Design 101 - Players must ALWAYS have choice to avoid or run instead of fight
- Thread starter Yokai
- Start date
muhammad ali was a successful boxer.
But he got parkinsons and had to end his carreer.
James Dean was a successful actor.
He died young in a car crash.
ayrton senna was a successful formula one driver.
He died driving a formula one car.
Feel free to put your own definition of successful, but to me it is someone who is good at what they do when they are doing it. Even if they happen to die or get caught later.
Successful does not mean living to the ripe old age of 100 with a fortune.
They were rich during their time and lived the way they wanted.
It has been stated that all ships handle the same in sc, idk how true that is but it would be a nice thing to test.
This idea is terrible, traders should not have a get out of interdiction free card. That decoy thing would be the only thing anyone ever uses. As for the 10 cargo thing, what if I want more than 10 tons? If I Pull over a type 7 I'm not going to be content with 10 tons, 30 tons maybe.
This has been thrown out many times and it continues to be a bad idea. I'd rather not even see the traders than have them be invincible.
Very good question... one that tends to go unanswered.
Snakebite
Banned
Whilst I agree that a player should be given the opportunity to run away rather than stand and fight, it should not be guaranteed that they can actually get away every time, as doing so would ruin it for the attacking player.
In the context of Elite an interdicted trade ship should have to make a choice run or fight but if they choose to run the attacker must still have a reasonable of catching its prey. Otherwise 99% of interdicted ships would run away and the game is ruined for all other play styles and arguably also ruined for the traders who loose the sense of danger and exitement if they know that they can always get away.
You might want to read up a page or two and find all the stuff quoted by dev Sandro Sanmarco that I comment on. Bottom line, interdiction is lopsided in favor of the interdictor, and there is extremely low risk + high reward for the pirate, contrasted with extremely high risk and zero reward for the trader.
You might also want to reread the OP, where I state that this applied to Solo and Group modes too. Interdiction happens there as well.
Last edited:
I would agree wholeheartedly with you if the risk/reward were equal for the "attacker" and the "prey" AND IF the outcome was 100% skill-determined rather than gear-determined. However, right now the riski/reward is anything but equal. And even Sandro Sanmarco agrees that the outcome is balanced in favor of the attacker.
Last edited:
There is short term succes and there is over all success.
What you mentioned as succesful died early, had nothing to do, to live a life with , murderering, thief.
Maybe you have seen to many Holiwood movies, but pirates did die early, they did get horribly tortured.
Very few of them entered their thirties or even forties - and they died not because of accidents, they died because they were hunted down and - see above.
You can call this succesful - live hard die young. I call it stupid (in most cases).
Life has much more to offer than just 10 great years - btw. i for myself had a lot more wild years. And the most succesful, in your definition, died long ago, at heroine, alcohol whatever. Or have now rotten noses because of cocaine abuse. Still i myself and a couple off friends had this drugs too, but choose to stay away at the right time.
Tell me who is more succesful?
Anything you say reminds me at a kid, that listens, with a glance in the eye, to the heroic pirate/hero stories.
Last edited:
I'll keep banging this drum I suppose....
Traders should be at risk of interdiction by pirates in fighters armed to the teeth....a well armed fighter should be able to pretty much dictate the interdiction and battle with all but a specced freigters.
Setting out in a freighter packed full of rares with no fighter escort should be a very silly and dangerous thing to do. Interdictions should be mad easier.....trading should be a much tougher choice of career....going it alone shouldn't be an option in any but the most well policed systems.
What's the average Cr/hr on a rares run? It can be in the millions so I'm told....
A pirate is lucky to get 250k in an hour....
As I see it trading has been to easy for too long....certainly once the wings update arrives, interdiction should be made easier....FSD should be disabled for far longer....
This would force people to organise convoys, pirates will be forced to hunt in packs....it'll be great fun. The pirates themselves would need to bring along a freighter of their own to pickup all the cargo if they're lucky enough to catch a convoy unawares.
Changing the game so people can continue to space truck unhindered seems insane and most of all incredibly boring for all of us. The game should be changed to encourage conflict and cooperation. If that's not for you then you can fly Han Solo.
Traders should be at risk of interdiction by pirates in fighters armed to the teeth....a well armed fighter should be able to pretty much dictate the interdiction and battle with all but a specced freigters.
Setting out in a freighter packed full of rares with no fighter escort should be a very silly and dangerous thing to do. Interdictions should be mad easier.....trading should be a much tougher choice of career....going it alone shouldn't be an option in any but the most well policed systems.
What's the average Cr/hr on a rares run? It can be in the millions so I'm told....
A pirate is lucky to get 250k in an hour....
As I see it trading has been to easy for too long....certainly once the wings update arrives, interdiction should be made easier....FSD should be disabled for far longer....
This would force people to organise convoys, pirates will be forced to hunt in packs....it'll be great fun. The pirates themselves would need to bring along a freighter of their own to pickup all the cargo if they're lucky enough to catch a convoy unawares.
