No problem! What do you think of Zulu's suggestion a few posts up? Seems like a good compromise. I say this like "we" have any say in the direction of the game, LOL. Then again, FDev is reading this!

Truth be told, I don't like it. I would rather see security status be meaningful through police presence and response times, rather than tinkering with how modules behave.

And there's a reason why it's hard to win against a player interdiction - in most cases, the player interdicting you is well practiced at it! Like it or not, it really is a git gud issue!
 
Truth be told, I don't like it. I would rather see security status be meaningful through police presence and response times, rather than tinkering with how modules behave.

And there's a reason why it's hard to win against a player interdiction - in most cases, the player interdicting you is well practiced at it! Like it or not, it really is a git gud issue!

Agreed.
Tinkering with modules just takes responsibility away from the playerbase,
that kind of enforcement you can use while raising a child.
Don't touch the modules, elite has enough hard counters already.

The security state is relevant, but FD still allow hitpoint inflation,
so there you have the point to apply leverage.
Then again the people crying for "anti-gwiefing"
also might be inclined to keep their PVE god-mode
via megashields and resistant hulls.

Hence the argument of:
"Grow up, both of you."
 
Last edited:
Truth be told, I don't like it. I would rather see security status be meaningful through police presence and response times, rather than tinkering with how modules behave.

And there's a reason why it's hard to win against a player interdiction - in most cases, the player interdicting you is well practiced at it! Like it or not, it really is a git gud issue!

I find it much easier to interdict someone than beating the interdiction.
 
And there's a reason why it's hard to win against a player interdiction - in most cases, the player interdicting you is well practiced at it! Like it or not, it really is a git gud issue!

I find it much easier to interdict someone than beating the interdiction.

I'm with Kurama on this, as I have done both. There is some variable here, because like I said, I can be outside the escape vector when being interdicted by an NPC and still win, whereas I can keep that escape vector centered when interdicted by a player and still lose. There is a very noticeable 'weight' to the red "you are losing" bar when being interdicted by a player. I once asked if there is anything besides skill that influences this, like ship mass or size / grade of the FSD Interdictor being used, but nobody had an answer.

Personally I think it should take more skill to pull someone out of SC than it does to escape interdiction, if for no other reason than that new players will have to escape interdiction on day one, whereas equipping and using an FSD Interdictor is something that players do after they have had time to master basic game mechanics. The fact that even experienced players give the advice to "submit and high wake" implies that losing to a player interdiction is inevitable.
 
Personally I think it should take more skill to pull someone out of SC than it does to escape interdiction, if for no other reason than that new players will have to escape interdiction on day one, whereas equipping and using an FSD Interdictor is something that players do after they have had time to master basic game mechanics. The fact that even experienced players give the advice to "submit and high wake" implies that losing to a player interdiction is inevitable.

It actually takes more skill to pull someone out of SC than it does to escape interdiction. New players like every other players have to learn and progress.
As an experienced player now, i rarely loose when i am being interdicted by other players (best i did was winning around 15 interdiction in a row). When i loose, it is because i made a mistake against a skilled attacker who did not make any (my fault).

The fact that experienced players give the advice to "submit and high wake" is because it is the easiest, most effective and simple way to deal with an interdiction.
In order to submit the only thing you have to do is throttle to 0 (very easy)
Submitting will prevent you from the risk of loosing it and getting the long FSD cooldown.
Submitting prevent to be interdicted right away by a team mate of the attacker if you managed to win the first one.
 
Last edited:
This feels like a bit of a band-aid approach.
While I don't think it would be a bad thing, I'd really prefer they made the system security levels actually mean something.
High-sec should feel safe and comfortable, while anarchy should feel tense with a constant sense of being on guard.

Again, I wouldn't be against the disable interdictors in high-sec idea. But I'd really prefer they go deeper with sec level impacts on gameplay.
 
It actually takes more skill to pull someone out of SC than it does to escape interdiction. New players like every other players have to learn and progress.
As an experienced player now, i rarely loose when i am being interdicted by other players (best i did was winning around 15 interdiction in a row). When i loose, it is because i made a mistake against a skilled attacker who did not make any (my fault).

This goes against all my experience in the game to date, but this is great news - I would rather beat the interdiction than submit as it would make beating a blockade (or just other CMDRs) better.

Submit and High wake is easier yes, but it means I have to leave the system = lost time.

Do you have any video of your technique?
 
One of the things I've found with interdicting versus being interdicted is that when you're interdicting, you can see your target's roll angle more easily than just following a crosshair around, which makes predicting where your target is gonna go next a touch easier.
 
