+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Discovery RP 24/7 General Discussions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+--- Thread: Are you entitled to win? (/showthread.php?tid=132213)
RE: Are you entitled to win? - Sebastian Nobles-Stirling - 08-02-2015
(08-02-2015, 12:20 PM)St.Denis Wrote: And seeing as the topic has added ‘Ganking’ in to itself.
What is ‘Ganking’?
Is it when one side has more ships than the other?
Or is it when one side has bigger ships than the other?
Or the one than most people don’t seem to complain much about, both sides have an equal amount of ships and of equal composition – but one side has a few very good PvPers whereas the other side has average to below average PvPers?
Not everybody knows the other Players on the other side so it is very hard to decide which side is actually being ‘Ganked’. Looks can be deceiving.
In my experience, ganking has little or nothing to do with whether the two parties know each other. It has a lot, nay, almost everything, to do with intent. I would define a gank as the willful intent to make an encounter so foregone that the other side has no chance regardless of RP, skill or any other variable. You planned to kill them from the get-go, and they WILL die. Ganking doesn't allow for any other option.
A single merchie encountering 3 or 4 destroyers that logged in specifically to encounter it is a gank. That same merchie encountering a lone bomber, even with the same situation, is not.
Ganking, as opposed to qq, is not about RP or blues. it is about abusing another player (not character, player) for your own enjoyment. Whether you know them or not does not change the gank. The sad thing is, it is usually done within the scope of the rules, if not the intent. This is what the victim finds most frustrating, especially if they are new-ish.
RE: Are you entitled to win? - Coin - 08-02-2015
so lets turn this around. if you are really bad at pvp, do you have the right to insist that people take turns to come out on top outside of a scripted event? What normally happens is that people learn the rock-paper-scissors of gunboat-bomber-fighter and suddenly even though they are alone against three bombers in a GB, they come out on top. THAT day, that player feels like a champion, like they have suddenly understood this game, the mechanics of drift-strafe+thrust, they've learnt to ignore the reticule when drifting backwards, they've mastered the art of the mine-sweeping CD AND they remember to e-kill immediately afterwards, they gain the confidence of a PvPer.
Who are you to take this feeling of omnipotency away from someone? I say no. Space-boat-fighting game shouldn't be turned into space-boat-theatre.
RE: Are you entitled to win? - Fluffyball - 08-02-2015
(08-02-2015, 03:52 PM)Sebastian Nobles-Stirling Wrote: I would define a gank as the willful intent to make an encounter so foregone that the other side has no chance regardless of RP, skill or any other variable.
(...)
Ganking, as opposed to qq, is not about RP or blues. it is about abusing another player (not character, player) for your own enjoyment.
I wouldn't put it in a better wording myself. I define three types of gank myself:
1. Libertonian Overkill
2. Merchant Revenge
3. Just Blues
"Libertonian Overkill" is a more an unwilling situation, in which non-organized gank happens as players join the pew - kind of common "in the wild" and being kind of gray zone in here, since LR is usually having fun as well.
"Merchant Revenge" is one of the more abusive, yet not-so-common types in which, in revenge for being destroyed/pirated, player pop up with his friends in dreads to gank sole pirate as form of revenge.
The last one, with a charming name "Just Blues" is type of gank, which goal is to either distrupt the roleplay of two other parties or just simply to willingly overkill the smaller group with larger forces (being more scumbag version of option one).
The last type of gank is the most dangerous of all, because other parties or players might, especially after that gank is repeated, refuse to log stuff or even roleplay with certain faction/player/group of players.
RE: Are you entitled to win? - Haste - 08-02-2015
I think most people who are genuinely good at (snub) PvP don't really give that much of a damn about winning or losing. They know they're competent and don't need to prove it to themselves/the world.
If anything people who desperately feel the need to win seem to be those who aspire to be good at PvP but aren't quite yet.
Dunno if I answered the OP's question at all but I just ended up typing this. Woo.
