The majority of “pvp” I see during Xeno Threat are murder hobos in meta fighters attacking solo players in MSR’s just trying to move the cargo to move the needle forward on the event. That’s not pvp to me, that’s just ruining someone else’s gameplay, and I am fine with pvp in general but this so called pvp is gross.
The game is not designed with Pvp in mind. There's 0 thought given to how pvp fits into anything. Why isn't there a beacon asking for combat assistance?
PvPers act like Normal, PvE players are here for them to attack. Like they are NPCs in the game brought in FOR THEIR FUN. They get mad at the idea of adding in anti pvp rules would spoil their game play or game loop... but have NO problems spoiling PvEers game play or game loop. PvPer suck and make the game worse. PvP is great, when both sides WANT to fight. Yet it is never a fair battle field. It is always PvPers in a gun boat going after a PvE player in a mining or cargo ship. "PvP is the game loop that never dies?" Yeah it will. Look at Last Oasis and other open PvP games. You chase out casuals and the population dwindles until the game dies.
Pvp should be heavily discouraged in regards to pve events that are time limited with rewards that are, for better or worse, one time only. It's greifing, plain and simple. You are actively impeding a players ability to get a reward they only have a limited amount of time to complete and won't be able to acquire once the event is over. In essence, you're not letting them participate. Should pvp be allowed over all? Sure. But at some point, it's not the pve players' fault for approaching an event with the expectation that it's going to be pve, and then getting frustrated when another player is actively sabotaging their attempt to get a time limited reward. Edit: i want to make it clear, it is 100% a pve event. The website says that other players might be hostile, but the core of it is pve. Other players have to choose to not cooperate in the event and be aggressive. There is not a separate criminal aspect that you can participate in for a reward, your choosing not to share. There is zero benefit or reward for this.
Typically speaking, PvP in a PvE is anti social toxic behavior, there is zero benefit to either side. The players who say "cig wanted player interaction" seem to think the only kind of interaction that can be had is negative toxic interactions, they don't seem to realize not everyone wants that.
@XxTavoRxX he said that the reason people are complaining about PvP at the event area was not because people were trying to get the reward. It's obviously because of the reward, otherwise who cares if people PvP the event
I always take issue whenever someone in the PvP community goes "you don't like PvP because you are casual/play for the RP or atmosphere/aren't very good at it". That comes from a place of preconceptions. I am quite good at certain games, even played in tourneys with the top players, but when I am invited to PvP in them, I don't play more than a few games, because the sweaty, overly-competitive atmosphere of the PvP scene is just not for me... in the same way River says he finds PvE too boring, I suppose. "If you like PvE only you are a casual" is such a silly take.
Someone mentioned the music is very loud, so maybe the volume screws Mike's audio EDIT: And right after I wrote that, he mentioned a DaVinci Resolve issue so that could be the problem
Hell, not even getting ganked. The game's instability lately has led to me exploding mid flight to debris or asteroids that didn't even render before I died to them. During XT last night, I struggled through killing about 15-20 NPC's, only to get caught in desync hell, and manage to explode with another guy, who was in an F8C and doing a helluva lot better than I did. Rather than struggle through getting back into the game, I just apologized to the dude, logged out, and went and played Classic WoW the rest of the night.
Yeah agreed. Logged into xt last night. Jumped in pulled upto the fight and got jumped by 2 people who were natural and died in 3 seconds. Logged and went to bed
There isn’t enough consequence for building crimestats & negative rep, sure allow pvp, but if done in certain areas it effects everything from respawn time and ship insurance not just a quick prison escape or hacking mission
Problem is at least at the moment the game doesn't work as intended, thus being an alpha. They definitely have to do so ... when the game is ready for it. This is the whole problem of advertising it as "the game is already released and playable and its a live service" no its not, its just a broken tech demo.
CIG is as bad at communicating gameplay. They supposedly have a narrative team, a marketing team and a communications team and yet, they have less communication than a college capstone
PvP players are so fast to complain about PvE players being cry babies yet as soon as we avoid engaging in pvp with them they are the ones crying that its not fair that we can leave a fight.
Exactly this. If they really want guaranteed PvP, there's a game for them: Arena Commander. You aren't guaranteed PvP content in PU, just like PvEers aren't guaranteed a PvP-free experience.
@@needy3535how does that change what was said, if you want PvP it is there for you, the difference between the two is that in the pu you can jump unsuspecting players and ruin their game with very little risk, but in AC you have to compete against others who are prepared and ready for you.
@@LazyBrokOli more typical toxic reaction, you PvPers complain that PvE ers cry when they are killed but here you are crying when it's pointed out that there are plenty of PvP opportunities, but you all complain it's not enough, you HAVE to be allowed to join PvE events and kill other players. It's just typical anti social toxic psychology. Guess who will cry and whine the most if any features are brought in that limit PvPers? It'll be like watching the women's groups in the forest screaming at the sky.
"This guy is only thinking about his game loop" Yeah, because that's a problem PVPers definitely don't suffer from. It's not like their entire game loop is to interfere with literally every other game loop.
@@vncore496 ... Seriously? Have you seen Reddit or Spectrum, in the weeks leading up to 3.22.2? People whining and bitching about how manually unloading cargo is gonna be such a pain for them after doing bounties or piracy? You're not looking hard enough, because thats been a common complaint, even with the auto-load/auto-unload option clearly being shown in the previews. I just tell them the same thing they like to tell all of us: "Oh, that sucks. Maybe you should find a group to help you. ;)"
@@vncore496 once we see some surefire countermeasures for PvEers to deter PvPers, we will see the complaints roll in. In fact, I've already seen some with MM.
I don't have a problem with PVP and I don't have an issue with PVP in events like XT. My issue is that in a pre-robust reputation era of this game's development, "siding with XT" means absolutely nothing and the players who do it are accomplishing nothing outside of the kill itself. When a player wants to do something that negatively affects another player purely for the sake of negatively affecting that player, that's a legitimate real world personality defect and any and all criticisms of these players are valid. In the future, if/when players have established reputation and the ability to earn reputation with competing factions, the idea of a player ship (properly marked as hostile) showing up to fight on the side of XT is extremely exciting to me. I can imagine friendly players calling out incoming hostile players and allocating resources to defend against them. But as the game is right now, another red marker in a sea of red markers insta-killing a supply run ship with a size 9 torpedo with nothing to gain and nothing to lose... that's just an actual disorder. I've been a [pvp] gamer for a looong time, and I have been fascinated by the psychology of gamers for just as long. I see very little difference between the "griefer" archetype and the "hacker" archetype. These people exhibit legitimate real-world anti-social behavior that I do not wish to normalize as any part of the greater gaming culture. I agree that the issues with PVP in SC today are a game problem not a player problem, but that doesn't mean some of these players don't HAVE a problem. This sorta sounds like I'm being salty, it's genuinely not that deep. I've just always been fascinated by anti-social behavior within and outside of the gaming space. But whenever you ask a hacker why they're hacking they just say something along the lines of "u mad bro" so my curiosities will never be quelled haha
@@needy3535 lol well if amount of writing is correlated to being pissed, there are a lot of angry authors running around. George R. R. Martin must be like a war criminal or something haha
XT is also showing us the problems that will happen at DCs as well, where people will be doing good / evil missions / PVE / PVP missions all in the same location, good luck CIG
I think that for Xenothreat in particular, bringing in the legal system would help with the pointless PVP and the purposeful PVP. For example, I think that the entire XT area should be considered "UEE territory" that requires you to have a contract to be in. Similar to how bunkers work, if you don't have the Xenothreat event contract then you would be considered "trespassing" then you would be marked as hostile to the UEE npcs and to players with the contract. People who want to PVP at XT could come to the area anyways, but they would be marked as hostile to everyone just for being in the area, and would be shot at on sight. This in combination with a second event contract offered by Xenothreat themselves would give PVPers a higher risk/reward experience. The Xenothreat are willing to pay money for every UEE affiliate you kill, but you'd be going up against the UEE and all the players under UEE contract. This would make PVP at XT have an actual purpose and payout, instead of just "heehoo I wanna shoot". Granted, this solution assumes a couple of things. One, it assumes a working UI that doesn't mark players as fully hostile for accidentally missile locking a friendly. Perhaps this could be represented by a yellow pip to other players. Also, this solution assumes that contracts and reputation are more refined and functional systems than they are now.
That is a good point the clear out the real issue. The UI Problem. Though to be honest, you should consider anyone a hostile player and in case it was just an NPC he is still dead. So maybe it is less of an UI problem and more a problem with the expectation of the pve players.
@Traumglanz I disagree. Other players should be considered as potentially hostile, but going into a collaborative event like this, the expectation is that no player will be hostile to you right out of the gate.
These hard core PVPers are a strange breed. Everything is a competition, everyone is a competitor! My 5 year old nephew does the same. Starts playing a game when no one else does, claims a win!
I think Reputation needs to be a big part of the event, to the point you need to be on good standing with the UEE to even get the contract, and once you get there everyone who has that contract should be marked in a different color and same with other UEE ships that might be involved, and if you start attacking one of those ships you should lose the contract and marked as hostile and take a big rep hit with the UEE. When I went there I had to check each ships name tag to think, "is that a player, are they attacking me or is it the silly event that has marked them as red?".
The only problem with this is that accidentally missile locking a friendly or stray fire hitting a friendly marks you as hostile. I think a better way would be to mark someone as hostile would be once they kill a friendly. That, and having the entire Xenothreat area be restricted to UEE rep people. Anyone else gets "tresspassing" and shot at like at bunkers.
@@operationorigami8962 I think stray fire should be accepted, but sustained fire should mark them as hostile, should not be only after they have blown you up
There's a reason full loot pvp games struggle to grow populations. Unchecked PVP is parasitic and kills the host. SC needs a real security system that checks PVP or it needs PVE servers.
It turns into a meta rush, every time. In SC, I saw piracy go from "Attack" to "Lock someone in place by having a two QED ships trichord strafe them without attacking". Which, in just about any undercrewed/solo Cargo ship, is not something you can fight off. Maneuverability is too high on them, too low on you, and they can just lock you in place until they decide to steal your shit, kill you, or you backspace.
The problem with PVP is that all the mechanics to regulate pvp (rep, security, serious consequences, etc) are not implemented in the game. So to the non-pvp people it's like pvp players are clubbing baby seals without any real downside to there style of game play and it's impact on literally every other game play loop. Their absolute refusal to acknowledge that (or their lack of care) is what tends to poisons this entire conversation.
Both XT and SoO should have sides to participate in by choice. Anyone who jumps in without picking a side and fires on either/ both teams automatically gets branded as a "pirate" and can be attacked by both sides without repercussion.
That sounds like a fun event, but its a pvp event. Not every event should be a pvp event. XT may be a good candidate to be a pvp event. But the game needs event content for both pvp and pve.
in general agree can be a good pvp event. But as books above said, its a pve event. They can make two separate events out of it. So you fight at Jericho on the UEE side and at Grim Hex for the XT side. PvE Event for both sides this is what they advertised, now they have to make it, but guess what, they don't care at all.
@@derjadebaum9159 I'd think Grim Hex is a little too far away, but a staging area that XT has taken over during the event closer to the actual jump gate would make sense. BTW, it''s not a PvE event, it's a PvA one. It's just people who like to solo think the event is unfair because it doesn't accommodate their playstyle, personally I think not every event should.
@@books3475 It's not a PvP event, it's a PvA event, people can solo/ murderhobo and people can play solo and just haul cargo. However both sides should know you're at a disadvantage on either side of an event like that because it was designed around playing as a group.
I imagine a chunk of the pvp at xeno is unintentional, there is currently a bug that makes participants of xeno red just by participating. Plenty of people see red and try to kill.
After Pyro, I'd like to see a high security system and criminal reputation. Everyone gets a place to play in the way they want to and actions have consequences. There is room for everyone in SC, regardless of play style. It's up to CIG to start moving towards that.
Don’t know if it was said before, but players not in your party who have xt mission active are green, but only in fps. They should be also green in their ship.
100%. And attacking other greens should insta-fail them from the mission, so they'd stand out like a sore thumb. The murder hobos blend in too well, so it feels unfair.
@@Nerd_Detective yes, like it is with other UEE associated or lawful missions. And maybe in the future: unlawful players could have a mission supporting XT, but only available if they have enough rep with them.
Dude lost me the second he started shitting on other creators and their gameplay. "No one started playing because of Astropub"... Maybe not because of Astropub, but plenty of people started playing because of the kind of thing he likes to do. If you need ANY indicator of that, the amount of Base Ironclad sales should tell you how demonstrably wrong that statement is. For every "decent" point he made, he strayed further and further into typical PvP'er mindset of "THIS IS HOW MY GAME SHOULD PLAY", with no regard for the overall quality of the PU and it's broad gameplay spectrum. We all know PvP needs to exist in SC, but like Mike said - there needs to be a clear defining line as to what is considered PvE centric, and what is just a free-for-all. When the entirety of Overdrive Initiative was a PvE chain, you'd expect the cap-off to that to also be a similar style situation, considering how many people just solo'd the Overdrive content. PvP'ers need to understand - there need to be concessions to lessen the consequences for PvE players, be it severe repercussions in high security areas, or more control over their defense when jumped, now that MM has gutted defensive flying/countermeasures. Whether that's "25-50% shields in NAV", or Maelstrom and Armor making ships larger than a Heavy Fighter tankier. If you just make an environment where there are no repercussions to griefing players engaging in that content, eventually they'll just leave the game out of annoyance. And all you'll have is a small group of PvP'ers on every server crying into the ether/Spectrum, because the only people they have to fight are each other, and the "instant gratification" is gone with the free kills. Now they have to work at it, because they're on equal footing. Piracy is solely symbiotic alongside Industrial gameplay. No miners/cargo/salvagers, no piracy. No piracy, no PvP aside from the game becoming Arena Commander in an open map.
If they just marked PvPer in the mission it would be fine the problem is its not a fair fight when they get to unload on you before you even know whats going
That's my biggest problem. They're simply not participating in the event. XT still is hostile to them, and they're kinda abusing the system. There's no mechanism for players to side with XT, so they're just sneaking in and backstabbing, which doesn't feel fun or fair. The mission isn't built around hostile players. Note, of course, that PVPers are naturally on both sides. Many of the pilots in the fighter screen are competent PVPers, and actively turn to engage the murder hobos when they arrive.
The issue is that you can switch between gameplay types whenever you choose. Pvp one day, pve the next. How does the game know what you're going to do before you do it? Reputations *helps* but someone can have good reputation, get the mission, and then choose that that is their first pvp session. Someone suggested that it makes you pick a side beforehand, and that's almost a good idea if there is a 3rd option to be rogue. It still isn't a fix. It still doesn't mean there isn't PVP, as someone could choose the XT team, kill players, and people get mad. The issue is also that a lot of players don't mess with settings too much, and they cycle through targets one at a time and paint ither players with missles active, and get marked as hostile. They likely don't even realize they're doing it, but are confused why they get killed and can't charge the person with a crime.
Nah, Smashly was right, and you feel it. It's in the frustration, the reason you decide to put the game down, the annoyed feeling you have - you've been harassed as you did not intend to consent to that behaviour.
I think if the Xeno AI shoot you then you’re not on their side. Also it’s not really PVP if you’re loading cargo into your ship and someone comes along and needlessly blows your ship up. There was no counter to that. Before turning red you’d have been the same friendly colour. I think if people are PVPing at Xeno it’s on the cusp of a grief.
A couple of takes form this 1. A PvPer implying that PvPers are in some manner superior and more essential to the game. That's not really a good look is it? Might be worth a whole video on its own on why that is the case but I doubt they will be happy. 2. Either CIG are covering their corporate backsides over "griefing" with the little note on ther website or they have some communications problems that management should be solving. Both of those are completely on CIG to fix. They have made a rod for their own backs on this one and iots not going away anytime soon. The accountants will tell them that the game must cater firstly to the majority of players in order to attract new players. 3. Regardless of both of the above XT is clearly intended as PvE, just as the Overdrive preceding it was clearly intended as PvE. Perhaps the PvP community might have the common courtesy to respect that instead of coming in on a zero consequence seal clubbing spree. PvPers talk of being "highly skilled players". Not a lot of skill being demonstrated here is there? Again, not a good advertisement for your playstyle. PvP advocate essentially stating that "my choice of playstyle is better than yours because I can just shoot folk for no reason and get a charge out of messing up their day". And we are back to waiting on a reputation system because CIG have let a zero consequence playstyle take root and have no real mechanism to deal with it in place. You dont get to play bad guy in an event unless you have enough bad guy reputation, which requires way more work than just showing up in an F7A and blasting folk. If you show without thAT rep and play bad then there should be serious in game consequenxces. UEE conficsates your shop for a month perhaps.CS2 you can't shed for three weeks. I'm sure something could be done if the will was there. Excellent and well balanced commentary Mike. If you make CitCon I'll buy you a beer.
does the guy that pulled me out of quantum and soft deathed my reclaimer then scanned me to realize i had no cargo then blew me up and then tried to lure me back in global to "get my stuff" find that an appealing gameloop? Did they get an award for sitting there with a snare just to actually waste everyone's time? No to me that is annoying shit and not fun. Yes im fine with pvp but just softing and then blowing up with zero interaction or thought of "the other gameplay loop" Who want's that?
@@TribalMentality This mentality is never gonna work. There is not a single PVP'er out there that is gonna accept even half the payout from miners/cargo runners to sit around idly for an hour or two, doing absolutely nothing except hope for the POSSIBILITY of a fight. Those people want to PvP, not babysit "in case". CIG needs to get hot on making AI Blades a thing, so those folks can have some built-in defense - however minor - because a majority of folks aren't going to want to be at the mercy of someone elses game loop - be that getting pirated, or waiting around for someone to salvage/mine while bored out of your gourd.
@@lordfraybin Multi-crew or not, there's no reason a light fighter should be able to strafe any ship bigger than a Heavy Fighter/Light Cargo to death, with no recourse. They need to get armor or shields to a place that make bigger ships feel as beefy as they should. Or Blade-manned turrets to put PvP'ers on their toes. 90% of those cargo players would at least feel less like prey, and more like they can put up a fight and get away. I'm coming at this from pirating as a player who can always tell who's flying solo based on how the ship reacts to interdiction/attack. It stops feeling fun when you know they can't put up a fight, and right now - due to the instability of the game, time to get everyone moving, etc. - a huge portion of people you end up jumping are solo, because the game is not in a place where constant group play is simple or convenient enough to be regular. Also, we're in an age where forced group content just doesn't work for a majority of players, due to time constraints, life commitments, etc. It's why almost every MMO thats released since WotLK WoW has implemented PUG finders/matchmaking for dungeon and raid content. Not everyone is a no-lifer who can dedicate 12-16 hours a day to idling around a game - a lot of the space-dads who backed the project are guys who get 2-4 hours to play a night tops. When an hour of that time is getting everyone to the same location, getting setup, and getting out to the location you're gonna be playing at, it's just not gonna work for a majority of those folks, in the state the game is in now. A lot of these are problems that will/can be solved if we keep moving towards a complete game. But as the game is now, it's more conducive to actually playing to fly solo.
PVP in missions is for those who are not able to compete in real PVP because they would get screwed. That's why they use similar events when people don't pay attention to them and focus on PVE content, because it's their only chance to hit something and boost their ego. But yes, this is also part of the game.
It's 100% a game design issue, with everyone being tagged red it only makes the problem worse. You HAVE to treat all players as friendly and an aggressor is able to take out a few ships before friendlies are able to meaningfully respond. I'm all for PvP at events like this when the gameplay systems are in place but how it is atm I find it dishonorable. I'm a pvp and Piracy enjoyer
This is funny considering river grit and his group are cowards that only pvp when the odds are stacked for them and have a temper tantrum when the odds arnt stacked.
@@killpo_1that’s for sure, especially dudes who have livelihoods that are dependent upon it. You can’t make cool frag videos or sick b roll if your enemies fight back
@@totallynottheciaI’ve never seen a pvp game filled with so crying lames like his crowd. This is saying a lot because I played ark rust and dayz pvp servers
Ayoooo? I think your thinking of the wrong group my guy. lol However, happy to fight anytime! Just let us know! Or even better yet, friend me on RSI and just join off me whenever!
@@mcalhoun73 Thats basically what I meant I just was too lazy to type what you said because it was late. So, I agree with what you just said to your disagree to what I said.
The problem is not PvP but griefing. People who take the opportunity to stick the short end of a stick into someone else's cake. It is not as if they had a challenging target or one that was looking to PvP, it was a target set on a co-operative mission. But c'est le vie. Unless someone is ready for them solo-ish players will be at a distinct disadvantage... and while getting into an organization is great, not everyone can be online at the same time. And YES! This is an incomplete game - it is still in Alpha.
Much like other games, make them flag for the pvp part of it then. Want to do Xeno or Siege, ok you've flagged yourself for PvP everyone can see you and well now you are game to be killed. As of right now we have no clue who is the PvP'er or not, we go into a mission thinking we are facing a fight with AI controlled ships. Then I get blasted in the side or from behind not knowing why, thats not PvP, thats killing someone distracted by a game loop you just ruined for them. But if I know you are coming, I can see you coming, I can then defend myself.
This is exactly what's frustrating about PvPers in Xeno. Because of how CIG has coded the event, 100% of the players there are red the moment they start engaging the Idris. Now, I'm supposed to pick the 1 asshole from a million red pips around me? Let's be honest here, so called PvPers picking off people at XT are just weak. I enjoy PvP but the ones who are at XT are not it.
@@feral_fenrir And there in lies the real problem, you aren't going there thinking that another player is going to gun you down. Also there is zero way to defend yourself. So while you are distracted playing the content you signed up for, you get hit by someone who is there just to cherry pick kills and call it PvP, in the loosest sense of the term.
Yes. It's an event where you're supposed to be cooperating with your teammates who joined the event, random or not. So, now you have to distrust every one of your teammates that you don't know? How is there going to be cooperation in that scenario?
just to probably restate the obvious to the guy who made the original video: PVP is only fun for people who like PVP. It is not fun at all for people who do not like PVP. And the stuff he says is boring to him, is endlessly fun for the people who do not like PVP. To ignore that reality is to be completely willfully ignorant.
I don’t know how reasonably difficult it would be, but the two different sides can each get what they want and keep player choice intact. The two aspects of the event can be split into a PvP section and PvE section. The PvE portion of cargo loading and hauling can be instanced and you could have those players dock at the station, get on a NPC ship that takes them to an instanced area where they have to search wreckage and salvage cargo and load it onto the ship and then get back on and fly back to station to complete the mission. The PvP portion can be split into a UEE faction and Xeno faction and then they can have a non instanced area where the UEE faction still has to take out the Idris and the Xeno faction has to defend it for a lengthy time limit. Everybody gets what they want, you can choose to go whatever route you want, and if you finish the PvE portion and decide you want to try blowing up the Idris or whatever then you can go ahead and do that as well. I say this knowing little about game design, so keep that in mind, but it seems like a simple enough solution. Either that or just put a disclaimer in the mission text that other players might kill you.
You decided to blame players for lining up to get kills in the Vanduul mask event. But that didn't ruin the event for you. "Pvp" to the point of breaking the mission, game, etc, is on another level. We don't have the choice to play the event when exploiters steal the idris, when "PVP"'ers take advantage of laggy servers at the Jump exit, etc. Once they really start losing all these advantages they exploit they will mostly leave. The skew is just soo out of whack. Just orders of magnitude different. Ruining soo much gameplay for complete patches. It's not just cig not being able to have a perfect game. It's the community exploiting it. Just like the dupe bug. XT would have been much better out of PTU if soo many didn't want their 2hr Idris session. Then we may even get 3.23.2 sooner. It's just an awful cycle. The idea that pvp will be perfect in Pyro with no ground to complain will be pretty funny. As a mostly solo player it's pretty rare to see groups not doing the above, at some point. The struggle to find like groups is real.
I wish the second star system had been a high security system like Magnus to act as a 99.9% PvE zone, because even when Pyro is out, Stanton will still be a medium security zone with plenty of PvP. Also, sound cuts out at 25:05 and comes back about a minute later.
I think Castra will likely be one of the upcoming systems after Pyro and Nyx. It has a strong military presence so I think it is a much better choice for consideration as high security than Magnus (home of Drake Interplanetary).
Worse, Pyro will be inhabited mostly by folks looking for hardcore PvP in groups, while most of the Solo PvP'ers will still hang in Stanton out of fear of having to go up against more than one other pilot.
Don't mind PvP. What sucks is cheese game mechanics such as infinite respawns right next to the mission location, which also happens to have no comm array. Abusing cheese game mechanics is a problem for both PvP and PvEers. Also makes for incredibly boring game play. A bunch of folks running as fast as they can from med beds to ships over and over and over just isn't interesting.
Murder hobos need proper consequences. Let'em do it sure but make sure they're prepared to deal with the repercussions. Also I feel like a lot of the pvp community tend to forget the devs themselves recently said the game is 'pve with a possibility of pvp'.
Hmm love your comments and way you are balancing both parties to each other and respect their...existence. One very very small and simple step CIG could make to help both works instantly would be simply to give quests different colours (hatchings for the colour blind) in e.g. green (no pvp expected) over yellow (pvp could appear) to red (most likely there will be pvp) and let the people decide which risk they want to take. From a traders perspective I like it boring to be honest because boring = profitable but o course sometimes its getting a bit toooo boring so I group up with a gunner /board marine and escort fighter and we e.g. did RMC runs inlcuding bombing the area, sending out ground troops to hold the position clear etc. I know this is possible just in an org but it demonstrates, like you descriped it, the change in the mood of player. My upper mentioned light weight idea is nothing that will solve the pve-pvp balance but it would help to send some more responsibility to the player himself and not acting like a braindead zombi (ewhat the PvPers are always critizing, and often with a lot of truth in it to be honest ^^).
Less than five minutes in and I don't think I can listen to this guy much longer. Tedious and full of yourself are a wicked combination. I'm ok with PvP at XT. Just wish the game would properly support it. Right now it is a bad joke. I agree that this is a CIG problem. I also agree that there is a fear among the PvP crowd that when others complain on Spectrum (aka CIG) that CIG might change the game in a way that denies the PvPers their joy at targeting the uninterested. They see themselves as wolves but bleat like sheep when threatened.
Exactly. There was a time when a previous XT event where there were missions for both regular players and players with a CS. But currently, the event site is filled with AI and regular players who are all red pips because the event is bugged and everyone who targets the Idris gets marked red for everyone. imo, anyone who's hiding themselves within this mess and picking off Connies and CuttyBs who are collecting cargo are just weak and not a real PvPer
I am absolutely for PvP. There is nothing preventing players from attacking other players once they are fired upon. The more obstacles and more blindsiding from PvP caused me to go at missions more strategically. My biggest tip is once you're close to the mission marker try finding a close bed log. If you die or you're killed by PvP, you know you'll respawn close to that point of interest. Also, as long as the PvP shoots you first they become fair game without consequence for killing them. I am a solo player and I had no issues with XT other than glitches or game freezing causing mission abandonment. I never died and failed in a XT mission for it, I died a lot but didn't fail for it. If I died, I'd just respawn in med beds and head back out to the mission markers. I love the idea of chaos and no rules once you leave safe zones. Honestly, this is still the beginning of Star Citizen's development (2012 was beginning) and we're all playing as game testers. All the gameplay issues you might have aren't the gameplay modes set in stone for the actual end game release, it is still just a work in progress. Also, @SaltEMike I am a fan of how blunt and unfiltered you are during videos. A few other podcast creators seem like they're employed by CIG or funded by them. I say that because I have seen a few where I simply felt like they were pitching sales at me or building up certain CIG sales. Not you though, you deal in your own cold hard SaltE belief's.
There's a video where Chris Roberts talks about how PvP is planned to be optional, and that 90% of the game will be PvE content. There's a reason why games like Rust, ARK, Tarkov has wipes to reset players and stunting power creep, in a game like this where PvP is open pretty much everywhere, power creep will become problem and eventually PvE players will never get strong enough to possibly defend themselves and eventually the game will lose those players.
Issue is you get painted red if you accidentally target a player while you have missles on. I have my targeting setting to forward under reticle hostile, so I only lock the desired ship, but if you have base setting, you're probably cycling through some players to try to find the right target, and then you're painted red.
the solution would maybe be a counter mission to support xenothreat, for which you will need reputation with xenothreat and a good reputation system. otherwise you might end up getting shot by both uee and xenothreat, which might not be very great
1 problem with including PvP in a PvE event is that you end up mixing no matter what, otherwise you are just making 2 events with the same theming, but tbh this year's XT was just so badly communicated, months before it kicked off there were already rumors about being able to join the Xenothreat but instead everything in-game pointed to pure PvE
Sorry for long post, Mike, but I have a few good thoughts here… First, though, I’m not sure how you can fix it, but there are a few places where the audio cuts out. As for my thoughts on your react video… 1. SC needs PVE protected areas, perhaps with lower rewards in exchange for the safety 2. It needs PVE/PVP-discouraged areas where PVP *could happen* with less risk to PVPers 3. And a full-on PVP primary area, perhaps with high rewards to entice people to enter and play in them I’ve played EVE once and remember little about that game, but I *think* this might be like their Hi-sec/low-sec/null-sec space areas…if so, CR needs to consider something like it even if another game is doing it.. 4. Big events like XT need a good-guy side and a bad-guy side so PVEers get their loop and PVPers get theirs. The game would need to adjust spawn rates to keep fights from being too one-sided for either faction, but that’s doable. My biggest point is that you didn’t mention something I thought was obvious: the *treachery* factor. While the fine print of XT did provide a tiny heads-up that PVP could happen, I think what makes most PVEers and XT group members angriest is that (correct me if I’m wrong) the group all eventually meets up at a common start point to begin the missions. There’s an implication in joining a group of random players who make the commitment to start the mission that everyone in the group is focused on the group gameplay…then when the PVPer shows his colors and backstabs his (now former) teammates, that’s an incredible abuse of trust. *Betrayal is personal.* As a soldier, I can’t even imagine what I’d think or how I’d react to a guy I train with and deploy with who tosses a grenade into my tent because he suddenly sympathizes with the other side.
Is it just me or did the video go silent for a couple mins from about the 24min mark? And again at 33mins, it seems things get muted when the react video plays.
I think reputation will help with this and allow players in game reasons for PVP. When you align with factions that will allow for risk reward depending on your 'side'. Right now that isnt in place. PvPers at this point have no real backing to PvP other than just wanting to do it. This way there is consequence to the side you are on and in what system. We have to wait for Pyro and reputation systems to get into place. Then afterwards they can decide if they need to really clamp down on PvP in terms of locations.
I see the PVPers point though. When you can just solo everything without fear, there will never emerge some organic structures that lead you towards looking for protection, going into missions with teams, actually using ships that make sense for the occasion etc. To make it feel like an actual universe with consequences you probably need this kind of risk.
I think the core issue is that for bothe PVE and PVP player, it's so hard to get what you want.PVE players get PVP because PVP players don't really have PVP missions (player bounty hunting is a joke) so they basically PVP whatever they can find. During Xenothreat, PVPers have nothing to do, of course the will come and try to kill people there. We need either to incorporate PVP in Xenothreat or run another event in parallel for PVPers to take them away from Xenothreat. Maybe while Xeno Threat is doing their full assault, they contract criminals of Stanton (unlawful PVPers) to wreck havoc on some random stations far from where the axtual Xenothreat fight is taking place, at the same time, CDF gives mission to lawful PVPers to go take care of them. It's probably a shittty idea, I am no game designer, but maybe something like that would help.
I've been killing everything at xeno. No distinction between players and npc. It's clear the messed up. There should be comms at the wreck site. There should be a flag for hostile players. Not having those features makes the evwnt beoken and incomplete. I love it but they messed up
I'm not sure if it was just us, but our Org noticed some issues with the "hostile" marker for ships while trying XenoThreat when it went Live. Some of us would appear red instead of white and then it would flip us back to white after a while. We ended up making sure we were only going after targets with spaces in their names because players don't have them. It is possible we were seeing some sort of desync issue because there did appear to be a lot of issues with the server we were on.
Was pretty disappointed I couldn't get on to the tech preview , getting error about the launcher . Your video has given me an idea of what I missed , so don't feel so bad now .
we went in as good guys to get the reward instead of our normal RP "We wanna live at ruin station and be XENO mentality (I use RP to justify my murder hoboing)" and were engaged by nearly every single person that was at the event because of the random red bug. However because of that I got more organic PVP in xeno than I did in all of 3.22 because of the bug...
The UEE invites every capable citizen of Stanton to rise up and fight the alien threat. A handful of citizens turn on each other during the fighting. What do we think the UEE reaction would be to treason? Do that thing.
The problem right now is that PVP has no consequences in XT because everyone is red anyway. On the contrary the PVP players actually get rewarded for murder hoboing through call to arms!! 😠
Siege/xeno/ninetails lockdown don't need to be instanced unless server meshing fails. They just need to give unverified missions for xeno so people who can't justify being popped in a combat situation can get over it. It should be all about the rep, and ninetails/xeno missions in stanton should be very high risk for unlawful players. The biggest problem this event has are the bugs and the terrible server FPS. They could even add Friendly AI that will target the Xeno/Ninetails contractors (at this point it would just give them extra targets, but its better than nothing).
Would like to see how things are after Pyro has entered the game, as I feel most pvpers will be hanging around there and they would feel more at home. Other players go there at their own risk. They need to sort out the security in secure systems too and reps. A lot of this can be resolved when these systems are implemented properly. On the other hand this game is a PVPVE game and people know that coming in (or they should know that). I dont PVP unless I have to defend myself and still love the game as it is. I know the risks going out of an armistice, or accepting something like XT mission as I know there will be XT sympathisers and people wanting to shoot me for my cargo etc.
The biggest issue, for me at xenothreat, is that the UI, the grouping, the targeting is not yet done. If cdf pilots and xenothreat supporters would get marked properly it would not be a big deal. but now you shoot people by accident, or you think someones is doing that, en when you shoot him you get a crimestat .
PVP players...in this game...are like EvE ones. They want to ruin the game for everyone that doesn't play the way they want to play. In real life, murder hobos don't exist due to morality and consequence of action. In video games you have NO morality, and CIG hasn't implemented consequence of action. Prison is a laughable short loop that no one views as any form of punishment. So the game has become "Star of Thieves" and less of a "Star Citizen." CIG's biggest mistake ever was making Stanton the starting system. New players are driven away by groups like Griefernet and things like that. Star Citizen, for this reason, has drawn the Tarkov and the EvE crowd which is notorious for griefers. Griefers by the actual definition, not the game definition. In that people who enjoy ruining the fun of others for the sake of only ruining the fun of others. No goal or intent beyond the grief of other players. Basically, assholes. River is a sign of this. He seems more butthurt that the game isn't his way. He inflates his numbers to justify his point while downplaying other player's experience. It's rather funny.
Question: do I get praised for sitting at the arrival point and slaughtering people without shields as they arrived or banned? Issue needs to be made a problem but who knows if the ban hammer will come out
I have a suggestion.... for unlawful pvp homicides prison time for how many hours necessary + pilots license revoked (lawful systems only) for a month and/or ships pawned off to pay the damages and/or strip the right to wield firearms or hardpoints that could cause harm to others (lawful systems only) the issue is not restricting or unrestricting players, the problems is not having serious consequences if criminals get caught
The reason PvEers are a upset about being PvPed is they don’t want to do PvP. If they did they would be PvPers. A lot of MMOs solve this by requiring you to flag for PvP, that way only PvPers are only able to PvP with other PvPers. Everyone is happy. In Star citizen we could simulate this by having two events. One in Stanton and one in Pyro, this sets expectations for players as to the experience they are getting and allows CIG to taylor the event objectives to the play style like Jumptown vs ZenoThreat. The problem is PvPers are treating a PvE event like it’s PvP one which is not fun for anyone, except people who only enjoy ruining other people’s experience. I say this because there are no mission objectives that can be completed by PvP. Let PvPers play with other PvPers. That’s a mutually fun experience. PvPers killing PvEers is only fun for one side. Even if the PvEer wins the flight it’s not what they wanted. Basically, Mikes right. It’s an unfinished game problem. Hopefully these discussions will help them flush out the game mechanics.
The communications thing really struck home for me. I don't Pvp at all but I'm totally fine with it in the game. However, I think its really easy to entirely break missions if someone decides they just want to start killing everyone like in Xeno and SoO. I think CiG is still of the mind that people will group up to fight off the aggressive players but in reality they'll just skip the event. I really hope that CiG starts to consider reducing the rule of cool and start developing missions with actual player tendencies in mind.
Star Citizen doesn't have enough negatives for "pirates" and "griefers". The pro/con balance is always in favor of the pirate. Not to mention you can't even defend yourself if the pirates all focus down a C2 that has 12 escorts. The PVP at xeno is griefing though. The griefer accepted the mission just to ruin the mission. Easy make it so only those who accept the mission are allowed to QT into the area. If someone works against the mission they are griefing. PVPers are blowing up empty ships and calling it "pvp" or going after ships that can't really fight back.
Honestly, considering I had to fight the game tooth and nail to not reset my Xenothreat progress for a 3rd time. If I had to experience a 4th due to PVP on top of that, it might not sit well with me, not gonna lie.
I can relate, I haven't even tried the Xeno thing yet, been playing now again for about a week, got up to 100k, and down to 60k now again from either lag, or crashing into things because I can't see them in time, and then also randomly exploding in space which could be PvPers I don't know, usually happens just after quantum warping. Tonight, I just logged off because a group of guys were camping one of the jump points OM1 i think it was just killing anyone coming through there and I just can't deal with losing more gear on my way just trying to get some missions done.
Stanton is supposed to be med sec tho? Like the UEE doesn't have a huge presence in Stanton? It's up to the corps to mostly do the policing? I think a little bit of their failure to do that is realistic. That said, you're right Mike. It's possible to limit griefing while still keeping an open universe that feels authentic.
Sea of thieves doesn't grant the player any protection, it is made clear that people are probably going to try to sink you, even if you have no treasure, and people still get mad about it. Im not a big pvp'er and definitely not a griefer, but I approach the game like I would Sea of Thieves. If I'm doing a mission or running cargo, in the back of my mind, at all times, is the knowledge that someone might come to kill me. I don't see a good way to reduce the issue without fracturing the player base. They could make improvements to the bounty system though, to entice more bounty hunters to go after criminals like higher pay, big rep boosts, longer prison sentences, etc. This also gives pvpers a less "toxic" way to find pvp in the PU. It won't eliminate it, but it could make it better. There is the issue that I see a lot of players who have thebase targeting setting cycling through targets and painting other players while they have missles active, and that marks them as hostile. I'm not sure how to fix that, but I see it a lot.
If someone PvPs at XT, the game should recognize them as a turn coat and an XT sympathizer. The CDF puts out an APB and they're flagged for the day. Basically anyone who has the XT event mission will see the turncoat as if they're a bounty contract.
If Xenothreat had an option where you can choose sides and get rewards based on accomplishing goals for which side you're on, sure. I can see that. But Star Citizen has PVP events already such as Jumptown. CIG has already stated that Star Citizen is a PVE game that allows PVP, not the other way around. I'm all for more PVP events and a few combined PVP/PVE events as well. But when it's not structured that way, it simply ruins the experience. Especially right now. Friendly player ships turn red for no good reason. Doing events like this, you learn to not shoot player ships even if red because it's just a bug that's been around for years. But when players start trying to PVP in a PVE event like this with nothing to gain but griefing, it sucks. Especially with the bug. If you were playing chess in the park and someone came along and knocked the board over, you'd be pissed. If it happened consistently, you'd stop playing chess in the park altogether.
I think xt would be mostly fixxed with a bit more insentiv for lawfull pvp players (localised pvp bountyhuntet missions with higher rewards for xt) and without the everyone gets flaggged red for one stray shot problem.
Once PVP interactions happen naturally more often in the PU. PVPers won't kill at events like XT nearly as much imo. They go there because they're guaranteed to find other players.
Why don't people think XT is a PvP event? CIG describe it as a PvP risk, they give Xeno players Xeno rep, and even pay those players 1k per kill for shooting other players with A Call To Arms. Seems like people just ignore this stuff on purpose to be honest.
I feel like this dude's attitude towards the game is part of the problem. "I think PVP should be the most important focus because all other loops are boring." It's getting to the point where CIG can't even try anything like MM because the salts rage about it "ruining" the game. Get real, the game isn't finished they need to balance and they can't balance without changing stuff. People raging over a game that is barely halfway finished like its been a stable release for the past 12 years. Give me a break.
Dude. 92% of the community is not excited for cargo hauling. Cargo hauling is supposed to involve hiring an escort, hiring scouts to check for Mantises, etc. You arent supposed to be able to go pick up a billion credits worth of cargo and then go sell it without anyone trying to get it. That is the whole point.
Good PvP events should be balanced between the sides. Here it is massively imbalanced. PvE players often have no idea they are being attacked by another player. Once you suspect it, it may take a good 30 seconds or more of careful observation to discern whether the player marked as hostile is someone who accidentally fired on a friendly or an actual threat who is there to kill players. This is partially a UI issue - it should be easy to tell the difference between a FF error and someone with a crime stat. Yeah, that still leaves PvE players a bit behind on identifying threats, since PvP can claim their first kill without anyone knowing they're a murder hobo, but at least it would be something. Murder hobo, on the other hand, does not need a team or any effort discerning friend from foe. They just kill anything and run away when they're bored. They have nothing at stake, fly in worthless gear, and have nothing to gain except the joy they derive from the resentment of players they kill. If it's supposed to be a PvP event, it's the worst design possible for that purpose. PvE players main focus is killing NPCs. If the event is design well, that should already be enough to take up 100% of their attention. Then you add in sneaky opportunists who may or may not be present, but flying ships that are selected and optimized for PvP (which is very different from PvE setup). It is terrible design.
The majority of “pvp” I see during Xeno Threat are murder hobos in meta fighters attacking solo players in MSR’s just trying to move the cargo to move the needle forward on the event. That’s not pvp to me, that’s just ruining someone else’s gameplay, and I am fine with pvp in general but this so called pvp is gross.
L
The majority of SC PVP or "piracy" is mindless murder hobo behaviour. Much more akin to griefing than what CIG means by 'emergent gameplay'
The game is not designed with Pvp in mind. There's 0 thought given to how pvp fits into anything. Why isn't there a beacon asking for combat assistance?
PvPers act like Normal, PvE players are here for them to attack. Like they are NPCs in the game brought in FOR THEIR FUN. They get mad at the idea of adding in anti pvp rules would spoil their game play or game loop... but have NO problems spoiling PvEers game play or game loop. PvPer suck and make the game worse. PvP is great, when both sides WANT to fight. Yet it is never a fair battle field. It is always PvPers in a gun boat going after a PvE player in a mining or cargo ship.
"PvP is the game loop that never dies?" Yeah it will. Look at Last Oasis and other open PvP games. You chase out casuals and the population dwindles until the game dies.
You are just npcs to me
Pvp should be heavily discouraged in regards to pve events that are time limited with rewards that are, for better or worse, one time only.
It's greifing, plain and simple. You are actively impeding a players ability to get a reward they only have a limited amount of time to complete and won't be able to acquire once the event is over. In essence, you're not letting them participate.
Should pvp be allowed over all? Sure. But at some point, it's not the pve players' fault for approaching an event with the expectation that it's going to be pve, and then getting frustrated when another player is actively sabotaging their attempt to get a time limited reward.
Edit: i want to make it clear, it is 100% a pve event. The website says that other players might be hostile, but the core of it is pve. Other players have to choose to not cooperate in the event and be aggressive. There is not a separate criminal aspect that you can participate in for a reward, your choosing not to share. There is zero benefit or reward for this.
100% right. I think CIG put that "(other players)" line in there to appease the PvPers. "Look guys! We're not excluding you! See?"
Typically speaking, PvP in a PvE is anti social toxic behavior, there is zero benefit to either side.
The players who say "cig wanted player interaction" seem to think the only kind of interaction that can be had is negative toxic interactions, they don't seem to realize not everyone wants that.
But Mike said that wasn't the reason. He's obviously wrong
@@merc9nine mike said what wasn't the reason, who are you replying to and on what point? Serious question
@XxTavoRxX he said that the reason people are complaining about PvP at the event area was not because people were trying to get the reward. It's obviously because of the reward, otherwise who cares if people PvP the event
I always take issue whenever someone in the PvP community goes "you don't like PvP because you are casual/play for the RP or atmosphere/aren't very good at it". That comes from a place of preconceptions. I am quite good at certain games, even played in tourneys with the top players, but when I am invited to PvP in them, I don't play more than a few games, because the sweaty, overly-competitive atmosphere of the PvP scene is just not for me... in the same way River says he finds PvE too boring, I suppose. "If you like PvE only you are a casual" is such a silly take.
Omg the audio cuts at about the halfway point
damn, I was hoping it was on my end, I wanna hear the rest
Someone mentioned the music is very loud, so maybe the volume screws Mike's audio
EDIT: And right after I wrote that, he mentioned a DaVinci Resolve issue so that could be the problem
I suspect it might be RUclips auto-muting copyrighted music.
yep...I think that is it I got a notice.
Sadge @@saltemikereacts
After you get harassed you go to spectrum...
Nope, not usually. Most people quit the game and 1% to 3% of them go to spectrum.
True! I just go play diablo or dcs or whatever with my mates
Spectrum is so vile and toxic at this point you can literally have a more mature debate over at the Griefernet discord
Hell, not even getting ganked. The game's instability lately has led to me exploding mid flight to debris or asteroids that didn't even render before I died to them. During XT last night, I struggled through killing about 15-20 NPC's, only to get caught in desync hell, and manage to explode with another guy, who was in an F8C and doing a helluva lot better than I did. Rather than struggle through getting back into the game, I just apologized to the dude, logged out, and went and played Classic WoW the rest of the night.
Yeah agreed. Logged into xt last night. Jumped in pulled upto the fight and got jumped by 2 people who were natural and died in 3 seconds. Logged and went to bed
There isn’t enough consequence for building crimestats & negative rep, sure allow pvp, but if done in certain areas it effects everything from respawn time and ship insurance not just a quick prison escape or hacking mission
Problem is at least at the moment the game doesn't work as intended, thus being an alpha. They definitely have to do so ... when the game is ready for it.
This is the whole problem of advertising it as "the game is already released and playable and its a live service" no its not, its just a broken tech demo.
CIG is as bad at communicating gameplay. They supposedly have a narrative team, a marketing team and a communications team and yet, they have less communication than a college capstone
PvP players are so fast to complain about PvE players being cry babies yet as soon as we avoid engaging in pvp with them they are the ones crying that its not fair that we can leave a fight.
Exactly this. If they really want guaranteed PvP, there's a game for them: Arena Commander. You aren't guaranteed PvP content in PU, just like PvEers aren't guaranteed a PvP-free experience.
@@dandotvid pu is a different experience than ac. pvp in both are completely different experiences
@@needy3535how does that change what was said, if you want PvP it is there for you, the difference between the two is that in the pu you can jump unsuspecting players and ruin their game with very little risk, but in AC you have to compete against others who are prepared and ready for you.
From my record PvE players cry everytime they think they are in a rainbow happy land of "Friendly" player & got killed by others
@@LazyBrokOli more typical toxic reaction, you PvPers complain that PvE ers cry when they are killed but here you are crying when it's pointed out that there are plenty of PvP opportunities, but you all complain it's not enough, you HAVE to be allowed to join PvE events and kill other players. It's just typical anti social toxic psychology. Guess who will cry and whine the most if any features are brought in that limit PvPers? It'll be like watching the women's groups in the forest screaming at the sky.
"This guy is only thinking about his game loop" Yeah, because that's a problem PVPers definitely don't suffer from. It's not like their entire game loop is to interfere with literally every other game loop.
well spoken
They don’t. I’ve yet to see PVPers complain about space Bob’s ability to space truck and the need to restrict it.
@@vncore496 ... Seriously? Have you seen Reddit or Spectrum, in the weeks leading up to 3.22.2? People whining and bitching about how manually unloading cargo is gonna be such a pain for them after doing bounties or piracy? You're not looking hard enough, because thats been a common complaint, even with the auto-load/auto-unload option clearly being shown in the previews.
I just tell them the same thing they like to tell all of us: "Oh, that sucks. Maybe you should find a group to help you. ;)"
@@vncore496 once we see some surefire countermeasures for PvEers to deter PvPers, we will see the complaints roll in. In fact, I've already seen some with MM.
I don't have a problem with PVP and I don't have an issue with PVP in events like XT.
My issue is that in a pre-robust reputation era of this game's development, "siding with XT" means absolutely nothing and the players who do it are accomplishing nothing outside of the kill itself. When a player wants to do something that negatively affects another player purely for the sake of negatively affecting that player, that's a legitimate real world personality defect and any and all criticisms of these players are valid.
In the future, if/when players have established reputation and the ability to earn reputation with competing factions, the idea of a player ship (properly marked as hostile) showing up to fight on the side of XT is extremely exciting to me. I can imagine friendly players calling out incoming hostile players and allocating resources to defend against them.
But as the game is right now, another red marker in a sea of red markers insta-killing a supply run ship with a size 9 torpedo with nothing to gain and nothing to lose... that's just an actual disorder.
I've been a [pvp] gamer for a looong time, and I have been fascinated by the psychology of gamers for just as long. I see very little difference between the "griefer" archetype and the "hacker" archetype. These people exhibit legitimate real-world anti-social behavior that I do not wish to normalize as any part of the greater gaming culture. I agree that the issues with PVP in SC today are a game problem not a player problem, but that doesn't mean some of these players don't HAVE a problem.
This sorta sounds like I'm being salty, it's genuinely not that deep. I've just always been fascinated by anti-social behavior within and outside of the gaming space. But whenever you ask a hacker why they're hacking they just say something along the lines of "u mad bro" so my curiosities will never be quelled haha
This is what I have been saying, and I get roundly attacked by th PvP crowd for saying it
not that deep? bro you wrote like 4 paragraphs
@@needy3535 lol well if amount of writing is correlated to being pissed, there are a lot of angry authors running around.
George R. R. Martin must be like a war criminal or something haha
@@AuricNova you're SOOO not bothered right now
@@needy3535 sounds like ur sorta slipping down the "you mad bro" path I mentioned. Did I offend you somehow?
XT is also showing us the problems that will happen at DCs as well, where people will be doing good / evil missions / PVE / PVP missions all in the same location, good luck CIG
I think that for Xenothreat in particular, bringing in the legal system would help with the pointless PVP and the purposeful PVP. For example, I think that the entire XT area should be considered "UEE territory" that requires you to have a contract to be in. Similar to how bunkers work, if you don't have the Xenothreat event contract then you would be considered "trespassing" then you would be marked as hostile to the UEE npcs and to players with the contract.
People who want to PVP at XT could come to the area anyways, but they would be marked as hostile to everyone just for being in the area, and would be shot at on sight. This in combination with a second event contract offered by Xenothreat themselves would give PVPers a higher risk/reward experience. The Xenothreat are willing to pay money for every UEE affiliate you kill, but you'd be going up against the UEE and all the players under UEE contract. This would make PVP at XT have an actual purpose and payout, instead of just "heehoo I wanna shoot".
Granted, this solution assumes a couple of things. One, it assumes a working UI that doesn't mark players as fully hostile for accidentally missile locking a friendly. Perhaps this could be represented by a yellow pip to other players. Also, this solution assumes that contracts and reputation are more refined and functional systems than they are now.
This is a really good idea. Would be good to try get this up voted on spectrum
That is a good point the clear out the real issue. The UI Problem.
Though to be honest, you should consider anyone a hostile player and in case it was just an NPC he is still dead. So maybe it is less of an UI problem and more a problem with the expectation of the pve players.
@Traumglanz I disagree. Other players should be considered as potentially hostile, but going into a collaborative event like this, the expectation is that no player will be hostile to you right out of the gate.
These hard core PVPers are a strange breed. Everything is a competition, everyone is a competitor! My 5 year old nephew does the same. Starts playing a game when no one else does, claims a win!
I think Reputation needs to be a big part of the event, to the point you need to be on good standing with the UEE to even get the contract, and once you get there everyone who has that contract should be marked in a different color and same with other UEE ships that might be involved, and if you start attacking one of those ships you should lose the contract and marked as hostile and take a big rep hit with the UEE. When I went there I had to check each ships name tag to think, "is that a player, are they attacking me or is it the silly event that has marked them as red?".
The only problem with this is that accidentally missile locking a friendly or stray fire hitting a friendly marks you as hostile. I think a better way would be to mark someone as hostile would be once they kill a friendly. That, and having the entire Xenothreat area be restricted to UEE rep people. Anyone else gets "tresspassing" and shot at like at bunkers.
@@operationorigami8962 I think stray fire should be accepted, but sustained fire should mark them as hostile, should not be only after they have blown you up
@@benjaminmartin204 I can agree with that
There's a reason full loot pvp games struggle to grow populations. Unchecked PVP is parasitic and kills the host.
SC needs a real security system that checks PVP or it needs PVE servers.
It turns into a meta rush, every time. In SC, I saw piracy go from "Attack" to "Lock someone in place by having a two QED ships trichord strafe them without attacking". Which, in just about any undercrewed/solo Cargo ship, is not something you can fight off. Maneuverability is too high on them, too low on you, and they can just lock you in place until they decide to steal your shit, kill you, or you backspace.
The problem with PVP is that all the mechanics to regulate pvp (rep, security, serious consequences, etc) are not implemented in the game. So to the non-pvp people it's like pvp players are clubbing baby seals without any real downside to there style of game play and it's impact on literally every other game play loop. Their absolute refusal to acknowledge that (or their lack of care) is what tends to poisons this entire conversation.
Both XT and SoO should have sides to participate in by choice. Anyone who jumps in without picking a side and fires on either/ both teams automatically gets branded as a "pirate" and can be attacked by both sides without repercussion.
I agree - well said I couldn't have said it better myself
That sounds like a fun event, but its a pvp event. Not every event should be a pvp event. XT may be a good candidate to be a pvp event. But the game needs event content for both pvp and pve.
in general agree can be a good pvp event. But as books above said, its a pve event. They can make two separate events out of it. So you fight at Jericho on the UEE side and at Grim Hex for the XT side. PvE Event for both sides this is what they advertised, now they have to make it, but guess what, they don't care at all.
@@derjadebaum9159 I'd think Grim Hex is a little too far away, but a staging area that XT has taken over during the event closer to the actual jump gate would make sense.
BTW, it''s not a PvE event, it's a PvA one. It's just people who like to solo think the event is unfair because it doesn't accommodate their playstyle, personally I think not every event should.
@@books3475 It's not a PvP event, it's a PvA event, people can solo/ murderhobo and people can play solo and just haul cargo. However both sides should know you're at a disadvantage on either side of an event like that because it was designed around playing as a group.
I imagine a chunk of the pvp at xeno is unintentional, there is currently a bug that makes participants of xeno red just by participating. Plenty of people see red and try to kill.
After Pyro, I'd like to see a high security system and criminal reputation. Everyone gets a place to play in the way they want to and actions have consequences.
There is room for everyone in SC, regardless of play style. It's up to CIG to start moving towards that.
PVPers complain when PVE players have a plays to play by themselves.
14:38 NO people ARE getting mad because there is a reward attached to it. You don't speak for everyone so stop trying to!
Don’t know if it was said before, but players not in your party who have xt mission active are green, but only in fps. They should be also green in their ship.
100%. And attacking other greens should insta-fail them from the mission, so they'd stand out like a sore thumb. The murder hobos blend in too well, so it feels unfair.
@@Nerd_Detective yes, like it is with other UEE associated or lawful missions. And maybe in the future: unlawful players could have a mission supporting XT, but only available if they have enough rep with them.
If IFF systems, law system, and reputation actually worked, then sure
Dude lost me the second he started shitting on other creators and their gameplay. "No one started playing because of Astropub"... Maybe not because of Astropub, but plenty of people started playing because of the kind of thing he likes to do. If you need ANY indicator of that, the amount of Base Ironclad sales should tell you how demonstrably wrong that statement is.
For every "decent" point he made, he strayed further and further into typical PvP'er mindset of "THIS IS HOW MY GAME SHOULD PLAY", with no regard for the overall quality of the PU and it's broad gameplay spectrum. We all know PvP needs to exist in SC, but like Mike said - there needs to be a clear defining line as to what is considered PvE centric, and what is just a free-for-all. When the entirety of Overdrive Initiative was a PvE chain, you'd expect the cap-off to that to also be a similar style situation, considering how many people just solo'd the Overdrive content.
PvP'ers need to understand - there need to be concessions to lessen the consequences for PvE players, be it severe repercussions in high security areas, or more control over their defense when jumped, now that MM has gutted defensive flying/countermeasures. Whether that's "25-50% shields in NAV", or Maelstrom and Armor making ships larger than a Heavy Fighter tankier.
If you just make an environment where there are no repercussions to griefing players engaging in that content, eventually they'll just leave the game out of annoyance. And all you'll have is a small group of PvP'ers on every server crying into the ether/Spectrum, because the only people they have to fight are each other, and the "instant gratification" is gone with the free kills. Now they have to work at it, because they're on equal footing. Piracy is solely symbiotic alongside Industrial gameplay. No miners/cargo/salvagers, no piracy. No piracy, no PvP aside from the game becoming Arena Commander in an open map.
If they just marked PvPer in the mission it would be fine the problem is its not a fair fight when they get to unload on you before you even know whats going
That's my biggest problem. They're simply not participating in the event. XT still is hostile to them, and they're kinda abusing the system. There's no mechanism for players to side with XT, so they're just sneaking in and backstabbing, which doesn't feel fun or fair. The mission isn't built around hostile players.
Note, of course, that PVPers are naturally on both sides. Many of the pilots in the fighter screen are competent PVPers, and actively turn to engage the murder hobos when they arrive.
The issue is that you can switch between gameplay types whenever you choose. Pvp one day, pve the next. How does the game know what you're going to do before you do it? Reputations *helps* but someone can have good reputation, get the mission, and then choose that that is their first pvp session. Someone suggested that it makes you pick a side beforehand, and that's almost a good idea if there is a 3rd option to be rogue. It still isn't a fix.
It still doesn't mean there isn't PVP, as someone could choose the XT team, kill players, and people get mad.
The issue is also that a lot of players don't mess with settings too much, and they cycle through targets one at a time and paint ither players with missles active, and get marked as hostile. They likely don't even realize they're doing it, but are confused why they get killed and can't charge the person with a crime.
Nah, Smashly was right, and you feel it.
It's in the frustration, the reason you decide to put the game down, the annoyed feeling you have - you've been harassed as you did not intend to consent to that behaviour.
I think if the Xeno AI shoot you then you’re not on their side. Also it’s not really PVP if you’re loading cargo into your ship and someone comes along and needlessly blows your ship up. There was no counter to that.
Before turning red you’d have been the same friendly colour. I think if people are PVPing at Xeno it’s on the cusp of a grief.
A couple of takes form this
1. A PvPer implying that PvPers are in some manner superior and more essential to the game. That's not really a good look is it? Might be worth a whole video on its own on why that is the case but I doubt they will be happy.
2. Either CIG are covering their corporate backsides over "griefing" with the little note on ther website or they have some communications problems that management should be solving. Both of those are completely on CIG to fix. They have made a rod for their own backs on this one and iots not going away anytime soon. The accountants will tell them that the game must cater firstly to the majority of players in order to attract new players.
3. Regardless of both of the above XT is clearly intended as PvE, just as the Overdrive preceding it was clearly intended as PvE. Perhaps the PvP community might have the common courtesy to respect that instead of coming in on a zero consequence seal clubbing spree. PvPers talk of being "highly skilled players". Not a lot of skill being demonstrated here is there? Again, not a good advertisement for your playstyle. PvP advocate essentially stating that "my choice of playstyle is better than yours because I can just shoot folk for no reason and get a charge out of messing up their day".
And we are back to waiting on a reputation system because CIG have let a zero consequence playstyle take root and have no real mechanism to deal with it in place. You dont get to play bad guy in an event unless you have enough bad guy reputation, which requires way more work than just showing up in an F7A and blasting folk. If you show without thAT rep and play bad then there should be serious in game consequenxces. UEE conficsates your shop for a month perhaps.CS2 you can't shed for three weeks. I'm sure something could be done if the will was there.
Excellent and well balanced commentary Mike. If you make CitCon I'll buy you a beer.
PvPing in an event where there are not two sides for you to choose from is *not playing the event.*
I say this in jest... but the irony of mike offering to help river with audio and then the video audio cutting out
14:40 no, I’m mad because they put so much focus into it rather than getting the game to where it needs to be
does the guy that pulled me out of quantum and soft deathed my reclaimer then scanned me to realize i had no cargo then blew me up and then tried to lure me back in global to "get my stuff" find that an appealing gameloop? Did they get an award for sitting there with a snare just to actually waste everyone's time? No to me that is annoying shit and not fun. Yes im fine with pvp but just softing and then blowing up with zero interaction or thought of "the other gameplay loop" Who want's that?
hire an escort
@@TribalMentality This mentality is never gonna work. There is not a single PVP'er out there that is gonna accept even half the payout from miners/cargo runners to sit around idly for an hour or two, doing absolutely nothing except hope for the POSSIBILITY of a fight. Those people want to PvP, not babysit "in case". CIG needs to get hot on making AI Blades a thing, so those folks can have some built-in defense - however minor - because a majority of folks aren't going to want to be at the mercy of someone elses game loop - be that getting pirated, or waiting around for someone to salvage/mine while bored out of your gourd.
@@IrisCorven player flying a multi-crew ship solo complains they are an easy victim....
Go figure...
You know what we call people who harm others for no real reason? Sociopaths.
@@lordfraybin Multi-crew or not, there's no reason a light fighter should be able to strafe any ship bigger than a Heavy Fighter/Light Cargo to death, with no recourse. They need to get armor or shields to a place that make bigger ships feel as beefy as they should. Or Blade-manned turrets to put PvP'ers on their toes. 90% of those cargo players would at least feel less like prey, and more like they can put up a fight and get away.
I'm coming at this from pirating as a player who can always tell who's flying solo based on how the ship reacts to interdiction/attack. It stops feeling fun when you know they can't put up a fight, and right now - due to the instability of the game, time to get everyone moving, etc. - a huge portion of people you end up jumping are solo, because the game is not in a place where constant group play is simple or convenient enough to be regular.
Also, we're in an age where forced group content just doesn't work for a majority of players, due to time constraints, life commitments, etc. It's why almost every MMO thats released since WotLK WoW has implemented PUG finders/matchmaking for dungeon and raid content. Not everyone is a no-lifer who can dedicate 12-16 hours a day to idling around a game - a lot of the space-dads who backed the project are guys who get 2-4 hours to play a night tops. When an hour of that time is getting everyone to the same location, getting setup, and getting out to the location you're gonna be playing at, it's just not gonna work for a majority of those folks, in the state the game is in now.
A lot of these are problems that will/can be solved if we keep moving towards a complete game. But as the game is now, it's more conducive to actually playing to fly solo.
PVP in missions is for those who are not able to compete in real PVP because they would get screwed. That's why they use similar events when people don't pay attention to them and focus on PVE content, because it's their only chance to hit something and boost their ego.
But yes, this is also part of the game.
It's 100% a game design issue, with everyone being tagged red it only makes the problem worse.
You HAVE to treat all players as friendly and an aggressor is able to take out a few ships before friendlies are able to meaningfully respond.
I'm all for PvP at events like this when the gameplay systems are in place but how it is atm I find it dishonorable.
I'm a pvp and Piracy enjoyer
This is funny considering river grit and his group are cowards that only pvp when the odds are stacked for them and have a temper tantrum when the odds arnt stacked.
So many PvPers aren't interested in looking for challenging PvP gameplay, they're interested in looking for a victim.
@@killpo_1that’s for sure, especially dudes who have livelihoods that are dependent upon it. You can’t make cool frag videos or sick b roll if your enemies fight back
I’ve never seen an open world pvp game where people take fair or balanced fights (99.99% of the time).
@@totallynottheciaI’ve never seen a pvp game filled with so crying lames like his crowd. This is saying a lot because I played ark rust and dayz pvp servers
Ayoooo? I think your thinking of the wrong group my guy. lol However, happy to fight anytime! Just let us know! Or even better yet, friend me on RSI and just join off me whenever!
if cig would complete the game, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
I disagree. If CIG would simply figure out what kind of game they are making and execute a plan to make that game then that would stop the discussion.
@@mcalhoun73 Thats basically what I meant I just was too lazy to type what you said because it was late. So, I agree with what you just said to your disagree to what I said.
The problem is not PvP but griefing. People who take the opportunity to stick the short end of a stick into someone else's cake. It is not as if they had a challenging target or one that was looking to PvP, it was a target set on a co-operative mission. But c'est le vie. Unless someone is ready for them solo-ish players will be at a distinct disadvantage... and while getting into an organization is great, not everyone can be online at the same time. And YES! This is an incomplete game - it is still in Alpha.
Much like other games, make them flag for the pvp part of it then. Want to do Xeno or Siege, ok you've flagged yourself for PvP everyone can see you and well now you are game to be killed. As of right now we have no clue who is the PvP'er or not, we go into a mission thinking we are facing a fight with AI controlled ships. Then I get blasted in the side or from behind not knowing why, thats not PvP, thats killing someone distracted by a game loop you just ruined for them. But if I know you are coming, I can see you coming, I can then defend myself.
This is exactly what's frustrating about PvPers in Xeno. Because of how CIG has coded the event, 100% of the players there are red the moment they start engaging the Idris. Now, I'm supposed to pick the 1 asshole from a million red pips around me?
Let's be honest here, so called PvPers picking off people at XT are just weak. I enjoy PvP but the ones who are at XT are not it.
@@feral_fenrir And there in lies the real problem, you aren't going there thinking that another player is going to gun you down. Also there is zero way to defend yourself. So while you are distracted playing the content you signed up for, you get hit by someone who is there just to cherry pick kills and call it PvP, in the loosest sense of the term.
Yes. It's an event where you're supposed to be cooperating with your teammates who joined the event, random or not. So, now you have to distrust every one of your teammates that you don't know? How is there going to be cooperation in that scenario?
just to probably restate the obvious to the guy who made the original video: PVP is only fun for people who like PVP. It is not fun at all for people who do not like PVP. And the stuff he says is boring to him, is endlessly fun for the people who do not like PVP. To ignore that reality is to be completely willfully ignorant.
I don’t know how reasonably difficult it would be, but the two different sides can each get what they want and keep player choice intact.
The two aspects of the event can be split into a PvP section and PvE section.
The PvE portion of cargo loading and hauling can be instanced and you could have those players dock at the station, get on a NPC ship that takes them to an instanced area where they have to search wreckage and salvage cargo and load it onto the ship and then get back on and fly back to station to complete the mission.
The PvP portion can be split into a UEE faction and Xeno faction and then they can have a non instanced area where the UEE faction still has to take out the Idris and the Xeno faction has to defend it for a lengthy time limit.
Everybody gets what they want, you can choose to go whatever route you want, and if you finish the PvE portion and decide you want to try blowing up the Idris or whatever then you can go ahead and do that as well.
I say this knowing little about game design, so keep that in mind, but it seems like a simple enough solution. Either that or just put a disclaimer in the mission text that other players might kill you.
This guy needs a reality check he only gives a shit about PvP but the game is so much more then that
You decided to blame players for lining up to get kills in the Vanduul mask event. But that didn't ruin the event for you.
"Pvp" to the point of breaking the mission, game, etc, is on another level. We don't have the choice to play the event when exploiters steal the idris, when "PVP"'ers take advantage of laggy servers at the Jump exit, etc. Once they really start losing all these advantages they exploit they will mostly leave. The skew is just soo out of whack.
Just orders of magnitude different. Ruining soo much gameplay for complete patches. It's not just cig not being able to have a perfect game. It's the community exploiting it. Just like the dupe bug. XT would have been much better out of PTU if soo many didn't want their 2hr Idris session. Then we may even get 3.23.2 sooner. It's just an awful cycle.
The idea that pvp will be perfect in Pyro with no ground to complain will be pretty funny. As a mostly solo player it's pretty rare to see groups not doing the above, at some point. The struggle to find like groups is real.
I wish the second star system had been a high security system like Magnus to act as a 99.9% PvE zone, because even when Pyro is out, Stanton will still be a medium security zone with plenty of PvP. Also, sound cuts out at 25:05 and comes back about a minute later.
I think Castra will likely be one of the upcoming systems after Pyro and Nyx. It has a strong military presence so I think it is a much better choice for consideration as high security than Magnus (home of Drake Interplanetary).
@@Tsudico Yeah, even better, I was thinking of a different place and wrote Magnus by mistake.
Worse, Pyro will be inhabited mostly by folks looking for hardcore PvP in groups, while most of the Solo PvP'ers will still hang in Stanton out of fear of having to go up against more than one other pilot.
Don't mind PvP. What sucks is cheese game mechanics such as infinite respawns right next to the mission location, which also happens to have no comm array. Abusing cheese game mechanics is a problem for both PvP and PvEers. Also makes for incredibly boring game play. A bunch of folks running as fast as they can from med beds to ships over and over and over just isn't interesting.
This event was secretly designed and intended to feed murder hobos. CIG loves us.
Murder hobos need proper consequences. Let'em do it sure but make sure they're prepared to deal with the repercussions. Also I feel like a lot of the pvp community tend to forget the devs themselves recently said the game is 'pve with a possibility of pvp'.
I swear PvP bros are somehow even worse than carebears
from 25:06 to 26:16 you lost all audio
God, pvp call of duty kids are insufferable. I hope a new modern warfare remake will clear them out of star citizen.
Hmm love your comments and way you are balancing both parties to each other and respect their...existence. One very very small and simple step CIG could make to help both works instantly would be simply to give quests different colours (hatchings for the colour blind) in e.g. green (no pvp expected) over yellow (pvp could appear) to red (most likely there will be pvp) and let the people decide which risk they want to take. From a traders perspective I like it boring to be honest because boring = profitable but o course sometimes its getting a bit toooo boring so I group up with a gunner /board marine and escort fighter and we e.g. did RMC runs inlcuding bombing the area, sending out ground troops to hold the position clear etc. I know this is possible just in an org but it demonstrates, like you descriped it, the change in the mood of player. My upper mentioned light weight idea is nothing that will solve the pve-pvp balance but it would help to send some more responsibility to the player himself and not acting like a braindead zombi (ewhat the PvPers are always critizing, and often with a lot of truth in it to be honest ^^).
There is no "your truth".
That's called an opinion.
There is only "the truth".
Less than five minutes in and I don't think I can listen to this guy much longer. Tedious and full of yourself are a wicked combination.
I'm ok with PvP at XT. Just wish the game would properly support it. Right now it is a bad joke.
I agree that this is a CIG problem. I also agree that there is a fear among the PvP crowd that when others complain on Spectrum (aka CIG) that CIG might change the game in a way that denies the PvPers their joy at targeting the uninterested.
They see themselves as wolves but bleat like sheep when threatened.
Exactly. There was a time when a previous XT event where there were missions for both regular players and players with a CS.
But currently, the event site is filled with AI and regular players who are all red pips because the event is bugged and everyone who targets the Idris gets marked red for everyone.
imo, anyone who's hiding themselves within this mess and picking off Connies and CuttyBs who are collecting cargo are just weak and not a real PvPer
I am absolutely for PvP. There is nothing preventing players from attacking other players once they are fired upon. The more obstacles and more blindsiding from PvP caused me to go at missions more strategically. My biggest tip is once you're close to the mission marker try finding a close bed log. If you die or you're killed by PvP, you know you'll respawn close to that point of interest. Also, as long as the PvP shoots you first they become fair game without consequence for killing them. I am a solo player and I had no issues with XT other than glitches or game freezing causing mission abandonment. I never died and failed in a XT mission for it, I died a lot but didn't fail for it. If I died, I'd just respawn in med beds and head back out to the mission markers. I love the idea of chaos and no rules once you leave safe zones. Honestly, this is still the beginning of Star Citizen's development (2012 was beginning) and we're all playing as game testers. All the gameplay issues you might have aren't the gameplay modes set in stone for the actual end game release, it is still just a work in progress. Also, @SaltEMike I am a fan of how blunt and unfiltered you are during videos. A few other podcast creators seem like they're employed by CIG or funded by them. I say that because I have seen a few where I simply felt like they were pitching sales at me or building up certain CIG sales. Not you though, you deal in your own cold hard SaltE belief's.
There's a video where Chris Roberts talks about how PvP is planned to be optional, and that 90% of the game will be PvE content.
There's a reason why games like Rust, ARK, Tarkov has wipes to reset players and stunting power creep, in a game like this where PvP is open pretty much everywhere, power creep will become problem and eventually PvE players will never get strong enough to possibly defend themselves and eventually the game will lose those players.
25:03 audio cut out😢
Add in xeno side missions (ie red vs blue missions). And I think raising the player bounties a lot like 100000 or more so it would be worth hunting
PK'ers should be marked RED for 4 days
Issue is you get painted red if you accidentally target a player while you have missles on. I have my targeting setting to forward under reticle hostile, so I only lock the desired ship, but if you have base setting, you're probably cycling through some players to try to find the right target, and then you're painted red.
the solution would maybe be a counter mission to support xenothreat, for which you will need reputation with xenothreat and a good reputation system. otherwise you might end up getting shot by both uee and xenothreat, which might not be very great
1 problem with including PvP in a PvE event is that you end up mixing no matter what, otherwise you are just making 2 events with the same theming, but tbh this year's XT was just so badly communicated, months before it kicked off there were already rumors about being able to join the Xenothreat but instead everything in-game pointed to pure PvE
Sorry for long post, Mike, but I have a few good thoughts here… First, though, I’m not sure how you can fix it, but there are a few places where the audio cuts out.
As for my thoughts on your react video…
1. SC needs PVE protected areas, perhaps with lower rewards in exchange for the safety
2. It needs PVE/PVP-discouraged areas where PVP *could happen* with less risk to PVPers
3. And a full-on PVP primary area, perhaps with high rewards to entice people to enter and play in them
I’ve played EVE once and remember little about that game, but I *think* this might be like their Hi-sec/low-sec/null-sec space areas…if so, CR needs to consider something like it even if another game is doing it..
4. Big events like XT need a good-guy side and a bad-guy side so PVEers get their loop and PVPers get theirs. The game would need to adjust spawn rates to keep fights from being too one-sided for either faction, but that’s doable.
My biggest point is that you didn’t mention something I thought was obvious: the *treachery* factor. While the fine print of XT did provide a tiny heads-up that PVP could happen, I think what makes most PVEers and XT group members angriest is that (correct me if I’m wrong) the group all eventually meets up at a common start point to begin the missions. There’s an implication in joining a group of random players who make the commitment to start the mission that everyone in the group is focused on the group gameplay…then when the PVPer shows his colors and backstabs his (now former) teammates, that’s an incredible abuse of trust. *Betrayal is personal.* As a soldier, I can’t even imagine what I’d think or how I’d react to a guy I train with and deploy with who tosses a grenade into my tent because he suddenly sympathizes with the other side.
Is it just me or did the video go silent for a couple mins from about the 24min mark?
And again at 33mins, it seems things get muted when the react video plays.
I was confused by that too. Something got the video muted there. Maybe it was a RUclips copyright issue with background music.
Yeah, same for me it is an issue with the video
I think reputation will help with this and allow players in game reasons for PVP. When you align with factions that will allow for risk reward depending on your 'side'. Right now that isnt in place. PvPers at this point have no real backing to PvP other than just wanting to do it. This way there is consequence to the side you are on and in what system. We have to wait for Pyro and reputation systems to get into place. Then afterwards they can decide if they need to really clamp down on PvP in terms of locations.
I see the PVPers point though. When you can just solo everything without fear, there will never emerge some organic structures that lead you towards looking for protection, going into missions with teams, actually using ships that make sense for the occasion etc. To make it feel like an actual universe with consequences you probably need this kind of risk.
I think the core issue is that for bothe PVE and PVP player, it's so hard to get what you want.PVE players get PVP because PVP players don't really have PVP missions (player bounty hunting is a joke) so they basically PVP whatever they can find.
During Xenothreat, PVPers have nothing to do, of course the will come and try to kill people there. We need either to incorporate PVP in Xenothreat or run another event in parallel for PVPers to take them away from Xenothreat. Maybe while Xeno Threat is doing their full assault, they contract criminals of Stanton (unlawful PVPers) to wreck havoc on some random stations far from where the axtual Xenothreat fight is taking place, at the same time, CDF gives mission to lawful PVPers to go take care of them.
It's probably a shittty idea, I am no game designer, but maybe something like that would help.
I've been killing everything at xeno. No distinction between players and npc. It's clear the messed up. There should be comms at the wreck site. There should be a flag for hostile players. Not having those features makes the evwnt beoken and incomplete. I love it but they messed up
I'm not sure if it was just us, but our Org noticed some issues with the "hostile" marker for ships while trying XenoThreat when it went Live. Some of us would appear red instead of white and then it would flip us back to white after a while. We ended up making sure we were only going after targets with spaces in their names because players don't have them. It is possible we were seeing some sort of desync issue because there did appear to be a lot of issues with the server we were on.
Was pretty disappointed I couldn't get on to the tech preview , getting error about the launcher . Your video has given me an idea of what I missed , so don't feel so bad now .
we went in as good guys to get the reward instead of our normal RP "We wanna live at ruin station and be XENO mentality (I use RP to justify my murder hoboing)" and were engaged by nearly every single person that was at the event because of the random red bug.
However because of that I got more organic PVP in xeno than I did in all of 3.22 because of the bug...
The UEE invites every capable citizen of Stanton to rise up and fight the alien threat. A handful of citizens turn on each other during the fighting. What do we think the UEE reaction would be to treason? Do that thing.
The problem right now is that PVP has no consequences in XT because everyone is red anyway.
On the contrary the PVP players actually get rewarded for murder hoboing through call to arms!! 😠
Audio cuts out many times 😅
Siege/xeno/ninetails lockdown don't need to be instanced unless server meshing fails. They just need to give unverified missions for xeno so people who can't justify being popped in a combat situation can get over it. It should be all about the rep, and ninetails/xeno missions in stanton should be very high risk for unlawful players. The biggest problem this event has are the bugs and the terrible server FPS. They could even add Friendly AI that will target the Xeno/Ninetails contractors (at this point it would just give them extra targets, but its better than nothing).
Would like to see how things are after Pyro has entered the game, as I feel most pvpers will be hanging around there and they would feel more at home. Other players go there at their own risk. They need to sort out the security in secure systems too and reps. A lot of this can be resolved when these systems are implemented properly.
On the other hand this game is a PVPVE game and people know that coming in (or they should know that). I dont PVP unless I have to defend myself and still love the game as it is. I know the risks going out of an armistice, or accepting something like XT mission as I know there will be XT sympathisers and people wanting to shoot me for my cargo etc.
The biggest issue, for me at xenothreat, is that the UI, the grouping, the targeting is not yet done.
If cdf pilots and xenothreat supporters would get marked properly it would not be a big deal.
but now you shoot people by accident, or you think someones is doing that, en when you shoot him you get a crimestat .
PVP players...in this game...are like EvE ones. They want to ruin the game for everyone that doesn't play the way they want to play. In real life, murder hobos don't exist due to morality and consequence of action. In video games you have NO morality, and CIG hasn't implemented consequence of action. Prison is a laughable short loop that no one views as any form of punishment. So the game has become "Star of Thieves" and less of a "Star Citizen." CIG's biggest mistake ever was making Stanton the starting system. New players are driven away by groups like Griefernet and things like that. Star Citizen, for this reason, has drawn the Tarkov and the EvE crowd which is notorious for griefers. Griefers by the actual definition, not the game definition. In that people who enjoy ruining the fun of others for the sake of only ruining the fun of others. No goal or intent beyond the grief of other players. Basically, assholes. River is a sign of this. He seems more butthurt that the game isn't his way. He inflates his numbers to justify his point while downplaying other player's experience. It's rather funny.
Question: do I get praised for sitting at the arrival point and slaughtering people without shields as they arrived or banned? Issue needs to be made a problem but who knows if the ban hammer will come out
As someone who just does bounties and merc contracts, i have never been PvPed. Its always people doing cargo with millions in cargo, which is normal
i think people were just extra frustrated this time because of the Idris boarding. People get bloodthirsty over that thing once its in players hands.
I have a suggestion.... for unlawful pvp homicides prison time for how many hours necessary + pilots license revoked (lawful systems only) for a month and/or ships pawned off to pay the damages and/or strip the right to wield firearms or hardpoints that could cause harm to others (lawful systems only)
the issue is not restricting or unrestricting players, the problems is not having serious consequences if criminals get caught
The most important statement of the video starts here 13:48
"Game direction is PVE with elements of PVP"
The reason PvEers are a upset about being PvPed is they don’t want to do PvP. If they did they would be PvPers. A lot of MMOs solve this by requiring you to flag for PvP, that way only PvPers are only able to PvP with other PvPers. Everyone is happy. In Star citizen we could simulate this by having two events. One in Stanton and one in Pyro, this sets expectations for players as to the experience they are getting and allows CIG to taylor the event objectives to the play style like Jumptown vs ZenoThreat. The problem is PvPers are treating a PvE event like it’s PvP one which is not fun for anyone, except people who only enjoy ruining other people’s experience. I say this because there are no mission objectives that can be completed by PvP. Let PvPers play with other PvPers. That’s a mutually fun experience. PvPers killing PvEers is only fun for one side. Even if the PvEer wins the flight it’s not what they wanted. Basically, Mikes right. It’s an unfinished game problem. Hopefully these discussions will help them flush out the game mechanics.
lol the battle between screen shot'ers and PvP'ers
The communications thing really struck home for me. I don't Pvp at all but I'm totally fine with it in the game. However, I think its really easy to entirely break missions if someone decides they just want to start killing everyone like in Xeno and SoO. I think CiG is still of the mind that people will group up to fight off the aggressive players but in reality they'll just skip the event. I really hope that CiG starts to consider reducing the rule of cool and start developing missions with actual player tendencies in mind.
Also, your audio is cutting out.
Star Citizen doesn't have enough negatives for "pirates" and "griefers". The pro/con balance is always in favor of the pirate.
Not to mention you can't even defend yourself if the pirates all focus down a C2 that has 12 escorts.
The PVP at xeno is griefing though. The griefer accepted the mission just to ruin the mission.
Easy make it so only those who accept the mission are allowed to QT into the area. If someone works against the mission they are griefing.
PVPers are blowing up empty ships and calling it "pvp" or going after ships that can't really fight back.
Honestly, considering I had to fight the game tooth and nail to not reset my Xenothreat progress for a 3rd time. If I had to experience a 4th due to PVP on top of that, it might not sit well with me, not gonna lie.
I can relate, I haven't even tried the Xeno thing yet, been playing now again for about a week, got up to 100k, and down to 60k now again from either lag, or crashing into things because I can't see them in time, and then also randomly exploding in space which could be PvPers I don't know, usually happens just after quantum warping. Tonight, I just logged off because a group of guys were camping one of the jump points OM1 i think it was just killing anyone coming through there and I just can't deal with losing more gear on my way just trying to get some missions done.
If all the PvPers move to pyro who will they fight?
Stanton is supposed to be med sec tho? Like the UEE doesn't have a huge presence in Stanton? It's up to the corps to mostly do the policing? I think a little bit of their failure to do that is realistic. That said, you're right Mike. It's possible to limit griefing while still keeping an open universe that feels authentic.
Sea of thieves doesn't grant the player any protection, it is made clear that people are probably going to try to sink you, even if you have no treasure, and people still get mad about it.
Im not a big pvp'er and definitely not a griefer, but I approach the game like I would Sea of Thieves. If I'm doing a mission or running cargo, in the back of my mind, at all times, is the knowledge that someone might come to kill me.
I don't see a good way to reduce the issue without fracturing the player base. They could make improvements to the bounty system though, to entice more bounty hunters to go after criminals like higher pay, big rep boosts, longer prison sentences, etc. This also gives pvpers a less "toxic" way to find pvp in the PU. It won't eliminate it, but it could make it better.
There is the issue that I see a lot of players who have thebase targeting setting cycling through targets and painting other players while they have missles active, and that marks them as hostile. I'm not sure how to fix that, but I see it a lot.
If someone PvPs at XT, the game should recognize them as a turn coat and an XT sympathizer. The CDF puts out an APB and they're flagged for the day. Basically anyone who has the XT event mission will see the turncoat as if they're a bounty contract.
...There are large chunks of an argument that are muted through this video. Why's that?
If Xenothreat had an option where you can choose sides and get rewards based on accomplishing goals for which side you're on, sure. I can see that. But Star Citizen has PVP events already such as Jumptown. CIG has already stated that Star Citizen is a PVE game that allows PVP, not the other way around. I'm all for more PVP events and a few combined PVP/PVE events as well. But when it's not structured that way, it simply ruins the experience.
Especially right now. Friendly player ships turn red for no good reason. Doing events like this, you learn to not shoot player ships even if red because it's just a bug that's been around for years. But when players start trying to PVP in a PVE event like this with nothing to gain but griefing, it sucks. Especially with the bug. If you were playing chess in the park and someone came along and knocked the board over, you'd be pissed. If it happened consistently, you'd stop playing chess in the park altogether.
I think xt would be mostly fixxed with a bit more insentiv for lawfull pvp players (localised pvp bountyhuntet missions with higher rewards for xt) and without the everyone gets flaggged red for one stray shot problem.
Once PVP interactions happen naturally more often in the PU. PVPers won't kill at events like XT nearly as much imo. They go there because they're guaranteed to find other players.
They're guaranteed to find victims more like it. There's a place for them to get guaranteed PvP: Arena Commander.
Why don't people think XT is a PvP event? CIG describe it as a PvP risk, they give Xeno players Xeno rep, and even pay those players 1k per kill for shooting other players with A Call To Arms. Seems like people just ignore this stuff on purpose to be honest.
CIG needs to refine the mission more and include the PVP loop just like they do with SOO. They have gameplay, but a punishment for getting countered.
I feel like this dude's attitude towards the game is part of the problem. "I think PVP should be the most important focus because all other loops are boring." It's getting to the point where CIG can't even try anything like MM because the salts rage about it "ruining" the game. Get real, the game isn't finished they need to balance and they can't balance without changing stuff. People raging over a game that is barely halfway finished like its been a stable release for the past 12 years. Give me a break.
Dude. 92% of the community is not excited for cargo hauling. Cargo hauling is supposed to involve hiring an escort, hiring scouts to check for Mantises, etc. You arent supposed to be able to go pick up a billion credits worth of cargo and then go sell it without anyone trying to get it. That is the whole point.
Its weird we cant take a mission to join xenothreat side for this one
Good PvP events should be balanced between the sides. Here it is massively imbalanced. PvE players often have no idea they are being attacked by another player. Once you suspect it, it may take a good 30 seconds or more of careful observation to discern whether the player marked as hostile is someone who accidentally fired on a friendly or an actual threat who is there to kill players.
This is partially a UI issue - it should be easy to tell the difference between a FF error and someone with a crime stat. Yeah, that still leaves PvE players a bit behind on identifying threats, since PvP can claim their first kill without anyone knowing they're a murder hobo, but at least it would be something.
Murder hobo, on the other hand, does not need a team or any effort discerning friend from foe. They just kill anything and run away when they're bored. They have nothing at stake, fly in worthless gear, and have nothing to gain except the joy they derive from the resentment of players they kill. If it's supposed to be a PvP event, it's the worst design possible for that purpose. PvE players main focus is killing NPCs. If the event is design well, that should already be enough to take up 100% of their attention. Then you add in sneaky opportunists who may or may not be present, but flying ships that are selected and optimized for PvP (which is very different from PvE setup). It is terrible design.
I love cargo and i love AstroPub.