Jump to content

Anderson Williams

Alpha Tester
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Anderson Williams

  1. 11 hours ago, XKentX said:

    - Prevent L weapons from shooting XS and S because it will be too small.

    They tried and failed, it still has some effect tho.


    - Vmax limiting according to core sizes

    I think they will, that's the most obvious solution.


    - removal of the cross section for the calculations of the chances of hitting

    Why? Big ship gets more hits, small ship gets less hits. 

    - Give a utility to the voxel in PvP

    It had but many-years-in-development french tech didn't work with it when there are more 2-3 people firing and it lagged everyone.


    - Assign a capactiy cost to the ships so that the pirate has no or hardly 15G of acceleration + armor / shield + weapons and ammunition (force players to make choices).

    They will still have more than any noob miner anyway. "Pirates" in DU have shitton of money(due to ship capture being a good income). They use all t4/t5 and don't even care losing it.


      - Prohibit the use of XL motor on cores lower than L or shield L on cores lower than L.

    "Pirates" use L for any valuable target anyway so it doesn't change anything.

    Cross section Calculations are basically keeping us all from building Voxel Hulks again. Maybe a hit reduction modifier the smaller the core. Otherwise Kent is 100% accurate. Also 'pirates' or merely just us pvpers are always going to win, pvping is all we do. So a rando dude who 'shows up to carebear with claws' will never stand a chance.

  2. 8 hours ago, Jake Arver said:



    Not really and the way this is worded shows that NQ does not really understand the concept/mechanic. Tracking is directly related to transversal velocity as in; If there is no transversal velocity, the big guns will track just fine and probably one-shot the smaller ship. If the smaller ship uses it's agility to create transversal velocity which is higher that the tracking ability of the larger guns, it will be come (much) harder for the guns to track and hence, hit. I doubt DU actually takes transversal velocity into account or even calcutates it.

    they still miss.

  3. These changes are a great step, a continued step in the right direction. Multiple METAs seem to be forming and though somethings seem obvious some are not. I have some weapon recommendations but I worry that if I make them it will spoil our battle strategy.

    However, I would suggest a passive recharge for shields. Allow it to recharge slowly, so even in the fight if I can evade fire I can rebuild my shield slowly. Passively.

    Consider special weapons for XS core ships, or special modules/roles. For the most part there is literally no reason to utilize these ship still. Even if there were 10 of them and I was in a single NG meta ship I would wipe them all out without risk.

    I also wonder how much more difficult you want to make it, like you could remove the ability to use a remote from a gunner seat, or create an element/voxel system for connecting weapons to ammunition containers. If the connection gets damaged you could stop the weapon from firing.

    Some EWAR type systems, like the Warp Bubble we have been long promised.

    Ultimately I am super excited about the PVP changes and its gonna be a fun time having fights int he future. Thank you so much NQ for your hardwork

  4. 50 minutes ago, Eternal said:

    You know why people couldn't care less about politics in this game? Because organizations in this game are autocratic and totalitarian. Systems in real-life have evolved to be more equitable and liberal, and what kind of system do you exercise in this game? The old dynastic system during the feudal pre-globalized period with a class system! Some rulers are able to preserve this tradition today such as Brunei for example. Before Brunei was reduced to a small country it is today, it actually was a powerful thalassocratical empire! Sarawak, Sabah, western parts of Mindanao (including Sulu islands), southern part of Luzon, parts of Kalimantan, Belitung island, Mindoro, and Palawan, were all parts of Brunei through it's influence. They lost all those territories when the Westerners colonized Southeast Asia and the Bruneian monarch became a British protectorate. This empire is able to survive today with 500K population and small territory ruled by a sultan as the absolute monarch without any distinction between the wealth of the country and wealth of the sultanate. The world has changed so much today yet you still structure organizations in this game like we are still in the feudal period! Your system doesn't bear any semblance to the modern system and standard we have today in the real world! Why would the public care about the politics in this game if they can't influence it at all because there is no representative government in this game? We are not constituents, we are just subjects to your rule! 


    I couldn't care less about the politics in this game because there is no democracy at all and the absence of quality politicians! Politics in this game is a joke! I mean look at the RDMS, it is structured for absolute monarchy because the legates have all the power (the RDMS is a command structure). You know what happens when the people completely lost it's trust in the government (or the system)? They will go on people power movement such as what happened in Libya, the Philippines, and Myanmar, or worse, violent rebellion, to instigate change. The people here have the power to influence the system (without their cooperation, it doesn't work in the first place). Sure, you introduced organization and RDMS in this game in physical form, but they are built for command! 


    The politics in this game is a feudal de facto one! I have yet to see a developed official political system that gives power to the people! And the masses in this game is a dumb *ss! They don't even know their rights! How can you have good politics if the masses have slave mentality? How can I form a voting bloc if the rest of you are slaves? How can I represent you in the congress if you don't wanna be represented at all?


    You know, even Yakuza holds an election, do you know that?

    For someone who couldn't care less you write some books about it.

  5. 15 hours ago, Eternal said:

    You support a politician or a party because you see them as an asset to you. What is this AC? Do you think I give a sh*t about them?


    The moderators here have warned me about discussing real-life politics so I can't use an example here (based on real-life) of how politics hinder development.


    What is your platform and why should the public give a f**k? Are you delivering on your promises? Are you performing your responsibilities? Are you performing based on competence? Are you even doing public service or are you just there to cling to power? AC has no election, so it is a totalitarian organization with a ruling class that has absolute power.


    The public learns about politics through media, and you know I'm the biggest critic of bias medias (again, I'm not gonna give you real-life examples because of the forum rules). I don't believe that there is something you call a "neutral" media because they all have an opinion about something. They use this "neutral media" excuse to monopolize the media. If you have an opinion about something--and everyone does--you are not "neutral", so stop deceiving people! In this age, the media is no longer controlled by the giant mass medias, and there are now smaller independent news sources because the barrier-to-entry when it comes to publishing has been made more accessible! If you have an opinion about politics, then do state it, but do not ever call yourself "neutral" because that is not fair! There is no neutral news! What the public has to do is listen to all sources with opposing political opinions and make the judgement themselves! What you don't want to do is to listen to one source and be influenced by it! When some so-called "neutral" social media platforms took political side in some country and banned some politician's account, you deny people rights to press freedom, and therefore it is not liberal! They should not be able to operate legally on a country that proud itself with democracy! But raising issues such as press freedom, you are just gonna call me a "woke", even though this is a serious problem!


    I'm not interested about the politics in this game as they all lack the quality, but news about them will have to come from player-driven media sources with their opinions, and players are free to debate in-game politics! I don't buy this "neutral news" bull sh*t!


    This AC, in my opinion, is a useless organization! You are gonna ask for support and then you don't give anything back? A bunch of "patrons"! ("Patron", based on Spanish history, is a powerful religious leader receiving support from patronizers) Don't compare yourself to Joe Biden, you patron!

    Why do you say so much and matter so little...?

  6. 8 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

    I'd say the comments and discussion in this thread are more subtle than that though and polarizing it in the way you do IMO is not productive. I get your point though.



    Community does not exclude being on your own or engaging in activities on your own. IMO the opinion that you _must_ engage with others to enjoy the game is noot a fair one. A hauler can be on his own mostly for sure and I see nothing wrong with that. Obviously it would benefit him/her if there is an organization supporting and clearly there would be an origin and destination interaction but overal their main activity can and should be possible to be conducted solo.


    The frequently heard argument to "bring friends" or "have an escort" really overshoots the purpose and goals of the game. Arming your cargo ship and having X amount of people fly with you to defend should not be a requirement and for that purpose there needs to be options to minimize the risks such as ECM. NA has already acknowledged this and has said these mechanics will come into the game although that may take time. And I'm good with that.


    Again "playing as a community" is not the same as being with around others all the time and always including multiple players in activities. And NQ has literally stated that DU needs to be a game which can be played solo, with obvious restrictions in what can be achieved, which makes perfect sense.



    That is not the argument. Your initial post was "You say this,. I say that, you are wrong as I am right so get out". Bein involved/interested in combat is not a requirement to either have an opinion or discuss the pros and cons of PVP in the game. You pretty much are saying "you do not engage in PVP so you have no say in this".


    I also do not at all agree that my comments are "Karen Level" and frankly, saying this pretty much invalidates your own argument as you show to not have any interest in actually addressing or considering other peoples opinion and simply dismiss them without any .. And in doing so the one being Karen is actually.. yourself.


    I am actually very clear in that I see and understand how some will want to focus on combat as their main activity and have no interest really in the other components of the game. And that is fine but the same applies as with those who choose to go solo. You can't expect the game to bend towards your chosen playstyle which excludes some game pillars. DU is not about PVP, it is not centered around combat and conflict.


    Does combat need some TLC and is it missing components to make it better? Absolutely and it is absolutely valid to make that argument. Denying that combat as it is will not be a mechanic which will be attractive to the general DU player base is IOMO short sighted and based around a blind desire to want to see it be functional and useful. While it remains to be seen how NQ will address the deficiencies in combat, the initial indicators are that they have an understanding of what they need to do and will start doing so in the next few weeks in applying three major changes:


    • Construct cross section will become a factor in hit/mis calculations
    • Radar lock range will be the same for all cores vs all cores
    • Weapon size availability will be dependent on core size


    I'd say a good start from a combat perspective. What needs to come in as well is both (warp) interdiction and ECM which we know will happen but not just yet. (likely towards autumn/summer 2021)



    I expect the outcome of a "Good ol' boys PVP bubble roundtable" like you suggest will be preaching to the choir, predictable and not bring anything constructive for the game as a whole because your focus/objective will be to drive the game towards a combat/conflict oriented playstyle. You're welcome to surprise me and prove me wrong though.

    I reiterate my last statement again. Watch the roundtable... And give it a chance, give the pvpers a chance. :)


    11/21 @1500 EST on VarietyMMOs on youtube

  7. 1 hour ago, blazemonger said:


    Except the argument is not about the state of PVP from a PVP player perspective and not about being "boring", it is about how PVP is unbalanced and skewed towards PVP players when they target non combattant players. SO your argument here is void.


    I'd say a big point is that PVP oriented players have the wrong expectations about  PVP in DU and ignore all the clear signs this is the case. And many PVP interactions are between "bored" PVP players and players who have both no interest in PVP and no real counter to it which afaik doe snot really include yourself and the crowd you fly with as you look for actual PVP which is a different subject. Buy arguing this though, you play into the hand of those who have a skewed expectation which in the process does not do you any favors either.


    DU is NOT a PVP centric game and never will be. NQ clearly said that PVP has a purpose in game, it is not an (end)goal. That does not exclude the option to play purely in a PVP setting but it is the wrong expectation to have when you thing the game revolves around PVP which it does not.



    Except there is _no_  requirement for the game to be played in a team/group and in fact, NQ has given off clear signals that the game should and will be playable solo. Will that mean some activity is out of reach? sure and it would be silly to deny or expect otherwise. Couples with the PVP part of your post, a Hauler who sets up a business for himself should not be _required_ to both fit armaments and recruit friends/other players to man them while hauling, he should have options to counter a possible attack like ECM which NQ has already said will come. Will flying unarmed pose a higher risk of ECM failing and you getting shot at? sure, but that is a risk you take when you fly solo and you should accept that while the point of it being fair to expect the options to do so is a valid one.


    DU is NOT a "team base group based game" .. It is a civilization building game based around building communities and that does not exclude solo play at all. Playing solo does not mean you have no friends in game and/or do not work/play together on occasion and when the opportunity arises.



    Frankly, most I hear is ppl saying Industry is too easy and seeing how, two months in, massive factories able to produce anything possible are not uncommon is a tell tale sign of that and NQ has already announced that this was not intended and that they will put measures in place to make (high level) industry complexes harder to achieve



    Frankly, your comments boil down to this:


    Them: X

    You: Y

    Them: no

    You: if not Y then get out


    And I'd say that is rather inconsiderate, egocentric and shortsighted. There is quite a bit more nuance to this (and I do actually expect you are well aware of this)..




    And have a one sided, unbalanced outcome which will pretty much paint a picture for the game where you push it towards what are pretty much incorrect expectations based on what NQ has said is the purpose of PVP in DU? PVP is not a "stand alone mechanic", you can't discuss it and how it should evolve on it's own without considering the impact on the game as a whole.


    If you are going to have a round table, have ALL voices/parties there. have an actual discussion on the pros and cons and weigh each others opinions and expectations. But my guess is you want to hear voices that align with yours , not those who may offer valid counters to it so to keep your bubble of expectations intact. I'd actually be more than happy to join such a discussion but pretty much expect that other opinion would simply be drowned out and pushed off the table to keep the argument focused on "how do we get our wants in a better place, no matter how it affects other views which we deem irrelevant"




    I honestly believe DU will be able to stay alive without PVP, it will not be able to stay alive with just PVP. If you think otherwise, I can only  see an outcome where the game dies if you (and this those in the same mindset as yourself) had a say in its direction if you pursue this the way you seem to be.

