PvP Why PvP is not popular in Elite Dangerous?

[lenna]

And I hate to break it to you, but Elite Dangerous gets more like Eve Online with every release (I play both games).

Actually no, it is a few people that are trying to force it down that road.

As frostypaw has pointed out (sorry frosty, can't rep you again yet), they are very different products and serving very different audiences. Though there may be some overlap, it seems to be more the MMO-PvP focused element that are trying to turn ED into something it is not and plainly was never meant to be.

The griefers/gankers are the ONLY common issue, the rest is meta rubbish that some are trying to force down the rest of our throats.

I believe FD are well aware of the backlash they will receive if they head down the EvE route - they have made some concessions to the relevant crowd, but not enough to cause concern yet.

 

[Truesilver]

BGS War??? I am sorry but you are talking rubbish!

I understand neither your hostility nor your incredulity.

BGS wars have been a thing in Elite Dangerous since late 2015, when patch 1.4 introduced named player factions to systems. Since then many player groups have waged BGS wars against others, investing scores or even hundreds of hours of time per player and thousands of hours per group in the endeavour. (Being strictly accurate they were actually a thing from launch, but concerned NPC factions only. The first one I fought in was in March 2015. Patch 1.4 upped the ante a great deal, though.)

I wasn't even in a player group that specialised in the BGS, much more a PvP group, and yet we fought several BGS wars, usually though not always as the defenders. We also were assisted (sometimes in very large numbers) by allies ... and crossed the galaxy to help our allies.

I can give you a timeline with group by group, system by system and even station by station specifics, if you wish. And I'm just talking about a limited timeframe of my own experience, as I left the group in 2016. In the intervening two years dozens of other BGS wars have been fought, often with multiple groups intervening.

In my earlier post, the one that you responded to as I quote above, I set out in detail why the first and most important thing was to establish who the enemies were, because, I repeat:

If a concerned and sustained attack upon a faction's BGS is occurring, of course knowing who is responsible makes a difference. It means the defending players are able to identify a target for counter-attack, whether via PvP (if the opposing group have members that play in Open) or PvE (if the opposing group maintains its own faction's BGS).

Furthermore it permits player group leaders to identify mutual enemies of the attacking group and to ask them for assistance via group leader to group leader diplomacy.

In my experience of BGS attacks the best defence is combined maintenance of one's own faction's influence together with undermining of the attacker's influence and UA bombing of any suitable stations, most especially in concert with allies, because that forces the enemy to divert resources to defence.

Please don't accuse me of "talking rubbish" merely because you yourself have not participated in a frequent in-game activity. Your lack of personal experience of player group warfare does not mean player group warfare does not exist. I have tried to explain by reference to my direct personal experience. I don't know what else you want me to do but I repeat that I can provide as much detail of ED BGS wars as you wish to read.

 

[lenna]

...

You can repeat the same rubbish all you like but fundamentally it is meta gameplay and not actually part of ED. To my mind such behaviours are tantamount to a form of griefing if the individuals do not have a faction presence in that system (PP or player faction). The same can probably be said about artefact bombing - which FD seem to have toned down quite a bit.

While we have been able to add factions to ED and some of us have artificially affiliated our selves with those factions it does not change the nature of ED as a whole.

FD's slight concessions to the larger group gameplay (player inspired factions and the forthcoming squadron mechanic) does not change the fundamental nature of ED as a whole.

I reckon FD should not do any more than the absolute basics in support of larger group gameplay - to do more than that would invite certain kinds of meta-gameplay that would be ultimately self-destructive to ED as a product IMO. Leave that EvE-esque gameplay out of the ED environment. If people want to try to meta the relevant gameplay, FD should let them but not do too much to support it - that includes keeping the information on individual commander activities private.

 

[Truesilver]

fundamentally it is meta gameplay and not actually part of ED. To my mind such behaviours are tantamount to a form of griefing if the individuals do not have a faction presence in that system. The same can probably be said about artefact bombing - which FD seem to have toned down quite a bit.

Well yes, it certainly kind of felt that way at times to my group, as most of the groups that were attacking our faction's BGS had, so far as we were aware, absolutely no reason to wish us harm, nor any kind of benefit to be gained from their attacks. I think the fact that we had a high profile as 'good guy RP-ers' excited a certain amount of competitiveness and aggression - perhaps we came across as rather sanctimonious? - anyway, nothing wrong with someone choosing to spend their time attacking us (BGS or PvP) in my book, though, although you may disagree.

You can repeat the same rubbish all you like

I don't know what you mean, nor what I've said that is making you address me in these terms. My only contribution to this discussion has been to attempt to explain why it is tactically helpful for a player group under (apparently) structured BGS attack to discover which other player groups (if any) are attacking them.

I am not trying to anger you.

 

[frostypaw]

absolutely no reason to wish us harm, nor any kind of benefit to be gained from their attacks

Drag you down to their level. Always what they do and why I don't get involved with games that make you do that stuff. Enough horrors of humanity about that you can't avoid.

 

[lenna]

I don't know what you mean, nor what I've said that is making you address me in these terms. I am not trying to anger you.

I may be strong/blunt with my wording at times, but it is the easiest way to avoid mis-understandings.

Meta-gamplay like you keep bringing up is too much like heading down the EvE route, especially when you start talking about identifying which individual CMDRs are operating in particular systems and more specifically reporting on their activities to other players (outside of bounties perhaps).

What I am fundamentally objecting to is your persistence in trying to gain access to information that fundamentally you have no right to. If individuals want to have player factions with system influence then they should be willing to maintain it and everyone has the right to support/work for whichever minor factions they want to. Providing player factions can not be wiped out/removed from their home system then everything else is fair game.

Squadrons and fleet carriers should not be linked to minor factions in-game IMO and certainly should not be dependent on nor directly influence BGS considerations.

 

[Truesilver]

talking about identifying which individual CMDRs are operating in particular systems and more specifically reporting on their activities to other players (outside of bounties perhaps).

OK, I understand now. I think what you're saying is that so long as a Cmdr isn't committing major crimes in a system (hence, doesn't feature in the Top 5 Bounties) then no other Cmdr has any right to know what activities they've been conducting.

I would have to reflect on whether I agree with that but I can certainly see the argument.

 

[Ziljan]

When you're losing influence in a system, another faction or factions in the system is/are gaining.

Isn't that the more important aspect than knowing who caused this?

Here's a bit of info you might find helpful: A typical stealth BGS attack goes something like this: Small Player Group Alpha hires large Mercenary Group Gamma to attack their rival small Group Beta Defenders. Group Gamma then orders all their troops to log into Solo/PG, and proceeds to elevate some random faction in one or all of Beta's system (eg random Fed factions) and begins slaughtering cops and periodically wiping their bounty from the bounty board by suicidewinder, leaving no trace of who attacked or why. Group Alpha and Group Gamma remain invisible have risked nothing, and Group Beta is left picking up the pieces and scratching their heads.

If someone followed your logic, they would do what exactly? Retaliate against random Federation groups in their systems? This typically requires a multi-system state-manipulation approach. And if the defenders are an Open-only group, they risk potentially turning previously neutral local Fed factions adopted by unknown PMF into additional new player enemies.

In general, the most effective way to deter/deflect future player attacks is to keep an attacker busy defending their own home systems, particularly because (even without absolute anonymity) attack has the advantage of initiative, surprise, and pinpointing and tends to be stronger than defense. This is particularly true if the defender is a relatively smaller player group defending against a goliath mercenary faction. Whereas retaliating against puppet factions in your own home system is about as effective as punching at mist, or in some cases: quicksand.

 

[frostypaw]

Easier to not have player factions really. Sounds like a substantial rewrite to solve the multitude of problems created by trying to have faction war via BGS. How big a portion of the community is affected?

 

[lenna]

Easier to not have player factions really. Sounds like a substantial rewrite to solve the multitude of problems created by trying to have faction war via BGS. How big a portion of the community is affected?

I agree - FD allowing players to ask for personal factions to be introduced is essentially what started the perceived problems.

From an RP perspective, it does kind of make sense as it allows individuals to focus their RP-efforts around an in-game idea that they have had input to. For at least some non-RP gamers, the addition of a player faction for them might be little more than staking a flag in the ground identifying a system that they prefer to operate from. Beyond that, it creates a meta-gaming issue for those with desires for empire building using their player faction as the primary vehicle for it.

FD seemingly are aware of the knife edge they are dancing, but how they go about the introduction of squadrons will tell if they can continue to maintain the current balance.

IMO it is too late to consider removing the idea of player-inspired minor-factions but FD could do more to lessen their significance to overall gameplay and restrain themselves from going down the route of promoting one-player faction over another - unless it fits reasonably with-in their own lore to do so.

 

[Zeeman]

I used to love DD, then it was castrated and now I find myself dwelling in Off-topic of all places. I mean, I didn't even know there was an Off Topic before they ruined DD...

A lot of folk don’t, hence why hardware topics get posted in DD (and never get moved to the Hardware and Technical section in off topic, for the record. Interesting, the double standards...).

Whay the Hardware and Technical section is off topic, I have no idea. Does Planet Coatser need a HOTAS?


Z...

 

[Mohrgan]

A lot of folk don’t, hence why hardware topics get posted in DD (and never get moved to the Hardware and Technical section in off topic, for the record. Interesting, the double standards...).

Whay the Hardware and Technical section is off topic, I have no idea. Does Planet Coatser need a HOTAS?


Z...

I'm sure it has to do with being Reported or not. I would figure that people don;t notice some topics as belonging in a Sub-Forum, but other topics get noticed and reported quickly.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

They probably get noticed because some people make a big deal out of it and draw attention to it.

 

[Kefhyr]

I cant understand people who scream something like "I dont care about PvP, why random Joe destroy my ship when i just arrive after 6 months of exploration, there is no reason for that, he is just kid who did it for fun, i am explorer! Not a fighter" or "I am doing my stuff, why i must protect my trading ship with guns and shields?". And moreover why post about your job, that you have only 1 hour per day, kids, family, that you dont have time to play and that someone ruin weeks of your gameplay. Why i must care about it? I can say same to you, that i play only 1 hour per day and i want to destroy ships, why you ruin my precious time by running out from me? You do trading missions and i rob you. Simple :]

Well honesty it is your right to think so. You play your game. You're explorer or trader or miner etc. Well i am playing same game like you, but i am a pirate, a marauder, a bandit, you can call it anyway you like. It is my role to rob your ships or destroy them completely. I am not doing anything illegal from perspective of game mechanics. I am not cheating, griefing or hacking. I am not doing it because i am kid or father kicked me really hard when i was a child, I have military vessel with lasers and rockets, modules and limpets to breach your cargo hold and devices to run if situation goes out of control. I dont see anything wrong with it. I have everything Devs promised me(btw we dont have much "meat" in game, especially we dont have more than 30000 people that play offline in Mobius, that we could interact with, thats bad thing).

Yes i am attacking your transport, you dont have guns and shields. You cant fight me back. Well thats the way pirates operate. Pirates dont jump on 10 military Federal ships to rob them for obvious reason.

It is game mechanic. You're not playing Farm Simulator 2017 or Stardew Valley, where nothing can harm you. Stop calling other people griefers because they want destroy your ship. The fact that someone kill your ship doesnt mean that he dont have a reason for it. He can play any role he want, thats the way he like playing. Like it or not, we play same game with same rules.

And my opinion, that devs gone wrong path by separating playerbase to solo, open and private. You play solo or you play online with all other people. Elite is sandbox, we play same game. Why i must be separeted from people playing in Mobius? Only because i want roleplay one role and they want roleplay something different? Why then we have combat in-game? Limpets to breach cargo? Lasers? Guns? Why we have pirate dyes in market?

And i am not big fan of examples, like "MMOs have PVP only and PVE only servers so all players are happy". Well not all MMOs are same. Some are PVP only, but even there you can find PVE guilds/clans/groups. They stick together and protect each other. This thing i support for 150%. All people play together, but PVPers have some challenge by attacking big groups of players and PVErs have big chances to protect themselves.

 

[frostypaw]

Why i must care about it?

Why? The basic human ability to sympathise and understand. An essential part of emotional maturity.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

[...] Why i must care about it? [...]

And my opinion, that devs gone wrong path by separating playerbase to solo, open and private. You play solo or you play online with all other people. Elite is sandbox, we play same game. Why i must be separeted from people playing in Mobius? Only because i want roleplay one role and they want roleplay something different?

Yeah.

Don't like it? Tough. Why must I care about your badly supported opinion whether you like it or not. It's how the game is. Suck it up sunshine.

 

[frostypaw]

Yeah.

Don't like it? Tough. Why must I care about your badly supported opinion whether you like it or not. It's how the game is. Suck it up sunshine.

Indeed. I love the way these excuses always say this like "Well thats the way pirates operate." What you mean like living in fear and poverty on the fringes of society desperately trying to make ends meet after being unable to fit in?

Only that's not how it is in Elite is it. It's a life of casual luxury with virtually zero consequences and an entirely one-sided risk profile.

Once the game works like that then those arguments might stick - until then it's weak excuses.

 

[Kefhyr]

Why? The basic human ability to sympathise and understand. An essential part of emotional maturity.

Right. So we should understand each other, not only 1sided.

 

[frostypaw]

Right. So we should understand each other, not only 1sided.

Yup - your view is entirely one sided.

 

[lenna]

Right. So we should understand each other, not only 1sided.

And this is where mixed PvP/PvE in MMOs majorly falls down - but the primary cause of friction is from the PvP side since the vast majority of the more vocal PvPers in such mixed environments seem to lack understanding of why certain behaviour patterns and certain general behaviours are deemed unacceptable.

Thankfully, ED does not require dedicated PvEers to mix with dedicated PvPers - the latter group may not like it but the short answer to that is suck it up and live with it or go play something else. FD are committed to the current segregated approach and would lose ALOT of support if they depart from it.