Then why fire your guns, if it's not an attempt to control their actions?
To Solo Play Players: If You Could Disable PVP, Would You Play in Open Play Mode Instead?
- Thread starter AMX-008 GaZowmn
- Start date
OK, fine, let me re-phrase:
I have no need for 'out of game' tools to control how other players act, and i dont want them to exist.
That's better. Not perfect, but better. At least you're making it clear you want an emergent sandbox, rather than a "controlled environment".
What you attempted to do was argue a position of deterrence- which is in all actuality a preemptive attempt to control the future actions of another. It's an untenable position to argue- given it's still a measure that seeks to persuade another by use of force.
Now, I'm not saying that I want the entire game to have "training wheels" and a linear style- but preventative controls that seeks to mitigate unwanted gameplay behavior for the majority of players who aren't simply seeking to hinder other's gameplay based on their own personal preferences. You may disagree with that, and that's fine. Others may agree, and that's fine, too. But rejecting ideas to improve the game based on entrenched positions is why this stalemate exists.
The problem here is when you've got this sort of environment with a complete lack of controls- you also open the door to unwanted behavior, not just for PvE players, but also those who seek a bit more "meaningful" gameplay, not just 'sploding pixels. (arguably "because lulz")
To be honest, this entire conversation is academic.
I do not expect that there is even the slightest chance that the status quo on this will change, and thats 100% down to Fdev. They are pretty firm on the whole 'No PvP/ PvE flagging, but also all modes will always be able to affect everything equally'
Personally, i would like to see selected systems get protected with insanely, brokenly overpowered and fast reacting NPC patrols, to improve the experience of new players starting engineering. It would serve much the same goal as flagging that system 'no pvp' but without crossing a line fdev have already set themself.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
... and time spent accruing what is "contained" within the pixel ship....and we're still speaking about "pixels".
Of course it's academic, but this is a discussion forum about the game, after all.
I also don't believe it will ever change, and I don't there will ever be a "ED 2.0", given they've been able to sustain this game for many years without ever changing what's inherent about the game. (modes, etc.)
As to NPC patrols, etc. the idea is much like CONCORD for EVE Online, and that's also been discussed as an idea, as well as security system improvements and the like. I really don't know if it will ever be possible for them to implement, quite frankly, given the sheer universal scale, the lore itself, the lack of a "Pilot's Federation" authority of any kind, and how it all interacts. Though, I do think it would be interesting if the Pilot's Federation were made the "authority" (like CONCORD) and enforce those rules and laws, while also enabling players to take contracts, and so forth. The latter of which would lend credence to the "Bounty System", and enable a much stronger C&P.
We may all disagree on details... but I think most of us WANT to see the game improve, which is why such discussion is important, even if nothing ever happens as a result.
At least when all is said and done, there's no question of "informed consent" regarding decisions that were made.
Thats the reason why said mechanisms existence should not be publicised. Only thing person targeted by this would see is that suddenly he just sees trolly ganky player types only when he logs to open.
The problem with such ideas is secrecy then lends itself to justification of complaints by players claiming they've been "Shadowbanned for no reason!!!!!oneeleven11!!!".
I'd much rather prefer a straightforward explanation of game rules in which unwanted behavior is also clearly defined, and expectations and penalties have been set so there's absolutely no question as to what caused their "sudden inability to play with others".
All games have rules for players to follow, in which case clear breach disqualifies them. This one should be no exception.
Yes, this is why I'm very much in favour of using block (I think it solves most of the problems being debated here), but completely against any sharing of blocklists. My block list is compiled by me based on the effects of people on my game experience.
It is extremely unwise to assume it would stay secret. People would figure it out, everything gets figured out by players of games, always.
Point is that you have not been excluded to play with others. You just get to play with likeminded individuals. Off course sharing instances only with OTHER pad hoggers, station rammers, ground mission ruiners, shoot'em all gankers would get pretty frustrating experience fast, but you reap what you sow.
Though eventually even without this kind of decision by fdev, most of those people will be added to various blocklists and end on having only other trash tier commanders, or nb's available. Or those who don't block anybody.
Last edited:
I have to admit, It would be rather interesting to have an algorithmic based system that groups all players based on their demonstrated behaviors and patterns. Maybe with the evolution of AI and such we'll see such a game in the future. Given the lack of subset metrics for each player to define/choose what sort of experience they wish to engage in, I doubt we'll ever see it in this game.
What's it like at Raxxla?
Probably lonely. LOL
Yeah that would be nice, basically game would offer incentive to certain playstyles if you do not want to get and stay in trashfest. Be a toxic player and all people you encounter are toxic types
That would neatly solve most of problems with mmo type games.
I'm astounded that was a deterrent. It sounds like an invitation.
Anyone avoiding Open because they think it's a ganker haven or because the game doesn't arbitrary enforce an even more absurd CMDR/NPC dichotomy aren't people I miss from my experience.
We all have different ideas of what constitutes improvement. No proposal that further separates CMDRs and NPCs is going be an improvement from my perspective. No proposal that involves expanding out-of-character or otherwise non-contextual limitations on CMDR actions is going to be an improvement from my perspective. This is how an already degraded game is further damaged in my eyes.
Couching a heavy handed and arbitrary constraint in the barest veneer of context doesn't jive with me either. NPCs should follow the same rules as CMDRs, as far as is practical. Even ATR, as completely useless as they are, are a step too far in the direction of the absurd.
I also don't think any response time short of instant would change anything and even instant response times would be simultaneous with the destruction of many new CMDR vessels.
Of course, I also think the ganking issue is completely and entirely overblown and even if it wasn't I'd have trouble wrapping my mind around how being ganked repeatedly could possibly be any worse than the Engineering gameplay in the first place. I mean I take people's word for it that they like it less, but I don't understand it.
What would work is full "live" accounting for ones actions vs npcs or players.
Example...
A player attacks a player in deciat. The defending player innocently engineering ganked by the hobo killboat.
The dust settles.. our intrepid ganker swans off having had his fill.
Only to be intercepted by a wing of truly awesome npcs. Before he can crank up his fsd he is space dust.
So what actually happened ? Well he did something unprovoked and committed murder.
And was executed without trial for doing so. Rebuy screen each time a lawful (not wanted) cmdr is attacked.
Yeah even just attacked! If our noob survived its still curtains for our ganker friend.
This is how gankers should be handled.
Lethal force from which they cannot escape unless they leave the bubble. Reenter and their flagged. How long their flagged is optional. But once they've bit the rebuy the heats off. Till they do it again and it's rinse n repeat.
And here's the killer. They eventually have their killboat perma destroyed. No rebuy. After say, 3 ganks or whatever.
Ganking serves no real purpose apart from controversy over pvp. Their shadow permanently enshrines pvp as a dirty word.
Till their dealt with. Pvp cannot be fixed.
Once there dealt with and it's apparent that ganking isn't a good idea, things can change.
This is in keeping with the lore aspect too. Murder is murder and their should be harsh consequences.
Course it's a law n order overhaul.
Long overdue
o7
Example...
A player attacks a player in deciat. The defending player innocently engineering ganked by the hobo killboat.
The dust settles.. our intrepid ganker swans off having had his fill.
Only to be intercepted by a wing of truly awesome npcs. Before he can crank up his fsd he is space dust.
So what actually happened ? Well he did something unprovoked and committed murder.
And was executed without trial for doing so. Rebuy screen each time a lawful (not wanted) cmdr is attacked.
Yeah even just attacked! If our noob survived its still curtains for our ganker friend.
This is how gankers should be handled.
Lethal force from which they cannot escape unless they leave the bubble. Reenter and their flagged. How long their flagged is optional. But once they've bit the rebuy the heats off. Till they do it again and it's rinse n repeat.
And here's the killer. They eventually have their killboat perma destroyed. No rebuy. After say, 3 ganks or whatever.
Ganking serves no real purpose apart from controversy over pvp. Their shadow permanently enshrines pvp as a dirty word.
Till their dealt with. Pvp cannot be fixed.
Once there dealt with and it's apparent that ganking isn't a good idea, things can change.
This is in keeping with the lore aspect too. Murder is murder and their should be harsh consequences.
Course it's a law n order overhaul.
Long overdue
o7
Last edited:
It could even have cooldowns and timers which increase or decrease the frequency of matched behaviors, such as if you kill X players within Y amount of time, it increases the frequency in which you encounter other like-minded players, or if you're trading often in PvE it then increases the amount of "pirates" you may encounter, but if you decrease said activities, it then decreases the frequency, etc.Yeah that would be nice, basically game would offer incentive to certain playstyles if you do not want to get and stay in trashfest. Be a toxic player and all people you encounter are toxic types
There's the "organic emergent gameplay" so many are craving. And there's even checks and balances for those who wish to "redeem" themselves in demonstration, so when they quit demonstrating unwanted gameplay behaviors, their position will be reassessed by the game and adjusted accordingly.
The possibilities are endless.