Make PVP optional - READ first

Venixer

Well-known endo
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
51
#1
It occurs to me that Starbase will have a potentially HUGE playerbase.

And as far as we know, sandbox mode isn't in the planning, so for those who want to play without fear of being hunted down constantly or looking over their shoulder, allow players to take themselves out of PvP, by toggling some type of change in their status. But the game doesn't have to focus entirely on PvP as a core feature, it can be modified to allow PvP to be optional.

So how does Frozenbyte going about doing this? Here's a few steps.

1.) Allow players to change their status from Hostile, to Non-Hostile. Being Non-Hostile means they can't be damaged by player ships or weapons.
2.) Allow players to change their statuses ONLY at stations, not in the middle of space, so they can't attack someone, then switch status to escape retaliation.
3.) Give incentives for even non-combat players to stay in Hostile mode, by increasing their rewards for their mining or salvage. Perhaps a 3x or higher price payout at stations so they are willing to take the risk and engage in combat if need be, to protect their haul.
4.) Keep safe zones, for newer players or those who aren't as financially motivated.

5.) Make some extremely valuable and rare ores, only possible to be mined, in a Hostile status.

So I'm already hearing some natural questions, many from those who aren't even going to read the entire post.

Q: If people can just put themselves on Non-Hostile then no one would do PvP right?
A: No. There will always be players out there looking to pillage and kill. The rewards for even miners and explorers to stay In PvP mode gives these PvP players targets to hunt. This is why you offer players, incentives and rewards for risking to be in PvP mode.

Q: Why should players be given a choice?
A: Because it increases the options for players. Not everyone wants to engage in PvP for time reasons or just personal preferences. Giving players an option, means that some players who want to play safe, aren't forced into become targets when all they wanted was just some peaceful (and less profitable) mining. Choice never hurts playerbases, limiting their choices will results in people leaving because they're constantly being harassed by PvPers.

Q: What is to stop a PvPer from abusing the system and then putting themselves on non-hostile right after killing someone?
A: Make the toggling system only changeable in a station, not just a safe zone, therefore it takes a long time to go back. That way it is a serious choice and decision to make before a player embarks on their task. A PvPer will be locked onto that status when they leave a station, and a non-Hostile player can't attack anyone else even if he sees an easy kill.

Again, I ask Frozenbyte to consider this as an option, because it will give more options to players. Giving players a choice, and sometimes the chance to make slower money but safer, an option.
 
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
3
#4
Having played a variety of MMOs over the years, I really don't think a PVP switch is a good idea. So much more emergent gameplay is available when all people are at equal risk to attack when outside the "safe zones". It creates much more in game issues and solutions when even if you plan to play passively, you must watch out for other player attacks if you want valuable resources. Do I hire some people for protection? Do I risk this run for loot and set my ship up to be quick for an escape or slower so it can haul more stuff?

Open world PVP MMO's have always had the most impact on my gaming experiences through the risk/reward and it forces you to interact with other players, not just in combat but in deterring yourself from that combat. There are plenty of MMOs out there that cater to someone looking for a non PVP focused world. I seriously hope the devs don't go down that path for this game. Yes, it would give players who don't want to engage in PVP a choice, but at the same time it would break so many systems that open PVP can foster. Whats stopping everyone who wants to mine valuable resources or build a player station from just switching off their PVP tags? Why wouldn't EVERY player do that while performing these functions? It makes going after extremely valuable ore more of a tedious task than a dangerous one, seeing as you'd have no fear from pirating from other players. Only potentially NPCs which always pose a much lower risk once their patterns are figured out.
 

Mr.Silver

Well-known endo
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
58
#5
I agree with faded's opinion tbh. I can also see others viewpoints on this but overall for the experience/the game itself should be full pvp besides safe-zones so its a controlled development/economy by the players in a fair manor.
 

XenoCow

Master endo
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
562
#6
I think that there is some potential to the idea that you have.

I have one concern with the toggle-able, or even separate PvP and no PvP servers. If players can choose to play passively, then players who want to have risk, but not fight all the time will be targeted exclusively, forcing them into the passive mode.

If everyone has to be in PvP mode, then players who want to fight all the time would have to temper their combat a little because even mining ships could do some damage. Players who want to stay passive would have to plan for pirates creating escort jobs or building creativity. Players that want some middle ground would be able to not fear being hunted but could still fight sometimes when needed.

Although default PvP may make the game slightly tougher for those who want absolutely no combat or only combat, I think the fairness, emergent behavior like mentioned above, and overall safety that it creates makes up for that.
 

Mr.Silver

Well-known endo
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
58
#7
I mean the concept could be there, but is just to unstable for the player-base if you mess up/give in once then its all over.
 

Mr.Silver

Well-known endo
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
58
#9
if the devs implement the concept if they give in to carebears completely or if they do something which causes pr problems their done for just like new world. However I have faith in the games future no matter what happens so gg either way gg. #StarbaseIsAmazing
 

HarrisonB1210

Learned-to-sprint endo
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
21
#10
if the devs implement the concept if they give in to carebears completely or if they do something which causes pr problems their done for just like new world. However I have faith in the games future no matter what happens so gg either way gg. #StarbaseIsAmazing
yeah starbase is amazing! And I also agree that a pvp switch shouldn't be a thing because of the simple safe zone, and if you want to mine really good ores then going outside the safezone is what you do.
 

Meetbolio

Veteran endo
Joined
Feb 19, 2020
Messages
222
#11
3.) Give incentives for even non-combat players to stay in Hostile mode, by increasing their rewards for their mining or salvage. Perhaps a 3x or higher price payout at stations so they are willing to take the risk and engage in combat if need be, to protect their haul.
4.) Keep safe zones, for newer players or those who aren't as financially motivated.
5.) Make some extremely valuable and rare ores, only possible to be mined, in a Hostile status.
This is exactly what is happening, my friend. People who don't risk leaving safezone don't receive good pay, because even a couple weeks in there is barely any corazium (second-best ore) left in the safezone. The incentive to go outside of the safezone is because the only existing shipwrecks are ones outside of the zone, and the deeper into the belt, the better ores you get.

There's no need for a PvP toggle, it's already in the game. You either leave the safezone, or you don't get paid well.
 

Meetbolio

Veteran endo
Joined
Feb 19, 2020
Messages
222
#19
Not only did the devs say so, I can confirm as an alpha tester that there is plenty of low-quality asteroids in the safezone.
 
Top