I think it's more that players prefer to choose the risks they take. And that for some (arguably the majority), the NPCs are risk enough.
- Status
I think it's more that players prefer to choose the risks they take. And that for some (arguably the majority), the NPCs are risk enough.
And that's fine, which is exactly why solo/PG/Mobius exist. You quite happily choose your player based risk levels there.
Oh i do understand why that happens.
Because making somebody else feel weak in turn makes some people feel strong.
It's a basic (and imo opinion primitive) instinct as old as humans themselves.
It's the same instinct that makes us morbidly fascinated watching people suffer from disasters and conflict when we watch the news.
If PvPs prime motivation and satisfaction no longer is about "you" winning, but "him/her" loosing, than that's PvP gone wrong.
And i'm not saying it has to be PvP free of all consequence, but the consequences for the looser should never become the main driving force for the winner.
You mean your strawman version of the rhetoric you talked about?
It's not hysteria why PvP is not popular.
There is no iWin mode.
There is no riskless mode.
Some players enjoy riskless playing.
But the introspection I'd like you to gain is, that the thing you complain about the most, namely slagging off players who enjoy a different mode or playing style, is a prominent feature in your posts: slagging of those who don't play in Open. In other threads as well, but just in this thread PvP is not popular because of the hysteria of players who sit in their safety iWin mode.
Last edited:
Geesh StiTch, maybe some folks just don't wanna play with you.
Its really not that complicated.
Its really not that complicated.
Hey Ziggy,
I've spent a lot of time over the years shooting dudes with different colours on their suits. Not in those MMOs though. There it seems like shooting dudes is a reward you get for picking enough flowers or fishing enough fish.
PvP in ED feels a bit the same way.
ED has never compelled me to shoot a dude. It never gives me a reason.
I think powerplay was a missed opportunity to provide an area of the game that was PvP focused without impacting on those who are not interested. There could have been a whole layer of the game that was for PvP and give the PvPers something to fight over.
CQC sucks LOL
I don't get why people can't get why - Elite was made as a space trading/fighting/exploring game. A game where you have your ship and the galaxy is yours to discover.
That is a completely different concept to crappy little fighters in a Mario arena setting with powerups and autoaim. The models in those games look cheap and arcadish too - get rid of all the stupid lights and it would look a lot better for a start.
I don't think ED players, on the whole are interested in that - nobody bought ED to ever be stuck in one tiny setting flying around trying to get powerups.
Sure, some like the riskless destruction of CMDRs in inferior ships.
They like exploits to get their high-end combat ships invulnerable with endless G1 mod rolls that magically turn into G5 mods.
They go on and on to whine about iWin mode while using iWin ships.
They love to talk about risk and consequences as long as it doesn't affect themselves.
They really like "git gud" and "legit gameplay" as long as it doesn't affect themselves.
And so here we are in a thread asking why PvP is not popular, and as 100% per norm, it's been dragged in a harsh downwards spiral by the anti PvP forumite crowd retitled "why we hate gankors".
Did any of you take the time to notice this was actually something a little different?
If this is me just slagging people off per norm, try put down the copy/paste blocks of "keep gankorz away from me!" and try actually take the discussion at face value. Or are people afraid that not showing 100% anti PvP tendencies will suddenly see all PvE banned within days or something?
Cute
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Indeed they do - and they may be considering implementing some consequences for particular PvP behaviours that they deem to be to the detriment of the game. The forums are pure PvP - the game not so much.
I'd be interested to hear how that could be achieved without disenfranchising those who choose not to engage in direct PvP.
I'm not anti-PvP. What on Earth gave you that idea?
But if you don't want to discuss it but rather post some hysteria, fine by me.
Last edited:
Frontier promised us spaceships to fly and a 1:1 recreation of the milky way. I immediately thought myself of Admiral Kirk, setting off on a long voyage to explore strange new worlds, and meet new civilizations (*). The real question is why would I ever give a damn about PvP? There's a bazillion "shoot stuff" games out there, it's the most beaten path of all. I choose my games based on what else can they offer past the shooting stuff.
(*) - Unfortunately there isn't much "kirking around" either, as the only way to interact with the galaxy is looking at stuff that we might accidentally stumble upon, but that's another matter...
(*) - Unfortunately there isn't much "kirking around" either, as the only way to interact with the galaxy is looking at stuff that we might accidentally stumble upon, but that's another matter...
Last edited:
I would love to discuss PvP here.
What I wouldn't love to discuss is PvP in terms of "well justify the losses to ganking victims!", which is - in all seriousness - what seems to reside in the PvP partition of many forumite's heads, and is the hysteria I referred to earlier.
Engineers grind made PvP a game for the few with the time and the inclination. OP builds running amok in general population. Another reason not to play in open.
Last edited:
I think it's possible to fix PP to give meaningful PvP.
I also think PvP only combat zones could be interesting. Take your own ship for high risk/reward or use a combat ship from the faction, if you just want to lend a hand without risking your assets.
If these zones had relatively high impact on civil wars, they would become meaningful.
Have similar zones that lowers or raises the success of CGs.
There are probably a tone of ways to make in-game PvP that does not requires years of grinding and does not involve disrupting the unwilling. A more creative person than me, could probably make a list.
I did all of my PVP years back in games like BF2142 all the way through to just before BF4 came out, those to me are pvp games. but after years of playing them and being in clans, guilds etc and falling out with people in RL screaming matches over TS, being an admin for a few servers the whole urge or need to do anything PVP drained out of me, it was just too fudgeing stressfull.
Played Eve for over six years but never got into the pvp side of it even though I lived in wormhole space for a lot of it, did a bit of pvp in SWTOR but much prefered the pve side of it.
ED for me is a solo player game with a bit of an mmo and some pvp bolted on the side off it as an afterthought. I play it to be Lokvette queen of the stars, doing her own thing in her own time, I dont need other people to enjoy the game, nor do I feel the need to be others content. Its funny as my brother got this game at the start of this year, he is or was a very avid pvp player in eve well over the 3k player killed mark, but when I explained to him to be competitive in pvp in ED I think he looked at it and went ..nah sod that, and he went back to other pvp/games.
Im not saying it should be an even playing field but engineers went a long way to screwing up a lot of the game for a lot of people or that's the impression I get reading the forum, I also think the fact you can't sign up for Imp, Fed or the Alliance past the ohh im an Imp. fed or an Alliance supporter in terms of unless you're in a player group it sometimes feels your actions are worthless and there is nothing to really fight over. Again that's just the way I see it if there was hell I might even do it, but then I look at the engineers and think fudge that for a game of soldiers.
Played Eve for over six years but never got into the pvp side of it even though I lived in wormhole space for a lot of it, did a bit of pvp in SWTOR but much prefered the pve side of it.
ED for me is a solo player game with a bit of an mmo and some pvp bolted on the side off it as an afterthought. I play it to be Lokvette queen of the stars, doing her own thing in her own time, I dont need other people to enjoy the game, nor do I feel the need to be others content. Its funny as my brother got this game at the start of this year, he is or was a very avid pvp player in eve well over the 3k player killed mark, but when I explained to him to be competitive in pvp in ED I think he looked at it and went ..nah sod that, and he went back to other pvp/games.
Im not saying it should be an even playing field but engineers went a long way to screwing up a lot of the game for a lot of people or that's the impression I get reading the forum, I also think the fact you can't sign up for Imp, Fed or the Alliance past the ohh im an Imp. fed or an Alliance supporter in terms of unless you're in a player group it sometimes feels your actions are worthless and there is nothing to really fight over. Again that's just the way I see it if there was hell I might even do it, but then I look at the engineers and think fudge that for a game of soldiers.
Last edited:
I think Open only Powerplay would be a good move. The obvious downside of course is, you'd be denying all those who have invested a lot of time in their factions with PvE.
I don't like PvP in ED because it's not made for PvP.
What we got is a lot of bolt on mechanics to shoehorn people to fight even if they don't want to, and that is bad.
Let me give you an example.
In DayZ, and I really enjoy that game, the PvP is not something you are forced to encounter, you can with ease avoid it if you know how to play the game. All the game mechanics are build to make the player decide when they want to do the PvP.
In ED you log in PvP the moment you join OPEN! you can't avoid it, because you magically get a Radar tag saying that LOOK here we got a player (hollow radar tag). It's utterly silly from a gameplay POV and from any other POV you might have unless shooting fish in a barrel is what you want. Then you got the whole C&P mechanics don't even let me get started on that one.
So there you have it, PVE is what ED is about, I love to play in COOP with friends in a player friendly environment therefore I play in MOBIUS PVE.
What we got is a lot of bolt on mechanics to shoehorn people to fight even if they don't want to, and that is bad.
Let me give you an example.
In DayZ, and I really enjoy that game, the PvP is not something you are forced to encounter, you can with ease avoid it if you know how to play the game. All the game mechanics are build to make the player decide when they want to do the PvP.
In ED you log in PvP the moment you join OPEN! you can't avoid it, because you magically get a Radar tag saying that LOOK here we got a player (hollow radar tag). It's utterly silly from a gameplay POV and from any other POV you might have unless shooting fish in a barrel is what you want. Then you got the whole C&P mechanics don't even let me get started on that one.
So there you have it, PVE is what ED is about, I love to play in COOP with friends in a player friendly environment therefore I play in MOBIUS PVE.
I think it's possible to fix PP to give meaningful PvP.
I also think PvP only combat zones could be interesting. Take your own ship for high risk/reward or use a combat ship from the faction, if you just want to lend a hand without risking your assets.
If these zones had relatively high impact on civil wars, they would become meaningful.
Have similar zones that lowers or raises the success of CGs.
There are probably a tone of ways to make in-game PvP that does not requires years of grinding and does not involve disrupting the unwilling. A more creative person than me, could probably make a list.
Aye, there have been suggestions made before. My personal favourite, along the lines of your own, is to have either a boost to Open contribution or similar that doesn't actually hamstring PG/Solo players wanting to legit support their factions from the sidelines. One of the big issues with the current implementation is that the best way to support your faction is, quite simply, within PG - even if you're a competitive supporter of the faction.
Solo/PG players as above obviously must retain the ability to support their faction. But either through direct reward changes, or as you say "Open only" or "PvP only" Czs with greater rewards, or something more intelligent (never said I was a game designer) it'd be nice to see competitive factions actually play competitively. It might do something to help the stagnation within PP.
'course, there's a substantial amount of work PP needs either way. In its current implementation, I would say that PvP would be improved for PP's complete removal/reversal. Major-faction-wide bounties were far better for constructive PvP, and far more convincing as C/P.
Last edited:
- Status