Beyond is great but please let the next updates focus on combat and PvP

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

Be careful what you wish for, is what I'm saying

OP i can vouch for this.

For the first 2 years of my play, all frontier did was combat related changes. Go on admit it. Im not a combat first player.. so i sat there thinking frontier were like the best developers on the planet, thinking they were some kind of blizzard that made games my liking and could be fond of, all sorts of dumb things.

This patch frontier looked at my gameplay styles styles finally.. and my god...

I humbly and fully retract every single thought i had wondering why people complained so much when frontier change the game. Now that its my turn... sorry '16 era pvp players, i finally understand.

 

[PiLhEaD]

1. One simple thing would be some kind of reward. Some way of rewarding consensual pvp. Right now the only thing you get from pvp is a rebuy screen.

2. Beyond that, giving some kind of meaning to powerplay. A way to organize pvpers to get rid of this "I got shot in open for no reason".

3. Also the second half of my OP has an idea of an arena type system they could add.

Thanks for the reply mate.

1 - Nice idea. I think rewarding those for whom PvP may be a 'one-way street' is a very good idea - e.g. the re-buy (or reward) is based on: i rank of opposition; ii number of opposition; iii time spent resisting/battling. *

2 - Not sure what you mean here. What does 'meaning' mean?

3 - CQC?

* e.g. if I'm in an unarmed T6 and get jumped by three battle-condas, should I die I get a positive reward that is a percentage of TCV (Total Cargo/Contract Value) multiplied by time-to-death.

 

[AP Birdman]

I suggested that your position, that Griefers (something you have self identified as) arise because there is no systematic use for PvP. This type decides that since their goals and desire aren't perfectly met, you will simply have to take it on others, because they are bored. I call this petty extortion, and go onto describe that idea with a short sentence in the voice of someone taking that stand. I have no trouble describing this attitude as childish play ground behavior.

I asked that you take a moment to reflect on that notion. But more to the point of this discussion I asked that you take the effort to make some real, actionable suggestions as to what would accomplish what you want. This all seems too much for you, as you'd prefer to just dismiss ideas that don;t suit you. I can live with that.

I have suggested, repeatedly, a voucher system, that would reward all involved in PvP encounters, would offer influence over the BGS and PP thus bringing meaning and impact to PvP. What do I get? Crickets... It could be argued, that I have done more for your cause than you have, yet you feel the need to dismiss my calls for a positive debate. I can live with that as well. I can only hope that someone takes up the mantle of suggestion and negotiation to help bring about some improvement to the current situation.

o7

I apologize for glossing over your previous post because I was focusing too much on the nasty posts instead of trying to forward the conversation.

As for griefers, I think it's wrong to say that we are doing it with a gimme something to do or else mentality.
Most of (but not all) the griefing that is going on in game right now is simply the result of we have nothing better to do.
We've already shot at each other a million times and still continue to but it's very hard to find new players to pvp with because the game has absolutely no incentives for it. Like I said, the only thing pvp rewards you with is a rebuy screen so any player that has any doubt in their skills is gonna avoid it.

If I'm not in the CG I will mostly ignore the ships I can clearly see have no ability of fighting back but pulling everyone I see is the only option the game gives me to find new players to fight and it works. I've had some of the most epic battles from random encounters with people I've tried to gank.

So again, its not a "gimme or else" mentality, it's a "I have no better way to find fights" mentality.

That's why I don't understand why people don't wanna throw any kind of bone to pvpers because that's literally all we need to stop us from knawing on your leg.

I think the only feasible way to do this is for Fdev to do something meaningful with powerplay and to, at the very least, reduce the insurance costs by half. 50 million cr rebuy for a fully PvP built cutter is absolutely ridiculous.

There just needs to be some kind of incentive for new players to join pvp.

 

[Strangepork]

I feel like all my brothers and sisters just got shiny new bikes and toys for Christmas and I'm still stuck playing with the same Lego set that's missing a bunch of pieces.
Beyond has been great for many people, no doubt, but combat missions still suck, PvP is mostly pointless, time to kill is way too high in fully engineered ships, and there are many weapons that are almost pointless for PvP.

At the very least, I'd love to see better rewards and payouts for combat missions. There's no reason why wing assassination missions and massacre missions need to be such low reward per effort missions considering the risk.

I don't like running cargo, I don't like mining, I don't like exploration and I don't see why I can't earn as much as everyone else doing what I enjoy most in the game and I know I'm not the only person who feels this way.
I lost many, many of my pve friends after Fdev nerfed the payouts for wing assassination missions in 3.0.

Also, why is there still no challenging pve for a full wing of players in fully engineered Corvettes? I understand that there needs to be easier missions for new players with little to no engineering but why does it have to be either/or? Why can't there be easy missions for new players and hard missions for a full wing of experienced players in fully engineered ships?

PvP on the other hand is a tough cookie and I don't even know where to begin with it.

I think it would at least be a start if Fdev made an official PvP system where rebuys we're waved crimes we're turned off. Fdev could also make it so that killing another player could reward you with credits or something. I don't know ow but something really needs to be done with PvP in this game.

I'm not even gonna mention "open only power play" because even if Fdev did this, I don't see players even using it anyways.

So please Fdev, I'm begging you, please work on combat and PvP next. Pretty, pretty please with sugar on top. Please don't just leave us out to dry.

Yep, if it will distract you let's combat over your odd opinion that combat is undeserved in the game. Troll.

 

[Mohrgan]

I apologize for glossing over your previous post because I was focusing too much on the nasty posts instead of trying to forward the conversation.

As for griefers, I think it's wrong to say that we are doing it with a gimme something to do or else mentality.
Most of (but not all) the griefing that is going on in game right now is simply the result of we have nothing better to do.
We've already shot at each other a million times and still continue to but it's very hard to find new players to pvp with because the game has absolutely no incentives for it. Like I said, the only thing pvp rewards you with is a rebuy screen so any player that has any doubt in their skills is gonna avoid it.

If I'm not in the CG I will mostly ignore the ships I can clearly see have no ability of fighting back but pulling everyone I see is the only option the game gives me to find new players to fight and it works. I've had some of the most epic battles from random encounters with people I've tried to gank.

So again, its not a "gimme or else" mentality, it's a "I have no better way to find fights" mentality.

That's why I don't understand why people don't wanna throw any kind of bone to pvpers because that's literally all we need to stop us from knawing on your leg.

I think the only feasible way to do this is for Fdev to do something meaningful with powerplay and to, at the very least, reduce the insurance costs by half. 50 million cr rebuy for a fully PvP built cutter is absolutely ridiculous.

There just needs to be some kind of incentive for new players to join pvp.

Semantics, and justification. But this belabors the point. So, I'll leave it at that.

I would like to press you on the idea, u-hum my idea, about PvP-Vouchers. Once the proper conditions occur, i.e. Consensual Commanders meet in a PvP engagement, Vouchers are rewarded. 3 to the victor, and 1 to the vanquished. These vouchers would be redeemed by the BGS or PP authority for credits and influence. Rewarding the vanquished along with the victor would be a way to encourage the less prepared to engage. Influence and credits would have to be balanced so that risking the potential of only gaining one voucher, losing, would still be a real draw to bring players into the fray, that haven't or don;t now. Of course the numbers and values could all be debated, and FD would have to get behind the idea, but this seems a great way to encourage PvP without discouraging PvE.

What do you think? Point out the flaws, make suggestions and lets get a real proposition together, that can be presented to FD that has a chance to gain traction.

 

[Screemonster]

honestly, I'd love to see player piracy as more of a thing, but the problem is that from the target's point of view they have no way of telling whether the person that just pulled them is an actual pirate or a raw combat fit that's just going to blow them out of the sky without talking

like if there were more pirating-focused hardpoints that were explicitly created to be effective at holding a target in place and getting them to drop cargo, but are suboptimal for sealclubbing, then a target that sees someone packing them could be fairly certain that the person interdicting them has something in mind other than just sending them to the rebuy screen for the lulz.

And I'm pretty sure I've mentioned before in multiple threads that I'd love to see a pvp arena type scenario in the actual game that players could actively visit and fight in for CQC rank, with severely reduced rebuys and rewarded with bond payments based on the cost difference of the opposing ship (with some adjustment factor for engineering). Have sponsorship deals pop up as missions from factions across the bubble and so on. Limited locations each week to get everyone that wants to PvP concentrated in a few places.

Naturally it'd be fairly pointless to go to one of these arenas in a mode other than open unless there was some sort of special chicanery to allow instancing regardless of mode within those PoIs.

 

[Para Handy]

....... NONSENSE CROPPED OUT ........

OMG - this has just got to be a troll post. Literally EVERY update has been crammed with combat-oriented stuff. If the OP was serious then all I can say is: "Do cut down on the wacky backy mate".

 

[AP Birdman]

Semantics, and justification. But this belabors the point. So, I'll leave it at that.

I would like to press you on the idea, u-hum my idea, about PvP-Vouchers. Once the proper conditions occur, i.e. Consensual Commanders meet in a PvP engagement, Vouchers are rewarded. 3 to the victor, and 1 to the vanquished. These vouchers would be redeemed by the BGS or PP authority for credits and influence. Rewarding the vanquished along with the victor would be a way to encourage the less prepared to engage. Influence and credits would have to be balanced so that risking the potential of only gaining one voucher, losing, would still be a real draw to bring players into the fray, that haven't or don;t now. Of course the numbers and values could all be debated, and FD would have to get behind the idea, but this seems a great way to encourage PvP without discouraging PvE.

What do you think? Point out the flaws, make suggestions and lets get a real proposition together, that can be presented to FD that has a chance to gain traction.

Actually that's a fantastic idea but the only problem I see is how players join and leave powers. In my opinion, the whole way pp modules work needs to be removed and players need to be locked into the power they choose, similar to the way Elder Scrolls Online works. I feel like the system could be easily abused the way it is right now.
But vouchers for kills against players aligned to opposing powers is a FANTASTIC idea.

Adding to that, they could also make it so that the more territory your power controls, the more your vouchers are worth. I think that could really get players involved in expanding the pp territories.

 

[AP Birdman]

OMG - this has just got to be a troll post. Literally EVERY update has been crammed with combat-oriented stuff. If the OP was serious then all I can say is: "Do cut down on the wacky backy mate".

Cool bro, thanks for your input

 

[AP Birdman]

Thanks for the reply mate.

1 - Nice idea. I think rewarding those for whom PvP may be a 'one-way street' is a very good idea - e.g. the re-buy (or reward) is based on: i rank of opposition; ii number of opposition; iii time spent resisting/battling. *

2 - Not sure what you mean here. What does 'meaning' mean?

3 - CQC?

* e.g. if I'm in an unarmed T6 and get jumped by three battle-condas, should I die I get a positive reward that is a percentage of TCV (Total Cargo/Contract Value) multiplied by time-to-death.

2: I'm not entirely sure but read the recent posts by Mohrgan and myself.

3: Yes cqc but it needs to be in-game, not it's own separate thing, and give players the ability to use their own ships.

 

[floc]

the problem with pvp in elite is that has no point at all. Fdev have to fix this. Then we can talk about other things regarding combat and pvp.

 

[Mohrgan]

Actually that's a fantastic idea but the only problem I see is how players join and leave powers. In my opinion, the whole way pp modules work needs to be removed and players need to be locked into the power they choose, similar to the way Elder Scrolls Online works. I feel like the system could be easily abused the way it is right now.
But vouchers for kills against players aligned to opposing powers is a FANTASTIC idea.

Adding to that, they could also make it so that the more territory your power controls, the more your vouchers are worth. I think that could really get players involved in expanding the pp territories.

I don;t intend that this idea be locked within PP. I suggest that the Vouchers could be cashed in to add to the Law and Order buckets within the BGS as well. Just as turning in a CZ Voucher or a Bounty. I think the vouchers would be independently valued. I feel it is imperative that both sides of the engagement should be rewarded for taking the risk. Without this aspect, there would be no encouragement for players coming into PvP. Making rewards based on some size or territorial range would discourage small groups and solo (meaning unaffiliated) players from entering into the fray.

 

[Mohrgan]

the problem with pvp in elite is that has no point at all. Fdev have to fix this. Then we can talk about other things regarding combat and pvp.

The idea is to show that we players can come to a consensus on what would improve the lot of Combat/PvP players. Crossing our arms and telling FD to fix it solves absolutely nothing.

 

[AP Birdman]

I don;t intend that this idea be locked within PP. I suggest that the Vouchers could be cashed in to add to the Law and Order buckets within the BGS as well. Just as turning in a CZ Voucher or a Bounty. I think the vouchers would be independently valued. I feel it is imperative that both sides of the engagement should be rewarded for taking the risk. Without this aspect, there would be no encouragement for players coming into PvP. Making rewards based on some size or territorial range would discourage small groups and solo (meaning unaffiliated) players from entering into the fray.

Yeah but you have power play in the game, why not utilize as much as possible. I do agree with you though that the solo, unaffiliated players would be left out.
But there has to be some kind of meaning to expanding pp territory. Something to get players involved.

 

[PiLhEaD]

2: I'm not entirely sure but read the recent posts by Mohrgan and myself.

3: Yes cqc but it needs to be in-game, not it's own separate thing, and give players the ability to use their own ships.

Nice mate, and thanks for your frank reply.

2. I have no idea either. Power Play has always struck me as Risk-in-Space, and to be honest, I'm not a big fan of Risk to start with, and so I can't really see any form of gameplay that would engage me. Perhaps if it was less adversarial, and more about expanding trading routes and making more money (yum yum), and dare I suggest making contact with alternate 'cultures' (thanks Iain M B!), well that would would appeal to me 'bigly'.

3. I totally agree, CQC should never have been outside the main game, and as a means to test a new ship/build, I think it's a brilliant idea. That said, I don't know how easy/hard/impossible integrating it into the main game would be.

 

[Roybe]

the problem with pvp in elite is that has no point at all. Fdev have to fix this. Then we can talk about other things regarding combat and pvp.

The idea is to show that we players can come to a consensus on what would improve the lot of Combat/PvP players. Crossing our arms and telling FD to fix it solves absolutely nothing.

The most logical way for PVP to become 'meaningful' is to tie the activity into the BGS, somehow. The problem with this idea is how to equate the infinitesimal amounts of players killed by PVP into something meaningful, when looking at the overall wash of PVE trophy inputs, without opening up a can full of ways to cheat in the game.

 

[Mohrgan]

Yeah but you have power play in the game, why not utilize as much as possible. I do agree with you though that the solo, unaffiliated players would be left out.
But there has to be some kind of meaning to expanding pp territory. Something to get players involved.

Well, I'd have to say at this point we are onto another subject. I would be happy to confine the PvP aspects of the game to PP, but I suggested an all around integration to accommodate as many players as possible.

Let's then flesh out how PP can offer a generally solo player, someone not part of a organized group, a way to find Combat/PvP engaging. Understanding that there is both a financial and influential reward involved, and more directly for engaging in PvP.

Do you accept the Voucher concept that I proposed in it's entirety? And, do you believe that such a scheme would satisfy the PvP community?

 

[Mohrgan]

The most logical way for PVP to become 'meaningful' is to tie the activity into the BGS, somehow. The problem with this idea is how to equate the infinitesimal amounts of players killed by PVP into something meaningful, when looking at the overall wash of PVE trophy inputs, without opening up a can full of ways to cheat in the game.

As I have suggested, we would use Vouchers that would reward Credits, and Influence over the BGS and/or PP. Nothing would be removed from the current PvE aspects of the game, there would just be an additional pathway to credits and influence through PvP. Just as simple NPC combat has currently.

 

[PiLhEaD]

Is there a game that has provided 'meaningful PvP' in an open world environment analogous to that of ED? Reviewing a tangible and working in-game example would help, and if there are none then this might suggest a profound issue.

I don't see that linking PvP directly to any game mechanic(s) is sensible as I suspect that 'perverse incentives' will always arise where the mechanism can be abused and subverted.

My view is that some in-game league with tangible rewards based on CQC is one way to establish meaningful PvP. Similarly de-penalising commanders at the rebuy screen as I suggested above will encourage more people into open, if also combined with non-destructive pirating tools.

Some Thargoid-like means to temporarily disable but not destroy a ship with time to steal/eject cargo would surely be high on the list for players with a pirating outlook? Doubly so if making the pirate(s) vulnerable whilst trying to recover the ejected cargo?

 

[Screemonster]

Some Thargoid-like means to temporarily disable but not destroy a ship with time to steal/eject cargo would surely be high on the list for players with a pirating outlook? Doubly so if making the pirate(s) vulnerable whilst trying to recover the ejected cargo?

something that does module, but not hull damage.
Hell, go the route that FTL went with ion weaponry. Deals stacking module damage that bleeds off over time, no actual damage whatsoever. To make it fancier, make it so it bleeds off faster if the module is disabled and cannot be applied to a deactivated module, but a module that has any stacks of it can't be powered up if it's off. A module that gets more ion damage stacked than it has integrity remaining is forcibly powered down.

Huzzah, now you have a gun for taking out a ship's engines without killing them. The real kicker would be how to tweak it so it's useful for pirating but not so useful for simply immobilising a ship while you murder them.