There are (almost) no griefers in Open Play

[Crimson Kaim]

Pretty funny post. Thanks for sharing your point of view. Assume you are a griefer, by your choice of gameplay, or often called one?

Like your post, everyone is entitled to an opinion so perhaps you'll get your wish for fewer complaints if or when griefing really does becomes less of an issue. This will require changes to the game and not changes from the players. While griefing is common in many online games Elite does make it very easy to get away with, and folks often use excuses like you have posted to point to roleplaying or interpreting game mechanics in their way to hide their unwelcomed gameplay. And griefing takes place a lot more than you suggest in open. So enjoy everyone's opinion and simply ignore threads that are not of personal interest.

BTW PK'ing for your first three reasons alone fits the description of griefing quite nicely.

Well you would describe the gameplay of Elite is based on griefing then? I am using an extract from the Elite Wiki which is not my opinion but a written definition of griefing (or not-griefing). There is no opinion involved when defining griefing, just evidence/source(s) I can put some weight on.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

You forgot about those who knowingly infiltrate a private group and violate the rules of the group and then claim that said private groups rules don't apply to them. But I suppose that those who chose to play in private group instead of "moaning" about it aren't being grieved either.

I am aware and highly against the "Mobius invasion" but Frontier neither supports real player groups nor does Frontier support private groups completely. Yes, there is a possibility to form up and invite/kick players to/from a group but without proper rules for private groups this won't be a full support.
However, this is not the topic I have covered. I wanted to point out that there are almost no griefers in open play (and that atleast 95% of the time someone uses the word "griefer" the actual definition doesn't apply to described player). But private/solo is another topic and I have not covered that in my OP.

 

[jasonbarron]

Eh. No. That niche is taken by the npcs.

Griefers are just the fat tourists that throw their empty sodacans and candy wrappers everywhere, are loud and obnoxious and think for the 50 bucks entrance fee they own the place and are entitled to the trashthrowing.

I used to think so, too, but then 2.1 dropped and I couldn't help but notice that by and large the only people NOT complaining about the new NPC's were the PvPers. This fact was not lost on me. They might have unattractive habits, but they're not fat lazy tourists. Fat lazy tourists who leave their candy wrappers lying about would be all the complainers, in my estimation. Ditto for proponents of insta transfer.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

I dont call them griefers I call them idiots. One unprovoked unreasonable attack where they spoil your game is more than enough.

I am fine with that. Guess we all know some idiots in games .. jobs .. public places, etc.

 

[Zylark]

Meh, anyone in a big bad combat fitted ship that goes after a soft target that have no chance of fighting back in anything resembling equal terms, is griefing.

That said, there are 'legit' ways to go after soft targets - say actual pirating. If the trader do not comply, then by all means shoot to kill.

Going after people in a CG is a bit of a grey area. One can claim one do it for roleplay reasons - to stop the CG being a success. But that is in any case quite futile, as it matters little if one do CG tasks in Solo, PG or Open. If one limited CGs to Open only on the other hand...

Also, I'd agree that if done in a Powerplay setting, it is fine. If attacker is signed up with say a Fed faction and the target with an Imp faction, then by all means go in guns blazing.

Though more often than not, I suspect these socalled PVPers just go after soft targets because... reasons. The target had the bad luck to share instance with them, and that is enough.

 

[Cajuncontroller]

Well you would describe the gameplay of Elite is based on griefing then? I am using an extract from the Elite Wiki which is not my opinion but a written definition of griefing (or not-griefing). There is no opinion involved when defining griefing, just evidence/source(s) I can put some weight on.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



I am aware and highly against the "Mobius invasion" but Frontier neither supports real player groups nor does Frontier support private groups completely. Yes, there is a possibility to form up and invite/kick players to/from a group but without proper rules for private groups this won't be a full support.
However, this is not the topic I have covered. I wanted to point out that there are almost no griefers in open play (and that atleast 95% of the time someone uses the word "griefer" the actual definition doesn't apply to described player). But private/solo is another topic and I have not covered that in my OP.

But you did state that players have a choice of solo/private group (which Mobius is) which is part of the topic.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

people posted here they were pad-hogging the Hutton CG just to spite cmdrs actually trying to do something.

Well, there is solo for that matter. Instancing is your friend. I always do that if the pads are full either of players or NPCs. Go to solo and dock, do my business and undock in any given mode.
So this is not really a problem.

 

[DaggerSnake]

Okay I like the nice clear definitions but what is it when:
1) Player sits on pad blocking others from landing?
2) Player, in a suicide Sidewinder, spends the day just ramming other Cmdrs?

As soon as they do it to you multiple times and prevent you from landing (progressing) then you've triggered the definition so these apply too.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

But you did state that players have a choice of solo/private group (which Mobius is) which is part of the topic.

In these terms, yes. But keep in mind that Private doesn't equal PvE only. You are just as 'PvP-able' as in open with the only difference being that the group founder can select the pool of players. For full PvE and maximum security a player play in solo.

 

[DukeIronHand]

Answers in red​.

Fair enough.
Thank you.
As a Solo player (ISP reasons) I have no dog in this fight I was just curious.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

Meh, anyone in a big bad combat fitted ship that goes after a soft target that have no chance of fighting back in anything resembling equal terms, is griefing.

This is your personal definition but as a community we should stick to certain definitions. I have quoted the wiki so everyone gets an understanding of the actual meaning of a griefer (exclusively in elite dangerous for now). So the scenario you described is, by the definition of the wiki, not griefing.
Personal interpretations are worthless in this case. This is like taking a random word from the dictionary and modify its meaning so its fits for personal use. I could potentionally say that a car without wheels and an engine remains a car .. but it would simply be incorrect. By definition, it would be the chassis and the interior cabin.

 

[DaggerSnake]

Well, there is solo for that matter. Instancing is your friend. I always do that if the pads are full either of players or NPCs. Go to solo and dock, do my business and undock in any given mode.
So this is not really a problem.

Something I found interesting last night at the LT 133(sp?) CG was that in OPEN there was lots of friendly banter in and around the station, but whenever someone left to get more gold they would say see ya in a bit, then log to SOLO, make their run and then come back to OPEN once they docked and chat again. I met several people and we seemed to instance back up OK back inside the station. I never thought to do that. Seems like kind of a silly design to have to play that way to keep social interaction without dealing with troublesome players.

Kinda lame for the real Pirates too trying to get the gold. I mean if there is a CG worth pirating it's GOLD delivery right?

I was flying a bare, no shield, all cargo Python. Luckily NPC pirates are no threat...

 

[jasonbarron]

I was flying a bare, no shield, all cargo Python. Luckily NPC pirates are no threat...

How did running bare like that work when 2.1 first dropped?

 

[Crimson Kaim]

Something I found interesting last night at the LT 133(sp?) CG was that in OPEN there was lots of friendly banter in and around the station, but whenever someone left to get more gold they would say see ya in a bit, then log to SOLO, make their run and then come back to OPEN once they docked and chat again. I met several people and we seemed to instance back up OK back inside the station. I never thought to do that. Seems like kind of a silly design to have to play that way to keep social interaction without dealing with troublesome players.

Kinda lame for the real Pirates too trying to get the gold. I mean if there is a CG worth pirating it's GOLD delivery right?

I was flying a bare, no shield, all cargo Python. Luckily NPC pirates are no threat...

That's perfectly fine. And the lack of social support is neither a problem of the modes, nor PvP. It is just a lack of content or FD simply doesn't want us to form groups. They apparently want us to be sad and alone

 

[Bomba Luigi]

This is your personal definition but as a community we should stick to certain definitions. I have quoted the wiki so everyone gets an understanding of the actual meaning of a griefer (exclusively in elite dangerous for now). So the scenario you described is, by the definition of the wiki, not griefing.
Personal interpretations are worthless in this case. This is like taking a random word from the dictionary and modify its meaning so its fits for personal use. I could potentionally say that a car without wheels and an engine remains a car .. but it would simply be incorrect. By definition, it would be the chassis and the interior cabin.

We as a community don't have a definition, just lots of personal definitions. His personal definiton is a good as your personal definiton.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Quoting the Elite: Dangerous Wiki:

Can that user-created site be considered to be an authoritative source on the subject of the definition of the term?

 

[Arkantes]

This is your personal definition but as a community we should stick to certain definitions. I have quoted the wiki so everyone gets an understanding of the actual meaning of a griefer (exclusively in elite dangerous for now). So the scenario you described is, by the definition of the wiki, not griefing.
Personal interpretations are worthless in this case. This is like taking a random word from the dictionary and modify its meaning so its fits for personal use. I could potentionally say that a car without wheels and an engine remains a car .. but it would simply be incorrect. By definition, it would be the chassis and the interior cabin.

Try all you want to stop people from using the term, they still won't like the players they call that, and might just use other names instead (that you'll enjoy a lot less).

Who made you the pope of this community by the way?

 

[Mohrgan]

Well you would describe the gameplay of Elite is based on griefing then? I am using an extract from the Elite Wiki which is not my opinion but a written definition of griefing (or not-griefing). There is no opinion involved when defining griefing, just evidence/source(s) I can put some weight on.

Any Wiki is populated by general posters, not officials from the game. The statements you attempt to use as rules are simply someone else's opinion. Put no weight on promulgating other opinions, written or no. FD has actually put out a statement or two on what is an offense, and what is an 'unfortunate occurrence'. If there can be generalization on the motives for those who choose a PG to play in, so to can there be generalizations about those that choose open.

Explaining to people that the activity they find unwelcome is not griefing, doesn't stop it from being unwanted. It just serves to remind players that your play time in open is at the discretion of others. whether they enjoy it or not. If open wants to improve it's reputation, justifying griefing would be a good thing to stop. Clean up open's personality in the media, and you have a start.

 

[Cajuncontroller]

In these terms, yes. But keep in mind that Private doesn't equal PvE only. You are just as 'PvP-able' as in open with the only difference being that the group founder can select the pool of players. For full PvE and maximum security a player play in solo.

I was not talking about PvE vs PvP. I was referencing grieving. And when individuals enter a group (Mobius or otherwise) and know what the groups rules are, and then break those rules for whatever reason that is grieving.

 

[Boomer Kay]

I used to think so, too, but then 2.1 dropped and I couldn't help but notice that by and large the only people NOT complaining about the new NPC's were the PvPers. This fact was not lost on me. They might have unattractive habits, but they're not fat lazy tourists. Fat lazy tourists who leave their candy wrappers lying about would be all the complainers, in my estimation. Ditto for proponents of insta transfer.

Yea, sure, let's blame the people who point out that trash does not add to the food chain. If they would not complain, we could peacefully live in denial.

 

[Mohrgan]

That's perfectly fine. And the lack of social support is neither a problem of the modes, nor PvP. It is just a lack of content or FD simply doesn't want us to form groups. They apparently want us to be sad and alone

FD has supported players groups but, in FD's fashion. You simply decide to define something and them wash your hands of things. Join a group. Then you will see that it's not that hard at all to form up. When I was flying patrols with my Faction, we could dissuade ne'er do wells simply with numbers, let alone actual fights.