Griefing and social engineering policies
- Thread starter LauriFB
- Start date
"Outside of the safezones we'll still uphold all of the rules, but it becomes much more case-by-case and is not as automatic as it is within safezones." I want to start my statement using this quote..... I am very confused about the developers stance on whats allowed, and not allowed. I keep seeing different information. Once i feel satisfied, then i see something else that confuses me. Frozenbyte, what crowd are you trying to appeal to?
When i first saw the trailors of this game, i saw huge fleets of ships brawling, and the most amazing damage ive ever seen in a game, all in one server. I saw pvp. Now, i feel as if the community is trying to eliminate the people who like this sort of game play, and contain it. With all these rules im seeing, its sounding as if the devs are trying to create an organized pvp thing. Even if you are outside the safe zone, there can be a situation where you can make it look as if you are being "griefed." I hate that word. its very manipulative, because the context that pve people use it in, within this community, is assuming the intentions of why they are being attacked. I was in closed alpha, so ive seen alot of it. Pvp people are labeled badly in this game. ive never seen such discrimination towards this kind of game play in any game ive ever seen. And, yet it seems so absurd seeing as how we are in an MMO that contains many weapons, and contains a damage mechanic to really entice the whole destruction aspect. This game screams pvp. If there were no weapons, sure, no pvp. OK. fine. I wouldnt be here. But, we also have pve industry, economy, etc.
Both types of gameplay are great. Ive seen this in eve online, and i loved it. They created a balance in the game that was alot of fun. I wont go into details to save space. But, what im getting at is there is mechanics in game for both types of gameplay. Great. No problem there. But, you have to realize that the two crowds tend to have opposing ideals about their gameplay desires. I dont not know how to make a game. no idea. i cant program to save my life. But, i know pvp people. These rules are a bit overzealous to say the least. Inside the safe zone is absolutely fine, and completely understandable. But, once they cross that line, there should be no rules, what so ever. I would see the devs say that its a free for all, but the statement i quoted above contradicts this. As a pvp guy, i feel like im walking on egg shells playing this game. They permaban so quickly. no hesitation, just ban. What ive been reading just takes the hype right out of me, and this has been my favorite game of all time. by far. no better game to me. But, if this turns out the way i fear, ill be leaving. its too stressful for my playstyle, and i just wanna have fun. Outside the safe zone needs to be free to do anything to our hearts content. There needs to be mechanics in the game to prevent every kind of undesirable action without the devs getting involved. If the devs keep getting involved, drama will soon arise within part of the community, and could hurt the game. If frozenbyte doesnt like how someone is talking, mute them. allow others to mute them. i mean, its simple. we are adults, right? there is already a safe zone. so that cleans up most of the mess alone. Social engineering is an interesting part of an mmo pvp game. I honestly think alot of these pve people just take these actions very personally, and then they have this false idea of the person thats committing the act, picturing them as the worst kind of human being alive. The way i think of it, is the safe zone is line between the pve crowd and pvp crowd. you cross that line, its our playground. you play by our rules. which are none. and if they wanna be safe, stay in the safe zone. it makes no sense to put rules outside sz. We already have too much safe zones as is. i mean, youll have to grind for months just to get a cap ship to finally raid a station. I personally would like to see another mechanic added as another way to raid.
What im getting at is that im confused. Devs, id like to ask you to give rules with a rock solid foundation. please dont use words that can be easily misunderstood because they arent firm. words like "maybe" is not a stable word, just as an example. i really need to see rules that cannot be mistaken, or misunderstood. Im mainly concerned about outside the safe zone.
Please, i do not wish for any replies what so ever, except from developer.
When i first saw the trailors of this game, i saw huge fleets of ships brawling, and the most amazing damage ive ever seen in a game, all in one server. I saw pvp. Now, i feel as if the community is trying to eliminate the people who like this sort of game play, and contain it. With all these rules im seeing, its sounding as if the devs are trying to create an organized pvp thing. Even if you are outside the safe zone, there can be a situation where you can make it look as if you are being "griefed." I hate that word. its very manipulative, because the context that pve people use it in, within this community, is assuming the intentions of why they are being attacked. I was in closed alpha, so ive seen alot of it. Pvp people are labeled badly in this game. ive never seen such discrimination towards this kind of game play in any game ive ever seen. And, yet it seems so absurd seeing as how we are in an MMO that contains many weapons, and contains a damage mechanic to really entice the whole destruction aspect. This game screams pvp. If there were no weapons, sure, no pvp. OK. fine. I wouldnt be here. But, we also have pve industry, economy, etc.
