Yes PVP is unfair.

dxm55

Banned
Of course piracy is a perfectly legitimate play-style. However it does not require the target to be a player - no role does - it is up to the player role-playing the role as to which targets they select.

.... and PvE players don't want to be bothered by the unwanted attentions of other players at all - not just pirates....

I would hate to point you to that webpage advertising the Combat, Exploration and Trader roles of the game again. It would be like going in circles.

Piracy, whether against players or NPCs is a legitimate role. It's clearly stated there. And I fully support it.

It's not like ganking or griefing. So unfortunately, the player who is on the receiving end doesn't have a choice.

Unless he plays in Solo or Group. Which is also a valid mode of play, and is a good reason why one would stay out of Open.
 
interesting...

+1

How would you tighten up piracy without taking away the chocie for them the kill their victim if the victim does not comply to their demands?
I mean we all want the random pk sport thing gone for the most part but i don't think any of us want piracy drastically affected either...

there is one other aspect that we also need to consider, the ramming death aspect, where someone deliberatly rams you while you are speeding and then their ship gets destroyed... that would further impact on the 'victim' in all the scenarios we have all put forward still i think

Going back to the holding up a store at gun point... If the shop keeper refuses to pay, and you shoot him, is that not changing the crime from armed robbery up to murder?

So in short, I don't see the difference. If you as a Pirate interdict a non-wanted CMDR and open fire and ultimately murder/destroy them... Hard cheese! You've made a dangerous move! As a Pirate you should instead be intimidating them into paying up, or at worse damaging their ship to such an extent it makes sense for them to pay up, or such that you can forcibly take the cargo. Piracy should not be about permitting murder!

That said, that's why I think the game needs to open up plenty of "legal" avenues to murder/destroy CMDRs! Indeed, I'm sure pirates could be give missions to periodically murder CMDRs to distrupt/destabalise systems. ie: The missions would be to kill a member of the Pilots Federation in system X or Y within Z days... The mission giver would *hand wavium* hack/cover up the murder so it would not count against the player... This would actually give the game a control over "random murder" too in keeping with other underlying mechanics! eg: If a system needs destabalising for a reason, offer more such murder related missions.
 
Last edited:
Of course piracy is a perfectly legitimate play-style. However it does not require the target to be a player - no role does - it is up to the player role-playing the role as to which targets they select.

.... and PvE players don't want to be bothered by the unwanted attentions of other players at all - not just pirates....

Sorry, but pirates are part of the game and in the environment of the game we play and therefor PvE whether they are player pirates or NPC pirates, infact your more likely to survive a player pirate then an NPC as NPC pirates just want to murder you at the moment no matter what cargo you drop. Its murder/ship destruction for lol's that is the problem. If people do not want to be pirated by other players, then they have solo.

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

Going back to the holding up a store at gun point... If the shop keeper refuses to pay, and you shoot him, is that not changing the crime from armed robbery up to murder?

So in short, I don't see the difference. If you as a Pirate interdict a non-wanted CMDR and open fire and ultimately murder/destroy them... Hard cheese! You've made a dangerous move! As a Pirate you should instead be intimidating them into paying up, or at worse damaging their ship to such an extent it makes sense for them to pay up, or such that you can forcibly take the cargo. Piracy should not be about permitting murder!

That said, that's why I think the game needs to open up plenty of "legal" avenues to murder/destroy CMDRs! Indeed, I'm sure pirates could be give missions to periodically murder CMDRs to distrupt/destabalise systems. ie: The missions would be to kill a member of the Pilots Federation in system X or Y within Z days... The mission giver would *hand wavium* hack/cover up the murder so it would not count against the player... This would actually give the game a control over "random murder" too in keeping with other underlying mechanics! eg: If a system needs destabalising for a reason, offer more such murder related missions.

No it shouldn't, but the threat of death/ship destruction should be there otherwise they will just fly away without that much risk. Yes you can damage the ship, knock out the powerplant, drivers etc, but its the thought of ship destruction that makes people stop and think about dropping cargo. If you are forced to take out the powerplant / thruster etc, this can take some time, and possibly won't have enough time before security arrives.
 
Last edited:

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
I would hate to point you to that webpage advertising the Combat, Exploration and Trader roles of the game again. It would be like going in circles.

