Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.

[Littlerift]

Did Frontier not settle the minority/majority debate when they stated that PvP players were in the minority?

 

[MarkAusten]

1) People constantly insult and try to shame PvP'ers
2) At some point they are fed up with a community that is thoroughly intollerant of others and leave.

Call it what you want.

And PvPers constantly insult and try to shame PvEers. There's enough blame on both sides, neither are being particularly calm and collected about the subjects under discussion. Yourself and myself included.

 

[frostypaw]

I see private and solo mode as the extent ED offers to accommodate pure PVE interests.

The reason why people don't come together to defend a common space is that there is no reason not motivation to do it. There are private and solo mode readily available to avoid the issue. Path of least resistance simply put. But when everyone does it, close to no one tries to maintain order in Open.

As I've said before this tells you something.

Not enough people want to play "good cops" - and FD and the playerbase need to accept that and stop pretending it's so. It's a shame yes, but it is what it is.

Similarly as stated before although you are in theory correct that "anything is permitted" in practise society and the playerbase makes it's own rules on what is and is not tolerated, and people have to come to accept that too.

BTW those arguing about PvP players being under-represented on this forum should know we've done that round a few times and even when all the PvP forces are summoned from their supposed hiding places the numbers are still tiny compared to the PvE player population. There have been a bunch of attempts to swing-back polls when it's not gone the way the more vocal/aggressive portion would like, it's never worked. Again this must be accepted, it's not going to change - it's just not that game.

Pirates should be right behind this anyway.... having the horrors reduced so it's fun for people makes it far more likely they'll hang around to be pirated.

 

[Robert Maynard]

If I were to tell you "If Muslims didnt bother murdering innocent people all the time, I am sure they wouldnt be discrimated again." would you consider that sound logic? Or would you say:"well, when you look at the number of terrorists versus the number of non-terrorist Muslims, surely its just a small subset who blow things up so we shouldnt' blame the rest for it."

I'd suggest that argumentum ad absurdum had been engaged in when the comparison is to different play-styles in a video game.

Why is it okay to constantly discriminate 'pvp-players' and pretend they are all shameful, disgusting, noobkilling, 'content-creating' cowardly crumnorgles? Is it really that hard for you to understand pvp is a very valid playstyle, and many fantastic ED pilots had a lot of pvp fun among themselves? Why do you think it is perfectly fine to shame people who've done nothing wrong to nobody?

Of course PvP is a valid play-style - however there seems to be collateral damage in that some PvP players don't bother to discern whether their chosen target actually wants to be engaged in combat. When one play-style requires players as targets and another play-style eschews being targeted by players there's bound to be a difference of opinion.

.... and I doubt that many players would characterise all PvP players in the manner you mention - while it seems likely that a subset of the PvP player-base (that doesn't look for challenge in their PvP) might warrant such characterisation.

Hahahaha!

Right. So these modes are how FD designed the game, and they should not be changed. Except they should change it, as that has been your point all along. And there should not be a reward for Open, because for the overwhelming majority of time there is pretty much no real added risk in Open, as the number of griefers versus number of systems is so small. Yet at the same time it is absolutely vital to have a pve-mode to protect the players against the virtually non-existent danger you dont want to reward people in Open for facing.

nice.

The possibility of more Open groups (modes) where the rules of each can be different to accommodate different play-styles was mentioned in the KS FAQ more than four years ago - what is being requested is in-keeping with that design - another Open mode that suits the PvE play-style with a rule-set to suit.

Frontier are on record as considering all game modes valid and equal (and they are aware that not all players agree with their stance). Whether Frontier choose to change their stance if up to them - we'll see how they choose to encourage players to play in Open - although it may be less on the bonus side and more on the side of consequences for illegal PKing - who knows....

 

[GluttonyFang]

"Moderator bias" implies bias in Moderation. Participation in threads means requires that the Moderator in question does not Moderate that thread - and is participating on an equal footing with any other user (and Moderators are volunteers drawn from the forum user-base) - and posts should remain compliant with the forum rules, as failure to do so has consequences.

Just becaose the game permits actions against other players does not mean that those targeted will find it "fun" - and when things are not "fun", in a game (and I would expect that most players play games for "fun"), then people may complain about them.

Complaining is perfectly fine, but the amount of insults thrown at PVP players for simply playing the game (I don't mean griefing) was ridiculous and the ones that get banned are the victims instead of the perpetrator.

