PvP The PvE <-> PvP Rift

[Mohrgan]

All that time. All that grind. All that money and effort to build a battleship that can withstand anything... Yeah, I get the desire for it to be invincible, but good piloting and outfitting makes it that. It's not the ship itself, which so many Corvette and Cutter pilots want - that instant 'I win' button.

This is why I like hunting them with my friends - to remind them they are not the apex predators.

Anyway, the one's with the skills to back up the ship are really fun to behold (and fly with!). Bumping up NPC difficulty, like Fren said all those moons ago, would absolutely be a boon in every way.

Making the NPC's harder wouldn't make PvP any more appealing. It would just satisfy the need some Commanders have, for all players be measured against PvP, and it's associated builds. Turning Engineering into a requirement for everyone, right away, rather than have Engineering be a long term goal for moderate Commanders.

Let's concentrate on making PvP influential and meaningful for those that enjoy it, rather than attempting to raise PvP to dominate every players game.

 

[Sylveria]

PvP already is rare and meaningful if you're not constantly looking for it.

So PvP really is "meaningful", then?

So what's all the hubbub about again?

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Making the NPC's harder wouldn't make PvP any more appealing. It would just satisfy the need some Commanders have, for all players be measured against PvP, and it's associated builds. Turning Engineering into a requirement for everyone, right away, rather than have Engineering be a long term goal for moderate Commanders.

Let's concentrate on making PvP influential and meaningful for those that enjoy it, rather than attempting to raise PvP to dominate every players game.

I'm talking about making the game more rewarding regardless of what you do or how you play.

 

[Mohrgan]

I'm talking about making the game more rewarding regardless of what you do or how you play.

Define how making NPC's run in PvP type builds would be more rewarding.

I like Truesilver's idea, to create optional scenarios with PvP-Build like NPC's for those with the interest. But, to just put that type of ship out there against moderately engineered or not engineered ships is just punitive.

 

[ALGOMATIC]

I think the resistance against modifying shield stacking values comes from the Cutter/Corvette crowd, and probably crosses the lines between PvE and PvP tbh. Regardless of whether you engage NPC's or human's, the entire point for the Vette/Cutter pilot is to be 100% insulated from danger. For the record, my two main ships are a Gunship with 310 mj's & a Chieftain with 410 mj's.

Which, in a weird way, brings us back to the OP's point which hasn't been revisited in nearly 90-100 pages.

Any build that relies on SCBs as its main defence will be at a disadvantage vs cascade rails. HD stacking is a crap build that will not put you in advantage, specially if you rely on 4 0 2 flying.

 

[jasonbarron]

Any build that relies on SCBs as its main defence will be at a disadvantage vs cascade rails. HD stacking is a crap build that will not put you in advantage, specially if you rely on 4 0 2 flying.

I'm a 0-4-2 man myself

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

Define how making NPC's run in PvP type builds would be more rewarding.

I like Truesilver's idea, to create optional scenarios with PvP-Build like NPC's for those with the interest. But, to just put that type of ship out there against moderately engineered or not engineered ships is just punitive.

Truesilver is on the right path there. I'm thinking of Bethesda RPGs - obvious starting areas, but once you start wandering out from there things get more difficult. Could even have hot zones like the Pegasi Sector and Anarchies.

 

[jasonbarron]

Truesilver is on the right path there. I'm thinking of Bethesda RPGs - obvious starting areas, but once you start wandering out from there things get more difficult. Could even have hot zones like the Pegasi Sector and Anarchies.

I made the same exact suggestion as truesilver in the early part of the thread and was promptly excoriated by many of the same people who would later see it come from True and go "Gosh Truesilver, what a revolutionary idea!" Proving that the topic, as usual, is simply a popularity contest.

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

I made the same exact suggestion as truesilver in the early part of the thread and was promptly excoriated by many of the same people who would later see it come from True and go "Gosh Truesilver, what a revolutionary idea!" Proving that the topic, as usual, is simply a popularity contest.

What? FF a popularity content? No. That's impossible!

 

[Sylveria]

I really don't know.

I originally came to the forums after hearing so many cries of things like "PvP is meaningless! Why did you kill me? I didn't even have any cargo!" or "You'll regret this. I will tell my whole stream of 0 - 2 people what a big smelly jerk you are!" and such unforgettable classics as "You %^&@#&!!!" from players in the game.

Still haven't heard a practical reason why they don't just shut up and git gud.

I have a couple thousand hours in ED, most of which time has been spent pursuing PvP and PvP related goals.

Still not tired of this so-called "meaningless" PvP.

