Avoiding Group Control...

[dobbo]

Inject a rule into the background simulation - any time these players form a group bigger than "X" and remain static in a system longer than "Y" spawn NPC's of increasing number and strength until the group moves on.

Why bother. The game is already gathering data that adds a bounty to your avatar. What is to say it isn't gathering other stats that indicate the type of player you are. The game mechanics can then dump all players of certain types into their own instances. They may not even have to be that canny. If player A has player B on their friends list, but twenty other players have player B on their ignore list then the chances are those twenty other players wouldn't want to play with player A either.

Groups like the Mittens will always travel in packs, it's necessary to their style of dominance. That will make them vulnerable to instance isolation. So what if they control the Sol system, and brag about it. All we have to do is send our commands into our parallel Sol, have a meet up, a party and post the videos on YouTube.

 

[technome]

really... if you blinkering people cant see it... let me spell it out... ED has a 32 person instance limit... The goons have a 5000+ membership list... the Goons.. break into 17 man squads.. (17 because 2x17 = 34 = new instance) they then swarm 20 systems with these 17 man squads and gank EVERYTHING that comes through..... AI PC.. doesn't matter... once they gank a few haulers, they then spread out a bit... pretty soon... they control a 100 system wide area...

in a 400 billion star game is that much?.. nope... BUT when they control 15-20 major star ports through sheer numbers....well... you have EvE 2.0 with joysticks

This won't work.

For one thing, there are over 120,000 populated systems. Even if only 5% are considered core, that's around 6,000 core systems. And here's the important bit. There are no choke points analogous to the jump gates in eve to identify, squat and control.

Next up, groups and instancing. How are these hypothetical 17 man squads going to ensure they work as a team. They're going to form groups, otherwise known as private groups. They will no longer be a part of the "All" group and so their effectiveness is by nature minimised.

Even if they try this, though, where will they be able to instance in a system to control it? An instance is only as big as it needs to be to contain its members' combined sensor range. The only location even remotely feasible is around the station itself. Good luck with that. Frontier have already stated that the Federation, Empire and Alliance will take a dim view of that, starting with extremely capable station defence forces and escalating to include full-scale fleet actions with multiple capital ships.

 

[Space_Killer69]

Why bother. The game is already gathering data that adds a bounty to your avatar. What is to say it isn't gathering other stats that indicate the type of player you are. The game mechanics can then dump all players of certain types into their own instances. They may not even have to be that canny. If player A has player B on their friends list, but twenty other players have player B on their ignore list then the chances are those twenty other players wouldn't want to play with player A either.

Groups like the Mittens will always travel in packs, it's necessary to their style of dominance. That will make them vulnerable to instance isolation. So what if they control the Sol system, and brag about it. All we have to do is send our commands into our parallel Sol, have a meet up, a party and post the videos on YouTube.

Because the mechanism works's in game and it couldn't be countered by arguing that a specific group have been targeted unfairly by being who they are. They've been targeted due to their in game actions - No planetary government would allow it's trade routes to be blockaded indefinitely without response.

Though the thought of a "Meta-gaming Group" only universe does sound tempting - it does kinda break the concept of MMO, even more so than single player online etc. is bending it through almost 90 degrees.

 

[Rhys Annwn]

Next up, groups and instancing. How are these hypothetical 17 man squads going to ensure they work as a team. They're going to form groups, otherwise known as private groups. They will no longer be a part of the "All" group and so their effectiveness is by nature minimised.

They can use the alliance system to team up. This is different to private groups and allows for some coordination of actions.

 

[JeffRyan]

The secret would be controlling decent traffic low population centres.

Where a lot of people pass through a system but few actually 'live' there. That would ensure a decent number passing through but the system traffic never goes above 32. David said during the E3 stage demonstration that second instances only come into play (and match-making and the ignore function) when the population of a system goes above 32.

If you have a group of 14 friends and you jump into a low population system you WILL all be together as the second instance only comes into play past the magic 32 number.

This mechanic is the one that would be exploited

 

[ianw]

Be interesting to start testing this once we get the grouping function.

Also 32 is an estimate isn't it? The most I've seen was at the weekend when I counted 10 other players within scanner range - wonder if that will increase with today's drop.

 

[Jezzah]

Goons sound like a bunch of anaemic, thin lipped, sweaty geeks with **** all better to do to make them feel big about themselves. I played eve before they ever got really big so Im not too familiar. They seem to have destroyed that game. Not welcome here.

 

[wstephenson]

For one thing, there are over 120,000 populated systems. Even if only 5% are considered core, that's around 6,000 core systems.

Will new players be distributed randomly around 6000 systems, or will their start points be concentrated around well-known groups systems like Sol, the Old Worlds, and our current playpen?

And here's the important bit. There are no choke points analogous to the jump gates in eve to identify, squat and control.

Consider the galactic map. Due to the way systems are distributed and limited hyperdrive range there will be choke points on the system graph: systems you have to go through to get there, systems whose low degree of connection means their neighbours exert disproportionate influence on the background sim. Hopefully those systems are not also heavily trafficked.

Next up, groups and instancing. How are these hypothetical 17 man squads going to ensure they work as a team. They're going to form groups, otherwise known as private groups. They will no longer be a part of the "All" group and so their effectiveness is by nature minimised.

Even if they try this, though, where will they be able to instance in a system to control it? An instance is only as big as it needs to be to contain its members' combined sensor range. The only location even remotely feasible is around the station itself. Good luck with that. Frontier have already stated that the Federation, Empire and Alliance will take a dim view of that, starting with extremely capable station defence forces and escalating to include full-scale fleet actions with multiple capital ships.

The instance fence around a group's actions and grouping logic doesn't matter if the group is targeting the shared, persistent parts of the universe that they can influence.

 

[Space_Killer69]

The secret would be controlling decent traffic low population centres.

Where a lot of people pass through a system but few actually 'live' there. That would ensure a decent number passing through but the system traffic never goes above 32. David said during the E3 stage demonstration that second instances only come into play (and match-making and the ignore function) when the population of a system goes above 32.

If you have a group of 14 friends and you jump into a low population system you WILL all be together as the second instance only comes into play past the magic 32 number.

This mechanic is the one that would be exploited

But then I hit a mental wall - to what end?

And countered by switching to private group or even just plotting and flying a separate route. (Admittedly you could only do this after the event.) However once word gets out by the forums/newsfeeds etc.

Even with a low pop system, they gank a hauler on jump in - the bounties are given out, eventually they trip a system wide response due to their bounty size. The system spawns weak NPC's - they hammer the NPC's as (NPC's are weak.) Bounty still increases until it hits a level that triggers an overwhelming response. Pirates would have well moved on by then as staying in the same place is going to more than likely detrimental to their health whereas to hold a blockade you've got to be static. And to hold a blockade against just Human PC's may mean you're going to want to hold the blockade longer for moar tears.

The background simulation takes into account the disruption and possibly triggers an "instability flag". FD then look at wether to tip the system into a lower level' possibly even anarchy. or decide the system is too important as a core trade route and beef up the system defences.

Eventually, even rotating 17 man groups through the system to minimise the bounty hit - every one in the group has the equivalent of a huge bounty (They're there to gank PC's not gather Pirate Rep.) and is confined to anarchy systems. They're then stuck with a grind to clear their debts as they won't be allowed to "rinse and repeat" characters on demand just to drop a negative rep/bounty.


The above is my understanding and is quite probably wrong.

 

[Togg]

i'm not trying to be a ****.. i'm just telling you how it will be... there WILL be 3-4 groups of 17 men/women/neckbeards/mouth breathers.. around a station... do they HAVE to cover the whole area?... nope.. all they have to do Is station themselves outside the docking entrance.... you want in... you go through them... and as the no fire zone is just 2 Km... they have more than enough time to kill even a anaconda.

 

[wstephenson]

Even with a low pop system, they gank a hauler on jump in - the bounties are given out, eventually they trip a system wide response due to their bounty size. The system spawns weak NPC's - they hammer the NPC's as (NPC's are weak.) Bounty still increases until it hits a level that triggers an overwhelming response.

<snip>

Eventually, even rotating 17 man groups through the system to minimise the bounty hit - every one in the group has the equivalent of a huge bounty (They're there to gank PC's not gather Pirate Rep.) and is confined to anarchy systems. They're then stuck with a grind to clear their debts as they won't be allowed to "rinse and repeat" characters on demand just to drop a negative rep/bounty.

The above is my understanding and is quite probably wrong.

Are Pilot's Federation bounties persistent over ship destruction? I don't see a rule in the Criminality DDF. Otherwise, they can use a kid in a stockwinder to land the killing blow as I described earlier:

Pilot's Federation bounties may be gamed by letting a sacrificial player who is not in the alliance always get the killing shot in, so the rest of the gang only get the 'assault' bounty, the executioner gets the 'murder' bounty and then burns their bounty level by flying into an asteroid, destroying the ship.

 

[Graill]

You know, I was not going to respond to this thread but morals dictate I do so.

(G)oonswarm. A bunch of malcontent individuals in a trash game (EVE Online) bent on doing nothing but grief to the best of their ability. I still played EVE all those years ago when (g)oonswarm came in under the best intentions, they turned into total garbage, like most of the other corps in that cesspool of a game. EVE is a corrupt game perfectly made to keep the mindless dregs of society in a playpen in which they will do the least harm.

It is my hope that people with the mentality to think as (g)oonswarm or others of their ilk, to come into a game simply to screw with people will be addressed quickly and with a heavy hand.

We do not need this type of trash player in a game. People wonder why EVE is still Niche after 11 years, why it cant go above a monthly metric average (CCP's own server numbers) of 23-25k folks a month over a year for the last 9 years. Corrupt devs, the list of failures goes on, EVE, a rotting stigma.

I have no problem in letting sociopathic/antisocial people play in the same multiplayer realm as I do as long as they are leashed and are afforded every opportunity to pay a heavy price for their folly and end up enjoying their own little instance of hell they create with no one to prey upon but their own worthless hides and some NPC's. No, (g)oonswarm doesn't need to come here.

So say we all.

 

[Robert Maynard]

....and as the no fire zone is just 2 Km... they have more than enough time to kill even a anaconda.

I would hope that the emplacements on the outside of the station itself would have a range significantly exceeding 2km, with power to toast large ships in a matter of moments....

.... and Vipers .... and missiles .... and Militarised Anacondas!

Even in lawless areas, I would expect some form of enforcement of the mob rule. Any station exists for a number of purposes, one of them is trade - to prevent traders access to a station would probably be frowned upon in all jurisdictions.

 

[Seonid]

all they have to do Is station themselves outside the docking entrance.... you want in... you go through them...

Or switch to Private/Solo group and fly right by.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Are Pilot's Federation bounties persistent over ship destruction? I don't see a rule in the Criminality DDF. Otherwise, they can use a kid in a stockwinder to land the killing blow as I described earlier:

I expect the PF imposed bounties to be persistent - not much use if they are not as a player could elect to pay the lesser of the insurance payment or the bounty. I think that the idea is that the bountied player has to pay both.

As to bounties for a group endeavour, if the players are in an Alliance then I expect that they would all get the same bounties applied to them for the crimes committed by any member of the Alliance.

 

[wstephenson]

As to bounties for a group endeavour, if the players are in an Alliance then I expect that they would all get the same bounties applied to them for the crimes committed by any member of the Alliance.

Then the hatchetman will remain outside of the Alliance and the rest of the goons remain thugs, but not murderers.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Then the hatchetman will remain outside of the Alliance and the rest of the goons remain thugs, but not murderers.

.... with the attendant risk of not being able to enter the same instance as the Alliance for some reason.

 

[Gibbonici]

i'm not trying to be a ****.. i'm just telling you how it will be... there WILL be 3-4 groups of 17 men/women/neckbeards/mouth breathers.. around a station... do they HAVE to cover the whole area?... nope.. all they have to do Is station themselves outside the docking entrance.... you want in... you go through them... and as the no fire zone is just 2 Km... they have more than enough time to kill even a anaconda.

They can abuse the no-fire zone and instancing system as much as they like, but they'll never be able to blockade anything.

We'll know if they're in ED by the "hundreds" of people posting complaints about the group system in a variety of voices ranging from the raging to the reasonable. Same for the lack of player-controlled assets etc etc etc.

 

[Space_Killer69]

Are Pilot's Federation bounties persistent over ship destruction? I don't see a rule in the Criminality DDF. Otherwise, they can use a kid in a stockwinder to land the killing blow as I described earlier:

I'm not 100% but think that ship destruction triggers your bounty payments (Both Pilots Federation and PC levied). The pilot has to pay the bounty (At least the NPC Generated). If that forces you into debt then you're stuck with an character slot that has to clear its debt before you can delete it to wash any negative rep it's built up.

 

[Robert Maynard]

If that forces you into debt then you're stuck with an character slot that has to clear its debt before you can delete it to wash any negative rep it's built up.

Not sure if the prohibition on the deletion of endebted commanders has been confirmed - it has certainly been proposed.