MarcOmegaSome of your experience can probably be attributed to blocking and the implementation of instancing. If even one of the gankers that you evaded decided to block you as a waste of their time, because you evaded, then you will likely not instance with any of the other players that they are friends with either. That is exactly why PvP players complain so much about the block function, because of the way that it creates cascade blocks and inherited blocks among a larger group of players than just the specific players that were actually blocked.

Sakashiro

MarcOmegaSome of your experience can probably be attributed to blocking and the implementation of instancing. If even one of the gankers that you evaded decided to block you as a waste of their time, because you evaded, then you will likely not instance with any of the other players that they are friends with either. That is exactly why PvP players complain so much about the block function, because of the way that it creates cascade blocks and inherited blocks among a larger group of players than just the specific players that were actually blocked.

While this might be playing a part, I still see plenty of gankers in supercruise when I go to Deciat. I'm just getting the impression that I get targeted less frequently.

On the other hand, I failed to get into the Hollatja instance where Tony was doing the "seal clubbing"...

SakashiroIt would be ironic if gankers blocked each other from ganking me. Not much I can do about that, I guess.

Sakashiro

ArtifactHunter_

Amata LireinWhen Mittani and GoonSwarm learned about it they started hunting him

I feel like that should be a bannable offense, but, unfortunately, I suppose they technically didn't break any in-game rules. However, trying to convince someone to kill themself is a criminal offense in many countries, so they may have broken real laws.

I guess it depends on how they learned about it and whether they could tell that it was serious.

Playing a multiplayer game, especially one in which virtual violence is a normal occurrence, probably wasn't an ideal approach to therapy.

Rebecca Hail

Sakashiro

ArtifactHunter_

I feel like that should be a bannable offense, but, unfortunately, I suppose they technically didn't break any in-game rules. However, trying to convince someone to kill themself is a criminal offense in many countries, so they may have broken real laws.

I guess it depends on how they learned about it and whether they could tell that it was serious.

Playing a multiplayer game, especially one in which virtual violence is a normal occurrence, probably wasn't an ideal approach to therapy.

I'm usually more in the camp of "open is open season", but that isn't just "not an ideal approach to therapy", it's a crime. How they learned it and whether they could tell that it was serious have nothing to do with it.

If someone learn that someone else is suicidal and the first thing they think is: "Let's test how far I can push them before they actually do it", they belong behind bars for a couple of years.

As for it not being a bannable offense, that doesn't matter either. When it comes to online games the player themselves owns nothing, not even their account and the company behind the game can choose to ban for whatever reason. Additionally to that I'm fairly certain that pretty much every ToS states that you're not allowed to breach or attempt to breach laws.

Sorry for the rant but hearing something like that just makes me a bit mad.

Rebecca HailI'm usually more in the camp of "open is open season", but that isn't just "not an ideal approach to therapy", it's a crime. How they learned it and whether they could tell that it was serious have nothing to do with it.

If someone learn that someone else is suicidal and the first thing they think is: "Let's test how far I can push them before they actually do it", they belong behind bars for a couple of years.

As for it not being a bannable offense, that doesn't matter either. When it comes to online games the player themselves owns nothing, not even their account and the company behind the game can choose to ban for whatever reason. Additionally to that I'm fairly certain that pretty much every ToS states that you're not allowed to breach or attempt to breach laws.

Sorry for the rant but hearing something like that just makes me a bit mad.

Sakashiro

MarcOmegaSome of your experience can probably be attributed to blocking and the implementation of instancing. If even one of the gankers that you evaded decided to block you as a waste of their time, because you evaded, then you will likely not instance with any of the other players that they are friends with either. That is exactly why PvP players complain so much about the block function, because of the way that it creates cascade blocks and inherited blocks among a larger group of players than just the specific players that were actually blocked.

While this might be playing a part, I still see plenty of gankers in supercruise when I go to Deciat. I'm just getting the impression that I get targeted less frequently.

On the other hand, I failed to get into the Hollatja instance where Tony was doing the "seal clubbing"...

