PVE servers/Safer seas/victim mentality from a “pvpers” perspective

All they have really been doing is adding more wide reaching QoL and leaning pvp a bit more into consenting combat via incentives.

People that were getting crumbs just now have more opportunity to have an experience where they can grow in their play styles.

They really haven't changed a whole lot in design, it's largely just a more sustainable approach to their original foundation.

This game still has a lot of struggle. People struggle all the time in this game, Rare has just improved the experience for more people over time, which is overall a positive thing for the community and longevity.

@wolfmanbush

Agree, and if my post came across as a criticism of safer seas, I didn’t mean it that way. I think safer seas is perfectly fine as currently proposed. My post is directed towards much of the conversation that’s followed the announcement.

@capt-greldik said in PVE servers/Safer seas/victim mentality from a “pvpers” perspective:

@wolfmanbush

Agree, and if my post came across as a criticism of safer seas, I didn’t mean it that way. I think safer seas is perfectly fine as currently proposed. My post is directed towards much of the conversation that’s followed the announcement.

Public feedback areas are just a small part of the overall vibe of the community.

It'll be people that are heated/critical/participating for social reasons/etc. Tough to gauge overall opinions

The typical sea of thieves player doesn't ask for much and doesn't have a super strong opinion on most things in the game.

So you're not really addressing a major view as most aren't trying to change the game in major ways.

If I go spend a week doing what I already do, which is wander around servers and check in on people and see how everyone is doing, most of the people doing their own thing aren't doing much other than trying to enjoy a game. They want new hair styles and a little of this and a little of that. They have their concerns and likes/dislikes but they are just here to have some fun.

That always needs to be acknowledged imo, the organic environment and those outside of these social areas largely do not see this game as broken, they aren't too fired up one way or the other.

Sea of thieves is largely fun for them, family time, alone time, escapism, more easy going. The feedback areas under-represent the appreciation that people have for this game outside of the common social areas.

Agree again, I don't believe that the conversations taking place on these forums necessarily represent a significant portion of the community, although they sometimes do. However, this is a conversation not at all unique to SOT, and the words said on forums can very well lead to actions. For that reason I'd like to share my perspective as well.

In addition to that, I genuinely would like other players to empower themselves a little bit, not just in this game but in others. They could improve their sailing experience so much just by learning some basic competencies and using them to better survive, or even conquer on the High Seas.

@capt-greldik said in PVE servers/Safer seas/victim mentality from a “pvpers” perspective:

Agree again, I don't believe that the conversations taking place on these forums necessarily represent a significant portion of the community, although they sometimes do. However, this is a conversation not at all unique to SOT, and the words said on forums can very well lead to actions. For that reason I'd like to share my perspective as well.

In addition to that, I genuinely would like other players to empower themselves a little bit, not just in this game but in others. They could improve their sailing experience so much just by learning some basic competencies and using them to better survive, or even conquer on the High Seas.

It wasn't really a player issue over the years it was an environment issue.

Most of the main participation issues are directly caused by a risk/reward scenario that ended up running people out and causing them to adapt in ways that some content creators/veteran players didn't like

The last year has seen significant improvements in this (and will have more as season 10 goes on) which will likely lead to improved pvp scenarios.

It takes time for things to regrow.

Right now what is slowing things down is that the social areas have become so unpleasant. If people try to do much of anything outside the narratives they get pushed out or pressured to the point where they conform to the negativity. This slows down growth for potential new content creators for SoT and in general just people that have a more pleasant outlook on things.

This creates an issue of largely bringing in more negative mindsets (socially) rather than organic growth of optimistic/appreciative/fresh approaches (socially).

@ghutar said in PVE servers/Safer seas/victim mentality from a “pvpers” perspective:

It's like playing poker with friend for very low stakes enough to care and make intresiting low enough to not be mad if I loose that money.

