no you wouldn’t be blind... for one thing, your bandwidth spike would warn you there’s others in the system (CTRL-B) and, all NPCs send canned messages before attempting to interdict (ie don’t try to get away... etc). In getting rid of the hollow box a few other tweaks might be needed, like showing it as hollow once an interdiction starts, or clearly labeling it as a player in comms if they send a message. I don’t say this solves griefing, it just removes the cross hairs off players that hollow boxes currently represent. Maybe take it a step further and make it impossible to differentiate a commander vs NPC at all, other than the bandwidth spike telling you someone might be there... you’d just be guessing based on the name
Griefers make open impossible, and how easy the solution is.
- Thread starter NisseNeutron
- Start date
no you wouldn’t be blind... for one thing, your bandwidth spike would warn you there’s others in the system (CTRL-B) and, all NPCs send canned messages before attempting to interdict (ie don’t try to get away... etc). In getting rid of the hollow box a few other tweaks might be needed, like showing it as hollow once an interdiction starts, or clearly labeling it as a player in comms if they send a message. I don’t say this solves griefing, it just removes the cross hairs off players that hollow boxes currently represent. Maybe take it a step further and make it impossible to differentiate a commander vs NPC at all, other than the bandwidth spike telling you someone might be there... you’d just be guessing based on the name
I'm surprised. People actually want it to be more difficult to establish player communications in the already lonely galaxy and replace it with outside-game gimmick like the bandwidth gauge? I don't like Deciat gankers, but I'd rather not lose the possibility of meeting & greeting other CMDRs on stations and systems along them.
Last edited:
Agree. I'm not a fan of being interdicted all the time in the hot spots, but I love the interaction that happens at certain places. The AXCZs, rescue ships, and damaged stations. I've expanded my friends list greatly just off meeting and chatting in those spots. I'd not have known we had newb commanders working on a Basalisk in the AXCZ and thus would not have been able to help them better organize their attacks without being able to quickly see who's who.
Last edited:
If you only get rid of hollow boxes in supercruise this is fine, all the fun player interactions occur in normal space anyway, and all the negative ones seem to be interdiction related.
He ganked usM00ka derailed this threat with the other one. It's all his fault.
Hmm. If everyone has gone maybe we could put this thread to good use. Anyone know any good gank builds?
I play in Open mode almost exclusively the past couple of years after being strictly Mobius for like the first year I played. Even made it to Farseer's in Open a few times w/o getting ganked.
Does it happen? Yeah, sure, it does. Does it happen every time you log in to the game and make a jump? No..
I don't like pvp, but I decided that I'd rather play in open because for how often I ever saw another player in Mobius, I may as well have just played Solo.
Does it happen? Yeah, sure, it does. Does it happen every time you log in to the game and make a jump? No..
I don't like pvp, but I decided that I'd rather play in open because for how often I ever saw another player in Mobius, I may as well have just played Solo.
Yeah, it does not happen everytime but often enough. My last Open-Only attempt ended shortly after I was so proud when finishing the grind to make my beloved Cobra MK3 "gank proof", engineering some hrps and mrps, shield and even sacrificing one slot for a shield booster. Tested at Farseer (cuz, ya kno, only then its gank proof) and still got blown to pieces in seconds, multiple times, obv. not gud 'nuff. Attempt failed.
Do you have your build handy? Id love to help you improve it
To be fair the solution was given on page one. In fact OP knew it before he even made the thread but just decided to ignore it.
It's the same answer it's always been and always will be; don't want any possibility of PVP? Play in a mode that isn't open. 61 pages of noise and lulz after it doesn't change the fundamental truth of that statement.
The root of this problem is the desire to play in open colliding with the unwillingness to do what it takes to succeed in it.
Congitive dissonance, caused by the fact they feel they should play in open and that they're the kind of people that like open modes, rubbing up against the fact that they don't actually like playing in open because they can't control everything that happens.
I've always thought the root of the problem lies in peoples shock at the huge difference between encountering a hostile npc and a hostile player.
It speaks volumes that in every case the victim thinks "yep, she'll be right" as they launch into open completely unprepared for the consequences should that hollow marker turn into anything except a benign o7.
I find it especially interesting how much extra vitriol ensues when death happens to a pvp player rather than an npc. Just goes to show how low skill/challenge the pve backdrop is when compared to the robust and ever evolving tactics and agression of real players.
Its a shame really, maybe if the pve content was elevated to the point of actually being dangerous, the average player would elevate thier builds, skills and tactics to a point where most gankers wouldn't be any real problem.
It speaks volumes that in every case the victim thinks "yep, she'll be right" as they launch into open completely unprepared for the consequences should that hollow marker turn into anything except a benign o7.
I find it especially interesting how much extra vitriol ensues when death happens to a pvp player rather than an npc. Just goes to show how low skill/challenge the pve backdrop is when compared to the robust and ever evolving tactics and agression of real players.
Its a shame really, maybe if the pve content was elevated to the point of actually being dangerous, the average player would elevate thier builds, skills and tactics to a point where most gankers wouldn't be any real problem.
Huh the vibe I get is people not liking the C&P response. Especially after they get blown up the first time, but consent to clicking into Open again. The logic of the bubble and C&P is just odd.
When a "PvP"er blows up an unarmed explorer in a hi-sec system, where's the response and danger for the attacker?
I remember nerf-calls that were mixed up with the NPCs having bugged weapons, and iirc most moaning about being killed very quickly was due to that, and not the AI behaviour routines. Sadly both got rolled back, and we never got the better AI re-added.
eg:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNrpDnp9-tE
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dHdsYrmKnM
There was one time when npcs ran away a lot (like whenever their shields dropped), making combat quite tedious, but iirc FDev changed that themselves.
I do agree the range of npc skould be more broad: with harmless being all but pinatas, while Elite npcs should be the best AI they can code. At the moment anything after say Master feels much the same.
When a "PvP"er blows up an unarmed explorer in a hi-sec system, where's the response and danger for the attacker?
What were these calls for nerfs?
I remember nerf-calls that were mixed up with the NPCs having bugged weapons, and iirc most moaning about being killed very quickly was due to that, and not the AI behaviour routines. Sadly both got rolled back, and we never got the better AI re-added.
eg:
There was one time when npcs ran away a lot (like whenever their shields dropped), making combat quite tedious, but iirc FDev changed that themselves.
I do agree the range of npc skould be more broad: with harmless being all but pinatas, while Elite npcs should be the best AI they can code. At the moment anything after say Master feels much the same.
Last edited: