PvP You're probably going to say "duh, it's obvious", but I think I get it now. (PvP dislike)

[Morbad]

no discernable reason

One does not need to dramatically telegraph their motivations to their enemies for them to be legitimate.

Maybe this CMDR assumed you had or were manipulating the BGS in a way that was unfavorable to them. Maybe you once stole one of this CMDRs kills in a RES or nearly squished their ship and were recognized. Maybe the CMDR just wanted to test their packhounds and seeing a T-9 explode was the icing on the cake. All equally valid reasons for a player to have their CMDR attack that T-9.

I manage to low-wake escape 3 times before being destroyed as I am entering the airlock of a space station.

It was no fight, the only outcome was that my ship was going to be destroyed.

You had at least three chances to save your ship and you decided to stick around to be shot down.

It's possible that the individual was destroyed by the station, but I think they probably combat logged.

If the ship firing on you wasn't within 2km of the station when you actually exploded, it's highly likely they escaped.

The only positive from that was seeing packhounds in action.

Well, you learned that sometimes you need anti-missile defenses. It should also have become apparent that low-waking when you can be interdicted seconds later probably means you should leave the area rather than repeat an action that isn't working.

 

[CamelNumber1]

First points - no, apart from maybe the pack hounds test - but I doubt that, too. I've seen youtube the individual getting a hiding from someone on youtube, and it turns out if was a couple of hours before I encountered them.

Sticking around - well not really. I just wanted to get where I was going.

They were about 500m from me when I was actually in the airlock. Having "friended" them, I notice that pretty much all the time when they enter open play, they're in a detention centre - so I figure that means that they are being killed. A lot.

As they say, 3 times is the charm. I have modified my gameplay to counter this behaviour, but there is a point to all this: people behaving like this put other people off playing. It's that simple. If there aren't enough players, the servers will be switched off and there will be no more game.

 

[Sole Hunter]

I was just reading the FFF, where someone's post struck me.

It said something along the lines of that they don't want to spend time with people who want to fight and destroy them in-game, however, they are happy to have "positive" encounters.

The thing is I can't help but think that "positive" means they have a chance of winning.

Do you guys think this is the cause of the PvP/E divide? People just want to "win" every time, and if they can't for whatever reason then they get upset? Because I'm not sure that's how competitive play works...

positive imply they dont want to get hit with a rebuy screen. If we get rid of that or reduce it then there's no risk or danger associated with flying in open.

 

[Morbad]

I just wanted to get where I was going.

No doubt. Sometimes it's better to wait, or change destinations, than risk having to start over after paying a rebuy.

They were about 500m from me when I was actually in the airlock. Having "friended" them, I notice that pretty much all the time when they enter open play, they're in a detention centre - so I figure that means that they are being killed. A lot.

Yeah, I agree with that assessment. Penalties for getting shot down are quite mild, so some people just don't care about the survival of their ships.

As they say, 3 times is the charm. I have modified my gameplay to counter this behaviour, but there is a point to all this: people behaving like this put other people off playing. It's that simple. If there aren't enough players, the servers will be switched off and there will be no more game.

I have no doubt many people find these experiences off-putting. I personally think the game is overly lenient on ship destruction (for everyone) and that the crime & punishment system could still use some work in higher security areas. However, I'd find it even more off-putting if the game used overly heavy handed means to prevent players from having their CMDRs engage in such activities. Such attacks should always be possible, even if the deterrent value of in-game law enforcement and economics could stand to be a fair bit higher.

As it stands, modifying our gameplay is the best option we currently have, if we still want to interact with others outside of private groups.

 

[[VR] Frank_G]

Turning a Guardian ruin into a racing track, while others slam their "exploration" Anacondas nose into the dirt (because they can´t see anything from a hundred meters away), launching fighters into Thargoid bases or killing senselessly just for da lulz is just not my style of gaming.

I want to explore and enjoy the excellent scenery and moods Frontier has created or fight in a more tactical way and with the goal in mind to not behave, like it is just another rebuy you lose. I don´t care about winning or beating other players. And these play styles don´t go along very well, if at all. So before i annoy any other player or let others ruin my few hours i have for gaming sessions, i stick to a private group together with some good friends. Very much fun, very interactive and the way i like to play. If you ask me... i neither need Open Play nor PvP.