Suggestion: Hardcore Mode

[Fizzatron]

So this idea came to me quite a while back, probably as a result of the problems of ganking etc.. were being discussed in the elite dangerous subreddit.

It's kind of simple really; FDev have the ability to run concurrent servers, though of course not for free etc.. so my thought was to have a dedicated server that basically is as it states, a hardcore mode. Your Commander dies, everything goes with it.

The first thought is that it's a terrible idea as all early gamers will get ganked non-stop, but it actually could work the other way around as well. In a hardcore mode, who has the most to lose? The highly engineered guy. I could see the possibility that for someone like that, combat would really feel dangerous when everything is on the line. Combat logging obviously would be treated as death evasion, so back to a new commander, zero balance and sidewinder it is for you.

It could be a fun side or main mode for those who want to take more risks and also who like to clear their commander every once in a while. It would settle all the "you're a hologram in a cockpit chair" stuff too. Maybe make the mode the "PowerPlay" mode only?

Throwing it out there, feel free to ignore, say it's the worst idea ever, or spitball. Not sure if it's been suggested before, it probably has I would imagine. Thanks for reading, o7

 

[Chrystoph]

Easily solved, if you die, wipe your save and start over.

 

[Gwyther]

An ironman mode would be kinda cool. Like you say, it really would give a sence of being Dangerous due to possibly losing everything.

 

[Para Handy]

Some of us have played ironman mode for years (clear save on destruction).

EDIT - though I have to admit I got fed up re-qualifying engineers so recently I have tried playing "plastic-man" mode - destruction means taking the freewinder - no insurance claims. It feels like cheating at the moment but I have only done it a couple of times, maybe I'll be able to live with it, or maybe revert to ironman, which feels much more satisfying.

 

[Gwyther]

I'm going to clear my save anyway once Odyssey is out for the PS4. I may then play in ironman mode for a while.

 

[Fizzatron]

Easily solved, if you die, wipe your save and start over.

That would solve individual role playing though trying that in the main game with gankers who aren't having to play by those rules would suck, I imagine.

 

[Chrystoph]

That would solve individual role playing though trying that in the main game with gankers who aren't having to play by those rules would suck, I imagine.

It would, of necessity, be opt in, so that, whatever your intentions, would make it seem unlikely.

 

[Fizzatron]

It would, of necessity, be opt in, so that, whatever your intentions, would make it seem unlikely.

Sorry, could you be clearer?

 

[Chrystoph]

Sorry, could you be clearer?

Frontier would have to give you the option to join,or not, Hardcore; the odds of Gank/Grief oriented players doing so is unlikely.

 

[Ettanin]

This will backfire simply for the endurance very special griefers/gankers have to make people suffer. Once they are fully engineered, they will do all they can to limit the numbers reaching the same level of power. Or else they eventually have no victims, or worse, become the victim.

If there are ways to make people suffer, they will be used, no matter how hard they are to reach.

Therefore, while an ironman mode in itself is not a bad idea, it is not the solution to limit/eliminate unfair and nasty forms of PvP.

 

[Misty_Dark]

What would the griefer really risk?

If they have put the effort in to get their killing machine completed with all the needed engineering! Then unless you run a comparable ship, that can challenge them, but instead is doing some cargo runs in your Type 7 or something else not focused on pure combat, then what would the risk be for the griefer?


And since the griefer is in a combat focused ship, they are very likely going to get away from any fight that they could loose, as they should have plenty of time to high wake away before their shields drops.


I do get that the an ironman server sounds enticing, until you realise that players are not stupid, and most players will reduce the risk, so any dangerous opposition, they will ofcourse avoid or only engage when they have the upper hand, like out number the target... If you would have to loose all that time for your ship etc, then why would you willingly go out and risk it? for what really? fame and glory? in a game where PvP is far from the main selling point.

As for the PvP aspects of this game, there are numerous design issues making this even worse, as what happens if a player combat log, not menu log, combat log. and if you say, kill them, then what about, I can force you to "combat log", since I was the instance master? and we go on with all the issues the current game design have on this.

But if we remove other players from the ironman challenge, and the main goal is to go up against the environment, ie PvE, then the already mentioned solution about self deleting the save when you dies works just fine, and if the game for some reasons messes up, and you find it unfair, you do not have to delete your save, and you do not have to involve customer support for making a case about why your ironman save needs to be restored... And this way of thinking can now be applied to when you feel that you got griefed on.. so you can on your own do this, without having to cave in to griefers, and play your ironman in whatever game you want, and have your own set of rules for what accounts for you dying (reset save) or be treated as a miss hap, like you had a bad dream (Think TV series Dallas Dream season)...

 

[here_it_comes]

That would solve individual role playing though trying that in the main game with gankers who aren't having to play by those rules would suck, I imagine.

And you think said gankers would join the ironman server?

It wouldn't make sense for FD to take on the added costs of an additional server mode to let a minority of players do what they can already can do. Do you really need FD to hold your hand and press the delete button for you, "man of iron"?

I say that as a fan of Ironman mode play. Currently near the end of a Superhuman Ironman run of X-Com. But having to unlock Engineers all over? No way. Not even X-Com is that brutal.

o7

 

[Fizzatron]

And since the griefer is in a combat focused ship, they are very likely going to get away from any fight that they could loose, as they should have plenty of time to high wake away before their shields drops.

That's probably the best argument against it honestly, though I wonder... I've seen instagibs of Thargoids, could the same happen to a griefer ship??

 

[Fizzatron]

Once they are fully engineered, they will do all they can to limit the numbers reaching the same level of power. Or else they eventually have no victims, or worse, become the victim.

I think the dynamics of it would have to shake out but the ganker becoming the ganked to me would be the mode working as intended.

 

[Fizzatron]

Frontier would have to give you the option to join,or not, Hardcore; the odds of Gank/Grief oriented players doing so is unlikely.

Thanks, I see what you mean now. The way I'm looking at it is that this mode is a separate galaxy altogether with no back and forth between solo etc.. it's open only, players can choose to start in that galaxy with a new save.

A lot of the objections to it I've read are legitimate especially in regards to gameplay mechanics, so this would require that FDev make some tweaks to how this alter-galaxy works in regards to engineer grind etc.. Lots of people have extra commanders, my thought is that offering this as an option could be a good way to retain long-time players.

 

[Ettanin]

I think the dynamics of it would have to shake out but the ganker becoming the ganked to me would be the mode working as intended.

not quite. It would lead to more Deciat gankers as they will seek to prevent other people from ever dabbing into engineering at all.

 

[Fizzatron]

not quite. It would lead to more Deciat gankers as they will seek to prevent other people from ever dabbing into engineering at all.

I'd be interested to see how it would play out, sure it could work out like that but I also think that there can't be 24/7 gankers patrolling the area, and if there could be, there could be folks who'd wing up to blast through the gauntlet and have some real battles. Implementing a serious level rapid response in system security patrol could also act as a balancing mechanism.

 

[Ettanin]

You see, the implementation of this mode gets more complex and it's more likely to be a niche mode instead of the de facto default, in addition to the fact that it requires dedicated servers, which FDev fervently shirks away from.

I don't think FDev is going to implement it. The potential returns do not satisfy the (financial) effort.

Peer to peer, despite it's side effects and the way the block list is implemented and usable is much cheaper than this idea.

 

[Fizzatron]

You see, the implementation of this mode gets more complex and it's more likely to be a niche mode instead of the de facto default, in addition to the fact that it requires dedicated servers, which FDev fervently shirks away from.

I don't think FDev is going to implement it. The potential returns do not satisfy the (financial) effort.

Peer to peer, despite it's side effects and the way the block list is implemented and usable is much cheaper than this idea.

Understood. I wasn't suggesting it become the main mode though, but I agree that FDev would have to do work on instancing capacity. Though I remember some time back that they posted a job opening for someone who specialized in multiplayer networking, so who knows what that might lead to.