I'm not sure that's a comparison Rare (or Xbox/Microsoft) want made. It equates all extraction games with gambling; all PvEvP where loot can be lost, really. I'm happy with the comparison, but it would also mean various jurisdictions (like Australia) would move Sea of Thieves to an R18+ rating for having 'gambling' or 'gambling-like' activity. It's currently PEGI 12 (PG in Australia). Given that they don't actively use loot boxes in the game, getting hit with a restriction for game design would be interesting (but not entirely out of character with the classifications boards in various countries).

It's not about enjoying or not pvp aspect but more about adult mindset and abilty to deal with loosing in game.

It's marketed to players who are 12+. Some of the younger players latch onto the 'shoot first, diplomacy isn't an option' approach that they come across from other players (whether that was the actual interaction that they learned from or not). Various others copy streamers and content creators (even old recordings). If you're proposing that they gatekeep the game to 18+, then maybe you're driving a point somewhere, but until/unless that's the case, the supposition of an adult mindset misses the wider problem of the intended audience.

Any 'adult mindset' aware of the target audience should be factoring in engagement with minors, and the community should have calibrated itself with that in mind. That it didn't, and still hasn't, should be widely regarded as a series of red signal flares visible across the known universe. (And it goes without saying that adults should be aware of the target audience, given the agreements that they signed/accepted to play.)

And now IF being sunk with that loot, or loosing match bring enough negative emotions to push some player out of edge and made him postal, rage quit or other extreme behavior then it's really not a game for that person or maybe online games are not for that person at all.

As that cloud sound harsh moment when you devolve to see other players and forum user as some kind of enemy that needed to be labeled (from toxic pvper to sore looser pver - and I saw so much of that in diffrent forums..) then I think that there is generaly problem with your's emotions and mindset not game or it's community.

Aside from age, and reasonable adult expectations of a game aimed at children, the context of what triggers the emotions matters. I've been in a position where we've been sunk multiple times by the same ship, unprovoked. They taunted us that our loot had sunk, and they weren't interested in it. 'Disappointed' is the feeling I had, because their interactions with us were straight to cannons, and then offensive voice chat at every opportunity; I've never been 'angry' in this game, but I've certainly been annoyed enough to call the session and then shift my solo play to active avoidance measures for a while afterwards. Yes, hyperaggression may be the minority of users we encounter, but if they drive enough ill-will towards other players, then the default reaction of certain crews will be to avoid diplomatic engagement (which, if you recall, was part of the vision of the game), and go straight to combat. After a while, this learned response overshadows the game, assuming it wasn't one already cultivated by other games or life experiences. (Age matters a lot, as the context of the person, say, high school, will shape how poorly this plays out on the individual; the game is marketed as suitable for kids, so this matters a great deal.)

As a result of all of these experiences, the people I play with generally treat any silent, and extended, shadowing/ghosting (following or paralleling) our vessel, with suspicion. People regularly don't reply when we try to talk, and we usually turn into the wind and move out (stopping what we're doing, often selling and ending the session). We're largely over forced engagements turning into us sinking people, taking their loot, selling it, and then being harassed for a situation we didn't create. I don't know what happened to decimate the friendly part of the community over the years, but it's rare we get any non-hostile responses now (even if we're a fresh spawn and have no emissary flag up).

@soulstinger2k20 said in PVE servers/Safer seas/victim mentality from a “pvpers” perspective:

Nobody starts this game as a 'sweat,' every last hardcore pvper started out getting hopelessly outclassed by everyone who got them in their crosshairs.

People who've had years to play the game start with an advantage when put in a server with new players. People with experience in similar settings do too. Those who started at launch weren't hopelessly outclassed in game skill. To solve for experience differences, the game has long needed more than the Maiden Voyage. A Pirate's Life (Part 1) provided some of the missing points in the tutorial (that whole Tall Tale series is basically a series of tutorials), but it's pretty clear that it's not enough, and some people won't do tall tales or Maiden Voyages (often due to lack of company in either/both). Safer Seas is coming to do that, and more.

I will never undersrand people who buy a game that is clearly marked as pvpve or where pvp is clearly included, if not central to the game's purpose, and then constantly demand the core identity of the game be changed due to the afore mentioned victim mentality.

