Yes PVP is unfair.

[excalibus]

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 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?


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).


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.

---

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."

---

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.

and for those people who do not ever want any type of PvP encounter to be possible for them, that is the whole intention of solo mode, even in mobius group there are circumstances where PvP is allowed in the group

 

[dxm55]

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).

Does it really matter to FD if players are playing in Solo, Group, or Open, given that all modes affect the BGS anyway? ie. Does not contribute or take away from any kind of infrastructure utilization or costs?

I say, let sleeping dogs lie. Honestly I can live with the current mechanics if FD decides not to do anything about it. Players inclined to be ats, psychos and ganking PKers will stay in open. Pastel-colored Ursines inclined to be Friendly, Understanding, Caring and Kind already play solo or in their own groups.

As it stands, the system is working. So even if nothing was done, no harm would be done anyway.

 

[excalibus]

without digressing into some derogatory pastel coloured universe which helps only to ire some people and does not add any real value to the discussion at hand...

I think the crime and punishment system should be overhauled and there should be a more in depth / granular lawfulness state of a commander (seperate to the clean / wanted state) that is based on their playstyle / playing history and modifiable by performing 'good' or 'bad' acts and should not only be based on acts against other players but be based on your actions both with NPC and PC alike and how authories respond to you should take that state of your character into account when you perform actions or have actions performed on you in their jurisdiction.

 

[dxm55]

without digressing into some derogatory pastel coloured universe which helps only to ire some people and does not add any real value to the discussion at hand...

I think the crime and punishment system should be overhauled and there should be a more in depth / granular lawfulness state of a commander (seperate to the clean / wanted state) that is based on their playstyle / playing history and modifiable by performing 'good' or 'bad' acts and should not only be based on acts against other players but be based on your actions both with NPC and PC alike and how authories respond to you should take that state of your character into account when you perform actions or have actions performed on you in their jurisdiction.

You know... I have a feeling that a harsh increase in crime and punishment, while well-intentioned to protect traders and newbies in Open mode, might cause some QQ in the ursine community playing in Solo or their own groups.

Because any assault on another ship will incur the wrath of the NPC Cop Squad, along with the proposed increased fines and duration, may very well affect their ability to take on assassination missions, pirate NPCs, and/or be a NPC murderer .

 

[sutex]

Crime & lack of Punishment theme , has gone around and around on ED threads, consequences is what is missing from ED, has been from the start , been playing in private servers, very early on, since understanding this one point.

Pity , would like to be in open but !..... and around & around we go.......

 

[Roybe]

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).

You have not met MoM™. She does sit quietly, coding away, her children learning day by day. Sometimes her cackling can be heard over Twitter. Watch the forums!

 

[Faded Glory]

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.

You know... I have a feeling that a harsh increase in crime and punishment, while well-intentioned to protect traders and newbies in Open mode, might cause some QQ in the ursine community playing in Solo or their own groups.

Because any assault on another ship will incur the wrath of the NPC Cop Squad, along with the proposed increased fines and duration, may very well affect their ability to take on assassination missions, pirate NPCs, and/or be a NPC murderer .

Just to be very clear, I'm not against some of the proposed changes. I think they will create a much more believable galaxy, and I'm not suggesting they shouldn't be implemented because they will affect PvE as well as PvP. I think that they should affect the PvE world too. What I am saying is that they need to be implemented well otherwise they will affect everybody's game, potentially negatively, PvP and PvE.

I think that NPC murder should mean something, not the silly missions we have now to go kill a celebrity, or murder traders or civilians, and the consequences of that crime are meaningless. Part of the problem is that FD trivialize crime in the game (to make it seem dangerous?) and then wonder what they can do to stop players killing each other. I'd suggest don't trivialize crime.

 

[dxm55]

I think they will create a much more believable galaxy.

I think that NPC murder should mean something, not the silly missions we have now to go kill a celebrity, or murder traders or civilians, and the consequences of that crime are meaningless. Part of the problem is that FD trivialize crime in the game (to make it seem dangerous?) and then wonder what they can do to stop players killing each other. I'd suggest don't trivialize crime.

I'm on the same page. I'm all for a galaxy that would resemble real life, if we were living in that era.
- Safe, secure core systems.
- Dangerous frontier and unexplored systems

And yes, I think NPC murders should count for something too. This week alone I've killed so many NPCs in assassination missions, and what?
Only got a 5-digit bounty on me with a 1 week timer. The cops should be going ape sh1111t on me.

