What is up with the mentality that piracy and PvP of any form is griefing?

[Extracted]

At the moment there is a ridiculous bias towards the griefer/PvPer. The potential cost to the victim is huge and the cost to the aggressor is negligible.

FD needs to address this balance to make piracy and general griefing an incredibly risky proposal where there's an very good chance that you will be caught and destroyed, or make it much harder to function, like any criminal would need to do.

On a side-note, current PvP "piracy" is essentially a bogus "legitimizing" of griefing since "Give me your cargo" piracy is a monumentally pointless exercise since the income is minimal and time expended excessive (if you actually pick-up the dropped cargo!).

Criminals want money, not useless cargo canisters, so some kind of "blackmail" system needs to be implemented (give me $250k or I destroy you), but this goes completely against with the desire of FD to make credit transfers as hard as possible.


My gut reaction would be that murders are automatically punished with the removal of all insurance coverage (do real criminals get insurance??), or maybe a sliding scale where insurance gets more expensive with each murder. This would be a huge deterrent to those that casually grief, and make it a much more dangerous occupation.

I think ED needs to figure out what they actually are trying to achieve here. It seems they are trying to cater to two different types of video games, an arcade space shooter, and a immersive space sim. I don't think you can have your cake and eat it too. The easiest way to balance this would be IMO ( their are other valid ways to do this...), make ship repairs cost something again, etc.. etc.. Make ammo cost more, quit giving out the fighter ships at a dime each, make rebuy costs excessively more expensive, remove the massive credit making exploits. etc.. etc... Right now the issue is PvPers make far to much to easily and are able to buy their ships at excessively lower prices then traders etc.. etc... Basically Piracy is not balanced to traders. It is extremely one sided. When Your Haulers w.e have no real chance of fighting off a Viper, as well as the price difference being somewhat massive.

But in all honestly people who are complaining about griefing. Here is an example of real griefing that could be possible in ED.
All these people doing the 'buckyball run' to Sag A* what if I went out their with 5 of my friends and stayed about 2 or 3 jumps from destination and just poped anyone that came into that zone. That could be days of your work gone instantly.... someone randomly killing you while you flying around hauling goods is nothing.... NOTHING......

 

[Jason Pegasi]

No, I hate to break it to you but it really is creepy when people play a multiplayer game with open PvP mechanics and then get sociopathic about it.

Engaging in fair PvP is not sociopathic.

What is sociopathic is when they deliberately do what they can to ruin your experience even if they don't enjoy it ie. going after you repeatedly, ramming you to death to avoid getting bounty, refusing to give you any sort of terms multiple times, etc.

 

[retslag1]

This generation wasn't raised in a world of pirates and pvp. Everybody is supposed to be a winner, remember?

 

[Extracted]

View attachment 32521

This generation wasn't raised in a world of pirates and pvp. Everybody is supposed to be a winner, remember?

wut r dem aliens dewin tew dem widdle keeds !?

 

[Aimeryan]

Read a fair number of pages and there were some good points made.

Problems:

1. The bounty attached to the murderer is too small (especially compared to the loss the victim suffered). This means there is nothing to deter them, as there would be in reality (death) - so they just keep on doing it, again, and again... and again.

   ---

2. There is no way to find other players that just want to fight in game, unless you count Open as that.

   ---

3. The legitimate reasons for killing other players (to control areas of influence by hindering/stopping opposing player's actions) is lost due to Solo mode.

Solutions:

1. The reason the bounty is low is so that bounty-farming between friends (or RMTs) doesn't become even more exploitive than it currently is. One solution is to keep the bounty as it is, but in addition give a fine that is proportional to the insurance paid by the victim. Make fines over a certain amount give a "Hostile" status that makes all law enforcement hostile to the player and deny access to any NPC services outside of pirate-owned stations, until paid off in full (it doesn't expire). The Power Play rules coming in can waver these fines being granted, as appropriate. Want to make it real hardcore? Make it so that they have to pay off the fine to respawn, allowing them to sell off ships they may have stored to do so if need be.

