That's kinda the opposide of what happened. The PvP hub was a community-led effort in San Tu that was pretty popular, the system was an anarchy, then another group entirely picked out the system as the perfect spot for their non-anarchy minor faction regardless of what people were already doing with the system.
[Suggestion] Open only 'district'
Could it be stagnant because of the people reasons inhabiting it? Perhaps certain attitudes so brazenly portrayed right here?
I remember from grade school a particular “game” that almost got to be popular - it involved carrying a rubber band with you and covertly snapping someone with it. After taking a few snapping I opted to play along, I just happed to use two friends and a rubber bungee cord.
The game lost its appeal after that.
It might well be that Open has lost its appeal in a very similar manner - no one really wants to be someone else’s source of entertainment.
Add to that that it is now summer time and some people actually do things like “go outside”, and it’s little wonder the target pool is shrinking.
And we already have an “Open Only Ghetto”, it’s called CQC.
Lestat
Banned
No your idea will kill the game. You can't have one without the other.
I see now - thanks.
Kinda like / support the idea of an Open Only district to provide a guaranteed location for PvP. Fail to see why it needs an advantage on prices/missions, though.
Heck ... why not declare an all out Warzone District where it’s “game on” between Empire and Federation, lock those systems to Open and award Combat Bonds for all kills within those systems, with bonus awards for CMDR kills rather than NPCs. Could even reduce rebuys in those systems (Empire or Fed subsidising your expenses in order to further their war) to make it more palatable for PvP newbies?
Heck ... why not declare an all out Warzone District where it’s “game on” between Empire and Federation, lock those systems to Open and award Combat Bonds for all kills within those systems, with bonus awards for CMDR kills rather than NPCs. Could even reduce rebuys in those systems (Empire or Fed subsidising your expenses in order to further their war) to make it more palatable for PvP newbies?
why does the war zone have to be strictly PVP? I like the idea of a war zone with the federation and empire duking it out, and why not throw some alliance systems in there just trying to survive. FDev could copy some meta ship builds for pvp and give them to NPCs in the area so players could practice against similar builds before going all in on the PVP front.
I haven't looked over the proposed rules but I think having a region that is open only is a good idea. There are lots of potential pitfalls but I think other players not wanting meaningful PvP to have a place in the game isn't a good reason not to try to make it work.
Some of the bones of my old 'Meaningful PvP proposal' thread may be of some use, I hope you can make this viable OP
Some of the bones of my old 'Meaningful PvP proposal' thread may be of some use, I hope you can make this viable OP
lol shock horror, PvE folks are against the idea.. who would have guessed.
Sure we can keep all the ganks at high-profile systems if that's what you prefer...
No actual arguments then, just salt.
At the moment PvP and PvE share the galaxy equally, what you are trying to do is divide the galaxy up so that PvP lovers, the acknowledged smaller group, get a larger share of the galaxy. I fly in open in high-profile systems all the time, at least the gankers have a chance of getting me.
Now even Blind Pew could see the flaws in your logic, and accusing people opposing it of just being salty doesn't address the major flaw, which is that gankers don't go to high profile systems to undertake combat in their uber killing machines against fellow similarly equipped players, that's the last thing they want, what they want is easy targets! So we would still have all the gankers hanging around the high profile systems because they simply wouldn't care about your PvP only area, no change there, but now we would have that really small subset of PvP players hanging around in their walled garden instead of out there taking on the gankers in the high profile systems where they should be.
I can't see that being an improvement. Like I said, if PvP get a special PvP playground, so should PvE players and all the high profile systems at least should be made PvE only.
Not convinced this plays out the way the OP thinks it should.
Those who don't like being ganked aren't going to go there.
The gankers won't find their prey there, so they won't be there either.
Those who want consensual PvP already have their pick of any system in Open to set up shop and get their kicks.
All that happens here is that a set of systems get shut down for a portion of the player base for no good reason.
Those who don't like being ganked aren't going to go there.
The gankers won't find their prey there, so they won't be there either.
Those who want consensual PvP already have their pick of any system in Open to set up shop and get their kicks.
All that happens here is that a set of systems get shut down for a portion of the player base for no good reason.
For the record, I don't PvP because I don't enjoy PvP. It's boring. However, I am not opposed to those who enjoy PvP, however, neither this particular notion nor Riverside's proposal offer much to make PvP either engaging or meaningful.
Kill Leaderboards are far too easily manipulated. Blocked off regions of space aren't particularly productive, especially if they're otherwise inhabited regions of space.
A more meaningful, balanced, and productive use of something like this would be PvP Combat Zones, much like our current Conflict Zones, but without NPC's. Within these zones, Power Play PvP'er can engage with each other until they're sick of it, with merits and vouchers awarded for their efforts. The grand objective: to hold the zone until the end of a Power Play cycle, for a bonus of Command Credit at the end of the cycle.
To prevent people from simply waiting until minutes before the end of a cycle, a threshold value would need to be established, where X number of merits must be earned through combat to push the control value of the zone towards one side or the other.
What about non Power Play PvP'er? Well... they can find meaning in the other aspect of these zones - a special bonus that lasts one Power Play cycle (Thursday - Thursday). That bonus will vary from Zone to Zone, and week to week. It may take the form of a Market Discount, Trading Bonus, Reduction in Rebuy costs, Reduction in Repair costs, Reduced Transfer Costs, caches of G5 materials, and so on. Of course, only one bonus at a time can be active, and controlling multiple zones results in receiving the bonus from the last zone participated in, with the bonus (and control) of another zone going to the 2nd ranked player from that zone.
Obviously these zones would have no value to players in Solo mode, as there simply would be no one to compete against. For Private Group players, they may also opt to engage in PvP play, but the majority of Private Group players play in Private Groups because they are not interested in PvP - which makes Open Play the only real viable option for those looking to engage with other players in such a manner.
These Zones would function like pockets of Anarchy Space, or Haz RES areas, where there is no system authority or ATF response in the zone. Power Play C&P rules would apply within these zones as well, so that opposing powers can butcher each other free of the standard C&P rules. Non-Power Players can expect regular C&P enforcement when they exit these zones, but are otherwise free to engage under the same "protection" within the zone.
See, this isn't hard - it's now meaningful, though harder to abjectly manipulate, has an appeal for both Power Players and Non-Power Players, encourages Open Mode play, and does not "lock out" regions of space.
Kill Leaderboards are far too easily manipulated. Blocked off regions of space aren't particularly productive, especially if they're otherwise inhabited regions of space.
A more meaningful, balanced, and productive use of something like this would be PvP Combat Zones, much like our current Conflict Zones, but without NPC's. Within these zones, Power Play PvP'er can engage with each other until they're sick of it, with merits and vouchers awarded for their efforts. The grand objective: to hold the zone until the end of a Power Play cycle, for a bonus of Command Credit at the end of the cycle.
To prevent people from simply waiting until minutes before the end of a cycle, a threshold value would need to be established, where X number of merits must be earned through combat to push the control value of the zone towards one side or the other.
What about non Power Play PvP'er? Well... they can find meaning in the other aspect of these zones - a special bonus that lasts one Power Play cycle (Thursday - Thursday). That bonus will vary from Zone to Zone, and week to week. It may take the form of a Market Discount, Trading Bonus, Reduction in Rebuy costs, Reduction in Repair costs, Reduced Transfer Costs, caches of G5 materials, and so on. Of course, only one bonus at a time can be active, and controlling multiple zones results in receiving the bonus from the last zone participated in, with the bonus (and control) of another zone going to the 2nd ranked player from that zone.
Obviously these zones would have no value to players in Solo mode, as there simply would be no one to compete against. For Private Group players, they may also opt to engage in PvP play, but the majority of Private Group players play in Private Groups because they are not interested in PvP - which makes Open Play the only real viable option for those looking to engage with other players in such a manner.
These Zones would function like pockets of Anarchy Space, or Haz RES areas, where there is no system authority or ATF response in the zone. Power Play C&P rules would apply within these zones as well, so that opposing powers can butcher each other free of the standard C&P rules. Non-Power Players can expect regular C&P enforcement when they exit these zones, but are otherwise free to engage under the same "protection" within the zone.
See, this isn't hard - it's now meaningful, though harder to abjectly manipulate, has an appeal for both Power Players and Non-Power Players, encourages Open Mode play, and does not "lock out" regions of space.
Simple fix. Just go into Group or Solo in GankersVille. And Open everywhere else.
Doesn't even require effort.
LOL the PVP community is as active as ever. Just head on over the Shinrarta Dezhra, Deciat, Cubeo…. to name a few.
Oh honorable PVPers... you can engage the gankers in a little tete-a-tete to your hearts content....
Everyone wins.
A dozen or so systems is a larger share of billions? alright..
The response I was responding to was salty, not every response. Some players want easy targets yes.. but the majority of the PvP community want decent fights/piracy/bounty hunting/warfare based on organic play, not necessarily organised fights against the same players all the time. That gets old really fast. - hence why the best PvPers keep quitting the game.
Saying those who engage in ganking only want easy targets is just plain wrong, most of the players who were in the top of the Distant Ganks 2 kill list were pretty much some of the best PvPers in the game (PvP league winners etc). They just do it because they know it'll get an amusing, salty reaction, doesn't mean they are fail-gankers (low skilled player killers).
I'm not saying it would stop all ganking outside the zone, of course it wouldn't - and it shouldn't. But PvP groups spend every week all charging around to the next hotspot to see who's about. Its pretty dull to be like 'any action in Deciat? Not right now, lets try Shinrarta.. no, let's go to Wyrd ' - I'd rather the PvP be happening over more interesting things like piracy, bounty hunting or territory control. An open only area with a high price/material/reward drop rate would be busy all the time, no doubt at all.
The entire galaxy is a PvE playground, where the threat of PvP can be entirely removed with a single button press. I support the idea of more admin tools for private groups, but any open PvE mode or zone would become a toxic dumpster fire of indirect griefing within hours. Least with an open only district, players would understand the risk they would be taking by going there, if they get killed, well.. hard-luck. Also the 'you guys got x so we deserve y' argument is not valid - open play has been starved of any exclusive features since the beginning and PvE has been given truck loads of development (trade/exploration/mining improvements, Thargoid/Guardian features etc).
Currently the only incentive to play open is the potential encounters with other players, this appeals mainly to combat-orientated players so we end up with an imbalance. The Division understand why a PvP-focused area of the game (the Dark Zone) needs to offer higher rewards/loot, it's an obvious concept - make the risk of hostile player encounters worth taking for those who would otherwise choose the path of least resistance. This stimulates activities like piracy & bounty hunting which rely on there being traders/miners/pirates in open.
LOL.. Yeah it's so active the best PvP players are quitting all the time due to the game being stagnant.
You underestimate the appeal of high credit/material rewards, non-combat players would definitely go into an open only area if it meant they're credits per hour increased by a large margin, or gathering materials was quicker.
I've been playing in open since the beginning and have been part of the PvP community ever since, I understand how everyone in that community thinks and what they are looking for. Namely high traffic areas because that's where either 1) most piracy targets are (miners/traders) 2) most outlaw targets are (pirates/gankers etc) 3) most PvP targets are (i.e other combat players for duels) 4) Most gank targets are (anybody who happens to be there). 'Any systems' are usually 0 traffic dead areas, that's why everyone flocks to Shinrarta and Deciat. An open district would be busy all the time as long as the rewards in the area were sufficient.
I find it quite sad that in a galaxy of billions of systems, PvE voices still would oppose a small cluster of currently unused systems being locked to open. The only reason to really oppose the concept is sour grapes really.
Yes it's a 'gamey' idea, but ED is a game (gasp), one that currently let's down open/PvP players in a number of ways. It's no more gamey than the Pilots Federation District or Telepresence to name a couple of things.
Credits, I doubt. Painite mining can get well over 100 million/hour without particular optimisation (and probably over 500 million/hour if fully optimised). Sure, the open-only zone might be offering 1 billion/hour earnings, but no-one actually needs that sort of money - at least, not as a continuous income stream. (and those earnings presume that you don't get killed or even delayed by the PvPers - far lower if you do)
Materials maybe, but again, there's only so many materials most people need, and there's lots of grind-relog-and-trade spots which already provide them in bulk with no risk or skill requirement ... and again, it's not "how many materials can you theoretically get from X" but "how many materials can you actually get from X while being shot at"
(You also don't necessarily want to set up your "PvP zone" to appeal to min-maxers, unless slowly wearing down healing-beam Cutters with phasing is your idea of a good time)
This isn't my experience of Open at all. The majority of players I see are not taking part in combat activities and certainly aren't set up for a high-end fight. The vast majority of encounters I've had have been social or cooperative rather than competitive - even with the people who are flying PvP-capable combat ships. Basically, the same reason people play PG, but with a much larger pool of people to meet.
Obviously if you hang around Shinrarta or Deciat in a combat ship looking for targets appropriate to your play style, your personal experience of Open may well be very different - but if what I see wasn't closer to the general case, the low-skill gankers really wouldn't be getting many kills, because most of their potential targets would be combat-oriented.
Having PvP happen over piracy or bounty hunting would need major changes in the basic combat model and economic model to make those viable professions in the first place. Can't do much of either - Open-only or not - if your target can just high-wake before you can even attach a limpet/knock a ring off their shields.
If you can't scrape together enough people as a (broad) Open PvP community to have consistent action in just three systems, you have far bigger problems than the precise nature of the game setup, or whether people can also visit those systems in other modes.
Distant Worlds 2 got several thousand players together for five months ... with virtually no in-game incentives, and certainly way less money or materials than they'd have got by staying at home. Distant Worlds 1 got a thousand for a similar period. Far more obscure exploration expeditions which didn't get even the minor support Frontier gave to Distant Worlds have got hundreds of participants taking part for a couple of months ... no "expedition-only" permit locks required.
If you can't get, say, a hundred PvPers together for a few weeks to have a big territory-and-BGS war in Open over some otherwise quiet system, your problem is really not that people might also be visiting that system in other modes.
But why would they quit?
The gankers are also PVPers, albeit those looking for easy targets.
Just take them on, and you have what you were looking for in the first place. PVP action.
In effect your group of true blue PVPers would become real bounty hunters and basically protectors of other PVE players.
Wouldn't that serve your purpose? You get your PVP action, and do the community some good while you're at it.
1. No it wasn't salt - it was calling out the proposal for what it is: a desire to draw more players in to be "content" for PvP players.
2. All gankers are gankers and to justify the deliberate spoiling of people's efforts to join together in an "exploration" of many thousands of kylies is just indicative of the mindset.
3. Oh dear - are we seeing that the proposal is to draw in non-combat builds - surprise surprise (not).
4. The nub of the matter - all you want is a honey-trap to lure in non-combat players to be your content.
/ thread
Do you know how piracy works? What's wrong with a high-risk / high reward area of the galaxy? Nobody would be forced to go there..
...and it clearly is salt, you're dumping it all over the thread.
So the result would be that non combat players are subjected to combat.
And the PvPers are provided with easy targets. While you claimed
Which means your idea backfires. When non combat players are lured into the district, they won't provide you with decent fights/piracy/bounty hunting/warfare based on organic play, but rather the easy targets you claim aren't wanted.
Your idea would possibly mean an influx of available easy targets. Not an increase in skilled PvPers facing each other. And since you mentioned "the majority of the PvP community want decent fights/piracy/bounty hunting/warfare based on organic play" your idea won't make that happen. The issue you have is that the PvP community is a small community. Even with the excellent way they assist newcomers. You will always be fighting the same CMDRs over and over again if you want skilled opponents. And now you've created a "district" so it's not only the same CMDRs, it's also the same location every time.
If it's organic gameplay you want, the better solution in my opinion, is to add a military aspect to Powerplay. Where battles between Federation Pilots have influence in the Powerplay universe. Where military actions can be countered by civilian actions and vice versa. Where PvP is central, instead of reactive. Where those in Open who desire PvP are pitted against those in Open who desire PvP. This will still have you encounter the same CMDRs probably, but your locations and objectives will be more varied.
Another idea I prefer over that is a civil war between Imps and Feds. There's a lot of allegiance for your own, and contempt for the opposition already there and there's the ships to match. That would bring an element of emotion into the mix. The war would be driven by PvP. Logistically it could be assisted by PvE, but that would only serve to help/hinder, not decide.
Both these ideas I feel improve the PvP setting, make it organic, creates challenging PvP objectives and as a result might lead to an influx of PvE players into the PvP style of play, since they are involved.
Cheers,
Ziggy.
... but you want to lure them there. So no it isn't salt it is just calling-you out for what you are after - people to be your content. Attempting to insult me with the "salt" nonsense just shows your weak argument. You want a honeytrap area - I say that is what it is - you try to insult me to downplay my remarks - doesn't detract from those remarks' veracity.
As others have said too - if you want PvP - go organise some PvP players, don't expect non-PvP builds to be happy for your engineered pirate vessel to overpower them with ease.
Last edited: