RP vs PVP = False

[kulbolen]

I am, and always have been, genuinely confused why PvP'ers *ALWAYS* react to this sort of thing with "It will kill open world PvP!".

you are confused because you just made this up, and it isnt actually the case.

I've seen it here, I've seen it in WoW , I've seen it all over the place.

wow open world pvp actually did decline drastically.

hy do people who claim PvP'ers are the majority instantly jump to the conclusion that given the option to not PvP, that every single person but them would choose not to do it?

who claimed pvpers are the majority?

 

[Edymnion]

you are confused because you just made this up, and it isnt actually the case.

So when was the last time you ever saw the PvP'ers go "Yeah, this restriction to PvP is a good idea"? Its the internet, it always gets taken to the extreme in both directions.

wow open world pvp actually did decline drastically. Most people just wanted to do their quests and get from point A to point B. They wanted to play the GAME in the overworld, and most stuck to structured PvP in arenas where they were fairly matched up against other players in the same bracket.

Yeah, because most people didn't want it in the first place.

who claimed pvpers are the majority?

Well apparently they do, because of the stink they raise about how terrible any given game is going to be without it.

If they acknowledged that they were the vocal minority, I'd like to think they would be a little more willing to cooperate in order to make sure they got included at all instead of beating their chests over it.

If you'd like to admit that most people don't PvP and that most people don't want PvP, it would be a lot easier to start from that standpoint and find a way to let those who don't want to do it avoid it, and then make incentives to get those people into it.

Forcing them to do it if they like it or not is not the answer, its just going to make them dig their heels in deeper.

 

[kulbolen]

So when was the last time you ever saw the PvP'ers go "Yeah, this restriction to PvP is a good idea"? Its the internet, it always gets taken to the extreme in both directions.

im a pvper. i was one of the first people to reply that a flag might be a good idea. more importantly, non pvp types already dont have to pvp. there are already protections in for protected sectors, invulnerable bases, altering weapon damages, administrator enforcement for breaking established server rules. everything youve said here is based on something thats not even true.

Yeah, because most people didn't want it in the first place.

the games overall subscription base also declined drastically. coincedence? maybe...

Well apparently they do, because of the stink they raise about how terrible any given game is going to be without it.

lacking anything suitable to backup the claim you made, youve added "apparently." because you made it up. and you know it.

If you'd like to admit that most people don't PvP and that most people don't want PvP, it would be a lot easier to start from that standpoint and find a way to let those who don't want to do it avoid it, and then make incentives to get those people into it.

unlike you, i have nothing to admit because i dont have an agenda driving a need to hide things, alter definitions, and make up arguments in the first place. i also have no idea on the status of pro pvp vs anti pvp folks, i imagine most lie somehere in between. furthermore, i dont have this notion that i speak for the entire pvp community. ive already told you how i personally feel, and ironically i agreed with your flag proposal.

 

[linwe talion]

What's the interest in building splendid ships if you don't smash them one into another after?..
What's the interest in conquering limitless space, full of NPC, if all of them are the same?
What's the interest in exploring something that you cannot leave to yourself or your descendants, covered with bloody stains, left of slaughtered invaders, who dared to explore it before you?
The human history is a history of human wars.
Starmade is a game about vigorously (and with style) kicking ass of other players. Not about "discovering" another asteroid, looking just like 100k asteroids before him.

BUT
An interesting fact, in the late 2016, creators of another space minecraft game, let us not name it here of course (it is Empyrion), made a poll for all players, and only 18% of players named PVP as the main feature. I'd propose the TC to make a poll here as well to understand, if the SM community is PVE or PVP oriented and to make conclusions according to the results.

IMHO around 40-50% players are totally PVP-liking. This percentage was much more ages ago, when losing a ship was less punishing (blueprint for credits era). Now it is very costly, so the amount reduced greatly.

 

[JinM]

Edymnion said: ↑
I am, and always have been, genuinely confused why PvP'ers *ALWAYS* react to this sort of thing with "It will kill open world PvP!".
you are confused because you just made this up, and it isnt actually the case.

Edymnion said: ↑
I've seen it here, I've seen it in WoW , I've seen it all over the place.
wow open world pvp actually did decline drastically.

Edymnion said: ↑
hy do people who claim PvP'ers are the majority instantly jump to the conclusion that given the option to not PvP, that every single person but them would choose not to do it?
who claimed pvpers are the majority?

I still find it amusing how "Make it so people who don't want to PvP don't have to PvP" always gets inflated to "open world PvP will be impossible!".

Lets run with that, can we?

Lets say you're on a server with a magic switch that lets you turn your PvP on/off in some way that can't be abused (however that might work).

Would you personally run around with PvP switched off?

If not, why do you assume that everyone else on a server would use it? If PvP'ers enjoy the danger and the threat, wouldn't all of them turn it off immediately?