Part of Safer Seas is a gentle on-ramp (tutorial/self-teaching), but a bigger part of it is a place for people to relax a bit (removing PvP). Rare made the statement on this, and while media sources screwed up their initial press comments on it (leading many to think it started earlier than December), the statement was Rare's to make. There's no longer a 'PvP is clearly included' (in the sense of required) when considering buying the game. Come December, PvP becomes entirely optional (with limitations). A bigger part of it will ultimately end up being for those of us who don't have the time to keep up skills that have no practical value outside of the game (and increasingly I fall into that category with games). Either way, Rare has opted to test the waters with Safer Seas, and it will almost certainly be driven by the data they get back. To that end, anyone new coming in talking about Safer Seas is doing so coming from a perspective where PvEvP isn't part of the game they bought (or wanted to buy), and is instead something outside of the PvE content they're here to play. If you're annoyed, Rare made the decision (after years of saying they wouldn't), and this is why there's such an influx of activity around it. (And that activity, if translated to gameplay, may open up more PvE activities in the game, and it'd be great to see more PvE activities.)

I've certainly got my gripes with the limitations they've put on it. I've said it in other threads: lack of Captaincy in Safer Seas is weird (Guilds can progress ship milestones for you, so that 'achievement' is meaningless anyway), lack of certain QOL (Sovereigns) is odd to boot, and lack of drive for cosmetics (can't save, can't trinket?). Lack of FoF, FoTD, etc., are all somewhat odd (given it would force a Skull of Destiny as a requirement for FoTD, and could have been used as a gateway to force omens by players, defaulting to Kraken Seas!). And these gripes aren't in some weird isolation. I keep seeing captained ships not turning in at the Sovereign. Two crews didn't know that they could. Servers are often entirely empty of emissary flags (likely fearing Reapers, even when there aren't any); we generally raise one anyway. These mechanics are just standard quality of life now. Either way, data driven responses will likely see things added or removed.

My big gripe with the state of the game is that people are constantly scuttling (limited attempts to even flee, very few engage in voice or text chat). A few hours ago we had a Captained Galleon scuttle against our two-player sloop because we approached the Sovereign on the other side of the island. I'm not remotely bloodthirsty (cannons usually tiled at least half way up, alliance flag offer almost always out, and ship title is almost always Voyager), but it's a sign of the state of the game that people expect hostilities. If we're at a point where those people are consuming slots for people who want PvEvP, then it's a good thing we're getting Safer Seas. But the onus will be on those who want the shared world to do both PvE and PvEvP activities; those lamenting the loss of PvE-only players to Safer Seas miss the point that the only other option for those people was to stop playing.

Excellent post and your mindset is inspiring. I think this post should be pinned.

All that said, I will still try advocate for those who don't or even can't have the same dedicated you have. Mostly I just wanna advocate for everyone who wants to play the game and have fun. I do believe this post and your approach is 100% the right way to go about it and those who can follow your example definitely should. I also don't think everyone can though and if being able to opt out of PvP is the difference between them playing or never playing the game again, I think that's fair.

Only thing I disagree with in your post is thinking that separating the community is a detriment to the game. Surface level, it seems like it but SoT has a healthy enough size for a player base that I really don't see Safer Seas having any real impact on anyone's High Seas experience. There's too many people who do love the game for what it is and the interactions/threat of other crews is indeed core to that.

Plus with Rare's decision to make so many things exclusive to High Seas, it's the ideal setup to bring more people into the High Seas when they are ready to take it for what it is. And that's the best thing about High Seas, it is the definition of the Sea of Thieves experience and I believe separating that out like they plan to really will make that clear so that when people finally do step into the High Seas, at least those who have the time, energy and dare I say dedication to do so, they are prepared to embrace it properly. And that's regardless of Safer Seas having full rewards or not, which is the only change to Safer Seas I see no problem with. All the other limitations on Safer Seas are vital for upholding that understanding of what it means to play High Seas, where the risks are great but the rewards are greater and that's where the game shines brightest.

Either way thank you, @Capt-Greldik for posting this thread. It's truly is insightful and, in my opinion, should be seen by anyone who thinks PvP is a bad thing.
And thank you for taking the time to read my response. Take care.

P.S. 1k hours since March despite working full time and having a family is REALLY impressive. I salute you, sir.

"PVPers" already have the ability to "segregate" the game from the PVE of the game so it's not like "PVErs" are alone in that sort of attitude. The difference is that if someone wants to exclusively PVP, they are empowered to do so but if someone doesn't really want to PVP then they're stuck with PVP. I'm fine with PVPVE, personally. But this argument of the two participants having equal standing just because a duality can be drawn is silly. In fact, their standings are antithetical. One completely absorbs the other as though segregation was already in play. Safer Seas isn't any different in that regard except that it comes with a 70% reduction in w007 on top of losing access to emissary and AF.

Safer Seas is just gonna give those players you're so worried about a place to actually complete activities. They have a bad time and then they never get more than a single toe wet. Maybe some get their whole feet in but stop there. I have introduced 5 people to this game, and played with like 4 newbies. None of them play anymore. Except my wife and one friend who will probably play like once or twice a year. They may be more inclined to play on Safer Seas and when they feel competent, I might show them Hourglass since the time investment is low. From there they might go onto HS.

@ghutar said in PVE servers/Safer seas/victim mentality from a “pvpers” perspective:

@orloglausa I think that you quite missunderdtand me or take comparasion to liteary.

So long story short:

• poker comparasion was about having stakes giving enough trill to try to win yet being low enought to lot loosing mind on forum when loosing.

• adult mindset was about comperhasing that in eny game there is chance you will not win.

Hope that clarify stuff a little bit. Happy sailing.

I understood it. My point is that you're ascribing a requirement that's higher than the game's classified level. The maturity requirement, set by the developers and relevant classification boards, and, to that end, should be assumed by the community as the baseline, is that of minors. Extraction games are, functionally, gambling, with the odds set in part by other players. Without good matchmaking, the game's balance is tuned purely against PvE encounters (to put some pressure on those with "more skills"), and, as a result of all of this, the 'odds' change. Serious research into gambling says a lot more than I'm willing to go into in a post, but the point to underscore repeatedly here is that the community has a baseline assumption (12 years old). Increased sensitivity to peer pressure and marketing (including content creators and media sources) will shape the game experience as each encounter, and series of encounters, builds a fundamental understanding of how engagements are meant to proceed. This is a factor for adults too, and despite ostensibly having more development/growth and better judgment, the game effectively doubles, and then triples, down on its approach to in-game loot being gambling. (Yes, the 'value' is often entirely meaningless, but ancient coins are tied to part of the loot pool, so it's not actually entirely meaningless.)

This is all without having gone into the obvious: some players will never gain a skill level remotely near the average in the community, let alone the top players. Be it through lack of ability/growth/maturity, significant disadvantages in hardware (and one game isn't a good justification to upgrade, at least to those players), poor internet connection (with no ability to do anything about it), or lack of potential experience to learn, the reality is that for some to be 'above average', others have to be below it too. And there's no meaningful matchmaking, and so those players who enjoy parts of the game (sailing, fishing, delivering things in a low-risk-low-reward way), ultimately have to decide if they want to bother playing. Bearing in mind that the trend towards safe and 'chill' PvE activities has been pushed for a long time (possibly even pre-launch); fishing is the activity usually highlighted, even though it came in the anniversary update in 2019. Once you start to strip away the below average players who enjoy the game, or game space, but are objectively below average, people who were once in the 'average' band start to fall beneath it. Repeat it a lot over five years, and here we are. Yes, new players come in, but ultimately people are pushed into 'why bother?' zones. Hence why Safer Seas makes sense.

Either way, the bottom line is that Rare made the call to add PvE. Safer Seas is PvE, it's just one-crew PvE. They'd rather people play the game in a limited scope than not play it. As I said before, people buying the game for PvE now are doing so because of what Rare has said. There are many voices who just want some kind of sanity in how it's being done, restrictions (or initial restrictions) notwithstanding. And I'll against highlight that losing captained ships means we can't sell to the Sovereign which will directly impact some fishing behaviour in Safer Seas. Those who felt pushed out, or who are buying into the promise of a PvE mode, aren't players who would be 'lost'. That others might leave before feeling pushed out speaks to a wider problem in the community.

I'm someone who tolerates PvEvP, but doesn't generally engage in firefights without trying a diplomatic solution first. But being able to play PvE would absolutely help me 'recharge' my will to deal with the High Seas, instead of just playing something else after a few bad sessions. (And winning the fights vs. losing the fights doesn't change how I feel about it; pointless combat with toxic comments coming from either crew dampens my desire to play.)

@magus104 said in PVE servers/Safer seas/victim mentality from a “pvpers” perspective:

I am sure some people will enjoy safer seas and it might be slightly more popular than I imagine. However year1 it would have been AMAZING. Too many progression paths have been added since that a PvE focused player like myself tries to minmax for safer seas to be a solution to anything. I never finished my "gold hoarder voyage complete" and never finished "open 100 vaults" but now with captaincy I also need devils roar voyage complete and then I need ledger progression and renown and now on top of that I have a guild to level up.

To add to this: for many it is their first year, or will be their first year, so it would help them a lot. But for those of us minmaxing the game, I agree; the current state of Safer Seas will be the 'chill' spot ascribed, but not a lot more. I'll probably still spend a lot of time in there, as I've found my sessions leaning heavily towards silent hostilities over the last couple of weeks.

I will say Safer Seas loot being only 30% of current loot value is great. However I think high seas needs its loot values boosted to make the progression gap even greater. 3/4 of the loot in high seas isn't even worth picking up. Especially if you are on the fort grinding or have been questing in the Roar.

As a starting point, it's probably fine. If they then added emissary flags to it, and removed progression limits, I would still call it fine. Gameplay for Pirate Lords is effectively just a sandbox anyway. Other than ancient coins, loot has limited value.

Sad truth is none of our opinions on this matter. They finally caved on the PvE debate because they see the metrics. They only report the positive numbers to us. So when they make a decision like this our opinions wont carry much weight. Safer Seas is coming out extremely limited to try and ease PvP players minds that "hey look it didn't impact the game at all" because 90% of the people who play now aren't going to take the amount of negatives coming with Safer Seas. One the PvE server shock dies down I suspect they will tweak Safer Seas to be more appealing to people. Then again when have they updated any feature they add? Only updated arena once and didn't understand people need cosmetics to grind so by not adding new rewards they scratched their heads as to why no one was playing. Hourglass has been out for a year and nothing new added to it. Did they even add that "cross stamp" play they were talking about? I still seem to match against the same opponent over and over which makes me think they gave up on that when the mode died down after a month it just became obvious updating it wasn't worth their time.

I'm hoping that they start using the Safer Seas model to add more PvE, enabling it there first, and then bringing it to the High Seas to test engagement. If players aren't interested in it in the Safer Seas, then it probably needs refining; if it's not worth getting without the PvP pressure, it's certainly not worth fighting over.

@crowedhunter said in PVE servers/Safer seas/victim mentality from a “pvpers” perspective:

"PVPers" already have the ability to "segregate" the game from the PVE of the game so it's not like "PVErs" are alone in that sort of attitude. The difference is that if someone wants to exclusively PVP, they are empowered to do so but if someone doesn't really want to PVP then they're stuck with PVP. I'm fine with PVPVE, personally. But this argument of the two participants having equal standing just because a duality can be drawn is silly. In fact, their standings are antithetical. One completely absorbs the other as though segregation was already in play. Safer Seas isn't any different in that regard except that it comes with a 70% reduction in w007 on top of losing access to emissary and AF.

