Griefers at the Engineers

In sum, PvP players act in direct contradiction of NPC programming.
I don't "blame" them,
I blame the game for this, not the griefers. If Old Duck were in charge (hahaha), I could easily fix this by changing the game, but Braben stopped answering his phone when I call, so I guess we're stuck with what we have.
 
What's so funny about it? Even you admitted that some of the former pirates went on ganking out of frustration. Now tell yourself the question: How shall a new player know if he was just killed by a frustrated former pirate or just one of those new fashion gankers - and how would it matter? Similar to real world wars, at some point it doesn't matter anymore who initially started the conflict or who was the chicken or the egg.
None of it matters. This whole discussion is pointless :)
 
I wouldn't go that far. You know never know what might take off because of discussions like this.
I am just posting during fuel scooping and such so I am just shooting from the hip. I can see things going back and forth and in this particular case I do not see anyone changing their minds.

It would be lovely to see some grand anti-ganker coalition emerging from all this. Or anything really.

This is all very entertaining though so do keep up!
 
No, I won't get that far. Lets ground it a little bit. From what I've gathered (correct me if I'm wrong), your general set of mind seems to be "Whatever I do in Open doesn't matter, as long it's not against the rules". Right?
Wrong. Everything you do in Open matters! A prominent example is piracy and its current state. Why do you think is it so? I'll tell you: Too many gankers who pretended to be pirates ruined the business for the pirates at the end.

So no, I'm not talking about sociopath, psychopath or whatever -path, just the plain old ***-hat I'm talking about.
So what you're saying is, I shouldn't play the game the way that I want to play, I need to play the game the way you want me to play it?
 
Strange, while reading it, your last sentence came to my mind as well. How do you think it says anything about what was first, just because they say so? Of course, if they started as honorable pirates, they won't have seen the cases where the bad pirate destroyed his customer's ship - this is very much in the nature of things cause they were the good ones. You would have to watch out for newcomer posts for instance to get a more holistic view of what's actually going on... or just have a closer look at this strange mindset of Mr. gankalot: it's exactly this sort of behavior that you're trying to support but not being ready to take the consequences.
What consequences? A few people complaining on the internet and some salty messages from a few nasty players? I don't see any consequences. Once again, more extreme over exaggeration to push an agenda.
 
I am just posting during fuel scooping and such so I am just shooting from the hip. I can see things going back and forth and in this particular case I do not see anyone changing their minds.

It would be lovely to see some grand anti-ganker coalition emerging from all this. Or anything really.

This is all very entertaining though so do keep up!
Been thinking about this over dinner. Don't really have any answers really but I think the key for all of us might be letting FDEV do FDEV. The game is going to be what the game is going to be. Whatever emerges thanks to the players, so be it. When new players run into situations that challenge them we all need to be out there ready to help in ways the promote the health of the game.

You can rise to the challenge and thrive in Open Play!
Private Group and Solo can tailor your experience if Open isn't for you!
There's tons to do and see!
Get involved in the community (but gird thyself! ;) )!

Things like this.
 
What consequences? A few people complaining on the internet and some salty messages from a few nasty players? I don't see any consequences. Once again, more extreme over exaggeration to push an agenda.
No, not this sort of consequences. Consequences to YOUR gameplay. This can be various things like FDev changing some game mechanics that hamper ganking in various ways or also the amount of weak players in Open shrinking dramatically. But I guess all that won't bother you as well... Why am I talking to you at all, I guess you don't care anyway.
 
No, not this sort of consequences. Consequences to YOUR gameplay. This can be various things like FDev changing some game mechanics that hamper ganking in various ways or also the amount of weak players in Open shrinking dramatically. But I guess all that won't bother you as well... Why am I talking to you at all, I guess you don't care anyway.
These are not consequences, they are things that you would like to see happen as a result of a problem you have not qualified.

Allow me to list for you a few facts. You do with them what you will.

1. Ganking is extremely uncommon. It gets broadcast by a few people, and occasionally becomes concentrated in single places where lots of people are gathering due to it being a target rich environment, but the fact is, non-gankers outnumber gankers by a vast margin

2. The vast majority of players are in open. This is from data provided by the devs some time ago, but based on the consistency of data, very little has probably changed. A few people getting mad and leaving open won't make a noticeable dent.

3. There are already MASSIVE potential in-game consequences for ganking. Gankers are usually wanted, and entirely legal to shoot at most of the time and in most places you might find them. They are putting themselves at more risk than you almost all of the time. The difference is, they don't care if they lose a ship, because they know it's just a game. Even if they have to grind money for another ship, they don't care. It's just a game.

4. If you are the kind of person that expects others to let you play the game the way you want, then it is your DUTY to protect the same for other players, and that includes gankers. If it's good for you, then it's good for them, too, no exceptions, otherwise, you're a hypocrite.

5. This is a multiplayer game. The moment something you want to do comes into conflict with what someone else wants to do, there is going to be competition. Whoever wins that competition gets to play however they like. Whoever loses also gets to play however they like.... with a new ship, of course. The cost of taking a risk in this game. Those are the REAL consequences. The ones you're afraid of, and the gankers are not.
 
No, not this sort of consequences. Consequences to YOUR gameplay. This can be various things like FDev changing some game mechanics that hamper ganking in various ways or also the amount of weak players in Open shrinking dramatically. But I guess all that won't bother you as well... Why am I talking to you at all, I guess you don't care anyway.
4 years of ganking in this game and Fdev haven't done a thing.
And do you really think I care about weak players in open? If they're too weak to hack in open, then they can go to solo, good riddance. Are you another one that assumes gankers only want easy targets? Fake news bro, get a clue. Maybe you should try talking TO a ganker instead talking down to them.
 
Last edited:
Why they should do anything about it? Without ganakers game in open will boring as hell.
Frontier wrote that I need combat skills in the open and that there will be pilots with huge bounties.
And that is true, in some places I get my *** kicked, in others I and my team have decent wing fights in others we boil up paper ships or hount PP enemies.
Whenever I wan't to play boring game, avoid fight, grind, sneak in... whatever. I just chose single/PG.
And what I see, that's what other PvPers do.

Best is to just log off from the forum and improve skills, use all possibility game is giving to you. That's what I can advice.
 
I think making bounty claims apply to the pilot rather than the ship, and subsequently un-capping them, might help people pursue them. Make bounties stick around unless explicitly claimed (via KWS or killing in the same system) and implement something that, if nothing else, makes players who have or have recently had very large bounties unable to cash in on it.

There's so much that could be done to make bounty hunting actually work, but FDev is, in my opinion, unconcerned with heavy revision in favour of slapping fixes over existing systems (i.e. the 2 million bounty cap).
 
This is a good point. It's what I was alluding to when I mentioned fighting griefers instead of dealing with them.

When I was really into serial murder it struck me how all the words in all the world never stopped any of us from pullin' down a CMDR and smoking them. But teaching them how to survive? Not just the tactics, build, but the will as well? Oof, that makes people unstoppable.

Help me help you help us all. Or however that goes!
Jog on.

Many players are just not interested, so they can never be "taught" the will to engage in what they would opine to be "non-consensual" PvP.
I'm one of those players that finds PvP "your way" utterly tedious.

Now, on the other hand, PvP in the way that Old Duck has described his version earlier in this thread - that wouldn't be so tedious - that would strike me as interesting and much more importantly as FUN.
Sadly, Old Duck is in an exceptionally miniscule minority group with that outlook on PvP, potentially a group of only one.

The far more popular "PvP" that is described by yourself - as "serial murder" - probably performed from the safety of a fully combat optimised, combat equipped and combat engineered fighting vessel - against anything and everything that is in all likelihood not optimised for PvP or engineered for PvP, or probably not even a fighting vessel at all - that is the very definition of tedious to the vast majority of those players whose ships you destroyed.

I shall go on - the very notion that you yourself label it as "murder" just goes to show the mindset of those partaking in this style of "PkP". The reason I can state that with utter conviction is that no character ever "dies" in the game - they merely have their ships destroyed, so "murder" is factually inaccurate, but if you want to label it as such - to label it as "I killed another player" - that only gives the rest of us a window into your own mindset when performing what is more factually correctly written as "destroying another character's ship". That'd be a fair observation and comment, would it not?

Yours Aye

Mark H
 
What consequences? A few people complaining on the internet and some salty messages from a few nasty players? I don't see any consequences. Once again, more extreme over exaggeration to push an agenda.
The consequences are people not wanting to play with you and blocking you for wasting their game time.
 
The consequences are people not wanting to play with you and blocking you for wasting their game time.
It's a big playerbase. All that does on either end is filter out undesirables who 'can't hack it' for the ganker, and filters out gankers for the victim. Net positive all around.
 
Wait... what?

I've had many fingers pointed at me during my time on this forum but this is the first time I've ever been accused of having an anti-Solo agenda. I should win an award for having kept it so well hidden for six years. ;)

This thread has broken everything.
What I read from your post is that you want this to be coded into the game:

Players who are in Solo or PG modes when piloting through certain "High Security" systems should have powerful NPCs spawn on them to engage them in combat, for the simple reason that other players in an Open mode instance of the same system are playing as "bad actors".

It's an emphatic NO to that idea, I'm afraid.
Just because some bad actor players are turning the notion of "High Security" upside down in certain locations, that doesn't mean the game code needs to be changed to reflect some player's non-canon version of the galaxy.

Does that make more sense? Or did I misunderstand your original point?
 
It's a big playerbase. All that does on either end is filter out undesirables who 'can't hack it' for the ganker, and filters out gankers for the victim. Net positive all around.
That is not a net positive - for the gankers - and well you know it.

Just as you know for a fact that, in general, the very players that gankers prefer to engage are the ones most likely to use the block function and/or the players that have already blocked them, because they know that it is these very players who would have a negative reaction to being ganked - and that's the main aim of ganking - is it not? It's all about the negative reaction...
There are quotes from individuals in this very thread who confirm this to be true, so it would probably be best if you check out the players who have confirmed this before you disagree with the sentiment of what I just wrote.

In sum, it is the player who "can't hack it" that are the more satisfying target. Despite the fact that it is nothing to do with "not being able to hack it" - that's just a thinly veiled insult - more to the point is that players like me just find it tedious to be ganked when I'm in a non-combat, non-combat engineered, non-fighter vessel when the ganker is one of a wing of combat optimised, combat engineered, fighter vessels. Just tedious, yawn.

Yours Aye

Mark H
 
Top