Yes PVP is unfair.
- Thread starter _Dastardly_
- Start date
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
The main reason why the modes exist is to address the issue of 'griefing'. David Braben has stated this many times.. I'm not going to be brow beaten to not raising the point and no, they are not seperate issues. Nice try
No he hasn't. It is 1 reason but how would you play in open on a train tethered to a 3g phone using only a few mb an hr. That was advertised by db and is why solo can't die. Also what would you do if an Xbox players live ran out? And finally how would the offlinegate people feel given they were promised that although offline was gone they would always have solo
PS I do not want easy mode at all I just am not always able or willing to interact with people. I am all for fixing the spinning npcs
Last edited:
again..
make any one who kills a clean or non hostile Human pp player pay the insurance as well as the murdered person.
with the exception of "report crimes = off"
That punishes people for killing soft targets.
The bounty thing where friends get to collect it as a form of soft target killing payment goes away (as long as no bounty is issued due to the insurance thing)
Traders feel secure knowing if they drop some cargo for a pirate the chances they wont kill them for complying is high.
and explorers feel a bit safer.
every one can play the game how they do now. its just the balance is a bit closer to being fair.
Again its not perfect but leaps and bounds better than how it currently is.
make any one who kills a clean or non hostile Human pp player pay the insurance as well as the murdered person.
with the exception of "report crimes = off"
That punishes people for killing soft targets.
The bounty thing where friends get to collect it as a form of soft target killing payment goes away (as long as no bounty is issued due to the insurance thing)
Traders feel secure knowing if they drop some cargo for a pirate the chances they wont kill them for complying is high.
and explorers feel a bit safer.
every one can play the game how they do now. its just the balance is a bit closer to being fair.
Again its not perfect but leaps and bounds better than how it currently is.
I tend to agree with you but if we do alter the mechanics so that players can be safe in high security areas then surely the milk runs need to stop. If you want to make a fortune it should come with some risk. I'd imagine a system where we might have to decide and consider where is safe to go or what risk we wish to take and not just because of those *evil* players.
Its also a falsehood that people are forced out of open. I've been playing in Open the vast majority of my time and why is it I never have problems? Even the bubble is a vast huge play area. Given this new found scenario I do wonder why we would need solo or private group?
I suspect some are petitioning for the game to be easy mode than really create for a fair and dynamic interesting game where our choices about where we go and what we can do mean something. Believe me, I have zero desire to kill you for kicks.
Last edited:
The main reason why the modes exist is to address the issue of 'griefing'. David Braben has stated this many times.. I'm not going to be brow beaten to not raising the point and no, they are not seperate issues. Nice try
Not really. There are people willing to play with griefers around with one condition - they get what they deserve. At this point they deserve very little punishment, and mostly it is credits. Which is not that good. That's why actual punishment like driving griefers out of legit systems would be actually make a difference.
I think the suggested idea of restricting access to higher security systems and so on is a good idea. I am sure it will not entirely fix the problem of PvP imbalance but it would prevent ships from docking in a high security system they are griefing, at least they would have to leave giving some respite.
unfortunately there are many many people who love to kill for kicks. If you make it harder to get kills in safe space then you need to boost the profits in more dangerous places and lower the profits in safer ones.
It it used to be a thing to squish smaller players in a big ship as you left the station, that was an unfair 'pvp interaction' and it's now punished by instadeath. I am not asking for that, I would like to improve the experience for both sides,
Where as i agree with this in theory. you do have to imagine what a utopia of "I WIN" the game would become with high security systems being next to 0 risk.
There has to be some risk or there really is no reward.
This whole point about 'griefers' is one of perception - I'm tired of it, shooting at someone isn't griefing, pwning noobs in Eravate could certainly qualify.. Whilst there are some asinine complaints about being shot at by NPCs no one has ever really offered a decent explanation as to why they take excpetion to be 'killed' by a player and not an NPC. Other than NPCs dont really present any real danger. Go figure.. this is all about making the game easy mode from what I can gather.
Last edited:
There are simply too many people to quote and agree or disagree with but here's my low down:
If you think that Player vs Player that is negative for one and positive for the other is antisocial, you are simply applying your bias to make free money and play single player. (Agreeing with GluttonyFang)
If you think that a Competent player can't beat an Elite player and so we should create strange and nonsensical fines and punishments for playing the game, you are missing the point. The more open to skill differences the better the game.
If you think that 'being left alone' is paramount to your experience and you have chosen to play a game in an open mode, refusing all logic to the contrary, you are missing the point once more.
If you truly disagree that crime has no punishment you are nearing something but still missing the point. Players can and DO band together, provide services to hunt criminals and generally attempt to protect the innocent or collect bounties.
If you think that being unarmed, whether explorer or trader, gives you a pass from crime you need to consider why a mugger in the city doesn't generally target policemen to mug.
Everything, and I mean everything that comes up short in servicing the wants and needs of the playerbase in Eliteangerous is a shortcoming of the feature list , not the spreadsheet of fines, bounties, etc etc. You need more mechanics for both hunting and protecting yourself. I find it hard to believe anyone can disagree with this.
So, FDEV, I will personally beseech you:
-Implement more information gathering in the UI. Gate it behind scanners or nothing at all. It's necessary. Provide clear and understandable threat levels in systems, let the ship warn the trader that he's in a dangerous place. Whatever it takes.
-Implement better options for player Bounty Hunters and logic for NPC Bounty Hunters to -track- down wanted criminals. Update the TOP 5 BOUNTY LIST to include ONLY PLAYERS FROM THE MODE YOU ARE VIEWING THE LIST IN. Create more useful and interesting modules so that players can become specialists in their field.
-Implement and foster a culture of cooperation that extends not only to crime and punishment but industry as well. NERF solo credit gain potential by as much as as 30%. Incentivize combat players to wing with traders and make sure that the wing profits 130% over the single player for their efforts.
--- Ask yourself what the Keelback is for. Seriously.
-To support all of the above, Implement social infrastructure into the UI of the game. Couple communications to Nav Beacons and Stations. Enable players to post requests, personal bounties and miscellaneous messages subject to automatic moderation - onto stations and system UI's that are connected by a common faction or other indicator that they would share easy information. Implement in game mail. No matter how archaic it may seem, RP and non RP situations alike are only helped in a game of player interaction if you can send a static, stored message to a player, organization or otherwise. Bonus if you can send mail to NPC factions which may be read by developers and replied to in some cases.
- Reiteration: Implement more features. Take an interest in posts like my previous one that has since been buried.
Provide for the unarmed trader but accept that they have chosen to be unarmed! Provide for the pirate but accept that they have chosen to break the law. Provide for the bounty hunter and enable them more, none of this murder bounty for murdering a murderer.
If you think that Player vs Player that is negative for one and positive for the other is antisocial, you are simply applying your bias to make free money and play single player. (Agreeing with GluttonyFang)
If you think that a Competent player can't beat an Elite player and so we should create strange and nonsensical fines and punishments for playing the game, you are missing the point. The more open to skill differences the better the game.
If you think that 'being left alone' is paramount to your experience and you have chosen to play a game in an open mode, refusing all logic to the contrary, you are missing the point once more.
If you truly disagree that crime has no punishment you are nearing something but still missing the point. Players can and DO band together, provide services to hunt criminals and generally attempt to protect the innocent or collect bounties.
If you think that being unarmed, whether explorer or trader, gives you a pass from crime you need to consider why a mugger in the city doesn't generally target policemen to mug.
Everything, and I mean everything that comes up short in servicing the wants and needs of the playerbase in Elite
angerous is a shortcoming of the feature list , not the spreadsheet of fines, bounties, etc etc. You need more mechanics for both hunting and protecting yourself. I find it hard to believe anyone can disagree with this.So, FDEV, I will personally beseech you:
-Implement more information gathering in the UI. Gate it behind scanners or nothing at all. It's necessary. Provide clear and understandable threat levels in systems, let the ship warn the trader that he's in a dangerous place. Whatever it takes.
-Implement better options for player Bounty Hunters and logic for NPC Bounty Hunters to -track- down wanted criminals. Update the TOP 5 BOUNTY LIST to include ONLY PLAYERS FROM THE MODE YOU ARE VIEWING THE LIST IN. Create more useful and interesting modules so that players can become specialists in their field.
-Implement and foster a culture of cooperation that extends not only to crime and punishment but industry as well. NERF solo credit gain potential by as much as as 30%. Incentivize combat players to wing with traders and make sure that the wing profits 130% over the single player for their efforts.
--- Ask yourself what the Keelback is for. Seriously.
-To support all of the above, Implement social infrastructure into the UI of the game. Couple communications to Nav Beacons and Stations. Enable players to post requests, personal bounties and miscellaneous messages subject to automatic moderation - onto stations and system UI's that are connected by a common faction or other indicator that they would share easy information. Implement in game mail. No matter how archaic it may seem, RP and non RP situations alike are only helped in a game of player interaction if you can send a static, stored message to a player, organization or otherwise. Bonus if you can send mail to NPC factions which may be read by developers and replied to in some cases.
- Reiteration: Implement more features. Take an interest in posts like my previous one that has since been buried.
Look at how the gameplay loop favors or disfavors play styles. Look at each role fairly.
Provide for the unarmed trader but accept that they have chosen to be unarmed! Provide for the pirate but accept that they have chosen to break the law. Provide for the bounty hunter and enable them more, none of this murder bounty for murdering a murderer.
A well-balanced BGS would have high sec systems being next to zero risk but also having low profits, easy but low paying missions, few if any black markets, etc. They should be noob havens basically.
You want a feature that will make traders happy in open? How about one where the trader is offering share from the profit in exchange for protection from mercenary players? Trader opens a panel, sets up slots, payment/slot, then invites nearby other player who gets a popup with the current destination of the trader and the offered payment. Its that simple. This feature alone would concentrate players to major trading hubs and would give incentive to play together.
How about a second FSD module that is allowing a trader to link up with the escort for increased jump range?
I dont think the above is impossible development challenge or it would take away a lot of development time.
This. It can work. Just separate piracy and sociopath behavior with one simple addition - declaration of piracy. Practically what Sandro offered is partial adaptation of early concept of this very same idea.
Last edited:
How is "skill" going to be gauged? PvP doesnt effect your combat rank and there are many many PvP'ers ranked harmless who fly cobras and Vipers and loads of harmless players in Anaconda's. I assume low rank vs low rank would be deemed ok which sort of makes a mockery of the whole thing.
I would have thought my previous proposition would have sorted these things. I do understand the concern about players being ats and so I think we have common ground. I'd love a game where I can actually pirate players or bounty hunt the pirates without us being defined as complete psychos. I could imagine a game where you could hire me to escort you somewhere and build a positive relantionship.. or if im a pirate i actually get to get some of your stuff in a legit manner that makes each and every style of play rewarding. Its all about balance and hopefully we are getting there by having a robust discussion.
edit: the solo and pg are an object to this.. would you agree? And hell no, I dont want some uber clan like EvE to own the whole game...
Last edited:
I see yet another pvp thread cropped up. And quite a few rabidly against any risk and that open should be just as safe as closed. Sad. Not gonna read 37 pages to catch up.
Simply state, and knowing that these statements draw carebear ire as well as Elitists (pun intended) rage: Elite seriously needs to look at Eve when it comes to many mechanics. Pvp is one of them. The sec status of systems as well as that of a player and the ability of utilizing lawless systems to the players' advantage if they want to avoid status hits. It also actually allows for profit by looting and salvaging from targets. This system has formed EXTREMELY well to the point where all the carebears can stay in highsec and do their happy stuff, though risk still exists bc face it...youre in space and some ppl will want you to die. Grow up and grow a pair.
The rest know where they can go for a fight and tend to stay there bc that's what they like. More penalties like higher bounties and restricted access mean pirates stick to lowsec, some of the best trading tends to be there so traders with some courage can venture there and may be pirated. Those of us that are further on the food chain will in turn hunt the baddies. Circle of life continues.
Because it is fun. Is it the fun someone who wants to be a spacetrucker wants? No. But like it or not this game and its players will push things in ways you don't like. Adapt or die vOv Don't want interference from other ppl? Go to Mobius, that's LITERALLY the reason it exists. Let the rest of us actually have a place.
