Yes PVP is unfair.

[Roybe]

Hello Commander Bumbles!

I'm interested in your opinion. Even though these penalties would only be applied in cases where there was a very clear mismatch of ability *and* a crime was committed, you think it would be a deterrent to player versus player activities.

Do you (or any other folk, feel free to respond), feel that there should be no additional penalties for lopsided encounters? That the world should remain uncaring and cold as is (don't worry folk, this isn't a trick question - there's no right or wrong answer!)?

It honestly depends on what the goals of the game are and the population trends you are aiming for.

Currently, the game does not care between PC or NPC, with death being more expensive to those that are attacked rather than those being attacked. In other words, a player's outcome to the loss of a ship is more meaningful (in time played to recoup) than those that kill and move on. 'As it should be!' I hear the gamer say! Why should a winner have to pay for something when they win? If this is the expected outcome of the game...then it must be expected that there will not be many people willing to lose substantial time investments, while their attacker gets away 'scott free'. Leading to Open vs. discussion. PvE players playing in private groups and solo because the cost to them is to high to be bothered with the risk, no matter how large or small.

If you are trying to swing the balance of population, how about, rather than a new addition to the security/legal system, something that will be ignored by the 'bad guys', how about an optional insurance piracy/death insurance purchasable each run that either covers the cost of the insurance payback...or the cost of cargo being carried. Some people have problems with paying for the ship...others with losing the price of the cargo...make them choose between each with each run...and deal with the added cost of 'risk free' play by having reduced profits on their run.

The extra time it would take to set up the insurance would also be factor for some people...'is it worth the time to click the menu' or should I go for a faster payout and return? This insurance could also only be available to 'clean' players if you want to provide a boon to those that play lawful good characters.

To be honest, nothing that will occur with the justice system will decrease the PK players. They thrive in a hostile universe. Harder environments are what they desire...living outside the lawful areas of the galaxy are not a deterrent...but a way to increase their virulence as they will be playing in close proximity to others that play like they do...because they will be 'forced there' by the game...which means wings of PK players, and later larger and larger player groups. Again...is this what is desired in the galaxy? The goal that people want to push towards? If not then you have to provide some protection of players investments (mainly their time away from their real life)for people that desire to play with large amounts of players...but do not see their demise at the hands of PK players as worth the effort to recover from.

I also see merit in either an open PvE mode or a PvP flag to be turned on and off by the player whenever they land at a station (the flag idea could also be tied to a purchase of the flag with in game credits...decreasing profitability)

 

[shambles1980]

The single best argument for a PvE-Open option ever. This type of outburst is exactly why I left the whole PvP world behind. Elite doesn't need to become what he describes. It can be what ever experience you seek.

unless its pvp ?

now let me understand what you want..
Do you want open that has PVe only areas. or Pve flags (making some areas I win, or eliminating piracy as a game play option)
or do you want a new mode that is called PvE open and is mobius but running on the elite server along side open?
Because 1 is a lot worse than the other (if we imagine that bandwidth wont be an issue or the server if it was doing both)

the second option does nothing more than mobius already does.. And if its run by FD then its a lot more work on them
And they would actually have to ban the people from that mode for breaking the rules (like that would ever happen)
So i dont see that ever happening.

the 1st option does not fix anything really either. Unless the "I win" area was confined to <100ly radius arround the starter system.
And the value of missions and trades in that area were an utter grind fest to put all other grind fests to shame.
PvP flags would just eliminate piracy.. probably have to be impossible to interdict some one with a pvp flag set to off too..
Which in reality eliminates piracy as a game path.

No loss pvp is the worse of the ideas. As it ends up with newbs being killed with 0 repercussions. traders being killed just for fun as they are reaching their destination "every single time" and going back to the start port they just came from. and explorers dying to sidewinders and cobras before they hand in the data Then being teleported back to the last station they were at..
You cant change that though.. if they keep the data then they just travel in packs One with a taxi transporter, then when they decide its time to turn round. taxi transporter kills them and Blammo back in the bubble.
Transporter taxi self destructs. who cares its not expensive. and they are back in the bubble too..

So again. i go to the bother of explaining why none of the above can work.

Can some one tell me why the idea of:

If you kill a CMDR who is not WANTED or PP HOSTILE and has REPORT CRIMES AGAINT ME turned on.
Then BOTH parties pay the re-buy cost.. the victim at the rebuy screen, and the perpetrator at the very next time they dock, die or log in.

im not saying its a magic fix that will sort everything out 100%. but it is better than what we have now. killing a newbie will cost you more than it costs them, "because they just get a new free ship"
people are less likely to kill explorers just for giggles. because its gonna get expensive doing that.
Pirates can still pirate. because a trader would rather lose cargo than look at a re-buy screen.
Pirates are more likely to try and disable a power plant /fsd than go for an out right kill on some one that is running.
Some people may even start to use those cargo hold mine things.

I still think Combat logging needs to be fixed 1st.
but if this is the aspect of the game the devs are showing interest in. then thats my idea.
and i would like to hear why it wouldn't work.

And you cant argue anything other than pvp flags will mean 10k players will stay in mobius.
because adding pvp flags/no loss pvp/ or any other idea i explained would not work, would make as many if not more leave the game entirely.

 

[Roybe]

unless its pvp ?

now let me understand what you want..
Do you want open that has PVe only areas. or Pve flags (making some areas I win, or eliminating piracy as a game play option)
or do you want a new mode that is called PvE open and is mobius but running on the elite server along side open?
Because 1 is a lot worse than the other (if we imagine that bandwidth wont be an issue or the server if it was doing both)

the second option does nothing more than mobius already does.. And if its run by FD then its a lot more work on them
And they would actually have to ban the people from that mode for breaking the rules (like that would ever happen)
So i dont see that ever happening.

the 1st option does not fix anything really either. Unless the "I win" area was confined to <100ly radius arround the starter system.
And the value of missions and trades in that area were an utter grind fest to put all other grind fests to shame.
PvP flags would just eliminate piracy.. probably have to be impossible to interdict some one with a pvp flag set to off too..
Which in reality eliminates piracy as a game path.

No loss pvp is the worse of the ideas. As it ends up with newbs being killed with 0 repercussions. traders being killed just for fun as they are reaching their destination "every single time" and going back to the start port they just came from. and explorers dying to sidewinders and cobras before they hand in the data Then being teleported back to the last station they were at..
You cant change that though.. if they keep the data then they just travel in packs One with a taxi transporter, then when they decide its time to turn round. taxi transporter kills them and Blammo back in the bubble.
Transporter taxi self destructs. who cares its not expensive. and they are back in the bubble too..

So again. i go to the bother of explaining why none of the above can work.

Can some one tell me why the idea of:

If you kill a CMDR who is not WANTED or PP HOSTILE and has REPORT CRIMES AGAINT ME turned on.
Then BOTH parties pay the re-buy cost.. the victim at the rebuy screen, and the perpetrator at the very next time they dock, die or log in.

im not saying its a magic fix that will sort everything out 100%. but it is better than what we have now. killing a newbie will cost you more than it costs them, "because they just get a new free ship"
people are less likely to kill explorers just for giggles. because its gonna get expensive doing that.
Pirates can still pirate. because a trader would rather lose cargo than look at a re-buy screen.
Pirates are more likely to try and disable a power plant than go for an out right kill on some one that is running.
Some people may even start to use those cargo hold mine things.

I still think Combat logging needs to be fixed 1st.
but if this is the aspect of the game the devs are showing interest in. then thats my idea.
and i would like to hear why it wouldn't work.

And you cant argue anything other than pvp flags will mean 10k players will stay in mobius.
because adding pvp flags/no loss pvp/ or any other idea i explained would not work, would make as many if not more leave the game entirely.

I can see how your idea would work. Everyone pays every time and the criminal pays more. See if you can get the idea past the PvP folks...basically you are punishing the attacker every time they kill someone. Seems a little confrontational to me...but who knows the PvP people might enjoy the added challenge of paying for their transgressions. one other thing to note...the justice system cannot be built to destroy a play style...the devs desire the choices to occur.

I think you are looking at the PvE mode improperly...it is just another way to interact...all the modes are, in actuality just a flag choice that allows you to be seen and interacted with as you see fit. Basically, you could be flying next to a PK player and would never know it...if you are flagged to the Private group or Solo. It's all about the instancing.

The idea of a PvP flag would work like any MMO that has the option...except that you would have to be in a space station to make the choice to turn it on or off...this could also be a cost to the player to decide if it is worth the reduced profits AND could also be something that resets every time they land so they have to choose each time they fly.

The other option I see is an insurance option that covers your losses from dying, by paying your full insurance load...a benefit of flying for a particular minor or major faction, or an insurance option that only covers the cost of the cargo. The three things these all do is give those that do not want to be attacked an option to play with others the way they might desire, and not have to be concerned with the loss of time to the 'bad guys'. Heck a PvP flag could be as simple as flying under an assumed NPC name and with a solid box/triangle for your ship.