    Actually no the argument has also been that it's boring. 'Waiting in a Pipe', '90s UI'... Yeah no it's not just about the big bad meanie pvpers picking on PVE'ers. No one is saying that DU's sole purpose is a pvp game. DU is a game of mining, building, trading and pvping. There are many pillars... Pvp is one of them.


    Community is plural. Not singular. It's playing with like minded people.... Civilization is plural... Not singular... Thank you for proving my point. 



    Actually several times NQ has, and JC has said the game is meant to be played as a community... So sure man play by yourself I am sure you will have fun. But you will never reach a level of accomplishment that a group play will. In theory you can play by yourself... But that's not gonna be the same as 'played best with others'.


    I completely agree end level content should not be aquired in 2 weeks... But getting the items isn't the same as getting the end level content.. of building a civilization which is really the content the game is geared towards. You have to build your civilization or be apart of one being built. The problem is so many arm chair experts will complain when it's harder.. and filthy casuals will leave anyway because easy is now hard..


    The constantly critique and commentary from some members of the community, yourself included, is heavily skewed in the way of criticism. Constant.. irritating... Karen Level criticism... So no it's not ;


    ME: THIS



    It's more..


    You: This

    NQ: ok here is this....

    You: not what I invisioned.. you are doing it wrong...

    NQ: we are trying... Literally small company

    You: The forums, my Twitter, and discord will hear of this. 


    I would love to eventually have other members of the community involved in the Roundtable.. but your belief that if the PVPers shouldn't be the only ones involved is hilarious... I don't do INDY... Why should my say be equal and valid over something I have no idea about. This first roundtable will talk about pvp for the pvpers, and how to make pvp more inclusive.. before you pull typical blazemonger forum warrior.... 


    Just watch the roundtable. I think you will be surprised. 

  8. 2 hours ago, GraXXoR said:

    Sees an Anderson Williams comment....

    Scrolls riiight on by... (already knows pretty much 90% of what he'll say...) Probably taking a dig at "carebears" or builders... 
    Hell, even DU voxelmancy and mining a supernode are more interesting.

    Speaking of voxelmancy and mining:

    Here is an anecdotal case I just experienced yesterday.

    I have spent about 10 hours building a medium core, light and efficient freighter for short range Alioth/Sanc duties.  6 hours of that, I swear, was just trying to neaten up the corners between two diagonal planes.

    We REALLY need some way to neatly reconcile two different surfaces in this game without magic and joss sticks!    
    The finicky stuff is just too cumbersome and apparently needs some kind of blood sacrifice (or mood altering chemicals) to achieve perfection.

    Speaking for myself (I don't like using "we" when I have no idea how others feel) It only takes one or two frustrations like this to put me in a sour mood... if I can't line up the vertices in this game between two different faces at odd angles, the whole construct looks pants and if I try and use the abomination that is the smooth tool, I end up with something that looks like a child's playdough creation.

    As for mining, the other elephant in the room...

    TO NQ:  Can anyone in your team honestly say that mining is going to become more sophisticated for the actual release?  And by sophisticated, I don't mean reducing the sensitivity of the angluar detector or making it slower. I mean actual new mechanics to make mining more engaging.

    Is there going to be anything that will make hexes actually valuable other than proximity to the Seven Eleven?

    I don't make fun of my food. 

  9. On 11/13/2020 at 11:57 PM, Poliwopper said:

    I haven't played for awhile because the core features are extremely unsettled and I don't want to spend a bunch of time on a project only to have the core gameplay change. But it's Beta.... it is what it is. That's just the stage of the game.


    The core issue with DU, though, is in my opinion that it must choose between being a building-with-friends game and a game that people play who enjoy challenging progression. It feels like it tries to be both, which I do not believe is possible.

    As someone who enjoys progression, I played a lot of DU but simply ran out of things to do. Everything is far, far too easy to get. I don't have an issue with the *amount* of content, for a Beta game... But the ease with which you can get to late-game content really seems bad.


    Some players want to play more or less in creative mode, and if NQ adds 10x the content depth those players will want everything to be 10x easier. This is a perfectly reasonable thing to enjoy and a reasonable game to make, and it looks to me like the direction DU is going.


    Other players (like myself) prefer to struggle, to need to work at progress, to lose ground every now and then. To fight for resources, to team up for protection. Doing this, after some *years* of playing, it should be possible to reach late-game toys.


    It looks to me like DU will never be satisfying for players like me, at least not for long. Prioritization decisions made - leaving PvP for last, the balance of resources in the game, the ease of crafting, the balance of recipes, etc. - have cast this die already.


    But I hope that NQ does not continue to try to straddle both gameplay styles, because that cannot be done. You cannot have creative mode on one or two planets and challenging progression gameplay on another. Whichever style of gameplay DU will be, it needs to be a choice and it needs to be baked deep into the design of the game.

    Argument summary--



    Them: Pvp is terrible... Pvp is boring...


    Us - how much have you pvp'd?


    Them: Once... Well maybe. 


    Us - get out. 



    Solo Play

    Them: I have nothing to do as a solo player...


    Us - isn't it supposed to be a team base group based game?


    Them: I should be able to play the game anyway I want.. this game is terrible. 


    Us - Get out.




    Them: it takes alot of time and is tedium...

    Us - omg just go quit already. 


    Look we all get that the game isn't perfect but the game is what you make it. It's time for the people who play the game to give suggestions and have quality conversation versus the negative armchair expert player Archtype that is beyond cancer. Most of you want your cake and eat it too... Half of you complain that the game is boring or low intricacy/emergent game play but are the same individuals who whine over 'open world pvp'. How do you think the emergent game play occurs? 



    For the PVPers, we are going to have a round table. We wanna set up talk about what we see as far as problems/successes of pvp and wanna offer insight to how to improve based on. Then hopefully NQ listens. The largest and best political/wars/conflicts/guineas book of world record events occur in Null sec. Where CCP doesn't try to build the sandcastle for you.. 


    But alot of the same gripes and complaints are just complaining because the game isn't exactly how they imagined it... Or the game isn't playing itself for them and You have to make your own content.  Or even worse... They expect the game to be one way.. and it since it isn't..  the game isn't great. 


    Poliwop brings up numerous good points... People complain it's boring but most of you would cry if it were hard. The problem is for the majority of DU community the game is fun. I feel many of you will never be satisfied. NQ is a small company doing massive company things. I'm sort of tired of reading the constant complaining. 



  10. 1 hour ago, Eshthar said:

    That doesnt Stop the L core from being immune to enemy Support If wished thats the whole Problem 


    And for the Love of god i pray NQ doesnt Take too much from EVEs balancing cause its awefull and CCP is trying to fix it basically since start so not really the Thing you wanna use as Rolemodel 

    I dont nessecary think thats true. You would need a larger ship to take on a Larger ship. Granted, without a Anti-Capital ship fighter... it will be almost impossible to kill L cores with XS weapons.

  11. 40 minutes ago, Eshthar said:

    Sure These Points are valid and im Like 90% Sure NQ found those already but now comes the real question:


    How do you prevent an L or later on XL core to Turn into a super massive Point Defense System?


    Like all your Points are valid though If those large weapons are so devastating you Just need a few to be efficient in Combat so the Natural answer to the empty space question in those cores would be " guard against small Shit" so in the end you have a devastating weapons Plattform with enough small guns to hold its ground even against enemy small Support

     Simple, with the Multiples higher damage per weapon level, like Large-Xs the L core with XS weapons wont have enough points to commit enough weapons to Larger weapons. So A true Anti-Capital ship L core will tear it a new one.

  12. So i have been pushing for weeks-Months for NQ to have a PVP round table with those of us who PVP so we can really try to assist in helping pvp foster and Grow. Mostly ignored, whatever I trust JC/Entropy/NQ are doing the best they can. And I am aware the rules for the IDEA box is one idea per thread but this would take like 8 threads so consider this an IDEA for pvp balancing. After Entropy's Interview with Spreeezy, a GREAT interview I felt more excitement over the coming potential changes to PVP. Changes that make sense, changes that will inspire diversity in pvp.. and punish the 'Build Space filler' type construction. This is logical and more accurate, the thiccer and bigger a bebe the easier it is to hit it.


    Entropy raised a good concern, and one we should all be leary of, how to prevent the L core and Medium cores from just being the end all be all for pvp. Ideally a Fleet of Large Cores would be the maximum fleet you would field, but it makes little sense for them not to have support. Its the equivalent of having a Capital Fleet in Eve that can do it all. That shouldn't be the case. The equation is simple...

    The larger it is, the Worse it Preforms... But the more powerful. With the Opposite being true.

    For instance, Large weapons should preform like Battleship weapons. They should gain labels, attributes, even Designs that suit that function.
    - Large Railguns, should have worse tracking than they do now, and a MUCH slower rate of fire. The larger the gun, the slower the rate of fire. But the Damage should be catastrophic. So for instance, if a Ship is flying, lets say a Small Core with low crossection at say 5,000km/hr at a high transversal... the Large Railguns should almost NEVER be able to hit it. Other variables like overall distance, speed of the ship firing the weapon, and so on would be taken into effect. The further/closer having a modifer for the ability to hit the ship, sort of a Sweet spot.
    - Missiles should focus more like Torpedos, with horrific tracking, that basically are only best fired at a target of large or Medium Core size. The launchers would be Labeled, like Capital Torpedoes or whatever. They have a super small magazine, maybe starting at 1 and expanding to 4. These weapons would have a SUPER long reload, but if that torpedo hits... its devistating. They would LOOK like torpedo launchers, not just a bland size edited missile launcher. Instead of having Mediums be smaller Torpedo launchers, have them function more like Cruise missile Launchers, with a Look to match. Lower yield than L weapons, maybe a larger magazine, and say longer range, better tracking but just don't pack anywhere near the strength of the Torpedos. Small missiles could be more like anti-S/XS core weapons. Large cores could use these as an attempt at PDWs, while XS/S do the same thing with the missiles. Larger magazine, reasonable range, but less damage. Tracking would be MUCH MUCH Higher. XS missiles would function almost like 'dumb firing rockets'. Obviously lock and fire but with a tiny window to hit, and a large window to miss. They would look and function the part.
    - Lasers same thing, some super powerful low damage radius, but extreme damage area that functions as a Cutting laser or something to that effect. These weapons would serve some sort of purpose that they just dont now.

    These sort of changes are just related to L weapons, but they would continue down the line. Cannons would function like HUGE heavy Cannon type weapons with incredible damage at close range, but you would have to time, pick your shots because of reload. Where as XS cannons would be like Vulcan Gattling guns, that serve a role.. anti-XS close range weapons, with magazines and function that SUITS the part. These XS would be almost fixed weapons, for the missiles, railguns, lasers as well. Ships wouldn't just orbit or joust, they would line up to fire at each other. The tactics associated would be so much more effective. These changes balance weapon systems to make a more dynamic role for weapons and combat tactics. It won't just be XS cube wins all, because XS cube will be IMMENSELY easy to hit and kill. And large/S/M core cubes would have the same issues, especially if ships have to balance fitting/power grid between engines/shields/weapons.

  13. 15 minutes ago, Anopheles said:

    What this dyng fire requires is a Daphne grenade to put it out.


    I do feel for you Daphne, forced at gunpoint to play a game with explicit open world pvp in it.  Especially one with extensive safe zones where you can sit tutting to your heart's content.


    It's ok, because even Daphne Muses in her own discord about getting into a pvp ship and 'griefing NG logistics's.... 


    Good luck :)

  14. 13 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:


    But griefing a guy 10 times in a row trying to get to his core. 

    Is being a sadist. 

    Allowed. But low moral values. 

    Thats not accurate especially in the context you have supplied. Lets say I played a game like Star-craft and was destroying my buddies base. By your assertion if I kill all of his units he continues to spawn I am a griefer. If I played a full loot MMO, which we do... and the target I have selected to fight has armored their core, as they should it will take me time to kill it. 

    If you say that me killing the same guy 10 times to get to his core is griefing, then what you are saying is... Once i shoot his ship and he dies, thats it I should disengage and move on. Not kill the ship, not be rewarded for pvping by taking the ship. I kill the guy one time, and he gets to say 'oh gee willickers you got me!' respawn, get back in his ship and leave. No thats not how it works.

    10 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:

    No. He is responsible for his bad choices. But the moral values of the person killing him 10 times are still very low. Independent of the responsibility. 

    That person is still greifing. 

    You are suggesting that by playing the game, as it is intended to be played... we are bad people. Thats not true nor accurate.

    9 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:


    But you may suffer the social consequences of your choice. 

    There are no social consequences, this comment could be misconstrued in a way to suggest that if someone kills you or someone else... YOU may do something bad to them. IRL.

    9 hours ago, LouHodo said:

    Vast majority of the people who have been crying about being griefer are more upset that they lost everything due to poor planning on their part.  But because society has raised people to never blame themselves for failure they instead project that failure on someone else.  This calling these PVP players griefers.  When in fact they are quite far from being griefers.  These players did not prevent you from playing or even enjoying the game.  They just killed you when you entered into their domain.  


    The lesson to be learned here is, if you don't want pvp don't leave the safe zone.

    This is the long and short of it.

    1 hour ago, joaocordeiro said:



    So I just wanna say, though my opinion is stupid and no one really cares... that the game has pvp. The game has pvp orgs which are large and like to fight. They are bound, because so many of you feel pvp shouldn't exist or safe zones for days. I told you how this was gonna go and none of you listened. Since you forced pvpers to have very limited means to pvping they have to take what they can get. So they hunt the commerce and trade lanes.

    When atmo pvp comes... there are gonna be wars. Empire vs NG, or like BOO vs NG, or like numerous other orgs vs NG/DSI/Others.. and its gonna be a blast. You guys will have the occasional commerce raiding but we are gonna be hunting each other and we will not cry and whine about it.

    The real problem here is that you guys feel you should not have to endure any risk for your reward, which borks the game. You guys made your own orgs because you wanna make something and be the leader, and instead of joining a larger more powerful org and working out how to PROTECT your convoys you felt that we should just ignore you because thats how its gonna work.

    Thats not.. at all how its going to work.

    But you lads will learn in time. Build relations with pvp orgs, join orgs that will protect you! Form mutual defense treaties... all of that stuff. Stop sitting in your corner playing blocks in a warzone, saying that no one should be able to touch your block city because... you built it. Imagine how this will work when they implement defense mechanisms, imagine that NQ will create a way for you to protect your ships that you wont even bother to learn because 'eww'. And you will still die. Then you will whine that you died from pvp, in a game with pvp, in an area that is clearly marked, for pvp.

    Join a pvp org, there are so many orgs offering defense for your convoys, there are ways around getting killed in the pipe. We see people defeating our tactics almost daily... when atmo pvp comes there will be wars between the larger orgs and you guys are gonna have a blast. Stop being salty over what is actually alot of fun. And Joacorderio stop projecting. C'mon hugs for everyone!

  15. 13 hours ago, Moosegun said:

    Clearly business is only booming for the aggressors, as one of the largest sellers of weapons and ammo on Alioth, business is pretty quiet........ luckily only a small market for me

    That's because we mostly do our own ammunition. But if you wanna work something out maybe my people will talk to your people and see if we can work something out

  16. Pvp is fun. I do not believe currently there are any actual Pirates in DU .. more roleplayers.... 


    I am a Tactical Asset Aquistion specialist for the All Father. And Buisness is a booming. Pray to the All Father or he will command the purging of your wild.. wicked heretical ways


  17. 10 minutes ago, Aaron Cain said:

    No problem with PvP, and no problem with extending the zones, but to implement PvP as a sink hole is just not the way to go.

    If we need something its a nice reason to actually have an economy or loads of materials and frankly, any PvP will only get better If there is an abundance of materials. Having everyone cheap ass on their materials as there aint much or the risk to loose them is to high will not help to get nice worthy PvP.

    Good mats, good industry, good production, perfect ships and nice holes. No sinkholes, a game needing sinkholes to draw something out is badly organized and designed.

    It needs sink holes to generate an economy for other members. If there is no demand or serious demand there is less need of supply... And you guys don't make money? 


    This is like the most basics of economics. People don't want you to buy less.. they want you to buy more so they make more... Dafuq?

  18. This is rich. I love threads like these because someone at some point is gonna accuse us of being psychopaths and sociopaths.... You likely will get banned for that if you keep it up. They don't allow name calling here. 


    Risk vs reward is the most honest and realistic resource sink there is if there is no NPCs or PVE. You guys call PVPers the minority... But why are some of you activating mutual defense treaties? And why are some of you complaining regarding removing safe zones if there are no pvpers out there? 


    There are massive pvp orgs in this game.... We will fight each other. We want to fight each other... We plan on waging war on each other. But we are gimped at the moment. So because we are so limited we have to hunt the easy prey. Turn us loose and let us run... We will find each other and be less likely to be camping your slow boat routes. 


    Or keep it the way things are and the moment you try to come out we will shoot your ships.... Interdiction is a planned feature as well... What happens then? 


    You may have to work with other orgs.. in a team game.... Who would have thunk it. 

  • Create New...