As soon as anybody has decency to explain his reasons. Typically there are none.
The Open v Solo v Groups thread
- Thread starter Ozric
- Start date
I do not particularly want superfast police response. That would be neat but, what I want is persistent, annoying, repeating police attention for wanted pilots visiting places with system security. And response level going up with rap sheet. Plus make those effect superpower level. You do crime spree in Federal space, better hide in Imperial space after that.
If you made all sec ATR nothing would change. It takes seconds to kill a generic ship and that the C+P is reactive adds up to you making your ship escape worthy (as exemplified in the Git Gud Rinzler videos). So, someone has to die to set off C+P...the trick people forget or are unwilling to think about is making sure that person is not them. Its this which is part of the game in Open.
The only way in game right now to survive is to develop skills and make your ship escape worthy. It won't help you all the time, but for 80 / 90% it will because you'll see, know the signs and be confident on how to escape. Even ATRs most aggressive stance (i.e. after a warning they will instantly drop guns out if you keep on killing) you'll still be destroyed because the bigger problem is gankers not worrying about death, because......the rest of the game is broken. Money, ships, repairs, criminality are all to cheap, people fly like idiots, criminal gameplay is absent.
All ATR are good at is policing excessive BGS killings- and BTW ATR are G5 already
Hell is only caused by people whose desire is to interfere and spoil the game play of others.Hell is other people.
Heaven is people engaging in friendly and/or co-operative activity.
And the greatest lie the devil told, is that there are no gankers, only CMDRs with badly designed ships and poor skills.
Steve
Yeah, nah.
We have a surplus of both.
We have a surplus of both.
So they consider game broken for themselves, and then decide to break up other players game experience. Yeah thats fun attitude. One reason to block them all.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... because they lose little time, in terms of time to recoup rebuy, with no other consequential losses on destruction of a combat ship, they don't consider the time taken for their targets to recoup stuff that is lost on destruction, or don't care.
If the economy, BGS and engineering actually made sense it would discourage people- but blocking is fine too within limits (since people are flexible with actual reason for attacks too).
Sadly some in Open will never fly with the right attitude, and expect total safety and compliance from others.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Gankers in G5 murderboats are (almost) totally safe already....
.... and who is the appointed arbiter who gets to decide what the "right attitude" is?
Thats the point I'm making. You can't know or assume, but the game has plenty of in game ways to avoid / combat / escape (as well as block) but are ignored as 'giving in'. Open is Open, its random and potentially hostile yet people feel its OK to strap steaks to themselves and ask the lions not to eat them.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Not really as a claim relating to a "right attitude" was made - implying that one has been defined.
Open is Open indeed, yet people feel it's OK to preferentially attack hollow markers "for reasons" and ask the targets not to complain - going as far as to suggest that the targets change their play-style to accommodate the attackers.
Almost everything I've seen Tobias post is an exemplar of selection bias.
Of course, the game's mechanisms actively encourage solipsism, so it hardly matters.
I'd personally be surprised if most players engaged with Engineering, even though most of the ones that I'm personally acquainted with do. It's not necessary for much of anything (even tooling around in Open and reliably evading ganks) and the barrier to entry is likely prohibitive for most casual players.
Completely and vehemently disagree. I'm not even sure how such a comment can be serious, given the obvious breadth of scenarios where there is some application of skill that can change the outcome.
Engineering is a scapegoat for all sorts of things.
So someone able to escape your pirate boat in it might be applying skill?
Unless you purely mean the trucking aspect (which has it's own problems), I'd suggest a game with simulated supply chains and economy.
I am fairly confident my CMDR has shot down other CMDRs whose players did not want their CMDRs to be shot down and that some of them would accuse me of harming their experience. However, I have never once intended or desired to interfere with or spoil the gameplay of others in this game.
Likewise, most of the players that degrade my experience in this game do not realize they are doing so, or may even be misguided into thinking they are improving my game.
Either way, intent or desire doesn't matter for much.
Everyone is near totally safe already, because the maximum level of consequence is both very rarely encountered and still quite low.
Everyone is, which is, IMO, an enormous problem for an ostensibly multiplayer game.
The game has abdicated most any ruling on this, leaving every individual player to decide for themselves, and of course every individual player has the one right way, which is obvious to them, and inscrutable to pretty much everyone else. Every time I visit the forum I read assumptions, that I believe are wholly honest, that boggle my mind. It's part of what makes the forums entertaining, but it makes for a crappy and incoherent gaming experience when every one of these opinions is given the same weight and those holding them all have the ability to impose them upon others, simultaneously.
I would have preferred a game that made up it's mind about what it wanted to be and told everyone who wasn't willing to tolerate it to take a hike. Instead, we get "blaze your own trail" taken to logical extremes of absurdity.
So your saying a combat engineered Vette Vs a Trade T9 is a fair fight?
Not sure how your comment can be serious either mate
O7
I never implied anything of the sort and there is nothing in my post I believe could have possibly been interpreted as such.
Not sure how your comment can be serious either mate
Try not replacing my comment with a strawman.
To reiterate my position. I believe it is obvious to the point of being self-evident, not to mention easily demonstrable, that something can be both highly asymmetric and still have the outcome influenced by skill. This is a position you explicitly rejected in the first post of yours that I quoted, but appeared to tacitly acknowledge later.
If you believe that an encounter must be fair for skill to come into play, I believe I can prove you wrong.
[panto mode on] Oh yes you did! [panto mode off]
I believe few CMDRs happily enjoying the game and minding their own business and doing no harm to others feel that you have harmed their game experience.
But I believe that you did, every time you attacked a CMDR happily enjoying the game and minding their own business and doing no harm to others.
If CMDRs are happily enjoying the game and minding their own business and doing no harm to others, and do not want to engage in non consensual PvP, then how are they degrading your experience in this game? Why would they even think that they are improving your game when they just mind their own business?
Steve
Reclaim open, reject the narrative that open is a free fire zone for gankers and murder hobos!
Your taking my original argument out of context as i was talking about PvP.
There is no balance in Elite therefore there is no skill involved in me attacking a trade ship in an engineered murder boat, i will always have the upper hand and the person on the other end has to use skill to evade admittedly but this is NOT PvP.
PvP is where folks engage in consensual battles where there is a reasonable possibility that either side can win.
Unless 2 pirates in similar ships want to duke it out in a random system ganking is not in any way shape or form PvP.
O7
Well technically PVP is player versus player action. Combat or otherwise. And that does not need to be equal. Like we could engage in hauling competition. Who hauls more cargo, me with my mission runner Cutter, or opponent with Sidewinder
. Or opponent with minmaxed T9....I don't recall ever suggesting that my CMDR has attacked anyone who was not doing him harm.
Are all of your questions this loaded?
Anyway, I'll use blocking as an example. Let's say I'm happily enjoying the game by having my CMDR bait his enemies into attacking him so he can shoot them down without having to trade precious armor for a silly interdictor that I barely know how to use. Along comes a CMDR whose player thinks my CMDRs enemies are gankers or griefers or whatever, either due to past experience, or the fact that they all have eight figure bounties while my CMDR is clean, and decides to block these other CMDRs. Now I reenter SC after driving off or escaping from said foes--who my CMDR dispises with all his heart, but whom I, the player have no animosity against and throughly enjoy playing with--and find only this blocker in SC. After wasting considerable time and effort trying to find my CMDR's opponents, either I realize what is going on, or I don't...either way, I have to abandon my entertainment. This harms my experience and this scenario is not purely hypothetical, it's not even particularly rare.
There are at least a few people active in this thread who have said they consider blocking gankers to be a public service, or words to that effect. They may honestly believe they are helping me or my CMDR when they encounter him being chained interdicted by 'gankers'. They are wrong.
I am talking about PvP.
I disagree with every assertion here. I think your definition of PvP is arbitrary narrow, to the point of being useless. I also think it's internally inconsistent. There are plenty of scenarios where any imbalance comes down to skill alone. I know players who will win a duel with identical ships against me 100% of the time. Not most of the time, every, single, time. It's not even close to being fair, because I do not have the skill to compete. Likewise, I have shot down gankers while trading in a ship I built to trade in...I had a handicap, enough of one to make it interesting, because otherwise I would have mopped the floor with their wing. You're certainly entitled to the opinion that the latter kind of encounter wasn't PvP...but then what was it?
Probably Morbad does not see this answer as I think he has blocked me on forums. But nevertheless, I do consider blocking gankers as a public service, but more as editing errors in universe away from my game experience. If side effect is ruining gankers instancing well I do not shed any tears over that.