Gankers' rights movement?

Nice story, until you run into someone capable, using reverb torps or a wing that knows what it's doing.
Then the false sense of security about "PvP heroes not daring" leads to another salty forum thread or reddit post about ebul gweefers 😂
Well I do not deny that there are people who can and will break big bad ships :) But seems to me that there is certain subset of people who really dare to attack only weak looking targets, and are very pacifists if anything that looks like it can fight back comes to their sights. :D
 
Well I do not deny that there are people who can and will break big bad ships :) But seems to me that there is certain subset of people who really dare to attack only weak looking targets, and are very pacifists if anything that looks like it can fight back comes to their sights. :D
True, but these guys are those that pose no threat at all when you fly a somewhat competently engineered and equipped ship.
Which is not a 3D shielded Asp 😜
 
Quite likely my friend would have escaped with minor damage if he hadn't need to get in to that station. His ship was quite a speed machine, and usually can just boost away from most problems. Even in that fight it was luck and speed that allowed him to not explode :D
 
Pablo Escobar says hi:
pablo-escobar-whitehouse1.jpg


High-security should mean that an area has both enough crime, and enough assets to protect, to justify the cost of maintaining rapid response forces capable of being a credible deterrent and possibly even stopping a crime in progress.

Using reality as an analog, it doesn't matter how high the security is somewhere, if I want someone dead badly enough, chances are they will die. When every second counts, help is minutes away. The reason there isn't considerably more violence and chaos in places with effective security is that the consequences are extreme. Yes, I could stab, shoot, run down with a large vehicle, or stuff my van with a ton of homemade explosives and five hundred pounds of tungsten ball-bearings and kill just about anything...but the chances of me doing this in a 'high security' area, and escaping are negligible. If I want to survive, freedom intact, as a killer, I need to target nobodies, or ambush people where response times are long, witnesses few, and surveillance absent.

Elite: Dangerous is too soft on consequences. There is no crime prevention system, and no credible deterrent, because of this lack of consequence. There is no way to make an ATR response swift and potent enough to actually protect anyone as long as CMDRs inclined to attack clean targets can be clean while doing so and ATR, as ineffective as they are, already have absurd and immersion defying capabilities (weapons no CMDR can get a vague analog to and the ability to teleport).

Waiting for criminals to act is acting too late, but deterrents need to be as proactive as possible, because making them heavy handed like ATR is both ineffectual and implausible. Unfortunately, the game is completely lacking in the mechanisms (mostly persistence related) to do credible C&P.

How does that shot of Mr Escobar compare to a fully engineered PVP kill machine? It doesn't, if PVPers turned up in a hi sec system in a caravan with the kids the ATR wouldn't respond, if Mr Escobar tried to approach the Whitehouse with a Browning 50 cal in each hand how far would he have got?

Everyone says Elite is a dystopian future "Wild West" so to speak, well then the Authorities should be heavy handed, that's why I mentioned Mr Dredd. Hell we have the death penalty for loitering in a station fer gawds sakes!!
 
Again, it would need to be even more than what a station pumps at you, from several ships at once. At some point players have to assume some responsibility for that situation and not rely on security because unless ATR extreme™ spawn in a circle 500m around you and open fire right away you still have about 30 seconds to a minute of you saving yourself. In the game its safe to assume PvE security will save you in PvE- in a PvP situation treat everything as anarchy.
You are presuming I mean once the greifer has started to attack.....no I mean as SOON as the greifer enters Hi sec, kill squad of Godzilla proporations are sent against them...No time to look at the scanner to find a juicy(weak) target.

They should, but EDs sec response is reactive and only ATR do that (even then thats after they warn you in advance and you keep on killing). Someone has to die to set the chain going- the object should be that person dying should be someone else and not you.

I know that's how the system is triggered now, I'm saying that's wrong in some circumstances.

It should, superpowers should shun you if you get hostile, ATR, BH and all sorts should hunt you (while criminal gangs accept you more readily).
FD really need to do expand criminal career!

The question becomes what do you punish someone with if they are not afraid to be shot down? Like I said earlier (and you suggest) there should be repercussions outside of that encounter- but, players need to be able to avoid being a victim too.

FD need to work on a system of working out who the Dbags are, excessively combat focussed ships against much weaker targets (in hi and med sec, low and anarchies exempt area, valid PVP kills also exempt PP, BH, Faction etc), too many "seal clubbings" and the player is kicked out of the Pilots Federation, someone posted a page from the Elite site that mentions the ne'er do wells in the galaxy "going rogue" "betraying the PF", well the PF NEEDS to have teeth. Players going "rogue" and "betraying the PF" by attacking other PF members excessivly get booted out, NO insurance, insta kill squads in hi and medium sec. Maybe even random attacks from Ai Bounty Hunters....make life HARD for someone playhing the game that way. The ultimate test of skill, "Dark Souls" level if you will.

There are a multitude of ways to do it, its all down to FD. I don't envy them, because this topic touches the whole game.
Agreed, but I think it needs to be done, would make the galaxy more believeable, it'll make more sense and it'll give those wanting a challenge what they want. And it'll hopefully make the Dbags go to another game?
 
