Griefing: Is it?

[Robert Maynard]

Totally agree...

But there are some that are willing... I'm calling out to those types of players to stand together..

And those that aren't.. cool... simply call on the folks above.. am I missing something? doesn't everybody win?

Indeed there are - the difficulty for the player needing assistance is that they may not know who to call and even if they did know, by the time help arrived it would probably be too late....

Not trying to disparage the service at all - just pointing out that it is reactive and requires the player to know who to turn to.

 

[BigPappa]

Yes, this.
I've noticed a few threads on this forum where fighter-escorts are being offered - Alice Margatroid's Recon group or BigPappa's wing, for example.

It gives the victim protection, or a sense of recourse and justice; the vigilante the kind of gameplay they want; and the criminal must fight for their life!

For Open players, this is the sort of player interaction that it's all about, no?

Ha Ha... I could be crazy but it sounds to me like the "pirates" are getting bored and want more of a challenge?

And before everyone blasts me.. yes I've had my share of getting "blow'd up" and yes I wasn't too happy about it...

 

[CorvusDove]

Essentially what that player wants then, is a game without any possible killing at all.

..Until its not what they want. Its why you can't really listen to people who whine about a ship loss unless they can prove it was an unintended exploitation of game mechanics that led to it.

 

[lenna]

Ok, so griefing can include a pattern of behaviour, but you can't define the whole by a part. So I don't believe I have missed the point. Griefing is what I said it is, the intention to cause grief. If there is a pattern, I don't see the relevance to the definition. Do it once or do it many times, if FD find you guilty of intentionally causing grief the result is still the same.

Ultimately, for griefing to be identified as griefing there must be a pattern to the underlying behaviours otherwise "intent" is not provable.
---
My remarks are related to the oft raised question of define griefing... in essence I have. The pattern of behaviour could be identified in a single incident or many but ultimately there are tell tales that would be looked for in order to distinguish genuine and honest PvP from true griefing. Personally, I don't approve of all PvP behaviours BUT there is the point that not all of the distasteful PvP incidents are actually griefing by any definition.

 

[Nara]

Essentially what that player wants then, is a game without any possible killing at all.

Yes. Robert Maynard has pointed out that some people simply don't want to PvP. That's totally fine, not everyone has to like PvP. But for it to become a reality FD would have to change how Open play works by making player on player attacks impossible, or making 2 versions of Open play for PvE and PvP. Can any of us realistically see either possibility happening?

Or players could just accept FDs rules and go with the flow or play in Private/Solo.

 

[Marra Morgan]

Indeed there are - the difficulty for the player needing assistance is that they may not know who to call and even if they did know, by the time help arrived it would probably be too late....

Not trying to disparage the service at all - just pointing out that it is reactive and requires the player to know who to turn to.

I'd expect Fuel Rats face the same challenge, although they've been featured on GalNet a couple of times so maybe that's something that vigilante / protection groups should consider looking in to?

 

[Nara]

Ultimately, for griefing to be identified as griefing there must be a pattern to the underlying behaviours otherwise "intent" is not provable.
---
My remarks are related to the oft raised question of define griefing... in essence I have. The pattern of behaviour could be identified in a single incident or many but ultimately there are tell tales that would be looked for in order to distinguish genuine and honest PvP from true griefing. Personally, I don't approve of all PvP behaviours BUT there is the point that not all of the distasteful PvP incidents are actually griefing by any definition.

I could kill you 15 times, without reason, and it would still not be griefing. There would be no way to prove that I am intentionally trying to cause you grief, unless I communicated my intention, which as I said before is already covered in the EULA.

 

[lenna]

I could kill you 15 times, without reason, and it would still not be griefing. There would be no way to prove that I am intentionally trying to cause you grief, unless I communicated my intention, which as I said before is already covered in the EULA.

If you were camping the station and killing people soon after launch and did so everytime they launched then the intent is implicit, no communication required.
---
The actual definition of what constitutes griefing is ultimately very complex, but there are patterns to the underlying behaviour(s) that people would look for.

 

[CorvusDove]

Ultimately, for griefing to be identified as griefing there must be a pattern to the underlying behaviours otherwise "intent" is not provable.
---
My remarks are related to the oft raised question of define griefing... in essence I have. The pattern of behaviour could be identified in a single incident or many but ultimately there are tell tales that would be looked for in order to distinguish genuine and honest PvP from true griefing.

For once, I agree with rlsg on something. There should be a Community Event. Seriously, that never happens.

I'm going to post it again, because it's relevant to this point.

 

[BigPappa]

Indeed there are - the difficulty for the player needing assistance is that they may not know who to call and even if they did know, by the time help arrived it would probably be too late....

Not trying to disparage the service at all - just pointing out that it is reactive and requires the player to know who to turn to.

And let's keep on posting until everyone notices who they can call on!

if someone is engaged you're right, it's already too late...

However each incident, included with previously collected data, helps us to identify potential patterns and trends so we analyze trouble areas that we can focus on to be more "proactive and preventative" in nature.

 

[Nara]

For once, I agree with rlsg on something. There should be a Community Event. Seriously, that never happens.

I'm going to post it again, because it's relevant to this point.

Your graphic is great until it reaches "Causing player misery as a reason", then it unfortunately falls apart. This question is asking the player to make an assumption based on emotion. Good luck with that.

