You could be playing Raft. It's this key point that I get hung up on. I'm fine with people blocking gankers if it makes them feel better to do so, but it seems very silly to me. I was introduced to some of the best people I have ever met in online games, including the group I still play other games with, by being killed by them. Instead of blocking or running away or cupping my ears and yelling "LALALALALA!", I started up conversations instead, and all of a sudden I had new friends. Go figure.
While again, I am fine with blocking people, the problem with the analogy presented here is that the protective nets you describe only actually protect about 0.0000000001% of the water. If you venture out past the line and something bad happens to you, well, you really have no one to blame but yourself when they find your severed leg washed up on the beach in a few days. ED doesn't even provide very good nets, so a lot of people resort to blocking. Which, again, is fine, but also not something I'd do.
Sure, people can learn, and if they can't, well, they can die.
But, not so many people are aware of the block functionality, so kudos to the OP for raising awareness of it and everyone posting here, keeping it at the top of the forums!
More O vs S threads in that pile may cause a singularity to appear. That won't end well.
S
Assumed "dangerous" has nothing to do with my decision to stay out of Open. Killing newbies out of sport, especially if they can't defend themselves, is a pretty reliable strategy. This is exactly why many abusers, whether in-game or not, prefer to use it. However, it's not a "fight" or anything I want to be a part of. If you've ever seen this winning tactic used, you haven't seen a fight, you've seen an assault.
In an assault, the attacker has a sense of success because he initiates the violence and dictates how it plays through. In other words, he feels relatively safe, because by attacking himself and defeating his opponent from the shadow of surprise, he can protect his own well-being and his back quite well. Although the trip is guaranteed to be full of adrenaline and excitement, he doesn't have to worry about his own well-being.
Not so in a fight. A fight is a longer confrontation with someone as tough, if not tougher, than you. And that someone is as determined to beat you as you are to beat him. It means that the only thing stopping him from doing things to you before you do them to him is you and your skills in combat. So here's a quick lithmus test to see if you're in a fight - you let your best attack go and it doesn't affect the target in any way - and then he throws his own attack at you.
In a fight, the confidence that is typical for an assault flies out the window, because now the fear of losing comes into play. And to put it mildly, this usually leads to a rampage from the attacker's behalf, especially if his own defense crumbles under his opponent's attack. Now, he will be in quite a hurry to get his opponent down before taking the fall himself. So as a rule of thumb: If you don't feel the fear of getting hurt, you are not fighting, you're assaulting.
Incidentally, it's also one of those situations where a ganker's "PvP" works exactly as he's practiced it. He is safe because he has the initiative and his victim is in a state in which he is unable to mount an effective resistance, let alone an effective counterattack. For many people, that feeling of being so smart and sharp when it happens to them is because they have imagined themselves to be a virtual killer commando and thrive on it. And it must also be said that assault and abuse comes with a terrible rush of emotions, adrenaline and endorphins. In fact, it is a form of activity that many get hooked on.
This particular human condition has a technical name: Sadism. The problem with sadism and abuse as a hobby would be, of course, when the sadist finally happens to end up in circles where such behavior is not condoned or at least somewhat tolerated, sooner or later he runs into someone who a) receives his best attack and doesn't budge, b) is faster than him to "pull" (making him the victim) or c) he ends up rattling the cages our delightful prison worlds.
So in what comes to anyone's choice between Open, PGs and other Hotel Californias... I'd say it's more of a "birds of a feather, flock together" thing.
In an assault, the attacker has a sense of success because he initiates the violence and dictates how it plays through. In other words, he feels relatively safe, because by attacking himself and defeating his opponent from the shadow of surprise, he can protect his own well-being and his back quite well. Although the trip is guaranteed to be full of adrenaline and excitement, he doesn't have to worry about his own well-being.
Not so in a fight. A fight is a longer confrontation with someone as tough, if not tougher, than you. And that someone is as determined to beat you as you are to beat him. It means that the only thing stopping him from doing things to you before you do them to him is you and your skills in combat. So here's a quick lithmus test to see if you're in a fight - you let your best attack go and it doesn't affect the target in any way - and then he throws his own attack at you.
In a fight, the confidence that is typical for an assault flies out the window, because now the fear of losing comes into play. And to put it mildly, this usually leads to a rampage from the attacker's behalf, especially if his own defense crumbles under his opponent's attack. Now, he will be in quite a hurry to get his opponent down before taking the fall himself. So as a rule of thumb: If you don't feel the fear of getting hurt, you are not fighting, you're assaulting.
Incidentally, it's also one of those situations where a ganker's "PvP" works exactly as he's practiced it. He is safe because he has the initiative and his victim is in a state in which he is unable to mount an effective resistance, let alone an effective counterattack. For many people, that feeling of being so smart and sharp when it happens to them is because they have imagined themselves to be a virtual killer commando and thrive on it. And it must also be said that assault and abuse comes with a terrible rush of emotions, adrenaline and endorphins. In fact, it is a form of activity that many get hooked on.
This particular human condition has a technical name: Sadism. The problem with sadism and abuse as a hobby would be, of course, when the sadist finally happens to end up in circles where such behavior is not condoned or at least somewhat tolerated, sooner or later he runs into someone who a) receives his best attack and doesn't budge, b) is faster than him to "pull" (making him the victim) or c) he ends up rattling the cages our delightful prison worlds.
So in what comes to anyone's choice between Open, PGs and other Hotel Californias... I'd say it's more of a "birds of a feather, flock together" thing.
lol it must be ok then if a youtuber says so, no disrespect to The Pilot because hes probably the least sensationalist of the bunch but youtubers/streamers generally havent a scooby.
O7
More O vs S threads in that pile may cause a singularity to appear. That won't end well.
O7
It should be remembered that in many open PvP style games the parties involved have very little to lose. Often just a respawn and carry on.
In ED the agressor often has both the situational advantage and very little to lose, while the target is at a disadvantage with possibly a great deal to lose.
I mean... I can't argue with this. Blocking is a thing. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if I've been blocked by half this forum for being an apologist for the gankers. I can see why someone would do it if they got killed minding their own business and were upset about it. I'm just not that guy.
But again, you are attempting to find a blanket rationalization for a behavior and apply some sort of uniform logic to it, which isn't worth doing. What matters isn't whether they're sadists or sociopaths or whatever armchair psychologist diagnoses get tossed around. What matters is how you, a non-sadist/sociopath/whatever, choose to deal with it. Some people block. Some people moan. Some people shrug it off. And some people have a laugh with their killer.
I never passed judgement on whether or not it was "ok". I just pointed out that it's very mainstream.
Although I see what you're saying, I don't really consider anything that can be lost in ED "a great deal". Rebuys are dirt cheap, and if you do die with something very expensive on you like a bunch of exploration data or commodities, that's kinda the risk you took given what you knew could happen in Open. To put it in further context, I came here about 6 years ago from a spaceship game where over a quarter of a million real dollars worth of people's assets and thousands of hours of their time were liquidated in less than 24 hours because someone forgot to pay a bill in a particularly important system. The ensuing bloodbath was... well... it was rough.
Dammit, I've been trapped in the lobby of this hotel all morning and avoiding work. This is what happens. Every time.
Imagine, if you will, a dark desert highway...a cool wind in your hair...Dammit, I've been trapped in the lobby of this hotel all morning and avoiding work. This is what happens. Every time.