Its mostly the kiddies that do this, 17 and younger. Their brains have not reached maturity yet or will be able to. Won't even let youngsters in clans or outfits in any game I have played including this one.
See, THAT's why I don't play Open.
- Thread starter UOcUKAkira
- Start date
- Status
Its mostly the kiddies that do this, 17 and younger. Their brains have not reached maturity yet or will be able to. Won't even let youngsters in clans or outfits in any game I have played including this one.
so.. whats wrong with that?
How about all these "uber" gaming gods who want a challenge do this: Play the game in a bog standard sidewinder (no ramming) and then I believe the game would be a challenge......somehow I suspect non will rise to this.....all mouth no trouser brigade.
Um wrong? I am not even close to that age group.
Best advice has already been given. If you are a non cargo carrying vessel and you get interdicted, they arent looking for a chat. Either find out if you think you can take him, or heat up that engine and jump out of there.
Also, you are not the first to make this mistake. So learn from it and the next time you decide the outcome.
Also, you are not the first to make this mistake. So learn from it and the next time you decide the outcome.
uh i pirated with a sidewinder for some months, not much of a problem, its a fine ship.
Yes, if you are looking to be a micro-griefer it's perfec'. The game is designed to allow terrible tragedy, in the form of ironman / hard core progression losses. The more a player has invested in their commander the more they have to lose. The lulz are better when a truly emotionally invested person is killed and their progression is ripped away. Breaking another players immersion in this way is the real goal of the griefer, and when you break it down to brass tacks Elite: Dangerous is a griefers paradise. It works very well indeed.
Sorry can't agree, why not play in a large group or solo mode then?
Because the intent of the developers was that Open is for everyone, and not just for PvP.
That's their actual intent. Currently they are failing to realise that intent, the end result is threads like these, and the mantra "play in group or solo".
Why can't you play in a PvP group? You like PvP, other players like PvP, but not all of Open likes PvP. The logical solution is to set up the NightsLong PvP group where any and all PvP is welcome. You will be the PvP equivalent of Mobius.
Last edited:
It's like a Turing test for morals, or possibly psycopathy but that suggests knowledge of the ramifications of player killing in an iron man hardcore context. <snip>
It's the kind of thing one should expect in an "Adversarial" game. It's only wrong if the players are not aware they are being forced to take part in it... which I believe many are.
- - - Updated - - -
You can of course play in Solo ... that's what the mode is for. My point is that many players expect to be able to play open in relative safety without their immersion being broken on purpose by other players. This is what causes the acrimony.
Last edited by a moderator:
Report the griefer activity, if you wish, you can put your own bounty on the griefers head 
http://elitegaming.org.uk/elite-dangerous/reportform.php
http://elitegaming.org.uk/elite-dangerous/reportform.php
An "Eve'esque" design choice by the authors of the game, one many disagree with. Every one in groups must play in PvP groups.
- - - Updated - - -
Report the griefer activity, if you wish, you can put your own bounty on the griefers head
http://elitegaming.org.uk/elite-dangerous/reportform.php
This is your solution ... outside that game ... immersion broken / too late.
So what? Would you be complaing if you got killed an npc instead? Why all this need for players to have a motive besides bloodlust, and not npcs? Npcs do exactly as you described, but noone asks them to be changed.
Last edited:
Yup and it works fine.
Agreed it may appear that way but I actually have never killed anyone yet. I like the thought of being under constant threat when trading etc.
Sigh nope "relative safety" in open mode? why do many players expect that when the mechanics work as they currently do?
Well, "threads like these" are one thing - the situation in game is another thing.
Not so nice things are obviously happening out there but if you say the devs are "failing to realise their intent" i do have to disagree.
I'm playing in open since I finished the training missions (beginning of January) and I didn't have a single bad experience with other players.
I even have been in the Lave/Leesti region a couple of times without beeing harmed.
This may have to do with the fact that I don't relly look for trouble, I don't know.
(In fact I have been blown to pieces a couple of times by a CMDR - but that was during the Lugh wars and had to be expected!)
It's a real shame, it would make daring raids on well-defended civilised systems a pulse-pounding affair. Anyone who has ever played a proper MMO with world PvP and proper NPC guards and the like would recognise the rush of streaming over the hill with a band of daring raiders. As things currently stand, you can do anything, anywhere, as long as it's a few kilometres from a station.
Right now, it's mostly just random acts of unprovoked lameness.
Last edited:
Yeah, It's really a 'no brainer'; Open is for psychos, stick to Solo...
Well, to be more explicit; Solo or PvE group.
Last edited:
I'm not sure what you saying here. I'm saying let Open include meaningful, thematic PvP (role-playing based if you like, but I don't expect everyone to be Marlon Brando) but it is not the focus. Have Mobius for those who want no PvP at all and have "NightsLong" for those who want a PvP-centric environment where anyone can anyone for any reason or for none. And we still have Solo for those who don't want to interact at all. The concept is sound imo, it just missed more definition of the middle-ground between fully Open and fully Solo. "Group" has the potential but needed to be more organised with several "pre-set" group options (PvE, PvP, etc.).
- Status