Currently we have the trade dividends system that shares trade profit with the rest of the wing.
Yes PVP is unfair.
- Thread starter _Dastardly_
- Start date
Currently we have the trade dividends system that shares trade profit with the rest of the wing.
Building on this, and as mentioned in another thread a fair while ago, information should be the defence and weapon of the trader, and the game would do well to build up this facet of its design.
Checking the scanner and ID confirmation is one tool, though any group with a scrap of sense throws multiple members from different angles to ensure they can interdict from behind, after which they wing beacon and hook up.
And scanner checking should remain a key part of play. At the risk of mixing metaphors, the trader is the rabbit and any half-competently equipped non-trade focused ship is the hound/fox/etc. The use of senses to detect and thus avoid danger are critical to the survival of the rabbit.
Once interdicted, our rabbit/trader should be in serious trouble. And most are, save for the beefiest of trade/large ships who may have enough defences to buy them the time to high-wake to safety. (Of course, logging off is an option but as this is not something that's endorsed by Frontier I would hope that we can consider it outside of the scope of this topic, while remaining a serious issue that needs to be addressed.)
And now we must consider what happens next. While the scanner is but one tool, a defence, in their arsenal, too often do we ignore what comes after the encounter. In so doing we miss the opportunity to provide a weapon for our trader/rabbit, that of sharing information on their attackers. While a black-list could be generated by a player on an individual basis, I would welcome E: D supporting such a practice, and building upon it, in game.
Perhaps it will become less of an issue if/when the TriggerWarningSuicideSidey practice of removing WANTED tags from a player's account addressed. In the meantime, traders could have the option of accessing information about commanders and their activity in a given system. Perhaps, like trade data, we all could purchase information on the other commanders. Perhaps such information is localised, and only given with the context of a single system. Or perhaps the Pilots's Federation could open their files, in their ever-so-shifty manner, and for a sum provide the dirt on a commander. Said dirt would include crimes, fines and times.
Personally, I would have the information localised, so that traders and travelers and rabbits could read up on systems and develop an understanding of the troublemakers that frequent it. Such information would empower those that take the time to use it, rather than relying on an automated system or device. And of course it would not protect against the roaming marauder but then, this suggestion is but one part of a larger framework. See below.
Finally, traders, upon destruction, should influence the system map. There's a fair few systems used by other games, and the simplest way to imagine it is as a graphical traffic report. Rather than congestion, such a report displays combat/violent activity. While we recognize that conflict zones and REZ sites represent sites of aggression, said report would better serve travelers with an indication that violence has occurred with in a given system, when and where and how often. Perhaps once again such a feature comes at the cost of credits, and such a practice seems fitting for the cold, uncaring universe of E: D. Of course the devil is in the details and within the context of this specific example we would need to decide if the report displays only player versus player activity or not, and how it would apply, if at all, across game modes.
There are many more examples available to those willing to apply a little brain juice and the key point I wish to make is:
Empower players, through information, available in a variety of forms and interesting costs. And empower them with options information with which to plan ahead and, should/when the inevitable occurs, to respond, communicate and share with others in an effort to help each other.
Sadly, at least within the current game system, this reasoning fails but only due to the lack of systems that stand to empower traders, through information and communication (as mentioned in the above wall of text). Currently, other than the dance of the scanner and perhaps word of mouth, there is a critical lack of inormation a traveler can access to empower themselves, compared to the already well developed ship flight and combat mechanics available to those wishing to engage in such activity.
I would modify the statement to read:
''Rather, traders that want player interaction should empower themselves through access to improved information sharing and communication and adapt their plans and routes accordingly.''
Then, if they're caught... well.. rabbt. Hounds. Mess..
Last edited:
Perhaps you should finger point in the direction of the individual who made the argument of "being forced to play in a certain way" instead of me who merely made counter arguments to it for the sake of clarification, if anything I'm trying to keep the discussion germane.