Safer Seas is just gonna give those players you're so worried about a place to actually complete activities. They have a bad time and then they never get more than a single toe wet. Maybe some get their whole feet in but stop there. I have introduced 5 people to this game, and played with like 4 newbies. None of them play anymore. Except my wife and one friend who will probably play like once or twice a year. They may be more inclined to play on Safer Seas and when they feel competent, I might show them Hourglass since the time investment is low. From there they might go onto HS.

I agree to an extent, what bothers me is that players choose not to participate in a significant aspect of the core design. When I say participate I don’t mean becoming a pvp streamer super hero, but at least learn the basics of survival. One doesn’t have to be a pvp god in order to escape, or to use their environment to their advantage. Every pvp encounter doesn’t have to be a parallel with cannons blasting nonstop until someone sinks. SoT is designed such that every player is both a pvper and pve’r. Players can focus more heavily on one aspect over the other, but at the end of the day we’re all just pirates, pirates with the ability to steal from one another, as the game is intended.

The fact is, pirates in SoT have all of the tools to survive and thrive on the seas. If they choose not to use those tools, as Rare intended for them to do, whose fault is that? Anyone can become competent at running away, anyone…

Toxicity and getting sunk isn’t limited to only “pve’rs”, that’s a blessing bestowed upon all of us. Furthermore, toxicity most definitely is not limited to pvpers. If players want to play Sea of Thieves without the thieves, fine. I really don’t understand that but whatever floats their vessel. However, I don’t want to hear that it’s because of toxicity, because that is a human behavior on full display on just about every internet space out there.

I’ve had trouble getting players to stick as well. I even bought the game for someone but they only logged in once. I did get one guy to play with me for about 2 weeks. We spent most of it doing hourglass (any new player should do this, imo) and his reason for quitting was primarily due to cheating, which at the time was rampant.

@capt-greldik I don't believe that toxic behavior being prevalent on the internet means that someone should be expected to tolerate it. They tend to just avoid those spaces because they expect that stuff to happen. It isn't omniprevalent here either, but bad luck on 2 out of 3 games and one toxic encounter can just really put a debt that's hard to recover on their expectations.

@crowedhunter

Agree, but that isn’t limited to pvp encounters. It’s just that pvp is possible and therefore toxic behavior will often result in pvp. Remove the pvp from the equation and the toxicity remains. In fact, in my experience it increases because what can one do if someone’s being toxic but the game doesn’t allow any direct action against them? The response will probably be toxic behavior of their own, eye for an eye. And yes, toxic behavior sometimes comes alongside pvp. Again, remove the pvp and the toxic behavior remains.

If players don’t like the aspect of being sunk, or losing in SoT, again that’s their prerogative, but pvp does not = toxicity, humans = toxicity. So if players want safe zones, or if players want to beef up the extended tutorial that is safer seas, whatever, but don’t tell me it’s because of toxicity. It’s because they don’t like sinking to other pirates, the toxicity will be waiting for them wherever they go on the internet.

It sucks to sink, usually, and if the pirate(s) responsible for your demise are also jerks, it sucks even more. One thing that road rage videos on YouTube taught me is that the person recording the altercation and filing a complaint is often partially to blame for the toxicity that occurred. Certainly not always, but often. If a pirate is under attack and starts scolding the attacking pirates, the attackers will probably respond in kind.

Nice article

@capt-greldik Okay, but the toxicity tends to come from other players generally and Safer Seas don't has that.

@knurd9369 Nobody will battle banter with me. They are completely silent until they get mad at me for making fun of them and then they get mean. Else they continue to say nothing. Or on more special occasions they might say stuff way over the line about what they're gonna do to a female on the crew or our mothers.

@crowedhunter

True. Sea of thieves without the thieves.

@silverwing-525 said in PVE servers/Safer seas/victim mentality from a “pvpers” perspective:

@crowedhunter said in PVE servers/Safer seas/victim mentality from a “pvpers” perspective:

@capt-greldik I don't believe that toxic behavior being prevalent on the internet means that someone should be expected to tolerate it. They tend to just avoid those spaces because they expect that stuff to happen. It isn't omniprevalent here either, but bad luck on 2 out of 3 games and one toxic encounter can just really put a debt that's hard to recover on their expectations.

Gotta love that stance of "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil", eh? It's amazing the lengths people will go to pretend like a problem doesn't exist, to the point of actually advocating for tolerating toxicity. Like.. Ok? So, we can't police interactions between players, we can't separate problem players from the group, we can't enforce any sort of code of conduct, and we can't separate players who's styles clash in a way that makes the experience unpleasant for one or both sides. I guess the only option is making an option where players can't interact at all (the nuclear option at this point)? Nope! Can't do that either! Gotta just grin and bear it! If you don't like that, then get out! Absolutely brilliant logic from some of these people.

Toxicity is actually against the terms of service and pirates can report such behavior. I’ve reported players for cheating and received emails in response from Rare stating that said players were banned, I imagine they’d do the same for a case of toxicity so long as sufficient evidence was presented. I’m not sure why toxicity is even part of the safer seas/safe zones/whatever else conversation. That’s kinda what I’ve been saying in my last few post. Toxicity is a human problem, especially on the internet. Toxicity is not synonymous with pvp or pve. This thread isn’t about whether or not toxicity is acceptable, it’s already widely considered not acceptable and is in fact a punishable offense per Rares terms of service.

If players would like to use the tutorial mode in order to avoid other pirates, and thus enjoy sea of sailing, go for it. My mentioning toxicity in this thread is very specifically in regards to players who seem to think that pirates sinking them is toxic behavior. No, that’s just players playing within the confines of how the game is intended to be played. If you think they’re being toxic while doing so then report it, as it’s a bannable offense.

@crowedhunter said in PVE servers/Safer seas/victim mentality from a “pvpers” perspective:

@knurd9369 Nobody will battle banter with me. They are completely silent until they get mad at me for making fun of them and then they get mean. Else they continue to say nothing. Or on more special occasions they might say stuff way over the line about what they're gonna do to a female on the crew or our mothers.

Did you report them? It’s bannable.

@capt-greldik Honestly, not in those instances. Hands are usually too full and 1then I tend to focus on my own crew instead of someone else to make sure they're still having fun. Besides I tend not to record SoT. I do if I'm by myself and they cross that line but people getting mad at me isn't really something that I would think is bannable. I'd feel bad if someone got banned over something that petty. It might make me not want to play, but that's got more to do with my outlook on people and society than the game. I should enjoy getting to have enemies, but those enemies make me sad.

The game is not welcoming or easy to learn for new players.

Most encounters with other players are default and mindlessly hostile, if not deliberately trollish. There is no curve. Learning is 100% negative reinforcement. Others love the game but don't care for pvp, a persistent ask from players from launch. The lack of an alternate mode has driven many players away from the game.

Presuming "victim mentality" of others makes everything said after hard to take seriously.

Why care about what someone else is doing, literally alone? It makes no sense and is actually claiming "victimhood" for oneself.

Play how you want. The game is still there for you. You never need to spend a second in Safer Seas and the people doing it won't miss seeing you or you them, guaranteed.

@knurd9369 That is absolutely true. In HG the ratio of positive encounters is great. It's not always the same kind of banter but it doesn't get toxic very often if ever. The worst I think I've seen in HG is condescension and bad faith participation. But I can't really get that in adventure bc I don't like to attack people, generally speaking. I will attack a Reaper emissary, especially if I am with someone and running an emissary (actually, I don't if they're in HG anymore since I feel like them taking away the allegiance is them saying they don't want interference.) but I don't generally have another person with me and I'll never attack a bigger ship bc the risk of teamshot is too high. So my exposure to good ones is dependent on dedicating my time purely to PVP.

One thing that helps the adventure defense though is that those people are usually actually bad at PVP and rely on catching you off guard or doing cheesy youtube stuff. Which is why it doesn't bother me personally that much when it happens anymore. I can put up a good fight at worst and be satisfied. But it does still bother me when the toxic stuff happens even if I win. So I get why the people in my crew would also feel that way. They don't enjoy the scenery as much as I do so they don't want to pay the price of the gamble. I get it.