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.

[Suggestion] A simple (ish) suggestion for promoting player interaction in multiplayer

Discussion in 'General' started by 101m4n, Jan 5, 2018.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    Note to moderators: Got ahead of myself and forgot I was in the general section and not "suggestions and feedback" my apologies.

    THE PROBLEM:


    I have heard it said (cough I watched a youtube video cough) that given the chance players of a game will tend to treat gameplay like an optimisation puzzle. They will plot the most certain and least risky course of action that they can, and effectively "optimise the fun out of it". In space engineers one of the areas this happens in is on public multiplayer servers. The world is so vast that you can easily bugger off into the distance and never again run across another player. If your goal is to minimise the risk of having your stuff stolen, then this is a very effective solution, and so most players do just this. Unfortunately, it also effectively negates the purpose of playing multiplayer in the first place.

    EXISTING SOLUTIONS:

    The most common solution at the moment is to set up your server world so that resources are scarce, and concentrated in a few key locations, to promote player contact. But it falls largely to the server host to set this up and get the balance right, and as a result it negatively effects the accessibility of hosting a multiplayer server.

    Another often-suggested solution is the implementation of some sort of "radar block" or similar object that allows you to detect ships at a greater distance, but this wouldn't really solve the problem. Hiding would still be a favourable solution, you would just have to travel a bit further. In order to be effective at balancing out the "hiding" incentive, the detection range would have to be very large, and hiding all but impossible, which probably wouldn't make for a very enjoyable experience. From a development standpoint, you would also have to take into account occlusion caused by terrain, for example, building a base inside an asteroid, or beneath the surface of a planet.

    PROPOSED MECHANIC:

    Introduce detectable "heat signatures" which vary by power consumption. More power consumption would mean more heat, which would mean a larger detection radius. When inside the detection radius of another ship or station, players would see a marker on their HUD labelled "unknown heat signature" or something similar. In reality, every system aboard a ship would waste a certain amount of power as heat, and you would sum the waste heat to estimate the thermal output of the craft. But in the game, just taking the total power consumption of the craft is probably a good enough approximation.

    To flesh out the mechanic a bit more you could:
    • Add a visual indication to detected signatures to indicate how much closer they need to be to detect you based on your own heat signature. This would create interesting "cat-and-mouse" situations where players chase each-other beyond visual range (kinda the way things are with passive sonar in naval warfare today).
    • Allow planetary atmospheres to "scatter" your heat signature (perhaps based on atmosphere density?), this would allow players to hide on planets or use them to escape pursuers.
    effects on game-play:
    • Power efficiency becomes more important that it previously was, making power efficiency modules on production facilities more useful than they presently are.
    • Players would be incentivized to build stealth vessels for reconnaissance and exploration, designed to cruise around using as little power as possible to avoid detection.
    • Large ships become much more detectable than small ones, giving players who are just starting out a helping hand.
    • Before leaving the game, players could shut down most systems, park inside an asteroid to prevent their hard earned gear being trashed by some self proclaimed "PVP entusiast" while they are offline.
    • Players might do things like create honeypots, heat signatures intended to lure other players to their doom.
    • Placing too much power hungry production equipment in one place would be potentially dangerous.
    IMPLEMENTATION:

