Simple Solution to Gankers versus Carebears

Yep. It's always the game's fault, isn't it?
Everyone here knows that video games are the only medium that denies you content if you're bad at playing it, right?

It's not like watching a movie and then a pop quiz happens a hour in where if you fail the movie shuts off.

Games are a bit unique in that regard. Everyone here is aware and OK with this fundamental feature of the medium, yes?
 
Im still lost as to why the current system needs to change.

I don't much like the moded system to begin with but it already allows freedom of choice.

Having a PvE only mode seems to be based around the agenda of purposely trying to remove PvP as a playstyle from the game entirely. Putting all the PvPers in one mode, given that we are in the minority, would result in us all getting very bored, very fast. Given how large the galaxy is and how hard it is already to find people on some platforms it would only cause everyone who does enjoy competative gameplay to leave simply because either they can't find one another, or that they get sick of fighting the same group of people day in day out.

Even the idea indermines the concept of a galaxy wide civilization in which many career paths are avalible.

I came back for a second post because I'm tired of the "PvPers are real life sadists who want to drop kick puppies and children" logic.

Leave it be and stop being so uptight about getting shot at in a game that by design, allows free and unsolicited PvP. Even if you don't like it, thats the way it is, and my good god, I hope thats the way that it stays.
 
so... I have a question for you all. What would you do if you saw a random signal source pop up in a system labeled player distress call, put forth by a player who had report crimes against me turned on and was attacked by a griefer/ganker. Let's say that this hypothetical player could hold their own in that fight until some patrolling player dropped out at the signal source and offered aid.

In short, I feel we have most of the tools to combat this issue already, we're just missing one crucial factor, open markers for attacked ships. could realy open the enforcer style and help more people find the PVP they're looking for.
 
Flaw 1 is a design flaw caused by very bad balancing.
Assuming 2 players of equal skills, both flying ships built for PvP, the player in the unengineered ship doesn't have a chance against the player in the fully engineered ship. At least that's my impression.
Which IS - exactly as it should be.
 
Isn't what?
Let me clarify. Skills between pilots being equal the guy in the fully engineered ship should absolutely WIN every TIME. EVERY - TIME!

Balance SUCKS! Balance is boring! Balance is for chess players, not a semi simulation of space combat.
 
Last edited:
I am wondering about this approach since Nobody has even mentioned it:
There are systems where you have to have a permit to get in...
It should(?) be possible to FDev to develop systems where permits have restrictions built into them...
example: Crom permit... gotta be allied with a faction that is basically a pirate faction.... the only station has only 1 rare that is worth having... and it is illegal almost everywhere...
this would be an ideal location for anarchists and others who prey upon traders who want the illegal rarity. Honest traders who get the permit and then venture in Will Be Very Aware that they are putting their ships and themselves in Grave danger in the hopes of getting that rarity and making a huge profit.
Other systems could be just the opposite where those who earn the permit and then violate the terms of the permit are punished immediately for those violations... make it clear when the permit is issued... what can and cannot be done to keep the permit when the violation occurs... the permit and access is revoked. I believe that players will segregate themselves without a lot of bellyaching about the conditions of their ships or wallets.The permit idea will also create a indepth story line of brave captains and foolhardy captains and villans who will dismantle your ship just as soon look at you....
Granted... the system will work only if the permit is a one time permit... revoked.. no chance of getting it back.
 
@yah-ta-hey: Those are great ideas and really sound like fun. They'd add mucho depth with the indirect benefit of adding content based entirely on player strategy and tactics in response to a system's restrictions. (y)
 
Those who argue for open only, or against a dedicated PvE global option, must have their own agenda, surely?
Wether one is arguing for a fourth mode, against a forth mode, more Engineering less engineering, more consequences, fewer consequences, no CQC rank displayed in the right pane, longer logout timers, no log out timers, chicken on a salad, malt in their chocolate shake, or whatever....the agenda is pretty much always to have the best experience the individual in question can.

The problems occur when one party cannot fathom why the other would prefer the things they do, so jump to the conclusion that the very preference is an attack.

I wish Frontier would adopt a policy and game restriction to complete all training videos and have a certain amount of credits, achieving your "pilots license" before being allowed to fly in Open.
A bit heavy handed for my tastes, but a minimum level of competence would probably cut down on a lot of complaints about a lot of topics.

This is a typical frequent misconception. Gankers are probably better than you regardless what ship you're in . Because they do combat all the time. They engage with competitive PvP amongst each other as well as trashing carebears. Simply put they have the skill, you have the pointless moral outrage and excuses
Not playing a ganker, but nearly every time another CMDR has attacked my CMDR over a bounty, CMDRs were shot down...just not mine.

Indeed, about the only kinds of encounters where I regularly see CMDRs get shot down are these; most casual bounty hunters that would try to yank a veteran CMDR have to be ignorant of defensive and escape possibilities in general to think they have a serious chance of collecting that bounty.

This was just as common, if not more so, before Engineers, because shorter TTKs gave the random opportunistic BH types less time to react, while their targets often were never at any real risk.

I dont think so, when transposable skills are far less important than understanding how grind works in this game.
This is not really the case, certainly not in the context of surviving an attack.

I think many a pvp player would gladly go back to a time before engineering.
Indeed.

And these threads would still crop up, because Engineering has always favored defense.

Also, Open-only ironman mode.

In short, I feel we have most of the tools to combat this issue already, we're just missing one crucial factor, open markers for attacked ships. could realy open the enforcer style and help more people find the PVP they're looking for.
You're overlooking some very fundamental requirements...namely reliable instancing (those playing criminals can block people too), solid rule enforcement (most of the combat loggers I've encountered started the fight), and gameplay mechanisms that allow CMDRs to be tracked and then cornered (even with a reliable destination marker high-wakes virtually ensure escape). All the incentives in the world won't inspire people to attempt what will still be a lost cause in most cases.

The exact same mechanisms that give less experience CMDRs a fair chance at not getting shot down virtually ensure escape for the more experienced ones, including most of the effective gankers.
 
Wether one is arguing for a fourth mode, against a forth mode, more Engineering less engineering, more consequences, fewer consequences, no CQC rank displayed in the right pane, longer logout timers, no log out timers, chicken on a salad, malt in their chocolate shake, or whatever....the agenda is pretty much always to have the best experience the individual in question can.

The problems occur when one party cannot fathom why the other would prefer the things they do, so jump to the conclusion that the very preference is an attack.



A bit heavy handed for my tastes, but a minimum level of competence would probably cut down on a lot of complaints about a lot of topics.



Not playing a ganker, but nearly every time another CMDR has attacked my CMDR over a bounty, CMDRs were shot down...just not mine.

Indeed, about the only kinds of encounters where I regularly see CMDRs get shot down are these; most casual bounty hunters that would try to yank a veteran CMDR have to be ignorant of defensive and escape possibilities in general to think they have a serious chance of collecting that bounty.

This was just as common, if not more so, before Engineers, because shorter TTKs gave the random opportunistic BH types less time to react, while their targets often were never at any real risk.



This is not really the case, certainly not in the context of surviving an attack.



Indeed.

And these threads would still crop up, because Engineering has always favored defense.

Also, Open-only ironman mode.



You're overlooking some very fundamental requirements...namely reliable instancing (those playing criminals can block people too), solid rule enforcement (most of the combat loggers I've encountered started the fight), and gameplay mechanisms that allow CMDRs to be tracked and then cornered (even with a reliable destination marker high-wakes virtually ensure escape). All the incentives in the world won't inspire people to attempt what will still be a lost cause in most cases.

The exact same mechanisms that give less experience CMDRs a fair chance at not getting shot down virtually ensure escape for the more experienced ones, including most of the effective gankers.
you have fair points there. simply shot out into the black and hit empty space lol
 
Top Bottom