Elite Dangerous Blocking System: A Call for Change

[Chaparral]

This all stems from the assumption that PvP/PvE partitioning is desirable. I don't personally think it is, and the very deliberate lack of such partitioning (which is itself a metagamist context defiance) is one of the things that originally attracted me to this game.

Maybe FDev's stance has changed enough that they think block is no longer sufficient, but I'm doubtful. I don't think they ever perceived this PvE/PvP thing as a problem; originally for the same reasons that I still don't, and later on because they had made their band-aid hack almost bulletproof.

I completely agree that there are many games that are strictly PVP 24/7, and that ED / EDO adopts this model.

I also completely agree that the current state of PVE /PVP partitioning is not perceived as a problem by FDEV. I do in fact think that they wear the gankfest designation as a badge of pride to a certain degree. "Our game is a simulation it is not meant to be fun or a game. It is what it is." mentality.

I play multiplayer survival games on PVP, and used to play on a SWOTOR server with the PVP designation.

The survival games usually offer an open PVE server option for those that are interested.

The PVP SWOTOR server pop evaporated and so I went over to a PVE with a PVP flagging system and had a much larger population to interact with.

Again, the issue is the system shock for new players is the industry standard is an open setting with some sort effective partition mechanics.

That does not exist in this 9 year old chestnut, and will never exist.

Hopefully in Elite Deadly they will look around a a bit and make a bid for a much larger population - but as I say - I'm not betting on it.

 

[Thatchinho]

I think that the issue is there are many MMO games that manage PVP and PVE partitioning MUCH better, and that there are multi-decade game examples of those mechanics.

The frustration is that FDEV seems to lack the capacity or interest to address the issue.

This is such a fundamentally false representation of things though.

Game makers should be trying to set things up in a way that suits the game they’re making. And that’s exactly what FD have done.

Now some people might want a different kind of game to the one FD have made, but that in no way means that FD should change their game to suit those people. Trying to portray that as a lack of capacity or interest doesn't help anyone.

 

[metatheurgist]

I came to this game because it reminded me heavily of EVE but I got to actually fly my ship and there is far less spreadsheets (I believe) to go over. I have the feeling that FDev expected player formed factions to be responsible for policing the systems at times, getting involved in more faction wars and fighting with other players in an opposing faction. Power Play stuff, which I have yet to dip my toes into, and Piracy. All of it was probably expected to just be player run at some point to some degree. The biggest problem is the playerbase is much smaller than what it used to be and everyone is so spread thin, especially now with the Thargoid attacks. I feel they messed up by dividing the community in the beginning by seperating Online and Offline/Private but still keeping your progress the same between worlds.

I seriously doubt that. The play space has always been mahoosive compared to any other MMO. 20000 systems in the bubble. If you had 20000 concurrent players, which would be outstanding for a niche space game like Elite, you couldn't spread them far enough to make player policing viable (1 cop per system and no-one would be a crim). I don't think Frontier devs were ever that deluded about the success of the game.

 

[varonica]

I have the feeling that FDev expected player formed factions to be responsible for policing the systems at times

In almost every game I have played where such systems have been implemented they end up as dead systems, they don't work, nothing ever happens. Player controlled cities for instance in one MMO I played where a clan could declare war and take over cities, cities banded together, formed empires, made agreements with other player empires and no wars every took place, any new clans and players that appeared in game were soundly smacked down by the controlling empires if they dared start anything, no cities ever changed hands, the entire system just sat there unused, a major part of the game was just dead and unused.

Any system that relies on players has to take into account the way players behave, and that can vary wildly depending on the number of players actually playing the game.

 

[We Are Being Hailed]

I seriously doubt that. The play space has always been mahoosive compared to any other MMO. 20000 systems in the bubble. If you had 20000 concurrent players, which would be outstanding for a niche space game like Elite, you couldn't spread them far enough to make player policing viable (1 cop per system and no-one would be a crim). I don't think Frontier devs were ever that deluded about the success of the game.

I never said it should fully be run by the players, I only said to some degree. I think they expected a lot more people than you would think to cruise around in the system and interact with one another especially given how large they made it. Given how it's a Space Sandbox as well it would attract the types of players who like a lot of other games similar in some fashion.

In almost every game I have played where such systems have been implemented they end up as dead systems, they don't work, nothing ever happens. Player controlled cities for instance in one MMO I played where a clan could declare war and take over cities, cities banded together, formed empires, made agreements with other player empires and no wars every took place, any new clans and players that appeared in game were soundly smacked down by the controlling empires if they dared start anything, no cities ever changed hands, the entire system just sat there unused, a major part of the game was just dead and unused.

Any system that relies on players has to take into account the way players behave, and that can vary wildly depending on the number of players actually playing the game.

You and metatheurgist just kind of said the same thing, it's a problem due to the lack of players in the game, but like I said not everything had to be fully reliant on the players. Which is why I mentioned that FDev could improve on the ground systems to make things like greifing a bit harder to do and crimes more rewarding to encourage the interactions. Depending on your ship and loadout, whether or not you have engineered modules/hardpoints, and the price on your head could determine how hard system security is thrown at you.

Personally I don't think they should have separated the community with Offline/Private and had just left it to open or at least made the progress completely seperate, with the current block system I can just remove unwanted individuals from my session. It's not that they can't see or interact with other people, just not me anymore and that's fine. I don't block people for just any little old thing, and the current blocking system is a godsend. I could be met in the middle and say that if system security was made more threatening and the sociopathic gankers who camp high sec stations killing newbies all the time were given a special "Most Wanted" title forcing security up their butt 24/7 until they leave the bubble, i'd be down for that. Then I'd be up for debating changing the current blocking system, until then no thanks.

 

[Banana's_Are_Good_For_You]

I think it would be quite funny if they removed the block, let's say tomorrow for funsies...
So, "if" this was to happen... how would y'all feel about it?
Just curious and no need for big rants... keep it simple.

 

[We Are Being Hailed]

I think it would be quite funny if they removed the block, let's say tomorrow for funsies...
So, "if" this was to happen... how would y'all feel about it?
Just curious and no need for big rants... keep it simple.

I'd still play in Open, but I feel it'd be frustrating at times when you have to deal with specific unwanteds who are just there to grief you or just be generally toxic/obnoxious. I'm more interested in why someone would honestly think the current system is bad.

 

[metatheurgist]

I don't block anyway, I live in Australia which is it's own private group (and also points out some of the fallacies of anti-blocking). But I totally get why people want it.

 

[EdzUp]

I came to ED after playing Elite, Frontier 1&2 we didnt PvP in those games and that was my assumption

 

[nanothargon]

Suggested player kill punishment system: pvp bounty hunting.

Cash reward (but not abusably large). Large reputation reward with faction/superpower.

For this to work, modes and blocking would need to change (for offenders only). When you kill a player:

• If they have a bounty, you have no consequence
• If they are clean, you have the current consequences (bounty, notoriety) plus
• Until some real world time has passed IN OPEN MODE (say, a week) blocking doesn’t work for you, so that you can be more effectively hunted
• Current information about you is published in local system news (last sighted location, no scan necessary) and possibly a top-ten most wanted in galactic map mode
• Law enforcement who successfully scan you issue a local system message giving your verbal location in the system and your location (if not in supercruise) becomes a targetable signal source

To make both sides of this gameplay more interesting, I also suggest a mechanism for players to issue assassination missions on other players (clean or criminal), with the reward cash paid by issuer on mission creation, with a fixed rate for target commander rank. Issuing a contract on a clean player immediately makes you subject to the conditions above, and gives you notoriety and a bounty.

 

[Jmanis]

I don't block anyway, I live in Australia which is it's own private group (and also points out some of the fallacies of anti-blocking). But I totally get why people want it.

 

[varonica]

it's a problem due to the lack of players in the game, but like I said not everything had to be fully reliant on the players.

No, indeed no. The MORE players you have the more likely such a system ends in stagnation, I have seen it multiple times in multiple games, this is how human society works.

 

[EdzUp]

Best way to deal with unwanted PvP would be to allow the killed player to add a percentage of their ship value to the bounty that way people will get hunted for the activity of ganking

 

[varonica]

Best way to deal with unwanted PvP would be to allow the killed player to add a percentage of their ship value to the bounty that way people will get hunted for the activity of ganking

Oh dear, how long ago did we all hear that suggestion for the first time? I forget now! A) people already get hunted for ganking, b) size of bounty would be a matter of pride for a ganker, it's what they play for! Who are the people who might be interested in hunting gankers down? Also a good way to move funds from one player to another, build huge bounty, swap to sidewinder, let friend kill you.....profit!

 

[EdzUp]

Oh dear, how long ago did we all hear that suggestion for the first time? I forget now! A) people already get hunted for ganking, b) size of bounty would be a matter of pride for a ganker, it's what they play for! Who are the people who might be interested in hunting gankers down? Also a good way to move funds from one player to another, build huge bounty, swap to sidewinder, let friend kill you.....profit!

Not if they have to be killed in the ship they were in, if you have a huge bounty the game could make it so you cannot change ships until the bounty is cleared.

 

[Ettanin]

I think it would be quite funny if they removed the block, let's say tomorrow for funsies...
So, "if" this was to happen... how would y'all feel about it?
Just curious and no need for big rants... keep it simple.

People will either leave or firewall up and block all TURN relays (which would only work in a wing or while in multicrew anyway as they aren't used to bridge randoms together unless the instance already exists and the last directly reachable CMDR leaves), incoming and outgoing ports used for peer-to-peer to play in empty instances or block the IP ranges of specific players.

 

[Thatchinho]

I feel they messed up by dividing the community in the beginning by seperating Online and Offline/Private but still keeping your progress the same between worlds.

There’s no Online / Offline split, everything is Online.

The way ED works is that there is a matchmaking server, which tries to match you with other players. It does this based on various rules, but particularly on things like the amount of relative lag in your internet connections. Assuming there are good enough connections and machines, then a peer to peer arrangement is set up with the most capable machine acting as a server* and the other machine’s connecting to it. An instance is created and the players that have been matched into that particular P2P group get put into that instance.

If you do something that changes the instance you’re in, hyperspacing into a new system for example, the matchmaking server will check for suitable existing instances of the new system and if they exist, match you to one of them, connect you to the players machine that is acting as the server for that instance, and then you’ll be put into the instance. If there’s no suitable instance already there, you’ll be placed into your own instance.

All the modes are is a set of rules for the matchmaking server.

The important thing to note is that someone can still end up in their own instance for various reasons, not just because they’re playing in solo.

Blocking is also a rule for the matchmaking server, but that’s where it gets complicated as the interactions of it with various other rules can mean it effects more than just the blocker and the player they’ve blocked. (See @Morbad ‘s posts for more on this.)

*this server is tracking and synchronising ship positions and things like that. The impact of actions on the game universe are dealt with by FD’s servers, as are things like mission generation, trade prices, and other things like that, as part of the Background Simulation.

 

[Thatchinho]

I feel they messed up by dividing the community in the beginning by seperating Online and Offline/Private but still keeping your progress the same between worlds.

Replying to the same point again, but on a slightly different front.

The thing is that there aren’t different worlds*. The whole principle of ED is that it is a single game universe, which progresses in real time, and which all players are affected by and which is in turn affected by the actions of all players.

As per my other reply, the modes are just part of the set of rules used by the matchmaking server to govern instancing.


(*As of 4.14 there is obviously the Live galaxy and the Legacy galaxy, but that’s a very different thing and they are completely de-synchronised.)

 

[TiberiusDuval]

I completely agree that there are many games that are strictly PVP 24/7, and that ED / EDO adopts this model.

Well no, PVP is mostly "tacked on" mechanic on Elite. There is very few game loops involving PVP offering any in-game rewards. Mostly one can say Elite being PVP enabled.

 

[varonica]

Not if they have to be killed in the ship they were in, if you have a huge bounty the game could make it so you cannot change ships until the bounty is cleared.

So you want people with large bounties to be stuck in their ships, but people with small bounties free to swap ships? Not sure how that will work, you see you are already introducing complication and who knows where that would end, what if a player has a large bounty but it's not from killing players and they want to swap to a ship with a larger jump range to go and turn them in at a distant station?

Buit whatever, I assure you that any "simple" solution has been discussed to death over the years because there is no simple solution, simple solutions to complex problems always end up causing more problems than the one they were supposed to fix.