Modes Restrict or remove PvE from the game, making Open a nicer place

[Rampant]

It is true, and as I say - it is true of many games. It's also understandable; in a game that allows both PvE and PvP of a similar nature, the PvP side will almost always require more skill and understanding of the game.

I am not using it as some crutch with regards to discussing ED content; it was a simple offhand statement. Naturally though, whatever you can focus on dragging into the witch hunt instead of discussing anything relevant...

I was simply trying to offer you some advice, but if you don't want to acknowledge it, that's fine by me, keep going with the UNTRUE mantra because it exposes you as having either an inability to understand (which is pretty bad), or a stubborn refusal to acknowledge what you know to be true anyway (which is just as bad).

I confirm, that I'm nor scared.

You tell me that I am.

Yet again, I confirm to you that I am, in truth, not scared, please be serious.

This isn't a witch hunt. This is actually relevant to the (albeit absurd) discussion of removing PvE from Open and other such related discussions.

The earlier you begin to acknowledge that players are not, in truth "scared", and refrain from typing that outright lie, then the sooner your posts will be accepted with some credibility.

Keep pushing the confirmed lie - and you give your posts no credibility.

The choice is all yours. No skin off my nose if you want to keep serving us posts with no credibility, because, actually, that serves my own purposes just fine.


Yours Aye

Mark H

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Like the many times PvP proposals are yelled down because PvE players cannot comprehend the content existing simultaneously, or because a hoard of players yelling "NO GRIEFORING" joined the party?

The word "cannot" doesn't fit, the word "don't"might, otherwise I could call you an armchair psychologist

I also love how you generalize in this post.

Ah there is that legendary respect for PvPers you speak of.

Welcome to ED, to your right you can watch some commanders fighting each other (directly), to your left you have some commanders that love isolation and bright stars. It just so happens that they tend to condecorate their own heroes, for example Archon Furry and Allitnil.

"I don't want you to enjoy the game because it'd mean me not enjoying mine". False sentiment to start with

Honestly want to know what psycology major did you take.

 

[StiTch]

I confirm, that I'm nor scared.

You tell me that I am.

I will concede to you when you quote me stating you're scared.

...I'll make this bit easy. I said many players are scared of PvP, which is not the same as "you are all scared". In any game that allows both PvE and PvP, the PvP aspect is more intimidating, as you cannot choose the skill of your opponent, they will typically be harder anyway, and play will be less predictable. In my early days of gaming, I have no shame in confessing I would master PvE before allowing myself to progress to fighting other players. Apart from Unreal Tournament...I jumped straight into PvP there.

Thankyou for your time

Honestly want to know what psycology major did you take.

I want to know what education you took, that you cannot distinguish paraphrasing from psychology

EDIT: Regarding generalisation, yeah, I am guilty of it. But it doesn't necessarily make it untrue; there have been a few good proposals made over time, and in most of them, it's shouted down due to a perception that it's trying to drag more people into Open so more bait is available, because they feel a PvP method of achieving change is unfair because they won't partake in it, or simply because people don't care about PvP content.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

I want to know what education you took, that you cannot distinguish paraphrasing from psychology

What or who were you paraphrasing?

 

[Robert Maynard]

EDIT: Regarding generalisation, yeah, I am guilty of it. But it doesn't necessarily make it untrue; there have been a few good proposals made over time, and in most of them, it's shouted down due to a perception that it's trying to drag more people into Open so more bait is available, because they feel a PvP method of achieving change is unfair because they won't partake in it, or simply because people don't care about PvP content.

The last being, perhaps, unsurprising given that the majority of players would not seem to get involved in PvP. The second last similarly because of the expectation of an Open mode gating of content that need not be (i.e. there are two multi-player game modes where PvP can take place).

 

[StiTch]

What or who were you paraphrasing?

Just let others tear the game they love apart just to appease a minor style of play?

Though as stated, the notion PvE and PvP content cannot coexist is horrifically misplaced.

The last being, perhaps, unsurprising given that the majority of players would not seem to get involved in PvP. The second last similarly because of the expectation of an Open mode gating of content that need not be (i.e. there are two multi-player game modes where PvP can take place).

Dem bridges won't be built as long as your mindset hinges on the notion PvP content must somehow exclude you from important aspects of the game, and that you don't need to give a crap about it in any case.

It's okay - you're welcome to maintain the sentiment that you don't have to care what happens to PvP, but PvP players will return the lack of craps given tenfold. And when that happens, it usually doesn't result in complaints of blown up PvPers, does it now

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Though as stated, the notion PvE and PvP content cannot coexist is horrifically misplaced.

My cristal ball is telling me that in this next reply (if you do), you won't answer my question.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

EDIT: Regarding generalisation, yeah, I am guilty of it. But it doesn't necessarily make it untrue; there have been a few good proposals made over time, and in most of them, it's shouted down due to a perception that it's trying to drag more people into Open so more bait is available, because they feel a PvP method of achieving change is unfair because they won't partake in it, or simply because people don't care about PvP content.

I'd like to hear some examples to get an idea.

 

[StiTch]

My cristal is telling me that in this next reply (if you do), you won't answer my question.

Next time your crystal ball might do a better job of revealing what's in front of you at the time. Answer was the relevant quote.

I'd like to hear some examples to get an idea.

Ziggy of all people raised an excellent suggestion which I keep referring to because PP needs some life. Iirc the post never gained attention, rather than going incendiary, but effectively put forward Open and PvE only objectives for PowerPlay. The usual BGS based objectives exist for PG - leaflet hauling for instance - but within Open the objective is different, for instance a CZ. The specific objective doesn't need to be set but in essence the result is two lots of objectives being completed at once. Ignoring either will cripple that power's objective, meaning PvE players are needed to haul to succeed, but players are also required to fight/haul/whatever out in the open - and you can freely choose which to do to support your side.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Dem bridges won't be built as long as your mindset hinges on the notion PvP content must somehow exclude you from important aspects of the game, and that you don't need to give a crap about it in any case.

It's okay - you're welcome to maintain the sentiment that you don't have to care what happens to PvP, but PvP players will return the lack of craps given tenfold. And when that happens, it usually doesn't result in complaints of blown up PvPers, does it now

They'll be lacking for quite some time then - as I have no interest in engaging in direct PvP.

I don't have to care - but I do (a bit). We all backed or bought the game that permits players to shoot at other players. My limit of caring is, however, reached when proposals are made to impose arbitrary restrictions on game content previously implemented for players in all game modes - as we all backed or bought the game that permits players to both experience and affect the game from any game mode.

The "not happy so I'll go and gank some players" approach has been used a few times now. Fortunately Frontier has given every single player the choice as to whether they want to play with those who are disgruntled in some way with Frontier's design choices - and if they don't then Solo and Private Groups may become a more palatable place to play for those players. If and when that happens, the complaints about the BGS, Factions, PowerPlay, etc. being affected from Solo and Private Groups will probably get louder.

 

[Mouse]

Again, rather than digesting what's put in front of you, just yell "STOP TRYING TO DRAG ME INTO YOUR GAME!!1!". Always works, right?

I am not asking for a flood of people in Open. I am asking for Open play that has continuity and consequence.

I yell no such thing and I do digest what is put in front of me, so I will ask.. if you are not asking for a flood of people into Open, then what would "The difference in engagement would be over 9000." mean? If the flood doesn't happen then there won't be much of a difference in engagement at all.

Like the many times PvP proposals are yelled down because PvE players cannot comprehend the content existing simultaneously, or because a hoard of players yelling "NO GRIEFORING" joined the party?

I wonder if all those PVP proposals that you believe were yelled down, if implemented would have drastically changed the game for everyone for the benefit of a few. That is a key issue, changes made affect everyone. Now I'm all for true PVP and an Ironman server, yet firmly against changes that would hamstring PVErs to make PVPers who feel that their game play is more "tough and needs better rewards" happier.

Ah there is that legendary respect for PvPers you speak of. "I don't want you to enjoy the game because it'd mean me not enjoying mine". False sentiment to start with but hey, let's just worry about what lets your CMDR sleep at night

Please point out where I have EVER said I did not want PVPers to enjoy the game, I will give you a hint. I never have nor ever will SAY THAT. I have great respects to PVPers, what I don't respect are the ants who can't pvp so they go after those they know are not a threat to them and who try to get Fdev to change the game for them and only them.

There is nothing stopping both PvE and PvP content existing comfortably within the game.

I fully agree with you, so stop with the superiority complex, let's build bridges and make the game a even better one for BOTH PVP and PVE.

It is true, and as I say - it is true of many games. It's also understandable; in a game that allows both PvE and PvP of a similar nature, the PvP side will almost always require more skill and understanding of the game.

Well so much for dropping the superiority complex. PVP does not require more skill than PVE.. it does however require different skills, that doesn't equate to "better skills". Nor does it require a higher understanding of the game.

I am not using it as some crutch with regards to discussing ED content; it was a simple offhand statement. Naturally though, whatever you can focus on dragging into the witch hunt instead of discussing anything relevant...

Pure horse hockey ...

 

[Mouse]

Though as stated, the notion PvE and PvP content cannot coexist is horrifically misplaced.

If you are going to take what I said out of context and then CLAIM I am stating that PVE and PVP cannot talk to each other or coexist or to even try... your full of it.

The Original comment in it's entirety.

"You will find that many of us PVErs will discuss PVP content, not knee jerking or anything, but when many times no respect is in turn given to the PVErs from those PVPers talking... what do you want the PVErs to do? Just let others tear the game they love apart just to appease a minor style of play? That isn't a way to build bridges."

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Next time your crystal ball might do a better job of revealing what's in front of you at the time. Answer was the relevant quote.

This one? "Though as stated, the notion PvE and PvP content cannot coexist is horrifically misplaced."

Do me a favor of citing that in APA and I'll give you some rep.

Ziggy of all people raised an excellent suggestion which I keep referring to because PP needs some life. Iirc the post never gained attention, rather than going incendiary, but effectively put forward Open and PvE only objectives for PowerPlay. The usual BGS based objectives exist for PG - leaflet hauling for instance - but within Open the objective is different, for instance a CZ. The specific objective doesn't need to be set but in essence the result is two lots of objectives being completed at once. Ignoring either will cripple that power's objective, meaning PvE players are needed to haul to succeed, but players are also required to fight/haul/whatever out in the open - and you can freely choose which to do to support your side.

Sounds good.

 

[Theodrid]

Theo,

I am not quite sure he meant we all have an ingrained hatred for seal clubbers, because that isn't true. I for one think it's a rather bland way to spend your time, but end of the day, it's any players right - what is simply missing is consequence.

Now in a nutshell, consequence is what PvPers fight for, and this extends to all players. Want to murder players in anarchy? It's basically a 1v1 duel. Working as intended. Want to murder noobs in starter space? Well...where is the incentive for other players to hunt him down after? PvE forces certainly aren't going to stop him. Where is the system that stops the murderer CLing? (here being one example of PvPers not giving each other preferential treatment. You CL, you cheat - end of).

Secondly while I appreciate the notion of unity, and not intentionally speaking for the PvP base or Algo here, why should we build bridges on other players' terms? Whether one or more or all of us disdain seal clubbers, it's a right of players to do so. I for one am not about to denounce player freedom in a misguided grab for approval from pigeons I've been playing chess with.

Want to start building bridges? Convince PvE players to discuss PvP content with more than just a kneejerk "NO GRIEFORING IN MY GAME PLOX".

Stitch, I'm going to focus mainly on the 'why should we build bridges on other players terms?' bit here.

It really is simple, many PVP'ers,. quite rightly, don't appreciate amateur psychoanalysis on their chosen play style, many PVP'ers don't like terms like 'griefer' and 'ganker' being used incorrectly and many PVP'ers don't like to all be generalised about. Now myself, and others, on these boards try not do do such things, I haven't always succeeded but I do try, the reason I do so is for better discourse with the more moderate pro PVP posters such as yourself - to build at least some bridges. There is no benefit to me other than that so when you say 'why should we?' I simply say to you for the above reasons, you shouldn't need any other incentive to do so if you are truly interested in civil discussion around PVP issues. I'm not going to pretend we can change the world here, you guys are still going to be generalised about, called names and analysed, PVE players are still going to be called forumdads, cowards and carebears by some, but for me even a 1% reduction in some of the manure from both sides would be better than none.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

This one? "Though as stated, the notion PvE and PvP content cannot coexist is horrifically misplaced."

Do me a favor of citing that in APA and I'll give you some rep.



Sounds good.

I like that suggestion by Ziggy!

 

[StiTch]

I don't have to care - but I do (a bit)

Wow, your compassion is through the roof

If you are going to take what I said out of context and then CLAIM I am stating that PVE and PVP cannot talk to each other or coexist or to even try... your full of it.

The Original comment in it's entirety.

"You will find that many of us PVErs will discuss PVP content, not knee jerking or anything, but when many times no respect is in turn given to the PVErs from those PVPers talking... what do you want the PVErs to do? Just let others tear the game they love apart just to appease a minor style of play? That isn't a way to build bridges."

You practically wind yourself up lol.

I was in addressing your belief the resolution has to be to tear your gameplay down to improve our own. If you understand PvP and PvE content can comfortably exist together, why the hyperbole?

Feel free to take that as rhetorical, because I got no effort for meaningless bickering.

if you are not asking for a flood of people into Open, then what would "The difference in engagement would be over 9000." mean?

It would mean that the gameplay would be more engaging. It would be a new ball game to be able to directly affect the state of the galaxy, using self motivation as opposed to a preconstructed event.

...but for me even a 1% reduction in some of the manure from both sides would be better than none.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a bit of loving thy neighbour; I'm just not keep on dropping my principals to get there.

You yourself made implications we should be standing against seal clubbers - but just as PvP will never be the core of the game, so murder will never be made against the rules. It is no more our place to denounce seal clubbers than it is for you to tell PvE players their opinion is wrong. Both are simply parts of the "other" playstyle we don't like and that some people from that playstyle themselves might not like.

And yet defend the seal clubber...

End of the day, PvP players engage in PvE too. We want a balanced game.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Wow, your compassion is through the roof

Still more than that of those that care little (if at all) whether the player behind the ship that they attack enjoys the encounter and/or those who tell players that don't enjoy PvP to "git gud or go Solo".

 

[StiTch]

Still more than that of those that care little (if at all) whether the player behind the ship that they attack enjoys the encounter and/or those who tell players that don't enjoy PvP to "git gud or go Solo".

...usually followed by a list of advice on how to git gud, including technique and loadout assistance alongside offers for direct training from the GCI.

Though I made the point above that, at least as discourse on a forum goes, you have no more right to use seal clubbing as a crutch to ignore productive conversation than I would mindlessly repeating "git gud".

So, burying the hatchet, I'll not use that phrase when I offer assistance, if you support PvP content. Deal?

 

[Robert Maynard]

...usually followed by a list of advice on how to git gud, including technique and loadout assistance alongside offers for direct training from the GCI.

Indeed - as if "gittin' gud" at PvP is a requirement - however that discounts the likelihood that the player might just not want to engage in PvP (as the majority of players apparently don't engage in PvP).

Though I made the point above that, at least as discourse on a forum goes, you have no more right to use seal clubbing as a crutch to ignore productive conversation than I would mindlessly repeating "git gud".

Not sure what your point is here.

So, burying the hatchet, I'll not use that phrase when I offer assistance, if you support PvP content. Deal?

Nah - I'll pass - that's not an equal trade.

 

[StiTch]

Indeed - as if "gittin' gud" at PvP is a requirement - however that discounts the likelihood that the player might just not want to engage in PvP (as the majority of players apparently don't engage in PvP).

Actually, I'mma use this as a chance to clear something up with anyone still reading: myself among others do not necessarily care how x player plays their game. We do not object at all to the notion of players "playing their way" at all, regardless of our complaints with specific game mode mechanics.

What we will address is players using poorly conceived trailblazing as an excuse to have a go at PvP players. By all means, please, take a shieldless T9 to trade in Open. Utterly your right. But just because NPCs will generally prove themselves incapable of even catching you, don't have a rant about griefors ruining your fun when you get stung. Choice and consequence is the soul of this game - want to sacrifice shields for cargo capacity, and thrusters for jump range? Yes moar profitz, but yes more chance of losing that profit.

Don't take us for advocating faultlessness. I do stupid things quite frequently...am practically a master of boosting out the slot and clipping other ships. But on the couple of occasions the station blew me up, I accepted it's my fault instead of taking to the forums to whine about station mechanics.

TL;DR I don't care whether players git gud. Just don't git bad and then blame other humans because you made a poor judgement call, and definitely don't get crappy because we offered assistance.

Nah - I'll pass - that's not an equal trade.

*shrugs* even a moderator isn't interested in having the decency to accept another playstyle exists. Now, what was that about me not trying to build bridges?