Open letter to Frontier

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
That's why I said I don't trade and asked the question. So 12 jumps takes a week?

He said 12 "runs"
Not 12 "jumps"

If your "run" is 3 jumps, in a Type 9 with 500T of cargo, that can take up to 30 - 45 minutes depending on what side of each star you land after a jump and distance from the star to your drop in point.
Then there is docking a huge slow brick without killing anything on the way in by nudging it with a fat backside.

In my Anaconda I can do the same route with 450T there AND back in the same time it takes a T9 to get there.
It is also a jump less in the Anaconda (the 3 jumps becomes 2 due to the great jump range of the Anaconda)
 
I found the open letter...

envelope1.jpg

It's empty!!! :rolleyes:
 
Which shows his argument as wrong. The AI do attack you but for some reason, having a player do it somehow hurts more.

Well, that comes down to intent.

An NPC attacks because it was told to by FD.
A person attacks because they want to, for what ever reason.

And as FD made it so making a living by PvP is a joke, what reason is there to attack another player apart from spite?

After all, stealing gold from a T9.. it takes so much time to hunt one down, you could have made 10 times more from legit gold in your own T9 than stealing from a player one.
Player bounties were hard capped as folks were abusing the system, so player bounty hunting is just a pointless... I can earn double per hour in a HazRES to what player hunters earn.
Killing an explorer destroys their data and offers no rewards.
Power play does not reward direct PvP (of all the game mechanics that should reward PvP, once based on conflict doesn't !?)

So FD gave us the option to PvP, but no actual reason to PvP - other than, because you can.

Folks don't mind loss, if there is a reason to the loss. There is no reason to it here, so folks get mardy when killed in PvP, because they lost time / effort etc.. for no reason.
 
Open Play is Open Play for a reason, what should there be a disclaimer saying "Warning: We do not hold back anyone attempting to rob you of your items."

They could solve the problem by adding an incentive to play Open and then separate Private Groups with PVE and PVP tags and give PVP incentives as well. Would that not work? Lets say a 50% bonus to all profits made in open. Promote piracy, promote escorts, promote cargo haulers, promote traders.
 
Last edited:
OK but if you're trading that's all you ever do. If the GRINDING is so bad, why are you even bothering to play the game that's so boring to you, the thought of spending another 2-3 hours is horrific? Surely 2-3 hours when you've done the same thing for hundreds of hours is nothing. I mean, you are playing the game to enjoy it aren't you or what's the point?

a) Getting blown up by a player isn't something PvE players enjoy
b) The problem isn't 2-3 or more hours spending trading/doing the same thing. The problem is losing the progress. It's removal of achievement. It's stealing time.

… but for some reason, having a player do it somehow hurts more.

You will simply have to accept that it is a big difference between getting attacked for no reason by a player or a NPC. Apparently some players have problems understanding the fundamental difference between human behavior and programmed events.


Well, that comes down to intent.

It's to obvious…
 
And these rules are motivated by motivation. It is this motivation I am questioning.

FD can rule that you have to have your lights on while docking because bananas are good for you.

My complaint is that the motivation doesn't lead to the ruling. Your explanation is: you have to have the lights on while docking because that's the rule FD set.


I will lump the motivation in the same boat, since I feel there should be consistency in motivation.

Now, if you're going to explain to me that Combat Logging is against the rules, don't expect a reply.

I'm not sure you're using the right word there.... why do FD need a "motivation" to set what ever arbitrary rules they want to set ?
And as far as I am aware, all online based games consider combat logging as exploiting / cheating, but all have different rules on PvP.
So FD are not even doing anything new, they are just doing what every other MMO / Online Game does.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/motivation

motivation noun

UK /ˌməʊ.tɪˈveɪ.ʃən/ US /ˌmoʊ.t̬ɪ-/



  • motivation noun (ENTHUSIASM)
B2
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/help/codes.htmlenthusiasm for doing something:
He's a ​bright enough ​student - he just ​lacks motivation.
There ​seems to be a ​lack of motivation among the ​employees.
 
Actually, I think explorers potentially lose more, though they are not vulnerable for that long. My last trip, I was carrying 46M in data and three weeks worth of time when I jumped back into the bubble. Plus I had no weapons, weak shields and crappy thrusters. I got interdicted within two seconds of arriving though escaped with just a couple of shield rings missing. However, on balance, given its a constant threat for traders, maybe they do have it worse.


yeah , some dude was also not happy he met me at Sagg A , oops still in open... I think you right , explorers CAN loose/lose the most.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure you're using the right word there.... why do FD need a "motivation" to set what ever arbitrary rules they want to set ?

Mostly for the reasons ziggy explained in literally the post you quoted? FD doesn't make rules for no reason - So why is combat logging against the rules?
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure you're using the right word there.... why do FD need a "motivation" to set what ever arbitrary rules they want to set ?
They don't. It is merely my opinion there should be consistent motivation. Hell, they don't have to give motivation at all. But when they do, I can discuss it.

Otherwise: However, "Combat Logging" 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.

You can replace Griefing by Combat Logging and sense flies out the window.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/motivation

motivation noun

UK /ˌməʊ.tɪˈveɪ.ʃən/ US /ˌmoʊ.t̬ɪ-/



  • motivation noun (ENTHUSIASM)
B2
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/help/codes.htmlenthusiasm for doing something:
He's a ​bright enough ​student - he just ​lacks motivation.
There ​seems to be a ​lack of motivation among the ​employees.


http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/motivation

  • [h=4]motivation noun (REASON)[/h]
C1 [C] the need or ​reason for doing something: What was the motivation for the ​attack? The motivation behind the ​decision is the ​desire to ​improveourservice to ​ourcustomers.
Come on Jockey, really?
 
lets hear your idea then if you care to comment and take your personal opinion out on mine. :)

Read one of the Open vs. Solo/Group mode threads.

Just as a starting point: In the last 2 months in open I saw 4 CMDRs and only one of them was a potential threat and all CMDRs where docked in a station. No, adding x% more profit for playing in open won't change anything.
And adding x% more profit won't motivate me to risk more in Open Mode and surely won't motivate me to drop a single ton of cargo to a "pirate".
 
Hence why it was an idea and an opinion. Regardless Open Play is the biggest complaint next to PVP, people go straight to Solo because its their first choice to make money, get tons of ships, and go into open because they don't want to risk the unpredictable behavior of a human being. Take it as you will. However regardless the game isn't really structured around this anyways. The game is still early in development.
 
Last edited:

Jex =TE=

Banned
Well, that comes down to intent.

An NPC attacks because it was told to by FD.
A person attacks because they want to, for what ever reason.

And as FD made it so making a living by PvP is a joke, what reason is there to attack another player apart from spite?

After all, stealing gold from a T9.. it takes so much time to hunt one down, you could have made 10 times more from legit gold in your own T9 than stealing from a player one.
Player bounties were hard capped as folks were abusing the system, so player bounty hunting is just a pointless... I can earn double per hour in a HazRES to what player hunters earn.
Killing an explorer destroys their data and offers no rewards.
Power play does not reward direct PvP (of all the game mechanics that should reward PvP, once based on conflict doesn't !?)

So FD gave us the option to PvP, but no actual reason to PvP - other than, because you can.

Folks don't mind loss, if there is a reason to the loss. There is no reason to it here, so folks get mardy when killed in PvP, because they lost time / effort etc.. for no reason.

Well the point i'm trying to get to is that people need to view the AI and players as the same. AI will kill you just as often as a player will try if not more. How many people...

A) actually see any other players let alone get to chat to them let alone get attacked by them?

B) Fly in areas where a lot of other players fly and increase the risk of getting attacked by one.

And if they do get attacked, well space is a dangerous place which has been the theme of Elite since 1984 so why is anyone complaining about it? It's fine if a computer controlled person kills people because it's part of the game but somehow a human controlled person does it and it's the worst thing ever. That's no a reasonable position to hold and it's really about people that can't stand to be beaten, imo.
 
Last edited:
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: eza
Hence why it was an idea and an opinion. Regardless Open Play is the biggest complaint next to PVP, people go straight to Solo because its their first choice to make money, get tons of ships, and go into open because they don't want to risk the unpredictable behavior of a human being.
Sorry, not buying that, too sweeping generalisations of one narrow viewpoint. :)
You should wade throught the "open vs. solo" megathreads (for example). Many don't have any interest in open play.
 

Jex =TE=

Banned
a) Getting blown up by a player isn't something PvE players enjoy
b) The problem isn't 2-3 or more hours spending trading/doing the same thing. The problem is losing the progress. It's removal of achievement. It's stealing time.



You will simply have to accept that it is a big difference between getting attacked for no reason by a player or a NPC. Apparently some players have problems understanding the fundamental difference between human behavior and programmed events.




It's to obvious…

That's the point though. It's not a difference at all. It's a ship and it kills you - it only matters to some people because they hate being beaten by a person. Nobody cares if someone beats another person in a video game. It's not a big deal and humans are programmed into the game. Haven't you been paying attention to anything Braben has said (He's been quoted in this thread a few pages back). You don't have to write code to program things into your game you know - the whole game is programmed around the players who are an integral part of the game so they're as much of it as the AI are.
 
Last edited:
I'm not having a go but you are wrong. All software is just licensed access. You never own the software. The license has conditions which can be altered at anytime without reservation. Meaning at any point the ability for you to use the software can be revoked. As soon as you accept the EULA you are tied to these contractual conditions.

Same with almost every bit of commercial software.

The comment I was replying to was that we were "renting access to the servers" which is patently incorrect as we're not required to make periodic payments or face losing acess as one would with a rental system (or a subscription based game).

Your contention is that we are purchasing a licence rather than the software which, while I'll concede that you are quite probably correct, isn't really relevant to the point I was making. Whether we have purchased the software or the licence to it, neither is a rental agreement.
 
Well the point i'm trying to get to is that people need to view the AI and players as the same. AI will kill you just as often as a player will try if not more. How many people...

A) actually see any other players let alone get to chat to them let alone get attacked by them?

B) Fly in areas where a lot of other players fly and increase the risk of getting attacked by one.

And if they do get attacked, well space is a dangerous place which has been the theme of Elite since 1984 so why is anyone complaining about it? It's fine if a computer controlled person kills people because it's part of the game but somehow a human controlled person does it and it's the worst thing ever. That's no a reasonable position to hold and it's really about people that can't stand to be beaten, imo.

Good luck with this line of reasoning. I've tried it before.
It seems that the big problem that the anti-PvP side have comes down to their perception of the attacker's intentions.

They reason that an NPC is reacting to code but a player is reacting to emotion.

Somehow, this makes the end result of being blown up wildly different.

-----

With your second, also perfectly logical and understandable, you will have some people hit you with the amazing non-sequitur of "Well Elite was never a PvP game before so why should it be now?/!11eleven".

Luckily now we have yesterday's quote from Sandro:
Frankly, none of the above is particularly about player versus player or lack thereof. It's about plausible and consistent game rules."
Which should be the end of it, right? :)
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom