please don't confuse PvPers with griefers

[Puck]

You can't really grief people in Elite though can you?

I mean its not like you actually really lose very much if you get shot as you get it covered by insurance, unless you have a cargo full of very expensive stuff, in which case you're fair game anyway. Plus, the old rule "dont fly what you can't afford to lose" is surely relevant here.

For me it's the risk of losing stuff that actually makes a game fun.

I can think of ways to grief. Like, for example, buy a Type 9 and sit outside a busy station just ramming people and watching them explode.

 

[Shepard]

I like pvp, but im avoiding doing interdictions on players because so many people are not cool with it. Unless they have wanted status, then its fair game.

I know! But if they still interdict then they are what ?? - right, they are pirating. Want your loot or just want to pew pew other players in their internet shipz... That's pretty much it.

 

[Aeolusdallas]

You mentioned financial gain as the most common motive for PVPer but I have never seen that as being the case. Using EVE as an example what financial gain is there in blowing up some high sec players ultra rare ship that he foolishly took out for a test drive? What financial gain is there in tricking newbie players with can flipping? None it's done for no other purpose than ruining another players day.
Or in more conventional MMORPG's like ,EQ2 or WOW ,where is the financial gain in killing and camping players? Again there isn't any. It's just to bully other players.

 

[Dabba]

In warzones if you fight for opposite factions - it's normal and justified if player from opposite faction that is red to you attacks you.

Yes of course. If you go to a warzone you are looking for conflict, and can safely assume the same of anyone else.

 

[bassman]

what we really need is some way to chat after the fight. that is how communities form. it's no good being able to chat during the fight, take your finger off the stick and you might just as well hit self destruct. we need the ability to talk after the fight when one player is in station a few jumps away.

Good idea, it would be nice to be able taunt/congratulate your opponent after the fight.

 

[Ogidch]

I can see both sides of the argument here and only play open play, I have attacked a CMDR who was wanted in a federal system. I was in an Adder and them a Sidewinder, I was simply bounty hunting and they were fair game as wanted.

I was also in an anarchy system exploring with my new cobra and scanning planets etc, when a player in a Cobra interdicted me, took a fair beating and limped out of their. This was exciting and welcome this unpredictability of the game, but can see how others would not.

It would be a real shame if players are forced into solo play, so maybe they need to look at the mechanic with a PvP scale chosen by the player OR possibly a game option which you select to only have interaction with none hostile players, if a player selects this and is hostile to another player repeatedly (5 or more shots to the hull etc) then they are automatically destroyed by the pilots federation inbuilt ship self destruct mechanism!

 

[Puck]

Good idea, it would be nice to be able taunt/congratulate your opponent after the fight.

I can't say I agree. They're dead.

 

[Joe Spivey]

this seems to be a reoccurring theme on these boards, if a player shoots someone and it's not for profit, then it must be to cause grief.

that is simply not true. i've played eve-online for years, both as a carebear, and a PvPer. now eve is well known for its griefers, but what you might not know is there is also a very large community of PvPers who are not griefers. in fact if you head out to lawless space where it's effectively open PvP you'll be hard pushed to find a griefer.

you see PvPers love nothing more than to have a good scrap then laugh about it after. sure sometimes the loss might hurt, and they will just drop a "good fight" in chat then go lick their wounds, but they will laugh about it later. other times the fight might be so good that they start chatting with their enemy right away. if a newbie wanders into this dangerous zone and gets blown up and stops to talk to the "evil pirates" what they will invariably get is a ton of advice and help on what to do next time.

you see these players are not out to cause grief, they are out to have fun scrapping. if you go into an open PvP world in any game then you have to assume there will be people there who just want to have fun scrapping. not to cause you misery, but to enjoy a fight.

and no they will not pick a honourable or fair fight. they will run away when the odds are against them just as they will give chase when the odds are in their favour, because it's all fair game in open PvP (ok, sometimes they will run when the odds are suspiciously in their favour as they might suspect a trap).

if you get to a place where you accept that just undocking means you might never dock in that ship again then the open PvP world can be a lot more exciting than the controlled NPC world.

you see when an NPC interdicts you, it can be quite a boring affair, it's either a fed or a bounty at your feet. when a player interdicts you then suddenly you might be fighting for your life, hammering the boost button as fast as you can praying the FSD will spool up in time.

in short PvP can give you more of an adrenaline rush than an NPC ever could, that is why it's a great thing in such a game and that is why i play open (unless an outpost is full *mutters*)

what we really need is some way to chat after the fight. that is how communities form. it's no good being able to chat during the fight, take your finger off the stick and you might just as well hit self destruct. we need the ability to talk after the fight when one player is in station a few jumps away.

