Yes, the infrastructure isn't implemented yet. Civilised space is not yet civilised. Once policing and consequence actually differ across the galaxy, it will start gaining flavour, and there will be a real difference between people trading safely in a T9 in core systems, and in terrifying Anacondas in anarchies. Until that happens, the game will not just be broken and incomplete, but uniform and boring as a multiplayer experience.
See, THAT's why I don't play Open.
- Thread starter UOcUKAkira
- Start date
- Status
Yes, the infrastructure isn't implemented yet. Civilised space is not yet civilised. Once policing and consequence actually differ across the galaxy, it will start gaining flavour, and there will be a real difference between people trading safely in a T9 in core systems, and in terrifying Anacondas in anarchies. Until that happens, the game will not just be broken and incomplete, but uniform and boring as a multiplayer experience.
im wondering how the game will decide wether its a righteous kill or a mindless murder though.
I notice this pattern all the time from the forum members who are advocates of player killing, and who say that "open automatically equals PvP".
Look, guys...
The name of this game is indeed "Elite: Dangerous".
BUT
The name of the game comes purely from one of the Elite ranks.
Let me say that again:
The name of this game comes purely from one of the Elite ranks.
The name of this game was not intended to be used as an excuse for meaningless player killing.
The name of this game was not intended to be used as an excuse for warping the meaning of Open play to say that Open Play only means "PvP Mode".
Which part of the above three sentences do you not understand?
Which part of David Braben explaining the origin of this game's name in this video do you not understand?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOYhoFYIWmw&feature=youtu.be&t=7m57s
With thanks to Jack Schitt (link to his post in this thread provided below) , who has tried to point this out, but whose point was never responded to.
dont you think if fdev didnt want pvp in open, they would just not have implemented it?
Geting interdicted is like a fight in rl. If someone is on your scanner behind you in SC then that is when you ask them "you ok mate?" or "can I get you anything?" as soon as the interdiction starts then it's definitely no longer a conversation and you take them out as soon as possible in self-defense. There is no requirement for the interdictor to talk to the interdictee, they may well just be killing people to gain their own notoreity.
- - - Updated - - -
You've failed... hard.
Here's the thing. If you have basically ability to switch from open to solo and back, to a trader, 0,001 % chance of being robbed is infinitely more unsafe then 0% chance of being robbed. Basically traders have no reason to fly in open unless there's no other alternative, or unless open is somehow more profitable for them. Since you have open and solo on the same save, then of course, there's no interest for the trader to be on open (and the pirate can also flee player pursuers by fleeing to solo).
Second, punishment - if you have insurance covering for 95% of the loss of a combat (read, non-trade/exploration ship), then punishment of losing your ship isn't very punishing. Of course on the flip side for the same reason (insurance) it's not very profitable to attack any other ship except a trade ship. There's no profit in attacking a ship actually capable of defending itself, only loss. This basically singles out traders as the only desirable target.
Third, if you wanted to place all people on the same server and let them conduct their business in open only, there would be a need not just for harsher penalties for murder (higher bounties which you don't clear at the drop of a hat, while not penalizing the "I accidentally hit a policeman with a multicannon round" situations) but also higher security in the safer systems - police coming swiftly (depending on the security of the system) to the assistance of the victim and actually pursuing and destroying the agressor's ship rather then being rather harmless NPCs as they are. So in safe systems there's real security, but venture in less safe ones there is obviously not much security. Push piracy into the fringe regions rather then the core worlds. Then you can offer a satisfying experience for everyone within the same universe.
Last edited:
Majinvash
Banned
Also by your exact argument, it wasnt called Elite Harmless. Was it??
Last edited:
If you mean I failed to read any kind of meaningful reply from you, then yes, I failed hard in that respect.
- - - Updated - - -
It wasn't called "Elite: Player Killer Frenzy" either.
They picked "Elite: Dangerous" because it looks cool, and for the reasons outlined by David Braben in the video, which you are desperately trying to ignore.
If you are wanted, in a war zone or in an anarchy system you should be fair game. The area outside this where I do have some sympathy is when there is a large differential between the ship numbers, strength and commander rating where the combat result is known from the beginning. That to me is not PvP its a fair ground duck shoot. There needs to be a consequence for the attacker in these situations and some form of redress for the loser. Get that balance right and more players would come to open.
I don't think anyone is really saying that we shouldn't have PvP in Open. What myself and others are saying is that we shouldn't have non-consensual, meaningless PvP in Open. Teenage hormones should not trump game setting. Having a pirate attack you for resisting or having an overly zealous Federation Ensign attacking an Imperial slaver is fantastic and just what Open needs, but look back to the OP. Having a player interdict and attack you with no dialogue, no sense of motivation or reason - that's out of place and unwanted.
