Yes PVP is unfair.

[Roybe]

In my experience Developers either let PvP rule, or become the only content. I.e. Mechwarrior, WoX and so on. Or, they make PvP optional by flag or zone. I.e. from Wow to STO. I can think of no game that controls a World-PvP based envirinment with a crime and punishment system. I've been a mainstream gamer, PvP involved, for many years.

I would be very interested in seeing the attempt. But, that won;t bring the non PvP oriented players into view. It would just make a more interesting world for the criminal minded (gaming wise). If it can be done, it may help to ease the way into the galaxy for the new-comer. That is a worthy reason enough to hope that the Dev;s give it a try.

I see this idea differently. Playing, like you, a lot of PvP..and playing with others that are like minded...bounties, punishments are not a hindrance...or preventative measure.

The criminally minded within the game will look at these at 'High Scores' and wear their numeric superiority with pride...in other words any legal punishments become this:

 

[Toxic_Waster]

perhaps what is trying to be discussed is ways to make the PVP component of the game actually mean something and have a more positive value to the game whilst reducing the mindless seal clubbing that goes on... while also adding more overall depth the to current crime and punishment system to get it to a point where it actually makes sense

Are you suggesting that the currem open mode of the game is all good and fine just as it is???

Y'all are fixed on this term "seal clubbing". I saw the phrase in Starcraft "We are who we want to be". Loved it. Perhaps some of you want to be the clubbed seals who likes talking about this on forums. Don't we all play the same game ?

 

[Roybe]

perhaps what is trying to be discussed is ways to make the PVP component of the game actually mean something and have a more positive value to the game whilst reducing the mindless seal clubbing that goes on... while also adding more overall depth the to current crime and punishment system to get it to a point where it actually makes sense

Are you suggesting that the currem open mode of the game is all good and fine just as it is???

...although this might be an interesting part of this topic...I think PvP is about where the devs want it to be. An activity that is not rewarded with in game coin...and is costly on both sides...attacker and attacked.

What is interesting is that the attacked understand their costs...it's their insurance screen.

What is ironic is that the PvP players, although they have a minor credit cost, their more explicit...and very high cost is that they run off their 'prey'....and irony of ironies, they do not see this as a cost. Just filthy PvE players cheating their way out of the game.

Now the PvP players, having completely failed their understanding of the game and how the real costs work, have pushed the PvE players to the point that they realize they are being shortchanged by the game....and are pushing back.

If Braben has stated this is a social experiment...then it has shown, once more, that PvP players do not understand environmental management...and will find themselves with a PvP mode and PvE mode very soon.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Perhaps some of you want to be the clubbed seals who likes talking about this on forums. Don't we all play the same game ?

I would say perhaps more just want the game as detailed, with the mechanisms put in place which we were told about years ago by the devs but are so far missing.
Your stance seems to be (paraphrasing so correct me if i am wrong) this is how the game is, therefore it is exactly how the devs want it to be....

I however believe the game is as it is because the devs are unable to get it to how they told us it would be, and so are trying desperately to push everything currently missing under a rug and pretend it did not exist.

As someone who bought into the vision sold to me by DB.... imo that is not on, and FD need to be "encouraged" to get it working as initially advertised, even if it means some of the shiny shiny content gets put on the back burner a little.

..I think PvP is about where the devs want it to be. An activity that is not rewarded with in game coin...and is costly on both sides...attacker and attacked.

The thing is Roybe, I just do not see it...... this may be somewhat true for the lone pirate or players who actively go looking for other combat players, but imo for the most part they are not the players putting people off...... how is the PvP costly for the players who happily blow up any and all ships that are grossly outmatched without warning, and without reason other than "because"?

edit.,... sorry got you their cost is they are ruining open by forcing people out of the game... maybe, but i reckon a large amount of them do not care, they will just crap in the sand pit for as long as they can before going back to EVE or on to the next game and then do the same there... but that surely cant be where the devs want it to be..... can it?

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

fold

That's it? That's all you got? No actual countering of my points other than I was lecturing you?

The word you're looking for there is "indignation". "abomination" is a word used to describe the current state of the missions system

Anyways - this is a non-argument among non-arguments. Literally any change anyone ever asks for in the game could be deflected with this. Let's just stop, okay? Suggesting that the game is perfect as is and needs no mechanics changes (which you didn't say verbatim, but when you deflect any and all criticism with "the game is fine as designed") is just a little bit silly.

Hear, hear!

 

[Toxic_Waster]

I would say perhaps more just want the game as detailed, with the mechanisms put in place which we were told about years ago by the devs but are so far missing.
Your stance seems to be (paraphrasing so correct me if i am wrong) this is how the game is, therefore it is exactly how the devs want it to be....

I however believe the game is as it is because the devs are unable to get it to how they told us it would be, and so are trying desperately to push everything currently missing under a rug and pretend it did not exist.

As someone who bought into the vision sold to me by DB.... imo that is not on, and FD need to be "encouraged" to get it working as initially advertised, even if it means some of the shiny shiny content gets put on the back burner a little.



The thing is Roybe, I just do not see it...... this may be somewhat true for the lone pirate or players who actively go looking for other combat players, but imo for the most part they are not the players putting people off...... how is the PvP costly for the players who happily blow up any and all ships that are grossly outmatched without warning, and without reason other than "because"?

edit.,... sorry got you their cost is they are ruining open by forcing people out of the game... maybe, but i reckon a large amount of them do not care, they will just crap in the sand pit for as long as they can before going back to EVE or on to the next game and then do the same there... but that surely cant be where the devs want it to be..... can it?

So your issue with the game that it doesnt correlate with the marketing slogan used some time ago?

 

[Roybe]

I would say perhaps more just want the game as detailed, with the mechanisms put in place which we were told about years ago by the devs but are so far missing.
Your stance seems to be (paraphrasing so correct me if i am wrong) this is how the game is, therefore it is exactly how the devs want it to be....

I however believe the game is as it is because the devs are unable to get it to how they told us it would be, and so are trying desperately to push everything currently missing under a rug and pretend it did not exist.

As someone who bought into the vision sold to me by DB.... imo that is not on, and FD need to be "encouraged" to get it working as initially advertised, even if it means some of the shiny shiny content gets put on the back burner a little.



The thing is Roybe, I just do not see it...... this may be somewhat true for the lone pirate or players who actively go looking for other combat players, but imo for the most part they are not the players putting people off...... how is the PvP costly for the players who happily blow up any and all ships that are grossly outmatched without warning, and without reason other than "because"?

edit.,... sorry got you their cost is they are ruining open by forcing people out of the game... maybe, but i reckon a large amount of them do not care, they will just crap in the sand pit for as long as they can before going back to EVE or on to the next game and then do the same there... but that surely cant be where the devs want it to be..... can it?

If this was a social experiment...as per Brabens quote...then yes, this would be a possible (and historically likely) outcome.

I think their hope in the experiment was for better management by the PvP side...and some gang related activities to curtail the PvP players from being so 'toxic'...but the smart money would have bet against that from the get go.

I do believe there was some hope for a balanced, less antagonistic, Open....but in the long run...all that will be in Open are people that PvP and accept that PvP will cost them massive amounts of time as a victim. Looking at this a little differently, PvP is rare...and meaningful - in the idea that the negative feelings from being killed by another player are very meaningful to the loser. Past that...PvP really is just a way to have some fun...and should have been a way to provide punishment against 'bad apples'...but this would have meant that the PVE players would have had a desire to PVP to punish the PVP bad actors.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

So your issue with the game that it doesnt correlate with the marketing slogan used some time ago?

no not a marketing slogan.... marketing slogans are inherently , I am on about detailed lists on how the game would work, inc interviews where DB himself addressed how mindless ganking would be treated, and the ultimately worse comes to worse one could go into a private group where filters are set up for what is and what isnt acceptable in that group.