The problem is the encounter has to happen, when it can absolutely be avoided. Also unless there's 3-4 PK dedicated ship after a trader, using defensive modules can secure one's escape even when the encounter occurs. Letting oneself be interdicted by a wing of 3-4 is the cause of negligence.
One can literally be doing something else when trading as long as one keeps an eye to the radar. This is from experience, and yes I'm one of those silly people flying around in a T6 shieldless hoping to get caught by the pirates, but it appears I just know how to play the game too well, not relying PvP experience, but general maneuvering and knowledge of the mechanics.
That's more of a reason why PvP should result in better profits. Just because one "side" in unhappy with the situation isn't a good reason why "the other side" should be unhappy with something else. Both sources of "unhappiness" should be fixed.
I agree, both "sides" can say that they are (sometimes) forced to play in a way they don't want. I just tried to explain why PvE oriented players complain.
They don't want to play in a certain way.
They don't like to be forced to play in that certain way - and shouldn't be forced because it's a game after all.
There is no option that allows them to play the game the way they want.
They complain.
PvP players, as you pointed out, have their reasons to complain.
There are modes that allow players to avoid certain activities, but there in only one mode that is open to all, that doesn't require somebody to allow the player into that mode and that has other players visible. (I won't comment more on modes as I don't want to risk this thread to be merged with …)
Interesting, though the whole idea of taking advantage of the radar is to check the system when one arrives at the star. And if people suddenly start to show up at the star with alarming numbers, check/drop to low wake as the situation demands.
Wandering through the rough quarter of town late in the evening with a wad of cash poking out of your pocket is an invitation to have your wealth taken from you...
There are behavioural factors that can influence trader risk: are you unarmed and shieldless? Do you carry high-value cargoes on popularised trade routes (or have you signed up for a deliver Palladium CG)? I prefer a lowered carrying capacity with more shields and firepower, and (for the most part) trading less popular routes -- not counting the time an EIC Vulture interdicted my Vulture while I was cashing bounty vouchers in Liaedin, I have only had three player piracy/assault incidents in 15 months of open play (fled one, drove off a lunatic flying an Eagle, and negotiated with a CMDR in a FDL).
There are behavioural factors that can influence trader risk: are you unarmed and shieldless? Do you carry high-value cargoes on popularised trade routes (or have you signed up for a deliver Palladium CG)? I prefer a lowered carrying capacity with more shields and firepower, and (for the most part) trading less popular routes -- not counting the time an EIC Vulture interdicted my Vulture while I was cashing bounty vouchers in Liaedin, I have only had three player piracy/assault incidents in 15 months of open play (fled one, drove off a lunatic flying an Eagle, and negotiated with a CMDR in a FDL).
Indeed, but until we can work out something to implement that pleases both parties (very very unlikely), it's better to avoid this kind of argument.
Open is where anything is possible, you can make a friend, get shot for no reason, find really helpful people, find really nasty people, etc..
This environment means people have to prepare for the worst or is willing to accept the consequence of having the bad luck to running into undesirable situations. In this case, the worst is most likely PKers winged up trying to kill someone for no apparent reason, and one should be prepared for that, considering we have all the tools necessary.
Aye. The scanner dance is a great example that traders are not powerless. I say we build upon it further, perhaps not directly through adjusting the scanner itself (at least not in isolation) but through additional systems of information/communication empowerment.
Indeed, traders bear so much of the interaction cost that I understand why most of them stay in solo, from a pure economics point of view, open makes no sense for traders (beyond a few % in trade bonds).
If the trader / Pirate / BH triad is to ever work, there need to be some adjustments to encourage it :
- Large cost laid on murderers of clean CMDR's in non-anarchy zones (e.g. if the victim has "report crime" turned on, the pilot federation will latter lay down the victim rebuy on the attackers upon his death.), and credible/escalating police response.
- Information to assess CMDR's, i.e. wanted : terrorist vs wanted : pirate.
