Open-Only in PP2.0?

[Shurimal]

It is a mess with no easy way out. Guess it comes with the territory of trying to have a semi-realistic dangerous cutthroat universe, but also trying to have a multiplayer game which can't rely on classic "you messed up, now reload save and lose some progress" but also trying to avoid "you messed up, so now all your progress is lost because it's a dangerous cut-throat universe with no magical resurrection". So we get this "Rebuys only matter when you're just starting out, but losing exploration data always hurts. BTW, you can't lose combat bonds at all."

In Elite, every time you lose, 50 million is deducted and if you don't make up for it, at some point in time you'll have 0 and you could lose your ship.

We're all trying to eat our cake and have it, too What makes Souls-likes special is that failure is part of the progress--you die, but you also become better at the game when doing so, and next time you can beat the boss. Some Youtuber explained it very nicely talking about Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice; first playthrough is a struggle to learn the game, but then you start the new game plus and it all clicks with you. You're now flying through the battles with grace and confidence. It's like learning to play a new song on an instrument.

I haven't heard of this game.

The Isle is a dinosaur survival. I haven't played it myself, but I think I have it in my Steam wishlist somewhere--but I've also heard that it has gone downhill with later updates and not really that good as it once was? So I haven't really checked it out anymore? Any way, from what I understand the only progress there is growing bigger, maybe? And otherwise it's just about trying to survive as long as possible before a T-rex decides to make a prehistoric Kumoburger out of you, so not really that much progress to lose in the first place.

Fact is there's no consequences in elite to ganking.

The lines between ganking and legitimate PvP get really blurry in many cases, and are mostly depending on one's point of view, and certainly not something an automated system could discern easily without false positives or false negatives. In all honesty, I have "ganked" a Powerplay pledge, but from my (and my character's) point of view that was a completely legitimate case of commerce raiding. It's an underhanded struggle for dominance between two factions. Privateers will be active and shipping will be lost, on both sides.

If I shoot a Powerplay pledged commander in Type 9 out of the sky in a contested system, is it ganking or is it legitimate commerce raiding? I get the bounty for it, but no notoriety if I'm pledged to a different power.

If I blow the same commander out of the sky in a third power's system, or Shinrarta, is that legit commerce raiding or ganking? I get a bounty, but still no notoriety in this case.

If I'm unpledged, but blow that commander out of the sky in my home system which I don't want any powerplay faction to move into, is it legitimate commerce raiding, or ganking? I do get both a bounty and notoriety for that action.

In these situations, a consequence for criminal actions must be engaging and fun to the criminal. AFAIK, "That Other Space Game" does that--escaping from authorities or breaking out of the prison is a gameplay loop in itself. In which case, does it really deter from ganking if in the worst case, if you get caught you get to play out a prison break scenario? You can't just take gameplay away from "criminals" by confiscating their stuffz or some other such punishment (I've read plenty such proposals!), because doing crime is valid gameplay, too.

a personalised waypoint only visible to you is given and you get to fly back and rescan your black box of your wreck to get all your stuff back. (excluding cargo)

That's a very good way to solve the problem of failures and fair consequences. Make it timed to, say, 2 weeks, so getting careless while exploring still carries the risk of losing exploration data, but if you get jumped when returning to the bubble you still get it all back easily

just because their play style is not really affected by the odd ship loss, for others it is catastrophic.

That's why you have proper opsec. You don't come back from a long exploration trip and enter Shinrarta to sell the data off. You certainly don't announce your arrival publicly, as you wrote. Preferably you sell off your data at one of the deep space asteroid bases located within 1000 ly from the bubble--infinitesimally small chance to see any hostile players there. Honestly, high-G planets and sleepiness--not gankers--are the biggest enemies of explorers

 

[Jack Winter]

the onfoot portion raises a slightly different challenge.............. with no real ability to incapacitate and hide bodies and with numbers stacked against us, there is always the lkelyhood of things going sideways and death can be inevitable. For me the entire way the on foot combat works in elite dangerous is incompatible with the main part of the game and again, just me but , it feels like a totally different game bolted on.

as such i generally dont play the on foot content. i would have far preferred a slower on foot content with less about mass shootouts and a lot more emphasis on NOT getting killed.

I'd say that it's completely valid to just run away if you messed things up, no need to shoot back just because they are shooting at you.

Reset the instance and have another go at it. Especially important if you want to stay under the radar or you don't want to waste time killing everyone..

 

[Morbad]

In Elite, every time you lose, 50 million is deducted and if you don't make up for it, at some point in time you'll have 0 and you could lose your ship.

I probably have one of the lowest average CMDR incomes of someone with roughly my ballpark of time in game and at the rate my CMDR dies the heat death of the universe might happen before he runs out of money from insurance claims or any other possible 'setbacks'.

I haven't heard of this game.

It's a fairly popular implicitly PvP MMO survival game where you play one of many kinds of ancient reptiles from birth to (usually violent) death.

The Isle on Steam

Experience fierce open world survival gameplay as you attempt to stay alive on an unforgiving island inhabited by dinosaurs! Hunt. Grow. Survive.

store.steampowered.com

The Isle - Steam Charts

An ongoing analysis of Steam's player numbers, seeing what's been played the most.

steamcharts.com

I don't play it myself because I won't patronize Valve or buy anything via Steam, but I've seen others play it and would be playing it('s legacy survival mode), it's distribution model didn't offend me.

So you're in favor of starting over in Elite if you get killed?

In my hypothetical ideal version of Elite: Dangerous, there would be ways to get one's CMDR permanently killed, yes. Of course, that's all contingent on everyone playing by the same underlying set of rules. I have no interest in artificially handicapping myself--at least not any more than necessary to play a character I want to play--in a persistent multiplayer-only game.

Anyway, having something to lose makes it considerably easier for me to immerse myself in a setting like Elite's and also incentivises gameplay that appeals to me.

but the thing is that loss is so one sided. I could build a meta ship and just fly around blapping explorers. they stand to lose loads. I have zero risk from an explorer and even if security gets me (or a player bounty hunter) so what? I lose a few credits and maybe a bit of notoriety which won't effect me if I move on and will disappear after a few hrs.

this is what some players seem to ignore. just because their play style is not really affected by the odd ship loss, for others it is catastrophic.

My CMDR has violently driven off, maybe even shot down, more other CMDRs, in self-defense, while exploring, than he has total rebuys. He's never lost an exploration vessel, to any cause (ive tested a few things that required ship losses for the sake of experimentation, but that stuff is implicitly OOC). This is because he takes into account the value of what he's carrying and takes adequate care. I'd like for the game to reward this sort of basic consideration a bit more, but frankly, even losing the most exploration data he's ever had at any given momement (which can be quite a lot, as I use it for BGS infulence) would not jeopardize my CMDR's long term success.

That's why you have proper opsec. You don't come back from a long exploration trip and enter Shinrarta to sell the data off. You certainly don't announce your arrival publicly, as you wrote. Preferably you sell off your data at one of the deep space asteroid bases located within 1000 ly from the bubble--infinitesimally small chance to see any hostile players there. Honestly, high-G planets and sleepiness--not gankers--are the biggest enemies of explorers

In an attempt to add some excitement to the trip, I did have my CMDR return to what was one of the highest traffic systems at the time, directly after the longest single exploration trip (~5600 systems) he'd ever been on:

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPzKJ1LZCTo


Was never in any real risk, but the illusion was much easier to sustain in mid-2015.

 

[Dragsham]

The lines between ganking and legitimate PvP get really blurry in many cases, and are mostly depending on one's point of view, and certainly not something an automated system could discern easily without false positives or false negatives. In all honesty, I have "ganked" a Powerplay pledge, but from my (and my character's) point of view that was a completely legitimate case of commerce raiding. It's an underhanded struggle for dominance between two factions. Privateers will be active and shipping will be lost, on both sides.

If I shoot a Powerplay pledged commander in Type 9 out of the sky in a contested system, is it ganking or is it legitimate commerce raiding?

I totally disagree with you as regards the definition of a ganker.
In no way is killing a rival power cmdr ganking...absolutely not. It's legitimate totally.
Ganking is mindless loreless, chicken ***t gameplay period. Which serves no purpose other than being facilitated by fdevs total disregard for 99% of cmdrs who wholly agree something should be done.
Please don't heap ganking with PP kills, Bgs kills, or consensual pvp.
Ganking is just mindless lols n giggles.

 

[SergMx]

I probably have one of the lowest average CMDR incomes of someone with roughly my ballpark of time in game and at the rate my CMDR dies the heat death of the universe might happen before he runs out of money from insurance claims or any other possible 'setbacks'.

Everyone has their own style of play. I am ready to lose all the current load, all the current rewards, but I am not ready to go negative.

I don't play it myself because I won't patronize Valve or buy anything via Steam, but I've seen others play it and would be playing it('s legacy survival mode), it's distribution model didn't offend me.

I don't know about this game, but I've seen people play Fallout 76, and for some reason they're not sneaking around and hiding around every corner. And if someone meets a player who is stronger than him, he gets prizes and congratulations from him and not death. I guess the anarchic world after a nuclear war is more civilized than Elite space.

Anyway, having something to lose makes it considerably easier for me to immerse myself in a setting like Elite's and also incentivises gameplay that appeals to me.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your dive. For me, immersion is not deception, it's reality. I'm not ready to go to a place where I'm likely to die.

 

[SergMx]

I totally disagree with you as regards the definition of a ganker.
In no way is killing a rival power cmdr ganking...absolutely not. It's legitimate totally.
Ganking is mindless loreless, chicken ***t gameplay period. Which serves no purpose other than being facilitated by fdevs total disregard for 99% of cmdrs who wholly agree something should be done.
Please don't heap ganking with PP kills, Bgs kills, or consensual pvp.
Ganking is just mindless lols n giggles.

It's impossible to answer for sure if it's a gank or not. There is a switch in the game - report offenses, it basically means you are ready to fight or not. But from the fact that the game is merging and separating members of the Pilot Federation, the whole implementation of fame and report crimes does not quite work the way it should.

 

[Morbad]

For me, immersion is not deception, it's reality.

We're both after verisimilitude, but you are not and will never be your character, no matter how immersed you are in said character.

Immersion in any game of fantasy, or less-than-perfect simulation, requires some degree of deception. It's best when the ratio of imagination to deception is slanted in favor of the former, and, in the case of multiple participants, when the imagination of all is guided down compatible paths, but deception--in the sense of the ability to ignore or change the flaws in the depiction--has to be there to iron out inconsistencies

Somewhat paradoxically, the more detailed and/or less abstract the depiction, the more glaring those inconsistencies will be and more we need to fool ourselves to be immersed through the flaws. Tell a vague story and everyone can imagine something that makes sense to them. Tell a story and includes details that contradict other details, or include things that cannot be easily reconciled with the setting...kinda need a bit of deception to make it work.

The problem with this game is that the level of deception it demands is extreme. All the mechanisms/gameplay underpinning the actualization of any goals one's character may have are blatant farces. It's all represented with a collection of poorly concealed internal contradictions and flimsy placeholders. We have a trading simulation...that lacks an economy, or anything resembling supply chains, backed by combination of price fixing and a nearly unconstrained money supply. We have simulated warfare...where no one can die, territory/assets cannot be held in any meaningful sense, and attrition is functionally impossible. We have things like data couriers and physical tourists...alongside high-bandwidth FTL comms, plus advanced augmented reality, that should render all of the former and most of the later totally redundant. We have stations and starports, whose only source of consumables relies upon the free flow of ship traffic...who are happy to let random buttholes tie up that traffic indefinitely. How is it even possible to be immersed in a game with mechanisms like this, without extreme self-deception?

I'm not ready to go to a place where I'm likely to die.

Neither am I, which one of the reasons I play games. I can vicariously experience hazards that would likely cut my very comfortable life short, or at least cut the comfort, were I to do so in the real world.

Frankly, most most of the characters I want to play are also rather risk-adverse...which is why those risks cannot be optional if I'm to get the most enjoyment out of a game. Games are often about overcoming obstacles; the conflict between what the character wants and the (fantasy) reality they find themselves in, is fundamental to many stories. I don't want the story of my CMDR to be, 'he had it easy. he was lazy, but he saw his numbers grow bigly, and he lived happily ever after", even if that's exactly what my CMDR wants, because that would make for some boring-ass gameplay.

In Elite: Dangerous, organic risk isn't even optional, it's functionally absent. My character must look insane to any who take the setting at face value; he's taking precautions against what cannot possibly harm him, as if I one were avoiding water in real life because they thought they'd melt like the Wicked Witch of the West. Must be the space dementia.

I totally disagree with you as regards the definition of a ganker.
In no way is killing a rival power cmdr ganking...absolutely not. It's legitimate totally.
Ganking is mindless loreless, chicken ***t gameplay period. Which serves no purpose other than being facilitated by fdevs total disregard for 99% of cmdrs who wholly agree something should be done.
Please don't heap ganking with PP kills, Bgs kills, or consensual pvp.
Ganking is just mindless lols n giggles.

I've always argued that, anytime there is a contradiction between the two, what the game actually shows (gameplay) should trump what it tells (lore). Ideally, the lore would be reflective of the gameplay and vice versa.

If you have a setting which, in practice, resembles stories of Valhalla, where everyone can endlessly fight and endlessly 'die', more than anything we're told about it, ganking is less out of place than what most of us do.

 

[angusmadmac1]

I will disagree if you have joined a power and an enemy power blows you up it's never a gank , along with if you are in a cz and you are blown up by the enemy side . You made those decisions and you have to abide by your own actions.
Piracy if done right isn't a gank , you get a message give us x ton or else, you make that decision to run or not , most pirates will shoot out your engines and take it but not blow you up .
A gank is someone who goes out their way to sit in areas where you can get easy kills , say first engineers, shin dez ( getting an elite on trade is too easy now ) trade CG etc .
I was attacked for having a Docking computer on my python. I got a message and then was attacked, not a gank in my opinion.
If there is a valid reason it's not a gank . To be attacked with no reason no communication is a gank.

 

[SergMx]

I don't want the story of my CMDR to be, 'he had it easy. he was lazy, but he saw his numbers grow bigly, and he lived happily ever after", even if that's exactly what my CMDR wants, because that would make for some boring-ass gameplay.

I don't think so. On the contrary, you'll find it more interesting to play. If your opponent knows he has nothing to lose, he will fight to the last man in the hope of winning.
You see it's like with an interception, nowadays it's rare to resist a human interception, because if we lose this mini game we get a long recovery. But if that wasn't the case, I don't think any of the victims would just give up.

 

[SergMx]

I will disagree if you have joined a power and an enemy power blows you up it's never a gank , along with if you are in a cz and you are blown up by the enemy side . You made those decisions and you have to abide by your own actions.
Piracy if done right isn't a gank , you get a message give us x ton or else, you make that decision to run or not , most pirates will shoot out your engines and take it but not blow you up .
A gank is someone who goes out their way to sit in areas where you can get easy kills , say first engineers, shin dez ( getting an elite on trade is too easy now ) trade CG etc .
I was attacked for having a Docking computer on my python. I got a message and then was attacked, not a gank in my opinion.
If there is a valid reason it's not a gank . To be attacked with no reason no communication is a gank.

In PP2, any killing of an enemy, even if it's clean doesn't bring you notoriety.

 

[angusmadmac1]

In PP2, any killing of an enemy, even if it's clean doesn't bring you notoriety.

Nor does blowing up a commander on the wrong side of a CZ ? Not sure of your point ?
Ganking or greifing is blowing up easy kills just to frustrate other players no other reason .
The C&P is pathetic in game.
Notoriety isnt even a deterrent or even a minor inconvenience.

 

[SergMx]

Nor does blowing up a commander on the wrong side of a CZ ? Not sure of your point ?
Ganking or greifing is blowing up easy kills just to frustrate other players no other reason .
The C&P is pathetic in game.
Notoriety isnt even a deterrent or even a minor inconvenience.

If I'm in Power 1, flying and see a pure commander from another Power 2, I can kill him, get the wanted status but my notoriety won't increase.
I.e. after killing 10 enemies I can immediately pay the penalty without waiting for the notoriety reset.

 

[angusmadmac1]

I'm sorry not sure if I am at crossed wires ??
Killing an enemy power commander is acceptable because there is an acceptable reason for it .
I'm not even sure you get wanted ( only in that power play sphere of influence ) .
So it's not ganking greifing etc. So it's an acceptable gameplay.
Ganking and greifing are totally different which was my original response .

 

[Rebel Yell]

Killing an enemy power commander is acceptable because there is an acceptable reason for it .
I'm not even sure you get wanted ( only in that power play sphere of influence ) .

Killing enemy power commanders is not only acceptable, but it's somehow mandatory.

In PP1 no bounties/notoriety were issued for PP kills.

In PP2 the killer receives a local faction bounty (unless anarchy or R100 Delaine in Delaine's systems), but zero notoriety.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Killing an enemy power commander is acceptable because there is an acceptable reason for it .

How are you defining what the list of "acceptable reasons" is here? (I don't dispute that PP kills are, but I'm wondering how you handle the less "12-foot high letters of flame" cases)

I've not seen any solution yet that isn't either inconsistently restrictive (A can freely shoot at B, but B isn't allowed to return fire), or so extremely permissive that the difference between "griefing" and "legitimate" kills is mostly whether you filed the appropriate paperwork, or so extremely restrictive that it wouldn't usually allow shooting at people on the opposite side of a CZ or pledged to an enemy Power.

 

[mach10]

I'm just going to leave this here for people to comment on, since FDev have invited discussion and (potentially? Maybe?) left open the question of whether PP could be Open-Only in 2.0.
Some questions to answer:

• How could OOPP improve or harm the functionality presented thus far?
• Are there areas of PP2.0 that could be vulnerable to fifth-column activities that OOPP could help remedy?
• Given what the designers have said, would it enhance their vision of PP2.0, or degrade it?
• The all-important question, would it drive players away from PP, or draw them in?

Forcing Open is the death of Elite

 

[Shurimal]

In PP2 the killer receives a local faction bounty (unless anarchy or R100 Delaine in Delaine's systems)

Another case for no bounty is if you do the killing in your own territory. And cherry on top, if the other commander fights back, it's them who get an assault bounty for shooting you

 

[SergMx]

Ganking and greifing are totally different which was my original response .

Yes, I understand, and I'm sorry I got a little sidetracked. The thing is, Elite doesn't have rules that characterize ganking. Me, you and Ganker can do ganking and we see it, but you can't prove it.
Ganker can always say that he just put a new gun and decided to test it. Or he and a friend made a bet who will shoot more ships with commanders in 1 hour.
Until the developers establish specific signs of ganking there is no ganking in the game.

 

[angusmadmac1]

How are you defining what the list of "acceptable reasons" is here? (I don't dispute that PP kills are, but I'm wondering how you handle the less "12-foot high letters of flame" cases)

I've not seen any solution yet that isn't either inconsistently restrictive (A can freely shoot at B, but B isn't allowed to return fire), or so extremely permissive that the difference between "griefing" and "legitimate" kills is mostly whether you filed the appropriate paperwork, or so extremely restrictive that it wouldn't usually allow shooting at people on the opposite side of a CZ or pledged to an enemy Power.

So that's the million dollar question ?
What is acceptable for one is griefing or unfair for another hence these threads.
Me personally PP I will accept, but also I don't PP , CZ are questionable at best so one leaves the other stays.

I personally don't think PvP is necessary in game and will disagree whole heartedly with open only PP , as some may have guessed due to my other posts.
So the Möbius rules of engagement suit me to the ground even in open.

 

[angusmadmac1]

Yes, I understand, and I'm sorry I got a little sidetracked. The thing is, Elite doesn't have rules that characterize ganking. Me, you and Ganker can do ganking and we see it, but you can't prove it.
Ganker can always say that he just put a new gun and decided to test it. Or he and a friend made a bet who will shoot more ships with commanders in 1 hour.
Until the developers establish specific signs of ganking there is no ganking in the game.

These are the definitions that I attribute to ganking and greifing .

Ganking is when a big group of players team up on one lone player, usually by surprise.
So a wing of 4 picking fights with 1 player

Griefing is the deliberate, indiscriminate and repeated harassment of other players - with generally little actual benefit to one's own character.
So blowing up newbies at the 1st engineers base

Technically a bully or bullies .