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

Yeah, it's more fun if the side that can unilaterally say, "no way!" is your side.

 

I think something that many folks are overlooking is that given the sheer scale of the universe plus the limited number of folks on a multiplayer server at any given point in time means that randomly encountering folks is going to be extremely rare. Unless, of course, there is a mechanic added to the game that lists "hot spots" or activity levels in certain systems that all players on a server can see. Otherwise randomly encountering people while adventuring is going to be obscenely rare (and I likely will end anyone who I come across as they are now a threat to my strip mining operations).

 

A person who wants no part in combat or interpersonal conflict is usually called a civilian or, in some cases, a non-combatant. What you are proposing is that we should allow the opponent to shoot, bomb, bludgeon, and murder civilians so we can take the edge off of the home troops. The writers of the Geneva convention would be very disappointed.

Hyperbole aside, I'm curious if you have any examples of this actually working (namely, a forced-PvP game with a sizable community of non-combatants). In my mind, those who enjoy PvP (the "soldiers/warriors," not the griefers) enjoy challenges and overcoming odds. In other words, if they are repeatedly beaten down by other players, they will see it as a challenge, not an annoyance to be avoided. My side of the fence, though, either prefers controlled challenges (single-player or PvE) or little-to-no challenge at all ("Peaceful" mode in Minecraft; artistic gameplay; easy casual games). When they encounter the uncontrolled challenge of griefers, they rarely see it as anything but an annoyance to be avoided, and a fault in the game itself.

In a game like Starbound, the "civilians" will view forced-PvP as a defect in the game and will seek to distance themselves from it. They will do this by either hiding (a viable tactic in the nigh-infinite space), removing themselves from the bombing list anyways; or they will seek out private, heavily-controlled, co-op only servers (not even bolstering the player-count of your server); or, what I fear most, seek out greener pastures, namely other games.

What I say here is pure conjecture, as I have little-to-no experience with online gaming, let alone PvP (the only online game I play nowadays is Guild Wars 2, and I'm not even part of a guild, ironically). However, I fancy myself a logician and a good observer of human behaviour, so I'm fairly confident in my conclusions, without any counterexamples.

While I would love to study the situation you propose, I fear that forcing it in Starbound will only lose/fragment its user base.

Also, thank you very much for presenting me this interesting response/situation. While I call PvPers challenge-hounds and glory-hounds, I fancy myself a knowledge-hound, and you've given me something to ponder/research.

Ibby out.

 

Please read the other posts before responding. This argument has been brought up and beaten down several times. PvPers, soloers, and parties-with-friends-only are not the only types of people that wish to play Starbound.

 

Its not exactly forced pvp, its an already dangerous sector made slightly more dangerous. You dont HAVE to go to sector X. Its kinda like the PvP zones in other MMOs, just avoid em, or find somewhere alone or quiet. With the billions of planets, its not likely your going to run into another player. If your building bases on a sector X world, your asking for shit to happen. I dont think Ive ever built anywhere other than sector 1. I think this is a good thing. In the same server you can have people who want to face griefers and grief others themselves, sequestered away into a dangerous sector of the galaxy. The Wild West as it were, will be populated by the brave, the lawbreakers, or the foolhardy.

Its not like you couldnt just find some distant non populated planet in the sector, or even just warp out if you meet someone.

 

I'm sorry, but I have to deal with all the negative facets of humanity in my real life, I don't want those being forced on me in a video game just so you can feel like a soldier, I'm not playing this game to be reminded of what huge dickwads humans can be, I'm playing it to have fun, and I'd rather play in an environment where certain rules make it appear that we all at least pretend to like each other.

Having a town I spend weeks building be invaded by players for whatever reason I cannot imagine doesn't sound like fun to me, is my anguish over having work be ruined somehow adding to your enjoyment of the game? I doubt I'm in the minority on this. There are other ways for a game to be immersive.

I think a setting on the servers for PVP to be enabled would be a much better solution than forcing it on otherwise cooperative servers. Then you can all get together and murder each other like brutes on an advertised server that'll probably have enough players for wide-scale invasions.

Other than that, including people who have no interest in fighting accomplishes nothing; it isn't going to accomplish what you want, it'll just discourage people from playing on bigger servers because there aren't very many people who want to be messed with, bad enough there is little to no griefing prevention whatsoever, why compound an existing problem?

