And you'll be known for your deeds. Either by those who favor them, or those who don't.
Either way, it's still your choice, not others choosing for you.
The Open v Solo v Groups thread
- Thread starter Ozric
- Start date
Either way, it's still your choice, not others choosing for you.
Obviously. But I still like that better than using obfuscation.
Being called foolish for that is what I called out
I also put up pure PvP vids, bugs reports, beta reports and educational gank evasion vids.
What will be weighted more?
How many vids are enough to brandmark me?
(Not that I really care though, and its a bit of a derail anyways...)
I can always respect honesty.Obviously. But I still like that better than using obfuscation.
Being called foolish for that is what I called out
I also put up pure PvP vids, bugs reports, beta reports and educational gank evasion vids.
What will be weighted more?
How many vids are enough to brandmark me?
(Not that I really care though, and its a bit of a derail anyways...)
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That likely depends on each player.
It's also not always the attacker that sends these videos.
If you don't care whether you get blocked or not, and you aren't on here complaining about a lack of targets in Open, you're not among the foolish I was referring to.Being called foolish for that is what I called out
If it's the gankee it's naming and shaming here though and usually gets subsequently deleted.
Stupid rule by the way, because I sometimes wish I could warn people officially from other "known" gankers before they get blown up
Yeah, such videos aren't here, but there are other sources on the internet.
FWIW, as a related data point, I personally wouldn't mind losing out on impacting the BGS/PP/etc as a trade-off for playing in Solo/PGs. I've never really cared much about PP to begin with, and like, honestly my largest influence on the BGS is that there's a little less bertrandite at the station if you're trading a similar loop to mine. Going back and reading some of the prior discussions on the topic, it seems odd to me that "ability to impact the BGS" is a major fulcrum around which the debates about fairness happen.
Does anyone who's not actively into PP actually care that much? And if you're actively into PP, aren't you pretty much already participating in a PvP activity by default? (These questions may betray my newb status to these discussions. Sorry if this is a proverbial dead horse.)
Re: CGs and such, I'd similarly find it reasonable to have Open-only CGs that pit factions against each other in a race, because again, the framing of that is explicitly PvP. I wouldn't want that for single-goal CGs, though. In such a scenario, I'd liken Open-only CGs as being in the same vein as other difficult content in MMO games, where your gear/skills need to be at a certain level to reliably do well. I'd run them if I think I have a ship that can handle a few jerks, or nope out if I don't want to deal with that.
So it's not that I'm entrenched in a particular position or incapable of compromise. I just feel strongly that all the potential "risks" I'm taking need to be opt-in, rather than opt-out.
Does anyone who's not actively into PP actually care that much? And if you're actively into PP, aren't you pretty much already participating in a PvP activity by default? (These questions may betray my newb status to these discussions. Sorry if this is a proverbial dead horse.)
Re: CGs and such, I'd similarly find it reasonable to have Open-only CGs that pit factions against each other in a race, because again, the framing of that is explicitly PvP. I wouldn't want that for single-goal CGs, though. In such a scenario, I'd liken Open-only CGs as being in the same vein as other difficult content in MMO games, where your gear/skills need to be at a certain level to reliably do well. I'd run them if I think I have a ship that can handle a few jerks, or nope out if I don't want to deal with that.
So it's not that I'm entrenched in a particular position or incapable of compromise. I just feel strongly that all the potential "risks" I'm taking need to be opt-in, rather than opt-out.
I'm sure were not the PvPers losing their cool heads and emotions...
anyway, these threads bring always some good reads.Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Given that the actions of some PvPers are specifically designed to at least attempt to provoke salty reactions....I'm sure were not the PvPers losing their cool heads and emotions...
The outliers exist on both sides and if they broke forum rules, dealt with accordingly. Those who remain obviously aren't outliers.I'm sure were not the PvPers losing their cool heads and emotions...
...same may happen to an open-mode BGS/PP player when his/her opponent goes to solo/PG to avoid direct confrontation.
Different points of view.
As someone who hates the BGS with passion and still fought a year long BGS war in Carcosa, I can tell you it's frustrating and annoying when you see you lose your wars in CZs and never encounter players. All instancing, time-zone realities and all this stuff aside, it really feels bad.
And on the other hand, when we had already lost our war, and we were hunted by SPEAR and half the nebula, the urge to use solo/PG to your own advantage was so great, I succumbed to that on times. Because it was just so annoying flying to a CZ in a CZ fit FdL in open, only to get chased away by a PvP wing, when you knew the other side was just in the CZ in PvP ships, their BGS players won the war in PvE ships in solo/PG.
This simply feels terribly bad, and from an organic PvP point of view it was giving us some great fights, with real stakes, but ultimately we lost without any chance to win (because we were a dozen or two players against easily double or triple that number).
We still would've lost if there were an open only mode, no doubt, because we were terribly outnumbered. But the feel of not being able to affect anything because you couldn't fight your opposition because you couldn't see them was really morale shattering in the end.
(And no one likes to lose, honestly
)Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Which rather depends on whether the opponent enjoys PvP, or not - bearing in mind that there is no requirement to enjoy, or even to tolerate, PvP in this game while engaging in pan-modal game features....same may happen to an open-mode BGS/PP player when his/her opponent goes to solo/PG to avoid direct confrontation.
Different points of view.
Those who prefer to engage opponents in PvP are free to want it to happen - however no other player needs to change how they play the game to accommodate those who want to engage them in PvP, i.e. if they want to engage the former group in PvP then it will presumably happen, if they don't - not so much.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Players who don't instance with their opposition have exactly the same tools available to them as those who don't instance with them....
Yes, you can quote single sentences out of my ramblings and post something obvious. And?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Not instancing with opposing players is something to be expected, given that the galaxy is shared between three platforms, comprising four discrete versions of Open (soon to be five) and operates 24/7 (apart from Thursday morning maintenance that is).
That's why I said "feels".
You know that's something subjective, those "feels"?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Indeed.