PvP is really making the open play miserable

Plus, in my opinion, it says a lot about someone's personality attacking defenseless ships without any reason.
That's exactly it. DEFENSELESS. In terms of understanding this term right (I'm a german gal), "defenseless" does NOT mean armed to the teeth only. As I understand the term "defenseless" it means without shielding either...or lag of skill to avoid dangerous situations (e.g. highwake-tactics).

And to be honest, as far as it concerns me. Flying in a shieldless ship in a potentially hostile environment is reckless and negligently.

But hey...maybe some of the poor souls in syria are enjoying the thrill of dancing on the streets with a sign around their necks telling: "FRAKK OFF ISIS"
 
Last edited:
Just been looking at the Elite Dangerous Code Of Conduct https://www.frontierstore.net/code-of-conduct


Actually there is quite a lot of scope within the code to control griefers and ganks. At the very start they make the point that 'Frontier Developments products and/or services and are designed to provide a friendly and welcoming atmosphere for all players.

Code of conduct violations are defined as 'behaviour that detracts from others enjoyment'.

There is even a specific described behaviour relating to mob-mentality griefers, although this is quantified in that it doesn't include standard player/group conflicts.

The 'rules', the 'social contract' does appear to have been considered in order to provide the scope for Frontier to do something, if they so chose.


So for the sake of clarity on my own humble opinion - the rules are fine. The majority of PvP and the players are fine, whatever role they take. But there are those intent on targeting new, inexperienced, occasional, or just not very good players and ruining their experience, exacerbated by the imbalance created when wings of commanders attack a single player. But not even all of these instances would be in themselves a problem.

It is the application of the rules that needs attention. Each reported incident of a breach of the code of conduct needs to be looked at, and the code applied consistently, firmly and fairly. Those commanders and squadrons repeatedly named in reports by different commanders should be highlighted for closer attention, and action taken accordingly.

From the perspective of players, who like me, feel concerned about the creeping rise of bullyish and thuggish behaviour within Open ('mob-mentality' in the code of conduct?), it is important that we are aware of the Elite Dangerous Code Of Conduct and report each and every incident so that ED can investigate. Unfortunately the code also prohibits us sharing any issues about how ED have dealt with our complaints - it would be interesting to know just how many times enforcement action has been taken for breaches of the code.

NB. interestingly combat logging isn't specifically mentioned in the code as an exploit either.
 
Just been looking at the Elite Dangerous Code Of Conduct https://www.frontierstore.net/code-of-conduct


Actually there is quite a lot of scope within the code to control griefers and ganks. At the very start they make the point that 'Frontier Developments products and/or services and are designed to provide a friendly and welcoming atmosphere for all players.

Code of conduct violations are defined as 'behaviour that detracts from others enjoyment'.

There is even a specific described behaviour relating to mob-mentality griefers, although this is quantified in that it doesn't include standard player/group conflicts.

The 'rules', the 'social contract' does appear to have been considered in order to provide the scope for Frontier to do something, if they so chose.


So for the sake of clarity on my own humble opinion - the rules are fine. The majority of PvP and the players are fine, whatever role they take. But there are those intent on targeting new, inexperienced, occasional, or just not very good players and ruining their experience, exacerbated by the imbalance created when wings of commanders attack a single player. But not even all of these instances would be in themselves a problem.

It is the application of the rules that needs attention. Each reported incident of a breach of the code of conduct needs to be looked at, and the code applied consistently, firmly and fairly. Those commanders and squadrons repeatedly named in reports by different commanders should be highlighted for closer attention, and action taken accordingly.

From the perspective of players, who like me, feel concerned about the creeping rise of bullyish and thuggish behaviour within Open ('mob-mentality' in the code of conduct?), it is important that we are aware of the Elite Dangerous Code Of Conduct and report each and every incident so that ED can investigate. Unfortunately the code also prohibits us sharing any issues about how ED have dealt with our complaints - it would be interesting to know just how many times enforcement action has been taken for breaches of the code.

