Should there be an 'Open' Player Vs Environment Option on the Login Screen

[eza]

We see things differently. For some reason you want to protect Co-Op players more than they feel the need for themselves. Games are enough of a magnet for griefers. You just seem intent at using the fear of Griefers to deny what would be a vast improvement for a great many. FD takes player contact hostage to PvP now, you want to take it hostage to the fear of griefers as well. That won't stand. A CO-Op mode is a logical extension of the current mode system.

You can offer what ever vote you like but, you can't box this argument into the griefers corner. Let them find their exploits, and let FD squash them or ignore them as they come. The call for an Open PvE mode is multifaceted. You can't use the chance of griefing to scare down a good idea. Griefers grief, there's nothing to be done about that, except if FD were to make a CO-Op mode, they could, at least, bust the griefers for their actions rather than have the dubious separation we have with Private Groups now.

I see things as someone who's been developing software professionally for twenty years, and has to think about how systems can be exploited, and how to defend against such exploits when programming systems.

You appear to see things as someone who wants an Open PvE mode right now, consequences be damned.

I'm not trying to scare, to pick problems with everything and offer no solution; which is why I thought of a solution to suicide ramming and posted it.

No, I don't think it's necessarily a good idea to introduce an OPvE mode, and I would rather see changes made to the security and bounty systems first, then see the effects of those changes examined, then further steps made.

But that's not what I'm trying to point out here. I'm trying to demonstrate a potential exploit and have offered a potential solution, from the viewpoint of a security-minded developer.

 

[Mohrgan]

I see things as someone who's been developing software professionally for twenty years, and has to think about how systems can be exploited, and how to defend against such exploits when programming systems.

You appear to see things as someone who wants an Open PvE mode right now, consequences be damned.

I'm not trying to scare, to pick problems with everything and offer no solution; which is why I thought of a solution to suicide ramming and posted it.

No, I don't think it's necessarily a good idea to introduce an OPvE mode, and I would rather see changes made to the security and bounty systems first, then see the effects of those changes examined, then further steps made.

But that's not what I'm trying to point out here. I'm trying to demonstrate a potential exploit and have offered a potential solution, from the viewpoint of a security-minded developer.

We can leave that all to FD. I see no reason to stop pressing for such a common sense idea. You cannot boil my argument down into self serving sound bites. I am saying that in the course of the debate over a Co-Op mode, don;t let the fear of griefing become a reason to not press forward. While you offered one solution to an isolated opportunity, you paint the whole idea of a Co-Op mode with the fear brush of it becoming a griefers magnate. It is unreasonable to assume we should do nothing, for the fear of exploits.

Better punishments for gankers aren't going to magically make PvE'ers more interested in non-consensual attacks. It will make some players feel better, and add some spice and a sort of realism to the game but, an improved crime/punishment system does not cover the call for a Co-Op mode. If you don;t want to fight with other players, punishing them more for doing it won't change your mind.

 

[eza]

If you really want to end up with a main menu consisting of:

Play with others
Play with griefers
Play with friends
Play with yourself

Then that's your prerogative. Obviously nothing I can say will be accepted by you. It's cool, I get it.

 

[Mohrgan]

If you really want to end up with a main menu consisting of:

Play with others
Play with griefers
Play with friends
Play with yourself

Then that's your prerogative. Obviously nothing I can say will be accepted by you. It's cool, I get it.

Do you see? You did it again. You assert that a Co-Op mode would attract nothing but grifers, in an attempt to scare people off an idea you don;t like. Nonsense. You are exposed as a fear monger. That is as plain as day with this post.

 

[excalibus]

@eza and Mohgran I understand where you are both coming from...

I would rather that they do implement an OPVE mode that has the most 'obvious' exploits discussed and methods to 'deal' with them fleshed out somewhat for FD to decide how best to implement personally...
I think in the long term interests of the game in as far as down the road fixes to 'exploits' that 'griefers' will find the more that it done to negate exploits now is time and money well spent versus a series of patches later on...

No doubt there will be 'exploits' that 'griefers' find to use, that is always the case, imaginitive and inventive minds often try the unexpected with software and often get undexpected results...

By time and money well spent, I actually mean (and eza will or should know this) defining the exploits now - even if we cannot agree on a workable system, will enable FDev to be able to see potential problems before they begin designing the code for the OPVE mode, that will mean they can save time with designing to accomodate those exploits now instead of haveing to redesign later around them... that in turn saves them money in that aspect of it, it also actually makes them money if they do it that way and do it fairly right when they do release an OPVE mode because that (IMHO) will contribute towards player retention...

If they get it wrong and an OPVE mode is initially full of holes as far as mittigating PVP is concerned, then it will have cost them time and money and not helped a great deal with player retention and could actually impact on player retention negatively if done wrong...

It is better to get as many potential exploits out in the open now so even if we cannot 'agree' on a solution, FDev will be able to seee what problems we have come up with and determine how they wish to tackle it...

I personally would not expect an OPVE mode to be implemented before the end of this season, but I could be pleasantly mistaken in that

 

[Lheim]

If you really want to end up with a main menu consisting of:

Play with others
Play with griefers
Play with friends
Play with yourself

Then that's your prerogative. Obviously nothing I can say will be accepted by you. It's cool, I get it.

I agree with Mohrgan. This is completely overstating the case against, and is fearmongering. You might as well say people shouldn't go to school any more.

You're assuming, somehow, that griefers are still going to be able to blow up victims in the first place. Or that, if they manage to find a way to do so, it wouldn't count as blatant exploiting and net them a game ban.

 

[DHMeyer]

If you really want to end up with a main menu consisting of:

Play with others
Play with griefers
Play with friends
Play with yourself

Then that's your prerogative. Obviously nothing I can say will be accepted by you. It's cool, I get it.

If there is an Open PVE mode with PVP combat either removed completely or restricted to certain areas, that would change one major thing: it would give Frontier and the players some official no PVP combat rules to lean on. It would remove ambiguity we currently have in Private Groups, where Frontier could do nothing as no PVP was "just" an agreement between the players, not a rule of the game.
If players have a possibility to blacklist other players they do not wish to see in such mode (for example players who tried to disrupt their gameplay in any way they can find - so griefers), that through the matchmaking would take care of the problem with time and make griefing extremely rare and easy to deal with on the level of each individual player. Effectively each player would be able to remove people they don't want to interact with in any way other than through BGS, from their game. Resulting in a system that would, finally, be self-policing.
If a player switched to Open PVP, this blacklist would not be carried over and individual players would not be able to manage it, however, Frontier support would be able to add players to it in case they got someone reported for griefing.

As for the ramming damage, considering it a valid combat technique could allow for ramming damage to follow the same rules as the one managing all PVP combat. Although I like the idea with ships taking no ramming damage nearby a space station if their speed is lower than 100, I think it could be as well extended to simply negate ramming damage, unless both players are in an area, where PVP is allowed. Of course there could be people trying to block the mailslots with big ships just to be difficult, but surely this should be considered loitering by the starport authorities who would deal with the issue themselves after the docking time / take off time limits expire?
I have also no problem at all with Open PVE being completely PVE, without any PVP zones, so for players who want to have the possibility of PVP combat could simply switch to Open PVP or Arena.

 

[DarthRavadge]

I don't think this is necessary but don't care either way. In all my time playing I have never been attacked by another player. All of the players and or wings of players I have encountered have either been friendly, or simply ignored my presence. This goes for everyone I have talked to in game as well. These so called griefers I hear about must only target noobs.

 

[Faded Glory]

I agree with Mohrgan. This is completely overstating the case against, and is fearmongering. You might as well say people shouldn't go to school any more.

You're assuming, somehow, that griefers are still going to be able to blow up victims in the first place. Or that, if they manage to find a way to do so, it wouldn't count as blatant exploiting and net them a game ban.

That does seem like a good point. If a player wanting to cause annoyance cannot inflict damage on another player, it's simply a minor irritation, if that, and presumably not terribly satisfying for the perpetrator. What's the point or fun in shooting another ship when the result will be null, and where's the fun in ramming another ship when the result will be nothing?

Negate player on player damage (I like the idea of the aggressor taking any damage, but that is indeed more open to exploiting), and I cannot see players wanting to cause trouble hanging around in such a mode. I cannot imagine it's fun dedicating one's playtime to an activity that isn't possible.

Surely the reason that this is an issue is because players have used exploits to engage in PvP (and causing damage) where it is possible, but not allowed / desired, for example, in and around stations, or in a group where the local rules are designed to prevent it. If damage cannot be inflicted, it cannot be exploited.

 

[SnowyNI]

I agree with Mohrgan. This is completely overstating the case against, and is fearmongering. You might as well say people shouldn't go to school any more.

You're assuming, somehow, that griefers are still going to be able to blow up victims in the first place. Or that, if they manage to find a way to do so, it wouldn't count as blatant exploiting and net them a game ban.

This!
If the minute they grieve they are removed from the game totally, then they'd soon run out of ahats wanting to do it... Would you really buy an account every week just to abuse someone and have it banned, just to have to go and buy another? I sure as Hell wouldn't (and the wife would stab me if I blew £20 a week on the same game re-bought over and over).

 

[Roland2]

If you really want to end up with a main menu consisting of:

Play with others
Play with griefers
Play with friends
Play with yourself

Then that's your prerogative. Obviously nothing I can say will be accepted by you. It's cool, I get it.

You forgot to label the modes:

Play with others (PvE)
Play with griefers (PvP (current open))
Play with friends (Private Groups (PvE or PvP))
Play with yourself (Solo)

 

[peteuplink]

I'm just going to add something else to this. I've always played in open, but recently I got a bit bored with ED and have been taking a break until the next update. I signed in today and found that all the friends I played with have now gone and joined private groups, which I cannot join because I don't know the owners, so I had nobody to play with and got bored after about half an hour and quit. They're in these private groups because, based on a conversation I had, they're afraid of the PvP and even though they've not been a victim the constant talk (re:scaremongering) about it on here is enough to put them off playing in the open game, but they still want to interact with others, instead of playing solo, and have chosen to join private groups. This has left little old me without my playmates... Now if we had a PvE option for the game, this might encourage people who've run off to private groups to get back into the wider game again (I don't know about anyone else but I think it's a bit silly to have a galaxy of 400 billion stars where people can lock themselves away in tiny groups like a private party) and it'll allow people like me who don't want to join a private group, and who enjoy some friendly player interaction, to have someone to play with.

I think that instead of private groups there should be player guilds, like we have in WoW, and also, like WoW, there should be the option as to whether or not you want to play together in a PvP or PvE environment. This will stop all the silly private group nonsense and the drama like "X group infiltrated our private playground and started killing people" stuff we've had recently. It'll also cut down the "I've been ganked!" stuff that gets posted on here.

The PvE server could still allow PvP in combat zones and could have a system where you can still get PvP combat outside of combat zones but both players have to agree to it by way of an on-screen message "Commander X has challenged you to combat. Do you accept Y/N".

 

[excalibus]

I'm just going to add something else to this. I've always played in open, but recently I got a bit bored with ED and have been taking a break until the next update. I signed in today and found that all the friends I played with have now gone and joined private groups, which I cannot join because I don't know the owners, so I had nobody to play with and got bored after about half an hour and quit. They're in these private groups because, based on a conversation I had, they're afraid of the PvP and even though they've not been a victim the constant talk (re:scaremongering) about it on here is enough to put them off playing in the open game, but they still want to interact with others, instead of playing solo, and have chosen to join private groups. This has left little old me without my playmates... Now if we had a PvE option for the game, this might encourage people who've run off to private groups to get back into the wider game again (I don't know about anyone else but I think it's a bit silly to have a galaxy of 400 billion stars where people can lock themselves away in tiny groups like a private party) and it'll allow people like me who don't want to join a private group, and who enjoy some friendly player interaction, to have someone to play with.

I think that instead of private groups there should be player guilds, like we have in WoW, and also, like WoW, there should be the option as to whether or not you want to play together in a PvP or PvE environment. This will stop all the silly private group nonsense and the drama like "X group infiltrated our private playground and started killing people" stuff we've had recently. It'll also cut down the "I've been ganked!" stuff that gets posted on here.

The PvE server could still allow PvP in combat zones and could have a system where you can still get PvP combat outside of combat zones but both players have to agree to it by way of an on-screen message "Commander X has challenged you to combat. Do you accept Y/N".

I feel a large benefit of my OP is to help bring the commanders wanting a multiplayer PVE experience together into one evironment... out of solo, out of groups and no doubt some will come from open...
I do feel that private groups are a valid play style and have a lot of benefits for the game as different commanders use them for different reasons and there are a variety of groups for all sorts of reasons... I would not like to see the option of private groups dissappear and my proposal for an Open PVE mode is not to dismantle the groups system...

 

[DHMeyer]

I feel a large benefit of my OP is to help bring the commanders wanting a multiplayer PVE experience together into one evironment... out of solo, out of groups and no doubt some will come from open...
I do feel that private groups are a valid play style and have a lot of benefits for the game as different commanders use them for different reasons and there are a variety of groups for all sorts of reasons... I would not like to see the option of private groups dissappear and my proposal for an Open PVE mode is not to dismantle the groups system...

Private groups are perfectly OK when used in the way they were intended: play with friends. Not 20k friendly people you've never met before. I play either in Solo or in a Private Group where I can just catch up with my friends whilst playing a game. And sometimes do stuff ingame together.

As for mentioning griefers and how their presence in Open or infiltrating private groups is dictating the need for Open PVE... Well, the griefers are one of the factors making the Open PVE a reasonable solution. But quite frankly, they are not the most important factor, quite far from it. The purpose is to bring people who enjoy this sort of gameplay (PVE) together in one place, out of the Private Groups environment, possibly with some people who currently play in Solo. This is a vast galaxy with plenty of room to fill and filling this space with human players is a good start.

Private Groups and Solo should remain as available game modes though. Edit: and so should the current Open (PVP) and Arena. Nothing against those modes.

 

[peteuplink]

Private groups are perfectly OK when used in the way they were intended: play with friends. Not 20k friendly people you've never met before. I play either in Solo or in a Private Group where I can just catch up with my friends whilst playing a game. And sometimes do stuff ingame together.

As for mentioning griefers and how their presence in Open or infiltrating private groups dictating the need for Open PVE... Well, the griefers are one of the factors making the Open PVE a reasonable solution. But quite frankly, they are not the most important factor, quite far from it. The purpose is to bring people who enjoy this sort of gameplay (PVE) together in one place, out of the Private Groups environment, possibly with some people who currently play in Solo. This is a vast galaxy with plenty of room to fill and filling this space with human players is a good start.

Private Groups and Solo should remain as game modes though.

I don't actually want to see the private groups go. I was just a bit peeved that everyone I know was off in their little groups and I wasn't allowed to join in. If we have an open PvE it would allow people like me, who like to play in open, to have more people around to play with.

As I said, I don't think the open PvE should completely get rid of PvP. I think it should still be allowed in combat zones if players are on opposing sides, and I think that there should be a PvP combat system where someone can challenge you to combat and then you have a choice as to if you want to accept or not, like they have in WoW. I'm not trying to say that ED should become a space faring version of WoW, just that it should have a choice of open PvP or open PvE and that combat between players should be handled differently in PvE.

 

[Arkku]

My suggestion for a fairly simple temporary "open PvE" option until a better solution to the underlying problem can be implemented: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=235935

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Private groups are perfectly OK when used in the way they were intended: play with friends. Not 20k friendly people you've never met before.

Ah, but I know those 20k people are potentially my friends, which is not the same with Open. I know for sure, some players in Open I have no interest in being friends with in game, and their only interest would be in killing me. However, out of those 20k in Mobius i know at worst we will simply never meet. If we do meet, we will be cordial and perhaps friendly.

So, its not a group of 20k friends, but a group of 20k potential friends.

People sometimes call out for features that allow us to meet up with likeminded players, especially when talking about clans/guilds. Well, Mobius group or groups like it (or an Open PvE mode) allow exactly that.

Why should there be a limit to how many friends a person can have (other than technical reasons)?

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Private groups are perfectly OK when used in the way they were intended: play with friends.

this is a fair point, private groups were probably not intended to have 20k people in when discussed back in kickstarter.
they were *meant* to run along side the multiple open modes promised which would have different rules in each one, which would kick players who broke them....

(and the wheel keeps on turning )

 

[Roybe]

this is a fair point, private groups were probably not intended to have 20k people in when discussed back in kickstarter.
they were *meant* to run along side the multiple open modes promised which would have different rules in each one, which would kick players who broke them....

(and the wheel keeps on turning )

...and were also supposed to have an option to be publicly seen...similar to Diablo. <spin, spin>

 

[excalibus]

My suggestion for a fairly simple temporary "open PvE" option until a better solution to the underlying problem can be implemented: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=235935

as a stop gap measure... it is still an 'honour' based system...