lol. True to character, providing the most ridiculous analogies and flimsiest excuses to justify his evil acts. See you in Eravate one day, Zarek Noobkiller, overlord of nothing.
In what way is griefing a good thing to have in a game?
- Status
lol. True to character, providing the most ridiculous analogies and flimsiest excuses to justify his evil acts. See you in Eravate one day, Zarek Noobkiller, overlord of nothing.
DeletedUser191218
D
Totally, but that kind of misses the point. I'm not suggesting banning pvp but there are other, more clever ways of implementing it. The best mmo environment i've played is undoubtedly ESO. PvP happens all tje time, even more than ED. But you either use the arena or challenge to a duel. And the result is you constantly have loads of players in open in every area. Everyone wins. You can go about the game without being harrassed by anti-social behaviour or you can PvP at any time you like. Now to reiretate - in what way is the implementation as FDev have done it BETTER than this?
DeletedUser191218
D
Ye that's fine. But that is really easy to do without the inevitability of the griefing epidemic that us killing ED's openn
environment. Just a bit of thought and planning on the implementation. Other games manage it abd have MUCH larger online player bases than ED
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
For better or worse, it remains possible in a game where player interaction is possible. Pointing out that each player chooses which mode to play in, each and every game session, is simply pointing out that players have choice - whereas, in Open, any player can choose to instigate an encounter with another player as a target, whether the target enjoys it or not. The onus is on the player making the mode choice to choose the mode that best suits their playstyle expectations.
The "git gud or go Solo / Mobius" campaign has been running for years now - rather "successfully", in terms of encouraging players to decide which they prefer, i.e. changing their play-style or game mode choice.
Differentiating gameplay from "griefing" is non-trivial - and highly subjective. Which is probably why Frontier leave it up to the player to choose their mode accordingly.
lol. True to character, providing the most ridiculous analogies and flimsiest excuses to justify his evil acts. See you in Eravate one day, Zarek Noobkiller, overlord of nothing.
Griefers (according to the definition I was responding to):
- Negatively impact game for others
- Their actions are of little risk to selves
- Lack of empathy regarding actions
Exploration griefers satisfy ALL the criteria for griefing.
I think a huge issue in the current game is the extreme difference between a fully engineered combat ship, and any other ship not similarly prepared for defence. I've had a big chat with someone who has been very kindly helping me to outfit my ships for adequate defense, and it takes (IMHO) a LOT of effort, both in outfitting as well as engineering, to get ships to a level deemed "survivable". That means, literally being able to survive long enough to high-wake out. It also significantly impacts their usefulness for other roles (for example the suggested builds had 3 shield boosters, each engineered with different resistences!).
Given this significant level of investment (I'm still unlocking relevant engineers), I'd wager that a LOT of players simply aren't prepared to do this.
The game needs (IMHO) a serious balance pass such that combat encounters last minutes, not seconds. Conversely the low/high-wake times would also need to be extended during a combat situation, otherwise it'd be trivial to escape.
My aim in suggesting a more extended combat scenario is that it would allow time for system security vessels to arrive and assist, IF the system in question is high/medium security. The higher the security level the quicker and stronger the response. While this is already the case in the current system, it's rare for an attacked ship to actually survive long enough before system security arrives and starts being a deterrent.
It would also give defending players, especially those not as practiced at combat interactions, more time to try to escape and even if (when!) they are killed, at least some semblance of gameplay instead of just being blown up in under 10 seconds.
To balance extended combat out, PvE payouts would need to be increased as number of ships killed per minute would be drastically reduced.
So for me, "griefing" would be attacking someone else for no good reason (other than simply "murder") in a ship and/or wing designed to kill the other player in the shortest possible amount of time, and choosing the target such that their chances of survival are, for all intents and purposes, not only zero, but also in a very short time period.
Given this significant level of investment (I'm still unlocking relevant engineers), I'd wager that a LOT of players simply aren't prepared to do this.
The game needs (IMHO) a serious balance pass such that combat encounters last minutes, not seconds. Conversely the low/high-wake times would also need to be extended during a combat situation, otherwise it'd be trivial to escape.
My aim in suggesting a more extended combat scenario is that it would allow time for system security vessels to arrive and assist, IF the system in question is high/medium security. The higher the security level the quicker and stronger the response. While this is already the case in the current system, it's rare for an attacked ship to actually survive long enough before system security arrives and starts being a deterrent.
It would also give defending players, especially those not as practiced at combat interactions, more time to try to escape and even if (when!) they are killed, at least some semblance of gameplay instead of just being blown up in under 10 seconds.
To balance extended combat out, PvE payouts would need to be increased as number of ships killed per minute would be drastically reduced.
So for me, "griefing" would be attacking someone else for no good reason (other than simply "murder") in a ship and/or wing designed to kill the other player in the shortest possible amount of time, and choosing the target such that their chances of survival are, for all intents and purposes, not only zero, but also in a very short time period.
