windshadow0177, post: 703, member: 1090 wrote:
Continued:
**2. Profit & loss of the current system
The heart of this issue is a binary question – do FRS participants profit from the kills of non-combatants or not? There are many ways to address that answer, but for now, I’m only interested in the raw metrics of the system. All the other related answers I’ll address later when I’m back into my opinions rather than looking at facts.
I personally do not have a factual answer to this question, so I will answer it both ways. When it comes down to battle-outcome, as it relates to non-combatants, I think we can all agree that - without fail - the non-combatant loses. If you disagree, I would like to hear your viewpoint.
If the current FRS system does allow FRS participants to profit, they win the fight and they profit. The non-combatant gains nothing of positive value.
If the current FRS system does not allow the FRS participants to profit, they win the fight and lose nothing. The non-combatant gains nothing of positive value.
At minimum, the non-combatant is inconvenienced in all cases, and to varying degrees, depending on the specific circumstances. It has been my frequent observation that this experience is upsetting and disturbing to the non-combatant.**
If anyone wants to dispute that assessment, please do so in detail. I want to hear your viewpoint.
An important side-thought to this section – how much opposition would the idea of compensating non-combatants in these circumstances find? Something to mitigate the inconvenience and disturbing aspects of such an incident for a non-combatant? Please think on it and give me your thoughts.
**3. What would be the result of changing the system to protect non-combatants?
As I proceed into this area, I am again shackled by not knowing if the FRS system allows a participant to profit from the action against a non-combatant, or not. Once more, I’ll address it from both points of view.
If the system were to be changed from FRS participants being able to engage non-combatants where they were able to profit from those engagements, the FRS participant would lose out. The non-combatant would be able to continue on their way without consequence.
In this case, I would think that an adjustment could be made at some level to help mitigate this negative impact for the FRS participant.
If the system were to be changed from FRS participants being able to engage non-combatants where they were not able to profit from those engagements, the FRS participant would lose nothing. The non-combatant would be able to continue on their way without consequence.
In this case, there is no need to adjust anything as there was zero impact to anyone, positive or negative.**
From my viewpoint, any loss sustained by FRS participants in the course of any change to this system is relatively simple to mitigate, and removal of negative events for non-combatants makes a powerful case for making such changes.
**What conclusions can be drawn from where we are:
Foremost, I think the starting place in addressing this issue is clarifying for both existing and potential players in this community is the expectation of what we will encounter here. Is this a dedicated PVP server? Am I required to participate in PVP to play here? Is this baiting that I have witnessed a cost of playing with this community? Is getting caught in the crossfire of FRS combat a cost of being a part of this server?
As stated in Section 1, there is no warning in any place that I have found that a normal, customary use of the SWG UI can result in finding yourself in immediate - willing or not - PVP combat. To my thought process, this is the core mechanical issue that allows these chains of events. It is normal in every other server community that I have played in to click on someone for various purposes with no negative impact of any kind.**
It is not normal in any other SWG environment that I have participated in over the course of 20 years for a single mouse-click or key press to be the only step from peaceful action to PVP combat when you have no expectation of or prior commitment to it (I.E., declaring Combatant or Special Forces in the standard NGE terms.) As a player, with no forewarning that this can happen, it’s not difficult to imagine the negative impact to my own or anyone else’s play experience.
While I have no facts or data to back this up, it is not difficult to imagine that this play mechanic as it stands results in a very high number of abandoned accounts and poor new-player retention. I would welcome any data that the server leadership would be willing to share in this area.
It is here that I’m going to begin crossing from analysis gradually into opinion. I will remain fact-based in what I have to say, or I will label it explicitly as my opinion.
**The idea that any player can profit from the exploitation of another player who is not aware of the rules that they are playing by is objectively repugnant, setting aside the combatant/non-combatant issue for the moment. While I acknowledge that this is a moral position for the most part, it is possible to see that this mechanic has vast negative implications and impact for new-player retention. Who is going to click on someone to greet them, a normal action in the SWG world, get killed for it, and continue to hang around? Who is going to go through that without knowing it could happen and continue to participate? At best, this would result in creating a negative, adversarial feeling in such a new player that could manifest in a host of counter-productive ways. At worst, they leave and they don’t come back. I suspect that this has happened many times already. I suspect that the truth of this could be derived from the account and log-in history of the server as a whole over time.
If the FRS participants cannot profit from these engagements, this escalates the issue to a level of gross sadism. Again, I don’t profess to know whether anyone profits or doesn’t from these incidents. If no one is profiting from these non-combatants being subjected to unwilling PVP in the course of what is a totally normal interface action most anywhere else…
I’m stopping that thought there. There’s nothing good that can come of me finishing that thought for anyone. It would be counterproductive at this stage of the discussion.**
**The heart of SWG has always been its community. It is the reason why SWG was great more than 20 years ago. It’s the reason why it’s still here, 13 years after the last official server closed down. Everything good from this game comes from the people who play it - and yes, the people whose passion maintains it. I guess what I don’t understand in the issue at hand is this:
Why is it necessary, okay, or acceptable to make things more difficult for a part of the population that makes things better and/or easier for everyone??? While I’ve not made a study of it, I’ve looked at the market on this server, and it’s not awesome. It’s not terrible, I have seen worse, but it could definitely be better. That’s in the hands of the crafters. Why does their experience have to be worse than it has to be?
This is the question that I’d like the FRS participants to consider.
As for the server’s leadership, please let us know what your vision for this place is. Not so that we can judge it good or ill, but so that we know what to expect, and we can choose our own course without surprises.
TLDR:
The problem here centers around three facts -
New players are ambushed by this unique PVP system without warning.
This is driven by a normally benign action - clicking on another player. This action will result in no negative consequences on most - if not all - other servers.
If this server is supposed to be a PVP- dedicated or a Hybrid-PVP server, it is not communicated to new users. This is creating a false expectation.
The problem here may be complicated or compounded by two other factors, and one of them is certainly true -
FRS participants are actively profiting by the killing of non-combatants.
-OR-
FRS participants are griefing non-combatants for unknown reasons; and none of the possibilities appear pleasant.
The final fact is that none of the above is good for the server, as this certainly makes new player retention far more difficult.**
Wow that was a read. I don't want to respond with a short and seem as though I didn't take your thoughts into consideration.
But I'll offer you my perspective. Coming from a miner/spacer myself who also pops.
I haven't found an issue at all. Nobody has personally tried to kill one of my hand samplers or crafters. And if they did, why would it matter? There is no penalty for cloning.
Honestly, yea.
Being that there is no pending for death/cloning... I don't see the point.