By your logic, FD could do in theory what ever the heck they wanted and we should not complain and try to hold them to a higher standard... hell, the season pass was a long time ago too, perhaps they could say you have had your lot.. all future content is now pay for if you want it, and we are having £10 a month subs as well.....

It seems you want COD in space, worse that that actually because at least COD everyone is roughly equal.... Personally I want a more believable game where players cant just ram ships for fun and do all sorts of illegal activities and just clear their name by blowing up a sidewinder.

do you also go into racing games and ram everyone deliberately if there are no mechanics to stop you?

 

[Roybe]

no not a marketing slogan.... marketing slogans are inherently , I am on about detailed lists on how the game would work, inc interviews where DB himself addressed how mindless ganking would be treated, and the ultimately worse comes to worse one could go into a private group where filters are set up for what is and what isnt acceptable in that group.

All they've really missed on were the filters...oh, and the idea of public/Open groups (easy to see and join...working similarly to 'servers' in other games, think public play in Diablo 3).

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

All they've really missed on were the filters...oh, and the idea of public/Open groups (easy to see and join...working similarly to 'servers' in other games, think public play in Diablo 3).

i dunno.... I would say they are currently missing a lot more than that, but.............. anyways, these genes are not gonna annotate themselves, i best do some work (as in real work )

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Another abominator! Welcome! What I meant to say is that somebody's else perception of how the game is "desired" to be played is not the ultimate source of truth and should be opened for the discussion.

Well, let's see then. Advertised roles within the game are Trader, Explorer, Bounty Hunter, and Pirate.

I see ranks for Combat (in-game rank - from PvNPC or PvP), Exploration (in-game rank), Trading (in-game rank), and CQC (PvP-for-sport).

I see no advertised role for Murderhobo. I see no in-game rank for Murderhobo. I've seen people confuse the Pirate role as being "interdict anything with a heartbeat and destroy their ships", which isn't piracy - that's PvP-for-sport. That's trying to turn Open into a PvP Arena, or Space Counterstrike.

The evidence before my eyes indicates that imposing PvP-for-sport on unwilling participants is not something FDEV were intending Open - or the main game - to be. David Braben, who said PvP will be "rare and meaningful" indicates to me that, again, the main game was intended to be played in a certain context which doesn't include things like seal clubbing.

I'd go on and on about the indications provided by this game's makers about the desired way to play the game, but I fear all the words would be too much to take in at one time.

 

[Sandmann]

no not a marketing slogan.... marketing slogans are inherently , I am on about detailed lists on how the game would work, inc interviews where DB himself addressed how mindless ganking would be treated, and the ultimately worse comes to worse one could go into a private group where filters are set up for what is and what isnt acceptable in that group.

By your logic, FD could do in theory what ever the heck they wanted... hell, the season pass was a long time ago too, perhaps they could say you have had your lot.. all future content is now pay for if you want it, and we are having £10 a month subs as well.....

He knows.

He's been shown all the evidence, the quotes from DB, the kickstarter docs, etc many times in many threads. He ignores them all coz they're inconvenient. He even ignores the fact that Sandro was in this very thread asking for suggestions re crime and consequence specifically to reduce the conflict between PvE and PvP (could you possibly get a clearer statement that this isn't what they wanted?), and clings to his fantasy that what we have is what was intended because he's a pk-er and doesn't want it to be what it was supposed to be because this crippled, partial version of what was promised SUITS him. He WANTS fish in a barrel to shoot, and no amount of common sense or logic will change his mind because THAT'S the game he wants to play. There's little point in continuing to engage with him on it.

 

[Roybe]

i dunno.... I would say they are currently missing a lot more than that, but.............. anyways, these genes are not gonna annotate themselves, i best do some work (as in real work )

I was limiting 'misses' to the topic at hand.

 

[Toxic_Waster]

Driving now. I will be back soon. Dont go anywhere

 

[Pluvialis]

...if you want to hold hands and sing Kumbaya you have plenty of alternatives.

I'd appreciate it if you could rein in the attitude a bit. We happen to enjoy different elements of games, and probably we're different in many other ways too. If the selling point of this particular game wasn't that everyone can play it their own way, we may never have crossed paths. Since we have, I'd like to keep it constructive.

I dont have the much faith for the legal system. It exists only to protect those in power...

While I don't necessarily disagree with you, it wasn't my intention to analyse the effectiveness of any current real-world legal system. My aim was to describe the intended function of such a system and give an idea of how we can tell ED's needs work: namely at the moment it represents no deterrent at all.

My point was that ED's lore presents us with the idea of ordered, organised societies. Whether or not the huge majority of space falls outside those areas and could be expected to be lawless, within those areas there must be some degree of control or those states could not hold together.

 

[Toxic_Waster]

no not a marketing slogan.... marketing slogans are inherently , I am on about detailed lists on how the game would work, inc interviews where DB himself addressed how mindless ganking would be treated, and the ultimately worse comes to worse one could go into a private group where filters are set up for what is and what isnt acceptable in that group.

By your logic, FD could do in theory what ever the heck they wanted and we should not complain and try to hold them to a higher standard... hell, the season pass was a long time ago too, perhaps they could say you have had your lot.. all future content is now pay for if you want it, and we are having £10 a month subs as well.....

It seems you want COD in space, worse that that actually because at least COD everyone is roughly equal.... Personally I want a more believable game where players cant just ram ships for fun and do all sorts of illegal activities and just clear their name by blowing up a sidewinder.

do you also go into racing games and ram everyone deliberately if there are no mechanics to stop you?

I'm not familiar with DB interviews. I played the original Elite in 1985. I loved this game comparing to other titles. I did not even know that other sequels were released until I tried ED. And I totally enjoy it with its combat mechanic and graphic. It was like the old Elite but with the spice of MMORG. Money well spent. I consider myself a casual gamer and I'm engaged in this forum more as the philosophical exercise. Thus I did not have any expectations and I loved what I've got. May be having the expectations is the problem to begin with.

Yes. FD can do whatever they want with its game and if they want to enforce monthly subs there is nothing we can do about it. Even if the game did not come out s they originally envisioned it's very likely they will stick to what they have until the game generates the growing revenue. I do think the market niche for Open world PVPers is much bigger than many of us think. And no matter how you, me or different sandmen cry to restore the order in universe things are unlikely to be drastically changed at this point. FD can throw a bone to create the impression that they're concerned about the forum opinion and for example do something meaningless like increasing the bounty (multiple times).

I dont like COD, I prefer Open world PVP games and ED is one of them. Thanks Frontier!

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

I'd appreciate it if you could rein in the attitude a bit. We happen to enjoy different elements of games, and probably we're different in many other ways too. If the selling point of this particular game wasn't that everyone can play it their own way, we may never have crossed paths. Since we have, I'd like to keep it constructive.


While I don't necessarily disagree with you, it wasn't my intention to analyse the effectiveness of any current real-world legal system. My aim was to describe the intended function of such a system and give an idea of how we can tell ED's needs work: namely at the moment it represents no deterrent at all.

My point was that ED's lore presents us with the idea of ordered, organised societies. Whether or not the huge majority of space falls outside those areas and could be expected to be lawless, within those areas there must be some degree of control or those states could not hold together.

I've never expected ED to be the organized society and see it more as the wild west. I did expect the game to be the wild west either. I just logged in and saw the total mayhem and I admit I liked it. I guess not having the expectations is the key for happiness.

 

[Sandmann]

I'm not familiar with DB interviews.

They've been pointed out to you many times. They're on youtube. Go find out WHAT DB et al said about what he wanted the game to be BEFORE you start telling us about what FDev does or does not want.

Even if the game did not come out s they originally envisioned it's very likely they will stick to what they have until the game generates the growing revenue.

Are you basing the theory that they won't change it on the many updates they come out with every year, or the fact that Sandro was in here talking about increasing consequences to fix the PvE vs PvP problem?

I do think the market niche for Open world PVPers is much bigger than many of us think. And no matter how you, me or different sandmen cry to restore the order in universe things are unlikely to be drastically changed at this point.

This, despite EVERY poll and EVERY thread on the topic since beta showing more than 50% of players being pve, and the ever increasing numbers in mobius and solo, and.the frequent threads complaining that open is void of.targets? I admire your ability to convince yourself that what you want is "right" despite overwhelming contrary evidence.

FD can through a bone to create the impression that they're concerned about the forum opinion and for example do something meaningless like increasing the bounty (multiple times).

Actually from memory he was talking about denying "murderers" access to major faction stations. How's that strike you, still meaningless?

 

[Sandmann]

It doesn't even make any sense that this was supposed to be a PvP game. It's a TERRIBLE design for a PvP (something PvP players have complained about frequently), arenas and small maps where you can find opponents are far more appropriate for that playstyle. Also, if it were intended as primarilly PvP why is there all that other stuff, unknown artifacts and minable asteroids and barnacles on planets? Why are they putting in looting and crafting with v2.1? Why do Galnet and Power Play (as bad as it is) even exist? Why is trading the best paid profession instead of combat? Why do they even HAVE cargo ships and stations with markets in a PvP game? If you really think about it, they couldn't have designed a WORSE PvP game. This is a game designed to have MULTIPLE roles, most of which are NON combat, and they're all supposed to actually be playable in a multiplayer environment which they're currently not, BECAUSE there is currently NO REASON to not run around vaporising non-combat players... which is what Sandro was specifically talking about fixing IN THIS THREAD.

They HAVE made a PvP version now, it's called ED: Arena. Perhaps THAT is the game you are looking for.

 

[KellyR]

It doesn't even make any sense that this was supposed to be a PvP game. It's a TERRIBLE design for a PvP (something PvP players have complained about frequently), arenas and small maps where you can find opponents are far more appropriate for that playstyle. Also, if it were intended as primarilly PvP why is there all that other stuff, unknown artifacts and minable asteroids and barnacles on planets? Why are they putting in looting and crafting with v2.1? Why do Galnet and Power Play (as bad as it is) even exist? Why is trading the best paid profession instead of combat? Why do they even HAVE cargo ships and stations with markets in a PvP game? If you really think about it, they couldn't have designed a WORSE PvP game. This is a game designed to have MULTIPLE roles, most of which are NON combat, and they're all supposed to actually be playable in a multiplayer environment which they're currently not, BECAUSE there is currently NO REASON to not run around vaporising non-combat players... which is what Sandro was specifically talking about fixing IN THIS THREAD.

They HAVE made a PvP version now, it's called ED: Arena. Perhaps THAT is the game you are looking for.

This is good. ED: Arena, I mean. That way those who want PvP by itself don't have to pay for the full game. But the main game was not designed to be a PvP game. It was designed to simulate spacefaring life in the 34th century. This includes PvP as a component, but as a component only. There are days, sometimes as much as a week or two when I never see another Commander. But seeing as space is so vast, something like 5 billion cubic light years in our galaxy alone, and we only have about 1 million commanders (that's a guess), That doesn't seem that odd to me. I like PvP but am no good at it. But when someone disassembles my ship for me, I don't cry and complain. That's the breaks. And no, PvP is NOT fair. Nor is it supposed to be. The one with the better skills will always have a huge advantage. There's a technical term for this. It's called Life.

 

[GJ51]

Fair is subjective

Nobody agrees on it

As long as the game treats everyone the same and we all have access to the same resources...

It's as fair as it will ever get

Man up

Use the platform to your advantage

Stop whining