PvP Gankers - why can't pvp be made consentual?

[Marra Morgan]

It's not something i've had to do myself but if someone doesn't want to pvp why shouldn't they log?

Because the devs have called it out as an exploit, and under the EULA we all agreed not to use exploits.

Choose a mode suitable for your playstyle. It's as simple as that, and entirely within your control.

 

[Guest 161958]

Actually I cannot understand why in an high security system authorities do not interdict gankers. Especially after they have been harassing in wings for hours.

High, Medium and low security system should give wings of gankers hard time interdicting them with a frequency proportional to the security rating of the system.

There is almost no risk for gankers now except a wing of gankerhunters.

 

[DeletedUser191218]

Actually I cannot understand why in an high security system authorities do not interdict gankers. Especially after they have been harassing in wings for hours.

High, Medium and low security system should give wings of gankers hard time interdicting them with a frequency proportional to the security rating of the system.

There is almost no risk for gankers now except a wing of gankerhunters.

Totally. Even if they do get interdicted it's almost impossible to lose against an npc. This whole thing has been made much worse due to engineering btw as unless you have a g5 modded ship you can't realistically even compete in pvp. So many little parts that FDev haven't thought out quite well enough culminate to make a fairly awful situation.

 

[DeletedUser191218]

Because the devs have called it out as an exploit, and under the EULA we all agreed not to use exploits.

Choose a mode suitable for your playstyle. It's as simple as that, and entirely within your control.

Open suits my playstyle. It's just ruined ny the presence of people who want to make it unpleasant for me and others. It's a nonsense arrangenent frankly that it's a behaviour actively encouraged by the developers.

 

[Marra Morgan]

Open suits my playstyle.

Everything you've posted suggests otherwise, tbh.

 

[racer1]

OP you can join a PvE type group like Mobius.

Rules of open are fairly clear and by signing into it you're consenting to them.

There are a million threads on this. It really comes down to different people have different opinions. Open caters for the no rules people, private groups cater for other play styles.

Ganking can take forms other than combat so a consensual PvP requirement won't stop it.

My question is - who loses out if it's consensual? PvPers still get to PvP with other consenting players. I get to play in open and interact with people without being hyperdicted by some antisocial weirdo in any CG i try to do. So who is missing out? Maybe the anti-social weirdo. But they're a weirdo, so it's fine. I don't get the mentality of wanting the game experience to be unnecessarily unpleasant at times.

I lose out for one. I'm not a PvPer but I like that anything can happen in open. I like that if my ship is destroyed I lose something, even though it isn't much, it makes the encounter that much more meaningful. Even when I'm being ganked.

You have PG for your playstyle, I suggest you use it instead of trying to force others to play in your style.

 

[DeletedUser191218]

Everything you've posted suggests otherwise, tbh.

Cool story bro.

 

[DeletedUser191218]

OP you can join a PvE type group like Mobius.

Rules of open are fairly clear and by signing into it you're consenting to them.

There are a million threads on this. It really comes down to different people have different opinions. Open caters for the no rules people, private groups cater for other play styles.

Ganking can take forms other than combat so a consensual PvP requirement won't stop it.

Cheers. At least you've offered a constructive response. I'll maybe try Mobius. I still think it's a bit daft and annoying that a few players can be allowed to deliberately try to run the game experience for others but then there's a lot of daft stuff in ED so shouldn't be surprising.

 

[Marra Morgan]

Cool story bro.

You're welcome, sis.

It's good to see you're taking my advice and considering another mode.

 

[Bigmaec]

Cheers. At least you've offered a constructive response. I'll maybe try Mobius. I still think it's a bit daft and annoying that a few players can be allowed to deliberately try to run the game experience for others but then there's a lot of daft stuff in ED so shouldn't be surprising.

Mobius is lots of fun. At least in Mobius Eurasia I met many friends ingame.

Another way to play is to always equip your ships "open fit" with reasonable shields, armored and with defensive stuff.
Haven't been ganked for weeks since I play this way after switching to open, as highwaking makes it easy to escape if your build isn't paper thin and you learn survival basics. But I respect it if you are not in for this, as it is vastly different to solo/PG.

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

The last two 'ganks' I encountered were genuine pirating.

Hell, I gave up 20t cargo from the 624t I was hauling yesterday, and left in peace (even though with engineered-boosted A7 shields I can avoid getting destroyed unless my FSD is taken out). This is good gameplay, I prefer open... the biggest issue with open are NPC ships that block landing pads at busy CG stations.

 

[DeletedUser191218]

Mobius is lots of fun. At least in Mobius Eurasia I met many friends ingame.

Another way to play is to always equip your ships "open fit" with reasonable shields, armored and with defensive stuff.
Haven't been ganked for weeks since I play this way after switching to open, as highwaking makes it easy to escape if your build isn't paper thin and you learn survival basics. But I respect it if you are not in for this, as it is vastly different to solo/PG.