If so, why would you leave it on?

Kulbolen you totally missed Edymions point, and are cherrypicking the weak arguments, instead of reaction to his complete thought. The thing he said was: " I still find it amusing how "Make it so people who don't want to PvP don't have to PvP" always gets inflated to "open world PvP will be impossible!"." In reaction to Lecic: "No, RP builders seem to have a much more sinister way of trying to stop those "big bully griefer pvpers!!!!" from existing- by constantly making suggestions and trying to push the devs for mechanics and additions that make open world PvP impossible.

"Making open world pvp impossible" is a generalisation just as bad as "This thought allways gets inflated to this other, even worse thought."

Kulbolen you are blaming Edy for generalising but don't care at all if Lecic did that for his own arguments. Also you are not reaction to the actual opinion of Edy, but react to a minor part of his argumentation line and cherrypick some wrong words instead of actually understanding what he tried to say.

What Edy tried to say was: PVP will not be impossible by the suggestions that were made.
What Kulbolen disagreeing with is totally fine, but I don't get his point. What are you trying to say or what do you want us to understand man? :D You are just disagreeing with some sentences but do you disagree with Edy's thought "PVP will not be impossible by the suggestions that were made." too?

The way out for booth of you, would have been to first ask Lecic what actual suggestions Lecic means that would make open world pvp impossible? You booth are talking in a slight theoretical way by not clarifying this.

But I agree with Edy, just saying. I think his way of actually asking what the other dude thinks is a nice start. Not the end it all, like clarifying some important stuff first, but fabulous for our forum standards. :D

 

[kulbolen]

An interesting fact, in the late 2016, creators of another space minecraft game, let us not name it here of course (it is Empyrion), made a poll for all players, and only 18% of players named PVP as the main feature.

interesting data, but not representative of the community. if asked if pvp was the main feature in empyrion id say no, even though i pvp in it. its clearly a single player game that had some multiplayer survival/minimal pvp tacked on.

poor performance and balance is also why i stopped playing... along with every single player i know in the pvp community there. if pvp turnover is high because game functions dont hold up; they will poll low.

i do wonder what people would say in starmade. id guess 25-30%

i have this feeling newer people dont actually realize the steps necessary to "dominate a galaxy" in multiplayer survival involve pvp. its funny to me when someone logs in, plays the pirate or dictator, makes a bunch of threats and demands and then has their shiny cruiser destroyed while bullying people, and cries about it being unfair that they were killed.

 

[NeonSturm]

Which server should I go if I want to:

1. … continue … to be …
2. 
   
3. PvP with small ships only
4. No trolling vs my large builds
5. be mostly creative
6. invite other peoples visiting my builds without having to worry about sabotage
7. …
8. … to be … continued …

Right now no server allows that without involving admin-commands.

 

[kulbolen]

Kulbolen you totally missed Edymions point, and are cherrypicking the weak arguments, instead of reaction to his complete thought.

i have no need to cherry pick; every argument he makes is weak... its not my responsibility to make his case for him.

Kulbolen you are blaming Edy for generalising but don't care at all if Lecic did that for his own arguments. Also you are not reaction to the actual opinion of Edy, but react to a minor part of his argumentation line and cherrypick some wrong words instead of actually understanding what he tried to say.

i dont care what lecic says, because lecic hasnt qouted me or tagged me, and isnt speaking broadly to or about me; ive already acknowledged that i am not representative of the pvp community as a whole. if he makes an argument that i feel is addressed to me or some archetype of me ill respond in kind. lecic and i have had ...no shortage of unfavorable interactions in the past.

Also you are not reaction to the actual opinion of Edy, but react to a minor part of his argumentation line and cherrypick some wrong words instead of actually understanding what he tried to say.

my reaction is both to the words he actually says, and the point he attempts to make. if youll go ahead and read the rest of my post youll note (once again) how i agree with his proposal and idea to add more protection. this doesnt have to be mutually exclusive with disagreeing with most of his argument, method of making them, or mentality in general. i dont think addressing an entire argument qualifies as "cherry picking his wrong words", nor am i responsible for his choice of words.

But I agree with Edy, just saying. I think his way of actually asking what the other dude thinks is a nice start. Not the end it all, like clarifying some important stuff first, but fabulous for our forum standards. :D

he has made a very clear stance on his thoughts and his refusal to consider others thoughts in related posts:

"Way I see it, anyone opposed to even the option of giving newbies a way to protect themselves from people like Batavium is only defending the position because they do it as well and just don't want to publicly admit to it.

No honorable PvP'er would want to jump a noob in the first place, and I don't care what the dishonorable PvP'ers think. The dishonorable PvP'ers need to be expelled from the game entirely."

he doesnt see how you can opt to play in a dangerous environment where bad things can happen, unless youre "one of them" and he thinks all forms of non duel, fully fair pvp should be forcibly removed. he made this clear himself. i do not agree with him.

im happy you agree with him and defended what he said while arguing what i said. you wont find me complaining that you didnt pick apart all of his words like you did mine, though, because i understand. its ok to defend what you believe.

like i said last time he got to the root of his position, i hope the devs dont agree. i believe his last response was, "they better."
[doublepost=1490373036,1490372970][/doublepost]

PvP with small ships only

qft. i wish more pvpers would scale down.

 

[Edymnion]

he doesnt see how you can opt to play in a dangerous environment where bad things can happen, unless youre "one of them"

No, you've mistaken my stance.

If YOU choose to play in that kind of environment, thats great. More power to you.

If you DON'T want to play in that kind of environment, that should also be an option (that doesn't depend on server rules where everybody just promises all sweetly to follow with nothing to actually back it up).

With something like the flag (which you agreed with), the decision on if you want to play that way or not is up to you, it isn't made for you by the server or the other players.

People who attack newbies who *don't want to be attacked* are who I am referring to.

 

[kulbolen]

No, you've mistaken my stance.

this is a literal qoute from you:

"Way I see it, anyone opposed to even the option of giving newbies a way to protect themselves from people like Batavium is only defending the position because they do it as well and just don't want to publicly admit to it.

No honorable PvP'er would want to jump a noob in the first place, and I don't care what the dishonorable PvP'ers think. The dishonorable PvP'ers need to be expelled from the game entirely."

nothing you say can fix it unless youre claiming you were wrong or youve changed your opinion.

 

[Edymnion]

this is a literal qoute from you:

"Way I see it, anyone opposed to even the option of giving newbies a way to protect themselves from people like Batavium is only defending the position because they do it as well and just don't want to publicly admit to it.

No honorable PvP'er would want to jump a noob in the first place, and I don't care what the dishonorable PvP'ers think. The dishonorable PvP'ers need to be expelled from the game entirely."

nothing you say can fix it unless you're claiming you were wrong or youve changed your opinion.

Batavium has said repeatedly that there is no such thing as griefing, and that he will gleefully attack newbies or anyone else that he can get his hands on. He has openly bragged that he is exactly the kind of player that drives people away from the game.

If you LIKE that kind of thing, thats great. You are saying that you want and will allow it for yourself. But many people don't like that. I still stand by "If you think that kind of thing is wanted and accepted, then you are the problem" when we're talking about harassing people that don't want it.

There is no contradiction here. I want to protect players who don't want to be harassed and hounded by people who intentionally go after them, like Batavium. Anyone who does that is a problem, and if they are proud of it, then we need mechanical ways to stop them because they won't stop doing it on their own.

 

[JinM]

i have no need to cherry pick; every argument he makes is weak... its not my responsibility to make his case for him.



i dont care what lecic says, because lecic hasnt qouted me or tagged me, and isnt speaking broadly to or about me; ive already acknowledged that i am not representative of the pvp community as a whole. if he makes an argument that i feel is addressed to me or some archetype of me ill respond in kind. lecic and i have had ...no shortage of unfavorable interactions in the past.



my reaction is both to the words he actually says, and the point he attempts to make. if youll go ahead and read the rest of my post youll note (once again) how i agree with his proposal and idea to add more protection. this doesnt have to be mutually exclusive with disagreeing with most of his argument, method of making them, or mentality in general. i dont think addressing an entire argument qualifies as "cherry picking his wrong words", nor am i responsible for his choice of words.



he has made a very clear stance on his thoughts and his refusal to consider others thoughts in related posts:

"Way I see it, anyone opposed to even the option of giving newbies a way to protect themselves from people like Batavium is only defending the position because they do it as well and just don't want to publicly admit to it.

No honorable PvP'er would want to jump a noob in the first place, and I don't care what the dishonorable PvP'ers think. The dishonorable PvP'ers need to be expelled from the game entirely."

he doesnt see how you can opt to play in a dangerous environment where bad things can happen, unless youre "one of them" and he thinks all forms of non duel, fully fair pvp should be forcibly removed. he made this clear himself. i do not agree with him.

im happy you agree with him and defended what he said while arguing what i said. you wont find me complaining that you didnt pick apart all of his words like you did mine, though, because i understand. its ok to defend what you believe.

like i said last time he got to the root of his position, i hope the devs dont agree. i believe his last response was, "they better."
[doublepost=1490373036,1490372970][/doublepost]

qft. i wish more pvpers would scale down.

So do you think that pvp will be worse? And if yes: What suggestions would make it so? Because that's the initial post ("pvp will not be impossible" vs it will be) you were arguing about, and disagreeing with Edy.

( - Yes you posted into this OP before, but into another argumentation line. So I pick the upper linked point on page 2 to jump into as point of reference you are reaction to Edy with the disagreeing words "you are confused (...) [and so on]"- or did I miss something?).

 

[Batavium]

Batavium has said repeatedly that there is no such thing as griefing, and that he will gleefully attack newbies or anyone else that he can get his hands on. He has openly bragged that he is exactly the kind of player that drives people away from the game.

You read what you want to read.

And i am absolutely right there is no such thing as griefing.

Will i attack any new player that enters the server? No. But if they enter with bravura and proclaim to be the new best thing ever to the server then i am going to putt them in there place. If possible because when spawn is protected or there are rules state do not attack the new players than i follow those perfectly.

If YOU choose to play in that kind of environment, thats great. More power to you.

If you DON'T want to play in that kind of environment, that should also be an option (that doesn't depend on server rules where everybody just promises all sweetly to follow with nothing to actually back it up).

When you enter a server you DO promise to follow the rules all sweetly. And if you do not then the admin will Ban you.

Your OPTION does not exist on server who's rules include or not have your view of how the game should be played.

You must play on a server designed for Edyminions whatever that might be. It most definitely is not the base game.

BTW if it were up to me then the use of Alternative names on Accounts would be abolished.

One Name on One Account! That way you are responsible for your actions and can not reenter the server under a different name to escape a ban.

 

[Edymnion]

BTW if it were up to me then the use of Alternative names on Accounts would be abolished.

One Name on One Account! That way you are responsible for your actions and can not reenter the server under a different name to escape a ban.

Aye, we can agree there at least.

Not letting people change names and hide to escape the consequences of their actions.

 

[Crashmaster]

I can't remember where else I asked this but; if some players get protection, what do you do to protect non-protected players from territorial incursion, spying, mineral theft and trolling by protected players?

That is what would make PvP worse. Safety would be abused.

Also; good morning StargumentMade!

 

[Edymnion]

I can't remember where else I asked this but; if some players get protection, what do you do to protect non-protected players from territorial incursion, spying, mineral theft and trolling by protected players?

That is what would make PvP worse. Safety would be abused.

Simplest answer would be "turn it off when you're in someone else's claimed space".

 

[Crashmaster]

Simplest answer would be "turn it off when you're in someone else's claimed space".

That's gotta be the most unintelligent, poorly thought-out response since you said fighting NPC's was PvP dude.

 

[Edymnion]

That's gotta be the most unintelligent, poorly thought-out response since you said fighting NPC's was PvP dude.

1) I didn't say it was the best answer, I just said it was the simplest.

2) The kind or protection I want to see is defensive. If someone is going out of their area and into yours, they are provoking and deserve whatever retaliation you throw at them.

 

[kulbolen]

you specifically claimed that someone cant be opposed to protections unless theyre a griefer...

youve specifically said you want all non consensual pvp removed, and people who participate it expelled...

i can disagree to protection for anyone because i think the universe should be dangerous, whether you like it or not. that doesnt mean i have to be secretly killing new players. i can disagree to a setting where some players are subject to dangers while others arent, yet they exist in the same environment and can compete for resources or goals or whatnot that are eventually implemented. i can disagree to the idea that im playing on a server where not everyone has an equalized playing field and equal danger.

according to your exact words, i have to be a griefer to think this. and according to you, i have to be removed, because i fully support non consensual pvp. i do not misunderstand.

youre free to choose a server that provides protection and easymode, and i fully support your ability to, but i choose to not play on that server.

Batavium has said repeatedly that there is no such thing as griefing, and that he will gleefully attack newbies or anyone else that he can get his hands on. He has openly bragged that he is exactly the kind of player that drives people away from the game.

you are making connections that dont exist, and using examples that didnt happen. as far as i know youve never provided a single shred of evidence to back up your claims of anyone saying they enjoy running people off servers or killing newbies. if you could provide an example, itd likely be a whopping 1 poster out of the entire community. yet you push your agenda using these claims.

you cant just say "no thats not what i said" and expect it to hold any weight. you said non consensual pvp should be expelled. you said anyone who thinks otherwise must be a griefer. saying " you misunderstood me" will not change it.

With something like the flag (which you agreed with), the decision on if you want to play that way or not is up to you, it isn't made for you by the server or the other players.

the flag i agreed to would be a server configurable setting. it would be ludicrous to not allow the server to determine its rules.

 

[Edymnion]

youve specifically said you want all non consensual pvp removed, and people who participate it expelled...

i can disagree to protection for anyone because i think the universe should be dangerous, whether you like it or not.

Then we are at an impasse.

I cannot condone a system where the strong are free to exploit the weak. I believe a game should be fair and fun to play for EVERYONE involved. Which means not being forced to play the game in a way you don't want.