 

[Roybe]

Just to be very clear, I'm not against some of the proposed changes. I think they will create a much more believable galaxy, and I'm not suggesting they shouldn't be implemented because they will affect PvE as well as PvP. I think that they should affect the PvE world too. What I am saying is that they need to be implemented well otherwise they will affect everybody's game, potentially negatively, PvP and PvE.

I think that NPC murder should mean something, not the silly missions we have now to go kill a celebrity, or murder traders or civilians, and the consequences of that crime are meaningless. Part of the problem is that FD trivialize crime in the game (to make it seem dangerous?) and then wonder what they can do to stop players killing each other. I'd suggest don't trivialize crime.

The problem isn't trivialization...it's that crime is designed as a part of the game. As I pointed out...it is very easy to remove crime from this game. Just have an instakill occur when anyone kills anything. If you want to stop PvP/PK crime then instakill occurs when one player attacks or kills another.

This will not occur, because the game is based on criminal activities. Massive changes to the criminal system, seemingly helpful to the protection against crime...have undesired consequences. Based on this, and a lack of a pure PvE mode or PvP flags, appears to show that the devs desire people to commit crimes, against players and NPC's, and expect 1 of 2 outcomes.

1. People will band together and protect each other and fight against the ne'er do wells...or
2. Choose to avoid the activities of PvP and play against the NPC's exclusively.

What is interesting in this is that they have basically made the PvP people responsible for how they maintain the Open part of the game. As toxicity rises in Open, players flock to Private modes...with a % that, through a pressure for a more social game, decide to go into Open to relieve that pressure. And this is where Mobius circumvented this idea...by providing a de facto PvE mode. Which means that Open will ONLY be filled with people that accept PvP as a way to play...or new people that do not have knowledge of Mobius. Yay..we have created an environment where seal clubbing is how many new players get introduced to the game.

Ultimately, it makes me grin and cringe every time i see someone say 'Hate PvP? Go to Mobius!' It is removing more folks from Open and making Open even less populated and more toxic...which brings more players to the forums, demanding that something be done to make PvP better.

Basically, if you want less player on player crime in the galaxy, for both sides, I would tell you 'Physicians, heal thyself!'

 

[Mohrgan]

The problem isn't trivialization...it's that crime is designed as a part of the game. As I pointed out...it is very easy to remove crime from this game. Just have an instakill occur when anyone kills anything. If you want to stop PvP/PK crime then instakill occurs when one player attacks or kills another.

This will not occur, because the game is based on criminal activities. Massive changes to the criminal system, seemingly helpful to the protection against crime...have undesired consequences. Based on this, and a lack of a pure PvE mode or PvP flags, appears to show that the devs desire people to commit crimes, against players and NPC's, and expect 1 of 2 outcomes.

1. People will band together and protect each other and fight against the ne'er do wells...or
2. Choose to avoid the activities of PvP and play against the NPC's exclusively.

What is interesting in this is that they have basically made the PvP people responsible for how they maintain the Open part of the game. As toxicity rises in Open, players flock to Private modes...with a % that, through a pressure for a more social game, decide to go into Open to relieve that pressure. And this is where Mobius circumvented this idea...by providing a de facto PvE mode. Which means that Open will ONLY be filled with people that accept PvP as a way to play...or new people that do not have knowledge of Mobius. Yay..we have created an environment where seal clubbing is how many new players get introduced to the game.

Ultimately, it makes me grin and cringe every time i see someone say 'Hate PvP? Go to Mobius!' It is removing more folks from Open and making Open even less populated and more toxic...which brings more players to the forums, demanding that something be done to make PvP better.

With all of that you still believe FD is responsible for the way Open has become? I see the issue squarely in the players hands. FD knew what was likely to happen and made allowances. There is nothing you can find in open that you can't find in Groups. That was/is on purpose. By allowing each player decide where to play they solved the whole problem at once, and a Mobius was inevitable. All it took was for someone to remember the PvE servers found in most every other game to get the idea. Bravo to Mobius for stepping up and getting the word out there.

 

[dxm55]

it's that crime is designed as a part of the game.

And that's all there is to it.

Piracy is a crime. Assassination missions are also criminal activities. And ultimately, murder for any reasons, or none at all, fall under the same category.
The only difference is whether they are done to an NPC or another player.


That's why other than crime and punishment (consequences) needing to be brought up heavily... the game should no longer distinguish between players and NPCs, both in punishment and by identification. Just remove the CMDR tags, and make all contact blips the same.

The gankers and pirates won't know if they're chasing a commander. And the ones being attacked won't know if it's an NPC or commander.
Everybody is in the same fog of war. Level playing field.

 

[Roybe]

With all of that you still believe FD is responsible for the way Open has become? I see the issue squarely in the players hands. FD knew what was likely to happen and made allowances. There is nothing you can find in open that you can't find in Groups. That was/is on purpose. By allowing each player decide where to play they solved the whole problem at once, and a Mobius was inevitable. All it took was for someone to remember the PvE servers found in most every other game to get the idea. Bravo to Mobius for stepping up and getting the word out there.

Either they knew this would happen or didn't know. In either case, I think this is the huge mistake of the game design. Allowing groups the size of Mobius are hurting the overall game play of the game. It removes one of the most basic choices anyone would have to make...to fly in a hostile galaxy with large numbers of people, or fly in smaller more private groups against the NPC's. Either make groups smaller and go by the apparent design...or admit the idea is flawed and provide a real Open PvE mode. Honestly, I do not think either is an options..so we have what we have and the mods should just start deleting or pushing all these discussions into their own mega threads of death.

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

And that's all there is to it.

Piracy is a crime. Assassination missions are also criminal activities. And ultimately, murder for any reasons, or none at all, fall under the same category.
The only difference is whether they are done to an NPC or another player.


That's why other than crime and punishment (consequences) needing to be brought up heavily... the game should no longer distinguish between players and NPCs, both in punishment and by identification. Just remove the CMDR tags, and make all contact blips the same.

The gankers and pirates won't know if they're chasing a commander. And the ones being attacked won't know if it's an NPC or commander.
Everybody is in the same fog of war. Level playing field.

Easy fixes, do not provide expected outcomes. Check the DDF for this discussion and why it wasn't implemented.

 

[Mohrgan]

Either they knew this would happen or didn't know. In either case, I think this is the huge mistake of the game design. Allowing groups the size of Mobius are hurting the overall game play of the game. It removes one of the most basic choices anyone would have to make...to fly in a hostile galaxy with large numbers of people, or fly in smaller more private groups against the NPC's. Either make groups smaller and go by the apparent design...or admit the idea is flawed and provide a real Open PvE mode. Honestly, I do not think either is an options..so we have what we have and the mods should just start deleting or pushing all these discussions into their own mega threads of death.

Your views of what is apparent design are questionable. The lack of limit to the size of a private group, I believe, shows intent. The intent to let groups evolve as they will. FD has total control of making any of the modes the favored mode. They could make open, or solo, the best option for just about all players if that is what they wanted to. And, they haven't. I see FD's absolute silence on the matter as their answer. They like the way it is. No one point of view is favored, and the choices are left squarely in the hands of the players.

But, that's the answer isn't it? PvP is not fair, nor does it have to be, as long as it can be avoided all together.

 

[dxm55]

Either they knew this would happen or didn't know. In either case, I think this is the huge mistake of the game design. Allowing groups the size of Mobius are hurting the overall game play of the game. It removes one of the most basic choices anyone would have to make...to fly in a hostile galaxy with large numbers of people, or fly in smaller more private groups against the NPC's. Either make groups smaller and go by the apparent design...or admit the idea is flawed and provide a real Open PvE mode. Honestly, I do not think either is an options..so we have what we have and the mods should just start deleting or pushing all these discussions into their own mega threads of death.

Heh. But does it matter?

Whether you're in Mobius or in Open, you're still in instances of up to 32 players max. And you could be light years apart, never actually seeing anyone during your entire play session.

Where I play in open, I don't see any other CMDRs in supercruise. The few that I do see are in the Hi RES farming.
Well, ok... the RES to station is a measly 14Ls apart. So you do see the in SC for a few secs as they make their rearm/refuel/repair runs.
But that's about that. I see maybe 1 or 2 CMDRs at most.

So really... because everybody affects the BGS whatever the mode they're playing, and players are always instanced in relatively tiny groups, it really makes no difference at all to the game universe or FD. IMO, there's virtually no diff in playing in Open or Group, really. Only Solo players can see a little bit of distinction in that they will have ZERO chance of meeting anyone else ingame.

Unless we're talking about a massive persistent instance where everybody is in. Then yeah. Protecting pastel-ursines would be something to worry about. But as it stands, the status quo could go on without anybody getting hurt, nevermind the few complaints.

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

Your views of what is apparent design are questionable. The lack of limit to the size of a private group, I believe, shows intent. The intent to let groups evolve as they will. FD has total control of making any of the modes the favored mode. They could make open, or solo, the best option for just about all players if that is what they wanted to. And, they haven't. I see FD's absolute silence on the matter as their answer. They like the way it is. No one point of view is favored, and the choices are left squarely in the hands of the players.

But, that's the answer isn't it? PvP is not fair, nor does it have to be, as long as it can be avoided all together.

Exactly.

And yes, PVP is never fair in an open universe as long as two opposing player are not flying the exact same ship and config. It's not even fair in FPS shooters, where some classes have advantages over others. Cue CS:Go, AWP vs MP4. A fair fight would be, everybody using D Eagles. How boring that would be.

 

[Roybe]

Your views of what is apparent design are questionable. The lack of limit to the size of a private group, I believe, shows intent. The intent to let groups evolve as they will. FD has total control of making any of the modes the favored mode. They could make open, or solo, the best option for just about all players if that is what they wanted to. And, they haven't. I see FD's absolute silence on the matter as their answer. They like the way it is. No one point of view is favored, and the choices are left squarely in the hands of the players.

But, that's the answer isn't it? PvP is not fair, nor does it have to be, as long as it can be avoided all together.

Why should a single player be responsible for a population growing past 20,000 paying customers? Shouldn't that kind of demand be met with an in game solution other than a single player holding the welfare of those players within his decision to play or not play? God forbid, what would happen if Mobius couldn't play anymore? Is he the only player allowed to transfer his account to another player in the whole game (clearly breaking the ToS)? Poorly thought out by the devs, if this was where they were going...as far as i am concerned.

Any way...on this I know I disagree with a lot of folks. I do not disagree that the game is balanced between the modes and the platforms. However, I do disagree that that no one point of view is favored...an Open PvE mode is not something that the devs want...which means that the lack of an Open PvE mode is what they favor...and are basically forcing a player to provide it for them.

 

[dxm55]

Why should a single player be responsible for a population growing past 20,000 paying customers? Shouldn't that kind of demand be met with an in game solution other than a single player holding the welfare of those players within his decision to play or not play? God forbid, what would happen if Mobius couldn't play anymore? Is he the only player allowed to transfer his account to another player in the whole game (clearly breaking the ToS)? Poorly thought out by the devs, if this was where they were going...as far as i am concerned.

Any way...on this I know I disagree with a lot of folks. I do not disagree that the game is balanced between the modes and the platforms. However, I do disagree that that no one point of view is favored...an Open PvE mode is not something that the devs want...which means that the lack of an Open PvE mode is what they favor...and are basically forcing a player to provide it for them.

If Mobius quits or buys the farm, some other player will take up the mantle to make another PVE Group.
It's not the end of the world. Bleh....

 

[Roybe]

Heh. But does it matter?

Whether you're in Mobius or in Open, you're still in instances of up to 32 players max. And you could be light years apart, never actually seeing anyone during your entire play session.

Where I play in open, I don't see any other CMDRs in supercruise. The few that I do see are in the Hi RES farming.
Well, ok... the RES to station is a measly 14Ls apart. So you do see the in SC for a few secs as they make their rearm/refuel/repair runs.
But that's about that. I see maybe 1 or 2 CMDRs at most.

So really... because everybody affects the BGS whatever the mode they're playing, and players are always instanced in relatively tiny groups, it really makes no difference at all to the game universe or FD. IMO, there's virtually no diff in playing in Open or Group, really. Only Solo players can see a little bit of distinction in that they will have ZERO chance of meeting anyone else ingame.

Unless we're talking about a massive persistent instance where everybody is in. Then yeah. Protecting pastel-ursines would be something to worry about. But as it stands, the status quo could go on without anybody getting hurt, nevermind the few complaints.

<snark>
This is why I have said that PvP should probably not been added to the game. You clearly have no need for it since there is no one playing it where you are. So why bother? The only valid PvP in the game is between groups moving trophies...again as you pointed out...so again...why have PvP?</snark>


Once more people see the game for what it is...and how it works...a lot of the PvP players will leave. Who remains behind after they go? THAT'S going to be the $64,000 question. <not saying this is the 'doom of the game'...just that if the more civilized PvP players leave...will their more 'dangerous' cohorts follow..or will they stick around and make Open a larger 'problem' than it already is?>


I do agree, there are no vast changes coming to this part of the game...the justice system will remain what it is...with minor pushes and pulls here and there...somewhere between Soon™ and Someday™...but nothing that will make the game better to move populations out of where they are currently playing.

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

If Mobius quits or buys the farm, some other player will take up the mantle to make another PVE Group.
It's not the end of the world. Bleh....

Again...I only ask that people think about whether or not it is fair that some player..Mobius or whoever, is to be responsible for the customer care of more than 20k customers in a business?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Does it really matter to FD if players are playing in Solo, Group, or Open, given that all modes affect the BGS anyway? ie. Does not contribute or take away from any kind of infrastructure utilization or costs?

