My Main Concern with ED

[Zarquon Beeblebrox]

I didn't know there was a forum rule where you had to quote a persons whole post to be able to respond to parts of it. I'm sorry, it wont happen again.

I never said I want to eliminate PvP from the game. I play a ton of PvP games, and it has it's place. The example you give is an excellent one, and quite welcome (though I would think exploration is the least violent path, in general).

Ok no dissagreement here....

My beef is with station campers, newb gankers and people wanting to just PK people to fill their tear jar and feel like they pwn. Senseless PvP with no in-game reason will hopefully be kept to a minimum.

Newbie pvp'ers need to practice on newbie players. Its funny how you seem to have radar knowledge about how each and every pvp'er is.

He is a griefer.
He is a newbie ganker
He is ganking for no reason other then filling tear jar.
He is he is...

Whats probably true. You have no idea who each player killing a player is. Why the kill was done. If it went as planned or ended up as plan B.

It seems you just label how the killer is based on how upset the killed got.

An unladen hauler, or an empty starter-sidey pilot shouldn't fear being randomly ganked just because anoother player finds it funny. PvP action that makes sense in the universe and the situation? Bring it

I disagree with you. He should fear being randomly ganked just because it is a pvp online game where people can be an assassin, pirate or what not. Its not breaking game rules and if it is it will be dealt with by the game admins or game mechanics.

But this point iv made before. Did not see the purpose of repeating it... Sorry

 

[Myspace Kaitsu80]

I´m so confused about this "griefer/pvp" rage here months before game is not even released, before many wipes..

I certainly keep blowing s...stuff up, have spotted lots of ticket/crash report issues also that way.

Just relax, or jump into a river or something to cool down after I blow you up with my missile Anaconda.

 

[Adept]

The difference with us Zap, is that I'm quite happy with the structured and setting appropriate violence, as pitched during the KS and later by David Braben, where as you seem to be betting that it's all hot air, and the reality will be closer to your ideal game, and much more no-holds-barred.

You've made your wishes quite clear, don't worry. I just suspect you are out of luck, and that Braben and Frontier are making a game they will enjoy playing. Braben doesn't want "players to suffer griefing" (direct quote, several occasions at E3 and other interviews). He also seems to have quite a restrictive view of what constitutes griefing, and a strong preference for co-op rather than versus multiplayer.

I'm supporting the game as it has been pitched and talked about by the creator.

 

[Zenicetus]

What if instances are never totally fulled, so if there is much people, 16 into each instance so another 16 enemies/traders will still fit in (or lower but still equal numbers about if some tech issues there).

This would be great for battles in missions and for military too.

Oh sure, you could have a 16 vs. 16 group or any combination. And that's how the conflict zones will probably be filled, once the faction reputation systems are in. Good times!

Outside the dedicated faction conflict zones, I think it will probably end up working best with pre-planned arrangements, like two competing groups of up to 16 players agreeing to show up in a separate Private Online group, so they ensure everyone gets loaded into the instance. Just expecting the game to do the matchmaking may not be reliable, given the way it prioritizes timezones and P2P connection quality. It might work, might not.

 

[Zarquon Beeblebrox]

The difference with us Zap, is that I'm quite happy with the structured and setting appropriate violence, as pitched during the KS and later by David Braben, where as you seem to be betting that it's all hot air, and the reality will be closer to your ideal game, and much more no-holds-barred.

You've made your wishes quite clear, don't worry. I just suspect you are out of luck, and that Braben and Frontier are making a game they will enjoy playing. Braben doesn't want "players to suffer griefing" (direct quote, several occasions at E3 and other interviews). He also seems to have quite a restrictive view of what constitutes griefing, and a strong preference for co-op rather than versus multiplayer.

I'm supporting the game as it has been pitched and talked about by the creator.

That my friend i think you are quite right in. And we can agree. Also i do like the game. I think it will be a fantastic game. I just also think it could be more. And even more fantastic (for me)

I'm not discussing these subjects as a matter of competition where the winner will get the game changed, altered or kept the way it is. I don't think there are winners in discussions, concerning subjective views.

I know what i want and what i like. I think i see and know the flaw in the arguments that many of the people fanatically against pvp in a online pvp game (this is not you) But that to is subjective and i'm allowed to think so.

I will not and can never be disappointed about how the end game of ED becomes. I already know that the people wanting my opposite are outnumbering the sales records. And in a capitalistic world as this. I lose.

But i know what i want, wish , and hope for

 

[W0OCQCK]

I didn't know there was a forum rule where you had to quote a persons whole post to be able to respond to parts of it. I'm sorry, it wont happen again.



Ok no dissagreement here....



Newbie pvp'ers need to practice on newbie players. Its funny how you seem to have radar knowledge about how each and every pvp'er is.

He is a griefer.
He is a newbie ganker
He is ganking for no reason other then filling tear jar.
He is he is...

Whats probably true. You have no idea who each player killing a player is. Why the kill was done. If it went as planned or ended up as plan B.

It seems you just label how the killer is based on how upset the killed got.



I disagree with you. He should fear being randomly ganked just because it is a pvp online game where people can be an assassin, pirate or what not. Its not breaking game rules and if it is it will be dealt with by the game admins or game mechanics.

But this point iv made before. Did not see the purpose of repeating it... Sorry

Ya know players like the above is exactly why solo play is a brilliant addition to this game design. Being a new player, I can go prepare myself to go meet this guy respectfully some day, in all my glory. While I'm preparing he can't bother me. I really love this.

I hope I have the opportunity to entertain you some day. I also hope this game is all you need it to be. Best Regards

 

[Myspace Kaitsu80]

I will not and can never be disappointed about how the end game of ED becomes. I already know that the people wanting my opposite are outnumbering the sales records. And in a capitalistic world as this. I lose.

Dont be so sure, people for PVP have grown significantly after game has sold more. Connected by TS or Mumble.

And your not only lonely wolf out there looking for company to have fun with, even trying to populate anarchy system as much as possible, fill as much instances as possible (at stations/in SC/at POI´s).

For me there is no griefing, just targets that for some reason died, maybe by accident (because I missed empty Haulers cargo hatch and had no scan, to mention one).

If I even wanna blow up DB launching from London, I should totally be able to, but penalty should be so severe that I would have never business in Federation ever.

 

[Adept]

I know what i want and what i like. I think i see and know the flaw in the arguments that many of the people fanatically against pvp in a online pvp game (this is not you) But that to is subjective and i'm allowed to think so.

Good to hear. It's quite an enjoyable debate actually, as long as tensions don't run too high.

I suspect the ultimate success for Elite would be a world that can be very dangerous if you stray to the wrong parts of the galaxy, and with clashes between players in the lawless "wild west" regions, but with reward and sanction mechanisms in place which channel that competetive aggression so that it's almost purely directed at those who "buy in" to such play style.

Soldiers of fortune are an obvious case, but also armed (or escorted) rogue traders braving the lawless zones, and even explorers searching for the big gold rush score.

It's possible that the game manages to channel player behaviour so that 99%+ will have more interesting things to do than ganking easy marks for fun, and those who can't think of anything better to do may end up being entertainment for bounty hunter players and the armed playerbase in general.

No feeling of being artificially limoted and restrained, and rather having better and actually worth while things to do

***

For those wanting to play the zero-sum game of territorial conquest and control, I suspect the key is to align with one of the big powers and push their agenda. That way one gets to fight for territory, keep enemies suppressed and actually gain rep, credits and rank while doing it.

 

[Myspace Kaitsu80]

I suspect the ultimate success for Elite would be a world that can be very dangerous if you stray to the wrong parts of the galaxy, and with clashes between players in the lawless "wild west" regions, but with reward and sanction mechanisms in place which channel that competetive aggression so that it's almost purely directed at those who "buy in" to such play style.

Soldiers of fortune are an obvious case, but also armed (or escorted) rogue traders braving the lawless zones, and even explorers searching for the big gold rush score.

Exactly, +1.

If somebody wants to solo with AI, let them.

If somebody wanna play trader in safety of Core Systems (or so), let them.

If I wanna get my Long Range Cobra (KS pledge reward) and get sucked to hole at centre of Milky Way first, let me.

If somebody has psycho friends from EvE or SC/RL, and they have used to play killing people, give them some backwater system to try control it even until some point, let them.

Being pirate or even lower killer criminal scum were included in (Elite rank) reputation standings.

 

[hydraSlav]

When I played EvE it was common practice for new players to start in the relative safety of high sec, conduct business, then move to 0.0. People went back and forth between 0.0 and empire all the time. I don't remember anyone saying it was unfair, or that you should play either high sec Empire or low sec/0.0, but not both. How is this fundamentally different from the scenario you described above?

Love wrong "facts" about EvE Love them!
High-sec isn't safe. High-sec does not provide protection to the victim. It provides punishment to the attacker. You can and will die in High-sec. Especially if you think you can transport large valuable cargo in "safety".

High-sec ISK gain is much lower than Low-sec, which in turn is much lower than 0.0. This is a game design decision on purpose. Risk-vs-reward.

If you are making money in (wrongfully perceived "safety") of High-sec, and I am doing it in 0.0, then I don't care what you make there, as I make much more, which puts me at competitive advantage. And if you start making disproportionally large amounts, I can come and kill you even in High-sec.

How is that same as "safe solo vs all group"?

Let me ask you a question since you claim to have played EvE. Imagine EvE, with a "solo online" mode from ED, blissfully free from all horrible PKers and griefers. If you could switch, at will, preserving progress, would you ever fly missions or trade in EvE not in "solo online"?

With different saves, you'd see me flying type IXs with 440 tons of gold on board in all open - not going to happen with EDs system - it would simply be illogical to do that.

They don't get it, do they? They believe in some utopian society with internet honour and etiquette?

I guess you've been here longer than I. Keep fighting the (realistic) good fight. Hopefully FD will behave as a business, not someone's personal hobby that is crowd-funded.

Reading this thread, it makes me hopeful, seeing other people among the single-player immersion lunatics who want to be nothing more than smaller than a spec of dust in the galaxy. I will see you at release in all group, hopefully in a cargo ship

 

[Myspace Kaitsu80]

True. I would have never moved anything valuable in EvE if I could have done it in solo mode (and npc´s would not have been even more serious threath than human players).

Maybe they make AI insane, or even one new, just online mode?

Lets hope.

EDIT: AI insane in solo mode only, to balance risks

 

[W0OCQCK]

Love wrong "facts" about EvE Love them!
High-sec isn't safe. High-sec does not provide protection to the victim. It provides punishment to the attacker. You can and will die in High-sec. Especially if you think you can transport large valuable cargo in "safety".

High-sec ISK gain is much lower than Low-sec, which in turn is much lower than 0.0. This is a game design decision on purpose. Risk-vs-reward.

If you are making money in (wrongfully perceived "safety") of High-sec, and I am doing it in 0.0, then I don't care what you make there, as I make much more, which puts me at competitive advantage. And if you start making disproportionally large amounts, I can come and kill you even in High-sec.

How is that same as "safe solo vs all group"?

Let me ask you a question since you claim to have played EvE. Imagine EvE, with a "solo online" mode from ED, blissfully free from all horrible PKers and griefers. If you could switch, at will, preserving progress, would you ever fly missions or trade in EvE not in "solo online"?



They don't get it, do they? They believe in some utopian society with internet honour and etiquette?

I guess you've been here longer than I. Keep fighting the (realistic) good fight. Hopefully FD will behave as a business, not someone's personal hobby that is crowd-funded.

Reading this thread, it makes me hopeful, seeing other people among the single-player immersion lunatics who want to be nothing more than smaller than a spec of dust in the galaxy. I will see you at release in all group, hopefully in a cargo ship

The bottom line here Hydra, is simply, "ED" is giving us the privilege to choose how we play. I'm all for it, 100%. If I want to play with friends and family, I don't feel the need for you to be a part of it.

Please tell us more about the wonderful Eve Experience. Don't forget the ships made of flubber, and jumping thru gates to emerge frozen, because they were trying to cram to many participants into a single node. Frozen solid or just never see the other side of the gate, just respon in a station never able to fire a shot.

 

[Myspace Kaitsu80]

For those that want more potential targets in MP, better start reqruiting (through Youtube, other medias and games) hundreds of thousands of new players, with large enough playerbase we are sure to see large part of those new pilots in MP space.

 

[Adept]

For those that want more potential targets in MP, better start reqruiting (through Youtube, other medias and games) hundreds of thousands of new players, with large enough playerbase we are sure to see large part of those new pilots in MP space.

Or they could just take the game on it's own merits, and enjoy it as it is.

Not that I oppose anybody recruiting more players. More sales, more money to create more Elite.

 

[DaveB]

/deadhorse

 

[Zvanya]

Love wrong "facts" about EvE Love them!
High-sec isn't safe. High-sec does not provide protection to the victim. It provides punishment to the attacker. You can and will die in High-sec. Especially if you think you can transport large valuable cargo in "safety".

High-sec ISK gain is much lower than Low-sec, which in turn is much lower than 0.0. This is a game design decision on purpose. Risk-vs-reward.

If you are making money in (wrongfully perceived "safety") of High-sec, and I am doing it in 0.0, then I don't care what you make there, as I make much more, which puts me at competitive advantage. And if you start making disproportionally large amounts, I can come and kill you even in High-sec.

How is that same as "safe solo vs all group"?

Let me ask you a question since you claim to have played EvE. Imagine EvE, with a "solo online" mode from ED, blissfully free from all horrible PKers and griefers. If you could switch, at will, preserving progress, would you ever fly missions or trade in EvE not in "solo online"?



They don't get it, do they? They believe in some utopian society with internet honour and etiquette?

I guess you've been here longer than I. Keep fighting the (realistic) good fight. Hopefully FD will behave as a business, not someone's personal hobby that is crowd-funded.

Reading this thread, it makes me hopeful, seeing other people among the single-player immersion lunatics who want to be nothing more than smaller than a spec of dust in the galaxy. I will see you at release in all group, hopefully in a cargo ship

We are nothing but a spec of dust in the galaxy.

If you think I'm making up that I played Eve you're welcome to think that. Killing me in high sec or anywhere else might have been harder than just finding me.

You're putting a lot of words in my mouth. I never said high sec was safe. I said "relative safety". You just elected to ignore the qualifier. I never said that you could not die in high sec. Nor did I say that playing in high sec was more profitable. I did not say that high sec/low sec/0.0 in EvE was the same as solo vs open in Elite.

You seem to want Elite changed into something else. I want the game that has been described and promised. This does not make me a "single player immersion lunatic" whatever that is.

You think that I want to play in solo to make money, switch to open play, then switch back to solo whenever some scary guy like you pops up? You're mistaken. If you think I've never played in and enjoyed open PvP MMOs both before and after I played EvE, you're mistaken. If you think I "believe in some utopian society with internet honour and etiquette", you're mistaken.

I would have no problems if there were no solo online mode or instances - just a big seamless playing field that everyone inhabits. I'd like that - but that is not what has been promised. I also think the option to play solo is a good business decision. It will draw more people in than it drives away. Why do I think that? Read the OP again. His attitude is quite common, and there are a lot of people that don't want to deal with big scary guys like you. Time will tell.

Thing is I would love to play the game I think you want Elite to be. I hope that game is developed. There is a place for that game on my hard drive. But Elite is not that game.

You said that you hope to see me in a cargo ship. Should I then assume you hope not to see me in a combat ship ? Tough guy

 

[Adept]

All of the people I've been forming a wing with are Allegiance veterans. One was a squadron leader (like a clan leader), one was the top of the leaderboard and most feared pilot in the game when it came out originally, and all of us played for keeps in the squad games for years and years.

We are not only very familiar with PvP group tactics and personal 6DoF dogfighting in space. We do not shy away from combat.

And guess what. There is perfectly likely chance that we'll talk about it and decide to play Elite in a private group, interacting with the universe and our chosen friends, but excluding any potential for tedious encounters with Goonswarm "player driven content", idiots having "fun" by ram killing ships inside stations and any antisocial problem cases who would be breaking our immersion by shouting racial abuse or stuff about our mommas to get a rise out of us.

Elite has the potential to be a truly awesome RPG experience, and it remains to be seen if playing in Open makes it better or worse.

 

[Llyr]

ED headed for a Black Hole if it does not stop Griefers from destroying the game.

ED is not EvE, will not have the same griefer aspects as EvE, and just won't ever be EvE.

I disagree, the moderators/programmers are turning it into EVE all over again by having no reasonable consequences.

Been playing about 6 hours tonight "I rarely get time off to do this." I have been jumped 4 times, 2 Anaconda's, A tricked out Viper and the last one was an ASP. All near Barnard s Star, not an anarchy place. I am getting very upset with the lack of consequences against these people. I am flying a slightly upgraded "Power plant and Power Distribution module" Eagle. It is no longer fun to work for hours to build up some cash and then have these jerks force you to spend it on insurance. Pound for pound I can take these Griefs, but they cheat by coming in in heavy tricked out ships, interdict you and crush you.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I disagree, the moderators/programmers are turning it into EVE all over again by having no reasonable consequences.

Players will be able to set Pilots' Federation bounties at some point (if the DDA discussion is implemented) on their attacker / destroyer. That should add a new dimension to consequences.

 

[Llyr]

I would not call Barnard's Star an Anarchy sector.

Been playing about 6 hours tonight "I rarely get time off to do this." I have been jumped 4 times, 2 Anaconda's, A tricked out Viper and the last one was an ASP. All near Barnard s Star, not an anarchy place. I am getting very upset with the lack of consequences agianst these people. I am flying a slightly upgraded "Power plant and Power Distribution module" Eagle. It is no longer fun to work for hours to build up some cash and then have these jerks force you to spend it on insurance. Pound for pound I can take these Griefs, but they cheat by coming in in heavy tricked out ships, interdict you and crush you.