Spit-balling ideas to fix and balance PvP

[Daffan]

There is quite a problem in PvP combat. Not the balance of individual weapons or ships - but as a whole mechanic of PvP.

There is a serious disparity between game play systems, some that make almost no sense - and some that have no balance. Here are some problems with solution, feel free to pick apart... if you can.


1) Make logout timer 60 seconds (If you've engaged in combat - you cant log out for 60 seconds).
WHY: It makes the frameshift scanner useless because it takes longer than 15 seconds to even use the module.

2) Make submitting give SC/FSD cooldown (So you cant submit and FSD/SC instantly - same penalty as if you LOST the interdiction)
WHY: There is no reason for anyone to fight an interdiction, it's better to surrender each time - Odd

3) Make High FSD affected by mass lock (So you cant just High FSD away and Mass lock means nothing)
WHY: Mass lock is useless because of this - a whole game play system is made redundant.

4) Make wake scanner instant and automatic (so people cant just log off in the next system instantly) - It might seem overpowered, but right now a frame-shift scanner is useless.
WHY: By the time you've even switched to, used the module - they have already jumped two systems, or logged off. It should follow them in their FSD - or else the module is still dead weight and useless. Good idea but poorly implemented.

5) Remove small weapon damage penalties (should be easy to understand)
WHY: Small ships already do low damage because of small and medium size guns, why penalize even further - it makes them useless in PvP.

Cheers lads
:S

 

[Twelvefield]

Elite came to us from 1984.

Other things from 1984: piano ties. Wham!. "Where's The Beef?". Union Carbide. Robin Leach. Band Aid. Harold Faltermeyer. For that matter, Alex Foley. Shermer High. Say Say Say. The Pontiac Fiero. Ministry. Karma Chameleon. Great Balls. Marvel's Generic Comic Book. For our British friends, let' s throw in Ingsoc.

Not everything from 1984 has made it into the new millennium with any grace at all.

 

[Daffan]

Elite came to us from 1984.

Other things from 1984: piano ties. Wham!. "Where's The Beef?". Union Carbide. Robin Leach. Band Aid. Harold Faltermeyer. For that matter, Alex Foley. Shermer High. Say Say Say. The Pontiac Fiero. Ministry. Karma Chameleon. Great Balls. Marvel's Generic Comic Book. For our British friends, let' s throw in Ingsoc.

Not everything from 1984 has made it into the new millennium with any grace at all.

How do i

oh

yes

 

[Quineloe]

A hyperjump takes around 30 seconds of tunnel vision. If it's really taking you this long to wakescan, you could also improve. However, even if you instantly high jumped after someone, there is no way at all you could possibly interdict him if he immediately kills thrust and stops to log out.


You talk big, about "fixing PVP", but all your suggestions seem to be a one-sided buff to hunting players who don't want to fight.

 

[bamber]

two I tend to agree with
.
Point 1 - log out timer, a bit more complicated but base on your best rank, 15 seconds in a hauler is a problem as you can easily be killed 15 seconds in a lakon 9 in nothing who cares I can survive 15 seconds easy

Point 2 the FSD cool down for submitting to an interdiction needs to be changed as you say its easy to jump away, but again base it on FSD size a D1 drive short cool down - a D6 drive longer an A6 drive longer still

others Im not sure bother me but I would say all points are as vailid for PVE as well as PVP

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Not everything from 1984 has made it into the new millennium with any grace at all.

Though, almost none of the things complained about were in the previous games. These are 21st century features.

1) Logout timer: "log out" in Elite killed your ship and you lost all progress since your last save at a station. In FE2 and FFE you could "save and quit" mid-fight, but you'd be back in the fight again when you reloaded so it was more of an extended pause button.

2) Submitting giving FSD cooldown. In Elite, all ships had factor-infinity inhibition of all other ships. You want to escape a fight, you have to outrun all the other ships, without boost, while they smash your rear shields and hull to dust. Also, you can't fight the interdiction - it automatically succeeds. FE2/FFE were much the same, though without any sort of FSD, and even if you did escape you'd have to fight them again soon.

3) In all previous games you could hyperspace jump away from a fight - but in Elite, your ship only had enough fuel for one maximum range jump, so you got to actually do this at most once and if you got into similar trouble in the second system you were dead - even with fuel scoops, since you came out of hyperspace nowhere near the sun. (By FE2/FFE ships could carry enough surplus fuel to get away with this, and you would only be followed by a dedicated assassin, so this is the one thing that was in a previous game - though the 90s rather than the 80s)

4) The equipment didn't exist in Elite, but in FE2/FFE the wake scanner was instant and automatic

5) Small weapon damage penalties didn't exist in previous versions (though in FE2/FFE it was possible for a big ship to carry so many shields that they regenerated faster than a small ship could possibly damage them)

 

[Psycho Romeo]

On one hand, the very nature of interdiction is to force both players into a situation where they may shoot at one another.
On that same hand, submit hopping is a really bizarre mechanic that almost completely circumvents this.
I don't really see anything substantial on the other hand. Traders are more than capable of defending themselves against anything that doesn't grossly outclass their ship price.

However, I don't agree with the OP with regards to the smaller weapons penalty. It only affects hulls, and it makes perfect sense as to why the mechanic is in place. Smaller caliber bullets do less damage AND can't penetrate thicker hulls as well as larger bullets.

Eagles really shouldn't be bringing down anacondas. Not unless the anaconda lets them.

 

[Colonel North]

two I tend to agree with
.
Point 1 - log out timer, a bit more complicated but base on your best rank, 15 seconds in a hauler is a problem as you can easily be killed 15 seconds in a lakon 9 in nothing who cares I can survive 15 seconds easy

Point 2 the FSD cool down for submitting to an interdiction needs to be changed as you say its easy to jump away, but again base it on FSD size a D1 drive short cool down - a D6 drive longer an A6 drive longer still

others Im not sure bother me but I would say all points are as vailid for PVE as well as PVP

Yep. (8 characters)

 

[persephonius]

A hyperjump takes around 30 seconds of tunnel vision. If it's really taking you this long to wakescan, you could also improve. However, even if you instantly high jumped after someone, there is no way at all you could possibly interdict him if he immediately kills thrust and stops to log out.


You talk big, about "fixing PVP", but all your suggestions seem to be a one-sided buff to hunting players who don't want to fight.

I agree with this as well. It appears that the OP is more concerned with the ability of players to escape after an interdiction that are not equipped to fight. And everyone else that is making comparisons to previous elite games, you are missing one fundamental thing. The previous games were all single player games, it didn't matter if your trader prey died to your interdictions 100% of the time. In elite dangerous, killing another player is potentially a set-back of many hours of work. There should be a genuine means to escape an interdiction. And to the OP, interdicting and killing someone that does not engage you in combat and attempts to flee is not PvP. About the submission to an interdiction not triggering a FSD cooldown. Well, it is not really the submission that avoids the long cooldown, it is actually that they were moving less than 1Mm/s that avoids the cooldown. It is the same with emergency drops out of supercruise, if you do it above 1Mm/s, you get the long cooldown and if you do it below 1Mm/s you avoid the long cooldown. It is a consistent mechanic. I believe that you can indeed complete an interdiction on someone and cause the long cooldown even if they do submit (and I have experienced this first hand), you just have to complete the interdiction before they get below 1Mm/s, which might be easier the faster your target is moving? There is a reason to attempt to fight the interdiction as well, and it is situational. If you are say a pirate in something small, and you know that a fer-de-lance is interdicting you for example, submitting won't help you much due to the mass lock factor of the FDL, so attempting to fight the interdiction will be beneficial to you if you succeed.

 

[Colonel North]

I agree with this as well. It appears that the OP is more concerned with the ability of players to escape after an interdiction that are not equipped to fight. And everyone else that is making comparisons to previous elite games, you are missing one fundamental thing. The previous games were all single player games, it didn't matter if your trader prey died to your interdictions 100% of the time. In elite dangerous, killing another player is potentially a set-back of many hours of work. There should be a genuine means to escape an interdiction. And to the OP, interdicting and killing someone that does not engage you in combat and attempts to flee is not PvP. About the submission to an interdiction not triggering a FSD cooldown. Well, it is not really the submission that avoids the long cooldown, it is actually that they were moving less than 1Mm/s that avoids the cooldown. It is the same with emergency drops out of supercruise, if you do it above 1Mm/s, you get the long cooldown and if you do it below 1Mm/s you avoid the long cooldown. It is a consistent mechanic. I believe that you can indeed complete an interdiction on someone and cause the long cooldown even if they do submit (and I have experienced this first hand), you just have to complete the interdiction before they get below 1Mm/s, which might be easier the faster your target is moving? There is a reason to attempt to fight the interdiction as well, and it is situational. If you are say a pirate in something small, and you know that a fer-de-lance is interdicting you for example, submitting won't help you much due to the mass lock factor of the FDL, so attempting to fight the interdiction will be beneficial to you if you succeed.

