My son loves it, I'm not a fan.
Then again, I don't like 99% of the games out there.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Yeah! Plebs, Care-bears, snowflakes, I love how some PVPers describe PVErs...
oooh even more barely veiled insults... PG's and Solo are "nurseries" *claps hands with glee* come up with some more come up with some more... I need more handholding.
Awww cute little misdirect...
I always love people who are so tough when in a video game...
This is the "arrogance" that we have to put up with with along with the ingame arrogance of having to play in other modes than Open to not have to deal with PVP while at the same time getting certain PVPers complaining that anything we do is detrimental to "THEIR" game.
I think it would be more inline with the devs to declare that direct PVP is a failure, based on the design of the game...and shut it down. Pay out the players that demand a refund...and move ahead with their plans on the game. PVP is nothing in the game, has no inputs, and just creates to much crappy, condescending, irritable, complaints...that will never get fixed.
If you're looking for arrogance, try proof-reading your own posts fella.
Sounds like a solid plan to me +1
Seconded.
It is about high time that all this was dispensed with.
Elite should be about the lone pilot verses an uncaring galaxy. Elite Dangerous has that but now has added multiplayer.
So co-op play is now possible and maybe piracy in some form, as in the spirit of the Elite franchise.
All the usual PvP pro is unfitting here. If the game must change it would make a lot more sense morally and financially for FD to cut PvP from the game entirely.
Then perhaps the majority can move forward with the devs to get our beloved game back to where it belongs.
Goose4291
Banned
Speaking personally, I wouldnt mind a flagged system, however it'd need to also lock CG/BGS/PP influence to the PvP flagged players only, to mitigate risk of it being abused in the manner the modes are currently
That's no way to talk about the Explorers community.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It's not "abused" - it's working as designed. Just as PvP is unrestricted in the multi-player game modes so is affecting the BGS, CGs, PP, etc. unrestricted in terms of game mode choice.
Goose4291
Banned
BGS, CGs and PP were always available to all players in all modes - the only abuse of the game is when people abuse bugs to earn billions of credits overnight.
Also, constantly whining on the forums about an advertised feature of the game is abuse of the forums in my book - good job I don't have a blue name, or I'd fix that abuse
Non consensual PvP will always be an issue with the Open game mode as it stands. The Solo and Private Group modes are sledgehammers to the proverbial nut that ideally would not be required but - for that to happen - the penalties for non-consensual player-on-player murder need to be waaay tougher. And the implications for the victim much reduced.
I would propose that certain circumstances should make a player a “viable target” for other players, such as:
- Certain missions - much like the way you get a “hostile ships may be sent after you” a similar caveat saying “acceptance of this mission will make you a viable target to other Pilots Federation ships”
- Alternatively - and perhaps more harshly - simply carrying cargo could be considered being a viable target but in that scenario, as soon as you jettison your cargo you cease to be a viable target since the “pirate” got what they wanted
- In either case, carrying a Bounty would instantly qualify you as a viable target
- As would selecting (alternate) sides in a CZ, of course!
So, if you’re not a “viable target” at the time of destruction, then the Pilots Federation should come down hard on the CMDR who takes you out: I’m talking Large Bounty, assassination missions with location updates for other players to enact revenge and NO REBUY for the victim
That way, if you’re flying around minding your own business and someone decides to shoot you for no reason whatsoever ... well, lets just call it “fair” gameplay.
I would propose that certain circumstances should make a player a “viable target” for other players, such as:
- Certain missions - much like the way you get a “hostile ships may be sent after you” a similar caveat saying “acceptance of this mission will make you a viable target to other Pilots Federation ships”
- Alternatively - and perhaps more harshly - simply carrying cargo could be considered being a viable target but in that scenario, as soon as you jettison your cargo you cease to be a viable target since the “pirate” got what they wanted
- In either case, carrying a Bounty would instantly qualify you as a viable target
- As would selecting (alternate) sides in a CZ, of course!
So, if you’re not a “viable target” at the time of destruction, then the Pilots Federation should come down hard on the CMDR who takes you out: I’m talking Large Bounty, assassination missions with location updates for other players to enact revenge and NO REBUY for the victim
That way, if you’re flying around minding your own business and someone decides to shoot you for no reason whatsoever ... well, lets just call it “fair” gameplay.
Last edited:
Aww.... someone upset that their veiled insults were called out? This is part of the big issue, the PVErs and most PVPers play the game and get along splendidly.... it is a subset of PVPers who "rock the boat" for a better term. And if you are referring to my use of Seal clubbing, griefing, and the like... it is not an insult... it is what they are DOING. Calling someone a griefer when they publicly claim they grief is as if I told someone smoking meth that they were a meth head... (no correlation just analogy between two groups doing something and being called something because of their actions) and you thinking I am arrogant and insulting them? Yet anyone who objects to their practices of seal clubbing and the like is insulted for doing so, many times told to "get gud", told to play elsewhere then criticized for doing so, giving condescending nicknames, talked down to as if they are children, etc.
This whole Open vs Public Groups vs Solo debacle that has been going on since forever... is not because of the PVErs, it is not because of the majority of the PVPers... it is because of this "subgroup" of PVPers who have a mindset of the game that doesn't fit into the game or the community as a whole. So when Sylveria, myself and others who PVE or PVP try to come up with ideas that work for both groups, it is that "subgroup" who make snide comments, derail, troll, etc. Because they don't want the community working well together, they don't want PVErs and PVPers working slight hangups out to get the community working smoothly, they want to frustrate PVErs and get them to make comments about removing PVP from the game. Because in doing so they feel that PVPers will feel their game threatened and back their more extreme ideas to change the core of the game. This crap has been going on since these forums existed, and look at most of the posts right after she started the topic.
You want to claim I am arrogant? Look at your insulting post and answer if is it to painful looking in that mirror.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Now there is a classic!
I have a better plan. Remove the BGS and PP from the safe spots and create a proper war instead of a grind competition in private groups.
Git gud.
I think that is a bad idea. PvP has a role to play in ED.
I'm pretty torn about what FD should do about it though. On the one hand I think in the last year or so they have spent too much effort trying to deal with PvP related issues that have cost development time that could have gone into other things for all players to enjoy... on the other hand, i think at least some of it was needed, although the new C&P system makes me weep because it breaks one of the most fundamental axioms of programming, KISS. Its a horribly messy complicated system.
There is, of course, a third choice
Allow real PVP only amongst those who gitted gud. In the real sense.
The squeakers would never stop squeaking, and the pew-pews would never be out of Argos because they never learned to PVP.
It could be glorious
Allow real PVP only amongst those who gitted gud. In the real sense.
The squeakers would never stop squeaking, and the pew-pews would never be out of Argos because they never learned to PVP.
It could be glorious
There is, of course, a third choice
Allow real PVP only amongst those who gitted gud. In the real sense.
The squeakers would never stop squeaking, and the pew-pews would never be out of Argos because they never learned to PVP.
It could be glorious
You mean a gotton gud flag or something?
When you have gitted gud you can active the gotton gud flag and be elegible for PvP? Your ship is then flagged to all other CMDRs to show off what a awesome dude you are and how you welcome PvP?