Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.

[Rustled Jimmy]

Isn't going to happen though unless you guys are all given styrofoam packing peanuts for ammo when your hardpoints are deployed on a fellow CMDR, or your shields are otherwise invulnerable to fire from a CMDR's guns.

In a PvE server, you wouldn't be able to lock weapons on another player and player shots would have no effect on other players ships. Like every other PvE in every other mmo...ever.

WoW has PvE and people can OPT IN to PvP. That's pretty much what a lot of players want here.

 

[Fracktal]

Isn't going to happen though unless you guys are all given styrofoam packing peanuts for ammo when your hardpoints are deployed on a fellow CMDR, or your shields are otherwise invulnerable to fire from a CMDR's guns.

Problem is IT IS already happening. People came to the game with expectations while the game fails in some aspects to provide a satisfying experience (applicable to both groups).

Again, it is not about invulnerable ships.

It is about people looking for different in-game experience and people to play with. You can't unify people with such different game-playing philosophy under the same banner without adequate play mode or safeguard to insure that.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Isn't going to happen though unless you guys are all given styrofoam packing peanuts for ammo when your hardpoints are deployed on a fellow CMDR, or your shields are otherwise invulnerable to fire from a CMDR's guns.

I would suggest a "simpleish" fix for PvE mode. weapons still do damage.

1) a CMDR is fined the amount of the destruction that they would have caused on another player, and that fine is forcibly deducted from their account on docking, and goes to the "victims pocket.

2) if blown up by a player in said mode, no vouchers etc are lost.

3) for all modes actually, on destruction players spawn back at the nearest station to them AT THAT TIME to stop using it as fast travel.

4) if a player is recorded breaking the rules or exploiting with 1% hull ships and no shields etc we submit a link of a video file of them. FD can ignore but

5) a player involved with being blown up with or by another player is flagged (both players victim and "killer"), and if they get a fixed number of flags they are then looked at by FD and kicked from the mode if deemed guilty.

6) a check box before going into any mode the 1st time details the rules of that mode and what is and isnt acceptable with an i agree button

IF

this is too much work, and ramming damage and FF bullet damage is just removed all together, well i would say the fines etc that are gotten by FF should still exist. we need to be encouraged to police our fire imo.

 

[Julio Montega]

I would suggest a "simpleish" fix for PvE mode. weapons still do damage.

1) a CMDR is fined the amount of the destruction that they would have caused on another player, and that fine is forcibly deducted from their account on docking, and goes to the "victims pocket.

And here comes the exploit:
Fly a paper built cutter into a trader with shields, die by the ramming
and boom the victim has to pay the fee.

2) if blown up by a player in said mode, no vouchers etc are lost.

3) for all modes actually, on destruction players spawn back at the nearest station to them AT THAT TIME to stop using it as fast travel.

4) if a player is recorded breaking the rules or exploiting with 1% hull ships and no shields etc we submit a link of a video file of them. FD can ignore but

5) a player involved with being blown up with or by another player is flagged (both players victim and "killer"), and if they get a fixed number of flags they are then looked at by FD and kicked from the mode if deemed guilty.

6) a check box before going into any mode the 1st time details the rules of that mode and what is and isnt acceptable with an i agree button

Stopped working at 1) for me.

 

[Heavenly-Hammer]

Just when I thought they couldn't get any lower.

I'm sure open is full of really nice people, but then you have Dbags like this, but you know FD want more people to play in open..well sort open out then and maybe they will.

Just to clarify, I'm talking about the huge Ahat that killed the fuel rat.

I swear man...reading these posts reminds me of the people who watch the evening news, see a couple of murders took place in their city of a hundred thousand residents and decide to just not go outside anymore because they could be next. The stereotypical woman clutching her purse. The person who stops flying because their plane might be next to get bombed or crash into the ocean.

Really, guys? You're letting the terrorists win the psychological war because some innocent soul somewhere in the galaxy died to a well-organized gank? The confirmation bias is stronger than Darth Vader's Force Choke on some of you. Never mind that there are thousands upon thousands of players out there. Forget the odds of you running into a murder squad (and dying to them) outside of starter space or CGs is roughly a rounding error. You saw this video one time on the internet so they're probably waiting on you too.

