Why not bind /explode to a button?
The splash radius is pretty small, but people have died to it before.

"It seems to me that the assumption is non-consensual PvP should be encouraged, or at the very least, allowed."

Hmmm... From what I've seen of the recent versions, non-consensual PvP is discouraged more than encouraged. It is virtually impossible to catch a fairly decent ship which decides to run. Plus you have an assortment of uber-defense bots ready to protect you in any major sector... It sounds like this will suit your own style of play, whilst it makes mine almost impossible (botting and trading ain't my idea of fun).

Then again, perhaps some of us long-term players that were used to the previous versions intense PvP are not going to fit in with the direction Vendetta is taking and it's time to find pastures new...

Icarus.

I see that we aren’t going to be able to get away from the “here’s some useful defense strategies, bud” line of conversation. There are, indeed, lots of options available to the player who doesn’t want to engage in PvP. Roiding, siting in stations forever, not using “good” trade lanes, only flying when a bunch of cooperative pilots are on, and, of course, quitting are some of them. None of that has anything to do with the conversation I’d really like to be having.

What I’m interested is knowing is why does every player have to deal with daily, frequent, unwanted PvP issues? Consider a different scenario. Cargo hauling is also part of this game, right? OK, so what might happen if Pilot A were to enter sector with Pilot B, and force Pilot B to carry 9 units of X to destination Y. I’m thinking that everybody on the server would laugh at the attempt.

I propose that this is no different than non-consensual PvP. The only reason there is no forced hauling is that there are no mechanics in game to allow it. If we likewise remove the mechanics for non-consent PvP, then the playing field really would be level.

Let me once again stress that I’ve got absolutely no issue with consensual PvP. I think that’s great stuff. I’m glad there are folks who enjoy combat. I wouldn’t attempt to force those players in the the roles of haulers, or explorers, or graphic design artists even if I could. But it appears that they are more than happy to force traders into combat roles.

Why is that?

So that being said, I’d like to address Icarus’ post.

First, thank you for your response. I agree with you. Attacking somebody who doesn’t want to be attacked is difficult, and will make your gaming experience difficult when you return to a more commonly used sector.

I would propose that attacking somebody who would rather be left alone isn’t the only option available to you, as a PvP veteran. It is my suggestion that there are a large number of PvP pilots, veteran and fresh, who would welcome an encounter. They would probably even meet in a mutually agreeable area, and you all can go at it for hours, as it were.

Leaving me alone doesn’t mean you can’t shoot anybody else. It means I would rather not play your way; I’d like for you to PvP and for myself to Trade.

Once again, Icarus, thank you for your time. If you ever need some goods hauled to your location, I would be happy to place a bid on the delivery offer.

----

As to the idea that “this is how it was in the real world, so it should be that way in game” line of thought, thanks for bringing that up again. I’m fairly certain that this is a game. Real life is real life. If you are looking for real life, have at it. It’s waiting for you. I would put forward that the vast majority of us are looking to get away from the real world for a while. We have jobs, school, nurseries, or what have you, and would like to tune them out for a bit. To do so, we pay somebody to create something entertaining. Many of us find challenges an integral part of the entertainment cycle, and so we move past playing checkers with ourselves.

This brings us to various games, such as Vendetta. The key here, is that we take on challenges proportional to our goals. Pushing a challenge on somebody, such as “survive my superior weapon capabilities while you relax in front of your computer monitor” is a challenge some of us don’t want. Others do, and so you can find them in the PvP world. I would like to avoid that world, so that I can simply relax after work while playing a game I enjoy. I like the challenge of stocking/maintaining a station so that it produces to its maximum capability. Or maybe charting new sectors. Or, and this might shock you, even helping out new characters through education or mutual enjoyment. I don’t want to blow you up.

I do, however, respect your desire to blow things up. To that end, you will find bots. When those no longer present enough of a challenge, attack some fellow PvP folks. Or attack groups of bots. Is there a challenge in attacking a far weaker opponent? I think not. Rather, attacking a newbie, trader, or any announced non-pvp opponent is clearly not motivated by concern for the victim. It is a selfish behavior, and while not unlikely to happen in the real world, should not be allowed in a game which attempts to provide an enjoyable experience for all of it’s players.

While I sympathize with this position, I also realize that it is not a position that is or will be supported by the mechanics of the game.

For the devs to remove the ability for, let's say Icarus, to kill, let's say you, for giggles or whatever reason, it would necessitate the removal of the ability for all killers to kill everyone or anyone.

"It is a dangerous universe." That quote is from one or more of the interviews John has given. I'll also offer to you the definition of "Vendetta" \Ven*det"ta\, n. [It.] A blood feud; private revenge for the murder of a kinsman.

I offer these because this is the basis for this game. Uninvited violence, for the most part, can be avoided BUT... should not be iliminated. If a player does not want to deal with this possibility, they should look elsewhere for a game which allows the safety they desire. However, if a player can realize that a death is just a minor setback in time or credits and not take it personally and flood the chat with whining, which invites more hostility, they'll realize that it is a tremendous and integral part of the experience.

Let me first state that taking elements from real life helps the immersion factor of any game. Some of the best games out there imitate portions of real life, whether it be the graphics, physics, AI behavior, etc. Although Vendetta is a sci-fi game, I'd personally like to see some logic behind why things are the way they are--in other words what might be a likely future for us 1000 yrs from now or whatever. Up to this point, Vendetta seems to have followed some of those examples, whether it was intentional or not.

>Rather, attacking a newbie, trader, or any announced non-pvp opponent is clearly
>not motivated by concern for the victim. It is a selfish behavior, and while not
>unlikely to happen in the real world, should not be allowed in a game which
>attempts to provide an enjoyable experience for all of it’s players.

This last paragraph has me confused. It seems to contradict what you're trying to get across. You have "trader" and "announced non-pvp opponent" on that list, yet you're trying to encourage pirates to continue being pirates. Which one is it?

I personally don't believe in having artificial or magical barriers that would prevent skilled players from destroying unskilled/nonhostile players or whatever. I absolutely hate that method of enforcing the game's rules. It just feels too fake for me. I was under the impression that Vendetta was aimed towards having a wide range of playing styles which wouldn't have any rules or barriers. Where would I get that impression? Let me explain.

The devs chose to have a consequence system in place. If you do something bad, you get penalized for it. There's a big example of real life imitation with Vendetta, btw. In other words it would be no different than getting ticketed by a police officer for speeding. The penalty system is IN PLACE right now when you kill someone that has drastically lower skill levels than you, but I don't think it's harsh enough to prevent newbie killers etc.

If they decide to make it harsher, which I hope they do, I think players should be able to check the skill levels of other players more conveniently than right now (in other words before firing a single shot at them). But ultimately, I think anybody can do whatever they want. Those who act in a negative way will ruin their own personal record in the process. There will be a consequence with every action.

"What I’m interested is knowing is why does every player have to deal with daily, frequent, unwanted PvP issues?"

They don't. Where did you get that from? That's the whole thing we don't get here: At this point, excessive PvP is a non-issue. There is almost no PvP at all, and that which does exist is mostly the border patrol mission - consensual PvP.

Plus, as you correctly point out, this is a game. Games need to attract players. Pirating is one the most popular/romantic aspects of a space MMORPG - removing it is a very bad move for the devs from a marketing perspective. "Do whatever you want - unless you want to do anything but trade." Not a good tagline.

this is supposed to be a game where ppl get to role play the fact that they are living 1000 yrs in the future, and that experience would not be complete if there was invincible ships, hand of god occasionally. The penalty system right now is a good deterant and realistic, and being a game that tries to emulate real life in the future there are going to a**h**** that kill everyone they see regardless of who they are, these ppl will become outlaws hunted by ever nation, simple. If you want a game where u can just fly around and not engage in combat and no one engages in combat with you, buy one of the many flight simulators. and as fisher said, all professions, however moral or amoral they are, should be allowed to exist

darth out

HHeh, some good points, for sure. I am especially fond of the "folks want to blow up newbs, so we should let them". I agree. All games should be marketed to the 10-17 age range, specifically the males of that range. It's the biggest market, after all. Females are quickly closing the gap, but luckily it turns out that 10-17 yr old females (who also play online video games) want about the same thing as their male counterparts do.

