PvP Gankers in Fleetcomm at Beagle Point

[Wargfoot]

Always check the Gs ahead of time. Got down to 40 something percent hull within this last year not paying close enough attention to it myself once.

This is assuming you want to bother survivng though as part of your play style. I'm not sure that it's actually the most effective style of play regarding progression in the game.

All the pro planetary landers bounce three times for good luck.
That's my habit, at any rate.

 

[Myrm]

Any landing that you can walk away from is a good landing.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

There rules are there, Frontier is just saying they do not enforce on behalf of the PG. Even then, just like playing any online game, there is a social contract that has an expectation for behaviors.

Ultimately the buck stops with the owner of the PG.

Any social contract is worth whatever time it takes to boot someone for violating your rules.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Any landing that you can walk away from is a good landing.

...if you use the ship the next day, it's an outstanding landing!

 

[Freyar]

Ultimately the buck stops with the owner of the PG.

Any social contract is worth whatever time it takes to boot someone for violating your rules.

However, people should be respecting those rules regardless. Should is different from reality, I am aware.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Should is different from reality

And super useless.

 

[DaggerSnake]

I can't understand the mentality of someone who would kill explorers.

In open, it’s just basic in game d-baggery, been happening in MMOs that allow it since the beginning. That’s why they made a Private Group option...oh...I guess they forgot the engagement settings for owners to use.

Infiltrating a private group to kill players? I guess the thing inside people who don’t do that is either missing, broken or just ignored.

At that point it’s kinda in Frontiers hands to give PG some options, or players hands to load out for PG as though they were in Open. Kind of defeats the purpose though.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

I guess the thing inside people who don’t do that is either missing, broken or just ignored.

Oh, gimmie a break.

Overblown comments like this are partially why some do it. And you know what? Deserved.

 

[WR3ND]

I suspect people generally have broken brains to one extent or another anyway. Probably helps social order and societal needs find balance in groups of people. But I digress...

Cheers.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I am in several different PG (was in mobius as well) and never agreed to PG's rules. How do you explain that ?
In reality, the only thing i did was requesting access to a PG. Parameters, admission and enforcing specific rules is on the moderator of the PG.

Damned if they don't.

The same goes for organizers of an event, or moderators of a discord channel. And look at the size of the hissy fit that is thrown when they do their job.
Damned if they do.

When a moderator decides to err on the side of caution, players act as if they have been violated, when they are more lenient, players blame them when something happens.

So, I have been hearing for years how it's up to Mobius to vet 30.000+ players. Fact of the matter is, you cannot vet that many players with any kind of regard of the individual. So if vetting is to take place in for instance a Fleetcomm event with discord support of thousands of players in a matter of days, it's not going to be nuanced. It's going to be blunt. So if you are of the position that it's up to the moderator to vet these players, you won't complain when the moderator has to use broad strokes because of the amount of players to vet. You don't go acting all indignant when you have a proud griefer reputation which you have nurtured for years and act all surprised when that same reputation gets you thrown out of a discord channel.

A flipping discord channel. Oh my. If this game is just a game, and we shouldn't be upset about losing your pixel ships, how upset should one get when he gets thrown out of a flipping discord channel?

It's a mad, mad, mad, mad, mad, mad galaxy, I tell you.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Damned if they don't.

The same goes for organizers of an event, or moderators of a discord channel. And look at the size of the hissy fit that is thrown when they do their job.
Damned if they do.

When a moderator decides to err on the side of caution, players act as if they have been violated, when they are more lenient, players blame them when something happens.

So, I have been hearing for years how it's up to Mobius to vet 30.000+ players. Fact of the matter is, you cannot vet that many players with any kind of regard of the individual. So if vetting is to take place in for instance a Fleetcomm event with discord support of thousands of players in a matter of days, it's not going to be nuanced. It's going to be blunt. So if you are of the position that it's up to the moderator to vet these players, you won't complain when the moderator has to use broad strokes because of the amount of players to vet. You don't go acting all indignant when you have a proud griefer reputation which you have nurtured for years and act all surprised when that same reputation gets you thrown out of a discord channel.

A flipping discord channel. Oh my. If this game is just a game, and we shouldn't be upset about losing your pixel ships, how upset should one get when he gets thrown out of a flipping discord channel?

It's a mad, mad, mad, mad, mad, mad galaxy, I tell you.

As an outside observer of these events why not next time, say Distant Worlds 3, put the onus on the people joining the PG?

Basically, "Yo, we got this super hot PG if you wanna roll in it. Don't mean you gank proof though, so, prepare accordingly. We'll obviously boot folks if they break the rules. Don't like it? Play in Open, another PG, or Solo."

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

As an outside observer of these events why not next time, say Distant Worlds 3, put the onus on the people joining the PG?

Basically, "Yo, we got this super hot PG if you wanna roll in it. Don't mean you gank proof though, so, prepare accordingly. We'll obviously boot folks if they break the rules. Don't like it? Play in Open, another PG, or Solo."

Because you'd be telling people in a PvE PG to prepare for PvP. Fleetcomm wasn't created for that, I didn't join Fleetcomm for that. DWE isn't that kind of event.

DWE you prepare for exploration. You want PvP? Play in Open, or create a PG for that.

As it is, those who were booted out, have proved the organisers right. Those who are killed in Fleetcomm by other CMDRs will have their account restored.

