The Open Only Incentive

[Marra Morgan]

Murder-hobos (player-killers) outside of CZ gain notoriety that is never reset until death and death means clearing their save.

I spent my first three years in the game roleplaying as an outlaw. Last year, I decided I would give the other side of the fence a go, and used everything I had learned as a criminal against the criminals as a bounty hunter and vigilante. Poacher turned gamekeeper, if you're familiar with that expression. Your proposal would mean that I, and any player who has done likewise, would have to restart their whole game instead of blazing my own trail as the game intends us to do. Put me down as a "no thanks".

Didnt think that one through, did you?

They never do.

 

[TheMegaTurnip]

I was on breifly earlier after I got up.

Killed someone within four minutes before I'd even finished my coffee.


Sorry guys, but you are most definatly my content.

 

[Velixar]

I say no CenturionPuch your idea fails because it only befits open players. When you post about idea it should help both sides. It could be different ways. Not an I win for one group and a fail for solo. Maybe 50% extra in bounties in solo?

I also find your attitude of other players rude crude and unwanted. I think most people will agree with that.

 

[NeilF]

I say no CenturionPuch your idea fails because it only befits open players. When you post about idea it should help both sides. It could be different ways. Not an I win for one group and a fail for solo. Maybe 50% extra in bounties in solo?

I also find your attitude of other players rude crude and unwanted. I think most people will agree with that.

I'd suggest the incentive to play in OPEN should be more interesting gameplay, not more CRs. We're still trying to make the most of gameplay mechanics and depth from basically 4+ years ago. The game needs to offer and orchestrate more involved PvP (& indeed PvE) gameplay...

Similarly, the penalty for unwanted "illegal" destruction (ie: PvP ganking) should not rely on CRs but more fundamental layers of straight forward punishments, which just ramps up accordingly (logically and sensibly). ie: The opposite of "hot ships & modules" and the like!

 

[CenturionPuch]

I was on breifly earlier after I got up.

Killed someone within four minutes before I'd even finished my coffee.


Sorry guys, but you are most definatly my content.

Sidewinders, the cornerstone of any nutritious breakfast

 

[Para Handy]

.....
We might kill people in game, but we don't advocate for destroying the time and effort of literally THOUSANDS of hours simply because we don't like someones style of play. .............
Save clear? Several REAL weeks.
Do you understand why people think it's a ridicuous suggestion?

Also system wide voice chat? Are you mad?!

........

..........

Didnt think that one through, did you?

..

They never do.

Yes the suicidewinder issue needs consideration and I do think that this can be accommodated by treating the no-fire-zone as a CZ as far as c&p goes. So yes "they do think of that" and know it can be countered.

As for the communications issue - well people that just want to blow up people don't seem to want to talk, is that what the consensus is?

Before "The Engineers" I used to always play in open and enjoyed the interaction with other people (apart from those sidewinders and eagles trying to ram at stations) as I knew how to survive if push came to shove. However since then when playing iron-man it is easy to lose those "Save clear? Several REAL weeks" that is bemoaned above by a random encounter with an uber-engineered PP-weapon equipped player.

I know most people don't care about the number of rebuys but, for example, I have one account that has a single insurance claim, I am trying to ignore it as I don't want to re-do the engineers yet again but it really makes my brain itch to know that there is a "1" there instead of a "0".

Hence my saying that if you facilitated communication (via voice chat) and introduced a real deterrent to PK then more people would actually prefer to be in open.

Oh yes - maybe fix the rubber-banding too.

Meantime I do venture into Open away from hotspots and it is pretty empty, I admit to not doing a CG or visit an Engineer in open in a very long time. If I am in Mobius I see more hollow icons but even then there is hardly an "o7" to be seen, never mind any chat.

 

[Para Handy]

Forgot to cover this:

I spent my first three years in the game roleplaying as an outlaw. Last year, I decided I would give the other side of the fence a go, and used everything I had learned as a criminal against the criminals as a bounty hunter and vigilante. Poacher turned gamekeeper, if you're familiar with that expression. Your proposal would mean that I, and any player who has done likewise, would have to restart their whole game instead of blazing my own trail as the game intends us to do. Put me down as a "no thanks".
.

Eh, no that is not so, you don't incur a murder bounty (and notoriety) for destroying a "wanted" ship. You also don't incur one when in anarchy systems. So no, your objection is incorrect.

 

[Marra Morgan]

Forgot to cover this:




Eh, no that is not so, you don't incur a murder bounty (and notoriety) for destroying a "wanted" ship. You also don't incur one when in anarchy systems. So no, your objection is incorrect.

It's not incorrect.

What's incorrect is your understanding of what I said.

I used to play as an outlaw - in doing so, I racked up a lot of notoriety and bounties.

When I chose to become lawful, I had to serve my time and pay off several millions in order to become "straight".

If your proposal was in place, my character would've been stuck as an outlaw forever, with no means to redeem herself or simply to switch playstyles and try something new, which goes against the game's Blaze-your-own-thing ethos.

Your proposal is too severe and effectively shuts off avenues of gameplay permanently for those who want to try the outlaw playstyle.

Are you following me now?

 

[Old Duck]

Remind me, what's this thread about again?

 

[Para Handy]

It's not incorrect.

What's incorrect is your understanding of what I said.

I used to play as an outlaw - in doing so, I racked up a lot of notoriety and bounties.

When I chose to become lawful, I had to serve my time and pay off several millions in order to become "straight".

If your proposal was in place, my character would've been stuck as an outlaw forever, with no means to redeem herself or simply to switch playstyles and try something new, which goes against the game's Blaze-your-own-thing ethos.

Your proposal is too severe and effectively shuts off avenues of gameplay permanently for those who want to try the outlaw playstyle.

Are you following me now?

I see, my apologies for misinterpreting your post.

Yes indeed, someone who was a player-killer, who incurred murder bounties and notoriety would be forever marked as such until they had a clear save. That is the whole point, as your remarks indicate, it would be a really harsh punishment for people who murdered players. N.B. Outlaws could still operate without repercussions in Anarchy systems and powerplay PvP could be available (using the PP flag in contested systems for example) and of course as much PvP as people want in CZ or organized melees in Anarchies.

At the moment there are no actual severe repercussions for PK murder - notoriety wears off, bounty costs are piddling to billionaires and the ATR are supposedly inadequate. The idea that murder should be ACTUALLY punished, with a penalty that hurts, is what is needed to curtail PK players feeding on non-combat types for "LULZ". Why shoudldn't murderers have to play in Ironman mode?

 

[Para Handy]

Remind me, what's this thread about again?

It was yet another proposal to encourage people into being "content" for PvP players.

 

[Old Duck]

It was yet another proposal to encourage people into being "content" for PvP players.

The irony of this is that if there are so many PvPers, then why don't they just fight each other? Problem solved. Threads like this are almost a confession that PvP is a very niche, small percentage of the overall player base.

Me, I've been "content" playing in Solo for months now. I really have no choice!

 

[Marra Morgan]

I see, my apologies for misinterpreting your post.

Yes indeed, someone who was a player-killer, who incurred murder bounties and notoriety would be forever marked as such until they had a clear save. That is the whole point, as your remarks indicate, it would be a really harsh punishment for people who murdered players. N.B. Outlaws could still operate without repercussions in Anarchy systems and powerplay PvP could be available (using the PP flag in contested systems for example) and of course as much PvP as people want in CZ or organized melees in Anarchies.

At least we understand each other now, and can respectfully and wholly disagree

At the moment there are no actual severe repercussions for PK murder - notoriety wears off, bounty costs are piddling to billionaires and the ATR are supposedly inadequate. The idea that murder should be ACTUALLY punished, with a penalty that hurts, is what is needed to curtail PK players feeding on non-combat types for "LULZ". Why shoudldn't murderers have to play in Ironman mode?

Why shouldn't everyone play in Ironman mode, including explorers and traders? I mean, dead is dead, right? Or does that only count for certain playstyles?

Your enthusiasm to punish a playstyle with a permanent penalty, other than lovely alteration, gives no regard for players choosing how their space-career evolves. There are many in my Squadron and others who have at some point played an outlaw and decided that going lawful would be fun. Fortunately, that choice will always be on the table.


(Token on-topic comment: I don't support what the OP proposes.)

 

[Stewart_]

What is your motivation for wanting more people in Open?

Frontier have repeatedly said all game modes are equal and valid.

As of now there's no point playing in open unless one wants to. If you don't want PvP/ganking, you just go solo or pg and do everything you can do in open be done with it.
But what if there was something in open that everyone wants but you can only get it if you play open?
Here's my idea:
After 4 weeks of open only playing, you get access to "spice" or call it whatever, that gives you a 100-150% FSD boost. There's a module to store it, it gets used up so it needs refills.
This stuff is mined/milked and sold in only one place in the galaxy, that happens to be an anarchy system with a station/city called something like Mos Eisley. It is Dangerous to go there, but you can hire commanders to wing up and escort you in if you're not so sure of yourself in surrounding systems.
Spice is what makes trade faster, exploration more efficient and moving around combat builds less of a pain. Everyone wants it.


Do You?

 

[Para Handy]

At least we understand each other now, and can respectfully and wholly disagree

Why shouldn't everyone play in Ironman mode, including explorers and traders? I mean, dead is dead, right? Or does that only count for certain playstyles?

Your enthusiasm to punish a playstyle with a permanent punishment, other than lovely alteration, gives no regard for players choosing how their space-career evolves. There are many in my Squadron and others who have at some point played an outlaw and decided that going lawful would be fun. Fortunately, that choice will always be on the table.

(Token on-topic comment: I don't support what the OP proposes.)

Of course we can, I totally respect people's views and opinions. The thing is when the variations of the OP proposal get posted most often the ulterior motive of "wanting more players as content" is disavowed or disguised.

The "ironman" solution is just an extreme example of instilling repercussions for player-murder. I put it up not quite as hyperbole but as an example of the extreme punishment that would discourage player-murder. I am not omniscient so no doubt there are alternatives or modifications to the idea, but some form of real repercussion to murdering players for "LULZ" seems to me to be the only way to make Open Play more utilized. Everything else that has been implemented has failed.

It seems to me though, that someone who was a player-killer could accept that to get a clean-slate would require more effort than mucking about until notoriety erodes and then coughing-up to pay off the bounty. I mean it isn't really much more of a hardship than the old days when you just nipped to the next door system and paid off the bounty - notoriety is just "literally" a waste of time.

 

[Para Handy]

The tread is not about PvP. Anyone that can read and has common sense can see that.

Even you admitted it was.

Sidewinders, the cornerstone of any nutritious breakfast

Further, I specifically asked:

"Now instead of attacking people who question why you want more players in Open give us a reasoned argument that doesn't involve those additional players forming a source of some kind of PvP "content" for you. Go on, try - it was your OP so justify it. "


Your answer was just to insult me again.

 

[Para Handy]

............ The system it's sold in would definitely be a PvP hotspot, but players that don't want to be involved have absolutely no reason to go there anyways. The ones that get shot at in that system know what they put up with and take it as part of the game. ............... You wouldn't even have to be a good killer to do this, but a good survivor for sure. For those that want more out of Elite.

Not even playground-worthy.

So as I said, you cannot provide a reason why you want to entice more non-PvP equipped ships into Open Play beyond having them as adversarial content.

/mic


EDIT - removed a quote from a post which had been subsequently edited to include more playground insults and yet again introduced "gankers" which I have never included.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

As of now there's no point playing in open unless one wants to. If you don't want PvP/ganking, you just go solo or pg and do everything you can do in open be done with it.
But what if there was something in open that everyone wants but you can only get it if you play open?
Here's my idea:
After 4 weeks of open only playing, you get access to "spice" or call it whatever, that gives you a 100-150% FSD boost. There's a module to store it, it gets used up so it needs refills.
This stuff is mined/milked and sold in only one place in the galaxy, that happens to be an anarchy system with a station/city called something like Mos Eisley. It is Dangerous to go there, but you can hire commanders to wing up and escort you in if you're not so sure of yourself in surrounding systems.
Spice is what makes trade faster, exploration more efficient and moving around combat builds less of a pain. Everyone wants it.


Do You?

No.

 

[Han Zulu]

Another problem with this idea is that it most likely will be used most by gankers to give them the extra boosts they need to hunt under-armored explorers with long distance jump ranges. This "spice" idea sounds like a perfect ganker exploit to take out more explorers.

 

[Ethaidan]

Remind me, what's this thread about again?

Donuts. And goats cheese.