I'm concerned – the direction of the game.
- Thread starter Cosmos
- Start date
So those players should merely wander off into an anarchy system where there are no crimes, and no consequences for attacking or killing someone. Forcing those 'antisocial' players into an anarchy seems to me (obviously) preferable to forcing those that disagree with a PvP playground into single player mode. And when they want to play in-game rather than out of game, they can return to systems with a legal code, and behave themselves.
Im struggling to see exactly how the opting-in or out process would work - would players essentially be invulnerable to pvp attack? That would be kind of dumb. If they just didnt appear as players then they would be fair game like any npc
No. You would be just as vulnerable and visible. All that would be not available by default to others is the visible CMDR tag and the radar blip would be filled. It does not detract from multi-play, provide some form of uncertainty and certainly does not detract from aggressive play. It's just that situational awareness is not provided for free.
Adding to AnnuverScotinExile's explanation, mechanically the issue is amazingly small. Look at the scanner in the bottom-centre of this picture. Notice the triangle is red (enemy) has triangles around it (targeted) and is filled in (NPC). In the current alpha, the triangle for a player ship is hollow. The core question is essentially "when should we hollow out that triangle" (plus some other side issues that boil down to the same basic thing).
Stachel
Banned
Love this idea I think it's a perfect compromise.
I think we'd all have to decide what to call a game like this; 'Multiplayer'? or something else; but I have to appreciate the effort and competence involved in conceiving it. If the proposal stands as is; and achieves FD's purpose in the game, its a Landmark....I think its very exciting.
I'm sure there will be in-game bulletin boards that people can use to arrange meet ups and events. There will be local comms networks where you can talk to other players. Players will be advertising and hiring themselves out for escort duty, mission running, exploration expeditions, scouting etc... players will be running in-game events that you can get involved in. Core system spaceports will be high traffic areas full of players coming and going. When EVA hits you'll be walking amongst real players on stations and planet side cities.
There will be plenty of ways to meet players in this game.
Just because you can't instantly pick a player out of a blob of 20 or 30 other signals doesn't mean this game will be indistinguishable from a single player game.
Use all the other features you'll be given to find other players to interact with. Failing that, use your eyes and learn the differences between npc behavior and player behavior. If its anything like it is in other games people will have it sussed within a week! :smilie:
Last edited:
Exactly.
If the only reason for attacking a ship is that it's player controlled and not NPC, then that's immersion breaking anyway. If you want to engage in piracy then who you attack should be based on something from Adept's list, or that you want the cargo maybe. But... something, some reason for the attack.
If I had no choice, I might be able to live with no ID until scan, as long as the scan process was individual scans, not a magic 'scan everyone' button, and those individual scans took a little while - so not scan/target next/scan/target next, etc., in a second or two. And the scan should be for details like cargo, bounty, etc., not just PC/NPC (which still makes no in-game sense). That is, the scanner would need to have already selected a potential target, and be looking for more details. In that way such players would still not be able to target a ship just because it was a PC (though they could carry on when they found out that it was, and give up if it wasn't, which is another reason it is not a good idea to those of us who want to play in-game not out-of-game).
For the record, the poll in the DDF was as follows:
View Poll Results: A contact resolves into a ship...
I want to know if the ship is human the moment it resolves 25 14.88%
I want to know if the ship is human after a BASIC scan 28 16.67%
I want to know if the ship is human after an ADVANCED scan 9 5.36%
I want to know if the ship is human if we have both opted in to an IDENT TRANSPONDER service 73 43.45%
I never want to truly know whether a ship is human or AI 33 19.64%
Badly worded, but then these things often are. I'm sure most people voted as if the wording was "I want to be told" rather than "I want to know" (insert usual comment about the Turing Test here).
Last edited:
With all due respect I do not agree with your solution or agreement. It in effects limits the scope of play by forcing you to behave legally and handicaps any player that wishes to experience life as a pirate. It's already hard enough to be a pirate in that you are forced to pay off your debts upon death without compounding that onto an alt.
If your comment about throwaway characters means "create / delete / rinse and repeat" then enforce a cool down period on deletions - the lower your rating the longer you have to wait whilst the commander is "greyed" out awaiting deletion. Gives the player the opportunity to change their mind (which would reset the clock naturally) and stop people creating quick nuisance characters.
(Obviously tie in any bans / suspensions / ignores / etc to the account)
I don't really see this as a matter of PvP either.
Lets say I'm a pirate. I want to pirate anything and everything. NPCs and players. My motives or gameplay do not change according to whether there is a gamer inside that Lakon or an NPC. I will plunder both yarr!!!
Lets say I'm a bounty hunter. I want to hunt anything and everything. NPCs and players. My motives or gameplay do not change according to whether there is a gamer inside that Krait or an NPC. I will kill both muhahah!!!
So, it really makes no sense to me to instantly know if that ship belongs to a player or an NPC. It actually makes the game even more immersive and "dangerous", since that blip on the map could be anything. From a mundane Anlavian buckaroo AI to a Deadly rated Peruvian ace PC in his mancave.
Having said that, a hail or an advanced scan could help me identify more things about my adversary. But not instantly, and not with ease/room for abuse.
Up until I read your post Dante80 (as I have been going through this thread page by page, post by post) - I was multi-quoting, and queuing up a number of replies to respond to. But having saw your's you've saved me the need to do that as you've eloquently put my thoughts better by your examples.
I feel many are approaching this issue as simply a 'player', not 'the commander of a vessel within a universe where risks and gains can be had but never exclusively without the the other'. PC or NPC - either of these coming after you - it shouldn't matter what they are - they are that risk in this 'Frontier' for the gains. And so why should they be immediately identifiable as one or other? Should they not be equally of concern when being tempted by your presence/cargo?
The last part of your post in effect cements both arguments imo - Non-immediate identification (perhaps just a generic ship reg number (as we had in Froniter Elite 2 and FFE))? With further effort of getting more information through a hail or deeper/involved scan.
I too would be dismayed to to see a split in the online multiplayer element just because. It would detract from the point of playing online and would make the experience that much diluted (ever more so given the expanse of the galaxy open to us).
Hate that idea, and it is nothing like a compromise.
So if I want to prepare myself should I be attacked, I get a flashing blue light saying "PC over here"? Or I have to fly around with out defences, and have my shields shot out and hull down to 50% before I have deployed my weapons and can fire back?
Liqua is right. As nearly always the case. The only grounds for treating all of an accounts characters as equally bad, is if you have evidence of collusion between characters: one farming for another, etc. You should be able to have a character that is a pirate and another that is a perfectly law abiding trader/explorer. and whatever the pirate character does should have no impact on the trader explorer. Unless they collude.
As I already stated - humans will probably be more capable and interesting opponents than the AI.
[*Edit* So going back to my previous post, I have to concede that I do see single player as inferior to multiplayer due to the AI issue.]
Last edited:
+1 couldn't have said it better. MP should be MP and CMDR names shown :/
Sorry Jack, I mean JEFF
I've read 27 pages and I'm still firmly in the don't distinguish between PC and NPC camp!
I like the idea of a friendly universe where we all gather together for a nice cuppa anytime we feel like it. A nice friendly wing wag in passing; gentleman amongst the stars...
However it won't be like that - if we are automatically identified as PCs then there will be a large crowd who will automatically attack.
The elite universe is supposed to be a dangerous and unforgiving place - I'm sure we'll all be attacked on a fairly regular basis regardless of play mode.
What I don't need is an even bigger target painting on my back so that players make a beeline for me.
I'm flying a ship, other players are flying in their ships, npc are flying their ships - we are all just ships in space to each other - the type of ship, cargo, armament and condition should be the info used to decide your actions.
I don't mind being targeted because I look like being easy pickings or because I'm full of valuable cargo - I don't want to be targeted because some prepubescent child who will only attack real people has been patiently waiting for me all day.
I like the idea of the game being difficult but I can do without pushing water uphill thanks!
The reverse is true also - I'm not the best pilot so I use the player identification as a means of only ever fighting npc ships, see a PC and run..
I like the not knowing - not knowing if you've bitten off more than you can chew, not knowing who is stalking you.
I'll play the ALL group regardless (and/or IM) of how it gets implemented, if the opt in/out is there I may even opt in. But I think the most rewarding and least frustrating mode will be ALL opted out.
Yeah I know - go play solo online right!
As others have said we'll have to wait and see how it all works out before we can properly judge what is right or wrong.
I could be right, you could be right; or we could all be wrong!
At the moment we're arguing over the shape of a colour with a blind man as referee.
Personally I think black is a rhombus and really don't get your red is a square argument
I've read 27 pages and I'm still firmly in the don't distinguish between PC and NPC camp!
I like the idea of a friendly universe where we all gather together for a nice cuppa anytime we feel like it. A nice friendly wing wag in passing; gentleman amongst the stars...
However it won't be like that - if we are automatically identified as PCs then there will be a large crowd who will automatically attack.
The elite universe is supposed to be a dangerous and unforgiving place - I'm sure we'll all be attacked on a fairly regular basis regardless of play mode.
What I don't need is an even bigger target painting on my back so that players make a beeline for me.
I'm flying a ship, other players are flying in their ships, npc are flying their ships - we are all just ships in space to each other - the type of ship, cargo, armament and condition should be the info used to decide your actions.
I don't mind being targeted because I look like being easy pickings or because I'm full of valuable cargo - I don't want to be targeted because some prepubescent child who will only attack real people has been patiently waiting for me all day.
I like the idea of the game being difficult but I can do without pushing water uphill thanks!
The reverse is true also - I'm not the best pilot so I use the player identification as a means of only ever fighting npc ships, see a PC and run..
I like the not knowing - not knowing if you've bitten off more than you can chew, not knowing who is stalking you.
I'll play the ALL group regardless (and/or IM) of how it gets implemented, if the opt in/out is there I may even opt in. But I think the most rewarding and least frustrating mode will be ALL opted out.
Yeah I know - go play solo online right!
As others have said we'll have to wait and see how it all works out before we can properly judge what is right or wrong.
I could be right, you could be right; or we could all be wrong!
At the moment we're arguing over the shape of a colour with a blind man as referee.
Personally I think black is a rhombus and really don't get your red is a square argument
I'm afraid this is the bit where you lose me. Nobody wants it to be impossible to tell people are people, or believes it ever could be. The people you're arguing against agree with you that would be both a rubbish and nonsensical idea.
At the moment we're arguing over the shape of a colour with a blind man as referee.
Personally I think black is a rhombus and really don't get your red is a square argument
Genius
Disagree. I stand by that it should be ship designation only shown. CMDR Name and detail after a further advanced info scan. IMO.
The distinctions will also come from your experience of that pilot (NPC or Player). If they should interact with you by COMMs also (which would clearly indicate they are PC, I think), so be it - but you have your immersion still and the opportunity to garner social growth overall as well.
At the moment we're arguing over the shape of a colour with a blind man as referee.
Personally I think black is a rhombus and really don't get your red is a square argument
Lol...just lol...
Last edited: