Kill the PVP Rebuy

[Deleted member 38366]

IMHO the rebuy (Credits/Cargo) is only a facette of the whole picture.

A Trader is losing Ship and Cargo. Time lost : approx. 30-60 Minutes of Gameplay depending on Ship value.
A Mission-Runner is losing Ship, some Cargo or have some Passenger Eject, possibly facing some fines over failed Haulage. Time lost : approx. 30-60 Minutes of Gameplay depending on Ship value.
A Bounty Hunter is losing Ship and Bounty Vouchers. Time lost : approx. 45-120 Minutes of Gameplay depending on Ship value and length of BH Session.
A Miner is losing Ship, mined Cargo and possibly a few Missions. Time lost : approx. 2-4 hours of Gameplay depending on Ship/Cargo size.
An Explorer is losing Ship and Exploration Data. Time lost : varies from a few hours upto months or even a full year (!)

Since only Ships have a built-in "Recovery Option" (Insurance), the additional value carried & lost can easily have a very distinct or even huge effect.

For "softening" the different effects of losing, IMHO we'd need Options. Additional work by the unlucky side of an encounter which recovers a fraction of the loss, similar to what Ship Insurance does for Credits.
- Traders blown up : able to recover {RNG 25-75%} of all Cargo in a Signal Source within the demise System. Bring Collector Limpets and some time.
- Mission runners : only {RNG 25-75%} Haulage recoverable in Signal Source, allows Cargo Mission execution at drastically reduced payout and mainly to avoid the fines.
- Bounty Hunters : able to recover {RNG 25-75%} Black Boxes, containing Bounty Vouchers
- Miners : able to recover {RNG 25-75%} Cargo from Signal Source
- Explorers : able to recover {RNG 25-75%} Data from Small/Medium/Large/Huge Data Survey Canisters; Data is transferred & regained at the moment of scooping and the depleted Canister discarded/destroyed in the Cargo hold

Signal Sources would require some searching and time (a risk by itself, buzzing in SuperCruise and potentially luring other Players to follow).

Optional :
- Players able to join an NPC Guild (Recovery & Insurance organization) for a price. Increases their recovery RNG rates and quickens finding the Signal Source but costs a fee on related incomes similar to an NPC Crew.
Basic, Standard and Premium Insurance offered.

That's how I'd approach this disparity between the different Playstyles and the different effects of getting blown up; main emphasis is to get the Explorers onboard, which' losses typically massively stand out when compared to other professions.

And with such a System, getting fragged i.e. during a CG of any type (even Exploration) would still mean something, but without creating a potential total loss.
(oh, and we'd finally have a function i.e. behind the Display "Cargo Insurance" )

 

[Lee Archer]

Most folks in the "problem" groups abused the snot out of the long-range passenger stuff, and are now sitting on tens of billions of credits. Literal 10+ billion credit balances. The new C&P system won't touch them in the slightest, they will continue to do as they will. Forever.

Yes, you may be right.
But And as per above, the impact of crime impacts deferentially, so the Falcon Fly system may be the only answer.


The solo option exists. The personal private group exists. The Mobius group exists.
Open play, what does it mean the gun shy explorer, miner-open to robbery, open to murder, harassment, extortion, great fun. It’s nothing if not exciting.

But the Rewards are exactly the same for completing missions regardless of the “mode”.

Item, info, mission data are known to be found at location X, players lie in wait to assassinate.
Is there a solution without losing the “excitement” of piracy; that’s why space trucking mission rewards are so high, right, no rewards are the same...

Ok, here’s a hint, sequester antisocial behaviour in an area designed for it, a separate region on the high seas that are not patrolled, outside the trade routes, a pirate haven,
a place of ... ANarChY! I think we already have this.

Then have Very VERY Well rewarded missions into this area and Hyper ENGineered TYPE 10 and Crack escorts can run them to their Homicidal / suicidal delight.

Really I personally don’t mind piracy, gankers are irritating cause I’m usually in the middle of something; but I watch for any chance to add a billion here and there so theyr’e just inconvenient.
But
It did make two quality, scientifically adept, imaginative, well heeled friends quit Elite.
But who needs em, right?
Falcon’s schematic may repopulate open.
One happy family.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

No.