Both types of gameplay are great. Ive seen this in eve online, and i loved it. They created a balance in the game that was alot of fun. I wont go into details to save space. But, what im getting at is there is mechanics in game for both types of gameplay. Great. No problem there. But, you have to realize that the two crowds tend to have opposing ideals about their gameplay desires. I dont not know how to make a game. no idea. i cant program to save my life. But, i know pvp people. These rules are a bit overzealous to say the least. Inside the safe zone is absolutely fine, and completely understandable. But, once they cross that line, there should be no rules, what so ever. I would see the devs say that its a free for all, but the statement i quoted above contradicts this. As a pvp guy, i feel like im walking on egg shells playing this game. They permaban so quickly. no hesitation, just ban. What ive been reading just takes the hype right out of me, and this has been my favorite game of all time. by far. no better game to me. But, if this turns out the way i fear, ill be leaving. its too stressful for my playstyle, and i just wanna have fun. Outside the safe zone needs to be free to do anything to our hearts content. There needs to be mechanics in the game to prevent every kind of undesirable action without the devs getting involved. If the devs keep getting involved, drama will soon arise within part of the community, and could hurt the game. If frozenbyte doesnt like how someone is talking, mute them. allow others to mute them. i mean, its simple. we are adults, right? there is already a safe zone. so that cleans up most of the mess alone. Social engineering is an interesting part of an mmo pvp game. I honestly think alot of these pve people just take these actions very personally, and then they have this false idea of the person thats committing the act, picturing them as the worst kind of human being alive. The way i think of it, is the safe zone is line between the pve crowd and pvp crowd. you cross that line, its our playground. you play by our rules. which are none. and if they wanna be safe, stay in the safe zone. it makes no sense to put rules outside sz. We already have too much safe zones as is. i mean, youll have to grind for months just to get a cap ship to finally raid a station. I personally would like to see another mechanic added as another way to raid.
What im getting at is that im confused. Devs, id like to ask you to give rules with a rock solid foundation. please dont use words that can be easily misunderstood because they arent firm. words like "maybe" is not a stable word, just as an example. i really need to see rules that cannot be mistaken, or misunderstood. Im mainly concerned about outside the safe zone.
Please, i do not wish for any replies what so ever, except from developer.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2021
- Messages
- 102
I think the message is pretty clear, what is not allowed is to find ways around the safee zone being a _safe zone_. There is a zero tolerance policy in that regard.
The safe zone in SB is not like Highsec in EVE, it is like the starter systems in EVE where the new players spawn and do the initial tutorial. And yes, CCP will ban your account "faster than you can get a new clone once CONCORD gets to you there", and without question, if you go into these areas in EVE and start scamming, harassing or killing new players, they track and notice this activity almost instantly.
What happens outside the Safezone in SB is entirely different and while there can be cases of griefing/harassment, what does or does not go there is much different from inside the SZ andf woudl need to be assessed on a case by case basic, so the message that Frozenbyte is sending is perfectly clear IMO.
The safe zone in SB is not like Highsec in EVE, it is like the starter systems in EVE where the new players spawn and do the initial tutorial. And yes, CCP will ban your account "faster than you can get a new clone once CONCORD gets to you there", and without question, if you go into these areas in EVE and start scamming, harassing or killing new players, they track and notice this activity almost instantly.
What happens outside the Safezone in SB is entirely different and while there can be cases of griefing/harassment, what does or does not go there is much different from inside the SZ andf woudl need to be assessed on a case by case basic, so the message that Frozenbyte is sending is perfectly clear IMO.
To me, no, it is not “perfectly clear.” In my post I mentioned at least twice that I understand the polices in the safe zone. I do not care about the strictness there at all. Let’s not even include the safe zone in this conversation. Let’s talk about the non safe zone. It is ridiculous to consider anything “griefing” outside the safe zone. That Is just a word people use who get upset because they die in game. What is “griefing” outside the safe zone? Give me an example? If this really is an issue, then this needs to be made public. Loud and clear. Very very loud. That way we all know, and us pvp people will move on to another game. If these rules bleed into non safe zone, you’d be a fool not to realize that this is easily exploitable. All it takes is a handful of biased people who don’t like the “offender” and gets the person banned. It’s easy to manipulate the situation, especially when multiple people are involved. The fact that it will be handled in a “case by case basis” also opens the door for discriminating against the pvp people. Rather than just laying down rock solid rules. They just make them up as they go. And this would happen in this game because I’ve seen what the community is capable of. This is extremely toxic, and the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard in game history. This will cause a very large amount of unwanted drama, and reduce the player base. And you guys can have your mining simulator. Hell, have the devs remove the guns. They also need to change the trailers to remove all those battle scenes. If you all want so many rules, go ahead, beg the devs to put the game into organize pvp only. That will cure all of the pve community concerns. And people like myself will quit the game. Problem solved. These rules need to be spelled out. I need someone to give me rock solid explanations as to what is not acceptable in non safe, otherwise, it’s toxic and exploitable.
Just a small notice: those are rules that were applicable in Closed Alpha. The only rules that apply now are those found on the official wiki.
https://wiki.starbasegame.com/index.php/Rules
And specifically gameplay rules
https://wiki.starbasegame.com/index.php/Gameplay_rules
They are still very vague and open to interpretation though.
https://wiki.starbasegame.com/index.php/Rules
And specifically gameplay rules
https://wiki.starbasegame.com/index.php/Gameplay_rules
They are still very vague and open to interpretation though.
I corrected the disclaimer to state that while official rules are in the wiki, this post should still be viewed as informative post as what to expect from the official rules.
Now, the official rules have always banned griefing, the information part just happens to be in this post. So there's still no technicalities how to bypass safe zone griefing rules.
We don't participate in bad faith discussions which always follow the same pattern: trying to get us to grant some sort of free ticket to griefing. If you have to ask about it, you already know the answer.
Now, the official rules have always banned griefing, the information part just happens to be in this post. So there's still no technicalities how to bypass safe zone griefing rules.
We don't participate in bad faith discussions which always follow the same pattern: trying to get us to grant some sort of free ticket to griefing. If you have to ask about it, you already know the answer.
Well, see Lauri, I’m not talking about inside the safe zone, I got that part. I need to know if you guys are trying to govern outside as well, and if so, specifically how? Because this would be a terrible idea. I’ll explain why. The mechanic of siege mechanics we have, the point is general warfare, you see to destroy your enemy, and take what is there’s to become yours. This mechanic alone could be argued as “griefing” by this communities definition. It could just slightly be bent this way or that way. “They attacked us because (insert toxic reason here)” it just becomes an absolute mess that is confusing for everyone, and not good for this game we want to see succeed.
Last edited:
It's all outlined pretty clearly in the first post, but I'll explain the reasoning also:
- Safe zone is for new players or those who do not seek conflict. It's in any case a safe area, including all deception to lure people out from there.
- Non-safe zone is basically the entire universe. It is not safe, in fact it's guaranteed loss of a ship. If you venture there and don't face a single player an asteroid will still destroy your ship. We promise a total loss for everyone taking the risk outside the safe zone, and we don't care does that happen by players or by fuel running out.
- Social engineering rules are there to prevent luring people out of safe zones, or to prevent stealing stations, bases or capital ships via deception. Social engineering rules do not cover faction espionage, but they are designed to protect pve players. So social engineering rules are mainly there to block bypassing safe zone rules.
thank you for your responses Lauri. Just to make myself easier to understand, I wasn’t looking for a loophole to trick new players. I have zero desire to do so. I don’t want to trick one, or mess with one in any way, shape or form. My curiousness was strictly outside the safe zone vs another group or person outside the safe zone that I did not lure or whatever. I wanted to know I could attack someone countless times outside the safe zone without being accused of some rule being broken. I think I feel more at ease now. I appreciate the patience in explaining this to me.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2021
- Messages
- 102
I want to remind everyone that we are building a fun game for a lot of different play style players. So while my stance on pvp areas seems pretty harsh, it's since the we have good plans on how to protect pve players with ingame features: capital ships and how much they offer both absolute and relative safety even when exploring all around the universe. But until cap ships are done I get that the rules with current game elements are brutal.
