How to avoid Gankers.

Open only would have been a disaster.
why?

It was not a brave and bold design decision, just a continuation of having the game as a service. It was also very trollish and poorly phrased with the "consensual pvp" stuff, and I know what I'm talking about. I imagine having those same bots consensually and organically parked 24/24 blocking each and every station pads.
sandro trolling the community really doesn't sound like a thoughtful analysis on your part :) he tried. it was an attempt to salvage pp, and imo sandro had very little allies in that. the idea of pp being pvp centric in nature is sound, it's just that the pvp implementation was barely more than a tick in a box, not really functional. that was not sandro's fault (and he likely even lacked the insight).

the idea is good in theory, he was probably oblivious at the start of the difficulties it would bring up in practice. 24h pad blocking is just a trivial example. most devs knew that pvp has never been but a bolted on feature. he was right, the 'pvp ethos' in the game was there, braben himself had pontificated on this more than once, and it is how you would expect open conflict to work ... the implementation just doesn't cut it, so frontier themselves shot the idea down.

how much this had to do with sandro leaving has had me wondering since.
 
The problem with open only is the difficulty following or participating in a storyline. If you want to follow the storyline with your group, and work on a goal, you cannot calculate the griefing that seems to substitute for legit role play in this game. An example would be someone flying 20K LY to grief someone doing a storyline mission and streaming it. The griefer would get more love here than the person trying to provide the content. So Solo or private has to exist. If we wanted Fortnite we would be playing that instead.
 
This is a good point, but what do you suggest PvPers do since they aren't developers and only can play the game they have available to them?

Ganking and griefing aren't the same things. If you are griefed by unwanted combat then you should absolutely fly in a different mode. Even PvPers though get ganked and being ganked isn't necessarily a negative experience, if you like that sort of thing and you aren't focused on PvE stuff.
You have to assume every pvper is ganked or a ganker without proper matchmaking, because without that it's all about stacking odds, except when two groups agrees on some rules. Some of those guys already forced a rollback on a patch before it even hit, by sheer threats of ganking every CMDR in open and their dog. They should just keep doing what they do best, and keep on shooting their own foot until they bore out and moe systems are under permit lock.

why?



sandro trolling the community really doesn't sound like a thoughtful analysis on your part :) he tried. it was an attempt to salvage pp, and imo sandro had very little allies in that. the idea of pp being pvp centric in nature is sound, it's just that the pvp implementation was barely more than a tick in a box, not really functional. that was not sandro's fault (and he likely even lacked the insight).

the idea is good in theory, he was probably oblivious at the start of the difficulties it would bring up in practice. 24h pad blocking is just a trivial example. most devs knew that pvp has never been but a bolted on feature. he was right, the 'pvp ethos' in the game was there, braben himself had pontificated on this more than once, and it is how you would expect open conflict to work ... the implementation just doesn't cut it, so frontier themselves shot the idea down.

how much this had to do with sandro leaving has had me wondering since.
Development should be back to basics instead of pushing a beta feature in a vague direction. At best PvP is a zero sum game in term of incentives and the most sure way to win it is by not playing it at all. Open only wouldnt have fixed that. Also, ganking at Deciat is only a thing because it's practical. That's as simple as that. If something is somewhat practical, and somewhat fun for at least one guy, it will be done. Back when open only was discussed, it would still have been more practical to find pvp content in a starter system.

Edit : I want to believe some of Elite's placeholders are just not due to a sheer lack of resource, but a conscious attempt to troll players. Frontier actually sells videogames where people can organically aspire animal poopoo with a vaccum cleaner. We have to respect that.
 
Last edited:
Development should be back to basics instead of pushing a beta feature in a vague direction.
it's an 'evolving' game. sandro pushed a lot of changes, some got through, some not, some antagonized the community. that's actually how much of this game was built: improvising. pp-revamp was only his last attempt, iirc?

At best PvP is a zero sum game in term of incentives and the most sure way to win it is by not playing it at all. Open only wouldnt have fixed that.
well that's indeed a statement. i get you don't appreciate the virtues of pvp, but there is actually a part of the community who does. of course no decision whatsoever, nor from the devs nor from the players, will make you like what you, from the start, don't like.

i get that this thread is vaguely about bringing those both worlds together and discuss how they interact. by 'necessity', they have to share the game, and it clearly addresses both, you see? surely nobody at this point expects much improvement, but it's still a hot topic and the discussion is there. you just placed yourself on one extreme of the fence, dunno what that changes. i should assume that you're merely here to say gankers are a pest to be get rid of? well, if that's so, then noted. but it doesn't really add much. it isn't going to happen either, so here we are.

Also, ganking at Deciat is only a thing because it's practical. That's as simple as that. If something is somewhat practical, and somewhat fun for at least one guy, it will be done. Back when open only was discussed, it would still have been more practical to find pvp content in a starter system.
well, of course we have gone from ganking to pvp to powerplay and back. i never closed myself to any suggestion to create dedicated pvp areas, quite the contrary. and there have been several but if you think of it, sandro's pp-open-only one was the single one that had even a remote possibility to become a thing. that said, ganking is inherent to open pvp, it is also sanctioned by frontier, it would still be there, with probably other means of mitigation ... and you still wouldn't like it :D

Edit : I want to believe some of Elite's placeholders are just not due to a sheer lack of resource, but a conscious attempt to troll players. Frontier actually sells videogames where people can organically aspire animal poopoo with a vaccum cleaner. We have to respect that.
new era 😂
 
And once again, I never said he was wrong. Just that my poopoo contained more carbons.
The definition I was using was evident by the context. To arbitrarily presume some other definition to change the argument, rather than interpreting things in it's original context are what Blackelaer, Phisto, myself, and others were taking issue with.

But as long as it needs a bandwith meter, twitch for streamsniping and having a tailored counterbuild, minimum 200 hours of grind to unlock stuff and premium ammo, and after all that you're still not sure the other guy dont use the trainer or would clog, let me just go with calling it poopoo.
I'm not sure where you're getting this stuff, or how you could think any of it was implied by anything I, or most others here, have been stating.

Most of Elite's PvP does not resemble this, certainly not the more organic encounters. Using negative outliers as the core of an argument is disingenuous.

BGS, powerplay and squadrons were never meant for pvp IMO...
Directly or otherwise that are PvP in and of themselves.

You have too many factions, and too many powers, to have meaningful pvp chokepoints around those features. I guess Colonia gameplay makes sense in that context.
Organic PvP neither requires, nor benefits from, artifical choke points.

There are plenty of natural ones...and if there weren't no one would be encountering hostile CMDRs with enough frequency to complain.

I imagine having those same bots consensually and organically parked 24/24 blocking each and every station pads.
Docking queues and timers on the other hand would greatly benefit verisimilitude in general.

If something is somewhat practical, and somewhat fun for at least one guy, it will be done.
Yes.
 
it's an 'evolving' game. sandro pushed a lot of changes, some got through, some not, some antagonized the community. that's actually how much of this game was built: improvising. pp-revamp was only his last attempt, iirc?



well that's indeed a statement. i get you don't appreciate the virtues of pvp, but there is actually a part of the community who does. of course no decision whatsoever, nor from the devs nor from the players, will make you like what you, from the start, don't like.

i get that this thread is vaguely about bringing those both worlds together and discuss how they interact. by 'necessity', they have to share the game, and it clearly addresses both, you see? surely nobody at this point expects much improvement, but it's still a hot topic and the discussion is there. you just placed yourself on one extreme of the fence, dunno what that changes. i should assume that you're merely here to say gankers are a pest to be get rid of? well, if that's so, then noted. but it doesn't really add much. it isn't going to happen either, so here we are.



well, of course we have gone from ganking to pvp to powerplay and back. i never closed myself to any suggestion to create dedicated pvp areas, quite the contrary. and there have been several but if you think of it, sandro's pp-open-only one was the single one that had even a remote possibility to become a thing. that said, ganking is inherent to open pvp, it is also sanctioned by frontier, it would still be there, with probably other means of mitigation ... and you still wouldn't like it :D



new era 😂
Well the whole thread is just about blocking gankers really. I'm not an anti-ganker you see, I'm just a pro-blocker. Even if in reality I have zero people in my blocklist, I find it handy that people could ignore each others like in facebook. It's a feature, you dont like it but it will still be there as well, it's really practical, people put up guides about that and open only, who was a hard sell, wouldnt have stopped that neither.
 
They should if you dislike seeing your aguments getting adressed one by one I guess.

Then again, this is a forum, and there is the option of engaging someone with arguments.
I know it's a crazy thought, but why don't you just go ahead and try it?
 
