ED vs PvP

[Dr.Dag]

Wolves, alpha groups that like to play in packs and compete against other packs... and eat chickens (traders)

Brilliant ...

 

[robo]

.... or possibly jackals.

More like muppets, watch out for that Miss Piggy one, she has a karate chop that can slice a Lakon 6 in two.

 

[Sissors]

So you think I am being childish, for explaining the facts? very odd Sissors, you have a strange view of childish. I have merely laid down what the game is and what you should expect.

No you are childish for putting everyone with a different opinion as a 4-year old and/or a griever. If you need to resort to that in your arguments, then just maybe there are rubbish.

OK I do admit, that those that want PVP may not just want an arena or be a griefer, perhaps am over simplifying that point.[/quote[
Glad to hear that.

However is that not what the PVP lobby want, a smaller environment where it is full of live players?

No. Well maybe. But I at least don't want to force people into that smaller environment, I want just what can be described with one statement:
Players to be able to make an impact on the environment.

And yes I know it is largely NPC driven, but largely and completely (like the current situation) is not the same. But if players can have an impact, then it will most likely be advantageous to stay in the neighboorhoud of other players, if you want to profit from that (or just want to meet others players). But if you want to go explore then fit your fuel scoop and go ahead! (Also I imagine that large areas of space would have barely stations).

Aditionally with impacting the environment it would mean you cannot simply hop into solo mode and get around that blockade of a planet a player group is trying to achieve, while taking the profit with you back into all mode.

And of course when flying my hauler I rather not get shot. Just like when playing BF4 I rather not get shot. And yeah when pvp'ing there are more interesting opponent than a hauler. However it can be a nice income source, and more importantly imo is that you can have an impact that way.
Yes you can also make a solo game with specific PVP arenas. From a pure skill POV those PVP arenas are better. But with open gameplay you can get imo so much more.

 

[robo]

No you are childish for putting everyone with a different opinion as a 4-year old and/or a griever. If you need to resort to that in your arguments, then just maybe there are rubbish.

I think you are mistaken, Dai made the reference to his 4 year old child because he felt you were not reading his post fully, due to your uninformed reply, not because of your opinion.

 

[Dai]

No you are childish for putting everyone with a different opinion as a 4-year old and/or a griever. If you need to resort to that in your arguments, then just maybe there are rubbish.

I am not calling everyone with a different opinion to me 4 year olds! I think you missed my point, I am saying the act of having to explain the whole its a big universe thing over and over and over again, and that David Braben and his team have already stated this is how they want the game to be, thing over and over again is like talking to my four year old. It has nothing to do with my opinion or anyone elses.

you see the issues here is not with YOU or a lot like you, or your opinions, I would say you are making reasonable suggestions and want to play the game as it is pretty much. However it sounds as if you are worrying that the game won't be "live" enough for you.

Likewise most of us old timers are excited by the multiplayer side but are worried that the multiplayer side may allow idiots in. lets face it (you said you play battlefield) you must know that in every multiplayer game that has ever been, it has filled up with guys who take advantage of game exploits, don't really play the game but just try to ruin it because they think it's funny, or hackers who are basically scum and I think should not have an age limit for.

that is where all this angst come in in these posts.

a few things to also point out, the NPC's have varying difficulty, I seriously doubt it will be any "easier" playing solo to online, and seeing as we will be mainly in an NPC world in online mode whats to be gained? other that a sanctuary from potential idiots (or some guys just want to play the game in it's original form only in solo play, but may on occasion want to meet up with a friend online) and how is that really going to effect you?

The main point of my post was to say, everyone should calm down on these posts because the game design is done, it is going to be what it is going to be and we will have to see how many "live" people we will encounter. and how busy the "popular" systems get. I wouldn't be too taken in by the not that many stations thing, I heard over 100K that is still a huge amount and with so many "instances" to drop into, even within the same systems, not counting the non station systems, it will never be busy.

anyway, I have had quite enough of this, I have said my 2 cents worth signing off. Peace out and lets meet on those servers ;-)

 

[Fenris Wolf]

Wolves, alpha groups that like to play in packs and compete against other packs... and eat chickens (traders)

Excuse me. I take offence at that.

Wolves are very family orientated and caring for each other. They actually try and avoid other packs as it restricts territories.

They also don't kill for fun. They kill for food, not for pleasure.

If you want to associate the 'griefers' as an animal (apart from human) then I would suggest the Chimpanzee as they have been documented that they not only kill their own kind for food, but also for fun.

 

[Dr.Dag]

Excuse me. I take offence at that.

Wolves are very family orientated and caring for each other. They actually try and avoid other packs as it restricts territories.

They also don't kill for fun. They kill for food, not for pleasure.

If you want to associate the 'griefers' as an animal (apart from human) then I would suggest the Chimpanzee as they have been documented that they not only kill their own kind for food, but also for fun.

So we got 'Carebears' and 'PvP monkeys'?

Dag

 

[Robert Maynard]

If you want to associate the 'griefers' as an animal (apart from human) then I would suggest the Chimpanzee as they have been documented that they not only kill their own kind for food, but also for fun.

.... and they make a lot of noise when things aren't going their way....

 

[Seonid]

.... and they make a lot of noise when things aren't going their way....

And are very proficient in the art of flinging poo.

 

[VR Mr Teatime]

The main point of my post was to say, everyone should calm down on these posts because the game design is done, it is going to be what it is going to be and we will have to see how many "live" people we will encounter. and how busy the "popular" systems get. I wouldn't be too taken in by the not that many stations thing, I heard over 100K that is still a huge amount and with so many "instances" to drop into, even within the same systems, not counting the non station systems, it will never be busy.

Just to add to your excellent post Dai and the point quoted above, it won't really matter how populated a single system gets due to the network mechanics at the core of the game and instances are not tied to locations or points of interest. The core networking mechanics mean that it will be nearly impossible to blockade territory, systems or locations within a system. Also an encounter is not purely a statistical dice rolling exercise like EVE, WoT etc. - your piloting skills will matter.

For the networking bit, see the copy and paste from another thread a week or so ago:

"For info and FDEV are free to come in if I misrepresent this:

There are no system wide instances as such, instead every player has what is best described as an invisible bubble around them that moves wherever they are. When 2 or more players come into the same location (which can be anywhere in space) the bubbles are merged and an ad-hoc P2P network is setup between those players, up to a current maximum of 32 players. If a 33rd and 34th player comes along then they will start their own ad-hoc P2P network with the same 32 player limit, rinse and repeat.

If however a 16 and 17 player group come within range of each other then their P2P networks will not get merged as that would breach the limit for each of their merged bubble groups/networks.

To add to the complication every player (or possibly one from each P2P network) has a client-server link to FDEVs AWS cloud servers, which handles persistent traffic e.g. the market and I believe hosts the stations now.

What this means is that you could and probably do have 1,000's of players in a single location, but you would only be able to see a maximum of 31 (plus yourself).

This topology also makes sense where you have 100/400 billion star systems and encounters between players could occur at any time and any place. Throw in floating point positional updates, which can only model so much volume/geographical area to the accuracy required for say dogfighting (or later walking about) and it becomes almost essential.

So the model is actually a hybrid of P2P and client-server.

Edit: Also worth adding that I believe FDEV are going to put some real world geographical IP matchmaking in to minimise the P2P latency issues that can occur if nodes/players are in say different continents.

Also depending on which game mode you are in and friends lists etc. will also add preferences and limits on which ad-hoc network you will get joined to in any location. "

 

[Olrik]

I've noticed several mentions in the forums of a "private" universe where people who continually grief and gank get relegated to. If that is already in the game

Not yet...

perhapts it could be made a choice from the options for new players.

Hehe. Why not? but they will stay there forever...

 

[KING5TON]

I'm not convinced about this mythical naughty players mode that FD banish certain players to.

By what metric will they be using to identify if a player is naughty or nice?
A player with a high number of reports isn't going to work as I could at this moment convince 100+ players to report anybody on these forums I didn't like the look of and get them banished.

I wouldn't do that as it's not the type of thing I'd do BTW

There are certain groups that may very well try and abuse the system against it's original purpose as a means to punish people that for whatever reason they have a grievance against. You can already see things round here where groups of players derail threads in attempts to get them closed down because they don't like what's being discussed (and it works), from that it's not a massive step to start doing that type of thing in game (e.g. Didn't like what that player did so me and my group and going to get them banned).

I wouldn't be surprised if I've been reported already just because of my opinions on these forums and nothing else. (Although that player that thought I was waiting outside Freeport to grief them when I was in fact waiting for friends may have reported me incorrectly I would have left him alone if he wasn't so arsey about it)

 

[Theaghan Black]

I'm not convinced about this mythical naughty players mode that FD banish certain players to.

By what metric will they be using to identify if a player is naughty or nice?
A player with a high number of reports isn't going to work as I could at this moment convince 100+ players to report anybody on these forums I didn't like the look of and get them banished.

I wouldn't do that as it's not the type of thing I'd do BTW

There are certain groups that may very well try and abuse the system against it's original purpose as a means to punish people that for whatever reason they have a grievance against. You can already see things round here where groups of players derail threads in attempts to get them closed down because they don't like what's being discussed (and it works), from that it's not a massive step to start doing that type of thing in game (e.g. Didn't like what that player did so me and my group and going to get them banned).

I wouldn't be surprised if I've been reported already just because of my opinions on these forums and nothing else. (Although that player that thought I was waiting outside Freeport to grief them when I was in fact waiting for friends may have reported me incorrectly I would have left him alone if he wasn't so arsey about it)

FD should have a log listing the player actions... by this they can check if the report is legit.

 

[KING5TON]

FD should have a log listing the player actions... by this they can check if the report is legit.

Yeah, I assume they don't log every action though. If they did they wouldn't be able to keep the log for long else it would be massive.

Chat content will certainly be logged and wouldn't be as frequent so storage and retrieval shouldn't be a massive issue.

The only thing I'd hope for is that they do log enough to weed out underhanded tactics like I suggested in my post and they send the bogus reporters to the naughty step.

 

[Theaghan Black]

Yeah, I assume they don't log every action though. If they did they wouldn't be able to keep the log for long else it would be massive.

Chat content will certainly be logged and wouldn't be as frequent so storage and retrieval shouldn't be a massive issue.

The only thing I'd hope for is that they do log enough to weed out underhanded tactics like I suggested in my post and they send the bogus reporters to the naughty step.

Not if they store it as IDs...

user_id, action_id, victim_id
12323,32,13255
PlayerA, attack, PlayerB

12 bytes for single log (plus other bytes for date, location ect...)

They can do it, don't know if they will.