OP, whilst I recognise that your opening post did tip its hat towards BGS and PP wars, when you said that kills would count as relevant points, it otherwise fails to recognise that the removal of the loss mechanic from PvP would make it into nothing more than a crude 1990's GameCube Deathmatch emulator.

ED PvP isn't - thank Braben - a struggle to get 10 or 100 kills within a given timeframe.

It's a struggle to stay alive whilst seeking the opportunity to inflict loss.

From this it derives its white-knuckle sense of meaning and threat, with the possibility of inflicting harm and loss upon one's enemies ... or suffering it oneself.

If you make it so that it's just 'respawn and get back to the fight as quick as you possibly can' PvP will be degraded.

I speak as someone who has participated in numerous paramilitary player group and Powerplay wars, who has treasured every single kill I have inflicted upon the foe, and who has grieved for every loss that I and my friends and wingmates have suffered. I have literally commiserated, online, with grown adults who were sad that they lost a ship. It seemed meaningful.

Your well meaning but, imho wrong, proposal would take all that away and replace it with nothing to treasure and nothing to grieve over - just a shallow race ... to rack up.

However, this post is also an excellent point.

For competitive PvP, the rebuy is a balancing factor.
A ship with a higher rebuy should in theory be more capable, so for genuine PvP there is a risk v outfitting consideration to be made.

 

[Kefhyr]

Dont know what kind of MMO games played topic starter, but there are games where death from PVP or PvE - lost or destoryed equipment and experience of few weeks of playtime, so ED is not so "special game". Moreover, in ED you can rebuy everything with 1 click, you dont have to buy your ship manually from station, buy all your upgrades again. I dont see anything wrong really, you died there, so you lose your ship with all your upgrades, so you have pay for it.

 

[varonica]

Dont know what kind of MMO games played topic starter, but there are games where death from PVP or PvE - lost or destoryed equipment and experience of few weeks of playtime, so ED is not so "special game". Moreover, in ED you can rebuy everything with 1 click, you dont have to buy your ship manually from station, buy all your upgrades again. I dont see anything wrong really, you died there, so you lose your ship with all your upgrades, so you have pay for it.

As has been pointed out already, there is a huge imbalance in professions, for a trader, bounty hunter miner etc losses are limited to a few hours play and maybe a few million in lost cargo and a rebuy, and a few hours of gameplay. Explorers could lose months of even a year of gameplay for no reward and potentially hundreds of million in credits due to lost exploration data. Any changes need to take this disparity into account. There was a suggestion earlier about explorers recovering some of their data, the reason why we lose data now is to prevent the suicide and turn in of data. We can't fly 30kly out into the black, suicide and then turn in that 30kly of data, thus cutting short the exploration paradigm.

So changes to the way rebuy and monetary penalties are applied would need to take that into account. This is why most explorers fly solo or PG, fleetcom for instance, when they return to populated areas and why any suggestion make open the only mode are strenuously opposed by explorers.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

I don't PvP, so they could dump PvP entirely and I wouldn't notice.

I don't concern myself with the BGS, or Factions, or Powers - There's pretty much no point to it. Change in system control, oh no, Beer is an illegal commodity. Change in Super Power control, oh look, Beer is legal again.

That's it, and that makes it pretty pointless at this juncture.

Perhaps in Not-A-Season-4 or 5 or maybe 6 or 7, they'll take a really long, hard look at Power Play, Factions, and the like and actually make them meaningful.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Is the Rebuy a positive element of the game right now? I don't think so.

But I do. Some dont, some do, FD decided failure has consequences. C'est la vie I guess. If you want free pvp, there is CQC.

I don't PvP, so they could dump PvP entirely and I wouldn't notice.

I don't concern myself with the BGS, or Factions, or Powers - There's pretty much no point to it. Change in system control, oh no, Beer is an illegal commodity. Change in Super Power control, oh look, Beer is legal again.

That's it, and that makes it pretty pointless at this juncture.

Perhaps in Not-A-Season-4 or 5 or maybe 6 or 7, they'll take a really long, hard look at Power Play, Factions, and the like and actually make them meaningful.

Out of sheer curiosity, is there something you do in this or another game that isn't pointless by default?

 

[lenna]

@OP: Removing Rebuy for PvP deaths would not be the answer. It would also not solve much due to cargo loss and other potential implications (e.g. mission failure induced fines due to cargo loss/death).