It would be cool if we could participate a little more in PP and BGS stuff with PvP.

Or if we had more difficult NPC's available...

But TBH, I'm mostly good with it as it stands.

IMO (and IME) a lot of the more vocal cries on the forums calling for drastic changes are fringe cases and nothing more.

The majority of people playing this game are satisfied with the way things are... it's a more vocal minority that keeps pushing for drastic changes b/c they can't get over themselves enough to realize FD isn't about to drop everything they're doing and cater to them personally.

The exceptions here ofc, are the occasional Mobius gank, which rightfully expressed since Mobius PvE is excplicity against PvPing. So if someone infiltrates the group with the sole purpose of engaging in PvP it's clearly a violation of the group's rules... which most REAL PvPer's would respect.

 

[Han_Zen]

How's that cheating?

And that is why OPEN mode provides more challange. You just said it yourself.

It’s like the middle ages. Only noble men were allowed to wear armour in battle.

We have access to silly defense and weapons, the NPCs don’t have access to.
It’s institutionalized cheating.

 

[Sylveria]

It’s like the middle ages. Only noble men were allowed to wear armour in battle.

We have access to silly defense and weapons, the NPCs don’t have access to.
It’s institutionalized cheating.

"If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

 

[Phisto Sobanii]

"If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

Considering Elite's exquisite dystopia both in game and out?

Thanks the gods for that.

 

[Han_Zen]

"If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

Everyone knows it’s the player builds that are broken, when it comes to balance.
We don’t need NPCs in PvP builds, we need players in NPC builds.

 

[jasonbarron]

Everyone knows it’s the player builds that are broken, when it comes to balance.
We don’t need NPCs in PvP builds, we need players in NPC builds.

I think that you will find a lot of consensus within the community for the idea of removing engineers

 

[Sylveria]

I think that you will find a lot of consensus within the community for the idea of removing engineers

I know I totally agree with it. All Engineers has ever done is conflate and complicate rather than increase enjoyment.

Sure you get the occasional "boost" in stats somewhere, but IMO it's more trouble than its worth. Had it been implemented without the need for Horizons to begin with (thus not creating an imbalance in shared play modes) then it may have been different. When it was introduced it created a de facto imbalance.

K.I.S.S. method would have been a better approach.

 

[Han_Zen]

I think that you will find a lot of consensus within the community for the idea of removing engineers

That’s the lazy approach, to avoid real ballancing.
We would still be left with defensive stacking and synth ammo.

Engineering is just the magnifying glass that makes the flaws of the outfitting system more visible.

 

[Sole Hunter]

Or you have to adjust your idea that piracy has to be PVP oriented. I agree that piracy has been weak sauce...but talking with the people that pirate NPC's, there have been substantial increases in payouts.

Meaningful is in the eye of the beholder so let's set that to the side momentarily.

What do you mean by player driven objectives?

yea except there's no point to do piracy against traders because there's no benefits for players to do trading in open when they can do it in the safety of solo.

player driven objectives for ex: "pirate X amount of X and deliver it to X black market for extra money" or "pirate 10 players for an extra reward" something that can only be done in open "trade X amount of X in open for an extra bonus".

that should give players an incentive to play 1) in open 2) risk versus rewards 3) promote both piracy and trading playstyles equally.

now, solo players are probably going to cry about the extra bonus. Well first off, there's nothing to complain about since you don't have to deal with the extra risk associated with open play. Plus, there's already plenty of open only features like multicrew. As for taking advantage of the bonus, how? you still have to fly and trade in the goods, if your friend steal your goods, you're losing money anyway.

 

[Sole Hunter]

Bonus in trading in OPEN. Bonus in trading in open and being in an anarchy system.

You are running a risk being pirated/murdered by another player in OPEN. Npcs are incompetent both at piracy and at murder so no risk to run into those issues in SOLO.

As it stands right now a trader has no benefit in flying in OPEN. It has only the extra risk without the extra rewards.

There is no choice but to make Open lucrative becsuse the extra risk running into other players.

yea this ^^ basically.

 

[Riverside]

yea this ^^ basically.

Sole Hunter, Algomatic, what is this extra risk in Open that you see and I don't?

You can be attacked by another player, but you can team up too. Surely it evens out? I play in Open & don't feel I am at more of a risk, it is a little more exciting because you are less certain about what is going to happen next.

As far as I can see the only reason anyone might think it's more difficult in Open is because players such as you two (straghtforward, honest in intent PKers, good at it too) are out there. So what makes you think it's more dangerous? Who or what are you afraid of?