The 3rd pillar of the safety rules, social engineering ban, is there to protect any "clever" tricks to force pve players to lose their civilian capital ships or their safe zone status. The short story is that civilian capital ships cannot be lost by any means, not via clever tricks by others nor via user error. They are 100% safe under any circumstance.
The 3rd pillar of the safety rules, social engineering ban, is there to protect any "clever" tricks to force pve players to lose their civilian capital ships or their safe zone status. The short story is that civilian capital ships cannot be lost by any means, not via clever tricks by others nor via user error. They are 100% safe under any circumstance.
They said the ships are the most expensive thing in game to make. More so than a station. I highly doubt anyone will have thousands on a company level. I doubt we will ever see that unless our player base grew like 10x. Maybe more. They are full of alloys, huge, and expensive. Even if there was a company that grew in size, and they were disliked. People would band together to take them out, if they were using military capital ships, that is. But, there can be companies out there that make civilian capital ships that cannot be raided. But civilian cap ships have their limits. They can’t enter a “war zone” how ever large that is. Basically where a siege is underway. And if they are already caught within, they cannot have ships come in their civilian vessel, nor can anyone fly out, their only option is to warp away if not stay, and wait. Although, I personally believe it’s op to allow Civ cap ships camping on the edge of the war zone to be honest.. though, I do not know how far out the warzone stretches. just seems a bit on the cheese side if you ask me.
Last edited:
I
I agree with you. But, you can fool people all you want to outside the safe zone. They are just wanting to keep noobs from quitting the game, because there is so much to learn. It’s definitely hard, and takes a lot of passion to learn. So I definitely get it. The plus side is like 99.9 percent of space is non safe zone. And we can fool, destroy, whatever we wanna do outside the safe zone.
I agree with you. But, you can fool people all you want to outside the safe zone. They are just wanting to keep noobs from quitting the game, because there is so much to learn. It’s definitely hard, and takes a lot of passion to learn. So I definitely get it. The plus side is like 99.9 percent of space is non safe zone. And we can fool, destroy, whatever we wanna do outside the safe zone.
I may be repeating the many others here, but player mods are a mistake. The Discord and reddit crowds are already toxic as can be and quick to tell players to simply /quit/ as Starbase "Isn't For Them" over literally any feedback.
Given power, these players are extremely likely to enforce their beliefs on who should be part of Starbase's playerbase by any means at their disposal, and make up reasons afterwards.
Aside from that, I'd like to also agree heavily with the idea that trying to enforce these rules on any reasonable sized playerbase is going to be a nightmare, not just from the fact that apparently members of the dev team are in fact playing the game as well as taking on dev roles, which invariably will engender accusations of cheating and favoritism, but because they are just hazy enough to be confusing and hard to discern meaning, and backstabbing is less common in reality than people like to pretend it is in games like EVE.
Edit: Considering some of the already sorta issues with stuff like levying ban threats for using developer designs, this is a bit worrisome et large, as given some of the previous statements by messir and villefb, my confidence in fair and unbaised judgements, especially if they involve developer factions, is rather low.
Given power, these players are extremely likely to enforce their beliefs on who should be part of Starbase's playerbase by any means at their disposal, and make up reasons afterwards.
Aside from that, I'd like to also agree heavily with the idea that trying to enforce these rules on any reasonable sized playerbase is going to be a nightmare, not just from the fact that apparently members of the dev team are in fact playing the game as well as taking on dev roles, which invariably will engender accusations of cheating and favoritism, but because they are just hazy enough to be confusing and hard to discern meaning, and backstabbing is less common in reality than people like to pretend it is in games like EVE.
Edit: Considering some of the already sorta issues with stuff like levying ban threats for using developer designs, this is a bit worrisome et large, as given some of the previous statements by messir and villefb, my confidence in fair and unbaised judgements, especially if they involve developer factions, is rather low.
Last edited: