Yes PVP is unfair.

[Bran Tse Mallory]

I'll just throw in a random suggestion here.

I've been thinking along similar ideas but was leaning more to an app (Website fit for mobile use in this case)... Everyone loves a good app, don't they?

The idea is as follows:

You have been attacked and want revenge but you only fly freight? Not a problem - Use the app to report the player whom you want to place a bounty on and the amount you are willing to pay and how you were killed - Reason for revenge.

Budding bounty hunters can then see who is wanted and by whom plus the price they are willing to pay in commodities (Gold for example).

The bounty hunter is required to provide proof in the form of a screen shot or video clearly showing the destruction of the wanted commander which he can then send a link to via the app so the original bounty poster knows he now has to pay and can arrange when and where this is to take place.

How will you know if the player will actually pay you? A system of reputation can be built in so all users that do not pay will get a black mark against them to warn others they may not give you the readies and of course the bounty hunter can also place a bounty on their heads for not paying.

This would allow for not only groups but also lone wolfs to take part and help those looking for retribution!

Still fleshing things out and who knows, I may even get time to write it one day...

 

[sewerratuk]

All pointless, as FD has left in Game Breaking issues that allow anyone to escape, anything, at any time.

There is literally ZERO risk to any player who knows what they are doing in this game ( And im talking about being in Open )

Literally all you need is a ship that can travel in a straight line and soak up sustained fire for 20 seconds.

GG FD

Majinvash
The Voice of Open

So why are traders/explorers complaining then?

 

[Muetdhiver]

Because traders/explorers cannot possibly soak up sustained fire for 20 seconds.
No way.

This is why they complain about getting murdered for no good reason :

• cannot escape.*
• cannot fight back.
• 99% of the cost of the interaction with the "PvPer" are on them.
• most likely cannot get revenge (no way to track the perp afterward).

*Traders could choose to be a little less greedy (i.e. fit some low level HRP's) and be fine.
Explorers : having the best possible jump range is the difference for your trip to last 14 weeks instead of 12 weeks, so... still, when coming back to the bubble,
ask for an escort from your friends and think of packing some heat sinks. There is no shame going solo or private group when you carry > 100M in data.

 

[GluttonyFang]

So why are traders/explorers complaining then?

Mostly due to ignorance of game mechanics and attempts to maximize profit without much thought.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Because traders/explorers cannot possibly soak up sustained fire for 20 seconds.
No way.

This is why they complain about getting murdered for no good reason :

• cannot escape.
• cannot fight back.
• 99% of the cost of the interaction with the "PvPer" are on them.
• most likely cannot get revenge (no way to track the perp afterward).

With proper and reasonable defensive set up, trading ships and explorers can survive against one or two opponents at once. Allowing oneself to be interdicted by a wing or making oneself too vulnerable is on the fault of the player.

 

[raok]

I believe they could and should make it more difficult to escape, longer FSD or FSD jam module, and fix the high wake.

If you go in Open, you know that there is a change for PvP. If you do not want that, you go to solo or private group.
The game has already maximum carebear included. Why not provide PvP tools for Open?

All the content we have, well it is not much, but all is PvE content. I do not see any reason why there could not be something for PvP players as well.

...

Maybe even something like... You do deeds for someone or something, for example for minor factions. They provide you as a reward, X% decrease to your insurance cost. This would be one time only. After that you once again do deeds to decrease your insurance.

When you get your insurance to 100%, you can freely do some PvP. At least until you die.

Would probably bring the big ships in PvP.

Also there could be something that you can only do in Open, or some bonus if you do in Open. Now all PvE players are crying out loud. But if you actually think about it, the whole game is made PvE in mind. So could you please be a little bit less selfish and let the PvP players to get something as well

 

[sewerratuk]

Mostly due to ignorance of game mechanics and attempts to maximize profit without much thought.

Indeed so
And if you want to do it in open, accept that the gamble may not pay off.

PvP BH is no more broken than PvP Piracy. There is plenty of fun to be had from it if you have the skill to do it properly. Probably more money in BH to be honest

 

[Noobossomus]

Spot on. I am a trader and I will *never* fly in open unless it is rewarded extra. A PvP encounter from a trader's perspective can never be fun in this game, plain and simple. You stand no chance, your only option is to run away. And the funniest thing is that even the pirate has nothing to gain... Piracy in this game is completely broken. One of the spots where you can see the discrepancy in attention given to the simulator (excellent!) and the gameplay itself (laughable, as if none of the designers never though about some key principles like credits per hour, risk vs. reward or open world PvP).

 

[_Dastardly_]

Mostly due to ignorance of game mechanics and attempts to maximize profit without much thought.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



With proper and reasonable defensive set up, trading ships and explorers can survive against one or two opponents at once. Allowing oneself to be interdicted by a wing or making oneself too vulnerable is on the fault of the player.

In *some* circumstances a player can avoid interdiction, in *some* circumstances a player can run for 20 seconds and avoid being blown up, against a decent PVP'er they have much lower chance, against a wing of PVP'ers they have very little chance indeed.

• 99% of the cost of the interaction with the "PvPer" are on them.
• most likely cannot get revenge (no way to track the perp afterward).

These are the important points.

 

[GluttonyFang]

In *some* circumstances a player can avoid interdiction, in *some* circumstances a player can run for 20 seconds and avoid being blown up, against a decent PVP'er they have much lower chance, against a wing of PVP'ers they have very little chance indeed.

• 99% of the cost of the interaction with the "PvPer" are on them.
• most likely cannot get revenge (no way to track the perp afterward).

These are the important points.

The problem is what trade ship in the right mind doesn't confirm the ID of another player ship in the system? The answer is laziness.

Wings are even more conspicuous.

Like I said, the game provides players with all the tools necessary to avoid/anticipate/escape hostile interactions.

 

[geoffrey.hdt]

Give incentive to PvP. Make PvP piracy and bounty hunting a viable career (we actually just need to tweak some mechanisms and tools already existing!).
Increase the bounties and make them active for longer instead of a week. Make security vessels / military interdictions an actual threat (but increasing the rate of interdictions is not a solution since it would just make it annoying).
Give a reason for players to go for challenging PvP instead of the easy kill and we will see way less griefers.

I have switched to pure PvP recently and look for the bigger challenge. I have barely no incentive. I seek to get my ass kicked. I feel like I am one of a kind only and understand why almost nobody wants to go that way.

 

[Lingand]

The problem is what trade ship in the right mind doesn't confirm the ID of another player ship in the system? The answer is laziness.

Wings are even more conspicuous.

Like I said, the game provides players with all the tools necessary to avoid/anticipate/escape hostile interactions.

They may have turned off the hollow icons feature (I can't recall whether it was 1.2 or 1.3 that offered the option on upgrade) -- even so, there are usually strong hints at least one other player is in system: ships already in SC when you jump in, or a sudden increase in 'stuttering' SC motion, at which point the communications panel is your friend...

 

[GluttonyFang]

They may have turned off the hollow icons feature (I can't recall whether it was 1.2 or 1.3 that offered the option on upgrade) -- even so, there are usually strong hints at least one other player is in system: ships already in SC when you jump in, or a sudden increase in 'stuttering' SC motion, at which point the communications panel is your friend...

Hollow Icon is known to glitch out on rare occasions for certain people, where they see Cmdrs like NPC, but this is very rare as confirmed with the support team.

Also, the best way to know if there is other players within a certain instance is to use CTRL+B, which is an elementary trick to detect other players' presence.

Like I said, tools are there, people just don't bother to learn them/use them.

 

[_Dastardly_]

The problem is what trade ship in the right mind doesn't confirm the ID of another player ship in the system? The answer is laziness.

Wings are even more conspicuous.

Like I said, the game provides players with all the tools necessary to avoid/anticipate/escape hostile interactions.

So if a trader decides to run the gauntlet and try to get his goods through it's his own fault and he deserves to face losing between 1 and 20mil (insurance and cargo) vs the attacker who faces a *possible* loss of < 1mil (if they get unlucky and get rammed) and a more likely teeny tiny bounty they can lose with a sidewinder. If we follow your reasoning to the logical conclusion then all traders should only stay in solo and never poke their heads out. And then there would be nobody to attack pirate/pvp.

 

[Drunk Si]

So if a trader decides to run the gauntlet and try to get his goods through it's his own fault and he deserves to face losing between 1 and 20mil (insurance and cargo) vs the attacker who faces a *possible* loss of < 1mil (if they get unlucky and get rammed) and a more likely teeny tiny bounty they can lose with a sidewinder. If we follow your reasoning to the logical conclusion then all traders should only stay in solo and never poke their heads out. And then there would be nobody to attack pirate/pvp.

Traders make so much money, you go on about the insurance costs and the cargo cost but who's to say that the attacker doesn't stand to lose the same amount proportionally to their total assets? Even though combat and such got a buff to earnings it's still traders that have the mega bucks at the end of the day.

 

[sewerratuk]

So if a trader decides to run the gauntlet and try to get his goods through it's his own fault and he deserves to face losing between 1 and 20mil (insurance and cargo) vs the attacker who faces a *possible* loss of < 1mil (if they get unlucky and get rammed) and a more likely teeny tiny bounty they can lose with a sidewinder. If we follow your reasoning to the logical conclusion then all traders should only stay in solo and never poke their heads out. And then there would be nobody to attack pirate/pvp.

What is also being said is that greed makes a trader a sitting duck (we have all done it).
Maximise cargo space - No shields, no HRP
Maximise jump range - D rated everything, No hardpoints

Therefore you take your chances if you are in Open

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

So why are traders/explorers complaining then?

Because of different play styles. Soaking up sustained fire of a good combat ship or even a wing of 4 combat ships until the FSD is ready is an illusion in a spaceship that is fun to trade or explore in.
Making a ship combat ready, selecting the right ship for PvP combat and spending time to find out what currently is the flavor of the month in PvP are all things that are not fun for somebody who wants to fly around and do peaceful things.

Mostly due to ignorance of game mechanics and attempts to maximize profit without much thought.
…

The problem is what trade ship in the right mind doesn't confirm the ID of another player ship in the system? The answer is laziness.
…

The problem isn't laziness or ignorance. It's simply not wanting to play the game the way more PvP oriented players enjoy playing the game. The problem is that Open Mode puts two play styles in one mode that simply don't fit and there is no real alternative for PvE oriented players.

At best it could be argued that the problem is "unwillingness to adapt to the situation". This is a game why should somebody not wanting to play this game in a certain way be forced to do so?


To answer the starting question:
Traders and explorers are complaining because they don't have a game mode that fits their interests and their play style.

 

[GluttonyFang]

So if a trader decides to run the gauntlet and try to get his goods through it's his own fault and he deserves to face losing between 1 and 20mil (insurance and cargo) vs the attacker who faces a *possible* loss of < 1mil (if they get unlucky and get rammed) and a more likely teeny tiny bounty they can lose with a sidewinder. If we follow your reasoning to the logical conclusion then all traders should only stay in solo and never poke their heads out. And then there would be nobody to attack pirate/pvp.

Rather, traders that want player interaction should learn how to deal with unpredictable events. Those that don't know how will suffer loss. If we want to talk about possibility, there is also the possibility that the attacker gets ambushed.

Those without the proper knowledge of the game's mechanic should stop blaming other players' behaviors and reflect on their own preparedness for the environment.

The plentiful escape and avoidance mechanisms make PvP pretty much consensual even in Open.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

The problem isn't laziness or ignorance. It's simply not wanting to play the game the way more PvP oriented players enjoy playing the game. The problem is that Open Mode puts two play styles in one mode that simply don't fit and there is no real alternative for PvE oriented players.

At best it could be argued that the problem is "unwillingness to adapt to the situation". This is a game why should somebody not wanting to play this game in a certain way be forced to do so?


To answer the starting question:
Traders and explorers are complaining because they don't have a game mode that fits their interests and their play style.

I already addressed the argument earlier, PvP players who don't enjoy PvE gameplay had to deal with it to gain the necessary assets to enjoy the game and begin their PvP career.

The argument of "being forced to play in a way one doesn't prefer to" is something both parties can claim and use, considering there are already modes that separate different kind of players, I don't see how is it appropriate to appeal to "forced to play in a certain way."

 

[Nitek [pl]]

I compltely agree. I mean, right now if I manage to destroy a trader what do I get? Absolutely nothing!

I should be able to strike a secred agreement with the insurance company and make some big buck killing those traders!

And how was your rebuy last night commander?:]]]]]] Corvette is an expensive ship ain't it ?;]

 

[Hanking Stardust]

I’m new, hence stupid, but since you can fly in 3 ship wings where’s the problem? All you need is a way to share the profits, now a long time ago I used to play a browser game called Astrowars and they had a system of banker, it was abused and so cash transfers were stopped- however it doesn’t follow that cash transfers always get abused, you just need a robust system. There’s no reason to imagine that the Elite universe wouldn’t have quite a restrictive galactic banking system so as to make abuse difficult if not impossible.

Just as an example the banking law might dictate that the Trader (or explorer) always has to take 66% of the risk, however this means the trader can trade 32% of the final income (when they sell at port) to their escort, so as you can have a maximum of two escorts then 16% each. The missing % is banking charges paid to the Galactic Bank. If the trader dies then nobody gets paid (same as always) but if an escort ship gets destroyed the commander’s estate gets the cash when and if the contract is completed presuming they weren’t wanted at the time of ‘death’ (in that case they get nothing).

Obviously escorts have to share their bounties with the wing so my % might be out but I think the idea could work. Escorts aren’t going to turn on the trader as they will get paid nothing (we might have to figure out how there was no salvage I suppose) and a three player wing against another with 1 trader is much less imbalanced.

 

[_Dastardly_]

Rather, traders that want player interaction should learn how to deal with unpredictable events. Those that don't know how will suffer loss. If we want to talk about possibility, there is also the possibility that the attacker gets ambushed.

Those without the proper knowledge of the game's mechanic should stop blaming other players' behaviors and reflect on their own preparedness for the environment.

The plentiful escape and avoidance mechanisms make PvP pretty much consensual even in Open.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



I already addressed the argument earlier, PvP players who don't enjoy PvE gameplay had to deal with it to gain the necessary assets to enjoy the game and begin their PvP career.

The argument of "being forced to play in a way one doesn't prefer to" is something both parties can claim and use, considering there are already modes that separate different kind of players, I don't see how is it appropriate to appeal to "forced to play in a certain way."

If you think that's an issue then start a thread and create a discussion around how PVP players can gain credits without resorting to a PVE playstyles, I'm sure you can come up with something. It's not really relevant to this conversation however.

As for your first point, evading, being aware of attackers and escaping simply determines the number of times there will be player vs player content, not the game framework 'fairness' of the encounter when it happens.