Horizons FDev, please talk to the active PVP community.

[Etherimp]

The opinions of experienced PvP players count no more or less than those of experienced miners, traders or explorers. If a player or group of players considers themselves an expert in a particular aspect of the game, then as experts those players should have no difficulty compiling evidence and making a compelling case for their point of view. FD has hard metrics, but player input still helps interpret those metrics. An argument that the views of any particular playstyle should be given priority simply because of the perceived superiority of that playstyle is just chucking rocks at the hornets' nest.

Someone can fly to the core and back in an Asp, never interact with another player in the game, get Elite in Exploration, and not know a single thing about ship balance.

Someone can trade Palladium all day every day in a Type 9, in solo play, and never interact with another player, get Elite in Trade, and not know a single thing about ship balance.

Someone can AFK in a combat zone all day in Solo play with an Anaconda with nothing but beam turrets and 4 pips in shields, and they can get Elite Rank easily, again, without ever having to interact with another player or know anything about ship balance.


On the other hand: NO. ONE. CAN. PVP. WITHOUT. KNOWING. WHICH. SHIPS. AND. MODULES. ARE. GOOD. AND. BAD. PERIOD.

When it comes to ship and module balance, PvPers are inherently exposed to more empirical evidence. They experience ships/modules under extreme conditions. Traders, Explorers, and Bounty Hunters DO NOT.

This is not a superiority complex; it's cold hard facts.

So, yes.. They do count for more.

 

[AJW]

If there is empirical evidence, present it. As evidence for what needs changing. Not as a justification for giving self-appointed spokespersons for a particular style of play privileged access to the developers. Let the evidence speak for itself.

(And please don't use white text - it doesn't show up when the forum background defaults to white...)

 

[Etherimp]

If there is empirical evidence, present it. As evidence for what needs changing. Not as a justification for giving self-appointed spokespersons for a particular style of play privileged access to the developers. Let the evidence speak for itself.

(And please don't use white text - it doesn't show up when the forum background defaults to white...)

White text was a mistake. Formatting from phone sucks. Tried to fix it, not sure if it worked.

In regards to "spokesperson" and presenting evidence - The idea is to open a dialogue between the developers and the PVP community. It's up to the devs to decide who they feel is qualified. Guys like Sundae and GluttonyFang probably understand the mechanics much better than most people who play the game; myself included. There are plenty of ideas I have heard which would improve the game drastically, probably for many PVE and Solo players as well.

But I'm not here to vet my ideas through you. I already know (and this thread shows) how any discussion about PVP is treated by the community as a whole. You can't post a PVP video on the Elite Dangerous subreddit without being down-voted to oblivion and being accused of being a "GRIEVER", even if everyone involved in the video was there willingly and having fun.

 

[Riprock]

Hardcore PvP'rs Muahahahahaha... cmon seriously?
Don't make me laugh, how can you have a hardcore Pvp game built around a client side server system...Losing, no worries just log out...

Mike Morhaime wrote an interesting article regarding Pvp balance in WOW...Namely he would never go down that path again, and was his "SINGLE" biggest regret he had on the whole project...So much so, the next expansion they've completely scrapped PvP gear altogether...
Balancing Pvp alongside PVE never works and never will, resulting in major headaches with huge bundles of cash wasted on constant balancing, then re-balancing, patch after patch, after patch...

When one of the biggest names in the game industry makes a public statement like that, you tend to pay attention...
Elite Dangerous is soley a PVE game with some tacked on PvP...Its there if you want it, and no big deal if you don't...

<snip>

 

[AlexRyder]

The word "MASSIVE" has a clear meaning. Anyone who thinks 16 players is a "MASSIVE" amount of players is mistaken.

If it were 16 people per instance in completely unconnected instances then you'd be right... It isn't. The galaxy has everyone logged into it at once and therefore "massively multiplayer" is correct.

 

[Etherimp]

If it were 16 people per instance in completely unconnected instances then you'd be right... It isn't. The galaxy has everyone logged into it at once and therefore "massively multiplayer" is correct.

"Massive-sometimes-single-player-sometimes-private-group-sometimes-multiplayer-but-only-up-to-sixteen-players-if-you're-lucky"

MSSPSPGSMBOUTSPIYL ... game.

 

[Cmdr_Prussian]

No, this is a game with absolutely zero player interaction. blaze your own trail, and be more imaginative. you can imagine AI encounters as player encounters and be all happy with it.
</sarcasm off>

Literally, why does this game have a multiplayer focus, if its not utilized in the slightest?

OP take mah REP

 

[Troubletcat]

Firstly, sorry for the delay in response.

Onto the post itself...

Understood; but you're missing the point. Firstly, CS and LoL and others (starcraft, quake, etc) actually DO (or did) consult their "pro" community. Because the "Pro" community are the players who can use weapons/skills/ships/abilities/characters/classes/champions to their fullest. If you want to see how balanced something is, you give it to the best players in your community and you ask them to break it.

Please read my post above about suggestions that *I* would personally make to FDev, and tell me how those suggestions would "RUIN PVE!"

I'm not saying that listening to the PvP community would neccessarily ruin PvE.

But PvE and PvP games are balanced differently. Players are much smarter than (video game) AI. Beyond that, PvE players generally want a different kind of experience to PvP players in combat.

What I'm saying is that giving special preference to high-level PvP players in ED is stupid because ED is primarily a PvE game. The competitive games you mentioned are not. They are primarily (some of them exclusively) PvP games. So listening to the high-level PvP community is the right thing to do. ED is not like those games.

ED isn't a competitive game FOR YOU.. Power-play and PvP are very competitive, and they are options in this game just as much as Exploring or Trading are. Furthermore, the reason why this game doesn't attract or retain a PvP audience is because PvPers are looked down upon and treated like crap by carebears and crybabies.

My point was that ED isn't a competitive game for the MAJORITY, not FOR ME.

Power-play... Most players involved in power-play are sitting in safe systems grinding merits for their weekly bonuses. What percentage of players involved in powerplay do you think are actually looking at the forums and going to the systems each week that are high in PvP? I'd be surprised if it's 25%. And what percentage of players of the game in total do you think are involved in powerplay on ANY level? I'm guessing it's around half. Maybe less. Lots of people avoid PP for various reasons. Many newer players who don't visit the forums are barely even aware it exists.

"PvP" is obviously competitive, yes. And there are player groups focused on PvP. Between all those groups, what percentage of the active playerbase are members? 5%? 2%? Less?

And outside of that, for every other player in the game (let's be conservative and say 70%+) PvP is something that happens very rarely.

Your perspective is skewed because you do a lot of PvP and participate in the active PvP community. The large majority of players are not in that boat.

Do people in this game gank newbies or traders and grief people? Absolutely; and I'm not one of those people. But if you sign up for OPEN play, you're OPENing yourself up to that possibility. I'll quote Star Control 2, "Space is a tough place where wimps eat flaming plasma death."

Don't want to die? Go play Solo/Private, or get good at PvP.

I don't care about this. I think griefing barely exists in the current game. I play in open all the time. I was involved in powerplay for a while in a low-end ship. I've been killed several times in ships worth >2 million credits by people in fully fitted FDLs for little to no reason. I don't consider this griefing. I consider this "playing in a shared-world game".

This is a non-sequiturhttps://www.google.com.au/search?q=...ved=0ahUKEwix-vzllafKAhWDHZQKHRcTAqIQvwUIGSgA to me. My point was just that for most people PvP is rare. I don't care if it makes them upset or not after they've chosen to play open - they chose to play open (like me!)

Kay.. What should I go play? Please point me to the Multi-player space-dogfighting game.

Eve Online doesn't count. (It's not dogfighting.)
Star Citizen isn't out yet. (And I question whether it will ever deliver on its promises or be worth the price.)

There is no well made competitve multi-player space-dogfighting game that currently exists. There are some bad ones, like Star Conflict. But none that are worth your time.

It's a shame that that market is under-served.

No bearing whatsoever on the nature of ED though.

Furthermore, are you sure you want to encourage dedicated members of this already small community to go play other games when they actually enjoy this game and only want to improve it? I paid my 120+ dollars for this game just like you did.

The community's small, but I don't think ED is in any danger of dying any time soon. I think that if people want a serious competitive game they should look elsewhere. There aren't any in the same genre as ED, sadly, but then again there are almost no modern games that are seriously competitive in any genre (you have CS:GO for shooters and not much else, SC2 for strategy games and not much else...) so this is not super surprising.

I'm sorry you spent so much money on a game that is not what you wish it was. That doesn't change the fact that that's not what the game is. PVP is PART of ED, but for most players it's a SMALL part. It makes more sense to spend effort on increasing the quality of the experience the majority of players are having most of the time than it does to worry about PVP in particular.

So in terms of the PVP community's input on balance? The same as solo players. You can post on the forums. The devs read the forums. If there's something that a large part of the community thinks is important expect it to end up being a huge thread on the forums that the devs will take notice of.

Why should a small part of the community that's dedicated to a style of gameplay that's only a small part of the game be afforded some special privilege when it comes to input on the games direction? If PVP was the main style of gameplay then yes, absolutely, the best and most involved players in the PVP community should get more input than others. But it's not. For the majority of players it's a side-show.

 

[X-Terminator]

Let's get this straight - This game is what we make it. It was left open for all styles and is NOT solely PvE (consider this an education).
Now then, PvP is NOT just combat but connecting players to play together any way they happen to.
FD must make it more broad to allow this rather than shun players into SOLO and GROUP. We all complain about content. We ARE the content! We need more abilities to interact with one another: -
Trade credits (rather than merely dropping cargo) and thus being able to help each other - this is called humanity!
See who is around in the Dock to chat to whilst in the Starport. This we can make plans to do things together from here!
We got Fuel Rats and Code (sadly many abuse it) and we could have created our own Navy (Clans) and much more. You basically could have a Star Wars script in ED if only we could blow stuff up like Outposts/Stations/Settlements!
PUT THE GAME INTO ED!

 

[Chance-]

PvP balance in a game with different sized ships would be hard to achieve. Also difficult to achieve when you can have 4 vs 1 scenarios.

Balance is only really possible when everyone has equal access to ships, loadouts, and has equal penalties. Games like Quake 3 for example has balance. There is no difference between characters and once you know a map, you know where to get the weapons, and your opponents also

No one is saying that every ship should be able to fight every ship. The issue is that Fdev changes certain strong ships to become even stronger in PvP while other barely viable options are ignored or nerfed in favor of PvE balance.

 

[Bran Tse Mallory]

When it comes to ship and module balance, PvPers are inherently exposed to more empirical evidence. They experience ships/modules under extreme conditions. Traders, Explorers, and Bounty Hunters DO NOT.

This is not a superiority complex; it's cold hard facts.

So, yes.. They do count for more.

Sorry but this kind of hubris needs to be squashed - your combat is no different from any other users combat. You use the same ships, modules, weapons and shields. All the data needed is in FD's hands. They do not need to talk to one group alone to balance anything, they need to listen to everyone's input. We all have fights in the game, just because you face another human makes not a jot of difference for the overall balance of the game. Never has, never will...

As certain YouTubers learnt after thinking they had Dice in their back pocket, just because you shout louder doesn't make your point more valid.

 

[Etherimp]

Sorry but this kind of hubris needs to be squashed - your combat is no different from any other users combat. You use the same ships, modules, weapons and shields. All the data needed is in FD's hands. They do not need to talk to one group alone to balance anything, they need to listen to everyone's input. We all have fights in the game, just because you face another human makes not a jot of difference for the overall balance of the game. Never has, never will...

As certain YouTubers learnt after thinking they had Dice in their back pocket, just because you shout louder doesn't make your point more valid.

You're right. You shooting an anaconda that spins in circles and fires turreted beams in all directions like a giant metal disco-ball is the exact same as me and 3 of my closest friends min-maxing our builds to take on another group of 4 guys with A rated PVP builds.

/sarcasm

Sorry, but your argument is just silly. NPC's are nowhere near the same as players.

 

[Mephane]

Sorry, but your argument is just silly. NPC's are nowhere near the same as players.

You are basically right but missing a crucial factor that ultimately distinguishes PvE from PvP in a way that makes them hardly compatible: In ED you need money, and if you lose (die) too often, you eventually lack the money to even just keep your ship, let alone buy new ships or equipment. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary for PvE to be skewed, in one way or another, in favour of the player. If you image a 50% chance of winning a fight (i.e. the ideal balanced situation when you look at PvP between equal opponents), anything with a rebuy cost higher than the average bounty were effectively useless for PvE combat. At its very essence, in PvE the player is required to win far more often than they lose, because the game is designed around that.

We all know that the risk in PvP is much higher, yet the stakes are the same. Die and pay millions in rebuy cost, which is not a fun prospect at all for lots of players because of the time it taskes just to recuperate the losses. This is the reason why lots of MMOs do not have repair costs or (or whatever their form of usual death penatly) when killed by a player. If we take WoW as an example because it is the one most people know, if you die to NPCs, your armour and weapons lose 10% durability which equals a certain value in coin to repair. Die to a player and you merely lose some time as a ghost running back to your corpse. So being killed by an enemy player randomly crossing your path is at most a short nuisance that costs you a minute or two. In ED, however, a single death is a major setback, and the game is designed around the player usually fleeing when an encounter turns out to be unwinnable, but in PvP that is often times impossible (especially since the more dedicated PvP players pick often ships that are good at chasing and/or mass-locking).

I've said it in the past and I will repeat myself: waive the rebuy cost and repair* costs from PvP, and many more players will be willing to risk the odd encounter with a killer-type PvP player. (*Repair must be included otherwise people would let themselves get killed by other player intentionally in order to get free repairs.)

I do understand that many PvP players want the stakes to be high and the loss to be significant to the defeated player, and also enjoy the thrill of the risk they face, too. But other players do not, and there is also a massive grey area between the pure high-stakes-high-risk hardcore PvP players and the pure low-stakes-low-risk PvE players. I am not alone in generally enjoying the thrill of combat itself, but not the risk of 1-2 hours of trading just to regain the loss from a just single death in a PvP fight.

 

[Distance]

I think everyone needs to give up on the idea of meaningful pvp in ED.

I bought in to the game for the mp possibilities but because FD went for a strategy of making the game something for everyone everyone's experience has been watered down. At this point they can't really change things without people kicking off so improving pvp without impacting on the pve players game without vastly changing the current game mechanics is impossible.

There's several big problems with ED in open which are easily fixed and one of them isn't detrimental to either side.

The current starting systems are a joke. Since beta people have been camping them and shooting noobs and the easiest way around this is for fd to have more than 2. Why haven't they sorted this already? Having 5 to 10 different starting systems spread throughout each factions sphere of influence is a no brainer and been asked for many times.

High waking is a big issue in pvp but a fundamental game mechanic for pve players.

15 second disconnect is another problem. As a pirate this (along with combat logging) killed ED for me and was one of the main reasons why I actually stopped playing.

Police response is another thing and tied to the last 2 points. FD should have scary npcs in high security systems. There should be safe places in ED and if you act like an ass in them to other players or npcs you should be hunted down and killed, end of. If they did put them in right now though, it wouldn't matter due to high waking or 15 second log off.

If they were put in place, removed high waking and lengthened the log off timer it would go a long way to making ED a better place. It would make open better for a start and you would still have protection in solo/group due to the higher police presence. There would be lawless systems where pvp and piracy could occur and there would be protected systems where pves could feel safe. In it's current state everywhere in ed is perfectly safe as if you can't high wake out you can always disconnect and failing that combat log since FD don't seem to care about it.

Ed started with the intent of having 3 choices where you could play on your own safely without players bothering you, play with your friends safely without players bothering you and playing where it's possible for you to die at anytime through the hands of another player. It's turned in to a game where you can only die if you're either new or inexperienced or if you actually want to and this won't change anytime soon unless FD make major changes.

I have a bias towards pvp and i'm entitled to that opinion and I'm right because this is how ED was sold to me. At the same time all the pve players who disagree with me are right because that's how ED was sold to them. At the end of the day it's all FD's fault for promising something they couldn't deliver.

I wish they would pick a side and be done with it, backlash be damned. They should also pick pve over pvp because lets face it, p2p for pvp is junk and always will be. They should still make the high waking, police and disconnect changes though

The sooner they pick pve and work on the game to have some engaging content and missions the better. The game shouldn't be just shooting endless dumb npcs in an asteroid fields, holding your trigger button over a dot whilst your ship scans it, using a spreadsheet to fly back and forth between the same two systems because there's no in game tools for trading or any of the other variations which haven't changed with horizons.

It's always had so much potential but the only way I can see myself playing it is when I get the rift, then I can ignore all the basic failings and enjoy it as an experience rather than a stale meaningless game.

 

[Asp Explorer]

It's always had so much potential but the only way I can see myself playing it is when I get the rift, then I can ignore all the basic failings and enjoy it as an experience rather than a stale meaningless game.

I'm sure you'll love the rift

 

[Distance]

I'm sure you'll love the rift

I held off getting a dk2 so looking forward to a big upgrade from my dk1 experience

 

[Etherimp]

You are basically right but missing a crucial factor that ultimately distinguishes PvE from PvP in a way that makes them hardly compatible: In ED you need money, and if you lose (die) too often, you eventually lack the money to even just keep your ship, let alone buy new ships or equipment. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary for PvE to be skewed, in one way or another, in favour of the player. If you image a 50% chance of winning a fight (i.e. the ideal balanced situation when you look at PvP between equal opponents), anything with a rebuy cost higher than the average bounty were effectively useless for PvE combat. At its very essence, in PvE the player is required to win far more often than they lose, because the game is designed around that.

We all know that the risk in PvP is much higher, yet the stakes are the same. Die and pay millions in rebuy cost, which is not a fun prospect at all for lots of players because of the time it taskes just to recuperate the losses. This is the reason why lots of MMOs do not have repair costs or (or whatever their form of usual death penatly) when killed by a player. If we take WoW as an example because it is the one most people know, if you die to NPCs, your armour and weapons lose 10% durability which equals a certain value in coin to repair. Die to a player and you merely lose some time as a ghost running back to your corpse. So being killed by an enemy player randomly crossing your path is at most a short nuisance that costs you a minute or two. In ED, however, a single death is a major setback, and the game is designed around the player usually fleeing when an encounter turns out to be unwinnable, but in PvP that is often times impossible (especially since the more dedicated PvP players pick often ships that are good at chasing and/or mass-locking).

I've said it in the past and I will repeat myself: waive the rebuy cost and repair* costs from PvP, and many more players will be willing to risk the odd encounter with a killer-type PvP player. (*Repair must be included otherwise people would let themselves get killed by other player intentionally in order to get free repairs.)

I do understand that many PvP players want the stakes to be high and the loss to be significant to the defeated player, and also enjoy the thrill of the risk they face, too. But other players do not, and there is also a massive grey area between the pure high-stakes-high-risk hardcore PvP players and the pure low-stakes-low-risk PvE players. I am not alone in generally enjoying the thrill of combat itself, but not the risk of 1-2 hours of trading just to regain the loss from a just single death in a PvP fight.

1. Mass lock and speed do not matter. High-waking takes approximately 10 seconds and you cannot be mass locked.
2. Rebuy costs are 5% or lower for alpha and beta backers. 5% is ... virtually nothing.
3. Nobody is saying "make PVE harder".. The request is to give PVP players a voice in deciding how weapons/armor/sheilds/new modules/old modules should be balanced.. ALL players will be using the same items, as will all NPC's.. NPC's are inherently worse than players, nobody is asking for a "buff" to NPC's.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I think everyone needs to give up on the idea of meaningful pvp in ED.

I bought in to the game for the mp possibilities but because FD went for a strategy of making the game something for everyone everyone's experience has been watered down. At this point they can't really change things without people kicking off so improving pvp without impacting on the pve players game without vastly changing the current game mechanics is impossible.

There's several big problems with ED in open which are easily fixed and one of them isn't detrimental to either side.

The current starting systems are a joke. Since beta people have been camping them and shooting noobs and the easiest way around this is for fd to have more than 2. Why haven't they sorted this already? Having 5 to 10 different starting systems spread throughout each factions sphere of influence is a no brainer and been asked for many times.

High waking is a big issue in pvp but a fundamental game mechanic for pve players.

15 second disconnect is another problem. As a pirate this (along with combat logging) killed ED for me and was one of the main reasons why I actually stopped playing.

Police response is another thing and tied to the last 2 points. FD should have scary npcs in high security systems. There should be safe places in ED and if you act like an ass in them to other players or npcs you should be hunted down and killed, end of. If they did put them in right now though, it wouldn't matter due to high waking or 15 second log off.

If they were put in place, removed high waking and lengthened the log off timer it would go a long way to making ED a better place. It would make open better for a start and you would still have protection in solo/group due to the higher police presence. There would be lawless systems where pvp and piracy could occur and there would be protected systems where pves could feel safe. In it's current state everywhere in ed is perfectly safe as if you can't high wake out you can always disconnect and failing that combat log since FD don't seem to care about it.

Ed started with the intent of having 3 choices where you could play on your own safely without players bothering you, play with your friends safely without players bothering you and playing where it's possible for you to die at anytime through the hands of another player. It's turned in to a game where you can only die if you're either new or inexperienced or if you actually want to and this won't change anytime soon unless FD make major changes.

I have a bias towards pvp and i'm entitled to that opinion and I'm right because this is how ED was sold to me. At the same time all the pve players who disagree with me are right because that's how ED was sold to them. At the end of the day it's all FD's fault for promising something they couldn't deliver.

I wish they would pick a side and be done with it, backlash be damned. They should also pick pve over pvp because lets face it, p2p for pvp is junk and always will be. They should still make the high waking, police and disconnect changes though

The sooner they pick pve and work on the game to have some engaging content and missions the better. The game shouldn't be just shooting endless dumb npcs in an asteroid fields, holding your trigger button over a dot whilst your ship scans it, using a spreadsheet to fly back and forth between the same two systems because there's no in game tools for trading or any of the other variations which haven't changed with horizons.

It's always had so much potential but the only way I can see myself playing it is when I get the rift, then I can ignore all the basic failings and enjoy it as an experience rather than a stale meaningless game.

Couldn't agree more on pretty much all of that. High-waking is fine, but there needs to be some counter-play to it. I think that's what they were going for with "wake scanners", but wake-scanners are about useless since I can find which system you went to by going down the list of systems in the navigation panel just as quickly as I could have scanned your wake; and even then, all you have to do upon entering the next system is just low-wake, and you've effectively disappeared.

 

[mongo2006]

Play your way

Is what they told us, it's on the front page even, for the PVP'er it's play the way we want you to or go to your QCQ corner and don't come out lol. Ive been gone for about 6 months, I had some real life issues that took me away right before PowerPlay came out. I came back about two weeks ago. Seems like you can make millions with no trading now, so what is a PVP'er to do with all this money when he has nobody fight?

When I left I was hunting C.O.D.E. getting in fights for hours at a time, saving traders from the evil doers that they were lol. to pvp on a high level you had to explore for trade routes and trade to finance your battles. Now to get into a real battle you have to wing with the enemy for 2 hours to get 16 guys in the same instance for a fight that may last for 15 minutes.

By the time you coordinate the fight in teamspeak, get the teams ready with replacing fuel scoops, docking, instancing, wing groups, telling jokes and laughing you're no longer interested in fight them. This game and this company have killed the PVP clans, I'm so happy there is another space sim coming out in a year or so, maybe they can learn from Frontiers mistake.

 

[Deadspin]

PVP isn't meaningless. Not by far. It's the "why" behind your pvp encounters that makes it meaningless or not. Some random guy running around ganking newbie sidewinders with a Vulture isn't really accomplishing anything.

One player group coming to the aid of another upon request is completely different and makes the pvp very meaningful.

 

[GluttonyFang]

C.O.D.E.

It's The Code...

Hah the more people that write it like that the more people are going to mistakenly think we are a branch from EvE's C.O.D.E.

Edit:

But yes, I agree, this game does tend to kill off strict PvP groups.