First of all, ED is not a PvP centric game. ED is a a player co-op game with a PvP element. But that is by the by. You say that PvPers love a good scrap and then have a good laugh. You say you want to have fun scrapping. That you want to enjoy a fight. You say it can be exciting knowing that you may loose your ship. You say PvP can give you an adrenaline rush and that is why it is such a great thing. That is all fine... except. What if the player you come up against doesn't want those things? What if his/her idea of fun in the game is to trade, to explore or to mine? What if he wants to do these things co-operatively with friends? What I am saying is what if your idea of what is fun isn't their's? If you meet such a player, will you respect the way they want to enjoy the game or will you impose combat on them? If you choose the later then you ARE a griefer no matter what you say. If you choose the later you are causing them grief by preventing them from enjoying the game in the way they wish. If it is PvP that you want in ED, fine... PvP to your hweart's content with those that WANT to PvP.

 

[zombieapocalypse]

I don't understand the mentality of people who want to play in open mode but then cry griefer if someone attacks you. And at the moment the only form of meaningful human interaction in open mode is PvP - most players I've come across are not interested in conversation (although the non-optimal comms system could be partly to blame for this). If you don't want to be attacked by a PC (a rare event anyway) then you have solo mode or you can join a PvE group.

Plus there needs to be some risk and tension in this game and let's face it, at the moment that's not coming from NPCs. I've only died twice since the gamma and both times were due to head on collisions with NPCs during dogfights (and I've learnt my lesson since). Also since the gamma I haven't even taken so much as hull damage from an NPC (and I do a lot of bounty hunting and missions). I never thought I would say this, but I starting to get a little bored of ED because it's simply not challenging enough for me. This is coming from someone who was totally addicted to Frontier: Elite II.

One of my most exciting moments in ED was when I was interdicted by another player in federation space. I submitted and deployed weapons and we had a standoff - neither of us was wanted so it was a case of who would fire the first shot. In the end we had a laugh about it and went our separate ways without a shot fired, but it was a tense moment and very exciting.

 

[ReaperAlex]

You sound sincere but quite frankly you are using the same excuses that griefers always use when defending themselves. What you need to understand is that most people do not want or like forced PVP and even more so unfair or dishonorable ones.

i'm making this post because i don't believe players who attack you for no monetary gain are necessarily griefers. i do understand the other side, i've been there, i've freely admitted to being utterly panicked by a pair of pirates in eve when i was new. it was a horrible experience and kept me away from open pvp areas for 2 years.

what is greatly misunderstood is people assumptions on why a PvPer attacks an easy target. yes there are griefers, people who just want to upset others. but the motivation behind an attack is more often than not that of wanting to get into a good scrap. like you would in any other PvP game where there is nothing to do but PvP (like many FPS pvp games). the PvPers in FPS games are not out to upset each other, well, at least the mature ones are not. luckily like eve, elite will be pulling in more mature gamers than it does immature ones.

you'll see this if you compare forums for different games. ones that attract immature players are full of abuse. look about this forum, sure there are arguments but if a player asks for help they invariably get it. so too with the eve forums. that is a good benchmark for a mature community and a good indication that the PvPers are looking for fights not the upset of others.

if a PvPer (not a griefer) attacks you he is not hoping to upset you, he is hoping you will put up either a good fight or a good cat and mouse game if you chose to run. i'd just like people to realise that is the intention behind the attack.

i am not saying there wont be griefers, i am just saying there will probably be more PvPers than there are griefers. the definition of a griefer needs to be more than just "they shot me for no financial gain".

what i'm seeing in here is some indication that griefing is a consistent attack on the same person. now i'm not sure if that is in one trip to station, or if it's for a prolonged period of time when a PvPer would have found another target to have a go at. if there is very little player traffic then there might well be station camping, so even then i'm not sure the motivation is to grief. maybe not because there are 2 easy ways to stop the chase, drop into solo or block the other player (which from what i've seen from beta/gamma posters means they will not be put in the same instance as you)

you see players who do not want PvP have options to avoid it. the main thing missing for both sides is a decent set of communication tools

some of us play MMOs to have other players about to chat to, that is very limited in elite even when PvP is not a factor. so i can see why players chose open when they dont want PvP, but right now we just have to understand that the choices are not perfect and open is the open PvP mode. the only middle ground is group, and there are links on the forums to groups who are trying to build a friendly no-fire world together.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Good idea, it would be nice to be able taunt/congratulate your opponent after the fight.

Nice for whom?

 

[Witzo]

if a player shoots someone then it must be to cause grief.

that is simply not true.

I will consider a gentle pat on the back for being a good sport to show up and have my behind handed to me when I was coincidentally passing by. I enjoy the constant feeling of impending doom, it keeps me humble.

 

[Korenwolf]

I like pvp, but im avoiding doing interdictions on players because so many people are not cool with it. Unless they have wanted status, then its fair game.

+rep, well said.

 

[bassman]

You can't really grief people in Elite though can you?

I've played since alpha and most of the time deliberately sought out the PvP "friendly" areas, have only ever been griefed once in all that time and it was actually quite fun - guy was station camping inside freeport shooting ships taking off, so I decided to keep ramming him to trap him in the station until the station killed him for trespassing.

 

[GibMeister]

I agree with the OP here.

When i come out of Solo play i fully intend to face real players in combat with my Viper, its the challenge! Human players perform much better than NPCs.

Whats a griefer? Dunno, I have started hearing this name on this forum, well, I can see NPC pirates in this game who attack me to destroy me and they say stuff like 'I'm gonna pick your bones clean' well is a Griefer someone who just wants to destroy you and make you suffer? Fine if they are, just like pirates and criminals in the game, whats the problem?

Play the game in Solo until you are fully upgraded and a good pilot and then go look for them and destroy them all! Live by the sword and die by the sword' its just another way to play the game.

 

[ReaperAlex]

I can think of ways to grief. Like, for example, buy a Type 9 and sit outside a busy station just ramming people and watching them explode.

you see this is more the sort of thing the term griefing should be reserved for.

 

[Crumplecorn]

What if the player you come up against doesn't want those things? What if his/her idea of fun in the game is to trade, to explore or to mine? What if he wants to do these things co-operatively with friends?

Private group.

If you meet such a player, will you respect the way they want to enjoy the game or will you impose combat on them? If you choose the later then you ARE a griefer no matter what you say.

So you say they have to play your way and that's fine, but if they say you have to play their way they are a 'griefer'?

 

[bassman]

Nice for whom?

Not really sure what point your trying to make but given that you were able to chat right up to the moment of death I see no reason not to extend the facility for a short time afterwards, since all chat is essentially opt-in I cant see a downside.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Not really sure what point your trying to make but given that you were able to chat right up to the moment of death I see no reason not to extend the facility for a short time afterwards, since all chat is essentially opt-in I cant see a downside.

If the destroyed player had chosen to chat with their attacker prior to destruction - fair enough, I suppose. If not then why should the player who had just destroyed them be able to send unsolicited messages?

 

[Korenwolf]

Nice for whom?

As with many other games (including the 800Lb elekk) being able to communicate with the other party to the combat while used a lot of the time for polite enough comms (/salute, "well played", "congrats" and so on) there are those who just want to scream obscenity / insults etc "f_g" / "ret_rd" / "noobbbb!!!" and so on.

Of course not forgetting "/spit" which I'm still trying to work out why the Blizz programmers thought it was a good thing to add.

Hell, blizz have gone the other way for Hearthstone and only allow very generic and bland messaging because they know the insults and noise would be a support nightmare (see "internet d_ckwad theory").

It only takes one of those offensive players to completely foul up the playing session for someone else, they walk away with "yah!!! trashed that noob" feeling and the recipient just ends up p_ssed off / logging out or dropping off to solo and never coming back.

Expecting manners from the entire playerbase however makes wishing for an honest politician seem like a reasonable prospect.