Common instanced locations

[Basilisk]

Not sure how possible it would be but the game has a bit of a social problem with a lot of players hiding out in solo or private instances to avoid PvP.

It might help some people come out of their shells if instances like the inside of stations were common, and if another player just happened to be there when you were you'd see them.

Just a shower thought, not sure if it would be worth the development investment but it would make the universe seem more alive.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Not sure how possible it would be but the game has a bit of a social problem with a lot of players hiding out in solo or private instances to avoid PvP.

The game has a much bigger social problem with the number of inhabited systems alone (over 60,000) massively exceeding the number of players online at any time (and even the average single system having space for several players to be present at once but hundreds of Ls apart)

The reason I haven't seen anyone in-game for well over a week is that, according to the in-game system traffic reports, I've been the only person in the system for that week. Maybe they were also in another mode but that's not really important.

It might help some people come out of their shells if instances like the inside of stations were common, and if another player just happened to be there when you were you'd see them.

The tricky thing here is that the "inside of station" is in the same instance as the rest of the station, so you can see player ships outside the concourse too - and even wave to them if they line up with the window. So each general instance needs its own station interior for that to work.

If you think there might be other players in your current system (it does happen occasionally) the system chat channel is cross-mode and doesn't require them to be at the same station, so they might respond there.

 

[Tryohazard]

In my extreme opinion I just think open is too unsafe with balance. If you're in supercruise and a more maneuverable ship wants you dead they will get you. Ships either have to be fully combat ready to survive, which means if youre doing anything else, you already know youd be toast if you got caught. And the minigame heavily favoring the attacker is crazy. For example I hopped into SOL as an ally and immediately noticed a corsair enemy flying around. Luckily I am more maneuverable so I trolled him by boosting around and then pointing my nose at him. But I knew the second I decide to commit to a destination he would get me, so what am I supposed to there? He was an ENEMY in allied territory. Where are the cops? Its SOL. realistically high security systems should just be better secured. Like if you want to go into enemy territory to do damage you should be getting straight-up bullied by elite security. Then the security level of systems would be given more consideration. But as it stands if you go into enemy territory is search of fish to shoot, you can just sit around the star no big deal.

 

[Frankymole]

In my etreme opinion I just think open is too unsafe with balance. If you're in supercruise and a more maneuverable ship wants you dead they will get you.

That's because the Crime & Punishment system revamp totally failed to do what it was supposed to do.
Both the rapid-response SWAT teams and the notoriety and hot-module/hot-ship stuff are pants.
Player-on-player crime is NOT punished adequately.

 

[Tryohazard]

Player-on-player crime is NOT punished adequately.

Exactly. And it really doent have to be all the time. Like sometimes people are going to get caught out before help can come or the enemy evaded the preventative measures. But at least that would be realistic and I would definitely be more willing to play open knowing there'd be a better chance at getting away or the enemy being stopped by cops. And I would gladly roleplay my death when I get caught out.

 

[SteveWW57]

Not sure how possible it would be but the game has a bit of a social problem with a lot of players hiding out in solo or private instances to avoid PvP.

It might help some people come out of their shells if instances like the inside of stations were common, and if another player just happened to be there when you were you'd see them.

Just a shower thought, not sure if it would be worth the development investment but it would make the universe seem more alive.

There is a mega thread (one of several) on the open v solo issue. The social problem is not the use of solo or private, but in open the anti social behaviour of others* imo. CMDRs use solo and private for reasons other than avoiding PvP, such as avoiding pad and slot blockers. What is the point of being in a common instance in a station, as it may be that CMDRs ignore each other.

* In open a CMDR cannot know whether the other CMDR they meet (usually after being dragged out of SC) will let you go if you have no cargo, let you go if you drop a few tons or kill you within seconds of leaving SC making you their game content.

Given the number of inhabited systems and the number of players active at any one time, the odds of meeting another CMDR are not in your favour.

 

[Uthael]

OP's idea is good. Players should see each other in any non-combat area even in solo play. On the other hand, players should also be able to appear offline, even to friends.
That aside, where there's enough on-foot players, make some NPCs leave through the doors. Also, ALLOW JUMPING.

What might make players want to join Open Play could be credit and resource rewards. Let's say that players in Open Play get +10% credits. Just enough to offset what an NPC mercenary pilot takes. For people who don't care about credits, collected materials could have a 30% chance of giving you 4 instead of 3 (that's also a +10% on average).

------------------------------------------------------
Off-topic rant:
We've had an event a while ago where players caused so much crime in the system that it went into a Lockdown state. The event megaship stopped providing services. That affected solo players, too.
The issue is this small minority of players whose only purpose in life is to make others' lives worse. Those people are the ones who'd use fully engineered ships to hunt non-combat players for sport. They are why people avoid Open Play.

 

[Brrokk]

Not sure how possible it would be but the game has a bit of a social problem with a lot of players hiding out in solo or private instances to avoid PvP.

It might help some people come out of their shells if instances like the inside of stations were common, and if another player just happened to be there when you were you'd see them.

Just a shower thought, not sure if it would be worth the development investment but it would make the universe seem more alive.

Actually the insides of stations are the one setting where it's sometimes essential to not be in Open. If you want to dock, that is.

Improvements I'd suggest would be for pad occupation to attract the same penalties as loitering, and use of docking computer to be compulsory in populated instances (so that queuing works).

(People in Solo aren't hiding... OK, I'll go and check in).

 

[Ian Doncaster]

For example I hopped into SOL as an ally and immediately noticed a corsair enemy flying around. [...] Where are the cops? Its SOL. realistically high security systems should just be better secured. Like if you want to go into enemy territory to do damage you should be getting straight-up bullied by elite security.

The pre-release Powerplay design had fairly strong NPC response to hanging around in territory owned by another Power, with combat-fit NPCs regularly turning up.

The streamers who got a pre-release preview of it pointed out that "you can't go to 11/12ths of the galaxy including a bunch of Engineer systems without constant NPC interdiction" wasn't going to attract the average player to Powerplay, and it never made it to a public release build (to the disappointment of some, but it was probably the right choice overall).

So that "enemy" status now means nothing until they actually open fire and pick up a bounty. Which in this case ... they didn't. They were just flying around supercruise looking at you. Sure, you know that they were about to interdict you if you gave them a chance ... but the game can't tell the difference between that and "another player who has no intent to interact with you whatsoever and is just hoping that you'll go away".

Player-on-player crime is NOT punished adequately.

That's because no-one getting shot down by another player really wants them to be punished. They want their attacker not to have been there in the first place so that their ship is still intact. That someone they've never previously met and probably won't again has something happen to them is largely irrelevant no matter what it is.

They could move the punishment all the way up to "if you kill another player under any circumstances your ship instantly explodes and instead of a rebuy your account is reset" which is the limit of in-game possibility, and it wouldn't stop people complaining about being attacked by other players (while it would, obviously, have a lot of really funny side-effects)

 

[Koma Pahu]

The pre-release Powerplay design had fairly strong NPC response to hanging around in territory owned by another Power, with combat-fit NPCs regularly turning up.

The streamers who got a pre-release preview of it pointed out that "you can't go to 11/12ths of the galaxy including a bunch of Engineer systems without constant NPC interdiction" wasn't going to attract the average player to Powerplay, and it never made it to a public release build (to the disappointment of some, but it was probably the right choice overall).

So that "enemy" status now means nothing until they actually open fire and pick up a bounty. Which in this case ... they didn't. They were just flying around supercruise looking at you. Sure, you know that they were about to interdict you if you gave them a chance ... but the game can't tell the difference between that and "another player who has no intent to interact with you whatsoever and is just hoping that you'll go away".

It’s a shame they didn’t make the response related to your rank rather than just make it almost nonexistent.

 

[Tryohazard]

So that "enemy" status now means nothing until they actually open fire and pick up a bounty. Which in this case ... they didn't. They were just flying around supercruise looking at you. Sure, you know that they were about to interdict you if you gave them a chance.

The game does know this actually. If they have their interdictor ready, their target becomes a pyramid on your radar and flash when its firing. So for example I knew the dude was both following me with interdictor and tried to fire thinking he was in position. So yeah coppers could easily scan for enemy and decide to pursue based on if theres an interdictor on the ship.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

The game does know this actually. If they have their interdictor ready, their target becomes a pyramid on your radar and flash when its firing. So for example I knew the dude was both following me with interdictor and tried to fire thinking he was in position. So yeah coppers could easily scan for enemy and decide to pursue based on if theres an interdictor on the ship.

That's true, though if the game viewed going weapons-ready as automatically a prelude to hostilities the main effect would be people complaining that the station blew them up when they were just trying to do wake scanning (oh, sure, and why did you need to know where that ship had jumped to, eh? Criminal intent, most obviously.)

I think there's three things here, though:

1) System Authority shouldn't be scanning for "enemy" status. "Enemy" is a Powerplay thing and unless you get a bounty in the course of your Powerplay actions (which is, admittedly, pretty easy to do) they aren't allowed to proactively attack. Equipping an interdictor is perfectly legal [1], using it is often entirely legal. For now, they're still Clean.

2) Powerplay ships should be attacking any enemy they see, regardless of whether they're carrying an interdictor. But Frontier has toned that down to happen very rarely because of the potential to put people off signing up for Powerplay at all. You don't want to be attacked by NPCs (ones which can win an interdiction, rather than the normal sort, at that!) every time you leave Archer space, get a bounty for defending yourself, and then be unable to dock, right? [2]

3) Powerplay is intended by Frontier as the PvP feature. Most of that PvP is indirect through the system states where it doesn't matter if you're pledged or not. But it is also intended to support direct PvP in the event that players from opposite sides do somehow instance - that's why you get a rebuy discount (and complete removal) at higher ranks. If an enemy player is hanging around your system, you're the one who's supposed to deal with them, not some hypothetical overpowered NPC. [2]


[1] A more nuanced approach to this where there are modules you're not allowed to take into certain systems, and governments which ban trade in Personal Weapons also treat it as an offence to exit your ship carrying a sidearm, and so on ... might be interesting but probably not popular.

[2] Note on these points that Frontier has noticed that actual (indirect!) Powerplay PvP where people try to undermine opposing systems is extremely rare and even less often successful, which is completely at odds with their intent for the feature. Whether or not they can actually encourage people to attack in Powerplay as anything other than a statistical anomaly, who knows ... but they're highly unlikely to bring in powerful NPCs to strengthen the current "no, you shouldn't be undermining this system, undermining is competitive and therefore wrong" message.

 

[PilotB]

I think there's three things here, though:

I think there's an issue here. It is a big galaxy and there are good reasons for players to move around it. Powerplay is a static system it's at odds with the basic structure of the game. You can dial up the hostility but really what powerplay is currently completely lacking is it's own powerplay crime/tracking system. If I am aligned with another power and we're not at war and I haven't done anything to the power in control. I should not be Kill On Sight. We should be able to move around the galaxy and visit places. The current system spawns local NPCs often power aligned system defence into every single instance as soon as you drop from hyperspace. This then has carry on effects to people who aren't even aligned with any powerplay factions. The whole concept isn't working out and I don't think we should be doubling down on you pledged so you should be kill on sight for most of the bubble when most stuff happens in the bubble. It's a side system and right now it's a messy one that just makes a lot of not powerplay stuff hard for very little value.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

You can dial up the hostility but really what powerplay is currently completely lacking is it's own powerplay crime/tracking system.

Agreed. You shouldn't be getting consequences delivered by minor factions for Powerplay actions. Doesn't work.

(But then the minor faction crime system is currently having people shot for delivering construction supplies to their colonies, so minor factions probably shouldn't be trying to enforce any laws at all, Powerplay-related or not)

If I am aligned with another power and we're not at war and I haven't done anything to the power in control. I should not be Kill On Sight.

All 12 powers are hostile to all of the other 11, and while undermining isn't as "automatic" as reinforcement is, simply docking at a station in the system gives the average player access to a range of undermining options, so pre-emptively trying to stop you doing that makes sense.

I agree that the NPCs shouldn't try very hard to stop a player doing undermining because otherwise not enough undermining is going to get done. The random Power NPCs appearing in any normal-space instance need to be restricted to ones where their presence makes more sense.

 

[PilotB]

I agree that the NPCs shouldn't try very hard to stop a player doing undermining because otherwise not enough undermining is going to get done. The random Power NPCs appearing in any normal-space instance need to be restricted to ones where their presence makes more sense.

I would rather they adjusted powerplay so that the powerplay related stuff was more tightly related to powerplay. If I'm loading someone's carrier I do not want to be constantly tailed 20km by a powerplay security pythons. If there's a CG we should be able to CG without the constant risk of murder for carrying something perfectly legal in the wrong spot. Tie the consequences closer to the actions and if that means changing undermining then undermining needs to be changed to leak less. They can be hostile but the lock in is for me at odds with the galaxy and much of the rest of the game design.

 

[Shir]

Played in open for years. At some point you realize the only interactions with hollow triangles will be an "o7" or someone trying to kill you, and a lot of drama which i have no interest for. So solo mode these days..

 

[Frankymole]

That's because no-one getting shot down by another player really wants them to be punished. They want their attacker not to have been there in the first place so that their ship is still intact. That someone they've never previously met and probably won't again has something happen to them is largely irrelevant no matter what it is.

That isn't how penal deterrence works though.
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime" puts people off doing crimes in the first place - so that ganker would not have been there in the first place. Which is what the victim wanted, right?

Having no punishment means ganking will multiply endlessly.

 

[Frankymole]

Played in open for years. At some point you realize the only interactions with hollow triangles will be an "o7" or someone trying to kill you, and a lot of drama which i have no interest for. So solo mode these days..

That sums up Red Dead Redemption 2 versus Red Dead Online... if Elite had a story mode as enthralling as RDR2, our arses would be in butter.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

That isn't how penal deterrence works though.
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime" puts people off doing crimes in the first place - so that ganker would not have been there in the first place. Which is what the victim wanted, right?

That's the nice cozy theory, but my point is that it doesn't work at all in the game context, so it fails utterly to give the victim what they actually wanted: the non-existence of the ganker. Real-world deterrence has multiple advantages, of which the two most important I think are.

1) Society is not designed around people who instantly reappear unharmed some distance away if they die, or have easy access to levels of firepower exceeding that of most national militaries.
2) Similarly society is able to spend hundreds of thousands of hours of the time of a variety of skilled workers (judges, lawyers, forensics, etc.) investigating and considering reports of crime, on an expectation of the time lag between crime and punishment being measured in months or years, rather than having to set out fully-automated instant-effect rules which inevitably have major exploitable loopholes (including, rather critically, on the "who is the aggressor?" calculation).

So there is no level of "punishment as deterrence" possible to implement in game which would prevent the attacks by that deterrence; all stronger levels would also - as even the existing one does - have a whole bunch of undesirable consequences for the people who expect themselves to be the victims.

 

[Rebel Yell]

It might help some people come out of their shells if instances like the inside of stations were common, and if another player just happened to be there when you were you'd see them.

When disembarking or as soon as dropping in the station instance?

Second one "all ports are open play" would be fantastic!