Jump to content
Anopheles

The right to be evil

Recommended Posts

I like playing evil, on occasion, in games. 

 

This doesn't mean I torture animals in real lifeel  (anyway cruelty to people pays better and they seem to appreciate it more).

 

Neither do I play evil for the lulz.  I like to be the consequence of laziness, greed or bad planning.  In one Space game my organization made it so that you could buy a pass to not be pirated and briefly turned a core area of space into the New Caribbean until the developer drained the joy out of pvp and the core professions of piracy.

 

We were a bad organisation that had a code (more of a guideline, really).

 

The one thing I like in a game is rules which can be broken and worked around but not so tight that you can't do anything.

 

We enjoy conflict with security and playing cat and mouse with traders.  But while we enjoy pvp, we didn't (as happened in the other game) want to do it all the time.  We wanted every contact with Traders to be unique-ish.  We weren't murder hobos, we wuz pirates. 

 

I understand the 'hours wasted' argument against non consensual pvp - i really do - and I like DU's way around it with zones of varying security but I do not understand people who join a free form sand box and start omediately seeking ways to restrict it.

 

It is upon you to defend your 'hours of work' by use of forethought and care.  It is not for the developer to make a game where you are totally safe all of the time.

 

A good game has safer and less safer areas.  It also has levels of risk which can be modified by player actions  (forming a convoy, not putting everything you own in one fragile ship).

 

Adapt yourself and everyone can have the game they want.   Strangle the simulation and you only end up with one type of player and a shrinking player base.

 

And with that, good day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what you are trying to say here that has not been addressed and discussed in several other threads, some still active. It might be better to join one of them instead of creating YA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first half of your post sounds awesome.  Welcome.

 

As for the rest.  It kind of seems like your setting up an argument where there isn't one.  If you like how DU is currently planning to handle PVP then awesome.

 

If you don't understand why people would seek to restrict a free form sandbox.  I can explain that.  It's because they aren't interested in PVP sometimes, or at all.

 

We don't exactly know everything about how PVP is going to work yet but it sounds like NQ has a pretty good plan to me.

 

But if the kind of sandbox that you are looking for requires 100% unrestricted PVP.  Then you're asking NQ to chase away an entire category of player just to provide cannon fodder for a specific type of PVP player.

 

That doesn't make sense to me.

 

Why do all PVPers have to be pirates anyway?

 

More PVPers need to step up and start roleplaying as mild mannered traders, who are secretly armed to the teeth.  What's the fun in attacking me while i'm trying to build something anyway?

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The good thing is NQ wants every playstyle to be in even ground. 

Safezones? Sure, builders can do their stuff there.

But space is dangerous and they want that feeling ingame too.

 

So I Like their approach very much: do ASA/MSA with Basic resources for every non-PvP player and make UA rewarding but dangerous - i wouldn't be upset If the starting system as a whole is a safezone tbh. If ppl want rare resources they have to Go outside - and that's a very good approach imho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about PVPers especially pirates, is that it's a low effort - high reward situation.

As natural,pirates profit from other people's hard work.

So if stealing another man's cargo is not considered a high risk situation,we risk running into a gameplay inbalance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Anopheles

What you are saying is not really unique, there is many like yourself and that's fine.. You'd come across them in the threads already here.

 

But anyway. since were here and were already getting the usual arguments on this here's my thoughts.

  • That DU will have non-consensual PVP outside of the safezones is fine.
  • That some seem to think that implies you should be allowed to just put up a blockade and shoot anything getting out of the safezone IMO is not.
  • That some seem to think this means you can just gang up and attack/destroy anything or anyone who is doing anything outside the safezone is also not fine.
  • DU should not become gank central. DU is a social, community and building game with PVP elements which I believe will be implemented to provide a means to resolve conflict when diplomacy fails. ARK style 'wait at the exit and shoot anything coming through' will very quickly kill the game and thus the content you seek.

 

That said, from the little we know DU mechanics (for combat) really do not lend themselves well to EVE style ganks and will require actual organisation, command structure, planning and proper execution. I have yet to see any org that gives me the idea they can pull this off but some will try. No 'Wait for it ... press F1 to gank' in DU which is good.

 

Personally I do not buy into the 'all elements of DU are created equal' as some do. I expect and believe DU will focus around community, building and expansion. With that comes the need to have the ability to go to war when you have to. War is not a goal in DU, it is a tool/a means to an end. As such combat, I believe, will be implemented in such a way that it serves the purpose it is intended for and by that definition it will not be a primary function/mechanic in DU. Some, like @Lethys will disagree because it is a focal point for them which I understand and that's fine obviously, we'll see how this develops.

 

Frankly, I  see way more opportunities and profit using PVP in other areas such as markets and economy. Large scale PVP conflict will often be triggered/set up by events benefiting the economy and the players active there, much like in EVE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, we disagree there ;)

25 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

That some seem to think this means you can just gang up and attack/destroy anything or anyone who is doing anything outside the safezone is also not fine.

Yeah because being 100% safe while mining rare resources is the way to go. 

Risk vs reward is the best driving mechanism imho. If you venture outside, it should be dangerous. No 24h war declaration bs needed to attack someone. The shields are there for a reason and that's fine (and needed

 

Edit: and only because you disagree, doesn't mean it's not what NQ wants. And that doesn't mean that everything will be equal either. It depends on players and how they shape the world, If they Go for chaos or order......who knows

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Anopheles said:

Strangle the simulation and you only end up with one type of player and a shrinking player base.

Counterintutively, not moderating the simulation can lead to the simulation strangled by the players. Well, strangled by one type of player that goes around harming all the other players, leaving with only that type of player and a shrinking playerbase thanks to the one type of player driving all the others out.  On the other hand, an argument can be made about this being natural and humans naturally being jerks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most of the message here. People shouldn't be safe just because their loot took hours to get. It's up to the player to make it hard for pirates to pirate, not the devs. And i suspect that pirating already from the start won't be as easy as some like to think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was interesting to me when, in the title, you put (and claim) your "right to be evil" (occasionally or not), because you actually need to break the others rights to do so.

What kind of non-sense rights system is that?

Then, why to invoque rights when it's all about breaking rights. At last, anyway, rights are mere and relative concepts, some people respect them, others not (wich is perfectly right for me when the laws serve corrupted-abusive interests, imposed by a minory).

 

Now, there's a point i'd sugest you to consider. If you are prone to play "the evil" but you're not enough good at it, you can easily become the joy of others ("good" or "bad" players), that they'll find pleasure in doing to you exactly the same things that you like to do to others, for a long, long time...

You know, the old game of "echo" (or boomerang). It works so, like when you plant seeds... After a while, you can't ask apples to an orange tree.
And there's no value judgment involved here. These are simple "field observations".

 

At some point, maybe (and often happens in game as in life) you find it's no longer funny....

That's called awareness, my friend. But it also can come by understanding, not only by pain.

 

Have fun in the game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Alsan_Teamaro said:

It was interesting to me when, in the title, you put (and claim) your "right to be evil" (occasionally or not), because you actually need to break the others rights to do so

Break others rights? Which one's? That Made me curious.

 

There are safezones where ppl can do whatever they want - No one can harm you there. 

When I step outside then it's usually because I want to earn more money or because of adventure. I have that right, right? But noone has the right to attack me?

 

To me this isn't so much about "rights" but more about getting what "the other side" wants. I think most agree that griefers aren't needed (that's why NQ disencourages that behavior heavily). But I do hope that ppl get why risk vs. reward bis needed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There should be some protection against  'psychotic like' griefing behaviour (like constantly destroying ships coming out of noob space, or kamikazing structures) that has no purpose but itself or the thinnest fig leaf of RPing (I'm playing a psycho!).  It should also be perfectly ok to play a 'pro active' salvage gang operating in lawless space.

 

The psychotic style of griefing is like the old definition of pornography - hard to define but you know it when you see it.

 

I know that some people define griefing as any kind of non consensual interaction but that's too wide a definition and I hope that NQ errs on the side of narrowness and has means to investigate claims quickly and not favour either side of the debate iin forum or in game.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Alsan_Teamaro said:

It was interesting to me when, in the title, you put (and claim) your "right to be evil" (occasionally or not), because you actually need to break the others rights to do so.

What kind of non-sense rights system is that?

Then, why to invoque rights when it's all about breaking rights. At last, anyway, rights are mere and relative concepts, some people respect them, others not (wich is perfectly right for me when the laws serve corrupted-abusive interests, imposed by a minory).

 

Now, there's a point i'd sugest you to consider. If you are prone to play "the evil" but you're not enough good at it, you can easily become the joy of others ("good" or "bad" players), that they'll find pleasure in doing to you exactly the same things that you like to do to others, for a long, long time...

You know, the old game of "echo" (or boomerang). It works so, like when you plant seeds... After a while, you can't ask apples to an orange tree.
And there's no value judgment involved here. These are simple "field observations".

 

At some point, maybe (and often happens in game as in life) you find it's no longer funny....

That's called awareness, my friend. But it also can come by understanding, not only by pain.

 

Have fun in the game.

 

I have awareness that this is a game and a realm of play.   I'm quite capable of using the correct register of behaviour in play and in real life, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Risk vs reward is not just about shooting each other in the face for stepping outside the safezone. Builders and Non-PVP players don't need the treat of being attacked as a risk, they already have many risk to deal with that don't involve combat.


Examples.......

  • - first you got to build a ship to leave the planet, that's not easy an you risk falling back to the  planet, or getting stuck in orbit if doesn't work.
  • -Then you have to spend hours, or days journeying to another planet. That requires managing power, and fuel. The risk being you could get stranded in space or worse.
  • -Then once you get to a planet, you still have to locate and mine for resources. Because resources are finite, that means you'll have to get to it first before other players, or risk having to trade/buy ore at high price from someone else. The risk being you travel all the way to another planet, only to find that territory and resources have been taken already.
  • -Then once you get what you need, you still need to get those resources off the planet, which means re-managing the power/fuel you need to make the journey back. Risk being not being able to make it off the planet because of weight, or worse getting stranded halfway through space because you miscalculated fuel/power.

Just a few small examples, but the point being, non-pvp player will have so many other risk to worry about when playing, they don't need constant threat of being shot in the face to enjoy the game. What pvp players don't seem to understand is that nobody is against pvp, most players just want meaningful gameplay.


Also, the type of gameplay I describe will lead to more organic, emergent gameplay that is fun, that you can't really get from just random pvp encounters. Forcing pvp onto players just because you can, only leads to allot of Salt, and a broken community.

 

Just my thoughts...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What concerns me is that it seems some consider PVP to be that unless you are in a safezone I am free to attack you, kill you, destroy your stuff or take it and I do not need a reason or justification for it. For me that realy goes against what I believe to be the very core of what DU is about. By following this doctrine you make the game like any other where it's all about me, myself and I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, blazemonger said:

For me that realy goes against what I believe to be the very core of what DU is about.

the core of DU is do whatever you want, you have to deal with the consequences yourself tho. Its like a good old rts, if you expand to much without any defense you'll suffer. In the end DU is a game without any rights and rules, thus you can't really forbid people to kill and rob. But with mechanics like bounties and similar you might make them reluctant to do so. But that will depend on the "peaceful" part of the community, how much they'll try to secure their selfproclaimed rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, supermega said:

first you got to build a ship to leave the planet, that's not easy an you risk falling back to the  planet, or getting stuck in orbit if doesn't work.

Easy<>risk. There's no risk involved because you can always fly back.

 

10 minutes ago, supermega said:

Then you have to spend hours, or days journeying to another planet. That requires managing power, and fuel. The risk being you could get stranded in space or worse.

Risk is very low because you can calculate needed fuel. Or, mine/produce more ad you go there (or when you arrived)

 

12 minutes ago, supermega said:

Then once you get to a planet, you still have to locate and mine for resources. Because resources are finite, that means you'll have to get to it first before other players, or risk having to trade/buy ore at high price from someone else. The risk being you travel all the way to another planet, only to find that territory and resources have been taken already

Scanning for ore doesn't involve a risk. Being there first, maybe. But then again planets are huge so this will Not happen for a very, very long time. Wirst case: you'll have to search and scan longer

 

14 minutes ago, supermega said:

Then once you get what you need, you still need to get those resources off the planet, which means re-managing the power/fuel you need to make the journey back. Risk being not being able to make it off the planet because of weight, or worse getting stranded halfway through space because you miscalculated fuel/power.

Same thing. Not rly risky.

 

14 minutes ago, supermega said:

What pvp players don't seem to understand is that nobody is against pvp, most players just want meaningful gameplay

Meaningful gameplay is: Not getting everything for free and without a danger to your life. Not being able to get everything in a 100% safe environment.

Again: If you don't want to do PvP then stay in the safezone.

 

16 minutes ago, supermega said:

Also, the type of gameplay I describe will lead to more organic, emergent gameplay that is fun, that you can't really get from just random pvp encounters. Forcing pvp onto players just because you can, only leads to allot of Salt, and a broken community.

You describe a boring game to me. If that's what you want, good. If you don't understand the fun of PvP, good. But don't assume that it's Not fun for anyone, just because YOU don't like it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@lethys I get it .... you're a pvp player.... you only care about running and gunning, and shooting people in the face with all the pew pew. Nothing wrong with that..... but DU isn't a pvp only focused game. Pvp is one small aspect of the the game. Ultimately the game will be defined by the mindset of the playerbase, so we'll see how it goes.

 

Also, to be very clear: IM NOT AGAINST PVP...... I NEVER SAID I DISLIKED IT....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, supermega said:

but DU isn't a pvp only focused game

see

 

and dustart.thumb.jpg.9b9faf03822cd5f9856e0aaee68036da.jpg from the website.

 

DU isn't about PVP only. But it's also NOT about building ONLY. It's about everything at once

 

And according to

 

this statement of yours is just wrong:

 

9 minutes ago, supermega said:

Pvp is one small aspect of the the game

 

12 minutes ago, supermega said:

Ultimately the game will be defined by the mindset of the playerbase, so we'll see how it goes.

Exactly. Per se PVP is allowed outside the safezone. If you don't want to pvp - go to an ASA or MSA.

If ppl want to keep their turf safe outside those zones - they have to actually work for it and secure it themselves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's just say there are gradations of PvP between "safe zone" and "free-for-all slug/slag fest".

 

But I don't think we can really have a meaningful discussion about it. First of all because we don't know anything about the combat, skills and crafting systems yet. We need a much more complete picture of the game mechanics to even begin to speculate how things will play out, right now we don't have jack shite. For all we know, wanton destruction may not even feasible.

 

And second of all because everyone will have their own ideas about how to play anyway, even without actually knowing anything about the game. And that's not about to change so there's no point trying to convince or convert eachother. It's just empty blah blah and doesn't really amount to anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nanoman said:

And second of all because everyone will have their own ideas about how to play anyway, even without actually knowing anything about the game. And that's not about to change so there's no point trying to convince or convert eachother. It's just empty blah blah and doesn't really amount to anything.

I thought the point of having a forum pre launch is for people to speculate, discuss ideas and getting to know each other.

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...