Question for Open players who don't like PVP/ganking... help me understand

[CMDR Nathan Atterlein]

the only issue is a few players that seem to think they should be able to act like a jerk consequence free.

The bottle's either half empty or half full. It's a matter of assumptions, either healthy or negative ones. Since we'll never know the person who's controlling the enemy pilot, it's pointless to dwell on this. If they respond positively after a gank, make friends, if they camp you outside a station, block them. You can also try and fight them... nothing more fulfulling than taking revenge, I tell you.

 

[Riverside]

The bottle's either half empty or half full. It's a matter of assumptions, either healthy or negative ones. Since we'll never know the person who's controlling the enemy pilot, it's pointless to dwell on this. If they respond positively after a gank, make friends, if they camp you outside a station, block them. You can also try and fight them... nothing more fulfulling than taking revenge, I tell you.

I was referring to specific posters in this thread. Using the blocklist is within the rules of the game too, and can also be considered a jerk move. Avoid the system, evade the player(s), drop to solo or group before entering the system, or just friend them so you know where they are & go when they are asleep

 

[Sir Ganksalot]

I've met several people in Open and its almost never because we started shooting. Is it really so hard to imagine that people play a social game mode for not combat?

Not at all. I've been talking in other threads about creating an alt to try playing like you guys because you all talk so highly about it.

 

[peteuplink]

A simple solution to the PvP/PVE/Open/Solo debate would be for Frontier Dev to add a flag system to the game. Each player has an option in their ship menu to flag PvP on or off. If it's on, you're showing other players that you're open for a fight, and if it's off you're showing that you'd rather be left alone and you can't be targeted or fired upon by other players. This would encourage more players to come into open.

 

[CMDR M. Lehman]

A simple solution to the PvP/PVE/Open/Solo debate would be for Frontier Dev to add a flag system to the game. Each player has an option in their ship menu to flag PvP on or off. If it's on, you're showing other players that you're open for a fight, and if it's off you're showing that you'd rather be left alone and you can't be targeted or fired upon by other players. This would encourage more players to come into open.

But is the mode or game well served by pandering to players who demand magical invinciblity before deigning to fly with others?

 

[William J Smith]

I'm an old hand at this, and almost always to be found in open, why, because of the risk
However , if i run into a bunch of idiots seal clubbing with me being the seal, I'm liable to put in a few calls to some old buddies and go join in the clubbing.... with the seal clubbers being the target.
(gets kinda fun when messages such as "healing beams and seekers are against the pvp code.. you're not playing fair" as a bunch of packhounds smash his drive out )

But its horses for courses... if you're happy in open with the risk of that hollow square either saying "hi o7 Fly safe cmdr" or trying to blow you into tiny pieces , then play open.
Or private, or solo... its your game

Also I've had an encounter 4000 light years out with another explorer.... we chatted about what we've seen, and then went on our ways (his 2 pulse lasers were'nt gonna dent my super up AspX )

Away from the PvP hotspots, most commanders dont shoot first...... but will shoot last so be careful in open of who you shoot at

Bill

 

[gorankar]

A simple solution to the PvP/PVE/Open/Solo debate would be for Frontier Dev to add a flag system to the game. Each player has an option in their ship menu to flag PvP on or off. If it's on, you're showing other players that you're open for a fight, and if it's off you're showing that you'd rather be left alone and you can't be targeted or fired upon by other players. This would encourage more players to come into open.

Flags are not a good idea. It would interfere with all of the PvP play styles. PP, pirate, murder hobo, ganker, etc.
A 4th mode is a better answer. A PvE mode. Imagine Mobius without the player limits. It's unlikely, but far more likely than the real answer. A C&P system that works. To the point that a clean commander in a high security system is unlikely to be interdicted except by the authorities looking for contraband. Still possible to get ganked, but the person that got you will be dealing with ATR wings in seconds and may as well never come back to that system unless they want to face a rebuy and pay their fines. Interstellar factors would be for fines only no bounties ever. Even after the notoriety wears off.

But is the mode or game well served by pandering to players who demand magical invinciblity before deigning to fly with others?

As opposed to pandering to people that RP as homicidal sociopaths, pirates, or don't RP at all, and are just there to make other players go boom? This argument always falls down to the PvE players simply not needing the PvP players. While PvP player, pirates, murderers, gankers, etc. all need other players as victims. So yes, you do pander, at least a bit, to the players you need to make the other players happy. That we are a couple of dozen pages in on this thread should show anyone that. The PvE players are not trying to entice, or force PvP players into solo/pg. It's the PvP players that are trying to entice or force PvE players into open.
I agree flags are not a good idea, a PvE mode is a passable one, but actually fixing C&P, the response, and time it takes to respond, to criminal acts, to the point that unlawful PvP, (piracy, murder, and the like), takes place primarily in anarchy and low security systems, is likely the best answer. Make it hurt in medium sec, and make em cry in high sec.

I will admit I have no idea how to balance that. I suspect Fdev does not either. Which is why I suspect we will get no change, or maybe a 4th mode at some point.

 

[thistle]

If anyone is playing in open, in a paper ship and then gets made when another player blows them up, they have no one to be angry at except themselves. It takes 10 minutes to look up a video on how to escape a gank, my group of guys and girls train players how to escape and build ships properly for open and if none of that fits the way you want to play, you can play in solo or PG.

"they have no one to be angry at except themselves". So you know and admit you're making new players angry/lost/confused. Why should they take 10 minutes to look up how to avoid, or worse become, a ganker? Because the game is about you?

BTW I wouldn't really classify attacking experienced players as ganking myself, experienced players expect and can handle it, or shake their heads and laugh at gankers. Or even join your Dream Team. That's cool. Ganking the new players who are not expecting it is different. But that's their fault it seems? That's how to rationalise it I suppose.

I find your rationalisations for being hateful towards gankers equally amusing.

Disagreeing with you, even laughing at your arguments, isn't "hateful". It's interesting you think that. You presumably think the actions of gankers attacking new players aren't "hateful", and you'd be right, they're just selfish. But lolling and mild sarcasm on a forum is "hateful"?

Is it just disagreeing with you personally that makes me "hateful"? Goodness, I do hope my words ... on a forum ... about YOUR ganking ... haven't hurt you too deeply. Sad face.

 

[Screemonster]

But is the mode or game well served by pandering to players who demand magical invinciblity before deigning to fly with others?

This is why I've advocated buddha-mode rather than outright godmode for this sort of thing, along with conditions (wanted, "dangerous" location, powerplay enemies, hardpoints out) that would nullify the protection.

It's not actually necessary to stop combat completely. The only thing that's actually a problem is completely unprovoked attacks against targets that can't fight back.

I'm an old hand at this, and almost always to be found in open, why, because of the risk
However , if i run into a bunch of idiots seal clubbing with me being the seal, I'm liable to put in a few calls to some old buddies and go join in the clubbing.... with the seal clubbers being the target.
(gets kinda fun when messages such as "healing beams and seekers are against the pvp code.. you're not playing fair" as a bunch of packhounds smash his drive out )

But its horses for courses... if you're happy in open with the risk of that hollow square either saying "hi o7 Fly safe cmdr" or trying to blow you into tiny pieces , then play open.
Or private, or solo... its your game

Also I've had an encounter 4000 light years out with another explorer.... we chatted about what we've seen, and then went on our ways (his 2 pulse lasers were'nt gonna dent my super up AspX )

Away from the PvP hotspots, most commanders dont shoot first...... but will shoot last so be careful in open of who you shoot at

Bill

One of the things I've always said is "there are no rules in a gank". If they try to gank you, they don't get to whinge when it turns out you have crimes on.

 

[peteuplink]

Flags are not a good idea. It would interfere with all of the PvP play styles. PP, pirate, murder hobo, ganker, etc.
A 4th mode is a better answer. A PvE mode. Imagine Mobius without the player limits. It's unlikely, but far more likely than the real answer. A C&P system that works. To the point that a clean commander in a high security system is unlikely to be interdicted except by the authorities looking for contraband. Still possible to get ganked, but the person that got you will be dealing with ATR wings in seconds and may as well never come back to that system unless they want to face a rebuy and pay their fines. Interstellar factors would be for fines only no bounties ever. Even after the notoriety wears off.

As opposed to pandering to people that RP as homicidal sociopaths, pirates, or don't RP at all, and are just there to make other players go boom? This argument always falls down to the PvE players simply not needing the PvP players. While PvP player, pirates, murderers, gankers, etc. all need other players as victims. So yes, you do pander, at least a bit, to the players you need to make the other players happy. That we are a couple of dozen pages in on this thread should show anyone that. The PvE players are not trying to entice, or force PvP players into solo/pg. It's the PvP players that are trying to entice or force PvE players into open.
I agree flags are not a good idea, a PvE mode is a passable one, but actually fixing C&P, the response, and time it takes to respond, to criminal acts, to the point that unlawful PvP, (piracy, murder, and the like), takes place primarily in anarchy and low security systems, is likely the best answer. Make it hurt in medium sec, and make em cry in high sec.

I will admit I have no idea how to balance that. I suspect Fdev does not either. Which is why I suspect we will get no change, or maybe a 4th mode at some point.

The simplest way of balancing how security reacts to players who willfully destroy others is to include a star based wanted level system.

1 star = occasional NPC interdictions from system security ships ranked at your current combat rank.
2 stars = increased level of NPC interdiction from tougher system security ships at a combat rank 1 higher than you.
3 stars = much more frequent interdictions from NPC's in ships ranked 2 higher including bounty hunters.
4 stars = ships ranked 3 higher and now you also get the armed forces thrown at you.
5 stars = you may as well just surrender because they've just declared open season!
Also at 4 and 5 star wanted levels in non-anarchy systems, your location is broadcast to system mission boards so player bounty hunters can join in the hunt.

In anarchy systems you won't get a wanted level for killing another player or get attacked by NPC's when wanted.
In low security systems you get 1 star added to your wanted level per kill and are attacked infrequently.
In medium it rises to 2 stars per kill and interdictions are more frequent.
In high it's 3 stars per kill and you're immediately in their firing line.

To counter this, the wanted players can hide out in anarchy systems where the security forces won't go, but players can still try to find them. If you kill the player that comes after you in an anarchy system, you won't get an increase in wanted level and you get some PvP against a willing opponent. If you're not killed the wanted timer times out by 1 star every 6 hours. If you are killed by a player or NPC the wanted level is wiped but you lose 25% of your earnings by way of a fine if you're killed in anything other than an anarchy system..

 

[CMDR M. Lehman]

As opposed to pandering to people that RP as homicidal sociopaths, pirates, or don't RP at all, and are just there to make other players go boom? This argument always falls down to the PvE players simply not needing the PvP players. While PvP player, pirates, murderers, gankers, etc. all need other players as victims. So yes, you do pander, at least a bit, to the players you need to make the other players happy. That we are a couple of dozen pages in on this thread should show anyone that. The PvE players are not trying to entice, or force PvP players into solo/pg. It's the PvP players that are trying to entice or force PvE players into open.
I agree flags are not a good idea, a PvE mode is a passable one, but actually fixing C&P, the response, and time it takes to respond, to criminal acts, to the point that unlawful PvP, (piracy, murder, and the like), takes place primarily in anarchy and low security systems, is likely the best answer. Make it hurt in medium sec, and make em cry in high sec.

I will admit I have no idea how to balance that. I suspect Fdev does not either. Which is why I suspect we will get no change, or maybe a 4th mode at some point.

I'm not sure if "pandering" is the word I would choose to describe PvP in open. Open is simply what its name implies: a setting where anything can happen. A PvE-oriented player has no more right to complain about being attacked any more than a PvP-oriented ganker has the right to complain that their victim got away, regardless of who "needs" who.

 

[Old Duck]

I get the sense, reading this thread, that gankers really don't want to "understand" open players who don't aren't interested PvP... Perhaps thread should be titled, "Open players who don't like PVP/ganking... let me help you understand why you are wrong."

 

[Phebull]

It's the lack of consequences for gankers that keeps me out of open.
The easiest fix for the problem is to simply have the insurance company reject any claim by the gankers so they have to pay full price. A small impact but an impact none the less.
I'd go so far as to say they should loose whatever engineering was done to their ship as well, forcing them to spend time grinding like the best of us.

 

[CMDR M. Lehman]

It's the lack of consequences for gankers that keeps me out of open.
The easiest fix for the problem is to simply have the insurance company reject any claim by the gankers so they have to pay full price. A small impact but an impact none the less.
I'd go so far as to say they should loose whatever engineering was done to their ship as well, forcing them to spend time grinding like the best of us.

Would this suggestion apply to all CMDRs with a bounty, or only ones gained through PvP?

 

[Phebull]

perhaps the insurance replacement cost should be factored by the overall bounties against you at the time of Boom.
So even with some amount of bounty on your head, you still get a decent portion of insurance coverage

Something like that, and if so then the mechanic seems like it might work across the board for everything, pvp and pve

 

[Screemonster]

perhaps the insurance replacement cost should be factored by the overall bounties against you at the time of Boom.
So even with some amount of bounty on your head, you still get a decent portion of insurance coverage

Something like that, and if so then the mechanic seems like it might work across the board for everything, pvp and pve

Bounties are already added to your rebuy when you go boom.

 

[Riverside]

I get the sense, reading this thread, that gankers really don't want to "understand" open players who don't aren't interested PvP... Perhaps thread should be titled, "Open players who don't like PVP/ganking... let me help you understand why you are wrong."

The thread does seem to have drifted into that yes, the OP appeared genuine in intent though. I have met quite a few Deciat ganker/griefer type players, and having chatted after an 'eventful initial meet & greet' have helped several with their home systems, either to avoid a war or just as an extra pilot doing CZs. The ones that are not jerks get added to a circulation list & I and others will try to share wing rewards to finance their rebuys so they don't have to mine quite so much. If they are online, not already in a wing (and not in Deciat ) the wars I fight against those that attack me financially support a group of players that are more than happy to help me if they can. There is never any obligation, just emergent content opportunities

 

[CMDR M. Lehman]

perhaps the insurance replacement cost should be factored by the overall bounties against you at the time of Boom.
So even with some amount of bounty on your head, you still get a decent portion of insurance coverage

Something like that, and if so then the mechanic seems like it might work across the board for everything, pvp and pve

Ah, okay.

I only ask because I've been around long enough to remember the Great Pants Soiling of 3.0, where certain among the PvE community were shocked, appalled, and enraged that the new crime and punishment system applied to themselves as well as PvPers.

 

[Phebull]

Bounties are already added to your rebuy when you go boom.

I didn't actually know that... however I was proposing factoring the buy back price based on bounties or notoriety...
so if there is a 1 mil bounty on you, you are paying full price if your ship goes boom, or something. I'm sure given time we can pick even the best of ideas to shreds

@Lehman
I wasn't around for that, but it seems to me that mechanics need to effect all players for it to be fair and just.
My problem is that as far as I can tell, there is no real consequence to gank/grief and that's not fair or just.

In addition, I think someone, many pages ago, suggested making it almost impossible to gank in a High Sec system, that seems like an absolute no brainer to me.

I've spent less then 10 hours in open, and probably like 500 hrs in solo.
I've been ganked 3 times, and those are the only booms I've had in the game, and yes, one of them was in Deciat.

Actually, I was blown up inside a station once, for an illegal passenger...

 

[CMDR M. Lehman]

I didn't actually know that... however I was proposing factoring the buy back price based on bounties or notoriety...
so if there is a 1 mil bounty on you, you are paying full price if your ship goes boom, or something. I'm sure given time we can pick even the best of ideas to shreds

@Lehman
I wasn't around for that, but it seems to me that mechanics need to effect all players for it to be fair and just.
My problem is that as far as I can tell, there is no real consequence to gank/grief and that's not fair or just.

In addition, I think someone, many pages ago, suggested making it almost impossible to gank in a High Sec system, that seems like an absolute no brainer to me.

Figuring out the right balance is tough. I don't like the ham-fisted "magically invincible" premises of a PvP toggle or PvE open, but nor do I like the idea of security states having as little meaning as they do. The idea of law enforcement arriving instantly also seems pretty gamey and far-fetched.

If I were in charge, I'd overhaul the criminal playstyle to a career path in and of itself. To have a bounty with a faction means that one can't land in its stations. To have a superpower bounty means that you're wanted all over the superpower and cut off from even landing in vast swathes of human territory. One would still be free to engage in criminal behavior, but they would need to plan their activities a bit more carefully. Naturally anarchies would remain the bastions of free enterprise they are today.

However...

I'd also make the criminal style far more profitable and dynamic than it currently is. Black markets would receive a massive overhaul. One would have to get in good with a criminal faction to even access them, and once access was granted a whole host of black and grey market gear would be available (which, if detected, would make one's ship an instant target by lawfuls). Normally unavailable items like Powerplay, pre-engineered, and Guardian gear would also be available, depending on the black market's RNG and player's reputation with the local criminal element. This reputation would not only depend on the usual running of missions, but one's bounty itself. You would need to have a price on your head to access the goody room and money-making missions.