Open Gun-ports = open for pvp : Pilots federations rule of the duel

[Phisto Sobanii]

This stuff always makes me laugh.

"Stop forcing your play style on me!"

"You should play like this instead!"

Which of course is forcing your play style on someone else, but thats ok right......right?

Isn't it so dumb? Everyone arguing about how people should play as if the game is magically going to change to support their viewpoints.

I think the real thing that rankles anti-PvPers is we can't be shamed into playing their way. What did we do when they tried that in Colonia? Strapped on the guns, rode out, and kicked their butts.

By doing that are you signalling you want PvP though, or just want a cup of tea?

Tea?

Spoiler

 

[Rubbernuke]

Isn't it so dumb? Everyone arguing about how people should play as if the game is magically going to change to support their viewpoints.

I think the real thing that rankles anti-PvPers is we can't be shamed into playing their way. What did we do when they tried that in Colonia? Strapped on the guns, rode out, and kicked their butts.



Tea?

Spoiler

Everything stops for tea. And little cucumber sandwiches.

 

[Rubbernuke]

This is how it works:

 

[Hoopes81]

Isn't it so dumb? Everyone arguing about how people should play as if the game is magically going to change to support their viewpoints.

I think the real thing that rankles anti-PvPers is we can't be shamed into playing their way. What did we do when they tried that in Colonia? Strapped on the guns, rode out, and kicked their butts.



Tea?

I think what makes me laugh the most is that they just can't see how hypocritical they are when telling people off for "forcing" their play style on them and start telling them how they should play in the same sentence.

I'm not a big pvp'er either, but if I go into open then I expect/hope for this type of stuff to happen, it just adds to the fun.

Spoiler

 

[Hoopes81]

I think what makes me laugh the most is that they just can't see how hypocritical they are when telling people off for "forcing" their play style on them and start telling them how they should play in the same sentence.

I'm not a big pvp'er either, but if I go into open then I expect/hope for this type of stuff to happen, it just adds to the fun.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

I think what makes me laugh the most is that they just can't see how hypocritical they are when telling people off for "forcing" their play style on them and start telling them how they should play in the same sentence.

I'm not a big pvp'er either, but if I go into open then I expect/hope for this type of stuff to happen, it just adds to the fun.

And that's just it. No one is asking you to become the next Yamato or deZpe. Just when you log into Open, know the score!

 

[Darkfyre99]

Which is the point in a circular way- unless you are prepared in a mode that allows any action you are not really approaching it correctly. You have to play to the mode, not expect the mode to play to you.

I agree, which is why I'm glad Frontier made the tri-mode system (patent pending) in the first place.

I'd elaborate, but I hear the Eagles warming up backstage.

 

[Brrokk]

I play sometimes in Open and I can't think of any reasons other than the ones he's listed.

...
You can't think of reason beyond what Murgle has raised because you refuse. Anyone that engages in PvP can't possibly be doing it for any other reason than to ruin someone's fun.
...

You have shifted the ground to suit what you think my motivation is, and you're wrong about it. I was agreeing with Murgle's post in response to Bigmaec's:

What if I want unconsenting fights?

Then that raises the question: Why?
Other than the obvious of course, such as: <discreditable reasons>
Convince me that players insisting on non-consensual PvP aren't horrible people...if you can.

I have never said that PvP play is bad. In fact, I've previously applauded efforts to organise it and offers to teach it. I might one day be tempted to dabble myself; I find the idea interesting. The question before us was whether there can be any creditable reason for a player to specifically want to attack other players who don't like PvP. I still agree with Murgle; I don't think there can be.

BTW I recognise that Bigmaec's post was probably tongue-in-cheek, to show up a flaw in the OP suggestion.

 

[Hoopes81]

The question before us was whether there can be any creditable reason for a player to specifically want to attack other players who don't like PvP.

Their reasons is that it how THEY want to play, which is just as valid and creditable as anybody's.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Sometimes I do wonder what would happen in Open if everyone had tougher ships and flew them like the meant it. A lot of ganking attempts are low quality efforts, would it lead ironically to a calmer mode overall?

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

I have never said that PvP play is bad. In fact, I've previously applauded efforts to organise it and offers to teach it. I might one day be tempted to dabble myself; I find the idea interesting. The question before us was whether there can be any creditable reason for a player to specifically want to attack other players who don't like PvP. I still agree with Murgle; I don't think there can be.

Brrokk. You are still refusing to understand. Did you even read my post?

Loren's Reapers literally attacked players in Colonia who don't like PvP. They dislike PvP so much they came up with agreements to minimize it between them. We continue to do so based on whether it suits our in-game objectives or not. I cannot empathize how little we care about what the other players think of this. It's part. Of. The. Game.

And why do we play this way? Because it's fun. Period dot.

 

[Brrokk]

Brrokk. You are still refusing to understand. Did you even read my post?

Loren's Reapers literally attacked players in Colonia who don't like PvP. They dislike PvP so much they came up with agreements to minimize it between them. We continue to do so based on whether it suits our in-game objectives or not. I cannot empathize how little we care about what the other players think of this. It's part. Of. The. Game.

And why do we play this way? Because it's fun. Period dot.

OK, so Loren's Reapers did that. If they did it for gameplay reasons, fine. If they did it because they knew it would upset those others, then I think Murgle's post is still right. But you've assured me that wasn't the case in that example. There's the distinction I'm trying to make. I don't think we really need to have a disagreement here.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

OK, so Loren's Reapers did that. If they did it for gameplay reasons, fine. If they did it because they knew it would upset those others, then I think Murgle's post is still right. But you've assured me that wasn't the case in that example. There's the distinction I'm trying to make. I don't think we really need to have a disagreement here.

Murgle is saying there's no other reason to do PvP than to upset others. I've demonstrated that's not true in one case.

However, our group is not the exception to the rule. It is the rule. Do you understand that?

(Side note: we knew it would upset people (and it did). Antagonistic gameplay can do that. However, it was absolutely irrelevant to us.)

 

[Viscera]

Lots of usual hoohah about something very simple.

Solo Mode. It is impossible to be attacked by another player in this mode.

Open Mode. It is possible to be attacked by other players in this mode.

Player Group: It may be possible to be attacked by players in this mode, but it will depend on the rules of the particular group.

Soooo....

If you want to play with other players, but not get attacked by them, you have two options:

1: Start your own player group with the rules you want, and allow various people to join it that want to abide by your rules of play.

2: Join Mobius, a player group. the work has kindly been done for you already.

If you could not give a hoot about other players:

Play in solo.

If you want interaction with players, good and bad:

Play in open.

These are your options. They are very simple. Choose to play in the area that suits you.

Do not play in an area that does not suit you, and moan about doing so. It is your choice at the end of the day.

 

[Brrokk]

Murgle is saying there's no other reason to do PvP than to upset others. I've demonstrated that's not true in one case.

However, our group is not the exception to the rule. It is the rule. Do you understand that?

(Side note: we knew it would upset people (and it did). Antagonistic gameplay can do that. However, it was absolutely irrelevant to us.)

Murgle didn't say "there's no other reason to do PvP than to upset others". He was replying to Bigmaec asking "What if I want unconsenting fights?", and I agreed with his reply in that context.

I won't argue this point anymore. Anyone who can read can check that this is true.

 

[ElectricFactory]

OP, listen to these guys. They're saying it in unvarnished tones; " we knew it would upset people (and it did). Antagonistic gameplay can do that. However, it was absolutely irrelevant to us."

You will probably never fully undertand this mentality, I sympathize, I get that. Fortunately the game makers recognized this and created a Solo mode to filter it out. Use it as I do, and never deal with any of it. Interstingly, there is a correlation in real life.. only no Solo mode.

[QUOTE="Viscera, post: 8339998, member: 107350

If you could not give a hoot about other players:

Play in solo.


[/QUOTE]

 

[Darkfyre99]

Sometimes I do wonder what would happen in Open if everyone had tougher ships and flew them like the meant it. A lot of ganking attempts are low quality efforts, would it lead ironically to a calmer mode overall?

Compared to similar games I've played in the past? I already consider Open to be fairly calm, even in so-called "hot spots."

Again, I'd elaborate, but the Eagles are waiting in the wings.

 

[Drelthar]

I’m not disagreeing, but its our combined attitude that promotes and encourages
them and resign open to amateur pvp’ers

Proper pvp’s organize and foster a
gameplay with consent.
So why not take that as a community rule?

Im Not Saying you can’t be a Major AHole online, please I’m one of the major ones you can meet
Gun-port rule of thumb enables more fun ways for everyone to relax and play together in different ways as it factors into keeping to the Role-playing as a nefarious person.

but it definitely puts more guilt of being an aHole on the people who do choose random violates another players gaming session.

I mean, let's for a moment assume everyone on this forum thinks this is an amazing idea.

How exactly is it going to become the general rule for all the many thousands of commanders who have never looked at this forum - or Reddit, or any of the others?
Well it's not is it, so I reckon this is your own personal pipe dream. Enjoy it though - and feel free to shut down your systems when I turn up to pirate you - it'll make it easier to steal your stuff.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Well technically OP is right, non-deployed hardpoints mean someone is likely to atleast try getting away. As you cannot jump with deployed hardpoints

 

[Crank Larson]

Sorry, I'll follow the rules of the game but that's about it. Open is open. You can follow your rules, I'll follow mine.