Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
lucagrabacr

"PvPer" is a misnomer in the context of DU

Recommended Posts

DU isn't ED with Solo Mode or Open Play options with the line between PvP players and non-PvP players clearly defined, to say a person or a group of people is a "PvPer" in DU implies that person or group of people does PvP while others don't - which propagates a faulty understanding of what kind of universe DU is supposed to be.

 

What most people call "PvPers" are really "Pirates", because even if someone isn't aggressively hostile towards other, doesn't mean they don't do PvP, in fact most people would at some point even if they're not necessarily pirates.

 

To divisively label the playerbase "PvPer" and "Not PvPer" is really, really misleading in what kinda universe DU's meant to be imo

 

Just putting it out there because people keep calling pirates PvPers, just call them pirates because non-pirates do PvPs too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-1

A PvPer is someone interested in engaging on PvP, as in what NQ defines PvP: currently only construct VS construct is permited. 

 

The grudge most ppl have against PvPers is not about ppl being pirates or not. Its about griefing and lobbying to allow forms of griefing. 

 

Personally i fell like big org fleets are a bigger problem than pirates. 

And mostly, I see big org leaders lobbying for more pvp and less restrictions.

Im a PvPer. And I will probably end up doing some piracy. But you wont see me choosing a target based on a discussion I had in discord. Or killing a speeder mk6.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

-1

A PvPer is someone interested in engaging on PvP, as in what NQ defines PvP: currently only construct VS construct is permited. 

 

The grudge most ppl have against PvPers is not about ppl being pirates or not. Its about griefing and lobbying to allow forms of griefing. 

 

Personally i fell like big org fleets are a bigger problem than pirates. 

And mostly, I see big org leaders lobbying for more pvp and less restrictions.

Im a PvPer. And I will probably end up doing some piracy. But you wont see me choosing a target based on a discussion I had in discord. Or killing a speeder mk6.

 

 

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.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:

That's the whole fucking point, but you obviously only care about yourself and what you think is "right". 

You take this kind of personally, don't you?

 

The op tried to push the "bad PvPers" as the "pirates"

I am countering that with the idea that the bad PvPers are the "griefers".

 

What's your opinion? Pirates or griefers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

5 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

Aparently you dont know the definition of griefing. Not even the origin of the word. 

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JohnnyTazer said:

Enjoyment of game? That's your argument? 

It's not my argument. it's the definition of griefing.

It may not be an important value for you but it's definitely an important value for me and for ppl that complain about PVPers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:

According to you, all pvp is griefing. 

1 - You still have not provided me with 1 single URL that supports your claim that griefing does not apply to MMOs

2 - The definition of griefing is killing a player again and again and again making sure he feels miserable. Not to kill him 1 time.

Who is now the 'but you obviously only care about yourself and what you think is "right". ' ??

 

I'm just replaying to the op saying what (In my opinion) is a "bad PvPear" not trying to change obvious definitions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, joaocordeiro said:

1 - You still have not provided me with 1 single URL that supports your claim that griefing does not apply to MMOs

2 - The definition of griefing is killing a player again and again and again making sure he feels miserable. Not to kill him 1 time.

Who is now the 'but you obviously only care about yourself and what you think is "right". ' ??

 

I'm just replaying to the op saying what is a "bad PvPear" not trying to change obvious definitions.

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JohnnyTazer said:

 That's what I'm saying the Definition of griefing doesnt apply to these circumstances. 

Griefing is not the 1st kill.

Griefing is when you make sure that player will never be able to play the game. Is when you decide to camp his broken core, because you know he will come back to check what is left and you kill him again. And you do this 10 times. You are not gaining a strategic advantage there. You are just feeding your needs with that player's desperation and grief..

 

I am against that. And I'm not trying to convince you its right or wrong. But it is a definition that me and a good amount of players agrees as being a red line. One we don't cross. One that empties servers. One that classifies, in our values, a bad person and a bad PvPer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

Griefing is not the 1st kill.

Griefing is when you make sure that player will never be able to play the game. Is when you decide to camp his broken core, because you know he will come back to check what is left and you kill him again. And you do this 10 times. You are not gaining a strategic advantage there. You are just feeding your needs with that player's desperation and grief..

 

I am against that. And I'm not trying to convince you its right or wrong. But it is a definition that me and a good amount of players agrees as being a red line. One we don't cross. One that empties servers. One that classifies, in our values, a bad person and a bad PvPer.

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.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:

 I said there is no griefing in the open world pvp zone. Griefing can exist in the safe zone.

Me and the entire internet disagree.
Im still waiting for that URL that you "could" link to me with a "most common definition"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

Me and the entire internet disagree.
Im still waiting for that URL that you "could" link to me with a "most common definition"

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JohnnyTazer said:

It's the exact one you linked....like I already said. 

Good to know that there is no other definition....

1 minute ago, JohnnyTazer 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.

No you should not be banned.

But you should be despised by the community.

In the same way you should not go to jail if you sue an orphanage for a 10 day delay in payment. But you should be despised by the community.

 

The law (in the orphanage) and the rules(in DU) are with you. But the morality of the situation is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, joaocordeiro said:

Good to know that there is no other definition....

No you should not be banned.

But you should be despised by the community.

In the same way you should not go to jail if you sue an orphanage for a 10 day delay in payment. But you should be despised by the community.

 

The law (in the orphanage) and the rules(in DU) are with you. But the morality of the situation is not.

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JohnnyTazer said:

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?

According to the rules, griefing is allowed on the PVP zones. Yes

But makes you a "bad PvPer" that every one hates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, joaocordeiro said:

According to the rules, griefing is allowed on the PVP zones. Yes

But makes you a "bad PvPer" that every one hates.

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:

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?

yes.

 

I was simply replying to the op, countering that "bad PvPers" were not pirates but griefers.

I never said they were breaking the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

yes.

 

I was simply replying to the op, countering that "bad PvPers" were not pirates but griefers.

I never said they were breaking the rules.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...