 

[shambles1980]

it does not bother the pvp people, they can just turn report crimes against me off, and Ta daa.. only 1 re buy..
Wanted players are also fair game. and so are power play opposition, again only 1 re buy there..
All it does is make it less enjoyable to kill soft targets. (noobs/traders/explorers)
Does not make it impossible to do it. but it helps persuade you its probably not the most profitable path to take.
Soo the only people it effects are the "griefers"

your pvp flag idea is again just a second mode of open that is pve only. Unless FD coded it so you could not shoot at a player. And then some how managed to make it so script kiddies couldnt exploit it in every mode. then you would have people with flag off in this "off instance" killing people.
So it would just be a mobius run by FD who would have to ban people from using that mode.


the insurance on cargo is a funny thing. depending on how much cargo and what the ship is. it may end up being cheaper to let the pirate kill you than to give the cargo, because you will get the money for the cargo back any way.


And i just do not get this argument about human interdiction being worse than npc interdiction.
Yes they have more skills than the npc's
but they also have FSD cool down times.
Weapons over heat.
ammo count.
They wont 100% guaranteed interdict you 1 second before you drop out and teleport you 300ls away from where you were. *then do the same thing again*
They wont just magically appear in front of you as you go to request docking permissions.
They dont cheat at the interdiction mini game

if anything NPC's are worse than humans. so i really don't see that argument at all.
But i do understand that the human players are a lot more skilled than the npc's and if you chose to stand and fight vs a human you have pretty high failure % if all you ever did was fight npc's.
But i dont see that as a bad thing personally. Then again i dont have a problem with people playing solo or mobius.

 

[Roybe]

it does not bother the pvp people, they can just turn report crimes against me off, and Ta daa.. only 1 re buy..

your pvp flag idea is again just a second mode of open that is pve only. Unless FD coded it so you could not shoot at a player. And then some how managed to make it so script kiddies couldnt exploit it in every mode. then you would have people with flag off in this "off instance" killing people.
So it would just be a mobius run by FD who would have to ban people from using that mode.


the insurance on cargo is a funny thing. depending on how much cargo and what the ship is. it may end up being cheaper to let the pirate kill you than to give the cargo, because you will get the money for the cargo back any way.


And i just do not get this argument about human interdiction being worse than npc interdiction.
Yes they have more skills than the npc's
but they also have FSD cool down times.
Weapons over heat.
ammo count.
They wont 100% guaranteed interdict you 1 second before you drop out and teleport you 300ls away from where you were. *then do the same thing again*
They wont just magically appear in front of you as you go to request docking permissions.
They dont cheat at the interdiction mini game

if anything NPC's are worse than humans. so i really don't see that argument at all.
But i do understand that the human players are a lot more killed than the npc's and if you chose to stand and fight vs a human you have pretty high failure % if all you ever did was fight npc's.
But i dont see that as a bad thing personally. Then again i dont have a problem with people playing solo or mobius.

Your lack of understanding still does not subside the jimmie rustling that occurs when players kill players. There are people that cannot be bothered to play with others IF those others can kill them 'for sport' and force them to have to play a bunch of hours (a luxury many players do not have...again, something you might not understand) that they feel is just a useless way to spend their time.

Basically, my ideas limit the pain to the PvE players, if they choose to apply the solution, and could shift the population out of Private modes...and still maintain the equality of all modes and platforms. Yours fails to...because it does not provide relief for anyone...particularly those that desire the relief.

Honestly, I think Sandro's suggestion will do nothing to change the way things occur in the galaxy..and would probably worsen the situation. It is actually rewarding the PK players with what they desire...and does nothing to provide relief to the PvE players....and will, in all likelihood increase the disparity between PvP and PvE.

 

[shambles1980]

Your lack of understanding still does not subside the jimmie rustling that occurs when players kill players. There are people that cannot be bothered to play with others IF those others can kill them 'for sport' and force them to have to play a bunch of hours (a luxury many players do not have...again, something you might not understand) that they feel is just a useless way to spend their time.

Basically, my ideas limit the pain to the PvE players, if they choose to apply the solution, and could shift the population out of Private modes...and still maintain the equality of all modes and platforms. Yours fails to...because it does not provide relief for anyone...particularly those that desire the relief.

Honestly, I think Sandro's suggestion will do nothing to change the way things occur in the galaxy..and would probably worsen the situation. It is actually rewarding the PK players with what they desire...and does nothing to provide relief to the PvE players....and will, in all likelihood increase the disparity between PvP and PvE.

not to be blunt or anything.
but why did people want solo mode if they just want to change open to PvE?
And how would Pvp flags instancing be any diferent than mobius now?
FD will not ban any one for killing some one they should not have. And if they added code to the game so that players could not shoot each other. the script kiddies would have a field day and this game would be done.

