PvP How can we get emergent gameplay to work in ED?

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
I love PvP. I've played a lot of PvP(mainly the Battlefield series), but I never do it in ED.
I think it's because emergent PvP doesn't really exist?

When I play in Open, it's quite rare that I get attacked at all. When it happens a quick assessment of the opponent usually tells me that I'm going to end up dead, if I stay and fight.
The opponents ship is full of SBs, SCB, HRPs and MRPs, while mine has mostly scanners, SRV bay and fuel scoop with the odd defensive module thrown in. I'm probably at about 3:1 disadvantage in defensive hit-points, pluss less resistance.
I end up waking out of the instance and continue with my PvE stuff. There was no fight.

Due to the nature of ED I would have to, wake out, land at a station, transfer my PvP ship, go find the guy again and then have a propper fight.
This doesn't work for me. I haven't even bothered to build a propper PvP ship, because I rarely have use for it.

PvP ends up as an activity purely for the dedicated congregation and 'Emergent PvP' is just slaughter of those that aren't capable of running away in one piece.

There are several reasons the game has ended up this way and probably several ways to improve the situation. I know all dedicated PvPers have to play a lot of PvE to gather materials. You probably end up in this situation from time to time.

What do you think?
- Is it a problem?
- If so, is it possible to improve the game in this area?
- How to improve?
 

ForeverN00b

ForeverN00b
I'm not sure I understand the problem here. You are saying that a dedicated combat build is better at combat than a multipurpose build? I agree. I wouldn't PvP in a multipurpose build either.

Emergent PvP does happen from time to time. I wish there were more in-game mechanics to encourage it, *cough cough powerplay overhaul* but it does happen.
 

patttiat

patttiat
First the multicrew fail and now the thargoid fail.

Pve was for me only to become combat Elite, it is just boring and feels so ez like duck hunt on the NES.
I played so many hours this year, i need a break.
 

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
ForeverN00b said:
I'm not sure I understand the problem here. You are saying that a dedicated combat build is better at combat than a multipurpose build? I agree. I wouldn't PvP in a multipurpose build either.

Emergent PvP does happen from time to time. I wish there were more in-game mechanics to encourage it, *cough cough powerplay overhaul* but it does happen.
Click to expand...

A combat build is and should be better than a multipurpose build in combat. It's more a question of magnitude, I think. If the difference was smaler, say 25% better defense on the combat build, I might have considered taking a chance.
Now the gap is so big, that the choice becomes to easy.
 

Arguendo

Volunteer Moderator
Arguendo
Interesting OP for sure. Looking forward to seeing the discussion. Unfortunately "Emergent content" has become a cliché mainly used by murderhobos.

ALGOMATIC said:
There is no pvp content because solo exist.


You cant have territory wars, blockades, cmdr hunting because everyone can jump to the safe place.
Click to expand...
That just means you can't fight every cmdr. Still plenty of cmdrs who don't swap to solo. Modes are not at fault, no matter how many times it's blamed for it.
 

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
ALGOMATIC said:
There is no pvp content because solo exist.


You cant have territory wars, blockades, cmdr hunting because everyone can jump to the safe place.
Click to expand...

The P2P nature of ED makes this type of gamplay difficult, even without the modes.

What would be interesting is if FD implemented some 'PvP only' instances, that had impact on the BGS. If a system was controlled by a player faction, they could have a a say in how much.

A PvP group controlling a system could then have 80% impact from PvP CZ, in their conflicts. A PvE group could go for 20% impact from PvP.

Not really thought about this in detail but it could work, I guess. :)
 

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
Han_Zen said:
A PvP group controlling a system could then have 80% impact from PvP CZ, in their conflicts. A PvE group could go for 20% impact from PvP.
Click to expand...
The question with those is: how do you get the other side to show up and what happens if they don't?

There are ~20,000 inhabited systems. The chances are if you try to settle almost any BGS dispute by PvP, the commander with the Hauler wins by default 99% of the time because no-one else shows up.

PowerPlay is a bit better, because there are fewer control systems - but there are still several hundred. Again, without coordination between the two sides, the chances are that victory is not determined by the few actual fights but by how many "wins by default" were scored. Victory will still go to the side with the better spreadsheets.

For that sort of PvP to work, there would need across the entire bubble to just be a few things worth fighting over, a mechanism for fighting over them which allowed control to change on a hourly basis or even quicker, but substantial benefits to controlling one.
 

ALGOMATIC

Banned
A
Ian Doncaster said:
The question with those is: how do you get the other side to show up and what happens if they don't?

There are ~20,000 inhabited systems. The chances are if you try to settle almost any BGS dispute by PvP, the commander with the Hauler wins by default 99% of the time because no-one else shows up.

PowerPlay is a bit better, because there are fewer control systems - but there are still several hundred. Again, without coordination between the two sides, the chances are that victory is not determined by the few actual fights but by how many "wins by default" were scored. Victory will still go to the side with the better spreadsheets.

For that sort of PvP to work, there would need across the entire bubble to just be a few things worth fighting over, a mechanism for fighting over them which allowed control to change on a hourly basis or even quicker, but substantial benefits to controlling one.
Click to expand...

Yes you are correct, there are too many systems at play.

