RP vs PVP = False

[KiloZulu]

First, I'd like to make clear that what has been largely defined as "RP" is simply anything that is not relevant to PVP. This is a broad definition, but it seems to be the expectation in discussions I've seen. As an example, the inclusion of any interior space within a ship beyond the minimum necessary to reach the ship core is broadly regarded as a nod to RP.

From comments that I've seen made throughout the forum, it's hard not to get the impression that some players think that this game is meant to be a primarily, if not solely, a PVP game. If that is the case, or if they are expecting Schine to veer in that direction, I think they need to take a look through the dev blogs and official content. As an example, one can look at the amount of PVP content presented in the game's official trailer. It invites players to explore a procedurally generated universe with billions of galaxies, while showing us ship creations such as the Enterprise. It offers that you can build anything, while showing the cargo ship from Futurama. It shows off the logic system. When it mentions combat, 75% of the way through the video, it doesn't bother to mention PVP, but rather that it is an option for scavenging and warring against other factions - without distinguishing that it is PVE or PVP. In fact, PVP is never expressly presented as a feature, let alone the main appeal of the game.

When you look at the content that has been generated for the game, and has been promised, very little of it is relevant to PVP. A mission system, aliens, planets, stations, a universe full of non-PVP content. Ship systems, logic, decoration, all aimed at non-PVP. Design contests for ships, stations, fleets - none of it with PVP in mind, and judged for aesthetics rather than PVP capability. PVP is a happy coincidence of the game's development, not its overarching goal. What's more, the design changes that Schine have made, are proposing, and continue to research, are not focused on PVP balance as their priority, but on game performance. Part of it is a direct result of PVP players min-maxing their ships and taxing the game.

I am not saying that my statements are the end-all-be-all intent of the game developers, and I'm certain that players can present exceptions to what I've stated, but what they will not be able to do is change the facts presented here. At best, Schine has adjusted their development to acknowledge the PVP crowd and better accommodate their wishes. For those players to expect Schine to convert their game to solely represent their play style would be ridiculous. All the swearing, insulting, and gnashing of teeth is not going to change that.

I feel that it is important for PVP players to recognize the state and direction of the game and either adjust their expectations or find a different game that suits their desires. I don't think that Schine has been at all unclear of their desire to reduce the size of ships in the game as part of their efforts at providing stable performance for their intended audience. My personal understanding of these changes is to encourage players to min-max to get the most out of a compact design rather than simply building larger and larger. You might think of it like the treaties between WW1 and WW2 to limit the size of warships and reduce crippling competition between the super powers of the time.

 

[Batavium]

StarMade is a survival game.

Should you play on a server where i happen to be on to. Then i will make sure you do not survive.

It is just a video game played for fun by human beings. As such you can expect the full range of behavior that humanity has on offer.

First gen StarMade used to revolve around Deathstars.

 

[Crashmaster]

I feel that it is important for PVP players to recognize the state and direction of the game and either adjust their expectations or find a different game that suits their desires.

I feel that it is important for RP player to recognize the nature and history of the game. They can stay though.

 

[kulbolen]

At best, Schine has adjusted their development

they could have realized (i have no idea what they thnk) from experience that pvp (more importantly, the perception of an environment where pvp is possible) is one of the draws of the game, regardless of its design intent.

further, cherry picking "facts" can also show an opposing point of view. the amount of time they spend trying to balance stuff without removing pvp could be used to draw a long winded argument about how its integral to the game. "very little" is subjective. i dont claim to know their intent, but if pvp is of no importance but causes such problems as youve presented, then why not just remove it?

I don't think that Schine has been at all unclear of their desire to reduce the size of ships in the game as part of their efforts at providing stable performance for their intended audience. My personal understanding of these changes is to encourage players to min-max to get the most out of a compact design rather than simply building larger and larger.

the best pvpers all already follow this mentality because its completely consistent with trying to be the best at any given time in any given scenario. size bloat comes from the less capable players trying to keep up; and the "rpers" with grandiose visions of 5 km long supertitans like in their favorite *insert sci fi here*

I feel that it is important for PVP players to recognize the state and direction of the game and either adjust their expectations or find a different game that suits their desires.

this is reasonable. you are not the games developer. if they make a post saying pvp isnt important, ill react accordingly.

realize none of the facts youve presented contradict a pvp friendly environment. you can have both without compromise and add more to the game overall; its just harder to create.

 

[Batavium]

They can stay though.

Funny i have never seen a PvP player say RP players should be outlawed. In fact you could say i am just a Hostile RPer. As i fly Borg ships.

Resistance is futile!

Light Borg a small example. Looks pretty doesn't it?

 

[Criss]

pvp (more importantly, the perception of an environment where pvp is possible) is one of the draws of the game, regardless of its design intent.

Well from a developer standpoint, it makes sense to give players something to actually test while long term work is done on the games other areas. Balancing combat on all scales would not go well if it were the focus of development closer to release, rather than later.

 

[JinM]

I totally understand the underlying idea, and I agree with the aspect of the "There isn't one true purpose of this game, but please look what the devs propossed and what not." - idea.

On the other hand, a sandbox game will allways be about all the possibilities it has to offer. And let's face it: A huge portion of the playerbase wants to fight, and would NOT play this game if the combat would be missing! Just think for a minute, how many people Starmade would play if it doesn't has combat. That doesn't mean that I want to disagree with the OP.

Still, that isn't the bigger picture here. Look:

There will allways be idiots in this forum, that don't understand, that Shine uses the community as input only, but doesn't care at all (exagerated words) if some dudes win an argument against another group of people. The only guys some dickheads can influence (by harassing and talking rude) are other community members. We are just hurting each other, without any effect on the game. :D But I know I know there will allways be another know-it-all who disagrees with me now, when I say: Shine consists of grown up people who think for themself and thus don't care about won or lost discussions about this or that game mechanic. They will certainly not do what any minority or majority thinks is the best for themself or the game, but they will do what they think is right. We aren't here mainly to convince Shine, but each other.

We are talking here to each other for the biggest part. We are not directly talking or discussing with the Developers in the most cases. So why the fuck are there so many people around, who act like they are not here to convince other people. Exactly, many just don't get it, that a forum is about talking to each other and persuading the persons who actually talk with you - not the devs or any silent majority, but the persons who respond to you.

 

[kulbolen]

Well from a developer standpoint, it makes sense to give players something to actually test while long term work is done on the games other areas. Balancing combat on all scales would not go well if it were the focus of development closer to release, rather than later.

i agree. but that wasnt really the message behind that qoute about pvp being part of the fun of the game. itll continue to be unless its removed, regardless of whats added.

is this a developer message saying that pvp wont be an important aspect of the game in the future after more features are developed?

 

[Criss]

i agree. but that wasnt really the message behind that qoute about pvp being part of the fun of the game. itll continue to be unless its removed, regardless of whats added.

is this a developer message saying that pvp wont be an important aspect of the game in the future after more features are developed?

No not at all. PvP is fun and there is no reason to lessen it's importance. In fact, on populated servers, pvp will likely become even more popular. Faction interaction, territory, claiming resources should contribute to the need for pvp, even in a diplomatic sense. Right now there is no reason to expand. We want to change that, and hopefully players seeking the greatest rewards from the universe will run into each other.

 

[KiloZulu]

I hope that I didn't give the impression that I believe PVP should not be a part of the game. My OP was to state that there is no indication that it is the primary goal of the game, which is what some forum members appear to believe. Even when the developers state their desire to "balance" the combat mechanics, I don't expect that to mean the balance will be PVP-centric. When they are including their own NPC factions and fleets, it is likely that they wish to balance combat against those forces.

I think it's safe to say that this game has always drawn comparisons to Minecraft, and that is for a reason. Sandbox, survival, crafting, exploration...PVP is not high on the list of features, and the main reason it exists is due to the sandbox nature of the game rather than any driven intent. Just as with Minecraft, any time that I've played on a public server, it is with the knowledge that the sandbox is going to have players who want to PVP among the crowd. I adjust my own play to the situation.

So. this isn't a game of either or, it is a game with both. PVP has to live within the confines of what that means - it is no more than an one option among many, not a mandate.

 

[kulbolen]

I hope that I didn't give the impression that I believe PVP should not be a part of the game. My OP was to state that there is no indication that it is the primary goal of the game, which is what some forum members appear to believe. Even when the developers state their desire to "balance" the combat mechanics, I don't expect that to mean the balance will be PVP-centric. When they are including their own NPC factions and fleets, it is likely that they wish to balance combat against those forces.

this i agree with, i dont expect pvp to be "the primary aspect" of the game. im not sure many pvpers actually believe the game was designed around pvp as the main goal, although im sure many do believe its one of the few current goals.

I think it's safe to say that this game has always drawn comparisons to Minecraft, and that is for a reason. Sandbox, survival, crafting, exploration...PVP is not high on the list of features, and the main reason it exists is due to the sandbox nature of the game rather than any driven intent. Just as with Minecraft, any time that I've played on a public server, it is with the knowledge that the sandbox is going to have players who want to PVP among the crowd. I adjust my own play to the situation.

im not sure why you need minecraft here unless you mean to drive your position by qualifying starmades playstyle with minecrafts advertising...

this is starmades steam info blurb:

"The ultimate space sandbox. Participate in epic fleet battles, form alliances, strive to dominate entire galaxies and harness the universe’s resources for your industrious empire or the destruction of others. Customise your experience, the universe is yours!"

you see, pvp is not a "feature" in a ticker list anymore than "pve" is. if i advertised a multiplayer survival game, i wouldnt advertise pvp at all... because id consider it inherent to "survival" in a multiplayer environment, if that makes sense. its all in how you choose to interpret the feature list. it may not be "the" defining feature, but its certainly not "not high on the list of features." it has a huge impact on any environment that exists with it as an intended feature, as you can clearly see by the forum posts lately.

 

[Lecic]

I think you are misunderstanding. Starmade is not an arena PvP game, and it has never been that. It is a survival empire building PvP game with a creative mode. Many features, while not solely for PvP, play heavily into it. Obviously few features can be solely for PvP, as the game has SP.

aliens, planets, stations,

And what are these things for? One of the many proposed and wanted uses for alien creatures is for capturing and weaponizing them against other players. Planets as resource points to fight over, stations as system claims, both as places for hireable NPC crew to make ships that PvP functional.

Ship systems, logic,

Ship systems? HAHAHAHA, are you fucking serious? Almost every system in the game is designed specifically for combat, and most of the remaining ones are used to fuel said combat.

For Combat-

• All 4 weapon systems
• Power/Shield Supply/Drain
• Shields
• Armor
• Most passive systems
• Cloaking/Jamming/Scanning
• Warheads
• Astrotech
• Jump Inhibitors

Scanning does have some non-combat uses, but its primary functions are combat based- decloaking hostiles, finding people to shoot, and locating claim stations to nuke.

Potentially used in/Fueling Combat-

• Salvagers and cargo
• Power
• Thrusters, passive push/pull
• Logic
• Rail systems
• Bobby AI
• Factory systems
• Jump Drives

Non-combat only-

• Passive stop
• Push pulse

Sure, none of these systems are (or the ones that are won't be, anyway) SPECIFICALLY for PvP, because, again, SP mode has to exist, but you'd have to be a bit dull to not realize that all these COMBAT SYSTEMS in a multiplayer game with PvP enabled are for PvP.

Design contests for ships, stations, fleets - none of it with PVP in mind, and judged for aesthetics rather than PVP capability.

Yes, because the SP game needs something for people to do. They were designed with aesthetics in mind because they know balance is likely to change, and judging them on combat ability would be pointless.

What's more, the design changes that Schine have made, are proposing, and continue to research, are not focused on PVP balance as their priority, but on game performance.

They are focusing on game performance because the part of the game that causes the most drain on servers and clients is PvP combat. If the game had no PvP combat, you could legitimately just not optimize the game ever again from what we currently have. It is sufficiently optimized for PvE and goofing around with your pals without a care in the world. The one part of the game that is laggiest right now is when two meta boats start ripping into eachother, destroying blocks, undocking and colliding the dozens or hundreds of modular power, shield, armor, and weapon units that they have.

 

[KiloZulu]

I think it's a strong leap to suggest that just because combat systems exist they are necessarily intended for PVP. Everything you mentioned above, aside from cloaking and scanners, exist and are useful without PVP. The sheer size and scope of the content that Starmade has and will offer are outside of the needs for PVP. If planets were simply a mining resource to create ships for PVP, we wouldn't have the cacti. Players who would argue that any change to the game should only be judged on their contribution to PVP are missing the forest for the trees.

 

[Lecic]

I think it's a strong leap to suggest that just because combat systems exist they are necessarily intended for PVP. Everything you mentioned above, aside from cloaking and scanners, exist and are useful without PVP. The sheer size and scope of the content that Starmade has and will offer are outside of the needs for PVP. If planets were simply a mining resource to create ships for PVP, we wouldn't have the cacti. Players who would argue that any change to the game should only be judged on their contribution to PVP are missing the forest for the trees.

Again, you are missing my point, which is that the systems are for COMBAT. This is not necessarily PvP, sure, but it would be ridiculous to claim that PvP is not and will not continue to be a central pillar in a multiplayer game with so many systems dedicated to combat.

 

[KiloZulu]

Maybe I'm focusing too squarely on your use of "central pillar." I think the pillar is off to one side a bit.

 

[Top 4ce]

The argument presented here is misunderstanding each aspect of the game. "RP" is the setting and environment for players to interact with and the framework on what those interactions will be build on. Combat, trading, and diplomacy are just some of those interactions. This is true for SP and MP.

The difference between SP and MP is how that setting will be interacted with, because this is indeed a sandbox game. In SP it's the classic PvE, building, or whatever.

MP however, that interaction will be with and against other players. Combat is the interaction with most likely outcome of risk vs reward. Hence combat is an integral part of the game, and making sure it is done correctly that is engaging and fun is important. Balance can always be adjusted, but the foundation of combat must be engaging, otherwise you lose the most important interaction in the game.

To recap, environment is an important foundation for the game, and how you interact with that environment is just as important, and on this game combat is the central interaction.

 

[kulbolen]

I think it's a strong leap to suggest that just because combat systems exist they are necessarily intended for PVP. Everything you mentioned above, aside from cloaking and scanners, exist and are useful without PVP. The sheer size and scope of the content that Starmade has and will offer are outside of the needs for PVP. If planets were simply a mining resource to create ships for PVP, we wouldn't have the cacti. Players who would argue that any change to the game should only be judged on their contribution to PVP are missing the forest for the trees.

nearly everything you wrote here is a misinterpretation. your entire cacti argument revolves around a point he never made, about planets "only" being a mining resource for pvp ships. tmk no one made any points about a believable or interactive environment being useless if its not for pvp.

straight from the start youve created strawmen to prop up your argument. no one here is claiming "lolol pvp was the primary original intent of this game," and none of the major focus forum posts ive seen have made that claim. if im wrong here, they were probably dismissed so quickly by all parties that i didnt see it at all.

by the way, ive used stop passive in "atmosphereic arena" fights, and ive hidden behind objects such as cactus on planets in "astronaut arena" fights.

most of us agree that pvp and pve can coexist as well developed aspects of the game, most of the "debate" is a matter of what we think is the right way to get there. devaluing our arguments by claiming otherwise is wrong.

 

[GalactusX]

For me, PVP is the basis of any multiplayer game. What really differentiates one game and another, is what your players do to pass the time according to their preferences.

As I said before, there will be people who like only PVP, others PVE and others RP, although the great majority always joins several, or if not all styles of game.

Personal choice is free, the problem is that people confuse "need" with "design"; None ship needs to have RP complements, because it may be a "specific design", and other ships do not "need" to have complements because they do not require combat.

A ship can have RP complements and be able to fight like no other, and other ships with no RP complement can be rubbish. As I say, the choice is for each player, if I build something that others do not like, because it does not enter their style of play, no problem, it is my personal choice, and who does not like it, play CandyCrash XD

 

[jayman38]

My understanding of the core purpose of the game for Schine was to re-create great, exciting space battles, in a customize-able, playable format.

This would suggest that Schine always had PVP in mind, but there are other ways of having big battles (AI).

As seen by the majority of computer games being combat-oriented, it seems that combat is the easiest, and therefore, most immediate game mechanic that can be developed. (As a member of Schine once said, provide players with weapons, and they will naturally fight.)

Beyond combat, I see magnificent possibilities for the game's future where there's a thousand different ways to play the game, as a universe simulation. Since builders have so much fun with non-combat features of the game, it's only natural to explore those less-combat-oriented elements and expand on them. The more multi-faceted Starmade becomes, the more fun and longer-lasting it will be as a game. Of course, that multi-faceted development needs to be tempered with a need to build great individual facets. We don't need another disappointing "Spore".

 

[El_Shanta]

I feel that it is important for PVP players to recognize the state and direction of the game and either adjust their expectations or find a different game that suits their desires.

I'm positive the general consensus from the few PVPers here and serverside would be a cross the board "no u", both arguments being about as unreasonable as eachother.