   ---

2. There is an Empire that deals in slavery - why wouldn't they also deal in death-match entertainment? Coliseum type stuff. Alternatively/Additionally, make Pirate-owned systems reward players for any kills they get, with diminishing returns on killing the same player within a period of time. Why? Because there are likely to be mean Pirates who dislike people "trespassing" on their turf, or some other reason.

   ---

3. I know this one has been brought up before, but Solo mode should be solo - you shouldn't affect others, i.e., you shouldn't affect Open. Otherwise, you get all the benefit and none of the risk. Solo should be for making money in peace, Open should be for interacting with the universe and others. Power Play will likely make this far more relevant.

 

[Remiel]

You read anger and bitterness in me where there is none.

You're very good at irony. I would clap but I have few misunderstandings to clear up.

1. No, it's nothing like pushing a kid in the street to fight his dad. Learn to separate fantasy from reality - it's more like shooting anything and everything to attract a response, because that's exactly what it is, no analogy required.

2. I'm not expecting anyone to play my way, I'm inviting them to fight me. I do the same thing in EVE, and you'd be surprised how many 'carebears' are more interested in a good fight than the dull drudgery of trading/mining.

3. Forum crying as not indicative of an overarching opinion. One man standing on a street corner with a megaphone shouting that the sky is falling might be very loud, but he's still a minority.

4. I can agree that the game needs weightier consequences in many regards, the details of which are for another conversation, but put too much weight on any one playstyle that doesn't run against the nature of the game (in this case, open sandbox nature, where devs themselves have clarified that shooting people 'just cuz' is perfectly legitimate) just pushes players away.

5. It's not arrogant to advise players not wanting to get shot by other players to go to solo, not even a little, because that's what solo is intended for. That's like telling me I'm arrogant for suggesting someone use Google to search for alfredo recipes. Let's be real here, solo mode is the solution for players who want to avoid what they perceive as 'griefing'.

Speaking of solo mode, it is in my own humble opinion 90% of the problem with this game, the other 10% being lack of measured consequence for actual griefing. See, in a game where you can affect the market/faction influence of a system without any player intervention at all, there's no real consequences for affecting it against the attempts of other players. This is why persistent universe games really need to endeavour, from the outset, to be single shard. Sure, you can throw in some instancing for some stuff, but anything instanced should have no measurable effect on the greater persistent universe, and that includes personal growth, where you can improve yourself in-game without interference. Instancing is for themepark games like WoW and SWTOR, the latter of which I quite enjoy. Persistent universes, though, are meaningless without a way to intervene in other players' activities, and that includes blowing up traders/miners for the purpose of destroying their cargo instead of allowing it to be delivered to a system that you want to cause a famine in, or maybe you feel like plat value is a little too low somewhere and you want to reduce the supply. Or maybe, you want to be able to stop a pirate preying on those supplies, but because he's in solo mode preying on the NPCs that are pulling them, you can't do anything about it.

Solo mode prevents such intervention, so nothing in this game really means anything at the end of the day. That's why I just fly around either exploring or blowing stuff up and creating my own content, because I know the content provided is completely worthless as long as people can get away with influencing the persistent universe without any intervention. And make no mistake, the instancing and solo mode affect everyone that wants to get involved in the persistent universe; traders, miners, explorers, pirates, bounty hunters - everyone.

- - - Updated - - -

Engaging in fair PvP is not sociopathic.

What is sociopathic is when they deliberately do what they can to ruin your experience even if they don't enjoy it ie. going after you repeatedly, ramming you to death to avoid getting bounty, refusing to give you any sort of terms multiple times, etc.

None of you are qualified to determine what is and is not sociopathic, sorry. Nice try though, but using this word as a pejorative is nothing more than a display of ignorance.

 

[Adept]

I'm not seeing pirates being called griefers on a frequent basis.

most people who are called griefers are the type of player that kills other players for no reason and with no intention of gaining money.

/thread at the 2nd post. Well done

 

[EDbubba]

View attachment 32521

This generation wasn't raised in a world of pirates and pvp. Everybody is supposed to be a winner, remember?

Funny, but missing the point...

ED is not a deathmatch environment, it is a personal journey that is centered around an economy model that generates personal progression opportunities. The critical distinction is the vast majority of activities in the game don't need, nor can utilize other player's interaction in any meaningful way.

This is why Wings and private groups become quickly hollow after the novelty of looking at each others ships wears off, if there's no significant benefit or sustainable interest playing with your friends, how could there possibly be a benefit playing with strangers?

We've played (as well as you can!) quite a bit in a Wing of four players, but other than farming conflict zones, there's almost nothing you can do as an allied group that is mildly interesting for more than a few minutes.

A lot of people clearly "don't get it" and are trying to apply typical PvP concepts to a game that really does not support them.

"Open" is literally just a "risk increase" button, with zero tangible benefit and/or change to the actual gameplay. Other than heads ramming you, you will face the exactly same situations the NPC environment presents (pirates, psychos, etc).

Since positive encounters in Open are meaningless and irrelevant to the actual gameplay, thus Open is essentially an entirely negative choice*.

Maybe a "level/skill" button for Solo/Groups would be more worthwhile...

* if you need an MMO game to socialize, you probably need to get out more!

 

[Remiel]

Al lot of people clearly "don't get it" and are trying to apply typical PvP concepts to a game that really does not support them.

Except that by virtue of being an open world sandbox, it absolutely does support them.

 

[Asp Explorer]

The thing with that type of attitude and play style though, is that by blowing everything up, you will encourage more and more players to go to solo/group or take other measures. You will find fewer and fewer people willing to play with you in Open, until it's just you and NPC's and other urm, psychos. Would it not simply be quicker, and this has been suggested before, to make a private group for the PVP-Pros so that they can all get straight to the shooty-bang-bang?

That way you are guaranteed fights, nobody would ever combat log, and you won't be percieved as griefing anyone ever.

 

[Extracted]

Funny, but missing the point...

ED is not a deathmatch environment, it is a personal journey that is centered around an economy model that generates personal progression opportunities. The critical distinction is the vast majority of activities in the game don't need, or can utilize other player's interaction in any meaningful way.

This is why Wings and private groups become quickly hollow after the novelty of looking at each others ships wears off, if there's no significant benefit playing with your friends, how could there possibly be a benefit playing with strangers?

Al lot of people clearly "don't get it" and are trying to apply typical PvP concepts to a game that really does not support them.

once again don't take offence to this but seriously:

Their is not a vast majority of activities in this game. This game has nothing to do for the avg gamer that isn't your sandbox, I do meticulous things gamer. Bounty hunting gets old in about a week vs NPCs so does piracy, trading is just boring to most people from the get go. So what does that leave ? PvP. Also realize this game is roughly $60USD in the states. If I pay that much for a game, I am going to get my $$ out of it. Beings that shooting other players is the only fun activity for me ATM in the game, that's what I am going to do (albit its not that exciting because of lack of risk). I am not just going to 'go do something else' until they release content. I am going to actively play and get my worth out of the game...

 

[Adept]

Except that by virtue of being an open world sandbox, it absolutely does support them.

Where David Braben, who pioneered the whole genre wants the norm to be cooperation, and serious consequences for bad behavior. Feel free to believe that blowing up other players for no other readon tan kicks is "ok". That is an extremely shallow take on the game, anf will meet serious pushback once the planned features come online.

Luckily, if the best you can think of is to blow up haulers and sidewinders I feel pretty confident that you will move on soon enough.

 

[Remiel]

The thing with that type of attitude and play style though, is that by blowing everything up, you will encourage more and more players to go to solo/group or take other measures. You will find fewer and fewer people willing to play with you in Open, until it's just you and NPC's and other urm, psychos. Would it not simply be quicker, and this has been suggested before, to make a private group for the PVP-Pros so that they can all get straight to the shooty-bang-bang?

That way you are guaranteed fights, nobody would ever combat log, and you won't be percieved as griefing anyone ever.

Fortunately, there are no psychos in the game. I met a real psycho in a game once who doxxed me and threatened to kill my family in a private email to my private email address showing me he knew the home address of my mother and little sister. Fortunately, the cops were all over him, and he was arrested within 48 hours, but do you want to know what it was over?

I blew up his pixels in EVE cuz he was afk mining.

I know it's fun to spit words like 'psycho' at people that don't behave as you tell them to, but frothing at the mouth about it really only serves to make you look as crazy as you assume others to be. Real psychosis has real consequences for real people. This is a video game with pixels and ironically, one of the things that leads to real psychosis is an inability to separate fantasy from reality.

 

[mossfoot]

Where David Braben, who pioneered the whole genre wants the norm to be cooperation, and serious consequences for bad behavior. Feel free to believe that blowing up other players for no other readon tan kicks is "ok". That is an extremely shallow take on the game, anf will meet serious pushback once the planned features come online.

Honestly, I think a lot of people WANT that, including the people doing it.

If you get people whining about not being able to blow up noobs in Sidewinders without consequence, then you'll know you've found your troublemaker psychos

 

[Adept]

If I pay that much for a game, I am going to get my $$ out of it. Beings that shooting other players is the only fun activity for me ATM in the game, that's what I am going to do (albit its not that exciting because of lack of risk). I am not just going to 'go do something else' until they release content. I am going to actively play and get my worth out of the game...

The purely negative "fun" of ruining somebody's day. Justify it to yourself all you like, bit it's a pretty low form of entertainment.

The good thing with reading comments like this is that it reminds game designers about rather important pitfalls. If openings are left for the griefer's "fun" they will get used. Some people always want to kick down the sandcastle.

- - - Updated - - -

Honestly, I think a lot of people WANT that, including the people doing it.

If you get people whining about not being able to blow up noobs in Sidewinders without consequence, then you'll know you've found your troublemaker psychos

I look forward to the day

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

I have not read the whole thread.. but..... there is a difference between calling someone ingame as a psycho and calling their meat suit a psycho.

I try to use the term serial killer as that to me is objectively correct and not really open to argument, however I do not think psycho is that much of a misnomer, when talking about the actions of a players avatar

 

[Remiel]

Where David Braben, who pioneered the whole genre wants the norm to be cooperation, and serious consequences for bad behavior. Feel free to believe that blowing up other players for no other readon tan kicks is "ok". That is an extremely shallow take on the game, anf will meet serious pushback once the planned features come online.

Luckily, if the best you can think of is to blow up haulers and sidewinders I feel pretty confident that you will move on soon enough.

Braben's not the only developer, he's really just a figurehead. It doesn't matter what he wants, if he wants the game to be a proper success story, he has to provide what the players want.

I find it ironic that in one sentence you'd accuse me of being shallow while following up immediately with a pretty shallow presumption of what I can think of to do in this game. Maybe if you argued valid points and left the emotional knee-jerking personal attacks out of your posts, people would take you seriously.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

To me it is quite simple really (but then maybe that sums me up)

IF people want to roleplay being a......... serial killer, blowing up who they want when they want, then the simulation isnt going to, nor should it, actively stop them doing it.

but they should be happy to roleplay the consequences IF they are seen doing it, and the consequences should be akin to something like what you would expect when a member of a privileged group which values its members goes on a rampant killing spree, inc being booted out and having to lump it with the non pilots federation members, and having to sneak around everywhere to not be seen. IMO

 

[Ian Phillips]

Enough.

Closing this thread for a time out.

And no more popcorn gags.