I would like to propose a system that would prevent abuse for some events and group activities. In this I would like some feedback from other factions to hear what they have to say on this proposal I have.

Registered events would be help in specific sectors during specific hours. They could get a death turret or some other type setup that would block, modify or hinder non-registered users to the event. i.e. nation war observers would not be able to fire, nor could any person in the sector be able to fire upon them. people who are not taking part in the event which would be available as a mission or some other type setup would either have their weapons deactivated upon entering the sector, their weapons removed or the turret would just simply destory them when they jumped in.

For events like the bus wars any non-bus ship that enters the sector would be treated the same way. Either they would modify their current ship/loadout with 100% gover issued equipment, they get blown up immediately or their weapons become non-functional.

Events like deneb run, last man standing, the ult wingman and etc.. would get the same treatment in the starting sector and finish line, but ONLY during the time of the event. Non-event times would be normal rules for those sectors.

If a player does decide to abuse the system then the event manager could msg the turret or what not and they would get the boot instantly. This setup would prevent abuse, would also seriously hinder standard game play in the normal context of VO but would allow the event to be held with no abuse.

hire guards

I approve of the making of this suggestion--not the idea suggested--because it may be time for the Devs to weigh in on How It Should Be w/r/t a balance between protecting player activities and burdening players who just want to play VO.

[Edit]And they have: http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/7/21278?page=2#263318 [/Edit]

so like insted of playing vendetta online we are going to play nation war online and deneb run online. you guys pissed people off now you want game mechanics in place to save you.

no. you don't want to open a can of worms with a hammer, or put them back in the can with one, either.

My intent to pushing our development of an Event registration system was to allow increased "advertising" of upcoming events (via some automated mechanic.. a special, optional email list, perhaps) as well as providing a means for event-organizers to get in touch with Guides, and for Guides to then volunteer to help the given event (for those events that require specialized Guide stuff.. special items and the like).

Special defensive arrangements were not my original intent, but it's possible to adapt the system for the same purpose, as I mentioned in the post linked by Lecter.

What it actually means to "Play VO" is at the core of this topic, rather than any mechanics used for Event defense. A general watch-your-own-ass, free-for-all attitude has permeated our game from the start, and the game was designed this way intentionally. However, I have begun mitigating things in recent months (albeit with a certain degree of context) to create more graduations of "danger" in the universe, and allow new people a little more time to become acclimated in a "safeR" environment. I still think the basic principles of safety haven't really been violated (three sectors with uberturrets aren't really a big deal to me, I don't find principled absolutism useful in this kind of situation; I have to be pragmatic). Still.. the same subject impacts other areas, like player Events.

Due to our small development team and all the various problems and excitement that we encounter, our game is still lacking in a lot of gameplay that we would desire. The community itself has sought to create its own forms of amusement, using our framework, and I support that; a lot of fun as been provided to the playerbase by these player-run Events. The historical, contextual approach to dealing with abuse of Events has been "hire guards" or some other in-context, player-driven mechanic that keeps everyone on the same level playing field.

This may be unrealistic in the long run, I don't really know. Yes, I know other MMOs don't do this. Most other MMOs don't have non-consensual PvP and a host of other "crazy" stuff we do, so I don't much care what other MMOs may or may not do. What I would like to find is the best balance for Vendetta Online, and get feedback on how people feel about this sort of thing.

To my mind, the idea of a temporarily-restricted, outlying sector (empty, maybe a few with asteroids) that has some sort invite-only "Event" going on is not going to "hurt" other gameplay. I don't really see "Peytros swarming Events" as "gameplay" so I guess I don't really care very much about bringing an end to it. I do care about tangential issues and slippery slopes that could result from this sort of change.

Any mechanic we come up with, assuming it doesn't require guide or dev involvement (which I would prefer) will put some unusual power into the hands of an Event organizer or organizerS, for a period of time. If we're talking about access controls, then that adds a lot of potential for elitism and restriction of access based on personal feelings and other things. Historically, as far as I know anyway, this has not been an issue for the player-run Events.. after all, a given organizer could already just choose to not record what a given player does, or exclude them in some way. Still, the potential is there, and god knows it could lead to a major dramatic headache for me (ultimately, a given person would just not be allowed to host Events anymore, but figuring out what sort of decision to make.. backing the organizer, backing the plaintiff, would require a lot of research on our part. Time. Pain in the ass. Bad).

