Yeah, My mate got a rebuy screen the last time he went PvP in solo (Player v Planet)
Can make an Ironman PVP PG and if people are found breaking the rules and not deleting their characters kick them from this group.
I have to disagree, with your 'not actively discouraged'. Since there is no bucket in the BGS for it and because of the higher cost of losses AND time required to maintain competitiveness with the overall meta, it is highly discouraged for the PVP player, particularly a PVP player that is curious/casual about the play style.
Unfortunately, you do not realize that PVP IS literally pointless in Elite: Dangerous....and talking to many it's not to high off the level of garbage either...
..and this is me not being facetious or sarcastic.
In this game, PVP adds nothing to the game (no BGS bucket) and is highly expensive in time and credits to partake in...it will never gain momentum with the vast majority of people because of these two facts.
To get back to the OP's original question, PVP is in the game to attract PVP players to the game, to sell more copies of the game. It is not meant to be in the game as a true competitive feature...it's just there to let people shoot others...because it would be to unrealistic to not let them (Open PVE). So, basically, a way to sell more copies of the game to those that will never be happy with the feature...
Last edited:
Elite was never designed as PvP, nor PvE. It was just players in the Elite galaxy. The game doesn't care who is controlling the ship you encounter. It's always been PvElite with some filters at the menu before even starting the game.
Bountes should be able to be collected wether NPC or CMDR
Pirates should be able to steal goods, wether its from an NPC or a CMDR
Powers should be allowed to be defended and attacked, wether NPC or CMDR.
Traders who want risk should be able to try and speed through a system being blockaded by more than AI brains.
Open is just open.
TheMegaTurnip
Banned
PvP is fun. Of course that fun is subjective, but it is fun for some. That is why it exists.
By this same logic you could ask why exploration is a thing. Because people enjoy it. So it made the cut in game.
Powerplay was originally designed as an outlet for PvPers. Not a great setup, but its alright. Though it does'nt mean everyone gets a free pass fro being hassled, but its part of the game.
Adapt or die.
By this same logic you could ask why exploration is a thing. Because people enjoy it. So it made the cut in game.
Powerplay was originally designed as an outlet for PvPers. Not a great setup, but its alright. Though it does'nt mean everyone gets a free pass fro being hassled, but its part of the game.
Adapt or die.
But exploration has a very large influence on the game itself....it has a BGS bucket.
No one's PVP death or win...has ever added anything meaningful to the game...it means a lot to the players that enjoy PVP...but it is only a sideshow in the game...with no attachments to the game itself.
As it is designed, as it will always be.
Which would have no members because even those inclined to participate are typically playing in Open because they want as broad a spectrum of interactions with as many other players as possible.
The only justification and support PvP requires to have meaning.
It would be nice if there were more tangible and plausible consequences for CMDRs who get themselves shot down and/or get caught violating laws in areas where they exist (and this applies irrespective of PvP), but simply having the core mechanisms of damage function the same on NPCs and CMDRs is a serviceable minimum.
PvP and the considerations and concessions I make for it dramatically alters my CMDR's BGS contributions.
I have my CMDR do, and refrain from doing, many things because of the possibility of encountering hostile CMDRs.
You considerations are irrelevant because you can do the exact same thing in other interactive choices (modes). As far as the first point, I can agree....but it would seem from the number of people that come here to complain about the modes.... the justification, is inadequate, to say the least. Otherwise, we wouldn't have all the 'hopes' for the game to reach it's 'potential'.
Not if I want to play the game, or the character, I want to play.
My considerations are at least as relevant as the existence of the BGS itself. The BGS has a small, but broadly tangible effect on the game's setting. My assumption of the role I have chosen for my character is the game.
Yet they want those players to adhere to their rules.. the ironman rules. SO they need to make a choice... do a PG where everyone who wants to play Ironmans or just do it for themselves and not worry about what others do.
A note... just as with the PVE Mode (which is requested because the numbers far exceed the numbers allowed in a PG.. if there is an Ironman Mode.. you will get the same broad a spectrum of interactions with as many other players as possible as if you had a PG where you all gathered. If you have to be in Open, just as with PVErs you can't complain about others not following your rules because there are none inforced in Open... it's wild wild west as someone claimed, it is no man's land... it is... Open.
In reality (outside video games) humans only start fights/battles/wars they think they can win - usually when they think the opponent is at a disadvantage.
Those looking for fair competition organize sports events with handicaps, rules and referees enforcing those.
Funny thing though... in games that are played for fun, most people want "fair competition" Personally, I have little desire to play games with people who treat a game played for fun as if they're fighting a war. They're tolerable in small numbers, but if they become the norm, I stop having fun. Unfortunately for me, I also like playing online games that are open world sandboxes with freeform PvP, so putting up with those types are kind of the price of playing.
As nearly 40 years of online gaming history has demonstrated, from the earliest MUDs, through early pioneers like Ultima Online and Shadowbane, through the recent changes to World of Warcraft, unless a game is designed specifically for that kind of player, they will rapidly drive away most of your player base, get bored themselves, and leave as well. Which is why most online games go with PvP switches.
Elite: Dangerous' solution to this problem is one of the best I've encountered, primarily since allowing players to choose, on a session by session basis, who they want to play with, Frontier has created an environment in Open where the level of player-killer activity is at worst an infrequent but rather annoying interruption to your gaming session, to at best "OMG, is that player moving to interdict me? Goody! Let's Play!" By allowing the preferred prey of PKs to play in other modes, it creates an environment in open where PKs can't maintain the illusion that they're 1337 PvPers, so they go elsewhere for their entertainment.
TheMegaTurnip
Banned
Actually I'd argue that the players who do PvP give it meaning in game. But now you get an idea of how ridiculous the OP is.
PvP bounty hunting (Generally quite well paid if you're half cop) is also usable with the BGS so.
PvP has as much right to be in the game as any other playstyle. Sure some people can't stomach the illusion of being a badass space commander getting shattered in front of thier very eyes, but there is a good amount of players who enjoy the challenge.
PvP is something some players like to do, erefore it has a place in open. Don't like it? Go play solo/PG, Don't try to ruin the fun of others because you don't feel you can be competative. At the end of the day OP, thats what these posts are caused by.
Good look wid dat.
TheMegaTurnip
Banned
PVErs are the juiciest targets. I always go after them first.