In next patch commits: "Force pvp in x sector"

I'm sorry, I don't want to feel like a soldier. I hate dieing and losing progress on stuff just as much as you do. But, you are playing a social game, with human elements, on a public server. By the very ACT of joining a public server, you are consenting to deal with all facets of humanity as they may occur on that server. Who are YOU, to tell a person on that same server, not your own, how they may or may not play, within the bounds of the game mechanics? You cannot remove their option of forcing something on your self, without engaging in that very same act of FORCING something on a person yourself.

Of course it's not fun, it sucks terribly! The FUN, is what you do afterwards to exact retribution from those invaders. That is emergent gameplay, and it can not possibly occur in a vacuum box.

It's not about immersive mechanics, nor is it about being able to destroy other people's work. It's about what happens AFTER those things happen.

Of course a greifer doesn't care, because they have nothing to lose. The reason you care is because you do have something to lose. The solution? The ability to take away what greifers care about - their ability to continue griefing. This of course requires certain mechanics that Starbound currently does not have ATM. But again, I'm speaking in general, not specifics.

A real PVPer however, cares deeply about the PVE stuff, because it is ONLY the PVE stuff that can give meaning to the PVP. A PVPer needs a populace of civilians, because that way the PVPer has something to gain, or something to protect, through their PVP actions. No PVP mechanic can thrive without a healthy population of civilians, without one, it turns into a meaningless deathmatch stadium, which will always eventually become boring.
However, if these civilians can simply "turn off PVP," the PVPer has nothing to protect, and nothing to gain.

 

Who are you to tell me I should suck it up and deal with such things just because you think they are good?

There is NO fun in retribution for me. None. Ever. I do not like killing other players, for any reason. It is a waste of time when I need to deal with it and highly unenjoyable from start to finish regardless if I win or lose. There is no joy in victory.

That is what you don't get. There are no positives to your scenario for people like me. You just want us to be fodder in the situation at the expense of our enjoyment for the betterment of yours. You cannot sell the concept to me because I get nothing out of it. Its all one sided.

And again, killing a griefer solves nothing. If they really want to do that, a little pixel loss won't stop them. They'll get the gear they want, zero out their pixels, respawn for no penalty and repeat till they meet their goal.

And I don't confuse the two. I just don't like either of them. Of course, I'm trying not to eliminate PVP. I just want the option to go about my buisness without dealing with the nonsense it brings.

 

I couldn't care less what the Geneva convention thinks. ALL of a country's Citizens comprise that country's Militia, whether they want to or not, except in cases of a Police State, where citizens are not lawfully justified in bearing weapons or defending themselves through force of arms.
The reality of Reality will eventually reach those who live so divorced from it, and when it comes knocking, they'll wish they were better prepared.

Unfortunately no, I don't have any such specific example, since no publisher would dare risk investment funds on such a venture. Haven&Hearth is, however, a viable substitute, though it has it's own failings and inefficiencies.
Mostly however, PVP can only exist upon a framework of PVE designed specifically for PVP. Else the game becomes either a PVE game, or a Deathmatch stadium box.

Of course they will hide. That's what permits the "white knights" to enjoy their share of the game, namely the PVP, the system could not work in any other way. Unfortunately, most games with PVP are not designed appropriately for utilizing the feature, which in turn results in encouraging exactly the wrong PVP behaviors, causing the vast majority of the prejudice PVP receives.

I fancy myself as the same, though it seems I may have more experience with gaming and PVP, due to your admission.

It depends greatly upon how it is implemented. However, Starbound is not an MMO, so it has a great advantage in that area. Servers will either be private or public, or single-player. And it's only public servers that will be cause for worry, though joining such a server is consent enough to all the mechanics, including PVP, that any complaints against such a voluntarily joined server are void.

You are most welcome! I love it when people ponder things rather than subjecting themselves to outright prejudice to something different. I also am a knowledge-seeker, not in the least bit a focused PVPer, but I love being in a PVP environment.

You sound like a single-player. Why in the world are you worried about PVP in this case? If you don't want to be interfered with, don't subject yourself to a community outside your own control. If you subject yourself voluntarily to such a community, you have no right to complain, because the situation is of your own making.

I'm not telling you to suck it up and deal with it. I'm telling you to stop forcing your personal values and opinions on others. Some people DO like Retribution. Who are you to tell them they can't play the game that way? PVPers are not looking to force their playstyle on you, because there are numerous avenues for you to avoid their playstyle, namely, "Don't enter Sector X." However, when you unilaterally require that YOUR playstyle receive ALL the benefits without taking the associated risks, as determined by the game developers, how are you any different than a Cheat? You want immunity, but not just that, you seem to want to force your immunity in the face of everyone else who wants to play the game according to their enjoyment- which may include PVP.

You say there are no positives on your side under forced PVP. I say there are no positives on the side of those who desire meaningful PVP, under a system of voluntary PVP. There is no point in a feature that can be turned off at will unilaterally- more in fact, such a feature would undoubtedly be highly abused to the detriment of real PVPers. PVP only being forced is Sector X is the only compromise that can be accomplished that honors both sides equally.

 

Co-op player, actually. I adore meeting with new people and playing with them in a positive manner. In other games I often play support. Helping others succeed is a joy for me. I've made a lot of friends over the years that way. Doesn't work so well when the more negative elements of the playerbase will just shoot you when you tell them were to meet you. It degrades trust in the co-op community.

Don't enter Sector X isn't a solution when the rest of the game is currently there. You are basically saying I shouldn't play the rest of the game right now, its only for people like you. Don't get endgame materials. Don't look for end game equipment. Just stay in sectors where there is no longer stuff I need.

My inability to be attacked doesn't affect your playstyle at all. Cause even if PVP is on I'll never fight anyone. Only takes a second to exit the game when you see someone coming after all. I will likely fill my tunnels behind me though, instead of leaving them open for others to use.

Do you honestly think that people who hate PVP are going to join this little social justice scenario you are trying to construct? I'm more willing to bet sector X will be individuals soloing and hoping they never see anyone, aside from organized clans and guilds, which often tend try and exert their power on anyone unfortunate enough to not want to slave themselves to one. I've played numerous games with PVP, well enough to know that few player organanizations are beneficial to those outside said organization.

"Legitimate" ways of getting it? If the devs end up agreeing with my point of view, and those like it since I'm not alone, then that will end up being the legitimate way of getting stuff, now won't it? This is beta. I'm giving my feedback. Its as valid as yours, no matter how much you might hate it. There is a reason so many games out there separate PVP from PVE. So that each side can enjoy the game with like minded people. And many at least try to balance the rewards on each side, with varying levels of success.

If this game had been tossed out with PVP planned right from Alpha sector I wouldn't have said a word. It would be that type of game. Instead its just slapped in at the end changing meeting people from being ignored at worst to not trusting anyone to get close enough to talk. And in a game where you can accomplish so much together, that is a horrible thing.

 

You know, Serpensio I honestly find it a little silly that you're trying to argue that the kind of PvP you're espousing is the only real PvP, when the vast majority of PvPers I've ever met leaned much more towards the bloodsport model than your noble warrior one. I mean, why else would high level tournements of fighting games, strategy games, MOBAs and arenas in various MMOs, not only exist, but flourish?

Regardless, I still personally have yet to see anything to convince me the current implementation is preferable to a serverside toggle.

 

that is the saddest thing. rather than use the social tools at hand, such people would ignore the conflict. conflict is something of a requirement for plot. there are a lot of stories being missed.

what is the point in playing an online, public, server if you are going to be soloing?

also, how beneficial player organizations are is highly dependent on the game's player economy. if the game itself supplies the commodities(in relatively safe zones) and players have but to collect it, then player organizations behave much like you describe. however, if the economy is primarily generated by players (players must gather the resources in the wide open, and dangerous, world, have the "skill" to rework raw materials into desirable items, and only the most basic of components was available for ingame purchase from non-player controlled NPC merchants, then player organizations are an important part of the game's overall health.

for example, in another game items that from from monster kills which are better than player craftables were so rare as to be fairly nonexistent. the best armor and weapons to use were crafted by players. gathering the resources to make the items, and indeed gaining enough skill on a crafter both took a long time, so it is more economical - if you wanted to spend your time fighting - to buy your weapons and armor from players. without non-combatant organizations (and the combatant guilds that protected them) there could be no combat. or there could, but you might as well be naked.

of course those mechanics are incompatible with the current form of starbound. to me at least, multiplayer starbound will need a lot of mods to make it interesting.

 

You can just ban people from your server for griefing. They might be able to take on a group of civilian players and win, but they cannot win against the almighty banhammer.

Also, your argument reminded me of a famous quote:
"It is easier to denature plutonium than to denature the evil spirit of mankind" - Albert Einstein

You are saying that peaceful people will have the means to fight others. This is a completely valid argument in the real world where people need to stand up and fight to preserve their human rights, but in a video game, where the world can be more ideal than real life and where policing negative behavior by forcing people out without them being able to resist, it doesn't do anything besides pollute that peaceful atmosphere with the same petty bickering humankind has exercised throughout its short, violent history.

And not everyone enjoys political intrigue or economics. Hearing either word makes me think of extremely stressful and depressing facets of real life which are definitely not things I want exercised in a video game - ESPECIALLY not when other humans are concerned, because humans are things that lack virtue in so many things, not the least of which being money and power, and I really don't find it enjoyable to watch two or more parties go to war over either in my spare time. If I wanted to watch a scenario akin to two or more rival factions of degenerate monkeys throwing shit at each other for petty baubles, I'd play EVE Online.

I am also a support player in most co-op situations. My biggest concern with forced PVP is what you already described; that it will further eliminate trust from a server's community when there are plenty of issues doing that already. I also don't enjoy getting revenge on someone with wars and factions.

Personally, I'd find it far more enjoyable to exact revenge on someone through character assassination and blacklisting than by killing them in a video game or even real life because that will scar them far worse than either. So I don't view it as a successful tool for revenge at all. "The pen is mightier than the sword." And its effects are far more permanent.

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/character assassination
you....prefer to spread lies about someone in the interest in starting drama? that is a very.... candid admission for you to make.

you have the desire to scar someone, as inflict some sort of harm? does that not make you just as petty as the one who griefed you?

i think your emotions aere causing you to misuse a lot of terms. did you not say that you believed in the "golden rule"? you do know that this "golden rule" is not the oft quoted "do unto others..." but "love thy neighbor as you love thyself"? the pen is indeed mightier than the sword, this is why i suggest you stop letting your strong emotions on the topic run away with you and cause you to select your words with little care. as much as you talk about "peacefulness" you represent yourself as a pretty aggressive person.

bear in mind, i agree that pvp should be a server toggle, and should not be forced in x sector at this stage in development. like many others i'm really interest in just why it was decided to do this. the only thing at all i've seen come of it is heated tempers on forums.

 

I play games to unwind, so I have no use for it. Though I also know how pub games work enough to avoid servers that aren't mine or my friends'.

If a game has both non-PvP and "consent only PvP" someone will endeavor tirelessly to find a way to grief anyway.
*shrugs* Some people are assholes/bullies. Can't change the nature of the beast.

 

Logic. Think of sector X sort of like the wilderness in Runescape.

 

Unsurprisingly, this thread is now about game theory and PvP mechanics in general, rather than a specific feature of the Furious Koala patch. I say unsurprising because the actual effect of this change is miniscule for anyone who regularly plays multiplayer, and it takes very little to state an opinion about it. On the other hand, any mention of "PvP" is sure to elicit a furious debate in the development forums of a beta-stage RPG with multiplayer support. Said debate will easily veer off-topic and slip into the murky waters of game theory, community building, and the varied disciplines of the humanities. That three-letter acronym evokes more internet rage than online censorship.

I strongly suspect this thread would not have materialized if the patch line instead read "Friendly fire now enabled in Sector X, unless players are in the same party."

 

or a quick bit about why...

"enabled pvp in x sector in preparation to test village allegiance mechanics"

i think a note like that would have generated quite a different type of discussion.

