Gank Evasion Academy

How would knowing the relative or absolute numbers change the OP's offer to train players that want some practice

You should ask OP how the numbers are relevant. He thinks his argument that he's not luring players hinges on those numbers being correct.

The guy is even hoping he can train people into shooting at him in the future. Yeah, sounds like there are no population problems for gankers at all.
 
Last edited:
You should ask OP how the numbers are relevant. He thinks his argument that he's not luring players hinges on those numbers being correct.

The guy is even hoping he can train people into shooting at him in the future. Yeah, sounds like there are no population problems for gankers at all.

There's not. And I'm the now literal murderhobo bumming a ride to Colonia saying it.

Anyway, this really isn't the thread for this. Gank's got some good stuff going on here. It's been cool watching the positive vibes grow in his Discord.
 
You should ask OP how the numbers are relevant. He thinks his argument that he's not luring players hinges on those numbers being correct.

The guy is even hoping he can train people into shooting at him in the future. Yeah, sounds like there are no population problems for gankers at all.
Dude, you're the one that brought up player numbers.

You know what actually gave me this idea? The fact that almost every player out of the HUNDREDS that I've ganked in the past 6 months that I've been on PC, has literally done all the wrongs things when getting interdicted with no hope of escaping. And every time I think to myself "if only I could show these players the proper way of escaping".

Again, if you played in open you would know there's no shortage of players. This has to be the dumbest argument I've seen about this.
 
Elite dangerous open play has one problem. No rules. It doesn't work well. If they want more people in open then maybe making low security and anarchy systems into pvp zones could help. While other systems would be safe. That way people could avoid pvp if they want to but still play and interact with other cmdrs.

Also if people think Elite is bad then they haven't been playing games for very long. I remember the early days of ultima online PKs and others far worse.

Make dedicated pvp allowed systems. It won't solve everything but it would be a start.

o7
 
Elite dangerous open play has one problem. No rules. It doesn't work well. If they want more people in open then maybe making low security and anarchy systems into pvp zones could help. While other systems would be safe. That way people could avoid pvp if they want to but still play and interact with other cmdrs.

Also if people think Elite is bad then they haven't been playing games for very long. I remember the early days of ultima online PKs and others far worse.

Make dedicated pvp allowed systems. It won't solve everything but it would be a start.

o7
That's probably never gonna happen though so I'm attempting to take matters into my own hands by offering training to those that want to play in open.
 
Elite dangerous open play has one problem. No rules. It doesn't work well. If they want more people in open then maybe making low security and anarchy systems into pvp zones could help. While other systems would be safe. That way people could avoid pvp if they want to but still play and interact with other cmdrs.

Also if people think Elite is bad then they haven't been playing games for very long. I remember the early days of ultima online PKs and others far worse.

Make dedicated pvp allowed systems. It won't solve everything but it would be a start.

o7

What the game needs is incentive for pvp rather than zones. Right now Elite Dangerous is a PVE game with some gankers roaming around. Players should be seeking pvp experience in open, not avoiding it or running away from interdictions.
 
Last edited:
The problem with that is that any 'incentives' will be immediately abused. Or can you imagine any form of incentive that's guaranteed not abusable?

Sure, the destroyed ship loses something and the other ship gains something. The only abuse that can occur is players could essentially trade that resource with each other. But it doesn't generate a resource out of thin air like bounties does.
 
The game didn't really commit. You have the weird mixture of solo/group, open, and the semi-interactable powerplay mixed up with all that mess of modes. Either way you're chasing the ghosts of people you never see. If the game committed one way or another maybe it would feel better.
I've literally said almost this exact thing in other threads. 100% agree
 
I have a BGS war going on around my territory at the moment, it's been going for a month or so.

I know a lot of people, I've played in Open for years & I have several players from both sides on my friend list. I can see that they are in open (and when they aren't ;)).

The leaders of each side have both committed to the BGS conflict in Open, and really they both just want an excuse to fight, win or lose so there isn't much animosity. I like that :)


The reason I bring this up is because I can see that both leaders have just entered the same system....


The game doesn't force PvP, but when you play it with that risk ever-present, it can be amazing :D
 
Other games are able to figure out how to do it without having exploits, why can't Frontier?
Can't answer that. But I am curious as to what your view would be. How could PvP be incentivised?
I've been wanting to actually get into it more seriously, but I realise that the way the game is designed, it's just really hard at this point to implement it in a way that rewards you to do so.
IMO PP was the only way they could have gone with without disturbing those who aren't inclined to engage in PvP. Sandro actually had a point there.
 
I learned long ago that to play open is to invite PVP combat. I have enough to deal with in the way of pirates when playing solo mode. I sure don't want to have to deal with insanely good players deciding that my load of biowaste is worth ganking. So if it involves passengers, cargo, or mining, I play solo mode.
 
I learned long ago that to play open is to invite PVP combat. I have enough to deal with in the way of pirates when playing solo mode. I sure don't want to have to deal with insanely good players deciding that my load of biowaste is worth ganking. So if it involves passengers, cargo, or mining, I play solo mode.

Nah man. I'm at PvP, but I try to play in Open most of the time. I don't know what your homebase is, but if it isn't smack in the middle of the bubble and nearby Shinrarta or Deciat, you wont encounter hostiles that often. And if you do, just submit and jump out. It's a thrill in itself. It always gets my heart pumping at least. And I like that excitement.
But if you don't, that's all good. Thre's three modes and solo is perfectly fine.
Just don 't pretend that logging into Open is some sort of suicide mission. Because it isn't. Seriously, 99% -and that's not a guess, I'm even rounding down here- 99% of the systems in the bubble are perfectly safe.
 
Can't answer that. But I am curious as to what your view would be. How could PvP be incentivised?
I've been wanting to actually get into it more seriously, but I realise that the way the game is designed, it's just really hard at this point to implement it in a way that rewards you to do so.
IMO PP was the only way they could have gone with without disturbing those who aren't inclined to engage in PvP. Sandro actually had a point there.
If it were up to me, I would make half of the bubble high security space where, if you so much as interdict a player with crimes on, you'll be annihilated by ATR before you can even get a shot off. In the other half, depending on what power you are aligned with, it's basically just a free for all against players aligned to enemy powers, with each power struggling for power of the bubble and players influencing the borders directly. If you've ever played Elder Scrolls Online, it would be very similar to how pvp and pve are separated in that game.
 
Right now I don't even consider myself to have a home base. I just left Obsidian after almost two years parked at the station and it was barely an hour's flight time to Meliae which was where I had my other ships and most of my spare gear, modules, and racks parked. I'd totally forgotten that I'd equipped it with a 6A fuel scoop. I call it my pet black hole. Sucks up fuel so fast it's done before you even realize it deployed. WIth 128T fuel capacity I wasn't too worried if I got a string of non-scoopables along the route.

I'd like to set up shop at a station that has EVERYTHING, every ship, every service, every possible upgrade for sale, and also be in the middle of the bubble. And of course where the money is good or at least not below average.

One thing I like about this game is that no matter what you choose to do, it's going to annoy you with something before long. Haul any cargo, some coprophagic NPC pirate wants your biowaste. Carry passengers and some fool wants to go sightseeing mid trip. I wish the game allowed you to pick passengers and throw them in escape pods and push the button on them. Or better yet, contact a slave trader and just sell the annoying passenger(s) to the slaver. Wealthy tourists are the worst passengers. I'd like to be able to space them in their underpants and use them for target practice. And forget about mining in peace. It won't be long before some socialist wants you to share your wealth with him. And do nothing to earnit, of course.
 
I learned long ago that to play open is to invite PVP combat. I have enough to deal with in the way of pirates when playing solo mode. I sure don't want to have to deal with insanely good players deciding that my load of biowaste is worth ganking. So if it involves passengers, cargo, or mining, I play solo mode.
If you ever change your mind, I'd be happy to teach you how to survive against player attacks. It's actually pretty easy once you know how to do it.
 
Back
Top Bottom