The ED Open Live Stream

[Riverside]

I disagree with you. I have no issues with the live stream event. It was a great idea.

If you come to the party, expect to get your nice shiny ship destroyed, probably several times.

Just ensure you can afford it.

I would suggest bringing a small ship to the event that you can afford to lose over and over. It'll be more fun to fly and with a bit of luck you might give a cmdr in a bigger ship a bloody nose.

Like CG's this is the sort of thing that you have to be prepared for some PvP action as the norm.



The point of the steam was that people could come and blow up the Devs

I understand your view & empathise. However neither you nor I are the game developers & that stream was an embarrassment that I do not look forward to seeing repeated on Thursday.

 

[Morkel]

The point of the steam was that people could come and blow up the Devs

Yes it was, but not at the station or on the way to the CZ. It was meant to be in th CZ where they would be 2 factions fighting. But people managed to completely destroy their ships before they barely got out of the station.

 

[Winterwalker]

I understand your view & empathise. However neither you nor I are the game developers & that stream was an embarrassment that I do not look forward to seeing repeated on Thursday.

Nah. It was a hoot (Just be careful who you wing up with Adam). Top life-lesson, learned!?

 

[Riverside]

Nah. It was a hoot (Just be careful who you wing up with Adam). Top life-lesson, learned!?

That's my point. Lesson learned, hopefully.

 

[Winterwalker]

That's my point. Lesson learned, hopefully.

I'm still laughing now. It was as Ed informed Adam that maybe <the commander in question> wasn't the best wingmate. I understood Adam's thinking .. that he wanted to keep an eye on <the commander in question> .. only flaw being <the commander in question> having a big blue dot over Adam's head!!! Brilliantly funny especially because (being fan boyish for a second) I'm finding these questions of instant decisions, making ED fun to play.

 

[T1-Jafo]

I think that the current damage level is a bit high since there should be some chance of escape (no matter how small), but at the same time I think the station has to have some teeth to do It's job.

My main worry here is that stations will end up killing relative innocents due to griefers who skirt the law and force bounties on other unskilled or new players who don't understand the law or the game mechanics.

For what it is worth, I agree with your first part. However, aren't your worries regarding unskilled and/or new players a little fret? As it will probably only happen once for them to realize the consequences of firing in a no-fire zone, missing the target and hitting the station by mistake, or getting scanned when you are hostile. I know that is all it took for me back in the begining.

 

[AgingGamer]

I totally agree about the issues with Open.
...

I think the fines for 'Murder and Destruction of Multi-Million Credit Property' are just a joke. I lose 15M CR and my attacker gains a 1000cr bounty. That should be the OTHER WAY AROUND!

Now that's interesting... but I might change it up a bit. Leave the insurance exactly as it is, but make the insurance payout add to the bounty for the killer (only for PCs, presumably). E.g.: if the PC pirate destroys my ship and I have to pay insurance of 8M Cr, their bounty is increased by 8M Cr. Add in some kind of progressive response from the NPCs- maybe make certain bounty thresholds result in wings of Federal / Imperial police interdiction of the criminal, and we may be onto something.

I also wonder a bit about the concept of systems going into anarchy, with bounties and station defences being 'turned off' when the system becomes too 'criminal'. Really? All this does is encourage the PvPers to 'hack' the game by turning systems to Anarchy as much as they can. Wouldn't a more reasonable response be sending in the federal/imperial/alliance guard to quell the uprising? A couple of capital ships, a few wings of fighters, and maybe some automated 'bounty interdiction / kill bot' turrets scattered around the system? Make the stations in systems with high crime rates scan everyone and kill players with bounties on sight. I mean, they kill players for loitering, for crying out loud...

Having said that, I have (and would continue to have) very close to zero interest regarding playing in open. Sure, I'd enjoy the social aspect of it, but I've played enough MMOs with PvP aspects over the years to know I hate what it brings out in some players. Back in 1996, Ultima Online, Raph Koster... we don't need to prove that self policing mixed PvP + PvE systems don't work. The PvP player will *always* prey on the soft (PvE) targets, they will *always* spend an ridiculous amount of time and effort trying to twist the game to that end.

I have a window of time each week to play, and repeatedly losing every bit of progress I make to someone with too much time on their hands is not how I want to spend that time. Players intentionally disrupting a community goal isn't 'fun' or 'cool' to me: it is just some people being a**hats...

 

[Conflictus]

I understand your view & empathise. However neither you nor I are the game developers & that stream was an embarrassment that I do not look forward to seeing repeated on Thursday.

Even when the developers themselves post "Nothing to see here" you spout from the rooftops the sky is falling. The tip of your spear just got snapped off and your still trying to stab stuff with it. It just looks desperate....

 

[Riverside]

Even when the developers themselves post "Nothing to see here" you spout from the rooftops the sky is falling. The tip of your spear just got snapped off and your still trying to stab stuff with it. It just looks desperate....

I'm now intrigued to know the thought process you went through to get from my post to yours. Could you expand on your response a little?

 

[Leo Sagan]

In short, I think there are ways, given time and resources, that we could improve the crime system specifically for player-on-player infractions.

I think many of us do realize that a working C&P system would require a significant amount of work and would probably need a lot of tweaking. I do believe that it is worth it and long overdue. I'm also convinced that a lot of other CMDRs would agree. Maybe an official poll could be useful here ?

After all, the fact that Ed felt the urge to make a series of streams promoting open is a sign that there could be more players using this mod, isn't it ? I feel that a good C&P system would help to achieve just that.

 

[Soon(TM)]

I think many of us do realize that a working C&P system would require a significant amount of work and would probably need a lot of tweaking. I do believe that it is worth it and long overdue. I'm also convinced that a lot of other CMDRs would agree. Maybe an official poll could be useful here ?

After all, the fact that Ed felt the urge to make a series of streams promoting open is a sign that there could be more players using this mod, isn't it ? I feel that a good C&P system would help to achieve just that.

Official poll yes, by frontier, not by one of the forum users.

 

[Kubicide]

Hello Commanders!

Interesting debate.

A few points though:

* Anyone who thinks that Devs publicly announcing their location in game won't get ganked is wrong. We're aware of the giant targets that get painted on our heads (especially when we put them there), and no amount of karma or punishment will ever prevent our untimely and repeated demise.

* Whether it's a single vessel with top level Engineer upgrades, a wing of A rated FDLs or a couple of vipers versus a type 7, it's possible to massively stack the odds in one direction or another. Picking on one element is, to my mind, possibly making a less useful point.

* Starport defences clearly had a wobbly. We've upgraded them significantly for 2.2; we'll be keeping an eye on how they perform.

* Adam was not upset by being ganked, he was upset because Dav beat him, in part due to his greed that cost him a bunch of bonds! He can be quite the competitive one. And I'm sure that when I'm next on stream I'll get my backside served up on a silver platter many, many times (I'm nowhere near as good as Adam, especially on gamepad).

All this being true, that's not to say that we aren't looking at ways in which to improve player-to-player interactions, whether by some form of karma or rating system or whatever (I've discussed this a couple of times in these forums, I believe). I do think we can make improvements.

Glad you watched the clip and responded to this thread. But with all due respect Sandro:

1. Where was the ganking? Why do you think this was not normal gameplay? They were not unfairly picked on; they simply lost in 1vs1 battles. They were even in wings with the upper hand at times. There is nothing to excuse what happened as this gameplay experience can and does happen to regular players especially during CGs or in starter systems.

2. You're right. The imbalance can shift to extremes very quickly and no MMO game should allow this. And it's not just one element that is broken in this game when it comes to balance.

3. Let's hope the 2.2 station changes are effective. Not sure if they do anything to stop certain griefing techniques though.

4. Maybe we saw a different video stream(?) as Adam was clearly upset at every loss especially when the Diamondback took him out. Ed also looks... unhappy and disappointed. And I hope Adam wasn't upset over losing, what, 40,000 credits in bonds especially considering that he had dialed up 8+ billion in the bank. He really had nothing to lose unlike regular players. Imagine how players feel when faced with the million dollar rebuy screen and knowing how long it will take to recover what was just lost? Dav wasn't an issue or concern (if anything wasn't it Adam firing on Dav at one point?).


Really hope you're seriously looking at player balance this time. Many of us in the community have expressed concerns (along with ideas) for a long time now.


- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Ejection from the FoEP, insurance null and void, and Wanted status in all systems assosciated with where the criminal activity took place, and bounty against CMDR and not the ship

Those who really want to pew-pew should be able to do so, but there should be equivalent consequences. Strip them of their ranks, make them unable to openly trade or refit or buy ships in unfriendly space, but leave anarchy and neutral open to them. Let them rank up in an alternative system that recognizes tyranny and terror as valuable tendencies. Give that style of play viable in-game reason to exist, but being a rampaging, crazed, flea-bitten, pew-pew murder hobo in an Imperial Cutter an incredibly difficult thing to pull off successfully.

Yep, totally agree especially with stripping insurance: make the attacker pay full price the next time they lose their ship. Make it brutal as the attacker needs to feel the risk going in since they almost always have the upper hand starting the fight.

 

[Cageman]

1) If a Commander kills another Commander, he/she will have to pay the Insurance cost. On top of that, he/she will get a bounty; not too high (in order to keep things in balance). 5k credits is enough. It will be tied to the Commander; not the ship, so, Suicide Sidewinder will not work.

2) Checks needs to be made; Is the offended Commander wanted? Is the offended Commander part or any faction? Is the Offending Commander a part of an opposite faction? Are those factions in war against each other? Did the offended Commander have "Report crimes" turned on or off?

All these things could make Open viable again for me, but, they way things look right now; I will stay out of Open.

 

[NW3]

Ejection from the FoEP, insurance null and void, and Wanted status in all systems assosciated with where the criminal activity took place, and bounty against CMDR and not the ship

Those sound like good ideas. My main beef is with the bullies who are killing other players who are in a far inferior ship. Piracy is OK imo, if the other fellow drops his cargo and you let him live. If the killed player is "wanted", the bully designation doesn't apply. It's the killing of innocent players, who are just trying to play the game, which is the main problem.

Yep, totally agree especially with stripping insurance: make the attacker pay full price the next time they lose their ship. Make it brutal as the attacker needs to feel the risk going in since they almost always have the upper hand starting the fight.

Agreed. This is what it will probably take, to get the bullies to fight fair. If you're killing other players, particularly in uneven fights, not killing NPCs, not letting them drop cargo and go, shooting fish in a barrel (mailslot), etc., you should become wanted with all factions and powers in the systems you've been PKing. Stations in those systems should fire at first sight (no more ammo refills) and you'd better have a fuel scoop. That should mostly confine them to the anarchy systems, which seems appropriate. And a big yes: it needs to be tied to players, not ships.

I think the biggest stick to whack the bullies with is loss of insurance. Perhaps on a sliding scale: It's restored after a week, assuming no "bad behavior", growing to a month, a year, possibly permanently.

Another possibility (and a simpler solution) is that since the bullies are increasing the insurance payouts due to their mischief, the insurance rebuy should be increased to 50% permanently, PLUS the entire cost of all the other killed player's ship values. Sure, they could choose the free sidewinder instead, but they'd lose all their engineered mods. That would hurt and it would take them out of the fight until they did a lot of grinding.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Sure, they could choose the free sidewinder instead, but they'd lose all their engineered mods. That would hurt and it would take them out of the fight until they did a lot of grinding.

Oh - and force them into Open

And if FD detect any instance massaging, network shenanigans, or combat logging - nuke their FD account

 

[Arguendo]

On top of that, he/she will get a bounty; not too high (in order to keep things in balance). 5k credits is enough. It will be tied to the Commander; not the ship, so, Suicide Sidewinder will not work.

And a big yes: it needs to be tied to players, not ships.

Don't you mean the other way around? It is tied to players now, but should be tied to the ship they flew when they performed the act. That way they can't swap ships and get rid of the bounty in the cheapo. Or am I missing something?

 

[Asp Explorer]

Don't you mean the other way around? It is tied to players now, but should be tied to the ship they flew when they performed the act. That way they can't swap ships and get rid of the bounty in the cheapo. Or am I missing something?

Naaah - bounty on ships gets cleared when whatever ship the CMDR is in gets destroyed - wether it was the ship the criminal acts were committed in or a suicidewinder.

Tying a bounty to the CMDR themselves would mean the bounty would come out of their own credits every time they got killed, and the only way to remove it would be a clear-save.

 

[Soon(TM)]

I think the biggest stick to whack the bullies with is loss of insurance. Perhaps on a sliding scale: It's restored after a week, assuming no "bad behavior", growing to a month, a year, possibly permanently.

Another possibility (and a simpler solution) is that since the bullies are increasing the insurance payouts due to their mischief, the insurance rebuy should be increased to 50% permanently, PLUS the entire cost of all the other killed player's ship values. Sure, they could choose the free sidewinder instead, but they'd lose all their engineered mods. That would hurt and it would take them out of the fight until they did a lot of grinding.

That's a bit OTT Really.

You still need to leave some fun in pirating, it is a viable career choice in the game.

Were looking for balanced fixes to the PVP issues, not just plain nuke em and let em burn tactics!

Having the bounty tied to the player instead of his ship is a good idea, making them wanted in all systems is also good.

If they pirate properly then the other commander should live another day, just maybe short of a shield, a bit of cargo and some hull damage. This should result in a basic system only bounty.

Murdering another commander in authority space should lead to being wanted everywhere by everyone for 24 hours, other than anarchy systems.

Messing with rebuy costs and such just makes it feel like pirates are being nerfed instead of balanced.

 

[Asp Explorer]

You still need to leave some fun in pirating, it is a viable career choice in the game.

Piracy doesnt lead to the destruction of ships carrying no cargo, or exploding people inside stations, or indeed any inconvenience to the pirated player other than losing a reasonable amount of cargo, some journey time, and perhaps (at a push) a few percentage of hull and module repair.

Piracy is not the same thing as wantonly seal-clubbing. Indeed I think that Pirates should also leave the FoEP and have their own ranking structure - and the higher it is the more likely a FoEP player is likely to comply as it'll be less likely for them to be exploded for lulz.

 

[Starstrydur]

I totally agree about the issues with Open.

It only takes 1 pilot out of 100 to be a jerk, and you get blown up. Many of my deaths in Open have been from crashing into someone blocking the mail slot, or messing around, and that sort of cash loss from idiots means a whole week of grind is lost in seconds. I have class 5 rated engineers shields and boosters, but I last exactly 2 minutes inside a combat zone against NPCs, so against any real player would be suicide.

I think the fines for 'Murder and Destruction of Multi-Million Credit Property' are just a joke. I lose 15M CR and my attacker gains a 1000cr bounty. That should be the OTHER WAY AROUND! I have my ship insured, so I should only have to pay a token cost (1000 CR, but the premium should go up a bit), and my attacker should get a bounty of 15M; the total assets of the property being destroyed. So if they blow up a sidey they get a few thousand bounty, but if they blow up my Corvette, I should be able to fly back to them in Open, and shoot them down to reclaim MY 15M CR loss, and get the money back! If the attackers kills 10 ships, they should have a bounty which reflects that, and become wanted throughout the whole galaxy, with the total combined value of their destructions, e.g 100M cr. This way, players will think twice before attacking other players.

edit: in the old days, they would kill someone and hang a person for doing something small, like stealing cattle - life was cheap. Now life is expensive, the punishment for murder is life - in prison - if they kill 1 person or 1000.

I mostly agree with this. I have several times accidentally run over and destroyed smaller ships going through the mail slot and got some pretty expensive fines. Yet players intentionally murder players and seem to go unpunished.

I was most amused to see the surprise on the faces of those guys getting murdered. They seemed to have no clue what they were in for. As it is the same as it is for a new player. I agree with the comments about needing security to work. In my experience players have a one in ten chance of cops in a secure system actually firing on an assailant before the fight is over.