It went the way of the Dodo, when griefer psychos came to Elite.
My open letter to Fdev
- Thread starter Rambo the 13th
- Start date
- Status
It went the way of the Dodo, when griefer psychos came to Elite.
Your statement said "be rational", thereby implying any other point of view is irrational. People have explained Mobius several times over in this thread and in others, but the blinkered mindset of those engaged in defending this griefing means they may as well not have bothered.
The problem ultimately is with Frontier not having decent group management tools or PvE flag on player accounts.
Nice try, but nope - FDev already said that a groups rules are unenforceable by them. Once removed they can't rejoin, that's it - reread that post in it's entirety. If you disagree please post the specific quote confirming this. I've already posted mine.
It was not a Community Goal though.
As I said, I am not going to crawl through all the previous CGs, do it yourself if you care.
But your argument is flawed anyway: the whole 'parity between modes promise' wasn't about CGs, as when the promise was made there was no such thing as a community goal (came with 1.1). The largest competition so far was Open Only, so the 'promise' of parity clearly doesnt mean what you think it does. This is also reinforced by FD saying they consider reducing the contributions of Solo/PG players to powerplay. tl;dr the 'promise of parity' isn't CG specific, and FD has in the past and plans in the future to have non-parity in some aspects.
Fair point, although I'd counter (if I may) with this
:Specifically entering a non-PvP group to engage in PvP (act of interdiction is a crime in Elite) regardless of telling people to high wake etc... Anyway going in deliberately with the knowledge of the groups rules would fall under "specifically targeting players for the purpose of being disruptive" in my book.
It is deliberately a little unclear but to me that's a case..
In any fashion I still think the OP has shot him/her-self in the foot by linking very flammable actions to a valid concern.
Also did you know flammable and inflammable mean the same thing? (Archer reference)
^no?... Just trying to lighten the mood...
Last edited:
Urgh...I have been here before.
Community goals...
Where the largest group always wins and the poor lone player always dies horribly if in Open.
I don't bother with them and I actually think they take away from what this game could actually be.
Too many times they seem to be used to do things that make no sense and, like in this thread, only serve to cause a lot of frustration and anger from all parties involved.
The idea was nice but as with most things, humans ruined it.
GG, over-diluted Homo-Sapien meatsacks.
Keep winning!
Should add that no one player or group is that important. You will never see every player involved in a CG so you can only do so much.
Welcome the constraints modern day gaming has.
Community goals...
Where the largest group always wins and the poor lone player always dies horribly if in Open.
I don't bother with them and I actually think they take away from what this game could actually be.
Too many times they seem to be used to do things that make no sense and, like in this thread, only serve to cause a lot of frustration and anger from all parties involved.
The idea was nice but as with most things, humans ruined it.
GG, over-diluted Homo-Sapien meatsacks.
Keep winning!
Should add that no one player or group is that important. You will never see every player involved in a CG so you can only do so much.
Welcome the constraints modern day gaming has.
Last edited:
Deleted member 110222
D
As I said, I am not going to crawl through all the previous CGs, do it yourself if you care.
tl;dr the 'promise of parity' isn't CG specific, and FD has in the past and plans in the future to have non-parity in some aspects.
I'm all for giving Open bonuses, and I never play in the mode.
But denying people access to content altogether, based on mode choice, does go against what FD promised.
It's not going to happen.
Deleted member 115407
D
And, for the record, I support both private and solo modes. I just think mixing them with open in how they can affect the BGS and CGs was a mistake.
Deleted member 110222
D
Urgh...I have been here before.
Community goals...
Where the largest group always wins and the poor lone player always dies horribly if in Open.
I don't bother with them and I actually think they take away from what this game could actually be.
Too many times they seem to be used to do things that make no sense and, like in this thread, only serve to cause a lot of frustration and anger from all parties involved.
The idea was nice but as with most things, humans ruined it.
GG, over-diluted Homo-Sapien meatsacks.
Keep winning!
Should add that no one player or group is that important. You will never see every player involved in a CG so you can only do so much.
Welcome the constraints modern day gaming has.
You make a good point. Do these guys cry over not being able to shoot down people they don't get instanced with?
You already posted it:
A player does not have to have been in the group to have been removed from said groups gameplay, ie; Mobius doesn't want PvP players and as such they have taken steps to remove them from their gameplay by creating rules to dissuade PvP from their game except in specific circumstances, which were then broken.
ever heard of activism or civil disobedience? if it weren't for broken rules you'd still live in a cave. no internets for you!
Deleted member 115407
D
Either open bonuses, or private/solo penalties. I'd be happy with that.
Fair point, although I'd counter (if I may) with this
Specifically entering a PvP group to engage in PvP (act of interdiction is a crime in Elite) regardless of telling people to high wake etc... Anyway going in deliberately with the knowledge of the groups rules would fall under "specifically targeting players for the purpose of being disruptive" in my book.
It is deliberately a little unclear but to me that's a case..
In any fashion I still think the OP has shot him/her-self in the foot by linking very flammable actions to a valid concern.
Also did you know flammable and inflammable mean the same thing? (Archer reference)
^no?... Just trying to lighten the mood...
I don't agree with the point you're making, but nonetheless will hit you with rep because of the Archer reference.
Have a +1 sirrah!
Deleted member 110222
D
Either. As long as Solo/PG can still play in some full form. Rewards can be different. Won't see me protest against that. In fact I hope it happens just to shut up the cry-babies. (Merit/CG points couldn't bother me in the slightest, as long as I get to fly my virtual starship doing the same stuff as everyone else)
Me too.
ED said there would be a offline mode, they cancelled it simply because it weren't possible, and Frontier or ED didn't go bye bye. Frontier can admit now, after 19 months of game play in the wild with real players that having all modes being equal for all activities simply doesn't work and simply doesn't allow for many of the other kinds of activities Braben spoke about in Kickstarter.
An they are already admitting it doesn't work with them discussing ways of encouraging more players into open when doing powerplay activities. One thing that been mention is people being able to earn more merits into open than in solo or private group, which is simply sticking a band aid onto the problem and unless it a substantial amount it simply won't work. I suspect even if the difference is substantial it still won't work.
Last edited:
Yes, i have. I've also heard of blatant disrespect and bullying, for no other purpose than gaining attention and causing grief.
Seems to me some people still live in caves, caves with internet.
I think peoples should really try to be rational and stop thinking that their apples are better than someone else oranges and try to force their favourite play style on others.
The main purpose of a CG event is to allow anyone, everyone, to participate regardless of the selected game mode.
If someone wants to be part of a group he must expect to be ban from that said group, if all he wants is to break the group's rules.
Again, forcing a PvP action within a PvE dedicated group is just lame to my opinion and serves no purpose. It has only show to all of us how immature, such a stupid action, really is.
- Status