But most fundamentally, it means we will be giving up some of the "level playing field" throughout the galaxy (or giving up a little more of it, if one is anal-retentive about the newbie sectors). Given that the Events seem to be a pretty critical and well-regarded aspect of current gameplay, it seems like it could be a worthwhile tradeoff, assuming it's implemented correctly (sectors are out-of-the-way and don't impinge on other gameplay). But this still does result in some shift in philosophy, and it's there where I would like to have more feedback from the player base. To boil it down, we can go one of two ways:

1) Registered-Event artificial access controls that permit activity in a given sector without infringement from anyone.

2) More/different/better in-context mechanics for achieving a similar goal without resorting to total artificiality. I don't know what this would involve.. hireable NPC guards? Capships? Only for empty sectors? There are a lot of exploit-avoidance and edge-case issues that stem from this, but it would tend to keep the galaxy "free-er" of absolutist artificial limits and restrictions.

So, more than giving a statement of How It Should Be, I'm asking How You Would Like It To Be? I know my own opinion(s), but nothing is cut and dried, and I would prefer feedback.

At MOST, in favor of a very limited version of 1); anything else would be a terrible idea, IMO. Policing what's an event, when has it been abused (Guild created safe zones, anyone? special mining events?), etc.=nightmare.

Events would need to be confined to an entirely empty sector. Nationwar is easy to police: hold it in a sector with no rocks, and you get to exclude anyone you like for the duration while you do your thing. Buswars are likewise easy.

Anything else, though, gets very tricky very fast. Find a queen or a levi that you and your friends want to take down in safety? Declare it an event sector and keep me from taking out your bombers. Nice ores in an unmarked sector? Declare it a safe zone so you can hold a "mining event" without the mean Dr. Lecter killing your miners.

Even the empty sector is a problem: want to mine in Grey? No problem! Just create a safe zone for an "event" and then warp into it to escape the "griefers."

"peytros swarming events doesn't count as gameplay" then what the hell does count as gameplay? HAWK is at war with TGFT they harass any person I recruit into the guild with pm's telling them to leave or they will kill them.

Other players will take 5 people and station camp a newb in HAWK and I have to come rescue them. BUT when I bring the war to their stupid carebear nation war in the middle of fucking greyspace it doesn't count as gameplay?

so let me recap this, we are free to kill each other where ever we want but when a bunch of whiney miners get together and decided to have a consensual pvp battle in the heart of greyspace who happen to be at war with another guild and said guild comes and crashes it to get back at them its not gameplay?

I have no problem with granting player(s) an unlimited set of godlike powers, as long as other players can easily avoid those (godlike) players. For example: Restricting the sector of effect to an out of the way place in or near nation space, and giving a warning and option to abort entrance to anyone entering the sector.
If you want to annex little sections of grey that are away from the major trade lanes, or create a new system that branches off of helios (or some other out of the way system) that has no merit other than these type of activities, I have no problem with this. I really could care less if miharu is a god of sector a1 of system utopia if system utopia is an otherwise worthless system to go to and not in the way of valuable systems. I will not care if miharu does not invite me to her personal bus war. I will not care if peytros has a pirates only convention in sector a2 and does not invite miharu. one man's utopia...

However...If you want to hold events in the heart of grey, then I ask that you please do so in the spirit of grey, and that is to say: "by the power of your own gun".

Simple solutions are always the best.
Secure a guide presence at player events like NW.
Anyone obstructing event gets the taste of guide powers (teleporting to the sun is most interesting).
Case solved.

Anyone obstructing event gets the taste of guide powers

What's obstructing? On what basis does the guide exercise their powers?

If you want to annex little sections of grey that are away from the major trade lanes, or create a new system that branches off of helios (or some other out of the way system) that has no merit other than these type of activities, I have no problem with this.

So, if I make Sedina A8 into my own little turret protected safe zone, and run back to it everytime someone comes after me for shooting people in B8 . . . you're cool with this, Roda?

what part of "away from the major trade lanes" is confusing you lecter? by away, i mean preferably more than one jump away. soes this explain it better? perhaps you might wish to insert your own opinion about how far away is "away from".

Roda: point taken, but the fact that there are whole systems that are "away from the major trade lanes" is, at most, an unfortunate accident of VO's low population. Arguably, there are no such systems in Grey. Either way, the potential to make a nuisance of onesself and then flee back to your safe zone "event sector" seems pretty high.

I like much better your idea of some sort of separate system for this sort of thing.