    I have never written a piece of software as large as a game like SE, and don't have any experience with the SE engine, nor the C# language for that matter, so I will keep these thoughts as general as possible:
    • In real life, the "detectability" of any uniformly radiating source is proportional to the intensity of the source multiplied by the inverse square of the distance from it (google: "inverse square law"). In practise, this curve could be tweaked by KSWH for game balance (the same way they did for planetary gravity). Real ships probably wouldn't radiate uniformly either, but lets keep things (comparatively) simple here.
    • In real life you wouldn't be able to determine the distance to a source without multiple measurements (so you can triangulate) or some notion of the sources absolute intensity (which you wouldn't have for an unknown and distant spacecraft). This could be made the case in-game, perhaps allowing players to write scripts which communicate in order to triangulate the position of heat signatures. Alternately, for the sake of accessibility, the triangulation and range-finding could be made an implicit function of the game. And absolute positions could show up on the HUD, again, up to KSWH. The latter would probably be easier to implement too.
    • In reality, heat signatures would be occluded by asteroids and planets. Personally I wouldn't mind it if they were only occluded by planetary bodies rather than both planets and asteroids. In either case, at least some notion of occlusion is probably necessary.
    • As an optimisation a minimum threshold could be specified below which a heat source is not considered detectable by the engine. This would mean that the server wouldn't have to consider the thermal power of every floating piece of space junk. It would also have the added effect of making "perfect stealth" possible.
    • Players could exploit the system by separating their base into many distinct grids, to counter this, grids with connected conveyor systems could be made to register as single combined heat sources.
    • To mitigate GUI clutter, a hotkey could be assigned to toggle visible heat signatures on and off the HUD or cycle through modes (detect all, neutral and enemies, enemies only etc) objects beyond antenna reach could be detected regardless.
    • Cool fact: the saturn 5 rocket had an effective power of about 85 hoover dams, or roughly 170,000 megawatts. As such hydrogen thrusters would probably have to be coded up as an exception to the electrical power = heat approximation. An alternative would be to have all components have a "thermal power" in watts based on their state of operation moment to moment (similar to the power consumption statistic).
    • Adding an additional "thermal power" statistic to components aboard a ship would also open up the possibility for "emission sink blocks" to temporarily capture thermal energy reducing a vessels detectibility (think normandy from ME). At the cost of making it more detectable later when the emission sinks are discharged. Could be an interesting mechanic to play with, but I can take it or leave it.
    • Naturally, there would be an off switch in the world config so that people who would rather keep things as they are can do just that ;).
    As previously mentioned, I have no real experience with SE from a programming perspective, but something like this strikes me as a comparatively quick and efficient way of solving the "never running across players" problem that always ended up putting me off multiplayer.

    Thoughts?
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2018
    • Like Like x 4
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. ShadedMJ Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    208
    I think your perspective on this may need to be reviewed. The bigger question is why players want to bugger off into the distance. I think they want to build until they are ready to meet other players. I submit that nothing upsets players more than just starting out and having their butt handed to them by an established player, especially in Space Engineers in that if you lose your starter ship (or single ship) there is almost no point to continue playing.

    I see the heat signature system nearly the same as the radar block you mentioned, but admit there is potential there. It would be a bit easier to picture your system with some made up numbers as examples. A possible addition to your system would be the minimum heat signature your ship can see is 40% of your own ship if the other ship is over 2km away, while the other ship can see yours at 15km away because your heat signature is highter. The goal of here would still allow players to hide if they wanted to, and two ships meeting (and possibly fighting) that are in the same general league.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. DrEarlInsanity Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    14
    I will always be the player that goes far way to avoid any player interaction just to stay away from all the aggressive 'might makes right' players.
     
  4. Dax23333 Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    639
    Definatly one of the better suggestions on this kind of thing i've seen, leaving the possibility to hide intact while providing some indication of other grids. And all without it being a noob finder rader like is so often loved and suggested by people calling themselves pvpers.
     
  5. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    So the detection of other heat signatures could be "drowned out" by your own. I like that idea... But it would still be possible to build a little "recon" vessel to find people with. It would also make sneaking up on big ships very easy.
    As for numbers, In my mind, anything radiating less than 10Mw (anything idle, most small ships etc) would be ignored. Atmospheres would totally obscure your heat signature when on a planets surface (making planet starts comparatively safe), but probably (though unrealistically) not obscure heat signatures outside the planets atmosphere, so you can see nearby stuff in space from the ground. As for maximum range, there wouldn't be one! I would set the system up so that small-medium ships using their whole power output (say one large reactor) would be detectable at 50-100km or so. The inverse square rule means that to double the visual distance of your ship, you would need to increase power output by a factor of 4. So whilst there is no real "max range" there is a sort of soft cap, it wouldn't just be a linear relationship.
    EDIT:
    You also have to bear in mind, most ships use on the order of 10x their normal power when thrusting or similar, so even comparatively large ships wouldn't really be visible when idle.