I see why some of you are in Mobious. You seem petrified by the very idea of loss, even if the likelihood is negligible. Afraid of your own shadows and inclined to a negative confirmation bias which in this case is creating a warped perspective on the actual threat Open poses. It's fatiguing in the same way talking to people with no sense of their local community beyond the scary evening news report is fatiguing.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

And here comes the exploit:
Fly a paper built cutter into a trader with shields, die by the ramming
and boom the victim has to pay the fee.



Stopped working at 1) for me.

except i tried to cover that later. if a player was involved in multiple PvP events even as a victim they would still be investigated and kicked from the mode.

but here is the thing, given part of the check box at the start would cover "dont be a " and flying in front of players with 1% huill and no shields IS 100% objectively being a in a mode where PvP is not allowed then it would be no hardship banning them from the mode imo.

its work for FD, but given we are continually told there are a minute number of these types in open, then, it should not be that much work... its either one or the other... open is infested with idiots, in which case FD have a problem they MUST address... or its a minor issue in which case it wont take FD long to weed out the problem people from a mode.

I like to think (hope) that there ARE only a small number of people who would go into a mode specifically made for no direct PvP and grief in there..... my hope is even actual PvP players would respect that they are not wanted and the mode is absolutely not for them, and would just stay away.

- - - Updated - - -

Afraid of your own shadows and inclined to a negative confirmation bias which in this case is creating a warped perspective on the actual threat Open poses. It's fatiguing in the same way talking to people with no sense of their local community beyond the scary evening news report is fatiguing.

its posts like this which make me wish there was no rude word filter

 

[Fracktal]

I see why some of you are in Mobious. You seem petrified by the very idea of loss, even if the likelihood is negligible. Afraid of your own shadows and inclined to a negative confirmation bias which in this case is creating a warped perspective on the actual threat Open poses. It's fatiguing in the same way talking to people with no sense of their local community beyond the scary evening news report is fatiguing.

The main motivation of a social hobby is doing something you enjoy with people you like. Why it is beyond the understanding of some people is beyond my understanding as well.

 

[Julio Montega]

except i tried to cover that later. if a player was involved in multiple PvP events even as a victim they would still be investigated and kicked from the mode.

but here is the thing, given part of the check box at the start would cover "dont be a " and flying in front of players with 1% huill and no shields IS 100% objectively being a in a mode where PvP is not allowed then it would be no hardship banning them from the mode imo.

its work for FD, but given we are continually told there are a minute number of these types in open, then, it should not be that much work... its either one or the other... open is infested with idiots, in which case FD have a problem they MUST address... or its a minor issue in which case it wont take FD long to weed out the problem people from a mode.

What benefit does your suggestion give, over the current "investigation of harassment" FD says to police?
I see only unnecessary additional work for the devs.
If there is an automatism people figure a way to circumvent it.

The problem being brought up everytime is,
that a PvP person killed a person with no PvP-interest.
That is it quite on spot like Heavenly-Hammer put,
in my words a witchhunt.

The problem is not, that there is PvP,
but there is no meaningful PvP.
Give the PvP crowd something to do and affect with their playstyle of desire
and stuff like this will become even more the road-accident it is.

Simplest solution:
Use ingame existing methods to handle infractions.
We have police.
We have "bounties". (revert them to PB perma bounties, only cleared on death with the new dormant feature)
We have factions.
Tie players to factions.

Hostile factions kill you on sight, no more docking,
no more stalking on the docking area, etc.
And the PvP will finally impact the BGS.
Problem solved? I think so.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Hostile factions kill you on sight, no more docking,
no more stalking on the docking area, etc.
Problem solved? I think so.

i like that idea, but it would seem FD WANT consequence free ganking in open. its been over 2 years now and actually the punishments for "murder" have relatively been relaxed not increased.
FD seem to not want open to have the sort of consequences you are suggesting, even tho i personally would love them.

I used to play in open, it was actually a nice place to be once. Some think it still is. it does not take many people not picking up their dog mess in the park before i choose to go to another park, esp if it is one I know has no animals allowed

 

[Anopheles]

What benefit does your suggestion give, over the current "investigation of harassment" FD says to police?
I see only unnecessary additional work for the devs.
If there is an automatism people figure a way to circumvent it.

The problem being brought up everytime is,
that a PvP person killed a person with no PvP-interest.
That is it quite on spot like Heavenly-Hammer put,
in my words a witchhunt.

The problem is not, that there is PvP,
but there is no meaningful PvP.
Give the PvP crowd something to do and affect with their playstyle of desire
and stuff like this will become even more the road-accident it is.

Simplest solution:
Use ingame existing methods to handle infractions.
We have police.
We have "bounties". (revert them to PB perma bounties, only cleared on death with the new dormant feature)
We have factions.
Tie players to factions.

Hostile factions kill you on sight, no more docking,
no more stalking on the docking area, etc.
And the PvP will finally impact the BGS.
Problem solved? I think so.

Said the same many times. Before Engineers and Sothis you had to spend as much times earning as shooting and groups where formed, groups that made the game richer and safer by fighting each other.

 

[Rustled Jimmy]

I swear man...reading these posts reminds me of the people who watch the evening news, see a couple of murders took place in their city of a hundred thousand residents and decide to just not go outside anymore because they could be next. The stereotypical woman clutching her purse. The person who stops flying because their plane might be next to get bombed or crash into the ocean.

Really, guys? You're letting the terrorists win the psychological war because some innocent soul somewhere in the galaxy died to a well-organized gank? The confirmation bias is stronger than Darth Vader's Force Choke on some of you. Never mind that there are thousands upon thousands of players out there. Forget the odds of you running into a murder squad (and dying to them) outside of starter space or CGs is roughly a rounding error. You saw this video one time on the internet so they're probably waiting on you too.

I see why some of you are in Mobious. You seem petrified by the very idea of loss, even if the likelihood is negligible. Afraid of your own shadows and inclined to a negative confirmation bias which in this case is creating a warped perspective on the actual threat Open poses. It's fatiguing in the same way talking to people with no sense of their local community beyond the scary evening news report is fatiguing.

Cool story bro. And as an open player and multi billion credit fleet owner I ask you;

What difference does it make to you if other people want to play differently?

How does it affect your enjoyment if others play in a PvE server?

Why are you so irritated that other people want to play differently than you?

I can't wait to know.

 

[Littlerift]

I swear man...reading these posts reminds me of the people who watch the evening news, see a couple of murders took place in their city of a hundred thousand residents and decide to just not go outside anymore because they could be next. The stereotypical woman clutching her purse. The person who stops flying because their plane might be next to get bombed or crash into the ocean.

Really, guys? You're letting the terrorists win the psychological war because some innocent soul somewhere in the galaxy died to a well-organized gank? The confirmation bias is stronger than Darth Vader's Force Choke on some of you. Never mind that there are thousands upon thousands of players out there. Forget the odds of you running into a murder squad (and dying to them) outside of starter space or CGs. You saw this video one time on the internet so they're probably waiting on you too.

I see why some of you are in Mobious. You seem petrified by the very idea of loss, even if the likelihood is negligible. Afraid of your own shadows and inclined to a negative confirmation bias which in this case is creating a warped perspective on the actual threat Open poses. It's fatiguing in the same way talking to people with no sense of their local community beyond the scary evening news report is fatiguing.

Difference is that the gankers in Elite aren't terrorists, aren't likely to endanger anybody in real life, and aren't driven by any deep seated ideological or theological motive which is susceptible to potentially being defeated if the targeted society holds ranks and shows solidarity. Also, my commander doesn't need to be in specific places at specific times, and thus doesn't need to even risk being attacked by terrorists regardless of how infinitesimal the likelihood of an attack is. The small number of people who are afraid of losing things are already playing in Solo, and the addition of Open PvE would provide a multiplayer area for such people to engage with one another.

In other words: you can't compare reality to a game world, and it's stunning that people even try to make these kinds of comparisons.

Again, you people don't seem to understand, despite 1000s of posts from hundreds of people in various threads pointing this out, that most people don't avoid PvP because they're afraid of losing anything, they avoid it because they don't enjoy it.

But sure, instead of engaging your brain just continue with the "Y'all just carebears who are afraid of losing" attitude and make pathetically tenuous comparisons between a game and reality. I can't imagine what it's like to be so concerned with my own opinion that I'd lambaste a load of people just for finding enjoyment in something that I don't.

 

[Julio Montega]

i like that idea, but it would seem FD WANT consequence free ganking in open. its been over 2 years now and actually the punishments for "murder" have relatively been relaxed not increased.
FD seem to not want open to have the sort of consequences you are suggesting, even tho i personally would love them.

I used to play in open, it was actually a nice place to be once. Some think it still is. it does not take many people not picking up their dog mess in the park before i choose to go to another park, esp if it is one I know has no animals allowed

Uhm, that is actually not only an idea, but a fact.
Need proof? I am still hostile in at least a single system for NPC infractions.
FD simply failed to calculate CMDR behaviour into that loop.

Difference is that the gankers in Elite aren't terrorists, aren't likely to endanger anybody in real life, and aren't driven by any deep seated ideological or theological motive which is susceptible to potentially being defeated if the targeted society holds ranks and shows solidarity. Also, my commander doesn't need to be in specific places at specific times, and thus doesn't need to even risk being attacked by terrorists regardless of how infinitesimal the likelihood of an attack is. The small number of people who are afraid of losing things are already playing in Solo, and the addition of Open PvE would provide a multiplayer area for such people to engage with one another.

In other words: you can't compare reality to a game world, and it's stunning that people even try to make these kinds of comparisons.

Again, you people don't seem to understand, despite 1000s of posts from hundreds of people in various threads pointing this out, that most people don't avoid PvP because they're afraid of losing anything, they avoid it because they don't enjoy it.

But sure, instead of engaging your brain just continue with the "Y'all just carebears who are afraid of losing" attitude and make pathetically tenuous comparisons between a game and reality. I can't imagine what it's like to be so concerned with my own opinion that I'd lambaste a load of people just for finding enjoyment in something that I don't.

Yes you can compare reality and a gameworld,
the TV series "Westworld" does that very well.
It clearly shows the abyss of human nature,
take that as an experiment

 

[Connor Caple]

Problem solved? I think so.

Reverse Descartes.

My friends and I over the years have killed eachother, or ourselves with alts, in many games to collect our own bounties - recent examples are EvE (Retribution? pmsl) and GTA V. Bounties are not a deterrent. Bounties are free money and a place on a scoreboard. [squeeeee]

Just because I currently refuse to PvP here doesn't mean I won't do it elsewhere

 

[Anopheles]

Reverse Descartes.

My friends and I over the years have killed eachother, or ourselves with alts, in many games to collect our own bounties - recent examples are EvE (Retribution? pmsl) and GTA V. Bounties are not a deterrent. Bounties are free money and a place on a scoreboard. [squeeeee]

Just because I currently refuse to PvP here doesn't mean I won't do it elsewhere

I wonder if that would be solved with a week's delay (npc's are instant). Call it Pilot Federation bureaucracy....

 

[Littlerift]

Reverse Descartes.

My friends and I over the years have killed eachother, or ourselves with alts, in many games to collect our own bounties - recent examples are EvE (Retribution? pmsl) and GTA V. Bounties are not a deterrent. Bounties are free money and a place on a scoreboard. [squeeeee]

Just because I currently refuse to PvP here doesn't mean I won't do it elsewhere

I agree, and think that bounties should be coupled with a victim surcharge - if you kill a player illegally then you should get a serious bounty and an identical fine. Then, upon death, you automatically pay that fine.

The problem with the current system is that there really is no punishment for unwarranted killing whatsoever.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

FD simply failed to calculate CMDR behaviour into that loop.

that is the thing. do you think they failed to do it? or did they choose not to because they did not want the agressor to pay such a price for blowing up players? i am all for not allowing docking rights for hostile players, and indeed what the heck happened to alliance/federation/imperial faction wide bounties? i am almost certain they were a thing on launch

I agree, and think that bounties should be coupled with a victim surcharge - if you kill a player illegally then you should get a serious bounty and an identical fine. Then, upon death, you automatically pay that fine.

The problem with the current system is that there really is no punishment for unwarranted killing whatsoever.

exaclty.. sadly i cant rep you.

ps would harvesting bounties not be considered a punishable exploit if caught? i would imagine that is something FD could monitor computationally.

and dont get me started on those exploiting the suicidewinder for "hiding" from bounty hunters. that is the ganker equivalent of clogging imo (but again, its on FD, the suicidewinder exploit should be closed as should the fast travel suicidewinder.. cross the galaxy in an instant!).

 

[Han_Zen]

This is where you are wrong. It is not about having an invulnerable ship. It is about not having to play with people they don't want anything to do with.

That's what private groups are for. Play with people you want to play with.

Anyone can play in Open-PvE.

 

[jasonbarron]

Now we have some great forum PvP going, gentlemen!

Maybe not the best defense for PVP comparing them to the sleaziest of sleazy humans on earth. This comparison alone is almost enough for me to take a 180 on pk'ing. And I am the most PVP tolerant person on the forums.

But the major difference is this: animals are 100% at our mercy with no choice or chance at escape or defense. Killing them for sport is morally reprehensible by any measure of fair play. Whereas in PVP, the other human can actually fight back, successfully flee, or simply opt out of the possibility of a confrontation altogether.

Sounds pretty close minded to me, friend. My use of "big game hunting" could be broadened to "sport hunting" turkeys in missouri, or Elk in Montana, and I'm guessing you would still feel these types were "sleazy" bottom of the barrel sorts. The truth is, that negative opinion is based on nothing short of ignorance. Hunting, both sport or pure subsistance or a combo of the two, is enjoyed by thousands like it or not. It's heavily regulated whether we're talking about Africa or Montana, carefully monitored with a lot of oversight to make sure habitats are strengthened and numbers of animals in any given group can still propagate; it's fair enough to say that you yourself find it extremely distasteful, but to make a value judgment as broad as you did strikes me as being as uninformed as it is unfair. And I wasn't necessarily defending PvP in that sense; I don't expect people on the receiving end to find it a pleasant experience...I'm simply defending it from the perspective of it takes all sorts to make the world go round, and what you find unpleasant might make (and probably does) someone else very happy indeed. Which is why we should be talking about C&P instead of another superfluous mode.

Separating the deer from the crocodiles is not what this game needs...we just need to start punishing the poachers more severely

Edit: also, for some of you wise guys already dissecting this post: my original point was simply to point out that plenty of people enjoy hunting and killing things, while plenty of others find it unpleasant.

 

[Ian Skippy]

i like that idea, but it would seem FD WANT consequence free ganking in open. its been over 2 years now and actually the punishments for "murder" have relatively been relaxed not increased.

Yeah, stupid FD, why did they do that? Oh yeah, I remember: because many PvE players asked FD to. And when I say 'asked', I mean 'kept making angry-rant topics'. Because it turned out that many PvE players like the idea of strict rules, but only when applied to others. "Filthy murders must be banned from all of the federation systems! But its totally unfair I am being wanted in all those systems just because I accidentily shot a cop with gimballed MCs at a nav beacon after which I got a bounty! UNFAIR! FD FUNSPONGE! NERF BOUNTIES!" Some griefers ramming people to death? RUN TO THE FORUMS AND RAGE! Whats that? FD puts a speed limit in place so you're safe from that? "NOT FAIR! I GOT KILLED JUST FOR BOOSTING MY T9 THROUGH A SIDEY IN THE SLOT!"

And here we are. The obvious solution would have been to take some responsibility for oneself, but you know how controversial that idea is around here. So now there is a new problem, and ofcourse its FD that has to fix it. And I'm gonna give a spoiler about the future:

Spoiler

Many PvE players will complain about whatever the Karma system FD spoke about will be. Because others must be punished, we ourselves have perfectly good excuses for whatever happened.[/quote]