So i have a reasonably well equipped FDL. Shields are near 2000 i think and resistances are ok. I don't ever get killed by gankers now and can always either escape (if it's one of the big 3 ships) or win. My combat competence is ok (i'm fa-off in combat which, in an FDL, makes a tricky target to hit). It's just more annoying than anything.
I was in a CG recently and kept being interdicted by the same guy. Every time i would fa-off towards him, boost past and low wake out. Again, interdicted. So i high wake out and then return and he's there again. I just thought this surely isn't a good way to do pvp in a game? I've submitted a mobius request anyway so will give it a go.

 

[Hairy Polo]

I keep reading terms like 'forced PvP' and 'non-consensual PvP.' These terms would only apply if someone infiltrated a player group, such as Mobius, to kill players (which has been done in the past).

Other than that, there is no such thing.

Some players will always make their own rules which everyone else *should* abide by.

 

[DeletedUser191218]

I keep reading terms like 'forced PvP' and 'non-consensual PvP.' These terms would only apply if someone infiltrated a player group, such as Mobius, to kill players (which has been done in the past).

Other than that, there is no such thing.

Some players will always make their own rules which everyone else *should* abide by.

Whatever mate. If someone attacks me and coerces me into a pvp contest against my wishes it's forced and non-consensual. You're welcome to argue black is white if you desire though.

 

[znôrt]

Whatever mate. If someone attacks me and coerces me into a pvp contest against my wishes it's forced and non-consensual. You're welcome to argue black is white if you desire though.

the point is that playing in open is an implicit consent for pvp. it can be argued that 'open' shouldn't be the 'first' (assumed as default by many) option, or that some warning might be appropriate.

 

[NeilF]

Because, if you are simulating space, there aren't any walled-off arenas. It *should* be a functional crime and punishment system, driven by system security levels and faction states, that penalises antisocial behaviour - rather than any 'artificial' boundaries.

Of course, that's easier typed into a forum post, than implemented in game, it seems...

Agreed! We're four years in, and by now why don't we have:-
1) Illegal destruction (yes, even in no populated systems needlessly/incorrectly defaulting to "anarchy") resulting in increased notoriety which should allow a couple of illegal destruction over a given period before then ramping up significant penalties such as stations & entire systems denying access. A Pilots Federation bounty making the CMDR a legal target to all other CMDRs, and if notoriety is high enough, the CMDR is highlighted to all other CMDRs as a know psycho. Notoriety should take days/weeks to decay.
2) The game orchestrating easy to access, meaningful PvP gameplay (eg: Via Powerplay, OPEN only CGs, or the game orchestrating labeled/clear PvP Hotspots in OPEN via the BGS etc.

Done! Penalise the unwanted PvP. Promote the wanted PvP.


At the moment we have clunky C&P mechanics ontop of shallow PvP gameplay which players are simply trying to still make the best of after FOUR years....

 

[Hairy Polo]

Whatever mate. If someone attacks me and coerces me into a pvp contest against my wishes it's forced and non-consensual. You're welcome to argue black is white if you desire though.

Lol, you keep making up your own rules there, buddy. You gave permission and agreed to PvP when you signed into open. Why is that so difficult to accept and/or understand?

You're welcome to argue white is black if you desire though.

 

[bladerunner900]

It's an aspect of ED i've never understood. I enjoy open and the interaction with other players. But why can't pvp be consentual? For eg, ESO has a PvP arena essentially but you can challenge players to a dual in the pve maps. It works. You still get the mmo vibe without people ruining the game for others. I don't mind a bit of pvp but not being attavked and hounded by gankers in uber-engineered ships in a CG system. I know the tips for escaping but it's a really unpleasant element of this game. And they have the cheek to take the high ground about combat logging. It's not something i've had to do myself but if someone doesn't want to pvp why shouldn't they log? It's not fair to force someone into playing the game in a way they don't want to. That's just bullying. I really do think pvp should be a mutual thing.

Humans are social animals. Unfortunately the anti-social minority can spoil it for the majority. Hence private groups. Not an ideal answer because of the limits on membership numbers.

 

[DeletedUser191218]

Lol, you keep making up your own rules there, buddy. You gave permission and agreed to PvP when you signed into open. Why is that so difficult to accept and/or understand?

You're welcome to argue white is black if you desire though.

Doh. See my OP. The entire premise of this thread is predicated around consideration around changing the current status quo so that open does not explicitly entail consent to being ganked. This is why you really need to read things from the start.

 

[NeilF]

Lol, you keep making up your own rules there, buddy. You gave permission and agreed to PvP when you signed into open.

You're welcome to argue white is black if you desire though.

In year one of the game, I accepted the placeholder PvP gameplay and placeholder C&P mechanics. Four years on, I can't...

What does the game now orchestrate as regards actual meaningful PvP gameplay? And are the C&P mechanics effective for toxic habitual pointless ganking?


Personally, I would have hoped after four years the game could have moved on a bit from CMDRs still having to make the best of the shallow PvP experience we started with four years ago... But hey! At least we gave plenty of Generation Ships to point and click at, and Multicrew to do next to nothing with, and CQC to watch collect dust, and... etc...

Is mindless/pointless/toxic ganking happening in OPEN? Yes. Is it what PvP should be about in OPEN? I'd suggest we should expect a little more after four years.