Piracy, whether against players or NPCs is a legitimate role. It's clearly stated there. And I fully support it.

It's not like ganking or griefing. So unfortunately, the player who is on the receiving end doesn't have a choice.

Unless he plays in Solo or Group. Which is also a valid mode of play, and is a good reason why one would stay out of Open.

As you mention it:

Combat

Arm yourself. It's a cutthroat galaxy out there, and you'll need combat skills to survive.

Why buy cargo when you can pirate it from a fellow Commander? Why explore distant systems when the data can be stolen? The galaxy is filled with vulnerable pilots, but The Pilots Federation takes care of its own.

Commanders who go rogue will accrue a bounty from The Pilots Federation, making them fair game for a would-be bounty hunter in Elite Dangerous' connected galaxy.

Combat, alone with Trading, Exploration and CQC offers progression to the rank of Elite. Rogue Commanders, assassination missions, or paid wetwork from one (or all) the galactic superpowers can bring wealth and respect.

Combat offers direct progression to the rank of Elite.

Piracy: steal from players - check.
Pilots' Federation looking after its own - missing.
Stealing data from explorers - missing.
Pilots' Federation bounties - missing.
Bounty hunters can collect on player bounties - check.

Yes, the game advertises Combat as a role. It does not, however, say that it *requires* to be conducted solely against players - players may choose to, however.

Two of the four Elite ranks can be obtained without firing a shot.
One of the remaining two can be obtained without firing a shot at a player.
The last cannot be obtained in the shared galaxy and is gained in the pure-PvP environment that is CQC.
 
Last edited:
Going back to the holding up a store at gun point... If the shop keeper refuses to pay, and you shoot him, is that not changing the crime from armed robbery up to murder?

So in short, I don't see the difference. If you as a Pirate interdict a non-wanted CMDR and open fire and ultimately murder/destroy them... Hard cheese! You've made a dangerous move! As a Pirate you should instead be intimidating them into paying up, or at worse damaging their ship to such an extent it makes sense for them to pay up, or such that you can forcibly take the cargo. Piracy should not be about permitting murder!

That said, that's why I think the game needs to open up plenty of "legal" avenues to murder/destroy CMDRs! Indeed, I'm sure pirates could be give missions to periodically murder CMDRs to distrupt/destabalise systems. ie: The missions would be to kill a member of the Pilots Federation in system X or Y within Z days... The mission giver would *hand wavium* hack/cover up the murder so it would not count against the player... This would actually give the game a control over "random murder" too in keeping with other underlying mechanics! eg: If a system needs destabalising for a reason, offer more such murder related missions.

Couple of potential issues with this...

If you are a pirate, and murder is so much more punished than assault, then the 'victim' has more cards to play than you do, knowing that the likelihood of the pirate using such force would end up potentially ruining their game (in the end, these punishments need to be game breaking if they are going to do anything to stamp out the anti social behavior that these ideas are proposing to address). It's really just the opposite side of the coin we have now, that there are no real consequences to murder. Likening crime in the game to crime in RL isn't really a good indication of how things might work out IMHO.

As to legal avenues for murder, yes, I think these should exist (PvE too), hence my previous posts regarding the crime punishment system. But... To have the possibility for legal / sanctioned PvP murder, then FD open up a huge can of worms for any CMDR who might not have explicitly consented to PvP, and that stands to make the current discussions seem very tame. "FD sanctioned another player killing me without my knowledge and consent?" I can see how that might go down... :) Obviously just my opinion.

I remember in previous Elite games, deep space was largely open for any action, and that was fine since there could be no 'exploiting' of the mechanism by players, and you could happily take a murder contract to kill a governor or senator, and as long as you didn't do it outside of a station, you didn't become wanted. If FD went down the road of creating real anarchy systems, and there was a very clear indication that a player was entering one and would therefore be fair game, then perhaps some of these ideas might work. Might...

I would add that at that point, they really would need to consider an official PvE Open mode for players who want the social side of their MMO without the aggressive side.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Sorry, but pirates are part of the game and in the environment of the game we play and therefor PvE whether they are player pirates or NPC pirates, infact your more likely to survive a player pirate then an NPC as NPC pirates just want to murder you at the moment no matter what cargo you drop. Its murder/ship destruction for lol's that is the problem. If people do not want to be pirated by other players, then they have solo.

Of course they are, however player-on-player piracy is not PvE - how can it be?

Yes, PvE players who don't want to be bothered by other player can choose to play in Solo - or Private Groups if they want to play with friends. Such are the freedoms available to any player.
 
Of course they are, however player-on-player piracy is not PvE - how can it be?

Yes, PvE players who don't want to be bothered by other player can choose to play in Solo - or Private Groups if they want to play with friends. Such are the freedoms available to any player.

Because players are part of the environment if they play in open and are playing a proper role in the game such as pirating, smuggling, trading etc. Even if you don't see them, they still have an effect on other players through the BGS and the commodities market even in solo, so you still cannot totally get away from other players influence. In that case, does that make the whole game PvP whether you are in solo or not?

PvE means player vs environment, if other players are part of the evironment then I see no problems with them being a part of PvE.
PvP is players competing against each other, it also stands for player killing. CQC is what I would consider PvP.
 
Last edited:
Wow what a discussion on a simple problem... well, as I see it anyway.

The problem is that a bounty on your head, no matter how large hardly even qualifies as a inconvenience.

I often have bounties of millions on my head and the worst thing about that is that you might get interdicted by a cop or BH just as you found a mission target in SC.
Annoying sure, but that's it.
And that is the worsted thing, usually you get interdicted while traveling by a hopelessly out classed NPC who is usually not even in a wing.
Whooptydoo... submit, kill, wait for FSD recharge and within a minute your back on route.

A bounty of a couple of 100k's let alone millions, should have any BH in a 15 ly radius from the system that issued the bounty who isn't hopelessly outclassed by you (based on ship and combat rank) to hunt you down.

I want to be hunted darn it!!
The instancing thing makes it hard for players to hunt one and other, so FD.... this falls on you.

Don't get me started about being able to dock at stations where you are wanted at.(oops to late)
The comms in the elite world are so sufffisticated that I get fined for shoting a wanted man wile my scanner hasn't confirmed as mutch, but a station I request docking clearance from can't tell I'm wanted... they need the cops to do that!?
Unrealistic is a kind description.

I got a kws on my ship, which isn't even required for in system bountys, they are not expensive! Got buy some you cheap station mannagers!!

And if it's a "gamplay" choice.... there are usually stations of other factions in a system you can dock at.
Besides having trouble docking is a consequence of criminal behaviour, which is just what ED needs.
 
Last edited:
If you are forced to take out the powerplant / thruster etc, this can take some time, and possibly won't have enough time before security arrives.

2 points on this.

1) i do think there is room for a new weapon for pirates, one which does little/no damage but once a ships shields are down disrupts their frameshift drive meaning it takes longer to get away, giving a pirate more time to get the hatch breakers going or damage the cargo hatch.

2) security forces arriving - Piracy should be hard to pull off in a high sec system. pirates should be operating in low sec and anarchy space. the whole point in different systems should attract different types of players.... of course low sec space should pay a little more for goods in normal trade, and also there needs to be higher paid missions taking stuff too this risky places as well as good missions to pick up from them**, giving players a reason to risk the shark infested waters.

**a perfect home for the 6/7 figure long range smuggling missions, if these were only available in dangerous systems....
 
Last edited:
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.


This is the problem faced by the current design, in a nutshell. If the intention of the devs was to do as I say, then the limitation of groups would be exactly what is called for. A forced choice by the PvE player to enjoy co-op in small groups or to be part of a larger social experience and get shot in the face sometimes.

If this is not the case, then the devs either thought that no one would choose to band together in a super large PvE private group administered by one player or they felt that the customer satisfaction of the vast majority (historically) of their players was to placed as a burden on one player, or that somehow a lare super group of PvE players would somehow be a good thing (At which point why not have an Open PvE mode?). Obviously, this is not a business call that I would make...I would have just had an Open PvE mode or provided a PvP flag for everyone in Open...particularly since the real PvP is only PvE based.

(Of course they could have known that a super group would be made, and for balancing purposes forced the PvE players to find each other...which still comes back to my first point, they did not desire an Open PvE group...because that would make the game unbalanced since the Open PvP could never fight against the hordes of PvE players playing the indirect PvP...so we are back to my first suggestion, limit the size of groups and have players make their choice...of course if Mobius' group ever hive minded and started pushing its weight around in the galaxy then the game is unbalanced for everyone)
 
Last edited:
Because players are part of the environment if they play in open and are playing a proper role in the game such as pirating, smuggling, trading etc. Even if you don't see them, they still have an effect on other players through the BGS and the commodities market even in solo, so you still cannot totally get away from other players influence. In that case, does that make the whole game PvP whether you are in solo or not?

PvE means player vs environment, if other players are part of the evironment then I see no problems with them being a part of PvE.
PvP is players competing against each other, it also stands for player killing. CQC is what I would consider PvP.


Yes. yes it does! Just not the type of PvP that 'shoot you in the face' PvP players care about. Now if more people would come to understand this distinction!
 
2 points on this.

1) i do think there is room for a new weapon for pirates, one which does little/no damage but once a ships shields are down disrupts their frameshift drive meaning it takes longer to get away, giving a pirate more time to get the hatch breakers going or damage the cargo hatch.

2) security forces arriving - Piracy should be hard to pull off in a high sec system. pirates should be operating in low sec and anarchy space. the whole point in different systems should attract different types of players.... of course low sec space should pay a little more for goods in normal trade, and also there needs to be higher paid missions taking stuff too this risky places as well as good missions to pick up from them**, giving players a reason to risk the shark infested waters.

**a perfect home for the 6/7 figure long range smuggling missions, if these were only available in dangerous systems....

I am in agreement here. There needs to be an incentive for traders to trade in high risk areas. As it stands there is nothing. Would also be great if there was a scrambler utilily slot that scrambles all communications for a certain time, therefore delaying the secuirty forces from responding. Smuggling should get higher rewards when you smuggle into high security areas etc.
 
Last edited:

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
I am in agreement here. There needs to be an incentive for traders to trade in high risk areas. As it stands there is nothing. Would also be great if there was a scrambler utilily slot that scrambles all communications for a certain time, therefore delaying the secuirty forces from responding. Smuggling should get higher rewards when you smuggle into high security areas etc.

The difficulty arises when attempting to determine what constitutes a high-risk area which would be incentivised - and also what form the incentive would take.
 
I am in agreement here. There needs to be an incentive for traders to trade in high risk areas. As it stands there is nothing. Would also be great if there was a scrambler utilily slot that scrambles all communications for a certain time, therefore delaying the secuirty forces from responding. Smuggling should get higher rewards when you smuggle into high security areas etc.

Incentives will never work because the greed of traders is limitless. They will still go into Mobius or Solo to get the rewards without PvP interaction
 
Incentives will never work because the greed of traders is limitless. They will still go into Mobius or Solo to get the rewards without PvP interaction

And?

Nothing wrong with that - we have known all along that Elite, as said before, never was and never will be a PvP-centric game. Point is that you HAVE to put such measures in place to encourage a PvP occurrence. If it does not happen then that's OK. At least the mechanism is in place.
 
Last edited:
And

So there is no point giving incentives because of the viewpoint you put across

Yes there is because with incentives you are giving the trader who does want PvP a reason for doing do. At the moment there is nothing at all. It's all about the choice.

And no, you cannot begin to dictate what others might do: Fact is they need the choice. What they do with said choice is up to them and no-one else.
 
Last edited:
I am in agreement here. There needs to be an incentive for traders to trade in high risk areas. As it stands there is nothing. Would also be great if there was a scrambler utilily slot that scrambles all communications for a certain time, therefore delaying the secuirty forces from responding. Smuggling should get higher rewards when you smuggle into high security areas etc.

There doesn't really need to be an incentive to trade in high risk areas, just an incentive to play in Open. If you get rid of the anti-social players you'll attract more traders to Open simply because there is more social interaction there.
 
And no, you cannot begin to dictate what others might do

Where did that come from?
At no point did I try to dictate what someone should do, I was merely expressing an opinion that traders will still take the easy option and say thanks for the extra cash. Any trader wanting to engage in PvP will do so anyway.
That is the choice the everyone has. Personally after trying trading for short period I would have welcomed some interaction, its probably the most boring thing I have done in the game. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom