lucagrabacr Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 I wrote about these a bit ago shortly after beta release, and exactly what I said gonna happen is happening right now so making a 2nd thread here and attaching a video I made about why we all should just stop calling combat PvP, seriously guys It's a misnomer, it's divisive, it's dumbing down the game HairballHacker, Daphne Jones and AlexRingess 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busterguy Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 Hi, im in New Genesis. We are a PvP organisation. Have a nice day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elusive_Voltis Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 But I like PvP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelk Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 I don't understand why you think calling it something different will change anything...people are well aware of who this "combat" is against and slapping a new label on it won't change anything. You may not like the term, but it isn't a misnomer. The issue isn't that players have opinions about "combat"....it's that NQ doesn't have any sense of design leadership. If NQ was competent enough to actually design their game, people wouldn't be so scared that they are being "forced" to compromise. The divisions within the player base exist because of how NQ decided to design, market, and present their grossly unfinished game -- many of the arguments about PvP aren't even arguments about the game...but rather its future, which is pure fantasy and speculation at this point. "How will PvP affect my buildings" won't stop being a question just because people call it "combat" lol. Absent any actual design or structure from NQ, of course people will debate more -- not our fault the game is mostly question marks left open for debate! ...stop quoting JC like the random whims and ideas he spews out on streams mean anything other than the fact that this game has no cohesive design leadership. People love to quote JC as if everything he says is some sacred promise. You can find plenty of things he's "promised" in the last 6 years that didn't work out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkHorizon Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 If you're a miner, you're a pvper because there might be better miners. If you're a ship builder, you're a pvper because there might be better ship builders. If you're a hauler, you're a pvper because there might be better haulers. If you're competing against other players that might be better than you, you are engaging in PVP as far as I'm concerned. PVP isn't just shooting the mark and taking their stuff, it can also be you getting customers business while leaving the competitor high and dry. It's all about where other peoples resources go since PVP is not just what's taken, but what's also freely given. I'm also fine with calling 'combat', 'PVP', because that's what combat is, PVP. I think the main issue the OP brings up is the community using blanket statements. *shrug* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucagrabacr Posted November 5, 2020 Author Share Posted November 5, 2020 17 minutes ago, DarkHorizon said: If you're a miner, you're a pvper because there might be better miners. If you're a ship builder, you're a pvper because there might be better ship builders. If you're a hauler, you're a pvper because there might be better haulers. If you're competing against other players that might be better than you, you are engaging in PVP as far as I'm concerned. PVP isn't just shooting the mark and taking their stuff, it can also be you getting customers business while leaving the competitor high and dry. It's all about where other peoples resources go since PVP is not just what's taken, but what's also freely given. I'm also fine with calling 'combat', 'PVP', because that's what combat its, PVP. I think the main issue the OP brings up is the community using blanket statements. *shrug* 1 hour ago, michaelk said: I don't understand why you think calling it something different will change anything...people are well aware of who this "combat" is against and slapping a new label on it won't change anything. You may not like the term, but it isn't a misnomer. The issue isn't that players have opinions about "combat"....it's that NQ doesn't have any sense of design leadership. If NQ was competent enough to actually design their game, people wouldn't be so scared that they are being "forced" to compromise. The divisions within the player base exist because of how NQ decided to design, market, and present their grossly unfinished game -- many of the arguments about PvP aren't even arguments about the game...but rather its future, which is pure fantasy and speculation at this point. "How will PvP affect my buildings" won't stop being a question just because people call it "combat" lol. Absent any actual design or structure from NQ, of course people will debate more -- not our fault the game is mostly question marks left open for debate! ...stop quoting JC like the random whims and ideas he spews out on streams mean anything other than the fact that this game has no cohesive design leadership. People love to quote JC as if everything he says is some sacred promise. You can find plenty of things he's "promised" in the last 6 years that didn't work out. I just think semantics matter, when people say "Do PvP" or "PvP organization" they imply non-aggressive players or non-PvP organizations don't do PvP, which is not the case, but the implications do divide the community or create a perceived division more so than how much there actually is, and NQ do tailor their developments from perceived player sentiment to some degree I just don't want DU to end up like ED where there's a completely separate path of gameplay without any PvP because of some hardcoded distinction or barrier (their solo / private group mode), essentially undermining the whole universe of the game Maybe I'm just paranoid or overly pedantic, at least I hope so AlexRingess and HairballHacker 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelk Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 I get it, but my perspective is that this ship has sailed a long time ago. I think the "division" in the community exists because the vision for this game is so ambiguous and poorly articulated and the state of production is so rough. If everyone was having such fun with the game as it exists today, it wouldn't feel like a division...but because the promise and potential of the game are so mismatched with its implementation today, there's a lot of angst and commentary about what needs to be "fixed" to make it complete. I guess my point is that NQ created this problem by launching such an incomplete project as a "beta" then pitching it as the end-all game for every space nerd's niche whims. I think a lot of people really, really want to believe in that promise and would rather blame each other than developer NQ...as soon as you recognize that NQ really doesn't have a plan, you're basically giving up that this game will become the promising civilization it was pitched as. There's still a lot of time for NQ to change directions -- until then, I agree that the player base needs to be patient with each other, but also understand that these discussions are inevitable...not because they are being pointlessly divisive, but because the incomplete and unknown state of the game's design invites speculation, discussion, and strong opinions...especially because many players feel so strongly about DU's potential and vision. The thing that would fix a lot of these issues is real leadership from the dev responsible for designing the game instead of big fat question marks whenever someone asks about how their game will work...I hope that players can be united enough to push NQ to do its job more professionally. lucagrabacr and Supermega 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
le_souriceau Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 I think all this "division talks" are very serious exaggerated. Especialy to blame such irrelevant thing as super-commonly used gamedev term is PvP. Sure, there is some vocal radical representetives of different... well, not even playstyles (because for most part its quite unclear how they actualy play) but lets say "fantasy concepts". While at same time most people are totaly within reason -- agree on some things, not agree on others, but there is no any drammatic principal divide or clearly defined in stone point of conflict. Pluralism is actualy healthy thing. Personaly I see only one real and dangerous potential for divide -- If NQ allow themeselfs to slip into old good favoritism, when some players seriously not that equal to mass of others (in access to information and ability to have kings ear). I already observe some minor, but worrying signs into this direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamiel7 Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 You make a good point, and I even think there's merit in just referring to it as combat, but if you asked me if I thought semantics actually mattered in any kind of substantive way, the answer would be no. I think it's more or less a diversion from the real problem that is divergent player expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underhook Posted November 6, 2020 Share Posted November 6, 2020 Combat implies your opponent also has a gun. In many cases the correct term would be slaughter. That said 'm all for combat but in this game they have PvP instead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atmosph3rik Posted November 6, 2020 Share Posted November 6, 2020 I think it was PVP players that made the push for this separation in the first place. Not in DU but in a hundred other games. PVP combat is different then PVE combat, and it needs to be balanced differently. So people started thinking of it separately. Which was a good thing for PVP in most games that i've played. It seems like the division that you're talking about here is between players who are interested in PVP combat, and players who are not. I don't think calling PVP something else is going to change that. But also, why change it? People having different interests is what the game is all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musclethorpe Posted November 6, 2020 Share Posted November 6, 2020 Sounds to me like you are going out of your way to be offended. I could make the same argument for the term combat in regards to "non-combatants". le_souriceau 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairballHacker Posted November 6, 2020 Share Posted November 6, 2020 On 11/5/2020 at 9:02 AM, lucagrabacr said: I just don't want DU to end up like ED where there's a completely separate path of gameplay without any PvP because of some hardcoded distinction or barrier (their solo / private group mode), essentially undermining the whole universe of the game YES! I was thinking of posting your graphic ('say "combat" not "PvP) over on the ED forums. There the debate has never ceased and is always polarized between the same two toxic extremes. FDev responded and as a result much of the game has been ruined IMO. I really don't want that to happen to DU. AlexRingess and lucagrabacr 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairballHacker Posted November 6, 2020 Share Posted November 6, 2020 21 hours ago, Underhook said: Combat implies your opponent also has a gun. In many cases the correct term would be slaughter. That said 'm all for combat but in this game they have PvP instead No, it does not imply the other guy has a gun. In fact, combat operations are more successful if you can get the drop on your opponent when he is not ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atmosph3rik Posted November 7, 2020 Share Posted November 7, 2020 1 hour ago, HairballHacker said: No, it does not imply the other guy has a gun. In fact, combat operations are more successful if you can get the drop on your opponent when he is not ready. And your goal in catching your enemy by surprise would be to, avoid combat. Underhook 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underhook Posted November 7, 2020 Share Posted November 7, 2020 9 hours ago, HairballHacker said: No, it does not imply the other guy has a gun. In fact, combat operations are more successful if you can get the drop on your opponent when he is not ready. That would be assassination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairballHacker Posted November 8, 2020 Share Posted November 8, 2020 On 11/6/2020 at 4:28 PM, Atmosph3rik said: And your goal in catching your enemy by surprise would be to, avoid combat. No, it would be to win the combat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atmosph3rik Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 9 hours ago, HairballHacker said: No, it would be to win the combat. Ok well then what are we calling the thing that was avoided, in that scenario? If we're not calling it combat anymore. That needs a name too. I would like to suggest "Big boy boom boom time" HairballHacker 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamiel7 Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 On 11/6/2020 at 7:28 PM, Atmosph3rik said: And your goal in catching your enemy by surprise would be to, avoid combat. Catching your enemy by surprise isn't avoiding combat so much as it is ensuring an optimal outcome for combat on your end. An engagement does not have to be fair or preferable for both parties to be considered combat by definition. One could argue that the people who are "best" at combat are the ones that don't take fights they aren't reasonably sure they will win. Of course, this is all semantics and pedantry at the end of the day. Whether you call it combat, PvP, or some other nonsense, there is still going to be a group of people that create and participate in the meta of it and a group that is unable or unwilling to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daphne Jones Posted November 10, 2020 Share Posted November 10, 2020 Be careful OP. They locked my thread for suggesting that combat and PVP weren't the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyTazer Posted November 10, 2020 Share Posted November 10, 2020 5 minutes ago, Daphne Jones said: Be careful OP. They locked my thread for suggesting that combat and PVP weren't the same thing. They locked the thread because you lose your shit like a 2 year old, and then name call. Anopheles and ShellCarnage 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShellCarnage Posted November 10, 2020 Share Posted November 10, 2020 This reminds me of the years of arguing on Eve Online that shooting a miner was not classed as "PVP" as the person didn't have the ability to fight back. If you play an mmorpg you are pvping period, any of these activites you are playing agaisnt another play : Mining, Trading, 'Combat' as you would call it. Regardless, PVP is what it is and has been for a long time. Honestly, I don't know why it even matters that much JohnnyTazer 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucagrabacr Posted November 10, 2020 Author Share Posted November 10, 2020 1 hour ago, ShellCarnage said: This reminds me of the years of arguing on Eve Online that shooting a miner was not classed as "PVP" as the person didn't have the ability to fight back. If you play an mmorpg you are pvping period, any of these activites you are playing agaisnt another play : Mining, Trading, 'Combat' as you would call it. Regardless, PVP is what it is and has been for a long time. Honestly, I don't know why it even matters that much Literally by not calling it PvP would make the arguments and division of "PvP / not PvP" occur much less often Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Novean-71071 Posted November 10, 2020 Share Posted November 10, 2020 What are you trying to achieve with this topic? Attention? There is PvP and PvE. PvP and PvE are the group of things player do togheter and against each other. Combat in done via AvA, CvC and whatever comes later and goes in PvP folder. #fml #semantics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShellCarnage Posted November 10, 2020 Share Posted November 10, 2020 1 hour ago, lucagrabacr said: Literally by not calling it PvP would make the arguments and division of "PvP / not PvP" occur much less often But why does that matter? Even if we called it Combat, people would called PVE carebear leaving you with "Combat Orgs/Carebear Orgs". The Divsion will be there no matter what because they are different game styles. It just seems like you've making an issue out of something that isn't even an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now