Ganking is fine as long as it doesn't cross the line to harrassment.
If I, at high level, run across a level 1 and decide I want to kill him for whatever reason, I call that fair, if after I kill him, I camp him and kill him again and again and again, I call it harrassment.
In WoW if I saw low level alliance I would /wave. If they /waved /bowed /saluted or even said hi, I would be on my merry way, if they said nothing or /spit /slap /fart or anything rude, I would end them.
Back in My Asheron's Call days when Going Red ment something, before AC created (PK-Lite, were you would not drop items if killed) Personally weather it was Red of pink pk, I dont like being ganked, unless you are on team vs team and you catch an opponent alone.
City of Hero's/Villians PvP is not as fun as What AC had and way to much ganking goes on in it.
Yea PVP servers in many games got their population thinned out very fast. I think that suggested quite a degree of difficulties retaining gamers there. Even for games with very popular PVE servers, their PVP servers are ghost towns. Can't imagine all these games have crappy PVP implementation.
I think FFA PVP is not exactly the best way to retain a large server population.
Yea PVP servers in many games got their population thinned out very fast. I think that suggested quite a degree of difficulties retaining gamers there. Even for games with very popular PVE servers, their PVP servers are ghost towns. Can't imagine all these games have crappy PVP implementation. I think FFA PVP is not exactly the best way to retain a large server population.
I thought Shadowbane was well done, but it was so buggy on launch that the game never recovered ( and that in itself should be a lesson to MMO producers, but we keep seeing crappy launches - think "Vanguard", a game that really should have done better than it fared. ).
I'm playing DF now, and it's entertaining ( at least for me ) but it does have more in common with a FPS than a true MMO. And that's not to degrade it, it's got some strong points but the launch has not been done well, and I think that it will rapidly fall into "niche" mode.
And when that happens, not much new content or improvements tend to happen.
The only people who gank other players are people who can not adequately PVP against someone of their own power/level in a game and they enjoy the rush of torturing other players who can not defend themselves.
Of course my definition of ganking is when High level players repeatedly kill low level players who stand no chance. The other definition is to reapetedly kill a player as they respawn from death before they have a chance to do anything such as equip weapons and armor. The last possible definition is to repeatedly kill a player with such odds the player does not stand a chance as in 6 vrs 1 odds or something along those lines.
Yea PVP servers in many games got their population thinned out very fast. I think that suggested quite a degree of difficulties retaining gamers there. Even for games with very popular PVE servers, their PVP servers are ghost towns. Can't imagine all these games have crappy PVP implementation. I think FFA PVP is not exactly the best way to retain a large server population.
I thought Shadowbane was well done, but it was so buggy on launch that the game never recovered ( and that in itself should be a lesson to MMO producers, but we keep seeing crappy launches - think "Vanguard", a game that really should have done better than it fared. ).
I'm playing DF now, and it's entertaining ( at least for me ) but it does have more in common with a FPS than a true MMO. And that's not to degrade it, it's got some strong points but the launch has not been done well, and I think that it will rapidly fall into "niche" mode.
And when that happens, not much new content or improvements tend to happen.
SB and DF represents a different story, not meaning better or worse, just different.
SB and DF are built to be PVP games. The game is PVP focused with everything thrown in to make the PVP richer in content. Stripped of PVP, there is nothing in SB or DF. There is no PVP servers, PVE servers, there is SB servers, DF servers. Period.
The games I am talking about are PVE/PVP games in which PVE has a meaning on its own without ffa PVP. Games like EQ2 or WoW where you have PVE servers and PVP servers. PVP servers works on ffa pvp, while PVE servers have constrained PVP like WG or arenas. My argument is, for games like WoW/EQ2, the PVP servers tend to lose population much faster than their PVE servers.
If an MMO has a PvP component where you can kill another player without having to meet X,Y,Z criteria then yes, ganking is justified even without RP. The option to kill is there. If people don't want the risk of being ganked, then they should play on a non-PvP server or a game with restricted PvP / no PvP.
Every MMO I've played has been PvP friendly, open ended in some, not so open in others. People that complain about being ganked, don't last long. They often complain there's no way to justify it, no reason at all that could EVER make it right. RP doesn't sound like the most solid of reasons but if PvP is in the game, and you're playing the game, you are acknowledging your risk of this by simply playing..
Umm... if pvp server is loosing population faster, then why is it that there are more heavy populated pvp server than pve server?
Check the number of pvp servers vs number of pve servers in WoW, and check their population levels. Its a fact, not a wishful argument.
That is the point PvP server players seem to always forget. If for ever PvP server there are 10 non PvP server, the population on the PvP server would have to be higher then all 10 non pvp servers combined in order to be more popular. There is a reason they need all those non pvp servers, and it's because way more people want to play that way.
The reason so many people avoid FFA PvP servers is the very reason this thread mentions, ganking. There are too many people who find their fun by deliberatly ruining the fun of other people. Not by having a challenge or competition but by actually ruining the real life fun of other human beings. It is mostly a result of a sad childhood or something I'm sure but either way it makes it unenjoyable to the masses. Combine that with the fact that most people don't want to non stop PvP, often times they PvP for a while and then want to go quest or craft or whatever it may be. Once again FFA PvP servers are not good for that so it drives people away,
Ganking is sad, and you normally end up feeling bad for the person who is ganking. Since obviously their lives are missing something. I used to play UO in the early days, and AC, and the FFA PvP server on DAoC. One thing I would never waste my time doing was ganking people. I would go after people who might have some good loot for me or go after people who would give me a good fight. That is where the excitement in PvP is, a fight that is tough for either side to win and when you start it you don't know if the winner will be you.
Originally posted by Yamoth Umm... if pvp server is loosing population faster, then why is it that there are more heavy populated pvp server than pve server?
Most of the MMO i have played suffer from low population on PVP servers. PVE is always highly populated. I guess not everyone agrees with gank anyone anywhere style of play.
Agree or not, PVE with some PVP thrown in will always be more popular. For rest who enjoy griefing others, play DARKFALL.
I'd say ganking is never justified by roleplay, because no matter how demented your psychotic character might alledgedly be, you still have a responsibility towards your fellow players to ensure that they too are enjoying your encounters. If no one is enjoying the encounters they have with your character, you've failed as a roleplayer.
That's not saying that you have to give everyone cakes or have sex with them, but there is no content in ganking. Just the game engine doing a few calculations and you're dead. No one gets anything out of that. Moreover, ganking suggests a one-sided fight where one player has zero chance to influence the outcome, and the chances of escape are pretty much zero as well. These battles are mostly short and pointless. We can assume that the character you attacked was also presently engaged in some form of roleplay which was deliberately ruined by your sudden, brutal and absolutely pointless attack.
Chances are the targetted player of your attack did not enjoy what you just did. In fact you just ruined his roleplay session, and gave him the hassle of trying to explain how he just returned back from the dead - or even worse, you're playing a game with permadeath so you simply destroyed all the work he had put into his character and gave him absolutely nothing in return.
If you want to play a ruthless psychotic that kills and maims all that he can, then I'd say you'd damned better roleplay through the encounters. If you're doing your job well, it is quite likely that other players will simply play along if you attempt to depict in emotes how the target character is caught in your devious ambushes. They're probably even going to be willing to roleplay through a losing battle if your skills are worth a damned.
But key to that whole scenario is the willingness to understand the other player and their character and act in a way that works for both of you. Your character might only be out looking to cover himself in the blood of his fallen enemies and devour their still beating hearts, but You as a player are (or should be) out to enjoy yourself with other people.
I've personally played through a number of encounters where my characters have suffered permanent death at the hands of other players, or suffered permanent damage like decapitated limbs, gouged out eyes, severed fingers, burns - and some of these encounters have been my most memorable and exciting ones that I can recall. Need I say that none of these encounters were actually played out in the game engine itself? They were roleplayed through, thoroughly and properly, making them exciting and dynamic instead of two character models whacking eachother repeatedly with oversized weapons untill one dies.
Instead, they have all altered the way I roleplayed my character and added to his/her being. The brutish warrior suffering a crippling injury to his sword arm; the pretty songstress taking severe burns to her face; the expert archer losing an eye? These are all highly interesting situations that would challange the players behind the character.
Anyways, aside from the long rant above I'll say that anyone that even tries to justify ganking with saying that he's playing a chaotic evil character, or an assassin - or whatever other lame excuse you can think of, is simply a poor excuse of a roleplayer and likely in need of a basic roleplay guide or a therapist.
Even gankers don't like to be ganked, that kinda finishes the discussion. I mean if they don't like and whine about it being unfair, then even they must know it's wrong somewhere deep (way) down in their soul.
Just to illustrate, in an mmo i used to play called 9dragons, in one of the patches they introduced a new fairly low level quest that required players to go into the PvP zone. Ofcourse there where mid level players that started ganking the low level char that were jsut there to complete the quest. They being ganker were not only killing them but also then insulting them etc.
Anyway after a while of this going on, a couple of high lvl player came in and started handing the mid lvl gankers their you know what's in retribution and kept attacking and killing them even in safe zones etc untill they left. the second the mid lvls got killed though, they started whineing about how unfair it was, the the high lvls were jerks for continually killing them, blah blah etc etc. So yeah, they hated getting treated like they treat others, so they must know it's wrong and therefore not justified.
before someone brings up the argument that the high lvl's killing the gankers is justifiable ganking, i must counter that the high lvl's do not kill these gankers for no reason, they did it in response to the gankers actions, which is comepletly in the spirit of proper PvP and thus is not considered ganking.
Are you being purposefully obtuse?! I never said or meant any of the things you have listed. My point is that if you kill someone in game repeatedly and without that person having any chance to defend him/-herself that it is not the ingame character that is frustrated but the person at the keyboard. Thus, your ingame virtual actions have real life consequences.
[edited to shorten post]
Now if you are going to quote him telling how wrong he is you are effectivly taking the side of the people he is speaking against. That's the logical conclusion when you see somebody quoting and counter arguing their point. so you basically said those things by proxy.
So you are saying, by speaking up against his statement I agree with everyone he is disagreeing with? I mean, come on! You're actually using coherent and fully formed sentences and you don't see a major flaw in this logic?
Let me try it again and maybe we can agree:
If you play on a full PvP server you have to expect to be killed by random players. It's not pretty, but it's part of the rule-set that has been defined for this particular server.
If you play on a PvE server and venture into a PvP area, you can equally be killed by random players. They are within their rights to kill you, if they so wish.
Where I make a distinction is the moral aspect of behaviour that goes beyond simply killing someone. I consider people who do the following, gankers:
- kill you right after zoning, before the zone has fully initialized
- hang out in a lowbie area and repeatedly killing players of much lower level - preventing them from progressing
- camp your corpse in a game where you have to retrieve it, in order not to lose XP,Gold, etc.
- kill you through superior level or number and then stalk you, killing you repeatedly.
These things have happened to me and I'm sure some other people posting in this thread. I have a limited amount of hours available to play MMOs and I want to have fun. In those cases I could not do anything but log out and try again later.
To get this straight: These actions conform to the rule set, but in my opinion are morally questionable and only serve to disrupt the other player's enjoyment of the game. Enjoyment that is being paid for by that other player.
Please acknowledge that there are people who don't like 'ganking' who do enjoy PvP. And to address the original quesion of this thread: True Ganking (the enjoyment disruptive kind) can never be justified.
Are you being purposefully obtuse?! I never said or meant any of the things you have listed. My point is that if you kill someone in game repeatedly and without that person having any chance to defend him/-herself that it is not the ingame character that is frustrated but the person at the keyboard. Thus, your ingame virtual actions have real life consequences.
[edited to shorten post]
Now if you are going to quote him telling how wrong he is you are effectivly taking the side of the people he is speaking against. That's the logical conclusion when you see somebody quoting and counter arguing their point. so you basically said those things by proxy.
So you are saying, by speaking up against his statement I agree with everyone he is disagreeing with? I mean, come on! You're actually using coherent and fully formed sentences and you don't see a major flaw in this logic?
I think you misunderstood me when i said you advocate the other side by proxy. I wasn't speaking about anything else but the armchair psychology used to describe ingame action and how that somehow fits with a real life personality. Or how people complain there are no consequences, but should have because real life has consequences. It's nonsense like that i was referring to. People need to realize we are talking about a game here. Whatever you feel about ganking is your opinion about it. I can't really argue against that. What are you going to do, suddently change your feelings towards it? No It's the nonsense going around where people draw real life comparisons i aimed to put down. I think we generally agree on some of the points.
When i played in a purist guild in EQ we were 100% against cross teaming. We were divided for a reason on a pvp server. The only time we really "ganked" somebody was when they cross teamed IE grouping with the percieved enemy. They would be sitting in their exp camp spot being happy jovial. Along comes me and a few guildies and killed them ourtight then telling them to leave the area. I'm sure those players thought we were complete assholes only out to ruin their day of fun and enjoyment of sucking on the big exp titty.
Which brings me to my point.
Whenever somebody gets killed in a PvP situation, isn't automatically justified in calling foul because they didn't like what just happened. The essense of pvp does not = at your leisure or on your terms. That is how a lot of these "shocked" players percieve it. if they get killed for a reason they do not agree with then you are the jackass that is out to make them quit the game...please more nonsense. These days all it takes is for you to kill somebody else in PvP = ganking. Where as in the old days ganking meant killing individuals in a pack making the fight pathetically easy. Or attacking somebody when they were completely defensless. Now every PvP encounter is a gank. Specially if you do not provide a reason as to why you killed this player. My take on that is that initially PvP sounds fun for a lot of people. When it comes down to it, that adrenaline rush they get from a surprise attack is too much. It does something to their mood and their kneejerk reactions of feeling assulted as if it was a real life incident. this is a good indicator PvP isn't for you but more of a "i can enter a battleground at my leisure" type of game where you don't face surprise attacks. But i guess it's easier to call everyone else a bully than to face the fact that this playstyle may be too much for them.
You can't join a free for all PvP server then expect that you get to pick your battles when, where and with whom. That's not how it works. i know a lot of people would like to stomp their feet and demand that it should be like that. That doesn't mean they are entitled to it. There are plenty of variety out there to pick both the game and the type of server you wish to play on. You do not have to join a free for all PvP server. If you do decide to join one there is no crying when you will be good ol fashioned "ganked"
Fibsdk, I agree with your statement and the corollaries: PvP =/= Ganking!
I don't think anyone has any right to complain when killed in any PvP setting. Annoying as it may be to be ambushed, etc. Ganking has an element of harassment in it, that I object to. PvP does not.
.... Gank away pvpers, the more they whine, the better we feel.
Which was, I believe, my point.
That's griefing and should not be confused with ganking. I prefer to have a reason for killing another player.
Gankers will always be around, and to be honest, they can make leveling much more exciting, not to mention giving us players that try to bring some kind of morality to the game, a fair target.
To adjust a quote from Sin City; "Gankers, I love them, no matter what you do to them, you don't feel bad"
With or without RP, and regardless of definition, ganking is simply part of any game that is programmed to allow it (and not even discourage it). With the exception of unintended loopholes (i.e. exploits), everything the game allows is in my opinion fully justified.
Don't like it? Play on a PvE realm, or if your game has none, pick another game if it bothers you too much. I personally like the thrill of open PvP, but with as little game time as I have I want to do what I want, uninterrupted, so I mostly play PvE.
Comments
Ganking is fine as long as it doesn't cross the line to harrassment.
If I, at high level, run across a level 1 and decide I want to kill him for whatever reason, I call that fair, if after I kill him, I camp him and kill him again and again and again, I call it harrassment.
In WoW if I saw low level alliance I would /wave. If they /waved /bowed /saluted or even said hi, I would be on my merry way, if they said nothing or /spit /slap /fart or anything rude, I would end them.
Back in My Asheron's Call days when Going Red ment something, before AC created (PK-Lite, were you would not drop items if killed) Personally weather it was Red of pink pk, I dont like being ganked, unless you are on team vs team and you catch an opponent alone.
City of Hero's/Villians PvP is not as fun as What AC had and way to much ganking goes on in it.
I do remember that on DAoC, the pvp servers were incredibly crowded for the first six weeks after they opened.
They then became the least populated servers, period.
So for at least in that game, yes, the pvp servers were the lowest population servers. Make of that what you will.
Yea PVP servers in many games got their population thinned out very fast. I think that suggested quite a degree of difficulties retaining gamers there. Even for games with very popular PVE servers, their PVP servers are ghost towns. Can't imagine all these games have crappy PVP implementation.
I think FFA PVP is not exactly the best way to retain a large server population.
I thought Shadowbane was well done, but it was so buggy on launch that the game never recovered ( and that in itself should be a lesson to MMO producers, but we keep seeing crappy launches - think "Vanguard", a game that really should have done better than it fared. ).
I'm playing DF now, and it's entertaining ( at least for me
) but it does have more in common with a FPS than a true MMO. And that's not to degrade it, it's got some strong points but the launch has not been done well, and I think that it will rapidly fall into "niche" mode.
And when that happens, not much new content or improvements tend to happen.
The question: Is ganking every justified?
My answer: NO
The only people who gank other players are people who can not adequately PVP against someone of their own power/level in a game and they enjoy the rush of torturing other players who can not defend themselves.
Of course my definition of ganking is when High level players repeatedly kill low level players who stand no chance. The other definition is to reapetedly kill a player as they respawn from death before they have a chance to do anything such as equip weapons and armor. The last possible definition is to repeatedly kill a player with such odds the player does not stand a chance as in 6 vrs 1 odds or something along those lines.
I thought Shadowbane was well done, but it was so buggy on launch that the game never recovered ( and that in itself should be a lesson to MMO producers, but we keep seeing crappy launches - think "Vanguard", a game that really should have done better than it fared. ).
I'm playing DF now, and it's entertaining ( at least for me
) but it does have more in common with a FPS than a true MMO. And that's not to degrade it, it's got some strong points but the launch has not been done well, and I think that it will rapidly fall into "niche" mode.
And when that happens, not much new content or improvements tend to happen.
SB and DF represents a different story, not meaning better or worse, just different.
SB and DF are built to be PVP games. The game is PVP focused with everything thrown in to make the PVP richer in content. Stripped of PVP, there is nothing in SB or DF. There is no PVP servers, PVE servers, there is SB servers, DF servers. Period.
The games I am talking about are PVE/PVP games in which PVE has a meaning on its own without ffa PVP. Games like EQ2 or WoW where you have PVE servers and PVP servers. PVP servers works on ffa pvp, while PVE servers have constrained PVP like WG or arenas. My argument is, for games like WoW/EQ2, the PVP servers tend to lose population much faster than their PVE servers.
Umm... if pvp server is loosing population faster, then why is it that there are more heavy populated pvp server than pve server?
Check the number of pvp servers vs number of pve servers in WoW, and check their population levels. Its a fact, not a wishful argument.
It depends on the game, kind of.
If an MMO has a PvP component where you can kill another player without having to meet X,Y,Z criteria then yes, ganking is justified even without RP. The option to kill is there. If people don't want the risk of being ganked, then they should play on a non-PvP server or a game with restricted PvP / no PvP.
Every MMO I've played has been PvP friendly, open ended in some, not so open in others. People that complain about being ganked, don't last long. They often complain there's no way to justify it, no reason at all that could EVER make it right. RP doesn't sound like the most solid of reasons but if PvP is in the game, and you're playing the game, you are acknowledging your risk of this by simply playing..
Check the number of pvp servers vs number of pve servers in WoW, and check their population levels. Its a fact, not a wishful argument.
That is the point PvP server players seem to always forget. If for ever PvP server there are 10 non PvP server, the population on the PvP server would have to be higher then all 10 non pvp servers combined in order to be more popular. There is a reason they need all those non pvp servers, and it's because way more people want to play that way.
The reason so many people avoid FFA PvP servers is the very reason this thread mentions, ganking. There are too many people who find their fun by deliberatly ruining the fun of other people. Not by having a challenge or competition but by actually ruining the real life fun of other human beings. It is mostly a result of a sad childhood or something I'm sure but either way it makes it unenjoyable to the masses. Combine that with the fact that most people don't want to non stop PvP, often times they PvP for a while and then want to go quest or craft or whatever it may be. Once again FFA PvP servers are not good for that so it drives people away,
Ganking is sad, and you normally end up feeling bad for the person who is ganking. Since obviously their lives are missing something. I used to play UO in the early days, and AC, and the FFA PvP server on DAoC. One thing I would never waste my time doing was ganking people. I would go after people who might have some good loot for me or go after people who would give me a good fight. That is where the excitement in PvP is, a fight that is tough for either side to win and when you start it you don't know if the winner will be you.
Here's a thought, Ganking will make you go blind and get hairy palms!
Most of the MMO i have played suffer from low population on PVP servers. PVE is always highly populated. I guess not everyone agrees with gank anyone anywhere style of play.
Agree or not, PVE with some PVP thrown in will always be more popular. For rest who enjoy griefing others, play DARKFALL.
I'd say ganking is never justified by roleplay, because no matter how demented your psychotic character might alledgedly be, you still have a responsibility towards your fellow players to ensure that they too are enjoying your encounters. If no one is enjoying the encounters they have with your character, you've failed as a roleplayer.
That's not saying that you have to give everyone cakes or have sex with them, but there is no content in ganking. Just the game engine doing a few calculations and you're dead. No one gets anything out of that. Moreover, ganking suggests a one-sided fight where one player has zero chance to influence the outcome, and the chances of escape are pretty much zero as well. These battles are mostly short and pointless. We can assume that the character you attacked was also presently engaged in some form of roleplay which was deliberately ruined by your sudden, brutal and absolutely pointless attack.
Chances are the targetted player of your attack did not enjoy what you just did. In fact you just ruined his roleplay session, and gave him the hassle of trying to explain how he just returned back from the dead - or even worse, you're playing a game with permadeath so you simply destroyed all the work he had put into his character and gave him absolutely nothing in return.
If you want to play a ruthless psychotic that kills and maims all that he can, then I'd say you'd damned better roleplay through the encounters. If you're doing your job well, it is quite likely that other players will simply play along if you attempt to depict in emotes how the target character is caught in your devious ambushes. They're probably even going to be willing to roleplay through a losing battle if your skills are worth a damned.
But key to that whole scenario is the willingness to understand the other player and their character and act in a way that works for both of you. Your character might only be out looking to cover himself in the blood of his fallen enemies and devour their still beating hearts, but You as a player are (or should be) out to enjoy yourself with other people.
I've personally played through a number of encounters where my characters have suffered permanent death at the hands of other players, or suffered permanent damage like decapitated limbs, gouged out eyes, severed fingers, burns - and some of these encounters have been my most memorable and exciting ones that I can recall. Need I say that none of these encounters were actually played out in the game engine itself? They were roleplayed through, thoroughly and properly, making them exciting and dynamic instead of two character models whacking eachother repeatedly with oversized weapons untill one dies.
Instead, they have all altered the way I roleplayed my character and added to his/her being. The brutish warrior suffering a crippling injury to his sword arm; the pretty songstress taking severe burns to her face; the expert archer losing an eye? These are all highly interesting situations that would challange the players behind the character.
Anyways, aside from the long rant above I'll say that anyone that even tries to justify ganking with saying that he's playing a chaotic evil character, or an assassin - or whatever other lame excuse you can think of, is simply a poor excuse of a roleplayer and likely in need of a basic roleplay guide or a therapist.
Even gankers don't like to be ganked, that kinda finishes the discussion. I mean if they don't like and whine about it being unfair, then even they must know it's wrong somewhere deep (way) down in their soul.
Just to illustrate, in an mmo i used to play called 9dragons, in one of the patches they introduced a new fairly low level quest that required players to go into the PvP zone. Ofcourse there where mid level players that started ganking the low level char that were jsut there to complete the quest. They being ganker were not only killing them but also then insulting them etc.
Anyway after a while of this going on, a couple of high lvl player came in and started handing the mid lvl gankers their you know what's in retribution and kept attacking and killing them even in safe zones etc untill they left. the second the mid lvls got killed though, they started whineing about how unfair it was, the the high lvls were jerks for continually killing them, blah blah etc etc. So yeah, they hated getting treated like they treat others, so they must know it's wrong and therefore not justified.
before someone brings up the argument that the high lvl's killing the gankers is justifiable ganking, i must counter that the high lvl's do not kill these gankers for no reason, they did it in response to the gankers actions, which is comepletly in the spirit of proper PvP and thus is not considered ganking.
[edited to shorten post]
Now if you are going to quote him telling how wrong he is you are effectivly taking the side of the people he is speaking against. That's the logical conclusion when you see somebody quoting and counter arguing their point. so you basically said those things by proxy.
So you are saying, by speaking up against his statement I agree with everyone he is disagreeing with? I mean, come on! You're actually using coherent and fully formed sentences and you don't see a major flaw in this logic?
Let me try it again and maybe we can agree:
If you play on a full PvP server you have to expect to be killed by random players. It's not pretty, but it's part of the rule-set that has been defined for this particular server.
If you play on a PvE server and venture into a PvP area, you can equally be killed by random players. They are within their rights to kill you, if they so wish.
Where I make a distinction is the moral aspect of behaviour that goes beyond simply killing someone. I consider people who do the following, gankers:
- kill you right after zoning, before the zone has fully initialized
- hang out in a lowbie area and repeatedly killing players of much lower level - preventing them from progressing
- camp your corpse in a game where you have to retrieve it, in order not to lose XP,Gold, etc.
- kill you through superior level or number and then stalk you, killing you repeatedly.
These things have happened to me and I'm sure some other people posting in this thread. I have a limited amount of hours available to play MMOs and I want to have fun. In those cases I could not do anything but log out and try again later.
To get this straight: These actions conform to the rule set, but in my opinion are morally questionable and only serve to disrupt the other player's enjoyment of the game. Enjoyment that is being paid for by that other player.
Please acknowledge that there are people who don't like 'ganking' who do enjoy PvP. And to address the original quesion of this thread: True Ganking (the enjoyment disruptive kind) can never be justified.
[edited to shorten post]
Now if you are going to quote him telling how wrong he is you are effectivly taking the side of the people he is speaking against. That's the logical conclusion when you see somebody quoting and counter arguing their point. so you basically said those things by proxy.
So you are saying, by speaking up against his statement I agree with everyone he is disagreeing with? I mean, come on! You're actually using coherent and fully formed sentences and you don't see a major flaw in this logic?
I think you misunderstood me when i said you advocate the other side by proxy. I wasn't speaking about anything else but the armchair psychology used to describe ingame action and how that somehow fits with a real life personality. Or how people complain there are no consequences, but should have because real life has consequences. It's nonsense like that i was referring to. People need to realize we are talking about a game here. Whatever you feel about ganking is your opinion about it. I can't really argue against that. What are you going to do, suddently change your feelings towards it? No It's the nonsense going around where people draw real life comparisons i aimed to put down. I think we generally agree on some of the points.
When i played in a purist guild in EQ we were 100% against cross teaming. We were divided for a reason on a pvp server. The only time we really "ganked" somebody was when they cross teamed IE grouping with the percieved enemy. They would be sitting in their exp camp spot being happy jovial. Along comes me and a few guildies and killed them ourtight then telling them to leave the area. I'm sure those players thought we were complete assholes only out to ruin their day of fun and enjoyment of sucking on the big exp titty.
Which brings me to my point.
Whenever somebody gets killed in a PvP situation, isn't automatically justified in calling foul because they didn't like what just happened. The essense of pvp does not = at your leisure or on your terms. That is how a lot of these "shocked" players percieve it. if they get killed for a reason they do not agree with then you are the jackass that is out to make them quit the game...please more nonsense. These days all it takes is for you to kill somebody else in PvP = ganking. Where as in the old days ganking meant killing individuals in a pack making the fight pathetically easy. Or attacking somebody when they were completely defensless. Now every PvP encounter is a gank. Specially if you do not provide a reason as to why you killed this player. My take on that is that initially PvP sounds fun for a lot of people. When it comes down to it, that adrenaline rush they get from a surprise attack is too much. It does something to their mood and their kneejerk reactions of feeling assulted as if it was a real life incident. this is a good indicator PvP isn't for you but more of a "i can enter a battleground at my leisure" type of game where you don't face surprise attacks. But i guess it's easier to call everyone else a bully than to face the fact that this playstyle may be too much for them.
You can't join a free for all PvP server then expect that you get to pick your battles when, where and with whom. That's not how it works. i know a lot of people would like to stomp their feet and demand that it should be like that. That doesn't mean they are entitled to it. There are plenty of variety out there to pick both the game and the type of server you wish to play on. You do not have to join a free for all PvP server. If you do decide to join one there is no crying when you will be good ol fashioned "ganked"
Fibsdk, I agree with your statement and the corollaries: PvP =/= Ganking!
I don't think anyone has any right to complain when killed in any PvP setting. Annoying as it may be to be ambushed, etc. Ganking has an element of harassment in it, that I object to. PvP does not.
Which was, I believe, my point.
That's griefing and should not be confused with ganking. I prefer to have a reason for killing another player.
Gankers will always be around, and to be honest, they can make leveling much more exciting, not to mention giving us players that try to bring some kind of morality to the game, a fair target.
To adjust a quote from Sin City; "Gankers, I love them, no matter what you do to them, you don't feel bad"
"nerf rock, paper is working as intended."
- Scissors.
Head Chop
With or without RP, and regardless of definition, ganking is simply part of any game that is programmed to allow it (and not even discourage it). With the exception of unintended loopholes (i.e. exploits), everything the game allows is in my opinion fully justified.
Don't like it? Play on a PvE realm, or if your game has none, pick another game if it bothers you too much. I personally like the thrill of open PvP, but with as little game time as I have I want to do what I want, uninterrupted, so I mostly play PvE.