In the end its keeping Open 'open' and not salami slicing that into a PG like experience when there are other modes that do what you want.
Solution for Ganking
- Thread starter Sirlance
- Start date
There is the problem.
They could. Personally I would say its best not to block someone just because they killed you or irritated you (if that was the case, I'd block half the people using system chat in SD), but reserve it for people you suspect of cheating or those exploiting in a way that negatively affects your gameplay.
Nah, real reason for ganking ax players is same old, it is easy and ships go boom. It is just same like ganking those exploration events, aka at best roleplay is just "reasonz" like "I roleplay psycho serial killer". No need to tolerate that unless one really wants.
What? Nobody wants to undermine Mahon? I suppose he is rather lovable. Good guy Mahon.
He's a bit like a vanilla yogurt. Not offensive, never sticks out and forgettable.
I can understand that, but at the same time for many CGs there is a narrative outcome for not getting to the threshold. That could come from lack of support but also by commanders 'going boom'.
Yeah that's true but the context of the post you quoted was not about blocking, it was a different conversation.
It was my mistake, I accidentally replied to your post instead of Helmut's.
OK, then it's insignificant in 2 bubbles but there's a third bubble.
To be honest for me blocking and menu logging blend together now.Yeah that's true but the context of the post you quoted was not about blocking, it was a different conversation.
It was my mistake, I accidentally replied to your post instead of Helmut's.
bubbles everywhere, I tell you. It's like a bubble bath in here.
About PP2 and the topic. It isn't.
Once again, in the case of NPCs looking for an enemy I have to scan ALL of them and I will find him.
In the case of humans I can see immediately who the enemy is in the system and I no longer need to scan everyone.
This is not right ! And I have not heard a single argument that it is right.
In the game, it's gotten to the point of absurdity, with some AX pilots calling for the destruction of allied NPCs to prevent them from killing Tharoids. Is that normal?
If I turn on report a crime, why do only NPCs come to my aid? Do people ignore this signal?
Last edited:
I've admitted before that for at least some PowerPlay activities I see the sense of what you're saying. I don't think FD have taken that view in PP2 though.
Open is already salami-sliced into loads of instances. I had it again last night: a very weird bug put me into camera view and the only way out was to task-kill. I logged straight back in because we were doing the last Hydra, but I was now with an entirely different lot of people in a scenario which hadn't been going long. No 60M credits plus finish bonus for me!
I suspect that when people say, "We saw our opponents for a while but then they went to PG", that they're actually just in a different instance of Open.
But PP and AX are very different cases. It's necessary to distinguish game opposition from griefing.
Anyone trying to putting those reactions into any kind of context, I would assume.
No, they don't, but distorted tales that cultivate outrage do seem to be able to make those reactions worse than they'd other be. Shaping a game (in either the personal or global sense) around these reactions becomes unreasonable.
Some people are honestly afraid that immigrants are going to eat their pets, or that unskilled laborers looking for sub-minimum-wage agricultural work, that no one else would ever stoop to doing, are going to steal their jobs. These people have been trained and manipulated to have irrational fears and obtuse misconceptions, but their feelings are very real and very widely held. The solution to the problems these people have is not to appease them, as that would solve few real problems, and create much worse ones.
Or if one prefers a more abstract, marginally less politicised, analogy, I can talk about microprocessors. There are a number of people who are dissatisfied with the gaming performance of AMD's dual-CCD parts, which require special workarounds to make sure games are scheduled properly. A sub-set of these people are up in arms because the 9950X3D has been confirmed to only have one v-cache CCD (alongside one standard CCD), just like previous models. They have convinced themselves, without knowing much of anything about why dual-CCD v-cache parts don't beat cheaper single-CCD v-cache parts (in gaming), that all of their problems would be solved if their CPUs had a second v-cache CCD. These people could be temporarily appeased by AMD announcing, building, and then selling them the CPU they think they want, until they realized they paid significantly more for a part that was no faster. Fact of the matter is, it's the (unavoidable) splitting of the compute complexes themselves that's the main source of the problem and strapping more cache where it can't be used effectively, will solve few, if any, of their scheduling issues. There can be no doubt about people's feeling with regard to the current asymmetric configuration and the problems they experience are real. They've just assumed the wrong source and demand a nonsensical solution.
It's hard for me not to see a number of parallels between such scenarios and the ganker outrage on these forums, outrage which is fanned by tales of how terrible Open is, how common gankers are, or how impossible it is to stand up to them...tales that are generally from people who barely spend any time around other CMDRs in the mode and do not seem to reflect the experiences of those who do actually use the mode.
The proposed solutions (to a problem that is, if not manufactured, certainly exaggerated) range from telling people to deny themselves whatever interactions they were looking for in Open and instead to seek it in much more sparsely populated PGs; suggesting they carve out their own PG in Open, with no regard to the side-effects of doing so; to propositioning Frontier for new mechanisms that would do little or nothing to address the problems cited.
Sure we would. Not saying the portion of players that perceive a ganking problem is or is not significant, but I don't think the subset of a subset making the odd thread about them is a robust enough sample size to come to any firm conclusions. It's like trying to extrapolate failure rates from negative product reviews or sensational headlines...can't be done.
Most of the regular participants of these threads are mostly there because they like to argue.
And that I'd agree to a point- but if you support the thargoids (by killing players) then you are essentially doing the same but at a meta level the Thargoid 'power' spreads automatically.
One is explicit (PP) while the other (AX) is a possibility but down to interpretation.
yeah... now you're really stretching to find analogies that fit your agenda. I'm not buying it, sorry.
In my experience from in game chat during Ax battles in open, those gankers don't give a flying """"" about lore, its just trying to get easy kills from ships that cant fight back.
I admit there are one or two folks genuinely doing it for roleplay but they are few and far between.
O7
PVE is fine, a game needs to offer steady, relaxing fun with a challenge if you want it, ED has this balance, PVE wise spot on.
O7
