Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

PVP Talk

Discussion in 'General' started by Bullet_Force, Sep 8, 2019.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. Cyber Cheese Apprentice Engineer

    I think I agree with that, too. There needs to be a vanilla PvP suite of settings. There needs to be a vanilla PvP option with the type of respawn limits, remote deletion limits, jump drive limits, and safe zone limits that have been suggested on this thread. Meanwhile, the existing default setup can be the PvE focused version. Then the players like those who harassed Calaban will have somewhere else to go that doesn't require them to research mods and private server admins just to play a game that clearly advertises itself as offering a PvP experience.
    That could be the 24 hour number, but most people don't log in every day.

    Now, how many people of the millions who aren't online anymore would still be playing if they didn't have to go research private servers and deal with player-made mods to get a space combat experience? How many people think of the game as one with no real objectives or PvP controls because that's been the vanilla experience for most of its life?
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. Calaban Junior Engineer

    I do agree that all the cinematic loading vignettes do imply PVP oriented gameplay (Red vs Blue mini movie comes to mind), and may have indeed gathered slathering PVP players to the game expecting Space Rust.

    But its simply not that game. Sure, it could be- among friends/groups who set up the game world to play that red vs blue scenario, But no- the Space Rusters expect to inflict their style of play on open public servers among random players to fit their version of "hardcore PVP-er" status.

    And they are now experiencing frustrations to what they wanted to do this whole time... and consider the game design as it evolves "flawed" as it develops away from how they expected/want it to be. (as that is a lost cause)

    - The limited weapons (for PVE wolves/drones/encounters, limited for PVP)
    - Safe zones (eliminates offline raiding)
    - Remote grid deletion (eliminates salvage others' property as a resource)

    Are all proof that Space Engineers is pulling away from such PVP on purpose.

    They are not design flaws. They are the game as it is intended. Any that want hardcore pvp battles and war in this game needs to take their failed expectations grievances to the misleading loading screen designers, rather than trying to cram how they want to play into public opinion.
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. captainbladej52 Apprentice Engineer

    I had intended to leave this particular thread alone but there's a couple of things that need to be said at this point.

    Jump drives are working as intended at the moment until Keen says otherwise. There is no "exploiting" going on with the jump drives in the sense you're thinking. There are already ways to play around a jump drive, you just have to be smart about it. As already pointed out previously, your counter to jump drives itself would need to have a counter. An exploit by nature is using something in a way that is not intended by the developers. The most common example is someone glitching behind a wall or part of the terrain to make themselves invulnerable. Simply because you don't like the jump drive in its current form does not make it an exploit. What you think is "good gameplay" and what I think it is are 2 completely different things. On this point myself and others have suggested ways for you to get the pvp experience you want via server settings, mods, and so on, and have even offered to walk you through getting some of it going, but that's all been shot down each time.

    A few things with this. First off griefing is defined as typically as someone in a multiplayer game who deliberately irritates and/or harasses other players using aspects of the game in unintended ways, and typically derives pleasure from annoying other people. Typically these aspects of the game are utilized in ways that there is no counter to such as exploiting. A common example are the morons who go around on minecraft blowing up people's stuff with tnt just to be a douchebag. In this case the SE equivalent could be the guys that sneak in and stick a warhead in your base without you knowing about it. In World of Warcraft a prime example is spawn camping in the open world or repeatedly killing the quest givers to prevent progress, or the infinite stun lock that was once possible. There are all kinds of griefers out there and griefing is not exclusive to pvp or pve for that matter. While pvp players can indeed be griefers, not all pvp players (or pve for that matter) are griefers.

    trolls and toxic players again are not exclusive to pvp or pve and come from both sides. An example of a toxic pve person: "I'm doing 200 bazillion DPS, how's the weather down there lower down on the charts. You guys suck because you can't hit 200 bazillion DPS." I see that one quite a bit in mmos. Like congratulations you figured out every cheese mechanic in game and are acting like a douchebag in the process. An example of non-toxic: "I recently hit 200 bazillion DPS and if you want to get those same results here's how I did it. If I did it so can you." In regards to pvp an example of toxic: "I smoked all you guys, you guys suck, I'm so much better than you." Again congratulations for showing us you're a sore winner and a douche. That's just a few examples of toxicity but it's not limited to purely that.

    I have nothing against pvp or I never would've made it to the top 20 in the world of Star Wars Battlefront 2 (2005) or been able to design the maps I did for Timesplitters Future Perfect. With that said, what you call pvp and what I call pvp are 2 separate things. When you think pvp you've demonstrated it's a no rules type of thing. When I think pvp I think 2 people starting on as equal footing as possible and letting skill take over from then on. There may be slight edges held by one or the other in certain areas, but not extreme enough of one to grant an unfair advantage. In World of Warcraft it used to be possible for Rogues to near infinitely stun lock someone to death. Of course the rogue players saw no issue with it, but the rest of the game did and diminishing returns were added to remove that unfair advantage. Now, rogues can still stun folks, but can't infinitely stun lock like they could before. The difference between there and here is that WoW has dedicated pvp modes and scenarios where as SE does not. In WoW it's 100% possible make a change for pvp or vice versa without effecting the other. In SE that's not always the case from what I've seen of it. SE is a sandbox and not exclusively pvp or pve which you fail to understand, either because you legitimately can't comprehend it or simply refuse to comprehend it. Both are possible outcomes on servers and most folks have made clear, if pvp is to occur they want it to be on as level a playing field as possible.

