Star Citizen has a griefer problem - Video

[Montoya]

Do you like PVE? Well Star Citizen wants you to enjoy your PVE but there will be a chance of griefers.

 

[Ayeteeone]

Player vs Player in any other sport, take Baseball - Say the Yankees fly into Seattle to take on the Mariners. This isn't generally a hard game for them; there might be a couple of questionable calls but usually they play, notch a win and then both teams head out for the night to do it again the next day.

Now let's apply the concepts of PvP as it seems to be intended for SC. The game goes as expected, but half the Mariners team gets sent to Harbor View Trauma Center, and after the win the Yankees take the Mariner jerseys, steal their cars, destroy the team aircraft, break their bats, burn Lumen Field and probably eat all the mac-n-cheese at Beecher's.

Which is more sustainable?

I'm oversimplifiying, yes, BUT this is not a hard concept. If you want long term success you don't destroy your players.

 

[LurchLord]

As much as the PvPsychos try to make it a valid argument, the undeniable fact and objective truth remains this:
For their preferred gameplay to happen, PvE players need exactly zero PvP players.
For their preferred gameplay to happen, the on average sociopathic PvP players are reliant on finding other players to leech enjoyment off of.
This is the only reason why PvP players are the ones to screech loudly and desperately whenever the hypothetical idea of PvE servers in any game is raised.

 

[Bambooza]

Player vs Player in any other sport, take Baseball - Say the Yankees fly into Seattle to take on the Mariners. This isn't generally a hard game for them; there might be a couple of questionable calls but usually they play, notch a win and then both teams head out for the night to do it again the next day.

Now let's apply the concepts of PvP as it seems to be intended for SC. The game goes as expected, but half the Mariners team gets sent to Harbor View Trauma Center, and after the win the Yankees take the Mariner jerseys, steal their cars, destroy the team aircraft, break their bats, burn Lumen Field and probably eat all the mac-n-cheese at Beecher's.

Which is more sustainable?

I'm oversimplifiying, yes, BUT this is not a hard concept. If you want long term success you don't destroy your players.

Not sure how applicable that example is as it's more akin to poker where you have the real risk of loosing all your cash. And you get to decide if when and how much your willing to risk. After all game items are simply representation of sunken time and not a real risk to outside game resources or your ability to continue to play like the example above would imply with the methods of being able to play being destroyed, would be like them coming to your house and throwing your computer out of the window.

From a game mechanics perspective the biggest issue is with out a lot of the law and order and rep systems missing its really hard to have any sort of pvp experience that doesn't revolve around a more lopsided scenario leaning heavily towards the initiator given they puck the easier target with little risk or consequences. This doesn't rule out the face that the highly valued and thus sought after items needs to be in these lawless spaces and not really a pve reward as it's the pvp dynamic that's at the core for driving everything else. After all why build a base, mine and manufacturer anything with out a driven need through equipment destruction sinks. Why team up but to be safer and push back against pirates.
If cig sets up the rep system and security correctly then there should be room and game loops enough for everyone even if not all players will end up with everything or be able to go everywhere.
So far things I have seen in game and some of the dev talks points to this bright future. Like comsats being able to turn off. Instant combat where only the instance your in can attack your base. Planet shields give multi layers of battles before real loss happens giving a chance for reenforcement and escalating battles which improves the experience and with the insurance the loss is temporary

 

[Cugino83]

Personally I've liked the idea of SC being a 90% NCP environment, that limit the probability of having a PvP encounter when you are not searching for it.
I don't hate PvP in general, but I'll like to choose when to engage in it and when not to, or at least have some control over it, that doesn't seams the be the Pyro case and I can see why people are upset.

More over blocking some components behind some PvP content right now is a bad move for two reasons.
Fist we don't have, right now, any way to archive those component in any other way: there is no crafting and there is no player-to-player official market: having those in game would be different and also contribute to create some player-to-player interaction that is something other then pew-pew each others.
Second is bad because right now there is no real consequences for the murder-hobo: there is no long time reputation or consequences for being a murder hobo, you can just reclaim your ship to have fuel and weapons restored, space station are not hostile to those people, NPC law enforcing is not existent ecc...
If/when there will be real in-game consequences for those extreme behaviour then the system will some how regulate itself and PvP encounter will be of the supposed piracy that CIG envision, unltill then there will be storm of murder hobo that just pretend to be PvPers pirate and that is not good for the game.

Also there is to consider the fact that SC have multiple ship that are far from being able to defend themselves: SC is not ED where you can setup a Anaconda or a Fer De Lance to be a mining ship, while retaining some of the weapons, speed and agility of a combat setup, a Prospector is not a Gladius, and while I like the ship "hard specialization" this is something to take into account when thinking of a PvP situation.

 

[Han Burgundy]

The solution will come with the addition of Reputation tracking and NPC factions responding to harassment in their territory. Response times will likely scale with distance from an allied outpost, but no organized criminal faction, in lore, would put up with a handful of psychopaths camping the jump gate. That's where CIG can leverage the fact that 90 percent of the universe's population consists of NPCs who can swarm the griefers and dick-slap them with a half-dozen faction branded hammerheads. Think of the Wanted Level system in GTA

As for components being locked in PVP land; Its a temporary solution to drive players into the new contested zones and create a space for a player-run marketplace. In-lore it also makes a bit of sense. I can't go to the mall in the US and buy a fully automatic AK-47, because laws exist. I can, however, take a trip to Syria and buy one at a bus station for $40. Eventually we will have crafting that will allow players to fill that gap without endangering themselves. If everything is available everywhere, then nothing is rare and cool anymore. Our characters should be a reflection of our adventures and not a boring min-max loadout that everyone else has.

Are these solutions perfect? Nah. But they are intentional steps toward a final vision that will be worth it. In the meantime, these shitheels fucking with everyone's gameplay are inadvertently creating gameplay for groups of do-gooders who would ally to hunt them down. Plus the PTU is always a bit more buck-wild than live because everyone knows that consequences in there don't matter. Perhaps "Freedom of Navigation" fleets will be TEST's first large collective operation in the game. Would be great PR for the Org, that's for sure.

 

[Ayeteeone]

Not sure how applicable that example is as it's more akin to poker where you have the real risk of loosing all your cash. And you get to decide if when and how much your willing to risk. After all game items are simply representation of sunken time and not a real risk to outside game resources or your ability to continue to play like the example above would imply with the methods of being able to play being destroyed, would be like them coming to your house and throwing your computer out of the window.

From a game mechanics perspective the biggest issue is with out a lot of the law and order and rep systems missing its really hard to have any sort of pvp experience that doesn't revolve around a more lopsided scenario leaning heavily towards the initiator given they puck the easier target with little risk or consequences. This doesn't rule out the face that the highly valued and thus sought after items needs to be in these lawless spaces and not really a pve reward as it's the pvp dynamic that's at the core for driving everything else. After all why build a base, mine and manufacturer anything with out a driven need through equipment destruction sinks. Why team up but to be safer and push back against pirates.
If cig sets up the rep system and security correctly then there should be room and game loops enough for everyone even if not all players will end up with everything or be able to go everywhere.
So far things I have seen in game and some of the dev talks points to this bright future. Like comsats being able to turn off. Instant combat where only the instance your in can attack your base. Planet shields give multi layers of battles before real loss happens giving a chance for reenforcement and escalating battles which improves the experience and with the insurance the loss is temporary

I was looking for a different way of presenting the idea, something more relateable. To that end I don't feel successful because my point is that in sports, the OG player-vs-player, you might not win the game but you aren't penalized by losing previously earned income. Insurance does NOT make the loss temporary, it merely reduces the amount lost by some as-yet-undetermined amount, and is itself a continuos resource sink because you are paying for it whether it is used or not. IIRC in EvE Online it was about a 1/3 the cost of a T2 fit battleship to insure it for 3 months.. might have changed since I played.

There is also the more aggrevating issue of it being a one-sided exchange. The PvE player doesn't want or need the PvP player in order to find satisfaction in playing the game. Those who are more sociopathic DO require other players to exert power against to find the satisfaction they are looking for, and I've lived long enough to know there is no good end to that without guardrails.

The above point is accentuated by something @Cugino83 points out, and I've brought up before: Most ships in SC are designed and built as prey for the predators. Classic example is the turret on the Freelancers.. why in the HELL would any ship designer, anywhere intentionally block the line of sight for the only turret on the ship?

The strategic solution is to join a group, based on the tactical answer of roving around in the game in packs/gangs/tribes. Yes, this will lead to some fun gameplay. It is also not always desirable or possible, and if your casual player can't progress without getting his assed handed to him, guess where he and his money are going to go...

