Ignoring or harming PvP in game design is contributing to ganking

[GreySix]

TLDR: PvP players are left with little to no compelling options for PvP content, resulting in increased ganking.

... which is a significant reason many newer players will opt for solo mode. Why serve as fodder for min-maxed triple elite gankers?
Life is too short as it is.

 

[[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos]

Not disingenuous at all. For those who don't want to be ganked, you're less likely to since people who want to PvP would have meaningful content they'd be entertained with instead.

I really am not trying to get in a slinging match with you over this but you state that there are not enough people who want to PvP and those that do inevitably turn to ganking through boredom, ergo, there must be so few of them as to not entertain each other. If 70% of the payer base wanted to PvP, we wouldn't be having this discussion. You'd all be out there, PvP'ing till your hearts were content. So it's a numbers game. I simply don't believe you're going to incentivise someone like me, who has no interest in PvP into being interested in PvP. I'm not being not interested to be spiteful to you, I have no interest in it. No incentive will change that.

If most people playing the game felt the same as me (and I'm certainly not claiming that they do) then what you have is a game where people don't want to play the way you do. No incentive will change that. What you going to do now? Tell them they must?

 

[[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos]

Don't waste your time OP. This forum is just a tiny fraction of the playerbase and it's rather unlikely that Fdev reads this. Most interesting stuff happens elsewhere.

I've witnessed many a drunken brawl in my life, my favourite part is when some sloshed woman grabs hold of one of the combatants and shouts, "Leave it Terry, he aint werf it".

Thank you for this.

 

[Red Anders]

I've witnessed many a drunken brawl in my life, my favourite part is when some sloshed woman grabs hold of one of the combatants and shouts, "Leave it Terry, he aint werf it".

Thank you for this.

I'm commenting only because that post deserves more than just a like

 

[Mohrgan]

Cool, if you're truly looking for a single player experience, I have no problems with that. But if you're interacting with the greater galaxy, having no incentive to do this in open where PvP can occur while having the same impact as those who choose to be in open where there's greater risk is a flawed design contributing to more people just resorting to ganking.

I would say that the person who bought the game for PvE payed the same price for the game, as the Commander who is looking for PvP. That's why everyone gets the exact same access for the exact same purchase. It's not like we had no idea that there were three modes in the game before we bought it. It was all there in black and orange.

The game is only flawed if you think forced PvP is a good thing. Many of us, myself included, don't. The flaw is in buying something, hoping it will be exactly the opposite of what is offered.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

I don't play other games because this one really is a lot of fun, but much of its potential is lost.

I feel the same about ESO.
It has the potential for helicopter gunships but sadly the majority of people don't seem to want them.

 

[Mogen Teras]

No
Learn what BGS is about and why PVP will going to hurt your faction, directly or by inactivity, instead of helping it.

One other aspect - PVP is a minor activity. Fun, but still minor
To put it into perspective, it's a minor part of a minor part and it is entirely optional.

PVP gatekeepers will still try to defend that Elite is a PVP focused game.

 

[Nadreck]

I thought San Tu was where the PvP folks did their thing?

Inara keeps reporting it as "high threat".

 

[CMDR_LS]

Bingo!!! There's nothing. This is a problem with the game design. I'm not saying we should force anyone into open, but to have no incentive at all to play in open is a problem that contributes to more people ganking because it's the only semi-reliable PvP content to be had that's organic.

if you ever played WoW, they recently introduced a concept called War Mode which can be turned on and off at capital cities. That system replaced the dedicated PVP servers as now people can simply activate war mode with a click of a button.
Anyhow, when it was introduced Blizzard knew nobody will EVER turn it on because of ganking. So what did they do? they added incentives and rewards to War Mode to encourage people to play in War Mode. You got more XP, better loot etc etc.

So to some degree I agree with the OP. not only ED has zero activities around PVP, but they provide ZERO incentives for players to play in open.

here are some example they can implement to incentivize people to play in open.

1) mining - 10% increased yield in fragments generations. that applies to core, sub-surface and laser
2) material gathering - 15% increased yield for all materials gathered from high graded emissions
3) mission rewards - 10% increase for all mission rewards (credits, mats etc)

 

[AdmiralXanos]

multiplayer is its own reward

1. Distant Worlds 1&2
2. Distant Ganks
3. Soleme & Harry Potter
4. Fuel Rats
5. DSSA

we don't need incentives. You'll have so many logs by favoring open + the block button would probably be bound to a macro to max DPS (diamonds per hour)

 

[CMDR Tony]

Yup, it's one of those threads...

PvP consistently seems to be the last thing considered with game features. If anything, features are introduced that hamper PvP in Elite. This pattern I believe is contributing to the infamous ganking "problem" so often posted on reddit or these forums. Full disclosure, I do my share of ganking. Let's go over some avenues that can bring about meaningful PvP in this game.

1) BGS: One player faction comes into conflict with another for control of stations and systems. This has great potential to drive meaningful PvP since each side has an incentive to hamper the efforts of the other. But there are some things that get in the way:

Solo / PG: Actions are just as effective in these modes compared to open, so players have no incentive to play in open if there's threat of hostile action.
Menu Logging: Allowed by FDev, reviled by the PvP community. You can de-spawn your ship in 15 seconds after getting attacked, leaving players very little time to complete an attack. With today's defensive modules and engineering, it's incredibly easy to have a ship that can survive 15 seconds of fire from fully decked out PvP ships.
Blocking: Say each group has 3 players in a wing. Wing 1 has blocked 2 members of the opposing wing already. Because of this, instancing will likely be incredibly broken, such that either the two wings don't see each other at all, or Wing 1 will only see a single member of Wing 2, while the other two members fail to instance with the rest of the players, giving Wing 1 an advantage. They can also just proceed to block any member if the opposing faction, effectively playing in PG but in open.

2) Powerplay: This was built to help encourage PvP, so seems like this would be perfect for those who want to do PvP. Again, there are many things that get in the way.

Solo / PG: Actions are just as effective in these modes compared to open, so players have no incentive to play in open if there's threat of hostile action.
Menu Logging: Allowed by FDev, reviled by the PvP community. You can de-spawn your ship in 15 seconds after getting attacked, leaving players very little time to complete an attack. With today's defensive modules and engineering, it's incredibly easy to have a ship that can survive 15 seconds of fire from fully decked out PvP ships.
Blocking: Say each group has 3 players in a wing. Wing 1 has blocked 2 members of the opposing wing already. Because of this, instancing will likely be incredibly broken, such that either the two wings don't see each other at all, or Wing 1 will only see a single member of Wing 2, while the other two members fail to instance with the rest of the players, giving Wing 1 an advantage. They can also just proceed to block any member if the opposing faction, effectively playing in PG but in open.

(Look familiar?)

3) Pirating: This is great fun when it works and is perhaps the only PvP activity that can net a potentially meaningful monetary reward. This is generally an activity that should not result in the death of even the victim (provided they comply with demands). Again, we have problems here:

Solo / PG: Obtaining cargo and selling it are just as effective (if not more so in this case with mining) in Solo or Private Group. NPCs pose just a minor fraction of risk that a player does. So there's really no incentive at all to play in open. Instead there are specific incentives to conduct this in solo / pg for the current mining meta.
Menu Logging: Allowed by FDev, reviled by the PvP community. You can de-spawn your ship in 15 seconds after getting attacked, leaving players very little time to complete an attack. With today's defensive modules and engineering, it's incredibly easy to have a ship that can survive 15 seconds of fire from fully decked out PvP ships. While some cargo can be extracted with hatchbreakers, pirates tend to announce demands first and give time for their victim to comply since they want to encourage this behavior. The small time window however doesn't afford this luxury.
Blocking: The entire purpose of pirating is to find players transporting high value items. If no players are found, there is no pirating to be done at all. Broken instances from blocking only exacerbates empty instances from the lack of players playing in Open.

(Again, look familiar?)

4) CQC: Perhaps the only PvP that actually works, but it's not very meaningful in the sense of personal CMDR progression or contributing to something bigger. We also cannot use the ships we want to fly, which are the ones we've spent credits and time building.

5) Organized PvP Events: These can be great fun, and many who enjoy PvP attend such events. But these tend to be few and far between, and have the problem of not contributing to something greater.

So, put yourself in the shoes of someone who really enjoys combat with other players in the grand universe provided in Elite. You're really just ending up hitting roadblock after roadblock. What's there left to do? You probably guessed it: Ganking. It's true for me, and I'm sure it is for others, ganking you see in Elite is largely a result of boredom.

To be successful at ganking, you have to:

1) Go somewhere that you have a chance of finding a target. This means an engineering system, where everyone is mining, or where it's being sold (though sell systems have been empty in open lately). We've already established BGS and Powerplay functionally do not provide an adequate environment for open PvP. With many in solo / pg or blocking, these are the only systems that you have any chance to encounter players.
2) Attack quickly and ruthlessly because you potentially only have 15 seconds if your target decides to combat log (or less depending on method). Time spent messaging or attempting to pirate often just results in the player combat logging.
3) Don't communicate before interdiction otherwise you might just get blocked.

So really, if there is a ganking problem, its really due to the design of the game, and the lack of compelling options for PvP because of it. As someone who ganks, I would absolutely love to have a compelling BGS war with another player group far more than just ganking in a random high traffic system. There'd be more fun pirate interactions as well if the current situation didn't overtly hamper pirating efforts so harshly.


TLDR: PvP players are left with little to no compelling options for PvP content, resulting in increased ganking.

YES OP! Right on and kudos to you for summing up the situation so well. You have my squadron's (and my squadron's allies I'm sure) support on this. It is so needed. We love the game and want to keep playing it because it does some things very well and PvP in Open is the direction many of us want but there is absolutely no incentive to do so and FDev has put into place all the obstacles that they can think of to discourage it. SHAME!

The PMF I am a part of has been invaded a few times and always it is done in PG\Solo so that we cannot meet our invaders in battle. So it turns out to be a contest to see who can out grind the other. Lame.

I was not against the idea of Solo\PGs before the addition to PMFs. But since the addition of PMFs, I oppose the existence of Solo\PG as they currently stand. Since the introduction of PMFs, many PMFs want to compete with each other for territory and whatever else. You can see this quite plainly on Inara where PMFs set up alliances and such even though there are no game mechanics that support this play style. Heck, we cannot even join our PMF in-game and instead have to create squadron names that sort of imply the PMFs we support. Clearly, many people want this sort of PvP.

To make matters worse, some people abuse the "block" functionality by permanently blocking people in certain squadrons so that they do not interfere with their activities (undermining a PMF, hunting AX commanders, etc).

So far FDev has not added anything to make this situation any better. Worse, they adopt the "gun makers" argument -- "we only make the guns, we don't make people use them in any particular way". Lame.

Things that would need to be changed or added to make this viable:

• Allow us to join our PMFs
• Allow us to make war on other PMFs so that we don't get wanted for killing their ships
• Do something about undermining PMFs from the safety of Solo\PG
• Change "blocking" so that it cannot be abused
• Let us more easily see PMF territories in the galmap
• Improve instancing so that we can see more of the other PMFs ships in the area
• Allow crossplay so that we can see more of the other PMFs ships in the area
• Weapons balancing & shield stacking
• And whatever else I have forgotten to mention...

 

[JosiahD]

The point is, that PvP is possible in E|D, but it isn't required. In a game arranged like E|D, the shared BGS over differing game modes and platforms, each task required to play the game has to be equally available to any mode. If not, some players would be disenfranchised. You can even see a trend towards offering, more and stronger, ways to avoid PvP in the game's development. With that in mind, why would PvP drive content? The answer is, It shouldn't.

Just like every other group activity in the game, it has to be driven by the players. Being jealous that Exploration can attract thousands of players to one cause, isn't reason enough to turn the game upside down to become something it isn't. PvP just isn't important enough in the over all.

Organize those Commanders interested in PvP in order to accomplish something. Even a Sandbox requires someone to shovel the sand into the buckets to make a castle out of it. Petition FD to integrate PvP into the existing game so PvP minded players can feel involved. That would solve a lot of the griping.

Exactly. Ostensibly Elite Dangerous is not a PvP game, as in it is not a core focus. It's possible to do, yes, but not an essential requirement. And it's also not simply based on ship vs ship combat - there is also the nuance of pvp via playing the BGS (supporting a faction against another to alter influence in a system) and things like Powerplay mechanics (as sub-optimal as they may be). But that'd be a no from me if the 'solution' were to force or even incentivise open play.

Moreover, I would argue that ganking and/or griefing doesn't result from lack of PvP options.....that's rubbish. In my experience, these playstyles are more often due to a mindset of a certain type of player that their 'right' to enjoy a game by blowing other players up is more important than the other player's right to enjoy a game unmolested. In other words, deriving pleasure by depriving others of theirs. Other times it'll simply be because the griefer is your typical schoolyard bully type. That's not PvP, that's just about being a jerk. Yet some players enjoy the risk of playing with such players, while many do not. Options are good.

 

[gorankar]

Ok, what's you're reasoning? I think I clearly stated why the design ends up encouraging immediately attacking the target.

It does not take more than a couple times of experiencing a ganker pretending to be a pirate, only to blow you up after you give them cargo, or even the moment you slow down enough to give them a clean torp shot, for you to decide it's not worth stopping anymore. Better to try and high wake, then switch mode, and perhaps block whoever interdicted you.
The response to a few gankers pretending to be pirates, has changed how some, (I'll leave you to decide how many), respond to attempts at piracy. They treat them as gank attempts. They assume a rebuy is in their future if they do not escape.
That is what has made PvP piracy more problematic for the actual RP for fun and profit pirates.

 

[Drelthar]

The meaning of ganking seems to be a moving target here on the forum. When you say ganking what kind of gameplay are we talking about exactly?

Destroying other players ships for no in game reason.

Additionally, if it IS for an in game reason, then not giving the other party any inkling of what that reason is, is functionally the same.

 

[Nickolai]

I tend to agree that PvP has been neglected, and has resulted in some undesirable outcomes for all involved.

I've been the victim of piracy, and the victim of ganks. I don't mind being the victim of a robbery, or "honest" pirates that let you go after their (reasonable) demands are met. However I do mind being the victim of a ganker (especially if I just spend 2 or 3 hours mining to fill my hold). That drives me into Solo mode quite often when I'm feeling risk-averse.

Totally in favor of some kind of bonus for playing in Open, as an incentive for taking a greater risk. Solo players can still have the same effect on the galaxy as they do today, but payouts/merits/mineral fragment yield/INF gains should be buffed if you're in Open. And Powerplay should be restricted to Open completely. Log into solo with powerplay cargo - it disappears. It's inherently a PvP part of the game, and if you don't want to risk PvP, don't participate.

 

[CMDR Tony]

Additionally, if it IS for an in game reason, then not giving the other party any inkling of what that reason is, is functionally the same.

Even when a reason is given in chat (pirating message, enemy faction message, enemy power message, etc.), the carebears still come on to the forums and cry "GANKER". The reason doesn't actually matter is just used as a convenient excuse to oppose PvP on the forums.

 

[Drelthar]

Even when a reason is given in chat (pirating message, enemy faction message, enemy power message, etc.), the carebears still come on to the forums and cry "GANKER". The reason doesn't actually matter is just used as a convenient excuse to oppose PvP on the forums.

Well sure, but it's not ganking then - so they'd just be being a bit sourfaced.

The reason does matter to a lot of commanders, more than you might think - so if people neglect the reasoning, "because people will just cry anyway" then that's just adding to the problem.

 

[gorankar]

How many would actually believe the reason given by the person that interdicted and then destroyed them?
If you got ganked you got ganked. Don't treat the term as a pejorative.

 

[AkenBosch]

I really love fencing, me and my friends would love to fence all the time with everyone else in the gym, but most of the other members really don't understand our love for fencing and the gym rarely hosts tournament for us to fence in. So, the only natural way to have organic fencing is to go around the gym and stab random members doing their push-ups and squats. It's the gym's fault anyway, they should hand a sword to everyone coming in to do their exercises. And with exercises I mean fencing, of course.

 

[Drelthar]

I really love fencing, me and my friends would love to fence all the time with everyone else in the gym, but most of the other members really don't understand our love for fencing and the gym rarely hosts tournament for us to fence in. So, the only natural way to have organic fencing is to go around the gym and stab random members doing their push-ups and squats. It's the gym's fault anyway, they should hand a sword to everyone coming in to do their exercises. And with exercises I mean fencing, of course.

Agreed.