Cant you control amount of PVP

Ah well I watch this with amusement. Still wondering at which academy to study game design that teaches you to always listen to one group and completely ignore another, and still mock users with slogans like "Play like you want".

I certainly can´t play like I want, can´t have guild, can´t have any dedicated group/guild content which defies the holy "single player experience", can´t even claim ownership of a single asteroid in this 100 billion star system universe.

Ah well you will be pleased to know that the Dolly School of Gaming usually takes applications for those who want to ensure every game ends up like every other.

You also did read the bit where David Braben clearly stated he was creating a game "HE" wanted to play? You did, right?

I personally believe you generally get better products that way, whether it be film, music or games etc... you subscribe to a consistent vision and if you don't like it then you move on, but if you do you can usually be usre that you will love it that much more.

Also having unlimited space of 100 billion star systems and still putting a grouping system like this in, filtering people out of the online game. Priceless. Just.. priceless.

Well, in my very honest opinion, there is NOTHING wrong with the grouping system, it is the most dynamic I have seen in a game of this nature, in fact it is one of the unique selling points frankly.

The whole PVE debate is all a bit silly if you ask me and should very much be separated from the desire to reduce or eliminate griefing.

A PVE only server 8as others have mentioned) is a terrible idea. Rather get the core rules and the AI policing structure set-up correctly and enjoy the sandbox experience. Or you know, use the filtering system.

I still have no idea why people insists on differentiating between combat vs AI or combat vs Humans. The likelihood is, especially if they follow the poll, you might not even know.
 
Last edited:
I really love this attitude that people playing solo offline will have a much easier time building up their commanders .. 'Cos as far as i am concerned, if you check the stat's after, say, 3 months 99.9% of people will have been killed by NPC's far more times than any Player vs player kills they have experienced .. who say's it's going to be easier in solo play? .. I am sure FD will make the NPC's A.I. competitive ... otherwise what is the point of the game at all, seeing as you will be facing mostly NPC's most of the time ....... mostly :D

That's because everyone's new to the game. Same thing with DOTA 2 when the game first came out the bots were harder then real people
 
Well I think I'm going to bow out of this discussion to retain my sanity. There is no pleasing some people. I think that quote about arguing with an idiot comes to mind. No system is perfect but the hysteria from some members on the forums is deeply worrying as are the extremely juvinile 'someone killed my ship' threads.. Get over it.
 
Well I think I'm going to bow out of this discussion to retain my sanity. There is no pleasing some people. I think that quote about arguing with an idiot comes to mind. No system is perfect but the hysteria from some members on the forums is deeply worrying as are the extremely juvinile 'someone killed my ship' threads.. Get over it.

I hope getting in that little flurry of parting shots and snide comments did something for your ego. Bye...
 
Hi everyone, this is my first post.

I've been thinking about this whole PvP thing. I personally don't like non-consensual PvP because I'd hate to think that if I kill someone, I've just blown up the ship they'd spent weeks trying to acquire and ruin all their fun, just as much as I'd hate for someone to do that to me.
There is a difference between human players and non-human NPC's. For a start the NPC don't have feelings and other jobs/time-constraints. Even the game acknowledges this difference by having the Pilots Federation.
However I also get what some are saying about immersion.

So I was thinking there is a compromise somewhere to be had and came up with this (apologies if someone else has already suggested it I don't have time to read all the posts)

*****Pilot's Federation News update*****

Due to a recent increase in insurance claims for pilots losing their ships due to so called "friendly fire" incidents the Pilots Federation have installed a chip on all weapons and Pilot's Federation member's ships. The chip on the ship will emit a FoF beacon identifying itself as a Pilot's Federation Member.
The chips in the weapon will not allow the weapon to be fired if a ship with a beacon is in the direct firing line.

Pilots can if they wish disable the beacon on their ship.

WARNING:- It has come to the attention of the Pilots Federation that there are some legacy weapons in circulation that unfortunately did not get the chip installed. However these weapons are very rare and difficult to obtain, so Pilots should not worry unduly.
In addition all Federations and Alliances have agreed that possession of these weapons is a criminal offence and will be punished harshly. Pilot's ships with the FoF beacon on will automatically detect the lack of chip in these weapons and mark the offending ship as Foe, even if hardpoints have not yet been deployed.

WARNING:- The Pilots Federation beacon uses the same frequency as the FoF beacon used by ships in War-zones, the War-Zone FoF beacon overrides the Pilot's Federation Beacon. Pilots on opposing factions in these zones should take care.

*****************************************

TLDR Version:
Have PvP Flag with a story behind it that hopefully fits the gameplay
Flag switched off in war-zones to allow players to fight other players on the opposing side.
There are some very hard to obtain weapons that ignore the flag but are illegal in non-anarchy systems and instantly the mark ship as foe to all other players that have the flag on, thereby giving someone time to escape and evade.
 
I was thinking there is a compromise somewhere to be had and came up with this

Welcome Maahes :)

That sounds like a good way of solving the roleplaying issues with a PvP flag, but it doesn't solve the mechanical issues. For example, say my pirate gang wants to raid your Anaconda. We only have one ship with a PvP-enabled laser, so we have all the other ships sit right on top of your ship's lasers blocking their fire while the PvP laser pecks you to death.

The current beta seems to be experimenting with the idea of players registering their consent by travelling to places they would only go to for PvP, so they simply don't meet people that aren't up for a fight.
 
I would think that this will develop organically as the game evolves.

Those who chose to attack a pilot federation trader/ miner/ whatever will end up with a bounty on their head and if they go it alone have to accept that they will be a target for the authorities and bounty hunters alike.

From there they can stay on the run or base themselves in systems with little or no law and in the company of like minded players, perhaps deciding to team up and further their ambitions.

The possibility for trading high value goods with such systems may encourage some traders to take the risk of attempting to journey to them for the profits but knowing they are taking much greater risks, but at the end of the day that's their choice.

As for conflict zones its another name for a war zone, you pick your side and do your best to defeat your enemy. As I suspect the game is unlikely to do conscription that is your choice.

What I am suggesting is that a natural balance we don't yet have in the current beta should establish itself.
 
Before I retired I dealt with dozens of people daily, hundreds a week. (military) Both counseling and critiquing, I have had troopies, honest and liars stare me in the face and swear on their mothers grave something was one way or the other. I have the experience to know how people think in a myriad of situations.

Take this game for example. A small number of gamers want PVP, a larger amount do not want PVP in multiplayer. Arguments on both sides attack and defend positions as to why it happens, how it can be avoided and what controls can or cant be set in place.

There are a voicefull few that use the excuse, you come into a warzone, do not cry. This is a true and valid statement. Where this starts to become a self serving statement is when a PK gamer, and many do this, find a nice nesting spot to squat down and knowing they will interact with many lesser opponents, farm the area and be quite satisfied doing it. This leads to bad experiences to others. The Pk gamer will eventually be killed but this does not deter the gamer that thinks like they do, they will return or find another hunting ground and repeat the same conduct. The vast majority of PVP'rs do not seek out equal or more powerful opponents, that's a fact.

There is abhorrent behavior in this world, and people will grin, shake your hand and be pleasant until the moment they stab someone in the back if they think they can get away with it. Many think they can and will use the forums to decry others and stand on a soapbox stating their position is the only way and quite justified. What happens when this justification ends up leaving them in an instance where others think the way they do, where all they do is gnaw on each others ankles? There is the prey and there is the predator, once all the prey is gone, the predators will turn on each other, then themselves, Lord of the Flies is a great example of the way these people think.

This game isn't made for just the type A people, its made for everyone that loves space sims and being a gamer. We need game mechanics in place to prevent abuse of the killing privilege, we need oversight and regulations for those few people that want to actively seek out and trash other people, regardless of the reason, they paid money, so they should get to do what they want within reason.

We need to make the PVE player happy too, and not restrict them to just single player game modes, that's an absurd idea, and only the PK's suggest it. What does it matter to the PK that cant kill everyone (player) they want in a multiplayer game? The only tenable argument a player has for wanting to kill every player they meet is their own entitled wants. These PK players want everything their way, they do not deserve or require everything their way.

There are many ways to handle both PVP and PVE and make it great for all involved. The developers simply have to have an iron fist and common sense game mechanics to execute this. the developers also need to temper choices between common sense requests and simple "I want, I deserve, I want, I demand" requests by any type of gamer PVE or PVP.

In the end the developers will do what they want. The voicefull minority of PVP'rs will not end up getting their way, this is a simple fact. It is far better to lose a few disgruntled pk's than lose thousands of potential consumers ready to spend cash.