What peytros and I (Dameos) did was not to directly hurt the community, but to direct an attack against a guild. The reasoning behind the attack on Nation Wars event was that it is at present, mainly funded, organized, and run by TGFT. Yes it is one of the largest events that occurs regularly. Yes there is a lot of the community that takes part in it. That was part of the reason of the attack. We are aware that others participate in the event both in funding, organization, and participation. We are aware that other have run it and funded in the past. We are talking about the present. /end disclaimer

Now onto the discussion at hand, I do not disagree with protection. Though I think that it should first be provided by players in game before seeking outside the existing game setup. Holding an event in real life in an unrestricted area similar to grey space you would have some type of security set up, even if for a "just in case". There was just two attackers. Previously peytros had attacked a Nation War event, so it could be expected he could try again, yet there was no defense of any kind. I would say work in game until it is ever proven ineffective. Not just immediately run for outside (new game mechanics or otherwise) help. My major complaint through this, is that as soon as this happened nothing was done except to complain and sling mud. There is plenty of ways of organizing a defense.

Second point, I love the idea of the restricted starter sectors, and do not disagree with a partial variation of danger. This is a great game, and needs more player base to support the Devs, so they can then better support us. Protection of the "newbs" is good thing. But part of the problem is the "vets", and "trolls", that disseminate false information and rush newer players to grey. Many will point at peytros and say that, but I have seen many others do it too. At all points I myself have tried to give good information over 100. Yes, a large part of the player base hangs out in grey, but part of that is this is a PvP game, and the lowest restriction on PvP fighting is in grey. New players should not be swarming to grey during the eight hour trial, just because the "best" ships are there.

I have also seen much grief tactics played to others. Mostly to me <smirks>. I have been playing for about a month timewise. Someone other then me in this situation would've quit or turned into a complete griefer to get back at others that attacked me. I have not done either. The only fights I had been in before the guild was in a state of war, were either an agreed consensual fight, or defensive where I did not fire first. Even now I don't usually begin a battle unless fired upon. And, yes, there are exceptions where I have fired first recently.

I will also say that in part peytros's attitude is supported by the player base, they insult him when he is actually being civil and he bites right back. It just feeds on itself. And, yes, peytros can be a major troll sometimes, but there is also times when he is actually being helpful on 100.

Okay enough rambling. I made a couple points. I made a couple defenses. And I also agree with some things. But main point is it should be attempted to be handled in game until it is proven ineffective.

To play devil's advocate here for a moment, Gulain, just what do you think would be an effective in-game defense against someone taking a fast ship through the NW sector and launching swarms at the various combatants?

To avoid derailing the topic, let's try to stay on the subject of general solutions for general cases, and not justifications or defenses to the specific Peytros incident.

As further note to what "artificial limits" would be, I can imagine something like:

* The sector must be empty (maybe special rare cases for mining events)
* The Event has a "time range" (XX time to XX time, an hour or two)
* The Event content must be approved ahead of time by the administrative staff (recurring events being approved once, or whenever the organizer changes).

For where the sectors are.. I don't honestly think it matters that much, as long as it's a random location stuck in the corner of some system. Grayspace is fine, as long as it isn't an important locale of any kind. God knows we have plenty of unused sectors.

I submit these details only for how they would reflect upon the idea of creating a "special turret zone" for a special guild, or whatever else. The time-limit makes the exploitative utility somewhat limited, and the approval factor makes the.. re-usability also limited. If we keep hearing about "such-and-such is just exploiting the Event sector as a special.. whatever", then we aren't real likely to approve that person in the future. And we might take other action against them.

The approval personnel would probably be the Guides themselves, rather than the development staff, to try and eliminate/streamline more of the administrative load.

Anyway, I welcome further debate, and whether we should avoid the above mechanic entirely and so on. Just posting details for debate as to their repercussion.

I'm also interested in an answer to Lecter's last (devil's advocate) query. I had to resort to the stupid beam turrets in the Training sectors, simply because all other in-context defenses were ineffective against a moderately skilled player.

Dr. Lecter: Examples of defensive measures could include posting a guard at the general warp in points, and spotters at station to announce incoming.

incarnate: I recommend no in game changes as of yet. Until is has been proven that such is actually necessary. I do believe that the sectioning off of a sector could be considered too powerful at present, and highly abusable. No in game attempt has been made to defend at this time other then "kill all HAWK's".

*edit* I mean it wasn't as if a whole army descended in Nation Wars. It was just pey and I.

Gulain: how's this for an idea, then.

You get HAWKs to guard as many warp in points for the NW sector as you can, and post some guys at whatever stations or WHs you like. And see how well that keeps me from driving a Greyhound through NW, swarming combatants as I go.

The problem is that it doesn't take an army to wreck what it supposed to be a down to the last % of hull contest.

That said, I think protecting a mining event would fundamentally stupid. Any time.

Dr. Lecter: Heh if I had the resources to give you a run on it sure. But, HAWK population is small.