Archbishop - Griefers
It's an explosive thread on General Forums.
Here's hoping they listen to Archbishop.
Nice reply Archie! and thx for the post here Graelyn!
Meh? CCP already have the hitpoint increase on all ships in the works. I reckon that's going to fix the issue of a few suicide kestrels.
They should make make it so you can only attack war-enemies or npcs in empire space.... should save me some ships when I attack the wrong target by accident again.
The problem is that these things are hard to check. And even if they change the system of alts, people can allways get a trial account and start all over. The poblem is that there are thousands of griefers and only so much CPP people, so statisically speaking, the griefers can find new ways to try and kill people far quicker than CPP can fix them...
It was even a problem with an open source game I once played / contributed to. Even with over 100 coders working on solutions, the griefers stil got the upper hand... You can not defeat griefers case by case...
You also can not define griefing, because the griefers will find other ways to make other lives miserable, that aren't in the definition... And by broadening the definition further and further, more and more innocents are going to get affected by the punishments (lack of a better word)... Which will only incourage the griefers further imho.
This is one of the oldest, most annoying and universal problems in the multiplayer gaming world... And I don't think I ever saw a game without them. Now i think of it, "Pyroto Mountain" didn't have to many problems with griefers, but that was a game that involved only forums, magic spells and trivia questions. So not the ideal enviroment for griefers...
Believe me, I have been playing in forum based RPGs for at least 4 years and the amount of power-players, meta-gamers and various other griefers that plague the free-form forum games is quite high. I can't tell you about the times a great game was destroyed because a power-player decided it would be fun if he managed to destroy me in a single post :?
The game I'm talking about was different from those games, in that it was not forum based combat, there were spells to cast... The forums were used for roleplay, just chatter and diplomatics...
You know, like anyone under lvl 50 getting the answer "Don't post if you don't know the entire story" answers in the diplomatic forums and such stuff... :roll:
QUOTEThey should make make it so you can only attack war-enemies or npcs in empire space.... should save me some ships when I attack the wrong target by accident again.
No way. Not whilst there are still slavers prepared to cock a snook at us because we're not at war with them and we (allegedly) can't touch them. Well, we've proved we can, and we will.
What you're suggesting is effectively hard-coding it so we can't attack non-CVA slavers, and as such they can operate completely without risk.
I would've thought inhibiting such roleplay is contrary to the beliefs of the roleplay alliance you're part of, no?
Agreed with Makkar here. I sense alot of dropping in security ratings in the future
QUOTEThe game I'm talking about was different from those games, in that it was not forum based combat, there were spells to cast... The forums were used for roleplay, just chatter and diplomatics...
Well, the ones I played weren't just forum based combat, I mainly just roleplayed and role-played combat came once or twice. I am actually playing a really interesting game atm in which my character is a deranged extreme paranoid. Locked in a cell
Agreed with the minnies on this one.
Hard coded anti-pvp codeing would kill immersion. One of the things that separates this game from say WoW is that you can try to kill anyone... you will generally pay for it, but you can still try. As opposed to some magical force that says "oh you cant shoot him even if you want to"
Yeah..should always be ways to do things/counter said things.
Reason being, you cant much counter this other than running if you see kessies warp in, even then might not be enough?
But the main idea is that griefers are not constructive members of the EVE community and should be treated as the trash that they are.
Ban their accos, Send them pet parts, Kill their children, basically they as people are waste of space.
We'll actually the pirates that lived in lower Domain before the CVA moved in might see us as griefing them... so .... err, stay away from my cat...
I believe true "Griefers" are only 2-3% of the population. Sure I think gate camping is lame and ore thieves stink but thats not really "griefing" in my book. What these guys are doing however is griefing because they're doing it in .5 and above empire space where its supposed to be safe.
I faxed a letter to CCP personally and I know some others have. We'll see what comes of it.
As for "trial accounts" CCP can and does record the IP's of all customers. It would be fairly easy to ban these clowns for good.
- Not to take this thread off topic, .....but.....Makkar? What does "cock a snook" mean?
your humble ni-kunni enemy,
Senior GM Arkanon replied in that post on Page 11. He said:
To set the record straight, we can and do ban players for griefplaying. Note that attacking another player is not griefplaying. But, while attacking another player is not forbidden anywhere in EVE, excessive use of disposable alts (as judged by a GM), the use of exploits or the abuse of trial accounts to grief players for your own profit without risk of retribution will not be tolerated.
We have banned players for what we deem to be griefing before and we will continue to do so. Abuse of trial accounts can and will lead to a ban on your main account(s). I hope this clears up some questions about this subject.
Senior Game Master**
So nice to see the GM's on the ball. Hopefully this will put an end to these pathetic griefers.
English idiom, Gracchus, and very hard to describe in text. , in effect, but not that gesture.
- Aye, the english peeps in PIE gave me a detailed and broadly diverse explanation. I truly had never heard the phrase before. ty