Kill the PVP Rebuy

[lenna]

And that's the inherent problem the OP wants to address.

PvP players and gankers have already crossed this threshhold and have the money necessary to build a frigate class warship. Even if they get taken out by a skilled one on one Sidewinder combatant, they have the bank accounts to laugh this off.

Except that with the C&P changes pending for 3.0 attackers will also have to bare at least some of the rebuy of the ships they target (illegally) when they eventually die or go to pay off their bounty - However, there are exclusions for Power Play, CZs, and Anarchy system based kills. At least as I understand it.

There are at least some elements of the PvP community that still refuse to accept that ED is not a PvP centric game and that many of us have no interest in getting involved with their kind of PvP - rebuy has little or nothing to do with it.

 

[vrcan]

I do PvP and only PvP. When i need good ship, i grind (fortunatelly no more needed at 3.0 so I cant wait for it). WHen i need money, i grind them easiest way (i did quince months ago, then smeaton)

But, i spend lot of money for rebuys, daily. 10-50mil per day, sometimes. I believe most pvpers can confirm i die often - and I am happy to die and being killed by better cmdr (because great lesson for me)
No more smeaton, no more money, no more PvP ?
This situation even push me to use mili armor instead of reactive, or even use builds where rebuy cost is important factor (I went from reactive fdl to mili and then to prisma build without armor, so rebuys went fom 10mil to 6,5 to finaly 4,3mil). Same with FAS, i have reactive armor stored and using mili armor.
Sometimes i try to arrange fight without death, but often i look silly for that demand.

I also noticed I am not alone and many other pvp friends stay away from reactive armor and they also keep rebuy cost lower.
SO what to do? Switch to small ship pvp? Or why the heck we cant have lower rebuy at least at PvP hub San tu?

ps: sorry if i missed somenthing in that discusion, i didnt read it all, and/or i didnt understand all (poor eng)


EDIT: oooh i forgot one thing, for the reason of high rebuy for big3 I even never considered it, but i want to try big3 pvp.

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

When the ganker gets a pvp debuff for 50% less damage and no shields for 5 hours, yes that would be cool.

But how do you differ the ganker from his victim?
Also wouldnt this just imporve combat logging?

Maybe, give a player with a high bounty for player kills happening outside anarchy systems when dying a big "debuff" as in doesn't gets his previous ship back for 2 days. Then they can sidewind or having to rebuy a ship before the old one is "restored".

@vrcan,what elite misse sis a kind of arena where people can enter a simulated battle in ships they have without any costs of rebuy. That way we could have some arranged PvP to test and play around without being a pointless money sink.

 

[Cageman]

Pirate interdicted a trader.. demands cargo... trader says no.
Pirate says give me cargo or die.. trader says no.. go ahead and kill me you will be the one paying for it.

And in the case of the op, the trader has nothing to loose and neather does the pirate but nore does he have anything to gain.

The trader will still lose the cargo and the money that was put there to buy it.

 

[babelfisch]

I've been active for a couple of years in the forum, and I have seen over and over threads arguing about the modes.

There has been an enormous commitment of resources by FDEV to try to hold "gankers" to account through C&P. It has been hypothesized that there will be many workarounds to avoid accountability, from using cheap assassination ships to structurally weakened expensive ships for ramming /blocking. Players are clever, they will circumvent C&P - or meet it head on and kill the ATR.

Take a step back and consider what the consequence is for someone "ganked" or "murdered" for RP or BGS reasons:

Rebuy - they must pay the insurance cost for their ship, and lose the value of cargo and any open missions. This translates into lost playing time - a very game-repulsive consequence.

Most players, when given an option to avoid this risk will take it (PG and Solo) - myself included.

In many other mmo's PVE player death results in damage to gear that must be repaired, and or a temporary death penalty to performance. In certain pvp centric instances in other games (player vs. player arenas or world vs. world combat) there is no death penalty consequence other than being teleported to a starter area. This design encourages players to get back in the action, and continue to play. This design enables improved learning and an enhanced chance that a player may try out pvp since there is no effective risk.

I recommend that FDEV consider dropping the rebuy for all PVP combat, and allow players to re-instance in the same location after a cool down period, or re-instance at the nearest nav beacon, or largest nearby gravity well if there is no nav beacon - with all open missions and gear intact.

There will be lost playing time, but it will not be punitively restrictive. In addition, the severe consequences for failing missions will be eliminated.

For BGS and PP purposes, the death will count toward the killer-player goals of course.

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

I doubt that money is an issue for most, your proposal wouldn't solve anything.

 

[SamSlade]

The trader will still lose the cargo and the money that was put there to buy it.

with a community as spiteful as this, I doubt anyone will consider the lost cash from cargo: this game is basically sims in space now.

there is no risk and no reward. everything is easy, safe and risk free.

 

[NeilF]

I've been active for a couple of years in the forum, and I have seen over and over threads arguing about the modes.

There has been an enormous commitment of resources by FDEV to try to hold "gankers" to account through C&P. It has been hypothesized that there will be many workarounds to avoid accountability, from using cheap assassination ships to structurally weakened expensive ships for ramming /blocking. Players are clever, they will circumvent C&P - or meet it head on and kill the ATR.

Take a step back and consider what the consequence is for someone "ganked" or "murdered" for RP or BGS reasons:

Rebuy - they must pay the insurance cost for their ship, and lose the value of cargo and any open missions. This translates into lost playing time - a very game-repulsive consequence.

Most players, when given an option to avoid this risk will take it (PG and Solo) - myself included.

In many other mmo's PVE player death results in damage to gear that must be repaired, and or a temporary death penalty to performance. In certain pvp centric instances in other games (player vs. player arenas or world vs. world combat) there is no death penalty consequence other than being teleported to a starter area. This design encourages players to get back in the action, and continue to play. This design enables improved learning and an enhanced chance that a player may try out pvp since there is no effective risk.

I recommend that FDEV consider dropping the rebuy for all PVP combat, and allow players to re-instance in the same location after a cool down period, or re-instance at the nearest nav beacon, or largest nearby gravity well if there is no nav beacon - with all open missions and gear intact.

There will be lost playing time, but it will not be punitively restrictive. In addition, the severe consequences for failing missions will be eliminated.

For BGS and PP purposes, the death will count toward the killer-player goals of course.

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

There's a huge mammoth in the room with all these sorts of points IMHO!


When people seem to see illegal (toxic?) ganking as a worth while asset to the game, and basically it seemingly being a valid (the only?) easily means of accessing PvP, surely this is just underlining a huge issue with the game?

Why isn't ED promoting/orchestrating meaningful PvP? Why isn't it offering "legal" PvP for some true outcome/purpose? Why isn't it even orchestrating "hot spots" in OPEN which are a known risk, and indeed even - if appropriate - offering gameplay which includes the risk of destruction by other CMDRs?


In my opinion, "illegal" destruction should be a truly meaning choice. Especially such habitual activity. And yes, even in anarchy zones! But, the game must start orchestrating PvP gameplay with some purpose/meaning, which is easy to find and take part in!

Is this suggesting OPEN should be risk free? Of course it isn't. But what it would mean is illegal destruction is a choice with some significant outcomes. And more importantly, if you want to take part in PvP, there's clear and easy to access gameplay which offers it.

 

[Cosmos]

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.

Then surely the problem is that FD aren't and haven't addressed the credit exploits of which have been in game since the beginning.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Credits are also much easier to earn in larger quantities proportionally once you've obtained larger vessels.

But not in any way proportional to the rebuy cost of those vessels. The bigger your ship is, the longer it takes to earn its cost back, often by a long way.


Trade: Sidewinder can carry 12t in a shieldless configuration. At 4k profit/tonne, it will take one trip to obtain multiple rebuys.
Cutter can carry 792t in a shieldless configuration. At 4k profit/tonne, it will take multiple trips to obtain just one rebuy.

Combat: an Engineered Sidewinder can hang around in a High RES helping out the cops at no real risk to itself whatsoever. An hour of that will get tens of rebuys.
An Engineered Cutter can of course snooze around in a Haz RES near-instantly splatting any NPC pirates it sees. After an hour of this, it might be a tenth of the way to earning a rebuy.
(Of course, an engineered FAS could likewise indefinitely dismantle NPC pirates in a Haz RES ... for a fraction of the price and rebuy)

Exploration: A Sidewinder and a Cutter earn exploration data at the exact same rate - actually, the Sidewinder with its better supercruise turn rate is probably slightly faster. A single terraformable world HMC will get a whole bunch of Sidewinder rebuys ... you'd need to get about 10% of the way to Elite to earn a single Cutter rebuy. (Admittedly, with only 4 internals, the Sidewinder isn't the best for endurance exploration, but if it has the endurance to reach Beagle Point how much more does it need?)

Mining: The Sidewinder is utterly terrible at this - nevertheless, with a mining laser, a class 1 refinery, class 1 prospector and class 1 collector, it can fill its 4t cargo hold with Painite in perhaps 15 minutes and earn tens of rebuys.
The Cutter can certainly mine a lot faster but even at maximum speed it might get a single rebuy in an hour.

Missions: The best paying missions might allow a Cutter pilot to get one or two rebuys an hour if they go all out for money in the right place.
Stacking a bunch of data courier missions lets a Sidewinder pilot get multiple rebuys in a single 10-minute trip - or a single surface scan mission can pay over 3 million credits which at Sidewinder level is basically unlimited rebuys.
(And the Sidewinder with its superior turn rate and smaller landing footprint is arguably better at surface scans than the Cutter is)


The problem, I think, is that the ship and module prices go up exponentially while the ship capabilities go up at best linearly with that (and sometimes are flat or go down) ... so anything balanced around costs - be that earning rates or rebuy - just doesn't work.

 

[vrcan]

I doubt that money is an issue for most, your proposal wouldn't solve anything.

I am reacting on BOLD you wrote.

Yes i know many have bilions. But also many have just milions, like me, and now it is even harder to get more money.
Even if i have again oportunity to get easy money, like from Smeaton, why to do that stupid grind if i can enjoy other things - pvp fights?

Also remember there are many newcomers, like me, who joined pvp just few months ago, and lately there are no so many opportunities to get money.... actualy there is none now (maybe skimmer missions?)

So i disagree - money IS an issuse for a most.

 

[Poseidal]

No rebuy (at all, not just PVP) is basically how the Dark Souls (a so called 'hard' game) games work. The only time you really lose anything is if you are in the habit of holding a lot of souls (currency) without converting it into levels or buying things (sets you to 0 there), and returning you to undead/unkindled status (which usually cost an easily farmable resource, and the game gives plenty, and is really only used for multiplayer/co-op anyway), but they really are only a temporary thing. Even then, you can retrieve most of it if you manage to return to your point of death without dying and retrieve it from your bloodstain. It still costs time to get between the checkpoints, but a PVP invasion isn't really that big a deal. PvP invasions in that game also can get some very funny interactions, like hosts setting up a quiz for invaders.

Players also host 'fight clubs' which basically invite other players to attack them or each other, and before any arena was formalised, was how people practised and fought each other in a controlled setting.

The invasion PvP system works quite well IMO, though it will take a bit of work on the main game for Elite to have something similar. Basically to make the goals between 'checkpoints' (stations?) something that you want to keep, but is risky; it is way to large for long exploration, but too small in a lot of other cases.

 

[babelfisch]

I am reacting on BOLD you wrote.

Yes i know many have bilions. But also many have just milions, like me, and now it is even harder to get more money.
Even if i have again oportunity to get easy money, like from Smeaton, why to do that stupid grind if i can enjoy other things - pvp fights?

Also remember there are many newcomers, like me, who joined pvp just few months ago, and lately there are no so many opportunities to get money.... actualy there is none now (maybe skimmer missions?)

So i disagree - money IS an issuse for a most.

What I am saying is that people don't dislike getting blown up because they don't want to pay for rebuy but simply because they don't like getting blown up.

 

[Han_Zen]

I doubt that money is an issue for most, your proposal wouldn't solve anything.

Time is the currency that matters, not credits. How long does it take to get back to even after a death?

There are huge variations in time invested in the 'current state'. A combat Vulture pilot with a 1.5 mill rebuy, will be able to bounce back in half an hour of RES hunting. Alternatively he can do an hour of high pay missions and save up 10-20 rebuys. There is essentially no consequence for his death.

A pure trader in a big ship, will suffer more time loss. The rebuy may be 20 mill and 10 mill in lost cargo may come on top. Doing their favorite activity, it will take them many hours to recover.

An explorer that has been out for a month will loose everything. The rebuy is insignificant, but the data is basically lost forever. Same goes for first discoveries.

As the most risk averse group, combat players are also given the the best tools to survive any potential danger. If you have no plans to carry stuff or jump far, your defensive capability can essentially be raised to immortality level.

A few of these combat players actually like to have a go at each other. As we all understand, it can be a bit boring to have a duel between two immortal ships. Players can therefor access a few weapons that reduces the immortality to semi immortality. If both players agree to fight til the end, one may actually die.
These magic weapons will unfortunately annihilate anyone who likes to jump far or carry some stuff, in a matter of seconds. That makes the player on the receiving end feel that the encounter was meaningless and annoying. There is nothing they can do that improves their situation.

They can of course fit magic weapons the self, but it doesn't help. They have to sacrifice the things that makes their ship effective in their designated roll.

This is all good. You can balance risk vs reward. Combat players don't have to do this though. They can max out all they want, for their favorite activity. No compromises and little risk.

This curious situation leads many non combat players to chose one of the modes where they don't get shot with magic weapons. It makes the risk(potential time loss) almost as low for them as for a combat player in open.

It's an almost impossible task for FD to balance the risk/reward aspect evenly between all roles in ED. At lest as long as player are allowed to outfit their ships differently to standard NPCs.

 

[vrcan]

What I am saying is that people don't dislike getting blown up because they don't want to pay for rebuy but simply because they don't like getting blown up.

Yes also that, but also because expansive rebuy.
I think both are true.
But money are bigger reason I suppose.

I think it would be amazing to have at least one system with lower or zero rebuy cost.

 

[babelfisch]

Yes also that, but also because expansive rebuy.
I think both are true.
But money are bigger reason I suppose.

I think it would be amazing to have at least one system with lower or zero rebuy cost.

I suppose losing all exploration data is a bigger issue than money.

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

for me personally,
rebuy costs is no issue, they are pretty low (and that comming from someone who didn't join any of the exploit grinds for quick, fast money)

there are harder consequences for exploding in a big ship:
- crew lost: an elite npc may have "cost" more millions then a brand new conda
- exploration data gone.
- some "waypoints" are also gone - scanned barnacles or crash sites

comming from a game similar to EVE, "never drive what you cannot afford to replace" is a given to me.

 

[sollisb]

Just don't fly in Open. There is no reason to be in open, unless you want to PvP.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Rebuy - they must pay the insurance cost for their ship, and lose the value of cargo and any open missions. This translates into lost playing time - a very game-repulsive consequence.

Learn how to lose.

 

[Truesilver]

- crew lost: an elite npc may have "cost" more millions then a brand new conda
- exploration data gone.

Yes, as I keep saying these two are punitive 'spikes' that are completely out of balance with everything else, from rebuy to loss of missions.

They could set a player back weeks or months, not days or hours.

From 3.0 most players would actually find it easier to replace max-spec engineered modules than lost data or Elite NPC.

 

[babelfisch]

Learn how to lose.

This. As said earlier, I believe the problem is not the money but that some people don't like to lose. That's fine, they just should not play in Open.