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.
I disagree with you on who is (metaphorically speaking) leaving the trash lying around
There are (almost) no griefers in Open Play
- Thread starter Crimson Kaim
- Start date
I disagree with you on who is (metaphorically speaking) leaving the trash lying around
And why would that be your definition and not his?
I disagree with you on who is (metaphorically speaking) leaving the trash lying around
There's enough video evidence .. but yea, I guess trying a "Ryan Lochte" is fashionable nowadays.
Before 2.1 I only flew a Cobra III, I ran that bare bones in OPEN a few times as its speed made it pretty much have no threats.
I only just upgraded to the Python. OPEN would be pretty risky, SOLO bare running is no sweat. There is no mode parity as far as risk when it comes to CG areas.
If not this, what can?
It is always a bad idea to self-quote or to state a personal interpretation as it is ... personal and therefore has not much value. Quoting others or other sources is much more of value as it is not self-created content.
Any other source provided I am happy to read but the main reason I used this as a definition is because I don't want to use my own definition for the reasons stated above. What would you trust more: The definition of a third party not involved in this matter (or likely not involved) or someone who clearly prefares one side in terms of playstyle? I am simply not political neutral in this matter and will never be as long as I keep PvPing and even if I'd stop I wouldn't be 100% neutral.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
There is the point. It is not my definition. It is the definition of the Elite Wiki. Check my previous post quoting Robert above for an explaination.
As in the other bazillion threads on this - In Open accept you are going to meet jerks. You may see this as griefing, well done.
Adapt your play accordingly or switch modes.
I've met pad blockers in open, it's bad form and I wish now I had left mines above the pads, but all I did was switch to solo, dock, then back to open.
No biggie.
To avoid jerks, play in Solo.
Adapt your play accordingly or switch modes.
I've met pad blockers in open, it's bad form and I wish now I had left mines above the pads, but all I did was switch to solo, dock, then back to open.
No biggie.
To avoid jerks, play in Solo.
I prefer definitions to be decided based on logic, not based on who proposes it. The Elite Wiki definition is just the opinion of a random other dude, with zero argumentation. My argumentation is simplicity. Griefing=trying to cause grief. Its how most people see it, it makes intuitive sense. The convoluted 'its only griefing if its done repeatedly in a way to prevent progress' excludes actions most people would consider griefing for no reason at all, and finds its roots in different games where griefing is done in different ways. There is no reason for that definition to be applied here, unless you want to use it to justify something. Btw, dont you find it... interesting to see that your 'neutral definition' happens to be exactly in line with what you want it to be?
Not that I care much, whatever its called one can avoid it easily. But this 'hiding behind definitions' is annoying in its own right.
Killing players 'mostly harmless' at starter system in sidewingers is maybe not griefing but is pretty lame.
Generally speaking it is difficult to have a equal fight in Pvp, most of the time the balance isnt there and that is fine. Most of the time, the weakest side can run if he has some experience in the game.
But using a wing of 2 corvettes and 2 anacondas to kill a novice player in a viper isnt done for the fun of an interesting pvp fight but just to cause grief to the new player.
And having fun at doing that is really lame.
Oh and I have seen a video of a known newbie killer being interdicted by a wing, combat logging off and calling them grieffers. He even switch off to Solo and was happy to see there werent any Cmdrs in his instance.
Generally speaking it is difficult to have a equal fight in Pvp, most of the time the balance isnt there and that is fine. Most of the time, the weakest side can run if he has some experience in the game.
But using a wing of 2 corvettes and 2 anacondas to kill a novice player in a viper isnt done for the fun of an interesting pvp fight but just to cause grief to the new player.
And having fun at doing that is really lame.
Oh and I have seen a video of a known newbie killer being interdicted by a wing, combat logging off and calling them grieffers. He even switch off to Solo and was happy to see there werent any Cmdrs in his instance.
I agree. I'm finding a large number of players just play a hybrid. SOLO in insecure areas, then back to OPEN at stations to socialize. The modes are just filter tools. They're just there to be used. I've never really thought it was a good design, but it's not really a game stopper.
Last edited:
Could just as well ask first, chances are the explorer is just going to sell there because it's the first available option and would have no issues selling it in another system..
Again, could talk first, possibly the trader could easily go somewhere else if the BGS matters so much for the other player.
This depends. If this is a CG in opposition to something (e.g. the recent Federal and Imperial warship construction) then yes, but many CGs are of the humanitarian type or to develop as system further, preventing this is would even count as high level griefing - grief everyone, not just those blown up, by preventing the CG completion and reducing final rewards or overall outcome.
Yeah that is a legit reason indeed. Well, as long as the "action in the past" is something that is justly revenge-worthy (i.e. some of the points here, like entering someone's home system, is in my view not an offense and not revenge-worthy).
I am not sure. I can understand this from a revenge perspective, but isn't it a bit futile to attempt to hunt a notorious combat logger because they would just combat log again?
Okay, this is legit as long as there is some sense. If a group just randomly declares another player group (or all other groups) as their "enemy" for no reason whatsoever, it's just a collective form of killing "for the lulz".
No one owns a system. Even if you are in a player group with their own faction there - it is not yours. You may do actions to prevent BGS effect detrimental to your group, but just the presence in this system does not give you a justification, moral or otherwise, to kill another player.
Well since the heat meta is purely a PvP thing anyway, I would guess anyone going around with a Thermal Shock spam build is looking for PvP trouble anyway... thus legit.
If you have asked the other player to wing up and they declined, then yes, I see this as a legitimate reason to kill them. If you just kill them without question, you are just being a greedy ****.
I am not sure how this would happen, but well, I guess accidents happen, if the killer apologizes in honesty (and maybe makes some financial amends) all should be fine.
Last edited:
I prefer definitions to be decided based on logic, not based on who proposes it. The Elite Wiki definition is just the opinion of a random other dude, with zero argumentation. My argumentation is simplicity. Griefing=trying to cause grief. Its how most people see it, it makes intuitive sense. The convoluted 'its only griefing if its done repeatedly in a way to prevent progress' excludes actions most people would consider griefing for no reason at all, and finds its roots in different games where griefing is done in different ways. There is no reason for that definition to be applied here, unless you want to use it to justify something. Btw, dont you find it... interesting to see that your 'neutral definition' happens to be exactly in line with what you want it to be?
Not that I care much, whatever its called one can avoid it easily. But this 'hiding behind definitions' is annoying in its own right.
How do you know what I want something to be?
I have never stated my person definition but can do if you want.
Also: You may use your own personal definition of griefing but simplicity is usually not enough, hence laws are so uber complicated. If laws would be simple and based on subjective interpretations I would kick you in jail now just because and you would call it griefing
However, it is just not enough to state "Trying to grief=griefing" as it is subjective and not accurate enough which results in a not-so-precise description of an event/object.
I could obviously just stae my difinition but it would be pointless as I am not neutral in this topic plus it would be yet another personal subjective interpretation which would be of no value. Just like your personal interpretation is of no value to others (other than yourself).
Additionally, I'd like to disagree that the wiki is just the opinion of yet another dude. The wiki has mods which check every entry and the wiki is a database created by multiple persons, not just a single one. The fact that this definition has been there since launch and never edited shows that not really much people disagree with this definition.
How do you know what I want something to be?
Because you spend 500 pages trying to justify some behaviour that wouldn't need justificaton if "sorry" or "gg" were used.
Blocking the pad: "Sorry, was afk"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2e4NlnLr28
Answers in red. Also, tese are just reasons other players have (including me). You don't have to accept them but it is a common rason and even a rule of engagement in some player groups.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
And that's fine but my appeal is to stop these "I just got griefed!" threads .. not players leaving open. I am fine with players leaving open.
Last edited:
Griefer is indeed an ambiguous term. Pillock seems to be more clear and indicative, so that's usually the term I use.
OP doez deserve rep for the "reasons" he listed. Very amusing.
OP doez deserve rep for the "reasons" he listed. Very amusing.
Despite Elite being considered a mature concept for a different gamer. ED suffers from the same plague of shoot on sight degenerates that all open world games do. In a supposed civilised space faring future. You would hope that people you meet, going about your daily business, would react in a similar fashion as they do in real life. So around Sol and Founders World etc everyone would be civil. Go to lawless regions (Somali/Syria as in real life) and expect trouble. I don't know if you would call that boring or immersion?
You pkers (most of you don't deserve the title pvper) are just cookie cutter drones.
You pkers (most of you don't deserve the title pvper) are just cookie cutter drones.
You pkers (most of you don't deserve the title pvper) are just cookie cutter drones.[/QUOTE]
So much Rep o7
So much Rep o7
1) There's more than 1 pad on an outpost and you can switch to solo/private if you need to dock that bad.
2) Don't speed. It's really that simple. If you don't speed @ the stations you won't die to a suicidewinder or eagle.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
And this is why we have griefer threads. You certainly don't know me and are the one sobbing 'cause you got destroyed. The reason why we have griefer threads is not because we have PKers but the ones like you who entertain your so-hated PKers.
Have a nice day.
Carebear tears taste so delicious.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Indeed - what? That was actually my point - there is no definitive definition of the term.
Just because someone chose to include their definition of a term on a wiki does not mean that it is "the" definition.
Another thread!
Woohoo. Lol
Actual Griefing hardly happens at all in ED.
For some reason, people have decided that being murdered is now Griefing, and I'm not sure why that started.
You don't accuse players in Battlefield or CoD of Griefing if they kill you once.
Being killed by a CMDR for no apparent reason is not Griefing.
Only being killed by the same CMDR(or wing of), over and over, specifically targeting you, is actually Griefing.
Even the Muppets in sidewinders with 1% hull slamming in to speeding ships near docks is not Griefing.
It's almost law enforcement
Simply don't speed. Problem solved.
(Saying that, I regularly dock at 200m/s.... Ain't got time for that!)
Woohoo. Lol
Actual Griefing hardly happens at all in ED.
For some reason, people have decided that being murdered is now Griefing, and I'm not sure why that started.
You don't accuse players in Battlefield or CoD of Griefing if they kill you once.
Being killed by a CMDR for no apparent reason is not Griefing.
Only being killed by the same CMDR(or wing of), over and over, specifically targeting you, is actually Griefing.
Even the Muppets in sidewinders with 1% hull slamming in to speeding ships near docks is not Griefing.
It's almost law enforcement
Simply don't speed. Problem solved.
(Saying that, I regularly dock at 200m/s.
... Ain't got time for that!)