one could argue that the Shin permit isn't a good newbie metric anymore, with how easy trade elite is. Doesn't help that the stupid content creators still churn out those silly "best start" videos like mad. And they also still propagate min-maxed paper planes.
The Open v Solo v Groups thread
- Thread starter Ozric
- Start date
Let's face it, they could do it for any reason, and people would be offended just the same.
I think the problem is that some players expect ED to give them the same power fantasy that they get from single-player games where the player is at the center of everything. In ED, you are not special, and there will likely be a few players higher up in the food chain than you. Like it or not, but ED rewards time invested, and the gankers have invested a lot of it; they went through the material grind so that their ships aren't cardboard, and they went through endless hours of training. And it's simply not true that they only attack weaker ships; they also fight each other all the time. You can drop into their wakes and watch them if you dare. They rebuy their own ships much more frequently than casual players do, which might help explain why they do not see it as a big deal worth throwing a temper tantrum over. But -- and this is the important point -- they are not breaking any rules.
If you can't stand the idea that you're not the biggest fish in the pond, that's entirely your own problem. You can either rise up to the challenge or rage-block yourself into some sort of rainbow-colored ball pit version of the game where you never have to take off the training wheels. The choice is yours.
Yeah, I only have a half-bottomed slow clap for that. Great, good on them. As long as they still engage in seal clubbing, that means nothing.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
As a result of how they choose to play the game - no-one forces them to play that way.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Which seems to assume that ones performance in the game constitutes some measure of self-esteem, to some players at least, presumably with those who consider themself to be at the top looking down on the rest.
Others view the game as something to play for fun - and there's no need to tolerate the gameplay of those who aren't fun to play with, in this game.
Obviously it does; otherwise a rebuy would not be taken as a personal affront. You can't claim you don't care about winning if you get upset about losing.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It's not actually about "winning and losing" - when players have outfitted and optimised their ships for completely different roles (as if playing different games). It's about having ones time wasted by someone who faces no risk or challenge in the encounter which may last seconds and cause hours (or more) of re-work to recoup the losses.
I expect some see pwning non-combatants as something to boast about though.
That all is irrelevant and does not matter. A "Ganker" is not playing the game correctly. Yes, it is not forbidden to play the game uncorrectly, but it is still a not intended way. The player is a Pilots Federation member, so he should behave like one. Wich pilot roles does the PF acknowledge? Ganker is not one of them. Also Apex Pilot is not one, by the way. My wish (unfullfilled of course) would be that players finally start to play this ROLE-PLAY game in space as it was designed for.
Says who?
Have i to repeat my posting? Really? Again: The player is a member of the Pilots Federation. There is no choice, he is. The Pilots Federation Pilots can engage in pre-defined roles. For example "Miner" or "Explorer"... basically the actions you have a rank in. Ganker is not an acknowledged role by the PF. This becomes also more obvious when you recognize that killing other Pilots Federation members (what every other player is) does not count for the combat rank.
The PF acknowledges the ganker role not by ranks but by issuing bounties.
CMDR A ganks CMDR B.
CMDR B responds by blocking CMDR A.
CMDR C has their instance adversely affected.
CMDR C promotes the idea that CMDR B use solo or PG.
CMDR B changes to solo or PG.
CMDR A is not happy that his potential victim is not around in open. The only one around is CMDR C, a top 10% player with the ship builds and skills to easily thwart CMDR A. Not going to get any lolz there.
Meanwhile back in solo .....
CMDR B is happily running missions, not getting ganked and not adversely affecting CMDR C's instancing.
CMDR C is encountering CMDR A a lot more.
CMRD C is happy.
Unlike CMDR A who only ever seems to see a gank proof target.
But,
CMDR C has an interest in several systems and notices that their influence is waning and conflict is frequent.
CMDR C deduces that solo CMDRs are responsible.
CMDR C promotes that BGS/PP should be open only so that they can interact with the CMDRs causing problems.
(bear in mind that any activity in a system can affect the influence levels)
CMDR A supports this change as he is fed up with only encountering CMDR C, and wants a larger pool of victims.
CMDR B caves into peer pressure, and plays in open again, and without blocking CMDR A as this adversely affects CMDR C's instancing.
CMDR A gleefully rubs his hands as he can now encounter CMDR B and get back to having lolz.
CMDR B may or not get ganked by CMDR A, but if it happens, at least he has not affected CMDR C's instancing by using the block function.
CMDR B goes on what he likes doing, trading peacefully.
CMDR C spots CMDR B and turns him into space dust.
CMDR B asks CMDR C why he was attacked.
CMDR C's responds with "You were affecting my system. Leave and never return if you know what's good for you."
CMDR B throws up his hands in despair, then tosses a coin to see if he should block both CMDRs A and C or go back to solo.
Meanwhile, back in open ...
CMDR A is waiting for the next innocent newbie to wander by .....
And the root cause of this in my view, is CMDR A.
Steve
CMDR B responds by blocking CMDR A.
CMDR C has their instance adversely affected.
CMDR C promotes the idea that CMDR B use solo or PG.
CMDR B changes to solo or PG.
CMDR A is not happy that his potential victim is not around in open. The only one around is CMDR C, a top 10% player with the ship builds and skills to easily thwart CMDR A. Not going to get any lolz there.
Meanwhile back in solo .....
CMDR B is happily running missions, not getting ganked and not adversely affecting CMDR C's instancing.
CMDR C is encountering CMDR A a lot more.
CMRD C is happy.
Unlike CMDR A who only ever seems to see a gank proof target.
But,
CMDR C has an interest in several systems and notices that their influence is waning and conflict is frequent.
CMDR C deduces that solo CMDRs are responsible.
CMDR C promotes that BGS/PP should be open only so that they can interact with the CMDRs causing problems.
(bear in mind that any activity in a system can affect the influence levels)
CMDR A supports this change as he is fed up with only encountering CMDR C, and wants a larger pool of victims.
CMDR B caves into peer pressure, and plays in open again, and without blocking CMDR A as this adversely affects CMDR C's instancing.
CMDR A gleefully rubs his hands as he can now encounter CMDR B and get back to having lolz.
CMDR B may or not get ganked by CMDR A, but if it happens, at least he has not affected CMDR C's instancing by using the block function.
CMDR B goes on what he likes doing, trading peacefully.
CMDR C spots CMDR B and turns him into space dust.
CMDR B asks CMDR C why he was attacked.
CMDR C's responds with "You were affecting my system. Leave and never return if you know what's good for you."
CMDR B throws up his hands in despair, then tosses a coin to see if he should block both CMDRs A and C or go back to solo.
Meanwhile, back in open ...
CMDR A is waiting for the next innocent newbie to wander by .....
And the root cause of this in my view, is CMDR A.
Steve
Such bounties are insignificant and according to general wisdom, have little or no impact on the CMDR with them. Whereas the victim has been sent to the rebuy screen etc
Steve
The best solution would be that all non-gankers block all gankers. Then all gankers and their friends who want to instance with them can do, while all others at least play the game as intended.
Oh... that would be open PvE mode.
That's an awful lot of clicks for what you can achiveve by one click on "private group"
But how do you judge who is a ganker though? It seems goalposts of 'valid' attacks moves far too much.That's an awful lot of clicks for what you can achiveve by one click on "private group"
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Private Groups can accommodate, at most, 20,000 members - not all of whom will be online (or still actually play, as it takes time for a PG to gain that sort of membership) - which is pitifully small when compared to the c.10M copies of the PC game that are out there.That's an awful lot of clicks for what you can achiveve by one click on "private group"
Without knowledge of a Private Group that suits ones gameplay preferences, Open is the only populated game mode available on the launcher - and the only game mode with an unlimited population.
It's easy to understand the reluctance of those who enjoy PvP, who may also tolerate / support gankers, to keep it that way - as it means that players seeking co-op PvE have a harder time finding it (without any unwanted PvP distractions).
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That's for each target to decide for themself - not the attacker(s).
A private group is very limiting, not going to meet anyone friendly by chance, playing there.That's an awful lot of clicks for what you can achiveve by one click on "private group"
Steve
Which is a problem in itself, especially if people like you propagate pre-emptive blocking, partially by using some obscure block lists found at the internet.