JohnnyTazer

Here is what it boils down to. Even If we both agree about your definition of griefing in DU pvp zone, my argument would be I think it's a good thing not bad. Here is why. 1. It's easy to counter after the first kill. If you die your ship lost, dont go back unless you expect a fight 2. You can counter it again by taking cheap ships to get killed, and know an enemies fleet size. Then bring a bigger fleet to fight. 3. It provided content, and choices and freedom, even if sometimes it's not the funnest being on the losing end. that is life. 4. I'm also in favor of giving haulers good mechanics to avoid pirates. Nothing 100% but they should have options. So that is why griefing is good. And good for the game. And bad to expand safe zones. As we are meant to play,build, fight, interact, and conquer, and to do that we need the biggest play area we can within reason.

Inside the safe zone we agree. So we dont need to bring that up. Griefing can happen there. I would argue if griefing is allowed, then shrinking the safe zone isnt bad, as NQ originally alluded to only sanc moon being pvp free. But also you said pirates are actually griefers. Can they be both? Can someone pirate 90% of the time and grief 10%, or are you saying all pirates are griefers? Also you have the ability to band together with people and kill the griefers, so that should be a good thing for you right?

Also, by your admission, griefing is allowed in dual universe, and not only is allowed, but a valid gameplay. My contention is, once you say "griefing Is intended gameplay" it really no longer becomes griefing, but griefing Is unintended by developers on most games situations.

But your orginal post says lobbying to have griefing allowed. To me that signifies that you think it should not be allowed. But you just confirmed that griefing should be allowed. Would you care to clarify your orginal post. Lobbying to allow more griefing clearly alludes to you thinking it should not be allowed. The issue we are having is you arent consistent in your arguments and contradicting yourself.

So according to you, there are no issues, griefing is 100% a valid gameplay. It is not bannable if it is done in the pvp zone. Also, according to you. People have the right to choose their opinions on If its "bad" pvp or not. Correct?

So, you agree that killing someone 10 times in a row, is allowed. And you also said that it is griefing. So from that we can conclude that you agree griefing should be allowed in the pvp zone. Correct?

It's the exact one you linked....like I already said. So let me ask you this. Since I already answered you twice. If I kill someone 10 times over and over, and for the sake of arguement that is griefing. Can I get banned for it? Should I be allowed to kill someone 10 times in a row? Please answer since I answered you.

Who is camping someones core in a pvp zone? Second what core to go back to? Element destruction is coming back. 3rd it's still not griefing what you just said, because as a last resort a person respawns in the safe zone so I cant kill them. If they really think they can come back to a pvp zone to retrieve a ship that was already fucked up by someone, that is their Choice and freedom to make. It's a stupid one, but still a choice nonetheless. And you say they are not gaining a strategic advantage? Camping is very valid tactic, if someone comes back they can kill and loot another ship. What if someone else comes along to loot and they kill them. More profit. Nothing you have described is griefing in the pvp zone. So no, your argument doesnt hold up at all, and you are wrong. And for the record I didn't say no griefing in MMOs you are putting words in my mouth to try to advance your argument because it doesnt hold weight. I said there is no griefing in the open world pvp zone. Griefing can exist in the safe zone.

I'm using your linked definition why would I repost the same thing. What if I kill someone over and over over so they pack up their base and leave so I can take their territory? I'm not doing it to make them miserable even if they can be a by product of the action. In open world FFA I'm not responsible for other peoples feelings no more than they are responsible for mine. That's why the definition you posted doesnt apply to open world pvp. The whole point is to conquer. You coming back to die over and over is YOUR CHOICE not mine. If anything you'd be griefing yourself at that point, because when you die and no rez node, you'd on alioth where I cant touch you. You have to opt back in. That's what I'm saying the Definition of griefing doesnt apply to these circumstances.

Just like the definition of beta. I'm sure you ask 5 people what beta is you get more than one answer. According to you, all pvp is griefing. You are a griefer if you pvp. If you kill someone and they are sad about losing their stuff, you griefed. Is that what you are saying? Because according to your definition everything you do in DU is griefing. Someone claimed a hex on alioth that I wanted, and it reduced my enjoyment in game. So I was griefed. Someone mined the gold on a hex I was gonna get, I was griefed.

Enjoyment of game? That's your argument? Hahaha. I die all the time in eve, have lost billions, have been evicted out of my hole wormhole system, podded, had expensive ships stolen from me. I enjoyed it. Because it's the player run open world. Its what I signed up for. My enemies job is to take/steal/ blow up my stuff. I win some I lose some. But I savor the freedom and get better highs when I sometimes do win. So no, it's not griefing. Enjoyment is such a subjective word. Nor am I responsible for other peoples feelings when I am not using any exploits but playing the game as intended. Man I'm schooling you hard today.

I do. It doesn't apply to open world pvp. I can link the most common definition here. The whole point of the open world pvp is so I can kill you, for gain, over and over if I want. That's the point. Griefing is disrupting gameplay, and that's what you do in a FFA zone. As long as you arent using exploits. The zone is enter at risk, and by entering you are acknowledging that. Griefing would be me parking my speeder to block the entrance of your base. Even if that's only a mild form, I'm disrupting what is the desired gameplay for that zone. Which in the sanz moon is for you to have a free safe space. Hopefully you have learned something today.

You can't grief outside the safe zone. You can use exploits, but at the risk of punishment. But there is no such thing as griefing in the open world pvp.

You just made my point with pvp. You get the freedom to choose not to shoot someone or some small defenseless speeder. Other people might choose to do so. That's the whole fucking point, but you obviously only care about yourself and what you think is "right". For other people it's fine shooting imaginary space ships in a video game that no one forces you to even purchase.

I could care less if DU dies if the change FFA as I wont play it so its literally the same thing to me. I dont give 2 fucks about NQ in that sense or any other game and developer. With that being said I dont wish anything bad on NQ or other games. I personally think WoW is trash but I'm totally ok with them succeeding as a game and company. But if I dont get what they pitched, I vote with my wallet and leave. And we already have some safe zones that's the point. Safe zones were announced from the beginning, we were just told the majority of game world would be open world FFA, that's the point we are making.

He sounds exactly like all the highsec miners in eve who go afk, want the isk and money and not to be ganked, and are fine alt tabbed to Netflix but cry when they die. They are a cancer to the game, no doubt I was aware some of those types of people would migrate to DU, haha.

I've heard rumors of many people getting teleports due to incompetence not server issues. Think NQ is just being extremely kind this month due to the very rocky beta launch.

You dont help a newbie by making things easy. You help them by making it easier to understand mechanics, and also where to find information when its needed.

No, it's called planning ahead. Bring tier 2 or 3 scrap in your nanopack if flying a bigger ship with bigger elements. Takes like 3 min to repair. It's not brain surgery just need a little foresight and planning. But good news, this Is a learning experience for you.

Terrible post. But I'm gonna forgive it because your new. Once you actually play the game more and learn, you will be just fine and figure out these things aren't very big problems. And also if you wreck your ship that's on you. Part of the game and what makes it fun.

+1 Technically everyone already is pvping. If you even mined 1L of ore you participated in pvp. Or used the market. All hail PvP!

None of those things you described I've heard them make promises on or use to pitch their game. Industry wasn't even in the game til alpha 2. As for L cores they clearly explained technical reasons why it's not larger at least at this point. You do realize the difference between them wanting to do something, but are unable to because of technical reasons? Why would I want to be part of infinite organizations that doesnr even make sense. They just pitch "organization" in general which I'm very satisfied with atmo, but also expect some QoL down the road. What was pitched was the world would be shaped by players, and run by players, and the actions of players. Increasing safe zones and making large portions of the map opt in only pvp if you want to, go against that very nature. Not sure what point exactly your trying to make, but doesnt seem like a good one.

Some pvpers do want to hunt players that have a low or 0 chance of killing them. That's their choice and its still pvp. But I do agree there needs to be counter measures for people to escape, mechanics and stuff like that. I'm pretty sure JC said only 5% of pvp is implemented right now. And I wouldn't care tbh if the current safe zone stays forever, but all t3+ ore removed from there, and no safe zones at all in future systems. They can just add Sanc moons as needed around alioth.

Also for those who know nothing about SWG, watch a few videos about it to see how "chasing extra money or WoW" can kill your game by abandoning your core loyal fanbase by radically changing fundamentals of how the game works.

For the most part they have my trust and I'm definitely willingly to wait around for a good bit to see how things progress. But they sold me on emergant gameplay and player choices. What choices do I have when I cant even use my guns? Now that's not me saying there shouldn't be safe zones, just they should be small, and void of high tier, end game content. The freedom to choose is what I care about. Do I wanna shoot this guy? That's the question I want to be faced with. Does that mean sometimes people will get "ganked"? Of course, but the fun lies in the freedom. They take that away and reduce to a breaking point, I'll unsub. Now the details about how to balance pvp, and ways to have people get skills to avoid it, I'm all for that. The hunter can't get his prey 100% of the time. And often times like in eve, even the hunter gets baited and takes a big loss. I see it all the time.