    I have nothing against pvp itself. What I have no tolerance for however is forced pvp where one person attempts to force a pvp encounter on another that has zero interest in it. No one person is so important that they have a right to force their preferred playstyle on others or force others to play their way. I don't hate pvp, I just hate your particular brand of pvp that you seem intent to try to push on others. Also the section of your statement I put in bold is exactly the kind of toxicity that makes me glad I no longer pvp like I used to do years ago back in season 9 of World of Warcraft pvp. It's attitudes like that day in and day out that made me sick and tired of that scene. it's that particular bolded section as to why you will get no sympathy from folks here and all the more reason you solidify my position that your "sup3r l33t hardcor3" type of pvp is a cancer to gaming that needs to be eradicated outright or confined to very specific servers and not allowed to spread. You know since we're being blunt that is.

    I do have to say I find it funny that you complain about us supposed pve folks being cry babies, yet you've done nothing but complain about how jump drives and safe zones need a counter, and how this or that setting needs to change, when you've had the power to fix things the way you want them the whole time. In fact several of us have tried to walk you through exactly how to do it. You complain about blocks that can easily be disabled or settings that can be changed in less than 5 minutes for your server(s) but somehow we're the crybabies. Gotta love that faulty logic.

    There very well could be more than 400, but how do you intend to prove it? So far you've produced nothing save for your own opinions. Even then, purely because a server may lean more towards the pvp side of things does not mean they subscribe to your particular brand of pvp.

    You're not crying and complaining folks can jump away eh?

    You say you're not crying that folks can jump away, yet the 3 quotes above would love to have a word with you on that one.

    The problem is one side wanted the pvp encounter and the other didn't, it's as simple as that. If they want a pvp encounter, then there are servers specifically for that. If Calaban doesn't/didn't want a pvp encounter, then who are they to try to force it on him? The point is that it's a game meant to have fun and no on side has a right to force the other into a type of mode or encounter they don't want to play. They wanted a pvp, Calaban obviously didn't. Thus they needed to accept that fact and move on, but they didn't and tried to force the issue. Like Malware said if Calaban was on a purely pvp server and it was meant to be a free for all, that's one thing, but it's safe to assume from his statements that's not the kind of server he was on. This meant those guys were indeed trying to force a particular playstyle/encounter on Calaban. Their fun and enjoyment of the game does not trump Calaban's. As it is right now the jump drive is working as intended. If Keen feels the need to change it or add a "counter" to it they will do so at that time.

    As Malware pointed out, disable the setting if you don't like it, otherwise it's working as intended. This kind of statement of yours just stinks of entitlement mentality. Until you take full control of the grid, it's not yours and belongs to the other guy. if he wants to delete it he's free to do so and owes you no explanation of it. Dude deleting his grid isn't "cheating them out of their hard won loot" as the tool being used to delete the grid is working as intended. If you don't like that tool then turn it off. It's also funny to me that you keep going on about how pvp is a no rules thing and everything is legitimate, yet you're complaining dude essentially employed a scorched earth strategy. So obviously you're not as purely "anything goes" as you would have us believe. Is pvp really a no rules type of situation and anything goes including scorched earth, or are there some rules that should be adhered to? You don't get to have it both ways so which is it? Either way you are not entitled to offline raid someone just because you don't like them or such. Seriously dude, these types of entitled statements aren't going to help you.
  4. chrisb Senior Engineer

    I can understand that players who play pvp want the game to be as good as it can.

    Me myself, well I'm a peaceful soul, so playing pvp isn't really my thing. I like to just survive and roam, doing the odd side mission, usually transport or mining something.
    But the update for economy was very good, so hopefully if the next is to be aimed at pvp, that too will please those players that play pvp, as much as the last one pleased me. :)
  5. Bullet_Force Apprentice Engineer

    What you are describing as "griefing" is really just a mix of people boasting about their skills and PVP. Killing other players and thereby annoying them is legitimate PVP it is not "griefing". The example you gave of Minecraft for instance is very much just a case of PVP. Same too for putting warheads in people's ships, thats legitimate PVP. I do it all the time. It's clear from your statements you don't actually know what PVP in this game is.

    The variety of PVP that exists in this game and indeed other survival games such as Rust and ARK is "Survival PVP". This is very much distinct to PVP that exists in say games like Battlefield or Call of Duty. Those are just simple PVP or basic PVP, you play a match for 20minutes then its all over and the map resets or changes and your back to the start. The PVP in survival games is very different because not only is it continuous and can indeed go on for months, it also encompasses more things then just simplistic combat. There is the factor of resources, base/ship building, politics/diplomacy and of course combat. All of those elements combine to create Survival PVP. All of those factors mentioned play a part in the PVP and its outcomes. What you are suggesting with your equal footing mode is no different to having some PVP arena/deathmatch mode where the combat is meaningless and without any effect. It is basically far more akin to Call of Duty then Survival PVP, because in that mode none of the other factors count only combat and even then the match ends and you get to go again with nothing lost.

    Also suggesting a game be balanced is hardly crying. How you can sit there and defend a 100% indestructible shield shows a severe lack of understanding of what makes for good gameplay. If I were to use your logic then players should be able to enable God Mode because why not, players shouldn't be forced into not cheating.

    So the solution to a broken feature is just to disable it? As I have said before I am not against scorched earth policies nor would I impose any rules to stop it, if they want to delete their ship then that is their business. What I am saying though is that feature heavily encourages people to offline raid which is something you have a problem with. I know on my own server when we had it enabled that was was one of the big issues many players raised with us and there was as a result quite a bit of players raiding others when not online to steal their ships and fair enough I fully understand their reasoning.
  6. Stardriver907 Master Engineer

    My solution would be to remove jump drives from the game. Remember, I was among a tiny fraction of the community who opposed their introduction the day they appeared. If Keen had followed my suggestion, we would not be having this conversation today. Not because there would no longer be an "easy" way to avoid a fight in Space Engineers, but because the game would be a faded memory by now. No one gave a rat's butt how unrealistic for the game a jump drive was. It makes getting from planet to planet shorter. End of discussion. PvP players, who may or may not be a minority in general but are at least 50% of the forum community, have had plenty of time to weigh in on the ramifications of jump drives to vanilla PvP gameplay. There may have even been a brief moment early on where I may have joined their cause. It never happened. I have to conclude, then, that anyone logging on to a server with some sort of fighting vessel looking "to experience that situation of coming up on a warship out of position--well-armed and ready for battle, but perhaps outgunned or just not wanting to fight today--and trying to take advantage," should be prepared to be disappointed. Frankly, since anyone can assume any player's functional ship they encounter probably has a jump drive, I can't imagine expecting that ship doing anything else other than jumping. You believe an inhibitor would solve that, and force a fight. I believe most players don't want a forced fight. I can't prove it, but I can invite people to find a server with an inhibitor mod and play on it so that they can see for themselves if the game is "better."

    Um, no. The Economy Update was a player-demanded feature that Keen also wanted and that I also opposed. The intent was not, in my opinion, to create a "PvE system", any more that the anticipated "weapons update" (which is actually only conjecture at this point) would be an attempt to create a PvP "system". The Economy update is a PvE feature for the sandbox.

    Actually, most people would try the features, no matter what their preferred playstyle might be. I would.

    Again, most players already know that any ship they encounter probably can jump away, so the tactic of just showing up and hoping that they won't or can't probably still wouldn't work, unless the update includes some sort of EMP device, which would be better than a block that just impairs jump drives.

    A middle ground between the players that want a fight with everyone they encounter and players that don't want to fight, for whatever reason. You believe that middle ground is a feature, even an optional one, that forces players to fight/makes it impossible to flee.

    You believe the vanilla game needs this because players that want this shouldn't be forced to use mods. You also assert that the game will be more popular if this happens.

    I assert that an inhibitor would be an easy fix that Keen would have implemented long ago had such a demand been made by the perhaps small but undeniably vocal PvP community. The fact that there has been no such vocal demand and no inhibitor has been introduced or even discussed speaks volumes.

    It's been my experience that griefers don't think of themselves as griefers and don't believe what they do is griefing.

    No more so than pushing a button that causes harm to my ship. I mean, if the other guy can't get away, kinda makes it easy for you, doesn't it? Gotta be proud of yourself for annihilating a ship that can't get away.

    Agreed. You can't do any of these things if you just show up and expect them to stick around even though they have a jump drive. So, they should just be forced to stick around.

    Yeah. That'll learn 'em. That loot was hard earned.

    All of them, and they're all correct. It's a sandbox game with no real objectives and no PvP controls. That's on purpose.
  7. Roxette Senior Engineer

    I totally get it now... I think some other people have also been confused by this thread. It's not really intended as a discussion of PVP in the game. The thread itself IS the PVP activity here. :D
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 2
  8. ThisIsADogHello Apprentice Engineer

    Yikes. How many servers have you been permabanned from? People like you are why any competent server admin keeps backups. Do you enjoy tying with disk failures and game-breaking bugs as being the things that everyone else hates the most?
    • Like Like x 1
  9. KissSh0t Master Engineer

    When I tried multiplayer a few years ago the people who would grief players creations without warning would actually get banned from the server.

    Seeing the yellow spawn ship actually gives me ptsd................
  10. Bullet_Force Apprentice Engineer

    I host my own PVP servers andin any case why I would be "permabanned" for doing PVP. You know that is a big part of this game right?
    --- Automerge ---
    Well that must be some kind of PVE server you were playing on. Care bear rules and all. No one gets banned on PVP servers for doing what the name suggests.
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2019
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. Cyber Cheese Apprentice Engineer

    Everything he is describing is also allowed on the server I play on (and I believe all Keen official servers), although anecdotally from watching the server browser I think you are right that a majority of currently popular private PvP servers are focused on mutual combat, rather than anything-goes. (And my server allows safe zones, so the risk from offlining and sabotage is markedly less these days.)

    To his credit, his suggestions are all about encouraging mutual combat while discouraging asymmetric warfare and offlining. The current game increasingly marginalizes PvP to the point that you really cannot force a fight unless your opponent is on a planet or not at the keyboard. So what do players do? Attack while the target is offline, of course.
  12. captainbladej52 Apprentice Engineer

    Not even close, that's 2 guys being douchebags after a match. As for the griefing, I hate to break it to you (actually I don't hate it) but 99% of the gaming populace disagrees with you on that one. But of course griefers never see issue with their actions as you clearly demonstrate. Once more, that person's gameplay and fun does NOT and I repeat does NOT trump the gameplay and fun of the rest of the room and the game does not revolve around him. Like I said previously, I made it to the top 20 in the world for Star Wars Battlefront II (2005) for space battles, 6 in the world for Close Combat First to Fight, was part of the reason blood death knights were nerfed for pvp and pve in World of Warcraft, in the top 40 in the world of Timesplitters Future Perfect, had maps designed for pvp and pve be EA recommended and featured for weeks at a time, was in the 3rd highest ranked pvp clan in Jedi Knight Jedi Academy, one of a select few who could utilize the Keldon effectively in Star Trek Bridge Commander, and was also a professional gaming ladder admin for a Chromehounds league. Plus there is video of myself and a friend in Star Trek Online playing a 2 vs 7 match against a different crew and winning 76 to 4 which I would be happy to post for you. So by your own logic I've forgotten more about pvp than you will ever know. There is also something you desperately need to understand and come to grips with, you do not have the exclusive claim to pvp and its definition that you think you do. Your definition of pvp may be anything goes, but that's not the definition of the majority of the playerbase, and guess who Keen caters to, the majority that's right, and you are the minority.

    In regards to ARK, once again that game is no exclusively survival pvp despite what you might think. It again is a sandbox type game that uses elements of both. Games like you're describing were also built from the ground up with pvp in mind from the start and something they actively go out of their way to encourage. Games like Space Engineers have bits of pvp to them, but the actions of Keen have made clear they don't want to force one side or the other on people. If you want to pvp that's cool, if not you don't have to and vice versa. If I want to play Rust or ARK I will go play either of those games. The other thing you need to realize is you can't force people to play a game or gametype they don't want to play. With the current expac of World of Warcraft they tried to pigeonhole people into "world pvp" by saying "yeah we'll give you a 20% experience bonus on quests if you leave yourself flagged for pvp" which amounted to them essentially saying "turn on your pvp flag or eat a 20% nerf to your questing experience." Quite a few folks naturally told them to go sit on a cactus and left the game as a result. If you really want to get people into pvp, especially your brand of pvp, then you need a reason as to why they should want to do it. What's in it for them and why would they ever want to participate in that style of play? If they don't see enough incentive there, or worse yet see you trying to force pvp on them, then they will leave, and you will have no one to play with.

    As to your final point of your quote above, asking for balance or saying you believe something to be unbalanced is one thing and can be debated, but that's not what you're doing. What you're trying to do is instead crying and moaning that you feel certain things are overpowered and trying to force a change at the developer level that would effect the entire playerbase and not just your server(s). Because you have decided you don't like the jump drive and safe zones as they are, even though they're working as intended by Keen standards, you're demanding the blocks be changed to suit your standards. You are not that important that you get to dictate that kind of a change to the entire community let alone Keen. You could say "I think this is overpowered and needs to be adjusted because A B C," and that could at least be debated, but that's not what you've been doing. What you've been doing is "this is broken and Keen needs to change it and stop pushing bad design or they're going to lose their sup3r l33t hardcor3 playerbase." The first one will actually see people engage with you and maybe, just maybe, might get Keen to consider making changes. The second one will get you nowhere and will get you the results you've gotten now of the community basically blowing you off and calling out the hypocrisy of your logic for essentially demanding an "I win button" that forces potentially unwanted pvp encounters on people.

    In regards to your analogy on God Mode, I could personally care less what folks do on their own servers. I personally think it would zap the fun out of it but it's their server and their choice. What is not their choice is to come onto my server that doesn't allow that, demand they be given God Mode, and then complain when I won't give it to them. By demanding changes at the developer level to suit YOUR tastes you're making clear you think YOUR definition of fun should trump everyone else's fun like myself, Stardriver, Malware, Calaban, and others. Again you are not that important. Other folks like Malware have given you information to make your server into the pvp paradise you want it to be. Instead of implementing those options and having that pvp paradise you say you want, you're still here trying to force others to play your way, and it doesn't work like that. If you want to have your pvp paradise that's your call to make with your server. What is NOT your call is coming to the community and saying "X Y Z needs to change because it's unbalanced, I don't like it, and Keen needs to change it for the game" because at that point, you're demanding that MY server be included in that change you want for your server. Your entire line of logic and reasoning has been like that one bossy vegan neighbor that's demanding you stop grilling meat in your back yard because they don't like it. Again, doesn't work like that.

    Once again, you are not the deciding factor on what is broken and what isn't, that would be Keen, and they've made clear that delete grids feature is working as intended. You can ask them to change it but they're under no obligation to do it. Secondly, you claim you're not against scorched earth policy, yet in your second quote above this paragraph you pissed and moaned about Calaban employing a scorched earth policy and deleting his grids that were "rightfully won". So yeah I'm calling bs when you say you're not against scorched earth policy because clearly you very much are, or you wouldn't have complained that Calaban deleted his own grids.

    You just don't get it because you choose not to understand. What you do on your own servers is your business. If you go to another person's server you are a guest on that server and obligated to follow the rules they set forth on their server. If you don't follow the rules they set forth, they have every right to ban you from their servers. What's allowed on your server means absolute flaming dog crap on my server or any other server. You might allow a no rules environment on your server, but I don't and for that matter neither does a large portion of the playerbase. You're welcome to ask to pvp but none of the rest of us are required to indulge you, and if you don't like that, well you're just SoL and can go back to your own server.

    Simply because a server doesn't subscribe to your "no rules" mentality of pvp doesn't automatically make it a pve server with "care bear rules". I also find it ironic you keep going on about pvp and how everything is legitimate, but complained that Calaban deleted his own grids. Afterall if anything goes, so does deleting one's own grids. So apparently you're not as "care bear rule" free as you claim. As for people getting banned from pvp servers for doing "pvp", it happens all the time. If the server has said "we only allow things up to point 4" and you take it to point 10, then they're going to toss you off the server. The amount of egotism in your logic is just like getting run over by a mac truck.

    Then stick to those servers and leave the rest of us out of it. If I want to play the same way as you, I will drop you a message and ask how your server is setup or otherwise cross that bridge when I get there.

    And no, no his proposed solutions are not about "mutual combat" but wanting an "I win" button that removes the ability of people to not be forced into a gamemode they have no interest in. "Oh you're getting ready to warp because you don't want to pvp, (clicks inhibitor) awe too bad." If it was about mutual combat, he wouldn't be trying to force his ideas onto the rest of the community at the developer level and demanding block changes purely because he alone doesn't like it. If it was purely about mutual combat, then there would be no need for inhibitors, changes to the safe zone, or so on, as folks would stay and fight without the need to disable those blocks or so on.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  13. Dax23333 Junior Engineer

    Sounds interesting. I have no idea what those numbers mean but one is very large and one is not.
  14. Bullet_Force Apprentice Engineer

    I am not against asymmetric warfare but I do think that offline raiding does take the fun out of things both for the attacker and obviously also the defender. That said I completely understand why some people choose to do be it either because the just joined the server and want to progress fast or because of broken features in this game that currently make it rather impossible to capture ships while the enemy is online if certain features are enabled such as PCU limits.
  15. Stardriver907 Master Engineer

    Personally, I don't see those as "good reasons" to offline raid. The notion that offline raiding is the only PvP left in Space Engineers is astoundingly myopic. "Gee, can't get anyone here to fight me. Guess I'll just destroy the bases of people that aren't here." That sounds a lot like PvE, not PvP, so technically it's not the last PvP resort.

