I fear that as well. there are allready a scary ammount of negative reviews on steam because the AI is ''hard'' lol
Open letter to Frontier
- Thread starter Cowboy Bats
- Start date
- Status
That is what (I believe) is the crux of the biscuit,,,,,
I think it's exactly that you know it's a human on the other end, but I'm not sure there's anything wrong with that.
I mean if some rock rolls down a hill of its own accord and hits me it's pointless getting upset at the rock. However it someone pushed it down the hill at me, of course I'm gonna be a bit upset at the guy who pushed it and accuse him of intentionally trying to injure me.
That there's a human on the other end makes a difference since there's then some genuine and real motivation to the actions of the (probably) attacking ship. Sure you can roleplay humans and NPCs are exactly the same but that's all it is, RP. ie pretending and ignoring the reality because you think doing that makes it more interesting.
It's as I've said a bunch of times, got no problem with some guy in a Corvette ganking me in my Asp while I'm prone at barnacles. But I'm only ok if they communicated first, stuck some reason for the attack in comms, made it interesting. If they're guarding barnacles, this is totally cool but make it known.
If they don't communicate then I am totally unable to differentiate their actions from griefing, there is literally no way for me to differentiate. And by not communicating they actually fail in achieving their goal which was detering CMDRs from barnacles, because NOBODY KNOWS. Sticking a message over comms is so easy too, I mean a few seconds work and it makes a world of difference. It suddenly makes the whole scenario justifiable in game, because by using comms they've just put their motivation right there in game for all to see, as opposed to "silence" where their motivation stays outside of the game.
Last edited:
I'm not really bothered if a player kills me or even if they gloat...it's more the general mentality of the toxic player I want to avoid. I've played many multiplayer/mmo's in my time and there are players who are just deeply unpleasant...I come to multiplayer games for entertainment and not to be the entertainment for someone who's idea of fun is making other people miserable. I've found, in most cases, PVE modes generally reduce the options available to such people.
Last edited:
Achilles7
Banned
While I think the OP is overreacting, somewhat..I do agree that FD's recent validation of this group is a touch embarrassing..also, SDC's abhorrent behaviour is similar to the trashing of Coldplay's table at the NME Awards..just disgraceful, absolutely terrib..- no, I can't hold it in any longer - loooooooooooooooool!!!
Or people getting rather annoyed and start blacklisting on a very discriminatory basis.
Is there a link to Zac addressing this anywhere?
I would say yes, based around that if a pirate scans you at for example a resource extraction location, and you do not have anything valuable, they just leave grumbling, since if you value your life, why risk a battle for nothing?
The difference with players is that we know we will simply 'respawn', npc's die from an ingame perspective.
Heck aggressive combatants can interdict you, enter, and scan and realize you are heavily armed, and then they scuttle off.
Yes there are some that simply attack without any of these but at least in my experience those are a minority and usually belong to specific kinds of factions.
The more this kind of negative play takes place, the more urgent the need for gameplay balance. Hence the sooner Sandro's ideas for improving crime and punishment features for seal clubbers and senseless murderers will be introduced. (I am referring to the "Yes PVP is Unfair thread - and Sandro's very helpful responses.)
So bring it on - and let's have an urgent reappraisal of crime and punishment !
So bring it on - and let's have an urgent reappraisal of crime and punishment !
Last edited:
Disappointing to be honest. PvEers constantly get told to go play in solo or möbius like open is some exclusive club. Then some idiots come along and spoil even that to get their kicks. Then when they complain about being griefed in a mode they get told to play in, the answer from some is they should police it themselves better. It seems the PvP crowd have no respect for PvEers choice of play style and think of nothing but themselves.
The answer is not giving 1 person tools to run a group 20 thousand plus players. That's the lazy way that serves nothing more than make PvPers feel like their mode is special. The answer is provide a proper PvE game mode.
Hopefully despite what FD said, they are taking the problem more seriously.
The answer is not giving 1 person tools to run a group 20 thousand plus players. That's the lazy way that serves nothing more than make PvPers feel like their mode is special. The answer is provide a proper PvE game mode.
Hopefully despite what FD said, they are taking the problem more seriously.
Ian Phillips
Volunteer Moderator
Should we now go back and remove all of the group feature articles, because of what some group members MIGHT do SOMETIME in the future?
At the time of publishing there was no problem.
A week after publication there was no problem.
2 weeks after publication there was no problem.
I also didn't see any post from the OP about this group in the third week after publishing.
But now there's a problem and FD are part of the problem because of a community feature post from 3 weeks ago? And NOW the Op makes a post about it.....
Why didn't he do this 3 weeks ago?
At the time of publishing there was no problem.
A week after publication there was no problem.
2 weeks after publication there was no problem.
I also didn't see any post from the OP about this group in the third week after publishing.
But now there's a problem and FD are part of the problem because of a community feature post from 3 weeks ago? And NOW the Op makes a post about it.....
Why didn't he do this 3 weeks ago?
I didn't link it, but if you do a search for redit, mobius and SDC it was the first hit I got.
This happened numerous times already before the publishing.
Absolutely not, speaking for myself only, as effectively there could be 20-30 NPC ships for me to hide amongst, meaning poor little PvP Timmy is stuck wading through perhaps dozens of interdictions to find someone to "grief" But little Timmy on the other hand will certainly run crying to mummy Frontier demanding that he MUST be able to specifically target CMDR's cos' otherwise it's just not fair.
As for more challenging NPC's bring em' on. But, me-thinks, if Mr Brooks assertion that NPCs will have new tactics to deal with reverse flying and possibly ramming, I think PvP players who largely depend upon these techniques are in for a very sudden and painful wakeup call.
I am however in agreement with the OP's sentiments. it is long since time past that this nonsense be dealt with. Applying a band-aid to Open is not going to fix the problem which, unfortunately, is what is being investigated by Frontier. This needs drastic surgery. As someone else said. "As a PvE player I do not need you in my universe, but you as a PvP player do need me". So to the PvP players I suggest "Physician heal thy self" and stop blaming everyone else for the Open desert that you have made. To Frontier, I respectfully ask, create a formal Open PvE mode based upon Mobius rules, then start tinkering with the rules within the galaxy.
Well now is the perfect time to play in Open, as all the pew-pews will be in Möbius looking for bads to gank 
Unfortunately, not just the "PvP crowd", but FD as well.
From: ZacAntonaci_Frontier
"Hey guys,
It's really disappointing to see players actively griefing other players. The fact of the matter here is that Mobius is a private group where players decide to come together and play in a specific way. The idea that someone decides they want to be disruptive without any real reason or gain is a shame.
However, "griefing" in itself isn't against the rules. There is no evidence that I can see that suggests that the players in question altered the game in any way in order to gain an unfair advantage. In addition, groups are made in a way that allow players to join together and play in a way they want. However, it is the admins of those groups that manage which Commanders have access to the group and which do not.
It is something that David Braben and the developers are aware of though. Only recently I heard David answer a question on this subject in a community interview and I know that it's something that has/is considered by the developers, and I know that creating a friendly and enjoyable game experience is something that is taken very seriously.
I should also mention, the offending players have been removed from the Mobius group. I know this because the Mobius admins got in touch when there were some technical difficulties with managing their group permissions to remove these members from the groups. The members were successfully removed and the technical issues have been resolved.
On a personal level, I must say, on the most part we see community members taking part in PVP or roleplaying piracy in a way that works for everyone. If a trader is stopped and asked to drop their cargo, they feel better for the experience and not having to rebuy their ship - That player is more likely to continue to trade. The pirate can then plunder another day.
It isn’t piracy if a player deliberately tries to ruin another player’s experience. It is unfortunate to see players trying and taking pride in this kind of experience."
Based on: "However, "griefing" in itself isn't against the rules. There is no evidence that I can see that suggests that the players in question altered the game in any way in order to gain an unfair advantage. In addition, groups are made in a way that allow players to join together and play in a way they want. However, it is the admins of those groups that manage which Commanders have access to the group and which do not."
Its Mobius' fault, not FD's (according to FD).
- Status