What ONE thing do you think will help online the most?

[madfretter]

If R* gave you free reign to make one change/addition to RDO right now, what would it be?

 

 

I'd like to see the honor system used a lot more with some changes. They put it in the game, but really don't make use of it. Most griefers seem to say the NPC isn't enough of a challange for them, so let's see how this works for them. Here's a few tweaks that would help slow down  the griefing and maybe even eliminate the need for private lobbies:

-Attacks on players need to hold a larger point loss (self defense should carry a 0 point loss):

-kill npc 1 point, kill player 10 points

-old man jones cannot erase bad honor points earned from killing players

 Severe penalties for low honor levels such as:

- longer times between respawns.

- random location changes for respawns

- shop buy rates are lower and they  will randomly refuse you service

-  mini map icon is always on and twice the size

- wanted indicators go down at half the rate and law can locate you more quickly.

 

 

 

 

[Poggy]

Just 1 thing!  Wow, that's hard ... Do I fix a problem or add new content?

Ok, if I could only do 1 thing, it'd have to be new content: add mini games.

[YodaMan 3D]

Separate servers for  PvP and PvE players for free roam.

[madfretter]

3 hours ago, Poggy said:

Just 1 thing!  Wow, that's hard ... Do I fix a problem or add new content?

Ok, if I could only do 1 thing, it'd have to be new content: add mini games.

LOl, yea, I knew it as soon as typed it that it was going to be hard to pick one thing...

[madfretter]

20 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Separate servers for  PvP and PvE players for free roam.

If they do that, they really need to make sure the PVE is actually PVE, no loopholes for trolls to use. ARK has PVE and PVP servers and for the longest time it was easier to troll people on the PVE servers. That's why I'm leaning more towards penalties for trolling...lol

[YodaMan 3D]

2 hours ago, madfretter said:

If they do that, they really need to make sure the PVE is actually PVE, no loopholes for trolls to use. ARK has PVE and PVP servers and for the longest time it was easier to troll people on the PVE servers. That's why I'm leaning more towards penalties for trolling...lol

The Division as a mini game called Survival.  In that you have PvE and a PvP mode.   Thing is in both modes, you have shared content.  So you can have 23 other players in your game.  The trolls learned early on, they can agro NPCs and they will attack other players, hopefully killing them so they take take their loot or keep the NPCs attacking them so they can go in and steal the loot from NPCs.  Or dumping Hunters, which is like the final boss to completeing each Survival game, so instead of you having to deal with one you now have 2 or more.  Either so you kill their hunter or it kills you and they can steal your loot.  From conversations I had with PvP players that did this cause they was upset that players didn't want to PvP with them.

So keep the game mode the same as is with just penalties, that is bad too.  Trolls don't care about penalties.  There won't or can't be a stiff enough that will affect them, they don't care what they lose.  They will just take it from someone else.

Edited December 29, 2018 by YodaMan 3D

[Poggy]

Yeah, it's a difficult balance.  At the moment I favour non--separate lobby solutions, but that may change.

[YodaMan 3D]

4 minutes ago, Poggy said:

Yeah, it's a difficult balance.  At the moment I favour non--separate lobby solutions, but that may change.

Well, I don't want like in GTA where a player can switch back and forth in PvE vs PvP mode and shoot me in the back then switch back so I can't touch him.  I say separate them, leave this one as is for those who like it and give one for those who want strictly non griefing PvE.

[Poggy]

I agree passive modes are even worse, but that wasn't what I had in mind.  I'd still rather not have separate lobbies if it can be helped.  There's other options to try first, IMHO.  From the simple - more butchers, more content reducing boredom, safe zones, map options, not losing stuff on horse at death, to the more complex, like bounty systems.

[ZLion]

I want to see three kinds of servers be available 

One for all-out role-playing of the wild west. Basically what we have now but more stable. 

One for restricted play through PvE. Maybe have an emphasis on survival making animals and food more scarce. 

And one for gangs only. So a private server for people who don't want to deal with other players and just handout online with friends. Invite only would work so if you wanted to have a gang war with one other gang, those two groups would be the only two on the server. 

[Netnow66]

14 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Separate servers for  PvP and PvE players for free roam.

This still seems like the simplest method to me so I'm backing this one. 

Everything available on one would be available on the other. 

