Frontier confirmed - Murder/PKing is a valid gameplay choice, can we all move on now?

[Aircool]

This is great. I like it. Nice to see the tweaks to avoid exploitative griefing, but keeping everything open for people to do whatever they want, no matter how unfriendly. It's the way it should be, so good on you Devs.

 

[AuGuR]

That would be a contradiction to Michael Brooks statement though. I.e., you cannot call killing other players a valid gameplay choice and at the same time ban people from parts of the game, who opt to play that way.

Really? Those espousing that nonsensical murdering a player is valid gameplay are the ones saying "if you don't like it, go play solo/group". How is that any different?

really? You are as stupid as you sound right now. SOLID BLOCKS **ARE** the NPCS. Wireframe blocks are players. I should come and hunt you down just because you are so aggravating to read. Thats why there is solo. No difference in game, just no human on human interaction, which is apparently what you want, unless you want every other person to be exactly like you, in which case we have either 1) clones 2) drones or 3) people who obviously dont know how to have fun in a game and accept the fact that people are going to interdict and shoot you. Poor muffin.

What it means is there's a difference in what people consider fun.

 

[JeffRyan]

Both groups are right:

Random PvP for whatever reason is valid. Until it becomes consistent and targeted against a specific player to cause them pain.

PvP doesn't have enough consequences as yet to make it the risk it should be.

 

[Commander Edison]

Both groups are right:

Random PvP for whatever reason is valid. Until it becomes consistent and targeted against a specific player to cause them pain.

PvP doesn't have enough consequences as yet to make it the risk it should be.

Very true, but 25 pages of sensible consensus wouldn't have been enough drama would it?

I did notice that people seemed to broadly agree on most main points after a few pages, but were too busy disagreeing loudly to notice.

 

[Xantasia]

Ive already put forwards a solution that will be fair but harsh and END "station griefing "entirely.

On the first offence of opening fire in a station:

IMMEDIATE 25k bounty applied to the player.
Docking permission for that station is permanently revoked and they may NEVER land at that station again.
Player ship is destroyed by the station in a single shot and NOT offered the chance of ANY insurance.


On the SECOND offence:

Any current bounty for the faction whos territory the player is in, is immediately tripled.
The players ship is immediately destroyed in a single shot, no insurance is offered.
The player is forever banned from landing in any station controlled by that faction.
The player is forbidden to come within 100km of any station controlled by that faction on pain of death.
Whenever the player enters territory controlled by that faction, they are actively hunted down by system authorities and security.
A KOS marker is placed on the player, granting everyone in the factions territory the right to kill and claim the bounty on said player with or without a warrant scanner.
Dying does not negate these penalties and clearing the save file does nothing to these penalties either.

Harsh? Yeah...but no one will ever grief in a station again. The current Dev offered solutions dont solve the problem. This will.

My apologies for quoting the whole post again but i have highlighted and put in quotes what i believe is the main issue and its in the first sentence.

Yes murder is a valid game choice and should be encouraged, otherwise we will just be firing blanks in a war game exercise.

ED should be a risk/reward game style choice and as people have stated space is dangerous and we should have an incremental scale from fairly safe to dangerous in various systems.

Yes it is a sandbox game and we are all free to choose how to play it but even a sandbox has rules. Yes if people want to sit in a station and fire at players/npc entering then yes that allowed, but the effects of doing so should be severe, and any changes, once decided upon should be mass emailed/in game info? to all players prior to implementation.

Yes i agree with the feelings behind both the OP and the above quote, how it is implemented is down to the Devs but every single Pilot should be able to feel safe in 1 area and that needs to be consistent between Open/Solo/Group and IMHO should be a "Station/Outpost" etc.

Time to go kill/trade/explore or just fly around

 

[Maccus]

And I try to be friendly...I can see I've wasted my time with you.

What's a waste of time is these people who are "pvp-averse" reporting player kills and bogging down the support system. Was the hint at being in "Open Play" not warning enough that "you might get straight up murdered for no reason?"

I'm not saying don't implement some harsher punishment for player killers. I'm all for bigger bounties, timed bounties, local systems blacklisting notorious players with bounties or a high number of player kills in the region. However, after reading over topics like this, people want players "blacklisted from civilization," or "insurance revoked" or just all out being banned from the game by FD. Clearly there is a more radical voice and opinion here, and that is not alright with me. Changes will come. However, since they won't make it outright impossible to prevent trolling entirely, the moaning will go on.

And thus I say what I have been saying ever since Beta. No matter what FD does, the complaining will never stop.