I would also agree. Pirates in open play would not ultimately not benefit if it were too easy and all the traders moved to solo!

 

[Cmdr Kurnek]

There is quite a problem in PvP combat. Not the balance of individual weapons or ships - but as a whole mechanic of PvP.

There is a serious disparity between game play systems, some that make almost no sense - and some that have no balance. Here are some problems with solution, feel free to pick apart... if you can.


1) Make logout timer 60 seconds (If you've engaged in combat - you cant log out for 60 seconds).
WHY: It makes the frameshift scanner useless because it takes longer than 15 seconds to even use the module.

2) Make submitting give SC/FSD cooldown (So you cant submit and FSD/SC instantly - same penalty as if you LOST the interdiction)
WHY: There is no reason for anyone to fight an interdiction, it's better to surrender each time - Odd

3) Make High FSD affected by mass lock (So you cant just High FSD away and Mass lock means nothing)
WHY: Mass lock is useless because of this - a whole game play system is made redundant.

4) Make wake scanner instant and automatic (so people cant just log off in the next system instantly) - It might seem overpowered, but right now a frame-shift scanner is useless.
WHY: By the time you've even switched to, used the module - they have already jumped two systems, or logged off. It should follow them in their FSD - or else the module is still dead weight and useless. Good idea but poorly implemented.

5) Remove small weapon damage penalties (should be easy to understand)
WHY: Small ships already do low damage because of small and medium size guns, why penalize even further - it makes them useless in PvP.

Cheers lads
:S

Agreed, as 1-3 are effectively exploits, and 4/5 should have worked like that from the start.

 

[Jockey79]

You talk big, about "fixing PVP", but all your suggestions seem to be a one-sided buff to hunting players who don't want to fight.

Erm, daft question - but if someone wants to avoid any sort of fight, why are they in open to start with?

I see people moan and moan on these boards about being killed or constant interdictions, people behaving in a way they don't like and all sorts of other complaints.
All things that are valid styles of play in open.

That is why, Solo and Private Groups are also a part of the game, if you want to avoid something - you can, and there is nothing anyone else can do about it.
Seems a bit odd to me, if someone puts themselves in front of other players guns, to moan if the other player shoots them or hunts them down - when you don't have to do it to start with.

 

[Alex Brentnall]

Erm, daft question - but if someone wants to avoid any sort of fight, why are they in open to start with?

I see people moan and moan on these boards about being killed or constant interdictions, people behaving in a way they don't like and all sorts of other complaints.
All things that are valid styles of play in open.

That is why, Solo and Private Groups are also a part of the game, if you want to avoid something - you can, and there is nothing anyone else can do about it.
Seems a bit odd to me, if someone puts themselves in front of other players guns, to moan if the other player shoots them or hunts them down - when you don't have to do it to start with.

I enjoy the interaction, seeing busy stations and being pirated. If someone comms me saying "Yaharr, prepare to be boarded" before they interdict me I'll stop and drop cargo since I know they arn't just looking for target practice.

Otherwise I use the submit and run procedure since even a fully upgraded trade ship has no chance against a PVP aligned ship.


What I would like more than anything is some way of knowing if the person interdicting me is a raving psycho out to kill people with no defences for his massive ego, or a pirate enjoying some interaction and adding life to the game.

Edit: the crazies looking for target practice have their place in the game but I'd enjoy it more if they were the 1% not the 75% it feels like at the moment.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

I don't agree with 5, the weapons penalty isn't that much of an issue. Small Ships are supposed to be weak against larger ships. The penalty only effects weapons vs hull anyway.

You talk big, about "fixing PVP", but all your suggestions seem to be a one-sided buff to hunting players who don't want to fight.

All these fixes will also help bounty hunters catch pirates. All of these things make it easy for pirates to escape justice. Without any of these being fixed, it's going to be next to impossible to catch a pirate.