 

I'm pretty sure plenty of people would have been able to make the connection between friendly fire being enabled leading to PVP behavior. There just would have been a short discussion of how such a feature would lead to team killing as a lead in, just like every other game with friendly fire suffers.

 

Please no forced PVP. If they want to make a PVP area separate of the main game, or set it up so online servers can kill eachother or something if they so wish then that's fine. But forcing people into PVP when they don't want to is unfair and not fun. Which goes entirely against the general theme of these sorts of games which is, to me at least "do what you want, when you want. Build what you want, where you want." it just seems in ill spirits.

 

But there is no connection. People in this thread are responding to the concept of PvP, not the actual occurrence or real possibility of PvP. I don't take the possibility of Sector X PvP seriously, in the same way I don't take the possibility of winning the lottery seriously. The latter has a higher probability, incidentally.

Going on at length about all the deleterious behavior this feature will cause is as rational as going to your neighbors and telling them how you're going to spend your all riches as soon as you win the powerball.

This thread all boils down to whether or not you like the concept of PvP. Starbound is not an MMO; multiplayer is optional, public servers are small in population, and people have immense freedom to choose who they play with and under what rules they play with. You can mod content and rule sets in a way you can't with WoW, SWTOR, or EVE. If you never PvPed on Terraria, you'll never PvP in Starbound.

 

Which likely doesn't contain most of the end-game good stuff of the game?
I know it'll likely change with whatever balance developments coming along, but still.

 

I probably should have mentioned that I only seek revenge on people who I really hate, and griefing in an online game doesn't really warrant that kind of work on my part. In most cases I just block people or report them, this is a far more effective deterrent than seeking revenge on them through physical confrontation as the latter just gives them another chance to grief you. Besides, most of the time, this does not generate the guilt-laced depression that you hope for when trying to hurt someone like they've hurt you, so in most cases, it's a lost cause and a waste of energy. Very unsatisfactory all around.

Also, just because someone prefers peaceful contact with others does not mean they are automatically a docile person. I am an aggressive person, I like to be direct to the point of bluntness, I prefer arguing with people over polite conversation (Because people are more honest with each other that way), but I do not enjoy senseless violence, I find the concept or imagery of war to be offensive, and I do not view verbal confrontation as competition. To me, it's more a test of my ability to communicate concise points and my conviction to be honest even when it makes me uncomfortable.

"Winning" is not an important thing to me unless the prize is something that I want. Bragging rights are nice, but not worth the extreme behavior some people place on them to the point of trash talking on Counter Strike or waging wars in EVE. It is certainly the last thing I care about in video games. The idea that games are only for sport is archaic, they serve many functions and should accommodate the players of all those functions.

 

For me the possibility of PVP is very real. Cause, you know, I like playing with new people and make an effort to do so. With PVP always on I have to worry if each and every one of those people is just going to want to shoot me or not instead of just having fun with them or letting them wander off if they aren't interested.

I'm not that worried about randomly bumping into people, though PVP on will turn such events into me just leaving instead of sticking around to chat unless I have a nice thick wall between me and them.

And no, I personally cannot mod.

 

If they were interested in doing you harm, they'd wait until you were busy planet-side, party teleport onto your ship, and steal your stuff. Or pull out the matter block generators from their inventory and fill your ship with lava for when you return. They don't need PvP enabled for that. There are plenty of risks with playing with new people. Getting shot at with plenty of time to escape is one of the lesser ones.

And a very small fraction of people can mod. That's why there's a downloadable mod database. And a selection of public servers that often have freely-available websites describing local rules and deviations from vanilla.

For example, the top voted server currently is a populous RP server called Antares. They're in the process of implementing a whitelisting system to better regulate who can get online. They already have an IP based 'probation' or banning system. The server has clear rules for pvp listed here. Basically, no matter how the PvP toggle works mechanically, non-consensual PvP is an offense that results in probation.

It's not at all hard to find a server community with values and tastes that match yours.

 

the devs are trying too damn hard to make this a 2D dark souls...

i don't like that.