The Tri-poll: What does multiplayer mean to YOU?

[Andrew Sayers]

Lots of good points in this thread, but I wanted to add one that hasn't been said explicitly for a while.

The match-making algorithm doesn't need to defend perfectly against griefing, just well enough to make griefers look elsewhere. For example, say a pair of them repeatedly hyperspace into a system until they end up in the same instance by chance. Then a newbie jumps in - without knowing they're griefers, the match-making system could easily say "he's harmless and they're competent, there's no possible way he could have fun with them so he gets a new instance". But when a deadly bounty hunter turns up, the same algorithm could easily subject the evil pair to the ordeal of a fair fight.

Even if they could exploit the system well enough to find their prey half the time, would it really worth the hassle when they can just go give people a hard time in EVE?

 

[Fromhell]

First option. I like a realistic universe which doesn't seperate NPCs from real players.

Ideally you wouldn't even know if a ship is a player or a NPC


Edit: just read your exposé on "grouping" and the option of making the persistant universe effectively a "single player game" and some other obscure player base splitting mechanics like fading in/out other players.

Totally realistic, immersive concept... NOT.

Here, let Bill Cosby give you some feedback:
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody."

 

[Cathy]

Edit: just read your exposé on "grouping" and the option of making the persistant universe effectively a "single player game" and some other obscure player base splitting mechanics like fading in/out other players.

Totally realistic, immersive concept... NOT.

So far single player online and offline is a given and part of the kickstarter "promise". This poll is about multiplayer.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I picked the first option. Why? Because that's basically 'real life' in the Elite Universe or even in the ethereal gulf of space. In Elite, or indeed any space sim/game/adventure, sure you can attack *anyone*, but your actions create *consequences*, just like life...

However, unlike life:

1) Death does not mean death (unless you're in IronMan mode *and* don't choose to continue in non-IronMan mode);
2) There are no meaningful punishments in the game to discourage the behaviour that such punishments are normally rather effective at discouraging;
3) Everyone has qualified and gained a pilot's licence and owns a ship;
4) In the event of getting bored with an avatar, the player can simply create another one.

So, with the absence of any real risk or punishment, what meaningful controls are in place to control the behaviour of those who revel in anonymity to dissociate themselves from the consequences of their actions?

 

[Ian Doncaster]

So, with the absence of any real risk or punishment, what meaningful controls are in place to control the behaviour of those who revel in anonymity to dissociate themselves from the consequences of their actions?

Frontier could quite easily force obnoxious players into their own private group, as I understand the grouping mechanism, and they'll never bother anyone again. Or they could even just have one "obnoxious players" group, and silently move people into it, so the only people griefers have to prey on are ... other griefers.

(I mean quite easy on a technical level - moderating the game to make sure people end up in that group when necessary might be a full time job for several people, and I assume Frontier have a proportion of the sales budgeted for that already)

 

[Robert Maynard]

Or they could even just have one "obnoxious players" group, and silently move people into it, so the only people griefers have to prey on are ... other griefers.

That sounds like one eminently sensible solution to the problem.

 

[Cody]

That sounds like one eminently sensible solution to the problem.

Not only eminently sensible, but delightfully elegant too!

 

[DigitalDuck]

Frontier could quite easily force obnoxious players into their own private group, as I understand the grouping mechanism, and they'll never bother anyone again. Or they could even just have one "obnoxious players" group, and silently move people into it, so the only people griefers have to prey on are ... other griefers.

(I mean quite easy on a technical level - moderating the game to make sure people end up in that group when necessary might be a full time job for several people, and I assume Frontier have a proportion of the sales budgeted for that already)

Yes, as you've already pointed out, the problem is with making sure obnoxious players/griefers end up there, and more importantly ONLY obnoxious players/griefers end up there. There's also the question of if it's possible to get out of that group if you change your ways.

Would massively reduce the problem if done correctly, as long as it's done correctly.

 

[Patrick_68000]

I think that we should not separate the players. The problem is the combat.

• While all players (PVP (Ironman, normal), PVE (Ironman, normal)) should be in the same universe to share the information, exchange the goods, travel together
• Except combat (weapons neutralized by the game).
• The player Ironman PVP can not attack the player normal PVP and vice versa.
• The player Ironman PVE and the player normal PVE can not attack an another player.
• The players PVP (Ironman and normal) can not attack the players PVE (Ironman and normal).
• Finally the players PVP can, only attack players to same categories (weapons not neutralized by the game). But all the categories play together in the same space.
• The principle of rankings Elite is the same for all categories. The prestige of the classification depends on the category.
• 1) Ranking Elite for the player Ironman PVP is the most prestigious. 2) Ranking Elite for the player Ironman PVE. 3) Ranking Elite for the player Normal PVP. 4) Ranking Elite for the player Normal PVE.
• About the kamikazes, who spoil the game, Frontier can place them in a group, as previously stated.
• It can also prevent them from having some weapons for some time.
• A recognized kamikaze would be sentenced to have a laser pulse of 1 MW and missiles without automatic guidance.
• Kamikaze would make pew pew pew ! and the other players would make PEW PEW PEW !!!

All the players play together in the same space. They share everything between all categories except the fight. Of course everybody can be attacked by NPC and can attack NPC

 

[Fromhell]

100 000 000 000 star systems, and you need to split the player base?

Must be some kind of bad joke.


Even if ED gets 10 million players like World of Tanks, each player has 10,000 systems.

Why can't we have a persistant universe like EvE with guarded and unguarded systems, without filtering who you can see?


People will switch around the settings depending on situation, this is what breaks immersion 100%

I will abuse the system like everyone else - why should I risk PvP when I have precious cargo? Let's quickly change the filter and set it back afterwards. Oh wait, why should I even want PvP if it doesn't offer any better rewards than easymode fighting AI?

Isnt't the logical increase in difficulty robot ship -> human ship ?

What do I get for taking the risk anyway?

100 billion star systems, isn't there enough space for simply guarded and unguarded systems? Higher rewards in the unguarded PvAll systems ones, because the risk is higher than in PvE safe systems?

First Star Citizen introduces that crappy PvE-PvP slider, now Elite adds a filter to remove people from the persistant universe.

Is CCP the only company which understands the term "persistent sandbox universe"?

 

[DigitalDuck]

People will switch around the settings depending on situation

I'm so glad you read what people actually write. It really helps your case.

 

[Serpentstar]

Here is a thought... Since the system is going to be creating instances for the players, why not place those people who have really high bounties for PVP activity automatically in the same instance.

The higher the bounty, the further away from the all group they become. Those that never accrue a PVP bounty would, conceivably work quite well together. Those with high bounties can prey on one another just fine. As it is said, there are going to be instances, it would be VERY easy to let PVP bounties be with PVP bounties in their instances.

I also get a kick for the people who have posted "those that survive" a PVP attack can then put in a notification. But the ones that don't survive don't have any rights or say in the matter. Brilliant way of thinking.

Why is it that all the people who want PVP have an issue with those that don't? People who want a PVE experience only in no way, imposes their will or desires on you. Aside from the fact, that is, that they will never be in your crosshairs.

Me for one, I selected the option to choose, but I doubt I will ever choose PVP. I would rather work WITH someone, than against them.

I still prefer the option to have a PVP/PVE flag. If you are PVP, I don't want to see you in game unless I specifically choose to do so. Which is a safe bet will never happen.

 

[X2Eliah]

The answer to that is simple - piracy. You can't be a pirate if you only attack other pvp players - that's duelling. Piracy = a pvp-er attacking a pve-er (trader) for resources.

And frankly, imo all this talk about "PvE players only see other PvE players" is a bit nonsensical. Space is dangerous. Space is adventure-filled. There shouldn't be a divide between PvE and PvP players, imo - put everyone in the same gigantic cauldron, let them naturally flock to where they want, have terms like "safe sectors" and "dangerous trade routes" actually mean something.

And before you object, mind - I'm saying this as a trader planning to do trading & exploring 90% of the time.

 

[loststargirl]

Let PVE people have them PVE flags so they cant be attacked by other players.

But dont rip the community in two.... Its still fun to do PVE together. All these posts feel like there are two camps while instead we all want to play this game.

