Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.

[Han_Zen]

The issue isn't PvP - try and get the blinkers off. I've no problem with PvP itself just the silliness of the excuse for it - a few rogue cmdrs going around shooting up some folk doesn't decide system policy for a population of millions. Just be honest with yourselves about it and at least considerate that not everyone speaks english or can easily use a keyboard (VR players for example)

The game it self is waaaay to forgiving to players. It's the fault of both PvPers and PvEers demanding to be strong and have influence. Now we have a situation where a mediocre player is more dangerous than even the toughest NPC.

I of course don't mean that the game should be filled with über NPCs that fly around killing everybody, but things you do should have a logic consequence.

I mean this in a larger sense than a well functioning C&P system. If I for example kill a Paterus enforcer deep in Patreus space, I should not be able to make it out alive, unless I'm lucky or very cunning. Not even in a wing of engineered Corvettes. The power of a PP leader should be well beyond what a wing should be able to handle.

If I kill a trader outside a station, the minor faction that owns the station would naturally be upset. If they are not extremely poor, they should have no problem driving me out of the system.

Same for trade. Do do not trade in a system controlled by criminals, unless you have become friendly with them first. Trade in safe areas and be safe(even form player attack if you can last for 30sec).

In a HCZ, we should be happy to get out alive with a kill or two and this should pay well enough to be worth it.

Open would stop being 'hard mode' and we could choose the mode we like, depending who we want to meet.

A game where every player is small, unimportant and at the mercy of the NPCs. Wouldn't that be lovely. [hehe]

 

[Vorxian]

Given that the cap is in place due to the timeout related issues that caused havoc with attempts to approve / remove players at an awkward time, I'd suggest that membership control of large Private Groups might be better handled in a web-based application via a browser rather than using the game client - which could also allow multiple Private Group admin to share the load rather than placing the whole load on the player who created the Private Group.

.... some optional "auto-kick" rules for Private Groups wouldn't go amiss either - with no Frontier managed penalties required.

Interestingly you got me thinking.

What if:

FDEV promoted Mobius to that of a server state, gave it equal resource as OPEN mode (to address the Mobius population), but kept it addressed as some kind of open player group... player managed open private group. hmm.... There you go: MOBIUS OPEN PLAYER GROUP! a new mode that behaves like an official server and shows in the server list, but one that has passed FDEVS approval to make semi-official through popular (very popular) demand...

That way, FDEV can hand over administration to Mobius administrators.. who's allowed in, who gets kicked etc is down to democratic decision, they do not get involved in TOS politics.. add some more powerful admin tools like 'Player damage OFF' / kick rules etc.. and when folks log in they're presented with a disclaimer handing off FDEV responsibility, quoting MOBIUS terms and conditions (as per Mobius web site) https://elitepve.com/

That way, FDEV give Mobius the ability to absorb ALL of it's players into one group. FDEV do not have to administer, or get involved in the politics of administration, gives Mobius himself additional tools to accomplish his vision, and he gets to appoint trusted administrators to assist in the management if things get difficult to manage.

It would work...!

ADDITIONAL for folks interested, here's Mobius policy

https://elitepve.com/page/policy

Spoiler

Policy and code of conduct while playing online in the dedicated Player versus Environment group (Mobius)

The group's goal is to provide players with an environment to play Elite: Dangerous in a full multiplayer world without having the experience spoiled by non-consensual PvP, ganking, domination, abuse or anti-social behaviour.

To achieve this, all members agree to abide to the rules listed below while playing online in the "Mobius" private group. Of course, the rules apply only to sessions inside the group.

:!: Please be considerate while playing or interacting with other players. We are all reasonable people. These rules are put in place to clarify some details only. They are not here to start legal wars about how to interprete them!
The group motto translates to "to each their own". So the number one and most important rule is:
Don't spoil another players game!
There are no leaders or chiefs in the group. Try to solve any disagreement between yourselves first, before reporting any offense to an admin or mod of this forum via PM.

Membership of the ElitePvE group:
Membership of the ElitePvE group (Mobius) is open to all players who wish to have a safe PvE environment with other players in Elite: Dangerous
Members are free to join any other group, clan, alliance, or similar. The ElitePvE group is non-exclusive.
There is no obligation to go online in the ElitePvE group whatsoever. It is merely yet another option to play the game. All members can play any other mode (open for all, solo, other groups) any time they wish.
Policy while playing in the ElitePvE group:
These rules apply while being online in the ElitePvE group.
It is not allowed to attack another player for any reason outside of Conflict zone. Conflict zones special rules apply, see below.
Players having a bounty, no matter how high, are no exception
Also players allied to another Power are no exception
Ramming another player on purpose is considered attacking, of course
It is not allowed to pull (interdict) another player out of supercruise
It is not allowed to accept or carry out missions which have another player as a target while playing online in the group.
Inside Conflict Zones the following rules apply:
It is not allowed to attack a neutral player (a player not having chosen a faction)
It is not allowed to attack another player while being neutral (not having chosen a faction oneself)
It is not allowed to attack another player on the own chosen faction
Only if both players have activly chosen opposing factions may they engage in combat
It is not allowed to exit and enter a warzone in rapid succession for the sole purpose of targeting other players. Only if the wrong faction was chosen by mistake or by mutual agreement of the present players (For example in order for everybody to join the same faction).
The above rules ensure, that players wishing no PvP at all can safely enter warzones as spectator or to decide actions later, without being forced into an unwanted fight.
It is not allowed to provoke criminal status by any means, like flying into the line of fire of a mining laser on purpose to flag another player as criminal.
Breaking any of the above rules will result in an instant ban without warning to protect the group from further unwanted infractions. Players making a complaint must supply a screenshot or other evidence for a ban to be implemented.
Commanders can appeal against the ban by contacting the group admins on this forum via PM or the contact form.
And finally again, the rules are here to clarify some details, not to complicate the game! We want to play together and have fun. That is the purpose of this game and the group.
"To each their own". "Do not spoil another players game".

 

[excalibus]

The point is that the mentioned "setting the state"is done selectively instead of reactively and thus it is not an adjustment of the simulation. It has nothing to do with "oh, players have hauled enough materials for a station in X system, we should get on that", but rather a timed contract for something to happen, completely detached from the actions in game in every way except keeping count. You can have a faction be Bust and build a station under the current system, the BGS doesn't even matter for the outcome.

well I will suggest you re-read my (long I know) post... I mentioned that when the player input reached a set level that then perhaps human interaction was required to set the state... so they set levels (in this case a preset number of UA's to be delivered), and once that happens, they change the state so the UA's begin to affect the station... Same system for the alloys could be in play too... only perhaps they set the alloys required for maia with one too many zeros?

 

[Apos]

well I will suggest you re-read my (long I know) post... I mentioned that when the player input reached a set level that then perhaps human interaction was required to set the state... so they set levels (in this case a preset number of UA's to be delivered), and once that happens, they change the state so the UA's begin to affect the station... Same system for the alloys could be in play too... only perhaps they set the alloys required for maia with one too many zeros?

Oh, sure they could have done that for UAs, but that's different from CGs which is what my objection was about on your post.

That would add the UAs in the simulation, that's correct. And the reason for that is because from that point forward the game behaves to the input of UA/alloys. You can automate by linking the amount required to population, wealth, etc.

But CGs are not the same, because there is no predictive model added to the game from them. It's not like after the first station CG there was a case where if you bring "X commodities" to a system they start a construction of a station or a capital ship.

 

[Han_Zen]

Interestingly you got me thinking.

What if:

FDEV promoted Mobius to that of a server state, gave it equal resource as OPEN mode (to address the Mobius population), but kept it addressed as some kind of open player group... player managed open private group. hmm.... There you go: MOBIUS OPEN PLAYER GROUP! a new mode that behaves like an official server and shows in the server list, but one that has passed FDEVS approval to make semi-official through popular (very popular) demand...

That way, FDEV can hand over administration to Mobius administrators.. who's allowed in, who gets kicked etc is down to democratic decision, they do not get involved in TOS politics.. add some more powerful admin tools like 'Player damage OFF' / kick rules etc.. and when folks log in they're presented with a disclaimer handing off FDEV responsibility, quoting MOBIUS terms and conditions (as per Mobius web site) https://elitepve.com/

That way, FDEV give Mobius the ability to absorb ALL of it's players into one group. FDEV do not have to administer, or get involved in the politics of administration, gives Mobius himself additional tools to accomplish his vision, and he gets to appoint trusted administrators to assist in the management if things get difficult to manage.

It would work...!

It's much better than Open-PvE. FD will never be able to kick players from any Open mode, just for a small infraction. A private group managed by a community could kick anyone they like.

 

[frostypaw]

I know you will never see it, but I like leading horses to water - PvP is a valid part of the game, I could iterate the word part but I feel it would make absolutely no difference to your outlook

I've said I've no particular problem with PvP. I'm not sure you understand my outlook - it's purely about pointing out you've made a silly excuse for your actions not condemning PvP

 

[excalibus]

If you watch the very first Thargoid encounter video from yesterday:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slbWLXIpCv8

You’ll notice that the NPC pirate Anaconda jumps in and opens fire on the disabled and powered down player Corvette, but when the player’s ship comes back online he has no damage to his ship whatsoever. SO, the code to disable weapon fire damage is already in the game, this video shows it in action.

Hmmm interesting... so it would not take much more than a couple of flags for determining a player firing on another player

 

[Julio Montega]

What are you talking about. FD confirmed PvPers are a minority. But that's also a bit of the point.

Imagine if open, by default, permitted no PvP, and everyone told those interested in it to join a PvP-centric group.

It would suck, wouldn't it? But it would also be a lot easier to organize than Mobius - just because there are fewer PvPers. Basically, as it is now, a few PvPers, unless they get their fill by somehow running into other PvPers, can make a lot of PvE players experience a lot worse. It doesn't really work the other way.

If you want to further castrate any believability left in the "pilot's federation",
changing open to "friendly unicorn's in space" is a surefire method.
No one forced anyone to the choice he took.
There is enough space for PvP and PvE in open.

Meeting points are where the west is wild,
and gunfire takes place.

And yes, PvE player actions perceived through the POV of
a PvP attitude feels like a bad experience, too.

Faction a BGS is pushed by PvE people from solo/PG,
Faction b BGS is pushed by PvP people who want, but can't,
affect the BGS through PvP, as PvP is meaningless.

The PvP perspective then leads solemnly to the circular argument
ever popping here:
PvP can't do anything against the PvE crowd,
since the PvP playstyle does not manipulate the BGS.


As posted a thousand times before, just make PvP impact the BGS,
flag players to a faction and simulate deaths, to reflect multiple NPCs
killed at once.

That way PvP can affect BGS, PvP people got something to do BGS wise,
and PvE people still can do what they want.
With the situation being tied to PvP faction vs PvP faction,
as PvE people who don't enjoy PvP still can choose to not go open,
to work the BGS.

 

[sewerratuk]

The game it self is waaaay to forgiving to players. It's the fault of both PvPers and PvEers demanding to be strong and have influence. Now we have a situation where a mediocre player is more dangerous than even the toughest NPC.

I of course don't mean that the game should be filled with über NPCs that fly around killing everybody, but things you do should have a logic consequence.

I mean this in a larger sense than a well functioning C&P system. If I for example kill a Paterus enforcer deep in Patreus space, I should not be able to make it out alive, unless I'm lucky or very cunning. Not even in a wing of engineered Corvettes. The power of a PP leader should be well beyond what a wing should be able to handle.

If I kill a trader outside a station, the minor faction that owns the station would naturally be upset. If they are not extremely poor, they should have no problem driving me out of the system.

Same for trade. Do do not trade in a system controlled by criminals, unless you have become friendly with them first. Trade in safe areas and be safe(even form player attack if you can last for 30sec).

In a HCZ, we should be happy to get out alive with a kill or two and this should pay well enough to be worth it.

Open would stop being 'hard mode' and we could choose the mode we like, depending who we want to meet.

A game where every player is small, unimportant and at the mercy of the NPCs. Wouldn't that be lovely. [hehe]

Here lies a paradox in that people want it to take hard work and dedication or years for you to attain elite status and be able to afford the big three ships, but woe betide if an elite NPC is able to take you out (if you stay around instead of HW) if you don't have the skill that should take a lot of hard work and dedication or years

 

[Robert Maynard]

If you want to further castrate any believability left in the "pilot's federation",
changing open to "friendly unicorn's in space" is a surefire method.

It's not about changing the existing Open though.

.... and, arguably, the Pilots' Federation is not just castrated, it's also been asleep for two years - as it does nothing to attempt to discourage its members destroying other members.

No one forced anyone to the choice he took.
There is enough space for PvP and PvE in open.

For those players that want to play in a PvP enabled mode, yes.

Meeting points are where the west is wild,
and gunfire takes place.

In Open, maybe.

And yes, PvE player actions perceived through the POV of
a PvP attitude feels like a bad experience, too.

Faction a BGS is pushed by PvE people from solo/PG,
Faction b BGS is pushed by PvP people who want, but can't,
affect the BGS through PvP, as PvP is meaningless.

That rather seems to be the way that Frontier designed the game - a game that offers, but does not require, PvP.

The PvP perspective then leads solemnly to the circular argument
ever popping here:
PvP can't do anything against the PvE crowd,
since the PvP playstyle does not manipulate the BGS.

The PvP crowd, as you put it, can affect the PvE crowd in exactly the same ways as they themselves are being affected by the PvE crowd.

As posted a thousand times before, just make PvP impact the BGS,
flag players to a faction and simulate deaths, to reflect multiple NPCs
killed at once.

Why would one kill count for more than one kill?

.... and PvE players would presumably also want to be able to flag to flag themselves to their chosen Faction - without becoming automatic prey for PvP players however. If they were to be automatic prey for PvP players then I'd expect that the requests for an Open-PvE mode would increase.

 

[-=VampyrE=-]

As posted a thousand times before, just make PvP impact the BGS,
flag players to a faction and simulate deaths, to reflect multiple NPCs
killed at once.

That way PvP can affect BGS, PvP people got something to do BGS wise,
and PvE people still can do what they want.
With the situation being tied to PvP faction vs PvP faction,
as PvE people who don't enjoy PvP still can choose to not go open,
to work the BGS.

Why should it?!?

Anyway, make law-enforcement hard and deny Pilots, thaat kill players without a reason (reasons are: Wanted/Enemy) the right to land on a station, based on there crimes.
That would be a good start. The more players you kill that are not wanted, the more Stations you can not land on. They simply dont want you in the System. They hunt you!
That would be a better way to deal with all-time-pvp-players

 

[excalibus]

Oh, sure they could have done that for UAs, but that's different from CGs which is what my objection was about on your post.

That would add the UAs in the simulation, that's correct. And the reason for that is because from that point forward the game behaves to the input of UA/alloys. You can automate by linking the amount required to population, wealth, etc.

But CGs are not the same, because there is no predictive model added to the game from them. It's not like after the first station CG there was a case where if you bring "X commodities" to a system they start a construction of a station or a capital ship.

Sorry my misunderstanding that you where specifically meaning CG's, yes they do initiate the CG manually so that would be considered injection of new content per se not change of state so you are correct in that aspect...

Once the CG is injected and running, and players are then participating, it all becomes BGS including the conclusion of the CG as then there is the 'injection of content' based on the end results of the CG tier reached

 

[Julio Montega]

That rather seems to be the way that Frontier designed the game - a game that offers, but does not require, PvP.
The PvP crowd, as you put it, can affect the PvE crowd in exactly the same ways as they themselves are being affected by the PvE crowd.

That is not the POV of PvP centric players.
What is there for their joy to do the same "grinds",
when they can do the "real deal" a.k.a. PvP instead?
If those players would enjoy PvE BGS manipualtion,
they would do that, and not field their concern with
meaningless PvP.

Why would one kill count for more than one kill?

Harder to kill a CMDR that fights back, then a NPC.

.... and PvE players would presumably also want to be able to flag to flag themselves to their chosen Faction - without becoming automatic prey for PvP players however. If they were to be automatic prey for PvP players then I'd expect that the requests for an Open-PvE mode would increase.

The flagging simply is for BGS issues,
it works in solo/PG aswell, if your CMDR has to claim insurance,
the points go to the adversary.
Nobody mentioned automatic prey,
that is just another wee phantom being spun here.
There are a lot of ways to go out of the way of PvP
in open, be it awareness, precaution or simply tactics.

Why should it?!?

Anyway, make law-enforcement hard and deny Pilots, thaat kill players without a reason (reasons are: Wanted/Enemy) the right to land on a station, based on there crimes.
That would be a good start. The more players you kill that are not wanted, the more Stations you can not land on. They simply dont want you in the System. They hunt you!
That would be a better way to deal with all-time-pvp-players

*SIGH*
As posted a ton of times, NPC interaction is actually already that way
you want c&p to be: hostile = kill on sight.
If a CMDR is flagged = these mechanics work finally... after 3 years...

Also valueing in a CMDR death as multiple NPC deaths,
speeds up the whole process of reputation loss and the attacker
becoming a hostile free-for-all.

 

[Vorxian]

It's much better than Open-PvE. FD will never be able to kick players from any Open mode, just for a small infraction. A private group managed by a community could kick anyone they like.

Exactly, it's the answer to pretty much every question raised about what's, who's and how's.

Just need someone from FDEV to swing by, and raise their eyebrow in some form of... ohh, now.. that's an idea... take it back to DBOBE to ponder over in a board room meet up!

 

[Han_Zen]

Hmmm interesting... so it would not take much more than a couple of flags for determining a player firing on another player

I think it's easy for FD to disable friendly fire, if they want to.

It's all the other stuff that is hard:

Griefer: I can't shoot you, I'll ram you in stead.
You: FD can disable damage from ramming to.
Griefer: I'll ram you into the toaster rack. I will not even take damage.[yesnod]
You: FD disables transfer of momentum, I will not even move when you hit me.
Griefer: I have parked in front of the letter box, how do you get in or out of the station?
You: I can fly trough you FD has disabled player contact completely.
Grifer: Mind if I hide inside you and shoot a few NPC?
You: I'll be in my private group. See you on the forum.

 

[MarkAusten]

Harder to kill a CMDR that fights back, then a NPC.

That depends entirely on the skill level of the commander and the ships in question.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Here lies a paradox in that people want it to take hard work and dedication or years for you to attain elite status and be able to afford the big three ships, but woe betide if an elite NPC is able to take you out (if you stay around instead of HW) if you don't have the skill that should take a lot of hard work and dedication or years

the issues is "People" are not 1 amorphous blob singing from the same hymn sheet, neither are PvEers or PvPers.

I myself loved that it took me 25hrs in my sidewinder to fully A rate it, and then save up for an eagle.

I spent a similar time in my eagle, then a little less in my adder, but was in my cobra for ages. I am ALL for playing the long game in ED I am ALL for the economy being unforgiving and realistic, there would be no 1 week billionaires or zero to anaconda in 24 hrs if i was balancing the game. i am 6 weeks in play time in ED since gamma and still only in a FGS and am fine with that.

I am all for zero tolerence of crime in high sec, and lasting and hard hitting consequences for actions against pilots federation members (they pay are insurance premiums remember so we are actively costing them money when we claim - we only pay the excess)

And i am all for an elite rated FDL being a thing to be terrified off, that if i am on my own, and unless i have a fully pimped ship i am in trouble....

BUT, that said, Elite ships ARE meant to be rare, hell, dangerous ships are not meant to be that common.

all of the above however is possible without any PvP. I have said it before, the problem with humans is, they need to be entertained in a game, and acting in a plausible manner is considered dull by many... where as well programmed AI can do it till the end of time.

for me, the only reason i am playing ED now is for the immersion of "spaceman simulator in 3303". Some of the players playing in ED totally ruin that experience for me.

i could not give a fig about PvP, or the metas and all that.. some of the "PvP" builds i have seen are a complete joke and i would never entertain using them, but if i wanted to fly to one of the hot spots in open, i would feel compelled to.

IF ED had launched with a convincing C&P system i would never have left open, but it didnt and now we have what we have.

some PvPers want conseuqence free arenas where they can blow up each others billion credit ships.. to me this would kill the game completely. how can this be justified in the economy, it would be like me saying i know i will take my Enzo Ferrari to a destruction derby and at the end someone will give me another one to replace it.

 

[-=VampyrE=-]

*SIGH*
As posted a ton of times, NPC interaction is actually already that way
you want c&p to be: hostile = kill on sight.
If a CMDR is flagged = these mechanics work finally... after 3 years...

Youdonotreallyread...

Make law-enforcement hard and deny Pilots, thaat kill players without a reason (reasons are: Wanted/Enemy) the right to land on a station, based on there crimes.
The more players you kill that are not wanted, the more Stations you can not land on. They simply dont want you in the System. They hunt you!

NO DAMN CHANCE to get a Class A FSD or other good modules - If you are an outlaw. FD may implement an SHADOW-Market. But the prices there should by many times the normal price. Even fixing an Class A-Part should be expensive there.

 

[Julio Montega]

That depends entirely on the skill level of the commander and the ships in question.

Yes it does, but as written before, it also impacts the
reputation loss and resulting hostile states faster.
That is why a CMDR needs to be worth multiple NPCs.
Also you as a CMDR are some kind of a priviledged being.

Youdonotreallyread...

Make law-enforcement hard and deny Pilots, thaat kill players without a reason (reasons are: Wanted/Enemy) the right to land on a station, based on there crimes.
The more players you kill that are not wanted, the more Stations you can not land on. They simply dont want you in the System. They hunt you!

NO DAMN CHANCE to get a Class A FSD or other good modules - If you are an outlaw. FD may implement an SHADOW-Market. But the prices there should by many times the normal price. Ever fixing an Class A-Part should be expensive there.

Youdonotreallyread...
That is how interaction with NPCs already work.
Shooty on clean NPC = rep loss and bounty. -> hostile -> no docking + kill on sight
Shooty on wanted NPC = no infraction.

With what i suggest as in flagging,
that would finally work on CMDRs, too.
The enemy state is a state apart from wanted/clean, as shows powerplay.

 

[MarkAusten]

That is why a CMDR needs to be worth multiple NPCs.
Also you as a CMDR are some kind of a priviledged being.

Now look here, there's no need to be insulting. There's no way I am worth more than some lousy NPC.

Er, wait a minute...