Cant you control amount of PVP

[Cosmos]

I suspect that most players idea of "griefing" would be that the AI pilot would not consistenly attack you, following you around and generally making your life hell. You could quite easily label it as childish and play ground mentality thinking but if one player had the ability to pick on another for their own amusement, shouldn't that player have the ability to do something about that?

Note that I am not talking about a lone instance of an Eagle pilot taking out a fat juicy freighter and allowing his buddy with another freighter to steal the cargo. Instead I refer to repeatedly attacking one player over and over again just to annoy them i.e. legitimate piracy vs. "griefing", whatever that is!

Well repeatedly killing someone where they have no way out or option to respond i.e. camping would certainly fit my understanding of griefing. However, in ED if someone kills you you won't be seeing them again for a while and you can put them on your exclusion list which means you'll be extremely unlikely to ever see them again.

I honestly despair. The vast number of people making loud noises about this issue clearly haven't taken the time to understand what options are available to them

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

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.

Er, no. Most of those players have, almost by definition, not played EVE, and thus will not have gone onto those forums. Most of the horror stories have been on here, plus those they have experienced themselves during the alpha. Of course, some of the things they have called griefing were not, for a variety of reasons, including bugs. But other things (spaceport blockading, etc.) undeniably were. (Cue Cosmos defending it as 'just testing'.)

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

i honestly despair. The vast number of people making loud noises about this issue clearly haven't taken the time to understand what options are going to be, but are not yet available to them

ftfy.

 

[Andrew Sayers]

This is a bit of an aside, but imagine the starter ship comes with multi-cannons, weak engines and no shields. In other words, it's an excellent stealth ship but a sitting duck if anyone discovers it.

Would you enjoy the danger of sneaking through dangerous space, knowing every blip could be a player looking for easy prey? Or would you find it a boring distraction from actually getting into fights? Whatever your opinion, how would it colour your opinion about the correlation between griefing and killing weaker players?

 

[Cosmos]

It differs because, in a crowded instance, the pPvPer will preferentially select a PC target - NPCs don't select a target simply because the pilot is a PC.

In the full game there aren't going to be crowded instances. When we also consider there is an entire galaxy of 400 Billion star systems it could well be the case we rarely ever see other players at all.

 

[Memnoch]

Keep them all isolated, but give everyone as many saves and as much choice as they want. Protect the integrity of everyone's gaming experience. Don't devalue it.

I'm not sure I see the value in this. So the two scenarios you describe we have:

1. A player that can change groups at will but with restrictions i.e. not during combat etc.
2. A player that is stuck in a non-PvP mode and can never be engaged by those that want PvP.

How does scenario 2 satisfy those that want forced PvP? At least in scenario 1 you have the possibilty or meeting this player. In 2 you will never see the. Surely 1 is the better choice here? I guess I'm just missing something but I don't see how giving other players a choice of how they want to play in any way detrimentally affects those that just want to PKill.

If this route was chosen, all of those that want group switching may chose for the permanent solo mode and in that case you will never see them anyway. Logically it makes no sense to me.

And on top of that, what about all of those players that you just forced into SP/PvE mode that want to play in groups with other like minded players? You just denied them that right.

 

[Commandr Sam]

I suspect that most players idea of "griefing" would be that the AI pilot would not consistenly attack you, following you around and generally making your life hell. You could quite easily label it as childish and play ground mentality thinking but if one player had the ability to pick on another for their own amusement, shouldn't that player have the ability to do something about that?

Note that I am not talking about a lone instance of an Eagle pilot taking out a fat juicy freighter and allowing his buddy with another freighter to steal the cargo. Instead I refer to repeatedly attacking one player over and over again just to annoy them i.e. legitimate piracy vs. "griefing", whatever that is!

That is where the problem comes in, griefing does need to be dealt with.

However as the game starts, it won't be long before a list of bounty hunters appears. All pirates can just then ignore these players. Or a pirate list that is ignored by any traders, gaming the system.

This is where the problem arises, how do differentiate between these 2 examples?

My thought is that it requires some FD input and that a simple ignore system is too open to being exploited.

 

[Robert Maynard]

In the full game there aren't going to be crowded instances. When we also consider there is an entire galaxy of 400 Billion star systems it could well be the case we rarely ever see other players at all.

I did not mean to infer that the crowd was PC only, rather the opposite - one solitary PC in a crowd of NPCs.

However, if PCs are not readily (or possibly at all) identifiable as such then those who preferentially target PCs will require to do more than look for a triangle on the scanner.

 

[Memnoch]

At the very least I think that in the near future threads like this are going to be very useful for those that want to play in a certain way. They will clearly show those Commanders that seem to have a near pathological desire to kill other players.

Keep signing up folks!

 

[Cosmos]

This is a bit of an aside, but imagine the starter ship comes with multi-cannons, weak engines and no shields. In other words, it's an excellent stealth ship but a sitting duck if anyone discovers it.

Would you enjoy the danger of sneaking through dangerous space, knowing every blip could be a player looking for easy prey? Or would you find it a boring distraction from actually getting into fights? Whatever your opinion, how would it colour your opinion about the correlation between griefing and killing weaker players?

I fear there is a false assumption here. Whilst I like the challenge PvP represents that doesn't mean I am going to blow away anyone I come across just because they are another player.

But I'll ask a again a question I posed before. What difference does it make if an NPC or a Player with a better equipped ship defeats you?
I have the sad realisation that NPCs are going to have more freedom in this supposed sandbox game than the players.

 

[Stachel]

I'm not sure I see the value in this. So the two scenarios you describe we have:

1. A player that can change groups at will but with restrictions i.e. not during combat etc.
2. A player that is stuck in a non-PvP mode and can never be engaged by those that want PvP.

How does scenario 2 satisfy those that want forced PvP? At least in scenario 1 you have the possibilty or meeting this player. In 2 you will never see the. Surely 1 is the better choice here? I guess I'm just missing something but I don't see how giving other players a choice of how they want to play in any way detrimentally affects those that just want to PKill.

If this route was chosen, all of those that want group switching may chose for the permanent solo mode and in that case you will never see them anyway. Logically it makes no sense to me.

And on top of that, what about all of those players that you just forced into SP/PvE mode that want to play in groups with other like minded players? You just denied them that right.

No. People can choose to play the game in any way they choose. Choice being the operative word. If they choose to create a solo-only character they are safe to do what they want. If they want to interact with others by creating a ALL group character then they must be prepared to encounter others all of the time, not just when it suits them. If that is a problem they can always just relax with a save game in one of the other groups and play in ALL another day ..

This isn't about denying people choice. Its about protecting the integrity of those who choose specific groups and levels of interaction from being undermined by those who group hop to min/max or otherwise game the system/s.

I want you to play how you want to play. Have as many save games in as many groups as you want. The caveat is: you can't grind away alone and then transfer that 'achievement' to a character in another group. You have to earn everything in each group and by requiring this everyone has a better gaming experience secure in the knowledge that they are always encountering others who have worked just as hard as they have and who they can respect and enjoy playing alongside or against.

The net result of this is that long term, the solo and co-op groups will be full of people will billions of credits, all Elite, with all the best ships etc. But those who choose ironman or ALL will be more likely to see a more balanced and long lasting representation of achievement.

 

[Commandr Sam]

The net result of this is that long term, the solo and co-op groups will be full of people will billions of credits, all Elite, with all the best ships etc. But those who choose ironman or ALL will be more likely to see a more balanced and long lasting representation of achievement.

Well that is untill the group players get elite and the best ship then jump back into the all group.

 

[Stachel]

Well that is untill the group players get elite and the best ship then jump back into the all group.

Which is my entire point, yes.

 

[Cosmos]

That is where the problem comes in, griefing does need to be dealt with.

However as the game starts, it won't be long before a list of bounty hunters appears. All pirates can just then ignore these players. Or a pirate list that is ignored by any traders, gaming the system.

This is where the problem arises, how do differentiate between these 2 examples?

My thought is that it requires some FD input and that a simple ignore system is too open to being exploited.

This raises another good point. When Alpha MP was first released you couldn't put a foot wrong in ethics and credits because people were cruising around policing the area, and subsequently there was next to no piracy at all. I found myself becoming incredibly bored and I suspect so did many others.

If bounty hunting is to be anything but the snooze fest of killing NPCs we actually need for players to have bounties on their heads, who bounty hunters can then target. So there needs to be some semblance of freedom for players to attack other players and yes even destroy your ship..

 

[Memnoch]

No.

A simple "No" eh?

Fortunately it seems FD don't seem to see it your way, at least for now.

 

[Cosmos]

I want you to play how you want to play. Have as many save games in as many groups as you want. The caveat is: you can't grind away alone and then transfer that 'achievement' to a character in another group. You have to earn everything in each group and by requiring this everyone has a better gaming experience secure in the knowledge that they are always encountering others who have worked just as hard as they have and who they can respect and enjoy playing alongside or against.

I agree 100%

Why oh why didn't Frontier just go for a PvE / PvP server split? Everyone would have been happy.

 

[Stachel]

A simple "No" eh?

Fortunately it seems FD don't seem to see it your way, at least for now.

Honestly, totally without virtiol, I am just blown away by how anyone (again without virtriol) can not appreciate what I am advocating is the only way to do this. Do you really want to play in a COD type sandbox where everyone is Elite, everyone is filthy rich and without any risk? And to turn the ALL group in to a holding pen for griefers and/or those who just want to throw away entirely disposable millions in bling and pretend they've 'won' the game? Thats exactly what happened in EVE 0.0. People now just whelp entire fleets of caps (tends of thousands of dollars worth of assets) because they are bored and its nothing to them ..

It makes me so sad that people don't want to have a genuine sandbox (in so far as that is possible in the face of other forms of cheating) where you can literally forge your own destiny and be totally certain everyone you encounter is working just as hard as you and truly savour that moment you finally become Elite or when you encounter someone who is.

I just don't get it. Anyway I have made my point as best I can. If only one or two people agree with me then I must accept the game we get .. As sad as that makes me!

 

[Andrew Sayers]

I fear there is a false assumption here. Whilst I like the challenge PvP represents that doesn't mean I am going to blow away anyone I come across just because they are another player.

But I'll ask a again a question I posed before. What difference does it make if an NPC or a Player with a better equipped ship defeats you?
I have the sad realisation that NPCs are going to have more freedom in this supposed sandbox game than the players.

I agree the Venn diagram of "people that want to fight other people" and "people that want to kill other people" has less than a 100% overlap, but I don't think anyone disputes there exist people that want to kill without a fight. Without touching on consensual PvP, I'm wondering whether that most awkward subset can be made to serve a useful function.

To answer your question, for me the difference between defeat from NPCs vs. PCs is simple - NPCs can't derive pleasure from my failure, which evens things up because I don't have the thing in my head that lets me derive pleasure from theirs. There's nothing wrong with that sort of competition - indeed it's the lifeblood of many relationships - but if your brain works the other way then PvP loses its luster.

 

[Commandr Sam]

I agree 100%

Why oh why didn't Frontier just go for a PvE / PvP server split? Everyone would have been happy.

The problem was only, from memory when this poll was carried out less 20% of the player base (that posted) wanted a PVE server.

The issue still remains that there has to be a mechanism to remove griefers without punishing innocent players.

 

[Cosmos]

I agree the Venn diagram of "people that want to fight other people" and "people that want to kill other people" has less than a 100% overlap, but I don't think anyone disputes there exist people that want to kill without a fight. Without touching on consensual PvP, I'm wondering whether that most awkward subset can be made to serve a useful function.

To answer your question, for me the difference between defeat from NPCs vs. PCs is simple - NPCs can't derive pleasure from my failure, which evens things up because I don't have the thing in my head that lets me derive pleasure from theirs. There's nothing wrong with that sort of competition - indeed it's the lifeblood of many relationships - but if your brain works the other way then PvP loses its luster.

I appreciate your honesty.. its something I suspect of many who are vocal about these issues. So its about ego and personal perception rather than the act of ones ship being destroyed. No offence but I find that a somewhat juvenile way to think about it and especially so if someone lets that upset them. I do find it very difficult to understand this sentiment given the age demographic of many of the games backers.

edit: and once again I notice there is this 'perceived' idea that any time someone beats you they are deriving some sick warped enjoyment from your defeat.. I've had my ass handed to me plenty of times in ED and many other games and I laugh it off, learn from the experience and use it to further develop my skills. I've also enjoyed many excellent battles with other players whom all enjoyed the challenge. Not directed at you Andrew, but I seriously suggest the problem in this area is with the individual.