It's fine

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Because you'd be telling people in a PvE PG to prepare for PvP. Fleetcomm wasn't created for that, I didn't join Fleetcomm for that. DWE isn't that kind of event.

DWE you prepare for exploration. You want PvP? Play in Open, or create a PG for that.

As it this, those who were booted out, have proved the organisers right. Those who are killed in Fleetcomm by other CMDRs will have their account restored.

It's fine

I feel this position rejects some simple truths: people will try to infiltrate the PG of a large event in order to kill Commanders. There is nothing in the mechanics of the game or the PG system that can stop this currently. Anything else is irrelevant.

What we want is nice to talk about but dealing with what is should be where we start.

Recognizing this would've perhaps had leadership encouraging people not to prepare for combat but for evasion and escape and hopefully would've saved some, if not most, of the heartburn. In any case, it's what I would do if I were leading an Elite: Dangerous event of this size and scope.

 

[Old Duck]

I guess they forgot the engagement settings for owners to use.

The owners of private groups should have all sorts of settings, like when hosting your own old-school FPS server. The ability to toggle friendly fire, the ability to toggle Engineering, the ability to allow / disallow different weapons and defenses, etc. I think that would make PGs pretty amazing as it would allow groups to define all sorts of rules and game-styles, and the game itself would enforce these rules.

Like I said, I've seen it in plenty of other old-school games (it's been ages since I've hosted my own server).

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I feel this position rejects some simple truths: people will try to infiltrate the PG of a large event in order to kill Commanders. There is nothing in the mechanics of the game or the PG system that can stop this currently. Anything else is irrelevant.

"Yo Frontier!"
"Whaddup?"
"CMDR somethingorother just killed me in Fleetcomm"
"Oh dear, hang on .... there you go"

What we want is nice to talk about but dealing with what is should be where we start.

Recognizing this would've perhaps had leadership encouraging people not to prepare for combat but for evasion and escape and hopefully would've saved some, if not most, of the heartburn. In any case, it's what I would do if I were leading an Elite: Dangerous event of this size and scope.

The lion share of kills have been in Open. Players were adviced to stay out of Open. How successful would Distant Ganks have been, had all DWE2-ers stayed out of Open?

Just accept some people feel like combat is wasting their time, no fun and rather not be subject to it. If someone is in the game with the sole intent of destroying CMDRs, I don't want them in my game. So stay out of Fleetcomm.

 

[Freyar]

The owners of private groups should have all sorts of settings, like when hosting your own old-school FPS server. The ability to toggle friendly fire, the ability to toggle Engineering, the ability to allow / disallow different weapons and defenses, etc. I think that would make PGs pretty amazing as it would allow groups to define all sorts of rules and game-styles, and the game itself would enforce these rules.

Like I said, I've seen it in plenty of other old-school games (it's been ages since I've hosted my own server).

Would be interesting. If you turn off engineering, how would you handle engineered ships and engineered NPCs? Would you have separate spawn tables?

 

[WR3ND]

The owners of private groups should have all sorts of settings, like when hosting your own old-school FPS server. The ability to toggle friendly fire, the ability to toggle Engineering, the ability to allow / disallow different weapons and defenses, etc. I think that would make PGs pretty amazing as it would allow groups to define all sorts of rules and game-styles, and the game itself would enforce these rules.

Like I said, I've seen it in plenty of other old-school games (it's been ages since I've hosted my own server).

I do often have custom settings for my vanilla Minecraft servers that are built into the game. I think with this game the issue is that it's done in an MMO style.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The owners of private groups should have all sorts of settings, like when hosting your own old-school FPS server. The ability to toggle friendly fire, the ability to toggle Engineering, the ability to allow / disallow different weapons and defenses, etc. I think that would make PGs pretty amazing as it would allow groups to define all sorts of rules and game-styles, and the game itself would enforce these rules.

Like I said, I've seen it in plenty of other old-school games (it's been ages since I've hosted my own server).

For a long time I have been against the ability of toggling CMDR on CMDR damage.

I've come around to it. Open PvE mode, PGs with those settings. Bring it.

 

[Old Duck]

Would be interesting. If you turn off engineering, how would you handle engineered ships and engineered NPCs? Would you have separate spawn tables?

Unlike hosting a server, a hosted group would have to exist in a shared galaxy, so I suspect any place with a engineered NPC would still have that. My thinking was if you play in a group that has engineering turned off, it literally is "turned off" on any of your ships that has engineering for the duration you are playing in that group. The idea is for players who want Engineer-free PvP. Obviously this has some caveats, as some builds may not work properly when engineering effects are temporarily disabled (like efficient builds using a small power plant), but players joining such a group would likely not use engineered ships to begin with in that group, as they'd want to have optimized builds for that experience.

Back to the topic of this thread, turning off friendly fire and ramming damage (between CMDRs) would be the easy way to prevent ganking. Again, it would be PG specific, controlled by the owner of the PG, and 100% optional for players to jump in and out of.

 

[jasonbarron]

In open, it’s just basic in game d-baggery, been happening in MMOs that allow it since the beginning. That’s why they made a Private Group option...oh...I guess they forgot the engagement settings for owners to use.

Infiltrating a private group to kill players? I guess the thing inside people who don’t do that is either missing, broken or just ignored.

At that point it’s kinda in Frontiers hands to give PG some options, or players hands to load out for PG as though they were in Open. Kind of defeats the purpose though.

The attitude here is a big part of why it happens. Comments like this make me want to high five the mode Invaders.