So the best fix in that regards is mobius. You have to have admin to kick out or ban the abusers.
you already have that.
So I suppose in that respect they should add a Join mobius PvE group link in the main window.
because the flags thing is either just a mobius run by FD who cannot ban people stating uk law, or a script kiddies wet dream waiting to happen.

also why would they be happy to play with a npc that can kill them for sport and make them play for hours "which they do not have the luxury of doing"

And my solution does provide relief. because most wouldnt kill you for Sport. they would kill you because you had a bounty. or you were a PP hostile opponent.
Which makes you a perfectly viable target in open, It makes you a perfectly viable target in all modes, But the only place you see a human is open.

 

[DarkWalker]

unless its pvp ?

now let me understand what you want..
Do you want open that has PVe only areas. or Pve flags (making some areas I win, or eliminating piracy as a game play option)
or do you want a new mode that is called PvE open and is mobius but running on the elite server along side open?
Because 1 is a lot worse than the other (if we imagine that bandwidth wont be an issue or the server if it was doing both)

Last one, an additional PvE-only Open mode running alongside the current PvP Open.

And no, it wouldn't have bandwidth issues. Open isn't anything special, it's just the default group everyone is a member of, so adding another mode parallel to it wouldn't increase the server load any more than a player creating a new group.

the second option does nothing more than mobius already does.. And if its run by FD then its a lot more work on them
And they would actually have to ban the people from that mode for breaking the rules (like that would ever happen)
So i dont see that ever happening.

It would guarantee that the people that want to avoid PvP wouldn't be left hanging should Mobius decide to stop managing the group, or for any reason became unavailable. Besides, Frontier would have much better tools to make sure it all works correctly than any player could ever have.

No loss pvp is the worse of the ideas. As it ends up with newbs being killed with 0 repercussions. traders being killed just for fun as they are reaching their destination "every single time" and going back to the start port they just came from. and explorers dying to sidewinders and cobras before they hand in the data Then being teleported back to the last station they were at..
You cant change that though.. if they keep the data then they just travel in packs One with a taxi transporter, then when they decide its time to turn round. taxi transporter kills them and Blammo back in the bubble.
Transporter taxi self destructs. who cares its not expensive. and they are back in the bubble too..

If no loss PvP was as bad as you painted it wouldn't be used by most MMOs out there. Consequences for PvP death are, nowadays, very much the exception, and thankfully so. I, particularly, only bother with PvP if there are no penalties for being defeated.

And i just do not get this argument about human interdiction being worse than npc interdiction.
Yes they have more skills than the npc's
but they also have FSD cool down times.
Weapons over heat.
ammo count.
They wont 100% guaranteed interdict you 1 second before you drop out and teleport you 300ls away from where you were. *then do the same thing again*
They wont just magically appear in front of you as you go to request docking permissions.
They dont cheat at the interdiction mini game

if anything NPC's are worse than humans. so i really don't see that argument at all.
But i do understand that the human players are a lot more killed than the npc's and if you chose to stand and fight vs a human you have pretty high failure % if all you ever did was fight npc's.
But i dont see that as a bad thing personally. Then again i dont have a problem with people playing solo or mobius.

It's not about the result. It's about the fact some... person decided to intentionally ruin my day. For me, winning a PvP fight I didn't want would be far less enjoyable than losing against a NPC.

Or, in other words: I want the most challenging content the game can throw at me, as long as it does not include (non-consensual) PvP. Non-consensual PvP is a sure way to ruin my mood even if I manage to win.

 

[dxm55]

1. Last one, an additional PvE-only Open mode running alongside the current PvP Open. And no, it wouldn't have bandwidth issues. Open isn't anything special, it's just the default group everyone is a member of, so adding another mode parallel to it wouldn't increase the server load any more than a player creating a new group.

2. It would guarantee that the people that want to avoid PvP wouldn't be left hanging should Mobius decide to stop managing the group, or for any reason became unavailable. Besides, Frontier would have much better tools to make sure it all works correctly than any player could ever have.

3. If no loss PvP was as bad as you painted it wouldn't be used by most MMOs out there. Consequences for PvP death are, nowadays, very much the exception, and thankfully so. I, particularly, only bother with PvP if there are no penalties for being defeated.


