Yes PVP is unfair.

[Muetdhiver]

This is why I Don't play open, I have a conda with a 6 million rebuy cost and it can hold 6 million credits worth of slaves at a time. No way am I willing to lose 12 million credits to PvP.

There is literally no incentive for traders to play open when they have so much to lose and nothing to gain.

This nails it : traders, in open, have nothing to gain. In fact, the cost of "interacting" with other players by becoming their "content" is 100% on them.

Do you think the gankers would pay 6-10M for the kill of a clean CMDR trading ship ?
Because what we have now is folks asking traders to pay 6-10M for the priviledge to get killed. Think about that for a minute.

The fact that said traders in open cannot interact/cooperate in a mutually profitable way with other players than traders doing the same route does not
help, of course.

 

[Pluvialis]

What's the difference between being interdicted by a player who wants to kill you and an NPC who wants to kill you?

In this proposed open PvE mode, would attacks by NPCs also be turned off?
If not, then the only reason to play open PvE would be because the NPCs are easier to deal with than players.

(I've found the opposite experience: always played open, never been killed by a player, but been killed by NPC wings a few times)

With so many threads on the same topic it's difficult to keep track of what's been said in which one. But this has been answered before, and at least some people (myself included) reject PVP not because we don't expect combat in what is basically a fighting game. It's because behind the attacks of the NPCs there's only their coding: they're just doing what they're programmed to do. Behind the attacks of players there's someone who consciously chooses to attack you; to make you their in-game content.

Some of us just don't like that idea. Personally, fighting just isn't my thing ("Why do you play Elite at all, then?!" "Because it's a space game and I love explorey/tradey/smuggly space games."), and I'd rather avoid combat with NPCs too, but I can't. I can, however, avoid combat with people who could choose not to attack me but don't.

 

[Ian Skippy]

This nails it : traders, in open, have nothing to gain. In fact, the cost of "interacting" with other players by becoming their "content" is 100% on them.

Do you think the gankers would pay 6-10M for the kill of a clean CMDR trading ship ?
Because what we have now is folks asking traders to pay 6-10M for the priviledge to get killed. Think about that for a minute.

The fact that said traders in open cannot interact/cooperate in a mutually profitable way with other players than traders doing the same route does not
help, of course.

Trade vouchers. Four traders instantly get a 15% bonus per person. For what its worth, I mine in an T8, and play exclusively open. Never been an issue. If people dont like Open, fine. But lets not pretend Open is super hardcore with no benefits.

 

[Deadspin]

Do you think the gankers would pay 6-10M for the kill of a clean CMDR trading ship ?

The uh.. "gankers" as you put it, have generally already paid a lot more money than traders when it comes to ship insurance and the like. You don't get good at pvp and learn the nuances of ship building from a website alone, you've got to crack a few eggs in the process and generally, when first learning, those are pretty expensive eggs. At least until you realize that a low cost stealth DBS takes other ships out just as well as it's high cost FDL brother.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

You don't get good at pvp and learn the nuances of ship building from a website alone, you've got to crack a few eggs in the process and generally, when first learning, those are pretty expensive eggs. At least until you realize that a low cost stealth DBS takes other ships out just as well as it's high cost FDL brother.

you do not need to be good at pvp if you are up against a T9 and in a python!...... i can promise you, stick the best PvPer in the game in a trade specced T9, and put me in a combat python and the only chance the T9 would have is if they can high wake out before i melt it......... and this is not me saying i am skilled at PvP.

trader clubbing in a combat specced vessel is not pvp... there needs to be a verses for it to be PvP.... the clue is in the name.

Trade vouchers. Four traders instantly get a 15% bonus per person. For what its worth, I mine in an T8, and play exclusively open. Never been an issue. If people dont like Open, fine. But lets not pretend Open is super hardcore with no benefits.

open has benefits for players in wings, for sure, and indeed is actually a lot easier for the most part than solo!......... but for the lone wolf..... not so much.,

 

[Muetdhiver]

The fact that said traders in open cannot interact/cooperate in a mutually profitable way with other players than traders doing the same route does nothelp, of course.

Read. I said that other than with other traders/miners, there is no invective. I know all about the 15%. (miners + BHer's works too, and is quite fun. BH'ers + traders does not work beyond RP however).

As for gankers paying millions for their ships : it not like you will lose it attacking a T9 do you ? If you go into real PvP with both sides using combat ships,
the the risk is equaly shared by the willing participants of the fight, as it should be.
It has little in common with the cas where you have an unwilling+weaker participant who has no choice but die and pay insurance or disgracefully logoff.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

The uh.. "gankers" as you put it, have generally already paid a lot more money than traders when it comes to ship insurance and the like. You don't get good at pvp and learn the nuances of ship building from a website alone, you've got to crack a few eggs in the process and generally, when first learning, those are pretty expensive eggs. At least until you realize that a low cost stealth DBS takes other ships out just as well as it's high cost FDL brother.

While doing that, the player is doing something entertaining/fun for that player. I assume that PvP is entertaining/fun for a player that primarily plays this game to have PvP.

The trader on the other hand doesn't want to PvP, the trader wants to make profit. PvP negatively affects the profit. PvP takes time and in the case of ship destruction it reduces the amount of credits the trader has. PvP affects time and money. It's simply bad for the trader.

The PvP player has to pay credits for doing what the player wants to do.
The trader has to pay credits for doing something the player doesn't want to do.

 

[dxm55]

What's the difference between being interdicted by a player who wants to kill you and an NPC who wants to kill you?

None at all. But for some, it's all about principles.
That intangible thing that can hurt feelings and ruffle feathers.


That's why I suggested the game removing the CMDR tag, and making all contact blips solid. No differentiating between players and NPCs.
Might solve a few things along the way.

 

[eza]

That's why I suggested the game removing the CMDR tag, and making all contact blips solid. No differentiating between players and NPCs.
Might solve a few things along the way.

I remember that was how Frontier were going to implement it originally. I think it's a good idea.

Not yet been interdicted in Mobius or Solo by a wing of 4 PVP speccd FDL's/Corvettes/Pythons ect NPC's whilst flying in Safe space
Happens in Open often with no provocation - which is why I dont (didnt) play open

And that's never happened to me in open.
But last week I had two PA-spewing NPC anacondas blow up my FAS!

NPCs don't react differently to different players for out-of-game reasons.

Is that the crux of the matter? The perceived intentions of the attacking player?
If that's all it is then no wonder Frontier haven't done anything about it: the issue is entirely in people's minds, and there's not a lot Frontier can do to fix that!

It's because behind the attacks of the NPCs there's only their coding: they're just doing what they're programmed to do. Behind the attacks of players there's someone who consciously chooses to attack you; to make you their in-game content.

Some of us just don't like that idea. Personally, fighting just isn't my thing ("Why do you play Elite at all, then?!" "Because it's a space game and I love explorey/tradey/smuggly space games."), and I'd rather avoid combat with NPCs too, but I can't. I can, however, avoid combat with people who could choose not to attack me but don't.

But if the end result is the same (end result being that one ship attacks another) then what do the perceived intentions of the attacker matter?
The differences in programming between the two aren't even that different ;-)

It seems to me that the game should be moddable to allow people to host custom servers - could toggle interdictions on/off, or take out all weapons from the game, or whatever combination of settings people desire.

 

[MJC]

You don't get good at pvp and learn the nuances of ship building from a website alone, you've got to crack a few eggs in the process and generally, when first learning, those are pretty expensive eggs. At least until you realize that a low cost stealth DBS takes other ships out just as well as it's high cost FDL brother.

Best comment I read in ages. +1.
The joy a true pvp-er feels in a small ship destroying a large opponent is only equal to the sadness when the said opponent pulls the plug at 10%.

*** So once FD gets rid of combat logging I will happily pay increased price for murdering. ***

 

[Robert Maynard]

Is that the crux of the matter? The perceived intentions of the attacking player?
If that's all it is then no wonder Frontier haven't done anything about it: the issue is entirely in people's minds, and there's not a lot Frontier can do to fix that!

Oh but they have - they foresaw that friction would arise between incompatible play-styles and included two game modes with limited population to allow players to exclude those with whom they do not wish to play from their game.

The fact that Sandro has posted here talking about increased consequences for PKing might infer that Frontier have looked at the relative populations of each mode and are concerned about Open, specifically the players who are no longer playing in Open (as much, if at all).

 

[Querty Out]

But this has been answered before, and at least some people (myself included) reject PVP not because we don't expect combat in what is basically a fighting game. It's because behind the attacks of the NPCs there's only their coding: they're just doing what they're programmed to do. Behind the attacks of players there's someone who consciously chooses to attack you; to make you their in-game content.
...

There is a developer at FDev who programs NPCs with great intent. He probably sits in a darkened corner of the office. People hush when they pass by and avert their eyes. Sometimes he works late at night. People say they have heard quiet laughter from his corner. Those who dared to have a passing glance at this screen saw sliders, buttons and numbers. Numbers and the faint image of a skull.
Know that you fight against Him. When your ship explodes a smile is painted on His face.

(Humour out).

 

[Robert Maynard]

There is a developer at FDev who programs NPCs with great intent. He probably sits in a darkened corner of the office. People hush when they pass by and avert their eyes. Sometimes he works late at night. People say they have heard quiet laughter from his corner. Those who dared to have a passing glance at this screen saw sliders, buttons and numbers. Numbers and the faint image of a skull.
Know that you fight against Him. When your ship explodes a smile is painted on His face.

(Humour out).

I believe a lot of this to be true - apart from the fact that he's a she....

 

[Soon(TM)]

Trade vouchers. Four traders instantly get a 15% bonus per person. For what its worth, I mine in an T8, and play exclusively open. Never been an issue. If people dont like Open, fine. But lets not pretend Open is super hardcore with no benefits.

Nobody is saying it's super hard core. The facts are that open play offers no advantage to traders, only disadvantages, in private or solo traders get all the advantages and none of the disadvantages of open play.

Hense the lack of incentive to play open when your are a trader.

 

[snadge]

I think the main problem with open play and PVP is terribad instancing and poorly thought out combat mechanics.

Although I am a rabid PvPer there is absolutely no benefit from playing in open mode for me, especially as a newer player, I got killed something like 15 times undocking from my starter station by someone (same person) before I had even tried to play the game.

I left open mode and have been in solo until I learn how to use my ship, this game is not a sandbox, it tries to be be but the instancing system has been merged to allow the game to show the beauty of the Galaxy, sandbox games are very far and few between.

I have no problem with ganking squads in open but give players the options to deal with them, ATM nothing exists, there is no reprucussions for being a jerk, sort it out.

 

[DarkWalker]

There would be no point for Open-PVE if a strong enough deterrent force was implemented in the game that would discourage all but the most hardcore of psychos.
After all, one attack in a thousand. I think we all can live with a bit of excitement in our lives.

One attack in a thousand is enough for the game to not be worth playing for me.

And it's not about excitement. A Zoo visit could surely be made far more "exciting" by going through the monkey habitat while dodging whatever the monkeys fling, but that wouldn't make the visit any more enjoyable (or worth experiencing).

---

What's the difference between being interdicted by a player who wants to kill you and an NPC who wants to kill you?

What is the difference between you dropping a hammer on your toe and someone intentionally hammering your toe? The end result is the same, isn't it?

I remember that was how Frontier were going to implement it originally. I think it's a good idea.

Not from the start, no. But some time during development a lot of players thought it was a good idea, and Frontier was open to implementing it if that was what the players wanted.

But, if I remember correctly, more than a lot of players thought it a bad idea. Including most of the PvP players, and quite a few of the PvE ones (like myself).

Is that the crux of the matter? The perceived intentions of the attacking player?

Not just the intentions. The fact it is a player. I don't care if the player attacking me without my consent thinks it's better for the game, if he is polite and fully roleplays the whole encounter, or even if he is willing to stop when I make it clear that I don't enjoy what he is doing; I don't want the player attack to even happen to me in the first place.

---

There are many ways to solve the "problem" of people migrating away from community playing. Of course the company will have to be convinced it is worth doing. I'm not so sure there is any corporate will to do so, unless there is some sort of monetary incentive to do so. There is no community ethos in this game, and no incentive to be civilized ever considered in its development. Just force everyone to waddle in the sewage together, or run away to solo. Again, not my idea of how humanity would behave if they reached the stars. Not my idea of immersion.

This is why, in UO, convincing the suits that having griefers in the game was bad for business (despite them being paying customers) was very important for dealing with the issue. And the devs did so, in part, by tweaking their working definition for griefer: "A griefer is someone who, through his social actions, costs you more money than he gives you."

---

Dark souls is not an easy game by any stretch but i enjoy it... again tho... zero interest in the PvP side of things, so i just tend to stay hollow, and yet that game is FAR easier if you use some humanity and get some help, but it means risking pvp so i do not usually bother and just plough through soloing it.

And, apparently, PvP in Dark Souls 3 is now more opt-in than it was ever before in the Souls series. Seems like it was remodeled after Bloodborne, where unless you intentionally use a specific item you can't get invaded at all. Which got those that want to stomp PvP unsuspecting players with their knickers in a knot.

 

[Faded Glory]

[snip]
The answer is, fast, but not instantaneous.

Ah, so you see.
Everything comes with a drawback. Can't have your cake and eat it too...

Unless you're telling me you want a mechanic to specifically cripple PVP? That would be a carebear's dream wouldn't it? To be able to attack NPCs with little consequence, but not to be attacked themselves.
The fact is that such a mechanism should apply to ALL attacks on ship. Both Player and NPC.

My point was not at all about 'what I want", but about how making a change like this can affect a great deal more than what was originally intended. As I said, it would make the galaxy a great deal more believable for me if security levels actually meant something (for PvE too), and I agree that any mechanism should apply to the whole game, not just PvP.

I don't know whether FD can implement this however. All due respect to them, but the RNG nature of the environment doesn't seem that granular at the moment, and some 'targets' show up all over the place simply because you have a mission that involves them. Personally I'd be very happy to see improvements in this area.

[snip]
ok so some thoughts..

the "murderous" missions should only be available in anarchy stations - I have said it before, but the BB is open to all, and having a murder mission on it in high sec space would be like having a killer wanted notice in the asda notice window. once taken on, it should say, "target X Y Z should be in (anarchy) system X around this time.

the kill trader / civvy missions again would be better if we intercepted them en route to their hi sec destination, but if not then they should be VERY well paid, but taken on only with the acceptance that if it is federation space, you are not going to be welcome in fed space any time soon afterwards - so a player would then decide to be an enemy of the federation a friend to the empire or alliance (or enemy to all and just commit to only independent space).

imo defence forces should not magic into the area to save you, but hi sec space should have more patrols on the obvious route from nav beakon to stations (so smugglers need to go around the houses........ (which would be fine if FD are going to keep the highly paid smuggling missions... and illegal items in high sec space should fetch a real premium)

ultimately tho piracy should be far easier in low sec and anarchy space

sometimes a player killer will get their kill, there is nothing which can be done about that, but so long as a believable consequence happened to the aggressor, imo most players who play in open will accept that. Those that cant accept that imo there should be an official PvE mode, but failing that should join mobius if they really want NO chance of any PvP

Agreed, that level of realism and believability are very much what is needed in the game (IMO). If FD are able to code this, then the sky is the limit, bounties would not need to unrealistically expire, as players could take missions to kill clean targets in anarchic places, and if you take one to do it in a non-anarchy system, the rewards would be commensurate to the crime you are committing (as would the potential repercussions).

Right now, half the stuff we do gets us wanted, but it means nothing (and nor is it remotely dangerous, for those that want the game to be so). If the changes being discussed can be well implemented by FD, it will improve the whole game enormously, but of course, if they are only half implemented, they stand the chance of messing things up big time.

 

[excalibus]

I personally do not think that PvP in open should be 'disabled' nor do I think there should be an open 'pve only' mode either (unless they make mobius group an official open server of course where pvp beyond the mobius rules in undoable...

Interesting that you want the company to produce the game you want and you do want to prevent others from having what they might want. It brings to memory an old saying: "It's not enough that I succeed, but YOU must fail."

That is not the case at all... perhaps you should review my posting history... It's not actually about the game 'i want' but more to do with my own opinion on certain suggestions by others... What happens with other players in the game does not overly concern me, what happens with my own commander is all I need to be concerned about... same as anyone else...

 

[dxm55]

My point was not at all about 'what I want", but about how making a change like this can affect a great deal more than what was originally intended. As I said, it would make the galaxy a great deal more believable for me if security levels actually meant something (for PvE too), and I agree that any mechanism should apply to the whole game, not just PvP.

I don't know whether FD can implement this however. All due respect to them, but the RNG nature of the environment doesn't seem that granular at the moment, and some 'targets' show up all over the place simply because you have a mission that involves them. Personally I'd be very happy to see improvements in this area.

I think that most reasonable people here would already agree that a tweak in system security and authority response/strength would be sufficient to mitigate ganking/murdering for no reason. There's really no point in continuing to repeat or add to the points already made.

There will always be some that will reject the notion of any kind of non-friendly player interaction no matter how realistic it is, or how the NPC security is beefed. But that's alright. They can play in Solo, and are happy there. And we'll probably be happier without them anyway.

 

[Kenaz]

So is there a PvP system?

if not would it be worth seeking out a "PvP" system? something sponsored by FD? or are PvPers mostly into seal clubbing.

Assuming crime/punishment increases, would it make sense for a PvP system to be in an Anarchy system? Maybe Archon Delaine system? Something equa-distant from Empire and Federation for the occasional Seal Clubbing Raid?
Hudson/ALD both declaring the system a blackout "no fly zone" for citizen in galnet.
Nearby system local news always saying "another ship went missing"
Nearby system authority PSA "Don't got to X system"
FSD into System, first thing they see is a destroyed space station or capital ship.
Preferably a system with a HazRes