 

[Dabba]

I don't think it was ever in question that it was a valid role, if they didnt want pvp then there wouldnt be pvp. Id say that much was obvious without Michaels post. As much as I despise griefers I wouldnt want the pvp element removed from Open. I would like to see the risk / reward balance that is currently very much in favor of the criminals reworked, and Frontier has acknowledged that issue.

You know what else is valid? People despising murderers and thieves. Just because its a valid role doesn't mean the people that choose to act out the part of the bad guy are going to be a liked and welcomed part of the community. You want to play the bad guy? Go ahead and play the bad guy. Just expect to be treated like the bad guy.

 

[Titus Balls]

I don't think it was ever in question that it was a valid role, if they didnt want pvp then there wouldnt be pvp. Id say that much was obvious without Michaels post.

You know what else is valid? People despising murderers and thieves. Just because its a valid role doesn't mean the people that choose to act out the part of the bad guy are going to be a liked and welcomed part of the community. You want to play the bad guy? Go ahead and play the bad guy. Just expect to be treated like the bad guy.

If these people were doing in real life, you might have a point. But in real life most of these people have families and hold down jobs - they wouldn't be getting very far playing a video game and being a murderer of thief.

Point I'm making is it's a video game, and people are playing a role in that - you know role playing.

Kids do it in the playground all the time, same with adults the bedroom. Do you hate all of them too?

DO YOU HATE D&D PLAYERS?

 

[Messaline]

Very true, but 25 pages of sensible consensus wouldn't have been enough drama would it?

I did notice that people seemed to broadly agree on most main points after a few pages, but were too busy disagreeing loudly to notice.

You know, it's interesting, I found someone here who I now view as a friend whom I wasn't a friend with earlier and I've put two people on my previously empty ignore list. As you said, there's a lot of agreement on the main points, but also I think battlelines are being drawn and that's not a good thing.

 

[Titus Balls]

You know, it's interesting, I found someone here who I now view as a friend whom I wasn't a friend with earlier and I've put two people on my previously empty ignore list. As you said, there's a lot of agreement on the main points, but also I think battlelines are being drawn and that's not a good thing.

Well I assume you won't see this as I assume that is me in the first one. If not then I'm afraid to say you are the only one drawing the battle lines - I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy that occurs on these forums. It's a shame because you may find we agree on more in the long run. I don't have all these green bars for no reason.

 

[Hatsune Miku]

You know what else is valid? People despising murderers and thieves. Just because its a valid role doesn't mean the people that choose to act out the part of the bad guy are going to be a liked and welcomed part of the community. You want to play the bad guy? Go ahead and play the bad guy. Just expect to be treated like the bad guy.

You keep making this silly statement. It's obvious they don't have to like the character but that's no reason to use it to defend the stupidity of some of the suggestions going against PVP mechanics or even encouraging using exploits in open play to avoid player aggression altogether.
In fact, it's worrying that the moderators of this forum still leave this thread up without editing.

 

[hookandsling]

You know, it's interesting, I found someone here who I now view as a friend whom I wasn't a friend with earlier and I've put two people on my previously empty ignore list. As you said, there's a lot of agreement on the main points, but also I think battlelines are being drawn and that's not a good thing.

As a thought experiment I imagined this board with Open the only mode deployed.



Don't do this yourself. It's terrifying.

 

[Bangfish]

This fills me with joy. Army of crybabies for which every nudge equals almost murder attempt in real life came up short.

 

[Commander Edison]

Well I assume you won't see this as I assume that is me in the first one. If not then I'm afraid to say you are the only one drawing the battle lines - I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy that occurs on these forums. It's a shame because you may find we agree on more in the long run. I don't have all these green bars for no reason.

Charlie Mr. Big Rep!

I'll be honest, while there is hypocracy on the go in the forum, I think it's fair to say that the majority of all this is noise for the sake of noise. We all know that a relatively sensible compromise is probably in the pipe, but that doesn't stop people laying it on a little thicker than they really need to...

 

[Distance]

The reason why there is so much opposition to pvp on the forums is because all the traders are alt + tabbing without any risk to complain about pvp on the forums whilst the pvpers are too busy playing to stand up for themselves.

The recent poll against the combat logging exploit was (around last count) 140 against and 100 for. This pretty much shows that the majority of people on the forums in these threads (which pretty much turned in to "pvp was involved so it's justifiable to combat log") don't have a clue on what's actually good for the game in open.

Most of the pvp proponents are for greater punishments for pvp killing and balancing via the in game mechanics whilst the traders posting here are shouting "instaban for pkers" instead. As mentioned in the first post killing via exploits is wrong, it's never been in doubt so pointless to carry on debating it.

Maybe FD should make a separate pve mode as having one option to opt in to pvp (open) and having two options to opt out (solo or mobius group) is apparently too unfair for people who spent their hard earned money to "play the game their way".

I'm sure you'd still have people complaining about open mode regardless though.

 

[Ghost1]

Never seen so many cry baby, its really beginning to get very very old.

 

[Dabba]

If these people were doing in real life, you might have a point. But in real life most of these people have families and hold down jobs - they wouldn't be getting very far playing a video game and being a murderer of thief.

Point I'm making is it's a video game, and people are playing a role in that - you know role playing.

Kids do it in the playground all the time, same with adults the bedroom. Do you hate all of them too?

DO YOU HATE D&D PLAYERS?

I don't make sweeping generalizations. I know many D&D players, I dislike some of them, and I like some of them. I dislike all griefers, I believe them to be damaged goods. By griefer I mean someone that derives pleasure from causing another human grief. I have no doubt that a lot of damaged people and overgrown bullies have families and hold down jobs, I also have no doubt that I would have no problems identifying them as rotten people and disliking them if I met them in real life, unfortunately I know quite a few of those too. What you do in an anonymous setting with no consequences reveals your character. So yes, the people that get off on causing other people grief are people that I dislike, in real life, in video games, in any setting. Damaged goods are damaged goods. You can try to justify and rationalize it all you want, its not going to change how people that act that way are viewed.

 

[Jorlin]

I really fought with myself about replying in this thread.

But here my thoughts about the OP:

1) Playerkilling (even without a reason) was implemented. You can play a serial killer if you want to and that's fine by me.

2) Just like Titus (if i understood him correctly), i miss the real consequenses.
If i'm on a crusade in Empire space, killing everything in sight to weaken the Empire, there should be more than some bounties on my head that i can pay off.
After a while the Empire should really hate me...
If i kill randomly everywhere, the after a while i shouldn't be able to dock anywhere besides independent/anarchy stations.

PvP is part of the open game by design.
But like David once said: It has to be meaningful.
At the moment it just lacks the consequences...

 

[Robert Maynard]

Maybe FD should make a separate pve mode as having one option to opt in to pvp (open) and having two options to opt out (solo or mobius group) is apparently too unfair for people who spent their hard earned money to "play the game their way".

Many games have created separate modes (servers) for PvP and PvE - it may be time for Frontier to consider the same. One notable disparity between open, private groups and solo is that the only free-access group mode is trying to cater to both PvE and PvP players (with some success, granted but with complaints). If a free-access mode, analogous to the existing open mode except with the simple rule that players shall not attack / impede / destroy / ram / etc. other players (earning a holiday from the group for any infraction), were to be created then a lot of the tension between player factions would probably be removed.

Mobius' private group has over 3,500 members now - that would tend to suggest that there is a desire for such a PvE oriented group.

 

[Titus Balls]

I don't make sweeping generalizations. I know many D&D players, I dislike some of them, and I like some of them. I dislike all griefers, I believe them to be damaged goods. By griefer I mean someone that derives pleasure from causing another human grief. I have no doubt that a lot of damaged people and overgrown bullies have families and hold down jobs, I also have no doubt that I would have no problems identifying them as rotten people and disliking them if I met them in real life, unfortunately I know quite a few of those too. What you do in an anonymous setting with no consequences reveals your character. So yes, the people that get off on causing other people grief are people that I dislike, in real life, in video games, in any setting. Damaged goods are damaged goods.

Yes but not everyone who does PvP or even murder in this game, as defined by Frontier as a valid game style, are griefers.

If you keep thinking you see griefers everywhere, you brain will trick you into thinking everyone is a griefer.

I assume you think I am one?

My status would confirm otherwise



#NotAllPVPers

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

Many games have created separate modes (servers) for PvP and PvE - it may be time for Frontier to consider the same. One notable disparity between open, private groups and solo is that the only free-access group mode is trying to cater to both PvE and PvP players (with some success, granted but with complaints). If a free-access mode, analogous to the existing open mode except with the simple rule that players shall not attack / impede / destroy / ram / etc. other players (earning a holiday from the group for any infraction), were to be created then a lot of the tension between player factions would probably be removed.

Mobius' private group has over 3,500 members now - that would tend to suggest that there is a desire for such a PvE oriented group.

There is absolutely no doubt about that - Frontier SHOULD support it, and I personally would support it too.

I just don't support people who want to do that complaining that everyone who enjoys PvP is also a griefer.