It's not about the result. It's about the fact some... person decided to intentionally ruin my day. For me, winning a PvP fight I didn't want would be far less enjoyable than losing against a NPC.
Or, in other words: I want the most challenging content the game can throw at me, as long as it does not include (non-consensual) PvP. Non-consensual PvP is a sure way to ruin my mood even if I manage to win.

1. Still a waste of effort, when FD can spend time fixing other bugs, or adding more features. (Like crime and punishment to mitigate murder/ganking)

Until FD fixes crime and punishment, PVE players should just stick to Mobius. There you have a consensual group who plays with each other nicely.
Open is open. It belongs to anyone, where anyone can do anything.

2. Another group can always be created. It's not gamebreaking.


3. If you die by the hands of an NPC, it would still pretty much suck as bad for you as being ganked does.
Furthermore, REAL pirate players will only ask you to drop your cargo and let you go.

Murderers/gankers will kill you outright. NPC pirates will scan you.... AND KILL YOU outright if you carry anything of value. Don't believe me? Try bringing your T9 full of rares to a Hi RES site and see.
When you have 2 Elite NPC Anacondas scan and then start shooting at you relentlessly, you'll realize that they're no different from these "griefers" you speak of.

 

[shambles1980]

Last one, an additional PvE-only Open mode running alongside the current PvP Open.

And no, it wouldn't have bandwidth issues. Open isn't anything special, it's just the default group everyone is a member of, so adding another mode parallel to it wouldn't increase the server load any more than a player creating a new group.


It would guarantee that the people that want to avoid PvP wouldn't be left hanging should Mobius decide to stop managing the group, or for any reason became unavailable. Besides, Frontier would have much better tools to make sure it all works correctly than any player could ever have.


If no loss PvP was as bad as you painted it wouldn't be used by most MMOs out there. Consequences for PvP death are, nowadays, very much the exception, and thankfully so. I, particularly, only bother with PvP if there are no penalties for being defeated.


It's not about the result. It's about the fact some... person decided to intentionally ruin my day. For me, winning a PvP fight I didn't want would be far less enjoyable than losing against a NPC.

Or, in other words: I want the most challenging content the game can throw at me, as long as it does not include (non-consensual) PvP. Non-consensual PvP is a sure way to ruin my mood even if I manage to win.

ok just 2 points.
FD cant ban any one from the FD run mobius so it would be full of player killers having a laugh (all the griefers would leave open to go there)
and
How is it if a person interdicts you it is "to ruin your day" but if a npc interdicts you it isnt?
FD have specifically programmed npcs to be asp hats, and that is what they do. most humans wont interdict you to ruin your day.

i have a feeling most of the people complaining about the horrors of open don't actually play in open at all.

maybe you should pop back in for a week or 2 then decide?

 

[DarkWalker]

not to be blunt or anything.
but why did people want solo mode if they just want to change open to PvE?

People didn't "want" Solo mode. It was offered from the start. When Frontier first explained how ED's multiplayer would work, they started by making it clear that players would be able to choose who they play with, including the option to play completely alone.

What some people demanded, and was after a while promised but in the end denied, was an offline mode. It's what I wanted, too; a mode where the whole galaxy would be mine, for me alone to shape without other players hindering my fun. More important for me, it would be a mode where I would be able to mod and tweak the experience in whichever way I saw fit, which is something I usually find to be at least as fun as actually playing the game.

As for PvE, the plan at first included giving players the tools to make open (as opposed to private), PvE-only groups. they were described in the DDR, and even mentioned in interviews. Unfortunately, Frontier never implemented those tools.

And how would Pvp flags instancing be any diferent than mobius now?

It would be an official mode. Thus, it would appear in the mode select screen, allowing players that don't read the forums to know about its existence. It would also be guaranteed to not depend on a single player managing it.

Also, Frontier has the resources to, if they so desire, guarantee that PvP in such a group becomes impossible.

FD will not ban any one for killing some one they should not have. And if they added code to the game so that players could not shoot each other. the script kiddies would have a field day and this game would be done.

Script kiddies are already able to make their ships invulnerable, so no meaningful change. More so because anything devised to catch those currently existing hacks should also be able to catch the new batch you are describing.

 

[Roybe]

not to be blunt or anything.
but why did people want solo mode if they just want to change open to PvE?
And how would Pvp flags instancing be any diferent than mobius now?
FD will not ban any one for killing some one they should not have. And if they added code to the game so that players could not shoot each other. the script kiddies would have a field day and this game would be done.

