Station psycho back at Leesti

[superflyguy]

everyone's favourite duffus is back at Leesti. after such highlights as sitting in a viper spamming shield cells and missiling everyone who entered he has now got a shiny yellow imperial clipper and is ramming in the letterbox. the best bit is he's now in a wing, so even if you get past him his wingman gently nudges you into oblivion!

they got my Asp and then when I checked back they were trying it on an Anaconda!

happy sunday!

 

[Valethar]

Make a note of the names, then use the 'report player' function.

 

[CMDR DAVID187]

lol......

 

[superflyguy]

i thought about reporting him but aside from being a duffus I don't think he's actually doing anything 'wrong'.

more of a public service annoucement post really.

 

[Astronut57]

I thought this guy had been sent to the 'naughty' server.

 

[pluton]

Station psycho back at Leest

they got my Asp and then when I checked back they were trying it on an Anaconda!

Yes, but where have you been for the past month? Stefan has even posted on this forum trying to justify his actions, and saying things like "I killed over 50 ships today". That he's still doing it shows immense dedication. Or something.

An Asp with good shields should be safe if you enter the letterbox slowly (more speed means more damage). You just bounce off and lose a shield ring. After a collision, use a shield cell immediately to restore your shields in case he or his Cobra sidekick tries again. Or log off and switch to solo to dock (since you're not in a combat situation or a valid PvP)

Press '2' (Comms panel) when approaching a station, especially George Lucas. If it shows a Clipper then target it to show the CMDR name. If it's "CMDR S" then proceed with caution. Or wait until he's boosted out after someone and then enter while he's busy.

 

[ozrix84]

I bet he also frequents punk rock concerts and shoves people around too

 

[Blackfoxx]

does nothing to encourage people to play in open does it? I'll stick with the group i'm in.. far more civilised.

 

[Petersen]

Funny to me the differing reactions in this and the "griefing" thread a few posts down. He's just playing the game, bro. He's just doing what FD lets him do. You don't like it, play solo. I see literally no difference between this and interdicting and murdering people just to kill them.

 

[PhazonAran]

Funny to me the differing reactions in this and the "griefing" thread a few posts down. He's just playing the game, bro. He's just doing what FD lets him do. You don't like it, play solo. I see literally no difference between this and interdicting and murdering people just to kill them.

Don't be surprised if people leave Open, seeing that kind of behavior is accepted.

 

[Krepose Gavayne]

I see literally no difference between this and interdicting and murdering people just to kill them.

I see a difference but for each of the two cases we should [eventually] see the consequences of player actions change.

A killer out in the black can be role playing. The cops aren't there to begin with, turn up late and are too few to alter things. The bounty can be shrugged off.

A rammer at a starport is like a joyrider playing dodgems at a large business' car park. You can be sure police will turn out in numbers to deal with them IRL and if the business was armed and permitted to dish out a bit of justice they would. IG you have the cops and armed business but no crime.

 

[gravityStar]

i thought about reporting him but aside from being a duffus I don't think he's actually doing anything 'wrong'.

I'd actually just report him and leave it up to FD to decide if he is doing anything that he should be banned for.
Even in real life; a single small offense may, in court, result in a lenient punishment or none at all. A pattern of hundreds of small offenses all bundled in a single court-case may result in some real jail time.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Funny to me the differing reactions in this and the "griefing" thread a few posts down. He's just playing the game, bro. He's just doing what FD lets him do. You don't like it, play solo. I see literally no difference between this and interdicting and murdering people just to kill them.

The difference is that someone interdicted by a person who intends to kill them can lawfully fight back, as attacking a CLEAN ship with weapons is a crime.

Ramming a CLEAN ship is not a crime.


I'm not sure why you cannot see the difference. The developers do, and are changing the next point-release to make in-station ramming a crime.


So, in fact, the developers are making changes in the next release to ensure there is no difference between in-station ramming and attacking with weapons.

Because now (gasp) there is a difference. Whether you admit to seeing it or not. Fortunately, you're not in charge.

 

[pluton]

Funny to me the differing reactions in this and the "griefing" thread a few posts down. He's just playing the game, bro. He's just doing what FD lets him do. You don't like it, play solo.

He's exploiting. It's not valid gameplay. It makes no sense, since the starport authorities would not allow such action to continue.

Frontier have confirmed it an exploit and have made changes in version 1.3 to prevent it. (Whether these changes make things better or worse we'll have to wait and see).

I'm really fed up of people saying "play solo" whenever someone points out anti-social, exploiting, or game-damaging behaviour. I want interaction with other players, I want interdictions and piracy and blockades. Solo and a PvE group don't allow these. When selfish players purposely cause grief to others and for no valid game reason, then they drive away players from Open and spoil the game for all.

I see literally no difference between this and interdicting and murdering people just to kill them.

A player entering the docking port can't maneuver to escape and he can't attack the rammer because of the no fire zone.

Murdering weaker players just to kill them for no game reason is also selfish behaviour that damages the game.