The only difference being we can't kill other players on PvE servers. 

That would get the job done in the simplest fashion. Simple and to the point, no reason to concern yourself with what might or might not work. 

That would work, plain and simple. 

[Poggy]

How would stranger missions work?

[Netnow66]

1 hour ago, Poggy said:

How would stranger missions work?

The exact same way. 

I don't recall a stranger mission where I had to kill other players. 

Is there a mission in particular you have concerns about? 

[Poggy]

Stranger missions can be interfered with by other PCs, and without their involvement they are trivially easy.

Some stranger missions also involve PC assassination.

[Netnow66]

Oh I understand now

But, the main stranger missions aren't assassination missions.

By the time I got a player assassination mission (and I didn't realize it was another player until it was too late), the person that gave it to me wasn't a "stranger"--I had visited him/her once and the person had a name.

I've only gotten two so far and the second one I just ignored once I realized it was a player.

As I said, I've had two since I've been playing so it's not something I'd personally miss. And something that could be easily removed from the mission roster, in my opinion.

But, no, nonconsensual player assassination missions would not exist on PvE servers if it was up to me.

On another note, the first time I played a quick match team battle, I (still a bad to mediocre player) learned something that good players probably don't know. 

When I panicked as a player approached, I tried to shoot him before realizing he was on my team. My gun wouldn't shoot. The mechanics of the game don't allow you to shoot someone who is on your team (unless I was glitching like hell).

I say flick that switch and gimme a server that views all players as being on "my team."

[Poggy]

I think there's better solutions than separate servers, at least ones to try first.

[Kean_1]

There's nothing wrong with invite-only sessions IMO.  Some of us just want to play with friends (co-op) or do things alone against NPCs.  I much rather do that most times than deal with random idiots online.  If I want to participate in PvP events, there any many other activities available. 

Free Roam can still have missions and activities as well. They can simply be made more lucrative for players given the increased risk of being targeted by idiots or rival players during some events.  .....think incentives.  Unique events can be limited to Free Roam as well.

GTAVO already offers a solo and private session experience.  It only makes sense that they offer something similar in RDO.  .....and given some of the details revealed by data miners back in October, it appears as if they are already planning to to just that which is fine by me.

Either way, something still needs to be done about the carte blanche griefers enjoy currently in RDO.  Guess we'll have to see what exactly that is in the coming days.

Quite frankly, I'm tired of having to constantly monitor other players to avoid them when I'm playing solo or without the protection of 2-3 friends.  I mean, what's the point in being forced into Free Roam as a PvE player when most people avoid one another except for those that wish to do you harm?

Edited December 30, 2018 by Kean_1

[Netnow66]

9 hours ago, Poggy said:

I think there's better solutions than separate servers, at least ones to try first.

There might be but I guess i'm a little impatient at this point. Even when I heard about Red Dead single player, I only really wanted online where I could fashion my own character and my story.

At this stage in the game, I say start with something that we know will work. 

But I guess I'll take whatever Rockstar will offer at this point.

[YodaMan 3D]

14 hours ago, Poggy said:

I think there's better solutions than separate servers, at least ones to try first.

Like what?  What we currently have isn't really working.  I won't play the old passive mode where I can't shoot a guy cause he went into passive mode and soon as I go by, poof!  He came out of it and shoots me in the back.  Piss poor idea right there.  Private servers?  Guess what, that isn't any different then PvE only servers, except you choose who you let and in.  Great for the Anti-social, but we shouldn't have to be removed completely from other players.  The original game had it right and it worked beautifully.  GTA showed all the ways to do it wrong and supported griefing to the max.  We really don't need that.

[madfretter]

7 minutes ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Like what?  What we currently have isn't really working.  I won't play the old passive mode where I can't shoot a guy cause he went into passive mode and soon as I go by, poof!  He came out of it and shoots me in the back.  Piss poor idea right there.  Private servers?  Guess what, that isn't any different then PvE only servers, except you choose who you let and in.  Great for the Anti-social, but we shouldn't have to be removed completely from other players.  The original game had it right and it worked beautifully.  GTA showed all the ways to do it wrong and supported griefing to the max.  We really don't need that.

YEa, I aggree that passive mode isn't the answer. Plus it stops us from  being able to use out weapons while we are passive, so we can't  hunt.  I like private lobbies because it gives us somewhere to go when we've had  our full  of toolbags on the public servers. I'd love it if they'd link up with Nitrado and  sell private servers. Then we could set the server to our likeness and let people join. I'd gladly pay monthly for that feature.

[Netnow66]

2 minutes ago, madfretter said:

YEa, I aggree that passive mode isn't the answer. Plus it stops us from  being able to use out weapons while we are passive, so we can't  hunt.  I like private lobbies because it gives us somewhere to go when we've had  our full  of toolbags on the public servers. I'd love it if they'd link up with Nitrado and  sell private servers. Then we could set the server to our likeness and let people join. I'd gladly pay monthly for that feature.

I didn't want to mention paying for decent servers because of the heat Rockstar gets for gold selling (I don't plan to purchase any myself) but if that is what it would take to play in (what I consider) a decent fashion, I think I might go for it (though I think it's really Rockstar's place to do something).

In one of the earlier Battlefield games, some guy had a server that ONLY played this one map 24/7 as far as I know. Whenever I logged on, there I would go. I'd have been willing to drop him some coins for doing that. I see no real difference here.

[Lucky Luke]

Free aim only free roam would end so much griefing i think, shotouts against npc & players would be way more tatical and fun.

Would also like to see prospecting in this game.

Happy new year folks.

[madfretter]

50 minutes ago, Netnow66 said:

I didn't want to mention paying for decent servers because of the heat Rockstar gets for gold selling (I don't plan to purchase any myself) but if that is what it would take to play in (what I consider) a decent fashion, I think I might go for it (though I think it's really Rockstar's place to do something).

In one of the earlier Battlefield games, some guy had a server that ONLY played this one map 24/7 as far as I know. Whenever I logged on, there I would go. I'd have been willing to drop him some coins for doing that. I see no real difference here.

I think the heat is more because it's kinda pay to win in some peoples eyes. I personally don't think  that, to me the gold is more pay because you have a full time job and still want to complete against people who can play all day...lol. 

The servers will be their own thing, so it won't interfere with the public. I've  hosted Minecraft and ARK servers for a long time now and have nothing but good things to say about it.

[Poggy]

2 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Like what? 

More content - reduce boredom griefing

Choice to spawn in camp - reduce repeat killing

More butchers/doctors trappers - reduce butcher grief camping

No pelt loss from death - remove the sense of frustration from being killed

People who shoot/kill PCs/horses get highlighted as hostiles on map - allow people to avoid griefers easily

Remove pink dots from map, except for those marked hostile, on missions, or those near stores - obvious benefits

Parley system to apply to whole posse - obvious benefits

Safe zones, like churches and sheriffs offces - give people more chance to hide from griefers

Increase number and AI of NPC lawmen spawn in towns when responding to player v player violence

Hostile mark and bounty reward for repeat offenders (if your posse has killed three or more players recently) for X mins

[YodaMan 3D]

18 minutes ago, Poggy said:

More content - reduce boredom griefing

Choice to spawn in camp - reduce repeat killing

More butchers/doctors trappers - reduce butcher grief camping

No pelt loss from death - remove the sense of frustration from being killed

People who shoot/kill PCs/horses get highlighted as hostiles on map - allow people to avoid griefers easily

Remove pink dots from map, except for those marked hostile, on missions, or those near stores - obvious benefits

Parley system to apply to whole posse - obvious benefits

Safe zones, like churches and sheriffs offces - give people more chance to hide from griefers

Increase number and AI of NPC lawmen spawn in towns when responding to player v player violence

Hostile mark and bounty reward for repeat offenders (if your posse has killed three or more players recently) for X mins

Nice ideas, but doesn't really stop griefers.  It may delay them, but it doesn't stop them.  If you want to stop griefing, then you have to make the price for do so incredibly insane that no wants to do it.  You need to convince these same players that they can have the same kind of fun engaging players, who want to engage into PvP.  The PvP and PvEvP players don't mind actual PvP when it happens.  Griefers need lambs, those players that they know they can beat and do so repeatedly.

My experiences this last weekend, where griefers seem to focus on players that they could kill easily, but tried to run from those who could kill them or get numbers in their favor to the point that they knew players would rather quit then play the game.  It really blows my mind the amount of players that seem to get off on trying to agro a player so much that they won't play the game and consider that a good thing.

[Poggy]

I don't think you can stop trolling entirely, and I think separating out servers will lead to some negative unforeseen consequences, and once initiated cannot be rolled back - which is why I think other solutions to reduce/mitigate trolling should be tried first.

[YodaMan 3D]

Would love to know what those negative unforseen consequences are?  Cause they did it with the original and it worked.  Most of your griefers back then still did their thing on the PvP server leaving the PvE players to have fun without them.

[Netnow66]

1 hour ago, Poggy said:

I don't think you can stop trolling entirely, and I think separating out servers will lead to some negative unforeseen consequences, and once initiated cannot be rolled back - which is why I think other solutions to reduce/mitigate trolling should be tried first.

I don't want to have to settle for "Safe zones, like churches and sheriffs offices - give people more chance to hide from griefers." You seem to already acknowledge not only that there is a problem but that you have no way to stop it. 

Separate servers would solve the problem.

I'm ready for a drastic change in what takes place online. I say this after just spawning from a mission and getting popped in the head with a revolver.

Of course, I feel Rockstar is probably going to make changes more in scope with what you want. But the topic is what I think will help. I think it's the separate servers. 

[madfretter]

2 hours ago, Poggy said:

More content - reduce boredom griefing

Choice to spawn in camp - reduce repeat killing

More butchers/doctors trappers - reduce butcher grief camping

No pelt loss from death - remove the sense of frustration from being killed

People who shoot/kill PCs/horses get highlighted as hostiles on map - allow people to avoid griefers easily

Remove pink dots from map, except for those marked hostile, on missions, or those near stores - obvious benefits

Parley system to apply to whole posse - obvious benefits

Safe zones, like churches and sheriffs offces - give people more chance to hide from griefers

Increase number and AI of NPC lawmen spawn in towns when responding to player v player violence

Hostile mark and bounty reward for repeat offenders (if your posse has killed three or more players recently) for X mins

There's a big problem with your list....... it makes sense, so R* most likely won't implement them...lol

[Kean_1]

5 hours ago, YodaMan 3D said:

Like what?  What we currently have isn't really working.  I won't play the old passive mode where I can't shoot a guy cause he went into passive mode and soon as I go by, poof!  He came out of it and shoots me in the back.  Piss poor idea right there.  Private servers?  Guess what, that isn't any different then PvE only servers, except you choose who you let and in.  Great for the Anti-social, but we shouldn't have to be removed completely from other players.  The original game had it right and it worked beautifully.  GTA showed all the ways to do it wrong and supported griefing to the max.  We really don't need that.

Anti-social?   Invite only (or "private" sessions) are simply options where you let in those who you want to let in.  Nothing "anti-social" about that except that some would rather not be dumped into a game with a bunch of randoms. Those of us who prefer to play only with certain people of our choosing are not unsociable at all.  .......we're simply selective as most are in real life as they typically choose who they want to socialize with.

As far as Free Roam, several of us have said repeatedly that it must change regardless to address the griefing issue and R* has already said they recognize that.  Personally, I am not advocating invite-only options as a solution for those PvE'ers who still want to enjoy Free Roam with less trolling.  No one is trying to force anyone to be removed from the masses but it seems some are hell bent on depriving those of us who would rather play with just friends the option to do so.  ......more options, not less.

When RDR2 was first announced, my friends and I were dying for news that the main campaign would include some kind of co-op. I knew it wasn't likely but then I held out hope for private sessions in RDO.  .....and we still do.  Even when (or if) they are implemented, I will probably still hop into Free Roam depending on how they address the troll issue, missions, heists and (more importantly) how many of my friends are available to play at that specific time.  

.....but many times I just want to hang out with just "us" or especially when I am alone I would rather have the option to do that in my own session when I like.   While not my cup of tea, some people like to "role play" and invite-only sessions would be a perfect way for them to vet players.   ......which is what this whole private session argument is about.  Providing the ability for people to vet players in their own sessions.   ......that's all.  

I don't want to see PvE'ers forced into private sessions but on the other hand, we also don't want to be forced into a PvP environment if we don't want to be.  People can say what they will about GTAVO but I think they were right in offering solo and friends-only sessions.