 

[Lorddarthvik]

My honest opinion on current affairs in SC is, who gives a shit? It's all going to change in a few months anyways, and they do not care for our input one bit. Never did, never will.

Current term:
CIG is depending on us to solve the current ganking issue by teaming up. This won't happen, period. Chat, grouping, all broken, hard to use, bugs out all the time...
For now, and only for now, Pyro jump points should have full security that instantly kill you if you fire at a player. We do not have an alternative to Pyro's gameplay, missions and items yet. They should allow us to "test" it as much as we like without the distraction of gankers.
It's not like with mining and salvage game loops where you could buy yourself into it. You can't just pay a tenner to get access to a normal gameplay of Pyro like you did with a Prospector. It's up to CIG to make this possible or what's even the point of having the jump gates open? All you'll end up with is angry players leaving the game for months, or for good.

In the short term:
we need the better player interaction systems shown in the citcon demos, better chat, grouping working and so on, along with player to player trading to make it worth having a high-risk PVP star system. You can get rid of the sec-bots then. Slowly groups will form to venture in there and bring back the riches, push out the gankers, and make those items available for those of us who have a life and don't wanna waste it getting ganked just for a shinier armor piece or pearl skinned blaster. It should also help in forming the opposition, pirate groups that pray on those daring to ventue in there.

TLDR we need a much better in-game social interaction system, ASAP. It would help with these issues, a lot.

In the long term however:

Spoiler: long version

Long version:
CIG seem like is going the EVE route, hoping to force social interaction and gameplay (grouping up to do anything) via allowing fully unregulated PVP ganking/griefing, even in high sec space, just like in EVE. This works, for like 3% of your potential players and ends with a very dedicated but tiny player base, resulting in a stagnating, if not outright unsustainable game. It's a fast and easy way to weed out those who have a real life and can be considered normies/casuals. So almost all of your potential market...

An MMO lives and dies on it's social interaction. What you want to have is basically facebook, with the occasional distraction in the background of pretty spacehips and planets. I know, sounds weird but it is the factual truth. Look at WoW when it was top, tons of ppl just jumped on to talk to their friends, guild mates, whatnot... I know I did, so did my wife, so did the millions of players hanging around even after the main content was done.
If you wanna go further back, Everquest was a chatroom where you occasionally went off to grind a bit. Same thing. FFXXXIVFFFFFIIIXXII or whatever that wannabe is called is the same again. It has a billion social interaction options, way more than WoW ever had, and it's thriving on that cos frankly everything else is a mess in that game...
PVP has to be there, but Not in an unregulated form, or you end up with twitter/x, where no sane person goes. You lose the normies, you lose the income, you lose the game.

Having PVP on all the time is fine, but we need alternatives to acquire the same things via PVE means. Getting ganked should be optional. We need high-sec to be truly that. Before you PVP maniacs starts screaming, no this doesn't mean the higher risk environment like Pyro should stop giving out higher rewards! So you will still have your pray wandering into your space where you can feed your irl inferiority complex.
The safer alternative should require more time or effort needing to be invested for the same rewards. PVE doesn't mean everything has to be soloable either, you can force social interaction by making PVE content that requires team work. It has worked for the biggest MMOs ever, it should work here too.

And for those arguing that PVP has to be there for item/gold sinks and to have a goal for big orgs and such utter bullshit...
You can have huge guilds and orgs aiming for PVE goals too. How about taking back space from the Vanduul? Having to build your org's base to craft more and better stuff to fight them, to keep up the pressure, to take back land filled with valuables you Can claim for your own org before another one does it... You can have all the same exciting gameplay elements that require team work and a groups dedication without relying on gank squads. It can still tie into PVP as well, for example going into gank-land for the higher reward of abundant building materials as you race another org to build up your attack fleet... you can do all these things without pushing the unregulated ganking PVP model to the forefront.
It doesn't have to be PVP, again proven by the greats of the past.

Let's be real for a second: as Montoya pointed out, we are fucking old now. That's probably true for the vast majority of the backers that actually fund the game. We want a more chill time than an infuriating time in our games, cos that way we can feel like we didn't waste what little free time we have left. If you think this is isn't true, that most of the player base is not 12 anymore, think for a sec. Who has the money to pump into the game? Someone fresh out of college without a job or a future, or someone older with a stable income and money to waste on shit like spaceship jpegs?

TLDR for long term.: it's been proven time and again that the truly successful MMOs all do 90% PVE content, content that is soloable up to a point and then requires time and effort AND social interaction to progress. With regulated PVP on the side for the miniscule amount of players wanting to get into that. Have a couple of systems where the trash can live out their fantasy, but don't force the others to have to go there. Do you want a niche game like EVE where those few left are provably sociopaths, or do you want a fun time with your friends, where PVP is regulated. Do you want a successful MMO CIG?

 

[Bruttle]

Many games have tried to mix PVP with PVE. Most have failed miserably. I would even argue that all have failed in that the "successes" are only after most of the PVE players leave and only PVP players that dabble in PVE remain.

The problem is and always has been a combination of risk disparity and non-consenting gameplay (for lack of a better term). The PVE player ALWAYS risks more. They ALWAYS have more to lose than the attacking player or players. The aggressor never has anything on the line. They are trying to take the PVE player's goods, which usually represents time and effort, while risking absolutely zero time and effort on the attacker's part.

The other half is the bad feeling when another player gets to dictate your day in-game. For lack of a better term, we'll call this non-consentual gameplay. If the PVE player decides they just want to have a relaxing experience, but the PVP player decides it's time for a brawl, that doesn't feel fun to the PVE player. That doesn't mean the PVE player doesn't like PVP. It just means that they wanted to do PVE stuff at the time.

Apply internet troll logic to this and you have a game that only PVP trolls enjoy. All other players leave and it becomes a game comprised entirely of PVP trolls. I've seen it over and over and over.

 

[Sky Captain]

The solution will come with the addition of Reputation tracking and NPC factions responding to harassment in their territory.

I tend to agree. Development of compelling factions around which PVP occurs would better delineate what such gameplay will look like. But we need CIG to share more of their vision on what such faction-based gameplay looks like. Is CIG's vision that Stanton is PVE and Pyro is PVP? And players PVP randomly for no reason other than to participate in the daily gankfest? And that's it? Or is there more a stake in PVP in this game? Factional standing? Factional resource control? Factional territory? Where's the UEE vs. Vanduul game? Is there factional PVP potential around that? As is, we here from CIG mostly about systems that allow individual PVP, not about the reasons that PVP - on a grander factional scale - would be different, important, and compelling in this game. CIG really needs to move beyond communicating about building basic game systems to also communicate on game play vision like this. Until they do, it is difficult to deep dive on a PVE vs PVP discussion, because its easy to assume that gameplay progress revolves around PVE only and PVP is just something others for kicks. But what if the game gave us a very compelling, very strategic game play reason to take a Test Squadron fleet to take and hold Pyro? Would that be a PVE/PVP conversation about something other than basic ganking. Probably. We need CIG to give us to show us more than game play system building and show us that that greater gameplay purpose for these systems they are building.

 

[Talonsbane]

There is also the more aggrevating issue of it being a one-sided exchange. The PvE player doesn't want or need the PvP player in order to find satisfaction in playing the game. Those who are more sociopathic DO require other players to exert power against to find the satisfaction they are looking for, and I've lived long enough to know there is no good end to that without guardrails.

The above point is accentuated by something @Cugino83 points out, and I've brought up before: Most ships in SC are designed and built as prey for the predators. Classic example is the turret on the Freelancers.. why in the HELL would any ship designer, anywhere intentionally block the line of sight for the only turret on the ship?

The strategic solution is to join a group, based on the tactical answer of roving around in the game in packs/gangs/tribes. Yes, this will lead to some fun gameplay. It is also not always desirable or possible, and if your casual player can't progress without getting his assed handed to him, guess where he and his money are going to go...

Just to clarify, not all sociopaths are like these PvP trolls. I openly admit to being a borderline sociopath. Most of my life has revolved around violence, receiving & then responding in kind to end it for the time being. I take great joy peacefully doing all sorts of things with others. However, when forced to fight, I suffer no remorse for what I do to those that forced the issue. If it was up to me, there would be a KoS list for all of these griefing jerks inside the CIG servers that would have them listed as full crimestat in every lawful & semi lawful system for at least a year after their last crimes in game. Leaving them only 4 options, stay in unlawful zones only while still having bounties targeting them by the stronger PvP lawful players in lawful systems, spend a year grinding in the in-game prisons, quit using that account for a year to use another that hopefully for them would be lawful OR quit entirely for a year if not longer. As these criminal players only care about their fun at the expense of the enjoyment being ruined by others, they deserve to have their fun destroyed in kind to the degree that they suffer enough to choose to change.

Many games have tried to mix PVP with PVE. Most have failed miserably. I would even argue that all have failed in that the "successes" are only after most of the PVE players leave and only PVP players that dabble in PVE remain.

The problem is and always has been a combination of risk disparity and non-consenting gameplay (for lack of a better term). The PVE player ALWAYS risks more. They ALWAYS have more to lose than the attacking player or players. The aggressor never has anything on the line. They are trying to take the PVE player's goods, which usually represents time and effort, while risking absolutely zero time and effort on the attacker's part.

The other half is the bad feeling when another player gets to dictate your day in-game. For lack of a better term, we'll call this non-consentual gameplay. If the PVE player decides they just want to have a relaxing experience, but the PVP player decides it's time for a brawl, that doesn't feel fun to the PVE player. That doesn't mean the PVE player doesn't like PVP. It just means that they wanted to do PVE stuff at the time.

Apply internet troll logic to this and you have a game that only PVP trolls enjoy. All other players leave and it becomes a game comprised entirely of PVP trolls. I've seen it over and over and over.

This is where & why I state that the best way to punish the PvP trolls / pirates / griefers, is for them to be punished by taking away their enjoyment by means of locking them away in a prison where they can have fun being ganked & violated by others like themselves for an extended period of time. Rinsing & repeating this until either they change how they play with others or rage quit like the worthless trolls they truly are in RL. Either this, or legitimize players being able to establish KoS lists for the griefers to endlessly hunt & ruin their fun, having their things taken until they either stop their BS or leave the game forever.

 

[Bruttle]

Until they do, it is difficult to deep dive on a PVE vs PVP discussion, because its easy to assume that gameplay progress revolves around PVE only and PVP is just something others for kicks. But what if the game gave us a very compelling, very strategic game play reason to take a Test Squadron fleet to take and hold Pyro?

I respectfully disagree. I think now is the perfect time to deep dive into the conversation. Not specifically now, but while development still has room to change. I've seen far too many games with relaxed pvp frameworks fail almost immediately. Millions of players show up to the game's start. A minority group of "pvp'rs" are allowed to run free. They gank, grief, harass, and drive the majority of the player base to quit. The developers see the player base tank, then finally take action. It's usually too late at that point. The silent majority has already moved on.

So I think now and every day leading up to release is the perfect time. I am so tired of great games allowing themselves to be ruined by a small minority of players. To be clear, I'm not talking about actual PVP players. I consider myself to be an actual PVP player. I enjoy the conflict and the fight of it all. I'm talking about the small group of people that only get gratification from ruining the game for other people. Those are the problem in every game that allows them to be a problem.

As far as open PVP, that's easy to me. Just make the risk equal on both sides. If I am risking 4 hours of grinding, the attacker's risk should be equivalent. It shouldn't be as simple as hopping in a superior ship, spending 5 minutes, and taking the fuits of my 4 hours of grinding from me. Choosing to pirate should be just as risky. It shouldn't be the most time efficient and economical way to get money. There should be gravity to the choice.

Let me put it this way. If I could walk up to someone irl, punch them in the face, and take their money, without repercussions or consequence, I would do that shit professionally. So would everyone else if they could. Honestly, just look around. We're kinda already there...

 

[Shadow Reaper]

IMHO, the trouble is griefers don’t treat murder as a serious issue. The solution is to hunt murderers tenaciously with both PCs and NPCs, and to severely limit their play options. Criminals shouldn’t often exist outside criminal run systems, like Pyro.

Additiinally, repeat offenses ought to generate growing consequences that include locking out alts. Enough murders and you can’t play for days at a time would cement the consequences of evil front and center.

BTW, the same is true in real life. Either you do or do not fear The Law. When you don’t you get the casual looting we see in San Francisco, utterly destroying the city. Same in SC. Either pirates and fiends are afraid of the consequences of their evil or they are not. They need to be extremely afraid for the game dynamic to work.

 

[Duckforceone]

the shard system is also a help to the griefers...

in eve online, if an org runs a system, they really are there providing security to the entire system... but in SC they might just provide security to a single shard, not all the other ones... which makes private player run security not that good.