MarcOmega

Sakashiro

Since I started playing in open, I've been sending friend requests to anyone who tried to gank me. Very few of those were denied. I wasn't sure if that would increase my chance of getting ganked because now everyone can see the star system I'm in, so people could easily hunt me down if they wanted to. But none of that happened. In fact I think it decreased the risk, to the point that these days I can even supercruise through Deciat for extended periods of time without any interdictions happening (except by NPCs).

Gank evasion can be learned, and I would argue that it offers greater excitement and a sense of achievement than most other activities in the game. Also worth mentioning is the "Gank Evasion Academy" discord where gankers share all the info one needs to survive gank attempts, and even offer training sessions. By now I've survived so many ganks (including some 3v1) that I consider my ship pretty much gank-proof, and many of the folks who helped me get to that point are gankers themselves.

Some of your experience can probably be attributed to blocking and the implementation of instancing. If even one of the gankers that you evaded decided to block you as a waste of their time, because you evaded, then you will likely not instance with any of the other players that they are friends with either. That is exactly why PvP players complain so much about the block function, because of the way that it creates cascade blocks and inherited blocks among a larger group of players than just the specific players that were actually blocked.

MarcOmega

Zentzlb


"You just have their best interests at heart." As far as I am concerned it is in everyone's best interest. Id much rather be fighting lawfuls with engineered ships than clubbing noobs.

That is really the primary point.  If you would rather be fighting lawful's, there is absolutely no reason to be clubbing newbs in the first place.  Clubbing newbs does not HELP your desired role in any way.  And spare the me the tired "I am just trying to motivate them to 'git gud' speech."  Trying to say that a ganker serves any purpose in encouraging players to engage in PvP is like saying that an effective marketing tactic for a guy running a dojo is to run around punching people in the face and then telling them they should join his dojo to learn self defense.  

Approaching newbs with actual encouragement and assistance, helping them to rack up successes in the game, encouraging them to learn new tactics, etc is much more likely to encourage new players to embrace PvP.  Smacking them down in a completely one-sided fight and harvesting the salt is not going to encourage them to do anything other than, leave the game/switch to solo/pg.  Legitimate PvP'ers should be denouncing the griefer/ganker as a dishonorable player, refusing to associate with them, declaring yourself to be apart from them.  Even "bad guys" who engage in piracy and other forms of PvP should be denouncing gankers as beneath them.  

And again, I will point out that it makes no difference to me one way or the other.  As much as I enjoy the positive interactions with commanders in ED, I can find that just as readily in Mobius PG than I am likely to find it in Open.  Since I play PvE, my enjoyment is not dependent on others in the game.  I would think that the PvP members, specifically, would be more apt to focus on ways to actually encourage players to play in Open and engage in legitimate PvP, weird how it seems that is just not the case.

And I am not painting all PvP players with a broad brush, but between the toxic ganker/griefer community and the apologists for those same members, and adding in the PvP'ers that tolerate/condone that antisocial behavior,  and then adding in the "legitimate PvP groups" that use loaded terms like carebears, and you are all your own worst enemy when it comes to the game.  I have never seen a worst set of ambassadors to a specific and minority version of gameplay in any game, although I imagine there are more toxic games that I have just not taken part in.

The reality, unfortunately, is that there are simply not enough of you. PvP is a very vocal minority of ED and that is me being generous.  If we subtract the toxic ganker/griefer crowd, it gets even smaller.  So, I get why it is that most of you are loathe to denounce the more toxic of your crowd but the fact is that it makes you your own worst enemy.  

What your crowd should have been lobbying FDev for, from the very beginning, was an actual PvP flag.  Let those that want to engage or who want to be engaged by other players declare themselves openly.  At least that way, it would have been possible to actually address some of your other complaints.  For instance, setting the PvP flag could have removed the ability to turn crimes on, so that unscrupulous PvP'ers couldn't use that shady tactic.  FDev could have increased the menu log timeout for players with that flag set to make it last longer.  FDev could have implemented an increased timeout for lost net connections in conjunction with that flag to combat CLogging. It might have even improved instancing as they could have implemented likely instancing between PvP'ers in the game to make it more likely to encounter other PvP players.