This feels like a bit of a band-aid approach.
While I don't think it would be a bad thing, I'd really prefer they made the system security levels actually mean something. High-sec should feel safe and comfortable, while anarchy should feel tense with a constant sense of being on guard.

Again, I wouldn't be against the disable interdictors in high-sec idea. But I'd really prefer they go deeper with sec level impacts on gameplay.

THIS is also my preference / priority as well (along with fixing C&P so it doesn't feel like such a kluge). Some think I wrote the OP because _I_ am being griefed all the time. Not so, in fact I can't remember when the last time was that a player interdicted me. I do, however, have a big heart for the little guy starting off, and I'm kinda annoyed with the messy, convoluted "solution" Frontier tried to provide to griefing in the form of C&P 3.0, thus the inspiration for the original post.
 
Last edited:
Do not impose your playstyle to others OP.

If you do not want to interact with others then do not interact. Just fly in some other place.

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.


------------------------------
In fact PvP is also just playing BGS in solo and group. If you influe on BGS on other faction you are playing PvP. Its just more like playing Stellaris. You are not shooting directly to someone, but you can safely and indefinitely Gank him and his faction. And he can stop you, only what he can do is hauling a fish faster than you.
Its just an imposing how other players should play, and they cannot even try to play they own way, use their advantages, because they never meet you. Perfect gankers are playing in group/solo.
Uhh, so hipocrycy. To being able to hit someone on solo/group without a his possibility to counter, then call him an a griefer. Ouch.

-----------------------------

My suggestion to crime and punish system:

High security systems/areas - in these areas security response should be so hard as station responce. Griefing and pirating just impossible
Medium security - griefing and pirating possible but hard and smart
low security - griefing and pirating possible, but with security response, lucrative routes or missions
anarchy - no security, your flying at your own risk, but very lucrative
trade routes or missions, up to 70% more than in high security

As a punish should not only by INEVITABLE ship destruction of a griefer or pirate, but also things like
- revoke FSD permit to the system
- limited access to the some Engineers (some of them may be against criminal)
- limited access to outfit and shipyard

In a conclusion - there should be a safe areas and routes where players can feel totally safe. Safety should not be regulated as PvP yes/no
switch, but by a in-game law and strong and fast response of security forces.

A player who commited many crimes should have temporary (week? two? month?) very annoying gameplay in high security systems. He should be interdicted instantly by very stron police, he should just be forced do widthrawn from the system and play in anarchy systems or low security

This player should also work out his return to the community. He should do donation missions, passenger mission and other 'peaceful' activities. If not - then he will stay fugitive and his gameplay in 'civilised' region of space will be extremely difficult
 
It actually takes more skill to pull someone out of SC than it does to escape interdiction. New players like every other players have to learn and progress.
As an experienced player now, i rarely loose when i am being interdicted by other players (best i did was winning around 15 interdiction in a row). When i loose, it is because i made a mistake against a skilled attacker who did not make any (my fault).

The fact that experienced players give the advice to "submit and high wake" is because it is the easiest, most effective and simple way to deal with an interdiction.
In order to submit the only thing you have to do is throttle to 0 (very easy)
Submitting will prevent you from the risk of loosing it and getting the long FSD cooldown.
Submitting prevent to be interdicted right away by a team mate of the attacker if you managed to win the first one.

At 1500 hrs, I'm a seasoned player and I did do PvP about half a year ago but then went exploring. At that time I certainly did not find true what you comment. It is certainly possible to escape an interdiction but I don't recall doing so.
 
THIS is also my preference / priority as well (along with fixing C&P so it doesn't feel like such a kluge). Some think I wrote the OP because _I_ am being griefed all the time. Not so, in fact I can't remember when the last time was that a player interdicted me. I do, however, have a big heart for the little guy starting off, and I'm kinda annoyed with the messy, convoluted "solution" Frontier tried to provide to griefing in the form of C&P 3.0, thus the inspiration for the original post.
I sympathize. It's not a huge problem really with the interdictions for players that have some experience and some credits and ship builds that get them through the day, it's just a bit nasty for the rookies with sidewinders and E-size modules trying to earn their first 10k. Personally, I don't care if there's any changes or not since it's not a problem to me, but if FD wants more players to start playing and make the entry barrier lower, and if they want more players in Open, perhaps they do need to improve some aspects.
 

Powderpanic

Banned
You could disable interdictors but

[video=youtube;dMjQ3hA9mEA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMjQ3hA9mEA[/video]

Powderpanic
The Voice of Griefing
 
Back
Top Bottom