 

Please read previous posts by me and others. There are counter arguments to both the "don't go into sector X" and "just find a random, unoccupied planet." They have been reiterated many times over. Here's my summary thread/post for the information (see "Counter Arguments" section, points (I) and (III)):
http://community.playstarbound.com/index.php?threads/my-opinions-on-pvp-forced-and-otherwise.67174/

Regarding your analogy to PvP zones in other MMOs: See "Counter Arguments" section, point (III). Most MMOs that I have read about do not add any new content for their PvP zones. When they do, it is either PvP-only content (e.g. Guild Wars 2 PvP armor cannot/should not be used in PvE) or it is copy-pasted from some PvE content. Occasionally, there will be non-PvP benefits for playing PvP content (again with GW2, you can gain PvE experience by playing one of there types of PvP), but there is rarely any content-locking through PvP.

Again, please read previous posts. If you're short on time, I recommend you pick up around page 7 or 8, after the initial arguments have been thrown around and counter-arguments start coming out in force. No one benefits from repetition of information in a forum.

 

Frankly, this is really damaging my opinion of the game. I kind of doubt I'll ever play multiplayer now if this setting persists.

 

As much as you have a good point (and I agree with you on said point), do consider that Serpensio provides an interesting concept for dynamics. It could work, and be interesting, if we had lots more mechanics in place to help the non-PvPers: ways to track/label griefers, server-wide or civilization-wide bounties on particularly annoying players, a large enough population of honorable PvPers to protect the non-PvPers, some way for the non-PvPers to "pay" for the protection offered (e.g. a farming skill which is mutually exclusive with some combat skills), etc.
I'm not saying it's going to work for Starbound, or even any game today, only that it merits inspection and introspection.

In other words, your hostility is noted and warranted, but perhaps misdirected.

 

An "arena" like sector solves this... a small sector with a few planets... something I already said and you guys keep loopin' around on the same "issue" thats not an issue because it don't exist yet... But whatever, I won't care anymore.

 

I think this change doesn't really make sense from any perspective.

People who want random PvP aren't going to get it (the odds of landing on the same planet and finding some other exploring player is incredibly slim); it just enables consensual PvP (invite people you want to have a fight with) and backstabbing (leave party and murder people). Of these two, I think only the consensual PvP is really worthwhile. Personally, anyway.

Another issue is hardcore characters. Sure, "only party with your friends" is something I can swallow, but I can't discount the possibility of some accident happening by negligence on the part of said trustworthy friends (like accidentally leaving the party). Which isn't great grounds for a complaint, but still. Then again, I suppose there are bigger things to worry about (like those enemies who can oneshot you through full impervium).

 

way i see it only level 10 planets should be forced pvp
by then people have nothing better to do than kill each other anyway.

 

while i agree that forcing pvp in x sector at this point in time isnt really the best idea, PVP, in general, would not destroy your town (unless certain weapons came into play), and as the game currently is, anyone could destroy your work.

as a pvp player in this type of game, my enjoyment does not stem from destruction of your work, but in the destruction of your virtual person. i am playing a role - the space pirate, the star raider. i scour the void looking for carnage and plunder.

this is what i suggest to you: you play on online servers, so you obviously have a desire to be social. make some friends with some pvp-focused players. if someone like me ever bothers you, get them to come deal with me. while we fight, you could be gathering more baubles for whatever you are building. this way, everyone gets what they want. the most you would have to deal with is a death or two, and possibly some structural damage from weapons. i am sure if you asked your protectors they would be glad to avoid using destructive weapons and draw the raider away from your constructs.

again, i agree that forcing this at this stage of development was pointless and likely pretty dumb (if only for the fact of the kerfluffle it caused) but there are better ways of dealing with it than getting emotional about the issue on a forum. this sort of mechanic is very good for generating memorable stories, if you let it.

 

Generally I play on private servers where I know mostly everyone, and if ever someone did want to attack me, I know at least two people that would probably find ways to get them back. I can appreciate your desire to remain in-character though, in fact I can imagine having big strong police chase you throughout the galaxy would further enhance that experience. My concern is for the people who don't have friends who can host servers for them, or who are totally alone in the game in general. I started playing it after three of my friends already owned it, in fact my key came from a four-pack. I am lucky, others are not.

I just feel like they should have implemented some build-up in preparation for this instead of tossing it into the mess they haven't put much effort in cleaning up thus far and maybe they should have either focused more on making other sectors or finished the first four sectors.

My intent was not hostile, it was direct. I apologize if it came off that way.

The ideas are interesting, but a lot of them hinge on the belief that most players are willing to be honorable. At that point, it's a matter of how much faith you put in humanity.

