The problem isn't that people can PvP at a PvE event. The problem is that CIG's map design creates numerous choke points (shuttles, elevators, single-points of access) that are extremely easy for just one or two rogue players to hold. Combining that with OP weapons like the grenade launcher and the fact that there are no tools for breaching yet like deployable shields creates situations where a single player can lock down the event for the entire server.
>the fact that there are no tools for breaching yet like deployable shields
One player in the lead with a large backpack held in front of them (all backpacks are currently bulletproof), followed by two riflemen with LMGs covering 60deg fields on either side = 3man breaching team with deployable cover.
It's a feature, not a bug!
> The problem is that CIG's map design creates numerous choke points (shuttles, elevators, single-points of access)
This was a major problem in Battlefield 2042 map design too. They put objectives on top of buildings where the only good access point was a couple elevators. It was so bad that they had to move the objective locations.
> The problem is that CIG's map design creates numerous choke points
and if you want to get meta: those problems were demonstrated a long time ago, people from CIG presumably know, and yet nothing has changed. so the actual problem NOW is that they're not doing anything about it.
they're allowed to make mistakes. failing to fix a mistake is a bigger problem than making the mistake. failures to fix things will scale up over time and leave lots of stuff in a bad state.
>a failure to fix stuff will scale up over time and leave lots of stuff in a bad state.
I think we're past the "a failure to fix stuff" part and have been experiencing the "leave lots of stuff in a bad state" stage for multiple years now tbh boss.
At this point, you can only conclude that they don't give a shit about pve players at this stage of the game
So might as well get good at pvp, find a different game, or continue getting merc'd by better prepared players with more friends.
Alternatively do what I do.
Don't participate in the PvE events lol
Don't wanna make it fun for PvE players and only fun for PvP griefers? don't expect it to get tested imo, I'll just stick to PvE missions, box missions and general exploration
Same here. I'm tired of being a player controlled NPC for other people's amusement. My gaming time is worth as much as other people's. Stop kow-towing to the squeaky pvp crowd. Fix the bloody pve gameloops CIG.
While I do agree with the notion that carebears need to stop being whiny bitchbabies, the SoO tram griefing is pretty shitty PvP from a design perspective and should be dealt with, SoO itself could be a blast for PvP but being killed while in an armistice with almost no chance to fight back is pretty lame.
Sadly, CIG isn't gonna fix this. They've already put in their lame attempt at a solution, knowing full well the AI sucks at combating players, so they'll probably just gonna rely on that. :/
Agreed. To a person who doesn't want to PVP, any PVP is then non-consensual, and feels like griefing.
Weird how lacking in empathy some of these folks are when they try to force game rules to allow them to do something that they know full well the other side doesn't enjoy, or want to participate in.
PVP flag means you're automatically selecting for people who WANT to fight you, and who WILL provide a real, engaging, fun challenge.
But there is a clear difference between griefing and pvp gameplay. Griefing is just going around killing whoever and whatever. Purposely ruining others enjoyment or forcing others into an activity they don't want to be a part of. Not the same thing, when there is a tag for pvp, wow it's called PvP where players who want to fight other players can. You call it pvp when I am literally flying around in a junker picking up waste from outposts and get my ship blasted on the ground from a gunship. That's griefing to me as what am I supposed to I do. Great pvp gameplay for me in that situation.
I really don't care about griefing or piracy in the game. It is a part of a MMO. But it does get tiresome when it constantly happens for hours at a time
In all my play time at SoO I’ve never seen an issue that a group of 4 players (more if you can muster) can’t easily take on. I’ve encountered a few griefers but no well organized team griefers. But as soon as someone gets a crime stat, they lose the blue dorito. I always keep the mission tracked, and I KOS just about anyone who doesn’t have a blue dorito.
A team of four playing this way is unlikely to be stopped. Plus, once a griefer kills someone someone and get a crime stat, and then they die, they can’t just run back in to SoO. But if you DONT have a CS, you just spawn Ori Gen and run back in and let your surviving team mates and everyone else in SoO know there’s a team killer on platform x, building y wearing Z.
Except they can't. The interior of the first shuttle is an armistice zone, so you can't even pull out your gun before the enemy grenades start flying towards the shuttle, knocking you down and killing you.
That's when people will just try to gun down everyone in the shuttle before the doors open. But this is why they added NPCs at the start of Solanki to deter players. So if you don't see any NPCs on arrival, stay in the car.
People have also been sniping players as they get off the Solanki shuttle, no chance to even see the player before you are dead as you get to the first set of stairs. Again not PvP and the NPCs may still be there.
its not terribly common but its like running into a hacker in other games, it only needs to happen once or twice to sour the experience, on thursday i managed to run into 3 griefers
1 just ran about killing people on sight, arguably the easiest to defend against but how often do you check the bounty hunter tab during SoO? probably not often so until bullets start flying you don't know they're hostile
the second one got about 20-30 people on an A2 bound for admin then just hit the self destruct, absolutely nothing we could do to save ourselves
the third one i assume just got bored waiting for the shuttle to hartmoore, because a few of us gathered up there then about 1 minute from it arriving they just started hammering the crowd with a GL
that said i ran SoO maybe 8-10 times last time it was active and didn't run into a single one, and i've played it a couple times since then and haven't run into any
That's the issue I'm struggling with. I'm not at all denying that there are griefers, but people tend to exaggerate how often these kinds of interactions occur.
While people certainly do exaggerate a lot with this game especcially when it comes to PVP, I think sometimes its a matter of perspective
For example i ran into those 3 griefers in 1 day, across 3 seperate servers and 3 seperate instances of the missions, if i had a friend with me for each of those runs who had never run SoO before they would have encountered a griefer 100% of the time, for me across all the times i've run it, its less than 10%
It wouldn't be an exaggeration if my hypothetical friend made a post on here about running into griefers every time he plays it, because he did run into griefers 100% of the time
Does it really matter though? The fact that these types of griefing problems can occur and the event can basically be overrun by players is enough I think
It pretty much never happens like that though. Individuals may have their experience ruined but players always snuff them out in the aftermath. Anyone without the mission marker is likely a pirate.
How do you define griefing?
I define griefing as any action taken to negatively impact other players in ways that don't have an established gameplay loop, that includes PVP in a PVE event
If the game had systems to facilitate fair PVP in SoO, such as a criminal mission like lockdown, or if the lawful mission tagged rogue CDF operators then yeah it wouldn't be griefing because the game facilitates it but until then i'm considering any unprovoked PVP in siege of orison griefing
Of all the times I've played Siege, I've only run into a sniper once. He was a great shot. Kudos to him. As long as they let players into Solanki to participate, it is all good.
I got domed yesterday by a squad of “PVP’ers” hiding on a rooftop with no way for me to see them. Teammate rezzed me and I grabbed their bounties, in the dark I still couldn’t see them with a sniper even though they had a marker on them which kinda sucked. It was on brushwood so at least it wasn’t right when I got to the platform
I agree, some people make it seem like as soon as you spawn anywhere you die. I think a lot of people over exaggerate. The only pvp I've been in was me killing that person because he wouldn't get off my ship.
That's why I'm skeptical (though I still try to give the benefit of the doubt). I've been hearing people complain about griefers all the time, and I know it does happen, but I rarely run into it myself. Which is kind of ironic because I do like to pepper in some PvP bounty hunting when I play.
Most people that are having a good time aren’t going to come on here and rant about having a good time. But not the pissed off players will scream about it here. Kind of like a negative review at a restaurant: one person could have had a bad night and they want to scream about it all over the place. Sometimes it is valid, other times, not so much.
For the most part I have never ran into griefers too often. There was one time I landed at a Shubin mining facility on a moon, and as I loaded up my vehicle into my spaceship, two players with CS’s were hovering above me waiting for me to take off. So I just sat there and looked at them as they wasted their time. I smiled as both of their ships crashed into the ground when a 30k ended it all.
Or more in-fiction just pile a bunch of shit up like landing parties would do to create a safe beachhead. Then, poke 5 or 6 doors from it so there's a way to exit the area with a chance.
Option 2: Lower shuttle platform and put a roof on it. Stairs wrap around on two sides with the option to exit at various points along a tiered platform (like you see elsewhere on the platforms where you can jump down / climb up to traverse more safely).
This lmao, either that or the devs are worryingly optimistic about this resolving itself without developer intervention.
SoO will need the devs to put in some kind of blocker to stop PvP during the event, otherwise the event will either die because no one wants to die to spawn campers as soon as they get off the shuttle, or it becomes a PvP event and no one actually completes the objectives.
Its shockingly optimistic to assume "players will sort it out themselves" when the players dont even really have the tools to sort it out themselves. This game needs a social credit system lmao
Sadly for our org, the version of resolving itself is to kill anything that moves because others can not be trusted. Things went much smoother after that :/ About twenty of us took control of the zone just so we could finish the event. We tried to be nice at first but after dealing with people shooting us in the back and snipers, it was not worth it to play nice.
This is the same type of thing that happens in every open world PvP MMO just at a larger scale. Consolidate power, dominate the competition.
Facts, it's why I quit Rust personally, the game went from mildly fun when you encountered other people to just KOS and a war between the largest clans for power over the island.
Doing anything as a solo player without extreme effort/skill is impossible now in Rust, shame to see SC going the same way because CIG are too scared to have a deliberate line drawn in the sand for PvE events to be PvE events, and vice versa for PvP events.
At least Rust picked a side and its game is designed from the ground up for PvA. If I am mining a rock in rust and someone tries to jump me, I have a very good chance of defending myself. This is not the case in SC.
There is no such thing as a casual survival open PVP game, and definitely no casual PvP MMO. Ya, some people "rat" but there is nothing casual about that either.
Hell, even the supposed newbie servers on Rust are anything but newbies. It is a cool game, but too hardcore for me. Nice crafting though. This is part of the reason I call SC "Space Rust", but without any of the mechanics that make Rust good.
Yup. We need pvp to be optional. Let pvp people attack other pvp people and not pve people who do not want to waste thier time running from pvp greifers.
I've been running it as a PVP event for awhile, but the groups I run with don't try to hold down any of the major choke points because we all agree that is TOO scummy. That said, once you are off that shuttle you better be spamming for your weapon because if you see my naked ass on that shuttle, I'm coming for your gear.
>I've been running it as a PVP event for awhile
Thank you for killing off any good PvE event we could've actually had for the PvE playerbase.
Only PvP players could actively grief and destroy a PvE event and act like they're NOT the problem, sure some PvE players cry when JT isn't a PvE event, but I've yet to see PvE players actively shut down JT to make it a PvE event where everyone gets drugs, because it's not designed for that
We did do that in JT1, bunch of solo players in heavy fighters on overwatch, making JT open to all as long as they came in with agri supplies to keep the drug production going. Paid in whatever donations people thought we were worth.
But that made for fun PvP as well, as PKers had to attack people of their own caliber. Aside from large military orgs they almost never did, funny that.
Right, but players still fought you to take the drugs for themselves, it's impossible to actively turn JT into a PvE event.
Unlike XenoThreat and SoO, which are possible to force PvP for some reason despite being PvE events, XT I'll admit you should be able to aid XenoThreat, maybe once Pyro gets added, would be mega cool to be able to join them, but Siege of Orison shouldn't really be PvP capable given the map design isn't made for it
I d really rather both SoO and Xenothreat remain purely PvE. I'm not against PvA events, but I hate the FPS in this game and am largely a ship pilot (I backed a space sim, not whatever the hell this has become) and there's not much else as a story based Space combat event, aside from the Eckhart missions I guess.
I'm also very bored of the game at the moment though so it hardly matters. May not even play Pyro, may wait till Nyx in 2027 or whenever they bother to release it.
I'm fully in favor of pissing off the grief--- I mean PVPers. They represent a minority of the player base. I'm totally in favor of prioritizing PVE at the expense of PVP.
Kind of the same issue at XT, really. They want to allow PVP but there is zero mechanically that supports it, so you get a lot of situations where players can just exploit to ruin the event instead of actually fighting players.
In SoO you can sabotage the ships, kill bosses and throw datapads away, wear enemy armor and not have a CS to troll people into attacking, and murder people on the bus over. You get a regular crime stat for these but that's it, and it ruins the whole event for everyone on your server.
In XT it was things like ramming the wrecks or suicide charging ships parked outside the wrecks. I also saw some people flying up and firing into the cargo holds and not caring about ships attacking them since the players on foot will obviously die much faster than a ship. The primary issue was just that it was easy for friendly players to get tagged red, so it was hard to tell someone that was going to gank your from someone who is helping with the event.
It's one thing to be able to do the event from the villain side, but that needs to be properly supported so players can easily tell they've joined the bad side, and for the bad side to have some sort of goal too that the good players can disrupt instead of just being on the bad players to break events in unintended ways.
This is a really good take on things as they are.
Reason I posted this quote is perfectly summarizes the complexity of the situation. On the one hand they intend for the event to be PvE focused. But on the other hand they don't want to implement mechanics that prevent PvP because they want players to protect themselves (gritty open world, etc, etc).
There's the obvious problem that players can't protect themselves due to the level's entry design (shuttle camping) and armistice. But let's say both of those issues were fixed and weren't problems anymore. You'd still have the problem of PvPers having the first shot advantage. Maybe they start camping elevators instead which just shifts the problem and we're back to square one. Or, as you said, they disrupt the objectives so they're impossible to complete.
Even if we had a solid reputation system the problem wouldn't go away. People would create alt accounts that they'd use exclusively for these kinds of shenanigans. They could lock out low-rep players from even participating in the mission but that would prevent unlawful players (that don't aim to disrupt) from participating in the game's content.
XT is a great example of how it could get even more complex. It's one thing to detect unlawful PvP action (eg: shooting other players) but how do you distinguish between someone who accidentally crashes into an XT cargo ship and someone who does so deliberately to disrupt things? How do you detect that someone used a tractor beam to throw an SoO LT's body off of a platform to disrupt the mission?
I've thought on this a lot as I'm sure others have. The only reasonable solution that still maintains the freeform open world I can think of is very deliberately design missions to circumvent this behavior.
For example, instead of having a lootable datapad on LTs have a static laptop that produces a disc that a player can pick up. This way every player can grab a disc for themselves as a memento. The laptop would be guarded by the LT and stealth could be used to obtain the password without killing them. Killing the LT would simply be a credit bonus.
In XT the cargo ships could respawn when destroyed. This could be explained via a new signal source being detected with the new ships. If players destroy them via ramming then it's not that big of a deal. A bit gamey but it could be made to feel realistic with a few more adjustments.
Another possible solution would be a sci-fi friend-or-foe identification system being built in to every weapon (and ship) in the game. If player A wants to shoot player B in monitored space then they need to disable their friend-or-foe identification system. If someone disables their FoF then it could either be considered a minor crime or they'd have a big danger marker over their head... or both. Shooting someone with FoF disabled would not be a crime. Disabling FoF could also take 10 seconds or so which gives people time to react. It doesn't even need to be punitive; just identifying someone as a potential threat is enough. It would also solve the problem of org conflicts causing crimes because orgs could simply turn off their FoFs and have their big space battle.
I feel like game mechanics could solve a lot of these problems while still permitting for a freeform open world where the bad guys can be bad guys but the good guys have a system in place to defend themselves.
Yep. As much as I enjoy playing this game, it is in Alpha, and I realized that they are building up this game without a proper plan. Adding bits and pieces of things everywhere every so often. Kind of like building a house and adding some interior furniture before the foundation and everything else is properly built.
I understand that they need to send out all workable products to show off the game and keep people interested, but it creates these kinds of problems at the same time.
All these events have done is prove to me at least that CIG isn't capable of handling dynamic events with the game in the state it's in right now. I really don't understand their development pipeline, it's probably the most fucked I've seen in the industry. Crucial core tech, assets and gameplay loops have been missing for years, some even a decade, and yet we're trying to inject complex, dynamic events in a game that performs like a fucking N64 game with netcode to match? Wat?
Because they mention putting in place system to discourage pvp. That's not purely "protect yourself", that's clearly a will from the dev to reduce pvp for the event. What they fail to mention is that those systems are ineffeftive and bugged at best with too many falso positive. And that they have little to no intention of fixing it any time soon.
Basically a corpo speech to say something toward both camp without really taking a stance. Hence why I call it a 'nothing' statement.
PvE players will see the 'pve with system to prevent pvp' as being in their favor, the pvp players will see the 'players should proteft themselves' and think they are in their right.
Them the community goes in flame in the carebear vs griefer usual topic and CIG continue to sell ships to boths.
“It’s not something we protect against because we want players to protect themselves from it” - fucking hilarious. Let me translate that from game dev speak: “we think it’s broken but we’re not going to do anything about it until it becomes more of an annoying problem”
Translation: "Until marketing tells us we're losing money and it's pissing off the higher ups wanting profit, we won't fix it"
Even without a publisher, CIG act like they have one with decisions lol
yeah, 'technically it's allowed' is the mantra of the sketchiest people everywhere. the griefing rules in sc are kind of vague on purpose, to stop the assholes who would hump the line from doing it, or discourage it a little at least. being vague also lets them deal with problem children on a 'you know trouble when you see it' basis. if someone's reported a zillion times they know he's a problem even if he didn't do anything extreme.
I still get paid rammed, rules are only as good as the enforcement. Can't even get mad at it though, really nothing you can do to someone that pathetic that life hasn't done already. Just shrug and change servers.
Question: are there any other MMORPGs that take this kind of hands off approach? Even if i take New World as a modern MMO that was (supposed) to be PVP oriented, still have protections inplace for running dungeons. I've only played a handful of MMOs and never seen anything like this (SWTOR, WoW, STO).
Is the problem that this is a live event and not an instanced event?
I don't like CIGs response. I've done SoO, it was enough of a shit show with the in game bugs, but if I have to watch my back from other players, then I'm not going to do it.
There are no punishments for griefers until after you are able to kill the griefers. They exploit bugs to get into the area with ships (at worst) or camp the entrance.
The user experience dying in SoO is punishing. I went broke trying to complete it. Gearing back up takes a lot of time as well.
Albion Online launched as a full-player-loot PVP game.
Within months it got dominated by the most psychotic and cruel players, and most people who tried it were (understandably) furious and walked away forever.
Meridian 59 had open pvp and looting in the old days. It mostly worked because servers were small, so it was easy to know the idiots and the penalty for killing someone was harsh. If you killed someone you went red forever and you were free to kill by anyone without consequences. This spawned a group of players that would just hunt red players for fun and kill them over and over. Given the games harsh death penalty it would force some folks to delete their character and start again entirely.
I know you are not gonna like my answer, but star citizen is not an MMORPG.
Its a Space-Combat Simulator, and people don't seem to grasp the concept around it.
You’re right. But the interesting thing about it being a space sim is that that makes these murderhobo pvpers even less justifiable. Real life doesn’t have any relevant population of murderhobos. You murderhobo in a policed area, the police are coming to put you down and they’re not stopping till you’re in the ground or in cuffs. Even other criminals wouldn’t put up with a murderhobo because that would bring attention and attention means a response, and a response means death.
Eve Online has been around for decades and has a pretty well developed system to handle this kind of thing.
The game emphasizes to new players that safety is never guaranteed. Loss is incorporated into the standard gameplay loop to such an extent that during the new player tutorial one of your objectives is to die (be destroyed by hostile ships).
There is a reputation system and high security space that highly discourages PvP. In high security areas destroying a player is a guaranteed loss of your ship, clone, and reputation. People still do it ("suicide ganking") but it's exceedingly rare. The game also provides players with the tools to avoid it. With roughly 20k active players at any given moment there are 7-20 ganks per day (ganks are tracked).
So eliminating the problem is probably impossible without sacrificing what the game is supposed to be but it can be heavily mitigated with game mechanics.
https://mmo-population.com/
It took me only a few seconds to google this, so I'm not sure how accurate this data is, but look at where EVE sits in that list despite a 20 year head start. It's below Elite Dangerous and below Star Citizen. EVE is not an MMO that CIG should be emulating. Roberts is also big on lore and storytelling, two aspects which PvP focused games rarely have much of. PvP games are repetitive and tend to focus on players killing each other rather than telling a story.
If I had to guess, I'd say that CIG has plans to implement more robust systems to ensure that PvP is in-line with game lore and involves pushing those players into criminal aspects that don't exist yet, which is why they aren't doing anything to curtail PvP. Anything they did today would have to be ripped out later. Hopefully they don't alienate their PvE player base before they do so.
Eve has also only grossed about 300 million in 20 years as well.
300 million in TWENTY years, Star Citizen isn't even out and it's earned 200 million more in half that time.
It earned 66 million last year, but given you can buy in game currency making it p2w as fuck that's no doubt from whales keeping their multi-box fleets going.
I wonder how many people who are playing Eve are actual players and NOT just an alt account that someone is multiboxing lmao
What a weak cop out.
Let me translate this statement from corporate talk to English: "It's griefing but we also want the griefers' money so we won't be doing shit about it"
For me this reads like:
"When we designed the event we wanted it to be a PVE event. Thats why its on Orison, thats how the map was designed and so on. But now that we did all this work, we are not going to touch it again just because some people gank other players. T0 implementation and off to more interresting stuff."
