Gankers' rights movement?

Because FDev decided that would be one of the ways they wanted to balance the different ships. Same as they decided it would not be balanced to grant some immunity to interdiction based on size.

It's a game, not a totally realistic simulation. Implementation of supercruise mechanics and interdictions reflect and represent the type of gameplay FDev want to produce, not a full prediction of some future state.
Balance different ships ;)
To do this, you need to make them equally achievable (rank of Admiral) to make the same number of slots (for engineering 2 shield amplifiers and 7 is different time in the extraction of materials) and most importantly to make them the same price, because all the equipment on it affects the amount of penalty if you lose the ship !

Here Above wrote, the more effort was spent to buy and modify the ship the better and it can not be compared if these efforts are less !
 
Except skill and experience are part of that balance in potential of the ship you fly. If you want to play a game balanced by all units being identical then draughts or backgammon may be your more speed.
The game is too much farm to ignore it. As for the initial conditions, the closest thing to it is ... CQC.
 
@SergMx have you played many other flight sim -type games? Balance is often not at all a consideration, as in real life vehicles of war are rarely balanced against one another. Typically, whatever balance is achieved is through the modification of the inferior vehicles' tactics and, often, actual construction or equipment, in order to make it competitive. But even then, balance is only roughly approximated and highly situational, contingent on the skill of the vehicles' operators, their training, doctrine, etc.

Granted, Elite is a game of science fiction, and not history, but it seems FDev have chosen to go a similar route as a historical flight sim. There are a wide variety of ships with pretty broad differentiation in class and capability. There is no pretense whatsoever that a Sidewinder will be balanced against an Anaconda.

With that said, for whatever reason, FDev have decided to make the interdiction minigame feature varying maneuverability, and they've decided to make all ships capable of interdicting one another. One might argue it's because they don't want any ship to be immune to interaction with other ships, or because it would be too technically complicated to require multiple ships to cooperate to interdict a larger ship, or for some other reason.

Regardless, after 6 years it's unlikely these core game mechanics will change, and "balance" is not a compelling reason to argue for same, especially not when there is precious little balance in evidence anywhere else in the experience. FDev have balanced interdictions as they see fit, creating an interesting minigame for players which prevents any ship class from being immune to interaction. Overall, of the many things that could stand improvement in the game, interdictions are really not the thing most in need of attention.
 
I'm gonna get you to build a PvP ship one of these days
But I'm just so sick of the griiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnd. https://media1.tenor.com/images/dba0f053d786d6de567490761ca2b49f/tenor.gif

I wanted to insert that gif as an image but I'm a boomer and haven't used message boards for many years.

Seriously though, I will get back to engineering. It's just bottom of the reasons I can think of to log into Elite right now. I'll just have to be satisfied with a moderately fast ship. Which I'm sure will be shown to be a very slow ship if I bump into yourself or another human player one day.

I'll just fly around and do random stuff for the time being.
Here's the realtor youtube vid of it though
Source: https://youtu.be/4kUC9abA4KM
Nice. I'd love to be able to just work from home and live in a place like that. The Amazon drones could bring me everything I need.
 
Disclaimer: I do not engage in ganking activity (well not yet, hehehe) though I have been accused of dishonorable conduct whenever I found uninvited explorers poking around my secret mining area. Lets just say I was polite enough to "ask" them to leave before murdering them, but I digress.

This topic is about people spouting condemnations and behaving in a toxic fashion when being the victim of a game mechanic that endorses villainy, even if it does not promote it. However some vile, purist individuals are irrationally imposing their narrow minded peace mongering and demanding that the game be tailored to their minority playstyles. I believe these "false justice warriors" should be opposed.

To be clear, I do not take any superior moral position here, only a technical one. I will use whatever in-game means at my disposal to protect my interests, and if I so choose I will kill, purge, exterminate, murder, slaughter, gank, raid, loot, plunder and otherwise pilfer my weesly guts out. And if the unfortunate soul happens to be in a rival faction, I will even be hailed as a hero, even if there is a price on my head afterwards.



Now I speak also as a victim of many attempts of ganking, a large percentage were successful. And in spite of that, I believe people have the right to roleplay as the bad guy if they so choose. You cannot have a "wild west" like space game without outlaws, it breaks immersion. But how far should we go to... "explain" those rights to people? Should we organize? Form a movement?

I believe that it may even be a good thing, may get people to finally accept that the bad guys are out there, in the big, black sea, ready to pounce anywhere, anytime.
View attachment 172022
HERE HERE!

But AFAIAC "ganking" per se is just fine and allowed by the game mechanics.

My only gripe with PvP in this game is how FDev allows players to instance-block people for doing something that is allowed by the game mechanics themselves (or any reason they want no matter how absurd) and where other things encourage it (being able to interdict each other, hatch break each other, etc). That is crossing the line.
 
Last edited:
HERE HERE!

But AFAIAC "ganking" per se is just fine and allowed by the game mechanics.

My only gripe with PvP in this game is how FDev allows players to instance-block people for doing something that is allowed by the game mechanics themselves (or any reason they want no matter how absurd) and where other things encourage it (being able to interdict each other, hatch break each other, etc). That is crossing the line.
So if you consider "ganking" to be just fine, surely you are man enough to permit the measures to not play with you, that are "allowed by the game mechanics", to be just fine too?

(or perhaps you only endorse the things that allow you to do whatever you wish?)
 
If it's some PvE rando blocking someone who's out to gank, I don't really care. Not much different from them switching modes at the end of the day.

It's PvP folks who block other PvP people to prevent instancing because of a skill disparity. It's incredibly rare, but it happens.

It's hard enough to get everyone instanced properly as it is, and that's just another layer of garbage on top of what we already contend with.
 
So if you consider "ganking" to be just fine, surely you are man enough to permit the measures to not play with you, that are "allowed by the game mechanics", to be just fine too?

(or perhaps you only endorse the things that allow you to do whatever you wish?)
Shut up, Rat catcher.

Engineers suck though. I beed to make an entire new thread about that.
 
So if you consider "ganking" to be just fine, surely you are man enough to permit the measures to not play with you, that are "allowed by the game mechanics", to be just fine too?

(or perhaps you only endorse the things that allow you to do whatever you wish?)
Both blocking and 'ganking' are, in and of themselves, entirely within the scope of the game's rules. However, blocking is more likely to be disruptive and is automatically a contextless, out-of-character, imposition on the instancing abilities of others, even those not personally blocked.

If all blocking did was affect the target, and no one else, I'd still think it was a silly OOC imposition on in-character events, but I wouldn't have major problems with it. However, it does not, and cannot, work this way. It has to have the ability to fragment instances to work as described, which means significant potential for abuse and collateral damage.

Not much different from them switching modes at the end of the day.
My major complaint about blocking is due to it, in fact, being very different from switching modes.

Switching modes doesn't impose on anyone else. A single block creates an entire new instance, and affects everyone who may find themselves in it.

I don't care one whit which mode someone plays in, but I find it very annoying that my CMDR can find himself in an entirely separate parallel universe from those he may otherwise have encountered, just because he was paired with someone who was or was not subject to a block. Yes, multiple instances and instancing issues would exist without blocking, but blocking compounds them.
 
You can bring all the gaming morality you want to the table but simply put....the game allows it so it's "legal" gameplay. Fyi, I don't gankbut I will kill those listed as wanted or enemy.
 
Shut up, Rat catcher.

Engineers suck though. I beed to make an entire new thread about that.
No, I don't think I will :ROFLMAO:

Odd how these 'super-hard' folk get butt-hurt when it is suggested that there is a whole sector of the playerbase who really don't have the desire to play with them, almost... now what is that favourite word... oh, yes "carebear" like...
 
Last edited:
Both blocking and 'ganking' are, in and of themselves, entirely within the scope of the game's rules. However, blocking is more likely to be disruptive and is automatically a contextless, out-of-character, imposition on the instancing abilities of others, even those not personally blocked.

If all blocking did was affect the target, and no one else, I'd still think it was a silly OOC imposition on in-character events, but I wouldn't have major problems with it. However, it does not, and cannot, work this way. It has to have the ability to fragment instances to work as described, which means significant potential for abuse and collateral damage.
Blocking has serious issues... hence why my block list remains empty...

But, if it wasn't for a certain 'playstyle' perhaps it would be used far less indiscriminately?
 
Top Bottom