The PVE flag was used in Jumpgate the Reconstruction and was part of why Jumpgate failed. No matter what you do greifers are going to find an exploit or hacks to get away with blowing up anyone they want. We lost to many players because of this. Now it was not the sole reason but losing to many new players really hurt the game.
Open PvE
- Thread starter SiriusSeven
- Start date
- Status
Like veleoceraptors, griefers will find a way... No debate
but don't let perfect be the enemy of good (or better)
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
which part? That they are busy with the Mac port, or that they are interested in this thread?
You're quite correct....
(both
)
It's difficult to understand how potential griefing should stop a good idea. It's not like Open in grief free. Set the rules, and sort it out as we go. There's a lot of that going around anyway. Once a griefer is exposed, they can't trouble Co-Op again, boom, banished. That sounds like a workable compromise to enable a need addition to move forward.
Well it's not a good idea in the first place.
Argue for or against it based on the ideas' merits, not some trumped up notion that griefing should hinder the concept. Explain what, to you, makes it a bad idea, and we can examine those points.
I read you spent ~ 40 hours clicking "accept", thank you, I was one of them, we owe you a new mouse at least
.It was mentioned that a PVE group might be a magnet for people who would want to disrupt it, you would be the one person who would know, I read about the couple of people who mistook PVE to mean "player vs everyone" recently Mmm....... best I say no more.
Do people generally respect the rules or is this a more regular occurrence that we just don't hear about often?
to date we have had 4 instances of being griefed, the rest of the 6200+ players respect the groups policy.I read you spent ~ 40 hours clicking "accept", thank you, I was one of them, we owe you a new mouse at least
It was mentioned that a PVE group might be a magnet for people who would want to disrupt it, you would be the one person who would know, I read about the couple of people who mistook PVE to mean "player vs everyone" recently Mmm....... best I say no more.
Do people generally respect the rules or is this a more regular occurrence that we just don't hear about often?
That's amazing, frankly. *Faith in humanity restored*
(Hopefully I didn't just jinx it.)
Why should he? I did exactly that, point by point, and the examination was reduced to "it's your opinion" and "I disagree". Those are not exactly counter-arguments.
At this point I think it would be easiest for FD to add the possibility to assign additional admins to a group. This change requires the least amount of work, and it removes that "single point of failure" Mobius users are worried about. Plus, it makes it easier to manage large groups.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Back to the programming effort issue - would it be more difficult to add multi-user access to part of a game account to allow the creator of a group to add additional player(s) to manage the group that has before now only been able to be created / maintained by a single player or to add an additional open group with rules. Only Frontier knows for sure....
Thanks for the info, I thought it would be low but that's a lot lower than I would have thought.
Actually no - every programmer knows for sure. It has nothing to do with accessing game accounts. Instead, group admin rights are currently only assigned to the creator of the group. Which makes the whole thing a matter of modifying the part of the code which verifies that the user has admin rights to add/remove members of the group, the ability of the existing admins to assign admin rights to members of the group and some light UI work. That's it. If they want to get fancy with it they can also throw in user roles/levels. All of which is largely database related work.
As opposed to everything I have listed throughout this thread. Including a radical redesign of the core game mechanics.
I'm going to ignore the obvious challenge in reconciling the above post with your previous "no such thing as an easy change" arguments, and instead focus on the observation that FD have demonstrated enough mastery of software development to suggest that implementing *either* option is well within their capabilities.
Indeed,they should probably do both.
Space Trucker
Banned
Hi!
Just my 2 cents in that matter:
FD, make an Mode based on Mobius displayed at the same menue as solo, open and groups and put the description "cooperative Multiplayer, pvp only allowd in CZ" or something.
I BET that after a few weeks all the people that are not interested in PVP pewpew are gone from open AND solo. Moebius is grat but nobody that dont read the forums knows about it
AND its way to much work for someone that is not paid by FD. Its simply unfair to him, as well as dangerous when he decides to stop playing for different reasons.
SHOULD be easy to implement, could be even the same thing as now, just with a few paid FD personnell instead of one moebius at the helm.
The core point is that while we already have the mode we want in moebius its not what i call fair to a player to impose work on him and as well not advertized to the same
amount as the other two modes.
Thus, making hte Moebius official and more prominent will cease most of the grinding points between the PVP and PVE community.
and the forums will quiet down a lot ;-)
Just my 2 cents in that matter:
FD, make an Mode based on Mobius displayed at the same menue as solo, open and groups and put the description "cooperative Multiplayer, pvp only allowd in CZ" or something.
I BET that after a few weeks all the people that are not interested in PVP pewpew are gone from open AND solo. Moebius is grat but nobody that dont read the forums knows about it
AND its way to much work for someone that is not paid by FD. Its simply unfair to him, as well as dangerous when he decides to stop playing for different reasons.
SHOULD be easy to implement, could be even the same thing as now, just with a few paid FD personnell instead of one moebius at the helm.
The core point is that while we already have the mode we want in moebius its not what i call fair to a player to impose work on him and as well not advertized to the same
amount as the other two modes.
Thus, making hte Moebius official and more prominent will cease most of the grinding points between the PVP and PVE community.
and the forums will quiet down a lot ;-)
Last edited:
uberdude
Banned
What you suggest sounds like it would let anyone and anyone join mobius without any checkpoint like an admin letting them in. So who would kick them out when they don't behave? Unless you're also suggesting that if FDev did make Mobius as an Option that they also turn off PVP damage outside of conflict zones? That would work. Would almost get rid of the need for admins.
Reason i say almost is there would still be the occasional "Acorns" that do other things to grief like ramming, spilling biowaste in busy stations other silly stuff that would require a boot from the group.
The quickest way to get it implemented would be for Mobius to quit and close the group down. You'd have 6000 angry people posting on the forums everyday until it was implemented
that's just evil
Mobius, don't listen to him!!! Lalalalalala, not listening, lalalalalala
Last edited:
that's just evil
Mobius, don't listen to him!!! Lalalalalala, not listening, lalalalalala
It's sad but true unfortunately. 100t of Palladium to take out the finger Mobius uses for clicking accept for the common good
(This is a joke in case people take me seriously
)- Status