NB. interestingly combat logging isn't specifically mentioned in the code as an exploit either.
I've already provided you with the opinions of the developers and Support Team. Make of it what you will, just please bear in mind that a minority of folks who share your opinion have been tryng to change the game to their own vision for 4 years, and Frontier have not moved an inch.

The Code of Conduct prohibits exploits, and the devs specifically called out Combat Logging as an exploit here:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/105778-“Combat-Logging”-Update
 
It's not about separating the 2. It's about spending real life hours to build something up for then some people coming along and pushing you back several hours. Especially as adults where gaming time isn't an easy commodity.

And again, I don't have anything against that being in the game. But the consequences should be more severe. That's all.

Don't get me wrong, I've never been killed by another player and build up more then enough to survive multiple rebuys. It's just the principle for me personally.


That sounds like more of an issue with your expectations and time management.
Take some responsibility, as an adult.

Video games are by definition a "waste of time".
If you don't want the added risk, just don't take it.
It really is that simple.

That doesn't mean people enjoying the game as it was designed are doing anything untoward.
That's nonsense.
 
I've already provided you with the opinions of the developers and Support Team. Make of it what you will, just please bear in mind that a minority of folks who share your opinion have been tryng to change the game to their own vision for 4 years, and Frontier have not moved an inch.

The Code of Conduct prohibits exploits, and the devs specifically called out Combat Logging as an exploit here:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/105778-“Combat-Logging”-Update
Thank you for highlighting that. It is from 2015 however. Did the mechanics of exiting and saving the game back then include the 15 second enforced delay?

I am also surprised that as this was mentioned in a thread, the code of conduct hasn't been updated to specifically include this. Frontier have made it clear within the code that they can update or change this without notice.
 
That sounds like more of an issue with your expectations and time management.
Take some responsibility, as an adult.

Video games are by definition a "waste of time".
If you don't want the added risk, just don't take it.
It really is that simple.

That doesn't mean people enjoying the game as it was designed are doing anything untoward.
That's nonsense.
I would say they are taking responsibility as an adult by trying to highlight an issue that is important to them.

I also don’t see the provenance in making issue about time management, expectations and defining video games as a waste of time. Surely this is subjective and irreverent to the point that was being made.
 
Like most other threads, the issue here is that there are widely different opinions on what qualifies as a gank or grief.

This has been going on since the beginning in the old Hotel California threads.

Frontier's (IMHO excellent) solution is to offer modes that all affect the BGS equally.

My point of view is that as a solution exists to the issues you mention - very broadly speaking improve at the game or choose a more appropriate mode, Frontier see their job as done.
 
I would say they are taking responsibility as an adult by trying to highlight an issue that is important to them.
Yes, and people often have very silly ideas about what is important.
Crying about something you have total control over isn't acting like an adult or taking responsibility.


I also don’t see the provenance in making issue about time management, expectations and defining video games as a waste of time. Surely this is subjective and irreverent to the point that was being made.

I didn't bring that up.
I responded to it.
It's all subjective.

So if you choose to frame things in a negative light, that's on you.
 
Hi Bob, yes absolutely. That’s why I can’t see how this would be classed as an exploit in the code of conduct, as it doesn’t lead to significant advantage.
It's been suggested by FDev that it's still not within the spirit intended.
The point you're overlooking is the real solution would be for FDEv to take control of your system, and not allow you to log out at all, or just auto kill your Cmdr.
But that's never going to happen obviously.
It's out of their hands really.

So, is it in the spirit of the rules?
No.
 
Last edited:
Pvp in open should stay as it is. If you don't want commanders attacking you, go to solo or join Mobius. I had fun with another commander trying to interdict me, i was a T-7 and he was a mamba. The interdiction lasted 5 minutes before he just gave up and let me win lol.
 
Thank you for highlighting that. It is from 2015 however. Did the mechanics of exiting and saving the game back then include the 15 second enforced delay?
Using the Menu-log 15 sec delay is acceptable. Sandro is specifically referring to exiting the game through task-kill or deliberately severing the network connection.

And yes, the post is from 2015 and their stance on the matter has not changed.

I am also surprised that as this was mentioned in a thread, the code of conduct hasn't been updated to specifically include this. Frontier have made it clear within the code that they can update or change this without notice.
The Code of Conduct hasn't been updated to call out any of the game's exploits. There's no need to - as long as the concept of "exploits are not allowed" is covered, Frontier can use their communications channels to define what is and isn't an exploit. Much more flexible and probably much less legal costs.
 
Yes, and people often have very silly ideas about what is important.
Crying about something you have total control over isn't acting like an adult or taking responsibility.

Hi Bob

Umm don’t think anyone is crying! Look, they are using the forums as they are intended to be used, to talk about what they feel are issues with ED.


I didn't bring that up.
I responded to it.
It's all subjective.

So if you choose to frame things in a negative light, that's on you.
Like most things in life, you have the ultimate control of not doing something. I think the common amongst all the threads, is that everyone has a vested interest in ED, they want to continue playing it and want to make it better according to how their view of it is. Otherwise they wouldn’t play it!

It may be that no one shares my opinion that some of the PvP behaviour is bullyish and thuggish, but That’s why there is a forum, to find the common opinions and to evolve the game.

It’s a fine balance, but belittling others opinions just because they are different to yours is not what we are on here to achieve.
 
Using the Menu-log 15 sec delay is acceptable. Sandro is specifically referring to exiting the game through task-kill or deliberately severing the network connection.



And yes, the post is from 2015 and their stance on the matter has not changed.



The Code of Conduct hasn't been updated to call out any of the game's exploits. There's no need to - as long as the concept of "exploits are not allowed" is covered, Frontier can use their communications channels to define what is and isn't an exploit. Much more flexible and probably much less legal costs.
Thanks for clarifying that. In that case I agree immediate disconnection of the network is an exploit, as it achieves the significant advantage as per the definition in the code.
 
Like most other threads, the issue here is that there are widely different opinions on what qualifies as a gank or grief.

This has been going on since the beginning in the old Hotel California threads.

Frontier's (IMHO excellent) solution is to offer modes that all affect the BGS equally.

My point of view is that as a solution exists to the issues you mention - very broadly speaking improve at the game or choose a more appropriate mode, Frontier see their job as done.
I’m not actually a million miles away from your point of view.

The vast bulk of PvP interaction is not an issue. I think a minority are the issue, which is why this does crop up in one form or another throughout the years.

I think when frontier suggest you go to solo or private because you’re not happy with a certain behaviour in open, it is just avoidance rather than properly investigating and tackling reported issues head on. By doing this I think bullying and unfair behaviour in open has grown (albeit still a minority). I think it’s perfectly acceptable for a player who wants to play in open, to want to moderate and control behaviour that is ruining their experience of open, and to not always be told there is a nice safe mode you can go to.

In fairness to Frontier the game is such that it is probably very difficult to differentiate acceptable behaviour from unacceptable in open, because of the types of roles players can take on.
 
My position is that anything permitted by the game is allowed, short of exploits, in Open.

Knowing humanity there will be cases of harrassment, abusive language and so on.

Nothing described so far imho would be reportable.
 
The Code of Conduct hasn't been updated to call out any of the game's exploits. There's no need to - as long as the concept of "exploits are not allowed" is covered, Frontier can use their communications channels to define what is and isn't an exploit. Much more flexible and probably much less legal costs.
The closest we had to that was Zac square-hole round pegging stream sniping as harrasment, after a few of their preferred twitch streamers got sniped (yet oddly ignoring it outside of the chosen few).
 
Top Bottom