Not a problem really - it is down to the victim to determine if they feel they are being unreasonably targeted and then report the incident to FD for them to judge. It is not the job of the collective community to try to delimit in "unambiguous and unequivocal terms" what is or is not griefing - that is a fools game typically advocated by griefers and griefer apologists.
FTR I personally do not consider a single ganking incident necessarily griefing - but it could be judged as such depending on the precise circumstances.
Private Groups is the easiest way to avoid the players that any given individual considers toxic to their enjoyment while still enjoying the multiplayer element. It is a shame that the Mobius group has exceeded the population/membership limits of Private Groups.
I like a true open pvp experience, but maybe it's because I played a lot of Eve Online and other similar masochistic games in the past
I like knowing that there is some real intelligent danger out there and that I have to be alert, when I'm doing my every-day stuff. It makes me actually think about how I actually fit my ship and look at the radar. I love ESO, but closed PVP zones don't give you the feeling of real danger, which I think, fits the "lone space ship captain" genre perfectly. All the iconic space captains had to be on their toes when flying around
And no. I'm not an active PVP player, but I really enjoy "running blockades" and having some real challenges in the game And this game really rewards smart ship fitting, alerteness and smart flying in SC when you want to get safely to your destination
A totally different thing is the NPC police in the game. Most good Open PVP games have some really OP police in the "safe" zones. ED's police response and the criminal system are a joke. The update to the system was totally misguided, making it simply much more convoluted and arguably "immersive" instead of effective.
There should be some effective NPC police at CG's in high sec space.
I like knowing that there is some real intelligent danger out there and that I have to be alert, when I'm doing my every-day stuff. It makes me actually think about how I actually fit my ship and look at the radar. I love ESO, but closed PVP zones don't give you the feeling of real danger, which I think, fits the "lone space ship captain" genre perfectly. All the iconic space captains had to be on their toes when flying around
And no. I'm not an active PVP player, but I really enjoy "running blockades" and having some real challenges in the game
And this game really rewards smart ship fitting, alerteness and smart flying in SC when you want to get safely to your destination A totally different thing is the NPC police in the game. Most good Open PVP games have some really OP police in the "safe" zones. ED's police response and the criminal system are a joke. The update to the system was totally misguided, making it simply much more convoluted and arguably "immersive" instead of effective.
There should be some effective NPC police at CG's in high sec space.
Last edited:
The obvious answer is, because it's more "realistic" – i.e. it better reflects human nature. In real life, people can attack you without warning or provocation. The obvious response is, "But it's meant to be fun!" And a response to *that* might be, "While it might not be fun in the moment, overall, a more realistic environment makes the world more alive and more fun for everyone." But it'll run and run
Deleted member 110222
D
Solo.
/thread
/thread
The obvious answer is, because it's more "realistic" – i.e. it better reflects human nature. In real life, people can attack you without warning or provocation. The obvious response is, "But it's meant to be fun!" And a response to *that* might be, "While it might not be fun in the moment, overall, a more realistic environment makes the world more alive and more fun for everyone." But it'll run and run
In real life there is no blockade of bloodthirsty gangsters every time you go to a city event
In real life there is no blockade of bloodthirsty gangsters every time you go to a city event
Depends on the city!
EDIT: I am in fact about to go out to an "event" in Camden… If I run into any drug-crazed psychos (not beyond the bounds of possibility), here's hoping they'll challenge me to a formal duel
EDIT 2: Curses! Engineered knuckledusters!
Last edited:
I think you need to look at the bigger picture - in ED all PvP is intended to be emergent in nature. That essentially means PvP is not expressly inhibited through mechanics nor is it expressly catered for in the main environment (CQC is another matter). There an in-game system of C&P/C&C that is meant to help moderate at least some of the more extreme and clear cut cases (seal clubbing) amongst other things. For the more extreme cases where people abuse the privilege of being allowed to PvP and take things too far there are also in-game reporting tools. The notional punishment for such behaviours would be a shadow ban which essentially means that (if imposed) for at least a time the guilty party will be still able to play but will not be able to (a) spawn with non-shadow banned players and (b) be unable to affect the BGS.
It is not a perfect system perhaps but the imperfections are mitigated by the availability of Private Group and Solo modes.
...
And no. I'm not an active PVP player, but I really enjoy "running blockades" and having some real challenges in the game
I wish there was more to it than Tank & Run though as once you've min-maxed it (ie best ship [Cutter] and mods) it's extremely rare to have interesting combat interactions as your ship is now borderline invincible within the time-scale of the engagement. For example, I recently had a guy interdict my Cutter pretty much every second run to a CG for about 2 hours. I'd get a "welcome back" followed swiftly by an interdiction. Each time the guy would have a different ship or a different weapon loadout.
Now I normally don't communicate with "pirates" but it's quite rare for the same player to even bother with me twice so I figured I'd see what his story was and how I'd offended him so deeply. I figured it was probably the Docking Computer again but it turns out he was just using my ship to test loadouts because "most ships blow up too fast". Now that was an interesting interaction but I was never in any actual danger or anything. I've lost that sense of excitement that comes with blockade running and I wish that it could be made more interesting somehow, with viable tactics other than Tank & Run.
Yeah, the police in High Security are a joke. Given it *should* be relatively easy to give System Authority ships engineered mods that would make them effective without having to change anything else I don't understand why it hasn't happened already.
If I might just add an observation to this discussion, I believe "griefing" (as I personally definite it) exists due to the extreme mismatch between a veteran PvPer flying a highly engineered ship with specialized modules and the newer player still learning the ropes. When ED first launched on PS4, playing in Open was an amazing experience, because we were all setting off in relatively equal ships just trying to make our way in the galaxy. It took a couple of weeks before the stereotypical "griefing" began, as the gap between ship builds increased over time. Now today we have the same type of griefing as seen on PC, where wings of Elite CMDRs in engineered ships "patrol" the CGs, starter systems, and engineer bases, hunting for Mostly Harmless CMDRs still flying in modest Cobras and Vipers.
I personally am not bothered by griefers these days, as I know how to avoid them, but having seen new CMDRs mercilessly slaughtered by these "wings", I have asked myself the same question the OP asks - how is this good for the game? Whether these new CMDRs quit the game because of the heavy burden of multiple rebuys ("dying" in ED is much more 'painful' than most games), or switch to Solo, or just avoid CGs, I don't see how this is a "good" thing for ED or Frontier as a money-making company.
I personally am not bothered by griefers these days, as I know how to avoid them, but having seen new CMDRs mercilessly slaughtered by these "wings", I have asked myself the same question the OP asks - how is this good for the game? Whether these new CMDRs quit the game because of the heavy burden of multiple rebuys ("dying" in ED is much more 'painful' than most games), or switch to Solo, or just avoid CGs, I don't see how this is a "good" thing for ED or Frontier as a money-making company.
This. Frontier values our liberty.
If you ever meet a player who just wants to spoil the game for everyone else just block them and forget they exist, its really easy and the games much more fun without them in it.
Specifics plus dev posts about how and why to use block here : https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=367388
Specifics plus dev posts about how and why to use block here : https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=367388
In real life there is no blockade of bloodthirsty gangsters every time you go to a city event
That's a spurious argument.
In the real world if you go to that city event with an assault rifle (as we have sadly seen) then you have the ability to kill many many people.
The difference is that in the real world that when you then turn that gun on yourself or the authorities catch up with you, then that's it. Game over. For ever.
In ANY game the issue is that you simply dont have the same consequences. You just start again, or in the case of ED pay a tiny fee and then continue - you don't even lose any of the assets you have accrued.
The single biggest modifier of human behaviour is an understanding of consequence.
In ED there simply are no real consequences.
If you want to moderate behaviour within a game to some form of social norm that we would recognise in the real world, then you need to have consequences that modify behaviour.
Now I am not suggesting that FDev SHOULD do this. They have provided other means to very successfully avoid the problems instead. BUT IF you wanted to fix the behaviour then you would need to make being beaten (ie death) a significant set back. You can't say "if you die you leave the game", the place would be empty and FDev would go bust. You CAN do thinks like get rid of ship insurance, lose engineeed assets and mats etc. It would however make the galaxy a closer simulation of real world behaviours. There would always be an outlying 'nutter' happy to die for their opinion and behaviour though. The problem there is that affects everyone that loses a ship and again a lot would leave and FDev goes bust.
The only real solution in a GAME is to enforce some C&P in the game mechanics. This is what FDev do. And regardless of some opinions you might read it is relatively effective. Remember that FDev have deliberately developed a game where the career path of being a criminal is a legitimate gameplay style. So in order to make the game interesting with some challenge the C&P system needs to have consequences to the criminal but not prevent them from being able to play.
All in all its a very very hard situation to balance across the galaxy and the various playstyles.
To ensure that they have the maximum possible accessibility to all different playstyles FDev provide Open, PG and solo. So this is where you get to choose your playstle. No mode is 'better' than another. It's a very elegant solution.
Those that call for "please stop the griefers shooting me" are saying "i want others to play the way i do." This is pretty much the same as those that cry that 'hiding' in solo is 'cheating' and everyone should be forced into open, "make them play the same way I do." Both are wrong. both fail to understand the consequences of their demands or the game they are playing.
I agree with you that "griefing" is not good for ANY game, though it is the result of idiotic behaviour in essence - not game balance, griefing was a thing even before Engineers.
The only true way to deal with griefers is to permanently ban anyone that engages in it, or at least shadow ban them, only then will they possibly get the message that such behaviour is not acceptable. Though I suspect the more determined griefers will just buy another account and continue where they left off.
- Status