    Well that's just the thing, SE doesn't have is any sort of framework for preventing the "might makes right" play-style. Minecraft is a good example of a game where you can do this right. Locking or protecting chests for example, or letting players set up their own build/destroy white-lists for their little corners of the map/towns/bases etc. Something like this, coupled with some better administrative tools for rolling back damage. This would help to add some depth to multiplayer and make it more of a community experience, rather than a "I can take your stuff, so I will" experience. At the moment there is nothing, and you inevitably end up with just a swarm of "PVP-ers" (cough griefers cough). Which is why there are so few servers, and why those servers usually only have a handful of players on them. If this were done right you could create an environment where people would feel safe broadcasting with an antenna "trading thruster components for platinum" or the like without fear off being asshole-stomped. And in the knowledge that if someone does grief them, it can be rolled back. But that is a different suggestion altogether :p
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2018
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. ShadedMJ Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    208
    Bear in mind, I myself have never used multi-player and likely never will. It does tilt my own perspective a bit, but I've been reading this and other Space Engineers forums (and other forums) for years now.

    I see DrEarlInsanity on other forums and would like an elaboration : Going far away is okay in my book. Under what criteria do you return? If you don't return, why be on a multi-player game?

    Regarding seeing a heat signature at range in general : I question a bit on the range, and the more I think about it, the less I like it. I start out and pick a direction and go 300km out or so, and even if I make the largest heat signature ship I can and park it, other ships would see mine at a range of ... what? Also, I now remember a few change proposals that said something like "You can't pilot any ship that doesn't have an antenna set to at least 30km."
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    @ShadedMJ The main motivation behind this is not really to make people easier to find, I think if you make people too easy to find then that will make the game much less enjoyable. You'd want to tweak the detection curve so that the low threshold for detectibility was low enough that you can still hide if you want to. Rather it is supposed to add a bit of depth to player interaction. People could build "silent running" modes into their ships, design vessels specifically for recon, stuff like that. At the moment we just fly around until seeing someone, then we either shoot them, or are friendly. And that is about the extent of multiplayer interaction. As such, there is no reason to go and interact with other players. There really needs to be more substance there I think to motivate doing so. The trouble is, anything within visual range is going to be limited to the "shoot or down't shoot" paradigm, so any further mechanics have to take place beyond visual range. The trick will be to do that without making people feel like they are being trapped into playing in a certain way.

    Also bear in mind that any feature as potentially controversial as this would almost certainly get it's own on/off switch in the config files ;).
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2018
  8. ShadedMJ Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    208
    @101m4h : That is generally my issue with it. More than anything else, this is making people easier to find. How is it not? If anything, this will make players go even further out to avoid heat tracking.

    If you want more depth, I feel this is the wrong way to do it. You should be advocating a different mechanic that furthers trading (which there are a few in the workshop) rather than something that can help you find other players because mostly finding another player means there will soon be one fewer players.
     
  9. DrEarlInsanity Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    14
    well shade. most of the time I am largely nomadic only stopping to make a retrofits or make a new ship. I will return to known space on occasion to trade, but tis only if i know the person well enough.

    why be in mp if I go 20+ million away? l'll play with people I like but if at all possible I also will even keepsaid desired people away to a point. I may trust them, but I have no idea if'n they'll drag server drama back to me.

    In general ill only return to the core on a blue moon.
     
  10. ShadedMJ Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    208
    Thank you DrEarlInsanity. If I were to do multiplayer, I would operate the same way. (In this forum, I think my first name is Shaded :) )
     
  11. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    I disagree. The best way to add depth to a sandbox isn't from deliberate development of special purpose features like that. It comes from the addition of simple but open-ended features that the player base can use inventively towards various ends. Trading certainly qualifies, but if you want trading to work you have to have other stuff in game too to prevent griefing*.

    I think I should clarify my position here. I have run two SE servers in the past, both coop/non-pvp servers. One thing I remember coming up in conversation a couple of times was the fact that SE multiplayer felt too much like single player. Everyone would just bugger off on their own and never come across or interact with anyone else. Even when people weren't trying to hide, they still rarely met in game. The reason for this was just the size of the game world really. A very large world with a very small visual range makes it exceedingly unlikely you will ever run across anyone. The fact that there are 3 dimensions of freedom in SE only exacerbates this issue. The trouble is, this is pretty much unavoidable if you want a world big enough for a handful of planets and moons. I remember this guy that built an enormous polar lunar base on the moon right next to the starting planet, and in the 3 months that I hosted the server, he never saw a single other person aside from me. And I found his base using spacemaster. I know that the notion of a feature that makes people more find-able in any sense is generally frowned upon, but in my mind the game really does need some form of interaction beyond visual range. Even if it does make hiding a tad more difficult. The reason I like this better than other suggestions for radar-esque mechanics is that it doesn't make hiding totally impossible, but just makes it something you have to actively think about, rather than something that just sort of happens.

    Another thing I hear alot is that SE worlds need more in them worth exploring. More NPC's, more encounters, better ai, etc etc. Whenever someone brings this up, my first thoughts are usually of the community minecraft servers I used to play on when I was a teenager. In multiplayer minecraft the detail of the game world came from stuff that other people had built, and as a result, there was always something to explore. I guess I want SE to be at least somewhat like that too, because at the moment it's like minecraft where you can only see 10 blocks in any direction.

    *For that the game really needs better administration tools too; ways to protect grids, ways to make certain areas safe from weapons-fire and grinding, ways to track down and ban griefers etc. But those will come in time.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2018
  12. ShadedMJ Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    208
    I'm with you on that. Also agreeing that a lot of times it might be hard to find anyone even with a ship called "Trade" broadcasting at 100km.

    I just think a tattletale heat signature might not be the best way to do it.
     
  13. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    Perhaps. But I can't think of a better solution, can you?

    In minecraft, when you wanted to hide, you went far away and built your base underground. In SE with this feature, you would go far away and minimise the power usage of your gear. Same sort of idea.

    There are also bunches of interesting little situations this could create, for example:

    If heat signatures were set up to be occluded by asteroids (not sure how difficult this would be to implement) then you imagine players building bases inside the asteroid, with a cavity in the asteroid serving as a hangar bay to park your ship in. When you want to leave undetected, you power up the bare minimum number of engines that you need and coast out of the asteroid and go to full thrust later, so that the location of the base itself remains secret, even if someone does detect the increased power from firing your thrusters.

    You could make decoys. Imagine you are in a pvp situation, you have been seen, and can see that you have been seen. Rather than run, you launch a decoy with a reactor, some batteries, and a thruster on it, then cut power. The baddie goes after the decoy thinking he's been seen and you are trying to escape, giving you time to pack up your stuff and find a new un-compromised location.

    Or imagine you are hiding and someone comes very close to your hidden base. So you cut power to hide and watch them quietly pass by as your oxygen ticks away, wondering all the while whether they actually saw you on their scanners, or if it's just a chance encounter.

    Alternatively you might be a social player, and you see a signature 250km out flicking on and off your HUD, and think to yourself "that must be jims miner, mining more iron for his big project". Or perhaps you notice a new large heat signature coming from a place you already have coordinates for (another friendly players base for example) and wonder to yourself, I wonder whats going on over there? and so hop in your ship to go take a look.

    So you see, it adds something nuanced for the pvp simpleton to sink their teeth into. Whilst simultaneously for the cooperative player making the game world seem a little less dead.

    Game designers often have to protect players from themselves. It's tempting to think as a player "I don't want to be found, therefore this feature is bad" but the truth isn't that simple. Multiplayer is exactly that, and although players might want to "optimise the fun out of the game" by flying out into the distance to avoid risk, it doesn't mean you (as the game designer) should let them do it.

    Personally I can't really think of a better way to make multiplayer more interactive. And I can't think of any way that doesn't involve also making people more detectable... Unless you have a bright idea?
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2018
    • Agree Agree x 2
  14. May Rears Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    398
    If you want to make multiplayer more interactable then you need to stop involuntary PvP. I.E you can only attack another player or damage their blocks that is in a war with your faction. You need to also stop exploits like dropping a shedload of steel plates from 1200m above a base which no defence can defeat. Co-op gameplay has to be just a part of an open multiplayer server as much as PvP.
     
    • Late Late x 1
  15. ShadedMJ Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    208
    @101m4n : It is still forcing players out. That is why I was suggesting a trading mechanism or something to promote player interaction. Its a shame that the core game tends to focus on beating up other players.

    Other PVP I've heard is a special setup map that has all the uranium or platinum on a few selected asteroids in one location. Everyone has to go there and get uranium and potentially fight for it.

    Other potential ideas ......

    How about an admin station with a lot of new laser antenna without an owner. Players can leave their secure bases fly off and activate their laser antenna at 200km range, select an admin station, and see all other ships that chose to activate their laser antennas. This is opt-in. The admin stations could be put at 175km increments out and through the communications relays you'd be able to see all the opt-ins at ridiculous ranges.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    That's a failing of human nature I'm afraid. Take a bunch of people, remove all consequences from their actions, and that is what happens. Same thing happens in every multiplayer survival sandbox I have ever played in. The generally accepted wisdom is that administration tools are used to prevent players from stomping each-other all the time and in essence, provide consequences. Some MC servers even have literal jails. It works pretty well too, you just need:
    1) A means to create safe places for people to go. In SE, this means just hiding. But we could have "safe sectors" and other such constructs.
    2) A means to find players that have griefed, after the fact (logs keeping track of large destructive events etc), and consequently deal with them.
    3) A means to roll-back grief.

    That sort of thing has been done alot before. Mostly from back before there were any procedural asteroids. It kinda works for PVP, but it destroys the sandbox/building game feel that I personally like this game for.

    So basically the same thing that the in-game chat does already when you paste gps coordinates into it. Except that it requires hundreds, no, thousands of extra grids on a server. As a past server host, forgive me for not being too enthusiastic about that. Also, what stops people from connecting with the sole intention of just going around and destroying everything they see? Nobody would risk using it.
    The point I am trying to make here is that there really is no real way I can think of to promote long-range interaction in a meaningful way that doesn't give away positions to some extent. And so given the choice, players will avoid it. Because of this, any mechanic implemented in this wheelhouse kinda has to be mandatory. An "opt-in" as you put it would just leave things exactly as they are.

    The trick with anything like this is to give people agency, i.e. not make them feel trapped by the games mechanics. I think agency provided by careful ship design is more than enough, and synergizes well with the "engineering" game-play roots of the game. Is it this that you disagree with me about?

    Lastly, in case I hadn't made this clear: any suggestion like this, or the one that you gave, has to assume the presence of an administration system for dedicated servers that is good enough to effectively counter griefing.

    @May Rears That's nothing a good set of server administration tools wouldn't fix. In the past what I have done with my servers is start people out on a planet with minimal resources, so that it takes maybe 10 hours or so of play to get into space. This has in my experience proven pretty effective at "whitelisting" griefers from most of the server. As for the steel plates thing, does that even work? If it does then that's just stupid design on keens part...
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2018
  17. PLPM Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    836
    I don`t like the idea of someone thrashing my stuff while I`m off, it`s not fun, neither is, hiding, that`s my main issue. Maybe a system which protects grids after a countdown when the player disconnects. (this as long as there are no foreign players within a certain radius of the grid when it finishes, as then it will not be protected) this could work well along with the signature idea.

    You could set forward "listening" outposts to warn against incoming signatures while your base is much more safe deep in your territory and powering off, with this you`d be able to disconnect without worries.
     
  18. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    Yeah, that's an idea I had too, you could build scanning outpost and use the cross-grid scripting and laser antennae to communicate back to your base if stuff comes near, could be very cool! You could even have the system put your base in "stealth mode" automatically...
    As for the safety of bases/grids, I have mixed feelings about that.
    On one hand I think it might be smart to have a "protect offline players grids" option, on the other hand I think it should be the responsibility of server owners to administrate and ban griefers. Maybe both? Bit of redundancy never hurts ;)

    P.S. In the past what I have done is just encourage players on my servers to keep schematics of their ships. If they get griefed, I ban the griefer, then paste the ship back in.
     