 

Understood. I kind of figured that, but wanted to play it safe. That last sentence about your "hostility" was thrown in at the last minute.

Hah. Too true. As I said in my own reply to him, it will probably never work again (it's been pointed out that Ultima Online sort of pulled it off). But, as with Communism and Anarchy, it's an interesting concept to ponder and possibly hope for.
(I'm rather surprised to see myself thinking about the viability of his idea, considering my rampant pessimism and misanthropy.)

 

Pessimistic misanthropes FTW

A communistic environment for a video game would be an interesting social study - except that Rust already tried it and I have not met a person who hasn't had someone frag them and nuke their base just because they can. The only way to ensure civility is to have a gun. I believe the quote "An armed society is a polite society" applies pretty well.

 

My train of thought somehow went offrails to the point of wondering what type of player would rush you even if you had vastly-superior firepower and then... Kamikaze pilots and suicide-bombers!
A survival-type game where you could strap TNT to your body and run into an enemy stronghold would be hilarious to watch/observe. Not fun, not socially- or politically-correct, but hilarious in the same way as out-of-context blackface. You know you'll feel guilty for it, but you can't help but laugh at the absurdity of the situation.
...
I have a sick and twisted mind. I'm gonna go drink some tea or something in the corner.

 

there's a couple of "recent" indy MMOs that have the same concept. for example, haven and hearth (which is also a survival game (you can see where a lot of dont starve comes from) with permadeath.

yes, you read that right, always on PVP with permadeath.

the idea was successful enough that a publisher picked the devs up and they started work on a spiritual successor called "salem".

 

Wrong. The issue is not about the "fighting." The issue is the emergent gameplay that evolves out of the possibility of fighting/killing non-combatants.
Remember, I said my answer was about PVP theory in general, not Starbound specifically.

Forced PVP is not about the "personal one-on-one fighting" that you anti-PVPers are all up in arms about. It's not there to permit or encourage people getting their kicks off from murdering random people. Forced PVP is about the economy. It's about Communities. It's about Justice.
When you force PVP on everyone, you permit the players to exercise justice as communities upon troublemakers. Not just PVP griefers, but PVE greifers as well. If you, or your community finds an element in your game unsavory, with PVP, you have an equal ability to exact retribution.
In any game with human social elements, there will be people who take advantage of others, or the situation/mechanics, most particularly to the detriment of another. This need not be in PVP, but may be in other ways, such as spawn greifing, building destruction, NPC killing, mob luring, or a myriad of other things.

Assume, for example, your happy PVE community is building a massive structure which requires a large number of certain types of blocks, which you get from a particular world. But you're interfered with by a greifer. The griefer doesn't have anything to lose by destroying your structure, and everything to gain. All you can do under this situation is to hope he gets bored and moves on, or to uproot your community and find another place to build (easy to do in this giant universe of Starbound, but a major hassel).
Assuming PVP is forced however, you, as the larger group, can now mob this one greifer to oblivion. You can FORCE HIM OUT! By depriving him of his griefing fun and turning the tables of griefing back on him, you increase the chances of his moving on sooner rather than later. That is, of course, assuming only the current Starbound mechanics. Ideally, PVP ought to involve serious loss in capability, because by so doing, you not only force him out, but you can also cripple his ability to further grief and bother you in the future.

Forced PVP also permits for more emergent gameplay options, such as Invasion and Base Defense, political intrigue, community economics, treaties, etc. All of which require PVE activities as their source, with PVP being only the climax of an engagement.

What do you mean? PVPers share an equal portion of your greifers already. You want to force an unequal distribution of the others onto the PVPers?

 

If its a griefer they aren't going to care if we kill them. They set themselves up for minimal to no loss for their death and go at it as they please, or just show up when the area is less occupied and do what they want then. No one is going to stand around guarding what they build, that would be boring. And no, killing them via PVP methods is not equal retribution for destroying a massive structure.

Its pretty damn useless.

None of your listed "gameplay options" are of any interest for people like me. Base defense is largely impossible since things are so easy to destroy. Economics won't really exist in a world where you can wander off and find almost anything you need with a little effort, aside from rare drops, which will be handled with simple trading. Politics? I don't see any allure in standing around trying to convince people not to attack me and mine when I could be playing the game instead.

This isn't EVE.

I really don't feel the average PVPer is going to be worrying about building griefers so much.. I could be wrong, but most PVPers I meet in games don't seem to be the building types.