 

[Petersen]

The difference is that someone interdicted by a person who intends to kill them can lawfully fight back, as attacking a CLEAN ship with weapons is a crime.

Ramming a CLEAN ship is not a crime.

Interesting. I didn't realize unarmed ships can (lawfully or otherwise) fight back. You'll have to enlighten me on how to fire weapons that aren't fitted to my ship.

It is a player causing problems for others through legitimate game mechanics. I'm sorry you don't like it, but if you have no problem with players interdicting and destroying helpless player ships, then you should have no problem with this player's actions. If anything this is more legitimate game play because as you state, it's not a crime.

I'm not talking about what 'should be' or what is 'morally right'. I'm talking only about what is, and what is logically consistent considering what is.

EDIT:

Murdering weaker players just to kill them for no game reason is also selfish behaviour that damages the game.

And yet, the 'griefing' thread is chock full of people saying (in so many words) "IT'S A LEGITIMATE STRATEGY!" Hence my bemusement at the disparate reactions to what is essentially the same thing.

 

[Ben Salient]

everyone's favourite duffus is back at Leesti. after such highlights as sitting in a viper spamming shield cells and missiling everyone who entered he has now got a shiny yellow imperial clipper and is ramming in the letterbox. the best bit is he's now in a wing, so even if you get past him his wingman gently nudges you into oblivion!

they got my Asp and then when I checked back they were trying it on an Anaconda!

happy sunday!

thanks for the "Heads Up" . am in that area today & appreciate the Advanced Warning to take extreme care & caution on approach.(am always on my toes in that cluster , but will be even more careful today)
.
would be nice to have a sticky where people could post latest news on where extreme caution is needed
that thread would just let people know to be extra careful in an area at the time & what to look out for.
..
if as a player you then benefitted from the "Public Service Announcement" / "Heads up" / "Advanced warning" you could come back & give the person who posted the info +rep as a thank you
...
it would be great if we could do this without all the other posts cluttering the thread with the same type of conversation that has been had countless times before
brings nothing new to the discussion or touch on topics not already covered in detail / talked to death elsewhere / currently being addressed by FD.

 

[Zplintz]

Make a note of the names, then use the 'report player' function.

This is a much better route to take.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Interesting. I didn't realize unarmed ships can (lawfully or otherwise) fight back. You'll have to enlighten me on how to fire weapons that aren't fitted to my ship.

It is a player causing problems for others through legitimate game mechanics. I'm sorry you don't like it, but if you have no problem with players interdicting and destroying helpless player ships, then you should have no problem with this player's actions. If anything this is more legitimate game play because as you state, it's not a crime.

I'm not talking about what 'should be' or what is 'morally right'. I'm talking only about what is, and what is logically consistent considering what is.

EDIT:



And yet, the 'griefing' thread is chock full of people saying (in so many words) "IT'S A LEGITIMATE STRATEGY!" Hence my bemusement at the disparate reactions to what is essentially the same thing.

Okay, your assertion is that you see no difference between station-ramming an unarmed ship and interdicting/destroying an unarmed ship.

Here are the differences:

Station-ramming an Unarmed Ship (v1.2) (w.r.t. the Rammer)

Legal status afterwards: CLEAN
Action of System Authority Ships afterwards: None
Action of station after Authority Ship scan: Allow to dock
Bounty hunter response: Cannot attack, or will be WANTED and destroyed by station

Interdicting/Destroying an Unarmed Ship (w.r.t. the Attacker)

Legal status: WANTED
Action of System Authority Ships afterwards: Will attack
Action of station after Authority Ship scan: Deny docking
Bounty hunter response: Can attack


There are some pretty obvious differences, and they have nothing to do with whether the ship attacked is armed or weaponless.

 

[Petersen]

Okay, your assertion is that you see no difference between station-ramming an unarmed ship and interdicting/destroying an unarmed ship.

Here are the differences:

Station-ramming an Unarmed Ship (v1.2) (w.r.t. the Rammer)

Legal status afterwards: CLEAN
Action of System Authority Ships afterwards: None
Action of station after Authority Ship scan: Allow to dock
Bounty hunter response: Cannot attack, or will be WANTED and destroyed by station

Interdicting/Destroying an Unarmed Ship (w.r.t. the Attacker)

Legal status: WANTED
Action of System Authority Ships afterwards: Will attack
Action of station after Authority Ship scan: Deny docking
Bounty hunter response: Can attack


There are some pretty obvious differences, and they have nothing to do with whether the ship attacked is armed or weaponless.

You're focused on the trivial. At their core, what the player engaging in each activity is doing is identical. I'm sorry you're so blinded by the difference in the trees that you can't see they're both forests.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

You're focused on the trivial. At their core, what the player engaging in each activity is doing is identical. I'm sorry you're so blinded by the difference in the trees that you can't see they're both forests.

Those trivial details are what make Elite a game about a pilot's life out in the galaxy... as opposed to Station Whack-a-Mole.