What is the design goal with random NPC gankers Frontier?

[Adept]

Here's an example where the basic design choices really mystify me.

I spent a hours mining for Engineering materials. I headed back to dock, to swap away from the mining ship, but near the station I noticed an USS, listed threat lvl 0, I believe. "Encrypted emissions". I drop in to take a look, scoop up the material fragment, and scan the beacon in the wreckage. As I'm about to leave, an NPC vulture drops in. "Now you die victim!".

Just one of the many senseless NPC gankers that populate the game. I'd like to hear what the designers think they are adding to the game.

a) What is the NPC supposedly trying to do?

b) How is this making the game more satisfying and fun for the player?

***

In this case I was in a mining ship, in a high security system where I'm allied with the controlling faction. I was also very close to the primary station. By all accounts I should have been in safe waters.

Not only do encounters like this break the suspension of disbelief and scream "It's just a game, nothing matters or makes sense", but would getting my mining ship blown up and losing the cargo really have added something?

As it happens, I managed to wrestle the Cobra mk IV out of there, and beat the interdiction when the NPC ganker naturally followed me into cruise. I just hate the idea of that happening to less combat ready players, especially those new to the game. This is a bad design guys. [blah]

 

[Omega Fighter]

Remember from one of patch notes a while ago

–NPC terrorist added

 

[SaliVader]

NPCs are gankers now?

 

[Perseus]

I guess it's supposed to be adding spice.
Maybe needs more meat first. Not sure about salt.

 

[Adept]

NPCs are gankers now?

The ones that just go "now you die victim", sure. I mean, what else would it be? Now granted, there was only the one, so technically not a gank, but I think the term is clear enough. The attacker isn't attempting to gain anything. It's not attempting to pirate the player for example, it just wants to kill them. This doesn't make much sense in the setting.

 

[Ian Skippy]

It adds a challenge. It means you need to always have an idea of how to escape unexpected encounters.

- - - Updated - - -

The ones that just go "now you die victim", sure. I mean, what else would it be? Now granted, there was only the one, so technically not a gank, but I think the term is clear enough. The attacker isn't attempting to gain anything. It's not attempting to pirate the player for example, it just wants to kill them. This doesn't make much sense in the setting.

If you read the Elite lore it makes a crapload of sense. 'gankers' are far more common in the elite universe than people here like to admit. Space is very big, SysAuth is on a tight budget and can barely keep stations clear. As a consequence there is a rich tradition of bored teen psychopath murderers and thrill seekers.

 

[Julio Montega]

That very specific NPC you described is the cause for the emissions
your scanners picked up. Nice trap, huh?

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Now, the important question, OP is this... After spending hours mining for engineer materials and having finally acquired them, was it really necessary to dally and drop into that USS?

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

The design goal for NPC gankers is to promote forum activity, which leads to more search engine results and higher result saturation, driving traffic to FDev's storefront.

Logic!

 

[xondk]

.]

Because the game isn't designed to be 100% predictable and safe?

 

[CMDR M Kozak]

Because the game isn't designed to be 100% predictable and safe?

Repped!

 

[DefiledDragon]

What I'm curious about is why NPC's that randomly attack you are called "gankers" and players that do exactly the same are called "griefers"?

 

[Ian Skippy]

What I'm curious about is why NPC's that randomly attack you are called "gankers" and players that do exactly the same are called "griefers"?

Ganking is objective (and usually means a group ganging up on a single weak opponent). Griefing is subjective, it means the griefer did it with the intent of causing an emotional state in the target. AI doesnt have such an intention.

 

[CMDR M Kozak]

This is a funny thread to come across after reading this weeks "We want a PVE mode because of players" thread.

What kind of game does people really want? Complete safety, just fly around and take in the sights = Space Engine.

 

[Grumpy jawa]

Game would be very boring if n pc stopped attacking. You fell in a trap, live with it

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Because the game isn't designed to be 100% predictable and safe?

Stop stating the obvious. You never give an obvious answer to an obvious question. It's a rule....

 

[DefiledDragon]

Ganking is objective (and usually means a group ganging up on a single weak opponent). Griefing is subjective, it means the griefer did it with the intent of causing an emotional state in the target. AI doesnt have such an intention.

The AI is driven by the intention of the designer. If the designer of the game intended the AI to destroy your ship for no reason, how is that different to another human being deciding to do the same thing without offloading the task to an AI?

 

[Ian Skippy]

The AI is driven by the intention of the designer. If the designer of the game intended the AI to destroy your ship for no reason, how is that different to another human being deciding to do the same thing without offloading the task to an AI?

Thats not the distinction I made. Its not about 'no reason', there is no such thing as that. The AI has the intended purpose of causing danger. The AI, however, doesnt care, nor is it able to care, about how you feel about it. A human could do exactly the same as an AI and that person may be a griefer. That would depend on whether that human has the intention to cause negative emotions. Thats why it is such a pointless term: if someone blows you up without saying a word, you dont know if he does it because he finds blowing up trade ships amusing, or because he wanted the trader to feel miserable. He is only a griefer in the second case.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Ganking (imaginary verb): It is a word commonly used in online video games, usually used in an MMORPG*. Ganking is the process in which a group of characters gang up on one or more players that do not have a chance to defend themselves, or when one high level player does the same action to a player way below his or her own level.

The long and short of it is - NPC's are there to be a pain in our backsides. Clearly the one you encountered has accomplished this goal.

Personally, I only do two things with my mining ships: Mine and Deliver ore.

Unless I'm mining in my Python, then it's Game On, as I have and will continue to take apart NPC Anaconda with it, as it was originally built to be a combat ship, but gets refitted often with a mining loadout especially when mining in particularly hazardous areas.

Even my Federal Dropship (which is my primary mining ship), can hold its own against NPC's of equal or lesser size. NPC FdL or Anaconda though.. I'm more apt to exercise the better part of valor there.

*MMORPG: Mostly Men Online Role Playing as Girls.

 

[DefiledDragon]

Thats not the distinction I made. Its not about 'no reason', there is no such thing as that. The AI has the intended purpose of causing danger. The AI, however, doesnt care, nor is it able to care, about how you feel about it. A human could do exactly the same as an AI and that person may be a griefer. That would depend on whether that human has the intention to cause negative emotions. Thats why it is such a pointless term: if someone blows you up without saying a word, you dont know if he does it because he finds blowing up trade ships amusing, or because he wanted the trader to feel miserable. He is only a griefer in the second case.

Ok, but you still haven't explained why people automatically attach the label of "griefer" to any commander that destroys their ship "without saying a word" or seemingly "for no reason", even though they haven't been able to establish intent or motivation.

To be honest, I wasn't really expecting anybody to try and explain it, I just find it amusing that people happily accept random destruction at the hands of the game designers (or AI if you prefer) yet complain bitterly when it happens at the hands of another player, even though the net result is the same, that being the rebuy cost of your ship and loss of any cargo.