There are those with equally temperamental issues on the PVP side, no doubt, but the amount of friends I had to watch switch from Code to SDC more or less had something to do with the forum. Some are clearly too eager for this forum but not all of them. Not just Code, many other PvP player groups share this sentiment.

That being said, the forum is getting more inclusive, which I will commend.

 

[Littlerift]

As I've said before this tells you something.

Not enough people want to play "good cops" - and FD and the playerbase need to accept that and stop pretending it's so. It's a shame yes, but it is what it is.

Similarly as stated before although you are in theory correct that "anything is permitted" in practise society and the playerbase makes it's own rules on what is and is not tolerated, and people have to come to accept that too.

BTW those arguing about PvP players being under-represented on this forum should know we've done that round a few times and even when all the PvP forces are summoned from their supposed hiding places the numbers are still tiny compared to the PvE player population. There have been a bunch of attempts to swing-back polls when it's not gone the way the more vocal/aggressive portion would like, it's never worked. Again this must be accepted, it's not going to change - it's just not that game.

Pirates should be right behind this anyway.... having the horrors reduced so it's fun for people makes it far more likely they'll hang around to be pirated.

I very much agree, the only people who lose out if Open PvE is introduced are gankers, and frankly I don't care about them at all.

 

[Han_Zen]

Did Frontier not settle the minority/majority debate when they stated that PvP players were in the minority?

I'm a PvE player. I play mostly in open. I use the other modes from time to time.

I do not want FD to spend half a year of dev. resources to make an Open-PvE mode.

I'm completly content with the modes we have and feel that this is a forum issue.

I of course think I represent the majority of ED players.

 

[Sugarat]

..even when all the PvP forces are summoned from their supposed hiding places the numbers are still tiny compared to the PvE player population..

In these discussions this is the assumption that bothers me most..

I am not a PvP player yet others assume that because I don't engage in PvP I must therefore belong to the PvE camp..?

Is it not possible that the unknown number of players who are happy to play in a mode that includes the possibility of PvP actually is larger than the combined numbers that are on either side of the PvP vs PvE fence..?

 

[MarkAusten]

And thats the point: you want to force people to work the BGS in one way: spacetrucking-race with no risk or danger. Thats how some like it, so thats how everyone should do it. I play Open, I dont attack others, but I allow others to attack me to prevent me from whatever I am doing. That way everyone can work the BGS the way they want. Sure, I can be killed, so thats something I will have to deal with myself. Seems a lot more fair than demanding FD takes care of me and force John to start spacetrucking or lose his BGS. I dont want to do that to John, so I wont. And i wont pretend I am Johns content, or that I am helpless, or that I am forced to this or that, because I am not.

And sure. Mobius is currently +-2% of the community, but there has to be a silent majority somewhere hidden that will push it over 50%. You have nothing to back that up, but hey, it can be possible. When the stats are so incredibly clear, you have to come up with something to challenge it.

I have repeatedly said that how other people want to play their game is fine by me except for ramming their view of the game down anyone else's throats, be that PvE or PvP. As for the rest of your first paragraph, good for you. Play the game the way you wish.

Mobuis +-2%? Where does that come from? The statistics are not incredibly clear otherwise I would not be questioning them. Where do you get the value of 2%? I will continue to challenge on this and any other unsupported use of statistics until you either state where you are getting the value from or admit that you're guessing.

So far you have just avoided answering the question, the implication being that you do not have the values and are guessing. Otherwise you'd reveal your sources if for no other reason than to rub my nose in it.

 

[GluttonyFang]

As I've said before this tells you something.

Not enough people want to play "good cops" - and FD and the playerbase need to accept that and stop pretending it's so. It's a shame yes, but it is what it is.

Similarly as stated before although you are in theory correct that "anything is permitted" in practise society and the playerbase makes it's own rules on what is and is not tolerated, and people have to come to accept that too.

BTW those arguing about PvP players being under-represented on this forum should know we've done that round a few times and even when all the PvP forces are summoned from their supposed hiding places the numbers are still tiny compared to the PvE player population. There have been a bunch of attempts to swing-back polls when it's not gone the way the more vocal/aggressive portion would like, it's never worked. Again this must be accepted, it's not going to change - it's just not that game.

Pirates should be right behind this anyway.... having the horrors reduced so it's fun for people makes it far more likely they'll hang around to be pirated.

I don't think you are listening in this case.

People are motivated by either a natural desire or some sort of coercion. In this case bounty hunters eat combat logging and there is no urgency to maintain order in Open because other modes are available.

There is no drive not pressure, of course close to no one cares.

 

[lokvette]

Did Frontier not settle the minority/majority debate when they stated that PvP players were in the minority?

They probably did.

The thing that makes me laugh about the whole debate is people on the forum thinking their speaking for anybody bar themselves, the forum community is in effect only a small part of the ED player base, all be it those that bother being vocal about the game what ever side of the fence we sit on.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Complaining is perfectly fine, but the amount of insults thrown at PVP players for simply playing the game (I don't mean griefing) was ridiculous and the ones that get banned are the victims instead of the perpetrator.

There are those with equally temperamental issues on the PVP side, no doubt, but the amount of friends I had to watch switch from Code to SDC more or less had something to do with the forum. Some are clearly too eager for this forum but not all of them. Not just Code, many other PvP player groups share this sentiment.

That being said, the forum is getting more inclusive, which I will commend.

[OT]

If forum users receive advisories / infractions or bans that suggests that they fall foul of the Forum rules (that every forum user is required to abide by). It is not difficult to make one's point without resorting to language / concepts / analogies that fall foul of the rules.

Any Moderation action can be contested, if the user wishes - simply report the relevant notification PM and it will be reviewed by the appropriate person.

[/OT]

 

[MarkAusten]

In these discussions this is the assumption that bothers me most..

I am not a PvP player yet others assume that because I don't engage in PvP I must therefore belong to the PvE camp..?

Is it not possible that the unknown number of players who are happy to play in a mode that includes the possibility of PvP actually is larger than the combined numbers that are on either side of the PvP vs PvE fence..?

Since FDev are not forthcoming with player counts and breakdowns, just about anything is possible.

 

[Littlerift]

I'm a PvE player. I play mostly in open. I use the other modes from time to time.

I do not want FD to spend half a year of dev. resources to make an Open-PvE mode.

I'm completly content with the modes we have and feel that this is a forum issue.

I of course think I represent the majority of ED players.

Unless FD are completely incompetent (which may well be the case...) I fail to see how it would take a year to implement such a game mode. The required coding to make weapons not damage specific ships is already part of the game, and while the many other potential griefing methods may take some time to fix they need to be fixed anyway, so it's not like non-Open PvE players are losing out if time is dedicated to that.

 

[Rinzler o7o7o7]

If PvP players did not "bother" players who do not want to participate in interactions forced upon them by other players then I doubt that there'd be as much antipathy between the two groups.

If phrasing is ambiguous then it is likely to be interpreted in different ways than it is intended to be.

It is ridiculously easy to escape from unwanted encounters in open play. Trust me, I am on a lot of KoS lists and haven't died to a gank wing yet (even in my taxi DBS).

If people did not want to be "bothered" with unwanted encounters, then they should feel free to play one of the PvE game modes that comprise of literally 66% of the current game modes. It's not that hard, really.

 

[Eymerich]

1) People constantly insult and try to shame PvP'ers
2) At some point they are fed up with a community that is thoroughly intollerant of others and leave.

Call it what you want.

That s because pvpers doesn't t look for a fair fight

They only Hunt for the new meta to get the best possible advantage and making the combat unfair toward the prey

Usually this is a silly Behavior which you start loose once you start getting old and most of the people ( better : some people ) here are old enough having discovered that there are a million things on life which are better than Win a fight in a pvp game

Other interest, unfair fighting ( but the pvpers are always in cutter conda or fdl until the new meta ) ganking behaviour are all circumstances which have driver away the people to open and which justifies the OP request i supporti too.

 

[frostypaw]

In these discussions this is the assumption that bothers me most..

I am not a PvP player yet others assume that because I don't engage in PvP I must therefore belong to the PvE camp..?

Is it not possible that the unknown number of players who are happy to play in a mode that includes the possibility of PvP actually is larger than the combined numbers that are on either side of the PvP vs PvE fence..?

I totally agree. I think that's the really sad thing about this - the PvP crowd (of which there definitely is a "there's nothing else worth doing in this game" vocal crowd) spend so much time insulting everyone else and lumping them together it's just gotten ridiculous.

