Open PVE Shadow Banned Server - Could it Work?

[Chaparral]

FDEV appears to have the capacity to send players to a purgatory server. The "Shadow" server.

So clearly there is a parallel Open universe where offenders are locked up. This must be a real physical server.

Would it be possible to designate this server the OPEN PVE server, and code it so that all weapons are "smart rounds" (a currently existing game mechanic)?

I understand that this is populated with EULA violators (how many can there be? a couple of hundred?) , but if their pvp capacities are neutralized - they would only be able to bot, ram, UA bomb, etc, anyways.

I understand that this would not eliminate all possible forms of interplayer harassment - but I think it would be a popular log in option.

I am very well aware of Mobius and its brothers (or sisters), and my three toons belong to them - but they are capped.

Would this be possible given the game architecture?

Not asking if OPEN PVE is a good thing. If you don't think it is - chances are you want targets or want space to be "dangerous". If you think it is, you want a coop open experience not capped by pg size. That argument has been recycled more times than the water in the Mississippi river has been through people's bladders.

 

[Lightspeed]

"Banned to a shadow server" .... LOL ...wouldn't that be Solo mode?

 

[metatheurgist]

It's not a server. It's no more a server than any PG is a server. It's just another way of grouping people into the same instance. And no, you can't make their weapons behave differently without a different client, which would be another version of the game.

 

[Chaparral]

It's not a server. It's no more a server than any PG is a server. It's just another way of grouping people into the same instance. And no, you can't make their weapons behave differently without a different client, which would be another version of the game.

Smart rounds are actually a thing now - not requiring a whole new client.

Are you saying there is a banned private group? Can I get an invite? That sounds kind of cool. Is there a cap on this group?

"Banned to a shadow server" .... LOL ...wouldn't that be Solo mode?

That's an excellent question. Are shadow banned players prohibited from interacting with other players? Can they still join PGs? I have no idea.

 

[Jpotter]

Are you saying there is a banned private group? Can I get an invite? That sounds kind of cool. Is there a cap on this group?
That's an excellent question. Are shadow banned players prohibited from interacting with other players? Can they still join PGs? I have no idea.

It's no 'group' they are effectively stuck in a private Solo mode no matter the start menu option they pick. Private meaning the BGS is static and can't be manipulated, they also can't see anyone else even if in 'open' mode.

 

[Riverside]

Never been there but my understanding is that interaction with the BGS is not updated, so it's more like a beta server than a private group. I don't think shadowban is what anyone would choose, although I dare say a few of the 'open only' people might be happy for other people to go there.

I think if you want an open PvE style of play Mobius & various other groups are an excellent solution with the only issue being the group registration limit & administering new joiners & bans. A player run private group is ideal for players who agree to a particular set of rules.

It's worth bearing in mind that unwanted player interaction goes both ways - it's really frustrating for some to think they are playing with a stranger who accepts the (lack of) rules in Open only to discover that the player they found doesn't really want a free for all.

 

[Quantis Trap]

OP, no I don't believe it would work, nor do I believe it works even remotely like you think it does now.

 

[Hellfire85]

Would it be such a problem to just drop those unending "I want another mode without PvP" discussions?

 

[Lestat]

Or you can elitepve You could join that and let Frontier do the real work for future updates.

 

[metatheurgist]

Would it be such a problem to just drop those unending "I want another mode without PvP" discussions?

Probably just as easy to drop those "It's unfair the carebears are beating me in solo/group at BGS" discussions.

 

[Chaparral]

It's no 'group' they are effectively stuck in a private Solo mode no matter the start menu option they pick. Private meaning the BGS is static and can't be manipulated, they also can't see anyone else even if in 'open' mode.

Ouch. That is a serious penalty box. So if they are members of a private group, they can't even see members in that group?

OP, no I don't believe it would work, nor do I believe it works even remotely like you think it does now.

Is there a shadow ban server outline anywhere in the forum?

 

[TheMegaTurnip]

Wait 'old on a moment 'ere..

"Neutrilize thier PvP capability" < Aside from the fact that PvPers mostly play by in game rules and it's the combat loggers who are the ones who exploit the system....

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Smart rounds are actually a thing now - not requiring a whole new client.

The current smart rounds mean you can't damage something you weren't targeting. Other than when showing off, most PvPers target the ship they're attacking.

 

[iFred]

FDEV appears to have the capacity to send players to a purgatory server. The "Shadow" server.

So clearly there is a parallel Open universe where offenders are locked up. This must be a real physical server.

Would it be possible to designate this server the OPEN PVE server, and code it so that all weapons are "smart rounds" (a currently existing game mechanic)?

I understand that this is populated with EULA violators (how many can there be? a couple of hundred?) , but if their pvp capacities are neutralized - they would only be able to bot, ram, UA bomb, etc, anyways.

I understand that this would not eliminate all possible forms of interplayer harassment - but I think it would be a popular log in option.

I am very well aware of Mobius and its brothers (or sisters), and my three toons belong to them - but they are capped.

Would this be possible given the game architecture?

Not asking if OPEN PVE is a good thing. If you don't think it is - chances are you want targets or want space to be "dangerous". If you think it is, you want a coop open experience not capped by pg size. That argument has been recycled more times than the water in the Mississippi river has been through people's bladders.

I highly doubt that there is something like a shadow-ban. It was just PR.

I also doubt that we will ever see something like OpenPVE. If you do a search on the Forums, we had a Poll years ago with an overwhelming majority that wanted to Combine the social possibilites of Open Play with the ability of not being griefed or pwned out of space for any stupid RP-reason. FD didnt even talk about that. I think there are technical issues, because any other reasons for not implementing an OpenPVE are not valid.

 

[xzanfr]

I thought the whole shadow banning group was a myth.
Has anyone been "banned" / know someone that has?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Why should players who prefer PvE lose the ability to affect the BGS, etc?

 

[TheMegaTurnip]

By the way, blowing a Cmdr up does not count as harrasment.

I'm sorry, it just does'nt. Nor does station ramming, as childish as it might well be.

Botting, combat logging, hacking. These three things should be what gets you banned primarily.

 

[lenna]

@OP: The "Shadow Ban" server essentially prevents anyone on it from affecting the universe state - they can still play, but they will not be instanced with non-shadow banned players nor can they affect the shared universe state - at least according to what we have been told by FD.

My guess is that your proposal to repurpose the Shadow Ban facility is DOA - not feasible, nor doable.

However, your idea about using the smart round mechanic to mitigate unsolicited PvP sounds like a plausible suggestion. Whether FD could implement something akin to smart rounds for all weapons as a fixed special effect is something only FD would know.

 

[lenna]

By the way, blowing a Cmdr up does not count as harrasment.

As a single event, maybe or maybe not (circumstances are everything), but when considered in the context of a pattern of behaviour it most definitely could.

Seal Clubbing could be considered a form of harassment, if done more than once it could be considered persistent harassment.

However, this is really quite off-topic in the main - PvP combat does not have to be considered harassment for it to be considered undesirable.

 

[TheMegaTurnip]

As a single event, maybe or maybe not (circumstances are everything), but when considered in the context of a pattern of behaviour it most definitely could.

Seal Clubbing could be considered a form of harassment, if done more than once it could be considered persistent harassment.

However, this is really quite off-topic in the main - PvP combat does not have to be considered harassment for it to be considered undesirable.

undesirable to those who can't handle being shot at in a game with GUNS in it. Yes.