PvP Frontier created PVP gankers. By design.

And this isn't even going into how collective punishment is objectively bad

what, you want to punish people for being friends with someone that ganks?
Force people to stop hanging out with each other in game because you don't like how they play?

I don't have words strong enough to express how much or how far I would like you to remove yourself from my field of perception.
Nobody gets to tell me who I fly with. Nobody gets to tell me where to fly.
So joining a squadron/platoon and completing missions and everybody gets a reward is okay, but if everybody gets penalties is bad?

If you join a community that does dark things then you are a dark businessman. Do not like it? Do not join them.

The squadron has commanders, officers, he should keep order if they need it.

A man who does not depend on anyone does not enter into an alliance with anyone, you can not make an alliance with anyone and do what he wants.
 
So joining a squadron/platoon and completing missions and everybody gets a reward is okay, but if everybody gets penalties is bad?

If you join a community that does dark things then you are a dark businessman. Do not like it? Do not join them.

The squadron has commanders, officers, he should keep order if they need it.

A man who does not depend on anyone does not enter into an alliance with anyone, you can not make an alliance with anyone and do what he wants.

Being in the same squadron doesn't give you rewards for completing missions, what the hell are you talking about?

So not only are you prepared to punish people because you don't like their friends, you also don't even know how the game works.

People like you make me want to gank. Maybe if we all ganked enough you'd sod off and leave us to play in peace.
 
Being in the same squadron doesn't give you rewards for completing missions, what the hell are you talking about?

So not only are you prepared to punish people because you don't like their friends, you also don't even know how the game works.
Are you saying that I do not know how the game works based on my words ?
That is, if you fly in the wing or in the team (multicrew) without missions, no one gets a bonus ?
Or you do not agree to receive a penalty if you gunner began to shoot himself ?
 
Are you saying that I do not know how the game works based on my words ?
That is, if you fly in the wing or in the team (multicrew) without missions, no one gets a bonus ?
Or you do not agree to receive a penalty if you gunner began to shoot himself ?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


So joining a squadron/platoon and completing missions and everybody gets a reward is okay, but if everybody gets penalties is bad?

If you join a community that does dark things then you are a dark businessman. Do not like it? Do not join them.

The squadron has commanders, officers, he should keep order if they need it.

A man who does not depend on anyone does not enter into an alliance with anyone, you can not make an alliance with anyone and do what he wants.

If you mean wing, then say wing. If you mean squadron, then say squadron.

They have two very different meanings.
 
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

If you mean wing, then say wing. If you mean squadron, then say squadron.

They have two very different meanings.
I know that's why I'm suggesting it.
In general, the meaning of my proposal is this: gankers can not have a squadron. Do you want to fly and gank? No problem, but you have to be alone.
Maybe that would make more sense.
 
I know that's why I'm suggesting it.
In general, the meaning of my proposal is this: gankers can not have a squadron. Do you want to fly and gank? No problem, but you have to be alone.
Maybe that would make more sense.
actually, no you don't mean wing.
Wings have 4 people max. In your previous post you refer ro a squadron of 100 people. So you actually do mean squadron.

For example :
A squadron of 100 men.
One of them ganked someone, got the fame, penalty and wanted.
Immediately the whole squadron gets the same, everyone.


So.... no. Your idea is bad and you should feel bad. Holy damn is this idea bad. Like, I'm not sure there are words for how bad this idea is.

What, because someone doesn't play the game you like, which is within the rules of the game, mind you, they should be locked out of being able to participate in other features of the game?

Holy damn, I don't even like ganking, but I like the idea that you should be able to dictate how other people play and punish them for straying even less.
If you want to go this far then why not propose that player-on-player damage be disabled entirely? If you're going to effectively ban people from playing just for associating with someone who does something you don't like, why not just make that thing impossible to do?

Actually, I shouldn't put that idea in your head. Maybe an open-world game with pvp enabled isn't for you.

But seriously, imagine if you joined a massive squadron, like the new players initiative, and one of them kills another player. Say they were having a training match and one of them forgot to turn crimes off. Now you, who had nothing to do with this, log on the next day and find that you're wanted and notorious for the crimes of two completely unrelated people.

So.. what? Now we're getting really spiteful because now what you're proposing is that the person who accidentally got notoriety should be chased out of the squadron and treated like a pariah. People will be scared to form squadrons and welcome new members in case those new members decide to gank.

I cannot think of anything more poisonous to a community than collective punishment and guilt by association for something that isn't even outside the rules of the game.

This would do more damage to the community than any amount of ganking ever could.

And even without that - what, you think that because someone plays a game in a way you don't like, then the desired solution is to ostracise them, force them out, push them away from being able to hang out with other players in a social context and punish anyone who dares to take them in?

It is a terrible idea and you should genuinely take a look at yourself in the mirror for even thinking that it's an okay thing to want.
 
People will be scared to form squadrons and welcome new members in case those new members decide to gank.
Something like that is what I want to get out of this sentence.

P.S. Maybe my translator is broken, but I don't quite understand some of your words, I expect to hear something like :
your sentence is bad because. But it seems to me that some phrases are not constructive.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, this one REALLY doesn't work. So many ways it can be abused. It would create far more issue than "ganking" itself currently does.

For clarity, this is a bad idea, because:
  • No one should ever be guilty by association - this is FUNDAMENTAL
  • a player could have a disagreement with their squadron, and use this to cause them issues prior to leaving
  • existing "gank" squadrons could easily use this to make money, as described above by @Screemonster
  • "gank" squadrons literally wouldn't care about another bounty / more noteriety - they don't care now
  • mistakes happen - as has previously been discussed, the game doesn't differentiate between NPCs and CMDRs, so if one accidentally destroys an NPC ship, one's entire squadron gets punished?
  • in a consensual PVP fight, one player forgets to turn "report crimes" off and gets a bounty, again the whole squadron suffers
Those are just what I've come up with off the top of my head and from other posts here. No, it's a terrible idea. Akin to WWII POW camps, where if one prisoner transgressed, all the prisoners were punished.

This 100% wouldn't stop (or even lessen) ganking - it would only serve to punish players for mistakes (and more importantly, the mistakes of others)
 
Top Bottom