LOL at this thread *facepalm, I trade in open play because I like the feeling I could be ganked at any time, I hunt noobs in anarchy systems that I know are close to starter areas where I went myself when starting to make some quick creds.. when i started. I have played open since the start and hardly ever even interact with other CMDR's, let alone get killed by anyone.
I do believe however there is merit in having the game modes locked to a save.
- - - Updated - - -
Totally disagree. It isn't unwanted by me, I don't mind getting killed or killing. I have only ever killed one person so far in my entire game I'm pretty much a trader explorer.
I do believe however there is merit in having the game modes locked to a save.
- - - Updated - - -
Totally disagree. It isn't unwanted by me, I don't mind getting killed or killing. I have only ever killed one person so far in my entire game I'm pretty much a trader explorer.
Last edited:
That's the part where I say consensual and non-consensual, remember?
Last edited:
Hmmm. Well, ultimately, it boils down to this - hunting NPCs is bland, easy and just repetitive / boring after a short while. There's absolutely no reason to cooperate in NPC hunting because your ability to farm them is limited by their spawn rate rather then actual danger in engaging them.
If it is again by design that NPCs are a pushover ("we expect even a newbie player to be more of a challenge") and that PvP is discouraged, then basically the only non-predictable, challenging and engaging activity (well, short of sightseeing the milky way which is not so predictable, quite engaging, and has a competitive touch to it - my favourite activity) is discouraged and de-incentivized.
Of course open mode should not be about wanton murder (and safe systems should be safe systems) but the game is sold under pretense of being a MMO set in a cutthroat galaxy, and neither is the game a MMO, nor is the galaxy a cutthroat one without PvP. I think the mantra "let everyone play the way they like" isn't sound design. Aside from exploration, it's kind of a themepark / grindville to get the next best ship / outfit to do more of the same except at a faster pace and with cooler visuals. This is the gist of the negative Steam reviews; the gist of the positive ones is "it has exploration of the milky way and flying a spaceship is really fun" which is also absolutely true. I think we gamers are expecting more these days in general - what was good for a single player game >10 years ago just doesn't really sustain people's interest all that much now.
If it is again by design that NPCs are a pushover ("we expect even a newbie player to be more of a challenge") and that PvP is discouraged, then basically the only non-predictable, challenging and engaging activity (well, short of sightseeing the milky way which is not so predictable, quite engaging, and has a competitive touch to it - my favourite activity) is discouraged and de-incentivized.
Of course open mode should not be about wanton murder (and safe systems should be safe systems) but the game is sold under pretense of being a MMO set in a cutthroat galaxy, and neither is the game a MMO, nor is the galaxy a cutthroat one without PvP. I think the mantra "let everyone play the way they like" isn't sound design. Aside from exploration, it's kind of a themepark / grindville to get the next best ship / outfit to do more of the same except at a faster pace and with cooler visuals. This is the gist of the negative Steam reviews; the gist of the positive ones is "it has exploration of the milky way and flying a spaceship is really fun" which is also absolutely true. I think we gamers are expecting more these days in general - what was good for a single player game >10 years ago just doesn't really sustain people's interest all that much now.
Last edited:
PVP in open is part of the game, that's why it's possible. The whole idea that people should be able to derp around unshielded with holds full of Palladium and not get pirated by another player "because Braben said the bounty system discourages PvP" is why you and many others have failed. PvP is a fact of life (or death) in open, it's non-consensual and can happen absolutely anywhere. I find this to be an accurate simulation of what life would be like if we had the technology depicted in this game.
Yes DB himself and others have said that PvP isn't the main part of the game and this I suspect is why it's hard to make an income as a player pirate. The fact that it will happen has also been mentioned by FDEV and scenarios have been suggested by them that indicate player combat encounters are by design.
Why the game got its name is frankly irrelevant, it's got "dangerous" in it and does what it says on the tin.
- - - Updated - - -
Frankly if you get attacked by a hormonal teenager and lose then you should have been a better pilot.
This is why you don't put the words "Open", "Private", or "Solo" in the title. Look what you've done! It turns into the great debate.
I don't think anyone has argued against player combat. Anyone claiming otherwise is just trolling. What has been argued for is security that makes sense, and punishments that fit crimes in areas where security is supposed to be tight. How that stops people blowing each other up is beyond me. Just parroting the same old "play solo" or "we have lazors for a reason, so boo-hoo about the pew-pew somewhere else" rubbish is doing nothing to advance the debate.
i had once two cmdr's intercepting me,one after the other one i was able to outrun second one killed me with this reason only,he texted me that if i failed to give him my login credentials for the game he would destroy me, i told him to go f... himself.
i had no bounty on me,no cargo just doing some missions. the first cmdr spoke about some "order" called the code,but in a threatening way so i ignored and tried to make a run for it.
i play open but not in the core systems
i had no bounty on me,no cargo just doing some missions. the first cmdr spoke about some "order" called the code,but in a threatening way so i ignored and tried to make a run for it.
i play open but not in the core systems
- Status