Limiting PVE players to a single player play style is a foolish line of thought and not good for the health of the game. Letting PK players run amok on the other hand is also not healthy....so what do you do? Separation is not the answer. PVP spices up a sometime dull multiplayer experience, it is when the game mechanics in place do not regulate this PVP behavior that the game begins to sour the experience of others. PVP Gamers will never police themselves. Developers need to think out of the box and be careful who they listen to for feedback and just what they implement. :cool:
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Before I retired I dealt with dozens of people daily, hundreds a week. (military) Both counseling and critiquing, I have had troopies, honest and liars stare me in the face and swear on their mothers grave something was one way or the other. I have the experience to know how people think in a myriad of situations.

Take this game for example. A small number of gamers want PVP, a larger amount do not want PVP in multiplayer. Arguments on both sides attack and defend positions as to why it happens, how it can be avoided and what controls can or cant be set in place.

There are a voicefull few that use the excuse, you come into a warzone, do not cry. This is a true and valid statement. Where this starts to become a self serving statement is when a PK gamer, and many do this, find a nice nesting spot to squat down and knowing they will interact with many lesser opponents, farm the area and be quite satisfied doing it. This leads to bad experiences to others. The Pk gamer will eventually be killed but this does not deter the gamer that thinks like they do, they will return or find another hunting ground and repeat the same conduct. The vast majority of PVP'rs do not seek out equal or more powerful opponents, that's a fact.

There is abhorrent behavior in this world, and people will grin, shake your hand and be pleasant until the moment they stab someone in the back if they think they can get away with it. Many think they can and will use the forums to decry others and stand on a soapbox stating their position is the only way and quite justified. What happens when this justification ends up leaving them in an instance where others think the way they do, where all they do is gnaw on each others ankles? There is the prey and there is the predator, once all the prey is gone, the predators will turn on each other, then themselves, Lord of the Flies is a great example of the way these people think.

This game isn't made for just the type A people, its made for everyone that loves space sims and being a gamer. We need game mechanics in place to prevent abuse of the killing privilege, we need oversight and regulations for those few people that want to actively seek out and trash other people, regardless of the reason, they paid money, so they should get to do what they want within reason.

We need to make the PVE player happy too, and not restrict them to just single player game modes, that's an absurd idea, and only the PK's suggest it. What does it matter to the PK that cant kill everyone (player) they want in a multiplayer game? The only tenable argument a player has for wanting to kill every player they meet is their own entitled wants. These PK players want everything their way, they do not deserve or require everything their way.

There are many ways to handle both PVP and PVE and make it great for all involved. The developers simply have to have an iron fist and common sense game mechanics to execute this. the developers also need to temper choices between common sense requests and simple "I want, I deserve, I want, I demand" requests by any type of gamer PVE or PVP.

In the end the developers will do what they want. The voicefull minority of PVP'rs will not end up getting their way, this is a simple fact. It is far better to lose a few disgruntled pk's than lose thousands of potential consumers ready to spend cash.

Limiting PVE players to a single player play style is a foolish line of thought and not good for the health of the game. Letting PK players run amok on the other hand is also not healthy....so what do you do? Separation is not the answer. PVP spices up a sometime dull multiplayer experience, it is when the game mechanics in place do not regulate this PVP behavior that the game begins to sour the experience of others. PVP Gamers will never police themselves. Developers need to think out of the box and be careful who they listen to for feedback and just what they implement. :cool:

Virtual +1 for that (can't rep you at the moment....).
 
Separation is not the answer. PVP spices up a sometime dull multiplayer experience, it is when the game mechanics in place do not regulate this PVP behavior that the game begins to sour the experience of others. PVP Gamers will never police themselves. Developers need to think out of the box and be careful who they listen to for feedback and just what they implement. :cool:

Actually, a significant number of PvE people would like separation. Just another open group where the Pilot's Federation transponders include a mandatory "no friendly fire" override. If I recall correctly around 25% of people wanted this option when FD polled us.

Keep it simple - in game consequences for illegal PKing (check), open PvE group for people who never want player/player killing (undecided), war zones or something like that where PKing has no consequence (not on the cards AFAIK, unless Anarchy systems cover this?)... everyone's happy.
 
Back
Top Bottom