Open Play and Crime and Punishment; a Proposed Holistic Approach

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
So I have watched with great interest as Frontier has made a series of changes to the game to help improve its overall long term health and viability. We know that advances in players' ability to do things cooperatively are coming with Odyssey and currently Frontier is making balance changes to earnings for various game loops.


I would very much like to see Powerplay and BGS be changed in favor of Open play. I would similarly like to see more players in Open to interact with each other as opposed to having a ‘ghost town’-feeling universe where the majority of players choose to play in Solo or Private Group as opposed to Open mode because of the perception (slightly mistaken though I believe it to be) that playing in Open is needlessly putting oneself at risk of being murdered consequence-free.


As such, I’ve come up with a set of suggestions concerning direct and indirect PvP, as well as crime and punishment in Elite that I think would go some way to addressing this, and I’d love your feedback on them.

Introduction and assumptions
The main ideas incorporated herein are based on the following assumptions that I believe to be true, and that I think (based on comments made by Frontier in the past) that Frontier also believe.


  1. More players playing the game in Open mode will make the galaxy more vibrant.
  2. PvP players also deserve the right to have an enjoyable play loop.
  3. This right should not extend to consequence-free mayhem.
  4. ‘Seal clubbing’ is bad for the game as attacking the new players immediately induces them to either quit the game or go to Solo forever.
  5. Player piracy should be a viable option whereby there is significant wealth gain possible with increased risk to the player to encourage acquisitive piracy over senseless murder.
  6. There should be some meaning to the various system security states: High Security, Medium Security, Low Security and Anarchy systems should all feel different.

I strongly believe that Frontier agrees with the above statements and the overhaul to the crime and punishment system in 2018 included changes that support this view. However, I don’t think that the game’s current crime and punishment system quite achieves these goals, because of the following:


  • The most dangerous places in the galaxy are reliably the systems with the most players in them. This is irrespective of the system’s security level.
  • Players still routinely report that they feel they are being killed with impunity in high-security systems.
  • Very few players engage in piracy (as opposed to simple player-killing).
  • Because of a lack of viable opportunity for fun and rewarding play within their chosen gameplay loop, bored PVP players end up with nothing to do more attractive for them than causing mayhem, and when they choose this path they find that it’s far too easy to get away with.

The below set of proposals are my attempt to achieve the goals that Frontier have said in the past that they have for the crime and punishment system in Elite.

Open, Powerplay and the BGS
With the above goals in mind, I would like to submit for your consideration the following changes:


  1. Powerplay and BGS effects are weighted such that any effect upon these systems is 5x for activities conducted in Open only as opposed to Private Group or Solo mode. If at any time for any reason between accepting the mission or merits and turning in the mission or merits you enter any mode other than Open, you are automatically relegated to receiving the lower amount of credit.
  2. All activities should pay out 1.5x in Open mode. Mining should generate more ore. material farming should generate more mats, mission-running should pay out more credits, exploration data should pay out better, trade missions should pay out more. Every aspect of the game should pay out better in every way to incentivize this mode of play without taking away anything from those players who wish to play in Solo. They will still earn exactly the same money they make now.

Given that this is a boost to earnings in Open rather than a nerf to earnings in the other game modes, the only possible objection to this (and the above suggestion in point 1) that a player might have is because they want to be able to affect other players without running the risk of being opposed. In my view, this isn’t a legitimate objection.


Note: It would be simpler to just nix BGS Influence gain and Powerplay merit-earning in any game mode other than Open, and this would be my real preference. But the above suggestions allow much the same behavioral effect without ‘nerfing’ any aspect of a Solo player’s experience. I am well aware of the historical arguments on this issue and it is for this exact reason that I offer a compromise whereby Solo players can continue exactly as they are now while still offering a concession to the obviously valid point of the majority of BGS and Powerplay groups that these gameplay loops were intended to be open to the wider variety of player interaction found in Open.


The current system of not really providing PvP players with meaningful gameplay loops (other than going to San Tu and trying to match up or using external Discord servers) has led to a large number of well-equipped player killers that are bored and, as such, run amok. In my opinion, this is both a failure to engage these players as well as a disservice to those upon whom they take their boredom out. I would like to propose a whole new system that would allow for dynamic gameplay to keep the ‘wolves’ happily killing other wolves and remove the incentive for the wolves to kill ‘sheep’, for all but the most determined of griefers (which will be addressed further down). My idea to accomplish this is the following:

PvP System
This is an opt-in PvP-flagging system in which players are incentivized to fight other players ANYWHERE AT ANY TIME. It would function similarly to a weekly CG. Once opted in, you are locked to Open until that weekly cycle ends. The rewards of the system would be awarded similar to a CG with rewards for the top 10 Commanders, 10%, 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%. In addition, the top 10 Commanders' names would be posted every week as an acknowledgment of their skill and an inducement for those who seek bragging rights to keep at it. The entire point of this system is for PvP Players to become each other’s content in a way that is both sanctioned and well rewarded by Frontier. These players deserve to feel heard, appreciated and rewarded just as much as any PvE focused players and this system will allow them to do so in a structured manner which, I very much hope, will capture the attention of most thus causing them to opt-out of the ‘Senseless griefing’ play loop.

Rankings
Per kill, the reward would be the Combat Rank Points (CRP) of the target Commander, plus 0.25x the Points Owned by the Target (POT). Killed Commanders lose points. The reward formula would then be: Points Earned = CRP + (POT x 0.25).

*EDITED ORIGINAL POST: MY SYSTEM WAS SUCCEPTABLE TO "WIN TRADING" THEREFORE I SUGGEST THAT 1. PLAYERS LOSE SOME POINT VALUE UPON DEATH 2.THERE BE A MODIFIER BASED ON THE VALUE OF THE SHIP KILLED SO THAT PEOPLE COULD NOT GIVE UP DEATHS IN A NOOBWINDER AND GET FULL VALUE AND 3. OTHER LIMITERS BE PUT INTO PLACE TO COMBAT WIN TRADING SUCH AS DIMINISHING RETURNS AS WELL AS A CAP UPON EARNING ANY POINTS AFTER A DESIGNATED NUMBER OF KILLS ON THE SAME TARGET EACH WEEK.

Combat Rank Points (CRP)


Cmdr.HarmlessMostly harmlessNoviceCompetentExpertMasterDangerousDeadlyElite
Target123456789
Harmless12.001.000.670.500.400.330.290.250.22
Mostly Harmless24.002.001.331.000.800.670.570.500.44
Novice36.003.002.001.501.201.000.860.750.67
Competent48.004.002.672.001.601.331.141.000.89
Expert510.005.003.332.502.001.671.431.251.11
Master612.006.004.003.002.402.001.711.501.33
Dangerous714.007.004.673.502.802.332.001.751.56
Deadly816.008.005.334.003.202.672.292.001.78
Elite918.009.006.004.503.603.002.572.252.00
Galaxy map flag








When opted in, players will be displayed on the galaxy map (perhaps via a red ‘friend symbol’), along with their current ‘value’ according to the above table. Players with Notoriety will be opted in automatically with their bounty value displayed and a point bonus for their kill. They are displayed as targets but ineligible to collect any points under this system while they have notoriety.


The above system should be thought of as the ‘carrot’ side of the PvP rework. This system would give PvP players a fun mode of play that will hopefully challenge and engage them, as opposed to murdering those who have no interest in that aspect of play.


Frontier would then take players who participated in the weekly contest and, similar to how CGs currently work, pay some actual decent rewards in credits (and possibly even more creative prizes). Once set up, this system would just keep rolling every week — moving a high portion of the killers from bored to engaged in a system that gives them bragging rights as well as decent rewards while segregating them from non-combat players by motivation where possible.


Now that we have covered the ‘carrot’ side, let's take a look at the ‘stick’ side of things. The idea here is to maintain the freedom of murderous psychopaths to act as they choose, but provide a large disincentive for them to engage in this behavior — just as in real-life society, engaging in certain behaviors carries penalties so prohibitive as to hopefully largely dissuade these activities.


A determined player-killer who chooses to ignore the consensual PvP system described above (and those other brilliant community-created consensual PvP loops which are already adequately organized) should be able to attack others, but with more consequence than currently exists.


First of all, every ship sensor should have a Kill Warrant Scanner built-in. Forcing the hunters of criminals to waste a slot on a Kill Warrant Scanner both puts them at a disadvantage to the criminals and greatly lowers the chance that player killers will come across another player who can scan them for bounties. Many griefers may have a massive amount of bounties in dozens of systems, and they should always be at risk of all players having access to this information. In addition, I would point out that gankers and griefers regularly prioritize killing anyone found with a Kill Warrant Scanner — this would remove their ability to do this. From a lore perspective, I would point out that it would be entirely within the Pilots Federation’s interest to incorporate this change as one of their members killing another of their members would be among the highest possible taboos.


All kills versus other players (only kills, not accidental shooting that does not result in a kill, also not any single-contact crashes such as the shieldless ‘suicidewinders’ used to trick people into killing you) should be treated entirely differently to NPC kills. For kills against other players the following system should be engaged:


  1. Notoriety should apply to both the player and the ship.
  2. Notoriety would not be incurred when killing a murderer nor engaging in consensual PVP as stated above, or by combat in Anarchy systems, or by combat against an opposing team player in a Conflict Zone, or by killing a player with report crimes turned off.
  3. Notoriety should cease to apply to players killing NPC ships. The existing system of bounties and NPC bounty hunters adequately deals with PvE crime.
  4. The value of the ship flown by the player committing the murder should be added to the base value of the bounty. A meta FDL valued at 149M would result in the first kill receiving an addition to the penalty of 149M for their first murder. This value should be doubled for every additional murder. The vast majority of ‘seal clubbers’ will chain several kills over the course of a play session. Increasing the penalty incurred for what are, in essence, serial killers seems to be simple common sense.
  5. Players acting as PvP bounty hunters should receive the full bounty payout for killing the offending player. If in a wing, the bounty should be split evenly between all members. This is balanced by ensuring that the player criminal who dies has to pay that entire penalty out of their own net wealth. Criminals would not be able to abuse this as a money transfer method as it's all coming from them. If they do not have the funds to pay the penalty then they should be put into debt after the liquidation of any assets owned to pay the penalty. At worst, a person gaming the system would be able to avoid paying for their crimes — but only at the expense of being reset back to a starter Sidewinder, and even then having to choose to either earn the money to pay back that debt or abandon the account and go through the process of spending all the time to unlock engineers and regain Powerplay modules, etc. Essentially, you could game this system to a very limited extent — but at great cost of your time, and those added days or weeks to rebuild a new account in which serial killers are not murdering innocent players is well worth the small subsidy by the Pilot’s Federation.
  6. Any commander with Notoriety should automatically be flagged in the weekly PvP system described above — not as a contestant but as a ‘murderer’, with an added bonus in point value. This incentivizes PvP players to hunt them for their bounties. They would have no way to unflag from this until their murder penalty has been paid. They would, however, not be able to claim any credits for bounties or points under that system while carrying the Murderer status. Those who choose to commit murder of other players would in essence be a part of the game but not as contestants, only as prey.

Basically, the TL;DR of this is that combat-oriented players get a cool new system to test their mettle against each other for profit and bragging rights or they can choose to senselessly murder non-combatant players (while accepting the stiff penalties) — but they can’t do both. I am hoping they will choose the former out of self-interest, but even if they don’t, there are enough roadblocks along the mayhem path to cause them serious issues. All of the above would cumulatively provide a lot more opportunity for consensual PvP while massively disincentivizing non-consensual PvP.

Player piracy
While being a serial murderer should not be an attractive career path because of its effect on the experience of others, there should still be a place for player piracy. Knowing how and where to conduct these activities will be discussed below, however I would very much like to see ships (whether NPC or player) drop their full cargo, minus some randomly determined loss due to destruction, upon being killed. This would allow for killers who are smart enough to stay in anarchy systems to actually earn money in their playstyle. Once again, the point of this is to provide smart criminals with opportunities, as opposed to mindlessly murdering new players with nothing worth taking.

System security states
Ok, so now we’ve covered the other points — let’s get into the idea of making the various system states have meaning. High Security, Medium Security, Low Security and Anarchy systems should all feel different. One of the things you will always hear from Elite 1984 players was how scared they were when jumping into an anarchy system.


Frontier has said several times that they want the different security ratings of the systems to affect the player’s experience, but at present, this is only true of the NPC interactions. Players, by far the biggest threat in the game to other players, largely ignore system security states. The most dangerous systems in the game are always the ones with the most players in them — regardless of security rating. This cannot be what Frontier intended.


Here, then, is my idea of how system states should be a modifier for all of the above changes:

*EDIT: PLAYERS WHO HAVE NOTORIETY (UNDER THE NEW SYSTEM) SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO SIMPLY LOITER IN SECURE SYSTEMS. THEREFORE ATR SHOULD BE HASSLING THEM REGULARLY (THE MOST OFTEN IN HIGH SEC, LESS SO IN MEDIUM AND EVEN LESS SO IN LOW SEC). ONCE ENGAGED ATR SHOULD CONTINUE TO HARASS AND ATTEMPT TO KILL THE PLAYER UNTIL THEY VACATE THE SYSTEM. THUS EVENTUALLY FORCING THE PLAYER KILLER BACK TO ANARCHY SPACE WHERE THEY ARE SAFE FROM AUTHORITIES.

  1. HIGH SECURITY: This should be nearly absolutely safe for all players to play in Open mode, knowing that they are basically in the equivalent of hanging out near City Hall in the middle of the afternoon with police presence visible. If any player is attacked by another player and has ‘Report crimes’ turned on, the ATR should respond within ten seconds. Experienced players will know that the time-to-kill in Elite with an experienced ship, especially against weaker targets, can be as low as a few seconds. This ATR response should be a wing of six, with five of them engaging the attacker and the sixth immediately providing healing beam/repair limpet assistance to the victim. All attacks by players on players automatically generate a bounty at a x2 multiplier. Player murders automatically generate the murder penalty described above, but x2. All BEGINNER engineer systems should be High Security systems. *EDIT NOTE: Yeah, thinking it thru a little more I'd say that the beginning engineers should be HIGH SEC, later ones can start to go low sec and the latter ones that require combat rank and such could maybe be mixed into some anarchy systems.
  2. MEDIUM SECURITY: This should be a fairly safe place for players — basically analogous to a residential neighborhood. If any player is attacked by another player and ‘Report crimes’ is turned on, the ATR should respond within 20 seconds. This response should be a wing of ATR ships engaging the attacker. All attacks by players on players automatically generate a bounty. Player murders automatically generate the murder penalty.
  3. LOW SECURITY: This should be a little risky — basically think about being at the slightly dodgy end of town just after sunset. If any player is attacked by another player and ‘Report crimes’ is turned on, the ATR should respond within one minute (no response for NPC attacks). This response should be a wing of N+1 (where N is the number of attackers) engaging the attacker. Player murders automatically generate the x0.75 the murder penalty described above. There should be some minor incentives in greater payouts of some kind to incentivize high-level players to go to these systems, with missions or resources that pay more than in High or Medium Security systems.
  4. ANARCHY SYSTEM: This should be VERY risky — basically think being in the worst neighborhood in your country at midnight. If any player is attacked by anyone, there will be no response. Player attacks and murders of any kind will not be reported. Going into these systems should scare any but the most brave/foolish. Even in Solo mode, you should be afraid: there should be a much greater percentage chance for highly-engineered NPC pirates (including wings) to attack you. But these should also be potentially the most lucrative systems: the biggest bounties are here, the most pristine mining rings are here, and missions to go to these systems should pay more.

However, Anarchy systems more than 30ly from inhabited space should not spawn pirates. Crime should only be a consideration near populated systems. This is both common sense and an obvious concession to not unduly harm the exploration gameplay loop.


In addition to the above existing system states, I would add one more: OUTER RIM. Basically think of the Reavers in Firefly. Consider putting a 30ly ‘shell’ surrounding the Bubble (and all other inhabited spaces) where this system state exists. This should be an absolutely terrifying system in which all of the rules of Anarchy Systems apply, but in addition, there should be a much greater percentage of spawn rate for wings of highly-engineered NPC pirates to attack you. There should be some very high incentives in greater payouts of some kind to incentivize high-level players to go there.

Conclusion
So there are my thoughts. I know that this explanation was not brief but I did try to think it through to the best of my ability. I wish to thank anyone who took the time to read through all of this, whether you agree with my ideas or not. I would very much appreciate civil discussion on these topics. Please share what you like in this thread and discuss what could be done better or differently. I am not at all expecting Frontier to make these changes lightly or quickly, or even at all. I’m sure there are plenty of people smarter than I who could suggest even better ideas, but as I noted Frontier has shown fantastic willingness to rethink some long-existing issues for the health and viability of the game going forward, so I wanted to kick off a conversation on this matter that might generate a workable solution.


Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Further, I would very much like to thank Commanders: Arsen Cross, WolfDragon, Swordsmith95, Kontrolldon and Audaxius who contributed ideas to this proposal as well as Souvarine who, as always, I submitted my ramblings to in the hopes that he could make them somewhat presentable. Anything worthwhile in this post is completely their doing, any idea you cannot stand is mine alone. ;)
 
Last edited:
Are you sure this isn't an open letter? :p <3


ATR should respond within ten seconds.
Players can get killed in less than 10 seconds. Say we go for a seal clubbing and have a naked trader T6 vs an engineered PVP FDL, let alone a wing of them, then that player can drop and be dead by the time they've stopped spinning! Honestly I think in High Sec systems, when you get interdicted, the ATR should be waiting and immediately attack the hostile party when they drop in...

Eid
 
Last edited:
I very much feel that the system for an opt-in free for all pvp mode with indicators on screen of who is participating with the added effect of harsher penalties for pvp murder applied to the pilot themselves instead of their ship and prohibiting pvp murders from logging into solo until the bounty is claimed is what we need.

Those interested in actual competitive play can join and know who they want to fight and no longer have to deal with the whole concept of report crimes trolling.

Bounty hunters can split into two stripes; those that want FFA PVP and those that don’t. Either way PVP bounty hunting becomes incentivized for the first time ever.

Yes please.
 
In short, we should just make survey, should pvp be related to territory control, Yes or No, but if you look closer to what devs are saying and what they are doing, and now OP answer yourself what are chances of those kind of changes going through under those conditions i mentioned.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Great ideas, very thoughtfully and constructively presented ;)

Absolutely agree that a weekly rolling PvP opt-in free-for-all would be brilliant. It would be a cracking bit of late-game challenge for those that want it.

And the fact that 'high security' basically means nothing is one of the biggest factors undermining verisimilitude in the current build of the game, in my opinion.
 
I especially like the system state changes mentioned above, at this point in my gameplay, all systems, though they look different and offer different things, feel completely the same. I want to have a reason to give pause when transiting from one system to another, across the bubble and/or relatively short hops. Too often am I just driving through everywhere without a care in the world. For an anarchy system specifically, I WANT to have a reason to reconsider taking a more paper build through an anarchy system just to travel through, let alone to do the more mundane things like material gathering where classically, you don't NEED a ship with high survivability. I want to NEED a highly engineered ship to go somewhere dangerous with "minimal care" to do something, and not just in case I wander into a PvP encounter.
 

Ozric

Volunteer Moderator
Another one.

Some things I agree with, some I don't, but the scope of what you're suggesting is essentially a new expansion in of itself. There are many better things that could be done with dev's time. Just finishing off and implementing the C&P system that was proposed would be a big enough task, and encompasses some of this.

We know that advances in players' ability to do things cooperatively are coming with Odyssey
Do we?

The current system of not really providing PvP players with meaningful gameplay loops (other than going to San Tu and trying to match up or using external Discord servers) has led to a large number of well-equipped player killers that are bored and, as such, run amok. In my opinion, this is both a failure to engage these players as well as a disservice to those upon whom they take their boredom out
This is something I've really never understood as an argument for why people gank or harass other players. Have you played EvE? I'm not really sure if you would come across a mainstream space game that had been as tailored towards PvP gameplay and gameloops. Full of gankers! People who kill other players for no reason other than the hell of it, will always be in any game with PvP.
 
Way to complicated. I also wonder what exactly you are trying to fix here. You are putting more 'rules'. You are adjusting modules. Changing npc spawns and a whole lot of other measures just to make sure we Pvp more?

Open mode suddenly pays more? Do I need to be in open for 24 hours? More 'rules' again regarding modes again.

I dont see this chicken lift off

And all just because in some systems there is danger of ganking?
 
This is something I've really never understood as an argument for why people gank or harass other players. Have you played EvE? I'm not really sure if you would come across a mainstream space game that had been as tailored towards PvP gameplay and gameloops. Full of gankers! People who kill other players for no reason other than the hell of it, will always be in any game with PvP.
Because there is no role for pvp currently, It's that simple, and i m not even a ganker, but i understand gankers, you basically kill anything that moves to get action from other pvp-ers, PvP is not responsible for territory control, becosue of modes, (We dont even have bonuses in influance or merits for open!), pvp is least profitable activity as bounties are capped, and is locked behind grind wal, "thx" to engineers unlock mechanics.
 
PvPers: give us meaningful PvP.
This idea: PvPers can have a scoreboard and a bounty tracking system.

Doesn't really cut it. (We have a couple of different community designed scoreboards of sorts already. The RoA PvP bot to track kills, the kindly provided EDR for us to compete for how naughty we've been, and Inara has the security report so we can see how much terror we're spreading)

I agree with the idea of weighting BGS and power play rewards to open, to encourage these activities to take place in open. But in terms of PvP activity, meaningful impact on the world is still hugely biased towards PvE grind - whether or not in open. With blocking breaking instancing, instead of just comms, someone can stay in Open and get their full influence reward for their activity and simply develop a lengthy block list. Even then, still more efficient to just counter each other by grinding PvE. Any PvP engagement motivated by BGS or power play allegiance would remain a sidequest to activity because someone is interested in it, not because there's any uniquely beneficial reason to do it.

  1. Notoriety should apply to both the player and the ship.
  2. Notoriety should cease to apply to players killing NPC ships. The existing system of bounties and NPC bounty hunters adequately deals with PvE crime.
1. Redundant. Notoriety applies to the player, it doesn't need to double onto the ship.
2. No - because notoriety isn't purely about punishing people for being naughty to players. It's about making it inconvenient to do any type of murder as a part of a gamut of illegal activities whether the player is engaged in immediate PvP, or mediated PvEvP. If someone is trolling BGS and murdering NPCs to put a system into lockdown, notoriety functions to make it inconvenient for them to try and clean their ship and their name.
 
Imagine it from a seals point of view. Ops post doesn't give enough reassurance to an explorer or noob just passing thru.
Most common PvP is in engineer systems and PvP events which they organise themselves.
Open should be the mainstay of the game with associated bonuses for hauling, defending yourself, and mission running.
Combat should not be buffed. Leastways not the attacker. Their cannot be a legion of tanked buffed pvpers in murderboats it's just more of the same as we have now.
Pvpers need rules. They cross the line they pay the price.
Perma notoriety.
Being hunted by spec ops almost to extinction. If a murderer was loose in a given system the state would go all out to find and destroy him/her or arrest em.
Consequences.
Open only has to be safe in high security systems where a pvper would face certain death. Only their skills and daring can keep them alive.
Pvp should be hard. The best of the best combat wise.
In anarchy systems the shoe is on the other foot. A pvper wing can establish themselves with carriers or new found stations and factions and make life real tough for law abiding factions in nearby systems thus affecting pp and Bgs
 
What is Bernard17 talking about is happening in power play, there is basically "wall" of underminers who are switching modes and use block list to avoid interception by pvp-ers, it's not some myth, it's just abused tool currently, and against common knowledge players who are donig this are not noobs flying not engineered ships, no, they are billioneirs flying fully kitted engineered big ships, it have to change.
 
Another one.

Some things I agree with, some I don't, but the scope of what you're suggesting is essentially a new expansion in of itself. There are many better things that could be done with dev's time. Just finishing off and implementing the C&P system that was proposed would be a big enough task, and encompasses some of this.


Do we?


This is something I've really never understood as an argument for why people gank or harass other players. Have you played EvE? I'm not really sure if you would come across a mainstream space game that had been as tailored towards PvP gameplay and gameloops. Full of gankers! People who kill other players for no reason other than the hell of it, will always be in any game with PvP.
Yes, another one. The first two were fantastically successful thanks. ;)

Yes, we do.

Yes, I have played quite a lot of EVE. Have you? Because the nature of your question makes me wonder how you could understand so little about EVE. That is a FULL LOOT PVP GAME where killing other players and looting them to amass your fortune is kind of the entire point BY OPENLY STATED DESIGN ACCORDING TO THE CREATORS OF THE GAME CCP. While Elite is a vastly different (and preferable) game Frontier have openly stated (David Braben, OBE himself on multiple occasions has said it) that it is their intent for Players to have the ability to engage in PVP of both consensual and nonconsensual variety. My suggestion is merely pointing out that while Frontier has stated that they want this gameplay loop to be valid in my opinion the current implementation is sub-optimal.

The whole "it would basically be a whole new expansion" comment is patently false. It would be a series of tweaks to the Crime and Punishment system, which if you watched today's Supercruise News you will have noted is exactly what the CM's said they are looking to do. That aside, Thanks for taking the time to respond Commander.
 
Last edited:

Ozric

Volunteer Moderator
Becouse there is no role for pvp currently, It's that simple, and i m not even a ganker, but i understand gankers, you basically kill anything that moves to get action from other pvp-ers, PvP is not responsible for territory control, becosue of modes, (We dont even have bonuses in influance or merits for open!), pvp is least profitable activity as bounties are capped, and is locked behind grind wal, "thx" to engineers unlock mechanics.
Having a role for them would make very little difference. EvE is just one example of a game where there is a role, but it still happens. People who want true meaningful PvP will benefit for some small changes, as a lot of them suggest themselves. Gankers will gank, because that's what they enjoy.
 
Having a role for them would make very little difference. EvE is just one example of a game where there is a role, but it still happens. People who want true meaningful PvP will benefit for some small changes, as a lot of them suggest themselves. Gankers will gank, because that's what they enjoy.
Under rules that allow ganked avoid gankers like blocknig and mode switching, we cant have pvp bounty haunting, becouse unskilled gankers can block proper pvp-ers, and this is happening.
 

Ozric

Volunteer Moderator
Yes, another one. The first two were fantastically successful thanks. ;)
I wasn't referring to your last posts, just another one on this subject.

Yes, we do.
What are they? I genuinely don't remember getting any details yet.

Yes, I have played quite a lot of EVE. Have you? Because the nature of your question makes me wonder how you could understand so little about EVE. That is a FULL LOOT PVP GAME where killing other players and looting them to amass your fortune is kind of the entire point BY OPENLY STATED DESIGN ACCORDING TO THE CREATORS OF THE GAME CCP. While Elite is a vastly different (and preferable) game Frontier have openly stated (David Braben, OBE himself on multiple occasions has said it) that it is their intent for Players to have the ability to engage in PVP of both consensual and nonconsensual variety. My suggestion is merely pointing out that while Frontier has stated that they want this gameplay loop to be valid in my opinion the current implementation is sub-optimal.
Yes, I played it for 4 1/2 years. It's a game designed for PvP where ganking is still prevalent, which goes against what you said in your proposal.
How can you have nonconsensual PvP with an opt-in system?

Under rules that allow ganked avoid gankers like blocknig and mode switching, we cant have pvp bounty haunting, becouse unskilled gankers can block proper pvp-ers, and this is happening.
What does that have to do with what I said?
 
PvP players also deserve the right to have an enjoyable play loop.
Not to be flip, but so do PvE players - and every other problem you've spent so much time and effort trying to solve (and which are still trivially bypassed/abused) ultimately stems from enough PvP players having done way too much 'defecating where they eat'.

So the PvE players largely left, and this boils down to another attempt to force them back into a playstyle they've decided to opt out of because they felt they were being denied the "enjoyable play loop" they "deserved".

The Genie is out of the bottle, the cat is out of the bag, the horse has left the barn. However you want to think of it, at this point there's no getting it back.

TL,DR: This is why we can't have nice things.
 
No thank you, if the gankers here want more pvp they can go elsewhere, i like doing my buisness without the constant ganking, if this will be implemented Elite will die as many will go elsewhere. Everytime i end up in open by mistake i ALLWAYS get ganked, i cant even reason with the gankers, they just laugh and say they want more salt.
besides didnt frontier say this would never be a thing, so why go on with it?
 
Under rules that allow ganked avoid gankers like blocknig and mode switching, we cant have pvp bounty haunting, becouse unskilled gankers can block proper pvp-ers, and this is happening.
Or just have enough shields to sit through a 15 seconds menu log timer after they were grommed when interrupted undermining. Why make a blocklist if you have FDev approved clogging to escape from any encounter.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom