That's kind of what PP was supposed to resolve.
- Status
That's kind of what PP was supposed to resolve.
Just read through a good chunk of this thread and it reminded me a bit of a political campaign, both sides blindly promoting their views and anyone else's views are worthless. Really it gave me a good laugh.
Now to the point:
I only play in Open and primarily pursue PvE, but am always up for a bit of PvP if the chance arises. I will attack commanders with a large bounty, or working for an enemy faction. Other than that any PvP is pre-arranged duels or me defending myself.
To anyone claiming this game is a PvE game and not designed at all for PvP is factually wrong, it is like saying 1+1=3. If this was the case then we would not be able to PvP at all, this game has systems (albeit limited ones) that promote and allow for PvP to happen in a variety of forms. Hell they even advertise Piracy as a valid career choice.
However it is also not a dedicated PvP game otherwise options like private group and solo would not exist.
When it comes down to it Elite is about freedom, freedom to PvP, or play solely for PvE. What this means is that if you are in Open play you are inviting the possibility of PvP (regardless of if you actually instigate it), if you do not want this risk then it is simple play in solo or private group.
Back to the original thread topic:
I completely agree that the hardcore PvP crowd (especially the fight club guys) would have the best understanding of how any given ship or module performs. As the OP put it they; due to the need to optimize their build and fitting will have found the places where the ships truly excel and where they fall short. They will see issues a pure PvE bounty hunter might never see due to the combat against (generally) more skilled pilots that also know how to pull the most from their ships, the PvP crowd can identify balance issues before the flight AI is upgraded and all the PvEers find themselves getting destroyed by NPC ships you previously believed to be an easy win. Finally if you play open then you are at risk of PvP, people attacking you in ships that they may know to be a bit overpowered etc from their experience in PvP encounters.
TL;DR I agree with the OP
Now to the point:
I only play in Open and primarily pursue PvE, but am always up for a bit of PvP if the chance arises. I will attack commanders with a large bounty, or working for an enemy faction. Other than that any PvP is pre-arranged duels or me defending myself.
To anyone claiming this game is a PvE game and not designed at all for PvP is factually wrong, it is like saying 1+1=3. If this was the case then we would not be able to PvP at all, this game has systems (albeit limited ones) that promote and allow for PvP to happen in a variety of forms. Hell they even advertise Piracy as a valid career choice.
However it is also not a dedicated PvP game otherwise options like private group and solo would not exist.
When it comes down to it Elite is about freedom, freedom to PvP, or play solely for PvE. What this means is that if you are in Open play you are inviting the possibility of PvP (regardless of if you actually instigate it), if you do not want this risk then it is simple play in solo or private group.
Back to the original thread topic:
I completely agree that the hardcore PvP crowd (especially the fight club guys) would have the best understanding of how any given ship or module performs. As the OP put it they; due to the need to optimize their build and fitting will have found the places where the ships truly excel and where they fall short. They will see issues a pure PvE bounty hunter might never see due to the combat against (generally) more skilled pilots that also know how to pull the most from their ships, the PvP crowd can identify balance issues before the flight AI is upgraded and all the PvEers find themselves getting destroyed by NPC ships you previously believed to be an easy win. Finally if you play open then you are at risk of PvP, people attacking you in ships that they may know to be a bit overpowered etc from their experience in PvP encounters.
TL;DR I agree with the OP
Last edited:
There have been numerous threads about various game issues and I am sure FD see them all and only respond when they feel they need to.
---
In the main where PvE issues are concerned, if the issue is well described then they should be able to replicate it and thus do not necessarily need to respond. However, where PvP issues are concerned the concerns raised may not be 100% clear and IMO most of the time tends to be more subjective and circumstantial in nature. Overall though, whether an issue is predominantly a PvE or a PvP concern ALL types of players should be included in any discussion on any given matter since neither type of gameplay sits in isolation from the other.
Last edited:
If the intent of PvP is to make it integral to the game, I'd say that intent has failed to be met.
in·te·gral
ˈin(t)əɡrəl,inˈteɡrəl/
adjective
1.
necessary to make a whole complete; essential or fundamental.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It would seem that the intent was to make PvP available for those who want it and also completely avoidable (i.e. 100% guaranteed avoidable, unlike the multi-player modes) in Solo.
Thank you FDevs for creating such an immersive experience. It appears to me that there are community oriented players within the pvp and pve worlds. Many of the pvp folks dedicate themselves to cutting edge meta of target destruction, which simply outclasses many basic pve multipurpose builds, and many casual players. This is true of many mmos as we all know, and the global solutions such as pvp/pve servers, pvp permitted zones, faction vs. faction zones (in my opinion) can dilute the immersion of the experience.
I suggest that the devs might consider in-game world-based solutions instead of trying to nerf/buff their way into resolving the pvp/pve communities. For example, in high-security systems, player-created interdiction instances could autospawn substantial security vessels that autoscan commanders within the instance. It is reasonable to assume that the process of an interdiction leaves a measurable signature that alert security forces could detect. In medium security a time delay occurs, in low longer etc. Pilots then would have greater incentive to map high-security system routes only if they are not outfitted for combat. I would recommend that high security systems levy a tax on transactions conducted there to pay for this active and practical defense force. I'm sure there are practical world-based solutions out there.
I do believe that a thriving community of players is something many of us are looking for in Elite, and neither the pvp or pve community deserves to have their play style marginalized. I really do hate autoselecting solo or pg when I'm hauling anything because it feels like I am pulling myself out of the community to avoid pkrs. I do it because I am aware (and have experienced) many pk meta individuals and wings in open play (not looking for cargo or bounties). If the risk was mitigated through thoughtful pathing and a logical game mechanic, I think both communities could be satisfied. I believe the pk play style is a natural part of this kind of game ecology - so I don't think we should look for solutions that eliminate those players from the community - just encourage those dark and scary folks to inhabit dark and scary places.
I suggest that the devs might consider in-game world-based solutions instead of trying to nerf/buff their way into resolving the pvp/pve communities. For example, in high-security systems, player-created interdiction instances could autospawn substantial security vessels that autoscan commanders within the instance. It is reasonable to assume that the process of an interdiction leaves a measurable signature that alert security forces could detect. In medium security a time delay occurs, in low longer etc. Pilots then would have greater incentive to map high-security system routes only if they are not outfitted for combat. I would recommend that high security systems levy a tax on transactions conducted there to pay for this active and practical defense force. I'm sure there are practical world-based solutions out there.
I do believe that a thriving community of players is something many of us are looking for in Elite, and neither the pvp or pve community deserves to have their play style marginalized. I really do hate autoselecting solo or pg when I'm hauling anything because it feels like I am pulling myself out of the community to avoid pkrs. I do it because I am aware (and have experienced) many pk meta individuals and wings in open play (not looking for cargo or bounties). If the risk was mitigated through thoughtful pathing and a logical game mechanic, I think both communities could be satisfied. I believe the pk play style is a natural part of this kind of game ecology - so I don't think we should look for solutions that eliminate those players from the community - just encourage those dark and scary folks to inhabit dark and scary places.
- Status