But, every time that suggestion has come from the PvE crowd, all I hear from PvP'ers is "carebear."  Forget how it might benefit your gameplay, obviously, we can't do anything at all that would detract from the ability of gankers to club seals.  

Technically, at least some of the issues could have been addressed already. Much like Mobius created an extremely large group of players for PvE, it was certainly possible for the PvP community to do the exact same thing for PvP. That would have, in all likelihood, handled the instancing issues that are so prevalent. And it would have focused PvP players on other players that were there for that same purpose.

So, I will again impart my own opinion.  Play the game the way you want to and don't fall for any BS from any other player that suggests that you should play in a different way than you actually enjoy.  The secret to really enjoying ED is to play your own way, make your own path and don't let anyone else get in your way.

ZentzlbYou are kind of missing the point of this game. I hear so many people complaining that gankers dont get punished for their actions, it is up to the player base to punish the gankers. If half the people I hear complaining actually learned how to fight and joined together against the outlaws the galaxy would be a much safer place. Saying "gankers bad" on reddit or on Inara or on the forums does nothing for anyone. Here go join the fight.

ZentzlbAside from that, bad game mechanics have lead to the "ganking problem" if you want to call it that. Most traders and miners will just combat log instead of handing over 10t of cargo which has lead to almost every pirate giving up on piracy to become a ganker. The name of the game is killing the ship before it can log. Ironically clogging almost never saves noobs, the most clogs I get are from developed players flying corvettes condas and cutters. For example of the large ships I engaged 'legitimately' in the CZs during the last community goal, almost 90% of them choose to clog rather than die. Additionally there is almost no incentive for PvPers to play for the lawful side, as you can only collect 2 mil of a player bounty.

I could write a whole essay on this but in short your thinking on this topic has not gone much further than "gankers bad" and in reality it is a much deeper problem.

Ryan Murdoc

ZentzlbYou are kind of missing the point of this game. I hear so many people complaining that gankers dont get punished for their actions, it is up to the player base to punish the gankers. If half the people I hear complaining actually learned how to fight and joined together against the outlaws the galaxy would be a much safer place. Saying "gankers bad" on reddit or on Inara or on the forums does nothing for anyone. Here go join the fight.

Thats a PvP PoV, and it makes sense you try to strengthen it. Reality however shows that PvP in this game was, is and will remain to be done by a minority of players, albeit the most vocal one. Maybe Odyssey will change that though it'll be more of a Ego-shooter then.

ZentzlbAside from that, bad game mechanics have lead to the "ganking problem" if you want to call it that. Most traders and miners will just combat log instead of handing over 10t of cargo which has lead to almost every pirate giving up on piracy to become a ganker. The name of the game is killing the ship before it can log. Ironically clogging almost never saves noobs, the most clogs I get are from developed players flying corvettes condas and cutters. For example of the large ships I engaged 'legitimately' in the CZs during the last community goal, almost 90% of them choose to clog rather than die. Additionally there is almost no incentive for PvPers to play for the lawful side, as you can only collect 2 mil of a player bounty.

I could write a whole essay on this but in short your thinking on this topic has not gone much further than "gankers bad" and in reality it is a much deeper problem.

So you're blaming the "bad game mechanics" now. Last I checked a reasonable person knows what a certain action entails, so if someone decides to become murderhobos for the heck of it just because the game isn't to their liking the way it is, what does that tell me about them as person and character? Quite a bit imho.

Mind you, I am not talking about the type of people who actually try to roleplay a bad guy. There are plenty who say they do so but only camouflage their selfish needs to dominate others due to their inadequacies in RL. Which led to the current problem that only very few will stick around after they got interdicted, not expecting to be treated "fairly" but having their ships blown up under their rears. And as far as Roleplay goes that is called "Godmoding" and is frowned upon. For RP means that each side ´gets equal chance to play their "Character" in this game at the given moment in time, anyone who doesn't abide by that rule doesn't RP at all.

While being at the topic of RP, The Code was once known to be good sports with decent RP qualities, but over time respectful people were pushed away and down by those who only wanted to kill, dragging their overall Rep down. And when push came to shove these toxic cowards bailed out and formed their own SQN, leaving others to deal with the fallout.

Sakashiro

Rebecca HailI'm usually more in the camp of "open is open season", but that isn't just "not an ideal approach to therapy", it's a crime. How they learned it and whether they could tell that it was serious have nothing to do with it.

If someone learn that someone else is suicidal and the first thing they think is: "Let's test how far I can push them before they actually do it", they belong behind bars for a couple of years.

As for it not being a bannable offense, that doesn't matter either. When it comes to online games the player themselves owns nothing, not even their account and the company behind the game can choose to ban for whatever reason. Additionally to that I'm fairly certain that pretty much every ToS states that you're not allowed to breach or attempt to breach laws.

Sorry for the rant but hearing something like that just makes me a bit mad.

What I meant by "not an ideal approach to therapy" is that an individual with diagnosed clinical depression probably shouldn't be allowed to play a game like EVE in the first place.

That being said, I just did some googling and found that the case was actually quite different than presented here. The Mittani apparently harassed the suicidal player outside the game, during a FanFest in Iceland, and he was drunk while doing so. He later publicly apologized and got banned from the game not for 6 months but 30 days. (Source)

How much the Mittani actually knew about the other player's depression at the time of the harassment remains unclear. I don't see any crime committed here, and if you still believe he "belongs behind bars for a couple of years", I would like to know on what legal basis.

Sakashiro

Rebecca HailI'm usually more in the camp of "open is open season", but that isn't just "not an ideal approach to therapy", it's a crime. How they learned it and whether they could tell that it was serious have nothing to do with it.

If someone learn that someone else is suicidal and the first thing they think is: "Let's test how far I can push them before they actually do it", they belong behind bars for a couple of years.

As for it not being a bannable offense, that doesn't matter either. When it comes to online games the player themselves owns nothing, not even their account and the company behind the game can choose to ban for whatever reason. Additionally to that I'm fairly certain that pretty much every ToS states that you're not allowed to breach or attempt to breach laws.

Sorry for the rant but hearing something like that just makes me a bit mad.

What I meant by "not an ideal approach to therapy" is that an individual with diagnosed clinical depression probably shouldn't be allowed to play a game like EVE in the first place.

That being said, I just did some googling and found that the case was actually quite different than presented here. The Mittani apparently harassed the suicidal player outside the game, during a FanFest in Iceland, and he was drunk while doing so. He later publicly apologized and got banned from the game not for 6 months but 30 days. (Source)

How much the Mittani actually knew about the other player's depression at the time of the harassment remains unclear. I don't see any crime committed here, and if you still believe he "belongs behind bars for a couple of years", I would like to know on what legal basis.

Rebecca Hail

Sakashiro

Rebecca HailI'm usually more in the camp of "open is open season", but that isn't just "not an ideal approach to therapy", it's a crime. How they learned it and whether they could tell that it was serious have nothing to do with it.

If someone learn that someone else is suicidal and the first thing they think is: "Let's test how far I can push them before they actually do it", they belong behind bars for a couple of years.

As for it not being a bannable offense, that doesn't matter either. When it comes to online games the player themselves owns nothing, not even their account and the company behind the game can choose to ban for whatever reason. Additionally to that I'm fairly certain that pretty much every ToS states that you're not allowed to breach or attempt to breach laws.

Sorry for the rant but hearing something like that just makes me a bit mad.

What I meant by "not an ideal approach to therapy" is that an individual with diagnosed clinical depression probably shouldn't be allowed to play a game like EVE in the first place.

That's not our decision to make. I'm straight up not qualified enough to make any recommendation as to how to treat depression.