![[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/234/234580.jpg?1612617334){kind=avatar}
Exactly, and all that is too much hard work and will raise a billion complaints, so they don't bother and let the ol 'I got ganked' and "Ganking is legal' arguments rage on. It's easier.
Question for Open players who don't like PVP/ganking... help me understand
- Thread starter Danquememe
- Start date
Exactly, and all that is too much hard work and will raise a billion complaints, so they don't bother and let the ol 'I got ganked' and "Ganking is legal' arguments rage on. It's easier.
This. My favorite game I got into this year (late) was 2018's Kingdom Come: Deliverance, which was lambasted for being way too hard and aggressively unfair to the player. I'd been eyeing it just for something gorgeous to play in 4k, and when it went on sale, I finally bought it. It's all PVE (single player), but the combat hierarchy is just as you describe and it's exhilarating! Perfect analogy for Elite, even though it's a medieval sword-fighting rpg. You can get pretty much the best gear in the game right away if you're shrewd, and it doesn't do buck all for you because you HAVE to level up your character and your skills as a player before you'll win any fights. Death sends you back to a previous save, too, which are limited, so you can potentially lose hours of gameplay. And even when you're good, you can get ambushed by a group of enemies... running may be the right move even at the top of your game. Realistically, any one dude vs 6 armed and trained soldiers is gonna get pwned no matter who he is.
This difficulty ultimately makes progressing through the game very rewarding, and even though it's just a game, as a player, you feel like you've developed skills (gotten gud) because you had to learn to do all the things, not just buy the magic win trinket and be a god among men. Elite is exactly the same, only since the bandits who beset you are other players, some players think they are therefore anti-social, riddled with psychological issues, evil people, etc. But are the developers scripted the bandits in Kingdom Come equally evil? Or is there some way to get everyone to acknowledge that we're all playing a game for fun, and part of what makes games fun to play is the chance to pit your skills against a challenging opponent?
Do you know if the person playing is 70 or 7? Can you not think that the player you're targetting really doesn't know what they're doing? That's what I mean about choosing your targets wisely and you reap what you sow! Open could be a MUCH better place, fun for more people, but only if the gankers/greifers change IMO. It's not about who's right and who's wrong, but making Open better for more people. Everyone benefits from that surely?
The best way to change the game is for everyone to learn how to escape. If most people know how do evade then greifers starve.
1) Is that Pic in game or on the website? Even so that pic is interesting especially with regard to the Pilots federation...."Rogue commanders" "betrayed the pilots federation"....where on earth is the consequence for doing that in Elite? I still think kill too many PF members and you are kicked out of the PF. Stations will have KOS orders so no docking etc etc etc.
2) so they hide in solo and still beat you?
3) hi sec Should be safe for lawfulls and unsafe for unlawfulls.
4) I doubt a shiedless/weaponless trader explorer thinks they can fight anything, but again it comes down to the systems (especially security) making sense in the game and they clearly do not.
5) it's not the mindset of "solo in open" that's the problem, until that's realised nothing will change and this discussion will crop up again and again and again and again.
I haven't been wrong yet in either venue, since you want to keep score.Again, nope.
It's not a "point of diction". Wherever the argument is held - you're still wrong.
It's the fact that you keep imagining your own measures and ideas of 'knowledge and skill' apply to anybody else. When you say "That doesn't really make it more challenging, though, does it?", the answer for you may be "no", but for somebody else - it could easily be "yes".
Just because you or I might find it boring doesn't invalidate the potential challenge involved, if it's challenging somebody's perseverance or patience. It's just that you don't consider those things a challenge.
Think of it this way: Different people consider different things challenging. You don't get to invalidate those because you think you're right. That's hubris in action - as I pointed out.
I do, very seriously, doubt there's many people on this thread that could circumnavigate the galaxy in a Hauler. I doubt Yamato could either. Silly strawmen about RL salaries aren't relevant.
I'm not imagining anything. Measures of knowledge and skill are objective. That's why they're measures. Can I do A? Yes. Can you? No. Then I am better than you at A. This is very simple logic and easy to measure given a metric. For example, pitting one player against another in direct competition over game mechanics. A BGS war, a race, PVP combat. Easy to see who wins and loses. As the game isn't really geared toward racing, there aren't really any ways that effects gameplay outside of bragging rights between individuals, but BGS or PVP combat can interrupt or alter gameplay habits in other types of gameplay. Even BGS depends on you arbitrarily aligning yourself with some faceless NPC faction. Only PVP combat presents a direct challenge to any gameplay you are trying to accomplish when you encounter it. It presents the greatest challenge to your completion of any gameplay loop because it is the most likely to result in your ship's destruction. This is really easy to understand. It is a challenge that any player in Open can face and must be aware of, not some random goal they set for themselves. It is a gameplay mechanic.
People can struggle with basic things, but that doesn't make those things more than basic. It's not invalidating those people to say their challenges are easy to overcome and inconsequential in the grand scheme of the game. It's a point of fact. We can teach them, or they can learn on their own and they can get better, and that's that. I do, however, "get to" do whatever I want within the rules of the game and the forum, because that's how the rules of the game and the forum work. You don't get to have any expectation that your self-righteous proclamations to the contrary carry any weight whatsoever.
If it's possible to circumnavigate in a Hauler, anybody sufficiently motivated, with the bare minimum of game knowledge could do it. Figure out where to go, load up the right gear, jump, scoop, jump, scoop, jump, scoop, jump, scoop, ad infinitum. The only thing lacking is motivation, which is why I introduced the thought experiment involving actual value being added to this pointless exercise. You struggled with the reasoning there, so hopefully, it's clear to you now. (See, I can be condescending and insult your intelligence right back! AND do it from logically sound footing! GG EZ lol)
You don't seem to understand what a straw man argument is. A straw man is when you create a point that nobody is arguing and then defeat that point to make yourself appear to score points in a debate. For example, in a discussion of the challenges presented by gameplay mechanics if I said, "well, if someone wanted to do this really boring and random thing that earns nothing, does not engage in any of the deeper mechanics of the game and takes a long time, that's the BIGGEST challenge!" that would be a straw man argument. Since the game doesn't present that challenge directly, it is not challenging gameplay, it is a personal goal. Personal goals are arbitrary and have no bearing on the difficulty of various gameplay mechanics. If I want to land a shieldless hauler blindfolded using only my nose while hanging upside down, that would be a great challenge for me, I assure you, but it is not one that faces players of the game by and large. [<<<THIS STRAW MAN IS DIRECTLY ANALOGOUS TO YOUR OWN] Whereas any player in Open can be interdicted and shot on sight by any other player, so this is challenging gameplay that is clearly universal and by design.
Bedtime here, so I'll let you have whatever last word you want. I've already dismantled your criticisms, so thanks for playing!
Last edited:
Seems that ganker side cannot fathom what really is their PR problem. Lets see. Okay NPC opponents have kind of valid motivations, financial gain (piracy, bounty hunting), political gain (preventing you to do some things advancing their rivals), there really is not psycho NPC's attacking somebody just for sake of attacking. Now player side: Ok, there are likewise motivations, financial, political and so on. But then there is that completely beliavability shattering amount of psycho types who just pull trigger on everything that moves. Ok, fine, there are some of those types in real life too. Though most of them are locked away or in process of getting locked away. Now if we had in place some consequences for choosing that playstyle, consequences being pretty heavyweight severely impacting available choices in gameplay I would not have any problem in that some players choose to roleplay psycho slayers. Current consequences are way too lightweight.
Its on the advertising- in game when you click on Open you get 'you will encounter other commanders in this mode' which unless you are the most naive child alive means you should be cautious.
This is not that argument- what we are talking about here is people not getting Open is dangerous, playing in it and being surprised people destroy them.
It should and is in PvE- however high sec in a PvP context allows me ten seconds to kill you before I need to fend off security and about a minute of killing more to get ATR.
You have maps, skills, alternate engineers, all sorts to trade in places.
Yiou are mistaken, it is. Solo is your overpowered ship in an underpowered galaxy that always stays the same. In Open everything is even at the top, and lop sided at the bottom. If you avoid places and run you then can build yourself up to face attack and become even with people.
The PF think otherwise, apparently.
Given how easy it is to avoid/survive ganks, they might have a point tbh.
This, which is why I think Sir Ganksalot's Gank Evasion Academy is absolutely brilliant (and, ironically enough, started and run by gankers, those people that even I used to think were a bunch of murderous, soulless monsters. Thankfully, getting to "know" a lot of them through these forums taught me otherwise, and for that I'm thankful), because it's so bloody obvious. I mean, back when I was a completely soaking wet behind the ears noob and even NPCs were a mortal threat to me, it didn't take any teachings beyond my first death to learn that I'd better run and get good at that before I bothered fighting, yet it took an initiative like Sir Ganksalot's to make me realize that it is absolutely no different when it comes to human players. Learn to run until you can fight, THEN fight. If you can run, you'll never have to fight or die unless you CHOOSE to.
I swear, sometimes I just want to smack myself upside the head.
Running doesn't require of me that I turn my ExploraDora Boat into a Meta CZ Murderboat, it just requires of me that I learn how to evade until I can jump (and, in an explorer boat, there is no Metaboat Griefer in the 'Verse that can follow my wake), all I have to do is learn how to submit, evade and jump, which is not a trivial task, but I don't have to focus on something I'm not interested in (pew pew, although that might change, my interests have a way of doing that all the time), which is all that I used to read by way of advice, souring me further on the whole subject, because I don't WANT to spend 99% of my first 300 hrs of playing time grinding to build a Murderhoboat and learning how to git gud at pew pew.
And it turned out that it was me being oblivious all the time. The obvious answer was there for me as it had been all along: Run. Running IS an option.
In the very rare cases where it isn't (Deciat and that most important early upgrade of all, the FSD range, I'm looking at you), there's Solo. Everybody uses it. Problem solved.
I'll see myself out. Just needed to say that
Deleted member 38366
D
No, I ignore them.
That has proven to be the best policy.
If anything, these people can safely be considered an insult to others for what it's worth.
It's okay, though. it's a PEGI-7 title and your failed attempts to defend mindless ganking is perfectly in line with that.
cya
PS.
Sorry, but the Irony of your post did not go unnoticed
LOL
Nice story. Sounds like an awesome 'hard mode' style which I love. The actual gameplay sounds boring as hell but each to their own.
Where it falls flat on its face is that there is no 'hard reset' for the ganker, no 'get killed lose hours of gameplay and back to last save', all that is reserved for the other player. But thats C&P and a whole sidetrack which has already been covered in depth.
The game doesnt present any challenge directly beyond learning to fly and dock a spaceship. Anything else is optional. Anything a player does in this game is a personal goal and we know your views on those. But I agree, another players arbitrary personal goal to play an anti-social anti-community character who has no value of the game itself or the many tools provided or other people and doesnt care about anyone but themselves has no bearing on the difficulty.
Deleted member 121570
D
A whole lot of waffle, right there. And still failing to understand the basic point that: challenge is only ever personal. You seem to be confusing what you think about your own ideas, your own measures, your own values and your own perceptions of the game mechanics with some kind of 'fact' around any of it. None of that's actually relevant. The " It presents the greatest challenge to your completion of any gameplay loop because it is the most likely to result in your ship's destruction" is one of the most hilariously silly things I've ever read.
I get that you might think you're 'dismantling criticisms' and imagine I'm keeping score in some weird debating society, but as you pointed out (but probably missed the point of) - it's a forum, context is important - and this is a thread that asked for views from people who don't PvP/Gank about what they get out of open.
If, in response to their answers - you blather on and try to devalue things they think are challenging as just 'personal', or stuff anybody could do, etc - and go on about how they can only experience real, objective, non-personal challenge (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean) by following your suggestions....yup....that's your hubris at play, right there.
I'll take one last stab at trying to help you see this, although I realise it's probably futile.
If the only thing lacking in the Hauler example is motivation; then the challenge lies in developing the motivation to do it. This is why you can't do it. For those who do - they've done something you couldn't. They win the galactic circumnavigation achieve you can't. The fact that there are haulers, and a galaxy, and it's possible mean that this challenge is equally there - by design.
Anyone can't do it, just for different reasons other than the ones you put so much stock in. It might not require what you term knowledge or skill, but it demands other things.
The things you think are important are as irrelevant to that long-distance traveller as their challenge is to you. Whether that's meaningful to you is irrelevant - their sense of challenge is equal to yours, and their sense of achievement if they do it equally so. I'm not devaluing the challenge of PvP by saying so. Different strokes for different folks.
I'm not actually trying to 'compete' with you here in arguments. It's good you're off to bed really. That way you can stop making yourself look any more of a misguided blowhard
Idk - this thread and others like it, convinced me to pick "open" a bit more,
never gave it much thought before
1) In game? (fair enough). Then in reality FD should not allow people to not fit guns and shields, they should have an explicit warning to discourage all but the most "manly" of gamers that flying without shields and guns is not a good idea. But then those that "do" fit guns and shields ARE being cautious, yet if not powefull enough still get destroyed by a PvP in their meta build. This isn't about naive people not being cautious all the time. Granted some will be, but not all.
2) There's Dangerous (walking in a rough part of town) and there's Dangerous (walking in Syria). And the worst thing is some people won't know if it's just "downtown" or "syria" until the first hit's land.
3) That's just time to respond, which I presume resets? (not sure on the details as I don't play criminal style). Players should be activiely hunted depending on how "bad" they are in hi sec. I mean you all want Elite to be harder, and complain it isn't so this is where FD should make things difficult.
4) Hi sec still doesn't mean what it says though, imagine if a trucker in the UK or US was driving down the road with their empty trailer and a tank pulls onto the motorway and just blows then up....they'd feel a tad aggrieved don't you think? They'd wonder "what the smeg are the law enforcement doing letting that happen?".
5) Nope because you're wrong about solo as you're not factoring in difficulty is subjective. Not everyone want to fly a combat build to have an overpowered ship. Not everyone is good enough at combat to have an underpowered galaxy. Until you understand that premise your overall midset is flawed IMO.
Open's flaw is that many can't play how they want, when that's the game biggest marketing hook (bigger than danger and combat IMO). Telling people how they have to play or build their ship to survive in open makes a mockery of the games "sandbox" IMO.
Agreed, FD need to have an escape tutorial in game based on evading a real player out for blood. There's a good reason the armed forces constantly train and drill.
Idk - this thread and others like it, convinced me to pick "open" a bit more,
never gave it much thought before
So many people seem to commit to a particular mode like it's a one-time choice. You can change mode more or less any time you like
Before every jump I consider what my personal reaction would be to being attacked. If I'm not feeling up to the challenge for any reason, I switch mode before I jump. The overwhelming majority of my 10,000hrs in the game have been in open
G5 sarcasm with double bracing? Its open and anything is possible and you should have at least one metric of speed, shield or offense always on tap.
Its called being prepared. You know ahead of time when things will be hard- engineer bases, capitals, Shin Dez.
Its 10 seconds to kill someone, which means in high sec regardless you have to live 10 seconds to even start thinking about escape.
Its why personal responsibility is so important because other players are the danger regardless of place.
Well it is- PvE in solo lulls you into bad habits because you never see the really nasty weapons or tactics used. People panic and fly away in straight lines, with ships ill equipped to handle player killing weapons like PA which use absolute damage (while players often go for resistance builds).
In the end Open is not about combat- its you knowing how to avoid combat and choosing when to engage or escape. If everyone knew how to evade, griefers would be starved of cheap kills and the problem ends- what some suggest is that the game is put into ever convoluted knots to protect people when the tools exist right now.
If you want to get more people into open, then you need to do the following;-
- Protect the new players from seal clubbing (which they finally implemented with the newbie area).
- Offer systems which are considered 'Safe'. i.e. Make High security systems somewhere where it's very difficult to pirate or gank.
- A Player Bounty hunter system where you can track and kill notorious players.
- Make it so that Notorious players safe players are Anarchy Systems. i.e. you can't track a notorious player in an Anarchy system.
- Powerplay PvP killers are handled under a different system, thus making Power-play more attractive to PvP players.