  19. PLPM Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    836
    That`s a much more simple solution, I hadn`t thought about it.

    I was thinking of servers with high population at all hours and that eventually, wouldn`t have an admin when you need him, but I guess I`m getting too ahead of myself there. I kind of wanted an autonomous system that isn`t punishing.
     
  20. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    No you're not getting ahead of yourself at all! I only had one or two instances of grief on the last server I ran, but both times having to get the schematics, paste them in, take ownership, jeez it was a chore and a half. Also there's no real way to figure out who did it for sure. For reference, minecraft had a plugin back in the day called worldguard, it maintained a big database of block edits so you could always tell who griefed, and roll back specific areas of the map by arbitrary amounts of time. That's the sort of thing we need, grid damage logging by username, and a way to restore grids from backups.

    The game defo needs better admin tools.

    Back on the topic of heat signatures though, I suppose stationary grids that are owned by people who are offline could be made totally undetectable, that might help.
     
  21. Oskar1101 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    224
    I really like the idea of heat signature. It adds tons of new mechanics and posibilities.
    Eg. Shooting weapons could increase heat so battles would be visible for others from bigger distance.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2018
    • Agree Agree x 2
  22. ShadedMJ Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    208
    @101m4n : Did you have actual players saying they wanted more interaction or is it just you? What would be considered a good range to investigate? Seeing a heat signature at 120km out, I think the thought would be "might be interesting but I'm not flying for 20 minutes to find out".
     
  23. Chaosrex Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    187
    What this game really needs is an incitive to actually interact with others, by other means then just "Seek & Destroy & Steal", Trading is one of the other ways you can go around.

    While there is a few mods that does add currency and trading, they're still mods, so susceptible to be broken with the next update or be abbandoned by their author because of various reasons.

    having a currency give player some kind of power, they can buy their ressources, sell it, they can hire people to help them/protect them, take care of abusive/aggresive players with bounties.

    Off course currency could also be a reasons why someone would attack you, but its just like life, you're never 100% safe of anything.

    Off course you could say that you could exchange ores and ingots/components and that currency isn't needed, but the thing with ores and components is that you can find them anywhere, their value isn't that precious or high, since it takes as much time to mine Uranium or Platinium then it takes to mine Iron or silicon, there is no extra rare material with a high value that you can use as a currency, and you spent has much time searching for those then any other types of ores.

    only downside to ores is the time invested in getting them, but as a market value, its just at the level of toilet papper in all honesty.

    So real currency/credits can add somekind of real value, something that people can look to and actually strife for.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  24. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    Sigh, these are questions I have addressed already elsewhere in the thread but alright; I see suggestions all the time for more content, more procedural this, better AI, more NPCs, more reasons to explore etc. Also, yes. I have hosted coop/PVE/ scarce resource servers before and the oddly solitary nature of SE MP is something players occasionally bring up. Other procedural/sandbox games (most notably minecraft) ended up being a success in the long run because of multiplayer. People would add their own complexity to the world, which in turn acted as a band-aid for the fact that it is difficult to keep a sandbox interesting with procedural content alone (think no mans sky). With tighter player interaction servers could also end up with their own communities, but that never seems to happen in SE at least not on any server I've ever played on (or hosted for that matter). Players just sort of come and go without ever doing anything they couldn't have done in single-player. The ratio of world size to minimum interaction distance simply needs to be smaller in my opinion. Also 20 minutes? A jump drive will get you there in 20 seconds ;).

    As for your other questions, I have no clue. Balancing this feature would probably be difficult. The goal would be to promote interaction between players that aren't trying to hide without making the players that are doing so (say in pvp settings) feeling like they don't have any options.

    @Chaosrex If you want to avoid anything nasty happening, then how would you implement trading in a way that doesn't also give away peoples positions? Also, how to incentivise it's use over normal resouve gathering? How would you implement your trading feature, gimme some specifics :).

    Lastly, the seek and destroy "i'll take your stuff because I can" behaviour is the default modus operandi for multiplayer survival sandboxes i'm afraid, unless you have administrative tools in place that prevent it. This is true of pretty much every mp sandbox I have ever played. At the moment the easiest measure you can take is to fly into the distance and avoid all player contact, but this effectively kills multiplayer in the crib.
    I have said earlier in the thread that anything that increases player interraction is also going to increase the risk of grief. So better server administration tools for detecting grief, identifying greifers and rolling back damage are a must too.

    But that doesn't seem to register in most peoples minds before they shoot this idea down...
     
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2018
  25. Lord Grey Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    311
    I personally would like more logs on what's going on on my server, who destroyed or dismantled things. For trading I don't see much reason at the moment state. It would be nice if you have trade stations where you can trade ore for ingots or ingots for parts, so you aren't depending on having a refinery and an assembler to start, just a drill. Or maybe you have to buy blueprints to construct different modules, and therefore have to trade stuff. Jump gates would be a nice idea. Big, expensive and a lot of effort to build so it's best achieved with cooperation. Just don't know how to rule it. 4 corner pieces that can be connected at any size? Only one object of a fixed size? Just a projected point that moves any size of ship touching it?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  26. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    Exactly! Last time I hosted one, the only option I really had was to fix the damage and then cross my fingers that whoever did it got bored and left...
    Something that logs collisions, weapon damage, and hacking attempts as well as the pilots and/or owners of the craft involved would be fantastic.
    --- Automerge ---
    In fact, I think i'll make a thread for that.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  27. Farindark Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    414
    Greetings

    The problem is not with the game and its mechanics it's with the people and the way they decide to play it. This option to play the way they want to play it is why they play it. :p Hence it's best left to the server host if they wish to dictate the way their server is set up and run.
     
  28. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    The way players want to play the game is a function of the game mechanics though. One could say that the art of game design is in designing the mechanics that make the player want to play in the most involving/stimulating way. The notion that because a player wants to do it makes it good thing for the player to do sounds great (as a player), but in practise, players will often treat games like optimisation puzzles or excercises in risk management and "optimise the fun out of the game". So simetimes it falls to the designer to "save players from themselves".

    Of course! No arguments there. There are already a zillion checkboxes for the dedicated server to modify its behaviour, for anything this potentially contentious there would certainly be another. One major problem with my idea here is that it is likely to increase the amount of grief on a server by making players easier to find. Imo though, that is down to the lack of administration tools that keen has provided. In my experience survival sandbox games always devolve into pvp freeforalls unless the server enforces its own rules, which is fine... But without the ability to roll back damage or even determine who was responsible for it, admins can't really do that.

    Try in your minds eye to imagine a community server with minimal grief, but rather than being basically on your own, you see heat signatures moving about all the time. It's just a dot on your HUD, but I think it would go a long way to making SE MP feel like less of a solitary experience. As for pvp it would add something there too in numerous ways already mentioned in this thread.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  29. PiettroBeretta Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    25
    You barely convince players to this.. pvp in this game could destroy 10000 hours of Hard work in few minutes .. I have met noone who wants to risk all his Hard work.. maybe if keen completely redesign pvp:

    Like advance defence systems depence on how long do you play.. so fresh players wont want to encounter them..

    Like consequences for attackers.. if someone declares a War he will be force to write why so others could pact againts agressive individuals.

    And finally some good reason why attack others.. now its only becouse someone find it very funny to destruct others Hard work.. so there might be territory reasons (more minerals, good spot, ) bussiness reason you products is in very high amount in thé market or items which is Very Hard to get
     
  30. 101m4n Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    130
    @PiettroBeretta Pvp is the default for survival sandboxes. Some people want it, some do not. The only thing keen really needs to do is provide decent server administration tools so that server admins can prevent it if it isn't desired. Think about how minecraft servers and the like administrate themselves. Lost count of how many times I have made this point:

     
    • Like Like x 1
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.