I take it you didn't try the NPC's in the first alpha? Those guys were using beam lasers with pinpoint accuracy. They didn't miss and had far better aim than most players. Besides I never suggested that ED should implement this. Im raising it as a talking point and saying it would be a good experiment or a thought experiment. Not to be done literally. Its simply a way of pointing out that this topic makes many people behave very emotionally and illogically.
Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.
- Thread starter CMDR Generic EventHandler
- Start date
I take it you didn't try the NPC's in the first alpha? Those guys were using beam lasers with pinpoint accuracy. They didn't miss and had far better aim than most players. Besides I never suggested that ED should implement this. Im raising it as a talking point and saying it would be a good experiment or a thought experiment. Not to be done literally. Its simply a way of pointing out that this topic makes many people behave very emotionally and illogically.
If open were pve by default I would back pvpers wanting a pvp mode.
That said mr braben reiterated in 2.1 live stream iirc that ed is not a pvp game with the exception of cqc.
I still wait for the "other" open modes with different rules that fd promised at ks, back when they asked for hundreds of pounds to make the game.
Maybe if there were more pvpers backing when the game was being made rather than paying a fiver on steam when its too late it would be more to their taste
Valkrie looks shiney hope they enjoy one mode to bind them all
Interesting conclusion. I agree that it would need policing, I agree that people will find new ways of griefing. However I disagree with the "why" bit.
Griefers are a group of players who go out of their way to try and harass other players in a game because effectively they get a kick from being a bully, or they just find it funny (blame comedy which centres around taking the mick out of people). Now if you were going to be a griefer for a day. Can you think of any really good ways of using the PvE mechanics to grief someone in ED? Me personally, I can't. Its been done before mind you quite successfully in EVE with second accounts infiltrating a corp, getting promoted and then moving everything out of the corp hanger and selling it all, leaving the target corp without anything. This entire endevour lasted months so that they spy could build up the relations required to gain access to the corp hanger. That's probably one of the more extreme examples of griefing that i've personally witnessed and it was done without firing a single shot, or PKing a single player. All done with PvE mechanics of the game.
Now in ED I personally cant think fo a way of doing something similar. The only way I can think of griefing someone is by finding some unarmed trader or noob and just shooting them down randomly.
Ergo 99% of griefing in ED revolves around killing other players.
I know you said something like this. I just thoughts that it was important to distinguish that a griefer will find a way to grief whether it be using PvP mechanics or even PvE mechanics. The griefers are the cockwombles that you're referring to. PvPers as a group have nothing to do with griefing and many PvPers dislike griefers because they tend to cause large changes in meta, and drops in numbers of players who are interested in competitive PvP. Furthermore they always give the PvP community a bad name. That being said the PvP community could do with acting a little less Machiavellian when it comes to dealing with players who are griefing others while using PvP tools rather than simply saying "learn how to play the game". Both sides in this debate are guilty of pushing an "us and them" mentality, which ironically is more of an inconvenience to the PvPers rather than the PvErs.
Whatever you say, m'man. I just haven't needed a monitor to protect me since I was...like 6 years old. Which was a looong time ago. And the idea of needing one is sort of, hmm, what's the word I'm looking for? Something that rhymes with "mussy" but it won't quite come to mind...
*jasonbarron goes back to his clinkedy-clink*
The snippet about there being more people interested in pve is unimportant for several reasons.
1: things change, if the poll had been taken after launch it may be that most players pvped, or it may be after some miraculous fix consensual PvP is enjoyable again in 6 months then the numbers could change.
2; the game is meant for all types of play, using the numbers as a way to shore up the virtue of a cause is bad mojo.
3: Despite the cries of some who think recent updates have just been pvp orientated, the game as bled pvp focused players (and mostly the consensual skill based pvpers) over the last year which is the major reason for the current larger than usual preferees for pvp. Most of the leavers would comeback in a heartbeat if skill based pvp against like minded individuals was possible.
1: things change, if the poll had been taken after launch it may be that most players pvped, or it may be after some miraculous fix consensual PvP is enjoyable again in 6 months then the numbers could change.
2; the game is meant for all types of play, using the numbers as a way to shore up the virtue of a cause is bad mojo.
3: Despite the cries of some who think recent updates have just been pvp orientated, the game as bled pvp focused players (and mostly the consensual skill based pvpers) over the last year which is the major reason for the current larger than usual preferees for pvp. Most of the leavers would comeback in a heartbeat if skill based pvp against like minded individuals was possible.
Last edited:
If only fd would grow a pair and implement what they promised at ks like bans etc which I would hope would be part of the pve tos.
They asked for real money based on these promises that they seem to have conveniently forgotton about.
Offline mode ring a bell (althought iirc this was slightly after when they thought they wouldnt hit ks).
Funny they never promised to make a pvp game when.it all hung in the balance almost like they realised their target audience was mainly previous elite players and not trying to steal eves customers.
No monthly subs? For a reason.
Now where are all the things that fd promised when they needed the cash.
Before steam took half the fiver
it wasnt people asking for open stating it would need one it was a pvp player stating that. I took it as a doesnt matter if they do a pve mode we will grief anyway
And we're back to square one. Do yourself a favour and read the Elite novels. Try Legacy, by FD's Michael Brooks. Then ask yourself is designing a Safespace-Mode with active babysitters making sure you are warm and comfy is their vision of Elite.
You can want whatever you want, but if I were you I wouldn't get my hopes up.
Sorry you cant really seriously believe what you are saying here, even CCP admit that in Eve online which is almost the definitive pvp game of this genre the majority never pvp and in fact 70% never leave hisec
Go ask some of the Traffic Cops we have playing the game! Unless collisions and repercussions are somehow limited or removed....there is always a way to harass a PVE player.
And we're back to square one. Do yourself a favour and read the Elite novels. Try Legacy, by FD's Michael Brooks. Then ask yourself is designing a Safespace-Mode with active babysitters making sure you are warm and comfy is their vision of Elite.
You can want whatever you want, but if I were you I wouldn't get my hopes up.
I think it a lot more likely they will put in an open pve mode than they will ever put anything makiing pvp meaningful into the main game
So who's left PVP'ing in Open? <sorry just had to!>
Its easy as dirt. Collision in nfz, flying through their beams in hires getting them wanted, stealing kills, whatever you want. Its what PvE players like myself have been saying since forever: you will be safe if you keep yourself safe. If you demand others make it safe for you you'll be an easy target. Learn to fly, learn awareness, learn how to detect a potential bunghole, learn loadoits, learn engineers etc.
The alternative (futile and silly rants at pretty much everyone not looking for a handheld-babysitter-lorebraking-kumbaya-fest) is unlikely to get results.
And we're back to square one. Do yourself a favour and read the Elite novels. Try Legacy, by FD's Michael Brooks. Then ask yourself is designing a Safespace-Mode with active babysitters making sure you are warm and comfy is their vision of Elite.
You can want whatever you want, but if I were you I wouldn't get my hopes up.
To borrow from CinemaSins: THE BOOKS DO NOT MATTER!
Last edited by a moderator:
Considering the author is ED's executive producer, and he was personally asked by David Braben, I am pretty sure the books matter to those who make the game.
Feel free not to care about them though, your call. Just keep in mind you yourself are not a dev, producer or anything. You are just one of >1.5 million players with an opinion.
Last edited by a moderator:
Same to you. Same to you.
Firstly I included your whole post did I not, I responded to one point of it and that was your requisition for proof of an item of PVP only content added since launch...
My apologies if you felt the steering comment was meant to infer YOU where steering the topic off course, that was not my intention, my intended meaning was 'instead of replying further to the other points which would further steer the OP discussion off course how about we get it back on course". side effect of a 12:30 am post. Again, my apologies for the apparent lack of clarity of that point on my part...
The additional revenue point was just that, a minor possible side effect of the game bleeding players, not open losing players but the game itself losing players, no it is not meant as an all doom and gloom the game is going to die post because that is not the case nor the intent, but to say that the game does not lose players due to there being no readily available PVE mode I honestly think is either disingenuous at worst or head in the sand at best...
Only FDEV know the metrics of puchases of the game vs those who no longer login and play... so of course there is speculation involved on all our parts and so some assumptions do inevitably get made...
As for ways of griefing, yes I am sure there are many and varied ways players can grief others beyond just firing their weapons at them, personally I do not think a zero weapons damage model is the way to go at any rate...
Indeed fixing the C and P system should be a high priority, it won't however remove griefing, it won't however remove unwanted PVP from occurring and reoccurring by the same perpertator against the same victim if they choose it...
I do think that Roberts idea as proposed in the thread discussion I linked to earlier in this thread, is one very workable solution, which is to summarise, a pilots license would be added to the game, and would be used for determining an ability to enter a PVE only mode...
As you commit breaches of the of PVE rule set your license loses points, for some breaches (for example firing on another player, or being the rammer in a NFZ) points would recover after a delay in time... for other breaches (guily of killing another player) the points would not recover... Each time you lose points, you would be kicked out of the PVE group for a period of time.
The unable to enter PVE MODE period would depend on A) your total number of points, B) the number of times you have committed offenses in the PVE mode, C) the type of crime that you are being breached for this time.
Once your license loses all of its points, you are then locked out of that game mode permanently... Only an intervention from Frontier could then allow you back into that mode...
This will allow for people to still be unsavory towards other players I concede that, but will also mean that doing so will come at a cost... Further to that, there can be checks and balances in place that perhaps when 2 players are involved in an incident (say ramming at a NFZ) then both players lose some points but are not immediately kicked out of the game until enough points are lost for an expulsion) see it as this, if a griefer tries to ram every ship going into a station, the victims won't suffer much more than the few points lost for being part of the ram, which will recover over time, but the griefer will quickly acquire points and be suspended from that mode of play
The concept is basically a karma system. The problem with that is dedicated "griefers" play the game much more than a regular player. Having a system that relies basically on a karma meter that replenishes on activities that restore it (presumably PvE) is ineffective. Take Black Desert Online for example, it's pretty much that, and you still can't stop most of the "griefing issues" over there.
Think about it, the metric will have to determine what is a serious offense and what is not. Sometimes blowing a ship up isn't the worst thing a player can do to another, and if we tighten the metric too much, we'll have screaming forumers that previously shouted about hypersensitive bounty response to shooting NPC by accident go crazy.
All of this is why I still stand by my point that PvE mode isn't an effective solution.
Last edited:
Yes indeed there would need to be care taken and tweaking no doubt of the metrics... But overall I feel the concept is solid... Solely because there would be certain actions, as defined by the metrics, that would allow points to be temporarily removed from the license and a minor suspension to occur while there would also be other actions that would permanently remove points and once a player loses all their points, they are permanently unable to enter that mode of play, and of course it would be locked to account not to the commanders save to circumvent exploiting the reset save option...
It either has to be that or there needs to be more visible player banning by frontier for whatever they consider 'harmful' to the player ecosystem... Of course banning players from the game in it's entirety is a whole different can of worms and not a path to be lightly taken...
All effectiveness of things come down to the rewards and punishments instilled, when I was growing up my father only ever hit me once... afterwards just the threat of a smack was enough to get me to behave... Not that I am advocating violence towards children, so please let's not derail the thread along those lines people and misquote what I am getting at here...
There needs to be punitive punishments that coerce players not to engage in PVP with other players who are playing only PVE, just as there needs to be rewards for those players who actively engage in PVP with other PVP players...
Of course no matter the conflict, PVP v PVP or PVE v E, there is usually a winning and a losing side, and I am not one if favour of rewards for the losing side as I think the whole 'we all are special, we all are winners' mentality of the social upbringing that seems the be the way that things are taught for the last 15 or so years is doing a huge social disservice to those people being taught that when they get out into the real world...
As it currently stands the rewards for winning PVE are desired BGS changes, achievement of goals, credits in the bank, recognition etc where losing a PVE encounter can range from undesired BGS, loss of credits, loss of data or cargo etc... quite reasonable reward / punishment IMHO.
For the PVP player the winner of a PVP conflict usually ends up with a repair bill, the satisfaction of winning the conflict, possibly the achievement of a personal goal. for the loser, it is typically either a rebuy or a much larger repair bill... there is typically no credit gain for the winner only a credit loss so that 'forces' them to engage in PVE which is something they might not like to do either...
I think that was one of the driving reasons behind introducing CQC, to give the PVP players an arena where they do not need to worry about rebuy and can pit their skills against each other in similarly capable ships while giving them a leaderboard for comparing their skills in PVP to others... Unfortunately it would seem, from the posts I have read at any rate, that PVP players choose to shun Arena... Something I do not really understand myself given it is the perfect platform for comparible PVP instead of the oft cited lop sided PVP in OPEN
that seems to get the most attention on the forums...
I don't think you have substantiated on the metric needed to gauge point removal/deduction, which is why I've been pointing out that the concept lacks substantiation, and all the substantiation and instances I've seen/imagined, doesn't work.
Also on a design philosophy level, I disagree with the concept of a pure PvE mode due to the sandbox nature of ED and difficulty of maintenance. Which I think I either elaborated on this thread or another one.
As for CQC, I think I explained several times over in this thread about why it doesn't satisfy some PvP players.
Last edited: