+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. (/showthread.php?tid=92857)
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Jack_Henderson - 01-24-2013
People who claim that they have never raged about pvp death and that they have never been hurt by the negative pvp consequences, are either...
... a) saints
... b) liars
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Veygaar - 01-24-2013
I've raged plenty of times...
...idk, I think that what gets me going the most is people who I see talking about "honor/not ganking" and me expecting that from them, then having them do the exact opposite.
I TRY to go in now expecting to get ganked, that always makes things better for me afterwards. Though sometimes I still get frustrated
Go in with the motto (try
): "Expect to get ganked, be happy when you're not." - This has helped me several times.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Remilia Scarlet - 01-26-2013
There is no point in reducing anything since it's already epicly easy. Fighters can fly away from system and back with full bots, caps can cloack and return. etc. I'd better add back the rule about leaving a combat being a pvp death.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Jack_Henderson - 01-26-2013
Remilia, reducing the negative consequences of pvp defeat would also perhaps reduce these things like asteroid hugging (T37), base hugging (Java/Cali), run&dock&come back, etc... all these things that are generally considered "dick moves".
If losing would not mean as much as it does at the moment, perhaps some people could pvp in a more relaxed manner... the general gaming would profit from that, in my opinion.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Hone - 01-26-2013
(01-24-2013, 12:16 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote:(01-24-2013, 10:37 AM)Govedo13 Wrote: 2 Hours combined with 10% of the ship value as dead fine excluding conn seems quite fine for me.
For me, the aim of this thread was to reduce the negative consequences of pvp death (rage, frustration, idiot behaviour, sanctions) by reducing the penalty for the loser. He has already been punished by losing, anyway.
I don't understand why anybody would call for even more punishment (like in your additional "credit loss" idea).
Because it's "discussing" it, so people will give the opposite view too, as they are free to do.
(01-24-2013, 01:52 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: People who claim that they have never raged about pvp death and that they have never been hurt by the negative pvp consequences, are either...
... a) saints
... b) liars
Ive raged about PVP death, but only when I thought someone was breaking the rules doing it. I dont mind dying, its just a game.
(01-26-2013, 06:41 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: Remilia, reducing the negative consequences of pvp defeat would also perhaps reduce these things like asteroid hugging (T37), base hugging (Java/Cali), run&dock&come back, etc... all these things that are generally considered "dick moves".
Not me, I consider that clever strategy.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Auriec - 01-27-2013
I definately agree that the system ban should be reduced. Many players I know only have one main character they often play with. If this one dies in a fight, they rage even more because they cannot play properly for about 4 hours. Especially when you die in a system where you inRP have to be a lot. (e.g. Hamburg for Military, embargo duty).
As a result, the server activity reduces significantly if this happens a lot and eventually, the players - especially newbies - will get too frustrated to continue playing.
In my opinion, system ban should be reduced to something between 1 or 2 hours. This should reduce the frustration a bit and of course the rage towards people the players had no chance escaping from.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Laps - 01-27-2013
(01-21-2013, 10:39 AM)Echilon Wrote: Take this... How bout Instead of 4 Hour wait period for Re-entering a system after pvp death. we lower that allitle. but keep the 4 hour idea of not re-engageing the person/ (or people who you fought) who killed you for 4 hours?
I agree with this, you really should have no reason to re-engage the person that killed you (unless they attack you first) but the four hour waiting period for re-entering a system is kind of overkill. Besides, within what, ten minutes? The other player should have already moved on.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Thyrzul - 01-28-2013
(01-27-2013, 08:29 PM)Sitruc Wrote: Besides, within what, ten minutes? The other player should have already moved on.
Not at all if you die at the beggining of a full scale furball which lasts another hour. And I think the four hour waiting period should apply for reentering for the same reason as reengaging: it would be immersion breaking to see the same ship you just blown up as much as confronting it.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Veygaar - 01-28-2013
(01-26-2013, 06:41 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: things like asteroid hugging (T37), base hugging (Java/Cali), run&dock&come back, etc... all these things that are generally considered "dick moves".
Valid tactics to win is not a "dick move."
PvP is about trying to win. Who fights to lose?
I believe some people have this strange idea in their mind about how other people should fight them. If you expect people to do exactly what you want then you'll always be thinking people are being "dicks" even though they're just adhering to a different train of thought on the matter.
RE: Reducing pvp death consequences to avoid ''gank'' rants. - Jack_Henderson - 01-28-2013
(01-28-2013, 01:13 AM)Veygaar Wrote:(01-26-2013, 06:41 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote: things like asteroid hugging (T37), base hugging (Java/Cali), run&dock&come back, etc... all these things that are generally considered "dick moves".
Valid tactics to win is not a "dick move."
PvP is about trying to win. Who fights to lose?
I believe some people have this strange idea in their mind about how other people should fight them. If you expect people to do exactly what you want then you'll always be thinking people are being "dicks" even though they're just adhering to a different train of thought on the matter.
The mentioned actions all came up when I drew up some "gentlemen agreements" for fights with a faction I will not mention. And we agreed that while these things are "valid tactics", they are still lame and when taken to extremes become "dick moves".
I know you think differently on pvp. That's fine. When fighting you, you are treated differently than when I fight people who I have these agreements with.
But it's not really teh topic.
I only said: The frequency of frowned-upon "I must win"-moves (which kill the fun for many) would perhaps be reduced if the pvp death penalty was lowered. Nothing more. Nothing less.