So the best fix in that regards is mobius. You have to have admin to kick out or ban the abusers.
you already have that.
So I suppose in that respect they should add a Join mobius PvE group link in the main window.
because the flags thing is either just a mobius run by FD who cannot ban people stating uk law, or a script kiddies wet dream waiting to happen.

also why would they be happy to play with a npc that can kill them for sport and make them play for hours "which they do not have the luxury of doing"

And my solution does provide relief. because most wouldnt kill you for Sport. they would kill you because you had a bounty. or you were a PP hostile opponent.
Which makes you a perfectly viable target in open, It makes you a perfectly viable target in all modes, But the only place you see a human is open.

I'm not here to argue the validity of statements between us. Sandro asked for our opinion. You and I have expressed ours...

Just so you know my position on Mobius...it is a workaround at best...an actual exploit at worst. In either case a player should not be responsible for the well being of 18k players in this, or any other game. Mobius group is only as viable as his ability/desire to log in and play. Once he stops logging in..the group either dies...or someone else takes over his account...in direct violation of the ToS.

I do not believe the developers wanted to create a PvE mode...because their design was to have Open be a choice filled option. Mobius has shown that there is a strong demand for a PVE mode. I doubt the devs will ever go this route...which means, honestly, they should leave everything where it currently is. If they change the rules...the need to be clear on what their desired outcome would be. If it is population shifts from Private to Open...that requires a certain set of choices. If they want to move more folks to Private, that means a different set. If it is to appease the community, then the outcome is irrelevant because doing that leads to unforeseen consequences. That is my point in this discussion...trying to help define the desired outcome...and provide ideas that would move the choices in that direction.

 

[shambles1980]

People didn't "want" Solo mode. It was offered from the start. When Frontier first explained how ED's multiplayer would work, they started by making it clear that players would be able to choose who they play with, including the option to play completely alone.

What some people demanded, and was after a while promised but in the end denied, was an offline mode. It's what I wanted, too; a mode where the whole galaxy would be mine, for me alone to shape without other players hindering my fun. More important for me, it would be a mode where I would be able to mod and tweak the experience in whichever way I saw fit, which is something I usually find to be at least as fun as actually playing the game.

As for PvE, the plan at first included giving players the tools to make open (as opposed to private), PvE-only groups. they were described in the DDR, and even mentioned in interviews. Unfortunately, Frontier never implemented those tools.


It would be an official mode. Thus, it would appear in the mode select screen, allowing players that don't read the forums to know about its existence. It would also be guaranteed to not depend on a single player managing it.

Also, Frontier has the resources to, if they so desire, guarantee that PvP in such a group becomes impossible.


Script kiddies are already able to make their ships invulnerable, so no meaningful change. More so because anything devised to catch those currently existing hacks should also be able to catch the new batch you are describing.

I have no issues with a FD run mobius.
But they would have to be able to ban people from that mode for killing other humans.
They would HAVE to admin it. they could happily have volunteers to admin it, but they would need to have rules. but that could work ok..
They honestly cant add code to allow the pve players not to shoot at each other because that would just end up in people flying around every where and no one can shoot them in any mode.

But with open you still need the deterrent. (which is what this thread is about. its not a please make fd run mobius thread.)
And the only working deterrent i can think of is:
both parties pay the rebuy, If the victim is clean, not a hostile PP faction member, and has report crimes against me on.

Thats not to say you cant also have a FD run mobius with volunteer admins that can ban members from the group *uk laws on consume-rights being ignored for a minuet*
but that does not mean that something should be done about the balance of crime and punishment against soft targets in open. (which is what the discussion is actually about)

 

[DarkWalker]

How is it if a person interdicts you it is "to ruin your day" but if a npc interdicts you it isnt?
FD have specifically programmed npcs to be asp hats, and that is what they do. most humans wont interdict you to ruin your day.

Because a NPC interdicting me is a piece of code, an unthinking entity without agency. It has no choice but to made what it was programmed to do. And, if the devs are not completely crazy, it will be programmed to make the game experience as a whole as enjoyable as the devs can make.

Meanwhile, a player interdicting me is someone that made a conscious choice to target me to have their quick fix, with no regard at all for whether I will enjoy the experience or not. Someone that could choose to respect me, but instead chose to not do so. In other words, someone I don't regard as worthy sharing my gaming time with.

maybe you should pop back in for a week or 2 then decide?

Nope. I'm not going to be anywhere players like you can ever meet me. And if, by mischance, I ever meet someone that wants to attack me, I will combat log without any qualm. Like I said before, I have nothing against player pirates existing, as long as I never, ever, meet one of them.

It's not a point of view I arrived at lightly. I spent the best part of a decade experimenting with various kinds of online games and MMOs, to determine which kinds I enjoy. And, in that time, I decided that I will never, ever, play again any game where others can attack me without my consent.

 

[CMDR_Amanath]

PvP suggests to me some sort of equality. We know that isnt the case in Elite and never will be, which is ok. A trading ship shouldn't beat a combat ship. So I prefer to keep away from calling it PvP, its just - pirating, murder, or warfare of some sort. If you dont want to be murdered by a human go to solo or a group of like minds. But any sort of suggestion that wants to make equality out of a freighter vs a dogfighter is silly imho. The game was never meant to be like that.

 

[Faded Glory]

Murderers/gankers will kill you outright. NPC pirates will scan you.... AND KILL YOU outright if you carry anything of value. Don't believe me? Try bringing your T9 full of rares to a Hi RES site and see.

I think taking a T9 full of rares to a Hi RES would be something only an NPC would do...

I have no issues with a FD run mobius.
But they would have to be able to ban people from that mode for killing other humans.
They would HAVE to admin it. they could happily have volunteers to admin it, but they would need to have rules. but that could work ok..
They honestly cant add code to allow the pve players not to shoot at each other because that would just end up in people flying around every where and no one can shoot them in any mode.

I don't see why FD couldn't add code that prevented player on player damage (or even inflicted damage on the attacker rather than the attacked) in an Open PvE mode. It wouldn't affect any other modes at all, so it's little or no administrative overhead for them. Mobius needs players to be banned or excluded because there is no way to code out the behavior that the members choose not to engage in.

 

[shambles1980]

Because a NPC interdicting me is a piece of code, an unthinking entity without agency. It has no choice but to made what it was programmed to do. And, if the devs are not completely crazy, it will be programmed to make the game experience as a whole as enjoyable as the devs can make.

Meanwhile, a player interdicting me is someone that made a conscious choice to target me to have their quick fix, with no regard at all for whether I will enjoy the experience or not. Someone that could choose to respect me, but instead chose to not do so. In other words, someone I don't regard as worthy sharing my gaming time with.


Nope. I'm not going to be anywhere players like you can ever meet me. And if, by mischance, I ever meet someone that wants to attack me, I will combat log without any qualm. Like I said before, I have nothing against player pirates existing, as long as I never, ever, meet one of them.

It's not a point of view I arrived at lightly. I spent the best part of a decade experimenting with various kinds of online games and MMOs, to determine which kinds I enjoy. And, in that time, I decided that I will never, ever, play again any game where others can attack me without my consent.

so you presume to know me and judge me having never met me, state categorically that you will happily cheat. Say without question or doubt that you will not re-join open.
And think you can form a valid opinion on the matter?

The fact that your opinion of me is so wrong is enough to invalidate your argument. Simply assuming something or some one is not something you would want to meet / experience, is a secondary one. And then from your final statement i am to believe you have never tried open or only did so untill you encountered your 1st pvp..

i am sorry but you are so bias that i cannot see how you feel you can form a valid opinion on this.

I agree PvE people should be allowed to have there own server if that is what they desire (they already have that)
I also agree it would be beter if FD could run it but they could not enforce it so the situation you have now is the best that you can have.
however
I also believe some people like to PvP, others like knowing they could be attacked by a human and raise the stakes *i am one of those* Some people like to role play as a pirate, And they should be allowed too. there are people like me who will attack a hostile power play cmdr because they are in direct competition to me. Others like to bounty hunt, and its more exiting if its a human because they may actually lose..
Hell i even understand that some people like to be asps and go around being jerks.
And do you know what?
They should be allowed to do that too. its their game as well as ours.

So i understand all that so formed my opinion on what should be done by looking at EVERY ones enjoyment of the game.
And if the closest thing to keeping every one happy is my idea of make every one buy the re buy cost if it was a soft target, then at least its a start.

And just so you know.
I only Kill hostile power play players, or some one that attacked me 1st.
I will chase people out of the combat zone if they steal my bonds, but i wont kill them.
and i dont attack wanted people. or soft targets. Also i dont pirate...
But again you formed your opinion a long time ago and it was wrong but it wont stop you from keeping it. Which is evident.

 

[DarkWalker]

I don't see why FD couldn't add code that prevented player on player damage (or even inflicted damage on the attacker rather than the attacked) in an Open PvE mode. It wouldn't affect any other modes at all, so it's little or no administrative overhead for them. Mobius needs players to be banned or excluded because there is no way to code out the behavior that the members choose not to engage in.

Yup. And, as a side benefit, it would prevent the kind of PvP incident that happens from time to time in Mobius. Preventing the unwanted behavior is far better than punishing those that engage in it after the fact, but as the game currently stands only the devs have the needed tools to prevent PvP from happening in a PvE group.

(Oh, and about Frontier not being able to ban players from modes: they have talked multiple times about being able to ban notorious griefers from Open. Not sure if they are still considering it, but in the past they considered it seriously enough to mention it as one of three main tools to prevent griefing.)

 

[shambles1980]

I think taking a T9 full of rares to a Hi RES would be something only an NPC would do...



I don't see why FD couldn't add code that prevented player on player damage (or even inflicted damage on the attacker rather than the attacked) in an Open PvE mode. It wouldn't affect any other modes at all, so it's little or no administrative overhead for them. Mobius needs players to be banned or excluded because there is no way to code out the behavior that the members choose not to engage in.

the thing is. if there is code in the game to do something. then its there to be exploited..

Lets say the running exe has a line of code in it that reads something like 008786577890000xxxxx "whatever its an example"
This code is for PvP off and makes you invulnerable to humans.
its a matter of hours at the most. to inject that line in to a running exe at the right place to make that mode turn on in open.

the only choice you have then is to update every few hours to stop it being exploited, or remove that ability. So why would you add it in the 1st place when every one knows what would happen.

Which is probably why FD doped the idea in the 1st place. they thought about it, understood what would happen and said We cant do that. so we will give them private groups as a happy medium.

p.s
FD can do shaddow bans (probably 3 days or so)
Uk consumer law means if they ban them they have to refund them.. If they refund them they can re buy any way.. so 3 day shaddow ban is about the best they can do i think..
Same with GTA V online. (short term ban is all they can get, and then they come back and do it again any way "have you tried to play gtaV online?)

At least with a private group the admins of that are not bound to refund them as they never bought anything from them, and fd dont have to refund them because it was nothing to do with them.

 

[dxm55]

Nope. I'm not going to be anywhere players like you can ever meet me. And if, by mischance, I ever meet someone that wants to attack me, I will combat log without any qualm. Like I said before, I have nothing against player pirates existing, as long as I never, ever, meet one of them.

It's not a point of view I arrived at lightly. I spent the best part of a decade experimenting with various kinds of online games and MMOs, to determine which kinds I enjoy. And, in that time, I decided that I will never, ever, play again any game where others can attack me without my consent.

I take it you play in Solo only right?

So why then are you bothering with a PVP thread? LOL....

 

[Bidermann]

These points, hell no.

The ship scans are the only way I can distinguish trader from bounty hunter. I would probably stop pirating if I couldn't actually consistently find targets.

NPC authority does not work directly. The difference between low-med-high security is response time, mainly - it's not dangerous to go into high-security systems as a pirate, but there's no reason to, as the second you get cargo, the police arrive. Sure, they can't kill you if you fight back, but you can't stay to collect that cargo, so that zone becomes a no-go.

Insurance null and void? So you're saying that if I try to engage in piracy, a perfectly legitimate role, I can lose 20x as much as an equivalent bounty hunter? No.

Sorry to bring these points down so hard, but these just aren't good points. If we followed Sandro's suggestion in that murders would lose you permission to dock at high-sec systems and change your insurance coverage slightly, with increasing penalty with the more murder you commit, the game would improve by a lot.

Agree totally, also scanning for me works in that by seeing what ship other cmdrs have you can work out the threat level, and PP needs the scans to find the target ships

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

the thing is. if there is code in the game to do something. then its there to be exploited..

Lets say the running exe has a line of code in it that reads something like 008786577890000xxxxx "whatever its an example"
This code is for PvP off and makes you invulnerable to humans.
its a matter of hours at the most. to inject that line in to a running exe at the right place to make that mode turn on in open.

the only choice you have then is to update every few hours to stop it being exploited, or remove that ability. So why would you add it in the 1st place when every one knows what would happen.

Which is probably why FD doped the idea in the 1st place. they thought about it, understood what would happen and said We cant do that. so we will give them private groups as a happy medium.

p.s
FD can do shaddow bans (probably 3 days or so)
Uk consumer law means if they ban them they have to refund them.. If they refund them they can re buy any way.. so 3 day shaddow ban is about the best they can do i think..
Same with GTA V online. (short term ban is all they can get, and then they come back and do it again any way "have you tried to play gtaV online?)

At least with a private group the admins of that are not bound to refund them as they never bought anything from them, and fd dont have to refund them because it was nothing to do with them.

in power play the PvP is needed to help fortify and protect systems , so shutting that down takes away the exciting part of the game , in my case trying avoid being attacked