My 2 credits as someone that's been around since beta and in the genre for a long time
o7 CMDRs
ps: a bio panel with history you can pull up on players wouldn't be a bad theft either ;D
Simply state, and knowing that these statements draw carebear ire as well as Elitists (pun intended) rage: Elite seriously needs to look at Eve when it comes to many mechanics. Pvp is one of them. The sec status of systems as well as that of a player and the ability of utilizing lawless systems to the players' advantage if they want to avoid status hits. It also actually allows for profit by looting and salvaging from targets. This system has formed EXTREMELY well to the point where all the carebears can stay in highsec and do their happy stuff, though risk still exists bc face it...youre in space and some ppl will want you to die. Grow up and grow a pair.
The rest know where they can go for a fight and tend to stay there bc that's what they like. More penalties like higher bounties and restricted access mean pirates stick to lowsec, some of the best trading tends to be there so traders with some courage can venture there and may be pirated. Those of us that are further on the food chain will in turn hunt the baddies. Circle of life continues.
Because it is fun. Is it the fun someone who wants to be a spacetrucker wants? No. But like it or not this game and its players will push things in ways you don't like. Adapt or die vOv Don't want interference from other ppl? Go to Mobius, that's LITERALLY the reason it exists. Let the rest of us actually have a place.
My 2 credits as someone that's been around since beta and in the genre for a long time
o7 CMDRs
ps: a bio panel with history you can pull up on players wouldn't be a bad theft either ;D
Last edited:
I would say that it's down to some people not wishing to be another person's content. We all have to accept the interference from the game, from NPCs, but we don't all have to accept interference from another sentient being in our homes, in our leisure time.
As to making the game easy mode... It shouldn't matter, even if you do believe it, since in the main, most players are not competing directly with you. Essentially, all players in whatever mode can choose the threat level they want to play at, and belittling PvE by suggesting it is easy mode is not terribly gracious. I jump into strong signal sources and distress calls with multiple waves of wings of NPCs, and they are not particularly easy, and I enjoy the challenge.
Personally I play this game for fun, for entertainment. If I was looking for something much more than that, I would probably look outside the world of computer games.
I've been playing EVE since 2012 and have seen this exact conversation come up time and again. It was coming up for 9yr before I played EVE and will be coming up there long after I quit. Traders will not be happy with the feature you suggest. Frontier will devote hundreds of man hours to implement it and on release day this exact whine will come up again. It will come up a week after that, and a week after that. Implement the "PVP Flag", default it to OFF/No-PVP, and the carebears will be happy. The PVPers will only be slightly less happy than they are now (which is not particularly happy). Wanting Elite
angerous to be open world, anything goes, is not going to happen Frontier made that crystal clear from the beginning. Shoot PVP in the head and lets get on with enjoying what we can of ED until someone else takes up EVE's mantel and makes the PVP game we want.
Last edited:
There are two things - first, definition of griefing for FD is very narrow one, and it boils down to repeated "pwnage" of less experienced players in certain area. Everything else is a go.
Second, however, FD want to reward 'proper' piracy (without killing victim) and punish sociopathic behavior - within limits of the game of course. Sandro ideas are taken from old discussions in DDF regarding this very same issue. There was pretty much agreement that piracy requires some kind of declaration of the act to separate it from blasting people away.
Depends on what you want: to make Open better for the players that are already there, or to attract to Open players that have fled to the other modes.
If your intent is to make Open better for players that are already there, a system like this would be a good starting point. In fact, something similar to what you posted was kinda described from the start, as the game's Kickstart page makes it seem like aggression against other players would be more severely punished than aggression against NPCs.
If your intent is to bring back, or attract, players that don't play in Open due to the PvP, then I doubt you will have much success. No matter how punishing attacking other players become, the fact remains that attacking others is not only allowed, but (since you expect this kind of activity to be part of the game) the punishment isn't really tuned to prevent it, just to make this kind of interaction more interesting for those that enjoy it (which, in turn, doesn't help at all those that don't enjoy it). I fear it would take nothing less than complete immunity from PvP to bring many of those players to Open.
Depending on which elements of the PvP and PvE camp you want to please bringing them together is just about impossible. On the PvP front you have many players whose only interesting activity in the game is hunting other players, preferably stalking them and taking them by surprise; on the PvE front you have many players, myself including, that see being attacked without first explicitly consenting to the fight as a game-breaking issue, sometimes even when it does not end in ship destruction, to the point we would rather not play than have any chance, no matter how small, of such an unwanted attack happening. I don't see how those two camps can even be brought together, because what makes the game interesting for one of them makes the game not worth playing at all for the other.