GTA Online has effectively zero rebuy for PvP deaths and that has not really stopped the PvP Griefer situation nor has it eliminated the negative consequences to the targeted player(s). For PvP events, that can be handled through a structured system akin to CQC but perhaps more integrated with the ED main environment - c/f PvP missions in GTA Online.

The revisions to crime and punishment that FD are introducing in 3.0 are a step in the right direction, we will have to wait and see how that pans out in the long run as it is not PvP centric but also applies to PvE kills. I can see PvE kill order missions potentially going down in popularity as a consequence of the 3.0 changes but I could be wrong on that score.

 

[A D]

Interesting idea, but think Truesilver is on the money here. Higher risk v reward makes for better game play.

TL;DR, but -

Illustration of risk/reward in multiplayer game and just good story for those interested. Played ARMA 3 multi-player with ASOR for a while. I sucked at it, so stopped for the benefit of all (on one occasion fell out of the helicopter and landed on my squad leader! ), but the almost real life mechanics and consequences are awesome. You have to train, equip for your mission, attend the briefing and work together to achieve the objective. The AI were deadly and when you died you were out (for 15 mins or longer by the time you found your way back to the LZ) or, if wounded, the team had to call in a medic or e-vac you out - some injures needed base hospital.

I'll give the boys at ASOR a plug - Anyone interested in true mil-sim multiplay in Australia, check out ASOR (search YouTube to see their multiplayer game play videos). It will require a commitment of at least 4-8 hours online a week (initially at least) and the learning curve is steep, but if you want to test your virtual soldiering skills check it out.

 

[SamSlade]

fake quote to get your attention

simple solution is PvP supporting Community Goals

Have a war zone in which each side offers insurance subsidies to commanders who come to their aid.

Have the types of ships whose insurance is subsidized scale with the duration of the community goal: start with small scale engagement ships(sideys, eagles, vipers) and scale up to the full spectrum towards the end of the conflict.

You could bring a Corvette from the start if you liked but you'd not get the insurance subsidy, you could PvP in a Viper throughout if you liked and you'd not encounter a huge change(except that you may get smashed towards the end as the big guns came out).

I've posted this idea before and the only issue people had with it was that it wouldn't be available to solo/private group players and as such wasn't worth doing. This line of reasoning is pure spite and hence not a valid argument.

 

[Chaparral]

It was mentioned that I have not hunted other players in ED. That is true.

I have hunted players in other games, where "rebuy" costs are nil.

In other games when personal consequences for pvp death are minimal in arena or world vs world combat, there are very real consequences for the faction you represent, so the process is not boring.

I am not that concerned about the griefer kill as I am for the health for broad-based pvp game play. The schism between PVE and PVP is quite jagged in ED, and in other games I really don't see that since there are built in mechanisms to support pvp for novices, vets and elites in player skill. I really do think pvp and especially wvw is great fun, but I don't want to burn a bunch of time grinding credits just to have access.

I am aware that there are mmo / multiplayer games that do penalize individual players upon both pve and pvp death. Games with pvp dedicated servers come to mind. So yes ED is not unique in that respect. ED does have the protected PG and solo modes as choices though, so quasi-pvp BGS and PP conflicts can occur with little or no risks to individual players.

GTA online was mentioned with respect to "no rebuy" having limited impact on griefing behavior, but it is fair to say that quite a few people play GTA online.

I hope that there is an understanding of the diminishing returns with the current model of ED. The total number of Open non-pvp centric players will decline when they do the math of risk vs. reward. I don't think that is a positive trend for the game as a whole.

I do like Falcon's line of thinking about a more scaled approach to pvp death.

Please understand, I want pvp and wvw in the game - I'm trying to figure out how to make it possible to expand the participants.

 

[Stealthie]

I guess, fundamentally, you need to consider what sort of game ED is supposed to be.

In something like CoD or CS:GO, for example, there is no "rebuy" and death just means respawning and having another go at whatever you were previously doing.

In ED, I imagine that would mean, say, leaving a station with a load of cargo and attempting to deliver it to a CG while a bunch of players try to stop you.
And if you fail you respawn at the station with your load of cargo, again, and you get to have another go.

Not keen on that for a couple of reasons.
Firstly, if that's the sort of gameplay I was after I'd probably just play in Solo or a PG.
Secondly, and more importantly, I'm not sure I'd be keen on that kind of gameplay in ED.
Everything in those "zero consequences" games just becomes a frantic rush to do stuff; head toward destination, try not to die and try to complete objective.
Rinse & repeat.

I suppose there might be a place for that kind of thing somewhere in ED though.
As has been said, perhaps there could be systems in conflict where pilot's rebuys are subsidised by the factions involved so that, effectively, there'd be no financial cost.
Might be kind of fun if, perhaps, they made that part of PP and it turned contested systems into giant "Combat Zones" for the duration of the hostilities.

You'd dock at a station somewhere outside the war-system and take on a "Support our side in the war" mission, which'd mean that any rebuys you incur IN the war-system would be paid for.
Then you just jump into the system and it's a big ol' free-for-all for the duration.
At the end of the PP cycle a winner would be decided, you'd get a "mission complete" message and you'd be paid for your contribution.

 

[Mohrgan]

Pixels golds are important, yo.

 

[Chaparral]

I guess, fundamentally, you need to consider what sort of game ED is supposed to be.

In something like CoD or CS:GO, for example, there is no "rebuy" and death just means respawning and having another go at whatever you were previously doing.

In ED, I imagine that would mean, say, leaving a station with a load of cargo and attempting to deliver it to a CG while a bunch of players try to stop you.
And if you fail you respawn at the station with your load of cargo, again, and you get to have another go.

Not keen on that for a couple of reasons.
Firstly, if that's the sort of gameplay I was after I'd probably just play in Solo or a PG.
Secondly, and more importantly, I'm not sure I'd be keen on that kind of gameplay in ED.
Everything in those "zero consequences" games just becomes a frantic rush to do stuff; head toward destination, try not to die and try to complete objective.
Rinse & repeat.

I suppose there might be a place for that kind of thing somewhere in ED though.
As has been said, perhaps there could be systems in conflict where pilot's rebuys are subsidised by the factions involved so that, effectively, there'd be no financial cost.
Might be kind of fun if, perhaps, they made that part of PP and it turned contested systems into giant "Combat Zones" for the duration of the hostilities.

You'd dock at a station somewhere outside the war-system and take on a "Support our side in the war" mission, which'd mean that any rebuys you incur IN the war-system would be paid for.
Then you just jump into the system and it's a big ol' free-for-all for the duration.
At the end of the PP cycle a winner would be decided, you'd get a "mission complete" message and you'd be paid for your contribution.

This sounds great. I'd jump at the chance to go to war in a large instance for a faction with an authentic mission reward. I've done this a bit in cz's but it can get pricey if you bring a big ship and haven't stockpiled an ocean of credits.

But subsidized rebuys by the faction would make it very attractive.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Out of sheer curiosity, is there something you do in this or another game that isn't pointless by default?

At the most basic level, no. Games are just a way to waste time. There's no point to any of them, but they can be a fun way to waste time.

The more complex answer is yes, I enjoy myself, knowing in the end it's all pretty pointless. But in terms of the game itself, there are some activities that have pretty obvious benefits. Unlocking Engineers has an obvious benefit.
Raising Navy Rankings has an obvious benefit.
Other activities, such as mining, salvage missions, base raids, data scans - these also have their own though less obvious benefits as well. So to that end, these are not pointless pursuits.

Powerplay, outside of unlocking certain optional modules, and the efforts required to shift the balance of faction power within the BGS on the other hand... these don't have any particular benefit. It doesn't make any difference in how the game plays depending on who controls what systems. It doesn't affect game play on which super powers are spread out wherever.

The super powers, despite all the GalNet tales of animosity, exist in a perpetual state of peace. Even entering systems at War or in a state of civil war has nearly no bearing on game play. Oh, a slightly different announcement from traffic control, as I bring in 400+ tons of wine and liquor. If they're legal commodities, I make a good profit selling them in the market. If they're illegal commodities.. well look, just one hop away they're legal, and I sell there. No one bothers me, no one cares. I fly around in Federation space, I fly around Sol, in an Imperial Cutter, no one even looks twice.

I fly around Achenar in a Federal Corvette, no one bats an eye.

