Cant you control amount of PVP

[Cosmo Bozo]

There will be players who play more hours per day than the average - do they have an advantage?

There will be players who possess better hand-eye coordination than the average - do they have an advantage?

There will be players who are able to make better trade decisions than the average - do they have an advantage?

Whose experience is being ruined by players who chose to meet fewer PCs than the average? (and why?)

This.

Also there are people who might want to have a bit of fun when they are tired after work and don't want to be bothered with PVPers at that point, but at weekend they might be up for a fight....
Not everyone is in the mood all the time.

 

[Adept]

This is the game breaker for me. I am totally OK with group switching but only one way! If you allow people to move freely between private groups and ALL you are devaluing the game for everyone who does not. At a stroke you've taken away everyone's sense of achievement - people will be able to grind for the best ships and biggest guns in total safety and only use the ALL group to grief those who did not. Even if they opt not to grief, allowing people to flip groups for an easy ride utterly devalues the game. Its going to really ruin the experience imho.

Massive hyperbole.

Nobody will be free to grief, as they will end up just squabbling with other griefers. Good riddance.

Secondly, this is not EVE, and you have no evidence that the All group will have significant amounts of PvP piracy. That is a complete unknown at this point, but it has been suggested by the devs many times that the majority of the gameplay and danger will be PvE.

Elite is a shared sandbox in a saner meaning of the word than it's use in EVE.
This is not a sandbox where the kids are locked in a struggle for survival, but the sort where they are actually playing together.

The "total safety" comment is particularly funny.

Now, I have no idea how much opportunity there is for switching between groups, but I see no reason to throw the toys out of the pram if it turns out people can do that.

 

[Magma]

Griefers will eventually get filtered into a group with other griefers where as David puts it, they can grief each other and will probably enjoy it.

Oh, like the recent anti-aimbot enforcement in Titanfall. Nice

 

[Cosmos]

Wait till Beta opens up. You are going to be hearing it a hell of a lot more I expect. At the moment the Beta players have only been able to play against the AI. When they are all thrown into the pot together...

I'm bracing myself for epic levels of QQ.

Does that mean I will have to blast everyone else out the way before I even attempt my fisrt dock?

No, people are being hysterical. You'll occasionally find someone doing it and I have attacked a few people in there myself but its far from the sinister nightmare portrayed on the forums.

This is the game breaker for me. I am totally OK with group switching but only one way! If you allow people to move freely between private groups and ALL you are devaluing the game for everyone who does not. At a stroke you've taken away everyone's sense of achievement - people will be able to grind for the best ships and biggest guns in total safety and only use the ALL group to grief those who did not. Even if they opt not to grief, allowing people to flip groups for an easy ride utterly devalues the game. Its going to really ruin the experience imho.

I do agree with you. What I find hard to understand is all the moaning when the game is going to go out of its way to allow players to avoid others.

Good understanding? Extremely easy?

Nevermind your casual dismissal of a very serious problem in online gaming, but could you share your private information on this a little. How are people hacking the game? Now, a lot of the checks against modifying your client probably aren't in place in the Alpha yet, but that sounds like you know some specifics about what can, and indeed has been done.

Note that if somebody has managed to hack the single player missions, that is not a big deal. I want to hear about any confirmed hacking in the multiplayer.

I'm not going into details but my point is that when it comes to the game there are much worse things than someone destroying your ship in a perceived safe area. Indeed, I am not casually dismissing anything. I find hacking and exploiting games to be dreadful when done for gain. Exploiters can essentially ruin the game experience for everyone and that is something to complain about.

 

[Luniticisi]

I really love this attitude that people playing solo offline will have a much easier time building up their commanders .. 'Cos as far as i am concerned, if you check the stat's after, say, 3 months 99.9% of people will have been killed by NPC's far more times than any Player vs player kills they have experienced .. who say's it's going to be easier in solo play? .. I am sure FD will make the NPC's A.I. competitive ... otherwise what is the point of the game at all, seeing as you will be facing mostly NPC's most of the time ....... mostly

 

[Cosmos]

Griefers will eventually get filtered into a group with other griefers where as David puts it, they can grief each other and will probably enjoy it.

I take exception to this. I'm seriously sick and tired of the labelling of players who enjoy multi-player adversity as griefers. It completely misrepresents a huge number of the gaming community. If the game was meant to be co-op only then it should have been advertised as such and infering that the only people who will be in the all-group are warped psychos intent on ruining someones day is just plain wrong.

I'll state it again. PvP is not griefing. With all the endless moaning related to this area I am beginning to wonder if being a part of this community is worth my time.

 

[Bob_H]

A lot of peoples concerns seem to be based on the idea that the only other ships they will be encountering in the game, proper, will be other players. While that is somewhat true in the current Alpha's and the upcoming early Beta's, when the Gamma phase gets going and morphs into retail the vast majority of ship encounters will be PvE and not PvP.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I take exception to this. I'm seriously sick and tired of the labelling of players who enjoy multi-player adversity as griefers. It completely misrepresents a huge number of the gaming community. If the game was meant to be co-op only then it should have been advertised as such.

I'll state it again. PvP is not griefing. With all the endless moaning related to this area I am beginning to wonder if being a part of this community is worth my time.

Styggron mentioned griefers, not PvP.

 

[Bob_H]

Styggron mentioned griefers, not PvP.

Cosmos is correct though that on the whole PvP is misrepresented as griefing. Griefing is a sub-set of PvP, certainly but is very distinctive from PvP in general. A lot of players (in games like EVE in particular) who think they're being griefed by a single player or group of players are more usually victims of their own inability to work out they shouldn't really be continually trying to do what they're doing in the exact same area they were doing it the past ten times they were shot up.

 

[Tacheel]

I take exception to this. I'm seriously sick and tired of the labelling of players who enjoy multi-player adversity as griefers. It completely misrepresents a huge number of the gaming community. If the game was meant to be co-op only then it should have been advertised as such and infering that the only people who will be in the all-group are warped psychos intent on ruining someones day is just plain wrong.

I'll state it again. PvP is not griefing. With all the endless moaning related to this area I am beginning to wonder if being a part of this community is worth my time.

Styggron mentioned griefers, not PvP.

The problem here is that a lot of people will treat pvpers as griefers.

 

[Cosmos]

Styggron mentioned griefers, not PvP.

Yes he did and you know full well that that players who enjoy player adversity in game are being elided with griefing. Its almost become an official position and I find it highly inaccurate and offensive.

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

This is the game breaker for me. I am totally OK with group switching but only one way! If you allow people to move freely between private groups and ALL you are devaluing the game for everyone who does not. At a stroke you've taken away everyone's sense of achievement - people will be able to grind for the best ships and biggest guns in total safety and only use the ALL group to grief those who did not. Even if they opt not to grief, allowing people to flip groups for an easy ride utterly devalues the game. Its going to really ruin the experience imho.

This issue pops up time an again and a dev response to it was this...

Players that dip into the "all group" after farming "private groups"; there are a few things to say about this.

• They are unlikely to have as good player-vs-player skills as those who live in the "all" group day in day out.
• NPCs can and will offer appropriate risks (in fact, it would not be a lie to suggest that we *could* make NPC ships significantly nastier than any human ships in the majority of situations. Not that we will, mind. But we could), so to get a tooled up advantage such players will have been facing a appropriate threat level (basically private groups should not be considered "easy mode").
• Everyone has access to their own private group(s)

It's not perfect, but it's my best shot at the moment.

I honestly think point one on that list is a non-starter. Players that group switch, using one to farm and one to fight, will be just as skilled as anyone who stays in the all group. If not more so since their whole 'profession' could be geared around pvp (only using the private groups to stock up and practice in private amongst teammates before popping back into all to look for targets).

The other two points, well make of them what you will.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yes he did and you know full well that that players who enjoy player adversity in game are being elided with griefing. Its almost become an official position and I find it highly inaccurate and offensive.

Would you rather that they were termed "PKers"? That is, after all, what they seem to prefer.

 

[Stachel]

This.

Also there are people who might want to have a bit of fun when they are tired after work and don't want to be bothered with PVPers at that point, but at weekend they might be up for a fight....
Not everyone is in the mood all the time.

You are thinking like a mature adult person. If its easy/safe to avoid others to continue grinding away only to opt to encounter others when you have big guns and lots of shields, it robs those who choose the harder path of full engagement (and risk) of their enjoyment. And the vast majority of people have already made it pretty clear they will avoid all risk if they can - as is expected. Its human nature.

Massive hyperbole.

Nobody will be free to grief, as they will end up just squabbling with other griefers. Good riddance.

Now who is being hyperbolic?

Secondly, this is not EVE, and you have no evidence that the All group will have significant amounts of PvP piracy. That is a complete unknown at this point, but it has been suggested by the devs many times that the majority of the gameplay and danger will be PvE.

I'd like to explain why I don't understand your logic but I'm afraid I just sit here perplexed that it isn't totally obvious to you how group switching will be exploited - by virtue of human nature - and will become just a place where sharks feed on other sharks and anyone else 'foolish' enough not to hide in private groups. If you think allowing people to duck out of ALL because they might get shot at by other players and to return when its perfectly safe is good for a multiplayer sandbox then you are just willfully being obtuse.

