Ignoring or harming PvP in game design is contributing to ganking

[Robert Maynard]

True, but why try to create something we know will be flawed from the start?

.... to cater to those who don't enjoy PvP at all.

Weapon damage can already be removed, noting the existing experimental effects.

Ramming damage could be similarly removed - with no "pinball" impulse effects.

Players who could not accept the compromises to necessity would not require to play in that game mode - as Open would still be there for them.

Simple rules would also need to be added relating to players being unable to interdict, wake drop and wake follow other players in an Open-PvE mode.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

Oh, it'd change it for sure. Still, "Give me 10 tons or I will hatchbreak you and stick you with a big repair bill" still works to a degree.

No I come to think of it repair costs should be higher anyway lol

 

[Misty_Dark]

Make game save kinetic state of ships starting from some seconds before collision. If somehow one commander seems to get rammed in shieldless sidewinder over and over again, it is quite clear who is the ramming troll.

ok, so the "game", that in this case now runs on client computer, should save the state... that computer that a player controls, and can run whatever they like, it would work on consoles, but not so much on PC. Why do you think there are so many anti-cheat engines bundles with various games? that is because players cheat in games, and if players could get fun out tricking the system into banning innocent players, then we would see players trying todo just that.

 

[Stealthie]

True, but why try to create something we know will be flawed from the start?

The most important issue, for me, is the risk of creating something that makes things much worse than they currently are.

Take, for example, the issue of combat logging.
Combat logging is bad (m'kay?).
A commonly touted (albeit, thankfully, impossible) solution is that ships would remain present in-universe after a player CLs.
The problem with this is that it's possible to manipulate data in order to remotely disconnect another player.

In "solving" the issue of CLing, you've created an incentive for cheats to use data manipulation tools and you've created a new problem which is much worse than the problem it solves.

Unfortunately, you've ALWAYS got to look at the way any proposal might be abused before supporting it.

In the case of a "PvP flag" system, it's inevitable that players are going to toggle it when it suits them and they're going to find ways to inflict themselves on other players who can't do anything about it.
It's a good idea, in theory, but I'd really need to know how the problems would be sufficiently mitigated before I could support it.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

Are ramming and combat logging issues of such import that they should be "solved" with such a change to the game?
I doubt the result would be worth the time spent.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

ok, so the "game", that in this case now runs on client computer, should save the state... that computer that a player controls, and can run whatever they like, it would work on consoles, but not so much on PC. Why do you think there are so many anti-cheat engines bundles with various games? that is because players cheat in games, and if players could get fun out tricking the system into banning innocent players, then we would see players trying todo just that.

There are two datasets, from both sides of collision. Okay they mismatch, and no one can determine who was at fault. Not from single point of data. Now then our brave suicide rammer continues his antics. Always when there is collision our rammers data has mismatch. That kind of analysis can be automated, and it does not need genius level people to find out who needs to banned.

Basic problem in general is not that there are some systems in place, problem is that there are people who abuse such systems. And solution to that is to do utmost to discourage them from doing such things. Bans of increasing length including permanent ones can do that.

 

[Screemonster]

Are ramming and combat logging issues of such import that they should be "solved" with such a change to the game?
I doubt the result would be worth the time spent.

I had a hell of a time not long ago with my computer randomly blackscreening and rebooting when playing games thanks to a problem with the graphics drivers. Once second it'd be going fine, the next, poof. The way some people carry on, I was pretty paranoid that someone would scream "COMBAT LOGGER" if it happened while I was actually in an instance with other people. Add the myriad other genuine reasons people ungracefully disconnect and you'd end up with people being banned over technical problems.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

That's how it is, but I wouldn't call those PvPers. There are PvP events and we've been told of some in this thread. But then there are people who say they want PvP but organise things like DG2 so that they can fight unarmed explorer ships, claim they're Thargoid sympathisers so they can fight ships only having AX weapons, or use advantage of numbers to destroy noobs.

Not everyone who says they want PvP really do want PvP opponents. There are too many who just want easy targets, and they'd like those targets lined up in a box please.

I respect the real PvP community and if I were among them I'd be asking them to be more vocal in condemning the hangers-on who give them a bad name.

Why would they care? I know I wouldn't - I'm there to play a game, not play forum meta.

If you want to stop ganking, well answer one is you can't, since someone has to die to set off the chain. But, you can make a criminals life harder by accruing more and more heat that does not go away.

We have weak sauce BH come after you, who need to be engineered and come in large numbers. They need to be annoying and a threat to work.

We need ATR that are persistent, and that follow you. I suggested this:

At notoriety 10, each full NPC / player scan spawns an ATR vessel

A half though out idea, but: If a player is at notoriety 10, they have to be very careful about being scanned by random ships, security or other players as if they are, an ATR security vessel drops in to hassle them. The handwavium being that a scan is like a sighting of you thats disseminated...

forums.frontier.co.uk

What this does is remove a killers shields wherever they go and are detected (but can be avoided with skill- i.e., if they lay low and stay away from trouble).

Lastly its on the individual to do as much as they can to be safe, 'git gud' is not an insult, but advice. Build better, fly smarter.

Notoriety has to act as a modifier, in that by being naughty it shuts you out of 'polite society' and opens up places like anarchies. Imagine there are systems that have roving bands of pirates in G5 ships, and the only way to get them to avoid you is to be feared via notoriety 10, 20 etc. In this way players who kill are encouraged away from law abiding systems which have the roving ATR on scan (as done above).

I really hate artificial clauses and would love something more organic like this, where the way you play shapes how the galaxy reacts to you that at the same time allows the norms to be protected but still allows killing.

What this does is delivering even more tools for griefers to muck up players with. Noone needs griefers in their games. They just waste people's time. Game mechanics shouldn't be designed around griefers - they should be designed around the players.

 

[Misty_Dark]

The most important issue, for me, is the risk of creating something that makes things much worse than they currently are.

Take, for example, the issue of combat logging.
Combat logging is bad (m'kay?).
A commonly touted (albeit, thankfully, impossible) solution is that ships would remain present in-universe after a player CLs.
The problem with this is that it's possible to manipulate data in order to remotely disconnect another player.

In "solving" the issue of CLing, you've created an incentive for cheats to use data manipulation tools and you've created a new problem which is much worse than the problem it solves.

Unfortunately, you've ALWAYS got to look at the way any proposal might be abused before supporting it.

In the case of a "PvP flag" system, it's inevitable that players are going to toggle it when it suits them and they're going to find ways to inflict themselves on other players who can't do anything about it.
It's a good idea, in theory, but I'd really need to know how the problems would be sufficiently mitigated before I could support it.

exactly

 

[Maggie_Oz]

I was pretty paranoid that someone would scream "COMBAT LOGGER"

Logging would have to be the ultimate victimless "crime" though surely ?

 

[Rubbernuke]

Why would they care? I know I wouldn't - I'm there to play a game, not play forum meta.

What this does is delivering even more tools for griefers to muck up players with. Noone needs griefers in their games. They just waste people's time. Game mechanics shouldn't be designed around griefers - they should be designed around the players.

Until FD say killing is allowed for any reason (or none) then thats not possible.

Its a complete immersion killer to have ever more arcane and abstract rules, and for people to frankly absolve themselves of blame when for a great number of people it was their own actions and choices that led to disaster.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

people to frankly absolve themselves of blame when for a great number of people it was their own actions and choices that led to disaster.

Getting shot is the fault of the target not the shooter?

 

[Rubbernuke]

Getting shot is the fault of the target not the shooter?

A lot of the time people forget:

Skills
Ship build
Location

Most of ED space is 'safe' in that its not a place others go, but for CGs, engineering bases, PP areas, areas of interest (such as discovered sites, mat gathering holes) people rock up in silly ships and panic, and get blown up.

If more people learnt to evade and build better and plan better, gankers would have a much harder time and might actually become rarer naturally since the victims get away more.

 

[GroG79]

These CMDRs are not per se in a bad build. Perhaps a bad build to survive a hostile encounter indeed. It way be a much better build; but focusses on maximising mining or jumprange.

 

[Morbad]

Getting shot is the fault of the target not the shooter?

I can't speak for anyone else, but every time my CMDR has been shot it's because I failed to move him out of the way.

 

[Stelar 7]

Her is a question PVP folks. Why haven't you created a PG for PVP the way Mobius has made one for PVE?

If there are so many people who want a PVP mode with rules about combat logging and such you have the same tools they do to enact one to your taste.

No need for the devs to step in. No need for special game updates or dev time. Just build, then Advertise.

 

[Screemonster]

Her is a question PVP folks. Why haven't you created a PG for PVP the way Mobius has made one for PVE?

If there are so many people who want a PVP mode with rules about combat logging and such you have the same tools they do to enact one to your taste.

No need for the devs to step in. No need for special game updates or dev time. Just build, then Advertise.

Can you seriously imagine groups like SPEAR and the Code voluntarily joining the same PG? Who would be the group owner?

 

[Stelar 7]

Can you seriously imagine groups like SPEAR and the Code voluntarily joining the same PG? Who would be the group owner?

I can imagine it, there should be someone they can trust. Are you suggesting some people have taken game fun and made it personal? Like the players are actually mad at each other over a video game? I'm not familiar with either of them so did a group or groups of humans suffer a failure of perspective?

Given how often I hear the advice "get over it" or "it's just a game" hurled at people I find the idea that they can't interact without Developer assistance absolutely hilarious. But also sad.

 

[FLa2hL1ke]

Iam with OP and i want to give my feeling to players who don't want gankers in open. The Problem with ganking. Npc‘s do it and players allowed to do it too, this is the game design and i think its the right one. And yes there are npc’s who start shooting for „no reason“. There are enought reason’s why it isn‘t maybe "ganking“ all the time. PP/Reputaion/influence/Squadron/roll play and there is no reason needed because its a game like all others. What should EVE online say. Fun is enought reason. Iam a pvp Player and i never done this direct ganking (Kill for no reason?). There are many who just can‘t log without called cheater in open. No one will see their log in solo and there are enought who use this against npc‘s. I Never logged and i don‘t care if someone does it, the game allowes it, this is not the players fault. I don‘t need the feeling to hunt someone down. But I like gankers, more possibilities to fight. There are enough who join the game and sit in a vette with a harmlos rank after one week because of Ltd mining. If they play open then they must count with everything. Miners/Traders allow piracy a nice activity, but it don‘t work without players because they don‘t want to lose 1T - fullT of their cargo. If you know how to fly then they will not catching you. Watch your sensors and check out what players do in supercruise. If you want fly with paper ships, then you must count with the consequences if they catched you. But it’s a high payed activity and it should be dangerous. Easy solution is solo, I have no Problem with it but it reduce the playerbase in open. Miners feel the special in open because of Fleet Carrier‘s and the system chat. "How nice it could be without gankers in open" some think. So then you are maybe in the wrong game. If you just want to earn credits to get bigger ship without the feel of danger, then its maybe not the right game for you if solo is not enough. Learn the game first if you don‘t want do die in open, its easy, start with small ship. Otherwise order a security from players you pay, mh no this not exist because you can jump into solo mode. Fine then maybe stay there first and don‘t change the game who everyone loves. Police groups need bad boys and bad boys needs them without one roll the game will be change to more boring. All groups all players gives this game what we need and the game can life a longtime without content. The roll play communication, the feeling of danger, not knowing what others will doning, this is what i love in this game in each roll. The contact to other player in mining will be much better in open, i would love to stay in open with gankers too to get more of this mining together. So iam someone who like to have open only.

I think the function to blocking others players destroys the game more that it brings to it. Same to the notoriety system, its ok... but you just need a annoying way to play around.
Iam critical about changes, there are some good improvements (starter systems) but i love the game how i meet it.
Still i love It.

With Solo/Blocking/Starter systems i think we have enough for PvE players.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

Iam with OP and i want to give my feeling to players who don't want gankers in open. The Problem with ganking. Npc‘s do it and players allowed to do it too, this is the game design and i think its the right one. And yes there are npc’s who start shooting for „no reason“. There are enought reason’s why it isn‘t maybe "ganking“ all the time. PP/Reputaion/influence/Squadron/roll play and there is no reason needed because its a game like all others. What should EVE online say. Fun is enought reason. Iam a pvp Player and i never done this direct ganking (Kill for no reason?). There are many who just can‘t log without called cheater in open. No one will see their log in solo and there are enought who use this against npc‘s. I Never logged and i don‘t care if someone does it, the game allowes it, this is not the players fault. I don‘t need the feeling to hunt someone down. But I like gankers, more possibilities to fight. There are enough who join the game and sit in a vette with a harmlos rank after one week because of Ltd mining. If they play open then they must count with everything. Miners/Traders allow piracy a nice activity, but it don‘t work without players because they don‘t want to lose 1T - fullT of their cargo. If you know how to fly then they will not catching you. Watch your sensors and check out what players do in supercruise. If you want fly with paper ships, then you must count with the consequences if they catched you. But it’s a high payed activity and it should be dangerous. Easy solution is solo, I have no Problem with it but it reduce the playerbase in open. Miners feel the special in open because of Fleet Carrier‘s and the system chat. "How nice it could be without gankers in open" some think. So then you are maybe in the wrong game. If you just want to earn credits to get bigger ship without the feel of danger, then its maybe not the right game for you if solo is not enough. Learn the game first if you don‘t want do die in open, its easy, start with small ship. Otherwise order a security from players you pay, mh no this not exist because you can jump into solo mode. Fine then maybe stay there first and don‘t change the game who everyone loves. Police groups need bad boys and bad boys needs them without one roll the game will be change to more boring. All groups all players gives this game what we need and the game can life a longtime without content. The roll play communication, the feeling of danger, not knowing what others will doning, this is what i love in this game in each roll. The contact to other player in mining will be much better in open, i would love to stay in open with gankers too to get more of this mining together. So iam someone who like to have open only.

I think the function to blocking others players destroys the game more that it brings to it. Same to the notoriety system, its ok... but you just need a annoying way to play around.
Iam critical about changes, there are some good improvements (starter systems) but i love the game how i meet it.
Still i love It.

With Solo/Blocking/Starter systems i think we have enough for PvE players.

With SOLO there is more than enough, and we also have PGs, so the blocking feature probably creates more problems than it solves (I have used it a few times but I have since reconsidered my position on that one)