Cant you control amount of PVP

[Erimus Kamzel]

So most of that could be undone by only allowing you to create two new characters in a 24 hour period and not allowing credit transfers to these new characters within another 24 hour period?

That wouldn't stop greifer characters. It would just slow them down.

Griefers rely on anonymity. They're cowards. If everyone knew who their other characters where, whose bankrolling their at, it would make life far more risky and their playstyle less appealing because bounty hunters / vigilantes would make their entire account a kill on sight target.

They'd be forced to at least buy a 2nd account if nothing else. The problem isn't going away unfortunately. All you can do is make it less easy to get away with - something other games constantly fail at.

 

[Robert Maynard]

That wouldn't stop greifer characters. It would just slow them down.

.... allowing players to hide their PC status would go a long way to slowing griefers down as well (at least with respect to their PC/NPC kill ratio) - if they can't be sure if the ship they are attacking is a PC or NPC ship....

 

[Bob_H]

So most of that could be undone by only allowing you to create two new characters in a 24 hour period and not allowing credit transfers to these new characters within another 24 hour period?

This would go some way to stopping the griefers but will not have a significant effect on the problem overall.

Really, to try and irradicate the majority of griefing you would need to make it financially unviable in the real world rather than next to impossible in the virtual world. i.e. make it so that in order to recycle or create a new griefing character then the griefer will have to buy a new game account every time. Actions like;

*Prevent any character from being deleted once it's created without a request to a GM or FD. The GM/developer can then delete or keep the character based on complaints, ignore lists, combat logs, etc.

*Remove the ability to transfer assets between characters on the same account.

*Make friend/ignore lists apply to all characters on the account associated with the specific character, not just the character being befriended/ignored.

*Allow players to share ignore lists or provide a reporting method that will allow GMs/FD to place accounts on a global ignore list should sufficient complaints/reports warrant it. All accounts on the global ignore list will be able to see each other but no one else who isn't on the global ignore list.

 

[TheGoatee]

.... allowing players to hide their PC status would go a long way to slowing griefers down as well (at least with respect to their PC/NPC kill ratio) - if they can't be sure if the ship they are attacking is a PC or NPC ship....

I agree. If you make life more difficult for an anti-social players, by restricting access to funds, restricting free new characters and making it difficult to tell who’s NPC or PC, then surely you reduce the chances of it occurring frequently.

Stopping all undesirable behaviour is impossible in anything. If you make life so difficult that most people can’t be bothered to do something, then you are well on the way to making it an infrequent occurrence.

 

[Spook]

The game runs a hidden stat: -call it "G points"

Character creation the stat is zero with a random modifier to prevent gaming (It's okay I've 20 more banks on this Toon before Griefer hell.)

The stat decays over time allowing "youthful mistakes" to consigned to the dustbin of history.


Player A opens fire on Player B. Player B retaliates no change in "G" as fair PvP.

Player A opens fire on Player B. Player B does not retaliate gives a + 1 to the Stat. This still allows for PvP but adds a consequence. The increase should be relatively minor allowing PvP play with the occasional afk/disconnected target but is cumulative and the decay to zero is reset after each incident. The Griefer either accumulates points till he trips the level to be termed as such or moderates his behaviour. His choice.

Player A opens fire and declares "Piracy" on player B.

Player B declines - no change in stat as a choice has been made.

Player B accepts - the piracy mechanism is played out.

Player B accepts then attempts to evade - Player A destroys him - no change.

Player B accepts then destroys Player A anyway. + 5 to G Stat.

A bounty hunter with a "valid target" does not suffer any increase.

At a certain level the player is warned that their actions have been noticed and the Pilots Association takes a dim view of murder. If they continue they will be placed on probation (moved to Griefer Hell).

Once in Griefer Hell the account is transferred not just the infracting toon.

The account stays there until the Stat decays to zero or a level deemed acceptable. The Infracting character is locked from deletion until such a time as they are deemed safe to rejoin society.

I'd also allow wars between alliances/individuals but make them valid only so far as they are consensual. Any PvP between those groups never increases the Stat. 24 hour cool down before the war is valid and 24 cool down before it ceases.

This way the SA guys/Girls can beat the seven shades out of the Redditors and you can be free to have a mortal enemy if you so wish.

The above to run in conjunction with the established rep/faction mechanics.

FDev/DDF monitor the game and set the threshold for responses, if ED is all fluffy and full of space kittens - set "G limit high" if we're being overwhelmed by hordes of uncouth barbarians -adjust it low.

Loads of holes in the above and it probably wouldn't work anyway but now I've typed it out it's getting posted.

 

[Cosmos]

Thats just a placeholder offcourse a vocal minority will make Elite-Dangerous into Elite:Trade/Mining-simulator 2014 ... Tractors in space!

Naah it will be just fine. I still find to see the relevance with these discussions when you can play solo - yet a few demand the rest play by certain gentleman rules and generally be the best of man while playing multiplayer.

Indeed. I really do wonder sometimes. It kinda reminds me of some religious movement. Its not good enough that they have their faith etc, they are only happy everyone else believes it too. Its not enough that there is a single player mode, single player on line, private group system.. we must have the all-group completely sanitised and safe.

Good point. One situation I can imagine, the aforementioned player limping back to a station, badly damaged. Already on the last few kilometers and well within the space heavily policed by the station, no pirate would dare attack another ship (instead probably try to smuggle stolen goods into the station, and therefore bound to behave inconspiciously), for they would not survive the day.

A griefer wouldn't care. They see a badly hurt player in a vulnerable position. They don't even need a fancy expensive ship for that, any starter ship would suffice to finish off someone who has just barely survived to reach the station's vicinity. And thus, in a situation most vulnerable but, according to all in-character reasoning, should be most safe - as soon as another player is shown on the radar (not even this, a griefer could hide in silent running mode), those will always be some nerve-wrecking moments until the ship is finally, safely landed on the pad inside.

Perhaps NPCs should be more dynamic then and behave a little more like a human players from time to time. You also seem to speak as if you can't run your ship cold or turn on silent running yourself. Its kinda hard to target another player in those cases.

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

.... allowing players to hide their PC status would go a long way to slowing griefers down as well (at least with respect to their PC/NPC kill ratio) - if they can't be sure if the ship they are attacking is a PC or NPC ship....

That's great idea and thankfully its something FD are at least looking into via a DDF poll...

Flash Poll: telling humans and AI apart

I want to know if the ship is human the moment it resolves 14.88%
I want to know if the ship is human after a BASIC scan 16.67%
I want to know if the ship is human after an ADVANCED scan 5.36%
I want to know if the ship is human if we have both opted in to an IDENT TRANSPONDER service 43.45%
I never want to truly know whether a ship is human or AI 19.64%

I like the idea because its adds more tension to encounters - not knowing who or what you're up against, at least initially. The good side effect of course being what you mentioned too.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Its not good enough that they have their faith etc, they are only happy everyone else believes it too.

"faith" and "belief" are a bit out of context here.

The private group system will naturally be based on the player base in the All Group. How else do you expect players to know who they wish to fly with?

Its not enough that there is a single player mode, single player on line, private group system.. we must have the all-group completely sanitised and safe.

Not "completely sanitised and safe", rather free from players whose sole aim is to try to upset the gameplay of other players by griefing.

Perhaps NPCs should be more dynamic then and behave a little more like a human players from time to time.

I sincerely hope that the AI is able to achieve human-like fallibility, unpredictability, etc.

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

Indeed. I really do wonder sometimes. It kinda reminds me of some religious movement. Its not good enough that they have their faith etc, they are only happy everyone else believes it too. Its not enough that there is a single player mode, single player on line, private group system.. we must have the all-group completely sanitised and safe.

Yeah, a bit like the PvPers religion: everyone must accept PvP without good reason, because it's what I want and it is a free world.

There really do not seem to be any good answers to this dilemma, only a series of not very good ones. But at the moment, I'm hoping that the consequences that FD intend to introduce will make the game playable in 'All' without having to run away to SP. Time will tell.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yeah, a bit like the PvPers religion: everyone must accept PvP without good reason, because it's what I want and it is a free world.

There really do not seem to be any good answers to this dilemma, only a series of not very good ones. But at the moment, I'm hoping that the consequences that FD intend to introduce will make the game playable in 'All' without having to run away to SP. Time will tell.

This.

 

[Bob_H]

Indeed. I really do wonder sometimes. It kinda reminds me of some religious movement. Its not good enough that they have their faith etc, they are only happy everyone else believes it too. Its not enough that there is a single player mode, single player on line, private group system.. we must have the all-group completely sanitised and safe.



Perhaps NPCs should be more dynamic then and behave a little more like a human players from time to time. You also seem to speak as if you can't run your ship cold or turn on silent running yourself. Its kinda hard to target another player in those cases.

I don't think anyone here is arguing for any of that (although more dynamic NPC AI would be a plus depending on how far you want to take it), at least I certainly don't. I do think that people want to, and should be able to, filter out what they consider to be the more undesireable player actions though: in particular griefers. I don't see any conflict in the desire to have enjoyable and meaningful PvP interactions while being able to take the griefer mentality out of the equation. There's certainly debate to be had over how best to achieve that, however as I don't think there is any reasonable way of doing it outside of account wide sanctions and third-party moderation/intervention.

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

Indeed. I really do wonder sometimes. It kinda reminds me of some religious movement. Its not good enough that they have their faith etc, they are only happy everyone else believes it too. Its not enough that there is a single player mode, single player on line, private group system.. we must have the all-group completely sanitised and safe.

I never understood why a closed all group wasn't on the cards. Maybe it was, I dunno. But it would have stopped all these posts about group switching mechanics, loopholes, exploits, etc and given everyone a choice to find their own preferred playstyle. Besides, I've said it before, a game with billions of destinations - billions - didn't need layers of safety nets in the first place!

 

[jabokai]

I never understood why a closed all group wasn't on the cards. Maybe it was, I dunno. But it would have stopped all these posts about group switching mechanics, loopholes, exploits, etc and given everyone a choice to find their own preferred playstyle. Besides, I've said it before, a game with billions of destinations - billions - didn't need layers of safety nets in the first place!

All they need to do is make Ironman a closed group (no wimping out to private groups or solo play) and add an extra open group for PvE and then, I reckon, 96.2% of people will be happy.

 

[Stachel]

All they need to do is make Ironman a closed group (no wimping out to private groups or solo play) and add an extra open group for PvE and then, I reckon, 96.2% of people will be happy.

They should also consider renaming it Elite: Mostly Harmless too.

 

[Erimus Kamzel]

All they need to do is make Ironman a closed group (no wimping out to private groups or solo play) and add an extra open group for PvE and then, I reckon, 96.2% of people will be happy.

You're probably right.

I'm still hoping sense prevails with Ironman mode and FD ditch group switching within it!

 

[Bob_H]

That's great idea and thankfully its something FD are at least looking into via a DDF poll...

Flash Poll: telling humans and AI apart

I want to know if the ship is human the moment it resolves 14.88%
I want to know if the ship is human after a BASIC scan 16.67%
I want to know if the ship is human after an ADVANCED scan 5.36%
I want to know if the ship is human if we have both opted in to an IDENT TRANSPONDER service 43.45%
I never want to truly know whether a ship is human or AI 19.64%

I like the idea because its adds more tension to encounters - not knowing who or what you're up against, at least initially. The good side effect of course being what you mentioned too.

Interesting result. It's good that FD are taking another look at this. If I was voting it would definitely be to never know if the other ship is piloted by another human or an AI. It would be enough for me to know that there are up to 31 other players in system with me among all the vessels I can see but I would prefer not to know which ones are which. But I would happily take the transponder option and keep it switched off as there needs to be the choice for both.

 

[jabokai]

They should also consider renaming it Elite: Mostly Harmless too.

Different nomenclature for the different groups...

Ironman - Elite: Dangerous
Solo - Elite: Empty
PvE - Elite: Friends



I don't think catering to several large groups with pretty different interests is a bad thing. If the game was PvP centric then yeah, it wouldn't make sense. But when such large parts of the game are about other stuff it doesn't seem too "out there" to cater for tastes that don't really work together, particularly when a small part of the game (combat) can potentially make or break the game for each group.

 

[Fromhell]

Man, you must be mellowing out a bit in your old age. 168 posts of pvp fear mongering and you turn up THIS late in the day? I expected to see you on page one

Ah well I watch this with amusement. Still wondering at which academy to study game design that teaches you to always listen to one group and completely ignore another, and still mock users with slogans like "Play like you want".

I certainly can´t play like I want, can´t have guild, can´t have any dedicated group/guild content which defies the holy "single player experience", can´t even claim ownership of a single asteroid in this 100 billion star system universe.

Also having unlimited space of 100 billion star systems and still putting a grouping system like this in, filtering people out of the online game. Priceless. Just.. priceless.

 

[Bob_H]

Ah well I watch this with amusement. Still wondering at which academy to study game design that teaches you to always listen to one group and completely ignore another, and still mock users with slogans like "Play like you want".

I certainly can´t play like I want, can´t have guild, can´t have any dedicated group/guild content which defies the holy "single player experience", can´t even claim ownership of a single asteroid in this 100 billion star system universe.

Also having unlimited space of 100 billion star systems and still putting a grouping system like this in, filtering people out of the online game. Priceless. Just.. priceless.

Good luck with your future study plans. Education is so important at any stage of life so it is crucial to find the most appropriate course at the best place you can get into and I wish you well in finding the right ones for you.

I'm also expecting that which ever design course you do opt for, your perspective will change dramatically from what it is now.

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

That's great idea and thankfully its something FD are at least looking into via a DDF poll...

Flash Poll: telling humans and AI apart

I want to know if the ship is human the moment it resolves 14.88%
I want to know if the ship is human after a BASIC scan 16.67%
I want to know if the ship is human after an ADVANCED scan 5.36%
I want to know if the ship is human if we have both opted in to an IDENT TRANSPONDER service 43.45%
I never want to truly know whether a ship is human or AI 19.64%

I like the idea because its adds more tension to encounters - not knowing who or what you're up against, at least initially. The good side effect of course being what you mentioned too.

badly worded, of course, as many of the polls are. I took the "I want/don't want to know" bit to mean "I want/don't want to be told": I have plenty of faith in FD, but not yet enough to expect that they can make their AI's pass the Turing test. So, you will eventually be able to work out that an AI is an AI, without being told, and probably that a PC is a PC. But I was one of the 19.64% that did not want a flashing blue light on top of a PC under any circumstances. And I voted for that not because I am afraid of being attacked by griefers, or afraid of being beaten by a better pilot (I expect both of those to happen), but because it makes no sense in game. I would like to hope that FD get the level of AI pilots to be variable, with the top ones being very good indeed. As Sandro has said, they could make them guaranteed better than any human if they wanted to.