    I'm curious. If so many hardcore PvPers are out there looking for a fight, why aren't they running into each other?
  16. Cyber Cheese Apprentice Engineer

    There are dozens of us! Dozens I say!

    But seriously, while Bullet_Force is on the other side of the planet from me, I do get a decent amount of live targets on Fountain Core (e.g.). I think this thread is about vanilla, where the default is infinite worlds. So your chances of finding a grid, that grid belonging to one of the 15 people online in a Keen server, and one of those 15 people being a person who is ready and willing to fight are astronomically low. Add to that, a majority of PvP players I know want combat to arise "naturally" rather than meeting at the clock tower at dawn. I can't really put my finger on what that means because I'm not one of those people, but I gather the idea is that they don't want a pre-arranged fight. Instead, they want an encounter where neither side knows for sure what they're up against or when it will happen (even if both sides were looking to rumble).
    Players being able to totally ignore each other on a server once they build a jump drive and stay in space sounds like single player with a small chat window, to me.
    I think the game drives people into it, and that's a tragedy. Keen would greatly improve the experience with incentives in place to go out and explore, while at the same time making it easier to defend your base but harder to ignore other players once you leave your base. This would promote more mutual combat situations and fewer situations where one basically helpless party loses everything to an attacker. (And, to reiterate, I think a total redesign of the PvP system should be implemented as an optional feature, just like the economy update, to avoid interfering with people who prefer the current dynamic.)
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2019
  17. captainbladej52 Apprentice Engineer

    This is a player problem and not a Keen problem. If they want to introduce new things within reason for folks to do to prompt exploration then more power to them. Otherwise this is a problem for individual servers and server communities to solve and not that of Keen. If you guys want the kind of pvp you've been talking about, then configure your server for it and play with like minded people.

    Once again this is a player problem and not a Keen problem. If you don't like things as they are now, then play with a group of like minded people, configure your server the way you want, or try something different. This is again a player problem and not a Keen problem.

    You had me on board for once until you stuck that last bit in about being harder to ignore other players. If Johnny 2x4 is on the server and I want to go to my own corner of the planet/space and pretend he doesn't exist, then I should be free to do that. I'm not opposed to incentives to explore within reason. As for the improvements to mutual combat, that's debatable. If I'm just out exploring and I don't want to fight a guy then I'm still going to jump to warp. If we're both after the same thing, such as a rare ore deposit, then that's a different story where I might actually fight him. Otherwise it depends on said incentive and what it is.

    Also hallelujah you're including a box to enable or disable said rework in your pitch finally. In which case I could finally give my own stamp of approval since it's an optional feature.
  18. mojomann71 Senior Engineer

    I linked it in another post but just trying to reach the PvP base, Stars End will be coming Oct 4th. Is heavily PvP based on how the Devs describe it.
  19. Cyber Cheese Apprentice Engineer

    Honestly every update should include a box. Do you remember when every Thursday every server would go down, or have to revert to an old save? Nowadays we still have to recompile a custom .dll for every update to fix missiles, and half the updates break Torch mod which brings down most of the populated private servers.
  20. Stardriver907 Master Engineer

    So when you play on a public server and you're looking for a fight, this is what happens. The chances of finding someone else that is looking for a fight is "astronomically low" (nice use of space terminology there). This does not support the claim that PvP players are 50% of the player base.

    (I'm not saying you said that ;). I'm just making a point.)

    Well, no mechanic that Keen can add to the game will change that. Obviously most players will avoid a fight if they can, and drive inhibitors and tractor beams won't change that. Players that don't want fights forced on them don't play on servers that feature those things. If they become standard features, most servers would disable them. How can I say that with such confidence? Because the mods are there but they're not prolific. If so many players wanted them, they would essentially be standard on public servers.

    Some PvP players might not like the idea of pre-arranged battles, but point of fact is that right up to WWI that was pretty much the way it was done. Opposing generals would agree on a time and place and then have at it. During the U.S. Civil War, battles were announced in the newspapers. Civilians would come and watch from a safe distance. All that changed after we got automatic weapons and artillery that could hit targets you couldn't even see. The Pacific Ocean In WWII was the last place and time battleships lined up and traded shots (you know, like typical SE space battles).

    Warfare is different now. There are no more chance encounters. Nowadays you find your opponent and start shooting. You don't care if they're ready and willing. The point is to catch them when they're not. On a typical SE server, most players will not be ready and/or willing to fight. That's just how it is. That's just how people are. Configuring the game so that fights must happen is a non-starter. If people wanted that they would just do it. No need for a mechanic that forces it. Since it won't ever happen, the alternative is the old-school method of pre-arranged battles. Think of it as tradition.

    This is "hammer that only sees nails" mentality. Players should have easily defensible bases but should not be able to ignore other players once they leave said base. This is a very specific way to play SE. You talk about it as if it's the only way. Well, it isn't. It's the typical way, and that's only because most players have never seen any other way.

    I have over 9000 hours playing this game, but it took me less than 100 hours to see that building bases was a bad idea. This was before planets. Everyone else was all for planets so that they could build their "impenetrable fortresses". Here we are today fighting about impenetrable fortresses and how they destroy PvP.

    Seriously what difference does it make if Keen comes up with a bunch of reasons to explore if you are always running home to defend your base? I understand the desire to have a base because that was the first thing I attempted when I bought the game. 100 hours later the futility was obvious. Once I started building Chilkoot Trail I started asking myself why was I building such an elaborate base. We only had asteroids then, and had I been playing survival mode I would have exhausted all the nearby resources long before the base was finished, which would have made the base kinda stupid. I could either go out and find more ore to bring back to the base to refine, or I could just process ore wherever I found it. It seemed to me that exploring would be kind of difficult if I was tied to one spot. Better to just take the base with me. Therefore my base is inherently easier to defend and I can ignore other players if I so choose, drive inhibitors or not ;). I am less vulnerable to offline raids, and I have more option if it happens. All that without Keen having to do something special just for me.

    Belay that bilge, ye swab (talk like a pirate day was, and always is, Sept. 19). The economy update was not a total redesign of PvE. It brings currency and trading to the standard game. That by itself would have been enough and there would be no talk of PvP being broken because of it. The shield is the problem. The shield is what changes the PvP dynamic. The shield is what lead to the discussion of jump drives and people "getting away". The entire conversation revolves around bases. That's why I don't build them. More trouble than they're worth.

    This is why I'm not running a server. The game is not stable enough, and there is no Keen version of Torch or SEToolbox. Without those things, running a server to the satisfaction of everyone using it is just too complicated. At least now that Keen is attempting to run their own servers, they should be able to experience first hand what a pain in the ass it is, and maybe they'll do something about it.
  21. Cyber Cheese Apprentice Engineer

    Well that's not necessarily sound logic. Most servers did not implement easy Inventory, small grid medical rooms, GPS, and probably others I wasn't aware of, even though mods existed to accomplish each of those features, but then Keen did each of those things and now everyone plays with all of those features.
    On the server I play, I am always ready to fight when I:
    a) Go to a planet;
    b) Go to an NPC station; or
    c) Go to a central asteroid field with modded ores (basically unlocks tier 2 combat systems).

    In vanilla, the equivalent is:
    a) Planets;
    b) NPC stations; or
    c) Trade ships/encounters/unknown signals.

    You can choose to never go to those places, and thus be far less likely to encounter a player. But until safe zones, your stuff could be randomly found via various mechanics and so you'd be at risk of an offline raid. Safe zones mitigate that, and thus reduce the time people spend hunting for defenseless bases--drawing more people to the above points of interest. But that is ruined if you can just jump away, because you still have no need to be ready to fight (except when you go to planets, which are arguably the least productive destinations.) The point I've been trying to make in this thread is that with some fairly conservative tweaking, Keen could create incentive structures that would make actual combat far more likely, but would also give players the safety and consistency they need to build up before they need to be ready to fight.
    I don't mean base in the narrow sense you're talking about. My "bases" include a couple defenseless large cargo containers in the middle of nowhere. Even our operational base that has defenses can be jumped around the world at a moment's notice. The point is to leave your excess goodies somewhere else so that you aren't dragging them into battle. And having security for your extra stuff is important for PvP, because few people will ever feel secure fighting if they have to bet everything on the outcome.
    I disagree. Before safe zones, even a mobile base would be vulnerable to offline raids, barring some very impressive use of the programmable block (which is technically experimental and not on Keen servers).
    I think it's a separate issue. I've been playing with jump inhibitors since September 2018, and I thought they were a good idea at that time as well. I have also wanted a better protection from offline raiding, as did many other servers which implemented safe zones before that was a thing.
    How long have they been doing this? Their servers run terribly compared to the Torch servers.
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2019
  22. captainbladej52 Apprentice Engineer

    I don't see Stardriver having claimed it's a perfect indicator of what folks will do, but it's definitely a potential indicator for certain. If a mod such as small grid medical rooms comes out then we can assume one of several things is at play if it's not that prolific. Either the person(s) who published aren't exactly well known in the community, which is a factor for some folks, or if exposure isn't the issue then we can assume folks have simply chosen not to download the mod for whatever reason. If a block becomes vanilla you will always see a jump in folks using said block, even if only for a time, for the simple fact it's now vanilla. Where as you or I might not have an issue using mods, others do and will refuse to use it, even if they like the concept of the mod. If a mod becomes super popular and gets integrated into the game, then naturally the number of folks using it will go up because one, it's a popular feature now, and 2 it's vanilla. Also I have not felt the need as of yet to do a small grid medical room/survival kit, just saying.

    I bolded a specific section of this quote as it's the key element here. What happens on your server isn't necessarily the golden standard for what happens on every other server. YOU might be ready for a fight and looking for one, but it doesn't mean everyone else on other servers are. This is why anecdotal evidences don't carry as much weight as concrete numbers and such. What you do and experience will not necessarily be the same thing myself and others do or experience. As the saying goes "expect the best, prepare for the worst."

    This again is ultimately a player problem and NOT a Keen problem. Once more if folks don't want a pvp encounter or a giant combat fight, they're not going to do it nor should they be forced into one or pigeonholed into it. It's not Keen's job to provide you with the combat and pvp you're seeking. Their job is to keep improving the game and stomping out bugs/exploits, and overall making sure there is enough sand, shovels, and buckets to go around in the sandbox. You're free to dislike the ability of people to hit their jump drives and warp out, but once more it is working as intended by Keen standards. I don't think most folks would care if they added additional encounters and/or incentives to explore within reason, but it's not their job to push a particular playstyle or the other.

