Said guy was not picky about his targets. He provoked once members of biker gang, and once tried to get cops to beat him. He went to local bar freqeunted by members of police force, and started to praise certain cop killer.
To Solo Play Players: If You Could Disable PVP, Would You Play in Open Play Mode Instead?
- Thread starter AMX-008 GaZowmn
- Start date
So continuing troll fest is fine and dandy and good for game?
That 'troll fest' only exists in your imagination.
Edit: the only troll fest that actually exists and is a real problem is cheaters (people who use a trainer).
Well I haven't seen anybody cheating in this game either. Perhaps said cheaters exist only in others imagination.
Which has utterly nothing to do with this discussion.
The game has rules. If other people playing by those game rules "irritates" someone, sounds like the problem isn't with those players or the rules. If it's really an issue, then Suggestions forum is thataway for suggesting changes to the game.
Trolling is minimally to do with actual actions, and everything to do with behaviours and intents. If neither is discernable, you simply cannot punish someone who's playing within the rules.
It has something to do. Our guy played within the rules, if one reads and applies law mechanistically, he was always the innocent victim. Kind of irl suicidewinder. Solution for problem was from officials side to be somewhat creative. Basically they took his complaints, and then did nothing. "Lack of resources"....
I agree, trolling is more about intentions. And I do not see say in suicidewinder gameplay any other intention than "ruin others gameplay". And that intention should be bannable offense.
And you can think should be a bannable offence all you like. Suggestions forum is there for a reason.
But it's not trolling... that relies on discerning behaviours and intents of individuals, no matter your own perspective of the intent of someone undertaking suicidewindering in isolation of any other information... opinion is not rule. And "Ruining others gameplay" is an invalid, incredibly subjective and volatile approach. You could basically argue fighting for one side of a CG is "ruining the game" for those on the losing side.
Likewise suicidewindering is not explicitly against the TOS, nor explicitly called out by FD as a cheat, exploit or other thing.
So like I said. You cannot hold people accountable to unwritten rules, especially based on player opinion of certain activities in the game. Underhanded? Sure. Devious? Yes. Against the rules? No.
Just because it's not allowed here to post videos showing clear cases of cheating does not make it nonexistent.
Actually I agree. I don't think suicidewindering, slot blocking or pad blocking should be bannable. But I think both "sides" need to be consistent. If we don't acknowledge unwritten rules about annoying behaviour, this also means that menu logging is OK, affecting the BGS in Solo is OK, blocking people is OK, stacking shield boosters is OK. Heck, even flying backwards is OK.
Last edited:
Of course I can. In fact one forum where I was adminstrator had nice ostracisation rule. Basically three known users in good standing could propose throwing out some user, and then all members could vote on said proposal. Simple majority needed. And the thing was that said user did not need to outright break any rules. Just being irritating jerk was enough. Said procedure was done couple of times.
People behaving on forementioned ways do not add anything to this game, provide mainly negative gaming experience, and basically drive people away.
That's fine because it follows your rules, presumably everyone knows these rules when they sign up.
In your suicidewinder example if in the very rare instance you see sideys hanging around a dock - just fly at 50 m/s. Easily sorted.
Your RL example is interesting enough but hasn't any relevance here - this is a game after all.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It's not that surprising really - every player bought a game where indirect and asynchronous PvP is possible (and even accidental) through the BGS and where Powerplay does not require players to play with other players to affect the feature - both features, like Community Goals, are designed to be affected by players in all game modes.
Just like every player bought a game where in-the-same-instance PvP is entirely optional, as other players are optional, while affecting all mode shared game features.
Last edited:
Accountant hat on...
There are 2 approaches to accounting;
Rules based as per Sarbanes-Oxley used in the US. Essentially a tick box excercise that results in corporations deciding whether it's cheaper to carry out the accounting functions or pay the fine for non-compliance.
Principles based as per the International Accounting Standards where corporations have more leeway in how they present their accounts but everything should be disclosed and deviations from standard format have to be described in the notes.
By sticking rigidly to a rules based format you generate loopholes as you can't anticipate every situation. Principles based should reduce the deliberate deception but is more time consuming to administrate.
No Robert, that was false advertising.
I thought I bought that game but it turned out that in-the-same-instance PvP only happens if you are lucky or play the rare pvp community goals.
optional means you have the option to actually do it, there should not be a "maybe" in there.
I do not blame the dev's however, they did what they could and CQC was actually great while it lasted.
It is the community's fault for pushing players like myself away from the game.
"Solo" never meant that you'll be playing Single Player game, only that you'll not encounter anyone directly.
That direct confrontation is something that many people don't enjoy and prefer to avoid.
I said its a myth, your BGS actions have more direct impact on me than any once in a month random pilot encounter in open ever had.
you do you, there are different modes for a reason, but don't go and be holy about it.
I see we clearly have different understanding what "direct" means in this case.
First of all the fact that you select some faction to be "yours" doesn't make it "yours". Opposition by random other players in other modes is not affecting you "directly".
It's affecting you through BGS (because you chose to care about some part of it).
And that was always supposed to be the only MMO thing about the game - one that noone can't skip - everyone's actions have effect on the same background, even if otherwise they want to play alone, or in closed group. Indirectly having effect on others.
I'm not "being holy". We're just not talking about the same thing.
Could you expand on what you mean?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
In what way was it "false"?
I'd be interested to know which "pvp community goals" are referred to here - as I'm not aware of any Community Goal that has required players to engage in PvP.
Optional means that it is possible, if other like minded players are available. No-one else needs to engage in it - and can't be forced to.
In what way? Given that there's no need to even tolerate, much less enjoy, in-the-same-instance PvP to play this game.