So, yes, I agree that open PvP is pretty much a must from a marketing standpoint. If pvp were removed from the game, for any reason, it would certainly put a big dent in the pockets of the Devs and the associated corporations. PvP is a necessary, and welcomed, aspect of any online game.

The thing is, I was going for more of a philosophical discussion than a material one. Does anybody really expect pvp to be even slightly curtailed in an online game? Inflating players' ego is the main function of modern gaming, not providing challenge. The challenge "thing" is more of a justification used to convince parents its a good idea to let those hostile juices flow. But I digress, and in doing so allow a bit of my cynical side to show. Sorry 'bout that.

Back on topic, more or less; and we are back to that "real life" argument. Wonder why pirates were few and far between back in the day? Here's a hint: LIFESPAN. It wasn't because the cops were stronger, or the pirating life was harder, or shipbuilders had some plot going, or because parrots fell out of fashion. It was because they had lots of enemies, and when one of those enemies killed them, they stayed dead. D – E – D, dead. In a game, that isn't the case. Two pirates can wreak havoc, not because they are skilled, but because they can be killed a coupla thousand times and keep coming back. All they have to do is transfer some money from their non-pvp/griefing account, and they are back in business. So if even 1% of a player population assumes the role of the pirate, and there are a thousand players, there are way more than just two pirates. And what are the odds that only 1% will take the easy road and prey only on targets weaker than themselves?

Since destroying the pirates isn’t a viable fix, and neither is quashing their money supply (there is always another account to transfer money from, after all), another solution must be reached if pirate activity is going to be kept in check.

Given some small amount of though, creativity _could_ be used to remove the problem. Except, as I will happily grant, the problem is also the cure. The draw of [easy] PvP will bring in the money crowd, and that isn’t the few pilots who have the patience to cross the galaxy in search of rewards which are neither immediate nor grand.

I also realize that I tend to draw a fairly negative stereotype of the PvP crowd. This cynicism is often unintentional, and results from a conglomeration of events throughout several games. I will be the first to admit that there are a shining few who attack their game with a tenacity and determination that I could only hope to someday achieve. These ace pilots are in a class of their own, and I would be proud to associate myself with them. But those are the few, and the crowd is lowered in it’s whole by the many members who have yet to mature in even a small degree.

So, given all this, what is the solution? It’s whatever the Dev’s decide, of course. It’s their game, after all. But allowing free reign to any pilot with an ego and a gun isn’t the only option. Shielding systems could exist which are far superior to any standard shield/armor, but require the use of battery energy to work. As a result, a ship so equipped would be unable to mount any weapon system of any type. Very high defense, no offense. This ship couldn’t harm a fart in a windstorm, but also can’t be harmed. Or maybe an engine, rather than a shield, which requires weapon slots in order to mount. This ship would have amazing speed, and would take large numbers of coordinated attackers to defeat. But that ship also couldn’t shoot anything.

There are a lot of viable solutions, given that some creativity is used, it doesn’t have to be all pvp or no pvp. Unless, of course, the goal is simply to have lots of free floating targets to shoot at. Why have a persistent online universe if all the players ever do is shoot each other. If you want non-combat players in the game, they will need a reason to stay. Telling them to “quit if they don’t like it” won’t keep them for long. But hey, its not my game. I’d just like to play in it.

I don't think modern MMORPG games are designed to inflate people ego's at all. Quite the opposite in fact, as in a single player game everything is tailored to make your character the centre of the game universe, whereas in an MMORPG you are just a single entity out of hundereds or thousands of others that are on an equal standing. Will the whole game community be destroyed if a single player decides to leave... probably not.

Given the way the game now requires the player to level up to gain better equipment and earning money takes considerable time (given the cost of licenses), I think it would be fairly hard going to maintain two or three decent characters, just for the sake of passing money from one char to another. I'm not saying its not going to happen, but chances are a trader that only has one character is going to have far greater levels and consequently, equipment, compared to the guy with multiple chars.

Although you seeemed to dismiss the idea, hunting down and destroying pirates can be a viable way to keep them in check. It means they are constantly losing money and its hard for them to regain cash or pirate others. To be honest I have always thought Vendetta is pretty light going on players that die. I think the consequences of a death should be far greater than they are presently. This would probably stop alot of the pirate wannabies as most "pirates" seem to have horrific K/D ratios.

