PvP Gankers - why can't pvp be made consentual?

[DeletedUser191218]

It's an aspect of ED i've never understood. I enjoy open and the interaction with other players. But why can't pvp be consentual? For eg, ESO has a PvP arena essentially but you can challenge players to a dual in the pve maps. It works. You still get the mmo vibe without people ruining the game for others. I don't mind a bit of pvp but not being attavked and hounded by gankers in uber-engineered ships in a CG system. I know the tips for escaping but it's a really unpleasant element of this game. And they have the cheek to take the high ground about combat logging. It's not something i've had to do myself but if someone doesn't want to pvp why shouldn't they log? It's not fair to force someone into playing the game in a way they don't want to. That's just bullying. I really do think pvp should be a mutual thing.

 

[Lobstris]

Because, if you are simulating space, there aren't any walled-off arenas. It *should* be a functional crime and punishment system, driven by system security levels and faction states, that penalises antisocial behaviour - rather than any 'artificial' boundaries.

Of course, that's easier typed into a forum post, than implemented in game, it seems...

 

[DeletedUser191218]

Because, if you are simulating space, there aren't any walled-off arenas. It *should* be a functional crime and punishment system, driven by system security levels and faction states, that penalises antisocial behaviour - rather than any 'artificial' boundaries.

Of course, that's easier typed into a forum post, than implemented in game, it seems...

I understand. But it's also a GAME. It isn't real life. Surely it's not unreasonable to request that the continuous element of people trying to ruin the game for people should be addressed. Perhaps we can begin to implement a report system, whereby if a ganker is reported he gets a warning by FDev, followed by a 3 month ban if they do it again? The in-game repercussions clearly aren't a deterrent.

 

[akaliel]

I understand. But it's also a GAME. It isn't real life. Surely it's not unreasonable to request that the continuous element of people trying to ruin the game for people should be addressed. Perhaps we can begin to implement a report system, whereby if a ganker is reported he gets a warning by FDev, followed by a 3 month ban if they do it again? The in-game repercussions clearly aren't a deterrent.

If you're going to punish it, then just eliminate PvP altogether by removing PvP damage entirely outside of anarchy space. Why bother with a punishment system at all.

 

[CMDR Cknarf]

The solution is literally right there, on the main menu.

If you don't like PvP encounters, solo and private group exist.

Logging is blatant cheating, where as ganking people is well within the rules of the game.

 

[ZeroAi]

It's an aspect of ED i've never understood. I enjoy open and the interaction with other players. But why can't pvp be consentual? For eg, ESO has a PvP arena essentially but you can challenge players to a dual in the pve maps. It works. You still get the mmo vibe without people ruining the game for others. I don't mind a bit of pvp but not being attavked and hounded by gankers in uber-engineered ships in a CG system. I know the tips for escaping but it's a really unpleasant element of this game. And they have the cheek to take the high ground about combat logging. It's not something i've had to do myself but if someone doesn't want to pvp why shouldn't they log? It's not fair to force someone into playing the game in a way they don't want to. That's just bullying. I really do think pvp should be a mutual thing.

+Rep

Seconded

Because, if you are simulating space, there aren't any walled-off arenas.

And no instant reincarnation either.

We can solve the issue by either making the game realistic or fun.

Realistic - every player get's one life, and if you murder someone else and are caught, your in game character goes to jail for life and forfeits his credit balance to be paid in reparations to the family of the player killed.

Yeah, that sounds horrible - but it is realistic!

The point is, in the real world their are severe consequences for murder, but in the game you comparably get a slap on the wrist.

So instead of trying to make the game realistic, and stop murder by making the consequences for murder realistic (and make the game really bad and no fun,) how about we just don't allow murder unless a player consents to PvP?

 

[akaliel]

+Rep

Seconded



And no instant reincarnation either.

We can solve the issue by either making the game realistic or fun.

Realistic - every player get's one life, and if you murder someone else and are caught, your in game character goes to jail for life and forfeits his credit balance to be paid in reparations to the family of the player killed.

Yeah, that sounds horrible - but it is realistic!

The point is, in the real world their are severe consequences for murder, but in the game you comparably get a slap on the wrist.

So instead of trying to make the game realistic, and stop murder by making the consequences for murder realistic (and make the game really bad and no fun,) how about we just don't allow murder unless a player consents to PvP?

The whole problem is that Elite, unlike pretty much every multiplayer game I've ever played punishes you for dying. And not just a little bit, it punishes you hard. And it doesn't reward you for winning either. Your reward is simply not being punished for losing. Elite's like a Japanese game show.

 

[Bob Lighthouse]

It's an aspect of ED i've never understood. I enjoy open and the interaction with other players. But why can't pvp be consentual? For eg, ESO has a PvP arena essentially but you can challenge players to a dual in the pve maps. It works. You still get the mmo vibe without people ruining the game for others. I don't mind a bit of pvp but not being attavked and hounded by gankers in uber-engineered ships in a CG system. I know the tips for escaping but it's a really unpleasant element of this game. And they have the cheek to take the high ground about combat logging. It's not something i've had to do myself but if someone doesn't want to pvp why shouldn't they log? It's not fair to force someone into playing the game in a way they don't want to. That's just bullying. I really do think pvp should be a mutual thing.

It is consensual, you consent when you choose open.

 

[Chaparral]

FDEV loves your suffering. They rank up in hell with each gank. That or they are just lazy and couldn't figure out how to make open pve work (like every other MMO).

 

[Bob Lighthouse]

Also, please read #s 2 and 5 here:

 

[DeletedUser191218]

Also, please read #s 2 and 5 here:

So? Change it. It sucks. There's a reason almost every open mmo treats this differently. Forced pvp is poor. It's encouraging anti-social behaviour and in-game bullying. There's something really wrong with a game developer that wants to encourage that.

My question is - who loses out if it's consensual? PvPers still get to PvP with other consenting players. I get to play in open and interact with people without being hyperdicted by some antisocial weirdo in any CG i try to do. So who is missing out? Maybe the anti-social weirdo. But they're a weirdo, so it's fine. I don't get the mentality of wanting the game experience to be unnecessarily unpleasant at times.

 

[Jmanis]

It is. Solo mode.

 

[Evanitis]

So who is missing out? Maybe the anti-social weirdo. But they're a weirdo, so it's fine. I don't get the mentality of wanting the game experience to be unnecessarily unpleasant at times.

I think you are an antisocial weirdo for you don't want to be unconsentually shot in our beloved spaceship-shooting game like the rest of us normal people, and you are missing out.

 

[Mohrgan]

The obvious answer here, in E|D's case, is find an environment you do enjoy. Find and join a Private Group, that has a no PvP rule set. Doing just that has worked out famously for me. I have played in one Mobius group or another for most of my play time.

Jumping, and blowing up Commander's ships is something more than an acceptable behavior. FD offers us ways to control who we spend our time with. We should all use them to facilitate what gaming experience we are looking for, in any given session.

 

[Bob Lighthouse]

So? Change it. It sucks. There's a reason almost every open mmo treats this differently. Forced pvp is poor. It's encouraging anti-social behaviour and in-game bullying. There's something really wrong with a game developer that wants to encourage that.

My question is - who loses out if it's consensual? PvPers still get to PvP with other consenting players. I get to play in open and interact with people without being hyperdicted by some antisocial weirdo in any CG i try to do. So who is missing out? Maybe the anti-social weirdo. But they're a weirdo, so it's fine. I don't get the mentality of wanting the game experience to be unnecessarily unpleasant at times.

That open is by far the most popular mode, sort of takes the wind out of your sails.

By definition the antisocial weirdos are not in the cultural majority.

It is clear that most people, based on the aforementioned popularity of open as it stands, do not share your viewpoint.

 

[FlySwat]

Potential Solution ... Eliminate the SHIP REBUY following destruction in PvP combat.
Instead ... Loser's Pilot Federation Combat Rank is demoted by one grade.

 

[Bob Lighthouse]

Potential Solution ... Eliminate the SHIP REBUY following destruction in PvP combat.
Instead ... Loser's Pilot Federation Combat Rank is demoted by one grade.

You want a stealth harmless rank for all the gankers?

I'm all for a cloaking mechanic but that seems kind of much.

edit:

Oh wait you said loser loses rank.
What is that supposed to do?

 

[FlySwat]

Oh wait you said loser loses rank.
What is that supposed to do?

It is simply a (suggested) alternative consequence for losing your ship in a Player v Player combat encounter. The losing Commander's combat rank is demoted by one grade, e.g. from Competent down to Novice. That replaces the huge Ship Rebuy financial penalty and you respawn with current Ship and Modules all intact. (PvP engagement only.)

In other open world sandbox games like Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, there is no consequence upon being killed, no penalty whatsoever. You just respawn at last saved location.

Just a suggestion. Remember, when all is said and done, Elite Dangerous is just a game ... a fun game.

 

[Bob Lighthouse]

It is simply a (suggested) alternative consequence for losing your ship in a Player v Player combat encounter. The losing Commander's combat rank is demoted by one grade, e.g. from Competent down to Novice. That replaces the huge Ship Rebuy financial penalty and you respawn with current Ship and Modules all intact. (PvP engagement only.)

In other open world sandbox games like Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, there is no consequence upon being killed, no penalty whatsoever. You just respawn at last saved location.

Just a suggestion. Remember, when all is said and done, Elite Dangerous is just a game ... a fun game.

I know what combat rank is, lol...

That would just unfairly penalize new players.
They'd never be able to rank up playing against other players.

On the other hand, I couldn't care less about my combat rank anymore since I have all the rank locked ships.

 

[Globusdiablo]

It is consensual, you consent when you choose open.

Indeed. ConsenTing to be consenSual.