These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: You have insulted my honor - I demand satisfaction! Dueling comes to EVE Online

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Haifisch Zahne
Hraka Manufacture GmbH
#321 - 2013-01-20 20:34:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Haifisch Zahne
Players control gambling? You are joking, right? I bet I can destroy your ship in a duel. I win. Now, pay up. What, no?!

I put 1 PLEX into the "wager box" for a duel. You accept the wager, putting up 1 PLEX on your side. I win. You lose 1 PLEX which the server gives me (although where is an interesting question).

To get down to brass tacks, CCP at Fanfest said that they were looking down the road at gambling matches for PvP. They also suggested the possibility that spectators could bet on the outcome, similar to boxing matches for example.

However, I can't see how the analogy of boxing matches holds up if someone can come down and shoot the boxer they didn't bet on. At least as an OPTION.


To just take a stab at this, here are some rough thoughts:

Many here are in FW, and they have their own specific concerns and interests. I can't say I see much use for duels on their part. They already have *lots* of targets, win nice shiny, and as they are in low-sec, they are relatively unburdened with restrictions on combat. As such, I can't see their input is relevant to the discussion as their use case scenario is not applicable to the situation at hand.

The null-sec alliances and roaming fleets have their own concerns and interests. and I can see little use for them of duels unless it is for tournaments (probably with betting).

The usefulness of duels is for principally for high-sec PvP. A form of wagering (enforced by the server) would be "fun" and "interesting". As an OPTION.


Some have expressed concerns about the "sandbox within a sandbox" aspect of private "gladiator arenas". Well, frankly, there already is a "sandbox within a sandbox" concept in Eve: the deadspace room. If on accepting a duel, the two (or more) consenting parties were wisked away to a deadspace room-- with the option to warp in at some distance perhaps. To allow the possibility of uninvited intruders, there could be the option to be able to scan down the duelists... or not.


I can't see why so many people have their panties in a bunch about giving some players an OPTION.


Sugar Kyle wrote:
Haifisch Zahne wrote:
However, again, I think a "duel" is only valid if there can be an option for strictly only two parties to be involved, enforced server-side, especially if there is wagering.


Players control all the gambling in game now. They should do their best to create and control this environment as well. Asking CCP to impliment "Honor" NPCs is not the path to take. Next, chastity belts?
Alayna Le'line
#322 - 2013-01-20 20:39:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Alayna Le'line
Rek Seven wrote:
Nice feature. You could record stats of someones dueling history so they can display it on their character sheet with pride.


No, just...no. If you want stats use an external killboard, we don't need this kind of egotripping promoted with ingame mechanics (there's already external killboards for that). If you want arena combat with an arena ladder etc, well you know where we'd send you.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#323 - 2013-01-20 23:13:23 UTC
I, for one, am looking forward to this.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Garai Nolen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#324 - 2013-01-21 02:26:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Garai Nolen
Namagon wrote:
As no one else mentioned it

OFF GRID BOOSTS

disable them while dueling or something - its not honourable to cheat as many do now.

I like the idea, but how it works in Eve is often different kettle of fish


In the CSM notes they stated pretty clearly that they want to get rid of off grid boosts but it's a technical challenge. They appear to be looking to tie this into their planned changes for fleet boosts in general.

EDIT: Yeah, page 49...

Quote:
Seleene brought up the topic of off-grid boosting, and Fozzie responded that technical limitations were the only reason it continued to exist. Fozzie could not comment on when this issue would be resolved and stated that “one day Veritas will come up to me and say ‘hey I fixed off-grid boosting’”, but he had no idea on a potential timeframe for this sort of miracle. Elise emphasized that while off-grid boosting was an issue, just the simple way that bonuses are applied in a fleet is flawed.
bufnitza calatoare
#325 - 2013-01-21 03:14:27 UTC  |  Edited by: bufnitza calatoare
Namagon wrote:
As no one else mentioned it

OFF GRID BOOSTS

disable them while dueling or something - its not honourable to cheat as many do now.

I like the idea, but how it works in Eve is often different kettle of fish



its not cheating. its a legit game mechanic.
and when ccp nerfs ogb, they do it for everyone. incursions and wh pilots will feel the pain too. not to mention the null sec bears.

adapt and get one ya self. oh and have a alt boostin you wont change even if they do change it...

I challenge someone in high sec. I bring my alt on grid where he KNOWS its mine and cant do **** about it.
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#326 - 2013-01-21 06:38:07 UTC
bufnitza calatoare wrote:
its not cheating. its a legit game mechanic.


Actually if the duel is supposed to be one person versus one person it is, in fact, cheating to be "one person and oh yes some booster alt off somewhere else in the system." It's a perfectly legitimate tactic that can be engaged in by both sides, and in many things if you aren't cheating you quite simply aren't trying, but it's still cheating. There's no shame to cheating, but let's be honest, it is cheating.

bufnitza calatoare wrote:
I challenge someone in high sec. I bring my alt on grid where he KNOWS its mine and cant do **** about it.


Actually he can use alts or corp-mates to probe down your OGB alt and gank them while you're dueling him. Blink

Whether or not he will is a different matter, but to say that there's nothing they can do is stupidity bordering on a complete divorce from the reality of EVE Online. It's like the people who insist that after the mining barge changes skiffs, or worse yet mackinaws, can't be ganked in high-sec. Roll Implausible does not mean impossible.
Colonel Xaven
Perkone
Caldari State
#327 - 2013-01-21 07:23:12 UTC
Shereza wrote:

Creating PvP-based (blood)sport events would fit the EVE I've been playing since 2006 without adding anything you don't think it needs.


I guess you are bored in any way and want a completely other game in this game.

Tell me: In which way a restricted, limited, system controlled "fair" mode of pvp would fit a game where all aspects influence the others, where players cannot be save, where the universe is harsh and cruel and where are no innovent at all?

Even in 2006 such a mode would have been hilarious.

Haifisch Zahne wrote:
Players control gambling? You are joking, right? I bet I can destroy your ship in a duel. I win. Now, pay up. What, no?!


You obviously didnt get into this at all. There are many popular gambling services run by players.

www.facebook.com/RazorAlliance
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#328 - 2013-01-21 09:38:16 UTC
Colonel Xaven wrote:
I guess you are bored in any way and want a completely other game in this game.


I'm not sure how you're coming up with the idea that I'm bored with the game, and I'm pretty sure I've mentioned on a couple of occasions that dueling and "arenas" are not my cup of tea. Still, if you want to read a completely different topic in this topic be my guest, that's most definitely your prerogative.

Colonel Xaven wrote:
Tell me: In which way a restricted, limited, system controlled "fair" mode of pvp would fit a game where all aspects influence the others, where players cannot be save, where the universe is harsh and cruel and where are no innovent at all?


Who said it would be fair? For that matter when have I said it should be fair? Hell, if you'd bothered to read even half of the stuff I've posted you'd understand that I've only suggested using NPC/server mechanics to implement a structure which players can use, abuse, or ignore to their hearts' content. I've even pointed out, repeatedly in some cases, just how downright unfair some of this crap could be even in high-sec.

Where is the fair in:
Nuking someone in a low/null-sec NPC arena fight to make money because the bets on them are high enough and everyone betting against them are on "your" side.
Providing off-grid boosting to any duel/arena fight.
CONCORD sitting back and snarfing in their coffee as the person you're dueling, a person who agreed to stop at hull, continues shooting into your hull until your ship blows up just because they wanted your stuff.
A poor loser decides that because everyone in an NPC "arena" are assholes he's going to be a major douche bag and nuke the "bookie" NPC after everyone's placed some heavy bets on a fight, all so that they lose all their money.

I don't really see much of anything fair in those scenarios, and those are scenarios that could play out under pretty much anything and everything that I've either suggested or agreed with.
Tarvos Telesto
Blood Fanatics
#329 - 2013-01-21 10:07:41 UTC
Hi CCP, after 6 years in EvE frist time i see somthing totaly new and fresh, thank you, realy big step forward, haters gona hate but i dont care, this game must evolve to new level, again great decision!

EvE isn't game, its style of living.
Colonel Xaven
Perkone
Caldari State
#330 - 2013-01-21 17:01:38 UTC
Shereza wrote:

Colonel Xaven wrote:
Tell me: In which way a restricted, limited, system controlled "fair" mode of pvp would fit a game where all aspects influence the others, where players cannot be save, where the universe is harsh and cruel and where are no innovent at all?


Who said it would be fair? For that matter when have I said it should be fair? Hell, if you'd bothered to read even half of the stuff I've posted you'd understand that I've only suggested using NPC/server mechanics to implement a structure which players can use, abuse, or ignore to their hearts' content. I've even pointed out, repeatedly in some cases, just how downright unfair some of this crap could be even in high-sec.

Where is the fair in:
Nuking someone in a low/null-sec NPC arena fight to make money because the bets on them are high enough and everyone betting against them are on "your" side.
Providing off-grid boosting to any duel/arena fight.
CONCORD sitting back and snarfing in their coffee as the person you're dueling, a person who agreed to stop at hull, continues shooting into your hull until your ship blows up just because they wanted your stuff.
A poor loser decides that because everyone in an NPC "arena" are assholes he's going to be a major douche bag and nuke the "bookie" NPC after everyone's placed some heavy bets on a fight, all so that they lose all their money.

I don't really see much of anything fair in those scenarios, and those are scenarios that could play out under pretty much anything and everything that I've either suggested or agreed with.


Scratch "fair" at the current design, but sooner or later it can be adjusted easily by request (i.e. restrict off grid boosting etc.). Leftovers are restricted, limited, system controlled - how do they fit to Eve's open world (except official Tournaments)?

www.facebook.com/RazorAlliance
Optimo Sebiestor
The New Eden School of trade
Organization of Skill Extracting Corporations
#331 - 2013-01-21 18:37:30 UTC
As usuall people are completly misinterpeting what this "duel" thing is, and lash out. There will be no arena, there will be no special mode. It's just a small add of functionality, wich disapeered when ccp created the new crimewatch.. Roll You can still grief and trap people as you did with can's. The only diffrence beeing, people can freely shoot the people that interfeer with the duel. Nothing wrong with that.
Tryaz
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#332 - 2013-01-21 19:57:52 UTC
I'd just like to go on record as saying I really don't like this "duel" mechanic idea. It feels totally at odds with the core gameplay principle in EVE that every action has a consequence.

big big BIG hate for this idea

Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Tryaz
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#333 - 2013-01-21 20:00:46 UTC
Optimo Sebiestor wrote:
As usuall people are completly misinterpeting what this "duel" thing is, and lash out. There will be no arena, there will be no special mode. It's just a small add of functionality, wich disapeered when ccp created the new crimewatch.. Roll You can still grief and trap people as you did with can's. The only diffrence beeing, people can freely shoot the people that interfeer with the duel. Nothing wrong with that.


Practically speaking you are right of course, that this just replaces the "1 piece of ammo steal" work around that players used before.
However, for me that's besides the point. Prior to this players had to steal which would result in aggression.
That did enough to maintain the action/consequence feel for me.
This is totally different in my eyes and I don't like it at all

Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Tryaz
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#334 - 2013-01-21 20:11:10 UTC
CCP Dolan wrote:
Finally I can have truly honourable combat!

1v1 at the sun is now a real 1v1!

Fanboi comment from Michael Bolton, there's a surprise

Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Tryaz
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#335 - 2013-01-21 20:13:35 UTC
CCP Guard wrote:
This is not a thread about the POS system, thanks. Please allow this thread to be about the contents of the blog.

Ridiculous! I'm so unimpressed with CCP on this one. Serves me right for visiting the forums, lesson learned o7

Narrator of Chronicles of New Eden, the EVE audiobook series. Listen at www.soundcloud.com/chroniclesofneweden
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#336 - 2013-01-21 21:28:43 UTC
Colonel Xaven wrote:
Scratch "fair" at the current design, but sooner or later it can be adjusted easily by request (i.e. restrict off grid boosting etc.). Leftovers are restricted, limited, system controlled - how do they fit to Eve's open world (except official Tournaments)?


Sooner or later anything can be adjusted easily be request. Titans shoot rainbows through the bridges, all fighter bombers are retextured as snowcones, the kestrel gets that Hello Kitty paint job everyone's been wanting for nearly a decade, dreadnoughts become worth a damn at hitting anything worth hitting, any system with sovereignty owned by a corporation with "goon" in the name gets a CONCORD presence, and so on.

If nothing was implemented because of how it might be twisted against the spirit of the game then (almost) nothing would ever be implemented.

Tryaz wrote:
It feels totally at odds with the core gameplay principle in EVE that every action has a consequence.

big big BIG hate for this idea


Given that anything that involves interaction between people has consequences I'm unsure why you feel this way.

Tryaz wrote:
However, for me that's besides the point. Prior to this players had to steal which would result in aggression.


There's a bit of difference between real theft and mechanics abuse in the form of consensual mutual theft with the intent of engaging in combat though.
Xiphos Volund
Amarrian Blueprint Company
#337 - 2013-01-21 23:33:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Xiphos Volund
I'm surprised how much support to this there seems to be. Skulduggery and betrayal are, at least in my opinion, two of the most intriguing aspects of EVE and are a major part of what keeps me playing.

That paranoia that comes with any fight, arranged or otherwise, that my target has got some help just sitting out of scan range keeps the excitement in even those fights that would be otherwise mundane. The ability for a fight to escalate from a simple 1 vs 1 to two groups having at it (verbally and space-physically) at any time during a confrontation is what MAKES a fight fun in my humble opinion.

Unfair fights are good.
Enforceable pre-determined fights which most EVE players who have been playing for any length of time can tell you the outcome before the fight, are bad.

That said; I didn't see anything regarding the mechanics of how this is supposed to work so I'll likely edit this post after getting to see them.



EDIT: Read the blog, suddenly couldn't care about the changes :)
bufnitza calatoare
#338 - 2013-01-22 06:42:03 UTC
if ccp does not make it possible to block all 1v1 requests so I don't get "challenged" every time in empire..

I am gonna mail bomb someone lol.

by mail bomb I mean email spam them :P
Adeena Torcfist
Right Hand Of The Legion.
Get Off My Lawn
#339 - 2013-01-22 16:03:44 UTC
such features i'd like to see


  • No docking when invitation has been accepted for a given time >2mins (Rule out baiting ships or someone that takes the cheap way out & not dying)
  • No jumping through Stargates taking the cheap way out for a given time
  • Honourable PvP = no RR cheating whores who abuse the system.


Implement these changes & it'll be a very healthy combat system thats been much needed for years.

also +1 on the ability to block 1v1 requests. not everyone wants pop ups when cloaky afk Lol
bufnitza calatoare
#340 - 2013-01-22 17:33:18 UTC
Adeena Torcfist wrote:
such features i'd like to see


  • No docking when invitation has been accepted for a given time >2mins (Rule out baiting ships or someone that takes the cheap way out & not dying)
  • No jumping through Stargates taking the cheap way out for a given time
  • Honourable PvP = no RR cheating whores who abuse the system.


Implement these changes & it'll be a very healthy combat system thats been much needed for years.

also +1 on the ability to block 1v1 requests. not everyone wants pop ups when cloaky afk Lol



make that docking timer for the length of the fight..

also cannot store ships into a orca for example. (starts out as a cruiser v ceruiser but someone swaps out to a hac or t3 cruiser )

also fight ends when one ship pops (timer ends.)... never know .. the 1v1 might end up being able to pop pods.