Regenerative shields would be nice IMHO but I wouldn't make them so powerfull that nothing can touch them. I think that for every ship setup there sould be a counter setup, otherwise there will be no variety (everyone will simply fly about with the uber -shield ship and things could/will get a little mundane).

I think you are over estimating the impact of pirates in the current universe. Login and trade for an hour or two and write down how many times you get attacked and killed...

BushiNo

You make some very good arguments, However what i'm reading seems to be based on the idea that any player should be able to go anywhere in the universe and feel safe if they dont want to engage in PVP.

You state in several posts that you wish to know why PVP should be allowed. Well the answer to that is simple. The developers of vendetta want danger to be a part of the game. It is an integral part of the design they have worked to make.

Now, having played several other MMORPG's and witnessed the havoc that griefers and Pk'ers can cause, I sympathise with your point of view, and except for one thing I would agree with you that there should be an option for turning PVP off for thosw who wish to avoid it.
That difference is in the combat system itself. Every RPG i have played has been a point and click combat system, allowing for almost no chance to miss if you have the advantage of surprise. With vendetta's twitch based combat, the attacker doesn't have as much chance of causing trouble because his attack is not gaurenteed to work. Running is much more of an option.

Now onto the argument about protecting noobs. This is allready taken care of. In no case will killing a noob be easy more than once. The reputation loss for killing someone of a nation inside that nations territory is just too large for people to be able to do it regularly. For those that do not wish to engage in PVP, they can remain inside the gaurded areas of thier nation within the larger universe.

in response to a specific point you posted

<<I see that we aren’t going to be able to get away from the “here’s some useful defense strategies, bud” line of conversation. There are, indeed, lots of options available to the player who doesn’t want to engage in PvP. Roiding, siting in stations forever, not using “good” trade lanes, only flying when a bunch of cooperative pilots are on, and, of course, quitting are some of them. None of that has anything to do with the conversation I’d really like to be having.>>

Thats because the conversation you want to be having has no real place in vendetta. I'm not trying to be mean or anything, but PVP was designed as and IS a part of the game. It is meant to be that way. The options within the game to minimize it exist.

You want to know at what point the attackers decision to engage in combat outweighs the "victim's" decision not to. The answer in part is that when the victim enters an area known to be dangerous s/he has made the decision to accept that risk. It can be compared to travelling to the PVP side of the Ultima Online universe.

<<<There are a lot of viable solutions, given that some creativity is used, it doesn’t have to be all pvp or no pvp. Unless, of course, the goal is simply to have lots of free floating targets to shoot at. Why have a persistent online universe if all the players ever do is shoot each other. If you want non-combat players in the game, they will need a reason to stay. Telling them to “quit if they don’t like it” won’t keep them for long. But hey, its not my game. I’d just like to play in it.>>>

You are under a false assumption, It isnt all PVP or all NON PVP. While PVP is an OPTION anywhere, its not a GOOD option in a lot of places. Most people will not want to spend 6 or 8 hours getting a character up to the point where they can be effective in a fight just so they can spend 5 minutes killing someone in one of the areas patrolled by the major nations. There is a game mechanic in place to discourage PVP in some areas.

To turn your own question around on you, when does the "victim's" choice to not engage in PVP become greater than that of the "attacker" who has chosen to make his living as a pirate. Both people are paying the same fee for the game.

EDIT: I would also like to mention that i am a trader first and a combater second. As such and having seen the game continue to develop, i'm pleased with the steps that have been taken to make PVP a part of the game without making it an overwhelming problem in the game.

2 cents ...

A non-destroyable ship sounds a bit like GOD mode to me. Remember the first time you found some GOD mode codes for (insert favorite FPS here).

It's cool for about 15 minutes while you fly around wasting all the baddies that kicked your ass when you played the game fair. Then it becomes completely lame and boring. No risk, no danger, no nothing, no play.

It's almost like saying, why do things have to cost money in Vendetta? I just want to buy whatever and play without having to worry about running out of money.

If you leave a method for a player to subvert a games risk completely then you've eliminated a part of the game itself and thusly a part of the fun. It's the difference between playing and twiddling your thumbs.