You are presuming I mean once the greifer has started to attack.....no I mean as SOON as the greifer enters Hi sec, kill squad of Godzilla proporations are sent against them...No time to look at the scanner to find a juicy(weak) target.

This is possible- I tried to make an even, skill based and simple version that keeps killers on their collective toes:


I know that's how the system is triggered now, I'm saying that's wrong in some circumstances.

Plus, I agree about security in general- these for example:


FD really need to do expand criminal career!

They do, and that as you go up and down its scale, doors open and close. The trick is to keep some doors far away from each other, while others overlap.

FD need to work on a system of working out who the Dbags are, excessively combat focussed ships against much weaker targets (in hi and med sec, low and anarchies exempt area, valid PVP kills also exempt PP, BH, Faction etc), too many "seal clubbings" and the player is kicked out of the Pilots Federation, someone posted a page from the Elite site that mentions the ne'er do wells in the galaxy "going rogue" "betraying the PF", well the PF NEEDS to have teeth. Players going "rogue" and "betraying the PF" by attacking other PF members excessivly get booted out, NO insurance, insta kill squads in hi and medium sec. Maybe even random attacks from Ai Bounty Hunters....make life HARD for someone playhing the game that way. The ultimate test of skill, "Dark Souls" level if you will.

Again great stuff. There should be a Jedi / Sith relationship with the Pilots Fed / The Club so that actions do have consequences.

Agreed, but I think it needs to be done, would make the galaxy more believeable, it'll make more sense and it'll give those wanting a challenge what they want. And it'll hopefully make the Dbags go to another game?

That would only happen if the general food source was more difficult to kill- this is either via modes, or the population learning to evade and avoid trouble when they can. I only wish the pilot training had a module where you could practice all this in controlled ways.
 
This is possible- I tried to make an even, skill based and simple version that keeps killers on their collective toes:




Plus, I agree about security in general- these for example:




They do, and that as you go up and down its scale, doors open and close. The trick is to keep some doors far away from each other, while others overlap.



Again great stuff. There should be a Jedi / Sith relationship with the Pilots Fed / The Club so that actions do have consequences.



That would only happen if the general food source was more difficult to kill- this is either via modes, or the population learning to evade and avoid trouble when they can. I only wish the pilot training had a module where you could practice all this in controlled ways.
Yup that's good ideas right there, maybe next era has some of this? (we can hope eh? ;) )
 
I expect that, as the block feature has formed part of the published design long before Powerplay was announced, it's unlikely to be changed for Powerplay. Those seeking to be unblockable by at least part of the player-base would very likely pledge if the block feature was over-ridden if both players were pledged.

IMO at least, block should not be a monolithic feature, but it should adapt to features inside the game. Which in reality is that Powerplay (which logically breaks block) should have an exemption.

Ad-hoc wings require trust - and not all those who might wish to join a wing are to be trusted, as some players delight in betrayal. While the existence of the modes is a problem for some, it's a feature for others.

Not everyone is out to get you- its up to you to take that risk. Thats what Open should be about, a dimension above simple NPC interactions.

What blocking should or should not be used for is not for players to decide - and Frontier place no apparent limits on its use.

True, but you'd think FD would think things through logically and look at what blocking should be for in the context of the game at certain times.
 
How does that shot of Mr Escobar compare to a fully engineered PVP kill machine?

That picture was taken in the early 80s, well after Pablo Escobar was known internationally as a drug trafficker, cartel leader, and mass murderer. He's on vacation, having his photo taken with his son in front of the White House.

It doesn't, if PVPers turned up in a hi sec system in a caravan with the kids the ATR wouldn't respond

ATR should be after criminals, irrespective of what they are flying, and not after well armed independent pilots, which is going to be most of them. Now if carrying weapons in high-sec was itself illegal, that would make things trickier, but one would still need to be scanned and intercepted by authorities.

if Mr Escobar tried to approach the Whitehouse with a Browning 50 cal in each hand how far would he have got?

Probably only to where he is in that photo, but mostly because Escobar was a fairly small man and 186+ pounds of weapons would probably have made it hard to climb the fence with just his feet.

Prior to the closing of Pennsylvania Ave to vehicular traffic in 1995, you could haven driven up in your van, hopped out with your Brownings akimbo, posed for a few photos, and likely driven off before being stopped. You might get a very uncomfortable no-knock warrant served on you by the ATF later, but it's not difficult to get a weapon to the front gates of the White House, even today.

Everyone says Elite is a dystopian future "Wild West" so to speak, well then the Authorities should be heavy handed, that's why I mentioned Mr Dredd. Hell we have the death penalty for loitering in a station fer gawds sakes!!

That heavy handedness certainly hasn't made crime uncommon or impossible in Mega-City One.
 
SLFs are a fringe case for me.
I linked a Corvette vid against Paul in another thread, Paul and I did several Big3 clashes. After the first one, where I nearly completely lagswitched him off
with my SLF (not even spamming commands) I refrained from using one. When I'm back in Carcosa I'm gonna try to make a vid about this.
There is something seriously borked about it, technically.

Whereas the police thing is one where I'd say "hey bad boy, trying to kill me? Your bad, you're breaking the law…"

I've noticed the SLF lag is hit and miss. Some outlaws interdict me, deploy their SLF and proceed to attack me. Sometimes I notice lag sometimes not. If it gets so bad that its impacting my survival, I'll bail on that encounter. No crying over comms about it, just "gg - catch you later"
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
IMO at least, block should not be a monolithic feature, but it should adapt to features inside the game. Which in reality is that Powerplay (which logically breaks block) should have an exemption.
Different levels in addition to the full instance block might indeed be useful.
Not everyone is out to get you- its up to you to take that risk. Thats what Open should be about, a dimension above simple NPC interactions.
Indeed it is up to each player whether or not to potentially waste their game time trusting other players. The idea of what Open should be about varies between players.
True, but you'd think FD would think things through logically and look at what blocking should be for in the context of the game at certain times.
I expect that the primary reason for the existence of the block feature is unaffected by which game content the player doing the blocking is engaging in, noting that the block feature has only ever been strengthened as time goes on.
 
400 mld of star systems, 200 ly cubic bubble around 50-80 gankers. They are located on both hemispheres. They have limited time for game, work, school and families
It means around 10 active from 8 to 12 p.m. It means 3 wings.
They are in 2 star systems.
  • Shinrarta dehzra
  • some CG or some engineers. If they are on CG then they are not at engineer
Really 10 persons terrorised entire galaxy with all parrarel universes?
If yes, then did better job than isis. isis terrorised only one planet.
Problem is like a monster in shadow of children room. If you turn lights on, there is no monster.
In fact there are no gankers. There is a community who refuses any, even simpliest and basic, rules of gameplay and form of self-development.
IF NPC, star, player or whatever destroying their ship, they are not thinking even single microsecond they should a bit learn a rules of a game what they are playing. They want to nerf NPC, stars, players, they want gimballed plasma accelerators, turreted iWin buttons.
I thought the number was this small as well. I was corrected on another thread. There is a facebook group dedicated to ganking in this game that has 1000 members (claim made by poster that corrected me).
 
Indeed it is up to each player whether or not to potentially waste their game time trusting other players. The idea of what Open should be about varies between players.

Its ironic since I seem to remember talk of trustworthyness with NPC wingmen at one point as well. But then, thats what squadrons are for too, more stable groups with internal codes of conduct.

I expect that the primary reason for the existence of the block feature is unaffected by which game content the player doing the blocking is engaging in, noting that the block feature has only ever been strengthened as time goes on.

It should be strong for some features (like generic open) where there is no gameplay focus, but limited in Powerplay (i.e. language) where the feature is about conflict. It then works to the strengths of the features, and not working against them at a conceptual level.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Its ironic since I seem to remember talk of trustworthyness with NPC wingmen at one point as well. But then, thats what squadrons are for too, more stable groups with internal codes of conduct.
The irony being that we are still awaiting NPC wingmen but got Squadrons instead - the former would likely be useful to all players whereas the latter are not necessarily.

On the other hand, if NPC fighter crew are considered to be a form of implementation of NPC wingmen, then the trustworthiness question has been removed, possibly because it was decided that it wouldn't be "fun".
It should be strong for some features (like generic open) where there is no gameplay focus, but limited in Powerplay (i.e. language) where the feature is about conflict. It then works to the strengths of the features, and not working against them at a conceptual level.
In which case the players it is rather obviously implemented as is to deal with would pledge to Powerplay to be unblockable by other pledged players.
 
The irony being that we are still awaiting NPC wingmen but got Squadrons instead - the former would likely be useful to all players whereas the latter are not necessarily.

On the other hand, if NPC fighter crew are considered to be a form of implementation of NPC wingmen, then the trustworthiness question has been removed, possibly because it was decided that it wouldn't be "fun".

But you still had that issue of trust- maybe new era will bring it with the AI.

In which case the players it is rather obviously implemented as is to deal with would pledge to Powerplay to be unblockable by other pledged players.

Thats the problem: if you pledge for whatever reason, you are a target. There are no innocent pledges, and even random destruction at the hands of another powers pledge is part of Powerplay.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
But you still had that issue of trust- maybe new era will bring it with the AI.
Might have had, maybe - as the DDF topic didn't make it in to the game as discussed.
Thats the problem: if you pledge for whatever reason, you are a target. There are no innocent pledges, and even random destruction at the hands of another powers pledge is part of Powerplay.
While it presents a problem to some, it does not seem to over-ride the primary purpose of the block feature (otherwise the block feature would include exemptions).
 
I wish the whole block list had a global toggle button. My entire list is less than one page of toxic a-holes and confirmed cheaters. But sometimes I want to turn the whole thing off to troubleshoot instancing issues. Its not worth the effort in its current form.
 
Top Bottom