PvP Behold, the great Fdev Ganker filter..

[Morbad]

the actions of some of the PvPers make those things very difficult to implement due to the nature of the player base.

I don't agree.

The actions of some players simply reveal holes that should be fixed regardless.

Because that's how you rock paper scissors.

I don't think rock-paper-scissors is a very good game and I'd be surprised if the majority of PvP oriented ED players did.

If you want everything to be the same, go play CQC.

Screen's statement implies a desire for more variety, not less.

I'd also argue that CQC has just as much, if not more, viable variety as most examples of combat in the main game...but it's still CQC, a sports simulator.

 

[AgentGB]

It has been said by many great and no longer with us Cmdr's, that the best time of Elite was just after launch.
When the exploits were mostly unknown but to a few and no one knew about high waking. Actions had consequences.

Everything carried a risk for both sides of the engagement. Where a trade conda with guns, was just as dangerous as a pirate python.
Most people ran around in Combat Asps and the Clipper was the alpha PVP ship because few could afford a Python. Vipers, Cobras had a place.
And not a sniff of the stupid release that was engineering.

If you weren't there you cannot comment on it, but know that you really missed the best Elite had to offer. This is where a lot of want of change stems from. It worked until the exploits and some insanely broken game mechanics became known. Player groups were dropping content as you wouldn't believe and the community wasn't the toxic mess it is today.

The core systems were buzzing, people feared having a wanted tag, as it opened you up to attack and the level of screeching about non-consensual PVP was almost non-existent. If FDEV had built on that, the game would have been magnificent today. We almost thought we had it with Power Play...Until Powerplay launched...

Powerpanic
The Voice of Griefing

spot on

Engineering is generally neat and allows for varied builds, the main thing that makes engineering a problem for PvP is defensive bloat, particularly to shields. The fact that a combat ship can be made so it will not only beat a noncombat ship, but is completely untouchable by a noncombat ship, skews things to a huge degree.
Like, people can gank in shinrarta with impunity because their defensive bloat allows them to just ignore the cops until ATR shows up, and if their targets are fitted for anything other than combat, they aren't equipped with the same kind of insane defensive stacking.
Engineered weapons, barring a few experimental effects, haven't powercrept to anywhere near the degree that shields/boosters/hrps have.

Not to mention the silly amount of grind required for engineering, that must make you pvp'er a dying breed in this game i'd imagine. I use to pvp before engineering, picked up horizon so many months ago. Find i've been overtaken by the power creep. try to face engineering head on, but for the life of me, it is so bloody boring. Make me actually like going to work.

 

[Slange Lands]

In Jumpgate, losing your ship meant ejecting and starting in a starter ship at a station. You didn't get your old ship back, though you got a percentage of it's value back based on your insurance rating, which went down the more frequently you needed to use it...I knew some people that were only getting half the value of their ship back. You then had to either have parts stored, or you needed to track down and rebuy everything, perhaps even having to go through the steps to make it if stock wasn't available. You also didn't get back any special/unique equipment at all; pre-collapse artifacts (the equivalent of Engineered modules) and the like were just gone. PvP was also even more unrestricted than in ED...no modes, no separate instances, no way to block anyone, and no easy way to log off or disconnect to cheese one's way out of consequences...no equivalent to high or low wakes either, except at the jumpgates leading to and from systems, which could be dozens of minutes of travel away.

In Shadowbane, outside a few small newbie zones, you could be attacked and killed anywhere at any time, by any number of hostile player characters, of any level. You also dropped everything in your inventory and anyone could immediately loot it; there was even a chance of some equipped gear staying behind.

These games were almost to the level of consequence I'd prefer.

Isn't it possible to play Elite Dangerous at the level of consequence that you do prefer, i.e. no insurance? Also, if one wanted the game to be a tiny bit more realistic one could also use exclusively, economic jumping. A few Commanders also succeeded in their goal of obtaining triple elite in a sidewinder. If you have imposed personal restrictions or level of consequence, bravo. However, if you have not, why have you not?

 

[Slange Lands]

[

It has been said by many great and no longer with us Cmdr's, that the best time of Elite was just after launch.
When the exploits were mostly unknown but to a few and no one knew about high waking. Actions had consequences.

I have heard the above sentiment many times by pilots that I very much respect. I really wish I was playing then! Would it be viable and possible for Frontier to create a completely separate game in which Vanilla mechanics were recreated? There would be no engineering. The entire universe would be untagged so that the nerf to jump range to explorers might not be so odious. Perhaps Frontier could even make it a galaxy other than the Milky Way?

I guess I am dreaming again....

o7

 

[Slange Lands]

But that's the thing. Nowadays money doesn't mean a thing, so all the cap does is make BH unprofitable. It's a calling but not a viable line of work in the ED universe.

Edit to clarify: If money doesn't mean a thing, then why does profitability matter? Because everyone needs at least one moneymaker and the current options are heavily biased against combat. I would perhaps enjoy bounty hunting as an alternative to VO/painite mining for the occasional need to make a quick couple of hundred million credits.



You don't have to. Drop 10 units of VO to a newbie and they get on the hockeystick curve of earning where they'll never have to look at another Cobra or Hauler ever.

There is no need to donate a billion when anyone can make their own in a day.

It's just a matter of getting past the initial million or two and then -- poof -- money quickly becomes a no-thing.

It's going to be interesting now that credits may have some value again because of Fleet Carriers. I, for one, will not be purchasing a carrier since I don't have enough credits and will not grind for them..... and besides, if I can't fly it, I ain't buying it.

 

[Morbad]

Isn't it possible to play Elite Dangerous at the level of consequence that you do prefer, i.e. no insurance? Also, if one wanted the game to be a tiny bit more realistic one could also use exclusively, economic jumping. A few Commanders also succeeded in their goal of obtaining triple elite in a sidewinder. If you have imposed personal restrictions or level of consequence, bravo. However, if you have not, why have you not?

It's a multiplayer-only game with a shared setting and the same rules have to apply to everyone for the experience I'm looking for to be possible.

The consequences have to be an ever present threat despite my very best efforts to avoid or mitigate them and my CMDR would have to be able to use them, directly or indirectly, against his enemies, and vice versa.

Would it be viable and possible for Frontier to create a completely separate game in which Vanilla mechanics were recreated?

It would be possible, but no one would play it, even those that preferred that incarnation of the game, because no one else would play it.

Anyone looking to play in a proverbial vacuum can simply not use Engineers.

Anyone looking to interact with others will go where the population is and anyone looking to interact on equal terms will be forced to use the most advantageous mechanisms available.

 

[CMDR Slee Piboi]

It's going to be interesting now that credits may have some value again because of Fleet Carriers. I, for one, will not be purchasing a carrier since I don't have enough credits and will not grind for them..... and besides, if I can't fly it, I ain't buying it.

All the more reason to provide alternative means of income rather than funnel everyone into the mining rush, which due to game balancing cannot even have any tangible consequences such as permanently depleting the bubble's VO/Painite resources.

But I'm not really concerned about the cost of fleet carriers. To me a billion is a day put aside for mining instead of having fun doing pew-pew. So whether the carriers end up costing .5BCr, 1BCr or 10BCr, it's just time. Earlier, I went all kinds of space crazy after mining roughly a haul of 100MCr. Nowadays I usually stay out there until my T9 is close to full on Painite, so that's 350MCr a trip, and I feel pretty numb about the whole experience. See rock, launch prospector, launch collector, shoot rock, repeat.

 

[Tiili]

[

I have heard the above sentiment many times by pilots that I very much respect. I really wish I was playing then! Would it be viable and possible for Frontier to create a completely separate game in which Vanilla mechanics were recreated? There would be no engineering. The entire universe would be untagged so that the nerf to jump range to explorers might not be so odious. Perhaps Frontier could even make it a galaxy other than the Milky Way?

I guess I am dreaming again....

o7

They are just wearing nostalgia glasses, the game was a lot worse back then.

 

[[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos]

They are just wearing nostalgia glasses, the game was a lot worse back then.

This much like most people believe Twitter has gone downhill since they joined, it used to be much better they say, when they joined 2 years ago but people were claiming it was rubbish 3 years ago. See also ‘music was better in my day’.

 

[CMDR Slee Piboi]

the same rules have to apply to everyone for the experience I'm looking for to be possible.

Yes.

I loved the concept of Skyrim Survival Mode, but when the mode had no effect on NPCs, I figured it's just another difficulty setting and carried on with the vanilla game. It's a lost opportunity if you ask me. Skyrim's inhabitants would behave completely differently if hypothermia, hunger, thirst, blood loss or infection were considerations. Being prepared is not difficult per se but it would certainly enable some interesting consequential gameplay to emerge.

"Here I'm bleeding to death in the marshes of Haafingar because I felt like traveling light. Well at least I gave the wolf a little poke, the wound fever will get it in a day or two"

I understand the appeal of ironman mode as a personal challenge. But as a way to patch up a game lacking in consequences, and trying to stay immersed by imagining everyone else is feeling the same weight of their actions as you are with your self-imposed handicap? No.

 

[Alwayslate]

Some PVErs just can't realize how putting PVPers against PVPers will benefit them.

 

[Havvk]

Some PVErs just can't realize how putting PVPers against PVPers will benefit them.

I wouldn't care either way.

 

[znôrt]

It would be possible, but no one would play it, even those that preferred that incarnation of the game, because no one else would play it.

i would. the alternative is solo anyway, so nothing to loose.

i actually proposed exactly this a few years back, the "elite classic open mode". true, nobody gave a damn ...

 

[znôrt]

It's going to be interesting now that credits may have some value again because of Fleet Carriers.

no, it's just going to push inflation to the next notch. so exactly the same. unless carriers bring some fresh gameplay of their own, the novelty will wear off in a week or two.

 

[Alwayslate]

I wouldn't care either way.

Do you speak on behalf of all players? No? Then Why do you think your opinions are so important that you have to reply to me to help me realize something that I have already realized long ago?

 

[Powderpanic]

Do you speak on behalf of all players? No? Then Why do you think your opinions are so important that you have to reply to me to help me realize something that I have already realized long ago?

Because every PVP thread needs its militant anti PVP poster.

The names change but the pattern stays the same.

Powerpanic
The Voice of Griefing

 

[Havvk]

Do you speak on behalf of all players? No? Then Why do you think your opinions are so important that you have to reply to me to help me realize something that I have already realized long ago?

I did not imply that I speak for everyone, let alone anybody other than myself. Calm down, and take a chill pill.

 

[Rampant]

Because every PVP thread needs its militant anti PVP poster.

The names change but the pattern stays the same.

Powerpanic
The Voice of Griefing

Interesting.

Enter the militant pro-PvP poster. This time not only do the patterns stay the same, but so do the names.

Which is poignant, don't you think?

 

[CMDR M. Lehman]

Interesting.

Enter the militant pro-PvP poster. This time not only do the patterns stay the same, but so do the names.

Which is poignant, don't you think?

Gitting gud has always had a rather poetic, elegant flow.

 

[Wargfoot]

It's a multiplayer-only game with a shared setting and the same rules have to apply to everyone for the experience I'm looking for to be possible.

The consequences have to be an ever present threat despite my very best efforts to avoid or mitigate them and my CMDR would have to be able to use them, directly or indirectly, against his enemies, and vice versa.

There are several "survival" type games available.
Upon death a player loses everything.