Removing rammers

Mohrgan

Mohrgan
bladebss said:
Well not realy i would quite like it to be real life..and have my very own viper mk 3 lol

however we live in elite dangerous as a character in that world, and just how that experience plays out is dependent on the rules at play. Some rules can be equated to real life and highlight simalar negative effects that would have on the experiance.

The excuse that its a game so no real life comparisoms can be made destroys all concept of realism in games.. often the main atraction to a game is its realisme.
Click to expand...

Then why are players supposed to accept out-of-game reasons for being attacked? I mean if we can't assign poor character to gankers because 'It's just a game', how can we assign bad behavior to Commanders that avoid ganks in the same setting? I guess you could wiggle around with selective application if that soothes you, but it's just another method of justifying poor behavior. The Golden Rule should apply in space.
 

bladebss

bladebss
Maggie_Oz said:
I understand that but in real life if you are a highly wanted criminal you are hunted down and thrown in prison for the rest of your life, not given an inconsequential fine.
If not combat logging is in the terms of service, then so to should not ganking
Click to expand...
No. Combat loggig is a real world violation.. ganking is an ingame violation. There are ingame consaquences for ganking. There are out of game consaquences for combat logging.

The person commiting in game crimes such as wanton murder are subjected to fines and notoriety and possable ''incaceration'' and loss of that ship requireing an insurance claim and loss of all onboard assets.

Weather or not thats severe enough of an ingame punishmwnt is subject to much debate but there is a clear distinction between in game and out of game. Based on the rules needed to be set up for how the game works.
 

bladebss

bladebss
Mohrgan said:
Then why are players supposed to accept out-of-game reasons for being attacked? I mean if we can't assign poor character to gankers because 'It's just a game', how can we assign bad behavior to Commanders that avoid ganks in the same setting? I guess you could wiggle around with selective application if that soothes you, but it's just another method of justifying poor behavior. The Golden Rule should apply in space.
Click to expand...
Wel.. i guess there is no problem with avoiding ganks in game. Using your wits and the tools available such as hiwake and bravely running away.

I cant think how an out of game reason could be reasonably assigned to ganking? They have poor character in game just as much as the potential for out of it dont they? We are humans in both settings and so act in the same light.
 

Maggie_Oz

Maggie_Oz
bladebss said:
No. Combat loggig is a real world violation.. ganking is an ingame violation. There are ingame consaquences for ganking. There are out of game consaquences for combat logging.

The person commiting in game crimes such as wanton murder are subjected to fines and notoriety and possable ''incaceration'' and loss of that ship requireing an insurance claim and loss of all onboard assets.

Weather or not thats severe enough of an ingame punishmwnt is subject to much debate but there is a clear distinction between in game and out of game. Based on the rules needed to be set up for how the game works.
Click to expand...

No the difference is that there is a real world proscription on an in game behaviour in the case of logging out, but basically zero consequences in game or out for the ganker.
 

bladebss

bladebss
Maggie_Oz said:
No the difference is that there is a real world proscription on an in game behaviour in the case of logging out, but basically zero consequences in game or out for the ganker.
Click to expand...
Your opinion of what constitutes ''basicaly zero'' is perhaps up for subjective debate but there are, infact, in game consaquences for gankers. Many people dont commit in game crimes based off of thse consaquences. They could be more meaningfull but that is again a debatable matter.

The ingame consaquences of combat loggin are you brake down all ingame rules and asociated consaquences and alot of in game meaning and choice to boot.
 

Rat Catcher

Rat Catcher
Maggie_Oz said:
Does anyone have a link or excerpt of the Terms of Service that forbid combat logging ?
Click to expand...
If you can find it - here is the EULA for ED:

Elite Dangerous EULA and Terms of Use

The Frontier Developments Online Store is the exclusive online retailer for products made and licensed by Frontier Developments plc
store.elitedangerous.com store.elitedangerous.com

And... Code of Conduct is here:

Frontier Developments Store

The Frontier Developments Online Store is the exclusive online retailer for products made and licensed by Frontier Developments plc
www.frontierstore.net www.frontierstore.net
 
Last edited:

Maggie_Oz

Maggie_Oz
Yes I read through that, nothing is mentioned, nor is anything in the Code of Conduct, nor is it an item on the in-game reporting menu
 
Last edited:

Rat Catcher

Rat Catcher
Maggie_Oz said:
Yes I read through that, nothing is mentioned, nor is anything in the Code of Conduct, nor is it an item on the in-game reporting menu
Click to expand...
Exactly :)
It only exists in the mind...
(although there was a Dev Post expressing the opinion that it wasn't nice to do so - but never written in CoC or EULA (Which are the only 'rules' pertaining to the game))
 

rrobes

R
FD always intended ganking to be part of the game.

Their thoughts (I extrapolate) was that this aggression would lead players to engineer ships, join wings and expand player options. Response has been mixed due to factors already discussed many times (resistance to engineering, don't want to be part of combat, etc.).

So ramming is permitted, penalties are gerrymandered and ships not pilots, are saddled with fines, to not discourage villainy.

Working as intended.
 

[VR] M4st0d0n

[VR] M4st0d0n
rrobes said:
FD always intended ganking to be part of the game.

Their thoughts (I extrapolate) was that this aggression would lead players to engineer ships, join wings and expand player options. Response has been mixed due to factors already discussed many times (resistance to engineering, don't want to be part of combat, etc.).

So ramming is permitted, penalties are gerrymandered and ships not pilots, are saddled with fines, to not discourage villainy.

Working as intended.
Click to expand...

Ask kindly for support to refund your ganked ship and they'll do it, tho.
 

Mohrgan

Mohrgan
rrobes said:
FD always intended ganking to be part of the game.

Their thoughts (I extrapolate) was that this aggression would lead players to engineer ships, join wings and expand player options. Response has been mixed due to factors already discussed many times (resistance to engineering, don't want to be part of combat, etc.).

So ramming is permitted, penalties are gerrymandered and ships not pilots, are saddled with fines, to not discourage villainy.

Working as intended.
Click to expand...

I think you are right. I think open was always intended to be chaos. That's why the Modes are so important to E|D. Without the modes, E|D would have just been a gankers paradise, and would have attracted far less interest across the board. Giving the widest spectrum of available environments to choose from has allowed for all stripes of players to find an interest in Elite.

Even when FD updated the C&P system, they left the mechanics for criminal behavior to go blithely on. Hoping that consequences were enough to encourage open play. Well, it didn't change much, because allowing for the wild-west-in-space, and C&P was always going to tick off the extremes. PvP-Pros see it as draconian, and PvE-Specialists as watered down.

I think the Pilots Federation would punish memebers for murdering other members, but so far FD hasn't felt the PF should get involved. That is on purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom