I like the direction of the last couple posts.

I agree it would take a lot of work.....

I agree. If they did bring the police towers back it would need a positive / negative system that comes with it. Some type of rep system....

Why bring the corp in to it anni?

Just wondering if one of your corpmates decided to gank me. Why should your corp suffer standing loss towards NPCs. Only the member that did the ganking is responsible not anyone in BKK but him.

Sorry I just see no logic in group punishment for the actions of an individual.

QFT and +1.

PvP is good.  Griefing is not.  Pseudo-legitimised griefing is not.  Sandbox cannot translate into "anyone can do anything they want" unless you want a tiny niche game.  There are actions that may be good for a player or a corp that are not good for the game as a whole.  For example, if you have a small player population, using a huge corp to massacre a smaller one completely and drive them out of the game, while providing epeen, is counterproductive to the game's life and expansion.  I am not saying that such a thing has happened here, or necessarily would happen (I have only played for a couple of months), but it serves as an example.

My opinion; your mileage may vary: Note also that "sandbox = free choice" is a laughable illusion.  It's like saying that you can order anything you want in a restaurant.  You can-- if it is on the menu.  Some games have a large menu and players mistake that for free choice.  "Sandbox = realism" is an even more laughable illusion.  Real societies maintain their status quo and mercilessly crush "in your face" (unsubtle) criminals and those that would deprive the enfranchised.

Some games allow griefing, and players mistake that for "hardcore".  Hardcore, in my opinion, is taking large risks with opponents who know what they are doing and who can hurt you back, not suicide ganking some poor new player that has 10% of your capabilities and may not even understand all the mechanics.  Only my opinion, mind you, and players are free to do whatever the game allows.

Devs and game owners have to decide what is valid on the menu.  I support allowing the PvEers to worry about PvE risk in a "safe" zone.  Mind you, the corollary is that the PvE experience then has to be balanced as the Devs think is good for their game as well.

there is one reason why totaly free pvp without save zones does not work:

because its a computer game, and ppl tend to abuse anything they can get a hold on especially when it gives them an advantage, or just for just small minded ppl that think they are great when they killed someone who had not the slightest chance from the very beginning. epen ftw.

the problem is that with the limitation of a computer game the ppl who do this dont have to fear real consequences. in real life there will be the police and the court so few of the "criminals" will get away with this. in a computer game the players will find and have the option to overcome the save mecanics (see steve) where you just sacrifice some lov tec *** to blow up cargo ships with expensive loot. this works in a computer game. but would this be a real world then they will wake up in thier new clone in handcuffs... or will never be able to set foot in hisec space ever again.
but we are in a computer game. that restrictions are not there. so ppl will always find this and abuse it.

so it is the best to keep it seperated. if ppl dont want any pvp then let them be. leave them their save zones so they can be happy. you want pvp. leave these save zones...

if you want the freedom to do everything you want. im fine with that. but then you have to bring a system that your actions have lasting consquences. and i havent seen any such a system yet. besides if it would be possible then it will be either very hard to build or so hard for you griefers that you will cry even more once you have comited your first crime...

no more has to be said...

By large corps are you who are you referring to?

Because currently the "Largest Body" could arguably be stated as composed of a large number of (Alpha dwellers) who have come together in such mass they can act freely (relative term) on beta together.

Yet time and time again we see "Smaller" more "PvP" focused groups dropping the hammer on them.

If you havn't played for awhile what time frame or corp are you referring to so i know what your talking about because generally there was a reason that was much different than simply "biggest numbers" for why they were on "ToP" if you will.

Look at this:

At the beginning, players can't attack or being attacked at alpha until they raise their pvp flag. This flag, once being raised, remains in that state until you're manually lower it. There is a restriction - once you became says 40 days old you can't lower it anymore. On betas/gammas everything stays as it is.

Your loot on alpha can be taken only by players with the same flag state - if you was unflagged when you died, only unflagged players can get your loot and vice versa.

Oh, and yes - trials aren't allowed to raise flag.

I have allways been of the mindset that you can never have too many options in a MOO if the game has a simple logical way to get started and have fun, getting to know the finer points as you get more into it ect.

SWG was alot like that i was 6 months playing before i stumbled into the true genius of the game mechanics.

oh sorry lemon,i meant to then got sidetracked.

about a year ago i guess i started playing perp,i did alot of reading while waiting hours for the updater which is still very slow, like 8+ hours since i downloaded it and its still going lol.

anyway my points were sort of about seeing the exact same set of issiues in another game i played and now in perp to so i just put my 2c in

I thought Grem was around for some of that, may be mistaken. But yeah, the real reason alpha became totally safe was because of just how much suicide ganking we did along with an endless list of police tower exploits we constantly found over and over again. I know a fair few players quit due to our ganks as well.

As to where I stand on this, well as you can imagine I "LOVE" to suicide gank, but I also see the issues behind it. I do think "something" needs to be done about 100% safe mining en'mass on alpha especially to curb afk/bot mining. (I think a deployable bomb on alpha with a 60sec charge up to warn non-bots/afkers would remove bots real fast.

Anyway, TLDR: I both want suicide ganks on alpha but without removing "real non-bot" players there. Let me know if someone figues out a way to do this.

Oldest player still in the game. Perpetuum for life.
Original Founder of M2S, may it rest in peace.
"Hungarian Math" is defined by the dictionary as "Just like normal math, but where each equation ends by dividing the sum by Potato."
-Shoutout to "Stranger Danger" for the "potato" comment.

That could work as well. I'll still miss the suicide ganking, but that may be for the best in retaining new players.

Oldest player still in the game. Perpetuum for life.
Original Founder of M2S, may it rest in peace.
"Hungarian Math" is defined by the dictionary as "Just like normal math, but where each equation ends by dividing the sum by Potato."
-Shoutout to "Stranger Danger" for the "potato" comment.

Agreed not completely safe with NPC threats, is the best way. In eve if you pay attention you can keep aligned, watching local chat and warp out to avoid player ganks.