- Tools to track most wanted by paying informants, works like friends on the map, last for a limited amount of time. Upon facing the rebuy screen, can pay to track the perp (i.e. revenge).
- Better piracy Tools (e.g. predefined messages and demands, that the trader can accept (i.e. auto-drop the required cargo upon agreement). Longer FSD cooldown + beefier hulls for trade ships would help a lot (i.e. giving pirates the time to rob non-compliant traders without killing them).
- For anarchy zones : give traders a invective to go there, instead of sticking to the safer high-sec systems.
Last edited:
Somebody asked why traders/explorers complain. I answered that question and provided reasons why players complain and "being forced to play in a way they don't want" is part of the reason why they complain.
I didn't use that phrase as a why to explain why "their side" is right or "the other side" is wrong.
They complain because this is not what they really want. Doesn't matter if it's right or wrong or if they should know better or be prepared.
Understanding why they complain is not the same as agreeing with their complains.
I agree with you that somebody playing in Open Mode should prepare for the worst, adapt to the situation and learn how to identify and avoid potentially threatening situations.
Once is one thing... but twice. Combat logging is reportable and subject to shadow banning.
By your description you weren't even jumped by a wing. It was just... one guy. ONE... guy. ONE Clipper vs. a Python... Come on.
Last edited:
Very well.
Sure, they are free to speak for their vision of the game, but seldom convince me of alternative agenda other than making the game unnecessarily simplistic. Of course, conflict of interest happens, and I can't speak for anyone's best interest other than my own and my syndicate as a whole.
Ha ha ha! You are making me laugh...
You fly one of the most powerful ship in the game and you can't even get rid of a Clipper, which is rendered almost useless in PvP by simply popping chaff for instance...
And on top of that you were in a wing?
That's pathetic.
Last edited:
So you admit to doing it more than just those couple of times. It seems you do it more often than that. I suggest you do not play in Open anymore. Once is one thing. Might just be having a bad day. But over and over again? Stick to Solo/Group, please.
Did you read his entire post?
Thought not.
He would happily have entered combat had there been some type of premis or reason for said combat.
However, dude interdicts him and immediately opens fire.
Idiotic behaviour.
I would also combat-log if for no other reason than irritate the perpetrator of said idiotic behaviour.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Lol, with due respect, stop telling others how to play their game.
Last edited:
There's a big difference between them and what you say you do. The nub killers can be hunted down and forced to pay for their crimes. The multiple offense combat loggers (the kind that does it often) can't.
Say frontier implemented a trader railgun that could fire tons of cargo at attackers at a high rate of speed and instantly annihilate them, would that be fair? No.
Would PVP players like it if they were constantly interdicted by wings of Elite FDL law enforcement ? No. Would you like having to abandon a juicy system with a trading CG going on just because those NPC law enforcers were there? no.
Traders get hit like a brick by wings of players in A-Rated PVP ships. Traders get interdicted by wings of PvP players all the time, but they are supposed to 'put up with it' or they should be good enough to avoid it or move to another system just because some PVP players are camping it?
There are arguments for both sides of this. There have actually been a lot of good suggestions from both sides, you must remember that as a PVP player, you are forcing YOUR playstyle onto someone else. There should be checks and balances.
(I really like the railgun cargo gun idea......)
Would PVP players like it if they were constantly interdicted by wings of Elite FDL law enforcement ? No. Would you like having to abandon a juicy system with a trading CG going on just because those NPC law enforcers were there? no.
Traders get hit like a brick by wings of players in A-Rated PVP ships. Traders get interdicted by wings of PvP players all the time, but they are supposed to 'put up with it' or they should be good enough to avoid it or move to another system just because some PVP players are camping it?
There are arguments for both sides of this. There have actually been a lot of good suggestions from both sides, you must remember that as a PVP player, you are forcing YOUR playstyle onto someone else. There should be checks and balances.
(I really like the railgun cargo gun idea......)
Sounds like a pretty good reason to enter combat and blow them away to me