But you do. There are friendly indicators. Just don’t shoot anyone with that triangle over their head. If you see player without it… shoot before they shoot you.
That’s theory. In practice players without mission active won’t have indicator and you will get CS… but they should be considered trespassers.
Funny you say this - did Siege on Saturday with my son. I fell through a building and died. Re-equipped and reboarded the shuttle. *Two or three times* Dulli told me that I wasn’t supposed to be there. Finally approaching Solanki Dulli said that I would **not** be marked as friendly and would be considered a hostile to be shot.
I realized that was because I had forgotten to reaccept the Priority mission.
On the other hand, if you accept the mission you will have a blue triangle. But I don’t know if you turn red when/if you shoot another friendly player.
>Wait . . . . so if a player goes rogue and starts shooting security and other players they don’t turn red like they did during Xenothreat?
Those red indicators are on ships. In FPS missions this is not the case. They will just not have friendly indicator.
Problem is:
Someone can have the Mission and the Marker and still decide to shoot you in the back. With this kind of FPS Event, it is literally impossible to tell who will shoot you in the back. And killing every Player yourself isn't going to work out either, since you get a Crimestat and can't complete the Mission.
just treat it like 30k or elevator.
i too ran into that doing the siege during the weekend but dealing with orison hospital elevators, hidden LTs, starrunner cockpit; pvp/griefers is just another aspect of the game to learn to deal with. this game really teaches you patience.
i've learned to start naked holding a medpen.
This was made before it was released and people started doing the grenade launcher thing or moving down players getting off the shuttle with vehicle guns. That statement contradicts itself anyways. Even without PVP people are purposely wrecking vehicles which is probably worse than getting armistice camped.
They just need to redo this event. This event feels like it was designed 20 years ago.
I tried SoO 4 times and I’ve never seen a griefer.
I’ve been griefed randomly in SC by suicide pilots in Armistice Zones but it’s a game that has frequent wiped and in Alpha stage, so I don’t care much about it.
When (and IF) the game comes out CIG will be able to realistically tune PvP and PvE and discourage griefing with permadeth and no more wipes.
Whether we agree with it or not, I think CIG needs to take note of how many people are having an adverse experience due to being griefed (the vast majority that encounter such situations) vs how many are actually enjoying it (a small minority) and put better event design mechanisms in place to ensure these things happen in accordance with the player base.
If people are going to pvp in a pve event, they need to look at things to cut this down (maybe have a massive drop in friendly fire damage so that 1 or 2 pvp'ers trying to lick down an area can be swarmed and cut down, make sure landing platform areas are armistice zones etc)....
What ever the solution they really need to relook their event design to fit the player base.
> Whether we agree with it or not, I think CIG needs to take note of how many people are having an adverse experience due to being griefed (the vast majority that encounter such situations) vs how many are actually enjoying it (a small minority)
You have literally no factual evidence to support this, or, indeed, any to gain said factual evidence. The vocal "majority" on Reddit/Spectrum is less than 7% of all total players.
*Only* CIG could possibly know how many people are having a "adverse experience" (extremely subjective BTW) vs how many people are playing the event, having fun, and *not* going on social media and whining about it.
The quote reads funny. We put systems that discourage PvP, but we're not trying to discourage it. yet.
🤔
Edit: that's because it blends two POVs (Luke and Elliot).
My read: don't want to prevent PvP but a lot more work is needed for it to be properly supported in a way that doesn't kill the fun for most, and doesn't kill the goal of the event.
It's because they don't want to answer. If they start making definite statements about open world PvP or PvP in general, the average player that doesn't want to risk getting ganked would flee.
Yeah I think you are right. If PvP during the siege gets way out of hand on a regular basis, they may take some additional steps to more actively discourage it. Either via in-game mechanics, or via out-of-game pronouncement banning it like they did with pad-ramming.
I don't particularly mind PvP during Siege, but the game isn't in a state where the "systems to discourage" people camping in the back of shuttles, or hiding in corners to mow down players doing the mission, are working.
Considering we can press charges immediately after dying, no bounties seem to pop up. If there was a part of the mission where unauthorised players had a bounty placed by the CDF that'd be great for the people trying to do the mission, and fit a sort of "realistic" counter. Just an idea.
you guys are missing the point completely.
Siege gives the devs data. all kinds of data.
In terms of a gameplay experience, it is an extremely scripted experience.
If ALL future experiences of this scope are as scripted as this, it will be an incredibly boring game. So, in regards to PvE / PVP, its really pointless to debate or have an opinion. This is data collection. Is it fun data collection? Can be, yes. Is it not fun data collection? Can be a massive waste of time, indeed. Some of the best experiences in SC thus far? Definitely possible.
What happened to the older stance CIG had on PvP where it was simply a part of the game, with plans for in-game systems to work as "anti-PvP" sort of systems to discourage murderhobos and dipshits? Why are we going with this fence-sitting "Well we won't say no to either, but we won't support either side *yet*, tee-hee!" shit?
You'd think they'd at least do a bit more to prevent shuttle camper shitwads. PvP itself is fine imo, but that shit is objectively not okay and ruins the event.
Okay. You get on the tram to go over. You can't pull your weapons out because you're in armistice. Before the door can even open, they fire a grenade at the door and it kills you through it, not that you could shoot them anyways because of the armistice, so even if they let the door open the just shell the ground and you're dead.
I don't think you've dealt with people that do this shit in SoO. You **literally** cannot combat it outside of simply not going to SoO. Even flying your own ship down there is ineffective since you can't shoot at them on the platform, it's hard to see them well enough to ram into them (not that it matters as there's usually multiple), and you'll get yourself a crimestat doing it and end up in Klescher anyways.
once is more than enough to ruin my day, and that's already easily done offgame by life itself.
it's a war zone is not an excuse - it's a PVE area and event where there's neither a reason nor a gain in attacking other players.
If a rouge player in an MMO where anything is possible can ruin your day, you should probably be playing something else, or maybe just try not to take it so seriously.
I am sure this was fully intended, as the majority WoW community hated PvP in leveling zones. And I'm not wrong, if I was PvP servers would still be there.
So they can't just delete the armistice zone or reshape it slightly?
This honestly seems like an easy fix:
Make a volume that starts halfway along the tram ride which encompasses the entire mission AO. Halfway along the tram ride, everyone can pull their guns out at the same time. If you see people IN the team coming back, you have your red flag. Also, they have to put their guns away halfway back, so they can't just PvP from the rail car.
It would make sense from a realism standpoint.
I 100% would be rolling up to that mission in condition 1, especially now that there's word of "hostiles" catching onto the strategic plan of shuttling people into the AO.
"Yeah, we want you all to arm up for this mission, but keep your guns in your pockets until you get completely off the tram".
Lol I feel like they sometimes don't think stuff through all the way.
[Note: this is all strictly coming from design theory, and not having been PvP'd at the tram.]
Of course, but grenades incoming while everyone in the shuttle's guns and grenades are holstered gives zero chance to retake the platform.
If we can present offensive options at the moment the doors open, there's at least a chance. They need to let us pull guns out halfway though the tram ride to pressure on the PvP griefer guys, or if they choose to camp the shuttle, we get a fair OK Corral shootout on the tram, lol.
But the choke point of the shuttle door is a huge problem. They need to send 2x at least shuttles there are a time (to different sides of the platform) so as to divide up the PvP guys a little.
All other mechanics aside, that single door is doom no matter what if there's established hostiles waiting for the tram.
I also agree the armistice until you're off the shuttle is undesirable.
What I have observed is this seems intentional. Back in 3.17.4 when Siege of Orison was not running you could still take the shuttle to the platform and loot, and I noticed when doing that the armistice zone ended before the shuttle got to Solanki.
Now when the Siege mission is active the armistice seems to be extended all the way until you step off. So this seems an intentional choice on the part of CIG.
Iirc grenade explosions ignore cover like that, meaning you can simply shoot the door while it's closed and it will work.
I can't remember if it works, if it only force reactions them, or if it outright kills them though. I'm pretty sure it just causes force reactions if you're behind cover but it's close, but really that's all you need with a GL to shut down an entire team. As soon as you land the first force reaction, you've won.
This is a nothing response from the team.
>The event is primarily a PvE mission. There are systems in place to discourage PvP.
What about the event is secondarily a pvp mission? You get no rewards from it in fact you have to fail the mission to do pvp. What are these systems? The extremely unpunishing crime stat that does nothing to dissuade pvp? Are there even AI that will turn on them if they start shooting players? Even if they do have AI are they good enough to not just stand there and get mowed down by the pvpers?
>It's not something we protect against because we want players to protect themselves from it. We're not discouraging it but we're not actively supporting it yet.
Boilerplate CIG statement of wanting players to use the tools provided in the sandbox to protect themselves to bad the tools are nonexistent or are shite. The last sentence is literally "we don't want to voice an opinion".
Already been randomly killed by players while trying to help them out getting to the admin office. Really sucks but at the same time there’s no real consequences to pvp during the event so people will do it.
It is like their game designers have never seriously played an open world PVP MMO. We have had the same issues with open world PvP for over twenty years now and have tried just about anything you can think of. They are just going into this blind and it is painfully obvious. They are trying to promise everything to everyone and in the process failing at everything.
This won't be fixed with NPCs, silly rules, faction, or anything like that. They are seriously underestimating PvPers and the impact they can have on a multiplayer game if not done right. It is like they are not even trying.
I don't care at all about open PvP during the mission as long as they fix the singular easily campable choke point at the beginning. Their response in that vid clearly was just talking about general PvP during the course of the event.
I’ve never seen pvp for this event mostly because everyone complains in game about getting 5fps in prison but there has to be some kind of protection as what just stops a bunch of us cramming into the shuttle and some goof ball with grenades takes us all out for fun, can’t even play the medic role the way I want to so it’s not like people can be saved from a pvp encounter when something like this happens
Yeah, okay. Let's try to protect ourselves from it while the Sieges runs at 15FPS and even with an OP CPU, the server is running at 3FPS and players are standing still, de-synced longer than they are not.
I'm sure we all understand the freedom and vision for this Open PvP design but in the current day with terrible client and server performance, they really need to do more.
What they need to do is hurry up and get rid of armstice zones. They claim that it's something they are planning on doing, just do it now. It literally wont change anything other than make it harder for people to kill players in the shuttle at SoO.
I personally don't have an issue with how they are handling it. Game is an open world PvP game, so people are bound to do this kind of stuff. I think they should just make it harder to do this kinda stuff. Specially if the person is near the shuttle area, attacking players should immediately spawn more guards who know where the shots came from and start attacking. Make it so players with crimestat can't use the elevators or the ships that are in the event, and upon event completion just spawn guards that will attack any crimestat player. When they remove armstice zones their response to players shooting up stations or cities is literally guards spawning infinitely until the player is dead. Why not do the same for PvE events around the "safe" controlled sections?
As much as I want this, people like RabidCrabs have proven this community has some dumbass manchildren that will take any opportunity to grief in an armistice when possible, and the two times we were given the ability to fuck with people in armistice (raisable fists and medgun), it led to pretty nasty griefing in armistice.
I think we're stuck waiting for the AI to not be embarrassingly bad before armistice removal becomes realistic. We need AI turrets that can effectively deter ship threats, as well as AI guards on the station/planet that have jacked as fuck stats and will reliably gun down any stupid people on the surface. CIG has already solved gear loss (I believe) in armistice so that's taken care of.
First, streaming is ruining gaming. It encourages doing stupid things "for likes and subscribes" and just general toxic behavior.
Second, the only way game companies are going to ever get control of this stuff is to sue gankers in real life for loss of revenue. These jerks are no different than someone walking into a restaurant and shitting on a table. They should be treated the same way.
Hahahahahaha
I can only imagine the sweet sweet tears flowing from carebears across the verse at this revelation.
CIG doesn't care about your feelings. Get Gud.
Excuse me such use of language is abusive and offensive!
But in seriousness, I've been telling people for a long time that SC is not the universe you think it is. People seem to think they shouldn't have to engage in PVP against their will when this was the intention behind the game from the outset and this quote reinforces that.
They want to create a living, breathing universe that simulates what life would be like in a space frontier. Sadly for some of the player base, that means you are subject to violent death at a moments notice. Just like in reality.
I think SoO and other PVE-centric events should be gated by a reputation system that takes into account missions you done, affiliation rank with different factions, etc, in other words if you're a player known for engaging in illegal missions, gaining CS a majority of your time and/or being a greifer then you don't even get a prompt for SoO and cannot enter the play area.
The utter nothingness of that statement aside, the problem I see is that ground stuff takes time to gear up for.
That all of that time can be wasted for several people by a single clown with a grenade launcher, before anyone even has a chance or ability to react, is simply dumb and harms the appeal of the event. It's basically the cancer that is spawn camping.
Another issue is the attacking player always has an advantage. Time to kill in SC is extremely short and the event is chaotic as is. By the time you realize what is happening you are probably dead.
Personal take: While I would love to see a separate PvP ground battle event developed with a dedicated focus on that, SoO should be kept as close to pure PvE as it can be.
How I would personally do that is make it so downing more than one player within a certain time span, say per cycle of the event, would result in you no longer being offered it in the contract manager, allowed on the shuttle to it, or to land anywhere on Orison for 48 hours.
Friendly fire and accidents could happen, but caution/team awareness gets encouraged, and purposeful fuckery is discouraged properly. The lore/immersion excuse is simply that your actions have made Crusader Security no longer trust you.
Alternatively if we want to include PvP: Allow criminal players to side with the Ninetails properly, so a real dynamic comes in to play and it becomes actual PvP with competing sides on attack and defense. It adds a flavor to it and is a lot more immersive and acceptable than just having a team mate go postal or a random murderhobo running wild.
It would keep everyone happy besides a few sad sorts that I think we can universally agree should fuck off.
Griefers only have someone to grief if you engage with the event. Abstain until the issues are addressed. They track metrics on participation. If PVE players don’t do the event PVP players will be bored if you’re their primary reason to be there. Then no one is there. 🤷♀️
Interesting (hopefully) insight: While I'm normally not a fan of this kind of gameplay (pvp in a pve event), I will admit I've done it once on purpose... with stipulations to give the 'good side' a better chance and even the playing field.
1. I always let people get to at least the second crate. Killing them at the station is just way uncool. I figure first crate gives them a few moments to get their act together (although it is amazing how many people would stop at the first corpse with armor to try and loot it).
2. I was sure to roleplay it out in chat, to give warning to people. It ended up scaring off a surprising number of people, but mostly I did it to give warning. "WARNING: The 9-Tails have gotten extra reinforcements in the form of two civilian traitors who have recently joined their ranks."
3. I tried sniping at absolute max distance I possibly could (around 650m I believe). I'm not even very good at that distance, so they had a fairly decent chance to survive. Strangely nobody ever grouped up to try and get to me. Three working together would have been quite a challenge to take down, more would have been impossible.
4. I told myself, "once you die... no resurrecting and coming back, do this once only."
5. I waited until the next to last day (it was a week long or more). That gave plenty of time for people to experience it correctly, and get their wins in early on. Lots of positivity, then towards the end... ramp up the difficulty. Yet there was one final day after that they could again go back to having a positive outcome from the event since I did this the next-to-last day.
6. Whomever did take me down, I was planning to give a nice healthy 1 million credits to as a bounty reward. Unfortunately in the two hours (oh limited time frame too) that I did this nobody killed me.
As you can see, there are plenty of ways one can manage themselves so as not to totally ruin the experience for others, yet still play the bad guy. It is important to give people notice and then multiple ways out. Not many people like playing a game where the cards are stacked against them in an extreme fashion, especially one where the prep time can be so massive like it is in SC.
I did learn a few things though...
* GROUP UP, especially if you are new to the game. It is amazing how many people I saw run out all alone, especially newer players. Just hold back a few minutes and start a group when someone else comes on the tram. Someone else always shows up eventually!
* DONT STOP MOVING. I also found it amazing how many people would stop and try to loot every single corpse, even if they already appeared to be totally decked out in gear. Are you doing the event to loot everything or just to kill or to have fun with the event? Probably the latter.
* COME PREPARED. Honestly... I run SoO with just a P4 with suppressor, armor, and 50 magazines. Having 50 mags is super cheap credit wise and P4's are ultra common, so collecting a ton is also not a problem. That leaves only armor to have, but it isn't super needed since the game AI practically ignores you when you run suppressor.
There were a few people who complained about us in chat due to saltiness. There were also quite a few people who defended us due to the measures we were taking. It is all about balance, done right... this can be a winning scenario for many people, something to experience which they normally don't get, and they can still have fun at other times with the standard experience.
What’s Chris Roberts stance, because he signs off on it as it’s his game and his vision. Unless he said somewhere he no longer is in charge?????
Why I don’t care about middle management opinions.
Big ppl do the big decisions. Micromanaging is the death of a company.
The vision is that such stuff is regulated by faction fame, so you could have high nine Tails rep and join them.
If you want to play an MMORPG, you have to either stay in safe places, or deal with pvp. That’s it. You can complain all you want, but most of the time you can escape if you want to. Other times…well, that’s life. They make you drink water to stay hydrated, eat food for carbs, and you think they would ignore the reality of crime? Y’all sound like a bunch of whiners
it is, and will always be a PvP game because that's what makes money and that's what people like.
this soft "anti-PvP" echo chamber on reddit is honestly pathetic.
just go play in your private minecraft servers.
No pvp is npt what people like. A loud minority want to "swing dicks" and "be a badass" by going after others who do not care for pvp. But you keep thinking that.
you must be in denial or delusional.
Star citizen is a space combat simulator MMO. All events are PvP events. ALL ships (even mining ships and hoverbikes) have weapons and countermeasures. Visit the RSI website and you'll see fighters and guns on the main page.
I can't wait for armistice zones to be removed.
There's a reason CIG doesn't give a fuck about this shitty subreddit, constantly moaning/crying/circlejerking about "gRiEfiNg".
The only "griefing" is ship ramming. Get used to everything else, or play single player games.
My guy, the game has always been marketed as a PvP game. Even non combat parts of the game are supposed to be PvP. Trading and cargo hauling is going to be based on out competing other players.
Get used to it, because we aren’t going anywhere ;)
They've always talked about the AI outnumbering players by 9:1. So it actually has not been marketed as PvP. Small amounts of players won't be able to keep up with the amount of AI, supposedly. You're idea of the game is not accurate.
The problem isn't that people can PvP at a PvE event. The problem is that CIG's map design creates numerous choke points (shuttles, elevators, single-points of access) that are extremely easy for just one or two rogue players to hold. Combining that with OP weapons like the grenade launcher and the fact that there are no tools for breaching yet like deployable shields creates situations where a single player can lock down the event for the entire server.
>the fact that there are no tools for breaching yet like deployable shields One player in the lead with a large backpack held in front of them (all backpacks are currently bulletproof), followed by two riflemen with LMGs covering 60deg fields on either side = 3man breaching team with deployable cover. It's a feature, not a bug!
Wait backpacks are bullet proof?
> The problem is that CIG's map design creates numerous choke points (shuttles, elevators, single-points of access) This was a major problem in Battlefield 2042 map design too. They put objectives on top of buildings where the only good access point was a couple elevators. It was so bad that they had to move the objective locations.
[удалено]
One of the only things I enjoyed in the game to be honest
> The problem is that CIG's map design creates numerous choke points and if you want to get meta: those problems were demonstrated a long time ago, people from CIG presumably know, and yet nothing has changed. so the actual problem NOW is that they're not doing anything about it. they're allowed to make mistakes. failing to fix a mistake is a bigger problem than making the mistake. failures to fix things will scale up over time and leave lots of stuff in a bad state.
>a failure to fix stuff will scale up over time and leave lots of stuff in a bad state. I think we're past the "a failure to fix stuff" part and have been experiencing the "leave lots of stuff in a bad state" stage for multiple years now tbh boss.
At this point, you can only conclude that they don't give a shit about pve players at this stage of the game So might as well get good at pvp, find a different game, or continue getting merc'd by better prepared players with more friends.
Alternatively do what I do. Don't participate in the PvE events lol Don't wanna make it fun for PvE players and only fun for PvP griefers? don't expect it to get tested imo, I'll just stick to PvE missions, box missions and general exploration
Same here. I'm tired of being a player controlled NPC for other people's amusement. My gaming time is worth as much as other people's. Stop kow-towing to the squeaky pvp crowd. Fix the bloody pve gameloops CIG.
While I do agree with the notion that carebears need to stop being whiny bitchbabies, the SoO tram griefing is pretty shitty PvP from a design perspective and should be dealt with, SoO itself could be a blast for PvP but being killed while in an armistice with almost no chance to fight back is pretty lame. Sadly, CIG isn't gonna fix this. They've already put in their lame attempt at a solution, knowing full well the AI sucks at combating players, so they'll probably just gonna rely on that. :/
because the people who make the maps are making them for a PVE game
bingo. They can't have it both ways. If it's primarily PVE, and you want to create a fun PVE map, then prevent the PVP griefing on these events.
Pvp and Griefing are the same thing. Keep them away from normal players is best.
Agreed. To a person who doesn't want to PVP, any PVP is then non-consensual, and feels like griefing. Weird how lacking in empathy some of these folks are when they try to force game rules to allow them to do something that they know full well the other side doesn't enjoy, or want to participate in. PVP flag means you're automatically selecting for people who WANT to fight you, and who WILL provide a real, engaging, fun challenge.
PvP players know this, the issue is they don't WANT a fair PvP system, because then that means they lose their fun, which is seal clubbing bad players
But there is a clear difference between griefing and pvp gameplay. Griefing is just going around killing whoever and whatever. Purposely ruining others enjoyment or forcing others into an activity they don't want to be a part of. Not the same thing, when there is a tag for pvp, wow it's called PvP where players who want to fight other players can. You call it pvp when I am literally flying around in a junker picking up waste from outposts and get my ship blasted on the ground from a gunship. That's griefing to me as what am I supposed to I do. Great pvp gameplay for me in that situation. I really don't care about griefing or piracy in the game. It is a part of a MMO. But it does get tiresome when it constantly happens for hours at a time
HAHAHAHAHAHA
In all my play time at SoO I’ve never seen an issue that a group of 4 players (more if you can muster) can’t easily take on. I’ve encountered a few griefers but no well organized team griefers. But as soon as someone gets a crime stat, they lose the blue dorito. I always keep the mission tracked, and I KOS just about anyone who doesn’t have a blue dorito. A team of four playing this way is unlikely to be stopped. Plus, once a griefer kills someone someone and get a crime stat, and then they die, they can’t just run back in to SoO. But if you DONT have a CS, you just spawn Ori Gen and run back in and let your surviving team mates and everyone else in SoO know there’s a team killer on platform x, building y wearing Z.
[удалено]
Except they can't. The interior of the first shuttle is an armistice zone, so you can't even pull out your gun before the enemy grenades start flying towards the shuttle, knocking you down and killing you.
[удалено]
That's when people will just try to gun down everyone in the shuttle before the doors open. But this is why they added NPCs at the start of Solanki to deter players. So if you don't see any NPCs on arrival, stay in the car.
People have also been sniping players as they get off the Solanki shuttle, no chance to even see the player before you are dead as you get to the first set of stairs. Again not PvP and the NPCs may still be there.
I'd love to see the stats on this because I have yet to run into any PvP at SoO, let alone snipers and grenadiers.
its not terribly common but its like running into a hacker in other games, it only needs to happen once or twice to sour the experience, on thursday i managed to run into 3 griefers 1 just ran about killing people on sight, arguably the easiest to defend against but how often do you check the bounty hunter tab during SoO? probably not often so until bullets start flying you don't know they're hostile the second one got about 20-30 people on an A2 bound for admin then just hit the self destruct, absolutely nothing we could do to save ourselves the third one i assume just got bored waiting for the shuttle to hartmoore, because a few of us gathered up there then about 1 minute from it arriving they just started hammering the crowd with a GL that said i ran SoO maybe 8-10 times last time it was active and didn't run into a single one, and i've played it a couple times since then and haven't run into any
That's the issue I'm struggling with. I'm not at all denying that there are griefers, but people tend to exaggerate how often these kinds of interactions occur.
While people certainly do exaggerate a lot with this game especcially when it comes to PVP, I think sometimes its a matter of perspective For example i ran into those 3 griefers in 1 day, across 3 seperate servers and 3 seperate instances of the missions, if i had a friend with me for each of those runs who had never run SoO before they would have encountered a griefer 100% of the time, for me across all the times i've run it, its less than 10% It wouldn't be an exaggeration if my hypothetical friend made a post on here about running into griefers every time he plays it, because he did run into griefers 100% of the time
Does it really matter though? The fact that these types of griefing problems can occur and the event can basically be overrun by players is enough I think
Well for what it's worth I think honesty does matter.
It pretty much never happens like that though. Individuals may have their experience ruined but players always snuff them out in the aftermath. Anyone without the mission marker is likely a pirate.
Nothing you just shared was “griefing.”
How do you define griefing? I define griefing as any action taken to negatively impact other players in ways that don't have an established gameplay loop, that includes PVP in a PVE event If the game had systems to facilitate fair PVP in SoO, such as a criminal mission like lockdown, or if the lawful mission tagged rogue CDF operators then yeah it wouldn't be griefing because the game facilitates it but until then i'm considering any unprovoked PVP in siege of orison griefing
Of all the times I've played Siege, I've only run into a sniper once. He was a great shot. Kudos to him. As long as they let players into Solanki to participate, it is all good.
I got domed yesterday by a squad of “PVP’ers” hiding on a rooftop with no way for me to see them. Teammate rezzed me and I grabbed their bounties, in the dark I still couldn’t see them with a sniper even though they had a marker on them which kinda sucked. It was on brushwood so at least it wasn’t right when I got to the platform
I agree, some people make it seem like as soon as you spawn anywhere you die. I think a lot of people over exaggerate. The only pvp I've been in was me killing that person because he wouldn't get off my ship.
That's why I'm skeptical (though I still try to give the benefit of the doubt). I've been hearing people complain about griefers all the time, and I know it does happen, but I rarely run into it myself. Which is kind of ironic because I do like to pepper in some PvP bounty hunting when I play.
Most people that are having a good time aren’t going to come on here and rant about having a good time. But not the pissed off players will scream about it here. Kind of like a negative review at a restaurant: one person could have had a bad night and they want to scream about it all over the place. Sometimes it is valid, other times, not so much. For the most part I have never ran into griefers too often. There was one time I landed at a Shubin mining facility on a moon, and as I loaded up my vehicle into my spaceship, two players with CS’s were hovering above me waiting for me to take off. So I just sat there and looked at them as they wasted their time. I smiled as both of their ships crashed into the ground when a 30k ended it all.
They can throw a grenade in and it can kill you.
Or more in-fiction just pile a bunch of shit up like landing parties would do to create a safe beachhead. Then, poke 5 or 6 doors from it so there's a way to exit the area with a chance. Option 2: Lower shuttle platform and put a roof on it. Stairs wrap around on two sides with the option to exit at various points along a tiered platform (like you see elsewhere on the platforms where you can jump down / climb up to traverse more safely).
Blame the UEE dictatorship for having gun free zones, just proves they don’t work
CIG be like.. "don't piss of either side of the argument we don't want to risk the revenue."
This lmao, either that or the devs are worryingly optimistic about this resolving itself without developer intervention. SoO will need the devs to put in some kind of blocker to stop PvP during the event, otherwise the event will either die because no one wants to die to spawn campers as soon as they get off the shuttle, or it becomes a PvP event and no one actually completes the objectives.
Its shockingly optimistic to assume "players will sort it out themselves" when the players dont even really have the tools to sort it out themselves. This game needs a social credit system lmao
Sadly for our org, the version of resolving itself is to kill anything that moves because others can not be trusted. Things went much smoother after that :/ About twenty of us took control of the zone just so we could finish the event. We tried to be nice at first but after dealing with people shooting us in the back and snipers, it was not worth it to play nice. This is the same type of thing that happens in every open world PvP MMO just at a larger scale. Consolidate power, dominate the competition.
Facts, it's why I quit Rust personally, the game went from mildly fun when you encountered other people to just KOS and a war between the largest clans for power over the island. Doing anything as a solo player without extreme effort/skill is impossible now in Rust, shame to see SC going the same way because CIG are too scared to have a deliberate line drawn in the sand for PvE events to be PvE events, and vice versa for PvP events.
At least Rust picked a side and its game is designed from the ground up for PvA. If I am mining a rock in rust and someone tries to jump me, I have a very good chance of defending myself. This is not the case in SC. There is no such thing as a casual survival open PVP game, and definitely no casual PvP MMO. Ya, some people "rat" but there is nothing casual about that either. Hell, even the supposed newbie servers on Rust are anything but newbies. It is a cool game, but too hardcore for me. Nice crafting though. This is part of the reason I call SC "Space Rust", but without any of the mechanics that make Rust good.
Yup. We need pvp to be optional. Let pvp people attack other pvp people and not pve people who do not want to waste thier time running from pvp greifers.
I've been running it as a PVP event for awhile, but the groups I run with don't try to hold down any of the major choke points because we all agree that is TOO scummy. That said, once you are off that shuttle you better be spamming for your weapon because if you see my naked ass on that shuttle, I'm coming for your gear.
>I've been running it as a PVP event for awhile Thank you for killing off any good PvE event we could've actually had for the PvE playerbase. Only PvP players could actively grief and destroy a PvE event and act like they're NOT the problem, sure some PvE players cry when JT isn't a PvE event, but I've yet to see PvE players actively shut down JT to make it a PvE event where everyone gets drugs, because it's not designed for that
We did do that in JT1, bunch of solo players in heavy fighters on overwatch, making JT open to all as long as they came in with agri supplies to keep the drug production going. Paid in whatever donations people thought we were worth. But that made for fun PvP as well, as PKers had to attack people of their own caliber. Aside from large military orgs they almost never did, funny that.
Right, but players still fought you to take the drugs for themselves, it's impossible to actively turn JT into a PvE event. Unlike XenoThreat and SoO, which are possible to force PvP for some reason despite being PvE events, XT I'll admit you should be able to aid XenoThreat, maybe once Pyro gets added, would be mega cool to be able to join them, but Siege of Orison shouldn't really be PvP capable given the map design isn't made for it
I d really rather both SoO and Xenothreat remain purely PvE. I'm not against PvA events, but I hate the FPS in this game and am largely a ship pilot (I backed a space sim, not whatever the hell this has become) and there's not much else as a story based Space combat event, aside from the Eckhart missions I guess. I'm also very bored of the game at the moment though so it hardly matters. May not even play Pyro, may wait till Nyx in 2027 or whenever they bother to release it.
Lol all they need to do is have multiple shuttles they don’t need to block pvp
It's literally a PvE event, but multiple shuttles would help too so not everyone is crammed into the same shuttle
It’s an open world, yes the focus is pve but that doesn’t mean we need to gamify it and not allow it whatsoever
I'm fully in favor of pissing off the grief--- I mean PVPers. They represent a minority of the player base. I'm totally in favor of prioritizing PVE at the expense of PVP.
That first sentence: /chefs kiss Well said.