Changing the game so people can continue to space truck unhindered seems insane and most of all incredibly boring for all of us. The game should be changed to encourage conflict and cooperation. If that's not for you then you can fly Han Solo.
Snakebite
Banned
You do know that there is a stealth mode don't you ?
When a ship is rigged for silent running it wont show on your scanner, But why run away if this happens to you, that stealthed ship will have no active shields so even if you are in a modestly armed trader you have a good fighting chance against the better armed but unshielded attacker....
Zero reward for the trader? You mean besides the highest income in the game right? And what's the high reward for pirates? Being rewarded with the second lowest income in the game? The inability to make a profit in a ship larger than the asp? If those are my rewards for pirates I'd rather not be rewarded at all.
Go study the design and history of ArcheAge. Then look at their forums. Then come back here and see if you feel the same.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
There is nothing that prevents a "pirate" player from _also_ trading on the side to make money.
However, in a direct pirate-interdicts-trader interaction, _all_ risk and loss is on the trader, not the pirate.
Last edited:
First part was ofcouse for those that mad at players doing interdiction at them.
If I have read things rigtht, there is no differnt in handling at interdiction/SC, so chance to win or lose is equel? Who wins is based on player skill and is that not the whole point?
The reward for the Trader is not to lose ship/carge, I say that is not zero, there is no plus side gain, that is right.
Npc pirates ask for cargo as fare as I seen, I dont know how much they want to go away, but is it all you cargo? Player pirates seem to do the same, until someone started using the submitting to flee, so now they just blast them? Seem to me, like if you lose the interdiction or submit, you shoud eject some cargo, so you can get away with you ship and the rest of you cargo and not "misuse" the submit.
I really don't have time to do that my friend.....what's the long and short of it?
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy
If a pirate has to trade to make money than piracy is less rewarding than trading. I do agree that it's not as risky but you can't disagree that it's definitely not as rewarding as trading.
A trader has to load all his money into cargo to make a profit, a pirate/bounty hunter has to put it into his ship and then get a slow trickle of income that's the nature of the game.
Last edited:
the game should be like real life..sometimes you have no choice.. all you have are bad choices and you have to make do with what you are dealt
it's blatantly not as profitable as trading.....
It's only a strawman because your post missed the point in the first place. A trader has no reason to interdict any target, therefore they'll always be the target of any interdiction event. So, I'm not really sure what benefit/gain/reward a target should be getting from submitting to being interdicted. Surely it needs to ve 100% risk by design? Unless the target is actually submitting to allow the pirate to take cargo.
I remember Sandro posting about their thoughts on interdiction but I don't remember taking away the idea that FD were considering balancing interdiction submission to provide any reward to the target. Surely the only reward for the tsrget should be winning the event and escaping?
I vaguely recall his point was there's no reason to fight interdiction as a target due to the current design, which promotes submission and escape. This is not what they intended.
And all of his proposed ideas were centred about making submission an act of waving the white flag. That is, submission should be the highest risk for escape, thus rewarding targets for trying to win the event itself.
It's pretty clear what Sandro wants to achieve. And I like his line of thinking.
Last edited:
As I'd see it, the choice for the trader to run away should be held primarily in his ability to escape the interdiction itself. It is skill based and would suit me fine.
It's a bad thing that submission results in a positive outcome with regards to chance to run. Submitting should signal a voluntary acceptance of an encounter, not a loophole to run away more easily. You're still free to run after submitting, but you should not get a really strong bonus for doing so. The advantage of submitting over failing to escape should be in things like damage or temporary loss of control / orientation and not in ability to escape in terms of time. FSD timer should not be an advantage.
I don't know about incentive for open. I haven't encountered a PvP interdiction yet. Once a trader is able to hire an escort or able to run in convoy, the dynamics might change. It will eat into the trader's profit margin, but it is a risk-return balance that the trader should be considering himself. Also, traders should be able to arm themselves in a manner that a pirate encounter is not risk free from the pirate's perpective.
At the same time, open should not be more dangerous than other modes. As a corrollary, AI ships should be way more dangerous; which would result in much more "frustrating" gameplay at all levels, but also a much smaller difference between open and solo and none of this "traders will of course gravitate towards solo"-sentiment.
Of course, the outcome of a trader-pirate encounter should be much more varied. I'd hope that these would all be plausible outcomes:
- "peaceful resolution", a reasonable tonnage changed hands
- succesful dodging, with the trader escaping with FSD
- pirate defeated by trader
- trader forced to give up tonnage under show of force: blown cargo hatch, hull reduced, etc.
- appropriate intervention by security forces, depending on security rating, faction relations, etc.
- intervention by other interested third parties: pirates, bounty hunters, armed traders
- trader killed
- pirate killed
Once there are enough possible outcomes that the encounter is never risk-free for any single party, it's all about decisions on which outcome you want to play for and which risks you want to take. Evading and dodging can lead to damage or even death, while it also can lead to a clean FSD escape or intervention by security forces. Risk, reward. And because intervention is always a possibility, the pirate should (professionally speaking) prefer the quick transfer of tonnage over any lengthy encounter.
It's a bad thing that submission results in a positive outcome with regards to chance to run. Submitting should signal a voluntary acceptance of an encounter, not a loophole to run away more easily. You're still free to run after submitting, but you should not get a really strong bonus for doing so. The advantage of submitting over failing to escape should be in things like damage or temporary loss of control / orientation and not in ability to escape in terms of time. FSD timer should not be an advantage.
I don't know about incentive for open. I haven't encountered a PvP interdiction yet. Once a trader is able to hire an escort or able to run in convoy, the dynamics might change. It will eat into the trader's profit margin, but it is a risk-return balance that the trader should be considering himself. Also, traders should be able to arm themselves in a manner that a pirate encounter is not risk free from the pirate's perpective.
At the same time, open should not be more dangerous than other modes. As a corrollary, AI ships should be way more dangerous; which would result in much more "frustrating" gameplay at all levels, but also a much smaller difference between open and solo and none of this "traders will of course gravitate towards solo"-sentiment.
Of course, the outcome of a trader-pirate encounter should be much more varied. I'd hope that these would all be plausible outcomes:
- "peaceful resolution", a reasonable tonnage changed hands
- succesful dodging, with the trader escaping with FSD
- pirate defeated by trader
- trader forced to give up tonnage under show of force: blown cargo hatch, hull reduced, etc.
- appropriate intervention by security forces, depending on security rating, faction relations, etc.
- intervention by other interested third parties: pirates, bounty hunters, armed traders
- trader killed
- pirate killed
Once there are enough possible outcomes that the encounter is never risk-free for any single party, it's all about decisions on which outcome you want to play for and which risks you want to take. Evading and dodging can lead to damage or even death, while it also can lead to a clean FSD escape or intervention by security forces. Risk, reward. And because intervention is always a possibility, the pirate should (professionally speaking) prefer the quick transfer of tonnage over any lengthy encounter.
Hello,
Thats the game, like a pirate often say. I f you don't like it - leave.
Sorry couldn't resist.
Back to serious.
Like a couple of people mentioned before, think about solutions, but not only solutions that just favour your style of playing. Because there are a lot of people - over 4.300 in the Mobius group and probably much more playing solo, who don't wann play your style. Who want to play a game together, not only deathmatch.
i for myself would love to go into open, but all my experiences out of the last 20 years with multiplayer games in the last 20 years.
Yes we started with doom in the early 90ies linked to my friends computer over a serial cable.
A couple of MMOs followed and Jumpgate!
If Elite Dangerous would have been just open play, i never would have bought it.
Because i thought i knew what is coming up. And i and most of the Jumpgate players will recognize this threads as - the same procedure as it was in Jumpgate.'
Traders wanted to be saver of Gatecampers, the pitates said: 'Your game is boring without us.' Sit in Fighters and fight against us. Sometimes when you had the chance to fly early in the morning, you saw the same guys in their Tows hauling big amounts of stuff, to earn money. as soon as they recognized, you are here in a fighter, they cowardly hided in a station.
With all this background, do you really expect me to play on your playground, were i got not a chance at all.
Help balancing this game, to find a solution between the (so much different) play styles.
But it should be balanced. Till now i just read: I want a 'WIN BUTTON'.
Pirates are not supposed to earn big money. their succes is the feeling of being free like a bird. And not locked in a small cabin hauling stuff from station to station.
Thats the game, like a pirate often say. I f you don't like it - leave.
Sorry couldn't resist.
Back to serious.
Like a couple of people mentioned before, think about solutions, but not only solutions that just favour your style of playing. Because there are a lot of people - over 4.300 in the Mobius group and probably much more playing solo, who don't wann play your style. Who want to play a game together, not only deathmatch.
i for myself would love to go into open, but all my experiences out of the last 20 years with multiplayer games in the last 20 years.
Yes we started with doom in the early 90ies linked to my friends computer over a serial cable.
A couple of MMOs followed and Jumpgate!
If Elite Dangerous would have been just open play, i never would have bought it.
Because i thought i knew what is coming up. And i and most of the Jumpgate players will recognize this threads as - the same procedure as it was in Jumpgate.'
Traders wanted to be saver of Gatecampers, the pitates said: 'Your game is boring without us.' Sit in Fighters and fight against us. Sometimes when you had the chance to fly early in the morning, you saw the same guys in their Tows hauling big amounts of stuff, to earn money. as soon as they recognized, you are here in a fighter, they cowardly hided in a station.
With all this background, do you really expect me to play on your playground, were i got not a chance at all.
Help balancing this game, to find a solution between the (so much different) play styles.
But it should be balanced. Till now i just read: I want a 'WIN BUTTON'.