PvP (Open) commanders not welcome on this forum?...

[CATPAIN KIRK]

Difficult topic - back in 2014 I took lots of flak due to advocating for meaningful PvP in this game because I actually love PvP if it serves a purpose.

FD decided to make it entirely meaningless and now what's left is a couple of the old guard doing it for sports (which I respect) and lots of immature people just doing it for chest thumping, e-peen contesting or carrying pointless flame wars from reddit into the game.

See this thread and the snide remarks.

 

[Red Anders]

Just how do you think a pvp tournament promoted by one Harry Potter would be received on this forum? How would that thread pan out?

I'd expect that even the people who constantly moan about him and his group would be delighted, since if they're engaged in a pvp tournament they won't be doing the other things that people constantly moan about.

That's me though, I'm not easily triggered.

 

[Globusdiablo]

Difficult topic - back in 2014 I took lots of flak due to advocating for meaningful PvP in this game because I actually love PvP if it serves a purpose.

FD decided to make it entirely meaningless and now what's left is a couple of the old guard doing it for sports (which I respect) and lots of immature people just doing it for chest thumping, e-peen contesting or carrying pointless flame wars from reddit into the game.

See this thread and the snide remarks.

But events such as the one I linked to in my OP should surely be considered cornerstones of the official forum, no?

 

[xondk]

PvP in Elite: Dangerous is easily associated with abuse and unfairness because of its asymmetrical nature which the developers seem adamant in maintaining. I can understand why someone who considers himself a PvPer would think twice before blowing his horn about it.

Seems a bit odd to blame the devs, how the heck would they control where players go and as such, what griefers with what weapons are where, in relation to where said pve/victim person is located?

Now granted CE's are an issue because they gather players and thus give griefers easy targets, but as a whole there's nothing wrong with CE's themselves.

The problem is mostly with some players behaviour, that frankly is unacceptable, but as long as they aren't discouraged of course they continue.

 

[Notwyn]

One PVP guy says he doesn't feel welcome... meh. Probably find a PVE guy that feels the same. All balances out, tempest in a teapot.

 

[DaveB]

...The dedicated PvP community is reaping what it has sewn...

I usually just shake my head and move on at the misuse of homophones, but the mental image of competitive PvP needlepoint is just hilarious...

 

[Nerwan]

There's been plenty of PVP events publicized, organised, and widely very positively commented on on this forum... So I'm not sure where the idea comes from. Oogies PVP leagues spring to mind. Most of the PVEers were pretty positive about those and many watched the vids etc..

 

[Lanceor]

That arguments above that have popped up within 90 minutes of the OP are a perfect example of why some people believe that the "Forums aren't the place for pvp. Posters only cry about it, mods don't like it. Everyone who would be interested is on reddit or on the discord servers we posted to."

As usual, there's a small minority (both PvE AND PvP) who can't understand why anyone would want to play the game any way other than their own. They come here with a poor understanding of how the other side thinks and even worse influencing skills, and try unsuccessfully to sway the other side. Throw a couple of trolls into the mix and you get a major s-storm each time the topic comes up.

 

[xondk]

That arguments above that have popped up within 90 minutes of the OP are a perfect example of why some people believe that the "Forums aren't the place for pvp. Posters only cry about it, mods don't like it. Everyone who would be interested is on reddit or on the discord servers we posted to."

As usual, there's a small minority (both PvE AND PvP) who can't understand why anyone would want to play the game any way other than their own. They come here with a poor understanding of how the other side thinks and even worse influencing skills, and try unsuccessfully to sway the other side. Throw a couple of trolls into the mix and you get a major s-storm each time the topic comes up.

There aren't really arguments per say.
And it isn't like reddit doesn't have arguments, but most subs have dedicated mods and various other tools that make it easier to track and remove those things, but it isn't like reddit is a saint, in fact often it can seem like those there learn towards being the PvP groups, that have their own prejudices against PvE people as mentioned.

 

[Kaltern]

Still this?

The ONLY reason people should be 'killing' other commanders in this game is if a) They're consenting to it, b) They have a reasonable bounty on their heads, or c) they become aggressive during a transfer of ownership transaction.

ANY other reason isn't PvP. It's Ganking. And that should result in being banned from the game. (after multiple warnings of course).

This entire 'thing' seems to stem from the ridiculous assertion that the game title 'Elite: Dangerous' somehow implies that it's not only fine to blow everyone up - it's a directive implicit within the name. Which is utter crap, of course.

Any 'PvP' player that doesn't fall into the categories as mentioned above, and still defends their right to do what they're doing, are the people that deserve the disdain from the PvE population. And any 'PvP' player who respects the POINT of player combat in this game should feel the same way.

 

[Globusdiablo]

One PVP guy says he doesn't feel welcome... meh. Probably find a PVE guy that feels the same. All balances out, tempest in a teapot.

I think you're missing the point. The official forum is missing out on excellent content (and commanders), simply because they apparently don't feel welcome.

 

[Jolly Roger]

Dude, people cry about how hard NPC AI is here. They cry about how hard trading is. They cry about how hard it is to travel from one end of the bubble to the other. They cry that they aren't running the Federation Navy after 2 sessions of grinding rep. They cry that paying the game 18MCr to transport their 300MCr warship across the bubble is too expensive and takes too long.

PVP? Real competition and risk? You're in the wrong neighborhood friend. And it's a damn shame.

You've said it all.

New around here, but all I can read is complaining.

Well, whatever, take some rep, cmdr

 

[Ziljan]

Unfortunately, separating the PvP'ers from griefers is a tough one, and sometimes they are one and the same.

It's not that tough. It's just a matter of perspective. Someone playing in a CZ in Open gets attacked, feel violated, and suddenly the other party is a griefer. From the other persons perspective, they were in a CZ, saw a red hollow triangle opened fire on a legitimate target of War. I mean we have people in Shinrarta flying around in Cutters feeling "violated" when they get attacked. It's a bit ridiculous, I mean it's gotten to the point where I feel like I need to ask politely if I can shoot a red hollow triangle in a CZ...

No encounter will ever be 100% symmetric, but that doesn't mean the other target is not legitimate. Just think of a the damage a Viper could do to a Anaconda in a CZ if they killed all of the green NPCs and allowed the Anaconda to become overrun with red NPCs, and then piled their own subtargetting DPS on top of that? A dagger may not be a claymore, but it is still deadly in the right hands.

 

[xondk]

Still this?

The ONLY reason people should be 'killing' other commanders in this game is if a) They're consenting to it b) They have a reasonable bounty on their heads, or c) they become aggressive during a piracy transaction.

A is not valid, you are playing in open, you automatically consent to whatever can mechanically happen in open. Just like most online games, Elite: Dangerous is also rated.
"Online Interactions Not Rated by the ESRB" - Warns those who intend to play the game online about possible exposure to chat (text, audio, video) or other types of user-generated content (e.g., maps, skins) that have not been considered in the ESRB rating assignment.

User generated content also including what players do.

And no, it isn't called ganking, that word is being misused often.

Ganking is several small people teaming up against a big target.
Griefing, is the term you are using for. Attacking others for the joy of attacking others to disrupt their play style.

Blowing up someone is entirely alright, the problem comes from people deliberately doing nothing else and only against those that clearly have no chance of defending themselves, absolutely nothing to do with PvP, but in itself, the act of destroying someone else, is perfectly valid.

Kinda like if there's free tastes somewhere and you take everything so no one else can taste, it is not illegal (though some places have 'one only' now) but it is an incredibly anti social, disruptive and annoying behaviour that would not be accepted and would have consequences irl, but not online, because of the nature of the internet.

But unfortunately it is posts like this, that OP is referring to, when a PvP focused player tries to discuss the subject at hand.

 

[Goose4291]

Still this?

The ONLY reason people should be 'killing' other commanders in this game is if a) They're consenting to it, b) They have a reasonable bounty on their heads, or c) they become aggressive during a transfer of ownership transaction.

ANY other reason isn't PvP. It's Ganking. And that should result in being banned from the game. (after multiple warnings of course).

This entire 'thing' seems to stem from the ridiculous assertion that the game title 'Elite: Dangerous' somehow implies that it's not only fine to blow everyone up - it's a directive implicit within the name. Which is utter crap, of course.

Any 'PvP' player that doesn't fall into the categories as mentioned above, and still defends their right to do what they're doing, are the people that deserve the disdain from the PvE population. And any 'PvP' player who respects the POINT of player combat in this game should feel the same way.

And posts like this further prove the OP's sources correct.

 

[DaveB]

Dude, people cry about how hard NPC AI is here. They cry about how hard trading is. They cry about how hard it is to travel from one end of the bubble to the other. They cry that they aren't running the Federation Navy after 2 sessions of grinding rep. They cry that paying the game 18MCr to transport their 300MCr warship across the bubble is too expensive and takes too long.

Yup, some do. And some others cry about the game not being designed as PvP-centric. They cry about the single shared galaxy. They cry about mode switching. They cry that they can't take control of territory. They cry every time FD rebalances the PvP combat-meta du jour...

And you know what? The rest of us will give both sets of idiots the same amused response and enjoy both flows of salt. And just keep on playing the game as it is not how some players with their own agenda want it to be. If that makes them feel somehow "unwelcome" then much as I regret that it is probably a reasonable reflection on their attitude.

 

[xondk]

It's not that tough. It's just a matter of perspective. Someone playing in a CZ in Open gets attacked, feel violated, and suddenly the other party is a griefer. From the other persons perspective, they were in a CZ, saw a red hollow triangle opened fire on a legitimate target of War. I mean we have people in Shinrarta flying around in Cutters feeling "violated" when they get attacked. It's a bit ridiculous, I mean it's gotten to the point where I feel like I need to ask politely if I can shoot a red hollow triangle in a CZ...

No encounter will ever be 100% symmetric, but that doesn't mean the other target is not legitimate. Just think of a the damage a Viper could do to a Anaconda in a CZ if they killed all of the green NPCs and allowed the Anaconda to become overrun with red NPCs, and then piled their own subtargetting DPS on top of that? A dagger may not be a claymore, but it is still deadly in the right hands.

Eh that's subjective, feeling 'violated' does not mean you are being violated, there are many yes that react when they 'feel' something even if it isn't true.
take CZ example, if they are fighting for opposite faction, its perfectly fine to blow you out of the sky.

There are plenty of valid reasons for killing people, which is why I point out that separating it can be tough, because you basically need to write down the actual griefers names and keep a look out for future behaviour, and in this case we are referring to attacks where it is so far from symmetric that it is silly, and where action is nothing but destroying another player, thus meaning that in the game there can be no possible gain from the action, destroying a clean target in a 'clean' situation, that has no possible way to change the outcome. And heck I'd say the amount of complaints seen unfortunately are not from CZ examples or such, but plenty of legit griefers about, but yes, there are also players that are very sensitive and subjective.
Hence separating an actual griefer from an actual PvP'er can be tough?

 

[GluttonyFang]

Let's face it, this is a PvE user heavy forum, and it breeds itself accordingly.

Without commenting on moderation bias, it's pretty clear some of the moderators here, and often the more vocal ones don't like PvP.

So yes, this place is unwelcoming to PvP players.

 

[Weps]

Seems a bit odd to blame the devs, how the heck would they control where players go and as such, what griefers with what weapons are where, in relation to where said pve/victim person is located?

Who else can you blame about the state of PvP? Players who engage in PvP within its current rules?

The devs (and I dare name even Sandro here) have time and again made statements from which I can only deduce that they want PvP to be asymmetrical. They said that a large ship should be able to attack a small ship with impunity and destroy it, that they want Open to be like this, but that they do not want players to be punished because this type of gameplay is considered a "criminal career".

You either bring all ships to a comparable level of combat prowess so that each ship can engage another one (along with other tweaks, wings etc.) and you continue with the current free-for-all, survival horror, the Hunger Games galaxy approach, or you keep the current (from what I understand player approved) ship design where freighters are freighters, warships are warships, but you also bring with it the modern day dismay towards frequent unregulated violence.

Until then, spontaneous PvP is simply going to be considered unfair by half of the participants, and that's not their fault, it's the game rules' fault.

 

[CATPAIN KIRK]

But events such as the one I linked to in my OP should surely be considered cornerstones of the official forum, no?

I didn't click the link as I don't visit reddit in general. But TBH no, it isn't.

From your description it's a PvP tournament. In the original medieval sense, it would at least serve the purpose of training for war.
Since wars over ressources/territory don't exist in ED by design it's a pointless chest-thumping event and I'd personally just not post in the thread, which is obviously no reason to not create it.

Imho a PvP subforum would be worth a try for such matters.