    So your own bases can jump around but you've been complaining this entire time about how folks can jump around... I just can't even... doesn't brain. Blade.exe has stopped working, please reboot Blade.exe. This particular quote ultimately comes down to one's individual building philosophy and is a moot point. It's also again a player problem and not a Keen problem.

    Once more he never said he was invulnerable, only that his stuff isn't as defenseless as it appears. You're never going to find a 100% impervious solution, though having one's base be mobile greatly reduces some of the risks.

    This is another player problem and not a Keen problem in regards to the jump inhibitors. If you want to use them that's your call for your server. To Keen the jump drive is working as intended until you hear otherwise from them. Keen saw fit to integrate the safe zones as they felt it fit in with what they wanted to do for offline raid protection and such. They didn't have to implement it but they did. It's up to each individual server whether they keep the block turned on or not.

    Something we agree on based on some of the issues I see regularly in Space Engineers videos on youtube and such. Perhaps running their own servers will let them better see some of the issues, but only time will tell.
  23. Stardriver907 Master Engineer

    Yeah, those mods were the result of player demand, not server usage. GPS, for example, was only briefly a mod before Keen released their own version. GPS is not a block, like a small grid medical room. GPS is a feature. It needed to be in the game, and it was looking like Keen wasn't going to do it, so a couple people made mods. Keen did it, though, before it had a chance to catch on with servers. Easy Inventory, on the other hand, got used by just about everyone that found out about it. Servers that didn't have it were probably concerned about performance. There were plenty of formal and informal polls that suggested, along with such prolific use of the mod generally, that an Easy Inventory feature would be desirable in vanilla. That feature is PvP/PvE neutral. That is what made it a no-brainer for vanilla. It pisses off no one. Never sparked a thread like this one. A drive inhibitor mod can't make the same claims.

    Does the fact that people go through so much effort to avoid combat suggest to you that they would be in favor of a mechanic that makes combat far more likely?

    Yet, as someone that does not describe himself as a PvP player, that is exactly what I do. I don't have a place to go lick my wounds. Any stand is a last stand. Just shooting every other player I encounter is bad for business, so I take more risks than someone that's just looking for a fight. If I play like that already, what makes you think I'm going to let a jump inhibitor give you an advantage? What makes you think not just letting me go is a good idea?

    I'm being led to believe here that there are a lot of players that want to be able to disable someone else's jump drive because every time they encounter someone they jump away. I asked why, if there are so many of these like-minded people playing, don't they run into each other. That other like-minded PvP player wouldn't cheat death by just pushing a button and getting out of jail free, would they? They would stay and either fight or take their medicine, wouldn't they? If there are so many, why is finding someone willing to fight so hard Keen needs to put something in the standard game to stop people from running?

    Aw cmon, man.
  24. Cyber Cheese Apprentice Engineer

    Actually that isn't true, unless you count the handful of steadfast opposition as "no one." (Incidentally, how many people are represented in this thread in opposition?) I admit there is not overwhelming evidence of the popularity of jump drive inhibitors, but your anecdotes about other mods that became vanilla and this specific thread are pretty far from proving inhibitors would not be popular.
    No. As I said, I also will jump away if I can, if I need to. I am not saying there is something nefarious about choosing to play the game as it currently functions. I am saying that changing that function would make the game better.

    From a purely competitive perspective, if I am starting on a new server with vanilla jump drives, I would not waste time ensuring that every ship I fly to a point of interest in space has defenses. I would just use a jump drive. Because the former strategy would be a waste of effort and slow my advance compared to everyone else.

    I view that as an unfortunate side effect of the reality that jump drives are too powerful. They just make space combat unnecessary. Fixing that would give me and everyone else a reason to change behaviors, a reason to devise another defensive solution, and a reason to experience space combat.

    I could likewise have constructed a similar argument against implementing survival mechanics. Why in the world would anyone want to go spend time gathering resources before they can build? If you claim the idea is so popular, why aren't there already a bunch of people out there not building quickly? Etc. The point is that nerfing jump drives adds a new layer of challenge and depth to the game.
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2019
    • Agree Agree x 1
  25. captainbladej52 Apprentice Engineer

    A "feature" that one can flip on with no counter that instantly harms another person's toon or ship that allows the person controlling said feature to force a potentially unwanted encounter on someone, will not be popular in any game. You can stay in denial if you want, but bottom line it would NOT be popular with the general populace.

    Across 2-3 threads now you have pissed and moaned about how the jump drive is supposedly overpowered, yet you're using the exact same strategy you say shouldn't exist. Hypocritical logic much. You're free to hold the position inhibitors would make the game better. However when everyone else lampoons your logic to shreds and says they don't want it, don't say we didn't warn you. This game totally needs more mechanics that can force unwanted encounters on people. As long as the "l33t sup3r hardcor3" pvp folks get their fun, screw everyone else right?

    How you choose to advance and progress is your choice and ultimately depends on one's own build philosophy. This portion is simply your opinion and can neither be prove or disproven.

    Once again this is a player problem, NOT and I repeat NOT a Keen problem. How you use the tools given to you is not their problem nor is it their job to encourage one particular style of play or another. Unfortunately for you the jump drives are working as intended by Keen standards until you hear otherwise. If you want to nerf them for your servers and such then do it. You have that option. Myself and others would be glad to walk you through everything you need to get that pvp paradise you're after.
  26. Cyber Cheese Apprentice Engineer

    On the subject of requests for jump inhibitors, I have found a few more examples (and they don't even all have opposition). 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. This tractor beam mod has over 19,000 subscribers. This jump inhibitor from 2015 likewise has 19,000 subscribers. Here is another jump inhibitor mod explaining the exact same reasoning I cited for its creation.

    By comparison the masterful and far more complicated easy inventory mod has 61,000 subscribers. So we are talking about a mechanic that numerically may be at least 30-60% as popular as a mechanic that was implemented, if you want to trust anecdotal evidence. But I would rather discuss how this would affect the game then try to guess what other people will think.
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2019
    • Informative Informative x 1
  27. Ronin1973 Master Engineer


    I'd like to see jump inhibitors... especially aboard NPC stations. Now pair that with some pirate antennas and a couple of timer blocks switching the antenna(s) on and off every few minutes and you have a possible dangerous approach to an NPC station... reminiscent of the original 8-bit "Elite" game where your approach to a space station might involve fighting off pirates that try to jump you.
    • Like Like x 1
  28. captainbladej52 Apprentice Engineer

    First off none of those first 5 items have anything really to do with what you're talking about. There may be the odd request for an inhibitor here or there in those 5 items, but that's not the main focus of any of them. So once more this is a grasp at straws.

    1: Combat Overhaul: folks have been speculating on this for awhile and this is nothing new. This is also something requested for awhile and doesn't center around jump inhibitors. If folks want that sort of thing then like I've said, more power to them, but something like that is extremely overpowered and would be heavily heavily abused to force unwanted encounters on people.
    2: Changes to block behavior: there's pretty much a request along the lines of wanting to change something practically every other day it seems. folks are always going to want to change something or the other to their liking. Personally i would love to see an option in vanilla to make the hydrogen thrusters far more efficient than they are now. To me it's always been wayy too easy to piss hydrogen in this game, but this gets into an entirely different can of worms. In the meantime I've created my Galdax Thrusters to be that work around. until hydrogen fuel consumption is addressed, if it ever is. Either way I have a set of thrusters that can be as strong or as weak as I want them to be.
    3: More weapons: This is something that comes up frequently and I actually wouldn't mind seeing additional weapons within reason. Folks know I'm also a supporter of energy shields. With that said this third one is simply stating an overall thing alot of folks have said is that we need more than just the standard turrets. The question though is what exactly would we implement at this point? Again this opens a different can of worms.
    4: Jump drives on planets: Not even sure why this one was included. With that said since the jump drive is basically a short range warp engine for lack of a better description, it would make no sense for what that guy was proposing to happen. Furthermore if it works by opening a wormhole, you get into this whole mess of theoretical physics and junk about how you could possibly end up venting the atmosphere of the planet into space and all sorts of weird junk.
    5: Folks complaining about jump drives: This one still has nothing to do with anything and is dude spouting his opinion.

    Not a single one of those 5 things above had anything to do with a jump inhibitor as the main subject. So those do not help your case.

    In regards to a tractor beam, once again this has nothing to do with a jump inhibitor. If we're talking about a tractor beam in the traditional sense of how they're portrayed, they have uses other than trying to grab enemy ships. If done correctly it could have uses for pvp and pve. Even then this isn't something I would force on people.

    For the jump inhibitor mods you have here, both of them are extremely overpowered in regards to their range. 50-100km. That's well more than 40 times weapons range at a minimum. Not only this but there is no counter to either of these blocks. So essentially anyone using this has an automatic "I win" button that can harm another's ship with no counter at all to them. In their current form if something like that were ever to be implemented in vanilla SE, it would get modded out so fast by everyone else or turned off it's not even funny. Cap that range out at 5km max and stick a counter to them like scattering field, limited up time, or both, and then I might be willing to talk to you. If this is what you mean by wanting a jump inhibitor then I would invite you to take a long walk out of a short airlock. We're still also back to the main issue here, which is that these blocks would be heavily heavily abused to force unwanted encounters on people. Folks being able to hit their jump drives if trouble pops up, or as a retreat to survive is NOT an exploit or anything. Even in real life if a military unit is just getting royally curb stomped they're most likely going to retreat to save what is left of their forces.

    Now in regards to those numbers we're talking roughly 21k total subs between those 2 mods. Last numbers for SE that I found was 1m-2m copies of the game sold. If we're going to assume as you're doing that mod numbers are a perfect indicator of how many in the population want something, then we can do the math. When we do the math that 21,000 people subscribed to those mods is only 2.1% of the total game's population at 1m units sold, and only 1.05% of the game's population if we assume 2m units sold. If we're to assume these numbers are reflective of the game's populace as a whole, then that does not bode well for your argument as it's not even in the same galaxy as what you suggested. If we're going by popularity of mods and such, then lets take a look at the 2 most popular shield mods.

    The first is Cython's shield mod here: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=484504816&searchtext=energy+shield - with 200,510 subs
    The second is Defense Shield by a group of folks found here: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1365616918&searchtext=defense+shield - with 90,560 subs
    Between the 2 of them that's 291,070 subs. Now if we do the math assuming the same 1m or 2m copies sold as before, that's 29.1% of the game's populace subbed at 1m copies, or 14.6% of the game's populace at 2m. So anywhere from 14.6%-29.1% of the game's entire population using the logic you've demonstrated here. So if you really want to keep insisting on mod subs being the perfect indicator then by your logic, energy shields should be implemented long before they ever consider a jump inhibitor, if they ever consider one. By your logic the amount of folks that want energy shields dwarf those that want a jump inhibitor. So if you really want to keep pushing that narrative then you've royally shot your argument in the foot. Railing for a jump inhibitor is trying to force 2% of the game's playstyle on the other 98% which isn't cool.
  29. mojomann71 Senior Engineer

    Not trying to add in fuel to the fire but didn't Keen announce at one point over 10 Million copies were sold? Maybe it was just 1 million.... :)
    • Like Like x 1
  30. captainbladej52 Apprentice Engineer

    Really? that's pretty epic if that's true. idk how many they've sold to date for certain. Reason I use the 1m-2m number is the last steam report thing I found that's where they were. If they've sold even more then heck yeah, keep the game going and growing.
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.