Almost all the players I've spoken to are quite happy to have PvP encounters and fight - they just hate being treated like filth and insulted and ridiculed and randomly ganked. As often pointed out there used to be some balance but it's become more and more polarised as those dedicated to being the 'hardest' keep grinding ahead be it on engineers or sheer fighting and practise such that there's a gulf in skill and preparedness. This and the relatively slim vocal/unpleasant crowd that the PvPers tolerate within their ranks (much as I imagine certain political movements tolerate their extremists on the basis of roughly agreeing with them if not exactly) results in a more and more polarised and unpleasant tone to any discussion with the carebears/griefers nonsense.

I don't think you are listening in this case.

People are motivated by either a natural desire or some sort of coercion. In this case bounty hunters eat combat logging and there is no urgency to maintain order in Open because other modes are available.

There is no drive not pressure, of course close to no one cares.

No I'm listening - I'm just not in a fantasy land where applying a load of unwanted pressure to people is going to make them enjoy the game. People don't want to be coerced, they want to have fun and play a game. While pressure and coercion might result in a player-activity landscape that some find appealing it's relatively few or you'd see very different results on combat-logging and C&P polls - the majority of people don't want that sort of game. Nothing much you or I can do about it, just got to adapt

 

[Littlerift]

It is ridiculously easy to escape from unwanted encounters in open play. Trust me, I am on a lot of KoS lists and haven't died to a gank wing yet (even in my taxi DBS).

If people did not want to be "bothered" with unwanted encounters, then they should feel free to play one of the PvE game modes that comprise of literally 66% of the current game modes. It's not that hard, really.

So PvP players claim that want a challenge, but they also claim that anybody with any skill at the game can avoid PvP while playing in Open, which means that they only time they ever fight anyone is either a 'willing victim' so to speak, or an unwilling victim who is useless at the game. The former is the kind of player that wouldn't leave Open PvP if an Open PvP mode introduced, so no loss there, and the second group provide no challenge whatsoever, i.e. no loss there. So again I ask, what does anybody lose if an Open PvE mode is added?

 

[jasonbarron]

I'm a PvE player. I play mostly in open. I use the other modes from time to time.

I do not want FD to spend half a year of dev. resources to make an Open-PvE mode.

I'm completly content with the modes we have and feel that this is a forum issue.

I of course think I represent the majority of ED players.

In these discussions this is the assumption that bothers me most..

I am not a PvP player yet others assume that because I don't engage in PvP I must therefore belong to the PvE camp..?

Is it not possible that the unknown number of players who are happy to play in a mode that includes the possibility of PvP actually is larger than the combined numbers that are on either side of the PvP vs PvE fence..?

I'm willing to bet both of you guys are the majority. Honestly, I think this whole discussion about Open PvE is silly. Not only isn't it necasarry for what I believe is the majority of players, it would be a fabulous waste of the developers time. I have other problems with it besides that, but as far as I'm concerned wasting dev tim is a pretty big issue.

What needs to be under serious discussion is a proper C&P system that adds to gameplay, giving non confrontational types some much needed relief while at the same time giving the PvPers something better to do; in other words, a system that ADDS to the game, as opposed to something being taken away. If you look at 99% of the ganker/griefer complaints re: PvP it's always at either a CG or an engineering base--simply denying docking privilidges to murderers in those systems for a set amount of time by itself would ameliorate most of the pressure being felt.

And a news flash for all of you Open PvE proponents (not aimed at the two of you I quoted): Fdev aren't going to waste a bunch of time creating a new safe space for you guys when there's an easier, more effective option on the table already that would benefit the community in a broader, fairer manner.

 

[GluttonyFang]

[OT]

If forum users receive advisories / infractions or bans that suggests that they fall foul of the Forum rules (that every forum user is required to abide by). It is not difficult to make one's point without resorting to language / concepts / analogies that fall foul of the rules.

Any Moderation action can be contested, if the user wishes - simply report the relevant notification PM and it will be reviewed by the appropriate person.

[/OT]

I expected that reply, I will just say one last thing before I let the digression die since I know I am walking on thin ice.

Moderators are humans too, they don't want extra work. When there is a large amount of reports toward a specific post, it gets a lot of attention from the team, I know that much from my time in here. But when you already have a large PVE user base, it's obvious what will get reported most, regardless of who triggered who. And often one party doesn't get punished due to lack of report. The victim couldn't report after getting banned, and most just give up on the forum seeing the other offender running free.

Like I said, I don't blame the moderator team, it's human, it's inevitable