Ignoring or harming PvP in game design is contributing to ganking

[Arvel Yael]

The are plenty of solo players that are heavily into maniplulating the BGS and to them it is very important who controls a station.

The open-ony players that engage in a conflict with the solo players are to some extent at a disadvantage in these situations as they could be hindered by other players, whereas the solo players can't.

My question remains though. Why?
What do players get out of seeing the Derelict Row Ballers is charge of a station instead of The Boy George Fan Club or the Jeremy Beadle Alliance?

 

[Rubbernuke]

Hmm! How about divergent Universes. If we wait long enough until FD no longer supports ED. It was promised that the code would be released so it could be run on a private server. IIRC.

Then everyone could be happy. Sláinte

Ironically Sea of Thieves is testing private servers for a fee.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

My question remains though. Why?
What do players get out of seeing the Derelict Row Ballers is charge of a station instead of The Boy George Fan Club or the Jeremy Beadle Alliance?

I'm no BGS maniac but a lot of players like forging their space in the galaxy and it is also a very deep part of the game - you should ask them though.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But you can't then say all modes are equal, because the outcomes are different.

One outcome is against a construct provided for entertainment - the other relates to an interaction with another player who does not need to engage in whatever it is the other player wants.

You need a shield that has enough Mj in essence. Thats not really imposing, thats being sensible in a potentially dangerous space- you are not forced to fly about in an HRP packed Cutter with the biggest shield possible.

Depends on the use case.

Its irrelevant about choosing, there is no equality in the outcome if you can interdict and rob an NPC, but interdict a player and they log on you. The trader is playing along by carrying valuables in Open.

Why is the choice of the attacker being given precedence over the choice of their player target? Again, NPCs are provided for entertainment. Frontier can't provide players for the entertainment of those who need them - the players have a free choice of who to play with and when to leave.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Ageed, but does not make what I said any less true.

Of course - and I could try landing on a planet with an 8g gravitational field in a ship with inadequate thrusters - it would affect my success rate and would be my choice.

Simply put, the BGS, as Frontier reminded us not long ago, is for all players, regardless of platform or game mode - which means that PvP is not required.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Jeremy Beadle Alliance?

Right or wrong, this is correct.

 

[Arvel Yael]

Right or wrong, this is correct.

If your holovid is featured, you get 250 credits.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

Of course - and I could try landing on a planet with an 8g gravitational field in a ship with inadequate thrusters - it would affect my success rate and would be my choice.

That just isn't relevant as an analogy, in fact it's probably just avoiding the issue

 

[Robert Maynard]

That just isn't relevant as an analogy, in fact it's probably just avoiding the issue

Not at all - choices have consequences. If one likes playing among other players who may affect ones efficiency in PvE actions then no one else made that choice - effectively the player chose to hinder themself while engaging in a game feature that does not require PvP.

 

[Rubbernuke]

One outcome is against a construct provided for entertainment - the other relates to an interaction with another player who does not need to engage in whatever it is the other player wants.

But at a pure game loop level, its not. One ship has cargo, one wants it.

The only difference is if the player looses connection, but even then NPCs have done the same (i.e. not appeared).

Depends on the use case.

As long as you can boost, fly evasively and keep away from fire you'll more often than not survive. You don't need to fit weapons, just have a ship that can evade and not be made out of paper.

Why is the choice of the attacker being given precedence over the choice of their player target? Again, NPCs are provided for entertainment. Frontier can't provide players for the entertainment of those who need them - the players have a free choice of who to play with and when to leave.

Because the player carries something someone else wants- setting up that situation. If that possible situation is not what people want then other modes exist.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Not at all - choices have consequences. If one likes playing among other players who may affect ones efficiency in PvE actions then no one else made that choice - effectively the player chose to hinder themself while engaging in a game feature that does not require PvP.

choices have consequences

and yet

If one likes playing among other players who may affect ones efficiency in PvE

The player who logs is the one affecting the efficiency in this case. There is no consequence to one person, while the other has wasted time.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

Not at all - choices have consequences. If one likes playing among other players who may affect ones efficiency in PvE actions then no one else made that choice - effectively the player chose to hinder themself while engaging in a game feature that does not require PvP.

I could just as well say that when a player chooses to go into open with an unshielded T7 at Deciat and then whines on the forums when he gets blown up, it was all his own choice.
My point is that it doesn't really get us anywhere does it? .. and you seem happy with that.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But at a pure game loop level, its not. One ship has cargo, one wants it.

In a situation where there are two players more than what one player wants matters.

As long as you can boost, fly evasively and keep away from fire you'll more often than not survive. You don't need to fit weapons, just have a ship that can evade and not be made out of paper.

That presupposes that having ones time wasted being attacked is "fun".

Because the player carries something someone else wants- setting up that situation. If that possible situation is not what people want then other modes exist.

Just because one player set up the situation does not mean they get what they want.

Open is the compromise mode with PvP, an unlimited population, menu exit and the block feature. If players menu exiting is not what a people want, don't interfere with other players.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I could just as well say that when a player chooses to go into open with an unshielded T7 at Deciat and then whines on the forums when he gets blown up, it was all his own choice.

Indeed.

My point is that it doesn't really get us anywhere does it? .. and you seem happy with that.

It doesn't - because the BGS was designed, developed and sold to be affected by all players and does not require PvP. I'm happy in the knowledge that I made sure that PvP was an optional extra before I backed the game.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The player who logs is the one affecting the efficiency in this case. There is no consequence to one person, while the other has wasted time.

The one who uses menu exit has presumably already had time wasted by the attacker. The attacker faces little consequence or, likely, risk - if they're selecting targets "properly" - and may have their "fun" at the other player's expense, regardless of whether the targeted player has "fun" if they stick around.

 

[SMcA]

and yet



The player who logs is the one affecting the efficiency in this case. There is no consequence to one person, while the other has wasted time.

Not completly true. The player who logged has wasted his time logging and re-logging. Then going on to his goal.

 

[Rubbernuke]

In a situation where there are two players more than what one player wants matters.

Then what is dictating the game, the fact the other person is a player, or what they are doing?

That presupposes that having ones time wasted being attacked is "fun".

Then don't get attacked, by using your ship, map and skill to avoid it. "Cut-thoat" is more than suggesting attack, its also being able to avoid problems as well.

Just because one player set up the situation does not mean they get what they want.

By carrying valuables they are playing the role, and being a proxy to an NPC.

Open is the compromise mode with PvP, an unlimited population, menu exit and the block feature. If players menu exiting is not what a people want, don't interfere with other players.

Which means that Open is pointless then for playing the game- its not a compromise at all if you can't gain anything from being in it.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Not completly true. The player who logged has wasted his time logging and re-logging. Then going on to his goal.

But the person who logged lost nothing- they lost no merits, cargo or ship. Both parties lost the same chunk of time.

 

[Rubbernuke]

The one who uses menu exit has presumably already had time wasted by the attacker. The attacker faces little consequence or, likely, risk - if they're selecting targets "properly" - and may have their "fun" at the other player's expense, regardless of whether the targeted player has "fun" if they stick around.

If that attacker is a pirate, then is wasted time. If it is someone trying to stop merits in Powerplay, its wasted time.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Then what is dictating the game, the fact the other person is a player, or what they are doing?

If both players are up for it, it'll happen - all it takes is for one not to be for it not to happen.

Then don't get attacked, by using your ship, map and skill to avoid it. "Cut-thoat" is more than suggesting attack, its also being able to avoid problems as well.

It's not the target's choice whether they are attacked or not - it's the choice of the attacker.

By carrying valuables they are playing the role, and being a proxy to an NPC.

Only in the eyes of the attacker - the player carrying valuables is seeking to profit from them - they need not play the role of "willing victim" if they choose not to.

Which means that Open is pointless then for playing the game- its not a compromise at all if you can't gain anything from being in it.

It is where players can engage with likeminded players - but where players may be thwarted by the choices of others.