I fly around Alliance space in anything, no one notices.

I spend a week hauling goods and passengers and blowing up ships and skimmers for the Brotherhood of Male Siblings, until their rivals, the Sisterhood of Female Siblings, send me a message that they hate me.

I fly over to a system they control, go bounty hunt for an hour, fly to one of their stations, the station welcomes me, I sell of 2m worth of cartographic data, turn in 4m worth of bounty vouchers, take a dozen data delivery missions, and they're not Allied with me, despite my having just spent a week massacring them without mercy.

I pledge myself to a Duval, and spend a week flying around "Hostile" Federation space, where I'm welcomed as a valued ally, run millions worth of missions, and I don't even so much as get scanned as I come and go.

This is why I say it's pointless. What I do, who I work for, where I go... where I've been, what I've done - none of it has any bearing on anything.

Maybe I spent too much time playing Civ games, where NPC-controlled nations remember if you break treaties, steal technologies, and stab them in the back to get ahead, and treat you as Untrustworthy when you act in such a manner. Maybe Powerplay and space-politics were not well thought out, badly implemented, and in dire need of some major overhauling around here.

Or maybe I'm just not playing pretend space ship pilot hard enough.

 

[lenna]

Please understand, I want pvp and wvw in the game - I'm trying to figure out how to make it possible to expand the participants.

CQC or similar is the only way to achieve what you seem to want IMO. Even then, lack of PvP participation is not all about the consequences but at least some of us just feel it is highly overrated and boring after having engaged in PvP in various forms over the years and had enough of it overall.

GTA On-line may have quite a few players but overall ALOT of the reviews for it do not recommend it - the solo play aspects on the other hand get viewed more favourably. GTA On-line also has issues with hackers and modders as well as in-game money sellers.

Those currently playing Open will probably continue to do so, and after the 3.0 changes some of the PG/Solo players may be more inclined to play Open but I would not expect a wider direct and deliberate participation in PvP type gameplay.

GTA Online is not what I would call a PvP centric game either though there is a much stronger bias towards it, there are strong PvP focused elements but the free roam PvP elements are just griefer/ganker paradise in-essence. The best parts of GTA Online IMO are the PvE and the co-operative PvE elements.

ED Main Environment in general is far from the PvP centric game that you seem to want it to be and there in lies the rub. If you want stronger PvP experience in ED then you need to look at CQC and request improvements in that area as that is specifically a PvP centric part of the title. A CQC styled mechanism is the only way you are likely to get even close to the PvP/WvW experience you seem to be after and if people try to push a PvP agenda in the main environment too much I can see it having the opposite effect to what some seem to want.

 

[Kingtutuk]

PVP or PVE Tags.
PVP Fair Game.
PVE no death in no fire zone around Stations or Bases, no interdiction by players, only NPC, Change only when docked. Selected on same screen as choosing a side for a CZ.

My two pence, [cool]

 

[Crimson Kaim]

No, the reason why I don't PvP in other games is because there is no real risk .. which makes it no fun and encourages suicidal strategies. Furthermore, reward is limited due to insanely low risk (which is called balance). I'd rather have the risk to lose everything so I have the possibility of a reward that is justified by that risk ... the reward being extremely high so there is the oppotunity to avoid low-skill but high time consuming tasks at the cost of high risk and high skill demand and recieve alot of value in a really short period of time.

 

[Han_Zen]

I've always liked the idea of implementing a CQC/CZ hybrid in game.

Works like this:

- Go to a station and sign up with one of the factions.
- Chose a faction ship from a list of available options(your own ship gets stored).
- Go to the faction battle zone(You can only drop in a faction ship) and collect bonds, like in CZ.
- Deliver bonds to rise in rep and get access to better ships.
- Die and you re-spawn in station and lose some rep.
- The FBZ is open in all modes and has a high impact on the BGS, in conflicts or contested PP systems.
- Kill a player or NPC witch have several undelivered bonds and they get transferred to you(number of bonds displayed in HUD).

 

[kilvenny]

I think in powerplay the powerplay tasks should have to be undertaken in a powers ships with a free rebuy. I think this would make powerplay a more interesting experience, conflict would be more balanced, but also more attractive. Conflict between power ships should never make you wanted.