General Hide 'player' ship on scanner and on the description - additional option

[Para Handy]

I presented the suggestion and what it will cause. If someone questioned something then i responded - that is called the discussion.
Nobody presented logical arguments against the idea. ..........

What complete tripe - absolute delusional nonsense.

The vast majority of people responded to your ganker's "Q-Ship" proposal by calling it out as a gankers' delight. You are in denial if you honestly think nobody has engaged with your proposal and dismissed all of your spurious deflections.

The winged hussars have plummeted in my estimation if they are not disassociating themselves from your position.

 

[Kyokushin]

Plenty of people have presented arguments against them, you've just ignored them.
You claimed that gankers can't gank in non-meta ships, I showed you three videos of me killing people in a T7 of all things - a T7 that, I might add, I specifically chose to fly because the miners wouldn't be able to immediately suspect it was a pirate ship.
Your response? Oh, no, there wasn't a response. You didn't respond at all. You just kept arguing as if that inconvenient little piece of evidence didn't exist.

but you have more or less totally ignored all the arguments against your suggestion...

No, i have responded. And never claimed gankers cant gank in meta ships, but i said almost none will do it because its innefficient. If you want to gank then you need to have efficient gank ladout - in different way the victim will simply flee.

What complete tripe - absolute delusional nonsense.

The vast majority of people responded to your ganker's "Q-Ship" proposal by calling it out as a gankers' delight. You are in denial if you honestly think nobody has engaged with your proposal and dismissed all of your spurious deflections.

The winged hussars have plummeted in my estimation if they are not disassociating themselves from your position.

Your opinion, not fact, and there was no spurious deflections. If there was then pick one and we can discuss. Oh wait, we did it but you're denying the response and explanation.
Its your denial not mine.

And in TWH anyone is presenting his own opinion So give me a better shot

You presented the opinion, you dont like it - everyone noted - now you can simply leave, its a topic about discussing the idea, not me

 

[Sir.Tj]

Can folks discuss the post and not the poster please?

 

[Techmonkey]

If I would gank I would not bother with a KWS scan, why wasting precious time where the gankee could combat log, I'd blast away. How I would know it's a player?
Player ships are not even close to NPC load outs. NPCs last longer. As said numerous times it would just make it easier for the gankers since they would have more time to scan every ship. Why should I be worried as a gankee, there are just npcs around, I have time right?

KWS scan before shooting
Ya'll crack me up

 

[Misty_Dark]

No, i have responded. And never claimed gankers cant gank in meta ships, but i said almost none will do it because its innefficient. If you want to gank then you need to have efficient gank ladout - in different way the victim will simply flee.

There have been SEVERAL explanation that it would not be that much harder to find another player, there are several ingame indicators that will make most players stick out, regardless if they are shown as player on the radar or not...
You have not really addressed ANY of these issues, and instead you have uphold your stance that it will be harder to detect another player. You have done nothing to explain the advantage a player that is actively seeking out out other players to attack, as they will learn all the tricks there are to fast identify other players, but their victims will have very limited knowledge about this, and are thus unprepared to be attacked by another player. and not yet another NPC.

So your statement that noone will do it, is not a very truthful statement, as you have chosen to more or less totally ignore all those arguments why your suggestion would not work, and this last post is once again no change to this, as you are still ignoring all the problematic arguments made against your suggestion...

Even the efficent Gankloadout had been refuted by Screemonster, who showed 3 videos where ScreenMonster used a Type 7 to pirate players in, and if they did not give Screemonster some of their cargo, destroyed or chased them away... and you reply with this to Screemonster! talk about selective reading on your part...

 

[Kyokushin]

I have explained in the my first post and there is no issues to address.

someone is just turning on the hide mode and is hidden. There is no big phillsophy here.

people here are scared of no more than a dozen od gank folks like childrens imaginated monster in shadow.

and gankers will just wont to waste a time to camp anywhere and guess who is a player and who is not.

sometimes maybe some will guess and then what ? A nothing someone sometimes will blow up - nothing extraordinary will happen.

and again players will get a cover and ganking will require more time, patient and luck in galaxy full of same ships on radar.
If someone will want to play and see others then will be able for ask them for it.

maybe an option for ex „visible for friends or visible for squadron” would be interesting.

 

[Ettanin]

and gankers will just wont to waste a time to camp anywhere and guess who is a player and who is not.

NPCs follow visually readily available predictable patterns such as travel and names. Another helpful indicator is either the bandwidth display or resource monitor network tab.

 

[Techmonkey]

Maybe you should try to be on the either side of a gank

 

[Kyokushin]

NPCs follow visually readily available predictable patterns such as travel and names. Another helpful indicator is either the bandwidth display or resource monitor network tab.

A player is mostly flying from a star to the stations, similar to NPC's. For this case there is also an option to add more NPC crowd will flying patter similar to player entering the system.

A bandwitch - yes - but at only at some point - however it also may be disabled.

And finally - no one is saying the hide option will 100% prevent of being shooted, and i will say more - it should not

 

[Ettanin]

A player is mostly flying from a star to the stations, similar to NPC's. For this case there is also an option to add more NPC crowd will flying patter similar to player entering the system.

Experienced gankers will still be able to distinguish players from bots by their movement.

A bandwitch - yes - but at only at some point - however it also may be disabled.

Nonsense. Player-caused traffic is significantly higher than traffic in a solo instance/instance you are alone in. And there are legitimate external tools to inspect with whom the client connects.

 

[Kyokushin]

No one is saying it prevent 100% gank, and good an experienced ganker will be able to figure it out sometimes - that is how it should work. That is how working to be experienced in something - you can do a things what cannot beginners.

As i wrote - at some point. Now take no more than a dozen gank community, add to it experience and necessity of using external network analysis tools what may show a player or not... and all of that may happen in one or two systems from 400 blns, because simply as i wrote - there is no more than a dozen gankers on entire earth

 

[antiriad]

there is no more than a dozen gankers on entire earth

If this were truly the case, then why would the change even be needed? It would merely lessen the ability of friendly players to interact with each other, since the likelyhood of being "ganked" would be minimal anyway?

IIRC, there were more than 50 names on the self-published "Distant Ganks 2" leaderboard, so that's definitely more than a dozen...

 

[Kyokushin]

Its not needed its a suggestion after 6 years of playing to add something fresh The motivation is to slightly improve gameplay, add more choice, its not a gamechanger.
In that 50 names was also 'wannabes' who took a travel but ganked occasionally, but even lets say a number of 50 is true.

400 mld of star systems, two hemispheres, most of these folks have family and kids. So now you have 25 per hemisphere, there are always people who are not playing or rarerly, lets take it to 25%, and now you have other 25% on shinrara dehzra, 25% on some Engineer and 25% on community goal, so you have finally around 25 of players who may be dangerous, or may be not, because this game mechanics allows to flee almost everytime if you simply have slightly smarter build.
So finally you can avoid these two lasts places and avoid probably all gankers, so per one location you may have active 2-3 pvp wings who will not only gank but also fight each other.

Now add for that a possibility to hide Will it influe your gameplay? No. Will it be harder to be ganked? Yes. Will it influe ganking scene? They will shoot each other for fun, not you because they will simply wont waste a time to fined you or anyone else, when they have a hour or two to shoot something after day of work.

If someone is stubbornly flying to well known pvp location when you can almost 100% expect a gank then i cant help. And probably nobody will.

 

[antiriad]

Its not needed its a suggestion after 6 years of playing to add something fresh The motivation is to slightly improve gameplay, add more choice, its not a gamechanger.
In that 50 names was also 'wannabes' who took a travel but ganked occasionally, but even lets say a number of 50 is true.

400 mld of star systems, two hemispheres, most of these folks have family and kids. So now you have 25 per hemisphere, there are always people who are not playing or rarerly, lets take it to 25%, and now you have other 25% on shinrara dehzra, 25% on some Engineer and 25% on community goal, so you have finally around 25 of players who may be dangerous, or may be not, because this game mechanics allows to flee almost everytime if you simply have slightly smarter build.
So finally you can avoid these two lasts places and avoid probably all gankers, so per one location you may have active 2-3 pvp wings who will not only gank but also fight each other.

Now add for that a possibility to hide Will it influe your gameplay? No. Will it be harder to be ganked? Yes. Will it influe ganking scene? They will shoot each other for fun, not you because they will simply wont waste a time to fined you or anyone else, when they have a hour or two to shoot something after day of work.

If someone is stubbornly flying to well known pvp location when you can almost 100% expect a gank then i cant help. And probably nobody will.

OK thanks for the reply.

I still don't see what the benefit is though? You've explained that there are very few "gankers" in the game at any one time, and you've explained that by avoiding 2 or 3 notable hotspots, you can pretty much avoid them completely anyway.

It's also true that there would be at least as much benefit to a "ganker" as there would be to a person attempting to avoid such confrontations.

There would also be a number of drawbacks in other areas, which have been pointed out by others. It would harm those who wish to pirate (not "gank") other CMDRs - pirating NPCs isn't a lot of fun for anyone, but pirating CMDRs can be fun for both parties. It would also considerably hinder social interactions within the game, as one would not necessarily be aware that another CMDR is present. In addition, it would harm those who seek PVP in PP or BGS settings.

As far as I can see, there are plenty of drawbacks for virtually no benefit, so I would personally not support your suggestion.

 

[Misty_Dark]

I have explained in the my first post and there is no issues to address.

someone is just turning on the hide mode and is hidden. There is no big phillsophy here.

people here are scared of no more than a dozen od gank folks like childrens imaginated monster in shadow.

and gankers will just wont to waste a time to camp anywhere and guess who is a player and who is not.

sometimes maybe some will guess and then what ? A nothing someone sometimes will blow up - nothing extraordinary will happen.

and again players will get a cover and ganking will require more time, patient and luck in galaxy full of same ships on radar.
If someone will want to play and see others then will be able for ask them for it.

maybe an option for ex „visible for friends or visible for squadron” would be interesting.

That "explanatation" is lacking ALOT details

It would be harder to find a player to gank in world 'full of NPC', without radar recogniction, and better gameplay for other side to hide like the shadow in npc crowd to catch a player.
More players could be able to play 'on the Open' because other will be never sure they are players or NPCs.

This have now numerous times been countered with
Debug Network log will show when there are other players in the area, and your so called solution is to disable that option, counter argument, is that creating a tool that will do the same is easy do, I can now also add that certain Firewall software already can do this for you. give you a nice representation about network traffic that the Elite Dangerous process is using.

Players and NPC moves in different pattern, or more specific, NPC tend to travel different routes than what players normally travel, and the more inexperienced a player is, the easier it is to identify them. Some experience in doing this is needed, and those players that would spend some learning these tricks, are also the same players that will benefit form this. Just like the very same players are the one that is more experience in doing interdictions, and due to more practice. This will put everyone at an disadvantage since just about any other player will not spend the time to learn or even understand how this works, and thus be totally blind sided when another player interdicts them.This was discussed in alot during the kickstarter and there is a reason for why we show players in the game like we do now.
So they would not be wasting alot of time doing this, as they would have a much better success rate in identifying other players that the regular players.


And now those players are at even bigger disadvantage than today, as they now have no way to identify of ship interdicting them is another player or not, and if we add the KWS to identify players, then most regular players would not bring that as a standard device to begin with, and if they did, they would need a minimum of 2 seconds to scan the ship, or at worst (stock), 10 seconds. That is a golden opportunity for any hostile player to line up their initial burst damage attack on the player doing their scanning. they can now fully utilize weapons that favours close range attacks, as their victim, if scanning, would be a nice stationary target that would not be alarmed about the other ship appearing to scan them, as that is what NPC's does.... and then get hit with a high burst damage in a crippling first attack.


We would have to remove/rework the last contacts information, as this would list all the players you have instanced with recently, so you just have to look at this list and figure out that there is a new player in your instance.. so now you only need to check all ships for ship with matching name, so I do not have to look for CMDR Kyokushin, I onyl need to find the ship with a pilot named Kyokushin.


I do not agree with your prediction that more players could play in open due to this, as once players starts to get destroy by the gankers, their words would start spreading in these forums and the tale would be something like this:
I opted to hide myself and believed to be "safe" and then another player, also hiding, found me and destroyed me and I had no chance.


And then your rambling about meeting other players, by typing "hello" in the chat, who even bothers to read the chat? and why would you randomly say "hello" in chat for the odd chance that there is another player the same system... today if you see another player on the radar, you can now send a friendly "o7" or similar and if they notices they reply back, and they might even be more alert to check the system chat if there is another player... so even easier for players to connect with other players in open, if they would like.

 

[Techmonkey]

And now those players are at even bigger disadvantage than today, as they now have no way to identify of ship interdicting them is another player or not, and if we add the KWS to identify players, then most regular players would not bring that as a standard device to begin with, and if they did, they would need a minimum of 2 seconds to scan the ship, or at worst (stock), 10 seconds. That is a golden opportunity for any hostile player to line up their initial burst damage attack on the player doing their scanning. they can now fully utilize weapons that favours close range attacks, as their victim, if scanning, would be a nice stationary target that would not be alarmed about the other ship appearing to scan them, as that is what NPC's does.... and then get hit with a high burst damage in a crippling first attack.

This is the most idiotic thing I've read in a long while, doing a KWS scan as a "gankee" to determine whether it's a player or NPC. If it's a player one will be dead before the scan is complete. I still don't understand why the OP thinks there is some hat tipping and waving after an interdiction. The whole thing is usually over after 15sec - 30sec

 

[Sysmon]

Back when we discussed this first in... 2013 or something, the fear of being stalked and ganked were the main reasons for keeping players distinct-looking on the radar compared to NPCs. Back then we were pretty special, as it wasn't until our NPC crew survived ship death that we stopped being special by respawning relatively unharmed after ship destruction.

Back then I was (and still am) for not showing CMDRs differently from NPCs on the radar. We should be able to make the distinction in communication channels and perhaps behaviour. However, that is only possible if crime and punishment is up to the task of dealing with player killers and general murder-hobos. And it is also required that piracy and outlaws can have meaningful "career-paths". We still really don't have either in the game, although the game has come a long way towards developing at least a somewhat functional C&P.

S

 

[Misty_Dark]

This is the most idiotic thing I've read in a long while, doing a KWS scan as a "gankee" to determine whether it's a player or NPC. If it's a player one will be dead before the scan is complete. I still don't understand why the OP thinks there is some hat tipping and waving after an interdiction. The whole thing is usually over after 15sec - 30sec

Exactly,a player standing still to scan the ship that interdicted them to figure out if they are NPC or another player is stupid thing to do, as this will put the player in a worse situation by now standing still offering themself up as a perfect target, giving the attacker an even better initial strike potential... so even considering doing a KWS as the target of an interdiction is bad idea to begin with.

 

[M00ka]

Exactly,a player standing still to scan the ship that interdicted them to figure out if they are NPC or another player is stupid thing to do, as this will put the player in a worse situation by now standing still offering themself up as a perfect target, giving the attacker an even better initial strike potential... so even considering doing a KWS as the target of an interdiction is bad idea to begin with.

Wouldn't the end result be that all one has to do is a passive scan on a ship to see if they have a KWS fitted. If yes, it is a player, if no, then high probability of being an NPC. And that just totally defeats the OP's entire concept of being able to hide!

 

[Techmonkey]

Wouldn't the end result be that all one has to do is a passive scan on a ship to see if they have a KWS fitted. If yes, it is a player, if no, then high probability of being an NPC. And that just totally defeats the OP's entire concept of being able to hide!

If the aggressor pulls a target, he pulls it to shoot. So the victim has a few seconds to decide whether he wants to fight or high wake. There is no time for sightseeing.