So what has to happen is PP leaders to be controlling only a small portion of the systems relative to what it is now (1 - 2 systems per PP leader).
It doesnt make sense that there is one leader for billions of people lore wise anyway.

Besides each system should have some commodity unique to them, so there will be a point in controlling territory, sort of like EVE, otherwise again, there is no point fighting over one system where you have 20000 more of the same.
 

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
Ian Doncaster said:
The question with those is: how do you get the other side to show up and what happens if they don't?

There are ~20,000 inhabited systems. The chances are if you try to settle almost any BGS dispute by PvP, the commander with the Hauler wins by default 99% of the time because no-one else shows up.

PowerPlay is a bit better, because there are fewer control systems - but there are still several hundred. Again, without coordination between the two sides, the chances are that victory is not determined by the few actual fights but by how many "wins by default" were scored. Victory will still go to the side with the better spreadsheets.

For that sort of PvP to work, there would need across the entire bubble to just be a few things worth fighting over, a mechanism for fighting over them which allowed control to change on a hourly basis or even quicker, but substantial benefits to controlling one.
Click to expand...

You are right. The CZ would have to be with NPCs like now, but with full open instancing.

No solo, no block list. Even If you drop in from solo or group the instance is open.
 

racer1

racer1
How about internals having restrictions.

So you can fit you trader for PvP and not lose any cargo space. An extension of some of the slots types we have now. Plus a PvP load out would not be able to use any of the cargo type restricted slots.

That would surely help?
 

Mohrgan

Mohrgan
What is almost completely missing in this discussion is the players, and what they want to do. Basically, emergent game play can only involve those Commanders who are looking for that kind of play. That is the rub. Since space is so vast, players can't really be anticipated, except for CG systems.

Forcing players to accept PvP is not a possible answer. The game's systems, design, and philosophy is to give the individual control over their Elite experience. In the end, you can only emergent those that want to be emergented.
 

Archduke

A
I've stastwd this a number of times.
PCvPC implementations need to be inclusive.
So far every effort from FDev has been exclusive or even destructive because they would rather remove entire potential gameplay or narrow philosophy ideology of styöe BECAUSE they were either incredibly naive or ignorant.

Consistent repeaty refusal to choose between msking a multiplayer game or a bgs sim simulation and inconsistent vagary over the viability of PCvPC conflict has left a swiss cheese of holes and division in community.

Non-open modes are a divisive, antisocial stain, but originally sinfleplayer was promised, since the wealth of data for galactic political scape can't be tailored individually, the shared bgs and solo mode is understandable if not wholly agreable.
Private groups, though, form a real community barrier for selfish arrogants that feel theyr're too good to play with the community- the same community supporting their CG and solving tyheir ARGs, mind.

The solution for a workable acceåtable role for PCvPC combat in the game lies in actually including playstyles and groups - not more exclusion and widening gaps.

The key is to INCENTIVISE those who shy away from interacting with the community to ENJOY the potentials and possibilities that encounters may bring. It's great to meet new folk and make friends, but nothing but anodyne groupthink is insufficient. Conflict needs to be embraced and welcomed.
Traders need encouragement to accept risk for reward, pirates need systems and structures to support that role, networking/wing elements need to allow, support and robustly offer mechanics for ambush and vigilant justice/revenge etc.

Whilst FDev and a number of players continue to play divide and conquer over the playerbase in yerms of PCvPC conflict, matters will only get worse.
 

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
racer1 said:
How about internals having restrictions.

So you can fit you trader for PvP and not lose any cargo space. An extension of some of the slots types we have now. Plus a PvP load out would not be able to use any of the cargo type restricted slots.

That would surely help?
Click to expand...

I have often thought that the game would be better if all defensive components were simply removed.
Engineered shield and armour should be enough.
It’s not a popular view.
Sandro said it would have to much negative inpact on NPC farming.
Generally players are more conserned with having top stuff in the game, than having a top game.

I still think it would make the game better.
 

UmbraRex

UmbraRex
Archduke said:
8<snip>8
The key is to INCENTIVISE those who shy away from interacting with the community to ENJOY the potentials and possibilities that encounters may bring. It's great to meet new folk and make friends, but nothing but anodyne groupthink is insufficient. Conflict needs to be embraced and welcomed.
Traders need encouragement to accept risk for reward, pirates need systems and structures to support that role, networking/wing elements need to allow, support and robustly offer mechanics for ambush and vigilant justice/revenge etc.
Click to expand...

I don't like PvP. Never have. Never will. Mainly because I'm terrible at combat.

NO amount of penalizing my preferred play style (and yes, giving a bonus to one mode over all the others IS penalizing the other modes) will make me enjoy PvP. Ever.

Make the penalty big enough and I'll simply stop playing. I will not move to your preferred mode so you can shoot me and make me waste potentially hours of my time.

And no amount of telling me 'get gud' will make me any better at combat. I will still be terrible, I'll still fail at escaping interdictions and I'll still fail at low/high waking out of instances.

And, for the record, I DO play in open. Yes, I always have shields, shield boosters, A rated thrusters, chaff (what PvPer uses gimbals?) and heatsinks. And if interdicted by an engineered ship I'll still die. I'm that bad at combat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom