YodaMan 3D

I have had bad experiences, but they aren't all the time. I know I haven't had it as bad as some. I have had those situations where I have been out doing my thing and had others nearby and we not just start attack one another. We aren't jumping to conclusions that all players are bad. Yet when players in PvEvP assume that they have to have a shoot 1st mentality, they no longer can say they enjoy that anything can happen. They eliminated that when they shot 1st. The whole "Surprise element of what will they do?" Is no longer there, they die or they shoot back. As far as griefing goes, it isn't just attacking a player once. It's the non-stop attacking till they quit playing or no reason then they aren't in PvP with you mentality. If some posse and they do this pretty regular, where they have a 4+ man posse rolls up on a lone player. Can you tell me what is going to happen? In our little "anything can happen scenerio?" They attack, he dies , they attack again, he dies, rinse and repeat. What doesn't happen is them roll up and everyone hugs and kisses and ignores each other. In some of these scenarios, I have asked why? Those few times players actually responded. "It was because, they was big bad PvP players that doesn't allow any one to get in their way". Now prey tell, there was PvP going on in the nearby town that they road around to get to me. I experience more toxicity from unknown others then I do surprising free gifts. That is my experiences and I don't jump to the conclusion that it is only that way for everyone. Some players don't see the same things as others. They don't have the same experiences as everyone else. I just try to see everyone's side of the story, then to assume my experience is the only one. Therefore it is the only option and everyone else who disagrees is just wrong. Its my way or the highway. I don't want to be that person or player, that wants to eliminate options. Not everyone comes into discussions with the hopes of being open minded and come up with logical answers. They just want what they want and F everyone else.

Then you must have gotten a different version of the game if the towns people don't draw on you. I have been in towns where players not in my posse come in and start shooting and next thing I know I am getting shot at by all. As for what I want, I want is balance in a PvEvP arena. I want it so that a PvE player isn't the sole target of every PvP player in the game. Not saying to eliminate them from the PvP option. I don't believe in the PvP mindset, that if PvEvP arena that if you PvE. That you have totally ruined my PvP only game and that it is completely PvP, because I am being and ass and demand it of you, so leave. Seeing how the gaming industry is trying to make all shooter games like this. Put all of us in a one server instance, we need to learn to share and not all be assholes. If I am in the mood to PvP, constantly attacking the lone player in Tall Trees and killing him a million times, solves nothing and only pisses him off. Especially when there is a group in Blackwater that is PvPing the crap out of that town. To set back and say that the players will police the servers, not all players can or will defend themselves. Since I restarted, I am about level 15 or so. Against a posse of 100+ with everything unlocked. There is zero defense, little reason to stay in lobbies where these asshats feel they need to attack me, when there are places or people they could be to PvP. Currently they get zero challenge from a guy who can't hurt them. PvP matches are currently a no go, even greater disadvantage and even less chance of survival or enjoyment. I do enjoy the PvEvP, where anything can happen. All most even though we play it don't or don't understand the concept. Just because you are a PvP doesn't mean PvP must happen all the time with each player you meet, yet there won't be PvP in here that won't shoot 1st. Zero chance of "just anything can happen" if you force PvP everytime. PvE players shouldn't assume, hey out hunting, fishing, some stranger mission, expect no one should come near them cause they want to be left alone. It is unfair in PvEvP arena that a PvE player should feel they are off limits. When your act as if they are off limits and your PvP players refuse to play PvP and intentionally only go after those not involved in there PvP. So now we need limits set, PvP players are deadset on running PvE players out of the game and refusing to show any restraint. PvE players making demands for rules so strict PvP can't happen. Rockstar trying to force us into the same server. Now HuDawg, personally has suggested over and over separate servers for all. Rockstart really doesn't want that. If they can't come up with other solutions. They may feel they have to. I personally don't feel that meets their claim that they will fix the griefing issue. I also feel that according to their history, they will punish those players by blocking content, put a limit on xp, or a limit on rewards gain. Now if Rockstar really has the vision and design plan that we all are in one server instance. As said players refuse to show no restraint, so Rockstar should now have to implement guidelines that motivates us to play in our safe zones if you will. We need balance that is fair to all. Do I believe PvE players should feel that they can't be attacked. No. Do I feel that if given the option that a PvP player should always attack a PvE player non-stop to the point of griefing and avoiding PvP all together. No. Yet we need balane.

There could and would be outside apps that could fix that.

Can you answer me this, what element of surprise is there in RDO? You see player, you assume all players bad, and you shoot all players? Guess what, there is no surprise element. In arenas like this, we as players 99% of the time assume that everyone else is there to attack. It removes our need for PvE from the equation. It becomes a battle royale, with participates who don't want to be involved. When you bully someone into doing what you want and blame them for it being their fault for not wanting to play the game the way you want. You are more likely to push those players away from PvP. You and I shouldn't demand another player to play our way if they have not intent to. Griefers generally have every intent of pushing those players out of the game. Griefers generally have zero interests in actual PvP. Much like griefing in PvE scenerios, they for them to have fun it comes down to how much fun is ruined for others.

I like the fighting back and them running. I haven't seen super grouping happen often in RDO, but have on other games and know that a lot of clans bank on that for their PvP and it has started to happen a little more often here. They have a few go out and start sh*t and then call in the Cavalry to protect themselves. Then you hear them say that the pelts don't matter, well you taking the beatdown you deserved does.

Funny story, a guy I had played with a week or so ago invited me to his game and sent me message that he was being griefed and needed back up. So I joined. Now according to him, he was farming and a couple of players showed up and killed him. He came back and killed one of them and the other bolted. He chased this player back to Blackwater. Where this griefer rejoined with his posse, who by the way was 14 players that was supergrouping. They unloaded on him and kept unloading on him. I sends me a message and here I come to save the day. OOPs! That ain't happening. We killed one or two here or there, but took way bigger ass-whooping then we dished out. So he gave up and we changed servers, it was a disaster.

That is part of the issue with the griefers. If you can't stop them, they won't stop. If you can they run and cry foul.

That is it exactly. You don't get it. You apparently have never, just been out hunting or fishing and had other players near by doing their own thing and neither of you having to interrupt what each other is doing. That is player interaction. You apparently have never been riding along and seen a hideout pop up, head over and see another player being pinned down by the NPCs and decide that, "hey I think I will draw agro and ride away. Giving the other player the chance to get back on his feet and finish the hideout and grabbing their rewards. You just don't understand that being on a same server doesn't require you to intervene in their fun. To you, it moves, I shoot it dies. You don't get that not all palyers are level 100 with everything unlocked and are at a huge advantage over a player just starting out. You also don't get that creating private servers that Rockstar won't punish those players who use them, by docking xp or loot or blocking content. You just don't get it. All of this Rockstar has been doing for a very long time and this is the 1st time they have made a statement that they want to FIX griefing. You don't get that either. Yeah it will change how we play PvP a little, but if done correctly. We won't notice the difference after a few hours of playing. Now a PvEvP, does get that. They understand they have the power to make a difference on who or what they shoot at.

If playing solo. I can't. Then again I won't be playing the game at all. I play for the interaction with others. Now in a lobby with other players, as you stated else where. Players can grief and ruin your fishing and hunting experiences with dynamite or unloading with guns. You really shouldn't be so closeminded, you can fix griefing just because you don't have the answer doesn't mean one isn't out there. As far as you can grief regardless of plans. Thing is you don't have to grief. It is your choice and is the reason why, if Rockstar holds true and says they want to fix the griefing, I am sure there are ways they can fix it. So when a level 1 player gets griefed by a 7 man posse and because their cards make them immune to his bullets. I guess that player just should never of bought the game. Still a player's need to grief can and should be handled and Rockstar has the ability, if they really want to fix griefing. Suggestions have been made and any one of the ones I suggested would fix it. Sad part is that griefers would whine and probably quit the game or they would be more driven to face off with PvP players.

Actually, it is griefing and Rockstar could just fix it and both players could continue playing the game they want to play. Separate lobbies could help but once again. It is not discouraging griefing.

I can't say I hate this option, my concern would be I start to spawn in. Griefer kills me before I am completely in. I respawn and rinse and repeat. Would I be in PvP or PvE? Pending on how they define it, a player may never get to the chance to make the switch. Exactly when you can originally select it would be good.

Yet it does have PvE, you can hunt, fish, or do story missions. It isn't much of an option, but I agree Rockstar has focused heavily on the PvP side. As much as I defend the PvE side, I also understand that IF Rockstar wants to FIX Griefing. They really do need to be careful not to destroy the PvP and PvE players should realize that sometimes PvP will happen. It just needs to come down to what Rockstar considers a fix. If all the stories are true, after 9 years of focusing on this game and Rockstar forcing employees to work overtime. All of this should have been done and beta shouldn't take 3 months. Then again gaming has been changing for years and how the industry deals withit and players are willing to accept.

Yet if players treat it like a run and gun and ignore the rest. It isn't just what the Devs envisioned, but how the players see it and treat it. All the things you mentioned, there are players, who have stated it isn't what you said and they don't treat it as that.

Cause it was advertised that there was PvE End Game. There wasn't. PvE End Game was going into the DZ to be Sheep. For the longest time, PvE was refused any kind of End Game Experience. Ubisoft/Massive added HVTs, LZ Bosses, and eventually WSP. Rewards for the longest time was still better in the DZ then any where else. Players liked the PvE. PvP players refused to share. Any time PvE players asked for anything, terms like snowflake, entitlement, carebears, etc..........was thrown at them. At one PvE players was able to build Skill Builds, which could hurt the PvP players in the DZ and PvP players cried for nerfs of everything. If I pay just as much for the game as you or anyone else, am I not allowed to make suggestions that can improve the game. Many times players asked for stuff and they wasn't doing it to be selfish, yet was rejected and ridiculed for it. Now Rockstar that is different style, but in GTAO they punished the PvE players for being in different lobbies, safe lobbies if you will. PvP players who griefed those same players went unpunished. No balance was ever tried, if anything they gave more options to grief with. Rumors and just rumors I am hearing, they are going to use the same business model for RDR2. Are you in the agreement, Rockstar should just say FU to all those players who don't like to be griefed. Maybe they shouldn't have bought the game, no refunds and a big FU to boot. How dear them think they should be able to enjoy the game. Quite simply put. Rockstar says they want to make it right and fix the griefing issue. It isn't about players putting themselves through anything. It's about Rockstar doing as they say they would and fix griefing.

After restarting once, I would regret doing it again. Who knows how many bugs I would suffer. All I know is it would be unplayable for me. Right now I don't have options as is sometimes.

In all fairness, a player who keeps charging at you guns a blaze. Aren't poor innocent victims. They are participating in PvP. They are openly begging for your assists to respawn. Regardless if it be you, HuDawg, or any other player, everyone is participating in PvP. Go to town. Have fun with it. Please don't confuse catering to and balance as being the same. The DZ was chaotic, it could have been balanced as well. It never was once again Ubisoft and Massive didn't want it balanced. They wanted wolves and they wanted sheep. Yet they advertised PvEvP. They advertised it as PvE where PvP could happen. They also made it the End Game and gave players no option but to play PvP. Yet I enjoyed both, pending on my mood. Now when you have 20 PvP players standing there and doing nothing but waiting for some PvE farmers to come in and take down a landmark. There is and issue with your PvP. Though they claimed not to fear dying in the DZ, none of them wanted to take a chance and become a sheep. They all wanted to be a wolf. So they stood around bored until someone volunteered to be a sheep. By the way just incase you are one of those, "Don't touch my DZ, leave it as is!" die hard PvP players. You got a DZ that got dumbed down, not balanced, cause they kept striving to force PvE players into the DZ. Each update they kept nerfing the DZ, cause fewer and fewer PvE players was going in. The PvP players kept pushing them out, cause they refused to PvP with their peers. All I can say is being a Day 1 player, sure missed the Day 1 DZ. Back then PvP meant something. PvE never really did get any End Game and TD2 sounds like it is going to be treated exactly the same. On the other hand, at least a PvE player does have a chance to fight back as where Ubisoft and Massive created 2 different builds either PvP and PvE. Where a PvE player couldn't hurt a well built PvP build. Ubisoft really hated PvE players. Lost 90% of their player base in just a few months and said good riddance.

I restarted because of bug issues with my horse, it got changed to a scrawny nag and I couldn't get it to change back. Now I have all sorts of answered bugs. Important thing, my horse is still my horse everytime. It is a bit of a coward now, where it didn't used to be.

If they keep coming back and both sides are fully engaged. Then it's call PvP. All bets are off. Go to town, let it rip. If they are playing, in my opinion you have every right to play back. If they shot at your friend, you kill them a million times and they never raised a finger to fight back, that's you just being a di*k. At some point there needs to be a line drawn. One that you don't or can't cross. Players that are not participating in PvP. Shouldn't be punished because players have personal anger management issues. You need a shrink in this case, not gaming where you kill people. Thing is you don't ever see a difference. Between PvP or PvE, you see your way and that's it. You don't see how wrong you are, because you are in denial. PvEvP is not FFA, it is where bothsides come together and co-exists.

Why exactly, would you kill another player 50 times for killing your friend once? During those 50 killings, is there at some point that, that you may stop and ask yourself. You know this player hasn't stopped me yet? Just maybe he or she may have learned their lesson? At some point they may have just stopped firing back at you? Just saying, at some point it is you being a di*k. Your point was probably proven 47 killings ago. As stated before, they quit blocking content and private lobbies could be a fix. They always block content, cause they want us all in the same servers. So your Band-aid server fixes nothing. Now what you are calling band-aids are weak ass attempts at fixes that they had no interests in fixing. Proven by them giving new and better ways to grief. If they want to fix, they need fixes. Your private lobbies where they punish players for PvE. Is super weak ass attempt at fixing. Cause they aren't fixing anything they are running away from it. They are separating their player base and then have to push players back to where they want them. PvEvP doesn't work without balance. FFA is called fortnite, or gunrush, or PvP only modes. Just remember PvP doesn't need the PvE. They can settle on some small map and be perfectly fine.

IRL, 2 people in a bar get into an argument. 1st guy gets nervous and calls his boys over. One thing leads to another, fight breaks out. Cops get called. Do thing interrogate only one side or do they hear the whole story. It doesn't have to be who instigated it, but if you are shooting back you die. Don't give the players an easy out kill yourself. Make so the players hate griefing. If you aren't shooting at all. Then you get out of jail free card. I believe Rockstar can code, they made this game right? Thing is they left things out, then need dealt with. All they got to do is come up a with a plan that actually fix it.

Been playing with randoms, trying to network. That has been a major fail. Have added some from here. Have had good times when we can get on together. Yet RL interrupts with timing. So it isn't like some don't try, just not all make the cut and worth the time.

Players who would defend themselves should have accountability if they fight back. It shouldn't be triggered by a Player killing another, it should be the repetition of one player being attacked and killed over and over. If players fight back, then the NPCs shouldn't get involved at all. In the old west, gun fights breakout. Civvies ran for cover and usually the law didn't intervene till it was all over. That way PvP can still happen if all parties are open to it. It's when they aren't.

You know it's funny. I was in a discussion that the issue with open realms like this is that PvE players are just too scared to die. So if they would just accept that dying is just part of the game. Griefing will no longer be an issue to them. Now this same player is a griefer in most games I know him from and when I asked why do you attack PvE players knowing that they either can't defend themselves or just won't? Could it be you are scared of dying in PvP? Then it only makes sense that you need to come to grips with dying and you won't be afraid to PvP with actual PvP players. Now he took offense, but it was fair statement. You keep saying that I haven't offered any suggestions, yet I have. You just didn't like them, afraid you can't PvP if they was in place. Now not saying they are the best plans and that they couldn't be tweaked, just brainstorming that could lead to both PvP and PvE players co-existing in the same realm. You view this debate as You ( a PvP player) being attacked, like I am trying to ruin your fun. Yet have zero issues with doing that to some one else. This type a realm isn't just FFA, it is PvEvP where both worlds exists. Which means that PvE can happen. To define griefing, to me it isn't when I get attacked once by a player or a posse. It is the non-stop attacking a player, doing nothing but trying to ruin another players fun for the sake of your own. Now many in these situations feel that when you attack another player. Those same players feel they HAVE TO run that player out of the server and make sure that they hated it so much that they just won't play the game ever again. They don't feel they can still share the same server. You being one that claims it is policed. I say by who? You respond with the players. I am curious, there isn't more PvP if the players are complaining to Rockstar and on here about the griefing. Shouldn't they be complaining about all of the PvP that is going on. If a player isn't participating in PvP, isn't fighting back. Then it isn't PvP. Players who participate in that isn't really playing in PvP. They are griefers and they aren't doing the game any favors by running players off. You have also claimed it's a FFA. Really? Seriously ask yourself, when you see another player. Do you grab your gun and shoot 1st? If you always shoot 1st, then it isn't anything can happen. That is the mindset of the current player base. If we all shoot 1st, then it's just a PvP game mode. If it's just a PvP game mode, then you don't need it to be freeroam. You don't need PvE elements. No fishing, no hunting, no towns people. No fences. You just need a nice little map where players can shoot each other. The only ones who need the whole enchilada are those who want to do it all. Those who want to PvEvP. Those who truly believe anything can happen. No griefing required. Yes some PvE players will get shot from time to time. Yet, it is no longer a shoot PvE players and run them out of my game. Those who wish to PvP can still find those who want to PvP and PvE players can fish and hunt without it interrupting each others game.

Yeah, you women gamers ruin everything. hahahaha.

Actually, there is plenty that could be done. I have offerred plenty of suggestions to Rockstar. Whether not they do any of them, well we have to wait and see. Good news is it won't affect the PvP players and will affect those who just want to grief. Greatest part is none of the suggestions are private lobby band-aids like they used in the past. Sad part is the rumors are sounding like they are still a go ahead on the GTA model they have been using. Which mean they will say FU to the PvE crowd and endorse the griefer crowd. Even though they keep saying that they don't want this game to turnout like GTA did with griefers.