Jump to content

Recommended Posts

i think here is where reputation system will go in work. The more you PvP lonely person (without declare war )  the reputation system will working and to the point you will be restrict to build anything in safezone or claim territory in it. Maybe if the have claim territory (build ) in safezone before become a pvp ganker, there should a warning before the safezone prevent them build base at safezone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zamarus said:

You are making a fine strawman out of this topic. Why should we be limited to "blow em' up" when theres a million ways to deal with people. Stop thinking inside that tiny box of yours, you know better. What you find is your interpretation and it seems to me like not many share it.

I don't know, but you are the person trying to distract from the main argument that pvp is not emergent gameplay. "Blow em' up was just an expression. Certain aspects of pvp can be emergent but pvp itself isn't when its something that is going to be a well-established game mechanic. 

 

But ultimately, its going to be up to the community  to keep the peace, and from what I've seen here, most players doesn't seem to be willing to do so, but do the opposite. I suspect that is because of EVE Online's "do-whatever you want" mentality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 0something0 said:

I don't know, but you are the person trying to distract from the main argument that pvp is not emergent gameplay. Certain aspects of pvp can be emergent but pvp itself isn't when its something that is going to be a well-established game mechanic.

You are literally refuting your own point here. If aspects of pvp can be emergent that means pvp can be emergent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, ShioriStein said:

i think here is where reputation system will go in work. The more you PvP lonely person (without declare war )  the reputation system will working and to the point you will be restrict to build anything in safezone or claim territory in it. Maybe if the have claim territory (build ) in safezone before become a pvp ganker, there should a warning before the safezone prevent them build base at safezone

Any reputation system will have to be player made, that’s the beauty of a player driven game.  Perhaps you personally could found an institution for such a thing?  And then you could potentially use privileges to allow/disallow people from using market terminals you own, and the like.  By terminals you own, I mean organizations who abide by your reputation system.  Effectively making the safezone useless for them except for temporary respite.

 

Of course it’s likely people will have a safe market hub for all, as more demand is more profit.

 

Have to love players driven games.  No watered down experience here, we get the full tap :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, The_War_Doctor said:

Well we do have the bounty system, so perhaps a reputation system connected to the bounty system.

Perhaps, but it would be pretty weird imho. Bounty hunting should be for personal grievances.  One man planted explosives at your organizations armory?  Time to put a large hit out on him.

 

Bounty goes up as he kills more innocents?  Who pays for it?  Each person who falls by his hand?  The person who put out the initial hit (if there was one)?

 

That’s not even to mention that the bounty hunting system will not impact safezones.  At least it shouldn’t, that would be doubly strange.

 

Who dictates what behavior is acceptable in that case?  Nah.  I don’t think it would work imho 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Captain Jack said:

Do you guys think that PvP thugs and gankers should be allowed to have safe harbor in the safe zones? That one is tricky as not all PvPers are mean people, but providing PvPers the same protections as non PvPers, doesn't seem right either.

 

1 hour ago, Zamarus said:

Not exactly sure what you are getting at. Everyone has the opportunity to utilise the exact same stuff in the game, how are you gonna do that

How will a player organization or individual player for that matter, counter a PvPer that has wronged them, when that PvPer can just hang out in a safe zone? I don't know how the game will handle it, which is why I asked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Captain Jack said:

 

How will a player organization or individual player for that matter, counter a PvPer that has wronged them, when that PvPer can just hang out in a safe zone? I don't know how the game will handle it, which is why I asked.

That is up to the org or player to figure out. If someone can wrong you, you sure as hell can wrong them back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Captain Jack said:

 

How will a player organization or individual player for that matter, counter a PvPer that has wronged them, when that PvPer can just hang out in a safe zone? I don't know how the game will handle it, which is why I asked.

If you’re reducing a player who has wronged you to a safezone, you’re already countering them.  Safe zones aren’t a one way street, nor should they be.

 

This whole PvPer classification is getting pretty rediculous imho.  Once you step into DU, you become all of it.  You’re a pvper, you’re a PvE(er?).  The only thing that is up to you is whether or not you get involved in politics and true civilization building.  By that I mean building institutions and infrastructure to support a population.

 

You can’t spend hours creating a settlement and think people will use it.  Have to take part in politics and civilization building for that to happen.  But is that person a PvE(er) or a pvper? He built a settlement, so he’s a PvE(er) right?  But wait, he destroyed an opponent to get such a prime real estate.  So he’s a pvper right?  None of the above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Captain Jack said:

Do you guys think that PvP thugs and gankers should be allowed to have safe harbor in the safe zones? That one is tricky as not all PvPers are mean people, but providing PvPers the same protections as non PvPers, doesn't seem right either.

How would you enforce that? Kick everyone out the safezone who killed one guy? 2? 20?

What about wars and the people participating there?

What about accidently killed people?

You want this to be a "who shot first" thing? Cause that can be abused (as you see in various games nowadays) and people will be griefed. 

 

And again: If there's a tradehub somewhere in the safezone then ppl can just exclude Others from trading there. Let players handle it. 

 

Besides a pvper can just circumvent this with an alt. And since safezones are huge it doesn't really matter at all. Cause ppl who don't want to PvP won't go out there anyway. 

And you can't exclude ppl from the arkzone in any way as this is the primary RN node for everyone

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm now i think Lethys say right. If there is a right to kick people of safe zone , no mater what there will be some guy abuse that.

I think ganker and griefer will not be easy to kill newbie because they will stay in safe zone, if they know the risk of unsecured area but they still go there mean that is their choice and their responsibility to accept their death not to blame the system, mechanic or unfair.

NQ have already said here:

On 2/2/2018 at 6:28 PM, NQ-Nyzaltar said:

With low resources in an ASA, you will be able to build this:

sans-titre6.jpg

 

This will do the job as a car. 

However, don't expect high performances in speed, security, comfort and such.

Don't expect either to win a race, or any competition with it.

 

However, with high value resources you will be able to build this:

2017-Porsche-911-Targa-4.jpg

 

Now with this car, you will be able to compete with other players in a race.

The car will have far better speed, better security and comfort, due to high quality Elements crafted and used in it.

So it mean that in safe zone still have enough for you to do but not everything, if you want everything you have to go outside and risk to get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zamarus said:

That is up to the org or player to figure out. If someone can wrong you, you sure as hell can wrong them back

Except you can't if they hang out in a safe zone.

 

In the simplest of terms, Player A kills Player B. Player B catches up with Player A some time later and finds that he has made a home for himself in non-pvp space. How is player B going to wrong Player A back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Captain Jack said:

Except you can't if they hang out in a safe zone.

 

In the simplest of terms, Player A kills Player B. Player B catches up with Player A some time later and finds that he has made a home for himself in non-pvp space. How is player B going to wrong Player A back?

Camp for player A when he go outside of safezone or bring something value out of safezone. Or you can even trick him out of safezone with something value able. Or you can even camp him when he kill someone and got so much value stuff on the way home so you can kill him and take the stuff for you.

There are many way to do it if you really want to revenge. Not half-mind revenge and said : OH whyyy NQ, the system so unfair for meeeeee.

NQ have said that many time, UNSECURED area is danger and risky. But once you step outside of safezone even know that risky mean that is your choice, none force you out of it, you want to go out mean you have responsibility to accepted your death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Captain Jack said:

Except you can't if they hang out in a safe zone.

 

In the simplest of terms, Player A kills Player B. Player B catches up with Player A some time later and finds that he has made a home for himself in non-pvp space. How is player B going to wrong Player A back?

I hope you read Lethys answer.

 

Also there's many things to account for in a game like this

1. Not everyone is gonna come out equal in every trade, people WILL get away with things and if you were unprepared thats on you

2. You don't have to immediately punish someone, not everything requires instant karma you could get back at them later.

3. If people create reputation systems in game or you happen to have other means you can still affect people in safezones by hindering them from getting resources from outside if there's people you can give them bad rep to or if you can keep them inside out of fear. 

 

Any of these 3 outcomes will happen and are legitimate alternatives you will never return completely equal on things in this game and it really shouldn't be so. Use your brain as a player to figure out what you want to do about it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Captain Jack said:

Except you can't if they hang out in a safe zone.

 

In the simplest of terms, Player A kills Player B. Player B catches up with Player A some time later and finds that he has made a home for himself in non-pvp space. How is player B going to wrong Player A back?

Doesn't even need to be UA to ASA or smth. It's enough If a builder scamms you. Cause he certainly never leaves the zone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lethys said:

It's enough If a builder scamms you

Hilarious for me to see some drama on forum about someone get scam by players that never leave the safe zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, ShioriStein said:

Hilarious for me to see some drama on forum about someone get scam by players that never leave the safe zone.

Disturbing for me that you don't see a problem with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Captain Jack said:

Disturbing for me that you don't see a problem with that.

There's no problem when its the result of two people interacting using the tools available. If you get scammed you took a bad deal, if you were oblivious to that then it's your own fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Captain Jack said:

Disturbing for me that you don't see a problem with that.

But if you get scam it mean that is your fault ? What is the problem with that ?

 

NQ have already said too that this game make for adult, they never got intend to make it for kid . It mean that they want to introduce it with the people who can have responsibility for their action ( their choice ).

They said they only get interfere only if it out of control and ruin the game so i dont think scam will be include. It is part of the "player driven", that will make all org have to make a rule or moving to do something. That will make the player got their fear. But myself i think that scam is every where even if they add that system like if killing too much kid who got scam you will be kick out of safe zone. All they have to to is strip them from their ship to their clothes and let them alive but nothing left on them . So will that be kick out ? But they not kill anyone do they ?

So in the end please provide me your evidence about "getting scam and be killed outside of safezone is unfair" ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Zamarus said:

There's no problem when its the result of two people interacting using the tools available. If you get scammed you took a bad deal, if you were oblivious to that then it's your own fault.

I agree. You can't protect people from themselves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tend to agree with what has been said.  If NQ were to regulate “scamming”, where’s the line?  What’s scamming?  

 

Best to learn and move on.  I’ve been scammed before, happens to many people I imagine... but you learn and move on.  Sucks, but it’s better than NQ regulating game mechanics because someone lost a few quanta.  

 

As I’ve said for what some people call “griefers” same punishment applies to the “scammer”.  Restrict their market access as much as you can... Create a reputation system, get other organizations to come together and restrict access.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a difference between *can do* and *should do*. Like I said, there seems to be little willingness in the community to prevent griefing/ganking/etc. but rather a mentality of "somebody else do it"....

 

I'm going to be frank here and say that it was a good decision for me to not fund the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...