- - - Updated - - -

If you were camping the station and killing people soon after launch and did so everytime they launched then the intent is implicit, no communication required.
---
The actual definition of what constitutes griefing is ultimately very complex, but there are patterns to the underlying behaviour(s) that people would look for.

No, this is still not griefing. A player is allowed to attack people outside a station, as many people as he likes. Why do you think this is griefing?

 

[CorvusDove]

Your graphic is great until it reaches "Causing player misery as a reason", then it unfortunately falls apart. This question is asking the player to make an assumption based on emotion. Good luck with that.

- - - Updated - - -

No, this is still not griefing. A player is allowed to attack people outside a station, as many people as he likes. Why do you think this is griefing?

Nara, that was mostly a space issue thing. I mean to imply on it that the assailant is actually stating that's the reason, not that the person who lost is guessing at it emotionally. If you get that far down the filters, then you're either in the other bins or the person is bragging and telling you how nice your carebear tears taste, which is a pretty solid admission.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yes. Robert Maynard has pointed out that some people simply don't want to PvP. That's totally fine, not everyone has to like PvP.

Two of the three paths to Elite in the game do not require the player to fire a shot, after all.

I'd expect Fuel Rats face the same challenge, although they've been featured on GalNet a couple of times so maybe that's something that vigilante / protection groups should consider looking in to?

That'd probably be one way forward for any player-protection groups to consider.

And let's keep on posting until everyone notices who they can call on!

if someone is engaged you're right, it's already too late...

However each incident, included with previously collected data, helps us to identify potential patterns and trends so we analyze trouble areas that we can focus on to be more "proactive and preventative" in nature.

Indeed - best of luck!

 

[lenna]

No, this is still not griefing. A player is allowed to attack people outside a station, as many people as he likes. Why do you think this is griefing?

Like it or not, due to the rebuy cost impact on the victim it does constitute griefing. This is a very simplistic example though but repeatedly ganking new players in Sidewinders as they launch from the starting station constitutes griefing - that is covered by the behaviour you outlined. However, it does not have to be new player victims nor necessarily sidewinder targets nor necessarily the starting station.

 

[Layne Vakarian]

How did you arrive at that conclusion? I'm not being critical - I really want to understand the rationale for this comment.

I should perhaps have said 'inspired to comment in this way....' The poster to whom I replied said that he 'killed' people with bounties, which is definitely not griefing or even close to griefing. I wondered if he might still feel bad about his actions...

 

[Nara]

Like it or not, due to the rebuy cost impact on the victim it does. This is a very simplistic example though but repeatedly ganking new players in Sidewinders that launch from the starting station constitutes griefing - that is covered by the behaviour you outlined.

Yes the player suffers an in-game impact. This should not automatically translate to an out of game sense of grief. Ganking new players... well how could the "griefer" possibly know that they are new? A sidewinder is available for all to use, and players use them for all kinds of reasons. The "griefer" would have to say that he is actually aiming for new players for it to become an issue... which is covered in the EULA.

Obviously, if you can find a quote from an FD representative that states how this is griefing then I would very interested in that. I think it would probably help all of us if FD were to explain their stance fully, but all I know of so far from FD (Mr Brookes) is that player murder is acceptable.

 

[lenna]

Yes the player suffers an in-game impact. This should not automatically translate to an out of game sense of grief. Ganking new players... well how could the "griefer" possibly know that they are new? A sidewinder is available for all to use, and players use them for all kinds of reasons. The "griefer" would have to say that he is actually aiming for new players for it to become an issue... which is covered in the EULA.

Obviously, if you can find a quote from an FD representative that states how this is griefing then I would very interested in that. I think it would probably help all of us if FD were to explain their stance fully, but all I know of so far from FD (Mr Brookes) is that player murder is acceptable.

That specific behaviour is what is sometimes referred to as spawn camping and is one of text book examples of griefing.
---
FD have not defined the list of behaviour patterns that constitute griefing (we would be here till the end of time covering all of them in all likelihood), but a silent griefer is still a griefer.

 

[CorvusDove]

That specific behaviour is what is sometimes referred to as spawn camping and is one of text book examples of griefing.
---
FD have not defined the list of behaviour patterns that constitute griefing, but a silent griefer is still a griefer.

Spawn camping doesn't apply in this game. You can go to Solo, relocate, then go back to Open.

And hope such a list is never defined, but instead the focus is on reason. A list of infractions just leads to gaming the list.

 

[Nara]

Nara, that was mostly a space issue thing. I mean to imply on it that the assailant is actually stating that's the reason, not that the person who lost is guessing at it emotionally. If you get that far down the filters, then you're either in the other bins or the person is bragging and telling you how nice your carebear tears taste, which is a pretty solid admission.

Ah sorry I see. Then yes, your graphic is great Personally I would make extra space for that one part as I think it's the crux of the issue.

 

[lenna]

Spawn camping doesn't apply in this game. You can go to Solo, relocate, then go back to Open.

And hope such a list is never defined, but instead the focus is on reason. A list of infractions just leads to gaming the list.

Actually it does, the availability of different game modes and the fact it can be evaded by exiting the game and changing modes does not invalidate the term nor it's relation to griefing.
---
OR are you supporting Combat Logging to evade such behaviours?