Stopping PvP in private groups is easy

[dementia]

Simply add a switch to the group creation where the creators can choose to allow PvP combat or not.

If they choose not then players can still shoot or ram other players all they like but it will cause zero damage to shields, modules or hull.

Such groups would then be impervious to hijacking by those players who want to fight other players. Those players can either stick with Open or create/join groups that do allow PvP combat.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

Simply add a switch to the group creation where the creators can choose to allow PvP combat or not.

If they choose not then players can still shoot or ram other players all they like but it will cause zero damage to shields, modules or hull.

Such groups would then be impervious to hijacking by those players who want to fight other players. Those players can either stick with Open or create/join groups that do allow PvP combat.

Hah! No. What you suggest changes the game rules. This if fundamentally wrong.

Groups have control over matchmaking. Giving them anything beyond that is giving them power. It would be like me flagging my group as immune to heat damage.
If you were to say something more like "3 CMDR kills per 50 hours/1 week is auto-banned from the group", that would be more acceptable.

But what you suggest isn't 'easy' as the thread title suggests. It's broken.

 

[GJ51]

Given that ED has no problem in the case of insufficient power available = no weapons fire, I suspect that

If target = CMDR

then

weapons = disabled

isn't much more of a challenge...

Simple conditions toggles for setting Group Play conditions has been suggested.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=233412&page=4&p=3585276#post3585276

 

[dementia]

Hah! No. What you suggest changes the game rules. This if fundamentally wrong.

Groups have control over matchmaking. Giving them anything beyond that is giving them power. It would be like me flagging my group as immune to heat damage.
If you were to say something more like "3 CMDR kills per 50 hours/1 week is auto-banned from the group", that would be more acceptable.

But what you suggest isn't 'easy' as the thread title suggests. It's broken.

I fail to see how it changes the games rules any more than Solo mode does or what Mobius or similar sentiment private groups are trying to do using an honour system. If a player can't play in a world with no PvP then they can always play in Open mode or start their own group.

Your suggestions sounds like you want some sort of 'quota' system which I think goes against the whole idea of what such groups are trying to achieve.

 

[Arry]

Stopping PvP in a private group is easy: If no PvP is a condition of joining the said group; then a life ban from the group, for breaking the groups rules; sorts it.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

I fail to see how it changes the games rules any more than Solo mode does or what Mobius or similar sentiment private groups are trying to do using an honour system. If a player can't play in a world with no PvP then they can always play in Open mode or start their own group.

Your suggestions sounds like you want some sort of 'quota' system which I think goes against the whole idea of what such groups are trying to achieve.

Solo, group, and open have exactly one difference: Matchmaking parameters. In solo and group, there is full control of matchmaking. In open, there is no control. I fail to see why a group should be able to change the rules of the game.

 

[dementia]

Stopping PvP in a private group is easy: If no PvP is a condition of joining the said group; then a life ban from the group, for breaking the groups rules; sorts it.

You'd think but it lacks sufficient due process and is open to abuse in itself. After all what is to stop one commander wrongfully accusing another (who then makes a counter claim). Were is the evidence of who was to blame going to come from?

 

[Siobhan]

Simply add a switch to the group creation where the creators can choose to allow PvP combat or not.

If they choose not then players can still shoot or ram other players all they like but it will cause zero damage to shields, modules or hull.

Such groups would then be impervious to hijacking by those players who want to fight other players. Those players can either stick with Open or create/join groups that do allow PvP combat.

Unfortunately, they'd still find ways to grief. Anything from killstealing (or blocking) to using ramming to cause a player to incur the wrath of SysAuth. Seen it all in other games (especially one with the initials EO).

 

[Arry]

You'd think but it lacks sufficient due process and is open to abuse in itself. After all what is to stop one commander wrongfully accusing another (who then makes a counter claim). Were is the evidence of who was to blame going to come from?

What 'evidence' did they have about the SDC? Enough it would seem.

Your point is valid; however, it would be a slight pause, in the turning of the wheels of justice. All claims and counter claims can be investigated, by the powers that be.

 

[gazzareth]

Good idea, can't see why they should have any reason not to implement it.

G

 

[Roybe]

What 'evidence' did they have about the SDC? Enough it would seem.

Your point is valid; however, it would be a slight pause, in the turning of the wheels of justice. All claims and counter claims can be investigated, by the powers that be.

Good point! Just make an Open PvE mode..so much quicker and easier.

Anyone here taking the week of the 15th of March off?

 

[gazzareth]

Good point! Just make an Open PvE mode..so much quicker and easier.

Anyone here taking the week of the 15th of March off?

Open PvE would be great - I assume you mean that PvP in that mode would be impossible? Would be useful for those that don't hang in the forums, and have never heard of Mobius. Of course it would probably very much upset the PvP community (at least those that enjoy attacking Commanders that want to play PvE)....

G

 

[CMDR Byr Goefin]

Given that ED has no problem in the case of insufficient power available = no weapons fire, I suspect that

If target = CMDR

then

weapons = disabled

isn't much more of a challenge...

Simple conditions toggles for setting Group Play conditions has been suggested.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=233412&page=4&p=3585276#post3585276

You must be a manager or project manager.

No coder would say "Simple matter of changing/adding this to the code."

 

[Falcon_D]

Hello,
I'm personally all for the Open PvP/Group/Solo concept.
However, I would like to see a group option which flagged the group for PvE only. Weapons and ramming would not not affect other players. Players trying to grief others via blocking or using any other way to incur the warth of SysAuth could be reported to and dealt with by the Group admins. Group admins have a bit more power to ban players from the group than FD has to ban people from the game.
This is not going to eliminate the problem of griefers. But will limit the way they can grief people.

Have fun, fly safe. o7