If the game is to be a thriving MMO then yes, the population of Open does, in my opinion, matter to Frontier.

I say, let sleeping dogs lie. Honestly I can live with the current mechanics if FD decides not to do anything about it. Players inclined to be ats, psychos and ganking PKers will stay in open. Pastel-colored Ursines inclined to be Friendly, Understanding, Caring and Kind already play solo or in their own groups.

As it stands, the system is working. So even if nothing was done, no harm would be done anyway.

It was Sandro, i.e. Frontier, who started the discussion relating to enhanced consequences for PKers. It would come as no surprise that players whose preferred prey is other players may be reluctant to accept changes (that Frontier consider to be for the benefit of their game).

The problem isn't trivialization...it's that crime is designed as a part of the game. As I pointed out...it is very easy to remove crime from this game. Just have an instakill occur when anyone kills anything. If you want to stop PvP/PK crime then instakill occurs when one player attacks or kills another.

This will not occur, because the game is based on criminal activities. Massive changes to the criminal system, seemingly helpful to the protection against crime...have undesired consequences.

While crime is indeed part of the game, crime with players as targets can be treated differently - as all players should be able to enjoy the game.

Ultimately, it makes me grin and cringe every time i see someone say 'Hate PvP? Go to Mobius!' It is removing more folks from Open and making Open even less populated and more toxic...which brings more players to the forums, demanding that something be done to make PvP better.

Basically, if you want less player on player crime in the galaxy, for both sides, I would tell you 'Physicians, heal thyself!'

The thing is, one side has a solution - don't play in Open. It is the side that requires players as prey that may ultimately suffer due to lack of "willing" targets.

Either they knew this would happen or didn't know. In either case, I think this is the huge mistake of the game design. Allowing groups the size of Mobius are hurting the overall game play of the game. It removes one of the most basic choices anyone would have to make...to fly in a hostile galaxy with large numbers of people, or fly in smaller more private groups against the NPC's. Either make groups smaller and go by the apparent design...or admit the idea is flawed and provide a real Open PvE mode. Honestly, I do not think either is an options..so we have what we have and the mods should just start deleting or pushing all these discussions into their own mega threads of death.

Wanting to fly with lots of other like-minded players is hardly an unreasonable request - and the PvP players are already well catered for in this regard, so much so that the only way for PvE players to fly with lots of other like-minded players is either to play among the PvP players or switch to a Private Group with a (probably very much) smaller population.

To arbitrarily restrict the size of Private Groups would be seen, by some, as pandering to the PvP agenda and would give PvE players a stark choice - fly alone or with few others (without PvP players) or fly with lots of players (including PvP players). While the PvP oriented players may rejoice at the prospect of more unwilling targets (for whom the draw of a large population overcame their aversion to PvP), I doubt that the PvE players would be quite so content with the "solution".

The addition of an Open-PvE mode would be an acknowledgement that there are a significant number of players for whom PvP makes the game less fun.

 

[dxm55]

It was Sandro, i.e. Frontier, who started the discussion relating to enhanced consequences for PKers. It would come as no surprise that players whose preferred prey is other players may be reluctant to accept changes (that Frontier consider to be for the benefit of their game).

Not all PKers object to changes that makes penalties for killing other players harsher.
It's just the implementation. PVPers welcome harsher penalties but expect the penalties to be applied uniformly.

Ridiculous mechanics like having the shooter hurt himself when he shoots another player is... well.. you know where that goes.
But having enhanced bounties, fines and wanted durations for the killing of ANY ship, NPC or Player, is welcome. It levels the playing field for everybody.

While crime is indeed part of the game, crime with players as targets can be treated differently - as all players should be able to enjoy the game.

As per my previous post, FD has sanctioned piracy and attacks on other players, even in the games website.

Tell me, my dear, are you saying they're making a U-turn in policy?
Or is this going to be a case of product not working as advertised?

 

[Snarfbuckle]

As per my previous post, FD has sanctioned piracy and attacks on other players, even in the games website.

Tell me, my dear, are you saying they're making a U-turn in policy?
Or is this going to be a case of product not working as advertised?

Ok, immersion wise then, not purely gameplay wise.

In systems with high security and billion of citizens and a working legal system - How does it make sense that murder is not a crime that people are hunted for?

Or for that matter - when the Pilots Federation takes a rther grim view of members slaughtering each other.

Yes, PvP IS sanctioned, but that does not mean that said PvP should not have consequences for BOTH parties when done in areas where security MATTERS.

In Anarchy and outside of regular jurisdiction, no problem. Popping non-wanted players and NPC's in high sec space should have a risk for a perpetrator.