RE: Are you entitled to win? - SnakeLancerHaven - 08-02-2015
Well, it appears to be also mostly the case that those which hate "gankings" also affect others with their QQing. Because sometimes when you get the feedback of a faction "wow this and this faction ganked me 10vs1 what the hell I wont ever play in this faction again anymore" you kinda feel like the responsibility to react the same way and give them advise, but mostly it's bad advise as we get too emotional.
^ This is more about faction leaders that suddenly QQ on feedback threads about ganking, as the members mostly go all uncontrolled and yell at leader that this and this group constantly ganks and he wouldn't log inside the faction again, just because of this. Pisses off some of the people, but eventually it makes them post on the said factions feedback thread with negative intentions.
Another thing could be, as some of the people proposed, to just let the Systems on the player list show "Unknown" and only the ones inside your Group would display the current System they're in. This way "omg this person logged, now let's log and pew him" would be avoided and people would actually just check the Systems for interaction.. Now I'm not sure if this is possible but maybe Players that are inside the system you're in would display but everyone else would stay unknown, would that kinda bring some balance for non-PvPers? At least they wouldn't be pin-pointed and actively hunted this way.
Other thing is, some of those PvP-based games have a ranking system. Like, this is the best PvPer then the 2nd, 3rd. Could implement this in here too, to give PvPers at least a reason to top each other instead of dealing with newbs at that time.
As in who should win.. It's hard to say, for me the one able to show a perfect scenario (RP) are the one that wins kinda, even with pews and even if he dies. If the Player manages to RP so good that you feel yourself inside a Movie Scene together with the PvP assets, even if he looses, I think he's the one that will get the best kudos for creating such a Scene that made fun for everyone else, even the PvP-whores to participiate with.
It's hard to say who wins realy... But as you may know, clearly in disco it doesn't matter that much. Best example is Rheinland that raided liberty nonstop won all the battles but in the end it was still Liberty which suddenly won and kinda pushed Rheinland back, bla bla.
Hmm... Train and win? Or make yourself a perfect actor of RP scenes and win too, even without being good in PvP.
RE: Are you entitled to win? - Fluffyball - 08-02-2015
@Snake, while I have admitted many times that Player List hunting is bad, the problem is people NEED to use said list to see who and where is online - in order to get roleplay and interaction.
We have over 100 systems in game. We can have like 90 players around at the average time peak. Many systems do not possess Trade Lanes (only 1/3 of them actually, if not less) and some of them offers distances greater than 100K.
RE: Are you entitled to win? - Wildkins - 08-02-2015
I've never found the right answer. I either throw RP to the wind and set up the fairest fights I can (under the pretense of "avoiding friendly fire", an incredibly weak excuse that works if you're keeping a battleship out of a snub brawl but much harder to deal with for a snub entering a snub fight) or I throw "fight balance" to the wind and acknowledge that, inRP, any hostile force in Liberty would be immediately engaged by any ready elements nearby.
I don't know, I've tried both and neither of them has ended in desirable results. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
RE: Are you entitled to win? - Tachyon - 08-02-2015
Let me switch to a non-staff account to comment how laughable the entire thread is, one moment.
RE: Are you entitled to win? - Pepe - 08-02-2015
(08-02-2015, 12:22 PM)Ryujin Wrote: Are you superior in something (pvp, writing lore, writing cool RP and so on..).
I'm glad someone mentioned other ways to "score a blue", as many battles are going on at Forum too. Good place for a reminder for all forum lancers:
Don't do unto others what you don't want others to do unto you.
(08-02-2015, 04:30 PM)Haste Wrote: I think most people who are genuinely good at (snub) PvP don't really give that much of a damn about winning or losing. They know they're competent and don't need to prove it to themselves/the world.
I saw them mostly logging on the weaker side in the name of the challenge, balance and gameplay. They are only matchmaker we have and I'm proud to have understanding with few of them.
RE: Are you entitled to win? - Antonio - 08-02-2015
(08-02-2015, 04:30 PM)Haste Wrote: I think most people who are genuinely good at (snub) PvP don't really give that much of a damn about winning or losing. They know they're competent and don't need to prove it to themselves/the world.
If anything people who desperately feel the need to win seem to be those who aspire to be good at PvP but aren't quite yet.
Dunno if I answered the OP's question at all but I just ended up typing this. Woo.