Elite is a shared sandbox in a saner meaning of the word than it's use in EVE.
This is not a sandbox where the kids are locked in a struggle for survival, but the sort where they are actually playing together.

The "total safety" comment is particularly funny.

Now, I have no idea how much opportunity there is for switching between groups, but I see no reason to throw the toys out of the pram if it turns out people can do that.

Why keep bringing up EVE? 'Locked in a struggle for survival'? Nobody is locked in a struggle for survival. They are parallel games divorced from each other where the only way to 'win' is to play both games simultaneously. Eve is just the perfect example of what happens when you encourage a split userbase. It blows.

Everyone should be free to choose how they play the game but once you have made a choice, with a particular commander profile/save game, you should not be able to move assets or resources between characters not in the same group and obviously you should not be able to move between groups with that character at any point. Have a save game in as many different groups as you like - but you can't change freely between them at will. By doing that you maintain the integrity of everyone's game in each of the groups and everyone can feel justly proud of their achievements in the varying different modes of 'difficulty'.

Allowing free movement robs people of that satisfaction and devalues their game experience. I honestly don't understand why people can't appreciate that.

 

[Memnoch]

Does that mean I will have to blast everyone else out the way before I even attempt my fisrt dock?

You can certainly try but I would advise against it!

Arguably those who do avoid other players are going to be able to progress at an accelerated rate.

That would depend on how you define progress but this could simply be the amount of credits you have. Trading without being hassled by other players could be very lucrative. However if you want to be a bounty hunter then chances are players are likely to be the ones with the highest bounties on their heads.

 

[Stachel]

This issue pops up time an again and a dev response to it was this...



I honestly think point one on that list is a non-starter. Players that group switch, using one to farm and one to fight, will be just as skilled as anyone who stays in the all group. If not more so since their whole 'profession' could be geared around pvp (only using the private groups to stock up and practice in private amongst teammates before popping back into all to look for targets).

The other two points, well make of them what you will.

Nice find, but when I read that, all I interpreted from it was: everyone is free to 'cheat'. I suppose we will wait and see, but I am not confident the game won't blow for those who play ironman or who stick in the ALL group because they want to feel a sense of accomplishment not the inevitible min/maxing munchkinism that the vast majority of multiplayer gamers confuse for the same thing.

 

[Commandr Sam]

The problem here is that a lot of people will treat pvpers as griefers.

It is the down side of an aging community, it means many posters on here have not experienced any form of pvp play in modern games and have read many horror stories from forums on eve etc.

I do not see griefing being an issue in this game as all players will be soo far apart. The only potential problem here is a knee jerk reaction to this over reaction from the forums. I would not ever want to see people pirating and playing the game as designed pushed into a "griefers" instance due to the over reaction of other players.

The benefit of an againg community is as a whole all the dicussions on here are civil and constructive. If you guys want to scare yourselves have a read on any other game based community and you will realise what a gem of a community we have here.

 

[Memnoch]

Would you rather that they were termed "PKers"? That is, after all, what they seem to prefer.

That would better because PKing does not equal griefing. Griefing does not even have to involve the death of another player, just inconveniencing them in such a way as to be detrimental to the other players enjoyment of the game. Like watching a player trying to land their ship and then flying underneath them to deny them the pad. Or watching a player that has just shot up an Anaconda and wants to scoop all the containers that fell out but destroying them all before the other player has had the chance. That person could get ed off at the one destroying the containers and they themselves, attack them out of frustration, and end up with a bounty on their head which the griefer can now legitimately claim. Griefing complete!

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

A lot of peoples concerns seem to be based on the idea that the only other ships they will be encountering in the game, proper, will be other players. While that is somewhat true in the current Alpha's and the upcoming early Beta's, when the Gamma phase gets going and morphs into retail the vast majority of ship encounters will be PvE and not PvP.

+ 1. At last a voice of reason. :smilie:

Yep, time an again people automatically jump on the pvp perspective as if its the only one the game has on offer. I've said it over and over again that npc encounters in a game this size will be by far the most common. Whether its a game feature, new idea, or about existing mechanics, pvp is only one aspect of the game and a completely NONE aspect in a few game modes FD are offering!

 

[Robert Maynard]

I've said it over and over again that npc encounters in a game this size will be by far the most common. Whether its a game feature, new idea, or about existing mechanics, pvp is only one aspect of the game and a completely NONE aspect in a few game modes FD are offering!

So, by inference, changing groups to avoid players altogether provides a negligible advantage?