Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That presupposes that revenge and overcoming opponents are key features in every players gameplay - I do not think that that is necessarily the case.
- Status
That presupposes that revenge and overcoming opponents are key features in every players gameplay - I do not think that that is necessarily the case.
Completely agree.
I want to add that FD needs to add and change a lot of things to make Open mode work in a way that makes it fun for more players.
I was only commenting about Open Mode as a open world PvP environment.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... except that Open mode is our open world environment that just happens to contain the possibility of PvP - it is not designed around it.
I would love to see more players take up the mantle of The Hero.
Fuel Rats are a great idea and prove that good emergent gameplay is possible and fun. They've really made a name for themselves with some well-deserved press on Galnet and the newsletter.
Also, props to the Imperial RP'ers in PowerPlay for their Pegasi campaign - although it's ostensibly about fighting the evils of piracy, it's riddled with intrigue and furthering the Empire's agenda.
Are there any other heroes out there?
Thanks!
That's the problem. It contains the possibility of PvP without being designed with PvP in mind. This is what causes all this problems in my opinion.
The current situation is, that we have an open world where direct PvP can happen (almost) anytime. This makes the Open mode a "open world PvP" environment - in my opinion.
If it was designed with PvP in mind it would have balanced PvP, it would have ways to avoid direct PvP without having to go to solo or a PvE group. It would balance the "good guys" with the "bad guys", it would prevent ganking, it would have meaningful ways for combat.
Designing a game with PvP in mind isn't about making it all about combat, it's about designing the game while knowing that combat is a possibility and design it in a way that combat, if it happens, is fun.
Give the T6, T7 & T9's etc tools to which to defend themselves. As it is my T9 handles like a supermarket shopping trolley full off beer, pushed along by an inebriated dwarf with a limp. Fine but give us moosive rear facing hardpoints that will melt the cheese off a burger from 22lys. Something that will make someone question not once or twice but several times over whether or not to attack. If I am carrying cargo worth 6M Cr, my insurer would demand that adequate steps were provided to protect their investment.
Ive read the 'OTT' comments about the pvp seal clubbers and I'm afraid there is a link between their online and offline characteristics. Sorry but it is true. However there will always be those who skirt the fringes of society and that just reflected in the game. Its sociology. Maybe they do not queue barge or spill peoples pint on purpose in real life but I bet they think it. Because in real life there are consequences but there are none in ED. So its 'open' season (no pun intended) to them. They can then get whatever it is out of their system.
Its the consequences for actions part this is missing in ED. In the real world those on the fringes do not live long enough to draw a pension, crime only pays for those right at the top and for many the existence is hand to mouth and frequently meat a nasty end. Here they just respawn.
I prefer to play nice.
Ive read the 'OTT' comments about the pvp seal clubbers and I'm afraid there is a link between their online and offline characteristics. Sorry but it is true. However there will always be those who skirt the fringes of society and that just reflected in the game. Its sociology. Maybe they do not queue barge or spill peoples pint on purpose in real life but I bet they think it. Because in real life there are consequences but there are none in ED. So its 'open' season (no pun intended) to them. They can then get whatever it is out of their system.
Its the consequences for actions part this is missing in ED. In the real world those on the fringes do not live long enough to draw a pension, crime only pays for those right at the top and for many the existence is hand to mouth and frequently meat a nasty end. Here they just respawn.
I prefer to play nice.
Scudmungus
Banned
Maybi nat 'be da rude boy' but..
..challenge makin fah gud stories. Antagonist makin fah gud stories.
No challenge? Big bad? Obstacles to overcom?
Den wi gat som borin genre-breakin Art House movie!
But listen: Rude boy. Challenge makin. Antagonist - dem gat to be overcom. Gat to have de tools to be makin rude boys run. Wi nat gat dat atm. Choosin to be rude boy? No worries. Tuff ting in Elite choosin NAT to be rude boy atm, fah reasonin oder dan personal morals.
Fa mi? Choosin to be rude boy gat to be bad choice. Tuff choice. Den.. mi gat challenge - Catch mi if yuh can! I n I love a gud chase!
..challenge makin fah gud stories. Antagonist makin fah gud stories.
No challenge? Big bad? Obstacles to overcom?
Den wi gat som borin genre-breakin Art House movie!
But listen: Rude boy. Challenge makin. Antagonist - dem gat to be overcom. Gat to have de tools to be makin rude boys run. Wi nat gat dat atm. Choosin to be rude boy? No worries. Tuff ting in Elite choosin NAT to be rude boy atm, fah reasonin oder dan personal morals.
Fa mi? Choosin to be rude boy gat to be bad choice. Tuff choice. Den.. mi gat challenge - Catch mi if yuh can! I n I love a gud chase!
Last edited:
Its a subjective opinion. Most traders probably don't welcome the bad guys. If anything its those playing the bad guys need the "good" guys.
This is the fundamental issue here, and largely the fundamental issue behind the whole Open vs Solo debate.
As we have discussed for three threads now, the "good" guys don't really need the "bad" guys, except for a small number of Bounty Hunter PvPers who deliberately go after PC bad guys. Most PvPers (i think) don't generally define themselves so firmly, they are just happy to get any quality PvP.
Targetting of traders is not good PvP. Good PvP is a challenge, traders are not a challenge. Targetting of traders is good Piracy though. And can be a good experience for the trader as well if done "right" - ie: Don't bankrupt the trader with the demands, let them go if they comply, etc. Piracy isn't specifically PvP. In fact, fatal level PvP should be the last resort of the Pirate, i think you would agree Jordan.
So, what is the problem here?
Just my opinion, but are we not back to people who have a desire to pew-pew can be split into roughly two groups? Those who want competitive PvP, and those who want one sided PvP?
Who "needs" the bad guys from these groups?
Those who want competitive PvP certainly don't need them. You simply find others who are interested in PvP and go head to head together with each other wherever you encounter each other.
Those who want simply to kill player targets don't need bad guys. They are the bad guys! They need the good guys! But the good guys don't want to be the targets of the bad guys! Hence they avoid them however they can, whether it to be change modes (and here we have the foundations of this debate) or move away from hotspots if possible.
(And sorry if equating good guys here with traders and bad guys with PvPers - its not exactly my intent, just accept the spirit of the phrasing rather than the literal interpretation. For sure there are good guy PvPers and bad guy traders... erm, i presume).
Disclaimer: I'm not a trader.
Last edited:
Good point! I'd like some mines that actually make an attacker think twice instead of laugh at the tickles.
Oh no! You've gone from good sense to utter rubbish! I'll put it down to your personal opinion because there's nothing to back that up.
I play bad nicely
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
How is PvP balanced?
.... unless there was only one player ship with fixed loadout, I don't see how it could ever be called "balanced". Even then there would be the opportunity to outnumber the opponent(s) - again not balanced unless combat was limited to 1v1....
Many roles are *not* about direct PvP - how would they be balanced in relation to PvP?
While i disagreed with another part of this post, i'll give you rep for that.
Pretty much that. ^^
Also things are in favour of the bad guy(s)/gals(s) v bounty hunter(s).
Bad guys/gals can do their bad thing anywhere - it's nigh on impossible for bounty hunters to instanced with them and the bounty boards are a joke.
It's far too easy to be a wrong 'un and get away with it. Proper piracy excluded.
Last edited:
Scudmungus
Banned
Truth. Maybi mi gettin older but... ..bein rare dese days dat anoda ooman uppin de fun durin mi playtime, oder dan dem dat mi gamin wid/mi bredren an sistren.
Its personal life experience Marra. Ive been outside society and inside and halfway between on my journey to where I am now. Ive seen and experienced things that I wish I hadnt. However I may have over generalised but this is no place for a full anthropological study thus generalisations are made.
You play badly nicely. I like that. I dont mind that. But spoiling purely for the fun of spoiling is not nice and I suspect you play badly for a reason I can accept. If not I am big enough to disagree without malice.
I play nicely based upon how I am. I am easy going and happy to help people. I could so easily have gone the other way but the nature vs nurture debate won in the end.
You play badly nicely. I like that. I dont mind that. But spoiling purely for the fun of spoiling is not nice and I suspect you play badly for a reason I can accept. If not I am big enough to disagree without malice.
I play nicely based upon how I am. I am easy going and happy to help people. I could so easily have gone the other way but the nature vs nurture debate won in the end.
Different persons have different preferences. I pretty much only play PvP when it doesn't have consequences, or at least not lasting ones. And if someone else engaging in PvP can influence my PvE there is a good chance I will leave the game, any game, over it.
(Yeah, this does mean that I don't like the single shared Galaxy Simulation. But I don't mind it much because it can be influenced equally in PvP and PvE.)
Actually, doing things without considering (or caring) how it will affect other people is one of the traits looked at when figuring if someone is a sociopath. So, you don't even need research; people that force others into PvP without caring if their target will enjoy the experience are basically exhibiting a sociopath trait.
It doesn't mean that those that do it are sociopaths; there is no well defined line that makes one a sociopath if crossed, and every person has some degree of sociopathy. But, yeah, behaving like that is a step down that road.
We have NPCs for that. I absolutely don't want to meet player-controlled bad guys, and will do anything to avoid it. For starters, I never, ever, shoot another player without we previously and explicitly agreeing to fight. And this thread has convinced me that even combat logging would be fair game to avoid those player types.
And no, opponents in CQC or similar arena or battleground minigames don't count as bad guys. They are merely opponents in an agreed upon fight, and thus perfectly fine. Consent changes everything.
A non-virtual common ancestor
Currently? It's absolutely not balanced.
Balanced PvP would offer options to the player to evade combat, use defense or to fight depending on what the player wants to do. Balanced PvP in an open world isn't just about direct combat. A balanced game with PvP should allow players to choose their play style and offer them a way to successful survive a combat situation or not getting into combat at all.
Balance is not about everything being equal. It's about being able to counter everything with the right game mechanic.
Fixed weapons - harder to use. Gimbaled weapons get countered by chaff or ECM.
Small ships should be fast and agile making them hard to hit, but hitting them would hurt them a lot.
Big ships should be slow making them easy to hit, but they should be difficult to destroy (lots "health").
Basically no ships should be good at everything that is important in combat.
They would have their options to survive combat (traders), evade combat (explorers) or flee from combat (smugglers). Some roles would be in between like miners who would have good defenses and some offensive capabilities.
Sure there has to be some uncertainty or imbalance to make it work. There has to be a chance to flee from or to kill an other CMDR.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
If ways to successfully avoid combat were to be introduced, how long should we expect that it would take for the asymmetric combat specialists to complain bitterly about the changes and call for the nerf bat to be wielded?
The fragility of the dedicated trading ships is one particular bugbear of mine.
Except....
There are no fixed roles - any player can adopt any role as they please - or none.
Not long. A lot of players who are happy with the current situation would complain. As you know some complain that there are ways to successfully avoid PvP combat right now via mode switching.
Btw: The methods to avoid or flee form combat wouldn't always work. For players who absolutely don't want to get involved into anything related to PvP (including using a PvP capable ship) there should be an Open PvE mode.
Players would have to choose the right ship, the right modules, weapons and utility slot modules for their way of playing the game. They need to find the right balance between the things they want to do.
You do have options to evade combat, you can avoid interdiction, warp away etc.. They HAVE given you all kinds of ways to avoid confrontation. You can even talk your way out of a fight if you have the wits.
- Status