Well the whole thread is just about blocking gankers really. I'm not an anti-ganker you see, I'm just a pro-blocker. Even if in reality I have zero people in my blocklist, I find it handy that people could ignore each others like in facebook. It's a feature, you dont like it but it will still be there as well, it's really practical, people put up guides about that and open only, who was a hard sell, wouldnt have stopped that neither.
i'm not a ganker either, but i like that it exists. it adds ... salt! in a good sense, and of course it has to be kept in proportion.

i get the facebook concept, but not for this kind of game but that's of course subjective. anyway, it's pretty much there, as said there are many options to avoid ganking outside of 'gitting gud'. fine, i guess, but that's not a believable virtual galaxy where the choice of mining here or there, smuggling or trading, fitting a scanner or a plasma accelerator or joining one faction or another really matters. it's ... yeah, a facebook game.
 
They should put a limit to multiquoting really... You're editing so much, taking one phrase here, one phrase there, at least put some bullet points.
The separation given by the independent quote sections serves the same purpose as bulletpoints; in this case, listing specific items I wished to address. If I've left out vital context somewhere, please point it out so that I may correct it.

Also, I'm not using the multi-quote feature, I'm manually copying and pasting things.
 
I don't think Elite is the kind of game that would benefit from proper matchmaking. Folks crave that organic PvP Morbad was talking about. I know that's what gets me going more than anything.

Duels and organized tournaments can always happen of course, but if something like BGS, Powerplay, or Squadrons more easily provided worthwhile reasons to fight I suspect you'd see a lot of people, not just PvPers, jump on in.

Look at the recent war AEDC and GARD fought over the Helios system. That's the stuff, right there.
Thanks, and agreed, but let's be clear -- this was essentially consensual PvP (as well as PvE) because we both were up for it. I would agree with the other poster that there isn't necessarily a chokepoint in BGS... unless you - explicitly or tacitly - both decide to make it one.
 
i'm not a ganker either, but i like that it exists. it adds ... salt! in a good sense, and of course it has to be kept in proportion.

i get the facebook concept, but not for this kind of game but that's of course subjective. anyway, it's pretty much there, as said there are many options to avoid ganking outside of 'gitting gud'. fine, i guess, but that's not a believable virtual galaxy where the choice of mining here or there, smuggling or trading, fitting a scanner or a plasma accelerator or joining one faction or another really matters. it's ... yeah, a facebook game.
Personnaly for me all semblance of realism ED had was just thrown in the bin when I first met a ship with neon glowing lights like it was out of a Tron movie, spewing pink gaz out of the engines, and with a commander face trying to recreate Gene Simons in HoloMe. It is a facebook game, inst it.
 
Personnaly for me all semblance of realism ED had was just thrown in the bin when I first met a ship with neon glowing lights like it was out of a Tron movie, spewing pink gaz out of the engines, and with a commander face trying to recreate Gene Simons in HoloMe. It is a facebook game, inst it.
So everyone should fly brown ships and look like your irl neighbour and it would be better :D?

Imo, if you look at the world today and what people are doing with their physical bodies and their automobiles, it's MORE IMMERSIVE with the neon lights and green dreadlocks.
 
So everyone should fly brown ships and look like your irl neighbour and it would be better :D?

Imo, if you look at the world today and what people are doing with their physical bodies and their automobiles, it's MORE IMMERSIVE with the neon lights and green dreadlocks.
Yeah but...
Clowns are scary... they could be the monster from Stephen King's IT :eek:

I see a clown avatar and think....clown :)
 
Last edited:
Thanks, and agreed, but let's be clear -- this was essentially consensual PvP (as well as PvE) because we both were up for it. I would agree with the other poster that there isn't necessarily a chokepoint in BGS... unless you - explicitly or tacitly - both decide to make it one.
That's one way to do it for sure. In my experience, whenever conflicts arise, it's great if leadership is in contact more or less acting like referees and coaches guiding the experience for the rest of the groups. Newton's Fusiliers and EXO had a conflict like that back in April/May of last year and it was extraordinary fun.

It's a lot more difficult to do of course when there isn't a prior relationship (like our conflict with Colonial Legionnaires up in Carcosa) but that has it's own special challenges and flavors (we've made nice since then and it's pretty dang neat).
 
So everyone should fly brown ships and look like your irl neighbour and it would be better :D?

Imo, if you look at the world today and what people are doing with their physical bodies and their automobiles, it's MORE IMMERSIVE with the neon lights and green dreadlocks.
Yeah everyone should be special and have a cool tatoo. Here, have a like.
 
Top Bottom