What I would like more than anything is some way of knowing if the person interdicting me is a raving psycho out to kill people with no defences for his massive ego, or a pirate enjoying some interaction and adding life to the game.

It's not 100% for certain, but if you get a message asking you to "stop and be scanned" it's usually a pirate. Most psycho killers don't waste time sending any messages, it gets in the way of their killing.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

I'm having this argument in another thread as well.

When you sign up for open, you consent to everything open has to offer. The good, the bad, the psycho.

There are some really good alternatives to these sometimes unpleasant situations if this is a little too much for you - mobius, solo, or just running around with something a little more potent than D rated modules. Paying attention to what's behind you helps, as you can take evasive maneuvers when someone is aligning with you.

If you're in a hauler and you get successfully interdicted by an FDL, what on earth makes you think you deserve any opportunity to escape? This is like starting a firefight in a station - you are just toast. Welcome to ED.

 

[Alex Brentnall]

I'm having this argument in another thread as well.

When you sign up for open, you consent to everything open has to offer. The good, the bad, the psycho.

There are some really good alternatives to these sometimes unpleasant situations if this is a little too much for you - mobius, solo, or just running around with something a little more potent than D rated modules. Paying attention to what's behind you helps, as you can take evasive maneuvers when someone is aligning with you.

If you're in a hauler and you get successfully interdicted by an FDL, what on earth makes you think you deserve any opportunity to escape? This is like starting a firefight in a station - you are just toast. Welcome to ED.

Fair comment but if your playing as a pirate and every single ship you encounter is an A rated combat ship then you're gonna have a bad time too. Welcome to Elite empty more like.
I accept that I signed up for it and im not saying the psychos are wrong. All I want is a bit of advanced warning to allow me to decide how to respond...

And I do accept it up until the point people start talking about forcing people into Open for community goals and powerplay and everything which happens quite regularly.

FYI: I have been on both sides of the interdiction game and an A rated T7/T9 has no chance even against a lowly Vulture, bye bye thrusters, hello rebuy screen.


Edit: As I said before I accept there are people out for target practice, its just after 3x 8mil rebuy screens within 2 hours play you start to feel the scale is tilted somewhat.

 

[persephonius]

I agree with this as well. It appears that the OP is more concerned with the ability of players to escape after an interdiction that are not equipped to fight. And everyone else that is making comparisons to previous elite games, you are missing one fundamental thing. The previous games were all single player games, it didn't matter if your trader prey died to your interdictions 100% of the time. In elite dangerous, killing another player is potentially a set-back of many hours of work. There should be a genuine means to escape an interdiction. And to the OP, interdicting and killing someone that does not engage you in combat and attempts to flee is not PvP. About the submission to an interdiction not triggering a FSD cooldown. Well, it is not really the submission that avoids the long cooldown, it is actually that they were moving less than 1Mm/s that avoids the cooldown. It is the same with emergency drops out of supercruise, if you do it above 1Mm/s, you get the long cooldown and if you do it below 1Mm/s you avoid the long cooldown. It is a consistent mechanic. I believe that you can indeed complete an interdiction on someone and cause the long cooldown even if they do submit (and I have experienced this first hand), you just have to complete the interdiction before they get below 1Mm/s, which might be easier the faster your target is moving? There is a reason to attempt to fight the interdiction as well, and it is situational. If you are say a pirate in something small, and you know that a fer-de-lance is interdicting you for example, submitting won't help you much due to the mass lock factor of the FDL, so attempting to fight the interdiction will be beneficial to you if you succeed.

I am quoting myself here. I have just tested a few things to double check a few things that I stated above. It is possible to trigger the long cooldown when your target submits to an interdiction, but when trying this out again now, the success of this was not that consistent, and it did not correspond to the 1 Mm/s speed. I failed to avoid the long cooldown a few times by submitting late, and once by perhaps too much speed. Though I did succeed in avoiding the long cooldown travelling at speeds around 10 Mm/s when the interdiction completed.
Anyways, I will post a few ideas I have about interdicting players and ensuring you have the best chance to trigger the long cooldown. If you are stalking a trader in a particular system, just watch what he does for a few of his approaches to a station. When I am trading, I try to use the gravity well of the planet close to the station I am approaching to achieve a greater deceleration, I accelerate past the planet, and the planet slows me down and I can approach a station much faster this way. If you see this behaviour, interdicting a player as they accelerate towards the planet can cause them to get too close to the planet triggering an emergency drop even if they submit, and they will have the long cooldown. This is a lot easier if the station they are approaching is near a planet with rings.

 

[CMDRKNac]

No suggestion about changing: P2P nature of the code, client-manipulation etc. (and ban all the cheaters who gained billions exploiting or cheating so losing ships doesn't matter to them).
No suggestion about nerfing SCB to oblivion (this is what actually makes smaller ships, or any ships for a matter of fact, redundant).
No suggestion about increasing repair costs again (unnerfing them), so hull damage matters even if you do not kill.
No suggestion about making security of a system matter (this may improve in 1.3).

I don't see how the OP "fixes pvp".

P.S: Something that cannot be fixed until my first point is addressed, so never.

 

[ianw]

I don't agree with 5, the weapons penalty isn't that much of an issue. Small Ships are supposed to be weak against larger ships. The penalty only effects weapons vs hull anyway.


All these fixes will also help bounty hunters catch pirates. All of these things make it easy for pirates to escape justice. Without any of these being fixed, it's going to be next to impossible to catch a pirate.

It's not 100% for certain, but if you get a message asking you to "stop and be scanned" it's usually a pirate. Most psycho killers don't waste time sending any messages, it gets in the way of their killing.

These things would work for the pirate v bounty hunter PVP mechanic - they tend to fly more or less equivalent ships with PVP loadouts and are both looking for trouble.

Where it breaks down is the pirate v trader PVP interaction and I just don't see how you make that interaction work in a way that's fun for both parties.

If things were tightened up as per the OP then it would simply be;

Pirate see trader and interdicts them - trade ships seem to have a disadvantage in the interdiction fight.

then

Trader has no choice but to drop exactly what the pirate wants or the pirate destroys them. That doesn't sound like much fun from the trader's point of view.

And that's before we start talking about pirate wings.

In other words the trader has no real option to escape let alone fight back until they get to an Anaconda at which point with the current mechanics they can survive and escape even a wing of 4 (which is where I'm at now).

Unless the pirate and trader ships have almost identical combat capabilities - the system design is always going to favour either the defender or that aggressor, can't think of any way around that for the pirate v trader scenario.

 

[persephonius]

No suggestion about changing: P2P nature of the code, client-manipulation etc. (and ban all the cheaters who gained billions exploiting or cheating so losing ships doesn't matter to them).
No suggestion about nerfing SCB to oblivion (this is what actually makes smaller ships, or any ships for a matter of fact, redundant).
No suggestion about increasing repair costs again (unnerfing them), so hull damage matters even if you do not kill.
No suggestion about making security of a system matter (this may improve in 1.3).

I don't see how the OP "fixes pvp".

P.S: Something that cannot be fixed until my first point is addressed, so never.

I won't comment on your first point, as it is referring to illegitimate gameplay due to cheating. But about actually balancing genuine gameplay:

With regards to shield cell banks. Why do you believe that small ships should be in any way balanced with larger ships? This is not a theme-park MMO where classes need to be balanced so ideally any particular class should be competitive with any other class. Imbalance between ships in elite dangerous is perfectly justified. Nerfing SCB to oblivion is essentially removing them... Doing this will have a dramatic effect on the ability of ships such as the Python and Anaconda to be played as tanks. In group PvP, I believe that is one of the most popular uses of these 2 ships, and I have seen many posts indicating that the python and anaconda in group PvP cannot really serve much other purpose then this tank/support style of action, and I agree with this. Yes, there is imbalance between larger more expensive ships and smaller cheaper ships, and it should be this way. And more to the point, an Anaconda will not likely kill anyone in a one on one confrontation unless that person didn't care about loosing and wanted to stick around and fight for the fun of it. I have also seen many videos of players successfully destroying the ships of players flying pythons who were in smaller ships such as the viper and the asp. In my opinion, the balance in PvP is more about defining what is considered desirable comparisons between specific modules/weapons and achieving intended targets for things such as time-to-kill. This doesn't mean that a specific ship shouldn't make another ship seem redundant when they meet, I believe that this most definitely should happen.