Griefers at the Engineers

Yeah, you play the game and it's perfectly fine. If you choose to fly solo/private when you haven't got any weapons mounted feel free to do so, it's probably better for everyone.
 
I didnt say that, i know there is alot of diferent pvp players, as there is alot of diferent types of traders and explorers, i just stated my personnel experience, wich is not so irrelevant since i find alot of ppl that have same experience and views, and that was what i stated, if that in anyway shape or form touches a nerve on some ppl, i cant imagine why.
It doesn't touch a nerve. I'm explaining to you why your experience is functionally and academically irrelevant. Just because it's relevant to you personally, doesn't mean it's relevant to anyone else. Nor does anyone have any reason to believe that you have had this experience as you claim, nor the claim that people you've spoken to have it.

We cant and should not take the few for the all, but some ppl really go too far, and those are the ppl that run players away from Open and into Solo.
(lets just say that my 1st few days in this game were in open and i had to go solo to get anywhere since my sidewinder was getting wrecked as soon as it left the spaceport by gankers wich despite even "talking with them on chat" didnt made them stop, now imagine with other new players what effect that might have...
I unlocked the federal corvette last week and ran some days in open with it, in a semi-combat build, and the ones that engaged me all ran as soon as things didnt looked easy for them.
I agree. Some people do go too far, and that needs to be balanced. But people running from open? We have data that proves more people play in open than any other mode.

We all know or should know it only takes 1 bad apple to rotten the others.
No, it doesn't. Not at all. You throw that apple away, and if the others are fine, you keep them. What you're doing is called throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Solutions for the blunt gank problem exist, not hard in my view, but are ppl interested in that they are implemented, for what i read, most arent, so i wont bother u anymore and refrain from posting further here, no point.
The problem is, you're telling people what you want, but you're not listening to what they want. We know what you want. You've made it clear. We're explaining why we don't want it, and what we do want, and you're not even paying attention. I personally made a whole post earlier about disabling all weapons within the no fire zone of a station or base, or alternatively, just making all players invulnerable, unless they're scanned with crimes or illegal cargo on them. I'm on your side with the 'people go too far' bit. But I'm not going to start suggesting punishment of all players for the crimes of a few.

I mostly do exploration. A few months ago, maybe not even that long, I was setting up a new Krait Phantom for exploration. I was on my way to Jameson Base, from Jameson Memorial, to do light weight life support, sensors, and surface scanner engineering, when I saw an FDL in supercruise. Knowing what that might mean, I targeted it, and noticed straight away it was turning in my direction. So I turned in his, scanned him, got the player's name, and checked his loadout. An FDL with an interdictor is probably a ganker, so I emergency dropped from supercruise to high wake to the nearest system. However, because of the possibility that I might be mistaken, I didn't high wake the moment my FSD cooled down. I started boosting in the direction of a system I had targeted to keep my speed up, and turned off FA in preparation for an attempt to gank me.

Sure enough, the FDL landed, Archer announced 'scan detected', and just as the player opened fire at me, I was already charging my FSD and throwing my ship into an FA-off crazy Ivan spiral with full left roll lock, and full right rudder. His beam laser hit me once, and the rest of his shots came nowhere near me, before I was in the next system over.

Then, because I like living on the edge, I decided that the gankers were probably focused on traffic coming out of Jameson Memorial. So I went straight back into the system, landed at Jameson Base without trouble, and started taunting local. After some friendly smack, I actually ended up have a nice chat with Harry Potter himself about how torpedoes work. Apparently, the guy had tried using them on my Krait, despite the fact I was doing well over 400m/s, making him a bit of a twit, cuz you can't hit someone with torpedoes if they're doing more than 250. Anyway, I digress.

It was one of the most fun experiences I've had in this game, and if it wasn't for gankers, I would be robbed of that. Do you know what? It was actually more fun than any of the ganks I've performed myself. Now, whenever I do engineering, I seek out the gankers. They're really hard to find, though. Really rare. That's my experience. I hardly ever see them at all, and I do a LOT of engineering. I love theorycrafting, so I build a lot of experimental crap, and engineer it all. Then I test it out, and move on to my next build.

Without gankers, I would not have had that one experience with them. And as I stated, it's hard enough to find more of it. My experience is the complete opposite of yours. Is it any more or less relevant than yours? No. It's just as relevant. Or, irrelevant, in this case, because my experience is a population sample of ONE. One player's experience is simply not enough to qualify an accurate assessment. But if we are going on personal experience, then according to mine, there aren't enough gankers, and we need more.

That's what I want.
 
Plus, we know that roughly ten minutes later Darth has already caught up with Princess Leia's ship, is torturing her and forces her to watch as the Death Star annihilates her home planet. Boo-yah!
Hi, Star Wars nerd here.

http://www.swgalaxymap.com/search/

According to the map, Tatooine is at best speed that a Corellian Corvette can achieve at least 2 to 3 days from Scarif in hyperspace. So no, not ten minutes.

And then, from Tatooine to Alderaan (assuming the trip was made on the Devastator, that's easily another week and a half at least.

Search 'Scarif' and look 'south west' to find Tatooine as well. Alderaan is near the core, 'east' of Coruscant.

Sorry, couldn't help myself.
 
Last edited:
I realize now how poor I am at incorporating the view of folks playing the original Elite. Elite: Dangerous is all I've known so the Thunderdome like aspect I seem to see everywhere would naturally be easier for me without the history. I'm not even talking about just PvP, but the churning, boiling politics of the Bubble is something to behold.
And to be fair, being familiar with 35+ years of the game's history is not something that should be required. It's just something that us old-schoolers come with by default, and it's bound to colour some of our attitudes towards ED.

There is an equally valid argument, given the sometimes tenuous links between the various incarnations of Elite and its sequels, that there is no fully agreed history to the galaxy and that everything prior to 2014 should be thrown in the bin, the franchise effectively rebooted, and that whatever course ED takes should be the new benchmark even if the entire galaxy turns into a giant Battle Royale. Obviously that's not a course I would personally favour for reasons already outlined, but as arguments go it does have some meat on its bones especially given the 20 year gap between First Encounters and ED. But because David Braben and the people he made custodian of Elite's legacy -- both FD staff and fiction licencees alike -- have already cherry-picked, reinterpreted and retconned much of what went before rather than just torching it all, it's always going to be there.

It's one of the reasons why I still think the Modes were a genius move. When all else fails they offer a means for players who favour the chaotic Thunderdome experience (I like that analogy BTW) to have it, while those who would rather maintain a greater sense of continuity with the earlier games can do so either alone or with other similarly-minded players. As I've said elsewhere, I would rather those different experiences be wholly the result of player choices in the game (where to go, what to carry, how to behave) rather than something selected on a menu, but unless there are some radical changes to the game's structure the Modes are the fallback. Or the backstop, to use a term that's in vogue at the moment. They're a club rather than a scalpel, but they enable a larger number of people to play a version of the game that's closer to their personal ideal than if it was Open only.

The real problems start when people can't accept that, and insist that some ideals are more ideal than others. It's a trap I used to often fall into because I was waiting for FD to tune the game more towards the vision they outlined back in 2012/2013, in which player interactions would be modulated more by galactic location and politics than by where the largest number of hollow squares could be found. Once I realised that wasn't going to happen, it was easier to accept that the three Modes effectively provide for three different game styles sitting atop the same data and engine.

As far as threat level goes, open is 99% identical to solo in 99% of systems. People simply remember the one time they were randomly attacked at a CG instead of the hundred times they weren't. This in turn colors one's entire perception of open. Then you have entire sub-communities of people reinforcing this bias within their echo chamber, and bam!
There is always amplification going on when these threads appear. And ironically, the more people who post to point it out the more visible the thread title remains, so there's something of a self-fulfilment thing that happens as well.

As for the numbers, I could be "that guy" and ask you to justify the 99%, the one and the hundred, but I won't because that's not going to get us anywhere. What I will point out, wholly anecdotally from my own experience which is admittedly quite an edge case, is that the "99% identical in 99% of systems" offers me absolutely no additional gameplay or entertainment beyond what I enjoy in the other Modes.

I'm a player who does not engage in PVP and rarely interacts with other CMDRs at all beyond O7s and general chit-chat. If I'm flying my exploration account 20,000ly from anywhere, Solo is exactly like Open. If I'm flying my bubble account and I want to see other human pilots, PGs offer the same opportunities for interaction as Open albeit from smaller pools of players. So the argument for Open -- for me -- boils down to, "It's exactly the same experience as the other modes, with a very tiny but non-zero chance of losing a bunch of progress to a random attack." As sales pitches go, it's not exactly floating my boat.

I doubt my specific play style is representative of a huge percentage of ED players, but I probably share some Venn space with a fair number, especially those who eschew PVP. Open has to offer more than "Basically the same but with occasional random death" to appeal to non-PVP players, and all it really offers them right now is a larger pool of players. It has become the de facto "PVP mode" whether FD intended it or not.

Open Powerplay bonuses and Open-Only Powerplay were intriguing ideas that might have offered something within the limited scope of the current game mechanics, but nothing came of them. Short of offering actual PVP missions on the bulletin boards, with commensurately unique rewards for participation, I can't imagine what the game could entice me with that would encourage me into Open. Random PVP does not appeal to me (at least not in this game), random ganking in contextually inappropriate locations even less so.

That's why I found it relatively easy to give up on Open once I'd accepted that FD were happy with the status quo. And I can't really blame them for that choice, once it became clear that many of the original design Proposals were not achievable. For players who want the no-holds-barred Thunderdome experience, ED is awesome. For those who just want a 21st century version of the Elite galaxy in which to lose themselves, it's equally spectacular. And as long as all player types keep buying the game/extras and funding the game's survival, everyone wins.
 
There is always amplification going on when these threads appear. And ironically, the more people who post to point it out the more visible the thread title remains, so there's something of a self-fulfilment thing that happens as well.

As for the numbers, I could be "that guy" and ask you to justify the 99%, the one and the hundred, but I won't because that's not going to get us anywhere. What I will point out, wholly anecdotally from my own experience which is admittedly quite an edge case, is that the "99% identical in 99% of systems" offers me absolutely no additional gameplay or entertainment beyond what I enjoy in the other Modes.

I'm a player who does not engage in PVP and rarely interacts with other CMDRs at all beyond O7s and general chit-chat. If I'm flying my exploration account 20,000ly from anywhere, Solo is exactly like Open. If I'm flying my bubble account and I want to see other human pilots, PGs offer the same opportunities for interaction as Open albeit from smaller pools of players. So the argument for Open -- for me -- boils down to, "It's exactly the same experience as the other modes, with a very tiny but non-zero chance of losing a bunch of progress to a random attack." As sales pitches go, it's not exactly floating my boat.

I doubt my specific play style is representative of a huge percentage of ED players, but I probably share some Venn space with a fair number, especially those who eschew PVP. Open has to offer more than "Basically the same but with occasional random death" to appeal to non-PVP players, and all it really offers them right now is a larger pool of players. It has become the de facto "PVP mode" whether FD intended it or not.

Open Powerplay bonuses and Open-Only Powerplay were intriguing ideas that might have offered something within the limited scope of the current game mechanics, but nothing came of them. Short of offering actual PVP missions on the bulletin boards, with commensurately unique rewards for participation, I can't imagine what the game could entice me with that would encourage me into Open. Random PVP does not appeal to me (at least not in this game), random ganking in contextually inappropriate locations even less so.

That's why I found it relatively easy to give up on Open once I'd accepted that FD were happy with the status quo. And I can't really blame them for that choice, once it became clear that many of the original design Proposals were not achievable. For players who want the no-holds-barred Thunderdome experience, ED is awesome. For those who just want a 21st century version of the Elite galaxy in which to lose themselves, it's equally spectacular. And as long as all player types keep buying the game/extras and funding the game's survival, everyone wins.

It sounds like you've found the mode in which you're happy. More power to you!
 
And to be fair, being familiar with 35+ years of the game's history is not something that should be required. It's just something that us old-schoolers come with by default, and it's bound to colour some of our attitudes towards ED.

...
What an amazingly balanced post!!
+1
If Open only would be populated by more of such guys I'd certainly playing in Open more frequently. Whereas of now it feels pretty pointless most of the times...
 
You're not making a very strong case. It's just a game homie.
I suppose that if someone buys a property that you wanted in Monopoly, that person is a harasser and a jerk as well?
I'm not your homie, sorry, and yeah, of course it's just a game.
You got quite the defensive stance given that you're just innocently playing the game your way... :D
And you have quite a nasty and hateful stance considering it's just a video game homie. 😃
Jesus, what a piece of jerk (Sir Ganksalot) !!!!!!!!!!

Even here, on the forums you can't force yourself to act like a human being??????

YOU WERE ASKED NOT TO CALL THE PERSON YOU'RE TALKING TO A "HOMIE". AND WHAT DO YOU DO IN YOUR REPLY???

This whole thread is a joke!!!!!!

I have zero interest of gankers/griefers motives, or what kind of RL people they are, or that we're talking video game here and that one consider ganking is a normal thing, as it's within the game's rules. Are you people serious????!!!

IS IT THE FACT WE'RE INTERACTING TO EACH OTHER VIA INTERNET THAT ALLOW PEOPLE TO BE UNPOLITE TOWARDS OTHER HUMAN BEINGS??? what?????!!!!

I can't believe what I'm seing here in most of the posts in this thread. I'd very like for all of us here to have the obligation to sign each post with our own in-game name, as I would very like to block/ignore most of you people.
 
Jesus, what a piece of jerk (Sir Ganksalot) !!!!!!!!!!

Even here, on the forums you can't force yourself to act like a human being??????

YOU WERE ASKED NOT TO CALL THE PERSON YOU'RE TALKING TO A "HOMIE". AND WHAT DO YOU DO IN YOUR REPLY???

This whole thread is a joke!!!!!!

I have zero interest of gankers/griefers motives, or what kind of RL people they are, or that we're talking video game here and that one consider ganking is a normal thing, as it's within the game's rules. Are you people serious????!!!

IS IT THE FACT WE'RE INTERACTING TO EACH OTHER VIA INTERNET THAT ALLOW PEOPLE TO BE UNPOLITE TOWARDS OTHER HUMAN BEINGS??? what?????!!!!

I can't believe what I'm seing here in most of the posts in this thread. I'd very like for all of us here to have the obligation to sign each post with our own in-game name, as I would very like to block/ignore most of you people.
Umm.... no.
 
Hi, Star Wars nerd here.

http://www.swgalaxymap.com/search/

According to the map, Tatooine is at best speed that a Corellian Corvette can achieve at least 2 to 3 days from Scarif in hyperspace. So no, not ten minutes.

And then, from Tatooine to Alderaan (assuming the trip was made on the Devastator, that's easily another week and a half at least.

Search 'Scarif' and look 'south west' to find Tatooine as well. Alderaan is near the core, 'east' of Coruscant.

Sorry, couldn't help myself.
Way to suck the funny out of the room, CMDR.

:ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:
Jesus, what a piece of jerk (Sir Ganksalot) !!!!!!!!!!

Even here, on the forums you can't force yourself to act like a human being??????

YOU WERE ASKED NOT TO CALL THE PERSON YOU'RE TALKING TO A "HOMIE". AND WHAT DO YOU DO IN YOUR REPLY???

This whole thread is a joke!!!!!!

I have zero interest of gankers/griefers motives, or what kind of RL people they are, or that we're talking video game here and that one consider ganking is a normal thing, as it's within the game's rules. Are you people serious????!!!

IS IT THE FACT WE'RE INTERACTING TO EACH OTHER VIA INTERNET THAT ALLOW PEOPLE TO BE UNPOLITE TOWARDS OTHER HUMAN BEINGS??? what?????!!!!

I can't believe what I'm seing here in most of the posts in this thread. I'd very like for all of us here to have the obligation to sign each post with our own in-game name, as I would very like to block/ignore most of you people.
Same name in game my homie. Block away.
 
Let's be clear. Ganking in popular systems is only a thing because of p2p microinstancing. If we had regional megaservers where 40 players could simultaneously instance, a wing of 3 "gankers", however geared up would behave very differently when facing 30 players. Currently the snare and cripple mechanics so deadly in the current instancing architecture would become the bane of gankers instead of the current targets. Ecologic self-policing could be a thing if FDEV weren't such a dumpster fire and dedicated to building this thing on the cheap.
 
Jesus, what a piece of jerk (Sir Ganksalot) !!!!!!!!!!

Even here, on the forums you can't force yourself to act like a human being??????

YOU WERE ASKED NOT TO CALL THE PERSON YOU'RE TALKING TO A "HOMIE". AND WHAT DO YOU DO IN YOUR REPLY???

This whole thread is a joke!!!!!!

I have zero interest of gankers/griefers motives, or what kind of RL people they are, or that we're talking video game here and that one consider ganking is a normal thing, as it's within the game's rules. Are you people serious????!!!

IS IT THE FACT WE'RE INTERACTING TO EACH OTHER VIA INTERNET THAT ALLOW PEOPLE TO BE UNPOLITE TOWARDS OTHER HUMAN BEINGS??? what?????!!!!

I can't believe what I'm seing here in most of the posts in this thread. I'd very like for all of us here to have the obligation to sign each post with our own in-game name, as I would very like to block/ignore most of you people.


No need to yell...

Seems, well, rude.

:D
 
Let's be clear. Ganking in popular systems is only a thing because of p2p microinstancing. If we had regional megaservers where 40 players could simultaneously instance, a wing of 3 "gankers", however geared up would behave very differently when facing 30 players. Currently the snare and cripple mechanics so deadly in the current instancing architecture would become the bane of gankers instead of the current targets. Ecologic self-policing could be a thing if FDEV weren't such a dumpster fire and dedicated to building this thing on the cheap.
Nah man, gankers would love that mega server structure where they could get their hands on you enmasse. If something like that were implemented, the ensuing PvE white knight massacre would look something like this:
 
Jesus, what a piece of jerk (Sir Ganksalot) !!!!!!!!!!

Even here, on the forums you can't force yourself to act like a human being??????

YOU WERE ASKED NOT TO CALL THE PERSON YOU'RE TALKING TO A "HOMIE". AND WHAT DO YOU DO IN YOUR REPLY???

This whole thread is a joke!!!!!!

I have zero interest of gankers/griefers motives, or what kind of RL people they are, or that we're talking video game here and that one consider ganking is a normal thing, as it's within the game's rules. Are you people serious????!!!

IS IT THE FACT WE'RE INTERACTING TO EACH OTHER VIA INTERNET THAT ALLOW PEOPLE TO BE UNPOLITE TOWARDS OTHER HUMAN BEINGS??? what?????!!!!

I can't believe what I'm seing here in most of the posts in this thread. I'd very like for all of us here to have the obligation to sign each post with our own in-game name, as I would very like to block/ignore most of you people.
ROFL I'm a jerk because I continued to call someone with a nasty attitude "homie"? Ok....

The irony, hypocrisy and cringe is strong with this one.
 
Top Bottom