Why is being a "prey" of a pirate in open a bad game design...

MarkAusten

MarkAusten
MadSinUN said:
f this has been discussed before, there is nothing to prevent you from reviewing some of the points and discussing this concept again. Marked " corrected and updated";)
Click to expand...
If I were too try and do that I'd be here until Christmas next year and I've better things to do with my time ! :)
 

MadSinUN

MadSinUN
MarkAusten said:
Nothing would prevent this except being thrown out of the mode and restricted from re-entry, something that could not happen if the modes were combined. As they say, "Once is an accident. Twice is a coincident. But three times is enemy action", three strikes and you're out, so to speak. Now, the "bully" only has to get anotther account and do it again but after three times they are out again. Eventually either the "bully" is going to get tired of throwing away money or FDev put in a permanent ban. Still, with separated modes the "bully" has to work hard and eventually spend money to achieve their aims whereas in the combined mode anyone can do this any time they like and there is no downside on the part of the "bully".

It seems to me that in a separated mode situation the chances of PVP action accidental or intended would be greatly reduced whereas in the combined mode it would not. And coupled with RM's 'moved to a separate instance timeout feature' would go a long way to easing the concerns.

Still, the thought does occur to me that your proposed solution effectively separates players out into two 'virtual' modes anyway. After all, a difference that makes no difference is no difference. Or in th modern vernacular, if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck.
Click to expand...

The problem of blocking sites and calling attacks on stations can be solved by changing the mechanics of station administration. Increasing the area with a limited time spent in it. Transferring a player who has been delayed on the site to another instance (as suggested by Robert) , etc. My suggestion will allow you to set aside a not unimportant property of open mode. 1. Visual component. For many players, seeing the same live players around them is significant. 2. Fully allows you to interact with other players on a non-combat level. Cargo exchange, joint research / production and assistance to each other.

And "kick the player out of mode" is different from " voluntary selection"
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
MadSinUN said:
""Open Pve" and " Open Pvp "will be better if they are combined in one" Open mode "using a permanent (In this case, "Permanent" means that this choice will be linked to the account.), voluntary choice of game style before entering"Open mode".
Click to expand...
What is "better" for some would not necessarily be "better" for all - so any contention that a proposal "will be better" is subjective and prone to inaccuracy.
MadSinUN said:
This will not divide the players
Click to expand...
Players are already divided and have been since before the game launched - if changes to Open aren't "enough" for players then they won't play in it.
MadSinUN said:
Players will also be able to fully interact with other players on a non-combat level.
Click to expand...
If the list of "non-combat" interactions includes interdictions, wake following, wake dropping, hatch-breaking, etc. then they constitute a PvP interaction, in my opinion, and would not reasonably be permitted against players flagged for PvE.
MadSinUN said:
When implementing such game mechanics, those players who do not want to be a victim /target will be able to fully satisfy their desire without changing their style and mode of play. Pvp players in this case will not be deprived of a full-fledged, random battle with Pvp players. I am sure that players who are not engaged in combat but prefer to be in danger from the possibility of attacks by other bandits will be enough that the gameplay of the pirate was also implemented.
Click to expand...
Depends on what PvP players could do to PvE players after the proposed changes.
 

MarkAusten

MarkAusten
Robert Maynard said:
What is "better" for some would not necessarily be "better" for all - so any contention that a proposal "will be better" is subjective and prone to inaccuracy.
Click to expand...
Indeed so. I know of several players that only have one account and play in the various modes depending on how they feel that day. The permanent play-style option would not satisfy them at all. Hence it is not better for them.
 

MarkAusten

MarkAusten
MadSinUN said:
When implementing such game mechanics, those players who do not want to be a victim /target will be able to fully satisfy their desire without changing their style and mode of play. Pvp players in this case will not be deprived of a full-fledged, random battle with Pvp players.
Click to expand...
I can see that for many PVP players this would not be satisfactory. How wold they know in advance whether or not their intended target is PVE or PVP? And if there were some some of flag to indicate this, then I can see that there would be complaints that it break their immersion and everyone they meet should be a possible target. Indeed, that has been raised a few time before as I recall (see prior comments about my memory).

We player are a contrary lot.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
MarkAusten said:
We player are a contrary lot.
Click to expand...
Indeed we are - as we, rather obviously,don't all want the same things.

Any time I read a complaint from a player that the game "has not met its potential" I note the fact that each player very probably has a quite different of what would constitute the game meeting "its potential".
 

MadSinUN

MadSinUN
Robert Maynard said:
What is "better" for some would not necessarily be "better" for all - so any contention that a proposal "will be better" is subjective and prone to inaccuracy.
Click to expand...

Especially for you Robert: "All my suggestions and opinions are solely my opinions and my vision of solutions and relate only to my understanding of the situation." It just seems to me (it seems to me and only to me) that you will soon have sore fingers from constantly typing the same obvious things for me. Thanks.;)
 

MarkAusten

MarkAusten
Robert Maynard said:
Indeed we are - as we, rather obviously,don't all want the same things.

Any time I read a complaint from a player that the game "has not met its potential" I note the fact that each player very probably has a quite different of what would constitute the game meeting "its potential".
Click to expand...
I think I am correct in saying that there are many views on that as there are players and cover the entire possible spectrum of views on that particular subject. With a bell curve distribution, perhaps?
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
MadSinUN said:
Especially for you Robert: "All my suggestions and opinions are solely my opinions and my vision of solutions and relate only to my understanding of the situation." It just seems to me (it is me and only me) that you will soon get sore fingers constantly doing the same obvious things for me. Thanks.;)
Click to expand...
It applies to all who make definitive statements using words like "will" rather than "may", "never" rather than "rarely", "always" rather than "mostly", etc..

A definitive statement only requires one player to disagree to invalidate it.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
MarkAusten said:
I think I am correct in saying that there are many views on that as there are players and cover the entire possible spectrum of views on that particular subject. With a bell curve distribution, perhaps?
Click to expand...
How many dimensions does that bell-curve encompass - as we're not talking about a single simple change.... ;)
 

peteuplink

peteuplink
As I see it, most of the people who do PvP in ED don't play as pirates. Some do, but they're the minority. A pirate is someone who raids or plunders other vessels for gain, usually in the form of cargo or currency. The players in ED who PvP mostly just seem to play the role of murdering psychopaths who simply kill because they know they can get away with it as there is no real punishment to prevent it. There's no gain aside from the thrill of knowing that they've just ruined someones game experience.
 

Rubbernuke

Rubbernuke
peteuplink said:
As I see it, most of the people who do PvP in ED don't play as pirates. Some do, but they're the minority. A pirate is someone who raids or plunders other vessels for personal gain, usually in the form of cargo or currency. The players in ED who PvP mostly just seem to play the role of murdering psychopaths who simply kill because they know they can get away with it as there is no real punishment to prevent it. There's no gain aside from the thrill of knowing that they've just ruined someones game experience.
Click to expand...

While killers obviously exist, FD have struggled to make trader ships robust enough to survive a few shots to allow disabling them. If it was easier from the start (and had hatch breakers from day one) a lot of accidental destruction would have been avoided.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom