Ignoring or harming PvP in game design is contributing to ganking

[Stealthie]

Making robust C&P mechanism does not make moral stance of some playstyles, it just makes universe more living and believable and drives certain playstyles to where they belong, anarchy systems.

Exactly.

It's a cliche but ultimately I want the same feeling I got every time I jumped from Lave into Riedquat in Elite.
Lave was safe and cozy, and a bit dull, whereas Riedquat was absolutely terrifying and arriving safely was a real cause for celebration.

I'd like to see that kind of distinction within ED - parts of the bubble where you're 99% safe and parts where there's a real risk of getting exploded, either by players or NPCs, regardless of how good you are or what you're flying.
I don't really care how that's achieved but the difference between "safe" and "dangerous" needs to be dialled-up until it's glaringly obvious.

Earlier on I said the problem with ED is that it's all like the "wild west".
That's not really true.
In fact, ED is all a bit like a dodgy part of Slough, where it's mostly dull but you might be in trouble if you bump into the wrong person.
I'd like to see some bits of ED being like Angola while other parts are more like Antigua.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

You ever been mugged, burgled or assaulted? How quick and efficient does the police response tend to be - they catch the perp that same day?

Now imagine the police first have to travel 1,500Ls to get to the scene of the crime.

If anything C&P in the game is far too effective. Completely immersion breaking.

1500 ls in real time in Elite takes about same as to drive 5 km with car...Say if I take out my rifle and start shooting people cops would be here mightly quick.

 

[Stelar 7]

Pull the other one. It's got bells on.

You're telling me that gankers really NEED a fully engineered FdL to explode an unarmed AspX and that if they were forced to into unengineered ships they be forced to go after even softer targets?

Nope, that is at best an uncharitable strawman of what I said.

And you're saying that like they don't already go after the softest possible targets.

Again uncharatible strawman, do you expect people to take you seriously?

You do raise a valid point regarding NPC combat, though.
Set it up so that only PvP bounties will result in your rebuy getting cancelled.
Let's say the Pilot's Federation is responsible for insuring members' ships so they refuse to pay out when one PF member attacks another PF member without good cause.
Problem solved.

You assume that "good" pvp players will hunt the bad ones perhaps?

Ganking isn't solved by a bounty or NPC hero cops or the measly cost of a ship.

If you want ganking stopped add a block your attacker button to the rebuy screen, and let people copy and paste the name, from that screen so they can share.

Post player X blasted my Type 9 in blah system if you aren't in the mood block X now.

Then just forbid name change on account restart or update block lists and the gankers will not have targets.

 

[Defacto]

You ever been mugged, burgled or assaulted? How quick and efficient does the police response tend to be - they catch the perp that same day?

Now imagine the police first have to travel 1,500Ls to get to the scene of the crime.

If anything C&P in the game is far too effective. Completely immersion breaking.

Uh... what? You ever had your ship be subjected to piracy? If you want to make a real life comparison, at least use a fitting one.
Now imagine, that instead of leaving whatever anchorage local naval forces are stationed at, they only have to travel for a few minutes.
Why use distance when travel time is the relevant factor?

But using real-life comparisons for E: D game mechanics makes little sense anyways, since we are dealing with a far-off sci-fi world... and, well, a game.
Effective security and punishment is very important, because it will make way for the next important step: providing a possibility for high-risk criminal activities. This in turn opens up a possibility for those criminal activities to, in a balanced way, have large payouts, if the player has the guts to do it, and the skill to get away.
Slowly, we can start to salvage a working risk/reward dynamic from the wreck of the Elite: Dangerous economy...

 

[Havvk]

You ever been mugged, burgled or assaulted? How quick and efficient does the police response tend to be - they catch the perp that same day?

Now imagine the police first have to travel 1,500Ls to get to the scene of the crime.

If anything C&P in the game is far too effective. Completely immersion breaking.

Pretend like they're already patrolling and happen to be close by lmao, hating and trying to catch you ridin them dirty drives

 

[Havvk]

(pls delete, accidental double post)

 

[TiberiusDuval]

For piracy I would advocate letter of marque system, say Imperial side pilot could obtain one against Federation or Allience, or independent systems and that allows them to do piracy in such systems. Of course doing such thing would result one being outlaw of target systems, but no problems in Imperial systems (if one does not do crimes against Empire). One can have only one letter of margue active. For those truly independent pirates, well better have homebase in anarchy system. Anarchies would be free for all.

 

[Stealthie]

If you want ganking stopped add a block your attacker button to the rebuy screen, and let people copy and paste the name, from that screen so they can share.

Post player X blasted my Type 9 in blah system if you aren't in the mood block X now.

Then just forbid name change on account restart or update block lists and the gankers will not have targets.

The block function is fine for stopping individuals from being ganked by the same person more than once but it doesn't really help deter gankers.
All it does is force them to look for a new target over and over... which isn't really a big problem.

Bottom line is that both an attacker and their target have a rebuy at stake so that can be eliminated from the discussion.
Beyond that, the target has the risk of failed missions, lost cargo and/or lost exploration data.
What risk is there for the attacker?
Nothing.
That's already an imbalance between attacker and target, in the attacker's favour.
The only way an attacker can be deterred is via their rebuy because that's the only thing they have that might be put at risk.

 

[Havvk]

The only way an attacker can be deterred is via their rebuy because that's the only thing they have that might be put at risk.

With a 95% insurance in the current game, even my 1.4 billion cr corvette(I'm using this as an example) is a petty 45ish million. That much money is not hard to get from an hour or even less in a good mining belt. Therefore the only way a rebuy would deter a ganker/griefer is if he didn't have one. Ship, lost. Engineer upgrades, lost. Start back up in starter sidey. One or more of these, scaling depending on notoriety level, would be so much better imo.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Well I had once suggestion of "criminal restitution" No insurance for criminal and restitution of destructed property to insurance company. So you'll need to buy your ship and pay out what ever destruction you caused before you were catched. That would make ganking pretty rich peoples fun.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

For piracy I would advocate letter of marque system, say Imperial side pilot could obtain one against Federation or Allience, or independent systems and that allows them to do piracy in such systems. Of course doing such thing would result one being outlaw of target systems, but no problems in Imperial systems (if one does not do crimes against Empire). One can have only one letter of margue active. For those truly independent pirates, well better have homebase in anarchy system. Anarchies would be free for all.

That's a very cool idea. It would be great to see the faction rankings have a degree of context.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Though I was not so hard that you'll lose engineered modules.

 

[Stelar 7]

The block function is fine for stopping individuals from being ganked by the same person more than once but it doesn't really help deter gankers.
All it does is force them to look for a new target over and over... which isn't really a big problem.

Bottom line is that both an attacker and their target have a rebuy at stake so that can be eliminated from the discussion.
Beyond that, the target has the risk of failed missions, lost cargo and/or lost exploration data.
What risk is there for the attacker?
Nothing.
That's already an imbalance between attacker and target, in the attacker's favour.
The only way an attacker can be deterred is via their rebuy because that's the only thing they have that might be put at risk.

I don't think deterence works.

When it comes down to it, we are playing a videogame and both the ganker and the hauler are players playing the game in a valid way.

The hauler chooses to run cargo in open. When I do it the reward of heightened risk is the benefit.

The ganker risks notoriety and fines. Both are risking an hour or so of less fun gameplay. Longer sometimes.

If you have a game with soft targets you will have ganking. A better block tool makes sure that after an encounter both parties have a choice for if that will happen again.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

Though I was not so hard that you'll lose engineered modules.

I think that should happen whenever you lose an engineered ship or module, even if they get damaged in some way.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

That's a very cool idea. It would be great to see the faction rankings have a degree of context.

Thats taken from IRL historical piracy, pretty many pirates were actually licensed privateers having license from some country.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

I think that should happen whenever you lose an engineered ship or module, even if they get damaged in some way.

Adds stupendous amount of grind. No way.

 

[Havvk]

The ganker risks notoriety and fines. Both are risking an hour or so of less fun gameplay. Longer sometimes.

I personally believe that the timer lock-out is such a bad, VERY BAD, "griefer deterrent". I may hate griefers/gankers, but cmon, they spent $30($60 if they got Horizons) on the game just like the rest of us. Despite their despicable choice of gameplay, they shouldn't be punished in the way of basically "soft banning" them for ANY amount of time.

 

[Maggie_Oz]

Adds stupendous amount of grind. No way.

Grind is a personal choice, besides all you need are the components and you can be gathering them as you go.
I'm sure many players have more than they will ever use and at the moment they have no use at all once you have your upgrade.

 

[Stealthie]

I personally believe that the timer lock-out is such a bad, VERY BAD, "griefer deterrent". I may hate griefers/gankers, but cmon, they spent $30($60 if they got Horizons) on the game just like the rest of us. Despite their despicable choice of gameplay, they shouldn't be punished in the way of basically "soft banning" them for ANY amount of time.

Honestly, the whole "notoriety cool-down" thing sounds like the sort of thing you'd go with after you spent months trying to implement something better but couldn't get it to work.
The fact that it was, apparently, FDev's go-to solution doesn't really say a lot about their imagination when it comes to this stuff.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

I personally believe that the timer lock-out is such a bad, VERY BAD, "griefer deterrent". I may hate griefers/gankers, but cmon, they spent $30($60 if they got Horizons) on the game just like the rest of us. Despite their despicable choice of gameplay, they shouldn't be punished in the way of basically "soft banning" them for ANY amount of time.

Notoriety does not lock you out of game, it just mean slightly worse service options.