"We're gonna let him cook" *interrupts video 30 seconds in

@saltemikereacts

4 ай бұрын

Classic

@itesseracted

4 ай бұрын

real

@Deceaser

4 ай бұрын

goteem

@lordfraybin

4 ай бұрын

LOL!!! Yeah... but it's Mike. What did u expect? Still... "extreme pvp" was driving me nuts too.

@telesto1087

4 ай бұрын

STOP PAUSING

The #1 problem with pvp at all in SC against non-combat players is there is literally NO RISK for the aggressor. When there is finally a fully fleshed law/security system, with real consequences for doing so then pvp can be a real thing.

@teddypicker8799

4 ай бұрын

Something like elite dangerous where you can auto call the space cops to help you would be nice too

@silus73

4 ай бұрын

@teddypicker8799 sort of. however, the space cops have to be able to shoot. In the big picture though right now if a player attacks a player they, at most they get a CS go to OPK and either get rid of it and back out they go to harass someone maybe 30 mins tops no loss, mean while the victims could have been mining, maybe just left a bunker, maybe collect loot boxes that was at least 1 - 2 hrs game play and they would have to 1 - 2 hrs to recover. PvP needs to have a lasting cost. I look forward to the rep hit supposedly coming in 3.23. I'm hoping you attack a player with high standing in say Hurston, then the aggressor will find flying in Hurston space or any other lawful area a sheer nightmare from then on, or at least until they can reverse that rep. That would bring some bit of justice to the victim. Also I want the rep to stay no matter how long they spend in prison, meaning they have to do some kind of good for a time to get it back.

@Frank-costanza

4 ай бұрын

@@silus73 yeah, every time I went to prison I had someone just gift me time and I was out in less than 15 minutes. It's not a real penalty at all currently, especially with the time credit transfers and logging out to wait out the timer.

@tropicthndr

4 ай бұрын

Whatever cig needs to do in order to keep the servers from causing frame rate drops down to abysmal levels or crashing.

@HustleBones.

4 ай бұрын

sounds like u needa take a break til then lil bro

Having not watched the video yet, my own take is that it should not be optional, but it should be avoidable. The former implies that you can simply "turn it off" or "opt out" and guarantee that you will never be engaged in PVP under any circumstances. I personally believe that it should be relatively simple and obvious to avoid.

@ultrastoat3298

4 ай бұрын

I've been kinda sounding the alarm on this for quite a while now. There is this loud contingency of care bears that play this game that think everything is griefing, when in reality is there is almost no griefing. What they call griefing is just them getting killed and getting mad about it almost 100% of the time.

@Frank-costanza

4 ай бұрын

​@@ultrastoat3298the only pvp I've encountered was just griefing. I do bunkers, trade, explore and see nobody. But I go to a station and some idiot is sitting outside of armistice shooting into hangars.

@Haegemon

4 ай бұрын

Yes, I agree.

@ultrastoat3298

4 ай бұрын

@@Frank-costanzaLOL. Don't believe you for a second. Literally thousands of hours in the game and never seen it happen. 100% that's the not only pvp you've seen lol. People lying out here to feel good. Bet dude was hiding in armistice with a bounty on him.

@Frank-costanza

4 ай бұрын

@@ultrastoat3298 cool, don't believe me I guess. Dude was just sitting there shooting into hangars. I didn't lose anything since I was just flying some lti token with trash armor on. I've never seen another player in a ship where pvp happened, just them hanging out or landing at a landing zone.

Yeah, totally agreed with you on "PVP being optional:" it should be optional-ish based on where you're based. Uncontrolled violence will be rare in civilized systems because it'll be hard for people with a really bad rep to stay there for long without bounty-hunters or the law quickly zeroing in on them. Not impossible, but it should be rare. One day. Once all those rep and law systems are in place. Maybe.

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

"optional-ish" is what CIG planned with the PvP slider to start. "based on where you're based" is what they decided on when the non-instanced architecture no longer allowed for a slider-based solution. 100% what the plan's always been. 👍

Griefing and harassment should not be the same definition. Because we already have the word Harassment. Griefing is using game mechanics in an unintended way to disrupt the gameplay of others. (Like using your body to block the door to the bank in the safe zone where you are invincible) (I've not yet heard a better definition, or example, that isn't just also the definition of harassment) Exploiting is using unintended game mechanics (In contrast to the INTENDED invincibility of the bank to block doors) to gain and advantage. (Like figuring out that you can use the bank invincibility outside in the pvp zone if you equip a specific quest item before exiting the bank) PK = Ganking = Murder Hobo = Random PvP for the sake of pvp

@shippy1001

4 ай бұрын

The issue with PK is that, even though you don`t win anything by killing other players, you still have the satisfaction of doing so, it will always exist.

If they start loosing or not gaining players, because a minority wants PvP everywhere, they will rethink that strategy. No, not every player wants PvP. The majority wants a relaxed coop experience or running missions against AI or explore the world.

Here is what I see and is an opinion... SC is going to be a game on a scale that CANNOT be base-suppported by 1 player group on the scale we are used to it Will be a composite player base game so the other groups that don't normally don't play PvP have the commodity that determines whether SCis stable enough to function at scale. When a group controls the commodity, you need you don't tell them how to operate, it isn't a majority rule choice, they tell you the terms for them staying . If they don't get them they split and you don't get what you need to function. "If Pvp isn't for you go somewhere else" and PvPers saying "come try this my way" = "your right, bye, and good luck with your game that is now more dairelect than it was." We who play need more to play more than they need SC if they don't get what they want to some degree The game structure deflates an fails

Personaly im not a PVP guy, but the risk that i mught be targeted at any moment is something i like. But, i also believe that Piracy should come with a heavy price. Like being accepted only at Low sec, or pirate stations. And i would like uf specialization alowed you to get access to soecial items. A jammer that hides bounty marker for limited time. A radar Jammer that makes you appear only when they are very close. A ship attachment that hides contraband. special upgraded mining tools that either alow you to mine bigger nodes. (ROC nodes by hand, and Ship nodes With ROC). Hacking ships alowing you to use them as yours for limited time, create map markers and beacons that you can jump to in the midle of nowhere, to create Loot drop and stolen ship drop locations.

@Ju_A_B

4 ай бұрын

💯

Why do I keep hearing the statistics that only 1% of players are PvP? I also keep hearing that the majority of players interactions are hostile (outside armistice zones). How can both be correct?

@tafferinthedark

4 ай бұрын

A lot of people shoot first, not because they want PVP but because of paranoia. If I knew the guy coming down the elevator would be chill I wouldn't shoot. But there is a high chance that I will get shot if I don't soot first. Either because he will be a PVPer or paranoid like me.

@Mr.Universe

4 ай бұрын

Because it is incorrect, this weird non pvp group seems to be the loudest..I don't know what exactly they're expecting of a game that suppose to be immersive with many of the ships combat oriented

@ArcaneDgR

4 ай бұрын

@tafferinthedark so perhaps the 1% number is only those who self identify as PvP and yet the majority of players "act" like they are PvP players?

@ArcaneDgR

4 ай бұрын

@Mr.Universe I agree that something about this statistic is not right because it doesn't add up ... there is another factor at play that is not being discussed or considered ... or there is major spin taking place ... I don't know

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

@@tafferinthedark Uh, brother, if you attack another player unprovoked then you are by definition an aggressive PvPer. Paranoia or not, doesn't matter what trauma you carry, you are what you do, and sounds like you've become what you hate. Just sayin.

So he barely touches on multiple systems with various sec levels and how that will affect the game future state. However neither he or you Mike make mention of the game having that 9/1 AI NPC to player ratio that will take murder hobos to a place of boredom, if they're bored they will go elsewhere.

@sidrat2009

4 ай бұрын

I wonder how much better server side not abilities, the AI will need to get in order to manage that population? I wouldn't mind it being 3 NPC's per player. Murder hobos tend to go where the riches are as that's where the majority of people will be, alright maybe they go to the third most popular location instead.

@Wyatt_o7

4 ай бұрын

well literally all of that doesnt even exist yet so.... he did also mention the fact that multiple systems coming will have an affect around 30:30.

I'm pretty much with you on what you say, it's great seeing someone have a levelheaded approach to this topic. My primary issue with a lot of games these days is devs basically danger-gating content behind PvP, as in you can only do that if you're willing to take the risk of engaging in PvP. I wish they see the oppportunity in creating a game where danger from PvP is not much different from danger through PvE. If I engage in a risky or dangerous endevour it shouldn't be my primary concern if it's players or NPCs taking advantage of me being ill prepared, I want it to not matter. I want them to make dangerous space dangerous, even if there's no other player there, to make NPCs use the same mechanics and same overall strategies to exploit vulnerable targets. I don't want there to be PvP vs PvE ship loadouts, they need to be the same for the same engagement I want to take up or evade. I want a friendly pirate faction to come to my aid in their space the same as a lawful police force coming to my aid in their "safe" space (if I'd be on the same standing with either of them). This is my overall main gripe with how games these days are often designed, just as SC seems to want to go. PS: I know, there's the human factor too ofc, and I duly believe if they can make a system like I described above to work, they can also deter the so-called murder-hobo behaviour, combined with their self-advertised 10:1 NPC:player ratio and their own assurance they won't be (much) differentiable, into streams of contributing gameplay.

In planetside 2 if you get killed by a guy you have an option of putting a bounty on them. Perhaps if you get PK’d you can have that kind of option. You can set the price of the bounty and a bonus for item recovery. Who knows? We apparently have years and years until this game is finished

Some people never played RuneScape or Everquest and it really shows when it comes to views on this game's PVP in the PU.

@critic_empower_joke_rlaxtslife

4 ай бұрын

Don't confuse the kids, they already have massive headaches over quantifying "excess".

@emmanuelogedengbe3738

4 ай бұрын

Never player EverQuest, but Runescape & OldSchool RuneScape wilderness has a prefect example of what pvp should be like 👍

@allthatishere

4 ай бұрын

I don't even know what you guys are trying to reference. Care to offer any insight here? Like, at all?

@Reit72

4 ай бұрын

@@allthatishereI wasn't that hardcore of a Runescape player, but the wilderness in OldSchool Runescape is a northern section of the map where PVP is automatically on. You can attack anyone, everyone can attack you the moment you cross that line. Anyone that dies in there drops all their gear (exception of protected items that players are limited to secure). The wilderness offered boosted monster respawn rates and some other things for faster leveling. There are gamemode areas that you could run to like Clan Wars. I think it's a lot different now in the current Runescape I haven't touched RS since 2012, so some of this could be wrong. Just spewing what I think I remember

@JohnSmith-fe3sb

4 ай бұрын

What do either of those games have to do with Star Citizen?

how come no one brought up the fact if i defend myself and die i lose my kit but the guy pk ing goes to jail and keeps his kit and a no claim ship at EH , THis patch is backwards in this topic

Nah people still cry about pvp in elder scrolls online, pve players come in to the pvp zone especially during a pvp event to do quest and still dry about pvp

You do not need more safe areas, or safe areas to learn to mine etc, there is an entire solar system to mine in, the chances of running into someone on a server of 100 or 1000 is actually slim, drop into the belt to mine, mining on a planet in a random location all slim chances. It is doubtful that from hundreds of thousands of players that they encounter pvp or get jumped so often enough to have to change the game to cater to them Think about it for yourself if you have been playing a few years how many times have you really been jumped or encountered other players in a pvp scenario while you were not specifically looking for that, likely very few, this whole discussion is blown out of proportion because out of the hundred trade/mining runs someone did they lost 2 or 3 runs to pirates and decided thats unacceptable to them just multiplied by 100 different players, that is ridiculous to cater to them and change the game for that.

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

How dare you. I demand CIG protect me at JT.

“There’s no gain” Schadenfreude is gain for many.

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

So is fun.

Pvp will not be much of a problem once we have 10+ systems to go to. Half of them are guarded by the satellite system. And unlawful systems will be a challenge. For public events. Have a security org. Run secruity for the events. With a reward of credits or chance of winning a ship with a voting system. Getting bombed at an event which could've been avoided by anti ship vehicles provided by the community to keep the line of a PvP in a PvE situation

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

Stanton has comm arrays. They don't stop crime. Stanton has AI security and player BHs. They don't stop crime. Stanton has 24hr+ jail times. They don't stop crime. The only thing that can stop crime is a weapon lock green zone, and those are all going away. The game is currently the safest that it's ever going to be. That's the plan. That was always the plan. It's not secret.

@Frank-costanza

4 ай бұрын

@@CitizenScott "this game is for murder hobos exclusively and I love it" cool take dude

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

@@Frank-costanza "CitizenScott is so based and I love him" aw thanks boo

@Frank-costanza

4 ай бұрын

@@CitizenScott I gotchu baby. I'm only here for your exquisite takes on pvp.

@arctic4291

3 ай бұрын

​@@CitizenScottnow but in future...we don't know, maybe It Will be possible to remove every green zone

PVP option only by having HI-sec systems/locations.

@MishaDark

4 ай бұрын

Yeah I can get behind having relatively safe systems where you're extremely unlikely to encounter pvp but you also need to have limited resource availability in these places. More risk = more reward.

@AZzalor6632

4 ай бұрын

That's what's good in EVE. In High-Sec, especially 1.0-0.8 systems, you will basically never encounter PvP except you run around as a loot pinata and get tornado ganked. The cost to reward for ganking there is just too high so you can fly around in ships worth billions and basically are at 0 risk. Something similar could be in SC. In high sec systems, police will respond quickly to an attack and disable your ship and take you to prison. Heavy fines and long lasting reputation damage are the consequence. IF you manage to somehow warp away, every gate will be patrolled by police so you can't leave the system without getting caught and the police is constantly looking for you. This way, you COULD have PvP, but the consequences would be so harsh that it would only be used as a last restort or in very specific cases and not to just simply annoy other players or gank newbies.

@Waybreaker

4 ай бұрын

I haven't bought the game yet but this is exactly what I understand to be the plan.

@CommentRedacted

4 ай бұрын

@@AZzalor6632 I completely agree with your comment. I played EVE quite a few years ago, and if I remember correctly, PVP was still doable in hi-sec (high security) areas (solar systems) but security was on you REAL quick if you shot at other players; you weren't getting out alive. I think there was even a warning that would pop up before going guns hot. But ya, safe solar systems with on point security and heafty fines/repercussions for PVP'ers; maybe have an 'opt-in" for both involved if you really need to PVP in hi-sec (think dualing), maybe even include player missions to hunt down criminals in hi-sec (could pay a decent price too). Low-sec (low security) solar systems, you can PVP but someone will show up and assist (NPC's or maybe player spawned assist missions here as well) hopefully before you blow up, and null-sec (no security) your on your own, call a friend. I think there needs to be repercussions for 'needing safety" all the time in a game, why should the developers provide ultimate safety for free anyways? I think if the solar systems are set up as high security, low security, no security and it's clear when planning your route, through those systems, what the security status is, you can charge more (or be paid more) for your mission and you hire other players (or NPC's) to escort you through dangerous places. Lets keep in mind here, there are people who prefer the risks in game and just because someone else prefers no PVP doesn't mean you get to deny others the ability for PVP. Obviously griefing would need to be dealt with but that would probably only be limited to low security and no security areas; if high security areas give no escape, I doubt griefers would hang out much there.

@ericweeks8386

4 ай бұрын

@@MishaDark Assuming SC automatically deletes the account of anyone who "pirates" in this game the moment they die, I'm all for that. We want realism, don't we? Average life expectancy of a "real" pirate in the golden age of piracy was about 2 years. And no, they didn't die of old age. Eve Online has shown the very very large downsides of "Risk = Reward". NBSI is quite possibly the worst indicator of humanity's downfall there has ever been.

that Daymar Rally infiltration is some subterfuge if I've ever seen it. Truly peak gameplay.

Free open world, full-loot pvp mmo's are simply extremely difficult to pull off. It requires a type of game design/balancing that is very specific to the genre to get ANYONE, including most pvpers to tolerate its ultra-punishing nature, and even then won't have any real mass appeal. EvE and a handful of other games have found their niche in catering to that specific audience, it's big enough to sustain them at somewhere between half a million and a million active accounts (around 80k concurrent players usually). I've played eve for several years, and it is fine, but it is certainly not everyone's cup of tea, and frankly the playerbase is filled with an over representation of dark triad personality types that most won't want to deal with. Star citizen is not trying to cater to that specific audience, because when you do, THAT IS THE ONLY AUDIENCE THAT WILL CONTINUE TO PLAY LONG TERM, and SC simply speaking requires a larger playerbase than that to be financially viable. As such yes, PvP must for the most part be optional, no, acquiring resources should not be limited to PvP clan controlled zones, no, there should not be pirate empires controlling most non-starter systems, and yes, exploration without half the UEE navy backing you up to prevent random bullies who get their jollies purely from the joy of taking a machete to the nearest infant, should be plenty viable and even the norm. Now do I think there should be a sector of space with equal or slightly higher rewards for the PvP-eager players to romp around in? Certainly! We have 100+ systems coming in, there's no reason a good cluster of them couldn't be focussed specifically on this type of gameplay. However keep in mind that this would only attract PvP type players, no young ducklings to stomp on here, only angry geese fighting each other. (Which is what the griefers (or PK-ers if you like) want, a no-contest, one-sided, bullying stomp out of whatever they attack followed by running their victims pockets). Now should there be an incentive for non-pvp players to traverse this zone of high stakes pvp to make their own money? Certainly! I think it's a great idea to offer temptation to the pve crowd to try and find ways of avoiding pvp or temporarily engaging in it for pve benefits. Maybe this zone could be between the UEE and the Xi'an or Banu, and you need to travel back and forth to get the best parts for your vanduul-killing or industry ships/bases. Maybe there's huge opportunity for smugglers in/through this zone. But that's the thing, it's optional to go in/through there. It shouldn't be 10x the profit, relegating all the rest of the 100 systems of space to effective irrelevancy. And no, insulting everyone who wants to enjoy their videogames in peace as "carebears" or "pussies" isn't accurate, just go meet them IRL and get your nose stuffed into your throat.

Zyloh-CIG: "Over the four years since I shared our stance [on PvP], we've only intervened a small number of times (less than I can count on two hands), a figure significantly lower than the countless reports of 'excessive griefing' and 'stream sniping' we've received." -Spectrum, 2/9/24, 'Meta-Gaming, Player Organized Events, and Organized Warfare.' "Countless reports" of not only "excessive griefing" but also "stream sniping" in a game with 1000s upon 1000s of concurrent players and millions of backers, and CIG have only seen any actual issue with those things twice a year on average. They don't see a problem. It's not a problem. Stop acting like it's a problem. Just sayin.

@Frank-costanza

4 ай бұрын

Oh hey it's you! Stay mad my friend!

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

Sorry, do I know you?

@lolsalad52

4 ай бұрын

did you just date that quote to 2014?

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

@@lolsalad52 lol yup fixed

I will define excessive as a consequence of pvp where the initiator has minimal risk and abundant reward. Risk should always be balanced with the rewards or you'll find those with an advantage taking pvp to excess and depriving other players of a good time.

When death of a spaceman mechanics are implemented, it may help to stem some pvp engagements, but otherwise, may also adversely affect players when being targeted by piracy operations, or when solo players are attacked by a group such as griefernet. This may also affect the risks all players engaging in risky life/death gameplay.

@StoneCoolds

4 ай бұрын

Pirates and griefers will just have secondary accounts that they use for that and can kill at will as many times as they want, death of space man it's a nerd fantasy from people that don't understand how the game and humans work

@Frank-costanza

4 ай бұрын

​@@StoneCooldsyup, it's a neat idea. But for a game with such a time investment, the penalty for death cannot be harsh or people will simply Uninstall.

@StoneCoolds

4 ай бұрын

@@Frank-costanza exactly, a cool concept but a horrible idea in practice

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

DoaS only punishes those who allow it to punish them.

@themarveluniverseonline

4 ай бұрын

@@StoneCoolds That can get pretty expensive just to be a griefer.

There are a lot of older backers, and they will never have the reflexes of the most vocal pvp crowd. Who tend to be on the young side. There should be an opt out for pvp.

"Space is dangerous." "Danger everywhere... with consequences." "You can turn [PvP] down, but you can never turn it all the way off." "We'll never be able to 100% guarantee you're 100% safe, and frankly we don't want to do that." "There will be factions that really like it when you go around PvPing and killing other players." "Regular PVP and piracy-leaning activities are not only accepted but encouraged within the parameters of fair play." CIG's words, not mine. This is the game. Act accordingly.

@saltemikereacts

4 ай бұрын

The game doesn’t exist. Act accordingly, as the actually develop the people who said that (not the people deciding the direction of the game, or game designers) have been changing things quite a bit.

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

​@@saltemikereacts I mean those quotes are from CR, Papy, Dorsy, not the CIG janitor... but yeah for sure they have definitely changed things a lot as they build the game. They've removed weapon locks from around most stations, and now when they bring in new ones like Seraphim they don't even bother applying weapon locks. Way more dangerous. Point is, if people want a PvE only option then that's cool, I'll happily take that myself, but that doesn't mean we have to act like the plan's not the plan that it's been from the start. The PvP slider idea is now location-based danger, but they both have the same common vision of "Danger everywhere... with consequences." That part's never changed.

@ericweeks8386

4 ай бұрын

If CIG had two instances of the universe, one with PvP and one without, I can guarantee you that the PvE server would be more populated by far.

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

​@@ericweeks8386 You can't, and they won't, but I get what you mean. Question is, why would they do that?

@ericweeks8386

4 ай бұрын

@@CitizenScottKeep more players longer. If they don't do "crime and punishment" right, and no game that tries to mix PvE and PvP has ever done it right, they drive off the larger portion of their player base, leaving a barren Eve/Shadowbane-esque "live service" game, where it will compete with Anthem for the bottom rungs.

Salte Mike spitting on his perspective on PVP vs griefing.

what you need to watch out for in the future is being able to move rocks , ships, ect in verse and having it persist. players could organize and move rocks and bury settlements ect. so we need defenses or some kind of anti air systems to destroy anything that would harm the players in safe zones.

The only way for "excessive PvP" to be combated, is for CIG to finally pull their finger out their backside and produce some genuinely engaging, difficult, and intense PvE contracts/scenarios. Almost every PvP player I play with has taken a bit of a break from SC recently and their game of choice? Helldivers 2, because it's engaging, difficult, and damn intense but solely co-op PvE. There will always be Griefernet types and, frankly, I don't mind them because it throws something new/different into the mix to deal with. But the number 1 issue right now is the lack of engaging, difficult, and intense PvE content.

So i came across a reclaimer sitting at an orbital marker around Yella, and they had something like 600scus of cmat. I rammed it with my hammerhead, killing both people on board. Then I transferred all the cargo and sold it myself. Is that considered excessive pvp or grieffing?

@gromdan1332

4 ай бұрын

Its PvP.

I think a big part of CIG's plan is to try to deal with these things in game. So I think we'll see them moving toward greater enforcement as the game develops and allows for it.

I think the server meshing tech is the fundamental dependency here. If server meshing ends up consuming too much server resource, then I expect there will be broad no-fire zones imposed where weapon systems wont work, and perhaps crash damage will be reduced. If server meshing ends up low enough in server resourcing, then they will us AI systems to enforce lawfulness. AI ships jumping in within seconds of an unlawful PVP event. I do really like the idea of a strong and highly influential reputation system.

There should be something like Short to Mid Range "Communication Channel Frequencies" that Player Suits can tap into and then you appear in a "list" of said frequency for communication and there could also be Mid to Long Range ones that can be accessed by ships. But there it would be optional whether you expose yourself or not. I also think that it is way too early to really go over whether or not PvP should be optional. We have, so far, only concepts and ideas for how exactly the crime system will improve, what the player to NPC population will look like, etc. and we also lack the options to "hire out" players as guards, mercenaries, etc that protect non combat players, ...

i rarely pvp but i also dont have an issue with it in SC. In any situation i can usually just avoid it if needed. The only one i absolutely despise are those Dbags that do nothing but go around to bunkers just to blow up parked ships so your just stuck there after your mission.

Once there are functionally more systems, this may become a non issue. A planet or system with stupidly high security could provide the safe space that people need.

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

It's already a non-issue according to CIG. Just more noise and drama.

@dr.johnorr3341

4 ай бұрын

@@CitizenScott I agree. As Mike mentioned CIG can't keep saying it's an Alpha...however it is an Alpha. Anything they do now is just a long winded throwing of it against a wall and seeing what sticks for years. Given that we will still most likely have the ability to choose our starting places, I'm sure there will be extremely ultra safe areas versus places where the NPCs just wander around waiting to be shot along with everyone else who visits. Spread the loot out accordingly and the problem is pretty much solved.

@vast634

4 ай бұрын

@@CitizenScott The game barely works reliably yet. There are only few player on a given server. They cant know if its an issue later. Especially not with much higher server population.

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

@@vast634 They can know, and they do know, and they've let us know. "Over the four years since I shared our stance [on PvP], we've only intervened a small number of times (less than I can count on two hands), a figure significantly lower than the countless reports of "excessive griefing" and "stream sniping" we've received." Millions of backers. Thousands of concurrent players. "Countless reports." Less than 10 times that CIG have seen an issue. It isn't a problem at all.

@vast634

4 ай бұрын

@@CitizenScott All that is based on mini servers (like 50 players) in a pretty large open world. How will this work if 100.000 players are online in the same world? Its a completely different game then. And they simply cant know that, because they cant test it with those player numbers. Either general PvP must go, or the idea of one shared server for everyone.

Yeah, wow had a list of all players in game. It took a little filtering, but you could even look what zone they were in, but they also had block.

If you're flying a fighter type ship ie: Warden, Lightning, etc... you should be ready to have a PVP encounter, lesser chance flying a Cutter, Cutlass, Titan, etc... and C2, 400i, 890, etc... highly unlikely, but more likely with Pirates. ;-) I wonder if CIG could setup "random" Danger Zones, starting with a PVE event (maybe near SPK?) that somehow can become a PVP event for an hour or two, then after several hours another (maybe over New Babbage) for a short time, then two or three days later, have another somewhere else?

Well, just look at EvE. There is almost unrestricted PvP. Sire, High Sec, but even that's not really safe anymore. The thing with PvP is, depending on what level you'll allow it, it'll be the mandatory focus of your engagement with the game. If you go for realism and it's allowed everywhere. Then it'll just be 100% the focus of the game. Driving away the vast majority of PvE players. That's not good or bad. That's just a choice. You can look into finding a balance. There are many systems to try do this. Automated security, hard disable PvP in certain zones, soft disable it, karma systems, etc. Restricted PvP. This is trying to serve both sides. VERY HARD TO PULL OFF! I don't really know games that have pulled this off very well and doesn't really satisfy anyone. PvPers will feel gimped and PvEers will just feel harassed whenever they have to enter a PvP area, or worse, feel held back if they lock rewards behind PvP. Or just throw out general PvP. And just implement some basic controlled PvP modes, duels, tourneys, etc. Now. There's one thing to keep in mind. For the majority of players (casuals) PvP is pretty much a no go. And very few (if any) PvP focused MMOs die/fail. So, it's healthy to focus on PvE and making PvP secondary from a business point of view.

lol.. what do you mean "excessive pvp" is not a thing.. It is exactly what it says. Excessive. That would mean, if the game has X gameplay and you can not do X gameplay because you are constantly being bombarded and overwhelmed by other players doing "pvp" preventing you from ever being able to do X gameplay. If those interactions happen from time to time... that would not be "excessive" ... I'm really not sure why I would need to explain this..

CCP did a study a few years back that showed players who were ganked within the first month had higher player retention than those who didn't. He's just making things up whet he says it hurts retention. He's also making things up when he says safe zones were added. The only "safe zone" is in a station. There is a ToS that states you can't target new players in the state systems but they aren't safe.

The idea that CIG shouldn't clearly state what the rules are is so dense. Sorry, saty, couldn't disagree more. This idea that if they say what the rules, then players will do everything right up to the line being a problem is a solved problem. If they say "you can't jump servers to stalk a specific player or group of players" that's the rule. If players do everything up to that point, then they haven't broken any rules." Where's the problem here? Another examtis speed limits. Speed limits (in the US) are intentionally set 5 to 10 mph under what could atill be considered a "safe" speed because they know humam behavior tends to push the rules a bit, so they set it lower to account for that. So CIG could just as easily follow this model. Set the rule at "If you seek out and attack the same group of players to disrupt their events more than two times, you are in violation of the rules." Maybe they only enforce that rule after the fourth attack. The rule is enforced, but there is a little leeway in when they choose to enforce this. Instead, we have a system of law that the world, largely, has agreed is not a good system. We have unwritten rules that are only enforced at the whim of the ruling class (cig). History is full of examples where this atyle of law enforcement has failed spectacularly.

There are comments asserting that those who want a PvP toggle are 'care bears'. To those: please join the armed forces and experience combat, war, killing, death and the consequences - and then decide whether your idea of a relaxing experience is to play a computer game in a 'chill' way or not.

I'm a sweaty pvper, Mike is 100% based on this. There needs to be a shallow end, and a deep end. Going into the deep end where pvp happens needs to be lucrative. High risk, high reward. Shallow end needs to be a high security area, where lawless activity leads to appropriate response, loss of reputation, and punishment.

Simple solution would be fully controlled UEE systems would be massive armistace zones. That would force pvp players and pirates to attack certain points in the system to deactivate the control the UEE have. This lets pve players engage in pvp but also have direction and the ability to leave a system before pirates take over.

He probably meant excessive greifing not excessive PVP.

I think CIG has done A LOT to promote the history and mythos of the game. That knowledge would/could be very help for their customers to better understand the game and what to look forward to. That all being said, they haven't done ENOUGH to talk about the mythos and history of their game. Look at something like League of Legends just as an example. I know more about Piltover than I do about Stanton and I haven't played LOL in 10 years. They need more cinematics and more outgoing lore content.

Eve Online has the PVP right. I think they should copy that. What they can improve or add is a way for players to "rent" security forces for an area. they pick a spot in space or on a planet and the security will patrol a predefined perimeter. Any unlawful aggressor will have their reputation lowered and the security forces will blow up their ship and kill the player and have them re-spawn in jail for a long enough time as to make it somewhat inconvenient if you can't escape the security forces.

Yes, New World. When New World first opened to beta testing, it was a full loot PvP game. Turns out, very few people liked it, and the devs very, very quickly changed the rules for PvP. New World is a great example, actually. Even after all the initial problems it had, and still has, the devs launched two big updates, one that greatly improved on combat and PvP, the other a PvE focused expansion. No prizes for guessing which one drew more players back in. I think it's a bit unfair to make the leap from "you don't like PvP in MMOs" to "I feel like you don't play MMOs". Yes, people are shitty and like to go about PKing. That's why most MMOs since the second ever MMO has PvE servers, worlds, or options. People can play MMOs and dislike PvP and PKing, because PvE MMOs exist. On the other hand, I will say that people who think CIG's reputation system and Death of a Spaceman would stop PKing are the ones who have not played many MMOs.

I think the answer has to be yes ,not all people want pvp and wont even buy or play if they are going to be bothered or harassed while playing a game to build something in the system other than fighting. This problem has happened to me many time as recently as yesterday,for instance I am in a salvage/cargo/mining ship of any size seeing if you can actually do this alone solo and get to the salvage contract and successfully complete it and some person with nothing to lose except some missiles or ammo opens up on you and starts to attack because they are bored there ship cant haul but 2 to 6 scu of cargo or none at all,but it's a war ship that can easily do major damage to you quickly because you are for one not in a turret to defend yourself or you only have 2 tiny guns and 1 or 2 missiles and move like a snail or you are in the cargo hold and don't know it's happening and blow up and die so now you can only go out with no less than all the positions filled on the ship in every section and then divide the profits by 2 people or 5 or 8 players of more if you have a fighter contingency on hand and now your profits are a joke and you might as well go back to a Vulture and Roc forget ever working towards a large ship because they are basically worthless with a minimum crew,who wants to plan a single outing for a week ahead of time organizing all the people necessary and only get one shot at or 2 before someone has to log it's BS, and scrounging up complete strangers that have never played is always fun but almost never without some problems.And there are no real safe zones ,what at a spaceport or a main city, My cargo ship was blown up in the hanger while landing at a spaceport real safe,you can't mine or salvage at any of the safe zones or at the mining facility you have to leave and cargo is the same you have to leave,the only ones losing are the people trying to make a profit by working for hours with industrial ships or cargo ships, like sheep to the slaughter the line we have to cross to make a profit,not the guy in a heavy fighter his loss is minimal,oh he used missiles and some fuel while you lost 2 hours of a 50k contract and a million plus in cargo so he could get his rocks of killing you for no reason,while you are basically helpless in a salvage seat or cargo hold moving boxes,I don't understand this mentality that they think this is a big achievement attacking a small or big industrial ship when no one can really fight back,yes the ship has turrets but everyone is working to get the job done and are not in those turrets it takes time to get all over the ship and by then you're already dead,blown to bits and everything gone,they just pick one spot and open up with everything they have got and destroy what you just spent 2 hours working on and if some people can get to a turret it has to be on the right side of the ship top or bottom or back and hope they have a shot and then they just move out of your line of fire.what fun is there to play the game when there is someone on the outside of the line is waiting to kill you with a missle launcher while you have a pocket knife,yes I know you can hire protection like two guys in two fighters want to sit and wait for an hour or more doing nothing to get a tiny profit to protect a prospector or a cargo ship,no one wants to sit and do nothing in the game for an hour or more they want to play the game ,two things will happen in the game if they don't have non PVP servers,first all people doing anything industrial or cargo,or building bases and outpost quit just leave the game and now you have only war ships nothing else you going to fight in a cargo ship nope and no commerce or exploration no bases for trade,that's a real empty solar system only PVP players or Pirates with no one to kill except each other, and why would a pirate go after a war ship at all no loot other than a bigger war ship and so on no meaning to the game.Boring, That's Arena commander all you do is fight and you have that already.Believe it or not there are people that don't want to play this game to fight all the time oh yea the occasional pirate or marauder from in the game itself but we can try to avoid those areas where they are, you can't avoid all the players in the game if they hunt you.The people that I am talking about want to build up a trade company or service business or a outpost or bar at a spaceport or set up a base or city on a distant planet,terraforming maybe to and that what's so special about this game it doesn't just have to be about combat only.Sky's the limit and for those who want that dedicated servers would work for you and if someone wants to risk everything they have worked for so you can destroy it by all means they can roll the dice, but if you argue that it shouldn't exist that would mean you want to force people to be on a PVP server,but that's not fair to do because that only people that benefits people that want PVP targets and not anyone looking for more than a fight in the game.Dedicated servers creates a game for anyone who wants that type of game and for those who don't want that game play the other server for them and based on the numbers it looks like 50/50.And yes I know long comment lol,but I want everyone to be happy and this is the best solution.

Im not a pvper but its something that exists . The only time it upsets me is if i have a cargo bay full of stuff i just bought haha. But i think there should definitely be a way for people to try to avoid pvp atleast

How about real-world repercussions. Jail, full seizure of assets. So, it's high-risk high reward. So, every time you get caught you lose everything and get set back to zero. Lifetime criminal record, compounding punishments. Eventually execution of the character practically resetting the account. Like in real life!

I think the thing that would make the ambushing of the Daymar really not griefing would be the presence of any reason to do it beyond just getting kicks out of messing up other people's fun. For example, if their goal would have been to disable or destroy all those vehicles to salvage them and make bank? That'd be legit. If we had the ability to sell vehicles or keep ones that we steal? That'd be legit

I am getting old, most of my friends dont play anymore and I think PVP should be optional. If I have to worry about someone coming down and blowing me up while mining or blowing up my ship while in a mine then I am not going to play anymore and spend any more money on ships. Why bother as its not fun for me, after spending 5,000 plus I should be able to just enjoy the verse without PVP.

Comms signal down is a pretty good indication that security forces are not responsive. That should be the indicator...

I don't really like to affiliate myself with a "group" or a place on a chart. Most players in MMO's make choices based on an expected reward. If they add a substantial reward for killing 100 players at distribution centers, I will probably find an effective way to do that without really caring about why the player I'm trying to kill is there. Many of the players percieved as just murderhobos now, are likely just bored and don't have anything better to do in game and would be doing other activites if they had reason to do so. That said, I really dislike the attitude "Star Citizen needs bad guys" and using that as excuse to make orgs with the primary focus to terrorize the playerbase. This seems to be an EVE mentality which I don't fully understand not having played EVE, but I do understand that Star Citizen currently doesn't have gameplay to support that. Murderhobo and carebare are both such stupid terms. I agree with Mike that it's on CIG to create incentives for players to take risks and that you should be able to learn the game without risk. I do think an entire star system that is completely safe is a bit much, but not totally opposed to it. Short term I'd like to see sim pods integrated in the new player experience to safely learn to take off, land and all other tutorial stuff you may think of.

I was doing my very first mission and bein a little greedy... dragging all the dead NPC's to my ship so i can strip them of armor and weapons to put into my cargo hold to sell... A PC flew down to me, blew my ship up and left.... they didn't loot anything, they didn't hunt me down... they just... blew my ship up and flew off.... that was rude.

Ships that don’t want to fight should have special markings, like a religious symbol. They should be protected to a point, just make it an expensive mistake and the griefing will stop

My definition of "Excessive PVP" would be; "other player constantly murdering each other without any goal or meaning, just because they can (e.g Ares Inferno vs Cutty doing box-missions, with absolutely no consequences for the aggressor )" ....

Not a hard question to answer at all; it's yes.

80% of the time I encounter other players in the p.u., it's hostile. Kinda takes away from the immersion. I work full time and go to school. So the little time I have for the p.u. just makes me feel like I have a huge target on my back. Especially with players that play all day long.

@dtrapid1

4 ай бұрын

I might be wrong and jaded by experience in other mmo's, but it does only take a few bad encounters to turn a benevolent player in a shoot first ask questions later kind of player. (Fool me once shame on you, Fool me twice shame on me). Imo it's basic psychology, humans learn fast, and if you get jumped with no recourse because you gave the opportunity away in good faith, well guess how you'll react the next time that happens...

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

"...just makes me feel like I have a huge target on my back." That is literally Mission: Accomplished for CIG. They want space to be dangerous, so they design the game to make space dangerous. It's not that deep.

@teddypicker8799

4 ай бұрын

Because the game is boring rn pvp is the only fun thing to do

@HustleBones.

4 ай бұрын

@@teddypicker8799facts

Simply put, game developers should focus on implementing robust law systems. If a player repeatedly kills others, it should be increasingly difficult for them to clear their criminal status. Hacking should not allow players to escape consequences as if they never committed the crimes. For example, remove the bounty but retain the record of the crime in the area where it was committed, as players should still be recognized. The game should make it progressively harder for the player as they commit more crimes. Additionally, when NPCs improve and players can kill in stations, if a player catches a criminal who used a hack to clear their bounty, they should still be able to capture them, even if they are in a station, akin to Han Solo's style. If the player is innocent, NPCs could consider them a criminal and penalize them for shooting inside the station, but the criminal's payout should be substantial.

If there is no way to avoid pvp at all and play my chill way, iam done with pledging for SC and CIG. I just want to be a STAR CITIZEN, not a fking frontline fighter what is so hard to understand i WANT to PLAY like i WANT not Chriss Roberts wants me to do ffs.

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

"i WANT to PLAY like i WANT not Chriss Roberts wants me to do ffs." So make your own game. This is CRs game. Just sayin.

@teddypicker8799

4 ай бұрын

You can avoid PVP by getting a fast or stealthy ship or staying away from hostile areas

@sirbonobo3907

4 ай бұрын

Its Not His Game WE paid for it. Its our Game

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

@@sirbonobo3907 🤣🤣good luck with that...

PVP debate, is because "some" CM makes ruleS on forums, that are not included in the TOS because he knows he can't put them there. And that's why everyone discuss that, just because a low-grade CM manage it. Can't wait for him to be replaced at some point, and believe me he will, because we know what it does in the background. Like ban people for stuff that are not in the TOS. -Streamsniping isnt in the TOS, it's actually the opposite "we ignore third party website" but still ban people for it. -pvp not allowed on daymar rally (or specific event / places) is not in the TOS. but still ban people for it. -asking people name on twitch stream, with the official SC twitch account to ban them while those person wasnt there, sometime didnt played since months get banned too. -PM people on discord to make ban threat while the supposed thing is not in the TOS. at one point he gonna takes those responsability. + Mike ? can you tell us why "no reasons" should lead to bans in a sandbox game ? is there something in the TOS saying "if you do things without reasons or gain, you gonna get ban ? how poor is ur argument ?

3:15 Exactly! @SalteMike I agree. They could have prioritized better. But SINCE they did not, griefing was allowed to flourish to the point until people simply had enough and started complaining about it. CIG said nothing for far to long and the griefing grew out if control. I think it's totally Ironic certain influencers can say out loud "I don't want DCS in space!" Well guess what, more of the player base DOES NOT WANT " RUST " IN SPACE!!! Btw, have you seen a Jumptown Event, noone plays in these events. If it was truly just a PVP event why can an org lock it down and make millions upon millions of AUEC. NERF THE PAYOUTS ALREADY! So none pvpers can at least have a chance to TRY the event! Crank up the AI ALREADY , WHY IS THE AI SOOOO BADDD!!!

Okay, in regards to the rant that “pretty ships came first, and the systems for how they are going to run the MMO part of the game we’re still waiting to figure out.” They told us YEARS ago that the plan was to finish S42 first, so of course the real gameplay design focus hasn’t been on the MMO part. They want the money that will come from the commercial launch of S42 to finish off SC and build out the MMO that it will eventually become. I get why it’s a frustrating way to develop an MMO, but there are clear reasons why they chose to do it this way. 23:13

1. I thought the daymar rally was supposed to be dangerous? Being open to attack was one of the risks I seem to recall CIG talking about when they repped the event. 2. Why does GN need a purpose? If you view them as terrorists, their only.goal is to sow discord and fear amongst the citizens of Stanton. I don't think it's right that CIG took action outside the game to punish these players but it's understandable why they did; Because they've failed to build the mechanism and enforcement arm required to take action against unlawful players in-game. It's also unfortunate the group is.called GrieferNet because it plays into the narrative being spun by space-dads and care bears that all PVPers are just griefers.

Chais Squad once retaliated against an org of wannabe pirate hunters who's ego and mouths got a bit too big. We handed them a total defeat in less than 90 seconds with no loses. Why did we do it? To teach them a lesson that they were not the biggest badasses in the verse, in fact they are very small fish. Imfany was not a part of the equation.

My question is that why does this matter right now? Isn't this the whole reason for the different systems? Like in the more high sec systems you can't do this and in the low sec you can. There is a risk and reward with these obviously too. High sec would be easy but low profit and vice versa in low sec. I think once more of these star systems come out these orgs and players will gravitate towards these systems based on the gameplay they want. That's how I feel, I'm open to comments and stuff I'm not considering

I'm starting to think that hard pve and solo players are the problem

if CIG wants developed economy in SC, with gatherers, crafters, traders e.t.c then CIG should make possible for this kind of players to have some stable gameplay. Which means - make PVP optional in some way. No one will seriously invest time if they can just randomly loose cargo worth of a week or a month of a gameplay. People will delete they accounts after such incidents. Team gameplay or hired escorts won't solve this problem, partly because there is no way to fully protect cargo ship from damage, partly because it will discourage players who are not inclined to play in big teams from trading.

Excessive PVP is where you have to fight at every turn. A game with too much fight and not enough time to do other things is no fun and kills other types of play. This causes players to leave. This is what excessive pvp means. Not too difficult to understand.

Dude I have done about 1000 service beacons with out ever running into a player. There is missions that if you don't have the loc. It's impossible to run into someone.

When organizing events hire an org for protection. Recruit as many orgs as possible to try and keep the peace.

"Excessive PvP" to me probably has something to do with Zerging or just never being able to escape PvP. We've all seen games like Last Oasis where your safety only comes from having the largest group on the server. If a big group catches up to you you'd better just start shouting "China number one!" in hopes they don't attack you. I think this is why so many MMO's have structured 3v3 modes and etc. I would also guess is why a large portion of players stick exclusively to PvE content in MMO with both options available.

@SaltEMike New World used to be a hardcore PvP game where people got ganked as soon as they spawned. Thats when they did a 180 and made it a PvE game which is why it launched with so little PvE content.

The problem with pvp everywhere is that there's no risk for the those pvpers who are griefers and all they do is avoid other pvpers to go seal clubbing. You end up in one hand with someone who just enjoys ruining others game sessions without any risk to themselves doing it over and over without any real repercussions and on the other hand someone else who is trading, salvaging, etc who gets nothing out of their play session over and over with a lot of repercussions. If you want pvp everywhere, there have to be strong repercussions as well for those pvpers that all they want to do is seal clubbing.

there should always be a choice PVP or not to PVP. PVP will always need it Care Bears to support it. Before SC i was a long time EVE player. i like the idea of High Sec, Low Sec and Null Sec. I have also ejoyed the Opt In for PVP in the MMOs i have played. but through all of these PVP or PVE grifers have always found a way to screw with peoples game play.

Saying PVP is avoidable/optional is all good but then saying oh the only place where a player can choose to avoid PVP is in some tiny number of lame learning zones where you can't even make a profit.... that's not a real option, that like telling a player you get the tutorial mission and nothing else is fir you, if you were a non-PVP player Salty would that sound like a good game to you?

pvp should be optional as in "if you don't want to pvp then don't go where there is PVP" .. and if someone is doing PVP in places where it is not allowed then they get a permanent PVP flag for that place that cant be hacked away .. all of this will ofc. only work once we have multiple starsystems.

So he want to bend the game for not even 3% of players? Players who are just terrorists. Instead of implementing good game mechanics? Nope, there should be hard ingame consequences for this. Consequences who you can't so easily get rid of. Also we dont even have Ai police and blue zones in the game. And an attacked / killed player should have the option to put an bounty on the attacker and call for Ai Police.

The game should follow the WOW model. Zones with open PVP yet High reward. Zones with Great Story and PVE where the average gamers can learn the tactics and how to play. Areas were as you gain experience in the game, you learn how to play vs those harder kinds of dangers. Bring a Scanning ship so you can avoid AI Pirates, or learn how to fight those Harder NPC's. A good game has Great Mechanics that work together. No 1 torp wins every battle. A form and function to combat and the different combat styles. Each Strong Ship in 1 area must have great weaknesses in other areas. The game must be a way to Grow, Thrive and Live. Not log in and die.

@Mr.Universe

4 ай бұрын

No...if I wanted to play WOW...I'd just play WOW.

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

IDK man, seems like game's doing fine by specifically NOT being other MMOs...

pvp should be optional. Most of the time I'm dead before I can find the target that is firing at me PVP. I just want to get on from time to time and don't want to be bothered by someone that is clearly superior than me in combat, to ruin my game play time. Pretty simple reasoning

I think it should always be a looming danger, but an avoidable one. One thing i’m sure of, the salvage yard camping is total bs.

Okay, as a new player I'm beginning to wonder where all this worry is about with PVP? So far I'm maybe 2 weeks into this game mining, doing delivery, and salvaging. I have had one encounter with random people shooting me but I managed to take both of them out. Am I just on chill servers every time I log in? PVP should not be optional, because it really ruins the MMO experience. I will say that maybe the consequences of taking people out should be higher by the use of bounties and just the laws within the game.

all SC issues are "well when they add this, when this come in".

with the right flight model pvp is optional. Short of having your quantum ability dampened by a well coordinated pvp squad, you can typically peace out before you are downed. with MMs having the different speed modes getting away should technically be easier imho.

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

Escape's easy right now. All it takes the tiniest bit of awareness. MM makes it much harder arguably. We will see.

@DJJeSta09

4 ай бұрын

@@CitizenScott i don't have enough MM experience to be sure, but on paper it seems MM makes it harder to disengage once you have engaged but it seems easier to run once you see a threat on radar by switching out of SCM to that cruise speed and then QTing out. So in my mind i am seeing it as easier to avoid the conflict if you choose to without the enemy being coordinated enough to get the jump on you and dampen QT to keep you there. Could be wrong but just sounds easier to peace out before the engagement happens in MMs

@CitizenScott

4 ай бұрын

@@DJJeSta09 Maybe, but missiles exist, and shields/countermeasures don't work in NAV mode. Pretty stoked to experiment and find out when MM hits PU.

I think PvP and PvE needs a balance, yes optional but in some cases, non-optional, example that I have is from POTBS, I played that MMO for a long time, and here`s the thing, if you are PvP enabled you gain more rewards, and if you fight another PvP enabled player you gain "medals" which was a currency for cosmetics and titles. But also, there was unrest zones or warzones if you will, where anyone inside those zones can get target for PvP, even if you are just a "trader" it doesn`t matter, there it is, chaos, but contained chaos. Now for SC you can`t have a PvP flag that shows you are willing to fight, so in those scenarios I feel they should leave as is, but adding a reputation system where you get shot on sight, or permanent-ish reputation loss that may lead you to a world of pain for those consecutive perpetrators, like jail time being 2x, 3x, no-way to leave early, or preventing you from calling certain ships in certain stations, that sort of thing, make it punishing in Stanton, but not punishing in Pyro has an Example, there, contained chaos.

If players shouldn't jump events like the Daymar Rally then they shouldn't be allowed to jump players/small org events either.

The 'PvP slider' should be more non-consent based WHEN PvP in Star Citizen isn't crap and full of exploits. Right now people should be able to opt out or just exit from unwanted PvP because it sucks to get killed by invisible people.

Pirating affects the economy. When cargo meant for a particular system is stolen and rerouted, prices will go up, and demand will be higher. Pirating is legitimately essential to the overall game. Also, let's be serious; no one should be strolling through Pyro without the potential of being bent over

I would expect, a high sec space to draw 10 to 1 pve odds the moment you break the law. Some day.

seriously, I don't get the problem of having a PvP and a PvE PU... Same amount of overall players, same amount of resources to run the same amount of servers. Atleast as a short/midterm solution, this would seem as the easiest and most viable to me...

sounds to me like pirates attacked a race and the reason would be fear, advertisment, and potential top of the line racing parts. Tells me the racing hosts need security to watch over the race and protect it vs pirates and griefers.

Death of a spaceman will make all of this moot, for the most part

do you guys think ppl who spend 20k $ in this game and another 10k on gear will go kill brain death npc ?

It depend how reputation and AI will regulate PvP. It can be excessive like in otherwise beautiful Mortal Online 2. Same solution is needed. Make some places more secure for risk averse players. Less risk less reward. Ideally it can be balanced with dangerous law enforcers or hiring AI escort. It's easier in Star Citizen than in MO2 to avoid danger.

As an avid PVE advocate, meaning I don’t do PVP at all, no. PVP should not be optional. I like the idea of systems being classified by security level. I should know what I’m getting into by going into nulsec, and a pirate should know what they are getting into by going into hisec. It makes the PVE way more fun knowing I could get smoked at any point.

You don't have to say "Excessive", it's just PVP lol. That guy really leaned on that.

ISC’s like the distro center one lead me to believe CIG saying “pvp sliders” was malicious marketting

there should always be a choice on being in a PVP server or not as the company wants to make money and the best way to not make money is to have someone that doesn't want to be killed by players will quit the second they get killed by players