Simple Solution to Gankers versus Carebears

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Player actions in any game mode may indirectly affect all players. Affecting other players is not limited to in-the-same-instance PvP.

They don't. They affect the environment. Which in turn affects players. Is just mumbojumbo "dey affect me gameplay..." - if it all was driven by some obscure algo that governed economy and world states, people wouldn't even know.
Players have their input in a somewhat dynamic world - you could argue to cut down extreme outcomes caused by player interaction. But me fiddling with the BGS likely doesn't have any effect on anyone.

 

[Robert Maynard]

They don't. They affect the environment. Which in turn affects players. Is just mumbojumbo "dey affect me gameplay..." - if it all was driven by some obscure algo that governed economy and world states, people wouldn't even know.
Players have their input in a somewhat dynamic world - you could argue to cut down extreme outcomes caused by player interaction. But me fiddling with the BGS likely doesn't have any effect on anyone.

As I said, "indirectly".

If players in one mode could not affect players in another mode, in any way, then I'd expect the "make [insert feature here] Open only" demands would have ceased long ago.

 

[Codger]

236 posts and just getting started!

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

As I said, "indirectly".

If players in one mode could not affect players in another mode, in any way, then I'd expect the "make [insert feature here] Open only" demands would have ceased long ago.

It is a silly claim. It's only there to fabricate some nonsense versus PvE. Again - if it was all driven by some algo, no one would notice or bother.
But that doesn't matter anyway, since the underlying problem is mixing uncompatible player populations in the first place.

 

[Morbad]

They don't. They affect the environment. Which in turn affects players. Is just mumbojumbo "dey affect me gameplay..." - if it all was driven by some obscure algo that governed economy and world states, people wouldn't even know.

'What you don't know can't hurt you' is total nonsense.

The source of the effect doesn't need to be apparent for the effect to be there. If that source is other players, then what they are doing matters.

If players in one mode could not affect players in another mode, in any way, then I'd expect the "make [insert feature here] Open only" demands would have ceased long ago.

Assuming mode switching wasn't easily abusable, then if players couldn't affect other players in any way in another mode, there would be near zero grounds to complain about whatever it was they were doing. In a very real sense, they wouldn't even be playing in the same game.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Assuming mode switching wasn't easily abusable, then if players couldn't affect other players in any way in another mode, there would be near zero grounds to complain about whatever it was they were doing. In a very real sense, they wouldn't even be playing in the same game.

Indeed, it would be like that if Frontier had chosen to go the route of separate galaxy states per game mode.

 

[Voracity_T]

If players in one mode could not affect players in another mode, in any way, then I'd expect the "make [insert feature here] Open only" demands would have ceased long ago.

Indeed.

And that would have been the preferable route for FDev to take as far as a few of us are concerned. Less division in the community and a far more logical choice given that people in PG and Solo can currently ruin another factions BGS/PP moves without ever being seen or known. Thats just ridiculous and very one sided.

 

[Robert Maynard]

And that would have been the preferable route for FDev to take as far as a few of us are concerned.

Probably for more than some - although it would have led to questions regarding which galaxy should be considered to be canon.

Less division in the community and a far more logical choice given that people in PG and Solo can currently ruin another factions BGS/PP moves without ever being seen or known. Thats just ridiculous and very one sided.

It's a consequence of PvP being an entirely optional extra in this game as sold to all players. Players cannot be forced to engage directly with those who want to use an optional play-style.

 

[Rat Catcher]

...snip
... But me fiddling with the BGS likely doesn't have any effect on anyone.

Tell that to the players who changed the Carcosa system state through BGS manipulation - then thank them for actually improving things for the majority of players in Colonia!

I gather that was accomplished in all modes, by a few

 

[Voracity_T]

It's a consequence of PvP being an entirely optional extra in this game as sold to all players. Players cannot be forced to engage directly with those who want to use an optional play-style.

That doesnt make much sense considering that every playstyle is optional in this game Robert.

 

[Robert Maynard]

That doesnt make much sense considering that every playstyle is optional in this game Robert.

It makes perfect sense in the context of PvP being a contentious play-style that it is obvious that not every player enjoys much less wishes to partake in. Frontier decided to design their game with this in mind and chose not to require players to play with other players.

 

[Rat Catcher]

Probably for more than some - although it would have led to questions regarding which galaxy should be considered to be canon.

It's a consequence of PvP being an entirely optional extra in this game as sold to all players. Players cannot be forced to engage directly with those who want to use an optional play-style.

Folk will argue black is white with you over this - as it would appear that there are some for whom anything other than open is an abomination!

I play whichever mode suits me at the time, I like having the choice - if I wish to 'socialise' I play in open, otherwise PG/solo (aren't I terrible!).

Those who argue for open only, or against a dedicated PvE global option, must have their own agenda, surely?

This is a great game, I play it to relax and enjoy myself, with or without other players

 

[Reggit]

Just my particularly naive opinion...

I feel compelled to point out - a Cmdrs playstyle will tend to change depending on how experienced they are. By which i mean, i used to be a "Carebear" and i hated Gankers - but after learning from my fellow Cmdrs...Now i make Gankers my 'Content'....and i love it! Honestly - it keeps me playing. I've done everything to death and the unpredictability of PvP is....well....if there's a risk of facing the rebuy™ .....Exciting!

I think PvE players should be very careful about wanting 'modifications' to be made - there's a real risk the progression of alot of Cmdrs will be ruined and Elite will become.....Boring (and then bad things happen!)
Splitting the playerbase between even more modes is probably a bad idea (The Galaxy is kinda huge already!) Solo and Private exist for those so inclined or those who are very new. I'd say an average Cmdr should be safe in open with minimal experience as long as they know how to run....how to outfit...and what the term 'Hotspot' means.
- It's not too hard.
(Worth mentioning - I've got a couple of paper builds, but if i ever want to fly them...i'll simply log into Solo first)

I will concede - Elite kind of badly needs more 'structured' PvP (to stop bored Cmdrs from becoming Psycho Cmdrs!) OOPP sounds okay i suppose....but i think Powerplay would need alot of work in general to entice the PvP crowd.
Off the top of my head - allowing squads to 'declare consensual war' on each other is something i think could keep the 'mad dogs' busy for a while. (I see Greens and neutrals upon entering a system - i'd love to see some Red Cmdrs speeding towards me!)

But...i really don't know what would work...who does?
As much as id like to see TT constantly taking on the Nomads in a set space (where i can join in) and allow the PvE guys to join in or give them a wide berth...Personal accountability is the only safe way to fly in open. Suck it up, learn from your experiences....Don't get mad - Get Even o7

 

[NeilF]

The whole debate with lots of salt on both sides is a result of bad game design by Frontier.

Design Flaw 1: You can either have a battle ship or a paper cut. There is nothing inbetween. You have an explorer, trader or miner ship, and meet a battleship in PvP: There is no GitGud possible, ever. You can't win against a tank in a shoebox.

Design Flaw 2: You want realistically dangerous? So give it to the gankers, too. Play a psychopathic serial killer all the way you want - but be prepared to be killed at sight in civilised systems and have a billion-Credit bounty on your head in anarchies - which also other players can get.

Remove these two design flaws and the whole debate is over, on both sides.

Indeed! "Design" <-- That's the key word...

Consider how we're five+ years in, and now consider how much design has gone into:-
a) Some meaningful orchestrated (legal) PvP gameplay? - Why are CMDRs from opposing Powerplay powers having PvP related tasks orchestrated and offered by the game to dictate the outcome of a system? Why doesn't the game orchestrate OPEN only Community Goals or "Hot Spots" to create PvP related gameplay?
b) A rewarding, engaging piracy mechanic and career? - Why can't a CMDR progress as a pirate, gaining access to more nefarious locations and better rewards?
c) Some meaningful mechanics to punish "illegal" destruction? - Why doesn't illegally destroying another CMDR (or NPC), after a few cases mean more and more stations and indeed even systems deny you access? Why are a spate of such behaviour (over a given time frame) are you not highlighted on other CMDR's scanner as a known "threat"? Why doesn't the Pilots Federation offer a notional bounty so as to make you a legal target no matter where you are?

When FD finally do some solid design for (a), (b) and (c) the game will move forwards in a good direction.

 

[dxm55]

Folk will argue black is white with you over this - as it would appear that there are some for whom anything other than open is an abomination!

They're either elitist bastiges or just looking to club baby seals.

 

[Hanerib]

I think this thread made me a ganker

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Tell that to the players who changed the Carcosa system state through BGS manipulation - then thank them for actually improving things for the majority of players in Colonia!

I gather that was accomplished in all modes, by a few

I'm pretty sure people don't really know what they want. They see a thing and think it's bad for them. If the environment wasn't dynamic or noone could leave the slightest imprint on the world the wailing about "sterile, static, dead" world would arise from this very place.
Yet, player impact showing real effects are merely incidental rather than widespread.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Design Flaw 1: You can either have a battle ship or a paper cut. There is nothing inbetween. You have an explorer, trader or miner ship, and meet a battleship in PvP: There is no GitGud possible, ever. You can't win against a tank in a shoebox.

Wrong

Your design flaw 1 isn't a design flaw.

You can build traders or explorers capable of survival in open very well.
It's the extremely one-sided min-max builds that are in danger of getting steamrolled,
the 84.3 LY Condas and the 3D shielded Asps.

This

 

[Voracity_T]

I think I might do some piracy this evening.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I think I might do some piracy this evening.

That reminds me - I need to buy a few Prismatic Shields this evening.