 

[DigitalDuck]

Space is adventure-filled. [...] "safe sectors"

There's no adventure if you have to stick in one sector to get your desired playing style.

Also, terms like "safe sectors" and "dangerous trade routes" mean something either way, because there are NPCs in the game too.

Let PVE people have them PVE flags so they cant be attacked by other players.

But dont rip the community in two.... Its still fun to do PVE together. All these posts feel like there are two camps while instead we all want to play this game.

If you don't separate them, then people playing for immersion, or people who enjoy PvP, will (quite rightly) complain that they can see a player, and they don't take damage when they shoot them.

The decision doesn't rip the community in two any more than it already is. Players who would play in the PvE group would otherwise play single player. We all want to play this game, but additionally we all want to play it our way.

I can't read that last sentence back without thinking of Burger King...

 

[loststargirl]

If you don't separate them, then people playing for immersion, or people who enjoy PvP, will (quite rightly) complain that they can see a player, and they don't take damage when they shoot them.

The decision doesn't rip the community in two any more than it already is. Players who would play in the PvE group would otherwise play single player. We all want to play this game, but additionally we all want to play it our way.

I can't read that last sentence back without thinking of Burger King...

You do realise PVP players play PVE too? I gladly go with someone to Burger King when he just orders a salad. It's about being social.

I will be happy to battle Thargoids side by side with you.

 

[DigitalDuck]

You do realise PVP players play PVE too? I gladly go with someone to Burger King when he just orders a salad. It's about being social.

I think you misunderstand the use of "PvE" in the thread - here, a "PvE" player refers to one who does not consent to player combat.

It's about being social for some, it's about immersion for others, it's about trading for others still. If Immersion Ian sees Caution Cathy and wants her cargo, should he be able to get it?

Immersion Ian thinks so. As far as he's concerned, it's a ship. There should be no reason his lasers cannot damage the ship.

Caution Cathy thinks otherwise. She's averse to all player combat, doesn't want to shoot other players, doesn't want to be shot by other players. There should be no reason another player is allowed to shoot her.

It doesn't take much to see that both of these cannot be satisfied at the same time, if ever the two shall meet. Your options are either to tell one of them, "Tough!" and then watch as they stop playing (in that universe, if not the game entirely), or to separate them. If you separate them, your options are either to limit one of them to certain parts of the universe (which will annoy Immersion Ian anyway), or to split them into separate universes.

I will be happy to battle Thargoids side by side with you.

I'll be in PvP/normal/whatever mode either way. I'll happily battle Thargoids with you if you haven't ended up on the wrong end of my laser by then.

 

[Patrick_68000]

Everybody must remain in the same space. PVP AND PVE should stay together. Pirate PVP can not attack a merchant PVE when they intersect ? So what ? if we separate PVP and PVE (and Ironman and normal) in several universes, the result is the same. As well stay all together. At least it allows more players in the same universe. And also allows for social dialogue, trade, exchange of information between PVP and PVE (Ironman, normal). Separate categories is a horror. They reduce the number of players in the universe, and creates communautarism. For example, if I play normal PVP, I would like to exchange information and do business with Liqua and Jabokai who playing PVP Ironman. And exchange information and to trade with other players who play in PVE. If we separate the players, we can separate the people on the forums. Forum for those who play in PVP, forum for those who play in PVE, forum for those who play in Ironman Mode ect ...

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Pure PvE creates some awkward situations.

The NPC trader - player escort - player pirate problem:

Either:
Player escort can't defend NPC trader because the pirate is a player.
or:
Player pirate can't attack NPC trader because it's part of a player escort mission.

 

[Fromhell]

Why even discuss this further?

Every poll shows a clear majority of people who don´t want the persistant universe break apart by artificial filters and different rulesets.

Give the ones with gankophobia single player mode with optional co-op and make the persistant universe worthy of the name Elite "Dangerous" by making it PvAll. No one is against TERRITORY SEPARATION into guarded and unguarded systems, at least this is in fiction and non immersion breaking.

The majority doesn´t want Elite "Temporary Dangerous"