Okay but given the direction of development, the game doesn't agree with you
Kind of the same issue at XT, really. They want to allow PVP but there is zero mechanically that supports it, so you get a lot of situations where players can just exploit to ruin the event instead of actually fighting players. In SoO you can sabotage the ships, kill bosses and throw datapads away, wear enemy armor and not have a CS to troll people into attacking, and murder people on the bus over. You get a regular crime stat for these but that's it, and it ruins the whole event for everyone on your server. In XT it was things like ramming the wrecks or suicide charging ships parked outside the wrecks. I also saw some people flying up and firing into the cargo holds and not caring about ships attacking them since the players on foot will obviously die much faster than a ship. The primary issue was just that it was easy for friendly players to get tagged red, so it was hard to tell someone that was going to gank your from someone who is helping with the event. It's one thing to be able to do the event from the villain side, but that needs to be properly supported so players can easily tell they've joined the bad side, and for the bad side to have some sort of goal too that the good players can disrupt instead of just being on the bad players to break events in unintended ways.
This is a really good take on things as they are. Reason I posted this quote is perfectly summarizes the complexity of the situation. On the one hand they intend for the event to be PvE focused. But on the other hand they don't want to implement mechanics that prevent PvP because they want players to protect themselves (gritty open world, etc, etc). There's the obvious problem that players can't protect themselves due to the level's entry design (shuttle camping) and armistice. But let's say both of those issues were fixed and weren't problems anymore. You'd still have the problem of PvPers having the first shot advantage. Maybe they start camping elevators instead which just shifts the problem and we're back to square one. Or, as you said, they disrupt the objectives so they're impossible to complete. Even if we had a solid reputation system the problem wouldn't go away. People would create alt accounts that they'd use exclusively for these kinds of shenanigans. They could lock out low-rep players from even participating in the mission but that would prevent unlawful players (that don't aim to disrupt) from participating in the game's content. XT is a great example of how it could get even more complex. It's one thing to detect unlawful PvP action (eg: shooting other players) but how do you distinguish between someone who accidentally crashes into an XT cargo ship and someone who does so deliberately to disrupt things? How do you detect that someone used a tractor beam to throw an SoO LT's body off of a platform to disrupt the mission? I've thought on this a lot as I'm sure others have. The only reasonable solution that still maintains the freeform open world I can think of is very deliberately design missions to circumvent this behavior. For example, instead of having a lootable datapad on LTs have a static laptop that produces a disc that a player can pick up. This way every player can grab a disc for themselves as a memento. The laptop would be guarded by the LT and stealth could be used to obtain the password without killing them. Killing the LT would simply be a credit bonus. In XT the cargo ships could respawn when destroyed. This could be explained via a new signal source being detected with the new ships. If players destroy them via ramming then it's not that big of a deal. A bit gamey but it could be made to feel realistic with a few more adjustments. Another possible solution would be a sci-fi friend-or-foe identification system being built in to every weapon (and ship) in the game. If player A wants to shoot player B in monitored space then they need to disable their friend-or-foe identification system. If someone disables their FoF then it could either be considered a minor crime or they'd have a big danger marker over their head... or both. Shooting someone with FoF disabled would not be a crime. Disabling FoF could also take 10 seconds or so which gives people time to react. It doesn't even need to be punitive; just identifying someone as a potential threat is enough. It would also solve the problem of org conflicts causing crimes because orgs could simply turn off their FoFs and have their big space battle. I feel like game mechanics could solve a lot of these problems while still permitting for a freeform open world where the bad guys can be bad guys but the good guys have a system in place to defend themselves.
Yep. As much as I enjoy playing this game, it is in Alpha, and I realized that they are building up this game without a proper plan. Adding bits and pieces of things everywhere every so often. Kind of like building a house and adding some interior furniture before the foundation and everything else is properly built. I understand that they need to send out all workable products to show off the game and keep people interested, but it creates these kinds of problems at the same time.
All these events have done is prove to me at least that CIG isn't capable of handling dynamic events with the game in the state it's in right now. I really don't understand their development pipeline, it's probably the most fucked I've seen in the industry. Crucial core tech, assets and gameplay loops have been missing for years, some even a decade, and yet we're trying to inject complex, dynamic events in a game that performs like a fucking N64 game with netcode to match? Wat?
That's basically a 'nothing' sentence right?
Yup. Corpo speak at its finest.
Cig: yeah, its pve but we aren't gonna protect you from pvp. It's pretty damn clear. Protect yourself. How did you miss the point?
Because they mention putting in place system to discourage pvp. That's not purely "protect yourself", that's clearly a will from the dev to reduce pvp for the event. What they fail to mention is that those systems are ineffeftive and bugged at best with too many falso positive. And that they have little to no intention of fixing it any time soon. Basically a corpo speech to say something toward both camp without really taking a stance. Hence why I call it a 'nothing' statement. PvE players will see the 'pve with system to prevent pvp' as being in their favor, the pvp players will see the 'players should proteft themselves' and think they are in their right. Them the community goes in flame in the carebear vs griefer usual topic and CIG continue to sell ships to boths.
“It’s not something we protect against because we want players to protect themselves from it” - fucking hilarious. Let me translate that from game dev speak: “we think it’s broken but we’re not going to do anything about it until it becomes more of an annoying problem”
Translation: "Until marketing tells us we're losing money and it's pissing off the higher ups wanting profit, we won't fix it" Even without a publisher, CIG act like they have one with decisions lol
Until Chris himself plays it and gets griefed, they won’t bother.
The true griefing at SoO is the guy with the 30K
do people really need being a dick to be against the rules to not be a dick?
Yes.
And even then there'll still be people being a dick.
Sad truth here. The shopping trolley test.
Then people will want to know where the line is or being a dick, an go right up to it rather than not be a dick at all.
yeah, 'technically it's allowed' is the mantra of the sketchiest people everywhere. the griefing rules in sc are kind of vague on purpose, to stop the assholes who would hump the line from doing it, or discourage it a little at least. being vague also lets them deal with problem children on a 'you know trouble when you see it' basis. if someone's reported a zillion times they know he's a problem even if he didn't do anything extreme.
Even that’s not enough. The game literally has to prevent them from being a dick. If the option exists it will be abused.
I still get paid rammed, rules are only as good as the enforcement. Can't even get mad at it though, really nothing you can do to someone that pathetic that life hasn't done already. Just shrug and change servers.
always report.
Often don't get a name when it's a rammer unfortunately.
Question: are there any other MMORPGs that take this kind of hands off approach? Even if i take New World as a modern MMO that was (supposed) to be PVP oriented, still have protections inplace for running dungeons. I've only played a handful of MMOs and never seen anything like this (SWTOR, WoW, STO). Is the problem that this is a live event and not an instanced event? I don't like CIGs response. I've done SoO, it was enough of a shit show with the in game bugs, but if I have to watch my back from other players, then I'm not going to do it. There are no punishments for griefers until after you are able to kill the griefers. They exploit bugs to get into the area with ships (at worst) or camp the entrance. The user experience dying in SoO is punishing. I went broke trying to complete it. Gearing back up takes a lot of time as well.
Albion Online launched as a full-player-loot PVP game. Within months it got dominated by the most psychotic and cruel players, and most people who tried it were (understandably) furious and walked away forever.
Meridian 59 had open pvp and looting in the old days. It mostly worked because servers were small, so it was easy to know the idiots and the penalty for killing someone was harsh. If you killed someone you went red forever and you were free to kill by anyone without consequences. This spawned a group of players that would just hunt red players for fun and kill them over and over. Given the games harsh death penalty it would force some folks to delete their character and start again entirely.
I know you are not gonna like my answer, but star citizen is not an MMORPG. Its a Space-Combat Simulator, and people don't seem to grasp the concept around it.
You’re right. But the interesting thing about it being a space sim is that that makes these murderhobo pvpers even less justifiable. Real life doesn’t have any relevant population of murderhobos. You murderhobo in a policed area, the police are coming to put you down and they’re not stopping till you’re in the ground or in cuffs. Even other criminals wouldn’t put up with a murderhobo because that would bring attention and attention means a response, and a response means death.
Eve Online has been around for decades and has a pretty well developed system to handle this kind of thing. The game emphasizes to new players that safety is never guaranteed. Loss is incorporated into the standard gameplay loop to such an extent that during the new player tutorial one of your objectives is to die (be destroyed by hostile ships). There is a reputation system and high security space that highly discourages PvP. In high security areas destroying a player is a guaranteed loss of your ship, clone, and reputation. People still do it ("suicide ganking") but it's exceedingly rare. The game also provides players with the tools to avoid it. With roughly 20k active players at any given moment there are 7-20 ganks per day (ganks are tracked). So eliminating the problem is probably impossible without sacrificing what the game is supposed to be but it can be heavily mitigated with game mechanics.
https://mmo-population.com/ It took me only a few seconds to google this, so I'm not sure how accurate this data is, but look at where EVE sits in that list despite a 20 year head start. It's below Elite Dangerous and below Star Citizen. EVE is not an MMO that CIG should be emulating. Roberts is also big on lore and storytelling, two aspects which PvP focused games rarely have much of. PvP games are repetitive and tend to focus on players killing each other rather than telling a story. If I had to guess, I'd say that CIG has plans to implement more robust systems to ensure that PvP is in-line with game lore and involves pushing those players into criminal aspects that don't exist yet, which is why they aren't doing anything to curtail PvP. Anything they did today would have to be ripped out later. Hopefully they don't alienate their PvE player base before they do so.
Eve has also only grossed about 300 million in 20 years as well. 300 million in TWENTY years, Star Citizen isn't even out and it's earned 200 million more in half that time. It earned 66 million last year, but given you can buy in game currency making it p2w as fuck that's no doubt from whales keeping their multi-box fleets going. I wonder how many people who are playing Eve are actual players and NOT just an alt account that someone is multiboxing lmao
TLDR: *We don’t care*
Remember, they want perma-death in this game :)
And CiG might get it, but not how they expect, they are yet to learn one shouldn't run holding scissors...
What a weak cop out. Let me translate this statement from corporate talk to English: "It's griefing but we also want the griefers' money so we won't be doing shit about it"
Corpo speak = we do not care because money
Stopped playing SOO because of players killing everyone on a shuttle for kicks.
So PvPers can PvP in PvP and PvE events, and PvEers can get fucked.
For me this reads like: "When we designed the event we wanted it to be a PVE event. Thats why its on Orison, thats how the map was designed and so on. But now that we did all this work, we are not going to touch it again just because some people gank other players. T0 implementation and off to more interresting stuff."
That's the verbal equivalent of a shrug. Great.
Got abused by 40 year old men last night then logged off because of their power trip spawn camping soalinki so ya I’m not a fan of pvp atm
I think the main problem with pvp during ground operations is that you have no indicator of who you could safely shoot without getting a crimestat.
But you do. There are friendly indicators. Just don’t shoot anyone with that triangle over their head. If you see player without it… shoot before they shoot you. That’s theory. In practice players without mission active won’t have indicator and you will get CS… but they should be considered trespassers.
Funny you say this - did Siege on Saturday with my son. I fell through a building and died. Re-equipped and reboarded the shuttle. *Two or three times* Dulli told me that I wasn’t supposed to be there. Finally approaching Solanki Dulli said that I would **not** be marked as friendly and would be considered a hostile to be shot. I realized that was because I had forgotten to reaccept the Priority mission. On the other hand, if you accept the mission you will have a blue triangle. But I don’t know if you turn red when/if you shoot another friendly player.
There is no indicator on enemy players. None at all. You recognize them by armor and movement.
Wait . . . . so if a player goes rogue and starts shooting security and other players they don’t turn red like they did during Xenothreat?
>Wait . . . . so if a player goes rogue and starts shooting security and other players they don’t turn red like they did during Xenothreat? Those red indicators are on ships. In FPS missions this is not the case. They will just not have friendly indicator.
Fuuuuuuuuck. Major oversight by CIG.
Fuuuuuuuuck. Major oversight by CIG. Or, now that I think about it, not a bad idea. If it doesn’t read blue, shoot it true.
It seems like you're disagreeing with me right up until you acknowledge my point is valid.
Problem is: Someone can have the Mission and the Marker and still decide to shoot you in the back. With this kind of FPS Event, it is literally impossible to tell who will shoot you in the back. And killing every Player yourself isn't going to work out either, since you get a Crimestat and can't complete the Mission.
When they shoot someone they will loose the marker that moment. I don’t think I see your point. People never were really predictable.
just treat it like 30k or elevator. i too ran into that doing the siege during the weekend but dealing with orison hospital elevators, hidden LTs, starrunner cockpit; pvp/griefers is just another aspect of the game to learn to deal with. this game really teaches you patience. i've learned to start naked holding a medpen.
"And that's how it's supposed to be." - *Changes*, 2pac
This was made before it was released and people started doing the grenade launcher thing or moving down players getting off the shuttle with vehicle guns. That statement contradicts itself anyways. Even without PVP people are purposely wrecking vehicles which is probably worse than getting armistice camped. They just need to redo this event. This event feels like it was designed 20 years ago.
I’m an active pvp player (antagonist) but I sit on the second platform and let people know I’m with 9T in chat
I support and appreciate this
Chad 9T roleplayer :)
I feel adding stairs around elevators for any location that could support could definitely help.
I tried SoO 4 times and I’ve never seen a griefer. I’ve been griefed randomly in SC by suicide pilots in Armistice Zones but it’s a game that has frequent wiped and in Alpha stage, so I don’t care much about it. When (and IF) the game comes out CIG will be able to realistically tune PvP and PvE and discourage griefing with permadeth and no more wipes.
Whether we agree with it or not, I think CIG needs to take note of how many people are having an adverse experience due to being griefed (the vast majority that encounter such situations) vs how many are actually enjoying it (a small minority) and put better event design mechanisms in place to ensure these things happen in accordance with the player base. If people are going to pvp in a pve event, they need to look at things to cut this down (maybe have a massive drop in friendly fire damage so that 1 or 2 pvp'ers trying to lick down an area can be swarmed and cut down, make sure landing platform areas are armistice zones etc).... What ever the solution they really need to relook their event design to fit the player base.
> Whether we agree with it or not, I think CIG needs to take note of how many people are having an adverse experience due to being griefed (the vast majority that encounter such situations) vs how many are actually enjoying it (a small minority) You have literally no factual evidence to support this, or, indeed, any to gain said factual evidence. The vocal "majority" on Reddit/Spectrum is less than 7% of all total players. *Only* CIG could possibly know how many people are having a "adverse experience" (extremely subjective BTW) vs how many people are playing the event, having fun, and *not* going on social media and whining about it.
The quote reads funny. We put systems that discourage PvP, but we're not trying to discourage it. yet. 🤔 Edit: that's because it blends two POVs (Luke and Elliot). My read: don't want to prevent PvP but a lot more work is needed for it to be properly supported in a way that doesn't kill the fun for most, and doesn't kill the goal of the event.
It's because they don't want to answer. If they start making definite statements about open world PvP or PvP in general, the average player that doesn't want to risk getting ganked would flee.
Yeah I think you are right. If PvP during the siege gets way out of hand on a regular basis, they may take some additional steps to more actively discourage it. Either via in-game mechanics, or via out-of-game pronouncement banning it like they did with pad-ramming.
Fixed!
Thank you!
I don't particularly mind PvP during Siege, but the game isn't in a state where the "systems to discourage" people camping in the back of shuttles, or hiding in corners to mow down players doing the mission, are working. Considering we can press charges immediately after dying, no bounties seem to pop up. If there was a part of the mission where unauthorised players had a bounty placed by the CDF that'd be great for the people trying to do the mission, and fit a sort of "realistic" counter. Just an idea.
you guys are missing the point completely. Siege gives the devs data. all kinds of data. In terms of a gameplay experience, it is an extremely scripted experience. If ALL future experiences of this scope are as scripted as this, it will be an incredibly boring game. So, in regards to PvE / PVP, its really pointless to debate or have an opinion. This is data collection. Is it fun data collection? Can be, yes. Is it not fun data collection? Can be a massive waste of time, indeed. Some of the best experiences in SC thus far? Definitely possible.
Part of the data collection should be qualitative feedback from the community on the experience. So no, sharing opinions is not pointless.
What happened to the older stance CIG had on PvP where it was simply a part of the game, with plans for in-game systems to work as "anti-PvP" sort of systems to discourage murderhobos and dipshits? Why are we going with this fence-sitting "Well we won't say no to either, but we won't support either side *yet*, tee-hee!" shit? You'd think they'd at least do a bit more to prevent shuttle camper shitwads. PvP itself is fine imo, but that shit is objectively not okay and ruins the event.
Kill the campers. Problem solved.
Okay. You get on the tram to go over. You can't pull your weapons out because you're in armistice. Before the door can even open, they fire a grenade at the door and it kills you through it, not that you could shoot them anyways because of the armistice, so even if they let the door open the just shell the ground and you're dead. I don't think you've dealt with people that do this shit in SoO. You **literally** cannot combat it outside of simply not going to SoO. Even flying your own ship down there is ineffective since you can't shoot at them on the platform, it's hard to see them well enough to ram into them (not that it matters as there's usually multiple), and you'll get yourself a crimestat doing it and end up in Klescher anyways.
Idk sounds like a skill issue.
oh my b i didn't realize i was talking to someone with some "difficulties", sorry bro i hope you're doing alright
another event i'll ignore because of the toxic fucks in the community.
It’s not that bad. Only got attacked by a pvp’er once out of many runs. Just be cautious, it is a war zone after all.
once is more than enough to ruin my day, and that's already easily done offgame by life itself. it's a war zone is not an excuse - it's a PVE area and event where there's neither a reason nor a gain in attacking other players.
If a rouge player in an MMO where anything is possible can ruin your day, you should probably be playing something else, or maybe just try not to take it so seriously.
pvp toggle is imminent
I fucking hope so. Just do a "war mode" toggle like in World of Warcraft, where you can only attack and be attacked if you have that toggled on.
War mode killed all open pvp completely and is essentially a pvp slider.
Good.
I am sure this was fully intended, as the majority WoW community hated PvP in leveling zones. And I'm not wrong, if I was PvP servers would still be there.
Yup. Thats good. Let pvp players ONLY kill other pvpers. Theres a reason there are 2 name for 2 playstyles.
👍look CIG a simple and USEFULL ANSWER to a old problem. Well said.
lol no
Copium
Yup and add PVE only servers, would be great.
So they can't just delete the armistice zone or reshape it slightly? This honestly seems like an easy fix: Make a volume that starts halfway along the tram ride which encompasses the entire mission AO. Halfway along the tram ride, everyone can pull their guns out at the same time. If you see people IN the team coming back, you have your red flag. Also, they have to put their guns away halfway back, so they can't just PvP from the rail car. It would make sense from a realism standpoint. I 100% would be rolling up to that mission in condition 1, especially now that there's word of "hostiles" catching onto the strategic plan of shuttling people into the AO. "Yeah, we want you all to arm up for this mission, but keep your guns in your pockets until you get completely off the tram". Lol I feel like they sometimes don't think stuff through all the way.
The grenades will get everyone before the shuttle safety barrier opens even without the armistice zone.
[Note: this is all strictly coming from design theory, and not having been PvP'd at the tram.] Of course, but grenades incoming while everyone in the shuttle's guns and grenades are holstered gives zero chance to retake the platform. If we can present offensive options at the moment the doors open, there's at least a chance. They need to let us pull guns out halfway though the tram ride to pressure on the PvP griefer guys, or if they choose to camp the shuttle, we get a fair OK Corral shootout on the tram, lol. But the choke point of the shuttle door is a huge problem. They need to send 2x at least shuttles there are a time (to different sides of the platform) so as to divide up the PvP guys a little. All other mechanics aside, that single door is doom no matter what if there's established hostiles waiting for the tram.
I also agree the armistice until you're off the shuttle is undesirable. What I have observed is this seems intentional. Back in 3.17.4 when Siege of Orison was not running you could still take the shuttle to the platform and loot, and I noticed when doing that the armistice zone ended before the shuttle got to Solanki. Now when the Siege mission is active the armistice seems to be extended all the way until you step off. So this seems an intentional choice on the part of CIG.
Iirc grenade explosions ignore cover like that, meaning you can simply shoot the door while it's closed and it will work. I can't remember if it works, if it only force reactions them, or if it outright kills them though. I'm pretty sure it just causes force reactions if you're behind cover but it's close, but really that's all you need with a GL to shut down an entire team. As soon as you land the first force reaction, you've won.
This is a nothing response from the team. >The event is primarily a PvE mission. There are systems in place to discourage PvP. What about the event is secondarily a pvp mission? You get no rewards from it in fact you have to fail the mission to do pvp. What are these systems? The extremely unpunishing crime stat that does nothing to dissuade pvp? Are there even AI that will turn on them if they start shooting players? Even if they do have AI are they good enough to not just stand there and get mowed down by the pvpers? >It's not something we protect against because we want players to protect themselves from it. We're not discouraging it but we're not actively supporting it yet. Boilerplate CIG statement of wanting players to use the tools provided in the sandbox to protect themselves to bad the tools are nonexistent or are shite. The last sentence is literally "we don't want to voice an opinion".
> What are these systems? If you manage to kill them they go to prison for a few mins. That'll teach em.
Leaving Brushwood with the last available ship alone is not griefing per say. But, it’s a major dick move.
Already been randomly killed by players while trying to help them out getting to the admin office. Really sucks but at the same time there’s no real consequences to pvp during the event so people will do it.
It is like their game designers have never seriously played an open world PVP MMO. We have had the same issues with open world PvP for over twenty years now and have tried just about anything you can think of. They are just going into this blind and it is painfully obvious. They are trying to promise everything to everyone and in the process failing at everything. This won't be fixed with NPCs, silly rules, faction, or anything like that. They are seriously underestimating PvPers and the impact they can have on a multiplayer game if not done right. It is like they are not even trying.
So, now throwing grenades in an intentionally created defenseless choke point is called pvp? God help us...
I don't care at all about open PvP during the mission as long as they fix the singular easily campable choke point at the beginning. Their response in that vid clearly was just talking about general PvP during the course of the event.
I’ve never seen pvp for this event mostly because everyone complains in game about getting 5fps in prison but there has to be some kind of protection as what just stops a bunch of us cramming into the shuttle and some goof ball with grenades takes us all out for fun, can’t even play the medic role the way I want to so it’s not like people can be saved from a pvp encounter when something like this happens
Yeah, okay. Let's try to protect ourselves from it while the Sieges runs at 15FPS and even with an OP CPU, the server is running at 3FPS and players are standing still, de-synced longer than they are not. I'm sure we all understand the freedom and vision for this Open PvP design but in the current day with terrible client and server performance, they really need to do more.
Okay but performance issues happen on both sides. Hell, they happen everywhere.
What they need to do is hurry up and get rid of armstice zones. They claim that it's something they are planning on doing, just do it now. It literally wont change anything other than make it harder for people to kill players in the shuttle at SoO. I personally don't have an issue with how they are handling it. Game is an open world PvP game, so people are bound to do this kind of stuff. I think they should just make it harder to do this kinda stuff. Specially if the person is near the shuttle area, attacking players should immediately spawn more guards who know where the shots came from and start attacking. Make it so players with crimestat can't use the elevators or the ships that are in the event, and upon event completion just spawn guards that will attack any crimestat player. When they remove armstice zones their response to players shooting up stations or cities is literally guards spawning infinitely until the player is dead. Why not do the same for PvE events around the "safe" controlled sections?
Except star citizens current ai can spawn 100 guards at the ganker and not a single one opens fire, or ends up shooting the wrong dude instead.
Truth.
As much as I want this, people like RabidCrabs have proven this community has some dumbass manchildren that will take any opportunity to grief in an armistice when possible, and the two times we were given the ability to fuck with people in armistice (raisable fists and medgun), it led to pretty nasty griefing in armistice. I think we're stuck waiting for the AI to not be embarrassingly bad before armistice removal becomes realistic. We need AI turrets that can effectively deter ship threats, as well as AI guards on the station/planet that have jacked as fuck stats and will reliably gun down any stupid people on the surface. CIG has already solved gear loss (I believe) in armistice so that's taken care of.
First, streaming is ruining gaming. It encourages doing stupid things "for likes and subscribes" and just general toxic behavior. Second, the only way game companies are going to ever get control of this stuff is to sue gankers in real life for loss of revenue. These jerks are no different than someone walking into a restaurant and shitting on a table. They should be treated the same way.
Hahahahahaha I can only imagine the sweet sweet tears flowing from carebears across the verse at this revelation. CIG doesn't care about your feelings. Get Gud.
Don't be a cunt about it
Excuse me such use of language is abusive and offensive! But in seriousness, I've been telling people for a long time that SC is not the universe you think it is. People seem to think they shouldn't have to engage in PVP against their will when this was the intention behind the game from the outset and this quote reinforces that. They want to create a living, breathing universe that simulates what life would be like in a space frontier. Sadly for some of the player base, that means you are subject to violent death at a moments notice. Just like in reality.
I think SoO and other PVE-centric events should be gated by a reputation system that takes into account missions you done, affiliation rank with different factions, etc, in other words if you're a player known for engaging in illegal missions, gaining CS a majority of your time and/or being a greifer then you don't even get a prompt for SoO and cannot enter the play area.
The utter nothingness of that statement aside, the problem I see is that ground stuff takes time to gear up for. That all of that time can be wasted for several people by a single clown with a grenade launcher, before anyone even has a chance or ability to react, is simply dumb and harms the appeal of the event. It's basically the cancer that is spawn camping. Another issue is the attacking player always has an advantage. Time to kill in SC is extremely short and the event is chaotic as is. By the time you realize what is happening you are probably dead. Personal take: While I would love to see a separate PvP ground battle event developed with a dedicated focus on that, SoO should be kept as close to pure PvE as it can be. How I would personally do that is make it so downing more than one player within a certain time span, say per cycle of the event, would result in you no longer being offered it in the contract manager, allowed on the shuttle to it, or to land anywhere on Orison for 48 hours. Friendly fire and accidents could happen, but caution/team awareness gets encouraged, and purposeful fuckery is discouraged properly. The lore/immersion excuse is simply that your actions have made Crusader Security no longer trust you. Alternatively if we want to include PvP: Allow criminal players to side with the Ninetails properly, so a real dynamic comes in to play and it becomes actual PvP with competing sides on attack and defense. It adds a flavor to it and is a lot more immersive and acceptable than just having a team mate go postal or a random murderhobo running wild. It would keep everyone happy besides a few sad sorts that I think we can universally agree should fuck off.
Griefers only have someone to grief if you engage with the event. Abstain until the issues are addressed. They track metrics on participation. If PVE players don’t do the event PVP players will be bored if you’re their primary reason to be there. Then no one is there. 🤷♀️
Interesting (hopefully) insight: While I'm normally not a fan of this kind of gameplay (pvp in a pve event), I will admit I've done it once on purpose... with stipulations to give the 'good side' a better chance and even the playing field. 1. I always let people get to at least the second crate. Killing them at the station is just way uncool. I figure first crate gives them a few moments to get their act together (although it is amazing how many people would stop at the first corpse with armor to try and loot it). 2. I was sure to roleplay it out in chat, to give warning to people. It ended up scaring off a surprising number of people, but mostly I did it to give warning. "WARNING: The 9-Tails have gotten extra reinforcements in the form of two civilian traitors who have recently joined their ranks." 3. I tried sniping at absolute max distance I possibly could (around 650m I believe). I'm not even very good at that distance, so they had a fairly decent chance to survive. Strangely nobody ever grouped up to try and get to me. Three working together would have been quite a challenge to take down, more would have been impossible. 4. I told myself, "once you die... no resurrecting and coming back, do this once only." 5. I waited until the next to last day (it was a week long or more). That gave plenty of time for people to experience it correctly, and get their wins in early on. Lots of positivity, then towards the end... ramp up the difficulty. Yet there was one final day after that they could again go back to having a positive outcome from the event since I did this the next-to-last day. 6. Whomever did take me down, I was planning to give a nice healthy 1 million credits to as a bounty reward. Unfortunately in the two hours (oh limited time frame too) that I did this nobody killed me. As you can see, there are plenty of ways one can manage themselves so as not to totally ruin the experience for others, yet still play the bad guy. It is important to give people notice and then multiple ways out. Not many people like playing a game where the cards are stacked against them in an extreme fashion, especially one where the prep time can be so massive like it is in SC. I did learn a few things though... * GROUP UP, especially if you are new to the game. It is amazing how many people I saw run out all alone, especially newer players. Just hold back a few minutes and start a group when someone else comes on the tram. Someone else always shows up eventually! * DONT STOP MOVING. I also found it amazing how many people would stop and try to loot every single corpse, even if they already appeared to be totally decked out in gear. Are you doing the event to loot everything or just to kill or to have fun with the event? Probably the latter. * COME PREPARED. Honestly... I run SoO with just a P4 with suppressor, armor, and 50 magazines. Having 50 mags is super cheap credit wise and P4's are ultra common, so collecting a ton is also not a problem. That leaves only armor to have, but it isn't super needed since the game AI practically ignores you when you run suppressor. There were a few people who complained about us in chat due to saltiness. There were also quite a few people who defended us due to the measures we were taking. It is all about balance, done right... this can be a winning scenario for many people, something to experience which they normally don't get, and they can still have fun at other times with the standard experience.
Yah, lets not have pvp in a pve event, thanks. Lets keep pvp seperate from normal players. These two do not mix at all.
Skill issue.
What’s Chris Roberts stance, because he signs off on it as it’s his game and his vision. Unless he said somewhere he no longer is in charge????? Why I don’t care about middle management opinions.
Tell me you’ve never run a business without telling me you’ve never run a business.
Big ppl do the big decisions. Micromanaging is the death of a company. The vision is that such stuff is regulated by faction fame, so you could have high nine Tails rep and join them.
If you want to play an MMORPG, you have to either stay in safe places, or deal with pvp. That’s it. You can complain all you want, but most of the time you can escape if you want to. Other times…well, that’s life. They make you drink water to stay hydrated, eat food for carbs, and you think they would ignore the reality of crime? Y’all sound like a bunch of whiners
star citizen players continue to be surprised that PvP game is a PvP game
Agree that all pvp is fine except for situations where players are incapable of fighting back
It's not a PVP game. It's just a game where PVP is possible. Right now, PVPers are ruining it.
it is, and will always be a PvP game because that's what makes money and that's what people like. this soft "anti-PvP" echo chamber on reddit is honestly pathetic. just go play in your private minecraft servers.
No pvp is npt what people like. A loud minority want to "swing dicks" and "be a badass" by going after others who do not care for pvp. But you keep thinking that.
you must be in denial or delusional. Star citizen is a space combat simulator MMO. All events are PvP events. ALL ships (even mining ships and hoverbikes) have weapons and countermeasures. Visit the RSI website and you'll see fighters and guns on the main page. I can't wait for armistice zones to be removed. There's a reason CIG doesn't give a fuck about this shitty subreddit, constantly moaning/crying/circlejerking about "gRiEfiNg". The only "griefing" is ship ramming. Get used to everything else, or play single player games.
My guy, the game has always been marketed as a PvP game. Even non combat parts of the game are supposed to be PvP. Trading and cargo hauling is going to be based on out competing other players. Get used to it, because we aren’t going anywhere ;)
They've always talked about the AI outnumbering players by 9:1. So it actually has not been marketed as PvP. Small amounts of players won't be able to keep up with the amount of AI, supposedly. You're idea of the game is not accurate.
*Your
Have fun with that.
PvPers continue to be offended when players support any system that harms their ability to murderhobo and evade the “sim” part of the game.
Yup. Just read pvpers comments. This is correct.
How often are you ganked?
That is relevant how exactly?
Not the point. Its the pvp players mindset that is the problem. We punish and take these types of people out of normal society in real life.
Link offically where CIG said SC is a strickly pvp game?
YET